With some last-minute drama, the French-language leaders’ debate was held in Montreal on April 16.
As well, on the day of the event, the Green Party was disinvited from the debate due to not meeting the criteria of running candidates in 90 percent of ridings.
Carney Puts Focus on Trump, Says He’s ‘Not Trudeau’
The debate had a heavy focus on U.S. President Donald Trump by design, as it was one of the topics the moderator asked about. But Liberal Leader Mark Carney also put his own emphasis on the issue, repeating one of his key lines from his election campaign that “we are in the most serious crisis of our lives.”
The Liberal leader reiterated his key policy proposals during the debate, saying he will provide support for workers impacted by the tariffs and enable private investment in Canada’s economy to create more jobs. He said he has a priority to build more homes and to strengthen the “cultural institutions” in Canada.
He added that he has experience managing crises and is the best person to negotiate with Trump.
He fielded criticism of the Liberal government’s record from both Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre and Bloc Québécois Leader Yves-François Blanchet. Poilievre noted that Carney had served as an adviser to former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, while Blanchet said Carney has the same ministers and “ideology” as Trudeau.
“I’m not Justin Trudeau,” Carney shot back. Later at the post-debate press conference, he said he shares the same values as Trudeau in terms of “taking care of one another, the emphasis on reconciliation, emphasis on equality of all Canadians and building a better country for everyone else.”
Poilievre Focuses on Change, Energy
Poilievre also addressed the impact of Trump’s tariffs on Canada while emphasizing that Canada “will remain sovereign,” but he repeated his main line that “we have to control what we can control” and put the focus back on his main messaging—that the country needs to change course with a new government.
“We need to reverse Liberal economic policies that have weakened our country. We need to unleash our resources, cut taxes, and bring jobs back home, so we can face Trump from a position of strength,” he said.
Poilievre also underscored the need for Canada to build pipelines, develop more oil and gas and other energy projects, and remove legislation such as the Impact Assessment Act, which critics say puts unnecessary burden on such development. He made sure to also mention hydroelectric and mining projects, which are major industries in Quebec, when talking about the need to develop resources. The Conservative leader said he also supports nuclear energy.
When talking about his policy points on fighting crime, Poilievre received criticism from other party leaders for wanting to use the notwithstanding clause in the Charter to give multiple life sentences to mass murderers. In response, he said he wouldn’t apologize for “locking murderers up.”
Singh Tries to Show NDP Can Get Concessions
During the course of the election campaign, as the NDP has been sliding in polls, Singh has adjusted his campaign’s messaging from one of forming government to one of asserting that his party can get concessions from the governing party.
He touted his party’s role in getting the Liberal government to implement dental care and pharmacare programs under their supply-and-confidence agreement.
At one point during the debate, Singh asked Carney if he agrees that the government should “continue to subsidize oil companies,” and asked if Carney would “commit to stopping these subsidies.” Carney said, “absolutely.”
“This is why you need New Democrats,” Singh said, adding, “We got a commitment,” showcasing that he got another concession.
Carney said that “it’s not a new commitment.”
Singh also put high focus on health care and his party’s support for this issue, which wasn’t one of the themes chosen for the debate. At one point he clashed with the host, saying that the host kept interrupting him when he wanted to talk about health care.
Immigration a Focus in French Debate
Unlike the English debate, set to take place on April 17, the French debate featured the issue of immigration.
Politicians and media in Quebec have not been shy in discussing concerns over resource limitations on taking in new arrivals, as well as the desire to maintain the French identity. In this context, the issue of immigration has been a talking point by Quebec politicians for years, before it became less taboo for politicians in the rest of Canada to talk about it as the arrival numbers rose and limitations on health care and housing surfaced.
All party leaders noted that there is a limit to the intake Canada can have, but each had his own distinct messaging about the issue.
While the Trudeau Liberals significantly increased Canada’s immigration intake, once concerns over long health-care wait times and rising house costs escalated, their government began limiting immigration over the past few months.
Carney said he would cap immigration “for a couple of years” in order to build more capacity for welcoming more newcomers to Canada.
Poilievre said that the Liberal government had put in an “out of control” immigration system and that he would instead have “realistic numbers” for immigration based on housing capacity.
Singh put the blame on both the Liberal and Conservative governments for not having enough capacity to bring in more immigrants, saying he would form an expert panel to advise on the level of the country’s capacity for immigration. But he said he didn’t want to “fall in the trap of fear-mongering or blaming immigrants.”
For his part, Blanchet said Quebec should be the one to determine how many immigrants it can let into the province.
Carney, Singh, Blanchet Agree on UNWRA Funding, Poilievre Cites Concern About China’s AIIB
Carney said during the debate that the Liberal government has recently provided $100 million in humanitarian aid to Gaza.
Speaking on the conflict in the region, Carney said, “We are in a situation where we need to have an immediate ceasefire. We need to have all the hostages returned, and we need to resume humanitarian aid to Gaza.”
Singh criticized Carney for not saying Israel is perpetuating “genocide” in the region.
“This is a genocide. People in Israel do deserve peace and security, but people in Palestine do as well,” Singh said.
During the rally, a heckler could be heard saying, “There’s a genocide happening in Palestine,” to which Carney responded, “I’m aware, which is why we have an arms embargo.”
Netanyahu said that “instead of supporting Israel, a democracy that is fighting a just war with just means against the barbarians of Hamas, he attacks the one and only Jewish state.”
When asked for clarification on his position on April 9, Carney said he did not hear the word “genocide” at the rally as it was noisy. “My point was I’m aware of the situation in Gaza,” Carney said.
During the debate, Poilievre repeated his commitment to cut aid to UNRWA, pointing to the fired employees and the investigation into their Hamas links.
“I don’t think we should be funding that type of activity either. The aid we give should be directly to people in need,” he said.
Poilievre has said that he supports Israel defending itself against Hamas and that his party also supports the country “proactively striking Iranian nuclear sites and oil installations to defund the terrorist regime.”
His comments about UNRWA came when discussing the broader topic of cutting foreign aid and spending the money in Canada.
On the issue of Israel and Gaza as well as pro-Palestinian protests in Canada targeting the Jewish community, Blanchet called it “a very unique situation.”
“The Jewish community is a victim of radical Islamists. Palestinians are currently victims of terrible violence from the Israeli government. We have to help people in distress there and elsewhere,” Blanchet said.
Blanchet also joined Singh and Carney in agreeing to continue funding UNWRA, unlike Poilievre.
