Jagmeet Singh in conversation with Paul Wells: Maclean's Live - Macleans.ca
 

Jagmeet Singh in conversation with Paul Wells: Maclean’s Live

The new NDP leader Jagmeet Singh sits down for a live interview with Maclean’s in his first major national appearance in front of a live audience


 

In his first major national appearance in front of a live audience, new NDP leader Jagmeet Singh sits down for a live interview with Maclean’s senior writer Paul Wells at the recently renovated National Arts Centre in Ottawa. You can watch the whole thing right here at 7 p.m. ET, and also on Twitter, Facebook, or YouTube. CPAC will broadcast the event at a later time. Tweet along with the hashtag #MacleansLive, and follow our liveblog below for all the highlights. Also! Sign up for our upcoming daily politics newsletter, a morning must-read in the nation’s capital.

Why are we doing this, anyway?

Singh’s personal narrative is a big part of his stump speech, but he remains relatively unknown to many voters, particularly outside Ontario. The NDP leader doesn’t have a seat in the House of Commons and doesn’t seem in a hurry to get one. He’s chosen to spend the months since becoming leader on a series of visits and regional tours, traveling to both coasts and plenty of the ground in between.

But for those outside his core base, or anyone who hasn’t been to one of his “JagMeet and Greet” events, the NAC event will be the first chance to get the measure of a politician who has declared he thinks he can be prime minister. Singh’s conversation with Wells, one of the country’s best-known political analysts and reporters, and the host of the Maclean’s National Leader’s Debate during the 2015 federal election, will cover a variety of topics and include audience questions.

This is the first of a monthly series of conversations Wells will be conducting—in partnership with the NAC and CPAC and presented by the Canadian Bankers Association—with leading Canadian political figures. Next up in March, Andrew Scheer.

WATCH: Jagmeet Singh takes the Maclean’s 60-second challenge


 

Jagmeet Singh in conversation with Paul Wells: Maclean’s Live

  1. Nice guy and all of that, but he doesn’t fit the image of an NDP leader, the closets the party came to the image of the NDP, was Charlie Angus, Angus was more of a Jack Layton and Tom Mulcair combined, an affable guy, and guy who could scrap in the corners. How will Jagmeet answer questions in the HOCs if he became PM, when he can’t even ask questions presently as a ‘Lame Duck’ leader. Trudeau had a seat and still found the time to be in the house(whether he was effective or not) and meet the country as well, it’s called ‘walking and chewing gum at the same time’, the religious symbols are not helping either. Sheer has a seat too, the problem is, the media thinks he is just not known enough to the country yet, but i don’t believe that, i think the country do know him, they know him enough to already form an opinion, and they just don’t like him. The cons repackaged Harper a dozens times before the last election, and look what happen. You’re either ‘Authentic, or you just a Fake, Sheer falls under that category of ‘Fake”, to much lipstick..

    • I hope you ask tough questions Mr. Wells, no Fluff, make it strictly business..

    • I hope you ask tough questions Mr. Wells, no Fluff, make it strictly business..

  2. He seems like a nice-decent guy. But… NDP?!? Really? NDP is worse than Liberals, more to the Left. And it’s enough Left and politically-correct BS with Liberals, we had enough damage lately with McGuinty, Wynne and Trudeau, thanks.

  3. Provincial premiers should be able to, collectively, look after the affairs of the country. The Prime Minister should be concerned, while being aware of provincial needs, of Canada’s position internationally. Unfortunately, this discussion did not address foreign affairs … why? For example, there is uncertainty with NAFTA, and NATO requires some important decisions, not to mention China. Dare I also mention his inability to sensibly manage immigration.

    I am in favour of a minimum wage, but I am unsure of how to define the ambiguous ‘living wage’.
    Nevertheless, social welfare should not be such that it is preferable to employment. There is something very wrong when jobs available is greater than numbers unemployed. Certainly, part of this would be a new tax structure that takes into account the top 1% of the rich (perhaps even the top 10%).