With only a few days remaining in the 2019 federal election, candidates in Battlefords-Lloydminster took their pitch to the all-candidates forum organized by the Battlefords Chamber of Commerce.
Four of the five candidates – incumbent Conservative Rosemarie Falk, Liberal Larry Ingram, New Democrat Marcella Pedersen and People‘s Party Jason MacInnis all took part in the forum at Western Development Museum. The four had also taken part in forums in Unity on Oct. 1 and in Lloydminster Oct. 10. David Kim-Cragg of the Green Party once again was not in attendance.
This particular forum was slated to be open only to Chamber members to participate, but the Chamber reversed the decision and made it a public event, in response to a multitude of requests from the campaigns and the general public. Access Communications was on hand to televise the forum, which will be shown prior to election day.
The forum was 90 minutes long, which was shorter than past years, but otherwise followed a similar format to forums held by the Chamber before. The first question was a rapid-response based on the Chamber’s “Vote Prosperity” platform priorities: taxation, a regulatory system that works for everyone, access to trade, resources for small and medium-sized business growth, achieving a Connected Canada through innovation and infrastructure, a skilled workforce, and pharmacare. Each candidate then provided a response on one of the priorities each, with each candidate selecting a category randomly.
Ingram spoke on pharmacare and said while it make sense to have the same price of drugs across the board, he also noted “it’s going to be a lot of discussions.” He indicated he agreed with many of the Chamber’s points on the issue, such as building upon the existing system in place. “We don’t want to go back further than we’ve already gone back to,” said Ingram.
MacInnis spoke on the issue of resources to help small and medium sized businesses grow and expressed support for getting government out of the way. “We want to be as uninvolved on that as possible,” said MacInnis.
He voiced support for alleviating interprovincial trade barriers, lowering taxes on business, alleviating capital gains tax, and eliminating the carbon tax. “Everything’s gone up four cents on the dollar,” said MacInnis of the carbon tax.
Pedersen spoke on access to new markets around the world, and voiced support for producers.
“We need value for our producers and the important contributions they make,” said Pedersen, who said too often trade deals favor large corporations. Pedersen said trade deals should respect producers; she also called deteriorating relations with the Chinese “very concerning and must be resolved.”
Falk spoke on the regulatory system and said the Conservatives “will reduce regulatory burden by 25 percent.” She also called small business the “backbone of our economy” and said layering on red tape made it “more difficult for them to be prosperous”.
“From my experience as a social worker, red tape sucks and it gets in the way of actually getting tangible real work done,” Falk said.
Next were written questions submitted from the floor, and some common themes emerged in the questions with climate change a common one.
In response to the climate change question MacInnis voiced opposition to the carbon tax. “Throwing money up in the air does not fix anything,” said MacInnis.
Pedersen said the NDP plan was to transition from the oil and gas sector to the green sector. “We would not be leaving the oil and gas sector high and dry,” said Pederson, who said there would be a transition period, retraining of people and 300,000 new green jobs created.
Falk wanted to acknowledge what oil and gas is already doing, “such as carbon capture,” she said. She also pointed to her platform’s three-point pillars, including “greener technology not taxes,” not dumping raw sewage into waterways, and taking the fight for the environment globally.
Ingram pointed to a lack of support from the media for people resisting change to green technology.
“People here know darn well we can get off of this because we’ve gotten off of other things,” said Ingram. “If the media would get positive about climate change… we would getting a more positive attitude.”
Other questions included one on clean water on First Nations, whether Canada’s seniors will have to pay capital gains tax, mental health and addictions issues, and the labour force.
The question of how to address crime drew some markedly different responses.
Ingram noted the amount of money from the federal government for health and welfare and fighting crime has been “going up steadily the last few years”.
MacInnis expressed support for “allowing individuals to protect themselves. For far too long, victims have had less rights than the criminals.”
Pedersen pointed to the causes of crime. “It’s poverty,” she said, to applause. She got further applause when she said “we have to create a climate of respect for all peoples.… you’re not going to solve crime by increasing policing and more guns. That does not solve crime. That only creates mistrust among communities. I’m about building bridges between communities.”
Falk spoke of investing $12 million to the youth gang prevention fund, which she said will be directed to local initiatives. Falk also said there “has to be consequences” for committing crime, and supported revoking automatic bail and revoking parole for gang members as well as stronger background checks for gun licenses.
Fireworks were few until a question was posed on decorum in the House of Commons and campaign ads. “Question Period in the House of Commons resembles a prison riot,” the question stated. Candidates were asked how they would improve what Canadians see in the House and in ads.
In her response, Pedersen went after Falk for her controversial “high-five” with another Conservative MP following a vote in the House of Commons.
“Respect and listening in the house of Commons is very badly needed. During the first reading of the United Nations Declaration on Indigenous peoples, it was defeated and our MP high-fived another Conservative,” Pedersen said.
“And I’m thinking does this represent the ten First Nations in our area?” said Pedersen. “Is she truly representing this area?”
Falk responded directly to Pedersen. “The incident you are referring to happened after a series of votes and it was the conclusion of a vote. It was a specific political party, one that you represent, that wanted to make political hay, which is what we just talked about in regarding this question about bringing more respect. The second point I’d like to clarify was that the vote against UNDRIP was not a vote against Indigenous rights whatsoever. What the vote represented was the legal framework Canada is under. Canada is one of the very few countries in the world in which treaty rights are enshrined in our Constitution. So it was a vote reflecting that we would be unable to enact UNDRIP.”
There were also some fireworks with the last question on returning the federal books to balance. Falk said “we do need a balanced budget” and said the budget would be balanced within five years. “The Liberals don’t have a plan to do that,” said Falk.
“Our plan still is to balance the budget,” said Ingram, at which point an incredulous Falk replied “when?”
Last up were the closing statements from the candidates, in which they made their final pitch to voters going to the polls Oct. 21 in Battlefords-Lloydminster.
Pedersen: “I have been an MP – Marcella Pedersen -- for most of my life, and with your vote I can make it official. Vote M.P. for M.P.”
MacInnis: “Take a look at what really resounds with you, what platform aligns with you best. Vote effectively. Math should not come into the question, it really should be ‘hey I voted for these guys because these guys are representing me.’”
Ingram: “When people say you cannot do something, you cannot make a difference, that’s not true. I can make a difference.”
Falk: “Together we can help elect a new Conservative government that will live within its means while putting more money in your pocket. On Oct. 21st it is time for you to get ahead.”
