In a pivotal moment for Canada’s political landscape, candidates vying to succeed Prime Minister Justin Trudeau as the leader of the Liberal Party have presented their visions during consecutive debates held in both English and French. The contenders include Mark Carney, former governor of the Bank of Canada and the Bank of England; Chrystia Freeland, the former finance minister; Karina Gould, the House government leader; and businessman Frank Baylis. The party’s members will cast their votes on March 9, determining who will lead the Liberals into the next general election, scheduled for no later than October 20 this year.
Key issues dominating the debates
The debates have been marked by a significant focus on how Canada should navigate its relationship with the United States, particularly in light of threats from President Donald Trump. Trump has announced intentions to impose a 25% tariff on Canadian exports, with energy facing a reduced 10% tariff. Such measures could have severe implications for the Canadian economy and drive up costs for American consumers.
Freeland, who has experience negotiating with the Trump administration, positioned herself as a seasoned defender of Canadian interests. She emphasized her successes in countering Trump’s previous tariffs. In contrast, Carney expressed concern over Trump’s evolving approach, stating, “He is more isolationist. He is more aggressive. In the past he wanted our markets. Now he wants our country.” Gould, the youngest candidate, proposed a comprehensive strategy to safeguard Canadian sovereignty, advocating for a diversified economic portfolio to reduce dependence on the US. Baylis stressed the importance of strengthening ties with like-minded countries such as the UK, New Zealand, and Australia.
Addressing economic challenges and political rivals
With Canada facing economic headwinds marked by a shrinking GDP and heightened living costs, the candidates have also outlined their plans for economic recovery. Carney has committed to a balanced operational budget within three years while supporting key Liberal initiatives like affordable childcare and dental care.
Freeland defended her previous fiscal policies and proposed leveraging the current wave of patriotism in response to Trump’s threats to bolster Canadian industries. Meanwhile, Baylis highlighted the need for increased productivity, and Gould cautioned against unrealistic budgetary goals that could necessitate harmful cuts, advocating instead for a modernized social safety net.
While debating among themselves, the candidates frequently united against Conservative Party leader Pierre Poilievre, who leads in the polls. Gould likened him to a domestic version of Trump, while Freeland underscored his attempts to emulate Trump’s populist style. Carney characterized Poilievre’s approach as “irresponsible,” raising concerns over the implications of his leadership.
As global tensions rise, particularly regarding the ongoing conflict in Ukraine, all candidates reaffirmed their commitment to supporting Ukraine and increasing Canada’s military spending to meet NATO commitments. Freeland proposed achieving the 2% target by 2027, while Baylis and Carney suggested a timeline extending to 2030, emphasizing the need for investment in Canadian military capabilities.
Finally, candidates addressed the contentious issue of the consumer carbon tax, a hallmark of Trudeau’s environmental policy that has faced public discontent. Both Carney and Freeland indicated a willingness to abandon the tax, with Carney proposing a focus instead on taxing large polluters. Freeland remarked, “Democracy is about listening to people, and Canadians were very clear with us that they did not think that policy worked for them.” Conversely, Gould and Baylis expressed support for retaining a modified version of the carbon tax, emphasizing the necessity of funding climate change initiatives.