Don’t shy away from debates

An election campaign should be an opportunity for candidates to hear from the people, and for the people to hear from the candidates. It should be a brisk breeze blowing fresh air through the political system, sweeping cobwebs off policies and issues and bringing in new ideas.

But some federal Conservative candidates appear to be afraid they’ll get a chill from all that fresh air. They are avoiding political forums and media interviews in droves. A reluctance to participate in this most basic of democratic exercises would be an insult to voters and an affront to democracy itself.

Across the country, Conservatives have come under criticism for being no-shows at all-candidates’ forums and for declining to give interviews. The Toronto Star says an unnamed Conservative source revealed that the order to batten down the hatches came from party headquarters.

Not so, says one campaign manager on Vancouver Island. Teresa Sullivan, running the campaign for Esquimalt-Saanich-Sooke Conservative candidate Shari Lukens, says she hasn’t had any orders from headquarters to avoid debates. She notes that Lukens has been invited to participate in as many as 12 all-candidates meetings, but that preparing for these meetings takes away from the time spent knocking on doors.

Victoria Conservative candidate John Rizzuti agrees. He said he is considering all invitations to meetings and will accept some, but he wants to focus on introducing himself to voters in his riding.

On the other hand, when Nanaimo-Ladysmith Conservative candidate Mark MacDonald was invited to an allcandidates meeting by the Gabriola Island Ratepayers Association, this reply was sent by his campaign manager, Glen McPherson:

“At this time, we will decline all invitations of debates, positions and questionnaires during the election campaign. Mark MacDonald, candidate, and the campaign team are focused on the issues of the campaign, which will be highlighted in our printed materials.

“When Mark becomes an elected official, you are more than welcome to contact his office, to discuss a variety of issues.”

In an interview with Times Colonist reporter Cindy Harnett, McPherson makes a valid point:

“The fact of the matter is, debates are the most useless thing you can do in a campaign. If people want two-way dialogue, that’s fantastic, but debates are just a gong show.”

He said his candidate has accepted three invitations, but “we are not going to do all of them. We are not going to walk into set-up debates just so the Greens and the NDP can have fun.”

It’s tough slogging for a candidate at a forum organized by a group philosophically opposed to her or his party’s platform. There’s little chance of winning new converts.

But those are the candidate’s potential constituents. They should still be heard. Yes, they would ask some tough questions, but any candidate who shies away from tough questions should consider a line of work more suited to persons of delicate constitution.

Conservative Leader Stephen Harper is known for his tight control of information and the short leash he keeps on MPs. His own campaign has been carefully scripted and choreographed, and only selected party loyalists can attend his campaign events.

People can be excused for wanting to ask candidates if they will have the gumption to represent their constituents in Parliament, rather than simply being the party leader’s messenger and errand-runner.

That perception can be dispelled by candidates who show a willingness to engage with any group, regardless of where it lies on the political spectrum. It’s an opportunity to hear and be heard.

At the very least, it’s good practice for fielding questions in Parliament from the party opposite.