The Current - Were francophone voters wooed by leaders in French debate?

Episode Date: April 17, 2025

Radio-Canada parliamentary reporter Laurence Martin breaks down what was said at the French federal election debate Wednesday night, where Liberal Mark Carney, Conservative Pierre Poilievre, the NDP's Jagmeet Singh and Bloc Québécois’s Yves-François Blanchet fought it out for francophone votes.

Just weeks after 9-11, letters containing anthrax were sent all over America, and it would go down as the deadliest biological attack in U.S. history. I'm Kathleen Goltar, and this week on Crime Story, I speak with Jeremiah Kroll about a long-forgotten story that's had a lasting impact on American life. Find Crime Story wherever you get your podcasts. This is a CBC podcast. Hello, I'm Matt Galloway, and this is the current podcast. Doesn't it embarrass you to ask Canadians

for a fourth term of office after the worst liberal record? I've just become leader. You say that you're an expert in managing a crisis, but perhaps negotiating with tax havens. But when it comes to trade agreements, I haven't seen the proof. I've been prime minister for one month and in that month we have an agreement with the provinces, we have an agreement with Australia, we have an agreement with France, we have an agreement with the United Kingdom. During this debate I have tried to bring up health a few times, Mr. Roy had cut me off a number of times. Look at my time on the clock. Despite the Green Party getting dropped at the last minute

and a time change to accommodate the final regular season game of the Montreal Canadiens, the French language debate stayed true to expectations. Liberal leader Mark Carney and conservative leader Pierre Polly have fought to prove their credentials to francophone voters of the Montreal Canadians, the French language debate stayed true to expectations. Liberal leader, Mark Carney and conservative leader, Pierre Pauliev fought to prove their credentials to francophone voters with the NDP's Jagmeet Singh and Bloc Québécois leader, Yves François Blanchet, far behind in the polls, both trying to get back into this race.

Laurence Martin is a parliamentary reporter with RADU Canada. She was at the debate. She's in our Montreal studio. Laurence, good morning. Good morning, Matt. We'll get into the specifics, but broadly, do you think this debate moved the needle for voters in Quebec? with RADJA Canada. She was at the debate. She's in our Montreal studio. L'Onel, good morning. Good morning, Matt. Well, get into the specifics, but broadly, do you think this debate moved the needle

for voters in Quebec? Probably not. I don't think there was a lot of confrontation. I think it was a bit of a boring debate in the end, so I don't think it moved the debate a lot for voters in Quebec. I think we can talk about different leaders, but I think Mark Carney, for instance, you know, he didn't give an outstanding performance, but because there was no catastrophe, I think he accomplished what he needed to do. So no, I don't think it will change the needle much. No. Talk a bit about Carney. I mean, there's been a lot of attention on his French. Yes.

You know, we were just in Quebec and people said, it's fine. Yes. And his French is good enough to negotiate with Donald Trump, as somebody said to us. Is a catastrophe the thing that he needed to avoid? Completely. I think that's exactly what his team wanted. And I think last night his French was slow sometimes, but overall we were able to understand him. I think he actually did better than he did on other shows or other interviews where we've seen him in the beginning of the campaign. So there was maybe a bit of improvement.

When he was attacked by Pierre Poilieff several times, Mr. Poilieff said, for instance, you advised Justin Trudeau, you were his economic advisor, basically trying to tie Mr. Carney to the former prime minister. I think Mark Carney said at some point, you're not Justin Trudeau and I'm not either. So I thought that was a pretty efficient rebuttal. There were other efficient ones. He said, I just got here. Here's what I accomplished in a month as a prime minister.

I met the provincial premiers. I went to France, to the UK. So I think Mr. Carney was able to defend himself when he was attacked on that front. And same thing with Mr. Blanchet. At some point, Mr. Blanchet said to Mr. Carney, when it's time to negotiate with the US, you care more about protecting Ontario industries like the auto industry, but not aluminum, which is really important in Quebec. And Carney said, you're wrong, your data is wrong,

and kind of left it at that, which to me is very, is kind of what Mr. Carney does, does often, you know, basically saying to voters, I know what's what, you know, trust me, I can be a good prime minister. There's a column in one of the French papers this morning that says that Mark Carney is like a comfortable pair of slippers, the older boring man that the heroine chooses in a French telleromane. I don't know that that's a compliment or not, but it's certainly, it's quite something. That's really interesting because the comment that I hear a lot in Quebec is he's a bon monsieur, like, you know, a good old man. And I think for some Quebec voters that that's what they want.

I mean, we've talked about this before, but some voters are really scared of Donald Trump and they're looking for the good, you know, someone who will be able to negotiate with him. What about Pierre Poliev? I mean, one of our colleagues at Regio Canada said in some ways he was in seduction mode trying to charm voters in Quebec. How did that go? I was surprised by him because he didn't do poorly. I don't think he did extremely well either

I was surprised by his tone because I thought I know he wanted to look more like a prime minister and less like a leader of the opposition last night and Certainly he did that You know, I I think there's a sense I think he was told by his advisors, you know, you're in Quebec, voters like to have an emotional connection with their political leaders. If you sound too much like an attack dog, it doesn't necessarily land. The problem is that Mr. Ploiev is behind in the polls and there's only one and a half week left and he wasn't really able to kind of knock out Mr. Crinylight last night and

maybe he needed to accomplish that. So, I thought overall he was able to express his ideas well, what he wanted to say. He had actually really interesting exchange with Mr. Blanchet on pipelines, basically arguing that Quebecers are actually perhaps more open to pipelines than Mr. Blanchet says. Is that true? I mean, when we were in Quebec City, at the very least, and speaking with people, there was certainly a mixed opinion, I'll put it that way. Yeah, I think there's a mixed opinion. And right now, it's a bit of a, it's a weird time because of Donald Trump and people might be in theory open to a project, but when it's time to actually see, okay, where would the pipeline go? And, you know, if people

learn that it will be close to where they live, maybe there will be less openness. So I think it's fair to say that the population is probably quite divided in Quebec around a potential project like that, yes. That issue of consent was really interesting. There were other issues that got sticky. One was around the issue of immigration, top of mind for many people in Quebec. Who fared best, do you think, in that exchange?

I think on that one, I think Mr. Blanchard probably scored a few points, but- And he needed to get those points. The Bloc is collapsing in Quebec. The Bloc is really collapsing, but I think in the end, because there was no big disagreement with Mr Carney on this issue, because basically Mr Carney recognized that during the Trudeau year perhaps we welcomed too many immigrants in Canada and it was good that we lowered the levels for the next few years. So I don't think there was a big disagreement. So I don't think Mr. Blanchet really score points on this one.

I think on one issue, Mr. Blanchet was good when he criticized the liberal leader for the carbon tax rebate because Quebec is not getting it. And Blanchet said it's a bit unfair because, you know, the last rebate, it doesn't compensate any tax that consumers in the rest of Canada have paid because basically the liberals cut the tax, but they kept one extra rebate. So Mr. Blanchet was like, why aren't Quebecers getting that, that, um, rebate as well? But is that the kind of attack line that really gets you voters back in your tent?

I'm not sure. Donald Trump looms over this, but it was interesting in that there was more discussion of policy, it seemed like in the debate than there has been in the election campaign thus far. It wasn't just about Donald Trump, right? No, it wasn't. And actually the first question of the debate by the moderator, Patrice Roy, was actually what would you do?

Let's not talk about Donald Trump for one second. Let's talk about other issues. What are your priorities? And Mr. Carney, for instance, talked about culture. Mr. Paulyev talked about the economy. Mr. Singh talked about healthcare, which is an issue that the party really wanted to bring forward. We'll come back to that in a minute.

Yeah. So it was not dominated by Donald Trump. Now, obviously the liberals like when we talk about Donald Trump in a debate like this because they know that this is their main selling point to voters. But again, because Mr. Carney overall kind of met the expectations, I think that he probably is the winner of that debate. The healthcare issue is interesting because it wasn't necessarily on the docket in terms of things that were going to be discussed, but to your point, Jagmeet Singh wanted to discuss this

and got into this tangle with the moderator, Patrice Wah saying that he wasn't getting enough time, that he wasn't getting the opportunity to talk about this when he was going on about it. Patrice Wa cut his microphone off, or had his microphone cut off. What did you make of that? What kind of impression do you think that left? I'm not sure that attacking a host or a moderator is always the best strategy. I think sometimes it can look a bit not really elegant.

That's my take. But I was also trying to figure out, you know, why Mr. Singh is insisting so much on healthcare because this is a provincial jurisdiction and jurisdictions matter when you're talking to Quebec voters, you know. In a way, this is an issue that matters more on the provincial political landscape than on the federal one. So I thought it was interesting that Mr. Singh really wanted to talk about healthcare. I know his team said that this is what he wanted to accomplish. Yeah, I'm not sure he scored points on this one.

The other thing that I thought was really interesting with Mr. Singh is that how he attacked more Pierre Poilier than Mark Carney. For instance, on UNRWA, you know, he basically, Pierre Poilier said that he wanted to cut funding, Canadian funding to UNRWA. This was in the conversation around foreign aid. Yeah, exactly. You know, he basically, Pierre Poiliev said that he wanted to cut Canadian funding to unroll. This is in the conversation around foreign aid. Yeah, exactly. And then Mr. Singh said that what he was proposing was disgusting.

And I was trying to figure out why is Mr. Singh attacking Pierre Poiliev more than Mr. Kearney? And I was texting NDP sources last night saying, hey, what's the strategy behind this? And one source said to me, well, we needed to show Canadians that we're fighting for what they were scared of. And some Canadians are scared of Pierre Poilier. And maybe if we're fighting more efficiently against Pierre Poilier, maybe we can draw a contrast with Mr. Carney.

I'm not sure it worked. It's a bit of a mixed bag for the NDP, because if they're losing votes to the liberals, if their voters are more concerned about a peer poly of government that Justin, that Jagmeet Singh is articulating, would they not then just move more to the liberals? Yeah, exactly. And aren't they just doing the job basically for the liberals for Mr. Carney

because he wasn't really on an attack mode last night. He was more defending his policies and what he wanted to say. But yeah, I'm not sure it worked. I'm not sure it was really efficient. The debate was moved earlier to accommodate the Montreal Canadiens last regular season game. The Habs won four to two, they're into the playoffs. Do you think that will make a bigger impression

in the province than this debate? With just, to your point, a week and a half left in the campaign. Sorry, you're saying like is it going to help the debate? More people pay attention to the game than the debate in some ways. I'm sure they did. I'm sure hockey won over politics yet again. But you know, in the end, this is a debate, this was the only French debate because Mr. Criny declined to participate in the the normally there are two debates in French

there's one in TVR and then one by the debate Commission and That radio Canada produced last night. Mr. Carney declined to take part in the TVR debate officially It's because the Greens were not participating in it But they weren't there last night either. They weren't exactly but exactly. But I think in the end it was mostly because they felt that Mr. Carney's French was perhaps better to just do one. So I think overall most people watched the hockey game than the debate, but people will read newspapers in the morning, analysis. And I think, to go back to my earlier point, I don't think this is a debate that moved a needle that much, no.

Laurence, really appreciate you watching the debate for us and making your way through some of the things that people said last night. Appreciate it. You're welcome. Laurence Martin is a parliamentary reporter with Radio Canada.