Royal Redeems Herself on TV – but It May Be Too Late

By John Lichfield

Better, much better, but probably too late. France’s would-be first woman president, Segolene Royal, impressed many viewers with a feisty and eloquent performance in a televised debate watched by 20 million people on Wednesday night. But the Socialist candidate may not have done enough to redeem a previously muddled and error- strewn campaign.

The centre-right candidate, Nicolas Sarkozy, still appears to be heading for a clear victory on Sunday.

To the disappointment, and anger, of the Socialist camp, the centrist leader, Francois Bayrou, refused to announce that he had made a personal choice to vote for Mme Royal in the second round of the election this weekend. M. Bayrou’s nearly seven million first round votes hold the key to the outcome of the election.

The centrist leader said yesterday that he would "definitely not vote for Nico-las Sarkozy", a man that he has previously described as a threat to democracy. He also said that Mme Royal had "done pretty well" in Wednesday’s debate.

Nonetheless, M. Bayrou refused to say whether he would vote for her, or abstain or cast a blank ballot. Royal campaign officials had been counting on a Bayrou "semi-endorsement" to give her campaign the "bounce" it needs to overcome a four to seven point deficit in the opinion polls in the final days.

Many thousands of young, centrist anti-Sarkozy voters had been waiting for Wednesday’s debate before deciding whether to abstain or vote for Mme Royal. It seemed yesterday that she had not done quite enough to bring them into her camp in the numbers that she needs.

Jean-Francois Mabire, 36, leader of the Young People for Bayrou campaign in the Rouen area, said: "She did well but she showed no real vision for the future of France. I will definitely vote blank."

The French media mostly called the two-and-ahalf-hour debate a draw. Royal scored points for passion and guts; Sarkozy was praised for his calm and precision.

The great surprise of the televised confrontation was that the two candidates exchanged their usual roles.

Mme Royal has previously been accused, within her own camp, of being too serene and laid-back. On Wednesday night, she was an elegant labrador who suddenly yapped and growled like a terrier.

M. Sarkozy is accused by his opponents of being an excitable and brutal man, who will generate violent opposition on the streets if elected. On Wednesday night, he was a terrier trying to show that he was house-trained and did not always bite postmen.

The debate ranged over the 35-hour working week, education, taxes, crime and violence and European and foreign policy. Some of the sharpest exchanges were on minute points of social policy: whether there should be creches for all working mothers; whether disabled children should have places in ordinary schools.

Mme Royal was accused by the Sarkozy camp – and part of the press yesterday – of "losing her cool" toward the end of the debate. She accused the centre-right candidate of talking "with a tear in your eye" about disabled children although his government had scrapped a plan to help them to join ordinary classes.

"We have reached the summit of political immorality," she said.

"Calm down," M. Sarkozy retorted. "And don’t point your finger at me."

Mme Royal: "I won’t calm down."

M. Sarkozy: "To be President, you have to be calm."

Mme Royal: "Not when there are injustices … I will be angry about those when I am President of the Republic."

M. Sarkozy: "That will be fun."

Overall, M. Sarkozy achieved his aim of seeming calm and reasonable and well briefed on leading issues. After being widely criticised for his ranting and populist campaign style, he was determined to come over as managerial and a moderate man of action on Wednesday night.

For the first time since the Socialist primary campaign last year, Mme Royal found her authentic "voice" as a passionate, but modernising and pragmatic Socialist. She said that, if she was elected, she would make France the "country of enterprise", reconcile the French with mar-ket forces, end the confrontational relations between unions and big business and "unblock the machinery" of growth.

A similarly assured and passionate series of performances earlier in the campaign might have made a big difference.

What the papers said

LE MONDE

"The televised duel did not fully clarify the choices and, in some respects, disguised them. All the same, we are offered two Frances, two different visions … Mme Royal is right to make the rebuilding of union-employer relations key to a return to economic confidence … Nicolas Sarkozy has a much more ‘American’ vision, which will favour the upper slopes of the social pyramid."

LE PARISIEN

"The surprise was that both candidates were playing each others’ roles. We expected an aggressive Sarkozy, who gave in to his penchants for domination and overconfidence, and a serene Royal, who put forward her quiet authority concealing an alleged lack of experience. We were presented with quite the opposite."

LIBERATION

"Nicolas Sarkozy did not lose, but Segolene Royal won. In a debate of cold anger and restrained aggression, the Socialist candidate beat Sarkozy on one vital point: legitimacy. Pugnacious, precise and persistent, despite the occasional awkwardness, she often succeeded in putting pressure on the front-runner. Did Sarkozy do badly? No, quite the opposite. But even with all his determination, preparation and the advantage given by 31 per cent of the first-round votes, he did not dominate his rival."

LE FIGARO

"Precise and sure of himself, Sarkozy did not let himself go to the excesses which would have given satisfaction to his opponents and could have knocked everything off balance. Often fluent and sometimes aggressive, Royal did not make any serious blunders that could have been her undoing … At the end of the debate, Sarkozy’s self control allowed him to keep his punch while also giving him points for serenity."

(c) 2007 Independent, The; London (UK). Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning. All rights Reserved.