If I were Green Party leader Elizabeth May, I'd be glad I was being excluded from the leaders' debate.Plus now they get to present themselves as smoking martyrs to democracy and free speech while never having to display what an empty suit they are in terms of policy. Get down off the cross Elizabeth, we need the wood.
Far from needing a platform for solidifying and growing its potential vote coalition, I think the Green Party is something like mushrooms: It grows best in the dark. The less people know about the party, the more they project their own values onto the Greens. They are a handy protest vote for Red Tories, left-wing New Democrats, disaffected Liberals and bored Bloquistes - those who won't go so far as to vote for another main-line party, and can't stand not voting.
So take a page out of the Tom Hanks stinker The Money Pit. Keep the lights off. Say you are lighting the place with candles to prevent global warming. Stay in the shadows. Mumble when people ask what your specific policies are, and then talk vaguely about a bold new Green future. And be glad you won't actually have to show up at the debate!
To be clear: I oppose this decision. I think it's wrong headed and anti-democratic and I'd love for the Canadian people to get an opportunity to see just how formless the Greens are.
They'll probably get more votes from being excluded than they would have gained from participating in the debates and they'll certainly lose less votes from soft supporters finding out exactly what they stand for - or don't.