The aspiring Conservative leaders were impatiently awaiting this first debate and they did not hold back the blows against their adversaries. Pierre Poilievre was the target of all his rivals, but Jean Charest was not left out, having suffered particularly scathing attacks from the leader of the race.
Five of the six candidates for the leadership of the Conservative Party were gathered for the debate organized Thursday evening by the Canada Strong and Free Network (formerly the Manning Centre). For Jean Charest, it was an opportunity to make himself known to the Conservatives who, for many, do not remember his past as a Progressive Conservative, spread from 1984 to 1998.
The former Premier of Quebec resumed his sales pitch: he recalls his experience, promises to reunite Canada and the party, and warns the Conservatives against the “American-style” policy pursued by Pierre Poilievre. Each time he repeated these messages, however, the crowd seemed unreceptive. The applause was timid. The tirades of his rivals on freedom, against the media and against the Trudeau government aroused more enthusiasm.
The rift between Jean Charest and the members gathered at the Conservatives’ annual high mass was confirmed when, to attack his main opponent, Pierre Poilievre, he reproached him for having supported “an illegal roadblock”, referring to the convoy of truckers. He was immediately booed. “You can’t both pass and break laws,” he tried to continue.
Jean Charest has already made this criticism in the past. Pierre Poilievre had just used it a few minutes earlier to send him a salvo of attacks. “You talk about law and order, it’s a bit strong [étant donné] that your Liberal Party [du Québec] took half a million dollars in illegal donations when you were in charge. The average trucker has more integrity in his little finger than you had in your whole scandal-ridden Liberal cabinet,” he said. Mr. Charest’s work for the Chinese telecommunications company Huawei was discussed. Just like his “liberal” past, which Mr. Poilievre denounced all evening. To reproach him for having increased taxes, for having introduced a “carbon tax” through the intermediary of the carbon market and for having created a Quebec register of long guns. “It wasn’t the name of your party that was Liberal, it was your record,” Poilievre sent.
At war against law 21
In defending his vision for the future of the Conservative Party, Jean Charest criticized certain parts of his past. Which was not well received either. “If you took a minute to stop attacking the Harper government — which is the party we’re all supposed to be part of — maybe you’d recognize all the good this man has done for this country,” Pierre said. Poilievre, once again warmly applauded.
In an attempt to finally score points against him, Mr. Charest criticized him for not being ready to fight Bill 21 on the secularism of the Quebec state in the Supreme Court, a case in which he promised, for his hand, that he would intervene. “This idea of freedom, is it real or is it a slogan? swung Mr. Charest. The attack raised eyebrows among conservative observers on the spot, because almost all of the Quebec caucus supports Mr. Charest, but demands that the party not interfere in this Quebec law.
The leader attacked from all sides
Mr. Poilievre came into the debate as a good leader. From the eleventh minute, Jean Charest put him on the defensive, bringing out the telephone line to denounce barbaric cultural practices promised by the Conservatives in 2015. “The candidates who were part of this campaign [électorale] and who did not oppose this idea should answer for it”, launched Mr. Charest to Mr. Poilievre, who was, on stage, the only one who was part of Stephen Harper’s government (Patrick Brown did not presented Thursday evening).
Leslyn Lewis jumped into the fray, accusing Mr. Poilievre of supporting truck convoys only late in life. “You didn’t even go to the demonstration. You went to your neighborhood and took a picture with them at a roadside stop,” she quipped. Which Mr. Poilievre denied.
Mme Lewis, who opposes abortion and can count on the vote of conservatives on the social fringe of the party, further criticized Mr Poilievre for avoiding commenting on the draft decision of the US Supreme Court on stop Roe v. wade. “Mr. Poilievre has shunned the media for the past few days because he doesn’t want to say he’s pro-life or pro-choice,” she said. The Poilievre team ended up saying on Tuesday that he would not introduce or pass any bill tightening abortion rights.
The social fringe of the party brings together thousands of conservatives, who still influence the outcome of leadership races. Mr. Charest himself reached out to them. “They are part of our family and always will be,” he told them.
The aspiring chefs will face off again in Edmonton next Wednesday, then in Laval on May 25. Patrick Brown should then be in the game, attendance at these two official debates organized by the party being compulsory.