Debate: Two visions now clear

June 16

This was the first time I have watched a leadership debate in its entirety.

At times, it gave me a headache -- trying to hear the words of one leader over those of another. I came to the debate with the hope of finding each leader's vision of this country. The constant to and fro made that difficult, but in the end, I have a better idea of where each will take us.

On individual performances, there is no doubt that Stephen Harper came across as the most calm. This is in contrast to his early days in parliament as the Alliance Leader, when he would often come across as vindictive and mean-spirited in Parliamentary debate. But his calmness, in contrast to the passion of the other leaders, also seemed to paint his performance as 'wooden,' devoid of a deep connection to issues which matter most to Canadians.

I was impressed with the performance of Gilles Duceppe -- having never seen him debate before. He brought forth many good points, and forced questions of issues to Paul Martin and Mr. Harper. He knows he will not be the prime minister, and knows that his role is to defend the interest of Quebeckers, who in turn (according to polls), see the Bloc as their best representation in the forthcoming parliament.

I was disappointed with Mr. Layton's performance -- for constantly interrupting everyone with criticism. I would have liked to hear more of a positive message from him, rather than harping through much of the evening.

On a personal note, however, I felt very proud when he mentioned the example of NDP candidate Monia Mazigh as a Muslim woman with very good ideas.

Finally, I believe Mr. Martin performed well -- given the constant barrage from all angles. I asked myself if I would have been able maintain my composure if I was faced with a similar siege by my fiercest competitors on national TV.

Overall -- Mr. Martin and Mr. Harper tied for best performance.

With regards to the issues, it was disappointing to see very little attention given to the environment, and none to Canadian culture. And it is scandalous that not a second was devoted to discussing Canada's relations with its aboriginal communities. More time was given to Canada's foreign policy, than this important domestic issue.

As the evening wore on, I realized that beyond all the shouting and rhetoric, the Liberals and Conservatives have two very different visions for this country. The segments devoted to childcare, the military and the Charter brought that home.

As a mother of three small children, I found the Conservative plan for a tax break to be inviting, but not a comprehensive way to help all Canadian families deal with the growing demands of family and work. While Mr. Martin has pledged in the past to institute a national daycare program (and not come through), at least he has recognized the needs of struggling families.

His comprehensive approach also includes a program to help families tend to the care of aging parents. I did not hear any compassion from Mr. Harper on this subject.

As for military spending, I still do not understand why the Conservatives feel the need to spend so much in that area. Yes, we need to upgrade our military. But why to the extent fathomed by Mr. Harper? As Mr. Duceppe pointedly asked him, shouldn't the Conservatives wait for the results of a foreign policy review slated for the fall before committing so much money to the military? It seems that the Conservatives have already decided that our foreign policy will become much more militarized. This simply reinforces the perception (in my mind) that the Conservatives are ready to bend over backwards to please a U.S. administration that has been constantly demanding that we spend more on our military.

It was on the subject of the Charter that I found the greatest difference.

It seems clear that Mr. Martin deeply believes in the integrity of our Constitution, and is ready to defend it. This is to his credit. Mr. Harper came across as lukewarm.

In the end, I realized that the Conservative vision of Canada is less government, less taxes, more military, more powers to the province, and better health care. How to pay for this? Either cuts to social programs, or a deficit. But more importantly, it is a vision devoid of compassion -- reminiscent of the Harris government of Ontario. And, as Mr. Harper made his closing statement promising a government free of corruption that could be trusted, the name 'Peter MacKay' kept going through my head.

The Liberals, under the new leadership of Mr. Martin, have been vague on some issues. However, Mr. Martin's closing statement indicated an inclusive vision for all people of this country, where we would build on our strengths and attend to our problems - without a serious break in social policy. Can he be trusted to keep his word?

The next step before I decide is to meet the candidates in my riding.