Liberal leadership hopefuls faced off on back-to-back nights in Montreal on Monday and Tuesday night this week, for the only debates planned during the leadership contest.
Monday night saw the candidates facing off in the highly anticipated French language debate, on a rare occasion where none of the candidates are native French speakers. The candidates went into Tuesday night’s English language debate hoping to expand on their comments and plans outlined in basic terms Monday night due to their limited French language skills.
Both nights were dominated by discussion on Canada-U.S. relations, how each candidate would handle President Donald Trump’s tariff threats and their views on the economy and Canadian national defence.
General takeaways from the debate
Communication in French
Monday’s debate showed the extent, or lack thereof, of each candidate’s ability to communicate in French. With none of the four on stage being a native French speaker, slip-ups were prone to happen. Carney’s miscommunication on Monday night when he mistakenly said he agreed with Hamas shows the potential for language errors to capture the attention from larger policy matters.
With the Liberals seeking to maintain, or even gain, on holding 33 of Quebec’s 78 ridings in the next election — and an expected leaders’ debate in the language — it is likely that French will remain a consideration going forward.
Negotiating with Trump
Trump and the threat of U.S. tariffs dominated the first hour of Tuesday’s debate, with the president being mentioned a total of 62 times. While the four candidates agree on the severity of the threat posed by Trump and the potentially for a spiralling Canada-U.S. trade war, each offered a different approach.
Baylis leaned into his past business experience to note that Trump was not a new phenomenon to him. Referring to the decades he has spent negotiating contracts, he views Trump as a bully that cannot be trusted. Baylis added that he expects Trump to hit Canada with tariffs ahead of the March 4 deadline and target key industries, including steel, aluminum, and softwood lumber. As prime minister, Baylis said his first order of business would be to meet with the President of Mexico in hopes of coordinating approach to the U.S.’s 25 per cent tariffs threat.
Carney was quick to note that Canada will never become the 51st state, arguing that the Donald Trump of today is seeking control of Canada’s sovereignty, compared to the first term Trump who just sought market access. The former central banker pitched his expertise in negotiating, crisis management, and economic knowledge as worthwhile attributes that he brings to the table. To address the American economic threat, Carney envisions a reinforced Canadian economy with increased interprovincial trade networks and trade with allied countries across Europe and Asia.
Gould argued that Trump is quick to underestimate Canada and its leaders. In her role as House leader, she knows how to stand up to bullies, including Trump and Poilievre. Gould sees negotiating with Trump as the only way forward, and would consider leveraging Canadian imports to the U.S., potentially causing American industries and consumers to suffer.
Freeland labelled Trump as the greatest threat Canada has seen since the Second World War. She views Trump’s attacks on Canada as a warning signal to the rest of the world that the threat posed by the U.S. administration is real. Freeland would seek to work with allies in response to Trump, notable with Mexico, Panama, Denmark, and the EU who also face challenges to their sovereignty by Trump. The former deputy prime minister and minister of finance would also respond with decisive action targeting key U.S. sectors, notably proposing 100 per cent tariffs on U.S. dairy and Florida oranges.
Defence spending increases and timelines
The four leaders agreed on the need to increase Canada’s defence spending but disagreed on how and when to reach the NATO target of 2 per cent of GDP. Gould and Freeland advocated for reaching the target by 2027, while Carney and Baylis envisioned a longer, more strategic approach.
In Freeland’s view, Canada must prepare itself for a new international order where the U.S. is no longer the leader of the free world. Freeland would focus on defending Arctic sovereignty, work with Nordic and EU-NATO partners, and spend defence money within Canada. Similarly, Gould noted that Canada does not have the luxury of time and must act urgently on national defence and security. Increasing salaries and benefits for the armed forces and appointing a procurement czar would be immediate steps for Gould as prime minister.
On the other hand, Carney would also focus on Arctic security by creating at least two new bases in the region and seek to reshore defence spending within Canada. Carney would seek to hit the 2 per cent target by 2030 at the latest, but views the issue as a matter of management, and not just increasing spending. Baylis foresees a similar six-year timeframe to 2030 and would seek better compensation for the armed forces. Additionally, Baylis has proposed the creation of the Canadian Agency for Advanced Research and Defence, a new government funded program that would invest in Canadian innovation and procurement, mirroring DARPA in the U.S.
Differentiating themselves from Justin Trudeau
For nearly the first half of the debate, the candidates spent the majority of their time discussing topics where the candidates tended to agree with each other. It was not until the general topic of the economy came up that the candidates began marking their own territory.
Carney was able to finally differentiate himself from the other candidates and emphasize the notion that he is an outsider from the Trudeau government, something Chrystia Freeland surprisingly did not take full advantage of. Carney, in a blatant critique of the current government, noted that he would build the economy first and foremost, something the government should have been doing over the past five years as the economy has been weak. He emphasized the importance of infrastructure projects and jumpstarting the housing sector in the country, and bringing big changes to the way the country’s economy is managed. It was Karina Gould who surprisingly pushed back against Carney, highlighting that she hasn’t heard him speaking about affordable housing until this debate, and the importance of not talking down Canada when discussing the economy. She said, “We need to remember the economy is about people,” which tied into her critique of Carney’s economic approach not being as progressive as is needed.
While Chrystia Freeland was able to participate in this part of the debate, she tended to rely on responses we have seen before in defending the government’s economic decisions, such as being careful not to repeat Conservative talking points about Canada being broken.
Next steps in the campaign
With the debates now in the past, 10 days remain in the leadership campaign until results are announced the afternoon of March 9.
Voting has opened for Liberal party members to vote on the next leader. Voting will be conducted online, with a verification process in order to confirm identities. Ballots will have ranked voting, allowing party members to vote candidates in their order of preference. Votes will also be calculated with a regional distribution in mind, in order to allow rural voters greater representation. The candidate that receives a majority of points will be announced the winner. If a candidate does not reach a majority of points by the first round, the results of successive rounds will be counted, with the candidate with the least number of points being dropped until a winner is determined.
Keyword mentions by leadership contenders
- Donald Trump: 62
- Pierre Poilievre: 16
- Justin Trudeau: 5
- Productive / productivity: 23
- Affordable / affordability: 19
- Healthcare: 17
- Childcare: 16 (mentioned only by Freeland and Gould)
- Middle class: 11
- Tariff: 11
- Carbon tax / rebate: 9
- Arctic: 7
- Critical minerals: 4
- Pharmacare: 1
- Dentalcare: 1
Insights in this piece contributed by Bailey Stafford, Geoff Norquay and Tom Chan.
