Post by Lawattsia on May 5, 2017 2:34:39 GMT
Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the first of the three party leader's debates for the 2017 Lawattsian General Election that's been scheduled. I'm your moderator, Howard McMahon of LNN. I'm joined by Liz Grant of the Frederick Times. Tonight's debate is between the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition. First, the Prime Minister and Leader of the Social Democratic Party, Sir Roger Owen.
Also joining us the Leader of the Opposition, leader of the Centrist Reform Party, Mr. David Duncan.
Also joining us the Leader of the Opposition, leader of the Centrist Reform Party, Mr. David Duncan.
The first question goes to the Prime Minister and it involves the recent referendum result. Sir Roger, did you fail in your attempt to manage the aftermath of the referendum on the monarchy by not having an explicit plan for what this country would look like?
Sir Roger Owen: No, we didn't fail, the simple fact is, the irresponsible gentleman sitting to my left decided to ignore long established conventions and bring about a no-confidence motion while several backbenchers were absent attending to their own duties. The simple fact is, our coalition was never able to submit any plan in the aftermath of the referendum because of Mr. Duncan's eagerness to score some cheap political points...
So, can you tell us then what you support in the aftermath of the abolition of the monarchy?
Sir Roger Owen: What we supported was an elected Head of State. An individual who the people as a whole have trust in outside of party politics to do what is right for the country.
David Duncan: Sir Roger, what you're saying is a complete contradiction of what you told the Parliament Chamber in the debates last month that no plan had been put forward. Now you're telling us you want a Head of State. Which is it?
Sir Roger Owen: Well David, if you would just calm yourself for just one moment, you would see that was never the case. That was what my honorable friends the Social Liberals were suggesting, and if you remember the debate, I said it was a legitimate point of view and would be explored, but would not necessarily be the government's policy.
Mr. Duncan, you voted to dissolve Parliament a full two years before another election was necessary. Do you feel like this will backfire for you when the public is already weary of elections?
David Duncan: Well, I can understand the public's weariness with having to constantly go to the polls, but this is the sort of thing that we as a nation need to have a clear and comprehensible leader on. The Prime Minister has, over the past two years, increased the tax rate higher than during the last CRP government, they've greatly increased frivolous spending in sectors that didn't need it, and they've managed to create a constitutional crisis by having no plan for the aftermath of the referendum that they promised to deliver on...
Sir Roger Owen: Come on, be honest, David. Your party just wanted to let things stay frozen as they were. The fact of the matter remains that all of our leading industries: Dairy Exports, Information Technology, Beveridge Sales, Book Publishing... All our major industries, were moribund. You can't lay the blame off on Alfred Vandrake either since you were Chancellor of Finance were you not?
David Duncan: You can spin it that way, Sir Roger, but the average income in someone's pocket was higher when the CRP was last in government and none of our industries were nearly as bad off as you're suggesting. We were facing a difficult situation having just joined a new national union... Which, your government has also meddled in extensively without the consent of the Chamber...
Sir Roger Owen: It was in our manifesto that we would take an active role region wide and we did it!
I hate to interrupt you, gentlemen, but we have another question. This one from Ms. Grant... There has been a serious lack of women represented in Cabinet in the last several administrations. Will either of you commit to adding more women to cabinet level roles, as well as encourage the selection of more female parliamentary candidates? Sir Roger?
Sir Roger Owen: Well, I think that's a fair question for us to answer here tonight. We're a nation that prides ourselves on our egalitarianism, and it's true, more women could be represented at the Oak Palace, and more could become cabinet ministers. Currently, we have 3 women in cabinet, which is a 1/3 ratio. I'd like to get it up to a full 1/2. In the next parliament, we will have a reshuffle of the cabinet and I'd like to see at least 6 women at the table and I'll do my best to make that happen in the next SDP led government.
David Duncan: In the last CRP government, of the 12 cabinet positions, there were only 2 that were women. That's a very poor figure, and as you can see, the SDP-SLP government have done little to improve on that...
Sir Roger Owen: Were you asking Sir Alfred to add women to the cabinet? I bet Ed Anderson wouldn't have heard of it!
David Duncan: Sir Alfred made the decisions he made based on qualification for the job. I suspect that's not the way Sir Roger operates. The CRP is dedicated to advancing the most qualified applicant. It's my party that has a female Deputy Leader, not his, and I'm not interested in some weird equality quota. I will advance women and men based on qualification. I pledge you that.
PART TWO CONTINUES SOON
Sir Roger Owen: No, we didn't fail, the simple fact is, the irresponsible gentleman sitting to my left decided to ignore long established conventions and bring about a no-confidence motion while several backbenchers were absent attending to their own duties. The simple fact is, our coalition was never able to submit any plan in the aftermath of the referendum because of Mr. Duncan's eagerness to score some cheap political points...
So, can you tell us then what you support in the aftermath of the abolition of the monarchy?
Sir Roger Owen: What we supported was an elected Head of State. An individual who the people as a whole have trust in outside of party politics to do what is right for the country.
David Duncan: Sir Roger, what you're saying is a complete contradiction of what you told the Parliament Chamber in the debates last month that no plan had been put forward. Now you're telling us you want a Head of State. Which is it?
Sir Roger Owen: Well David, if you would just calm yourself for just one moment, you would see that was never the case. That was what my honorable friends the Social Liberals were suggesting, and if you remember the debate, I said it was a legitimate point of view and would be explored, but would not necessarily be the government's policy.
Mr. Duncan, you voted to dissolve Parliament a full two years before another election was necessary. Do you feel like this will backfire for you when the public is already weary of elections?
David Duncan: Well, I can understand the public's weariness with having to constantly go to the polls, but this is the sort of thing that we as a nation need to have a clear and comprehensible leader on. The Prime Minister has, over the past two years, increased the tax rate higher than during the last CRP government, they've greatly increased frivolous spending in sectors that didn't need it, and they've managed to create a constitutional crisis by having no plan for the aftermath of the referendum that they promised to deliver on...
Sir Roger Owen: Come on, be honest, David. Your party just wanted to let things stay frozen as they were. The fact of the matter remains that all of our leading industries: Dairy Exports, Information Technology, Beveridge Sales, Book Publishing... All our major industries, were moribund. You can't lay the blame off on Alfred Vandrake either since you were Chancellor of Finance were you not?
David Duncan: You can spin it that way, Sir Roger, but the average income in someone's pocket was higher when the CRP was last in government and none of our industries were nearly as bad off as you're suggesting. We were facing a difficult situation having just joined a new national union... Which, your government has also meddled in extensively without the consent of the Chamber...
Sir Roger Owen: It was in our manifesto that we would take an active role region wide and we did it!
I hate to interrupt you, gentlemen, but we have another question. This one from Ms. Grant... There has been a serious lack of women represented in Cabinet in the last several administrations. Will either of you commit to adding more women to cabinet level roles, as well as encourage the selection of more female parliamentary candidates? Sir Roger?
Sir Roger Owen: Well, I think that's a fair question for us to answer here tonight. We're a nation that prides ourselves on our egalitarianism, and it's true, more women could be represented at the Oak Palace, and more could become cabinet ministers. Currently, we have 3 women in cabinet, which is a 1/3 ratio. I'd like to get it up to a full 1/2. In the next parliament, we will have a reshuffle of the cabinet and I'd like to see at least 6 women at the table and I'll do my best to make that happen in the next SDP led government.
David Duncan: In the last CRP government, of the 12 cabinet positions, there were only 2 that were women. That's a very poor figure, and as you can see, the SDP-SLP government have done little to improve on that...
Sir Roger Owen: Were you asking Sir Alfred to add women to the cabinet? I bet Ed Anderson wouldn't have heard of it!
David Duncan: Sir Alfred made the decisions he made based on qualification for the job. I suspect that's not the way Sir Roger operates. The CRP is dedicated to advancing the most qualified applicant. It's my party that has a female Deputy Leader, not his, and I'm not interested in some weird equality quota. I will advance women and men based on qualification. I pledge you that.
PART TWO CONTINUES SOON