The Current - Parties square off in the final leaders’ debate. What are the key takeaways?

Episode Date: April 18, 2025

With election day fast approaching and advance polls opening today, the race for leadership has reached a critical moment. Matt Galloway talks to CBC’s Rosemary Barton, the Toronto Star’s Ryan Tumilty and the Globe and Mail’s Stephanie Levitz — and unpacks how Liberal Mark Carney, Conservative Pierre Poilievre, the NDP's Jagmeet Singh and the Bloc’s Yves-François Blanchet fared in the campaign’s only English-language debate on Thursday night.

When they predict we'll fall, we rise to the challenge. When they say we're not a country, we stand on guard. This land taught us to be brave and caring, to protect our values, to leave no one behind. Canada is on the line, and it's time to vote as though our country depends on it, because like never before, it does. I'm Jonathan Pedneau, co-leader of the Green Party of Canada.

This election, each vote makes a difference. Authorized by the Registeredleader of the Green Party of Canada, this election, each vote makes a difference. Authorized by the Registered Agent of the Green Party of Canada. This is a CBC podcast. Hello, I'm Matt Galloway and this is the current podcast. Will you look to the camera in the eye and apologize to the many people who suffered as a result of the inflationary policies that you advised Justin Trudeau to implement.

Mr. Carney, you are becoming a real Canadian leader, saying one thing in French and another one in English. As Prime Minister, one of the first things you did was a tax cut that helped out mostly millionaires, and you have a plan to cut services for people. My question to you is, Mr. Carney, whose side are you really on? Mr. Poliev, you spent years running against Justin Trudeau and the carbon tax and neither they're both gone. Have you made up your mind yet? Election Day is

rapidly approaching. The advance polls open today and it has been a big week for the various campaigns. Last night saw Liberal leader Mark Carney, Conservative leader Pierre Poliev, NDP leader Jagmeet Singh and Bloc Québécois leader Yves-François Blanchet go head to head in the English language debate right on the heels of the French debate on Wednesday. Here to chop it all up is the Current's National Affairs Panel, Rosemary Barton, the CBC's Chief Political Correspondent and the host of Rosemary Barton Live, Stephanie Levitz, Senior Reporter with the Globe and Mail's Ottawa Bureau, and Ryan Tomolte, a political reporter at the Toronto Star. Good morning, everyone.

Good morning. Broadly, we'll get into the specifics, but broadly in a word or two, Stephanie, will what we saw over the last couple of nights move the needle? Maybe. And the reason I say maybe is that these debates, you saw each leader really try to reinforce their messaging with voters and with advanced polls starting today, the idea of course is to lock in support, to take those soft voters and convince them

that they better show up at the polls. And so it is possible that if you were thinking about a particular candidate, what you saw might have said, yeah, okay, that's my guy and I'm gonna go vote for him. Rosie, what about a particular candidate, what you saw might have said, yeah, okay, that's my guy and I'm going to go vote for him. Rosie, what about for you? Is your sense, and we'll get into the specifics as I say, but is your sense that what we saw over the last couple of nights will change the narrative that has been unfolding thus far?

I don't think it will change it dramatically. I think one thing remains very clear that this is really a race between Mark Carney and Pierre Poilé, that that's fundamentally the two people that Canadians are looking at. And I would agree with Steph that this is really a race between Mark Carney and Pierre Poilé. That's fundamentally the two people that Canadians are looking at. And I would agree with Steph that this isn't going to change people's perspective, but it might sort of lock it in. If you watch those two debates, you probably weren't suddenly enamored with Mark Carney or Pierre Poilé, but you might now feel cemented in your decision that this is the right person for you. But let's see, you know, a long weekend, lots of things can change, and so I don't want

to jump to conclusions for Canadians at this stage. Well, and that's it, Ryan. It's a long weekend, and people will have an opportunity in the midst of discussing everything else that's going on in the world to perhaps talk about politics as well. Do you think what happened over the last couple of nights will change any minds? My guess is no, but I'm going to wait for the opinion polls to see what they tell us. What I saw on the debate stage over both nights was party leaders not really trying to broaden their appeal.

They weren't trying to get people who aren't already in their camp. And I think that's going to show up. And the biggest camp right now is still the liberals. And I'm not sure anyone tried to broaden their tent really. Rosie, let's talk about Mark Carney first. What was his assignment over these last couple of nights and how did he do? I think his assignment for both nights was the same. It was to not screw up and to not pretend to be someone different. And by that I mean to not pretend to be a politician, which he is, but reluctantly maybe, and to not be flustered when people went after him.

I think that was for me the moment yesterday where he was the target of everyone, even when it came to the leaders choice round when everyone could choose a question for Mark Carney. He joked he was gonna ask himself a question. Yeah, and even there he could have, he could have lost his cool a bit and he did not. And I think that was an important thing.

The French debate was very high stakes for him because as you know, a majority government for the liberals runs through Quebec, so he needed to make sure he didn't lose any support. He did just fine. He didn't knock the socks off anyone, I don't think, but he also didn't make a mistake. And so, most people in in the liberal war room were quite happy with his performance there saying that he held his own. I don't think he did anything dramatically to change things one way or another. I think in many ways that is sort of who Mark Carney is. He's not a dramatic person who's going to shake everything up.

He might in terms of what he wants to do with the economy and things, but on a debate stage, that's not where you're going to get it from. Steve, from your perspective, what was Mark Carney's brief and how did he do on that? One of the things we heard in that clip at the beginning was he was being attacked over the legacy of Justin Trudeau. And he said to Pierre Poliev, you ran against the carbon tax and Justin Trudeau and both of them are gone. Yeah. And part of that, the main attack for sure coming from the other three was that this

is, to borrow a phrase from Pierre Poliev, Mr. Carney is just like Justin. I'm not sure Mr. Carney did enough to divorce himself from that perception. When he's attacked by Trudeau, excuse me, when he's attacked by Poliev or Blanchet or Singh, I'm not Justin, I'm not Justin. I'm not sure that's enough for people, especially when you see his competitors sort of litigating some of those things. There was a line from Mr. Poliev, you even have Justin Trudeau staffers backstage writing your talking points. And he scoffed at that, Mr. Carney, I write my own talking points, thank you very much, was

his response. But is that enough? Are the policies that different? And I say the thing about policies because as we've discussed, you know, over the course of this election, the policy window between Mr. Carney and Mr. Palyev isn't enormous. There's not a ton of massive difference there. And a number of times in the debate, you would hear them agree on things. And so if there's no differentiation on policy, where's the demarcator for people? Is it, well, Mr. Carney is in fact just like Justin, or is it, hey, I actually don't mind the liberals. Like, it's hard to see how he distinguishes himself,

except for on demeanor vibe, to use a word, which I know people find dismissive about this election, but sort of his energy, his comportment. Did he get that across? He certainly didn't lose his temper as he's done in the past. So maybe that's a win for him. Brian, what were you looking for from Mark Carney? You know, I think we were looking for more of who Mark Carney is as a politician. I mean,

this person is still such an unknown. It's wild to think that three months ago, you know, he was not a politician at all, and suddenly he's prime minister. But I think his brief was, as Rosie said, it was do no harm. It was don't screw up, don't give anybody a reason to change their mind. Because right now, if everyone keeps thinking the way they are, the liberals are headed

for a majority government. So don't make a mistake with his brief, and I think he lived up to that. So what about Pierre Poliev, Ryan? If you said that he wasn't really trying to broaden the tent, what was he trying to do then? What did he need to do? You know, I saw a few moments last night where it felt like he was really trying to reinforce things. There were, you know, he talked about C-69, what the conservatives call the No More Pipelines bill.

It's an environmental assessment piece of legislation. It is controversial in the energy industry, but I'm not sure anyone who knows what that bill is, is voting for anybody other than the conservatives. We did hear a few moments, I think, where maybe Mr. Poliev was trying to reach out a little further. He was softer on his defund the CBC language, for example, talked about the CBC continuing on as a not-for-profit organization with no government funding. But mostly, he kept coming back to issues of crime,

he kept back to attacks on Justin Trudeau. Those are all the sort of attacks that he was making six months ago. It's remarkable how much when you see a conservative event, when you see a Pierre Poliev media availability, he's using lines that he was using a year ago, or two years ago, and you know, the world has shifted in those two years.

Rosie, let me ask you about the crime issue. This is something that Pierre Poliev has been talking about, well throughout the campaign, but certainly in the last couple of weeks and days, certainly. Have a listen to this from last night. I want to uphold the Charter Rights of Canadians under Section 7 to life, liberty, and security of the person. Right now, that right is violated by multiple murderers who are given discounts.

And I will use the constitutional powers that are created for this purpose to ensure that mass murderers stay in maximum security penitentiary for life. They will only come out in a box. Rosie, this is around the issue of using the notwithstanding clause to look at, in his words, keeping people who have been accused and convicted of extraordinary

crimes in prison forever. Who is he trying to appeal to? Who is Pierre Poliev trying to appeal to in that approach? Yeah. I mean, that again sort of speaks to what Ryan is saying. He's appealing to the people who already like him very much. You know, the crime is an important issue for a large part of the population, particularly in cities and suburbs. There are also immigrant communities where this is an ongoing concern and those are sort of the people that Pierre Poiliev is speaking to. Conservative struggle to do well in urban settings so it speaks to those people as well. But again, I don't think that that dramatically

broadens the tent for Mr. Poiliev. It was a very strong defense. I actually thought that was one of his best moments in the campaign when he was explaining his position there. Mark Carney's rebuttal to that is, you know, that's a slippery slope. If you're willing to suspend the charter rights of some people, where does it go next? I mean, that's a classic sort of liberal defense there too, but I don't know that if you're concerned about crime, that you weren't going to vote for Pierre Poiliev anyway. And I think that that, as Ryan pointed out, was sort of his issue over the past two days.

I would also say just in terms of his humanity, his softness, he did a good job at being that person on stage over the two nights. The problem is that's not who Mr. Poliev has been for the past two years. And I think a lot of people already have in their minds a view of who he is and a couple of nights of smiling at the camera and even being quite friendly with Mr. Carney in the post debate. I don't think it's going to markedly change things for people in terms of their impression of him. Steph, you wanna pick up on that?

It's an interesting contrast in styles because Pierre Poliev was speaking directly to the camera and many times, not looking at the people he was debating, looking at the audience through that camera. And to Rosie's point, everybody was watching, or a lot of people were watching to see what the tone would be of Pierre Poliev. What did you make of that? Yeah, it was interesting, right?

You had Pierre Poliev and also NDP leader Jagmeet Singh doing versions of the same argument, right? Speaking directly to people, I am here for you. I will fight for you. In contrast to the narrative that they're both trying to pin on Mr. Carney, that he's not in it for the people, he's in it for his corporate colleagues and whatever else, one of their attack lines.

For Mr. Poliev, it was really interesting right at the end when they were asked that question about what they regretted about the campaign, and the men all talked about not having enough time to talk to people. Mr. Poliev got quite emotional, and I think that's relevant because one of the things with Mr. Poliev

is when he was running for leadership, and he would do these big rallies, and he would stand, he alluded to this last night, and meet people and talk to them. That interaction, that interplay, people talking to him about what was going on in their personal lives, how much they were struggling, that affected him. We don't necessarily see that play out in his attack dog persona, but I was struck by wondering if he lost that energy over the last two years that thing that that brought him to leadership That that contact point with regular people was subsumed by his job as leader of the official opposition

And on this campaign he hasn't none of the leaders really have done a lot of you know grass Grassroots granular campaigning where they're talking to people whether Whether it works for Mr. Poliab, whether the clips circulate on the internet enough to reach people. I don't know for example, you know, he had some lines where he was talking to young people about their struggles to afford a home and a life. That's definitely a big issue in this election were those people watching this debate. Stef, what about Jogmeet Singh? He had a role in some ways as an agitator to try and mix things up, but he had to do that because,

and we saw this over the last couple of debates, he needs to put himself in the frame. If this is really a two-horse race, he has been left behind. How did he do in that regard? Yeah, and for him, pretty successfully, right? In the sense that he was stepping over other people's clips, he was really challenging Pierre Poliev and really more strongly, I would say, than Mr. Carney or Mr. Blanchet. Is there a danger in that, that he drives some of his supporters, if he's attacking Pierre Poliev and saying, you know, if Mr. Poliev were to become prime minister,

these are the things that he would do, does he drive some of the people who might otherwise go back to the NDP over to the Liberals again? You want us to wonder what Jagmeet Singh is just really trying to do is just attack Pierre Poliev because he's so frustrated by him, right? That it's not a political strategic move and he doesn't consider the political strategic downside. It's just he's not having any of what he perceives as Mr. Poliev's nonsense and doesn't have any patience for it and he has, you know, evidence no patience for

it for a very long time. Perhaps the challenge though, it's an inverse I guess, or a parallel to Mr. Poliev's own, are you converting voters or are you already speaking to people who are already voting for you anyway? And there is a pocket of the population who is cemented behind Jagmeet Singh, it's not a big number. He's believing support to the liberals. So if you're, why you're wasting time attacking Mr. Poliev and what you need are liberal voters to come back to you? I'm not sure about that. When they predict we'll fall, we rise to the challenge. When they say we're not a country, we stand on guard. This land taught us to be brave and caring, to protect our values, to leave no one behind. Canada is on the line and it's

time to vote as though our country depends on it because like never before it does I'm Jonathan Pedneau, co-leader of the Green Party of Canada. This election, each vote makes a difference. Authorized by the registered agent of the Green Party of Canada. Have you ever finished a book and just needed to talk about it immediately or wanted to know the wildest research an author has done for a book or even what booktalk books are actually worth your time Hi, I'm Morgan book. Yes, that is actually my last name And this is off the shelf my new podcast that covers everything related to books each Thursday I chat with other bookworms and authors or sometimes it's just me rambling about my latest book obsession from book to screen updates to hot

Takes on new releases and of course our monthly book club discussions. I've got you covered So get your TBR list ready and listen to Off the Shelf wherever you get your podcasts. This election, we haven't talked about Donald Trump yet, but again, I mean, he wasn't on the stage, but he was on the stage in many ways. And it was interesting over the couple of debates, the organizers worked to deliberately turn the spotlight on other issues and yes, talk about Donald Trump but also talk about other things. Mark Carney in particular would like this election to be about what's happening with our relationship to the United States and he spoke to that. Have a listen. We are facing the biggest crisis of our lifetimes. Donald Trump is trying

to fundamentally change the world economy, the trading system, but really what he's trying to do to Canada, he's trying to break us so the U.S. can own us. They want our land, they want our resources, they want our water, they want our country. We're all going to stand up against Donald Trump. I'm ready. Ryan, how did Mark Carney do in speaking to the issue of Donald Trump and again, the issue that has changed and scrambled the math of this election. I think he did well just in the sense

that he kept bringing things back to Donald Trump, right? Even in some of the other discussions that were about other issues, Mr. Carney managed to bring the conversation back to the thread of Donald Trump a few times. And if you look at public opinion polling, when Canadians are asked who they trust to take on Donald Trump, it's Mark Carney and it's not particularly close.

For Mark Carney, a win is talking about that issue and making Canadians think about it again. I think he did particularly well there and I think he comes across as someone who is prepared to take on these sorts of issues. He was able to talk about his record at the Bank of England. I think the parallels between what Donald Trump is doing to the global economy and what Brexit did to the British economy are pretty strong. So he's making a case that he's been here before and clearly, you know, that case is resonating.

Rosie, did any one of the leaders stand out more than the others on this existential, what people have called an existential threat to Canada? Yeah, I think Mr. Kearney did for sure. He has clearly thought about this in a deep way and believes that the campaign and the results of the election are really, to borrow one of his words, the catalyzer for Canada changing in a dramatic way. And I think that he made that case well last night. But I also think you're right, Matt, that I think what was instructive about the debates was that it wasn't just about that.

Was that it talked about affordability, it talked about housing, it talked about immigration and climate change and pipelines. And I think all those issues are important to lots of Canadians, particularly depending on where you live. So if you were not sure that there was enough conversation happening about some of those things, I do think that you got that from the debates over the past couple of days, debates that were well moderated and substantive. But if your issue is still Donald Trump, I don't think that anyone there other than

Mr. Carney really put on the table what the response to him is. I would just say there's what, 10 days or so to go. If Mr. Trump does something else, if president Trump does something else, then that will help Mr. Carney solidify that argument and capture that part of people's attention again. Can I just ask you, Rosie, about something that happened after the debate? Usually the leaders take questions from reporters after the debate. That was canceled last night over security concerns.

What happened? Yeah, there were half a dozen or so, I'm going to call them right wing activists, purporting to be journalists who were accredited by the Debates Commission and were inside the media room. A handful of those journalists, a couple of those journalists confronted other journalists. I'm calling them journalists again. They're activists. In fact, some of them are registered third party political operatives. They confronted a number of journalists. I was one of them and made things very, very awkward to the point where the commission decided it

was also not safe to engage in scrums with the leaders given how things were going to unfold and how they unfolded after the French debate, which was these activists sort of hijacking an opportunity to ask leaders questions. So that got cancelled. The commission came out and tried to explain why. I think that there will be questions for the commission going forward about decisions they made, not only around accrediting these people, but also around moving the time of it, leaving the Green Party out. This is the third debate the commission has organized.

I was part of two others others and not one of them has gone off without a hitch. They have all had problems. The saving grace perhaps for the debates this time around was that the debates themselves were good, but all the noise around it was not. And if the Commission's goal is to help Canadians decide and promote democracy, they are often getting in their own way. And I think that will have to be examined. Steph, just briefly, do you want to have a word on this? I mean, the fact that questions to the leaders could not unfold because of security concerns

in this country, I think, is alarming to many people. It is. And I guess there's a great question to be asked and a debate to be had about what were those security concerns and what's the issue? Is the issue the content of the questions? Is the issue the comportment of the people who say they are journalists? Is it this argument that we keep having, especially in this modern digital era, about what is journalism? What is activism? What is appropriate? And who gets to adjudicate that at the end of the day? I'll be interested to hear if at all the leaders react to that issue and what their viewpoint would be. This Debates

Commission is, you know, it's an arm's-length body. It's set up by a cabinet announcement. What they do going forward, and I think Rosie's point is well stated, all of the noise around it is distracting, but ultimately the debates themselves were good. And so so what's the problem then? Is it, I don't know, is it organizational? Is it ideological or institutional? I don't know how we solve for that, other than maybe getting to agree

that debates can be good. They are healthy and they are an important part of democracy, so how do we keep that part of it going? We just have 90 seconds left. The advance polls open today. Ryan, what is one thing that you're going to be looking for in the home stretch? We're looking for organization.

This is where whatever the parties have been working on on the ground really comes into play. Can they get those voters out? Liberal voters seem to outnumber conservative voters right now in opinion polls, but in terms of commitment, conservative voters are much more eager to get to the polls. So, can the liberals make up that difference? Can they knock on enough doors? Can they call enough people? Can they offer enough rides? Can they get those people to the polls and

actually get this done? Steve, one thing you're looking for briefly? I continue to look for the platform. As I was at the beginning of the week when we talk. Where are they? How are these guys going to pay for everything? What is in those documents that we haven't heard about for the last four weeks? And I'm not suggesting there is necessarily anything new in there, but I think it's remarkable

as the candidates were accused of doing, being irresponsible in the last 10 days of the election and we have no idea how you're actually going to govern. Rosie, 30 seconds to you. One thing that you're looking for in this home stretch. Where the leaders go. Where the leaders go over the next 10 days will show you where the battlegrounds are and where they're trying to shore up support. That will give you a clue as to whether they think they will win or not and whether they

think they'll form a majority or minority government. It's a long weekend for many people in this country. My guess is it will not be for any of you. So I appreciate you taking time to talk to us this morning. We're going to bring the band back together one more time next week as we get set for the vote. In the meantime, thank you very much for this morning. Thanks guys. Thank you. Rosemary Barton, CBC's chief political correspondent. Ryan Tomalty, political reporter at the Toronto Star. Stephanie Levitt, senior reporter at the Toronto Star.

Stephanie Levitt, senior reporter with the Globe and Mail's Ottawa Bureau. The advance polls open today. Our election road trip continues next week. I'm going to make my final stop in beautiful Halifax, Nova Scotia. For more CBC podcasts, go to cbc.ca slash podcasts.