Green candidates want leader in televised debate



Green Party leader Elizabeth May speaks to party supporters during the kick-off of her national election campaign at Sea Cider Farm and Ciderhouse in Saanichton, near Victoria, British Columbia, on March 26, 2011. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Deddeda Stemler

Green Party leader Elizabeth May speaks to party supporters during the kick-off of her national election campaign at Sea Cider Farm and Ciderhouse in Saanichton, near Victoria, British Columbia, on March 26, 2011.

Published on March 31, 2011
Published on March 30, 2011
Ryan Ross RSS Feed
Topics :
The Green Party , Radio-Canada , TVA

Island Green Party candidates are jumping to their leader’s defence after a snub that will keep her out of the national televised leadership debate.

A broadcast consortium made up of CBC, Radio-Canada, CTV, Global and TVA have decided not to invite Green Party leader Elizabeth May to the televised debate because her party didn’t have a sitting MP when the house dissolved.

Malpeque Green candidate Peter Bevan-Baker said the consortium’s rules state a party needs a sitting member, but when May wasn’t included during the last election the party had an MP in the house.

“Even with a sitting member we had to fight for Elizabeth to be included so it’s like they keep moving the goal post and I’m not quite sure what the motivation for that is,” he said.

In the 2008 election the Greens finished well behind the other main parties, but still managed to get 6.8 per cent of the vote.

The Green Party plans to run a full slate of candidates across the country, unlike the Bloc Quebecois, but Bevan-Baker said he doesn’t disagree with Bloc leader Gilles Duceppe’s inclusion.

“I’m just saying surely if you include somebody for whom only 25 per cent of the electorate has any opportunity to vote for then you should include somebody who represents a party that’s running candidates coast to coast.”

Bevan-Baker said he was disappointed to hear she wouldn’t be included because for many voters the only point of contact they have in the election is the leaders debate.

“If she’s not there it’s as if the Green Party doesn’t exist. We have a hard enough time gaining credibility and press space alongside all the other parties without what I would consider to be an unjustified exclusion.”

The last time May wasn’t included in the debate there was a public backlash that led to the consortium reversing its stance and allowing her to take part, which Bevan-Baker said he wouldn’t be surprised to see happen again this time.

“I think it’s because Canadians are essentially a fair and reasonable people and I think they recognize when an injustice is being meted out.”

Bevan-Baker said there are other political parties that also aren’t being included, but those parties don’t have the same level of support in the polls, aren’t running a full slate of candidates and don’t have a professional, paid leader like May.

“We were a fringe party 20 years ago. We’re no longer a fringe party. We’re a force in Canadian politics and we should be included.”

Cardigan Green candidate Leslie Stewart agreed and called the parties that were invited an “old boys club.”

“They really don’t want to open the door to anyone else,” he said.

Readers can also take part in our online poll that asks if May should be included in the televised debate.

rross@theguardian.pe.ca

Comments

  • Username
    The Green Parachute Club
    - April 2, 2011 at 21:59:47

    It is clear they have a vast majority of names on ballot or parachuted names from any where to run in all the ridings. What are there 300 plus ridings. That means you have names in all ridings and get 2 dollars per vote. Every year between election the money rolls in, thus a federally funded fund raising scheme for May. A national debate is only a marketing opportunity for them to raise money. The Greens must get elected somewhere and then join the debate! It's a kind of pyramid scheme politics. Keep her out!!!

    Submit a Comment

  • Username
    John Baltic
    - April 1, 2011 at 17:58:37

    Absurd. The Green Party made a mokery of the last leaders debate and they want to do it again. Win a seat and maybe we'll talk. 7% of the vote and a candidate in every riding does NOT make you a political force. Get over it. Parties like the Green make a mokery of the democratic process.

    Submit a Comment

  • Username
    Chris
    - April 1, 2011 at 12:27:20

    If the Greens are so fired up about being in the debates than get out there and elect some people and than next time they will be. Their Leader had run 3 times for election and has yet to be elected. If she was the leader or any of the main line parties she would not still be leader. This shows that the Greens are nothing but a fringe party. Maybe if the Greens are so fired up and think they desrve a seat at the debates they should be looking for serious leader who could actually get elected.

    Submit a Comment

  • Username
    Dave
    - March 31, 2011 at 13:21:43

    You can't invite the Green Party and stop there. There are many other parties just as legitimate as them, the Christian Heritage Party is a good example. How can you invite the Greens and not them? We hear a lot about the Green Party because they are "fashionable", but it is a mistake to think they are the only party in this boat. It is not about free speech, it is about making this a manageable debate and focusing on the parties that will ACTUALLY lead the country.

    Submit a Comment

  • Username
    Anton
    - March 31, 2011 at 13:21:02

    IF You think You're living in a Democratic Country where You, Your Children & Family have Rights -Take The Blinders Off Fools. Your Not. Not if Your living in Canada.

    Submit a Comment

  • Username
    Chris
    - March 31, 2011 at 11:39:21

    Wow Peoples memeories are certainly short...lets remeber the Reform Party was not allwed in the debates and they actually elected some people. The Greens need to elect some people before they are even considered as serious party. Anyone can go and start a party and register and get 308 people people to say they are candidates but yet none of them ever get elected. I have to wonder even why this party gets any of the taxpayers money for their party when they have never elected anyone. As Taxpayer I think there should be serious discussion as just why this party is even being funded. Maybe we should look at the real issue here and not the debate..just why does this party get any funding from the taxpayers at all?

    Submit a Comment

    • Username
      Tim's Right
      - April 1, 2011 at 08:51:52

      Tim is right. If the people in a community want to sink money into something that will bring business to the community, I agree it would serve them well to hold some kind of benefit to resurect and repait the lighthouse. Healthcare is hurting....my tax dollars need to be wisely spent.

  • Username
    Cindy Eldershaw
    - March 31, 2011 at 10:30:10

    This is where Freedom of Speech coming in, everyone one of us has a voice. And they say we are a free country.

    Submit a Comment

  • Username
    Fact Check
    - March 31, 2011 at 10:30:02

    The Green Party is a fringe-protest party. There are over 25 political parties in Canada. We're clearly not going to have a debate with 25 politicians when only 3 of them represent national, electable parties. While the Green Party claims to run 308 candidates in the election, the truth is, they don't run a single candidate. Let's be honest, Peter Bevan Baker may be a nice enough person, but he's not a serious candidate. Green candidates reside in one province and supposedly run in other provinces. Putting a sacrificial lamb's name on the ballot is not the same thing as running a candidate who will actually travel the riding, listen to the concerns of Canadians, and attempt to incorporate Canadian views into a national platform. The Green Party's platform is dictated by a few radicals at the top and they seek fringe protesters who will subscribe to that dogma. It's a top down organization, not a legitimate political party. The only way the Greens got into the debate last time was by pretending a former Liberal MP was a Green MP. That character was elected as a Liberal, sat as a Liberal, and when Parliament dissolved, he changed his tune and tried to call himself a Green. That's fine, but he wasn't a Green MP. He was a 'former MP' who joined the Green Party after the dissolution of parliament. Not the same. May shouldn't have been included in the debate because only caucus leaders are included. The Greens are polling at about 4% in this election campaign. That's simply not enough support - almost within the margin of error - to justify putting a newbie into the debate. If the Greens want to participate they should find quality, serious, hard-working candidates and run them in places where they might win a seat - Toronto and Vancouver. However, even Elizabeth May doesn't take herself seriously. She is a perpetual nomad candidate. She's run in Ontario, then in Nova Scotia, now British Columbia. What's next? Will she be the Green candidate against Barack Obama in 2012, too? If anyone wants to hear May speak she can put videos on YouTube. Frankly, I want to hear the thoughts of people who will actually be in parliament when this thing is said and done.

    Submit a Comment

    • Username
      Robb
      - March 31, 2011 at 10:53:29

      Finally, someone takes the time to think before they right. Your point it just. Why is May a nomad? Why are most Green candidates half running? I would like to see the Greens cleaned up and prepared because they would have my vote. I should also note, that I have no interest in politics, no experience, and no relation to the Green party. I should also note that I was once asked by the Greens if they could put my name on the ballot because they had no candidate... May should be focused on having a functioning party.

  • Username
    Daphne
    - March 31, 2011 at 08:06:22

    For a new but valid party that has candadites running for election all over the country, unlike the really fringe parties who don't, it is disgraceful to exclude them from a national leaders' debate. Let Elizabeth in, for our country's sake. A refreshing and valid voice, and grassroots appeal.

    Submit a Comment

Submit a Comment

Submit a Comment

This form is NOT used for emailing the article to a friend. Please use the "Send to a friend" link at the top of the page for that purpose.

The Guardian is not responsible for posted comments. Please be polite and confine your comments to the subject of the posted story. If you have an account, please sign on to it..

(we keep all emails private)
Agreement

We ask that users remain courteous. You may not post insulting, discriminatory or inappropriate content, which may be removed at our discretion. We are not responsible for user content and opinions. Use of this site as well as content submission & ownership are governed by our Conditions of Use and Privacy Policy.

Member organizations should be non-profit in nature, and promote legal activities. Any organization found promoting illegal activities or commercial products or services will be deleted from the site.

I agree with these conditions.

Advertising

Expert bloggers

Ride for Heart
Blogger
Heart and Stroke Foundation
Preparation is key
[Sponsored]

More bloggers here

Newsletter

Please enter your email to receive our free newsletter

Subscribe to news alerts
loading...

The Guardian Twitter

Advertising