Mark Carney treated like a frontrunner as Pierre Poilievre and Jagmeet Singh take aim at him and Liberals' history

At the end of the two-hour program, Poilievre shook Carney’s hand and said, “thank you, enjoyed that.”

Over the course of two nights of French and English debates, Carney, the Liberal leader tried to set out promises and to present a calmer, poised front, but struggled to make his arguments short and pithy — a point he admitted onstage before plowing ahead in the face of a three-pronged attack.

Carney, standing with the Conservative leader on his right and the New Democrat on his left, found himself immediately sparring with both.

That was especially the case with a more combative Poilievre than he’d debated the night before in French, while the NDP’s Jagmeet Singh sniped at both with accusations that they can’t be trusted to help regular people struggling with the cost of living.

At the outset, Poilievre condemned and demanded Carney repeal an “anti-pipeline” law that governs environmental impact assessments, and repeatedly shot barbs at Carney’s lengthy explanations about how to bolster the Canadian energy industry, saying the country needs “a change” so it can get energy to overseas markets, and not be forced to rely on U.S. buyers.

“How could you possibly think it’s a good idea to give the Americans a continued monopoly on our energy projects when you have seen how much these Liberal policies have weakened our country over the last decade?” Poilievre charged.

Singh interjected that the Liberals and Conservatives were competing over who could be the most pro-pipeline, adding the Liberals “built a pipeline. I don’t know what Pierre is complaining about,” said Singh, insisting what’s needed is an East-West electricity grid.

Trump’s tariff threat was the debate’s opening topic, with Carney insisting that Canada must confront Trump with “strength” but he argued — as he has on the campaign trail — that Canada needs a “clear plan here at home to build this economy, to diversify our trading partners with like minded countries, and … to have a position of strength in terms of our reaction to the U.S. unjustified tariffs.”

Poilievre and Carney agree that Ottawa should wield targeted counter-tariffs but Bloc Québécois Leader Yves-François Blanchet retorted Ottawa should fully retaliate with dollar-for-dollar tariffs. “Don’t be weak in front of Mr. Trump,” Blanchet admonished.

If Trump loomed large on the debate stage, so did Justin Trudeau, with Carney repeatedly pressed by Poilievre to explain how he is different from his predecessor, and Carney shooting back that the Conservative leader should get over it.

“I know it may be difficult. Mr. Poilievre, you spent years running against Justin Trudeau and the carbon tax … They’re both gone,” Carney said. “I’m a very different person from Justin Trudeau.”

Poilievre and Blanchet openly mocked that claim, with Blanchet declaring the real question is whether Carney is “better” than Trudeau as prime minister. 

“You say that you are a great crisis manager,” Blanchet said, alluding to Carney’s time as Bank of England governor when the United Kingdom exited the European Union. “As far as I know, Brexit happened even if you were against it,” Blanchet said, before pivoting to attack Carney on his asset ownerships.

Addressing viewers, Poilievre asked if they were prepared to “elect the same Liberal MPs, the same Liberal ministers, the same Liberal staffers, all over again for a fourth term?” He charged that Trudeau political staffers “are actually here with you at this debate in Montreal, writing the talking points that you are regurgitating into the microphone.”

“Oooh,” Carney said, smiling, adding, “I do my own talking points.”

One of the night’s impassioned exchanges erupted over the Conservative plan to use the constitutional power to override the Charter of Rights to punish a range of violent crimes, including sentences for multiple murderers, with Poilievre unapologetic about resorting to a power that has never been used by any prime minister to immunize his proposed laws.

“I think it’s a very dangerous slope to override judgments of the Supreme Court of Canada,” replied Carney. “In fact, the Charter of Rights and Freedoms exists to protect Canadians from people like us on the stage, politicians who may use their power to override fundamental rights,” he said.

“The question here is not where you start,” said Carney. “It’s where will you stop?”

Carney’s defence of the Charter drew a forceful response from Poilievre, who said he is out to protect law-abiding Canadians and victims, not repeat offenders who get out on bail and commit crimes and “terrorize our communities.” He accused Carney of being oblivious to the problems of car theft and home invasions.

“Canadians deserve to live in peace and security,” said Poilievre.

“I’m fighting for that as well,” Carney countered, saying he would increase penalties for guns and gang crime, and resources for enforcement, including at the border.

Singh condemned Poilievre’s inflammatory rhetoric, and also objected to Poilievre’s statement — during a discussion about the Israel-Hamas war in Gaza — that the country must return to the “Canadian tradition” of newcomers leaving “foreign conflicts behind” when they come here. 

Singh shot back that immigrants “care deeply about where they come from, and they should be able to do so. That’s a part of being in our country, to have that freedom.” He then accused Poilievre — a staunch Israel supporter — of “disgusting” treatment towards Palestinians, before turning to Carney to challenge him to recognize the “genocide” in Gaza. 

Carney responded that Canada must push for an immediate ceasefire, force Hamas to return hostages and resume humanitarian aid into the territory. 

At times, pressing questions, like what is the biggest security threat to Canada — got short shrift, forcing leaders to answer rapid-fire. Poilievre cited the “rampant crime wave that is still running out of control” and “illegal gun crime.” Carney said he deemed China represents the biggest security threat to the country, while Singh said cross-border traffic in guns and drugs, and what he claimed are “cuts” to public safety services. Blanchet said it is Canada’s and Quebec’s dependence on the U.S. to “protect us.”

In a section about leading in a crisis, the political opponents vied to say who was the staunchest defender of Ukraine, with Poilievre insisting his party does support Ukraine, and would bolster Canada’s Arctic defences against “Russian incursions into our waters.”

During an exchange on climate and energy policy, Poilievre said the Conservatives would approve natural gas projects on “national security grounds,” arguing exporting more of the fossil fuel would displace dirtier energy abroad and reduce greenhouse gas emissions globally. 

Carney, meanwhile, said he opposes government subsidies for the fossil fuel sector, and accused Poilievre of not having a climate plan. 

On leading in a crisis, Poilievre raised the need for government to match immigration levels to services and jobs, saying “this is crazy.”

“We have to get back to normal levels of immigration” Poilievre said, as Singh interrupted to accuse Poilievre of “blaming” immigrants for government failures.

“I do not blame immigrants. I blame the Liberal government, which brought this policy on,” said Poilievre.

Singh demanded of Carney, “whose side are you on,” leading Carney to underscore he has a long track record in public service, having left investment banking to join the finance department and then the Bank of Canada.

Challenged by Blanchet, Carney also defended his work at investment giant Brookfield touting the “largest infrastructure investor and developer in the world. It is one of the largest, if not the largest developer of renewable power in the world.”

In the end, the leaders did not appear before reporters to take further questions, after the debates commission said it could not ensure a proper environment for questioning the leaders. Commission director Michel Cormier refused to explain further, but the commission faced criticism for allowing Rebel News and a number of right-wing outlets to stack the microphones the night before.