So, the networks have decided, after certain unnamed political parties threatened to boycott a televised leadership debate that included Elizabeth May, that “it is better to broadcast the debates with the four major party leaders, rather than not at all.” I have a feeling May will have no problem finding a pulpit to preach from, if not a podium with the other talking heads. After watching only a few hours of campaign coverage two things are obvious: Elizabeth May is good television, and the networks know it. If no amount of bellyaching or lawsuit threats is sufficient to secure her time in the leadership debate spotlight, she will no doubt benefit from one-on-one interviews with the Peter Robertson’s and Don Duffy’s of Canadian Broadcasting.
Is the decision of the networks fair? I really haven’t thought about it, yet. Let me tell you what I have thought about. The Green Party has little to add to a national election forum than the infectious passion of May herself. The Green Party remains largely a one issue party and the environment is currently well represented by the NDP- long acknowledged by environmentalists as the greenest of the contenders, and the Liberal Party- after years of pretending the green shift is the real deal.
Harper has apparently suggested he suspects May will withdraw and back the Liberals. What is more likely is that she pulls a CAW and encourages supporters to vote for whoever is best suited to defeating the local Conservative candidate. Before she falls on her sword, how many Green supporters will she convince that their vote can not be trusted in the hands of a traditional party? Green Voters, please remember that passion is not a substitute for policy! This country needs more than a 21st century environmental policy. There are ideological homes for you here, or here!