Have Your Say – October 7, 2019 | Vote 2019

Have Your Say – October 7, 2019 | Vote 2019


CPAC.CA. “HAVE YOUR SAY” STARTS RIGHT NOW. [ ♪♪♪ ] ANDREW SCHEER MAKES A TRANSIT ANNOUNCEMENT IN MARKHAM, ONTARIO. JAGMEET SINGH SPEAKS WITH YOUNG VOTERS IN TORONTO. AND JUSTIN TRUDEAU MEETS WITH ELDERS IN IQALUIT TO DISCUSS CLIMATE CHANGE. IT’S TIME TO “HAVE YOUR SAY.” I’M MART SUTCLIFFE. THANK YOU FOR JOINING US. THE ONLY ENGLISH-LANGUAGE DEBATE WITH ALL SIX PARTY LEADERS TOOK PLACE LAST NIGHT. A LOT OF PEOPLE TRYING TO TALK AT THE SAME TIME. WE ARE GOING TO DELVE A LITTLE DEEPER INTO THE DEBATE TODAY. WE WANT TO KNOW FROM YOU DO YOU THINK THE LEADERS MANAGED TO GET THEIR MESSAGES ACROSS? WHAT STOOD OUT TO YOU? AND HAS THE DEBATE AFFECTED HOW YOU WILL VOTE? THAT IS OUR QUESTION TODAY. CALL US AT 1-877-296-2722. OR TWEET US… ALSO SEND US AN EMAIL AT… HERE’S WHAT SOME OF YOU TOLD US ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT YOU THINK DEBATES ACTUALLY MATTER. [ ♪♪♪ ]>>IF THEY’RE DOING IT THE RIGHT WAY, IF THEY’RE FOCUSING ON THE LISTENER INSTEAD OF THEMSELVES UP ON THE STAGE THEN, YES, THE DEBATE WOULD MATTER.>>THEY DO IF EVERYONE SHOWS UP. YEAH, AND IF EVERYBODY’S GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO SHOW UP.>>OH, I DEFINITELY THINK SO. I THINK THAT IT SHOWS THE PEOPLE WHO ARE WATCHING, YOU KNOW, WHAT THEY’RE FIGHTING FOR AND WHAT ONE CAN OFFER AND THE OTHERS CAN OR CAN’T.>>NOT SO MUCH. I MEAN, IT BECOMES A QUESTION TALKING POINTS AND IMPRESSIONS AND IN SOME CASES TRYING TO ONE UP THE OTHER. TO ME, IT’S MORE — THE MORE IMPORTANT THING IS TO GO ONLINE AND LOOK AT THE POLICIES OF THE PARTIES AND WHAT THEY PLAN TO DO AND THEN A DISCUSSION OF THAT SOMEHOW ONE-ON-ONE KIND OF THING.>>YES, I DO. I THINK THAT’S A VERY GOOD WAY OF DISCOVERING THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN CANDIDATES. A LOT OF THE TIMES IT DOES APPEAR THAT THEY STAND FOR SIMILAR ISSUES, BUT ACTUALLY KNOWING THE NUANCES BETWEEN HOW THEY HOPE TO ACHIEVE THEIR GOALS CAN BE VERY INTERESTING TO SEE THEM DISCUSS WITH OTHER CANDIDATES.>>YEAH, IF THEY’RE INTELLECTUAL. I MEAN, PEOPLE YELLING AT EACH OTHER DOESN’T DO MUCH BUT I MEAN IF YOU ACTUALLY LOGIC AND REASON AND SORT IT ALL OUT, IT’S GOOD.>>YES.>>WHY?>>BECAUSE I THINK IT BRINGS OUT SOME OF THE FACTS OR MAYBE SUPPOSED FACTS, IT MIGHT BRING OUT THE NATURE OF THE PERSON, THE CHARACTER, LEADERSHIP CAPABILITY.>>NOT REALLY, NOT UNLESS SOMETHING LIKE REALLY SENSATIONAL HAPPENS LIKE IF SOMEONE HAD SOME SORT OF INSANE ANSWER, THEN IT WOULD PROBABLY MATTER TO ME. BUT OTHERWISE, MY DECISIONS ARE PROBABLY MADE UP AHEAD OF TIME.>>Mark: SO DID LAST NIGHT’S DEBATE MATTER TO YOU, WILL IT AFFECT HOW YOU VOTE IN THIS 2019 FEDERAL ELECTION? OUR PHONE LINES ARE OPEN NOW. WE’RE VERY INTERESTED TO HEAR YOUR REACTIONS THIS MORNING. YOU CAN ALSO COMMENT ON THE DEBATE FORMAT. THERE IS ANOTHER DEBATE COMING UP ON THURSDAY AS WELL IN FRENCH ONCE AGAIN ORGANIZED BY THE DEBATE COMMISSION. JOINING US FOR OUR DISCUSSION THIS HOUR ARE DAVID REEVELY, NEWS EDITOR FOR THE CANADIAN PRESS AND JOHN IBBITSON WRITER AT LARGE FOR “THE GLOBE AND MAIL.” WELCOME TO YOU BOTH.>>THANK YOU.>>THANK YOU.>>Mark: DAVID, WHAT WAS YOUR ASSESSMENT OF THE DEBATE LAST NIGHT?>>THAT’S A BIG QUESTION. I THOUGHT WE GOT A LOOK AT WHAT EACH OF THE PARTY LEADERS FEELS HE OR SHE NEEDS TO DO AT THIS POINT IN THE CAMPAIGN, AND TAKING UP THE QUESTION THAT YOU DID IN THE STREETER THERE, I THINK DEBATES MATTER BECAUSE YOU GET A LOOK AT HOW THESE LEADERS PERFORM. WHEN THEY’RE UNDER A CERTAIN KIND OF PRESSURE. I THINK WE SAW SCHEER REALLY GO ON THE ATTACK AGAINST JUSTIN TRUDEAU WHICH IS WHAT HE FEELS HIS CAMPAIGN NEEDS TO DO. WE SAW TRUDEAU DOING HIS BEST TO BE STATESMAN-LIKE AND ABOVE IT ALL. WE SAW JAGMEET SINGH BEING A LITTLE JOKEY AND SETTING OUT TO BE LIKABLE AND APPROACHABLE AND KIND OF A REGULAR GUY WHICH IS WHAT HE’S BEEN TRYING TO DO. AND WE SAW ELIZABETH MAY TALKING ABOUT HOW NONE OF THESE GUYS THAT SHE’S FACING REALLY HAS A SERIOUS CLIMATE CHANGE PLAN. AND THEN THERE’S THE BERNIER SHOW AND YVES-FRANÇOIS BLANCHET WHO, LIKE ALL BLOC QUEBECOIS LEADERS, CAN COME ON THE ENGLISH DEBATE AND HAVE A GOOD TIME.>>Mark: JOHN, WHAT DID YOU THINK? DID ANYBODY ACTUALLY FURTHER THEIR CAUSE LAST NIGHT DO YOU THINK?>>I THINK TWO PEOPLE DID. I THINK JAGMEET SINGH GAVE A VERY EFFECTIVE PERFORMANCE. WHICH REINFORCED THE PERFORMANCE HE GAVE LAST WEEK IN THE TVA DEBATE. AGAIN, THE NDP CAME INTO THIS ELECTION IN DESPERATE STRAITS. THEY WERE FAR BEHIND IN THE POLLS, WERE BEING CHALLENGED BY THE GREEN PARTY, THEY HAVE NO MONEY. THEY STILL HAVE NO MONEY. AND THERE WAS TALK OF THE OBLITERATION OF THE PARTY, OF THE PARTY LOSING PARTY STATUS IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS. WELL, THINGS ARE STILL DIRE FOR THEM IF QUEBEC, BUT I THINK A LOT OF PEOPLE WERE IMPRESSED WITH JAGMEET SINGH LAST NIGHT SO IF YOU WERE AN NDP-LIBERAL SWITCHER OR YOU WERE AN NDP-GREEN SWITCHER, A PROGRESSIVE WHO WASN’T QUITE SURE WHERE TO PUT YOUR VOTE, I THINK SOME OF THOSE VOTES MIGHT MIGRATE OVER TO THE NDP THIS WEEK. WE’LL SEE. I COULD BE WRONG. BUT AT LEAST BASED ON THAT PERFORMANCE. I THINK THE CONSERVATIVES COULD ALSO FEEL GOOD ABOUT THE NIGHT IN THAT THEY HAD A BAD WEEK LAST WEEK. ATLANTA BRAVES DID POORLY IN THE TVA DEBATE. AND THEN CAME “THE GLOBE AND MAIL” STORIES ABOUT HIM HAVING DUAL CITIZENSHIP AND YOU COULD BEGIN TO SEE SOME EROSION IN THE TRACKING POLLS. IF MR. SCHEER IS VERY AGGRESSIVE, AS DAVID POINTS OUT, VERY AGGRESSIVE PERFORMANCE HALTS THAT EROSION, THEN CONSERVATIVES CONSIDER THAT A WIN AND, YES, MR. TRUDEAU, AS INCUMBENT PRIME MINISTER, SIMPLY WANTED TO AVOID DOING ANYTHING THAT WOULD SERIOUSLY UNDERMINE HIS CAMPAIGN. HE GOT OUT OF IT AT LEAST MOSTLY UNSCATHED IN THAT SENSE, THOUGH AGAIN, WE DO HAVE TWO NATIONAL PARTIES THAT ARE TIED IN THE VOTE THIS WEEK AS THEY WERE LAST WEEK. ONE BEGINS TO WONDER WHETHER EITHER OF THEM IS EVER GOING TO BREAK OUT.>>Mark: YEAH, THAT IS AN INTERESTING QUESTION. WE’LL COME BACK TO THAT IN A MOMENT. BUT DAVID, ON ANDREW SCHEER, WHO IS I THINK IT’S FAIR TO SAY THE ONLY OTHER PERSON OTHER THAN JUSTIN TRUDEAU WHO COULD BE THE PRIME MINISTER OF CANADA A MONTH FROM NOW, DID HE DO ENOUGH AND DID HE TAKE THE RIGHT APPROACH? BECAUSE WE ALWAYS HEAR THAT IT’S ONE THING TO ATTACK YOUR OPPONENTS AND TO OPPOSE THEM BUT YOU HAVE TO PRESENT A COMPETING VISION THAT PEOPLE CAN EMBRACE. AND HIS FIRST INSTINCT, HIS FIRST — IT WASN’T AN INSTINCT BECAUSE IT WOULD HAVE BEEN PLANNED DAYS IN ADVANCE BUT HIS FIRST MOVE IN THE DEBATE WAS TO GO ON THE ATTACK AGAINST JUSTIN TRUDEAU AND CALL HIM A PHONY AND A FRAUD.>>YEAH. AND I THINK THERE WAS ONE OF THE LIGHTER MOMENTS IN THE DEBATE, THE LEADERS GOT TO ASK EACH OTHER QUESTIONS, AND WHEN IT WAS SCHEER’S TURN, HE IMMEDIATELY TURNED TO THE SIDE TO FACE JUSTIN TRUDEAU, FACE-ON, THEY WERE RIGHT BY EACH OTHER. AND SO HE ALMOST PLAYED UP ON THAT POINT. I THINK WHAT THE CONSERVATIVES HAVE BEEN TRYING TO DO IS ESSENTIALLY PULL THE LIBERAL PARTY DOWN WITH JUSTIN TRUDEAU OF COURSE AS THE FIGURE HEAD AND THE EASY TARGET AT THE TOP AND THEY HAVE BEEN TRYING TO DO THAT AND THEN MOVE ON TO PRESENTING THEIR ALTERNATIVE VISION AND THEY’RE STILL KIND OF STUCK ON THE FIRST THING BECAUSE THE POLLS, I MEAN, DESPITE TRUDEAU’S SPECTACULAR HISTORY WITH THE BLACKFACE AND THE BROWNFACE, AS YOU SAY, THEY’RE NOT BUDGING ALL THAT MUCH. LITTLE TWIDDLES UP AND DOWN, BUT THE TORIES REALLY NEED TO WEAKEN TRUDEAU AND THEY HAVE BEEN TRYING EVERYTHING AND SO FAR, DOES NOT SEEM TO HAVE BEEN WORKING.>>Mark: JOHN, WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT THAT?>>I TAKE A SLIGHTLY MORE DISTANT PERSPECTIVE. I THINK IN THE CONTEXT OF THE LAST FOUR YEARS, THE CONSERVATIVES SHOULD BE PRETTY HAPPY. THIS WAS A BIG MAJOR MAJORITY GOVERNMENT THAT JUSTIN TRUDEAU WON IN 2015. THE CONSERVATIVES WERE SO DEPRESSED THAT MOST OF THE TOP TIER DIDN’T EVEN RUN FOR THE LEADERSHIP IN 2016. THE FEELING WAS, WELL, WE’LL TAKE ANOTHER HIT IN 2019 AND THEN WE’LL GO AFTER HIM IN 2023. LO AND BEHOLD, THE SPONSORSHIP — THE SNC-LAVALIN SCANDAL ARRIVES, THE ETHICS COMMISSIONER FINDS THAT MR. TRUDEAU REPEATEDLY VIOLATED THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST ACT IN TRYING TO PRESS FOR BASICALLY A PLEA DEAL FOR THE ENGINEERING FIRM. THEN COMES EARLY IN THE CAMPAIGN, THE PHOTOGRAPHS OF MR. TRUDEAU IN BLACKFACE. AND SUDDENLY, THE CONSERVATIVES FIND THEMSELVES TIED IN THE POLLS. WITH LIBERALS LESS THAN TWO WEEKS TO GO. I THINK IF YOU HAD GONE TO ANY CONSERVATIVES EVEN LAST JANUARY AND SAID, HEY, YOU’RE TIED IN THE POLLS TEN DAYS OUT, WILL YOU TAKE IT? THEY WOULD HAVE SAID, OH, YEAH, WE’LL TAKE THAT AND THAT’S WHERE THEY ARE RIGHT NOW.>>Mark: YEAH. INTERESTINGLY, THIS IS THE SECOND ELECTION IN A ROW WHERE SOMEBODY MIGHT HAVE STARTED OUT THINKING THEY NEEDED A TWO-ELECTION STRATEGY AND ENDED UP WITH A ONE-ELECTION STRATEGY. BUT I’M NOT SURE HOW THIS ONE’S GOING TO TURN OUT BUT THERE WERE A LOT OF LIBERALS WHO A YEAR BEFORE THE 2015 ELECTION WOULD HAVE THOUGHT OH, THIS IS NOT OUR TURN, RIGHT? WE’RE DESTINED TO BE IN OPPOSITION FOR A LITTLE WHILE LONGER YET AND THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN LO AND BEHOLD THEY WIN THE ELECTION AND WE’VE GOT THE CONSERVATIVES WHO WERE IN THAT POSITION A YEAR AGO, TWO YEARS AGO, THREE YEARS AGO WHO ARE COMPETITIVE IN THIS ELECTION. WE DON’T KNOW IF THEY’RE GOING TO WIN. BUT THAT DOES SAY SOMETHING ABOUT CANADIAN POLITICS, DOESN’T IT?>>WELL, IT SAYS, AS THE OLD SAYING GOES, A WEEK IS A LONG TIME IN POLITICS. WHICH MEANS WE HAVE A LONG TIME UNTIL THE NEXT ELECTION.>>Mark: TWO LONG TIMES ALMOST. WHAT’S INTERESTING, THOUGH, IS THAT I STILL STICK TO THE IDEA THAT INCUMBENT GOVERNMENTS AFTER THEIR FIRST TERM ARE TOUGH TO BEAT IN CANADIAN POLITICS. THAT’S A PRETTY FAMILIAR PATTERN. AND DAVID, THE NUMBERS SEEM TO SUGGEST THAT EVEN IF THE POPULAR VOTE IS CLOSE, THAT THAT STILL FAVOURS THE LIBERALS IN TERMS OF WHERE THOSE VOTES ARE CAST AND HOW MANY SEATS THEY’LL WIN.>>IT DOES SUGGEST THAT, ALTHOUGH THAT’S A VERY FRAGILE STATE OF AFFAIRS. WHAT YOU’RE TALKING ABOUT IS HUGE NUMBERS THE CONSERVATIVES RACK UP IN THE PRAIRIES, PARTICULARLY ALBERTA AND SASKATCHEWAN, SO IF IT LOOKS LIKE THEY’RE TIED IN THE POLLS, THE LIBERALS HAVE BROADER SUPPORT AND THAT CAN TRANSLATE INTO A LOT MORE SEATS THAN WINNING 80% OF THE VOTE IN RED DEER AND CALGARY RIDINGS. THAT SAID, THERE IS I THINK MUCH GREATER POTENTIAL FOR VOTE SPLITTING ON THE LEFT AND I THINK IF YOU SEE THE NDP GO UP JUST 2 OR 3 POINTS, THEN THAT LIBERAL ADVANTAGE STARTS TO FADE. IF THEY GO UP 5 OR 6 POINTS, THEN IT PRETTY MUCH COLLAPSES.>>Mark: RIGHT. SO IS ANDREW SCHEER ROOTING FOR JAGMEET SINGH TO HAVE A GOOD NIGHT LAST NIGHT?>>IF I WERE ANDREW SCHEER, THEN I WOULD HAVE BEEN, YEAH. BECAUSE THAT’S WHAT WE SAW HAPPEN — I MEAN, AS THE LIBERAL VOTE WEAKENED IN THE 2000s AND CULMINATING IN 2011, IT WAS THE RISE OF THE NDP AND THE ORANGE WAVE REALLY IN QUEBEC IS WHAT PUT — THE LIBERALS AND GAVE HARPER THE MAJORITY.>>I HAVE TO BE CAREFUL ABOUT ONE OF MY CONVENTIONAL ASSUMPTIONS. TO DAVID’S POINT, IF THE NDP GOES UP, WE KNOW THE LIBERAL VOTE GOES DOWN. MAYBE NOT. MAYBE IF THE NDP VOTE GOES UP, THE GREEN VOTE GOES DOWN. THE GREEN VOTE IS WAY HIGH, THEY WERE 3% IN THE LAST ELECTION. THEY’RE ON 10% NOW. SO IT’S “POSSIBLE THAT JAGMEET SINGH CAN CANNIBALIZE ELIZABETH MAY’S VOTE AND NOT DO A LOT OF DAMAGE TO THE LIBERALS JUST BECAUSE IT’S ALL NON-LIBERAL PROGRESSIVE VOTE. AND THE OTHER AREA WHERE I MIGHT HAVE TO EAT MY WORDS, THOUGH I’M NOT EATING THEM JUST YET, I HAVE ALWAYS ARGUED THAT THE 905 ELECTS THE GOVERNMENT, THE BIG BAND OF SUBURBAN RIDINGS SURROUNDING TORONTO ALWAYS VOTES FOR THE GOVERNING PARTY, IT ALWAYS HAS SINCE 1968. AND SO I KEEP WAITING FOR THE 905 TO MAKE UP ITS MIND. THE POLLS CONTINUE TO SHOW TO THE EXTENT THAT YOU’RE ABLE TO BREAK DOWN THAT FIND, THAT THE 905 REMAINS SPLIT JUST AS IT REMAINS SPLIT IN ONTARIO BETWEEN THE CONSERVATIVES AND THE LIBERALS. SO I MAY BE PROVEN WRONG. IT IS POSSIBLE THAT THE 905 WILL DIVIDE BETWEEN THE LIBERALS AND THE CONSERVATIVES RATHER THAN SLOSHING OVER IN ONE DIRECTION OR THE OTHER. IF THAT HAPPENS, AND YEAH, WE REALLY DO HAVE A HUNG PARLIAMENT.>>Mark: YOU MENTIONED EARLIER, JOHN, THIS NOTION THAT IF YOU’D SAID A YEAR AGO TO THE CONSERVATIVES THAT GOING INTO THE FINAL TWO WEEKS OF THE CAMPAIGN THEY WOULD BE TIED WITH JUSTIN TRUDEAU, THEY PROBABLY WOULD HAVE BEEN PRETTY HAPPY WITH THAT SCENARIO. BUT GIVEN ALL THAT’S HAPPENED, THIS IS THE GLASS HALF EMPTY VERSION OF THAT GLASS HALF FULL PICTURE YOU JUST PAINTED, GIVEN ALL THAT’S HAPPENED, THERE MIGHT BE SOME PEOPLE WISHING OR THINKING THEY OUGHT TO BE FURTHER AHEAD THAN THEY ARE NOW.>>WELL, THERE ARE GOING TO BE, I THINK, A LOT OF PEOPLE WISHING THEY THOUGHT DIFFERENTLY BACK IN 2015. JASON KENNEY DECIDED THAT HE WAS GOING TO MAKE HIS FORTUNE IN ALBERTA. PETER MacKAY DECIDED THAT HE WAS GOING TO LEAVE POLITICS. RONA AMBROSE DECIDED NOT TO FIGHT FOR THE PERMANENT LEADERSHIP OF THE PARTY. IF ANY ONE OF THOSE THREE WERE LEADING THE PARTY RIGHT NOW, WOULD THE CONSERVATIVES BE DOING BETTER? I THINK A LOT OF PEOPLE WOULD SAY IF ANY ONE OF THOSE THREE WERE LEADING THE PARTY RIGHT NOW THE CONSERVATIVES WOULD BE DOING MUCH BETTER. BUT AGAIN, CAVEAT. IF LET’S SAY RONA AMBROSE WAS RUNNING. WHERE WOULD MAXIME BERNIER BE? IN OTHER WORDS, THE FACT THAT ANDREW SCHEER IS SUCH A STRONGLY SOCIALLY CONSERVATIVE LEADER HELPS TO SUPRESS THE PEOPLE’S PARTY VOTE. IF YOU HAD A PETER MacKAY RUNNING OR RONA AMBROSE, SOMEONE MORE IN THE CENTRE OF THE PARTY, YOU MIGHT WELL SEE MAXIME BERNIER STEALING VOTES FROM THE TORIES.>>Mark: OR HE MIGHT STILL BE PART OF THE CONSERVATIVES.>>THAT TOO.>>Mark: IN ANOTHER SCENARIO, TOO. I’M SORRY, WE’RE GOING TO HAVE TO JUMP IN HERE BECAUSE WE’RE GOING TO GO LIVE NOW TO ELIZABETH MAY, THE GREEN PARTY LEADER IS IN LONGUEUIL, QUEBEC WITH LOCAL CANDIDATE PIERRE NANTEL, OF COURSE FORMER NDP MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT WHO HAS CALLED HIMSELF A SOVEREIGNIST AND ELIZABETH MAY OF COURSE HAS DRAWN THAT DISTINCTION BETWEEN SOVEREIGNISTS AND SEPARATISTS SO WE’LL SEE IF THEY TALK ABOUT THAT. HERE IS ELIZABETH MAY WITH PIERRE NANTEL.>>LET PIERRE FINISH AND I’LL COME BACK.>>I’LL SIMPLY SAY WHAT’S CLEAR HERE IS NO MATTER WHAT YOUR TRADITIONAL CORNER IN THIS ELECTION, I THINK THAT THE YOUTH, THE PEOPLE WALKING IN THE STREET ARE ADDRESSING OUR ATTENTION, SAYING –>>I DON’T THINK SO.>>NO, I’M VERY CLEAR THAT HE’S A SOVEREIGNTIST. YOU KNOW, HE WAS RECRUITED TO PARLIAMENT BY JACK LAYTON. HE HAD EIGHT YEARS IN PARLIAMENT TO SHOW IF HE WAS A STRONG FEDERAL MP, A STRONG QUEBECER AT THE SAME TIME. IT’S CLEAR TO ME HE IS BOTH AND THAT MAKES HIM A PERFECT MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT FOR THE GREEN PARTY.>>MY APOLOGIES. I’LL LET YOU FINISH.>>YOU GO.>>YOU WANT ME TO REPEAT SOMETHING I ALREADY SAID. LET PIERRE FINISH AND I’LL COME BACK.>>I’LL SIMPLY SAY WHAT’S CLEAR HERE IS NO MATTER WHAT YOUR TRADITIONAL COLOUR IN THIS ELECTION, I THINK THAT THE YOUTH, THE PEOPLE WALKING IN THE STREETS ARE ADDRESSING OUR ATTENTION SAYING WE KNOW THIS CLIMATE CRISIS IS THE BIGGEST ISSUE NOW AND THE BIGGEST ISSUE NOW IS TO FIND A WAY TO HAVE EVERYBODY WORKING TOGETHER IN CANADA AND THAT IS WHAT MRS. MAY OFFERS AND THIS IS THE OFFER I TOOK GLADLY BECAUSE I THINK IT’S A BIG TENT AND WE ASK EVERYONE TO JUMP IN ON THIS ISSUE.>>I ALSO SAY IN 1995, NEARLY HALF OF QUEBECERS, IT WAS CLOSE, VOTED FOR THE SEPARATION. IT’S BEEN A LONG TIME. IT’S NOT A — WE’RE NOT LOOKING AT A REFERENDUM ANY TIME SOON. EVEN THE BLOC QUEBECOIS MEMBERS DON’T PUSH FOR A REFERENDUM. WE’RE LOOKING AT A SITUATION WHERE QUEBEC IS PART OF CANADA BUT WITH A VERY — WITH A STATUS THAT EVEN STEPHEN HARPER RECOGNIZED AS QUEBECERS ARE A NATION. WE’VE MOVED A LONG WAY TOWARD ACCEPTING THAT THAT’S A REALITY WITHIN OUR COUNTRY. I DON’T WANT TO GO DIVIDING PEOPLE. I WANT TO SAY, LOOK, IF WE HAVE TO PULL TOGETHER IN ORDER TO RESPOND TO THE CLIMATE CRISIS, AND I KNOW QUEBEC — I KNOW PIERRE’S HISTORY. [ Voice of Translator ] HE’S A PROUD QUEBECER. WHO STANDS FOR THE INTERESTS OF QUEBEC AND QUEBECERS. AND THAT’S NOT THE REASON WHY — THAT’S NOT A REASON TO DISAGREE WITH HIM AS A MEMBER OF OUR CAUCUS BECAUSE WE DON’T NEED THE BLOC QUEBECOIS, WE NEED THE GREEN BLOC. [ End of Translation ] SO IN THE HEART OF OUR COUNTRY, THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO ARE FIERCELY LOYAL TO THEIR PART OF THE COUNTRY. BUT THEY’RE ALSO VERY STRONG CANADIANS. BECAUSE WE WORK TOGETHER. WE’RE — WE REALLY ARE ONE FAMILY IN CANADA. I’M MORE WORRIED ABOUT WHAT’S GOING ON IN ALBERTA FRANKLY WHERE POLITICIANS ARE MAKING AN EFFORT TO DIVIDE. I DON’T SEE POLITICIANS RIGHT NOW IN QUEBEC MAKING AN EFFORT TO DIVIDE US. I SEE IT IN ALBERTA. AND I THINK IT’S VERY IMPORTANT TO ALWAYS SAY WE PULL TOGETHER AS CANADIANS. WE ARE STRONGER TOGETHER. WE ARE NEIGHBOURS. WE ARE FRIENDS. IT DOESN’T MATTER TO ME WHERE YOU’RE FROM IN CANADA, WE ARE ONE FAMILY.>>IT’S TIME TO UNITE ON THE CLIMATE CRISIS.>> — TACTIC THIS MORNING BY PROTESTORS AT THE JACQUES-CARTIER BRIDGE?>>I UNDERSTAND PEOPLE ARE SO PASSIONATE AND UPSET. I’M UPSET. I’VE BEEN WORKING ON THE CLIMATE ISSUE, NOT JUST ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES, BUT CLIMATE FOR 30 YEARS. WE MISSED THE CHANCES WE HAD TO STOP IT BEFORE GLACIERS ARE IN RETREAT. WE MISSED THE CHANCE TO STOP IT BEFORE WE WERE LOSING ARCTIC ICE BECAUSE POLITICIANS SIGNED TREATIES ASK DIDN’T DO ANYTHING. SO THE ANGER FROM OUR YOUTH AND EXTINCT REBELLION IS SOMETHING I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND. AND I DO SUPPORT ACTIONS OF NONVIOLENT CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE. I GOT ARRESTED MYSELF AGAINST THE TRANS MOUNTAIN PIPELINE BUT THE REALITY RIGHT NOW IS I WISH ACTIVISTS WOULD CONSIDER WE’RE IN A FEDERAL ELECTION CAMPAIGN. WHAT’S THE MOST SIGNIFICANT, MEANINGFUL THING YOU CAN DO TO GET CLIMATE ACTION? RIGHT NOW, WE’RE HAVING A REFERENDUM ON CLIMATE IN THIS COUNTRY. THAT’S WHAT THE ELECTION IS ABOUT. AND IT WOULD BE I THINK MUCH MORE EFFECTIVE WAY TO GET CLIMATE ACTION IS TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYONE YOU KNOW VOTES, PARTICULARLY YOUNG PEOPLE, GET OUT AND VOTE, VOTE GREEN. THAT’S THE MOST EFFECTIVE WAY TO ENSURE THAT CANADA CHANGES OUR TARGET, NATIONS THE CLIMATE EMERGENCY, AND ALSO SETS ASIDE PARTISANSHIP SO AFTER THE ELECTION, WE WORK TOGETHER.>>THAT’S RIGHT.>>(Voice of Translator): IF YOU WANT TO FOLLOW US TO THE AUBERGE, THAT’S A BEAUTIFUL PLACE IN LONGUEUIL. BUT ANYWAY, THERE ARE A LOT OF PLANS OFFERED BY LONGUEUIL. WE’LL TALK OF GOING FROM HERE TO THE EAST AND AROUND THE LAKE AND TO THE AIRPORT. AND WE’LL MEET UP THERE. YOU’LL ENJOY IT.>>Mark: ELIZABETH MAY, THE GREEN PARTY LEADER, ALONG WITH PIERRE NANTEL, CANDIDATE IN QUEBEC, FORMER NEW DEMOCRAT MP, AND AS WE EXPECTED, THERE WERE QUESTIONS ABOUT PIERRE NANTEL’S STATUS, WHETHER HE IS A SOVEREIGNIST OR A NATIONALIST AND HOW HE BELONGS IN THE GREEN PARTY. AND THEY RESPONDED TO THOSE QUESTIONS, SO JOHN, DO YOU THINK THAT ISSUE’S BEEN PUT TO REST? IS IT STILL SORT OF SOMETHING THAT’S PLAGUING THE GREEN PARTY?>>I THINK IT TAKES PLACE WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF WHAT IS IN THE END A VERY DISAPPOINTING CAMPAIGN SO FAR FOR THE GREEN PARTY. AGAIN, AS WE WERE TALKING ABOUT BEFORE THIS BEGAN, ELIZABETH MAY POLLED 3% IN THE 2015 CAMPAIGN. SOME OF US, AND I WAS ONE OF THOSE, SAID THAT SHE HAD NO RIGHT TO BE GIVEN THE DESIGNATION OF LEADER OF A NATIONAL PARTY. SHE WAS A FRINGE LEADER WHO MANAGED TO GET HERSELF ELECTED ON VANCOUVER ISLAND AND THAT’S ALL SHE SHOULD BE REGARDED AS. THAT SAID, THE GREENS WENT UP IN THE VOTE. THEY’RE FLIRTING AROUND 10%, SOMETIMES EVEN A LITTLE BIT HIGHER. THEY HAVE PROPPING UP THE OFFICIAL OPPOSITION IN PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND, THEY’RE PROPPING UP THE OPPOSITION IN NDP IN VANCOUVER ISLAND SO THERE’S A LOT OF TIME FOR ELIZABETH MAY TO PREPARE THE GREEN PARTY AS A CREDIBLE NATIONAL ALTERNATIVE, ESPECIALLY NATIONAL ALTERNATIVE TO THE NDP. THUS FAR I HAVE SEEN ZERO EVIDENCE THAT SHE WAS READY FOR THAT, THAT SHE PREPARED FOR IT AND THAT SHE HAS ANYTHING APPROACHING A CREDIBLE NATIONAL CAMPAIGN. I DON’T SEE OFF VANCOUVER ISLAND, INCLUDING IN QUEBEC, WHERE SHE HAS A GHOST OF A CHANCE OF WINNING A SEAT.>>Mark: DAVID, ONE OF THE INTERESTING THINGS ABOUT HOW THIS ELECTION MAY PLAY OUT IS THAT PARTIES WHO DIDN’T END UP HAVING A GOOD CAMPAIGN OR MIGHT BE DISAPPOINTED WITH THE RESULT, IF IT’S A MINORITY PARLIAMENT COULD END UP HAVING A BIG ROLE TO PLAY IN CANADIAN POLITICS SO FOR EXAMPLE JAGMEET SINGH COULD END UP HAVING MORE POWER IN CANADIAN POLITICS WITH 20 OR 30 SEATS IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS THAN THOMAS MULCAIR EVER DID WITH A HUNDRED, RIGHT?>>YEAH, I MEAN, THE OPPOSITION — THE OFFICIAL OPPOSITION HAS VIRTUALLY NO POWER REALLY, AT LEAST IN THE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS. THEY CAN SLOW THINGS UP BUT THEY CAN’T REALLY DO ANYTHING. BUT IF YOU HAVE THE PRIME MINISTER HANGING FROM A STRING DEPENDING ON YOUR SUPPORT, THEN, YEAH, THERE’S AN AWFUL LOT YOU CAN DO. IF I WERE JUSTIN TRUDEAU AND I WERE FACING A MINORITY GOVERNMENT, WHICH OF COURSE I’D RATHER NOT DO, BUT IF I WERE, HAVING EITHER THE NDP OR THE GREENS TO CHOOSE FROM AS POTENTIAL PARTNERS VOTE-BY-VOTE IF NOT IN SOME FORMAL ARRANGEMENT, I THINK I’D BE PRETTY PLEASED WITH THAT SITUATION. TRUDEAU IS A FAIRLY LEFTISH LIBERAL AND HIS CLIMATE CHANGE POLICY IS OBVIOUSLY AN ENORMOUS DEAL TO HIM AND HE’S GOT A FAIR BIT OF SUPPORT FROM ELIZABETH MAY ON THAT FRONT AND HE CAN GO TO THE NEW DEMOCRATS FOR SUPPORT ON SOCIAL POLICY, AND ECONOMIC MATTERS. BUT AS MINORITIES GO, MINORITIES STINK. NO ONE WANTS TO BE IN CHARGE OF A MINORITY GOVERNMENT BUT AS MINORITIES GO, THAT’S NOT A BAD PLACE TO BE.>>Mark: ALL RIGHT. LET’S SEE WHAT OUR VIEWERS THINK ABOUT THE DEBATES LAST NIGHT AND MORE. MEGAN IS IN CHARLOTTETOWN. HELLO, MEGAN. GO AHEAD, MEGAN. MEGAN, ARE YOU THERE? GO AHEAD.>>Caller: HI, YEAH, THE IDEA THAT THE DEBATE WOULD AFFECT MY VOTING POSITION.>>Mark: RIGHT.>>Caller: I DON’T BELIEVE SO. IT’S BEEN ESTABLISHED THAT THE — POPULATION IS THE MAJORITY POPULATION VOTING IN CANADA THIS YEAR AND I THINK WE DEPEND PRIMARILY ON THE INTERNET AND SOCIAL MEDIA AND WORD OF MOUTH AS OPPOSED TO THE ACTUAL DEBATE ITSELF. TO DETERMINE WHO WE ARE WAITING FOR.>>Mark: OKAY. DID YOU WATCH THE DEBATE?>>I DID, YEAH. YEAH. I FOUND IT QUITE CRINGEY, IF I’M BEING COMPLETELY HONEST.>>Mark: WHY DO YOU SAY THAT?>>Caller: BECAUSE WHEN YOU PUT POLITICIANS AGAINST POLITICIANS, IT’S KIND OF LIKE CAT’S PLAY. THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO ARE TARGETING EACH OTHER AND MAKING STABS AND IT’S MORE ABOUT — WELL, FROM WHAT I SAW, ABOUT KNOCKING DOWN THE OPPOSITION AS OPPOSED TO BUILDING UP THE VALUES THAT YOU STAND FOR AS A PARTY.>>Mark: RIGHT. OKAY. MEGAN, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR CALL. CHERYL IN SASKATOON. HELLO, CHERYL.>>Caller: HI THERE.>>Mark: HI.>>Caller: I WANTED TO COMMENT ON THE DEBATE. I REALLY THOUGHT JAGMEET SINGH — I FOUND HE DID A REALLY GOOD JOB COMMUNICATING. HE WAS SLOW. I DIDN’T SEE HIM GETTING UPSET OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, AND HE HAD SOME GOOD LINES THERE. FOR ANDREW SCHEER, I DIDN’T LIKE HOW HE WAS SO CONFRONTATIONAL AND NEGATIVE. AND HE STILL DOESN’T HAVE HIS PLATFORM OUT AND SO I’M CONCERNED ABOUT THAT. FOR ELIZABETH MAY, I FOUND IT QUITE CONFUSING TO FOLLOW HER. SHE HAD LOTS OF STATS AND ABBREVIATIONS FOR THINGS AND I JUST REALLY COULDN’T KEEP TRACK OF WHAT SHE WAS SAYING. AND AS FAR AS JUSTIN TRUDEAU GOES, I THOUGHT — I THOUGHT HE FELL OVER HIS WORDS SOMEWHAT AND, UM, I FEEL THAT HE COULD HAVE PERFORMED BETTER. BUT AS FAR AS CHANGING MY VOTE, I STILL WILL GO WITH THE LIBERAL PARTY AND IT’S BECAUSE THEY HAVE THE LOW-INCOME POLICY OF THE CANADA CHILD BENEFIT AND THEY’RE ADDING TO THAT. AND I STILL HAVEN’T HEARD WHAT THE OTHER PARTIES ARE GOING TO DO ABOUT THAT. THANK YOU.>>Mark: OKAY. THANK YOU FOR YOUR CALL. STEVE IS IN MEDICINE HAT, ALBERTA. HELLO, STEVE.>>Caller: HELLO.>>Mark: HI. GO AHEAD.>>Caller: IT WAS QUITE INTERESTING WATCHING THE DEBATE LAST NIGHT. IT DIDN’T CHANGE MY OPINION OF WHO I WAS GOING TO VOTE FOR BUT IT CERTAINLY INFORMED ME OF SOME OF THE THINGS THAT I WASN’T AWARE OF IN THE CANADIAN POLITICAL SCENE. AND I VALUE THE FACT THAT THE MEDIA AND SUCH AS YOURSELVES AND THE OTHER PARTNERS ACTUALLY HELP US OUT AS CANADIANS BY PROMOTING THE DEBATE AND HAVING IT ON TV AND ON THE VARIOUS PLATFORMS. SO THANK YOU FOR THAT. DID YOU WANT ME TO GIVE YOU SOME THOUGHTS ABOUT –>>Mark: SURE.>>Caller: YEAH. LIKE I FOUND IT QUITE INTERESTING THAT MR. SCHEER, HE SEEMED LIKE HE WAS HIDING WITHIN HIS OWN BODY. IT SEEMED TO ME HIS BODY LANGUAGE, HE HAD SOMETHING TO HIDE AND BASED ON A COUPLE OF THE MOST CURRENT THINGS IN THE MEDIA, IT SEEMS HE DOES REGARDING HIS RESUME AND HIS CITIZENSHIP. A U.S. CITIZEN RUNNING FOR PRIME MINISTER? I SUPPOSE IT’S NOT ILLEGAL, BUT YOU’D THINK THAT A PERSON LIKE THAT WOULD WANT PEOPLE TO KNOW THAT ABOUT HIM SO HE’S HIDING THAT, AND THAT’S A TERRIBLE THING TO BE HIDING, I THINK.>>Mark: DO YOU THINK IT MAKES THAT MUCH OF A DIFFERENCE?>>Caller: WELL, I DON’T KNOW IF IT WILL MAKE A DIFFERENCE IN THE VOTES BUT I THINK IT’S SOMETHING THAT IS CORE TO WHO YOU ARE AND IF YOU’RE NOT LETTING THE PEOPLE WHO ARE SUPPOSED TO VOTE FOR YOU WHAT YOUR CITIZENSHIP IS, WELL, THAT’S PRETTY SNEAKY, IF YOU ASK ME. THE P Q, I THINK THEY ARE A TREASONNIST PARTY ANY WAY. I FIND IT DISGUSTING THEY’RE ON A DEBATE, THEIR PURPOSE IS TO TEAR DOWN CANADA AND WE SAW A POMPOUS LEADER WHO WAS CLOSE MINDED AND ALL ABOUT TAKING AND TAKING AND TAKING AND OFFERING NOTHING YOU KNOW FOR THE FEDERATION WHICH IS UNDERSTANDABLE BECAUSE THE B.Q. AND WHAT THEY’RE FOR. MR. BERNIER AND MR. SCHEER, WELL, THOSE ARE THE TWO FRONTRUNNERS, RIGHT, FOR THE CPC WHEN THEY HELD THEIR LEADERSHIP CONVENTION A WHILE AGO SO IT TELLS YOU THAT YOU HAD BASICALLY TWO CONSERVATIVE LEADERS ON STAGE DEBATING. AND THERE’S NOT MUCH TO CHOOSE FROM THERE. BOTH DON’T OFFER MUCH. MR. TRUDEAU, UNFORTUNATELY, HE HAD NOWHERE TO HIDE. WHAT YOU SEE IS WHAT YOU GET. HIS FOIBLES AND HIS GOOD PARTS, PEOPLE SEEM TO KNOW A FAIR BIT ABOUT ALREADY. MR. SINGH, WELL, HE’S IN THE TRADITION OF SOMEONE LIKE J.S. WOODWARDS, THE VOICE CRYING IN THE WILDERNESS, MAYBE A BIT AHEAD OF HIS TIME, A MAN OF GREAT IDEAS AND IT’S REALLY INTERESTING TO SEE HIM DEVELOP OVER TIME. AND MISS MAY, I AGREE WITH ONE OF YOUR PANELISTS THERE, I THINK IT WAS JOHN, I CAN’T SEE HER DOING A WHOLE LOT. LIKE SHE DOESN’T SEEM TO KNOW OR HER PARTY DOESN’T SEEM TO KNOW HOW TO BUILD A NATIONAL PROFILE AND TO BRING PEOPLE TOGETHER. CLIMATE CHANGE IS REAL. BUT I DON’T KNOW WHAT MORE THERE CAN BE, YEAH.>>Mark: STEVE, I APPRECIATE YOUR BREAKDOWN ON ALL OF THE CANDIDATES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR SHARING YOUR THOUGHTS WITH US. ERIC IS IN GRAND BANK, NEWFOUNDLAND AND LABRADOR. HELLO, ERIC.>>Caller: THANK YOU FOR TAKING MY CALL. AND I WANT TO COMMENT ON THE ELECTION. I DIDN’T WATCH THE DEBATE LAST NIGHT BECAUSE I WATCHED TORONTO.>>Mark: YOU WATCHED THE MAPLE LEAFS.>>Caller: YES, I WATCHED THE MAPLE LEAFS AND I HOPE THAT TRUDEAU AND THE TORY LEADER, I HOPE THEY LOSE LIKE THEY DID, AND ANYWAY, I’M GOING TO VOTE NDP THIS TIME. I DIDN’T VOTE THE LAST TIME BECAUSE I WAS SICK. AND I’LL TELL YOU WHY, BECAUSE WE HAD ONE OF THE BEST FISHERIES IN THE WORLD AND THE LIBERALS AND THE TORIES THROW US UNDER THE BUS, YOU KNOW. THEY DIDN’T PROTECT THE FISHERY AT ALL. SO I MEAN THAT’S HOW I FEEL ABOUT IT AND I REALLY APPRECIATE YOU TAKING MY CALL AND YOU HAVE A GOOD DAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.>>Mark: YOU TOO, ERIC, THANK YOU FOR YOUR CALL. LET’S TALK ABOUT A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT HAVE ARISEN FROM THOSE CALLS. DAVID, WE HEAR A LOT FROM PEOPLE THAT THEY DON’T LIKE WHEN POLITICIANS IN CAMPAIGNS GO NEGATIVE AND YET WE KNOW AS WELL THAT IT MUST WORK BECAUSE THEY ALL DO IT. AND SO THEREFORE THERE MUST BE, YOU KNOW, THEY WOULDN’T AT THIS STAGE IN THE EVOLUTION OF CANADIAN POLITICS DO SOMETHING THAT DELIBERATELY TURNED OFF VOTERS. AND YET AT THE SAME TIME, WHEN YOU SAW JAGMEET SINGH IN LAST NIGHT’S DEBATE, HE DIDN’T APPEAR TOO NEGATIVE, HE APPEARED VERY POSITIVE, CONGENIAL, FRIENDLY, EVEN WHEN HE WAS DISAGREEING WITH PEOPLE. AND THAT ACTUALLY STOOD OUT TO ME AS A BIT OF A CONTRAST. IS THAT — IS THAT THE LUXURY OF BEING IN THIRD OR FOURTH PLACE THAT HE CAN DO THAT OR IS THAT SOMETHING THAT A FRONTRUNNER COULD ALSO CONSIDER AS A TACTIC?>>I THINK WHAT WE’VE BEEN SEEING FROM JAGMEET SINGH, PARTICULARLY, I MEAN THROUGHOUT THE CAMPAIGN, BUT ESPECIALLY IN THE DEBATES, AND ABOVE ALL LAST NIGHT, IS WE’VE BEEN SEEING THE JAGMEET SINGH THAT NEW DEMOCRATS SAW WHEN THEY CHOSE HIM AS LEADER. WHICH IS AN IMMENSELY LIKABLE GUY WHO HAS THOUGHT DEEPLY ABOUT SOME DIFFICULT ISSUES, HAS LIVED WITH RACISM HIS ENTIRE LIFE AND HAS QUITE PROFOUND THOUGHTS ABOUT HOW TO CONFRONT IT. AND THINGS THAT MATTER A GREAT DEAL IN OUR SOCIETY THAT WE DON’T REALLY HEAR ABOUT THAT MUCH, AT LEAST NOT ON THAT LEVEL FROM OTHER LEADERS. AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, ALL THE TALK, AS JOHN WAS SAYING EARLIER, HAS BEEN ABOUT WHAT A DISASTER THE NDP IS ORGANIZATIONALLY FINANCIALLY, IT’S NOT BEEN A GREAT FUNDRAISER, A BUNCH OF HIS MPs HAVE RETIRED ON HIM, AND HE’S TRYING TO PULL THE PARTY BACK FROM THE BRINK. BUT I THINK HIS BEST CHANCE IS BEING THE JAGMEET SINGH THAT WE SAW YESTERDAY. AND SO IT HELPS THAT HE DOESN’T HAVE POWER TO GAIN OR LOSE. HE CAN REALLY BE HIMSELF, I THINK. BUT HIMSELF IS AN APPEALING GUY WE’RE SEEING.>>Mark: JOHN, WHAT DO YOU THINK?>>YEAH, I THINK ONE OF THE MOST POWERFUL LINES OF THE NIGHT IS WHEN ANDREW SCHEER AND JUSTIN TRUDEAU WERE YELLING OVER TOP OF EACH OTHER AND IN A MASTERFUL WAY IT REVEALS, BY THE WAY IT DOESN’T HURT TO BE A LAWYER IN POLITICS, MR. SINGH JUST CUT IN AND SAID THESE GUYS ARE JUST TRYING TO CONVINCE YOU OF WHO’S WORSE FOR THIS COUNTRY. WE SHOULD TALK ABOUT WHO MIGHT BE BEST FOR THIS COUNTRY. NOW, IT’S A LUXURY THAT HE HAS AS LEADER OF A THIRD PARTY, BUT IT ALSO REFLECTS, I THINK, THE FAILURE OF BOTH OF THE LEADING PARTIES’ CAMPAIGNS BY THEIR OWN DEFINITION OF SUCCESS. IF YOU ARE HAVING A GOOD CAMPAIGN, THEN WHAT YOU TRADITIONALLY DO, AND WE’VE ALL SEEN THIS TIME AND TIME AGAIN, THE PARTY SPENDS THE FIRST PART OF THE CAMPAIGN DRIVING DOWN SUPPORT FOR THEIR OPPONENT. THAT’S THE TIME OF THE NEGATIVE ADS, THAT’S WHEN THE HIT JOBS REALLY COME AT IT. AND THEN YOU TAKE THE OPPONENT’S VOTE DOWN AS FAR AS YOU THINK YOU CAN GET IT AND YOU PIVOT. AND YOU START TO TALK ABOUT YOUR HOPE AND CHANGE, THE THING THAT YOU WANT TO DO TO MAKE A BETTER COUNTRY, THE POLICIES THAT YOU BELIEVE WILL MAKE PEOPLE’S LIVES BETTER. WE HAVE NOT SEEN THE SECOND HALF OF THAT CAMPAIGN. BOTH THE LIBERALS AND THE CONSERVATIVES CONTINUE TO RUN RELENTLESSLY NEGATIVE CAMPAIGNS AGAINST EACH OTHER. WHICH CAN ONLY SAY THAT IN THEIR OWN WAR ROOMS, THEY ARE AFRAID THAT THEY ARE NOT DOING THE JOB OF SUPPRESSING THE VOTE OF THEIR OPPONENTS SO THERE’S NO CHANCE FOR THE CONSERVATIVES AND THE LIBERALS TO PIVOT TO THE HOPEY CHANGEY STUFF AS SARAH PALIN ONCE SAID THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO BE TALKING ABOUT. AND THAT LEAVES JAGMEET SINGH WITH HIS TREMENDOUS OPPORTUNITY TO COME IN AND SAY I AM INDEED THE CANDIDATE WHO IS FOR RECONCILIATION, WHO IS FOR OPTIMISM, WHO IS FOR FIGHTING RACISM AND FOR FIGHTING THE BIG BOSSES.>>Mark: LAST NIGHT, ANDREW SCHEER WAS CRITICIZED FOR NOT RELEASING HIS PLATFORM. WE HEAR PEOPLE TALK ABOUT THAT, ONE CALLER RAISED IT. IT’S BECOME A BIT OF A TALKING POINT FOR HIS POLITICAL OPPONENTS. HE OF COURSE HAS RELEASED MANY COMPONENTS OF HIS PLATFORM. HE JUST HASN’T PUT IT ALL TOGETHER IN A FULLY-COSTED PLATFORM DOCUMENT. HOW BIG A DEAL IS THAT DO YOU THINK, DAVID?>>WELL, I MEAN I THINK WE’RE HEARING IT IS BECOMING A BIT OF A DEAL BECAUSE THE OTHER PARTIES HAVE PUT OUT COSTED TO A GREATER OR LESSER EXTENT BUT SORT OF THEIR FULL BLUEPRINT ANYWAY, EVEN IF ALL THE FANCY DETAILS ARE THERE AND I THINK IT’S PARTICULARLY WEAKNESS FOR THE CONSERVATIVES GIVEN ONTARIO’S EXPERIENCE WHICH IT WAS ELECTING A GOVERNMENT UNDER DOUG FORD THAT NEVER BOTHERED WITH A FULL-BLOWN PLATFORM. AND I THINK ONTARIANS, THE POLLS SUGGEST, ARE NOT THRILLED WITH HOW THAT’S GONE SO SCHEER HAS PROMISED THAT THERE WILL BE A PLATFORM AND IT WILL COME OUT AND IT WILL BE COSTED AS THEIR INDIVIDUAL PROVINCES HAVE BEEN AND IT WILL COME OUT BEFORE THE ADVANCED POLLS OPEN AND THAT IS IMMINENT, I THINK THAT’S AT THE END OF THIS WEEK SO THE FACT THAT HE’S TIMING IT TO BE AFTER THE DEBATES BUT PERIOD OF TIME ADVANCED POLLS OPEN IS INTERESTING. IT MEANS HE CAN’T BE CHALLENGED ON SOME OF THE FINE DETAILS AND THERE ARE — I THINK THE MATH IS HE’S PROMISED TO REDUCE GOVERNMENT REVENUES AND TO SPEND MONEY MORE THAN HE’S EXPLAINED WHERE THAT MONEY IS GOING TO COME FROM SO THERE ARE HOLES THAT PLATFORM IS GOING TO NEED TO FILL THAT PROBABLY SOME PEOPLE ARE NOT GOING TO BE HAPPY ABOUT AND HE’S TIMING IT CAREFULLY TO NOT BE CHALLENGED ON THAT.>>Mark: ALL RIGHT. LET’S TAKE A CALL FROM KEN IN RED DEER, ALBERTA. HELLO, KEN.>>Caller: HELLO.>>Mark: HI, GO AHEAD.>>Caller: YES. I JUST WANT TO MAKE A QUICK COMMENT. I FELT THE LEADERS DEBATE FOR THE MOST PART WAS A SCRIPTED MESSAGE WHERE MR. TRUDEAU PROMISES, YOU KNOW, MANY THINGS, MOST TIMES MOST THINGS DON’T COME TO FRUITION. I LIVE IN ALBERTA. I’LL ACTUALLY A RURAL ALBERTAN, I’M A FARMER. NOBODY TALKS ABOUT FARMING AND THE INDUSTRY, THE CARBON OFFSET THAT WE HAVE AS FARMERS, WE SEQUESTER MORE CARBON THAN ANYBODY, AND WE’RE PAYING. WE DON’T GET THE REFUND THAT OH, THEY TALK ABOUT THE REFUNDS. AND AGAIN, ALL THESE REFUNDS COME THROUGH AND IT COSTS MONEY TO GET THE REFUND. SO REALLY, IT JUST BECOME A TAX THAT IS SELF-SUPPORTING SO THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN HIRE ANOTHER, YOU KNOW, 50,000 ACCOUNTANTS TO KEEP YOU RUNNING, AND THAT HAPPENS AND IT HAPPENS, THE GST IS A CLASSIC EXAMPLE. CONSERVATIVES DID IT AND THAT’S WHAT HAPPENS, YOU KNOW. I HAD A TRIP TO AUSTRALIA, THEY TALK ABOUT ENERGY. THERE MUST BE, I’M GOING TO SAY 50% OF THE STRUCTURES IN AUSTRALIA HAVE SOLAR PANELS. MOST OF THEM DON’T WORK BECAUSE THEY WERE TOO EXPENSIVE TO KEEP UP. THEY PUT THEM ON. THE BIG QUESTION IS WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO WHEN THE SUN DOESN’T SHINE, WE HAVE NO POWER. WHAT DO WE DO WHEN THE WIND DON’T BLOW? YOU HAVE NO POWER. POWER IS GENERATED FROM ENERGY. REGARDLESS WHAT ENERGY YOU CHOOSE, YOU HAVE TO MAKE THE ENERGY CLEAN. COAL CAN BE CLEAN. NATURAL GAGS. GAS. NATURAL GAS AND DIESEL, THEY CAN CLEAN THESE THINGS. THEY CAN CLEAN THESE THINGS SO THAT YOU DON’T HAVE THE CLIMATE PROBLEMS THAT WE’VE GOT.>>Mark: THAT’S NOT WHAT THE EVIDENCE SUGGESTS BUT ANYWAY, LET’S PAUSE THERE. I APPRECIATE YOUR CALL, KEN. I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE GET TO SOME OTHER CALLERS AS WELL. THANK YOU. NEXT UP IS AL IN ST. CATHARINES, ONTARIO. HELLO, AL.>>Caller: HELLO.>>Mark: HI.>>Caller: HOW ARE YOU? IT’S BEEN A WHILE SINCE I SPOKE TO YOU LAST. I GUESS IT WAS A LONG TIME, BUDGET OR SOMETHING.>>Mark: OKAY.>>Caller: WE TALKED A LITTLE BIT ABOUT BREXIT AND THAT. BUT I JUST WANTED TO MORE OR LESS MAKE A GENERAL OPINION ON LEADERSHIP IN THE DEBATE LAST NIGHT. I’VE WATCHED THESE DEBATES SINCE THE NIXON DEBATES. I CAN ACTUALLY SAY THAT I ACTUALLY WATCHED IT. MOST PEOPLE DON’T. IT’S BECAUSE OF MY AGE. BUT WHAT I HAVE TO SAY IS THAT JUSTIN TRUDEAU, HE LOOKED PRIME MINISTERIAL. ANDREW SCHEER, HE DID NOT LOOK PRIME MINISTERIAL. I THINK SCHEER, MR. SCHEER COULD COME ACROSS BETTER IF HE WASN’T ATTACKING. IT’S SORT OF A ROUGH SCENE THERE, YOU KNOW. SO WHEN YOU SEE THAT, IT SORT OF TURNS PEOPLE OFF. AS I SAY, I WATCHED AN AWFUL LOT OF DEBATES, AND I THINK EVERYBODY SHOULD TRY TO RESTRAIN THEMSELVES TO THE ISSUES AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE WITHOUT GOING INTO PERSONAL ATTACKS. BECAUSE I THINK THAT MR. SCHEER MADE A BAD IMAGE FOR HIMSELF IN A LOT OF EYES LAST NIGHT. THAT MIGHT HAVE VOTED FOR HIM. OTHER LEADERS, SUCH AS JAGMEET SINGH, I LIKE HIM, HE GOT A TREMENDOUS CHARISMA. HE’S GOT TREMENDOUS PERSONALITY. HE’S GOT GOOD LINES, HE LAUGHS, HE’S VERY COMFORTABLE. AND I LIKE THAT GUY. REALLY IS SUPER. SO I’M NOT GOING TO SAY THAT I’M GOING TO VOTE FOR THIS GUY OR THAT GUY, BUT I’M TRYING TO TALK ABOUT THE PRIME MINISTERIAL SIDE OF THINGS. AND I THINK THAT ELIZABETH MAY, SHE KIND OF COME ACROSS PRETTY GOOD. BECAUSE I’VE WATCHED SO MANY DEBATES. BUT I’M GOING TO SAY ONE THING ABOUT MR. HARPER. I ALWAYS FOUND HIM TO BE A DECENT INDIVIDUAL, HE DID NOT DO THE KIND OF PERSONAL ATTACKS THAT MR. SCHEER IS DOING. AND I THINK MR. SCHEER HAS BEEN WATCHING TOO MUCH TELEVISION ON CHANNEL 33 COGECO, CNN, AND HE’S BEEN PICKING UP TOO MANY POINTERS FROM DONALD TRUMP.>>Mark: OKAY. AL, I’M GOING TO JUMP IN SO WE CAN GET TO SOME OTHER CALLS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR CALL. LET’S GO NEXT TO ROBIN IN LINDSAY, ONTARIO. HELLO, ROBIN.>>Caller: HELLO.>>Mark: GO AHEAD, PLEASE.>>Caller: IT’S SUCH A PLEASURE TO TALK TO YOU FELLAS.>>Mark: THANK YOU FOR CALLING.>>Caller: AT THE OUTSET, WE TALKED ABOUT MR. SINGH AND WHAT’S HAPPENING TO THE NDP PARTY. AND THAT’S A LONG STORY BECAUSE I’VE BEEN A POLITICAL ORGANIZER IN THE PAST. AND I’VE SEEN MASSES OF SEATS COME IN, I’VE SEEN MASSES OF ITALIANS COME IN, AND THEY HAVE TAKEN OVER THE PARTY COMPLETELY THROUGH THEIR TEMPLES. A SAD SITUATION. SOME OF THE PEOPLE THAT LEFT THE NDP WERE AMONG THE BEST. MR. SCHEER AND MR. TRUDEAU ARE RIGHT WINGERS ALONG WITH — I DON’T KNOW WHY THE FRENCH INDIVIDUALS WERE ON THAT PROGRAM. COMING FROM GATINEAU, IT REALLY MADE NO SENSE. THE TIME ELEMENT, EVERYTHING ABOUT THE PROGRAM WAS SUSPECT. EXCEPT FOR ELIZABETH MAY. AND SHE HAS BEEN SOLID RIGHT FROM THE START. SHE HAS BEEN HIGHLY CREDIBLE WITH EVERYTHING THAT SHE SAID. AND THE OTHERS COULDN’T HOLD A CANDLE TO HER. AND SHE DOESN’T GET THE PLAY, SHE HASN’T GOT THE PLAY. THEY TALK ABOUT THE CHARISMA OF SINGH. WELL, HE’S PROBABLY SPENT HALF HIS LIFE BUILDING UP TO THIS POINT. AND I THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR ALLOWING ME TO GO ON.>>Mark: THANK YOU FOR YOUR CALL, ROBIN. LET’S LOOK AT A COUPLE EMAILS WE RECEIVED FROM VIEWERS. OUR EMAIL ADDRESS IS [email protected] SO HERE IS AN EMAIL FROM COLETTE SAYING FOR SURE THE FRENCH DEBATE LAST WEEK WAS MORE ORDERLY AND EASIER TO FOLLOW. THE ENGLISH DEBATE DID NOT CHANGE MY VOTE. YES, I REALLY LIKE MR. SINGH, HIS PERSONALITY AND THE WAY HE SPEAKS DIRECTLY TO THE PARTY BUT HIS PARTY’S STANDING WILL NOT CHANGE. JANN WRITES, THIS DEBATE DID NOT CHANGE MY MIND BUT IT MADE ME VERY CLEAR AS TO WHY I’M NOT VOTING FOR EITHER LIBERALS OR CONSERVATIVES. THE TWO CANDIDATES THAT DID STAND OUT WERE ELIZABETH MAY AND MR. SINGH. TOO BAD THESE TWO COULDN’T WORK TOGETHER. I FEEL WE MIGHT JUST HAVE A FIGHTING CHANCE FOR A BETTER CANADA. LYNN WRITES BEING A PREVIOUS LIBERAL, I WANTED AND TRIED TO LIKE THE LIBERALS BUT AS SOON AS TRUDEAU OPENS HIS MOUTH, I AM TURNED AWAY. I WAS IMPRESSED BY SINGH, VERY WELL-SPOKEN AND MAY HAVE PICKED UP VOTES. REALLY LIKE SCHEER, TOO, ESPECIALLY WHEN HE CALLED OUT TRUDEAU. AND MELISSA WRITES, WATCHING THE DEBATE HASN’T CHANGED MY VOTE. HOWEVER, IT IS VERY DISAPPOINTING WATCHING SCHEER AND TRUDEAU BICKER BACK AND FORTH INSTEAD OF SPEAKING DIRECTLY ON THEIR POLICIES. I WAS — IT WAS ALSO INCREDIBLY DISRESPECTFUL OF JAGMEET TO SAY MAX HAD NO RIGHT TO BE THERE. I THOUGHT JAGMEET HAD MORE RESPECT THAN THAT. VERY UN-CANADIAN OF HIM. JOIN THE DISCUSSION ON SOCIAL MEDIA USING THE #CPACvote2019 OR SEND US AN EMAIL AT [email protected] SO LET’S LOOK AT SOME COMMENTS ON SOCIAL MEDIA. THIS PERSON WRITES, IF ANYTHING, IT SOLIDIFIED MY DECISION. AGAIN OUR QUESTION, HAS THE DEBATE AFFECTED HOW YOU WILL VOTE. JACKIE WRITES, YES, IT DID, IT HELPED ME DECIDE WHO I’M NOT VOTING FOR AND ALSO HELPED ME DECIDE WHO I’M DEFINITELY VOTING FOR. THIS PERSON WRITES, NO, ALREADY VOTED VIA SPECIAL BALLOT. RICK WRITES, REMAIN UNDECIDED AS ALWAYS, BUT WAS PLEASANTLY SURPRISED TO SEE THE ENVIRONMENT FRONT AND CENTRE. LOYALTY TO A PARTY WITHOUT QUESTIONING THEIR PLATFORM IS IRRESPONSIBLE IN THIS DAY AND AGE AND FIRST-TIME VOTERS WILL DECIDE, WHICH IS ALSO A GOOD THING. DEBATE? THERE WAS NO DEBATE. IT WOULD HAVE BEEN NICE TO HAVE A REAL DEBATE. OKAY. THANK YOU FOR ALL YOUR COMMENTS. WE ARE GOING TO GET BACK TO YOUR OPINIONS IN JUST A MOMENT. SO DAVID, LESS THAN TWO WEEKS TO GO TO ELECTION DAY. WE’LL BE WAKING UP TO A RESULT. IS IT STILL NOT CLEAR WHAT THAT RESULT IS GOING TO BE, ARE THERE STILL A LOT OF DIFFERENT SCENARIOS?>>OH, YEAH, I THINK THERE’S VIRTUALLY AN INFINITE NUMBER OF SCENARIOS. WE’VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT HOW TIGHT THE POPULAR VOTE IS. I DON’T THINK — I THINK THE NDP HAVE PULLED AWAY FROM THE GREENS FOR THIRD PLACE. TWO WEEKS IS A LONG TIME. YOU KNOW, BASED ON THE DYNAMICS SO FAR, I WOULDN’T EXPECT THEM TO FADE, BUT THESE THINGS CAN HAPPEN. WE COULD END UP WITH A MAJORITY ONE WAY OR THE OTHER OR WE CAN END UP WITH A VERY COMPLICATED MINORITY SITUATION.>>Mark: I DON’T KNOW, WHAT DO YOU THINK?>>UNLESS SOMETHING HAPPENS OVER THANKSGIVING WEEKEND, I THINK MAJORITY IS MOVING OFF THE TABLE. AGAIN, NEITHER PARTY — IF YOU BELIEVE THAT YOU NEED 38% OF THE VOTE TO GET A MAJORITY GOVERNMENT, THAT IS THE BEAR MINIMUM, AND EVEN THEN THE VOTE SPLITS HAVE TO GO JUST YOUR WAY, YOU KNOW, IN ORDER TO USING THE FIRST PAST THE POST SYSTEM TO GET YOURSELF TO MAJORITY, NEITHER ONE OF THOSE PARTIES IS WITHIN DISTANCE OF 38%. IT IS POSSIBLE THAT PEOPLE WILL GO HOME THANKSGIVING, TALK TO EACH OTHER, CONSENSUS WILL EMERGE AROUND THE TABLE, AND WE’LL SEE THAT CONSENSUS REFLECTED IN THE FINAL WEEK. BARRING THAT, I DON’T SEE A MAJORITY GOVERNMENT. AND THEN IT BECOMES REALLY INTERESTING. I DO NOT SEE THE POSSIBILITY OF A CONSERVATIVE GOVERNMENT THAT IS PROPPED UP BY EITHER THE GREENS OR THE NDP. THE TWO PARTIES ARE JUST — THREE PARTIES ARE JUST TOO FAR APART FOR AT LEAST THE CONSERVATIVES AND THE OTHER PARTIES ARE JUST TOO FAR APART ON ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES. BUT THE BLOC IS DOING WELL IN QUEBEC. WE FORGET THAT THEY TOOK 50 SEATS ROUTINELY IN THE 1990s, IN THE FIRST DECADE OF THE CENTURY. IF THEY GET UP ANYWHERE CLOSE TO THAT, I DON’T THINK THEY WILL GET UP THERE, ANYWHERE CLOSE TO IT, THEY COULD BE THE THIRD PARTY IN THE HOUSE, THEY COULD BE AHEAD OF THE NDP AND THE GREENS. AND THEN HOW WOULD THE LIBERALS AND CONSERVATIVES NEGOTIATE TRYING TO PUT TOGETHER A GOVERNMENT THAT WILL SURVIVE A THRONE SPEECH WITH THE TACIT SUPPORT OF A SEPARATIST PARTY? THAT’S WHAT OUR JOBS GET INTERESTING.>>Mark: I KNOW YOU’RE NOT RULING OUT A MAJORITY CATEGORICALLY BUT YOU SEEM TO BE SAYING IT’S THE LEAST LIKELY OUTCOME. THE POLL TRACKING WEBSITES, THOUGH, 338CANADA.COM, CBC’S ERIC GRENIER, THEIR POLL TRACKER, THEY SEEM TO SUGGEST THAT A MAJORITY IS WITHIN RANGE, IF YOU LOOK AT THE RANGE THAT THEY’RE PROJECTING FOR BOTH THE CONSERVATIVES AND THE LIBERALS. MORE SO THE LIBERALS THAN THE CONSERVATIVES, BUT IT’S WITHIN THE RANGE OF THE NUMBER OF SEATS THAT EACH OF THOSE PARTIES COULD WIN. A MAJORITY IS STILL A DISTINCT POSSIBILITY.>>WELL, AS YOU SAY, THEY’RE WITHIN A RANGE OF POSSIBILITIES. BUT I WILL SAY THIS. IF FROM SOME FREAK OF ELECTORAL NATURE THE LIBERALS SAY GOT ONLY 33% OF THE VOTE BUT ELECTED A MAJORITY GOVERNMENT, THERE WOULD BE HELL TO PAY IN TERMS OF NATIONAL UNITY. YOU WOULD HAVE VERY LARGE NUMBERS OF VOTERS, ESPECIALLY IN THE WEST, SAYING THAT THIS WAS COMPLETELY ILLEGITIMATE WITH ONLY ONE OF THREE VOTERS CASTING A BALLOT FOR THE GOVERNING PARTY, ALL RIGHT THEY FORM A GOVERNMENT, THEY FORM MINORITY GOVERNMENT, BUT IF THEY SOMEHOW TORQUE THAT INTO A MAJORITY OF SEATS, IT WOULD BE DESCRIBED BY MANY PEOPLE AS AN ILLEGITIMATE ELECTION. AND I WOULD BE QUESTIONING THE LEGITIMACY OF IT MYSELF.>>IT IS FUN TO IMAGINE THE CONSERVATIVES SIGNING UP TO SUPPORT PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION.>>FINALLY.>>NEVER HAS BEEN A TORY POSITION BUT MIGHT TAKE A RESULT LIKE THAT TO MAKE IT HAPPEN. I POINT OUT THAT WE SAW A TON OF MOVEMENT IN THE POLLS IN JUST THE LAST FEW DAYS OF THE 2015 ELECTION. THE LINES WERE PRETTY FLAT THE WHOLE TIME AND THEN YOU SAW THE LIBERAL NUMBERS SHOOT THROUGH THE ROOF, SO I THINK IF WE WOULD BE HAVING THIS CONVERSATION AT THIS POINT FOUR YEARS AGO, IT PROBABLY WOULD HAVE BEEN VERY SIMILAR. AND THEN REALITY CAME AND KICKED EVERYONE IN THE FACE.>>Mark: I REMEMBER THROUGHOUT THE 2015 ELECTION, A LOT OF PEOPLE SAYING, WELL, I DON’T KNOW WHAT THE OUTCOME’S GOING TO BE THIS, IT WILL BE A MINORITY GOVERNMENT. AND IT DIDN’T END UP THAT WAY. DIFFERENT CIRCUMSTANCES, OF COURSE, LOTS OF OTHER FACTORS AT PLAY, DIFFERENT LEADERS, NINE-YEAR INCUMBENT GOVERNMENT, SO I’M NOT SAYING THAT JUST BECAUSE IT HAPPENED THAT WAY THAT TIME MEANS IT WILL AGAIN. BUT IT IS HARD TO PREDICT. DO PEOPLE REALLY SIT DOWN AT THANKSGIVING AND TALK ABOUT WHO THEY’RE GOING TO VOTE FOR, DO YOU THINK, OR HAS THAT BECOME A BIT OF A MYTH IN CANADIAN POLITICS BECAUSE WE NOW HAVE ELECTIONS TYPICALLY NOW WITH FIXED ELECTION DATES A WEEK OR SO AFTER THANKSGIVING?>>I HAVEN’T SEEN A SCHOLARLY ARTICLE BASED ON EXIT POLLING DATA OR ANY OTHER KIND OF POLLING DATA THAT SAYS WE CAN SEE A MEASUREABLE MOVEMENT IN POPULAR SUPPORT BASED ON A STATUTORY HOLIDAY DURING THE ELECTION CAMPAIGN SO IT’S ALL ANECDOTAL. THE ANECDOTE THAT MOVED US TOWARDS THINKING ABOUT THIS WAS THE 2006 ELECTION. AT LEAST AS FAR AS I WAS CONCERNED. IN THE 2006 ELECTION, YOU HAD A VERY LONG ELECTION CAMPAIGN.>>Mark: IT STARTED IN 2005.>>AND WHEN EVERYBODY BROKE FOR CHRISTMAS, IT LOOKED AS THOUGH PAUL MARTIN’S LIBERALS WERE AHEAD. WHEN WE GOT BACK AFTER CHRISTMAS, ALL OF A SUDDEN STEPHEN HARPER’S CONSERVATIVES WERE AHEAD, SO THERE WERE THINGS THAT HAPPENED DURING CHRISTMAS WEEK. THERE WAS THE SHOOTING OF JANE CREBA NEAR YONGE AND DUNDAS WHICH BROUGHT THE WHOLE ISSUE OF GUN VIOLENCE TO THE FORE AND THEN THERE WAS THE RCMP ANNOUNCING THAT THEY WERE INVESTIGATING POSSIBLE INSIDER TRADING WITH RALPH GOODALE AS FINANCE MINISTER. SO IT MAY BE THAT THOSE TWO EVENTS FLIPPED VOTERS IN A MAJOR WAY AWAY FROM THE LIBERALS AND TOWARDS THE CONSERVATIVES. OR IT MAY BE THAT OVER THE COURSE OF THAT WEEK, PEOPLE TALKED TO EACH OTHER AND CONSENSUS EMERGED THAT THEY WERE SICK TO DEATH OF PAUL MARTIN AND THE SPONSORSHIP SCANDAL AND THEY WANTED TO GIVE STEPHEN HARPER A CHANCE. AGAIN, IT’S ALL ANECDOTAL. I WILL GIVE YOU THIS MUCH, THOUGH, THE POLITICAL CAMPAIGNS THINK THEY MATTER. THEY ARE FORCED TO SUSPEND CAMPAIGNING BECAUSE THAT HE IS NO POINT IN CAMPAIGNING OVER THANKSGIVING WEEKEND. AND THEY DON’T LIKE IT, THEY’RE NERVOUS, THEY LOSE CONTROL OVER THE AGENDA FOR THOSE THREE DAYS. AND THEY ARE VERY NERVOUS WHEN THEY COME BACK ON TUESDAY TO SEE WHAT IS HAPPENING. SO THERE’S THAT TO IT AS WELL.>>Mark: OKAY. DAVID.>>I THINK SOME FAMILIES DO TALK POLITICS AND MAYBE SOME PEOPLE DO HAVE THEIR MINDS CHANGED. I SUSPECT WHAT HAPPENS IS SOME FAMILIES TALK POLITICS AND THEY STOMP AWAY FROM THE TABLE SAYING THEY CAN’T BELIEVE THE OPINIONS OF SOME OF THE PEOPLE THEY’RE RELATED TO.>>OR WHO MARRIED THEM.>>OR WHO MARRIED THEM. I MEAN, I THINK THESE THINGS CAN HAVE AN EFFECT. I DON’T THINK THEY CAN HAVE A PREDICTABLE EFFECT.>>Mark: RIGHT. ALL RIGHT. TERRY FROM SARNIA, ONTARIO. HELLO, TERRY.>>Caller: HELLO, MARK.>>Mark: HI.>>Caller: AND TO JOHN. I’M SORRY, I FORGOT –>>Mark: DAVID.>>Caller: DAVID?>>Mark: YEAH.>>Caller: JEPP. GENTLEMEN. I HAVE A COUPLE OF POINTS I’D LIKE TO MAKE REGARDING THE DEBATE LAST NIGHT. FIRST, IT WON’T SWAY MY VOTE BECAUSE I’M A CONFIRMED CONSERVATIVE REGARDLESS. HOWEVER, I DID HAVE A TAKE ON THE PERFORMANCE OF I’D SAY THE FOUR MAIN PARTY LEADERS, SCHEER, TRUDEAU, SINGH AND MAY. AND WELL, TO START OFF WITH, I THINK THAT THE FORMAT WAS JUST A SHAMBLES. IT WAS THE LEAST CONDUCIVE TO AN ACTUALLY INFORMATIVE DEBATE FOR THE VIEWER. I MUCH PREFERRED THE STRUCTURE THAT THE FRENCH NETWORK TVA HAD LAST WEEK. I THINK THAT WAS A MUCH MORE VIEWER-FRIENDLY STRUCTURE. THAT SAID, I MEAN, TOO MANY — FIRST OF ALL, TOO MANY PARTICIPANTS AMONG THE LEADERS. I SAW NO NEED TO HAVE EITHER BERNIER OR BLANCHET THERE. AND ALSO I DON’T REALLY SEE WHY THERE WAS A NEED FOR FIVE MODERATORS. ONE, TWO MAX WOULD HAVE BEEN SUFFICIENT. BUT OKAY, THAT PUT ASIDE, I FELT THAT — I MEAN, I’VE ALREADY DISCLOSED MY POLITICAL ALLEGIANCES, BUT I DID THINK THAT SCHEER PERFORMED CONSIDERABLY BETTER THAN HE DID IN THE TVA DEBATE. HE WAS AGGRESSIVE BUT THEN AGAIN, HE PRETTY MUCH HAD TO BE. BECAUSE HE DID PERFORM SO POORLY IN LAST WEEK’S DEBATE. [ Please Stand By ]>>Caller: — TRUDEAU HELD HIS OWN. HE DIDN’T SCORE ANY POINTS, IN MY OPINION. BUT I MEAN, IT’S TOUGH FOR AN INCUMBENT. HARPER WAS THAT POSITION FOUR YEARS AGO AND HE DIDN’T WIN THAT DEBATE EITHER. THE CONSENSUS SEEMS TO BE THAT SINGH PERFORMED THE BEST, AND I WOULD HAVE TO SAY IN TERMS OF CONGENIALITY AND LIKABILITY AND RELATABILITY TO THE VIEWERS, I WOULD — I WOULD CONCUR WITH THAT. I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT. >>Mark: OKAY. >>Caller: I WAS PUT OFF SOMEWHAT, THOUGH, BY ELIZABETH MAY. I FOUND THAT SHE CAME ACROSS TO ME, ANYWAY, AS SOMEWHAT CONDESCENDING AND PREACHY. ESPECIALLY WITH HER SNARKY REMARK TO SCHEER ABOUT, YOU KNOW, WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, YOU ARE NOT GOING TO BE PRIME MINISTER IN TWO WEEKS. >>Mark: RIGHT. >>Caller: I MEAN, AS THE GENTLEMAN ON YOUR PANEL POINTED OUT, POLLS, ESPECIALLY IN ONTARIO AND IN THE 905, ARE STILL SO VOLATILE, AND WE HAVE SEEN LAST-MINUTE SWINGS ON THE WEEKEND BEFORE AN ELECTION, BOTH IN 2015 AND 2011. I MEAN, I REMEMBER THE 2011 ELECTION WHEN — WHEN HARPER GOT HIS MAJORITY AND THE NDP HAD THE ORANGE CRUSH OR THE ORANGE WAVE, NO ONE REALLY SAW THAT ORANGE WAVE COMING, AND TO BE HONEST, MOST PEOPLE DIDN’T SEE THE CONSERVATIVE MAJORITY COMING EITHER. >>Mark: YEAH. FAIR ENOUGH. OKAY, TERRY, I’M GOING TO JUMP IN JUST TO GET TO OTHER PEOPLE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR CALL. >>Caller: FAIR ENOUGH. >>Mark: LET’S GO TO ROLAND IN MANITOBA. HELLO. >>Caller: YEP. HELLO.>>Mark: HI, GO AHEAD. YEP, I’M CALLING ABOUT THAT DEBATE THERE. >>Mark: YEAH.>>Caller: I THOUGHT IT WAS JUST REALLY MIXED-UP DEBATE, THE — THE DEBATERS WERE HAVING A HARD TIME GETTING THEIR POINT ACROSS BECAUSE THEY HAD SUCH LITTLE TIME TO EXPRESS THEIR VIEW, AND WHEN THEY DID GET A CHANCE, THEY WERE WALK OVER BY SOMEBODY ELSE. I HOPE THE NEXT DEBATE IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT, THAT THEY GET A CHANCE TO TO EXPRESS THEY’RE POINT OF VIEW. THAT’S MY NUMBER ONE POINT. MY NUMBER TWO POINT IS I GOT TO HAND IT TO BERNIER. HE IS — HE HAS GOT A GOOD POINT WITH LIMITING THE AMOUNT OF IMMIGRATION COMING IN TO CANADA. THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT 300 TO –>>Mark: ALL RIGHT. UNFORTUNATELY, WE’RE LOSING YOU, ROLAND. THANK YOU FOR YOUR CALL. WE HAVE TO SAY GOODBYE TO YOU, DAVID. YOU HAVE LOTS OF WORK TO DO. ANY FINAL THOUGHTS AN AS WE LOOK FORWARD TO THE FINAL WEEKS OF THE CAMPAIGN. >>I’M LOOKING FORWARD VERY MUCH TO THE FINAL FRENCH DEBATE IN A COUPLE OF DAYS. ONE OF THE DYNAMICS THAT WE SAW THAT WAS DIFFERENT BETWEEN THE TVA DEBATE AND THE ENGLISH DEBATE IS JUST THE COMFORT OF MOST OF THE LEADERS SPEAKING THEIR FIRST LANGUAGE VERSUS THEIR SECOND LANGUAGE. I SUSPECT THAT WAS A HANDICAP FOR SCHEER AND ONE OF THE REASONS WHY HE PERFORMED SO MUCH MORE POWERFULLY IN — IN THE DEBATE LAST NIGHT THAN HE DID IN THE ONE LAST WEEK. WE’LL SEE WHETHER HE MAINTAINS THAT MOMENTUM OR WHETHER HE IS BACK ON HIS HEELS AGAIN, STRUGGLING AS HE WAS PREVIOUSLY.>>Mark: OKAY. THANK YOU, DAVID. JOHN, YOU ARE ABLE TO STICK AROUND A LITTLE BIT LONGER?>>ABSOLUTELY. >>Mark: WONDERFUL. SO ONCE AGAIN, WE ARE ASKING YOU TODAY ON CPAC HAS THE DEBATE AFFECTED HOW YOU WILL VOTE. PLEASE CALL US WITH YOUR THOUGHTS AT 1-877-296-2722 OR SEND US A COMMENT ONLINE USING #CPACVOTE2019.>>>LET’S TAKE A CLOSER LOOK NOW AT YOUR THOUGHTS ON TWO THEMES THAT CAME UP DURING THE DEBATE. THE ENVIRONMENT AND AFFORDABILITY. [♪♪♪] [♪♪♪]>>I’M MORE CONCERNED ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE. >>WHY?>>BECAUSE THINGS WILL BECOME MUCH LESS AFFORDABLE IN THE FUTURE IF WE DON’T ADDRESS CLIMATE CHANGE. AFFORDABILITY IS NOT REALLY AN IMMEDIATE CONCERN SINCE EVERYTHING IS GOING TO BECOME INACCESSIBLE AND SOCIETY IS GOING TO CHANGE DRASTICALLY AS A RESULT OF CLIMATE CHANGE IF WE DON’T DEAL WITH THAT RIGHT NOW. >>MOST OF THE CANADIANS TODAY, THEY SUFFER THE PAYING THE PAYMENTS, THE BILLS, PAYING THEIR HYDRO. SO AFFORDABILITY FOR US, FOR THE MIDDLE CLASS, IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN THE CLIMATE CHANGE. CLIMATE CHANGE, CANADA DO IT — DOING IN CLIMATE CHANGE VERY, VERY LITTLE, BUT WHAT ABOUT THE REST OF THE WORLD? WE CANNOT CHANGE THEM. SO FOR US AS A FAMILY, AFFORDABILITY IS VERY IMPORTANT FOR US. IN THIS ELECTION.>>I THINK PROBABLY A MIX OF BOTH. >>WHY?>>BECAUSE ‘CAUSE CLIMATE CHANGE WOULD AFFECT MY KIDS AND THEIR KIDS, THE NEXT GENERATION, AND AFFORDABILITY IS CURRENTLY, YOU KNOW, I NEED TO MAKE SURE I CAN AFFORD FOR MY FAMILY. SO THERE IS NO RIGHT OR WRONG ANSWER. IT APPLIES TO BOTH. >>CLIMATE CHANGE. >>WHY?>>BECAUSE IT’S THE MOST IMPORTANT ISSUE RIGHT NOW. TOO MUCH GOING ON IN THE WORLD RIGHT TO NOT BE CONCERNED ABOUT IT. >>I’M CONCERNED ABOUT BOTH, BUT AFFORDABILITY IS SOMETHING THAT IS VERY DAY TO DAY, RIGHT? SO I WOULD SAY AT THE MOMENT PROBABLY MORE AFFORDABILITY. BUT KEEPING IN MIND THAT WE STILL NEED TO BREATHE, RIGHT? GOTTA BREATHE THE AIR. SO BOTH. BUT DAY-TO-DAY CONCERNS ARE AFFORDABILITY.>>AFFORDABILITY.>>WHY?>>WELL, I THINK RIGHT NOW JUST IN TERMS OF THE CHOICES I MAKE, I BELIEVE THAT MY OWN BUDGET IS MORE IMPORTANT TO ME THANDY I THINK ALSO IN TERMS OF CLIMATE CHANGE, I THINK THERE IS A LOT OF — IT’S NOT THAT I DON’T BELIEVE IN IT, BUT I THINK RIGHT NOW THEY ARE OVERBLOWING IT A LITTLE BIT AND I THINK THE CHOICES I MAKE, I CAN WORK ON CHOOSING THINGS THAT ARE AFFORDABLE WHILE MAKING GOOD CHOICES FOR THE ENVIRONMENT AT THE SAME TIME. [♪♪♪]>>WHEN A POLITICIAN REFERS TO THE BASE, THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT A GROUP OF VOTERS THAT ALWAYS SUPPORT A SPECIFIC POLITICAL PARTY. THESE VOTERS ARE EXTREMELY UNLIKELY TO VOTE FOR ANOTHER POLITICAL PARTY AND CAN BE COUNTED UPON AS A STABLE SOURCE OF VOTES. [♪♪♪] [♪♪♪]>>I THINK IT’LL BE MORE THE PARTY AS A WHOLE AS THEY ARE KIND OF REPRESENTING THE BIGGER GROUP VERSUS JUST THE ONE PERSON, LIKE IN CHARGE. LIKE, YES, THAT’S VERY IMPORTANT AS WELL, BUT I THINK MAYBE MORE TO REPRESENTING AS A GROUP IS GOING TO MAKE A BIGGER IMPACT FOR ME.>>I THINK IT’S USUALLY A PARTY, I THINK.>>WHY?>>JUST A COLLECTION OF — I FEEL LIKE THE PARTY HAS SIMILAR THINGS. I DON’T REALLY FOLLOW POLITICS THAT MUCH, AS MUCH AS I SHOULD, BUT I THINK IT’S MORE OF A PARTY. >>PA PARTY. >>WHY?>>BECAUSE THAT’S WHERE THE POWER IS.>>I WOULD SAY I VOTE FOR THE PERSON IN MY RIDING. I ACTUALLY LOOK AT ALL OF THEIR INTERNET PROFILES, I LOOK AT WHAT THEY HAVE WRITTEN, I LOOK AT WHAT THEY TALK ABOUT AND I GIVE A FAIR SHAKE. SO IT DEPENDS WHO IS RUNNING IN MY RIDING.>>TO BE HONEST, I VOTE FOR THE PARTY.>>WHY?>>YEAH. THE PARTY WILL USUALLY HAVE A SET OF PRINCIPLES THAT I GO ALONG WITH, AND GENERALLY I JUST STAY WITH THE SAME PARTY. [♪♪♪]>>WHICH PROVINCE WAS THE FIRST TO GIVE ALL INDIGENOUS PEOPLES THE RIGHT TO VOTE?>>BRITISH COLUMBIA.>>I WAS GOING TO SAY ONTARIO. >>NEWFOUNDLAND AND LABRADOR.>>NOVA SCOTIA.>>YOUR CHOICES ARE … [ Laughter ]>>I LIKE THAT.>>SASKATCHEWAN, MANITOBA, OR BRITISH COLUMBIA.>>HMM. WESTERN. I’M GOING TO GO WITH BC. >>YEAH, I AGREE WITH HER. >>SASKATCHEWAN. I DON’T KNOW.>>BRITISH COLUMBIA.>>IT’S BRITISH COLUMBIA.>>GOOD.>>YOU GOT IT RIGHT, MAN. THANKS. [♪♪♪]>>THROUGH ENFRANCHISEMENTS, INDIGENOUS PEOPLE COULD GIVE UP THEIR INDIAN STATUS AND VOTE IN FEDERAL ELECTIONS AS FAR BACK AS 1867. FIRST NATIONS HAVE ALSO FACED CHALLENGES IN BECOMING FULLY RECOGNIZED CITIZENS. IT WAS NOT UNTIL 1949 THAT THEY WERE PERMITTED TO VOTE IN BRITISH COLUMBIA’S PROVINCIAL ELECTIONS WITHOUT CONDITIONS AND WITHOUT LOSING STATUS, MAKING BC THE FIRST PROVINCE TO DO THIS. THE LAST PROVINCE TO FOLLOW SUIT WAS QUEBEC, IN 1969.>>Mark: TIME ONCE AGAIN TO HAVE YOUR SACHLT I’M MARK SUTCLIFFE. THANK YOU FOR JOINING US ON CPAC TODAY. WE ARE ASKING TODAY HAS THE DEBATE AFFECTED HOW YOU WILL VOTE, AND WE ARE INTERESTED IN YOUR OPINIONS. CALL US AT 1-877-296-2722 OR TWEET US @CPAC_TV. YOU CAN SEND US AN E-MAIL AT [email protected]>>>WITH US FOR THE SECOND HALF OF OUR PROGRAM, JOHN IBBITSON, WRITER AT LARGE WITH “THE GLOBE AND MAIL,” AUTHOR AS WELL, AND JOINING US NOW, TERESA WRIGHT, NATIONAL REPORTER FOR THE “CANADIAN PRESS.” WELCOME, TERESA. >>THANK YOU. >>Mark: WHAT DID YOU THINK OF THE DEBATES AND THE AFTERMATH AS WELL, HOW PEOPLE ARE RESPONDING, HOW THEY HAVE BEEN REACTING TO THEM IN THE LAST 18 HOURS?>>WELL, I HAD KIND OF A UNIQUE VANTAGE POINT FOR THE DEBATE BECAUSE I WAS ONE OF THE — ONLY TWO REPORTERS THAT WERE IN THE ACTUAL ROOM BESIDES, OF COURSE, THE MODUATORS SO THAT WE COULD PROVIDE SOME DETAILS TO OUR FELLOW JOURNALISTS ABOUT ANY KIND OF COLOUR IN THE ROOM. AND SO I WAS ABLE TO FEEL THE ENERGY IN THE ROOM WHILE THE LEADERS WERE — WERE SORT OF DEBATING WITH ONE ANOTHER. AND I THOUGHT IT WAS KIND OF INTERESTING TO BE ABLE TO SEE THEIR BODY LANGUAGE WHEN THEY WEREN’T ON CAMERA, WHEN, YOU KNOW, BE ABLE TO KIND OF SEE SORT OF WHEN THEY ARE MAKING NOTES OR, YOU KNOW, WHEN PERHAPS THEY MIGHT BE SHIFTING THEIR WEIGHT, BECAUSE SOMETIMES — IT’S A BIT OF A TELL SOMETIMES IN TERMS OF WHEN THEY MIGHT BE GETTED FRUSTRATED OR WHEN THEY HAVE A POINT TO TRY TO BREAK IN. SO I THOUGHT, YOU KNOW, JUST — PERSONALLY, I THOUGHT THAT WAS KIND OF INTERESTING. >>Mark: ANYTHING ARISING OUT OF THAT, THAT YOU THOUGHT — THAT YOU NOTICE? ED. >>I COULDN’T HELP BUT NOTICE WHEN TRUDEAU AND ANDREW SCHEER WOULD — YOU KNOW, WOULD HAVE THEIR EXCHANGES WITH EACH OTHER, THEY WOULD TURN TOWARD EACH OTHER AND THEY HAPPENED TO BE STANDING NEXT TO EACH OTHER, AND THE — THERE WAS JUST MORE TENSION BETWEEN THEM, MAYBE PERHAPS VERY OBVIOUSLY, BUT INSTEAD OF, YOU KNOW, KIND OF USING, YOU KNOW, VERY SMALL HAND GESTURES AND SO ON, THEY WERE REALLY KIND OF STARTING TO KIND OF POINT TO EACH OTHER A LOT AND YOU COULD TELL THAT THEY WERE REALLY — THERE WAS DEFINITELY A POWER STRUGGLE BETWEEN THOSE TWO IN PARTICULAR, AND THEN ALSO I — JAGMEET SINGH WAS KIND OF ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE STAGE, BUT REALLY TRIED TO MAKE USE OF, YOU KNOW, BEING — YOU KNOW, THAT ALSO HELPED HIM, I THINK, IN SOME CASES TO, YOU KNOW, LET THE TWO OF THEM, YOU KNOW, START TO ARGUE AMONGST EACH OTHER AND THEN HE CAN KIND OF JUMP IN AND BE THE VOICE OF REASON SOMETIMES. SO I THOUGHT JUST EVEN ALL OF THAT COULD KIND OF PLAY INTO THE DEBATE. >>Mark: YEAH. JOHN LET’S TALK ABOUT SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT CAME UP DURING THE DEBATE. I THINK A LOT OF PEOPLE WONDERED A FEW WEEKS AGO WHETHER THIS WOULD BECOME AN ELECTION ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE. AT TIMES IT HAS BEEN ABOUT THAT. AT OTHER TIMES IT HAS NOT. DO YOU THINK THAT THE DISCUSSION AROUND CLIMATE CHANGE LAST NIGHT WAS ILLUMINATING AND DO YOU THINK THAT IT IS A FACTOR IN HOW CANADIANS WILL VOTE?>>WELL, CERTAIN TOOK UP AN AWFUL LOT OF THE OXYGEN. MANY OF THE QUESTIONS WERE SPECIFICALLY ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE — PARTLY WAS ELIZABETH MAY WAS ON THE STAGE — AT TIMES THE — WHATEVER WAS BEING TALKED ABOUT PIVOTED OVER TO CLIMATE CHANGE. I WAS ONE OF THE PEOPLE WHO THOUGHT THAT THIS ELECTION WOULD BE FOUGHT ON THE ISSUE OF CLIMATE CHANGE VERSUS CARBON TAX. WITH THE LIBERALS SAYING WE NEED TO FIGHT GLOBAL WARMING AND THIS IS HOW WE’RE GOING TO DO IT AND THE CONSERVATIVES SAYING THIS IS NOTHING BUT A TAX THAT WILL MAKE YOU POORER, AND BOTH SIDES WOULD JUST FIGHT THAT OUT. THEY ARE — HAVE BEEN WILLING TO DO THAT BUT TO SOME EXTENT, ALL OF THE ISSUES HAVE BEEN SUBSUMED BY THE QUESTION OF CHARACTER, WHETHER IT’S THE CONSERVATIVES ENTHRALLED TO DOUG FORD OR HAVING RADICAL CANDIDATES WHO — WHO SHOULD BE DISBARRED BECAUSE THINGS THEY HAVE SAID ON FACEBOOK OR, OF COURSE, Mr. TRUDEAU’S — THE PHOTOGRAPHS OF HIM IN BLACKFACE AND BROWNFACE. IT REMAINS I THINK THE LEAST ISSUE-ORIENTED CAMPAIGN FEDERALLY THAT I CAN RECALL. THERE IS NOT A SINGLE ISSUE, INCLUDING CLIMATE CHANGE, THAT IS GOING TO INFLUENCE THE OUTCOME OF VOTES. IT’S A NEGATIVE RESEARCH DUMB CAMPAIGN, AND — REFERENDUM CAMPAIGN, AND WHOEVER YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT IS LOSING. >>Mark: INTERESTING. TERESA, WOULD YOU AGREE?>>I AGREE THAT I THOUGHT WAS THAT CLIMATE CHANGE AS AN ISSUE WAS GOING TO BE MORE PREVALENT ON THE CAMPAIGN TROWEL. WE WERE ALL SORT OF PREDICTING THE ISSUES THAT WE — THE POLICY ISSUES THAT WOULD COME UP FOR DEBATE, AND LIKE JOHN, I’M REALLY SURPRISED THAT THEY HAVEN’T BEEN MORE PREVALENT, THAT THERE HASN’T BEEN A LOT OF — THERE HASN’T BEEN A LOT OF FOCUS ON SOME OF THOSE POLICY AREAS. AND ESPECIALLY SINCE, YOU KNOW, JUSTIN TRUDEAU GOING INTO THE ACTUAL ELECTION CAMPAIGN WAS VERY MUCH — IT SEEMED AS THOUGH HE WAS TRYING TO POSITION HIMSELF AS BEING THE BEST PLAN FOR, YOU KNOW — YOU KNOW, ANYTIMING CLIMATE CHANGE, BUT ALSO TRY TO KEEP THE ECONOMY IN — IN MIND THAT, YOU KNOW, THIS WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WE WERE GOING TO HEAR A LOT ABOUT, AND, YOU KNOW, IT’S REALLY BEEN, YOU KNOW, IDEALOGICAL ISSUES, AND MUD SLINGING IN MANY CASES AS WELL. I WAS HOPING THAT THE DEBATE WOULD BE ABLE TO START TO DELVE A BIT MORE INTO THE ISSUES AND I’M NOT SURE WHETHER IT WAS THE FORMAT OR MAYBE SOME OF THE QUESTIONS OR JUST MAYBE THE WAY THAT THE LEADERS WANTED TO KIND OF TAKE THOSE ARGUMENTS, BUT I DON’T THINK THAT THE DEBATE OFFERED — OFFERED THAT OPPORTUNITY.>>Mark: OKAY. AND LET’S TALK ABOUT BILL 21, WHICH I’M SURE WILL COME UP AGAIN ON THURSDAY NIGHT IN THE FRENCH LANGUAGE DEBATE, BUT THE FEDERAL PARTY LEADERS, OF COURSE, JOHN ARE TRYING TO WALK A VERY FINE LINE ON THIS. THEY WERE ACCUSED BY THE BLOC LEADER OF SAYING ONE THING IN FRENCH AND ANOTHER IN ENGLISH, IN SOME CASES. >>IT IS — FOR THOSE OF US WHO THINK OF BILL 21 IS INEXPLICABLE IN CANADA, WHICH EMBRACES TOLERANCE, FOR THOSE OF US FINDS THE BILL OBVIOUS NORSECIOUS BECAUSE IT — OBNOXIOUS — INHIBITS PEOPLE FROM SERVING IN THE PUBLIC SERVICE BECAUSE OF THEIR FAITH — FOR US, AND WE ARE OUTSIDE QUEBEC, IT IS REMARKABLE AND LAMENTABLE THAT ALL OF THE POLITICAL LEADERS — OBVIOUSLY EXCEPT HIM — ARE SO RELUCTANT TO ENGAGE. ALL OF THEM SAYING THESE VALUES ARE NOT OUR VALUES. BUT THERE IS A COURT CHALLENGE UNDERWAY AND I’M GOING TO RUN AS FAR AS AWAY FROM THIS DISCUSSION AS I POSSIBLY CAN WHILE THE COURT CHALLENGE IS UNDERWAY. AND JUSTIN TRUDEAU TRYING TO — TO CREATE A WEDGE BY SAYING I AM THE ONLY LEADER IN THIS COUNTRY WHO HAS NOT RULED OUT THE POSSIBILITY OF SOMEDAY MAYBE INTERVENING IN A COURT CHALLENGE. [ Laughter ]>>Mark: RIGHT. >>THAT’S NOT A POUND THE TABLE KIND OF STATEMENT FOR THE PRIME MINISTER TO MAKE.>>RIGHT. I THOUGHT THAT HE WAS — IT WAS INTERESTING THAT HE KIND OF CHANGED HIS TUNE A LITTLE BIT, Mr. TRUDEAU, ON THAT POINT BECAUSE WE HAVE BEEN ASKING HIM ON THE CAMPAIGN TRAIL — I WAS OUT WITH THE LIBERALS FOR THE FIRST DAYS, AND IT CAME UP QUITE A BIT, ESPECIALLY GOING THROUGH QUEBEC, AND HE DIDN’T USE THAT SAME LANGUAGE. WHEN WE ASKED WHAT ARE YOU PREPARED TO DO ON BILL 21, HE WAS MORE SAYING, I’M GOING TO WAIT AND SEE. I’M NOT GOING TO, YOU KNOW, INTERFERE WITH A COURT CHALLENGE, AND THEN LAST NIGHT, HE BROUGHT IT UP. HE CHALLENGED SINGH AND SAID WHY AM I THE ONE THAT’S KIND OF DEFENDING THIS OR SAYING THAT I’M WILLING TO STEP IN AT SOME POINT OR NOT WILLING TO RULE IT OUT. >>MAYBE. >>YEAH. >>RIGHT, EXACTLY. THE LANGUAGE — THE CHANGE OF LANGUAGE AND TONE ON Mr. TRUDEAU’S PART WAS KIND OF INTERESTING AND PROBABLY REFLECTS SOME OF THE FEEDBACK HE HAS BEEN GETTING. >>Mark: LET’S GET BACK TO YOUR OPINIONS. WE’LL TAKE A CALL FROM MICK IN EDMONTON. MICK, GO AHEAD.>>Caller: HI, THERE. >>Mark: HI. >>Caller: WELL, I THINK THAT THE DEBATES DID CHANGE MY MIND. ORIGINALLY I WAS LEANING TOWARD JUSTIN TRUDEAU, AND THAT’S BEAUI WANTED TO GIVE HIM A SECOND MANDATE. BASICALLY OUT OF RESPECT FOR HIS EXCELLENT FATHER AND THAT’S — I DON’T THINK THAT JUSTIN HAD DONE ENOUGH IN HIS FIRST TERM, BUT AS I HAD SEEN HIS POLICY STATEMENTS AND WHAT HIS FORWARD-LOOKING ACTIONS WERE GOING TO BE, I DECIDED THAT BASICALLY JUSTIN TRUDEAU HAS BLOWN HIS CHANCE, THAT HE HAD FOUR YEARS TO ACCOMPLISH A LOT OF THINGS. HE DIDN’T ACCOMPLISH MOST OF THEM. THANK GOD HE LEGALIZED MARIJUANA, WHICH HAS BEEN DEMONIZED FOR 70-SOME YEARS AND IS GENERALLY CONSIDERED SAFE. BUT I THINK THAT HE HAS LOST HIS MOMENT IN THE LIGHT. AND THE REASON IS BECAUSE HE HAS BEEN BRINGING OUT POLICY STATEMENTS THAT ARE VERY SIMILAR TO THE CONSERVATIVES THEMSELVES. I WANT TO SAY AS A CANADIAN, I SPEAK FOR A LOT OF CANADIANS, THAT THERE IS NO WELCOME MAT FOR ANY CONSERVATIVES IN CANADA, THAT WE CAN SEE WHAT THE REPUBLICANS ARE DOING IN THE UNITED STATES, AND I’M CERTAIN THAT ANDREW SCHEER WOULD VOTE REPUBLICAN IF HE HAD A CHANCE. AND SO FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE, PEOPLE THAT ARE VOTING CONSERVATIVE CAN JUST STRAIGHT TO HELL AND FUCK YOU, ASSHOLES …>>Mark: ALL RIGHT. A CALL FROM MICHAEL IN WINDSOR.>>Caller: THANK YOU FOR TAKING MY CALL. I HAVE A QUICK COMMENT ON THE CALL TO DYSFUNCTIONALTY OF THE FORMAT LAST NIGHT. AND THEN I WOULD LIKE TO EXPRESS MY DISAPPOINTMENT IN THE LEADER OF THE NDP. FIRST OF ALL, I THINK THAT VIEWERS WERE NOT SERVED BY HAVING SIX PEOPLE ON STAGE AND THERE SHOULD BE SOME TYPE OF MINIMUM REQUIREMENT. POSSIBLY ONLY NATIONAL PARTIES WHO ARE RUNNING CANDIDATES IN ALL PROVINCES, AND MAYBE SOME KIND OF A MINIMUM REQUIREMENT BASED ON THE NUMBER OF SEATS YOU HAVE IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS OR CERTAIN MINIMUM POLLING REQUIREMENTS. THE GREEN PARTY HAS RUN CANDIDATES IN APPROXIMATELY 2,000 FEDERAL ELECTIONS AND ABLE TO WIN — ELECT ONE PERSON. JUST DON’T SEE WHAT THEY REALLY ADD TO THE EQUATION, AND I THINK VIEWERS WOULD HAVE BEEN — THE ELECTORATE WOULD HAVE BEEN BETTER SERVED TO HAVE SINGH, TRUDEAU, AND SCHEER HAVING A MEANINGFUL DIALOGUE. >>Mark: OKAY. >>Caller: REGARDING — REGARDING THE PRIME MINISTER, I’M DISAPPOINTED THAT HE WASN’T PUT ON THE HOT SEAT MORE. QUITE OBVIOUSLY HE SEEMS TO BE A FEMINIST WHO GROPES WOMEN, A CLIMATE ACTIVIST WHO BUILDS PIPELINES, AND AN ANTIRACIST WHO HAS A BLACKFACE FETISH. I DON’T THINK CANADIANS CAN BELIEVE HIM ANYMORE. AND I WAS DISAPPOINTED WITH THE NDP LEADER NOT ATTACKING HIM MORE, TRYING TO WALK A VERY FINE LINE HOPING THAT THE LIBERALS WILL WIN A MINORITY AND HE CAN HAVE SOME TYPE OF POWER.>>Mark: OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR CALL, MICHAEL. WENDY IN CALGARY. GO AHEAD, WENDY.>>Caller: FEEDBACK OF WHAT I THOUGHT ABOUT THE DEBATE LAST NIGHT. FIRST THING, I’M REALLY, REALLY DISAPPOINTED THAT IT IS THE ONLY ONE ENGLISH DEBATE WHERE TRUDEAU HAS DECIDED TO ATTEND; HOWEVER, HE IS MORE THAN WILLING TO ATTEND TWO FRENCH DEBATES. I WOULD LIKE TO UNDERSTAND THAT JUSTIFICATION. MY SECOND POINT IS I THOUGHT ONLY ANDREW SCHEER SEEMED TO RAISE ANY AND VOICE ANY CONCERNS FOR THE TREATMENT AND THE THOUGHTS OF WHAT’S HAPPENING IN ALBERTA AND SASKATCHEWAN, AND I WOULD SAY SHAME ON THE REST OF THE OTHER LEADERS. I DON’T THINK MAY OR SINGH ANSWERED QUESTIONS OF HOW THEY ARE GOING TO PAY FOR THEIR PLATFORMS, AND WITH RESPECT TO THE LIBERALS’ DEBT MACHINE, I WOULD JUST ASK Mr. TRUDEAU WHEN PEOPLE ARE STRUGGLING IN ALBERTA AND ARE — AND ARE LOSING THEIR HOMES, IF WE TRIED TO USE THE SAME RATIONALE TO SAVE OURSELVES AND EXTEND OUR MORTGAGES, THE BANK WOULD LAUGH US OUT OF THE BANK. YET HE SEEMS TO THINK IT’S OKAY TO PUT MASSIVE AMOUNTS OF DEBT ON US, ON OUR CHILDREN, AND ON OUR GRANDCHILDREN. AND I JUST THINK THAT FIVE OF THE SIX LEADERS HAVE TOTALLY UNDERESTIMATED HOW ANGRY, HOW FRUSTRATED, AND HOW DISAPPOINTED ALBERTANS ARE WITH THE LACK OF CONCERN AND COMPASSION THAT THEY HAVE FOR PROVINCE. THAT’S MY THOUGHTS. >>Mark: THANK YOU, WENDY. >>Caller: THANK YOU. >>Mark: DANIEL IN KAMLOOPS, BRITISH COLUMBIA. HELLO, DANIEL.>>Caller: YES, HELLO, THANKS FOR TAKING MY CALL. I GUESS MY — I HAVE A QUESTION AND, YOU KNOW, I THOUGHT THIS WAS A FEDERAL ELECTION BUT YET THERE IS A LEADER THAT REPRESENTS ONLY QUEBEC AND ONLY HAS QUEBEC CONCERNS. AND EVEN COULD END UP BEING — FORMING A MINORITY GOVERNMENT, WHICH IS VERY CONCERNING TO A CANADIAN LIKE MYSELF. YEAH, I LOVE BC OUT HERE. VERY DISAPPOINTED WITH OUR PRIME MINISTER. HOW HE CAN RUN US INTO DEBT, LIKE OUR LAST CALLER HAD SAID, IN HUGE DEBT THAT WE ALL HAVE TO — AND MY KIDS AND MY KIDS’ KIDS ARE GOING TO HAVE TO PAY FOR, AND HIS JUST GENERAL LACK OF RESPECT FOR — FOR BASICALLY CANADIANS IN GENERAL.>>Mark: OKAY. >>Caller: IT IS SWAYED MY VOTE. I’LL BE VOTING FOR THE CONSERVATIVE PARTY AND ANDREW SCHEER. AND I LIKED HIS LEADERSHIP IN THE DEBATE. AND HE — HE ACTUALLY CALLED OUT TRUDEAU MORE SO THAN ANYBODY ELSE DID AND HOLD HIM ACCOUNTABLE.>>Mark: THANK YOU FOR YOUR CALL. BRYAN IN ST. CATHARINES, ONTARIO. HELLO, BRYAN. >>Caller: OH, HI, MARK, HOW YEAH DOING?>>Mark: GOOD. THANK YOU. >>Caller: I PREDICTED — REMEMBER ON THE 6TH DAY OF TUESDAY, I’M THE ONE WHO PREDICT ABOUT SCHEER WAS GOING TO WIN. >>Mark: OKAY.>>Caller: LAST NIGHT’S DEBATE — >>Mark: BY THE WAY, YOU ARE PREDICTING THAT ANDREW SCHEER IS GOING TO WIN THE ELECTION?>>Caller: YEAH. >>Mark: OKAY.>>Caller: LAST NIGHT’S DEBATE — OKAY, THURSDAY NIGHT, IF SCHEER STOPPED ATTACKING TRUDEAU AND START LOOKING AT THE CAMERA AND TELL PEOPLE WHAT HIS PLATFORM IS GOING TO BE, HE WILL WIN. BUT HE HAS TO STOP ATTACKING TRUDEAU. AND SINGH, DON’T GET ME WRONG, HE IS A NICE GUY, BUT THE PROBLEM IS — HE WANTS TO DO SO MUCH THINGS THAT IT’S GONNA COST AT LEAST A TRILLION DOLLARS. NOW, THIS PHARMACARE, IF TRUDEAU OR SCHEER GETS IN, THERE IS — EXCUSE THE EXPRESSION — BUT THERE IS NO WAY IN HELL WE ARE GOING TO GET A PHARMACARE. IT’S TOO, TOO EXPENSIVE. SAME WITH THE DENTIST. THERE IS NO WAY THIS IS GONNA HAPPEN. >>Mark: OKAY. >>Caller: HE HAS TO HAVE SOME — PEOPLE HAVE TO ASK HIM WHAT PLANS ARE YOU GOING TO CUT BECAUSE HE CANNOT KEEP ALL THOSE PROMISES HE IS MAKING.>>Mark: OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR CALL.>>>I KNOW A FEW PEOPLE HAVE RAISED — AND WE HEARD THIS YESTERDAY AS WELL, JOHN, THE IDEA THAT THERE ARE TOO MANY PEOPLE ON THE STAGE ON THE DEBATE AND THE SAME DYNAMIC WILL EXIST ON THURSDAY, OF COURSE, WITH THE FRENCH LANGUAGE DEBATE. IT’LL BE THE SAME SIX LEADERS. SHOULD THE CRITERIA BE DIFFERENT?>>I DON’T BELIEVE THAT Mr. BERNIER SHOULD HAVE BEEN ALLOWED ON THE STAGE. NO MEMBER OF HIS PARTY IS ELECTED TO THE HOUSE OF COMMONS UNDER THAT BANNER. HE WAS ELECTED AS A CONSERVATIVE, OF COURSE. THERE IS NO POLLING DATA TO SUGGEST THAT THERE IS ANY BROAD SUPPORT FOR HIS PARTY. 2 OR 3% OF THE VOTE. I THINK THE CANDIDATES DID A GOOD JOB OF SHUTTING HIM DOWN LAST NIGHT. Mr. SINGH AND Mr. SCHEER SAID YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO BE ON THIS STAGE AND WE PLAN TO DISCOUNT AND IGNORE YOU. BUT I WOULD NOT HAVE ALLOWED HIM ON THE STAGE. I THINK — WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT THIS BEFORE IN PREVIOUS WEEKS — PART OF THE MISTAKE WAS ALLOWING ELIZABETH MAY ON IN THE PREVIOUS DEBATE. SHE ONLY HAS A COUPLE OF PERCENTAGE POINTS OF SUPPORT IN THE POLLS. SHE HAD LITTLE PROSPECT OF WINNING OUTSIDE HER OWN RIDING AND YET THERE WAS A FEED-IN — WE WANT TO HAVE AS MANY WOMEN AS WE CAN ON THE STAGE. THAT WAS ONE WAY TO GET A WOMAN ON TO THE STAGE. AND HER — YOU KNOW, WHO IS OPPOSED TO THE ENVIRONMENT, WHO DOES NOT WANT TO FLIGHT CLIMATE CHANGE. SHE TALKED HER WAY ON, AND THE PRICE PAID MEANT THE SAME ARGUMENTS THAT SHE USED TO GET ON TO STAGE COULD BE USED BY Mr. BERNIER. SO I WOULD HAVE — I THINK WE NEED TO FIND A WAY TO PUSH THE MARGINAL PARTIES OFF THE STAGE INCLUDING NOT ALLOWING THE BLOC QUÉBÉCOIS TO DEBATE IN ENGLISH. THEY SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO DEBATE IN THE FRENCH LANGUAGE DEBATE. HE HAD NOTHING REALLY TO CONTRIBUTE LAST NIGHT. >>Mark: THERE ARE ENGLISH-SPEAKING PEOPLE IN QUEBEC, OBVIOUSLY, WHO WANT TOO HEAR — IF YOU CAN JUSTIFY HIM IN THE FRENCH DEBATE — COULD YOU NOT JUSTIFY HIM BEING IN THE ENGLISH DEBATE BECAUSE THERE ARE ENGLISH-SPEAKING PEOPLE IN QUEBEC?>>JUSTIFY ANYTHING. >>Mark: RIGHT. >>IN FACT, IT WAS THE DEBATE COMMISSION THAT JUSTIFIED BEING Mr. BERNIER ON THE STAINING. IF YOUR GOAL IS GETTING IT DOWN TO A MANAGEABLE DEBATE AMONG THE CREDIBLE NATIONAL LEADERS — I WOULD SUGGEST, AS IN THE PAST, THE CONSERVATIVES, THE LIBERALS, AND THE NDP — THEN YOU WANT — THAT’S YOUR RATIONALE. >>Mark: I WOULD THROW OUT ANOTHER SCENARIO WHICH IS ONE WHERE YOU HAVE DEBATES FOR THE NATIONAL PARTY LEADERS AND THAT THERE IS A THRESHOLD FOR THAT, AND THAT WOULD — AND YOU CAN DEBATE WHERE THAT THRESHOLD WOULD BE BUT IN YOUR PROPOSAL, YOU WOULD LEAVE OUT THE GREEN PARTY AND THE PEOPLE’S PARTY OF CANADA AND YOU WOULD ALSO LEAVE OUT THE BLOC QUÉBÉCOIS AND THEN IN THEORY, SOMEBODY ELSE COULD ORGANIZE A DEBATE ABOUT QUEBEC ISSUES, AND INVITE THAT LEADER THERE. ENVIRONMENT DEBATE, AND INVITE THE GREEN PARTY TO THAT DEBATE — >>EVERY THEORY HAS HOLES INCLUDING MINE WHICH IS WHEN THE DEBATES BEGAN, THE GREEN PARTY WAS WITHIN STRIKING DISTANCE OF THE NDP. >>Mark: RIGHT. YEAH. >>AT THIS POINT MAY CAN HAVE A — >>Mark: YOU COULD PUT THE CRITERIA WHEREVER YOU WANT.>>YEAH. >>Mark: THE DISTINCTION THERE WOULD BE THAT THE GREEN PARTY HAS CANDIDATES IN ALMOST EVERY RIDING IN THE COUNTRY. THE BLOC QUÉBÉCOIS DOES NOT. >>DID NOT. >>Mark: RIGHT? SO DO YOU THINK — THERE IS GOING TO BE A BIG DISCUSSION THAT FOLLOWS THIS ELECTION, TERESA, ABOUT THE DEBATES; RIGHT?>>OBVIOUSLY I THINK THERE SEEMS TO BE PRETTY BROAD CONSENSUS THAT PEOPLE DIDN’T LIKE THE FORMAT. NOW, HOW YOU DEAL WITH THAT OBVIOUSLY AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE IS LOTS OF DIFFERENT SUGGESTIONS. ONE OF THE THINGS — I MEAN, YOU CAN’T ALWAYS PREDICT. AT SOME POINT, Mr. BERNIER’S PARTY COULD GAIN ENOUGH SUPPORT THAT IT WOULD BE LEGITIMATE TO HAVE MORE THAN THREE OR FOUR PEOPLE ON THE STAGE. MAYBE IT MEANS THAT WE NARROW THE SCOPE OF HOW MANY QUESTIONS ARE ASKED BECAUSE I THINK PART OF THE QUESTION ABOUT THE FORMAT WASN’T JUST THAT THERE WERE FIVE MODERATORS WHICH ACTUALLY THINK HE ENDED UP HANDLING QUITE WELL, BUT BRINGING PEOPLE IN TO ASK QUESTIONS — >>Mark: A LOT OF DIFFERENT VOICES. >>YEAH. AND THAT THE TIME SPENT ON DIFFERENT ISSUES, THERE WASN’T A LOT OF TIME SPENT, AND SO THAT WHEN — WHEN THINGS STARTED TO ACTUALLY GET HEATED, THEY WOULD GET CUT OFF. AND I THINK THAT’S WHERE, YOU KNOW, THE FRENCH — THE TVA DEBATE WAS — WAS FAR SUPERIOR IN TERMS OF ALLOWING FOR MUCH MORE — MUCH GREATER TIME PERIOD TO DEVOTE TO CERTAIN AREAS THAT ARE ACTUALLY REALLY IMPORTANT POLICY AREAS FOR CANADA.>>Mark: ALL RIGHT. SHARON IS IN TORONTO. HELLO, SHARON. GO AHEAD.>>Caller: YES. I’M WANTING TO MAKE A COMMENT ON — THERE HAS BEEN A NUMBER OF CALLS CRITIQUING ANDREW SCHEER’S AGGRESSIVE PERFORMANCE. AND I WOULD JUST LIKE TO MAKE THIS COMMENT THAT I WATCHED THE FRENCH LANGUAGE DEBATE, AND IN THAT DEBATE, HE WAS BASICALLY, I FELT, TARGETED BY TRUDEAU AND MAY AND SINGH. I BELIEVE THEY ARE LOOKING FOR SUPPORT VOTES, WHATEVER, AND — AND ANDREW SCHEER CAME ACROSS TO ME AS A REAL GENTLEMAN, AND IN THAT A DEBATE, AND YET HE WAS FLOODED FROM ALL SIDES. TRUDEAU AT TIMES WAS ACTUALLY SMEARING AND VERY — SNEERING AND VERY SMUG AND AT ONE TIME DID A DIVISIVE COMMENT ABOUT HOW THERE WERE THREE OF THEM ON THE STAGE WITH THE SAME VIEW AND ONE — IN OTHER WORDS, PUTTING SCHEER AS THE GUY OUT KIND OF THING. SO WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF THE FRENCH LANGUAGE DEBATE, I’M CERTAIN SCHEER’S STRATEGIST FELT HE NEEDED TO COME OUT AND BE A LITTLE MORE ASSERTIVE OR AGGRESSIVE ON THIS — WITH JUSTIN TRUDEAU. I WAS KIND OF SURPRISED. I FELT HE WENT A LITTLE FAR WITH THE TWO NAMES. I DIDN’T THINK HE HAD TO GO THAT FAR. BUT I DO THINK IT WAS IMPORTANT FOR HIM TO WAGE SOME KIND OF AN OFFENSIVE WITH TRUDEAU. SO THAT’S BASICALLY WHAT I WANT — >>Mark: WHEN YOU SAY THE TWO NAMES, YOU MEAN PHONY AND FRAUD?>>Caller: YEAH. AND ALSO I JUST WANT TO MAKE THIS COMMENT — MY WHOLE SENSE OF THAT WAS THAT HE WAS UNCOMFORTABLE USING THE WORDS SOMEWHAT. >>Mark: HMM. >>Caller: DIDN’T SEEM NATURAL TO HIM, OKAY? BECAUSE IN CONTEXT OF OTHER TIMES I HAVE HEARD HIM SPEAK ON THE FRENCH LANGUAGE DEBATE, I FELT WITH ALL OF THE CRITIQUES HE HAD, HE HANDLED HIMSELF FAIRLY WELL ALSO IN HIS SECOND LANGUAGE. THIS IS MY OTHER POINT I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE IS AROUND — I’M GOBSMACKED THAT THERE IS — IS THERE THREE FRENCH LANGUAGE DEBATES TWOR?>>Mark: THERE ARE TWO. YEAH, TVA DEBATE THAT HAPPENED LAST WEEK AND THEN THE DEBATE COMMISSION EVENT THAT IS HAPPENING ON THURSDAY NIGHT OF THIS WEEK.>>Caller: OKAY. WELL, IS THAT THREE OR JUST TWO — TWO LEFT, YOU MEAN?>>Mark: THERE IS THREE — IN THE END, THERE WILL BE THREE DEBATES IN TOTAL IN WHICH ALL OF THE MAJOR PARTY LEADERS WILL PARTICIPATE, ONE IN ENGLISH, TWO IN FINISH.>>Caller: OKAY. I THINK FOR THE REST OF ENGLISH-SPEAKING CANADA IT’S SOMEWHAT OF A TRAVESTY THAT THERE WAS NOT TWO. TWO ENGLISH DEBATES AND TWO FRENCH DEBATES, AND I ALSO THINK THAT FOR TRUDEAU, THIS IS PART OF THE STRATEGY. HE IS VERY FLUENT AND VERY COMFORTABLE IN FRENCH WHEREAS THE OTHERS WOULD — WITH MAYBE THE EXCEPTION OF SINGH WHO IS QUITE ARTICULATE IN FRENCH — IT TAKES LONGER TO PROCESS EVERYTHING AND THEN COMMUNICATE.>>Mark: YEAH. >>Caller: THAT’S PUTTING OTHER PEOPLE KIND OF AT A LOSS. AND I DON’T THINK THAT — I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT IN BOTH LANGUAGES AND AN EQUAL NUMBER OF DEBATES. >>Mark: OKAY. SHARON, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR CALL. LET’S GO BACK TO WHAT PEOPLE HAVE BEEN E-MAILING US. THE E-MAIL ADDRESS [email protected] LET’S LOOK AT WHAT PEOPLE ARE SAYING. HERE’S AN E-MAIL FROM JUNE. I FOUND THE DEBATE LAST EVENING VERY ENTERTAINING. HOWEVER, IT WILL NOT CHANGE MY VOTE. I DON’T VOTE FOR THE LEADER OF THE PARTY. ONLY ONE PERSON. I VOTE FOR THE PARTY POLICY THAT I WANT FOR MY FAMILY AND THEIR FAMILY’S FUTURE. IAN WRITES: UNFORTUNATELY BERNIER NOT ENOUGH TIME TO MAKE HIS POINTS. DEBATE REINFORCED THAT PARTIES I WILL NOT VOTE FOR. GREEN, NDP, AND LIBERAL. PEOPLE’S PARTY OF CANADA FIRST CHOICE, CONSERVATIVES SECOND STRATEGIC VOTE IN QUOTE MARKS. AND CARLOS: Mr. TRUDEAU CLEARLY IS ONLY GOOD FOR THE PICTURES AND IS NOT CAPABLE TO HAVE A REAL DEBATE. THE WINNER FOR ME WAS Mr. SINGH. CLEARLY WON THE DEBATE. DIRECT, SIMPLE AND PUTTING ON THE TABLE THE THINGS THAT ARE IMPORTANT FOR ME AND MY FAMILY. KEEP YOUR COMMENTS COMING. YESTERDAY ON THE SHOW WE HEARD FROM MEGS RENNOLS, A GRAIN FARMER IN SASKATCHEWAN ABOUT WHAT SHE WANTED TO HEAR FROM THE DEBATE. AND SHE JOINS US NOW FROM KYLE, SASKATCHEWAN TO SHARE HER THOUGHTS ON WHAT SHE ACTUALLY DID HEAR. MEGS, WELCOME.>>Caller: THANKS FOR HAVING ME. >>Mark: WHAT DID YOU THINK OF THE DEBATE? DID YOU WATCH THE WHOLE THING?>>Caller: UNFORTUNATELY I DIDN’T GET TO WATCH IT. I WAS LISTENING TO IT IN THE COMBINE. BUT I WOULD HAVE LIKED TO HAVE HEARD LESS MUD SLINGING AND MORE FOCUS ON THE ACTUAL POLICIES. >>Mark: OKAY. SO OVERALL, WHAT WAS YOUR ASSESSMENT OF THE LEADERS AND HOW THEY PERFORMED EN MASSE?>>Caller: I THINK EN MASSE ALL HELD THEIR OWN. I THINK Ms. MAY MUST HAVE BEEN QUITE HAPPY THAT A LOT OF THE CONVERSATION WAS FOCUSSED ON CLIMATE CHANGE. PERSONALLY I WOULD LIKE TO SEE A LITTLE LESS OF THE RUNNING AROUND YELLING THAT THE SKY IS FALLING AND MORE FOCUSSING ON THE LONG-TERM GOALS TO BRING PEOPLE TOGETHER AND NOT JUST DRAW DIVISIVE LINE IN THE SAND. I WOULD HAVE ALSO LIKED TO SEE MORE TALK ABOUT TRADE AND OUR ECONOMY. >>Mark: OKAY. AND SO CLIMATE CHANGE IS NOT THE MOST IMPORTANT ISSUE TO YOU, THEN?>>IT’S IMPORTANT. OBVIOUSLY WHAT WE DO ON OUR FARM, WE’RE CONSTANTLY PUSHING TO BE MORE SUSTAINABLE. I WANT A FUTURE FOR MY CHILDREN THAT IS BETTER THAN THE ONE THAT I CURRENTLY HAVE. BUT TO GET THERE, WE NEED A STRONG ECONOMY. WE NEED TRADE TO HAVE THAT STRONG ECONOMY. AND WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO MAKE THE MONEY TO HELP IMPLEMENT THOSE SUSTAINABILITY PRACTICES. >>Mark: WHAT SPECIFICALLY, WHEN YOU MENTION THE ISSUES YOU WANTED TO SEE ADDRESSED, WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE TO HEAR FROM THE LEADERS ON THOSE ISSUES?>>WELL, SPECIFICALLY, HOW WE’RE GOING TO TACKLE TRADE. YOU KNOW, OVER THE PAST FOUR YEARS, I LIVE IN A RIDING THAT IS MAINLY OIL AND GAS, MANUFACTURING, AND AGRICULTURE. AND WE HAVE WATCHED ALL OF THOSE SECTORS TAKE A HUGE HIT IN THE PAST FOUR YEARS. WE HAVE WATCHED TRADE AGREEMENTS THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN EASY RENEGOTIATIONS STRUGGLE, STILL FLOUNDERING, AND THERE IS NOT A CROP THAT I’M CURRENTLY GROWING THAT IS NOT BEING AFFECTED BY A TARIFF THAT SOME OF THOEM ARE NOT EVEN BASED IN SCIENCE. THIS IS EXTREMERY IMPORTANT FOR SO MANY SECTORS IN CANADA MOVING FORWARD.>>Mark: SO IN THE END, DID THE DEBATE AFFECT HOW YOU ARE GOING TO VOTE?>>NO. I BELIEVE THERE IS ONLY ONE PARTY THAT IS GOING TO COME TO THE TABLE WHEN IT COMES TO TRADE AND OUR ECONOMY AND SUPPORTING BUSINESSES.>>Mark: OKAY. AND ARE YOU COMFORTABLE SAYING WHO THAT IS?>>THE CONSERVATIVES.>>Mark: OKAY. AND THAT’S — THAT’S HOW YOU INTEND TO VOTE, THEN?>>IT IS, YES. >>Mark: OKAY. THANK YOU FOR JOINING US ONCE AGAIN. I APPRECIATE IT.>>THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR HAVING ME.>>Mark: THAT IS MEGS REN SCOLDS, A GRAIN FARMER IN SASKATCHEWAN. ROBERT FROM ONTARIO NOW. >>Caller: HI. HOW YA DOING. >>Mark: GOOD, THANK. >>Caller: GOOD. I’M NOT AN NDP FAN.>>Mark: OKAY. >>Caller: LET’S JUST CUT TO THE CHASE HERE. BUT I THOUGHT HE DID A FANTASTIC JOB LAST NIGHT. I THINK HE HAS DONE AN EXCELLENT JOB ON THE — ON THE CAMPAIGN TRAIL. AND I THINK THE — WHEN HE GOT ASKED ABOUT BILL 21 OUT OF QUEBEC LAST NIGHT, HIM AND SCHEER HAD A LITTLE EXCHANGE — A FRIENDLY EXCHANGE, AND I SEE VERY LITTLE CLIPS ABOUT IT. I KIND OF LIKED IT BECAUSE IT WAS ALMOST LIKE TWO GUYS TALKING, AND I WOULD HAVE — OBVIOUSLY MOST PEOPLE WOULD HAVE LIKED TO SEE A BIT MORE DISCUSSION LIKE TWO ADULTS RATHER THAN A COUPLE KIDS YELLING OVER EACH OTHER. AND I THOUGHT THAT CLIP, I WOULD LOVE TO SEE MORE OF THAT. >>Mark: OKAY. >>AND AS WELL, TOO MANY PEOPLE ON THE STAGE. IF YOU DON’T HAVE AT LEAST SIX PEOPLE IN THE HOUSE, YOU DON’T GET TO COME TO THE MAIN EVENT. WE’LL RUN A COUPLE OTHER MINOR ONES. IF YOU DON’T HAVE SIX OR SEVEN SEATS ALREADY IN THE HOUSE, YOU CAN ATTEND THE MINOR CARD BUT THE MAJOR EVENT, KEEP IT DOWN TO THAT AND WE WOULD HAVE HAD THE NDP, THE CONSERVATIVES, AND THE LIBERALS, AND LET THEM SLUG IT OUT. COULD HAVE HAD MORE TIME FROM THE PEOPLE WHO — MOST OF US WANT TO HEAR FROM.>>Mark: OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR CALL. JODY IN CALGARY. HELLO JODY. >>Caller: (Speaking French). >>Mark: HI, JODY, GO AHEAD. >>Caller: I WAS ON LAST WEEK AND I MADE A MISTAKE WHEN I SAID BILL 12. I MEANT BILL 21. >>Mark: OKAY. >>Caller: BUT, YEAH, I WATCHED THE DEBATE LAST NIGHT AND AS — AND MY VOTE IS STILL THE SAME. OF COURSE, IT’S GOING TO BE ANDREW SCHEER. Mr. TRUDEAU IS — HE IS VERY ARROGANT AND HE IS JUST — I JUST CAN’T BELIEVE HE IS PRIME MINISTER. CALGARY — I HAVE BEEN IN CALGARY FOR FIVE YEARS AND THIS PLACE IS PARTIALLY A GHOST TOWN SINCE HE HAS BEEN IN OFFICE. AND I THOUGHT ELIZABETH MAY DID A REALLY GOOD JOB. I REALLY LIKE HER AS A PERSON. I CAN SEE THAT SHE IS A GENUINE PERSON. Mr. SINGH, THE SAME IDEA. I THINK THAT HE SEEMS TO BE A VERY GOOD PERSON. BUT EVERYBODY IS SAYING THAT HE WANTED — — WON THE DEBATE. AND YES, MAYBE HE DID, BUT HE HAS NO — LIKE, HE HAS NO WORRIES. HE IS BASICALLY — HE KNOWS HE IS NOT GOING TO WIN PRIME MINISTER. SO HE IS LOOSEY-GOOSEY. SO I BELIEVE THAT THAT’S THE REASON WHY HE WON THE DEBATE. BUT AS IN SCHEER AND TRUDEAU GOING AT IT LIKE TWO CHILDREN, THAT REALLY TURNED ME OFF.>>Mark: OKAY. >>Caller: YOU KNOW? AND — YEAH, I STILL SAY THAT — THAT TRUDEAU IS A — IS A FRAUD. AND ONE MORE THING THAT CALLER FROM EDMONTON THAT WAS ON THERE A WHILE AGO THAT WAS SWEARING AND ALL THAT STUFF. MY NAME IS JODY AND I’M IN CALGARY. COME AND TALK. >>Mark: THANK YOU FOR YOUR CALL. JEFF IN VICTORIA, BRITISH COLUMBIA. HELLO, JEFF. >>Caller: FIRST POINT, BEFORE I TELL YOU WHO WON AND ULTIMATELY LOST THE DEBATE, I’LL SAY THAT I THINK WHAT WE NEED TO DO ONCE AND FOR ALL IS COME TO GRIPS WITH — WITH THE TYPES OF OF DEBATES WE’RE HAVING. LIKE, IT’S BECOMING THE NITTY-GRITTY AND POLITICAL IN-FIGHTING JUST TO ARRIVE AT THE DEBATE SOLUTION. WE NEED TO DO IS — IS — I’M NOT GOING TO SAY ANYTHING TO DO WITH TRUMP BUT IT HAS TO DO WITH THE U.S. AND THEIR SYSTEM WHEN THEY HAVE PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES, THEY ARE NOT SO MUCH DEBATING LIKE THE FORMAT — EVERYONE KNOWS WHAT THE FORMAT IS GOING TO BE. AND STRAIGHTFORWARD. AND YOU JUST SHOW UP AND HAVE THE DEBATE. AND WE — AND WE NEED A STRONG THIRD PARTY — MAYBE A JUDICIAL COMMISSION — ON CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUES OR WHATEVER THAT — LIKE THEY DO IN THE U.S. SO THAT — SO THAT THE POLITICAL PARTIES ARE NOT NEGOTIATING. IT’S JUST — THAT’S THE DEBATE — SORT OF AS NEUTRAL AS THE ELECTION — AS, LIKE, THE –>>Mark: ELECTIONS CANADA.>>Caller: ELECTIONS CANADA IS. I THOUGHT WHO WON THE DEBATE, CLEARLY ANDREW SCHEER GAINING THE MOST POINTS AND LOOKED THE MOST PRIME MINISTERIAL AND THE WORST PERFORMANCE WAS JUSTIN TRUDEAU, BECAUSE NOTHING HE SAID LAST NIGHT LEADS ME TO THE BELIEVE THAT THE NEXT FOUR YEARS ARE GOING TO BE ANY DIFFERENT THAN WHAT THE PREVIOUS FOUR YEARS WAS. LIKE, A LEPPER CAN’T CHANGE HIS SPOTS.>>Mark: THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR CALL. IT’S INTERESTING THAT REHE RAISED THAT POINT. I THOUGHT IT WAS GOING TO BE MORE PRESCRIPTIVE. SAYING WE ARE HAVING A MODERATOR AND HERE ARE THE RULES AND HERE WHO IS GOING TO BE THERE AND NOT. AND BE ON THESE NIGHTS AND THE NETWORKS WANT TO CARRY THEM. IF THEY DON’T, WE’RE GOING TO LIÈVRE STREAM THEM ON FACEBOOK AND TWITTER. THAT’S WHAT I THOUGHT WE WERE GETTING WITH THE COMMISSION, BUT STAYED IT FEELS LIKE THEY BECAME A FACILITATOR FOR THE SAME CONVERSATION THAT TOOK PLACE IN PREVIOUS YEARS WITH THE CONSORTIUM OF NETWORKS AND THE POLITICAL PARTIES THEMSELVES. >>YES, FAIR TO SAY. THE IDEA WAS TO CREATE THIS COMMISSION THAT WOULD BE HANDSOFF, THAT WOULD CREATE A FORMAT THAT WAS FAIR. AND THAT WOULD BE REPRESENTATIVE. IT MAY JUST BE THAT THERE IS NO SUCH FORMAT. YOU KNOW I HAVE BEEN HEARING THIS COMPLAINT NOW FOR ABOUT 25 YEARS. BACK IN THE — >>Mark: YEAH, NOBODY EVER LIKES THE DEBATES. THEY NEVER COME OFF PERFECTLY. NO QUESTION. >>EVERYONE SAYS THEY TALKED OVER EACH OTHER. >>Mark: SURE, YEAH. >>CACOPHONY, THAT NOBODY GOT THEIR POINTS ACROSS. IT’S A MULTIPARTY SYSTEM. THE AMERICAN DEBATES ARE WONDERFUL. THEY OPERATE AT A HIGH LEVEL BECAUSE THERE ARE ONLY TWO CANDIDATES, EVER. THERE IS JUST THE REPUBLICANS AND THE DEMOCRATS — >>Mark: AND PERREAULT — I’LL ADVANCE MY IDEA OF HAVING A SERIES OF ONE-ON-ONE DEBATES. >>YOU KEEP GOING ON THAT, MARK. AS LONG AS WE HAVE A MULTIPARTY SYSTEM, WE’RE GOING TO HAVE A CROWDED STAGE AND WITH THAT, WE’RE GOING TO HAVE CACOPHONY.>>Mark: BUT THE — THERE WAS CLEARLY I THINK TERESA, MORE NEGOTIATING GOING ON AND — AND EVEN THE FACT THAT THERE IS ONLY TWO DEBATES AS A RESULT OF THIS. IT’S A FUNCTION OF THE TV NETWORKS, I THINK, AND THE PARTIES THEMSELVES HAVING MORE SAY IN THIS THAN I THINK A LOT OF PEOPLE EXPECTED THEY WOULD.>>AND ONE OF THE FACTORS THAT YOU MENTIONED THERE, THE FACT THAT THE TV NETWORKS THEMSELVES WERE ALSO PART OF THE NEGOTIATION, I THINK, YOU KNOW, THE PREVIOUS, YOU KNOW, ITERATION OF THIS, YOU KNOW, THE CONSORTIUM, THEY KIND OF ALREADY KNEW WHAT THEY WANTED. THERE WAS SORT OF A BASELINE OF WHAT EVERYONE’S NEEDS WERE, BUT HERE THEY WERE KIND OF RESETTING ALL OF THAT BRINGING IN, YOU KNOW, NEW VOICES WHICH I THINK IS IMPORTANT TO HAVE, BUT IT DID KIND OF BRING A LOT MORE OF THAT DEBATE, A LOT MORE OF THAT, YOU KNOW, HAVING TO TRY TO FIND MORE CONSENSUS AMONG A LARGER GROUP OF PEOPLE. AND, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY THERE IS GOING TO BE A LOT OF LESSONS LEARNED THERE. >>Mark: YEAH. >>THERE IS DEFINITELY GOING TO BE SERIOUS QUESTIONS FOR A LOT OF THOSE — THE PEOPLE INVOLVED.>>I THINK WE HAVE TO ASK THE QUESTION OF JUSTIN TRUDEAU. BECAUSE LET’S NOT FORGET — WESTERN VOTERS IN PARTICULAR HAVE EVERY RIGHT TO BE ANGRY THAT THE DEBATES, SO EARLY IN THE DAY. MOST PEOPLE AT WORK IF YOU WERE IN BRITISH COLUMBIA. >>Mark: RIGHT. >>ALL OF THE OFFICIAL DEBATES TOOK PLACE IN QUEBEC. AND TWO OF THE DEBATES WERE IN ENGLISH, ONE OF WHICH WAS THE TVA DEBATE, AND ONLY ONE IN ENGLISH, AS THE CALLER POINTED OUT. AND THAT’S BECAUSE JUSTIN TRUDEAU BOYCOTTED TWO ENGLISH LANGUAGE DEBATES. HE BOYCOTTED THE “MACLEANS” DEBATE, WHICH WENT AHEAD ANYWAY WITHOUT HIM, AND HE BOYCOTTED THE MUNK DEBATE WHICH WAS THEN CANCELLED BECAUSE THEY DECIDED IF HE WASN’T GOING TO BE THERE, IT WASN’T WORTH DOING IT. WE HAVE TWO FRENCH LANGUAGE DEBATES AND ONE ENGLISH LANGUAGE DEBATE BECAUSE JUSTIN TRUDEAU WOULD NOT DEBATE MORE THAN ONCE IN ENGLISH.>>Mark: RIGHT. AND, AGAIN, THAT GIVES THE PARTIES I THINK MORE POWER THAN THE PUBLIC WANTS THE PARTIES TO HAVE IN THIS; RIGHT? I THINK THE — I THINK THAT THERE IS A FEELING AMONG SOME PEOPLE THAT THE DECISIONS ABOUT THE DEBATES OUGHT TO BE MADE IN THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE VOTING PUBLIC, NOT THE BEST INTEREST OF THE TELEVISION NETWORKS AND THE PARTIES AND THAT HASN’T CHANGED ENOUGH FROM THE PAST. >>MAYBE NEEDS TO BE LEGISLATED RATHER THAN JUST APPOINTED. MAYBE WE NEED AN ACT THAT SAYS THERE SHALL BE AN ELECTIONS COMMISSION — OR DEBATE COMMISSION. IT WILL CONSISTENT OF MEMBERS APPOINTED IN THE FOLLOWING RULES, SET THE RULES, AND TIME OF DEBATES — ALL OTHER DEBATES PROHIBITED OTHER THAN THOSE THAT ARE — PERMITTED BY THE COMMISSION, AND IT IS UP TO THE POLITICIANS TO DECIDE WHETHER TO ATTEND THOSE DEBATES OR NOT ATTEND THEM. AND IT IS UP — AS YOU SAID — UP TO THE NETWORKS WHETHER TO BROADCAST OR NOT. BUT YOU DON’T GET TO HAVE THIS PICK AND CHOOSE QUALITY OF — >>Mark: RIGHT. YEAH, I WOULD LEAVE IT UP TO THE NETWORKS TO CARRY OR NOT. I WOULD NOT LEAVE IT UP TO THE LEADERS. I WOULD SAY THE LEADERS HAVE TO BE THERE. AND I DON’T THINK IT PRECLUDING ANY OTHER DEBATES. IF THE DEBATE COMMISSION SAYS WE’RE GOING TO PUT ON FOUR DEBATES, HERE’S WHAT WE’RE PLANNING TO DO, AND SOMEBODY ELSE COMES ALONG AND SAYS, WE WANT TO PUT ON A DEBATE ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR ISSUE OR WHATEVER, AND THE LEADERS DECIDE TO ATTEND, THAT’S FINE TOO. BUT AT LEAST WE KNOW THAT THERE WILL BE THAT MINIMUM NUMBER OF DEBATES AND — AND THAT THAT — THAT THE DECISIONS AROUND THOSE DEBATES WILL BE MADE ON THE — BASED ON THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE VOTERS, NOT THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE PARTIES OF THE TELEVISION NETWORKS. >>THE ONLY PROBLEM I SEE THERE IS IF YOU ARE LEGISLATING IT, THEN THE DECISIONS ON HOW THAT WILL WORK WILL BE MADE BY POLITICIANS BECAUSE IT’LL BE, YOU KNOW, DECIDED BY AN ACT OF PARLIAMENT, WHICH, OF COURSE, IS DEBATED AMONG POLITICIANS. >>Mark: RIGHT.>>I DON’T KNOW IF THERE IS ANY — >>Mark: SOMEBODY HAS GOT TO PUSH IT OUT OF THE NEST, THOUGH. ELECTIONS CANADA MAKES DECISIONS NOT BASED ON WHAT’S GOOD FOR THE PARTIES, BUT WHAT’S GOOD FOR THE VOTERS.>>AS LONG AS THE DEBATE COMMISSION WERE COMPOSED OF PEOPLE THAT ALL PARTY LEADERS SUPPORTED SO EVERYONE GETS A VETO. THAT WOULD BE ONE PROTECTION. >>Mark: COULD WE NOT JUST GIVE THIS TO ELECTIONS CANADA.>>I DON’T THINK THEY WANT TO BE INVOLVED IN ANYTHING AS PARTISAN AS A DEBATE. THEY WANT TO KEEP AWAY FROM THAT THING. I WOULD ALSO LEAVE IT UP TO THE LEADERS TO DECIDE WHETHER TO ATTEND. IF I’M NOT MISTAKEN, MARGARET THATCHER NEVER ONCE DEBATED IN ALL THE YEARS THAT SHE WAS THE LEADER OF THE CONSERVATIVE PARTY. SHE SAID IT WAS TOO PRESIDENTIAL, THAT YOU SHOULD BE FOCUSSING ON YOUR LOCAL CANDIDATE. IF PARTY LEADER A. DOESN’T WANT TO ATTEND THE OFFICIAL LEADER DEBATES AS RECOGNIZED BY THE COMMISSION, LET THEM MAKE THE DECISION AND LIVE WITH THE POLITICAL CONSEQUENCES. >>Mark: I JUST WORRY THE CONSEQUENCES AREN’T ENOUGH AND WE HAVE EVIDENCE OF THIS TIME AROUND BECAUSE JUSTIN TRUDEAU IS — HAS SKIPPED SOME DEBATES AND DOESN’T APPEAR TO BE PAYING A LARGE PRICE FOR IT.>>Caller: I THINK IF YOU SKIPPED ALL OF THEM, THEN HE PROBABLY WOULD, AND I THINK IN — THAT’S WHERE IF WE HAD OFFICIAL DEBATES THAT, YOU KNOW, THEY COULD, YOU KNOW, TAKE IT OR LEAVE IT. THAT WOULD BE MUCH DIFFERENT THAN JUST SKIPPING ONE HERE OR THERE, ESPECIALLY BECAUSE THOSE ADDITIONAL DEBATES THAT HE DIDN’T — THAT HE CHOSE NOT TO ATTEND WERE NOT THE COMMISSION DEBATED. SO HE HAD AN OUT. ESSENTIALLY. >>Mark: YEAH, INCONSISTENT BECAUSE HE IS ATTENDING ONE THAT IS A NOT A COMMISSION DEBATE IN FRENCH BUT ANY OF THE NON-COMMISSIONED DEBATES IN ENGLISH.>>>I JUST THINK THERE WILL ALWAYS BE A LEADER — IN WHOSE BEST INTERESTS IT WILL BE TO ATTEND THE BARE MINIMUM NUMBER OF DEBATES — >>I THINK THAT’S WHY YOU HAVE ONLY OFFICIAL DEBATES AS APPROVED BY THE — THE DEBATE COMMISSION. NO FREELANCING. “THE GLOBE AND MAIL” HOSTED A DEBATE IN 2015. BUT THERE WOULD BE NO — NO FREELANCING SUCH AS THAT. AND SO IF YOU WERE DECIDED TO BOYCOTT A DEBATE, YOU WOULD BE BOYCOTTING THE OFFICIAL DEBATE SET OUT FROM THE DEBATE COMMISSION, HAVING A HIGHER CONSEQUENCE. >>Mark: OKAY. WE ARE GETTING LOTS OF COMMENTS ON SOCIAL MEDIA. LET’S LOOK AT SOME OF THEM YOU. — THEM NOW. THIS PERSON WRITES: DONE WITH Mr. DENY AND Mr. DELAY. GOING TO VOTE NDP. JAGMEET SINGH IN IT FOR THE PEOPLE. IT MADE ME LIKE SINGH MORE THAN I DID BEFORE, HATE SCHEER MORE THAN I DID BEFORE. STILL VOTING FOR TRUDEAU AND I HOPE THE NDP IS THE OFFICIAL OPPOSITION.>>>PAUL WRITES: NOPE, MAXIME BERNIER AND THE PEOPLE’S PARTY OF CANADA ALL THE WAY. TED WRITES: THE DEBATE WAS A FARCE. NONE OF BERNIER, BLANCHETTE OR MAY BELONGED ON THAT PLATFORM. THE TOPICS WERE WEEK AND THE MODERATION WAS TERRIBLE. I PLANNED TO VOTE CONSERVATIVE PARTY OF CANADA BEFORE THE DEBATE AND NOTHING HAS CHANGED. AND THIS PERSON: I WILL NEVER VOTE FOR A CANDIDATE OR PARTY THAT ATTACKS THEIR OPPONENTS RATHER THAN FOCUSSING ON IDEAS AND POLICIES. EVERY CANDIDATE DID THAT ACCEPT ELIZABETH MAY. ANDREW SCHEER, IT’S HIS ONLY PLAYBOOK. NOT THE KIND OF HUMAN BEING I WANT REPRESENTING MY COUNTRY. LET’S TAKE A CALL NOW FROM SHANNON, WHO IS IN CALGARY. HELLO, SHANNON.>>Caller: HEY, HELLO, HOW ARE YOU DOING TODAY?>>Mark: GOOD, THANKSOO GOOD. GETTING LOTS OF SNOW HERE. JUST BEAUTIFUL.>>Mark: WOW. >>Caller: I JUST WANTED TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE DEBATE THERE, AND I THOUGHT SINGH DID A REALLY GOOD JOB. I REALLY LIKE HIM. I THINK HE IS A REALLY — SEEMS TO COME ACROSS AS A REAL NICE GUY. I THINK MAY HAS ONE AGENDA, AND THAT’S THIS CLIMATE CHANGE STUFF, WHICH WILL ABSOLUTELY DECIMATE OUR ECONOMY OUT HERE IN ALBERTA. I THINK TRUDEAU, I STILL REALLY HAVEN’T FORGIVEN HIM FOR THE — YOU KNOW, FORGETTING ALBERTA ON THE 150TH BIRTHDAY, AND IT SEEMS TO HAVE ONLY GOTTEN WORSE SINCE THEN. AND I’LL BE VOTING FOR SCHEER. BUT WHAT I’M WORRIED ABOUT HERE IS I’M WORRIED ABOUT A MINORITY GOVERNMENT, BECAUSE IF THE NDP AND THE GREEN PARTY JOIN UP WITH THE LIBERALS, THEY’LL TAKE POWER AND WITH THEIR PLANS THAT, ESPECIALLY ELIZABETH MAY HAS AND SINGH, WITH THIS CLIMATE AGENDA OF THEIRS, I THINK THAT THE WEST WILL PROBABLY SEPARATE FROM CANADA. AND I THINK THAT THE IS SOMETHING THAT IS ON SO MANY PEOPLE’S MINDS OUT HERE. I SEE PEOPLE ALL THE TIME, HEAR THEM AND TALK TO THEM ABOUT IT, AND I JUST KNOW THAT IF HE GETS REELECTED, THE LIBERALS AGAIN, I MEAN, I DON’T HEAR NOTHING ON DEBATES ABOUT ALBERTA, AND THAT’S WHAT’S REALLY SCARY. IT’S LIKE WE’RE NOT IMPORTANT. AND I REALLY THINK THAT THERE WILL BE A SEPARATION IF THE LIBERALS WIN. AND THAT’S MY POINT FOR TODAY. >>Mark: OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR CALL. GORDON IS CALLING FROM MONTRÉAL. HELLO, GORDON. >>Caller: YES, HI. >>Mark: HI. >>Caller: I WOULD LIKE TO TALK ABOUT THE TWO DEBATES THEY HAVE. ONE IN ENGLISH AND ONE IN — AND TWO IN THE FRENCH. >>Mark: YEAH. >>Caller: IT’S LIKE — I HAVE LIVED MOST OF MY LIFE IN MONTRÉAL, QUEBEC, AND I FIND IT VERY STRANGE THAT THE BLOC HAS SO MUCH INFLUENCE ON THE OTHER TWO PARTIES, CONSERVATIVES AND LIBERALS. IT’S LIKE — IT’S ALWAYS REVOLVING AROUND QUEBEC, NOT THE ONLY OTHERS. A LOT OF PEOPLE THEY DON’T KNOW BECAUSE THEY NEVER LIVED IN QUEBEC, SO THEY DON’T KNOW WHAT’S GOING ON IN THE POLITICS OF QUEBEC AND CANADA. AND LIKE, IT JUST BOGGLES MY MIND THAT I — THAT HE HAS SO MUCH CONTROL, BLOC, OVER TRUDEAU AND — AND THE CONSERVATIVES, WHOEVER IS THERE. >>Mark: OKAY. >>Caller: MY POINT TOO IS WHEN — ABOUT THE LAW 21. IT’S LIKE TRUDEAU IS AN AFRAID TO SAY HE IS GOING TO CONFRONT IT OR HE DOESN’T, BECAUSE HE DOESN’T WANT TO LOSE VOTES IN QUEBEC. AND THEN HE TURNS AROUND TO ASK SINGH. WELL, SINGH IS NOT PRIME MINISTER, AND IT’S OBVIOUSLY THE WAY — THE SERMAN AND BEING WHO — TURBAN AND BEING WHO HE IS, HE CAN’T CONFRONT THE LAW 21 WITHOUT SAYING — WITHOUT LOSING VOTES. >>Mark: RIGHT.>>Caller: YOU KNOW? SO I THINK THAT’S A STUPID QUESTION TO BE ASKING HIM. BECAUSE — >>Mark: I’M GOING TO JUMP IN. APPRECIATE YOUR CALL, GORDON. I JUST WANT TO GET TO AS MANY PEOPLE AS I CAN BEFORE THE END OF THE PROGRAM. >>Caller: OKAY. >>Mark: THANK YOU. DAN IS IN EDMONTON. HELLO, DAN. >>Caller: HI.>>Mark: GO AHEAD. >>Caller: I WATCHED THE DEBATE LAST NIGHT, AND I’M HAVING REAL DIFFICULTY FINDING ANY CREDIBILITY WITH JUSTIN TRUDEAU. IT SEEMS LIKE HE IS TRYING TO GET US DISTRACTED, AS HE VERY OFTEN WOULD AVOID HOT ISSUES AND TALK ABOUT WHAT THE PARTIES ARE DOING, AND I ALSO FOLLOWED HIM FOR A WHILE ON INSTAGRAM AND I POSTED ABOUT TWO YEARS AGO, CONCERNS ABOUT YOUNG PEOPLE VAPING. THERE WEREN’T A LOT OF COMMENTS AT THE TIME. I’M SURE ONE OF HIS ASSISTANTS COULD HAVE FLAGGED IT BACK THEN AND NOW WE HAVE THIS CRISIS. SO, YOU KNOW WHAT, I THINK HE HAS KIND OF FALLEN ASLEEP AT THE WHEEL A COUPLE TIMES AND I HAVE TO SAY THAT HIS CREDIBILITY AND HIS ABILITIES MIGHT VERY MUCH BE LIKE A PART-TIME DRAMA TEACHER. SO I’M SORRY, THIS IS HOW I FEEL, AND THIS IS WHERE WE ARE TODAY.>>Mark: OKAY.>>Caller: LOVE YOUR SHOW. >>Mark: THANK YOU. FRANK IN SAULT STE. MARIE, ONTARIO, HELLO FRANK. >>Caller: HOW ARE YA?>>Mark: FINE. GO AHEAD. FRANK, GO AHEAD?>>Caller: YEAH, TRUDEAU GOT HIS WAY LAST NIGHT. THE MODERATORS DID NOT INTERRUPT HIM WHILE HE WAS CONSTANTLY, CONSTANTLY SPEAKING OVER PEOPLE THAT WERE SPEAKING, LIKE ANDREW SCHEER ESPECIALLY. TRUDEAU GOT AWAY WITH TOO MUCH LAST NIGHT AND FOR THAT, I WAS VERY DISAPPOINTED. ANDREW SCHEER FINALLY SHOWED A BACKBONE. THANK GOD FOR THAT AND ALSO GOOD FOR HIM. THE FORMAT AS FAR AS THE — THE DEBATE, I THOUGHT, WAS TERRIBLE. PEOPLE THAT I SPOKE TO WATCHED IT FOR THREE, FOUR MINUTES AND THAT’S IT. HUNG UP. I DIDN’T — THE FORMAT WAS JUST TERRIBLE. JUST MADE IT POSSIBLE FOR TRUDEAU TO CONTINUALLY SPEAK OVER OTHER PEOPLE, ESPECIALLY SCHEER, AND AS A RESULT, THERE WERE NO CLEAR POINTS THAT WERE BEING ADDRESSED. I DIDN’T LIKE THE FACT THAT MAXIME BERNIER WAS THERE. HE CERTAINLY DID NOT HELP THE — THE CAUSE, AND HE ALSO — THE BLOC SEPARATIST LEADER SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN THERE. I DON’T UNDERSTAND THAT. THE FACT THAT WE HAVE ONE ENGLISH AND ONLY TWO — AND TWO FRENCH DEBATES, UNBELIEVABLE AS FAR AS CANADA IS CONCERNED. I THINK THE ONE THING THAT SHOULD BE NOTED — AND I DON’T KNOW WHY IT’S NOT, BUT ONE OF THE MODERATORS, RAJ, SHE MET UP WITH GERRY BUTTS. THEY WERE SEEN HAVING DRINKS. I CAN ONLY IMAGINE WHAT SHE WAS DOING — >>Mark: WAS IT POSSIBLE SHE WAS INTERVIEWING HIM? I MEAN, JOURNALISTS INTERVIEW PEOPLE IN POLITICS ALL THE TIME. IF IT WAS SUCH AN ATTEMPT TO BE A SECRET, WHY A PUBLIC LOCATION?>>Caller: YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. AND CERTAINLY THAT’S TRUE. THE FACT IS SHE WAS — LAST NIGHT SHE WAS — >>Mark: I DON’T WANT TO GET INTO ANYTHING WHERE WE’RE DISCREDITING THE MODERATOR. THANK YOU FOR YOUR CALL. I APPRECIATE IT. ALMOST OUT OF TIME, ANYWAY. SOME QUICK FINAL THOUGHTS. TERESA, WHAT WILL YOU WATCH FOR IN THE DAYS AHEAD? THE FRENCH LANGUAGE DEBATE. WHAT ELSE?>>WELL, OBVIOUSLY THAT’S GOING TO BE A KEY FOCUS FOR THIS WEEK. TO SEE, NUMBER ONE, WHETHER THEY DECIDE TO CHANGE UP THE FORMAT FOR THE FRENCH DEBATE IN LIGHT OF A LOT OF THE COMMENTARY AND ALSO JUST TO SEE A LOT OF PEOPLE HAD A LOT OF POSITIVE THINGS TO SAY ABOUT JAGMEET SINGH’S PERFORMANCE.>>Mark: RIGHT. >>IN BOTH DEBATES, THE TVA DEBATE AND THE ONE LAST NIGHT. SEE IF HE CAN CONTINUE TO HAVE THAT POSITIVE MOMENTUM. AND OBVIOUSLY THE DYNAMIC BETWEEN ANDREW SCHEER AND JUSTIN TRUDEAU WILL BE IMPORTANT TOO.>>Mark: OKAY. JOHN, THANK YOU. WE’LL HAVE TO STOP THERE. TERESA, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR BEING WITH US. I APPRECIATE IT. WE’LL SEE YOU AGAIN SOON. >>THANK YOU, MARK. >>THANK YOU. >>Mark: THANK YOU FOR WATCHING AND ALL OF YOUR COMMENTS. CONTINUE TO SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS WITH US AT [email protected] BACK TOMORROW AT 2:00 EASTERN TIME. UNTIL THEN, THANK YOU FOR WATCHING. [♪♪♪]