By Barry Wilson
Ottawa bureau
TISDALE, Sask. — It was well before 8 a.m., before the start of the drive to a campaign event in Carrot River April 21, when Randy Hoback’s phone began to ring.
The one-term Conservative MP and 2011 candidate in the Prince Albert riding was fielding calls about his failure to show up the night before at the only all-candidates’ forum of the campaign, organized by the Conservative-hostile Council of Canadians.
Hoback’s absence was apparently the talk of the evening, beginning with a council representative bemoaning the Conservative decision not to attend.
Read Also
Growth plates are instrumental in shaping a horse’s life
Young horse training plans and workloads must match their skeletal development. Failing to plan around growth plates can create lifelong physical problems.
NDP opponent Valerie Mushinski said later it was an insult to voters, “disrespectful of democracy.”
The next morning, the local newspaper headlined: “Candidates debate issues, incumbent a no-show.”
Prince Albert resident Bob Miller was quoted: “Think it’s a real slap in the face. Where’s our member of Parliament? Is he hiding?”
It is not the kind of coverage a candidate likes to read.
Hoback’s explanation is that he was “hiding” at a farm show in Tisdale, where he was able to talk to scores of farmers.
All-candidates’ meetings bring stacked audiences of supporters of all candidates and no minds are changed.
But it is not just a Prince Albert story or a prairie story.
It is a story that has surfaced across the country during Canada’s 41st general election.
It is far from universal, but many Conservative candidates have refused to go to all-candidates’ debates, citing other commitments. Inevitably, it leads to opposition attacks that they have something to hide — a dangerous perception in a political contest.
In some ridings, there has been evidence that Conservative campaign central is recommending against attending, citing stacked opposition crowds and no-win scenes for local Conservative candidates who find themselves under attack from everyone else on the panel and most in the audience.
Besides, local candidates under attack sometimes make verbal blunders, and in the age of YouTube and ubiquitous cell phone recording, they usually end up online and part of opposition attack ads within hours.
So for incumbents, all-candidate meetings can be no-win.
Still, whether manipulated by special interest groups and political opponents or not, it is a chance for voters to hear their candidates’ answer tough or tame questions and demonstrate their knowledge of files, their debating skills and their ability to absorb slings and arrows without crumbling.
These are all key skills for any aspiring politician wanting to enter the bear pit, and voters have a right to see them, whether their minds were made up beforehand or not.
When I covered election campaigns for daily newspapers in the 1970s, all-candidates’ debates often were the core of local coverage.
One night in Oshawa, Ont., in 1972, a young Ed Broadbent faced a planted Conservative question about his alleged allegiance not to voters in the riding but to the powerful United Auto Workers union that would call the shots if he won a second term as an NDP MP in Ottawa.
Broadbent’s defense of his independence from union orders while respectful of their issues was so powerful and emotional that he won a standing ovation and probably switched a few votes.
All-candidates’ forums may be no-win propositions for incumbents but they are part of the system and unlike at Conservative rallies featuring the prime minister, attendees are not screened.
There may be some unpleasant body blows, but absorbing them can hardly be more damaging than being accused of hiding under your desk.
