A sample ballot box is seen ahead of the 2019 federal election at Elections Canada's offices in Gatineau, Que., on Sept. 20, 2019.Justin Tang/The Canadian Press
Heading into the third week of the federal election campaign, a single narrative is hogging the spotlight: the one that says the only issue that matters is the tariff and annexation threat posed by Donald Trump, and that the only decision voters need to make is, which party leader is best suited to deal with the U.S. President?
It’s a powerful narrative but also a problematic one, because it is preventing a broader debate on the issues facing Canada.
Polling to date shows that this so-called “ballot question” is at the root of a voting-intention gap between the Liberals and the Conservatives, and of a collapse of the vote for the NDP, the Bloc Québécois and the Green Party. The polls also have Liberal Leader Mark Carney in the lead when Canadians are asked who they think can best handle Mr. Trump.
This has allowed Mr. Carney to campaign from behind a semi-opaque silkscreen of Mr. Trump’s face that diffuses his appeal across a wide swath of voters, but also lets him remain vague about which side of centre he would govern from if elected.
Plus, this unusual campaign has meant that Mr. Carney has put on his prime minister’s hat to respond to the Mr. Trump’s threats, and to enact policies and retaliatory tariffs, and then returned to the campaign as just another candidate.
This only reinforces the single-issue narrative, and that’s a disadvantage for Canadian voters. There could be a lot of buyer’s remorse among those who strategically cast their lot with the Liberals, only to discover afterward that important issues they care about are not on the agenda of a government they felt such an urgent need to vote for.
Which is why it’s good that there is still time in this campaign for the Trump narrative to dissipate enough that Mr. Carney has to come out from behind his protective screen.
So far, he has campaigned more like an old-school Red Tory than a blue-blooded Liberal, never mind a Trudeau-era progressive. He has “axed the tax,” a.k.a. reduced the carbon fuel charge to zero, and says he will legislate it out of existence if elected. He has killed Justin Trudeau’s controversial hike in the capital-gains tax inclusion rate and has proposed cuts to personal income tax. He has also said he is skeptical about the need for a deadline-driven emissions cap for the oil and gas sector, and he talks vaguely about making Canada a carbon fuel superpower.
On the other (left) hand, during the Liberal leadership campaign he proposed a second industrial carbon tax designed to subsidize consumers’ green expenditures. And he has since pledged that his government will not only leave the CBC untouched, but that he will also increase its funding, a counterpoint to Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre’s vow to defund the English version of the national broadcaster.
Mr. Carney also says he will make government more efficient and less costly with the help of artificial intelligence and machine learning, about as vague a promise by a politician to cut spending as has ever been made. And he vows that he would “focus on ensuring that each government capital-investment dollar catalyzes multiples of private investment.”
Okay.
So what would Mr. Carney do if elected? Would he support a trans-Canadian gas and oil pipeline, or would he raise the cost of pollution? Would he reduce other spending to pay for his tax cuts? What would he sacrifice to get Canada’s defence spending to 2 per cent of GDP, as he promises to do by 2030? Would his catalytic conversions actually work? Will housing get built? Will the immigration system be fixed?
These questions aren’t getting asked enough by a public focused on Mr. Trump’s rhetoric and actions. But here’s the thing: Mr. Trump’s great “Liberation Day” has come and gone, and Canada is still standing.
Canadian voters now have the breathing room to think beyond the single issue that has dominated the campaign to date, and to start to ask broader questions. There are also two debates coming up that will force Mr. Carney and Mr. Poilievre to demonstrate their political chops.
We have said from the start that the most important question in the election campaign is not who can manage the unmanageable, but who has the boldest ideas for making Canada more productive, more investment-friendly, more resilient and less dependent on the United States.
It’s time to ask those questions and get those answers. This election is not over. Far from it.