The author is a former conservative strategist. He was a political adviser in the Harper government as well as in the opposition.
Feared by the leaders and awaited by those who want to turn the tide or relaunch a moribund campaign, the electoral debate requires a lot of preparation. To succeed in a debate indeed requires clearly setting out one’s vision for the future, explaining one’s program and standing out from one’s opponents, while neutralizing their attacks so as not to emerge weakened.
This is what all the leaders will have in mind on Thursday evening, when the first debate of the Quebec election campaign will be held on TVA. There is no universal manual that one could consult to prepare for it. Still, the oratorical jousting is an art that still includes a certain methodology and techniques to master. Did you know that Gilles Duceppe had a clone at the NPD? For 15 years, Karl Bélanger, former political adviser to Alexa McDonough, Jack Layton and Thomas Mulcair, personified Mr. Duceppe in the preparation of the debates.
This revealing anecdote is found in Political confidences, a book by Marc-André Leclerc recently published by Éditions du Journal on the little-known role of political advisers. Mr. Bélanger qualifies himself as the person with the most experience to play the role of Gilles Duceppe, after Mr. Duceppe, of course. The preparation of the debates is done several months in advance.
This was the case for Stephen Harper, as former Conservative strategist Yan Plante, who oversaw the former Prime Minister’s preparation, reveals in this book: “Not necessarily for the simulations, but for the campaign narrative. You think about the actors, you build your notebooks. Mr. Plante also confided that, for political advisers, TVA’s face-to-face formula presents significant challenges. “You can’t limit yourself to preparing your chef for an excerpt. Of course, you will prepare a few excerpts, but since the exchanges are long, it will go into depth quickly. It’s harder not to answer a specific question. »
Still according to Mr. Plante, this format also includes several technical elements that complicate the task of chefs. “Let’s take an example: unlike what we see in most other debates, there is no timer in this studio to display the time remaining in the current segment”, he specifies to the To have to. “The difficulty for chefs is that they lose track of time in the heat of the moment. If they struggle to know where they are, and therefore to assess how much time they have left before Pierre Bruneau changes the theme, they may fail to get their main message across. Worse, by dint of debating subjects for too long, they risk hearing the bell announce the end of their time, thus depriving them of having the last word. In addition, adds Mr. Plante, “the cameras are less present in the studio, which encourages the leaders to watch their opponents”.
We also learn in this book that Robert Bourassa did not believe in mock debates. John Parisella, chief of staff to the former Liberal prime minister, says that “the weekend before the debate [contre Jacques Parizeau]we gathered five or six people in his office and we answered various questions that he asked us”.
“common sense”
In my past role as a political adviser, I myself participated in the mock debates for Andrew Scheer, impersonating Maxime Bernier. If I were to return to service, it is surely the role of Éric Duhaime that would be assigned to me, and that would come down to criticism, with attacks that I would describe as “common sense”. I would demonstrate, with supporting figures, that the situation is worse than before, that nothing is changing, by denouncing the immobility, the inaction and the absence of in-depth reforms in all the spheres which directly affect the people’s daily lives.
We can expect a multitude of attacks on Mr. Legault’s balance sheet from his opponents, who will insist that his promises have not been kept. “You haven’t done anything, nothing has changed in hospitals or schools, the situation is much worse than before! The goal is to put Mr. Legault on the defensive and force him to constantly justify himself.
Thanks to the debate on Thursday evening, Mr. Duhaime could score points. More than through the small segments that made his positions known in the media, the Conservative leader will have a golden opportunity here to make himself known to Quebecers. Or judge. For Dominique Anglade and Paul St-Pierre Plamondon, the goal will be the same: to breathe life into their respective campaigns, which are sorely lacking. They must be able to stop the bleeding. Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois will not miss the opportunity to point out that three of the candidates are millionaires.
Of course, sometimes it’s not the attacks of the other contestants that put the leaders on the defensive, but the questions of the host. We will remember in this regard the first question from Pierre Bruneau to Mr. Scheer, in 2019, on abortion, which had thrown the latter off balance. Moreover, it is not only the leaders who are personified during the simulations of debates, the animators are also. Former political adviser Martin Bélanger knows Pierre Bruneau almost as much as he knows himself.
After each debate, analysts measure the performance of the leaders according to the reception of the general public. Political advisers do the same, emphasizing their abilities to anticipate their opponents’ issues and angles of attack. They will rehearse every scenario imaginable in order to avoid surprises that could destabilize their leader.
It is said that Eddie Goldenberg, political adviser to Jean Chrétien, watched the debates without sound. He based his judgment about the performances of the leaders on their gestures, because the image is as important as what is said in a debate. This is also the reason why the body language of the leaders is so carefully studied during the simulations. However, I do not recommend this method, because it is still more pleasant to “listen” to a debate, with sound, to understand all the subtleties. With that, good discussion!