Peter McKenna: The process of the debate was dreadful

‘It just didn’t work well’

UPEI political science professor shares post-review on federal  debate.

UPEI Professor Peter McKenna: File photo from the Guardian

By Yakosu Umana

Oct. 8, 2019

The layout of the federal debate was dreadful, says Peter McKenna, a political science professor at UPEI.

The English federal debate was held yesterday in the Canadian Museum of History at Gatineau, Quebec Monday evening. Leaders from six major parties were invited to the debate.

There were too many leaders and interruptions with little time for an actual debate, McKenna said.

“Each party leader barely had 15-17 minutes to speak over the course of the entire evening.”

Some party leaders didn’t bring up major points in the debate and shouldn’t have been there, he said.

“Not sure why leaders Maxime Bernier of the People's Party's and the Bloc's Yves-Francois Blanchet were even on the stage.”

Liberal leader Justin Trudeau and Conservative leader Andrew Scheer stood their ground despite facing criticism from other parties, McKenna said.

“Trudeau looked nervous to me and Scheer came across as confident, but a bit aggressive and angry.” 

Green Party leader Elizabeth May had the best performance,although she wasn’t concise enough, he said.

“[May] was the best debater on the stage, but had trouble getting her points across in small soundbite,” he said.

“She was able to push her key agenda item of climate change.”

Jagmeet Singh won the debate, McKenna said.

“But not by much. He was able to make his points and score some points against both Andrew Scheer and Justin Trudeau.”

The time limitations affected the debate, he said.

“Towards the end of the debate, time constraints were making serious debate and discussion almost impossible.”

Let’s hope this format doesn’t repeat itself, McKenna said.