The French debate started out with a heated discussion about the environment and climate change.
Maxime Bernier's party wants to be included in two televised federal election debates in October.
The English and French events will be held at the Canadian Museum of History.
I've loved politics pretty much my entire adult life, both Canadian and U.S. I've always been an enthusiastic and avid follower and I've been known to watch every rally, speech and debate. I've also been known to stay up half the night waiting for the last vote to be counted.
Given that Quebeckers are facing yet another pivotal election on April 7, over the past couple of weeks, I paid close attention to the two political "debates" held between the leaders of the province's four main parties. I bracket the word "debates" with quotation marks, as these two two-hour sessions were debates in name only.
The presidential debate triggered flashbacks for me to February 8, 1989. Let me explain. That night, decades ago, another battle that then appeared to be of epic importance took place: a televised debate at Western University between psychology professor Philippe Rushton and David Suzuki.
For the average elector, the substance of a politician's argument is secondary to that of his or her delivery or style. That might explain why Mitt Romney won the first of three presidential debates last night. He was able to simplify everything. Obama failed to answer these accusations and shrugged them head on. At best, he failed to use soundbites that are easy to take home or quote. For an average American elector who is more concerned about Jennifer Aniston and who is leading in American Idol, Obama failed to capture their imagination.