Monday night’s French Liberal leaders debate produced little news beyond the obvious lack of fluent French by both Mark Carney and Chrystia Freeland.
Recommended Videos
Most francophone commentators managed to stay concentrated on the messages the candidates tried to put forward during the two-hour verbal joust. That being said, there was still lots of analysis of the poor quality of French.
My French LCN/TVA colleague and highly respected journalist Emmanuelle Latraverse scored it (slightly) in favour of Carney, based mostly on the high-level, detailed proposals he made on a series of subjects, including the economy.
She, too, seemed gobsmacked about the generally weak command of French on the stage.
Of the four candidates present, only Montrealer Frank Baylis could be said to be fluently bilingual. Karina Gould a close second. Both are long shots in the campaign despite their qualities.
On the issues dear to many Quebec voters, Carney got in clear lines on the decline of French and the need to promote and protect it. Those words have generally been greeted approvingly by journalists and commentators here.
When the subject turned to the positions of the candidates on Bill 96 and Bill 21, voters were served a wilted and heavily accented word salad by Carney, Freeland and Gould.
Only Frank Baylis had the courage, for example, to underscore his firm opposition to Bill 21, Legault’s law that openly discriminates against religious minorities.
Gould hinted at some form of disapproval by talking about the importance of defending the Charter of Rights, but seemed unwilling to clarify, specifically, beyond that.
The question from the moderator concerning Quebec’s language law, Bill 96, tried to zero in on the notion of a Quebec constitution. It didn’t work and we were all left wondering whether any of them had a position on that law. Bill 96 removes equality rights for English, particularly before the courts, for example.
Both issues could return during the English debate, but Liberal organizers appear to have gone out of their way to avoid putting forward questions that could prove too divisive and only help their opponents.
One verbal slip by Carney may have gone unnoticed were it not for a very quick, and effective effort by Freeland to draw a circle around the stain.
Carney had said “We agree with Hamas,” clearly trying to say “We agree with regard to Hamas.” Sensing an opportunity, Freeland immediately cut him off saying “we’re against Hamas.” Carney, of course, corrected himself but the damage was done and the Conservatives were on it right away.
Quebecers are used to a heavily accented clip from a Carney or a Freeland, in which they deliver a well-prepared line that will make the evening news. Putting their laboured French on stage for two hours is a completely different proposition and may have come as a stark surprise for many francophone voters.
A new Léger poll released just prior to Monday’s French debate had the federal Liberals two points up on the Conservatives, Canada-wide. In Quebec, the Liberals, under Carney, are given an astounding lead that would give them a massive majority of seats. Time will tell whether last night’s debate will have an effect on that.
When we look back at the French debate, it may turn out to be an inflection point.
Who won? Carney or Freeland? The answer may turn out to be: The Bloc Québécois.