With a last chance to publicly address all members of the conservative party, Jean Charest wanted to make it clear that he was at least physically present.
“You have to run. You actually have to run,” he said, sitting around a small table with two of his fellow candidates for Wednesday’s third official Conservative leadership debate in Ottawa. “You have to talk to the members. You can’t treat them with disdain.”
He later added that “leadership is showing up…in all circumstances.”
Charest didn’t use Pierre Poilievre’s name, but he didn’t have to, because Poilievre (along with Leslyn Lewis) was noticeably absent.
Without the presumptive favorite, and every available metric suggesting Poilievre could have an overwhelming lead, there wouldn’t be much of a debate. So Wednesday night’s event looked mostly like a chance for the other candidates to offer some farewell words before the party apparatus is likely to be handed over to Poilievre.
Whatever Charest’s protestations, Poilievre’s absence seems a logical extension of his anti-establishment politics. Poilievre is not the first favorite who does not want to expose himself to unnecessary risks in a confrontational debate.
But he didn’t just skip the debate: his campaign criticized the party for even trying to hold a third official debate and party organizers publicly criticized because of how one of the previous debates was staged.
Then, last night, Poilievre appeared at his own event in Regina and he mocked the candidates who did participate in the debate.
Pierre Poilievre, the putative favorite in the Conservative leadership race, did not attend the third leadership debate in Ottawa on Wednesday. In fact, he ridiculed it from Regina. (Ryan Remiorz/The Canadian Press)
No doubt many conservatives have taken pleasure in watching Poilievre throw rhetorical bombs in other directions over the past few months (and years), but Poilievre operates on the internal logic that you’re either with him or against him, and other conservatives they clearly shouldn’t. assume that they are immune from being placed in the latter group.
Concerns about anger and division
Scott Aitchison, the Tory MP who has presented himself as the level-headed and reasonable candidate in the leadership race, made noises again on Wednesday night about the tone and direction of the party.
“Our response to Justin Trudeau’s divisive politics cannot be more divisive. We must lead with respect,” he said. “We must offer real solutions to the challenges Canadians face every day and produce a government that actually delivers. We cannot be the party that just opposes government, we must be the party that delivers better government that really respects taxpayer dollars and delivers results.”
Aitchison later said: “This leadership campaign has been divisive and in some cases embarrassing.”
Whether this was directed at anyone in particular, Aitchison did not say. But the result of this was simply that the Tories must “come together”.
“Whoever is the leader on 9/11, we all have to come together,” Aitchison said.
Should the Tories still unite if the party falls short of Aitchison’s stated ideals? Maybe that’s a question for another day.
When it was his turn to make a closing statement, Charest mustered some of the panache that has made him a formidable voice in Canadian politics for more than 30 years and struck what could have been a central element of an argument against Poilievre’s candidacy.
“A lot of Canadians are … tired, frustrated, some of them angry. But anger is not a political agenda,” Charest said. “The challenge for the real leaders who come forward is to take this and translate it into something positive for the future of the country.”
There was a similar flicker of this from Charest a the much-maligned leadership debate in May.
Nothing is finished until all the votes have been counted. But if Charest had run a stronger, smarter campaign up until this point, he might have been in a better position to land a closing argument. It seems unlikely that just running for a third debate will be enough to swing the leadership race now.
As it stands, Charest will probably have to settle for the possibility of being able to say “I told you so” if Poilievre’s leadership of the Conservative party ends in tears.