Categories: Polls

Would you like to see a one-on-one debate between Stephen Harper and Michael Ignatieff?

…

by macleans.ca on Wednesday, March 30, 2011 4:19pm - 61 Comments

Tags: Election 2011, Polls

Out and About

"Second verse, same as the first."
Jenn_

So is Harper now trying to say a debate between the two of them, INSTEAD of the full leaders debate? Because, yeah, that's gonna happen. But maybe he knew that, huh?
psiclone

this is brilliant – thionk about it folks it drives a wedge right down between the oppostion parties – thropws them off balance and the media all focus on just Harper and Iggy ….. then when Iggy backs out as it looks like he is or I should say his people already are – as they didn't pipe up at the consortium meeting and let the clock run out – fear you can smell it … poor divided frustrated left wing nuts everywhere off balance and off message

Thwim

It's only brilliant if Canadians would *prefer* a one on one to an all leader's debate. If they don't, then offering the former to the exclusion of the latter won't be appreciated.

Given the public response last time to even Ms. May's exclusion, I think most people in Canada will see this for the gamemanship it is, and not be terribly impressed with Mr. Harper for it.

I can see this playing very well for Mr. Ignatieff if he now comes out with something along the lines of, "We'll not take away the chance for Canadians to compare the Liberal party to all of the major parties running, we're not afraid of any of them. Mr. Harper evidently is, as he now suggests that the only way he'll be willing to face us one-on-one is if we make sure the others never have a chance to put forward their plans. The vision of Canada that the Liberals have is not exclusionary."

Atchison

I think this play is a distraction. I can't see any leader benefiting from an extended exchange on the merits of a two party debate.

The debates debate only draws the media’s attention away from the recycled policies all parties have been presenting.

John D

Hmm, look who backed out…
Mike

Seems to me Stevie turned & ran on this one! First time someone stands up and challenges, bullies run was the way my mom explained it & looks like it still holds true.

Thwim

Me too. But between the candidates of my riding.
Pisnaz

On one hand it would make sense, there still is no reason the Bloc should be treated as a federal party. They gain votes from only one province, and frankly they have no agenda to further Canada's interests so why let them stand as an "official" federal party. The NDP we all know just do not have a snowballs chance in hell of getting elected in, so discounting the green party, which is odd as they do have representatives in most of Canada, unlike the Bloc, we have 2 parties that are going to matter. Either be honest and have the Conservatives and Liberals go head to head or open it up for all to partake as it should be in a democracy, and those who are not representative of the Canadian people should be sent packing.
JDW

There is absolutely no way that the media should control the number of debates and the format. At the very least, there should be a full debate with all legitimate parties, and a party that garners a million votes is a legitimate party. As the people obviously see the Green party as a legitimate party, the views of the media should not be relevant. As for format, the Liberals and Conservatives should debate one on one in a separate debate. Having the leaders miss another staged photo op in one of their supporter's kitchen is worth having the leaders meet face to face in a serious debate. The public deserves to know who can defend their platform and their record, not the party who can stage the best photo op!. This is an election not a marketing campaign aimed at convincing consumers to buy a brand of car.The Liberals and Conservatives are the two parties from whom a leader will be chosen. ( Remember, we don't vote for a PM. We elect MP's.) The greater the number of debates the better.These leaders must be forced to discuss the pertinrent issues without the party filter. This will force each leader to debate issues and not personalities or lineage. It must shine the bright light of public scrutiny on these individuals who want to lead our country. The parties should set it up and the media can be invited. If the "coalition" of television media don't want to show up, the local TV station can carry it. More public access to the leaders discussing relevant topics is never a bad thing. Democracy must be visible and spontaneous not a staged marketing campaign. .

being put in place.
saskboy

It'd be a good thing, but here's why it won't happen: http://saskboy.wordpress.com/2011/03/31/more-deba…
rhebner

I’d watch if you could get them into a caged wrestling ring and wearing tights. Otherwise, I’ll pass.

Canadian Mom

They have lots of cages left over from the G20!

KKay

we are all talking about elections
costs. who will pay for the additional debate.
Billyd

I would like the 3 main parties that represent Canada(Liberal, NDP & Conservatives) have a one on one debate with each other. The Bloc means nothing outside of Quebec. The Greens do not have the support nor any members in the House.

Bucko

Right on.
B.Causeiknow

"The Greens do not have the support nor any members in the House." This is all about the next election, not the last election. Therefore, the absence of the Green Party in the last parliament is irrelative. The Green Party must be given an equal chance to place someone in the next parliament.

guest

Why?? If they don't have representation they shouldn't be there…otherwise you would have to have all parties involved Christian Heritage etc…only parties with member of parliament should be included.

Bluesky

It's referred to as 'proportional representation.

Kevin

Why; so that none mannered Elizebeth May can wag her index finger in the face of our Prime Minister like she did last time.

Ross

He's The primeminister not the Pope

fribance

It should give us a clear view of whom is best suited to run the country. The problem, in a debate, you rarely hear the truth.
Mac

The only debate we need is between the to guys one of whom will be the PM – forget the four or the God forbid five way speak-fest.
Kevin

I think the Liberals/Conservatives and NDP should be the only one's present in a debate as the Bloc don't represent Canada and the others such as Greens have no seats and will have less after this election due to the fact that much of their enviromental policy is for times of luxery like the last election. Now it's about economy!!
tom bonner

I know of two votes Mr.harper has lost due to his one word "coalition "campaign. The media should let him know how tiresome he is.

dani

But what is the option? Minority Liberals dancing to whistles from NDP and Bloc?

Blacktop

Right on, Dani. No way should the Bloc have anything to say about federal government, in that their only purpose is to take Quebec out of Canada. .

Guest

No boner …. ur wrong! …. Harper has not lost, there will be no coalition in Canada, a useless 3 headed Prime Minister composed of Iggy, Jacko wacko & the bloc idiot! I don't think so , not with my vote or alot of others in Canada!
http://twitter.com/Chappy744 @Chappy744

We should let the media know how tired we are of them!

taxslave

After the last one I'm not sure I will ever watch a leaders debate again. Maybe if any of the parties had a better leader I might.
MTB

A note to Harper and Iggy: You don't need the broadcast consortium's permission to have a debate. Just name your time and place and do it. I'm pretty sure the TV cameras will show up. Just sayin'.
Ross

I'd love to see it happen ,as I believe it was Mr. Harper who put the offer out there not expecting to get an answer of YES, any time any place from Mr. Igniatieff, now it seems Mr. Harper is backing off.WHY?
GUESS SOMEBODY BACKED INTO A LAWN MOWER EH!!!
Guest

No, Iggy is not good for the country. Harper certainly is!

Iggy and Jacko and the separatist guy, idiot, brought down the gov't. & are now wasting tax payers' dollars, millions, for an unnecessary election

surely96

Please – Don't go on about tax payer's money wasted. This election is only millions. G-20 fiasco cost 1.3 billion! Building prisons that are not necessary or needed costs billions. F-35s that do not have good recommendations by the experts cost 30 billion! Firing all the watch dogs that he didn't like – nuclear energy, RCMP, veterans, accountability etc.

http://cdndailydigest.blogspot.com/ Joe Hueglin

Harper issued a challenge.
Ignatieff called him.
Mercer offered the dueling grounds.
Best follow through or not be taken seriously again, eh?
Kelly

Newstalk 1010 offered a forum for a one-on-one debate and the Munk Debate offered to finance it. Bring it on! (As an aside, Ignatieff's promise regarding student funding: In my day, we called OSAP (Ontario Student Assistant Fund) the Ontario Stereo Acquisition Fund. Or an extra 40 cases of beer).
Denise Julien

Well Ignatieff has impressed the hell out of me. I have voted different ways in my life, but I have never been as disgusted with a government as I am with 'Harper's government'. Canada has been a dark place for 5 years, with a cloud hanging over it, because of the policies of Mr Harper. Bring on the one on one. Ignatieff will wipe the floor with Harper, and Canada needs to feel like itself again.
char martel

i have no faith in the harper government..i know from harpers previous speeches he thinks of canada as a welfare state and i believe he has a secret agenda about canadas healthcare why all the money for stealth and not health.,.our tax money is used to pay for his little toys jails jets and corp tax cuts..i want a debate between the two main players in this election look them in the eye and see who really cares about canadian people…i want to know what they really have to offer us……

vera

I do not see anywhere Harper thinks of Canada as a welfare state! If anything he is trying to keep it from getting that way. Boo, secret agenda!!! What Crap! Someone always drags this dead cat out when they can't think of anything intellegent to say! Health care is never going to be solved, period. Isn't it a provincial problem anyway?
As for the jets, we are in desperate need of them, just take a look at what is going on in the world to-day. We are not immune to aggressive behavior. If you had someone in your family in the military you might sing a differant tune.

Canadian Mom

Vera, this is why Canada needs to wake up and stop being spoon fed by selected msm. Harper DID refer to Canada as a welfare state and that we were proud of that. He said this back in 97.

You say "we are not immune to aggressive behaviour" we used to be. Amnesty International has declared, PUBLICLY IN A RELEASED REPORT that Canada has FAILED on a humanitarian level BECAUSE OF The HARPER Government of Canada.

The UN didn't give Canada a seat on the Security Council for the first time in OUR history and we FAILED with Kyoto and took a beating from other countries in their media because of it.

There have been a lot of firsts with this Crime Minister and being charged with CONTEMPT of PARLIAMENT speaks volumes of your dear leader (he's not mine).

Please jump the Conservative ship before it sinks us all into an oily, dirty, non transparent sea of more scandal, CONtempt, and embarrassment.

PLEASE for the love of CANADA know what and who Harper is! (And I didn't even mention the largest deficit in history that he has NO PLAN to reduce.)
I say all this with sincerity and the hope that more people will see what's really happening to our once great nation of peacekeeping, proud, generous and kind Canadians.

Harper is a bully and we discourage bullies in our schools, homes and workplaces. We should not allow it in our government!

justinutherpyrsen

It would be satisfying to see one-on-one debates, but they would not improve our democratic system. In fact I think they would achieve the opposite.

While it would be momentarily satisfying, in a schadenfreude kind of way to see M Harper the bully get his comeuppance in a contest that pitted him against a wit and an intellect that are far and away out of M Harper's league, I don't think that this kind of momentary satisfaction should be indulged.

In my mind the short term satisfaction of seeing a bully put in his place is very much tempered by the harm that going to presidential-style one-on-one debates would inflict on our democracy. Ours is not a 'bi-partisan' system but a multi-party system. If we aspire to grace our our electoral system with the adjectives 'free' and 'fair' then we need to accept that all the registered parties must have an equal right to present their message to the electorate.

I understand that the two parties that had the most seats in the last Parliament are, by the force of past performance *likely* to have a similar standing in the next election. There have been exceptions (think Kim Campbell), but generally it is so. On the other hand, while we have to accept that the present is influenced the past, we have to believe that it does *not* determine it. That is a fundamental basis for having elections at all, it seems to me.

This idea came out of the discussion of the exclusion of Ms May from the leaders' debates.I think that we would be better served to insist on an inclusive debate first and then we can insist that one-on-one pairings are included as part of the format. I think this would be a healthier development for our democratic process.
mars

How many debates do we want??? the coalition has brought down the government –how many time—-we don't need that again!!!! We need a majority– so someone has the say about who is in charge!!!
vera

Please!!! Let's just get it over with!! I pray for a majority in favor of Mr. Harper so that we do not have to listen to those outrageous promises, etc and what ever is spueing from the Liberals mouths these days. Harper is the only one to run this country right now. Iggy (noramis) is only a talking head.