UCP leadership candidates choose their targets — and dance partners — in final debate

This column is an opinion from Graham Thomson, an award-winning journalist who has covered Alberta politics for more than 30 years. For more information about CBC's Opinion section, please see the FAQ.

The final public forum in the United Conservative Party's leadership race in Edmonton Tuesday evening was less of a debate and more of a dance competition.

The format had the candidates pairing off in little mini gambols of their own. Who each of them chose for their three-minute rhetorical twirl round the floor was all very strategic and fascinating.

It was a peek inside the minds of the various campaigns as they do the complicated math surrounding a preferential balloting system.

Danielle Smith, for example, chose Travis Toews for a heated debate on energy policy.

Leela Aheer chose Rajan Sawhney for a more friendly discussion about education.

Brian Jean invited Todd Loewen for a little chat over agriculture.

At times it seemed random, but there was method to the mayhem.

Smith picked Toews to debate energy policy, but really she chose him to attack his proposal for tariffs against provinces that impede Alberta's energy industry.

"We cannot stop the free flow of goods and tariffs between our jurisdictions," said Smith, calling Toews' idea unconstitutional.

Toews shot back that Smith's proposal for an Alberta Sovereignty Act — which would allow the province to ignore federal laws deemed unAlbertan — would create chaos.

"The sovereignty act is a false bill of goods," said Toews. "It will send tens of billions of dollars packing out of this province."

This was a predictable argument the two have been having for weeks where they, as the perceived front runners, have been trying to tear each other down.

But the dynamics behind it are all about that preferential ballot. Smith and Toews know they won't be relying on each other for support — and thus are free to bash each other. And bash each other they have been doing non-stop. The animosity is so great that Toews has refused to say if he'll run again if he loses the race.

But they are careful about not bashing other candidates, for fear of alienating their supporters. In a preferential ballot, it's not just members' first choice that counts, but their second or third or fourth, etc.

That's pretty much how Ed Stelmach won the Progressive Conservative leadership race in 2006. He won by being the nice guy — everybody's second choice.

In this race, at least three candidates — Sawhney, Jean and Rebecca Schulz — want to be the new Ed Stelmach.

They know they're not the frontrunners and, like Stelmach, are hoping to stay in the count long enough to pick up support from candidates who are forced from the race.

Jean, for example, chose Loewen for a discussion over agriculture where Jean made a point of saying to Loewen, "I value his opinion." This would be Jean offering a hand of friendship to Loewen, hoping that Loewen's supporters make Jean their second choice on the ballot.

The debate did at times get tense when Sawhney chose Smith to debate the issue of crime, but really it was giving Sawhney an opportunity to attack Smith's sovereignty act.

"It is ludicrous," said Sawhney, who pressed Smith to hold off introducing the act this fall and instead put the issue to Alberta voters during next May's provincial election. Sawhney then ridiculed Smith's idea, pointing out Smith has been talking out of both sides of her mouth by describing the act as both an act of defiance against Ottawa and a mere symbolic gesture.

"Which sovereignty act are we talking about: the unconstitutional one or the constitutional one?" asked Sawhney, who knows she has nothing to lose by attacking Smith but perhaps something to gain.

Sawhney is trying to set herself up as the anti-Smith candidate, hoping that supporters of more moderate candidates such as Schulz and Aheer will make Sawhney their second choice on the ballot.

But what the candidates did not do Tuesday evening was make Smith the centre of attention as they did in the first debate last month in Medicine Hat, where they grilled Smith but only succeeded in giving her the spotlight.

This time around, they sparred with each other. Not nearly as interesting as last time, but much more strategic.

Thus at times during the debate, Smith looked as forgotten as everyone else in the race.

But Smith seemed to have the crowd on her side. When she took shots at the former cabinet ministers on the stage for pandemic restrictions, many in the audience of 700 people cheered.

Even though the votes won't be counted until Oct. 6, this week is something of a homestretch.

Tuesday was the candidates' last debate before the preferential ballots are mailed out to members. They have a month to send them back, but if previous mail-in ballots are any indication, people tend to mail them in quickly because they have already made up their minds.

For all the strategizing going on Tuesday night, the debate might not have made any difference at all.

If that's the case, the winner of the race will already be chosen in the next week or so and the results will be in the hands of Canada Post. We just won't know the results until October.