ANALYSIS | Mark Carney and Pierre Poilievre see very different threats to Canada | CBC News

CBC - 18/04
The result of a modern debate is always something of a blur. But what this year's encounters underlined is that this election is primarily about both two very different candidates for prime minister and two very different ideas of what the greatest threat to the country actually is. 

Thirty-seven years ago, inside a television studio in Ottawa, John Turner thrust an index finger at Brian Mulroney and warned that with one stroke of a pen Mulroney had reversed 120 years of national development and thrown Canada into the "north-south influence of the United States." 

"When the economic levers go, the political independence is sure to follow," Turner said.

Turner lost both the election and the larger debate — the free-trade deal between Canada and the United States went ahead and came into effect two months later. But that exchange — possibly the most dramatic in the 60-year history of televised leaders' debates in Canada — is still replayed on television at election time. And Turner's warning now could be said to hang over the 2025 campaign.

In truth, a televised debate is not well-suited to settling big questions of national purpose and direction.

In 1988, the three leaders — John Turner for the Liberals, Brian Mulroney for the Progressive Conservatives and NDP leader Ed Broadbent — spent six hours in close proximity, three in English and three in French. They were each given three minutes — a luxurious amount of time by current standards — for both opening and closing statements. And Turner still insisted that a third debate, devoted entirely to the free-trade deal,...
[Short citation of 8% of the original article]

Loading...