First, my sympathies.
Posted at 5:00 a.m.
I imagine it was as painful for you as it was for me. Rarely have I seen a debate so difficult to follow. A little more, and the candidates were asked to summarize their platform in three seconds…
The face-to-face formula works very poorly with five leaders. For example, the second duel opposed the PQ and solidarity leaders on the environment even if they agree on the essentials. Waste.
By not having been well informed, the public has been influenced.
From the debate, I retain a few images.
François Legault in dean exceeded by the critics.
Éric Duhaime who is normalizing by posing as a new version of the ADQ, a “center right” party.
Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois who launches the best attacks of the evening against Dominique Anglade, as if his goal was to replace her at the head of the official opposition.
And Paul St-Pierre Plamondon as a rigorous gentleman who remains on the sidelines of major confrontations.
One would have thought that Mr. Legault would destabilize Mr. Duhaime. There was no shortage of pretexts: past remarks that trivialize rape and hate crimes, or even candidates who degrade women, dream of weapons in schools or do not believe in the theory of evolution. But we didn’t hear any of that.
The Conservative leader posed as an ex-adéquiste, even an ex-caquiste who takes up the betrayed commitments of Mr. Legault to reduce the size of the state.
Mr. Duhaime claimed that Quebec could have both better protected vulnerable people and relaxed health measures during the pandemic. How ? What would have been the impact in hospitals? How many deaths would we have had to accept? We didn’t know. The exchange was reduced to a discussion of numbers on the death rate. Science and demagoguery were thus placed on an equal footing.
The chief caquiste played the pragmatic. The experienced man who knows how to turn good intentions into effective policies. He kept coming back with the example of the lack of construction workers to attack the feasibility of his rivals’ commitments to schools, daycare centers and public transit.
He used Mr. Duhaime and Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois as foils. His strategy: to place himself between them to play the anti-ideologues.
Mr. Legault, however, seemed disconnected, saying that “the problem that happened at the Joliette hospital, with Mr.me Joyce, is settled”. Her family name is Echaquan, she is dead and discrimination has not disappeared from Quebec.
We did not feel he was overflowing with enthusiasm at the idea of starting a new mandate. The fire has already burned a little more in his chest.
Mr. Legault’s main rival is Dominique Anglade. And that’s why he has to thank the supportive co-spokesperson. Because the 32-year-old MP was ruthless towards the Liberal leader. He compared her both to Jean Charest and to a pale copy of the Caquiste, a party of which she was president 10 years ago.
Mr. Nadeau-Dubois was the calmest and most incisive. But in terms of image, it emerges from the debate scratched. If its rivals have repeated the expression “orange tax” so often, it is because it hits the mark.
Paul St-Pierre Plamondon was not spoiled by chance. He had to answer strange questions. The host asked him what to do with the congestion during the upcoming works at the Louis-Hippolyte-La Fontaine tunnel, as if it were a civil engineering congress…
Studious and polite, he tried to elevate the debate. But at times, he seemed to want to be insulted to get more attention.
Rare moment of spontaneity, Mr. Nadeau-Dubois had to react hotly to the challenge of the PQ leader and pronounce the title of the book by Pierre Vallières containing the “word that begins with an N”. At the CBC, management had to breathe into a brown paper bag. Not sure, however, of the concrete gain for Quebec.
Another bravado, Mr. Duhaime spoke to English speakers in the language of Mordecai Richler. As if the English speakers who had been listening to the debate for an hour and a half understood nothing except the non-verbal language. But for M.me Anglade is the sign that she is attacked both on her left by QS and on her right.
The Liberal leader was more comfortable championing inclusive values. Like the supportive co-spokesperson, she claims to be able to welcome more immigrants while making them French thanks to a miraculous idea: inviting them to settle in the regions. As if it were so easy. Mr. Legault rightly pointed out that you cannot force a person to live in a particular city. But he almost had no time to specify it.
Because once again, we had to change the subject. And I wonder if some had simply already changed positions.