Include Elizabeth May in debates

There may be a spring election, or there may not be. One has to suppose it will depend on what is in Monday's budget. Whenever it is, however, I believe that Elizabeth May should be included in the leaders' debates.

I'm not giving up my Liberal affiliation any time soon, even if I did vote for the Greens as a matter of principle last time. However, I believe in a diversity of voices. And if as expected the Green Party will run a full slate of candidates or very close to it, and May's poll numbers continue to hold above 10%, people will legitimately ask why May is being excluded by the networks. It's in the MSM's vested interests to keep alternate voices out -- after all, it makes life easier for them.

One only has to remember the 1991 British Columbia election which was supposed to be a two way race between the Social Credit and the NDP (the latter ended up winning). The BC Liberals (not affiliated with the federal party) had to fight in court to get its slot in the debate and wound up impressing British Columbians when the then leader called out the incompetence and sniping of his opponents. They became the opposition. Today, they're the government there. Had the networks had their way, BC would still be stuck with the Socreds (really the antecedent of the Reform Party).

Two years later, Preston Manning was allowed to be involved in the debates even though his party only had one seat in the Commons and Lucien Bouchard was also in the English debate even though he wasn't running outside Québec. Bouchard slam-dunked Kim Campbell with his famous question, "What is the real deficit, ma'am? What is the real deficit?"

Of course, the networks will say, "That's just the point. Bouchard had eight seats before the 1993 election. Reform had one. The Greens had none then nor do they have any now."

My answer to that is, "13% of Canadians say their first choice is the Green Party. Shouldn't they be allowed to see May question the other leaders herself so people can decide whether she's cut out to be a Prime Minister -- or at least a viable coalition partner?" The fact is, people may be tempted to vote their second choice to ensure another minority government. They need to know if May could very well be their first. It's the chicken and egg: It can't hatch unless it has the chance, but some don't even want the egg to be laid at all. That's just plain dumb. (No, I am not calling any politician a chicken here. I'm calling the networks chickens.)

While my hope is for a Liberal majority come the next election, I would not mind a Red-Green coalition or alliance. It would be a progressive government and it would serve to isolate the NDP which as of late has thrown its lot (peculiarly in my opinion) with PMS. This possibility will only happen, however, if people get to hear what May has to say. She should be included in the debates -- period.

Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.