Yesterday France experienced a first: a television debate between candidates of the same party, in this instance the Socialist Party (although one of the six candidates to the be the socialist candidate in the 2012 presidential election is from the tiny Left-wing Radical Party PRG). French television viewers have long been accustomed to televised pre-election debates. The first took place between the first and second rounds of the 1974 presidential election, and this debate has become a tradition, which was only interrupted in 2002 when Jacques Chirac refused to debate with Jean-Marie Le Pen.
The PS is organising an open primary, the first of its kind in France. Everyone on the electoral register will be able to vote, providing they are willing to pay €1 and sign a statement declaring that they support the values of the left. Yesterday saw the first TV primary debate, the kind of which we are accustomed to seeing in the US. However, whereas primary candidates in the US are only loosely constrained by their party label and can develop their own programme, the socialist candidates are bound by the party programme, which was adopted earlier this year. Also unlike in the US, where seeing the different candidates disagree openly with each other and criticise each other’s records and programmes is seen as normal, it would be disastrous for the image of the PS if the different candidates were to start bickering and disagreeing too strongly with each other. Like in most of Europe, French parties are supposed to be cohesive and disciplined, which is something the PS has sometimes struggled to be at its own peril (the 1990 Rennes Congress was a particularly painful display of the party’s internal divisions). Open disagreement between the candidates could seriously jeopardise the party’s chances in the election, as the press and the right would be quick to point out that the PS is divided and not ready for government.
As a result, yesterday’s debate was, well, how can I put it succinctly? Oh, yes… boring. The format didn’t help, since it only became a debate about 1 hour into the programme, which started by a 1-minute introduction and a 10-minute interview of each candidate was by a panel of journalists. Though this helped clarify the positions of each candidate for viewers who might not be too familiar with the details of their platforms (that is, all of us), it took quite some resilience for viewers to wait until the start of the debate and not switch to TF1 and watch Masterchef (and viewing figures show that more people tuned in to watch the debate than the cooking show).
And the debate was pretty consensual, with candidates emphasising how much they agreed with each other. Only towards the end did we get to see some differences between the candidates, in particular on the topics of nuclear energy (some candidates support the eventual full closure of nuclear power stations while others are for a simple reduction in the share of nuclear energy from 75 to 50%) and of cannabis (the PRG candidate is in favour of wholesale legalisation, some candidates are for depenalisation, and others are for the status quo). As a result, the debate more or less maintained the candidates’ standings, with François Hollande as front-runner and Martine Aubry as his main challenger. The other result of the debate is a collective yawn, as few things are more boring than a debate where all agree.
Elodie Fabre 