Kramp Relaxed, Educational McMahon, and Tinsley Bumps Into a Door

Monday night saw the six candidates for Prince Edward – Hastings coming together for an all-candidates meeting at downtown Belleville's Empire Theatre. Hosted by the Belleville Chamber of Commerce, and with Quinte Broadcasting's Jody Brooker handling moderator duties, this was the first, and maybe last, opportunity for voters to see all of the candidates for the May 2 vote together answering questions from the Chamber and the audience.

While I had an opportunity to talk to all the candidates except the Green Party's, my in depth coverage will come in the next few days. For now, here's my quick rating of each of the candidate's performances.

In alphabetical order:

Tim Hickey:

The lone independent candidate, Hickey was handicapped at times by questions which focused on national issues and what the party platforms were. When facing these questions, he spoke of his vision for Canada which, while entirely lacking specifics (he promised these would come later this week), was presented in a folksy manner which was appealing enough. Reality is, though, in the current electoral era, an independent is virtual roadkill unless they present themselves as aligned with one of the major parties ideologically. Bonus points for not jumping on the anti-Kramp express.

Grade: C+ Performed as well as expected with material available, but needs to make clear what his political ideas are.

Daryl Kramp:

The primary target of four of the other five candidates, the current Member of Parliament for Prince Edward – Hastings was hit by anti-Conservative rhetoric from the others. He was also the target of an unreasonable (my words) amount of heckling and catcalling from a part of the audience theatre audience. In the face of this, he was measured and clear in his responses, answering questions clearly, and ignoring the voices from the peanut gallery. He was clearly familiar with the Conservative platform, but also demonstrated a strong knowledge of his parliamentary bailiwick, answering with specific figures a question on changes in the trade balance between Canada and China. He also maintained a relaxed presence throughout.

Grade: A

Patrick Larkin:

The candidate for the Green Party came across as anything but a wild-eyed tree-hugger. Impeccably dressed, he was calm and professional throughout, and skirted most of the anti-Harper rhetoric. A revelation, and, aside from his party affiliation, a legitimate contender. The Greens should consider him when Lizzy May is given the boot after losing this election.

Grade: A-

Michael McMahon

The NDP candidate was clear and concise, coming across as the teacher he is while constructing a clear argument the sensibility of the NDP platform. That didn't fly, at least from the author's viewpoint, but he put himself forward as a serious candidate - until he neglected to rebut the Liberal candidate's blanket dismissal of the legitimacy of the other candidates as challengers to the Conservatives. Instead, he continued to attack the Conservatives, leaving the Liberal challenge uncontested. He did have the line of the night, though, when in response to a question about allowing voting on post-secondary campuses, he responded strongly in the affirmative, saying, "They wouldn't let their grandparents choose their dates. At least, they shouldn't”.

Grade: B

Andrew Skinner

The candidate for the Progressive Canadian Party happily tossed about ideas and suggestions which demonstrated the party is potentially as left-wing as the NDP, but without the maturity of thought and pro-American tendencies, and that he sees those who are of a more conservative bent as un-Canadian. He had rendered himself irrelevant by the end of his opening comments. But well spoken. A little experience might help tone down some of his hyperbole.

Grade: D

Peter Tinsley

When I read the campaign literature of Peter Tinsley, he came across as a strong candidate for the Liberals – even spoken of as a “star” candidate by some. Well, what a letdown. A shaky opening was lifted up slightly by a strong answer to a question about parliamentary coalitions – but with his complete dismissal of the other challengers to Daryl Kramp he ended a very weak evening. Strong on hyperbole, weak on the facts (making numerous factual mistakes) he was a complete disappointment. The clear loser of this debate.

Grade: F