Conservative leadership candidates Patrick Brown, left, Leslyn Lewis, Scott Aitchison, Pierre Poilievre, Jean Charest and Roman Baber, pose for photos after the Conservative leadership debate in French on May 25, 2022. Ryan Remiorz / The Canadian Press
Conservative leadership candidates attacked the ethics of their opponents during the only official debate in French, with Jean Charest, Pierre Poilievre and Patrick Brown highlighting controversies from the past, while discussing how to address the cost of living and protect the French language.
In the last campaign debate scheduled for Wednesday night, the perceived favorites stood out from the rest of the candidates with their bilingual skills. Being able to communicate in both official languages is widely accepted as a basic requirement for any national party leader.
The remaining three candidates – Scott Aitchison, Leslyn Lewis and Roman Baber – often struggled to advance in their second language, often reading their prescribed speech notes, even during sections of the debate that were to have free exchanges.
The French debate was moderated by Marc-Olivier Fortin, a former Conservative Party executive. It was held in Laval, a suburb north of Montreal, in front of a bustling audience of about 700 people, who largely supported Mr. Charest or Mr. Poilievre and they frequently applauded and booed the candidates ’answers throughout the two-hour debate.
Mr. Poilievre, an Ontario MP, often focused his attacks on Mr. Brown, his former caucus colleague and current mayor of Brampton.
“You have no credibility with the law and order when you have been found guilty of violating the laws of ethics,” said Mr. Poilievre, referring to a 2018 decision by the Ontario Integrity Commissioner on The time of Mr. Brown as the conservative progressive provincial leader. The verdict found that Mr. Brown had not reported rental income and did not disclose a $ 375,000 loan.
“The only one here who violated Elections Canada’s laws is Mr. Poilievre,” Brown replied, referring to a 2017 compliance agreement in which it was found that Mr. Poilievre violated election laws by wearing a partisan logo when he took office. announcement in 2015.
Mr. Brown sometimes struggled with his French grammar and looked for words, but he was able to convey his message and participate in a free debate.
After Mr. Charest fired at Mr. Poilievre for his support of the truck convoy and pledged to introduce a law against blockades, Mr. Poilievre intervened, raising the Quebec Charbonneau Commission, which investigated corruption in public sector construction contracts.
“Mr. Charest, I remember the Charbonneau Commission. … Truckers have nothing to learn from you when it comes to law and order, ”he said.
In response, Mr. Charest said the investigation found no link between political donations and awarded contracts. “I can lend you my notes because it looks like your briefings weren’t well prepared,” Mr. Charest.
The only official French debate took place at a politically sensitive time for Quebec. Two controversial laws passed by the Quebec National Assembly were catapulted into the national spotlight this week: on Wednesday, the federal government said it would take part in a legal challenge against Bill 21, which bans religious symbols in some workplaces. of the public sector, if the challenge arises. the Supreme Court. And on Tuesday, the province passed Bill 96, which expands Quebec’s language laws.
Law 96 is heavily criticized by the English-speaking minority in Quebec. The law will extend a requirement for French to be “widespread” in the workplace by applying it to companies with 25 or more employees. It also states that after the first six months, immigrants will receive services exclusively in French, with a few exceptions.
Mr. Brown and Mr. Ontario MP Aitchison said they were opposed to Act 96, while Mr. Brown said the language law goes against the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Mr. Charest, who needs a strong projection in Quebec on his way to victory, stressed the importance of provincial jurisdiction and said protecting the French is a “sacred duty” of elected officials. His campaign said it would not remain neutral if a challenge to Bill 96 reaches the Supreme Court.
Poilievre also said protecting the French was a priority.
In terms of economic policy, Mr. Charest attacked Mr. Poilievre for his recent promise to fire the governor of the Bank of Canada if he formed a government. Mr. Charest said the position betrayed a lack of understanding of economic policy and suggested that cost-of-living concerns be better addressed with measures such as supporting affordable childcare.
Poilievre said he would address inflation by reducing gas taxes and reducing the deficit. Other candidates harshly criticized him for defending cryptocurrencies, such as bitcoin, as an opportunity to “exclude” himself from inflation. Cryptocurrencies are largely unregulated and their value has fallen in recent months.
Opposition to abortion rights, or the lack of clarity around them, have hurt the fortunes of conservatives in Quebec in the last general election, and Mr. Charest tried to force Mr. Poilievre to clearly state his position. The Ontario MP said it was “pro-election”.
Mr. Charest, Mr. Brown and Mr. Aitchison have previously said they are in favor of the election. Mrs. Lewis is against abortion and Mr. Baber has said he does not believe governments should have a voice over how people start a family.
Expectations were high for Mr. Charest, debating on the home ground. On Wednesday he made a big projection and did what needed to be done, said Yan Plante, a former employee of Stephen Harper’s government who remains neutral in this career. However, it is unclear whether this will be enough for Mr. Poilievre also performed well, said Mr. Plant.
While Mr. Plante said the Ontario MP sometimes looks more like an opposition leader than a prime minister, adding that Mr. Polievre is the favorite and the message he delivered was simple and popular with party members.
Rudy Husny, also a former adviser to the Harper government, said there should be a language requirement for leadership candidates because the party is jeopardizing its reputation in Quebec when it puts unilingual speakers to the vote.
“Their level of French was insufficient and they did not belong to this scenario,” said Mr. Husny on Mrs. Lewis, Mr. Aitchison and Mr. Baber.
The party has reserved the right to hold a final debate in August. The match will announce the winner on September 10 at an event in Ottawa.