Great debate, for some
Who won the Munk Debate on foreign policy this week? That would be the viewers who tuned in. It was a lively, thoughtprovoking affair, with Stephen Harper, Justin Trudeau and Thomas Mulcair all addressing our country’s role in the wider world.
Canadians who care about military spending, citizenship, the United Nations, civil rights, trade, U.S. relations, terrorism, refugees, foreign aid and other Big Issues had plenty to chew on as the leaders all made their cases for heading up our next government. Barbs and all, it was an articulate, instructive, substantial exchange of ideas, by far the best debate yet in this long-drawn-out campaign.
As the Star’s Tim Harper aptly observed, it was a “passionate and animated” affair that gave all three leaders a chance to showcase their core values rather than niggle over the federal books.
Too bad more Canadians didn’t get a chance to see it, as the campaign for the vote on Oct. 19 moves into the critical final weeks.
A few thousand got to see it in person at Roy Thomson Hall in Toronto on Tuesday night. Home viewers who knew where the Parliamentary channel CPAC makes its unassuming home in the TV multiverse could tune in. So could those getting Hamilton’s CHCH superstation. And anyone with basic computer literacy could get the Munk Debates’ livestream feed, watch on Facebook or tap into other social media.
But whatever the audience was, it isn’t likely to come anywhere close to the 14 million home viewers who tuned in to the national debates in 2011 that were hosted by a consortium of major broadcasters including CBC, Radio-Canada, CTV, Global and TVA. More than 10 million watched the English debate and four million the French one.
This election campaign, courtesy of Harper’s refusal to participate in a consortium debate in English, Canadians have had to make do with a series of niche debates. Maclean’s magazine says its debate reached 3.8 million on CPAC and Citytv, plus another half a million online. Others have been put on by the Globe and Mail, by CBC/ Radio-Canada and the consortium partners (in French) and by the Munk Debates. Two more are expected to follow, hosted by Quebec’s TVA (in French) and proposed by the CBC and consortium partners (in English, without Harper).
This profusion of debates, while healthy in its own way, just doesn’t have the political impact of highly anticipated, nationally televised, prime-time encounters featuring all the major party leaders. There should have been room for such debates in Canada’s longest campaign in modern history, and one that is so closely fought. They have long been staple centrepieces of Canadian democracy, forcing prime ministers to defend their records and exposing the largest possible number of voters to the leaders, their policies and their fluency in les deux langues officielles.
In effect, Harper’s preference for a slew of minidebates, where he has less to lose on any given stage, has deprived Canadians of their best chance to see a major faceoff in this election and take the leaders’ measure in a collective, coherent national conversation. If it isn’t a subversion of democracy, it’s a cynical shrug in that direction. Harper has simply cherry-picked the venues likely to be to his advantage, and that play to his campaign themes of national security and the economy.
There’s a better way. In the run-up to the last election the Star suggested that debates be organized by a “non-partisan, independent and accountable commission committed to clear standards on participation.”
That would ensure a fair, transparent process for getting the leaders together to debate all the issues — economic, social, foreign, environmental and more — in a way that reaches the greatest number of voters. That advice stands.
This seemingly endless election, with its patchwork of viewer-lite debates, should be the last of its kind.
Too bad more Canadians didn’t get to see the thought-provoking, lively Munk Debate on foreign policy