By Martin Hellicar
IN STARK contrast to the mud-slinging of the past few weeks, the seven candidates in next month’s presidential elections turned last night’s much- hyped live television face-off into a low key, mild-mannered affair.
Liberal party candidate Nicos Rolandis summed it up when he said half-way through the three-hour debate: “I must say tonight’s programme is suffering from political impotence.”
President Glafcos Clerides, Akel- and Diko-backed candidate George Iacovou, Edek leader Vassos Lyssarides, United Democrat George Vassiliou, Nicos Koutsou of New Horizons, Rolandis and Diko rebel Alexis Galanos sat in a semicircle behind a flower-festooned table to field questions from a panel of four journalists.
After a candidate’s two-minute answer, his six opponents would be given one minute each to comment, before he then had two minutes to reply to their points.
Indicative of the generally insipid nature of the panel discussion was the fact that the rival candidates hardly ever tried to talk beyond the time allotted them for answers. They never looked perturbed by any of the questions, and voices were never raised. The candidates hardly ever directed answers at each other when replying to “digs” from their rivals – preferring to keep their eyes firmly fixed on the journalists instead.
The seven hopefuls used the opportunity provided by simultaneous coverage on all four local television channels to churn out their well-known campaign slogans and positions once again.
They repeatedly twisted or simply ducked the questions from the panel to repeat their own positions.
Lyssarides’ answer when asked to choose between the Cyprus problem policies of election front-runners Clerides and Iacovou was typical: “Why am I always asked to choose between policies that I do not agree with? There is a more positive approach, let me speak of my policies.”
“Can I ask you to comment only if you have something to say about the issue raised?” co-ordinator George Tsalakkos pleaded with the candidates early on in the discussion.
Even during the time they were allotted for commenting on a rival’s answer, the candidates would often insist on going off on a tangent to make a seemingly irrelevant point of their own.
“I hope we are not confusing the viewers!” Koutsou quipped at one point.
Towards the end of the showdown, Lyssarides – the main proponent of the TV showdown idea – expressed his exasperation with the discussion.
“Can I be allowed to say that we are having a dialogue of monologues? I have heard no-one comment on the statements I have made. It is as if we are reciting pre-prepared poems. There is no dialogue of substance,” the Edek leader said.
The candidates remained cagey about what their positions would be should the elections go to a second round.
The Cyprus problem was, as it has been throughout the pre-election period, the main topic for discussion.
“If I use this time to talk about the Ghali set of ideas again the viewers will switch off – seeing as they can’t zap to another channel,” Vassiliou commented when the topic came up for the umpteenth time.
