KINSELLA: Poilievre shines in French-language debate, but fails to take needed ground

Article content

The French-language debate: Brian Lilley and I watched so you didn’t have to.

Some of my Kinsellian debate rules: People don’t watch debates to have their minds changed — they watch to have their choice ratified. By that standard, Mark Carney did what he had to do. He went into the debate ahead of the others, and that is unlikely to change after the French debate.

Another rule: TV is about pictures, not words.  Carney occasionally looked a bit furtive and off-balance — while Pierre Poilievre looked the most at ease. Poilievre looked, dare we say it, Prime Ministerial.

A third Kinsellian rule: Voters in their living rooms are the audience — not the moderator or the other leaders. Poilievre did best on that score, and he addressed the camera most often. He wasn’t as angry as he is so often in the House of Commons, too. He was calm but assertive.

My take on each contestant:

— Jagmeet Singh: He probably spoke more than anyone else — to what effect? Over and over, too, the NDP leader attacked Poilievre. Over and over, many of us asked: Why? Why hammer the Conservative leader, when Mark Carney is (for now) the Prime Minister? It was a bizarre, self-defeating strategy.  But so, too, is the NDP in Election 2025: Watching Singh, one got the sense that he knew that he, and his party, are in big, big trouble.

Presently, Singh is on track to lose his B.C. seat — and his party could lose party status in the House of Commons.  As such, he needed to do better in Wednesday night’s debate — and he simply didn’t. He is unlikely to be missed by many Quebecois.

Recommended video

We apologize, but this video has failed to load.

Try refreshing your browser, or
tap here to see other videos from our team.

Play Video

— Yves-Francois Blanchet: The Bloc leader is probably unknown to millions of Canadians, and millions of Canadians should be immensely grateful for that. If you look up the word “arrogant,” you’ll see this guy’s graduation photo.  He was pompous, wordy and ineffective.

You could tell he thought he would dominate the debate, simply because he was the Quebec-born guy.  But, truly, Poilievre was a better performer than Blanchet.

— Poilievre: His French was excellent.  He spoke to camera, not the moderator.  He used his hands.  He smiled — when appropriate. His answers contained detail. Will it change the trajectory of the election? No. His performance will probably result in him picking up a few more seats in Quebec — but it won’t be enough to eliminate the lead that Carney presently has in la belle province.

Poilievre showed guts by talking about pipelines, several times, in front of a Quebec audience — where the preference is always hydro power, not oil. He was detailed and knowledgable and offered specifics.  But, again, it won’t be enough to topple Carney in Quebec. President Donald Trump’s threats against Canada were the focus of the first segment in the French debate — and, on that critical issue, Poilievre has been found wanting by Quebeckers. They, like many other Canadians, see him as Trumpy.

On balance, the Tory leader was the best performer of the night.  But again, it is unlikely to move the needle enough.  Carney’s lead, measured in every poll, is real and daunting.

— Carney: He entered the debate with the lowest expectations — during the Liberal leadership race, and during the Grits’ single French-language debate, he often stumbled when speaking Canada’s other official language.  In Wednesday night’s debate, Carney’s French was adequate, and possibly even improved.

More important than his linguistic skills, to Quebeckers, is an understanding of their unique culture and position within Confederation. By that standard, Carney did well, talking about French culture before even the Bloc leader did. It will be welcome in Quebec.

There were moments when Carney stumbled, however. Singh has effectively (and shamefully) become an apologist for Islamic extremism in the 2025 race, and he challenged Carney to accuse the Jewish state of mass murder — “genocide.” Carney, bizarrely, said he wouldn’t “use that word in a political way?” Um, what?

Equally, when asked about UNWRA — some of whose members participated in the atrocities of Oct. 7, 2023 — Carney said he would continue to provide the disgraced United Nations agency with millions in Canadian taxpayer dollars. It was a shameful answer.

But Carney, otherwise, did not have any major stumbles or fatal errors. When his three opponents were scrapping it out, he looked relieved.  His objective was to get through the French debate without falling on his face.  He didn’t. He survived.

At the end of the French-language debate, who won? Likely Poilievre.

But the Conservative leader needed Carney to fall apart in Wednesday night’s crucial encounter.

He didn’t.