4:26:15 PM
4:26:15 PM
Yikes, that was almost – but not quite – a liveblogging fiasco: I accidentally showed up at the National Press Theatre instead of the Charles Lynch, which may sound like a fine distinction to the rest of you, but was a two-block rain-soaked run for me. In bad shoes. With wolves after me.
Luckily, I made it just in the nick, so let’s get started, shall we?
4:29:30 PM
Okay, Ms. May has arrived, but was bustled into the backroom by her new communications guy, John Bennett – formerly of the Sierra Club, and a pretty seriously savvy guy, from what I can tell.
Oh, but here she is again – looking surprisingly chipper. “Here we are, day two of the Canadian election, and democracy already taking a beating!”
It’s on, people. The lady’s not for burning – or blocking from debate. She stoops to conquer, etc.
She gets right to the point – the Greens are part of the public debate, and should be on stage when the leaders get together next month, and that’s that.
“We’re told by the consortium,” she notes – via press release and pundits; they didn’t even have the courtesy to call her with the news – that three leaders objected to her presence, and might boycott the debate if they weren’t included.
She’s calling that bluff, she says – and issues a blanket call to touring media to ask their respective leaders whether they would pull out if Liz was put in.
4:33:39 PM
I have to say she’s coming across as — pretty reasonable, and I’ll admit that I’m a bit surprised by the decision — not so much the fact that the consortium ruled against her, per se, but that they did so out of fear that the rest of the candidates would sulk.
Meanwhile, Liz is ready to go to federal court to fight for her right to party recognition, and yes, I should probably be fired for that pun alone.
4:37:12 PM
After a short summary in French – which is actually surprisingly good, incidentally – she takes questions, and the first one goes to the heart of the issue: Why does she think the consortium caved in to the implicit threat of a three-way boycott? She responds by accusing Stephen Harper of being the leader who objected the most – she doesn’t have proof, she just has a feeling, y’all – but she also challenges Jack Layton to come clean, as well as Gilles Duceppe.
Four national party leaders – all of whom are men – and four broadcast executives, all of whom are men, to keep out the one female party leader.
So – wait, this is all about the consortium’s women issues? Really? Sounds more like garden-variety spinelessness to me, and guys have no monopoly on that.
After one more question about her next step – which will be to federal court, as previously noted – she bids us adieu — she has a seat to win in Central Nova, so she’s heading back East.
And – wow, that’s it? Huh. Mark my words, though – this is about to get very, very interesting.
UPDATE: This link goes to Colleague Coyne’s thoughts on the subject, and ITQ approves of his message.