English Leader's Debate 2008

Just finished watching the debate. Must say in this election I am definitely non-partisan. But I will still vote. Just not quite sure for whom. We can vote for a candidate, a party, or a "best chance to beat ___" option.

I don't live in Quebec anymore, but if I did I might consider voting for the Bloc. I find Duceppe to be engaging and charismatic. However, he is a through and through Quebecer and seems not only to disregard other Canadians, but many facts as well. One point he made tonight, that quebec had lowered its greenhouse gas emissions by 1.6 percent from 96(?) - 2001. In that same time, Alberta increased theirs by 36 % and Saskatchewan by 63 %. Now I have lived in both Saskatchewan and Alberta for the greater part of my life and feel a strong attachment to those two provinces. Duceppe finished his point by saying Quebec should be finanically "rewarded" for this decrease in GG emissions, while AB and SK should be punished. He forgets that between 1971 and 2001 220 billion dollars! left the province of Alberta in the form of transfer payments. Guess what? In that same period of time, that same amount of money just happened to enter Quebec (in the form of transfer payments) to subsidize its manufacturing sector so that Quebecers could have jobs and see economic growth in their province. (source: CBC radio show, 2006)

I crunched the numbers on my own and every year, Quebec receives 20 billion dollars in federal transfer payments. That money comes from the "have" provinces like AB, and SK, those same GG spouting provinces that deserve to be punished financially. The industries creating GG emissions in those provinces generate a lot of wealth for Quebecers and other Canadians. No. Our GG emissions cuts should be calculated nationally!

Moving on to Elizabeth May. She had an excellent showing. She knows her facts. She reads reports. She listens to Canadians. However, her French needs some work. And as well, the Green Party supports tougher sentences for young offenders - something I DO NOT approve of. As Dion pointed out, under new Conservative proposals, a 14 year old could get life in prison! We need to get to the root of the problem.

Dion made a good showing. He plays the polite professor. Sounds a lot like Schwarzenegger actually.

Layton. VERY drippy! Talks about the "loved ones" and the "kitchen table" way too much. He smooths over his wrinkles very well. Bulges rather. For example attending the Shouldice(?) private clinic. He claims to support the public system. For "heaven's sakes" Jack.
Contention number 2. "Our country needs to improve the living conditions of its Aboriginal peoples." As Dion pointed out, he voted AGAINST the Kelowna Accord. While not a cure-all, it was a push for Aboriginal self-government in the Kelowna area whereby they would have greater control over their affairs. In the hopes that they would take better care of their people that the federal gov't has.

Finally Harper. A very good debater. Knows "when to jab, and when to parry", as Keith Boag said. More importantly, (I actually box so these metaphors do not go without merit), he knows how to move away. He did not throw any knockout punches, nor was he overly aggressive. Anyone watching would have been impressed by this seemingly down to earth "family man in a sweater".

One enormous point of contention I have was that he gave absolutely no numbers. He cited the Conservative government's investments into such and such an initiative without ever divulging whether it was 1 dollar or 1 million dollars of investments. The other four leaders used statistics and numbers and it makes an impression on the voter.

That's it for tonight. Advance polls open tomorrow.