Front Burner - Conservative leadership candidates spar in debate

Episode Date: May 12, 2022

Last night, six Conservative leadership hopefuls squared off in the first official debate of the race. Conservative MPs Pierre Poilievre, Leslyn Lewis and Scott Aitchison; former Quebec premier Jean Charest; Brampton Mayor Patrick Brown; and Ontario MPP Roman Baber shared the stage – and while they’re all supposed to be playing for the same team, things still got a bit scrappy. Power and Politics host Vassy Kapelos was in Edmonton for the event and she joins Jayme Poisson to recap the night.

In the Dragon's Den, a simple pitch can lead to a life-changing connection. Watch new episodes of Dragon's Den free on CBC Gem. Brought to you in part by National Angel Capital Organization, empowering Canada's entrepreneurs through angel investment and industry connections. This is a CBC Podcast. Hello, I'm Jamie Poisson. So last night, six Conservative leadership hopefuls squared off in the first official debate of the race. Here's who is on stage. Conservative MPs Pierre Palliev, Lesley-Anne Levy, Lesley-Anne Levy, Lesley-Anne Lewis, and Scott Acheson.

Former Quebec Premier Jean Charest, Brampton Mayor Patrick Brown, and Ontario MPP Roman Baber. And while all these people are supposed to be playing for the same team, things still got a bit scrappy. Power and Politics host Vashie Capellos was in Edmonton for the event, and she joins me now to recap the night. Hey, Vashie. Hi, Jamie. Thank you very much for being here. That was a bit of an odd debate, I think might be fair to say. There were sound effects at one point. You can't mention any other candidate on the stage, and you can't mention any other federal leader. If you do, there's going to be trouble, and here's what you're going to hear.

And then there were also, there were paddles. There were paddles. We don't have any more points. No, I know, you're out. Yeah. Sorry about that. There were paddles. There was a sad trombone that was playing like right before the debate started,

mixed with like Coldplay as the soundtrack. It was all very, very confusing. I think in a little bit of seriousness, you know, having talked about the debate before it with the moderator, Tom Clark, he was really worried about the idea before it with the moderator, Tom Clark, he was really worried about the idea of them talking over each other, which we've seen in other debates, not just this conservative leadership, but like the last general election one, for example. And he was like, very much worried about it being like, unlistenable, you know, and so I think

some of those elements, I'm not not to say whether they worked or not. But I think that's sort of the motivation behind using them. It did have like a little bit of a game show vibe, I would say. Like at one point, they were asking like sort of dating app questions, which, you know, maybe is fair because these people are pretty unknown to a lot of Canadians. And I really was not expecting to hear that Roman Baber is such an Amy Winehouse fan. When I hear Amy Winehouse, I can see into her soul. She speaks to issues of addiction and mental health, something that people know that I'm very, very passionate about. And she left us too early.

But yeah, Amy Winehouse, back to black. That one threw me or that Leslie Lewis's favorite show to binge watch is Bridgerton. Like there were, yeah, those questions are actually very interesting questions. The idea of like, what are you binge watching? What are you reading? Who do you, like, who do you look up to as a political figure? And the answers can be very revealing. And I just, the sort of placement of them in the middle of like, you know, then right away, it's like, oh, what's the biggest threat to Canada?

It's like some hard turns that made, yeah, it did in some instances feel like a game show and other instances feel like a very serious debate. It's, it's a hard balancing act, but just in the vein that you mentioned, the idea of like getting to know people who for the most part, other than a few of them are not really known commodities in the country. It did, it did sort of help to that effect. Yeah. Yeah. I think, uh, Pierre Polyev probably did the best job of staying on

brand in this section. Mr. Polyev. Well, I think it was Netflix had a series on Trotsky, actually, and it helped me to better understand the diabolical evil of communism and totalitarian socialism. But, you know, the bright side is it helped me appreciate the freedom that we have in canada that we have to stand up for and defend um yeah uh he has message discipline you sure can say that about every time you hear him it's like you know you know what message is he's gonna stick to and he certainly did yeah 100 i think a lot of people expected a bit of a bare knuckle brawl after the the unofficial debate that took place last week where the tone was it was it was pretty feisty and and what did you

think of the tenor this time around it was way dialed down it just was so different that there was obviously a lot more control through the moderator and the format over who could debate who and at what times and over what subjects whereas like the questions last week were much more open-ended and the time allotted like there was a lot less structure which i think provided for that acrimony and the personal nature of the attacks i think there were moments like that certainly in this debate like it wasn't like you know a total kubaya session but it also wasn't as you said like the knock down take him out brawl that I think a lot of people have been thinking this could have been um when you talk about those

moments what what comes top of mind to you I'm thinking of that moment when Polyev kind of went on a run against Sharae calling him like a little forgetful. But that was your position. You seem to have forgotten it. You've forgotten a lot of things about your record. Yeah, I think that's the number one thing. So this was when you could kind of see that like the strategy of Jean Charest going into this was to highlight what Lesley Lewis had already flagged in the last debate, which was a lack of clarity around Pierre Polyev's own personal position on abortion. And you could see like no matter what Polyev said, Jean Charest was like, I'm going to expose this, you know, I'm

going to focus on this and that it's not clear. And Mr. Polyev talked about social conservatives. Let's talk about that. He still won't tell you his position of whether he is pro-choice or pro-life. And so he went after him on that. And Polyev was ready for it, right? Like right away, he was like, well, what about you? But Mr. mr charrette mr charrette why didn't you take a moment to acknowledge that you're the only one on this stage who actually voted for a law that would recriminalize abortion when you were part of the mulroney government you did you did like do you denounce your position and he's like you forget that you did that and here's another list of all the things that he talked about all these you know taxes and and things that happened when Jean Charest was premier of Quebec

that certainly fly in the face of a lot of the conservative ideals that the party talks about now, especially where taxation is concerned. You forgot that you raised the fuel tax, the sales tax, the health tax. You forgot that you banned natural gas development in your own province. You forgot you brought in a long gun registry. You seem a little bit forgetful about your record, Mr. Charest, but Canadians now remember. And so that was definitely one of the feistier moments. And I should say also like between Charest and Polyev, not unexpected. They were the main kind of, you know, foes for each other in the last debate. There is certainly like the greatest cleavage and posture of policy between the two of any candidates almost, you

could argue. And there's clearly a lot of personal animosity there, too. So it wasn't a shocker that they ended up having that kind of moment of the night, that punchy moment of the night. But interesting that it ended up kind of being framed around abortion. Yeah. Did you feel like we got a definitive answer from Polyev and where he stands in abortion after that, that back and forth? Like, did Charest get that answer from him? Well, Charest doesn't think that it was because in the scrum afterward, he was like, that was a huge flip-flop. I think it was a clear answer if the question had been, what would you do as leader of the party on the issue of abortion, right?

So he said very clearly, I'm not going to change the laws. I'm not going to introduce legislation. A polyeth government would not introduce or pass legislation restricting abortion. Equivocated his own personal. I mean, I'm trying to remember the exact words. I don't think he said like unequivocally, you know, here's who I am as a person. Here's my own personal position. I didn't hear that either. Yeah yeah so maybe that's like the opening going forward for the other candidates if they so choose to take it um because certainly when it comes to i'm thinking about like the andrew shearer days that was like a huge issue especially in the general election for him the lack of clarity on his own personal position uh and then he had a position

and then it sort of like got watered down like it was very you know he suffered for it basically it was a vulnerability in his campaign so whether that ends up being that way for Polly, I'm not like 100% sure yet. But on sort of what he do as leader, he was pretty clear on that, I thought. Probably worth noting, Leslyn Lewis got a lot of applause as the only person on stage to firmly state that she was against abortion. I am pro-life and women in Canada... Yeah, I mean, Lesley Lewis is the other end of the spectrum in that you may not like the position she's taken, you may disagree with it, but it's a position.

It doesn't appear to me like it's a weakness on her part, right? Like, or a vulnerability, I should say, only because if we're talking, like, politically and strategically, it's when you're not clear about what you stand for that your opponents go in for the kill, right? And that's certainly been the case in each of the past conservative races and to some degree in the exchange we just referenced between Polly and Sheree. She is very clear about where she stands. And again, you may disagree with it. It may not represent your views, but she's entitled to those views and she makes them clear. So it's difficult to, from a political perspective, as her opponents, like, fault her for that. Do we have clarity on the other candidates on the stage, too, on where they stand on this issue?

I felt like there was clarity from everyone else like i could tell you right now that they're all going to adopt the official party policy decision which is not to introduce legislation the only one i was less clear on and i'm not sure if you agree or disagree but it was roman bavar i i don't believe that government has a role in how people start and grow their families if as conservatives who want to stay of people's lives, then we should stay out of the most intimate areas of their lives. He did sort of in alignment with his view, for example, on vaccine mandates. So I took that like if I were to like take the implication from that, I would I would interpret that as like I'm not going to do anything either. But he wasn't as unequivocal as like, the charades or the HSNs or the Browns on the stage, right? Even even Polyeth was was a little

bit more clear about what he'd do as leader. So I feel like there's a little opening there too, like there's some, some, some room for other candidates to kind of prod if they want to get a more specific answer out of them. Another issue that seemed to invigorate some of the candidates in the audience was the convoy and the blockades. Just to explain the format a bit, the candidates at one point got to pick who they wanted to debate. And this was in a different section. It didn't include the sound effects. But Pierre Polyev picked Patrick Brown. And can you tell me a bit about that exchange, the one about the convoy and the blockades? So the convoy has factored in, I think, just by way of background, a bit for everyone

listening in a really significant way in this debate, but also like throughout the race so far. And a lot of that has to do with the fact that the convoy was actually like, basically what precipitated the fact that there is another conservative leadership race right like this if you remember was the time when Aaron O'Toole was like you know I don't want to meet with the truckers and he's like I'll go meet with them and there was a huge amount of backlash in caucus to what was perceived by conservative MPs as like not enough support for the cause from Aaron O'Toole and that as I said precipitated his ouster the end of Aaron O'Toole. And that, as I said, precipitated his ouster, the end of Erin O'Toole's leadership. And Pierre Palliev, one minute later, releasing his video

saying, I'm running to replace him and to be the Prime Minister of Canada. So it's not surprising that it's become a huge flashpoint and a touchpoint in this race in particular. Now, the exchange you're referring to, you're right, Pierre Palliev got to pick who he kind of debate with, and it was Patrick Brown. They have very different ideologies on this in the particular exchange they weren't necessarily like crazy far apart Pierre Polyev was was very much so like that's individuals individual responsibilities like if they break the law they should be held accountable for that but on the whole uh the people who were there protesting or demonstrating or occupying you know various parts of the country including the capital city like you know we should support their cause uh patrick brown's comments were mostly focused on the negative impact of

blockade the illegality of them and the way in which he would approach those going forward and also pierre polly of like really kind of went after Tom Clark, the host, in just the way the question was framed, which was really interesting too. Now, I just find it interesting that you didn't include in your list of threats the axe-wielding terrorists who've been attacking our pipeline workers in Western Canada. I don't know why that doesn't seem to be a trouble to you, or the rest of the national media. Although I think Tom did refer to critical infrastructure, which actually is a pipeline, too. But anyway, he was like, you know, you and the national media don't care at all about about that.

That's you know, you're framing it that way on purpose. So at the end of the day, I mean, like, look, Polyev, I think in the greater electorate has a vulnerability on this issue because it did, you know, fact check. It did take him a long time before he said anything, but I totally support this. And it was after there was already evidence of, you know, major effects on local economies and on the economy more writ large. So it took him a while before he said there's aspects of this that are illegal and should be stopped. And he certainly wasn't overly vocal about it. So there is again, like some room for opponents to criticize and to prod.

And Brown, I mean, was kind of on the periphery at that time and, you know, was able to sort of establish a position like the one he took, which is very similar to Jean Charest. And Charest and Poiliev have gone head to head over the issue as well through the media and as well in the last debate. Mr. Poirier is very conveniently rewriting history tonight. The fact of the matter is he did support illegal blockades. But I disagree with anyone who has a privileged position of making laws supporting illegal blockades that have cost us millions of jobs and cost us investment in this country.

My guess is this issue is like, you're going to stick around because they all seem to be fighting, you know, either like who is the most supportive of the treasurers or who thinks it's the most illegal. Like it's this very odd dichotomy up there. In the Dragon's Den, a simple pitch can lead to a life-changing connection. Watch new episodes of Dragon's Den free on CBC Gem. Brought to you in part by National Angel Capital Organization. Empowering Canada's entrepreneurs through angel investment and industry connections. Hi, it's Ramit Sethi here. You may have seen my money show on Netflix.

I've been talking about money for 20 years. I've talked to millions of people and I have some startling numbers to share with you. Did you know that of the people I speak to, 50% of them do not know their own household income? That's not a typo, 50%. That's because money is confusing. In my new book and podcast, Money for Couples, I help you and your partner create a financial vision together. To listen

to this podcast, just search for Money for Couples. One part of the night that I found super interesting and also entertaining was the discussion around Bitcoin. And Leslie Lewis decided to go after Pierre Polyev on Bitcoin. He also encouraged people to cash in their fiat currency, their paper money and buy Bitcoin. If they had done that, they would have lost $37,000 by the time he had said that to do that to today. Other candidates completely piled on. And the last thing we should be doing is encouraging our parents and grandparents, along with vulnerable families, to gamble their savings, their retirements, in something this risky. Bitcoin has lost 60% of its value since November of last year, 20% in the last month.

Anyone following his advice that we saw on YouTube would have lost 20% of their earnings. I mean, this is ludicity. Tell me a little bit about that exchange and what you made of it. Yeah, so the kind of underpinning idea put forth by Polyev that they were jumping on was this idea that, and he had said it right at the outset of the campaign, I think close to anyway, that Canadians can opt out of inflation by essentially using Bitcoin or things like Bitcoin, like cryptocurrency. And so there was a whole lot of back and forth. And interesting also, as you pointed out, that it was Lesley Lewis who first brought it up as a divisive point, because she has done she did the same thing in the last debate, like all of a sudden, she was going after him on his position

on abortion. And it surprised a lot of people who assume that, for example, like her second place votes would be for Polly Abbott and vice versa, because it's a rank ballot, like they felt like there was a lot of alignment there. So it was not the mashup that people had assumed would happen. And I think that occurred again tonight. And she was sort of like criticizing the, I guess, what underpins it, like the validity of the claims that he's making. And then, like you said, everyone piled on and they pointed to the volatility around Bitcoin, the amount of, for example, value that Bitcoin has lost just in the last two weeks, which is pretty astounding. And Polyev's retort was, you're misleading the public. I clearly stated that people should have the freedom, which isn't, you know, entirely true. He was saying, I mean, yes, he's saying

for that freedom, but he was almost advocating for cryptocurrency in the argument he's making to move away from traditional ways of doing finance, traditional, like the idea of the central bank, he's become completely against that. So he was kind of pitching the alternative. He wasn't telling anyone they had to do it. But again, it created an opening for other candidates to really all pounce, and they really did. On this issue of the central bank,

Polyev's, I think it was kind of like an announcement, I hadn't heard him say this before tonight, that he would fire the governor of the Bank of Canada. If actually, why is he saying this? What is this? What is this about? I feel like people are like, who is the governor of the Bank of Canada? Yeah, I know. That's a very good point. Look, I think it is the first time he said it for sure. So the news out of the debate tonight is that that if Pierre Polyev were to become prime minister, he would fire the governor of the Bank of Canada. This goes part and parcel as to

the why into like a narrative that he has pushed right from the start, which is institutions like the Bank of Canada are not in it for you. I am. And you should doubt their independence. You should doubt their veracity. You should doubt the things that they're doing because they have made your life worse and they have made your life more expensive. I'm not saying that's correct. I'm just saying that's the that's the narrative that he has pushed. And so this goes part and parcel into that narrative. There is no, I mean, the people who run his campaign are smart. There is no way they didn't plan that he would drop that in the debate, that it would likely become the headline out of the debate

and would create more buzz for him and for the things he's proposing. Look, it's like, do a lot of people know what the Bank of Canada is? I don't know. Do a lot of people like the idea of saying institutions, big institutions run by the quote unquote elites aren't doing things that help your life? I think that idea has some resonance, right? Whether it's accurate or not, whether you can prove it or not, we've seen south of the border, that issue really take hold, right? Like the undermining, essentially, of institutions that people feel are failing them in certain aspects of their life. Again, I can't say that that's true in this case. But I can say, I think that the narrative itself is certainly like popular with his supporters. And you could even feel that in the room when

he said things like that. Right. And on that note, like Jean Charest called this irresponsible. He said that Polyev was deliberately undermining confidence in institutions. Mr. Polyev's suggestion that saying that the Bank of Canada is financially illiterate is irresponsible. It creates doubt. If you're an investor looking at coming to Canada and you hear that kind of a statement coming from a member of the House of Commons, you'd think you're in a third world country. Are there any other big moments, decisive differences of vision, of positions that were clearly laid out tonight that we may have missed that might help a Conservative Party member pick their first choice? I'm not sure if there were major differences. I would say like the one question that nobody answered really well to me, or really thoroughly, I should say, from my vantage point that I think is really relevant to Canadians is on the issue of cost of living and the rising cost of moving down? What would you do to do that? And other than like getting rid of the carbon tax, there actually wasn't a long list of policy ideas put forward about how they would tackle that, which I found really interesting because most of them, if not all of them, have made it the central issue of their campaign. And understandably so, probably rightly so, right?

I'm not sure there's something that more Canadians care about at this point in time than how expensive everything is getting and how unaffordable their life feels. So you would have thought that they would have come prepared with like a laundry list, like three to five things. Here's what I'm going to do to reduce the burden on your life. And there really wasn't that like other than, you know, the gatekeeper line that we've heard down multiple times from Pierre Pauliev, multiple times from Pierre Poliev, a lot of blame on the Trudeau government for accumulating a lot of debt, which certainly is an argument that deserves some scrutiny. And it's understandable, there is a lot of debt right now. But like, okay, there's a problem, like, tell me how you're going to reduce the debt. Tell me what you're going to do about inflation, specifically, how will you reduce the burden of costs on me right now? Like, none of that was there. So my sort of takeaway

would be not so much on like big moments that did happen, but on big stuff that didn't happen. That's the one that sticks out to me. Okay. Uh, Vashi, thank you so much for this. Uh, thanks so much for, it's like a quarter to 12. So very appreciative. Thank you.

All good. I'm two hours behind. I've got tons of time. Oh, you can go, you can go out for a drink now. Okay, cool. Thank you so much. Well, no, but yeah. No, probably just go to bed.

Yeah. Thank you. All right. That is all for now. Thanks so much for listening. And we'll talk to you tomorrow. For more CBC Podcasts, go to cbc.ca slash podcasts.