A pointless, premature ritual?

Popularised in Thatcher-era Britain and enthusiastically embraced in Indian polity, "TINA", it appears, is coming home to roost in Canada. So far it seems there is no alternative (TINA) to ousted prime minister Stephen Harper. Canadian voters will most likely wake up on May 3 to see they've gone through another premature and expensive election the previous day just to return Harper to office.

This is the first time I'm in the midst of an election without feeling an emotional tug towards any side. This cold objectivity is actually quite refreshing. As a non-Canadian in Canada I am sort of on the outside looking in, though I am in the general vicinity. It sure is fun.

I just watched the first televised debate between the leaders of the four major parties - Harper representing his Conservative Party, Michael Ignatieff of the Liberal Party, Jack Layton of the New Democratic Party (NDP) and Gilles Duceppe of the Bloc Quebecois. To be brutally honest, the debate was a little dull. There were no fireworks. There was very little charisma. And there wasn't much conviction.

You see, I am used to the very shrill, colourful and chaotic Indian general election. Now that is electrifying and extremely entertaining. There are scores of parties, thousands of candidates. There is high drama at every turn. There is no possibility of a televised debate. Imagine if a representative of every party with an MP in the outgoing Parliament was allowed to participate (that's the criterion for the Canadian TV debate). For the current Lok Sabha (lower house of Indian Parliament), that would be 38 debaters! In contrast, this was a very Canadian affair - restrained, polite and, er, dull.

Going by the Liberal Party's past record, Ignatieff is the challenger with the best shot at knocking Harper off the throne. But it's hard to take the man seriously. Even if you don't let Harper's vilification campaign through TV ads sway you, it is impossible to completely trust Ignatieff. The man seems like an ageing party boy. And I don't know why, each time he took the floor during the debate I kept seeing Dubya Bush! No, Ignatieff isn't as thick. But there's just something about the man that is so much like W. And it came as no surprise to me when NDP's Layton pointed out that the Liberal leader had played hooky through most sessions of the just dissolved Parliament. (See, there's the party boy).

To me, Layton came across as the most credible and sincere of the lot. Now I don't know much about the man. This is my outsider's perspective, judging just by his debate performance. But his NDP just doesn't have enough following to propel him to office.

As for Duceppe, he needn't have been there at all. It was Quebec vs Canada all the way. Harper was the only debater who mentioned on a few occasions that Duceppe's Bloc hopes to break the country. It reminded me of Kashmir and India, seeing how Quebec is treated with kid gloves; how Quebec doesn't agree with the rest of Canada's belief in celebrating multiculturalism; how it keeps telling Ottawa to back off or else....

Now for Harper. It is ironic that this much reviled man completely lacking in people skills still has the best chance of returning to the prime minister's office. Harper's is the first government to be held in contempt by Canadian Parliament for allegedly misleading the legislature on government expenditure. The Liberals moved the no-confidence motion, specifically over federal spending on fighter jets and construction of mammoth prisons.

When I came to this country in May last year and spoke to people about the government, not one person had anything nice to say about Harper. So I asked how on earth he got elected to the highest political office in the land. "There was no one else," was the unanimous response.

TINA favoured Harper in 2008. Looks like it might do so again in May 2011. That's how I call it. If I'm wrong, at least this election will become a little more entertaining.