So, in this debate over who's to blame for the "non-debate" - in what direction should the finger of failure point?
Should is be the Leadership Debate Committee - known as the LDC - which was too inflexible for the major mass parties?
Or should it be the mass parties - who can never accept a "one size fits all" solution - and always want to have some special consideration or pre-condition?
UDP leader Patrick Faber spoke to us via telephone today. He told us that he was disappointed in the Chamber's press release last night which said that neither the PUP nor the UDP had confirmed at Friday's deadline.
He said he did confirm as he said he would at a press conference earlier in the week, but it is the LDC that never got back to him:
Jules Vasquez, reporter
"What would be your response to the Chamber's release of last night?"
Patrick Faber, Leader Of The UDP
"Well, I am very disappointed in the release from the Chamber actually. I gave a response every time the Chamber required something from us to do, but if they don't answer when we respond - I sent an email - and I will provide you with a copy of that email - to Mrs. Kim Aikman, who was the person who communicated on behalf of the LDC. That email said as I had indicated in my press briefing earlier in the week that I would be willing to participate on one condition that all the parties that were invited to participate would participate, would accept the invitation. Mrs. Aikman wrote back to me to say that she had received my email and that she would be forwarding it to the LDC."
"The other communication I got from the I think was on Sunday evening and that was an invitation to the virtual meeting on Monday,. I responded to that email Monday morning early to ask Mrs. Aikman to ask the LDC if the condition that I had put forward was met. Remember now the deadline was Friday evening and so they would be in a position to say whether or not all the parties had agreed to participate which is the condition that I put forward. That email has never been answered. And now I see where the LDC in their release is saying it is against their principle to answer a party individually. Well, that may well be the case, I don't know. I don't think that was ever communicated to me. But I find it very unprofessional on the part of the LDC that an email that I sent to Mrs. Aikman who was the person who made all communications on the part of the LDC would not even give an answer and then accuse me of not turning up to the meeting when in fact they had failed to answer my email."
"From what I have described to you transpired with the communication between the LDC and the UDP, there is a lot to be desired with the professionalism and the timely responses of the LDC."
Jules Vasquez, reporter
"They have extended the deadline to Tuesday October 20th at 3pm. They have extended the deadline for the signed letter of commitment from leaders for this afternoon at 3pm. Will they get that signed commitment from you?"
Patrick Faber, Leader Of The UDP
"When they answer my email. They have up to now not answered my email and they keep moving the goalpost. They are saying they don't communicate individually with parties, well then who is it that we communicate with? If I can't send an email to Mrs. Kim who is representing the LDC, even if it is that she needs to go them to get an answer - answer my email. You cannot treat with me unprofessionally and expect me to have confidence in your entity. Even to say this is outside the rule for me. If they are claiming that is the rule when I learnt about that would have been in their press release. Up to now they have not answered my email."
Jules Vasquez, reporter
"Many in the public may have had a hope or an expectation that such a debate would be held. It appears that none will be. Who should the public blame?"
Patrick Faber, Leader Of The UDP
"Well I don't know, but as I've said that I was perfectly prepared to give them the benefit of the doubt that it is an impartial professional entity that wanted to see a debate happen and I indicated that I am absolutely up to the challenge of engaging in such a debate and that is still the case."
Notably the PUP also says that the LDC never sent a response to their email of October 16th.
They sent out a release today saying, quote, "Any allegation by the UDP that People's United Party Leader John Briceño is afraid to debate Patrick Faber does not dignify any response."
The Party says it has, quote, "been engaged in countrywide consultations for many months and will continue to involve our people in the decision-making process." End quote. Also known as, "debate, who needs it?"
