Leaders’ debate highlights: Organizers cancel postdebate scrums after Rebel News scuffle

Open this photo in gallery:

9:37 p.m.

– Adam Radwanski

I thought the format and moderation were pretty good. And if you were already planning to vote for any of the parties represented on stage, their leaders gave you some reason to feel more comfortable about that.

Mr. Carney bolstered his calm, businesslike, unflashy but competent pitch. Mr. Poilievre mostly came off as a reasonable person offering change, not an attack dog (which may not have thrilled some of his base, but may have cemented support from more moderate backers). Mr. Singh seemed an impassioned defender of progressive values largely being overlooked in this campaign. Mr. Blanchet … well, there probably weren’t many of his supporters watching, but I imagine those who did were fine with his Quebec defences.

What I’m left with, though, is a feeling that the debate didn’t fully match the moment. We’re in the midst of a breakdown of world order, and Canada is more closely tied to the country breaking it than anywhere else. I would’ve liked to hear a lot more (other than pipeline talk) about how we’ll carve our own path economically, who we now consider our allies, and why China may still be the biggest threat and how we’ll handle that.

9:35 p.m.

Debate highlight: Carney and Poilievre talk housing

9:24 p.m.

– Marsha Lederman

It is absolutely appalling that a small contingent of rage-farming “journalists” has managed to get the postdebate media scrums cancelled altogether. This means that actual journalists are being prevented from asking important questions on behalf of Canadians, and that Canadian voters are being deprived of those answers. What a debacle. Shameful.

9:20 p.m.

– Lawrence Martin

Poilievre was still running against Trudeau.

Carney stayed above the fray.

Singh interrupted too much.

Doubtful that it’s a debate that will change the numbers much.

9:18 p.m.

– Marsha Lederman

Final thoughts on how the leaders did: Mark Carney was pretty much unflappable, coming across as thoughtful, intelligent and real. Jagmeet Singh was passionate and came across as truly caring about Canadians. Pierre Poilievre was too slogan-y, as usual, his answers often feeling a little too prepared. But there were moments when the human seemed to emerge, and this is when Mr. Poilievre was strongest.

As for Yves-François Blanchet, I appreciated his bluntness and humour, but I’m actually not sure he belonged there, in the English debate. After the debate ended, you could see Mr. Poilievre and Mr. Carney chatting with each other and smiling. That was really something.

Imagine the power of some sort of wartime-type cabinet, each of these politicians collaborating rather than fighting each other. However, to borrow a term Mr. Blanchet used tonight, perhaps that is just a fairy tale.

9:17 p.m.

– Robyn Urback

Over all, I think both Poilievre and Carney did really well. Carney was measured, confident, and he wasn’t rattled by tough questions or interruptions. Poilievre was pointed but restrained; he didn’t come off as too much of an attack dog, which was a risk for him. He also seemed to get emotional at a moment near the end, which I think is a side of him most Canadians haven’t seen. I think it will help to soften his image.

Will this debate change anything? Hard to say. The polls in about three days might give us some indication if so. But there were no knockout punches, no major mistakes. The one thing that surprised me was how little Donald Trump was discussed in this debate. If dealing with him is indeed the ballot question, it only came up, at most, a handful of times. That’s to Poilievre’s advantage. If anyone gets a slight bump from this debate, my suspicion is that it will be Poilievre.

9:05 p.m.

– Kobe Tulloch

The Green Party’s attempt to make up for the lost exposure of being disinvited appeared to be having Mr. Pedneault stream live on their Instagram page, sitting next to a projection of the debate, shaking his head, nodding or occasionally chiming in. As of 8:55 p.m. ET, the livestream had fewer than 40 viewers.

Greens were absent from the federal debate stage for the first time since 2011. Co-leader Jonathan Pedneault had his invitation revoked less than 12 hours before the French debate on Wednesday, after Elections Canada determined it had not met the qualifying criteria in terms of number of candidates running.

The party released its full platform early this morning, making it the first of the major parties to do so.

9:01 p.m.

Rewind: Watch the full two-hour leaders’ debate here

8:58 p.m.

– Adam Radwanski

I hate boxing metaphors for leaders’ debates. But Mr. Poilievre’s question to Mr. Carney about inflationary advice to Justin Trudeau sure seemed like his shot at a haymaker.

I thought it at least grazed Mr. Carney, in the sense that he briefly showed one of those flashes of impatience that are not his most appealing quality, and didn’t push back all that effectively on it. That said, he presents so differently from Mr. Trudeau that I’m not sure Mr. Poilievre is any closer to presenting them as one and the same than he was before.

8:56 p.m.

– Lawrence Martin

Surprising that Carney asked Poilievre about not getting security clearance when he has heard Poilievre’s answer on it many times. Poilievre handled it easily.

8:54 p.m.

– Robyn Urback

The most interesting part of this debate has been Pierre Poilievre and Mark Carney asking each other questions. Poilievre asked Carney if he would apologize to Canadians for, as Poilievre put it, the economic damage his advice to the Trudeau government inflicted on the Canadian public. Carney asked Poilievre why he won’t get his security clearance.

Both men deflected in their responses. That’s to be anticipated. But I would’ve loved to see two hours of these types of exchanges (sorry, Singh, Blanchet, you won’t be prime minister). The post-mortem after this election should include whether the federal debates commission should be cremated or buried, and how we can have more, and better, debates.

8:52 p.m.

– Marsha Lederman

On Gaza, that was an almost productive discussion. Pierre Poilievre and Mark Carney were in agreement that Iran’s role in the Oct. 7 attacks on Israel must be acknowledged and Iran must be held in check, to use Mr. Carney’s term. Jagmeet Singh tried to get Mr. Carney to call what Israel is doing in Gaza a genocide. Mr. Carney did not use that term. Mr. Singh called Mr. Poilievre’s treatment of Palestinians “disgusting.”

As for what’s happening in Canada, Mr. Poilievre said “the rampaging riots targeting Jewish communities” are unacceptable. Yves-François Blanchet argued that the Jewish community is being harassed by a small minority of “radical Islamists.” Mr. Poilievre brought it around to immigration, saying that new Canadians should leave their conflicts back in their homelands. Mr. Singh rejected that, saying that “people feel deeply about where they come from and they should be able to.” Mr. Poilievre said he’s concerned about Canada bringing in too many immigrants. But he clarified: “I do not blame immigrants. I blame the Liberal government.”

8:49 p.m.

– Nojoud Al Mallees

The Leaders’ Debates Commission has cancelled the postdebate press conference. The commission gave media accreditation to Rebel News, an organization that is registered as a third party in the federal election.

Elections Canada defines a third party as a person or group that is seeking to influence elections but is not directly affiliated with a party. The commission’s executive director, Michel Cormier, told CBC News that he was not aware of the registration.

Rebel News, along with other right-wing media outlets, dominated the postdebate scrum with leaders after the French-language debate on Wednesday.

Tensions rose between Rebel News staff and another reporter in the media filing room ahead of the debate on Thursday, prompting RCMP officers and other officials to enter the room. Mr. Cormier led Rebel News co-founder Ezra Levant out of the room. Mr. Levant returned after about 10 minutes but it’s unclear what was discussed.

8:42 p.m.

– Adam Radwanski

Mr. Poilievre has mostly shied away from playing to the more conspiracy-minded corners of his party’s base, but he did make sure to work in the Century Initiative.

If you’re unsure what that is, it’s a pitch to get Canada’s population to 100 million by 2100. The Liberals haven’t adopted it and aren’t running on it, but Mark Wiseman – a high-profile business executive who’s a supporter of Mr. Carney’s – is one of the people who’s behind it.

I have to say that I find the issue a bit of a tempest in a teapot, not just because it’s not actually Liberal policy, but also because if Canada just maintained one-per-cent annual population growth (which is what it’s generally been), we’d be close to 90 million people by 2100 anyway.

8:40 p.m.

– Lawrence Martin

Mark Carney has no experience as a political debater, but on style points, he is doing well, looking experienced indeed. He’s coming across as calm, seasoned, knowledgeable.

The debate is remaining civil. I expected Poilievre to raise the decibel level. But he is ridding himself of the angry man caricature.

8:37 p.m.

– Marsha Lederman

On Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the subsequent endless war: Poilievre starts off strong on the topic, saying he supports funding Ukraine, and stating that Canada does not need to always follow the U.S.’s lead. But his answer quickly becomes political (it is a political debate, after all) as Poilievre calls to “defund Putin” by sending Canadian natural gas to Europe. And then, because Poilievre can’t help himself, a slogan: promising that the Conservatives will “turn dollars for dictators back to paycheques for our people.” This might just be me, but Poilievre seems much more likable/believable/real when he speaks from the heart, rather than spitting out memorized talking points.

8:36 p.m.

– Nojoud Al Mallees

Mr. Carney – ironically – has a habit of switching to French while speaking in English (he briefly responded to Bloc Québécois Leader Yves-François Blanchet in French). I say ironically because his French has been heavily scrutinized since he jumped into federal politics earlier this year. The Liberal Leader has put in a lot of work since then to improve his French and now is putting it to (use even when he doesn’t need to).

8:32 p.m.

– Adam Radwanski

To keep my climate-policy hat on for a moment, perhaps some context for the brief back-and-forth on industrial carbon pricing is in order.

What they were mostly talking about is the system in place for heavy industrial emitters, which the Conservatives want to get rid of and all other parties want to keep. Research has shown it being the most effective of current national policies at cutting emissions (much more so than the consumer price was), and wasn’t very contentious until recently. In fact, it’s largely been supported publicly by industry itself, partly as a preference to other climate policies, and partly because through a credits-trading system, it helps make a financial case for investments in stuff like carbon capture.

That’s changed recently, in part because the Conservatives turned hard against it once the consumer price was no longer around to oppose, and partly because the oil-and-gas sector came out against it when climate issues fell down the political priority list.

8:29 p.m.

– The Canadian Press

Taking part in his first English election debate, Liberal Leader Mark Carney cast himself as a safe pair of hands for a Canada in crisis – while Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre sought to frame him as more of the same after a decade of Liberal government.

Poilievre repeatedly sought to draw a straight line from former prime minister Justin Trudeau and his policies to Carney.

“We need a change, and you, sir, are not a change,” he said.

“Are you prepared to elect the same Liberal MPs, the same Liberal ministers, the same Liberal staffers, all over again for a fourth term? Mr. Carney, Justin Trudeau’s staffers are actually here with you at this debate in Montreal, writing the talking points that you are regurgitating into the microphone,” Poilievre added.

“Look, I do my own talking points, thank you very much,” Carney shot back.

8:21 p.m.

– Robyn Urback

I think the loser in the first half of the debate has been Jagmeet Singh. I get it – he’s fighting for his political life (and his seat!) – but the pestering, the constant interruptions, the practical hectoring. I don’t see how it helps his goal of winning back support from progressives who have decided to back Carney.

Singh needs to make the case that Canadians must have NDP MPs in Parliament to exert the type of pressure that got them dental care and pharmacare. It’s a tough case to make, especially when there has been such an emphasis on strategic voting. But Singh’s not helping himself by being the guy heckling the others from one lectern over.

Open this photo in gallery:

8:20 p.m.

– Kobe Tulloch

The debate is getting a lot of traffic online, with searches about how tall Mark Carney and Pierre Poilievre are spiking to the top of Google Trends. But Canadian patriotism seems to go only so far; the top searches make sure to specify “in feet.”

Neither party has shared the leaders’ official heights, but Mr.Carney’s high-school hockey stats have him at 175 centimeters, or five feet nine inches tall. Mr. Poillievre has been estimated to be closer to six feet.

So far, interest in the heights of Yves-François Blanchet or Jagmeet Singh isn’t quite cracking the charts.

Open this photo in gallery:

8:18 p.m.

– Adam Radwanski

I feel obliged to say, as someone who spent the past five years covering climate policy, that it’s disappointing how little the “energy & climate” segment treated the transition to low-carbon energy as an economic opportunity.

We heard next to nothing (certainly from the two front-runners) about how to leverage Canada’s clean electricity advantage; how to develop and export clean-tech; how to develop a strong EV industry. I could go on. The point is, the whole segment basically treated the issue solely as being about whether or not we extract fossil fuels, and are or aren’t able to do so sustainably.

8:16 p.m.

– Andrew Coyne

This is a good format, and these are skilled, knowledgeable debaters. Wouldn’t it be great if we had more of these: if the leaders had been debating the issues in close quarters like this all the way through the campaign, rather than in one debate (in each language) 11 days from election day? We ought to be having a debate a week, arranging the campaign around the debates rather than the debates around the campaign.

8:07 p.m.

– Lawrence Martin

First half of the debate was like a tag-team match. Poilievre and Blanchet versus Carney and Singh, and vice versa.

Surprising to see Singh spend so much time going after Poilievre when it’s the Liberals who have been making the big gains against the NDP.

Open this photo in gallery:

8:06 p.m.

– Adam Radwanski

I wonder if Mr. Poilievre has mixed feelings about how much Mr. Singh is interrupting him. It has to be very annoying. But from the Conservatives’ perspective, an over-aggressive version of Mr. Singh is better than one who seems like a total also-ran, since they desperately need the NDP to cut into the Liberals’ numbers before election day.

I don’t know if what Mr. Singh is doing tonight will help with that, but positioning himself as a defender of progressive ideals against Mr. Poilievre may be as good a bet as focusing his attacks on Mr. Carney.

Open this photo in gallery:

8:04 p.m.

– Marsha Lederman

On public safety and security, Pierre Poilievre said, “I’m interested in the rights of victims. Mr. Carney seems to be interested in the rights of criminals.” I’m not sure who hears that and thinks, yeah, fair, not at all disingenuous. Of course, everyone on that stage is concerned about crime and wants to ensure adequate sentences – as Jagmeet Singh said. (Mr. Singh is really emerging as a voice of reason tonight.)

When Mr. Poilievre told Mark Carney, “I don’t think you appreciate, sir, the chaos,” I think he may have been trying to imply that Mr. Carney is far removed from life in Canada. (Mr. Carney using “GTA” in his response countered that.) Mr. Poilievre says that people are living “in terror” in many communities with a “rampant crime wave.” Fear-mongering? Or fair and accurate?

Open this photo in gallery:

8:03 p.m.

– Shannon Proudfoot

The Leaders’ Debate Commission accidentally – but in richly deserved fashion – made itself the main character this week, between disqualifying the Greens on the morning of the French debate and allowing the Rebel performance artists to dominate the scrums afterward.

Yves-François Blanchet’s gleefully obstructionist performance in this debate adds another twig to that camel’s back. The commission’s timid, muddled inclusion decisions undercut the effectiveness of the entire debate because a successful night for the Bloc Québécois Leader is lobbing the maximum number of stink bombs onto the stage – and he’s good at it.

8:01 p.m.

– Andrew Coyne

Carney is unflappable, good humoured, comes across as a normal person, etc. But his inexperience is showing – i.e., he is acting like a normal person, in an arena that is hostile to normal human reflexes.

For example, a normal person gives up the floor when someone interrupts them. Bad idea: You have to just keep talking through it. Second example: A normal person answers the question that was asked to him. Nope: You answer the question you prefer to answer. Third example: A normal person directs his answer to the questioner. Uh-uh: You speak directly to the camera. Fourth example: A normal person keeps track of the various points that have been made in the course of the conversation, and attempts to address each in turn. There isn’t time: You have to limit yourself to answering the one that you think is most damaging to your case.

7:51 p.m.

– Adam Radwanski

I’m trying not to focus too much on style. But I’ve been struck by how good Mr. Poilievre has been in his initial responses to the last couple of segments – first speaking directly to young people about housing, then calmly turning around the question about Indigenous people being disproportionately affected by tough-on-crime policies to Indigenous people being disproportionately affected by crime.

It’s been a bit more of a mixed bag for him in the opening debate segments. He’s mostly staying away from an attack-dog tone. But to my eye, his attempts to get under Mr. Carney’s skin – as when he worked in a canned line about Justin Trudeau’s advisers being there with him tonight, and got laughed off – have mostly backfired so far.

7:50 p.m.

– Andrew Coyne

Blanchet’s presence here is a reminder of what a blight the Bloc is on Canadian politics. A party and a leader that make no attempt whatsoever to come to grips with the complicated balancing of interests that is required to govern this country, but narrowly and unashamedly advocate, not even for the Quebec interest, but for the separatist interest.

It remains a mystery why they are permitted to participate in the English-language debate, given their utter indifference to the interests, not just of the rest of Canada outside Quebec, but the English-speaking community within Quebec. Or if they are to be involved, there should be no French-only or English-only debates. We are a bilingual country. Let us have bilingual debates, with simultaneous translation – so all the leaders have to talk to the whole country at the same time.

Open this photo in gallery:

7:44 p.m.

– Marsha Lederman

Pierre Poilievre is speaking in lists and slogans. (I have lost track of how many times he has said “for a change” or some variant of that.) Mr. Poilievre continues to target Mark Carney as Justin Trudeau-adjacent, which prompted this response from Mr. Carney: “You spent years running against Justin Trudeau and the carbon tax; they’re both gone.” Not sure if that zinger was prepared in advance, but, unlike much of what’s coming out of Mr. Poilievre’s mouth, it did not sound rehearsed. Jagmeet Singh is impressive as he speaks directly to the issues that are affecting voters who are hurting. And, oh, the irony of Mr. Poilievre talking about Mr. Carney “regurgitating” talking points is quite something.

7:42 p.m.

– Lawrence Martin

Best attack line from Poilievre so far: attaching Carney to Trudeau Liberals. Poilievre says he has Trudeau’s staffers there in Montreal writing talking points for him. Carney says he writes his own talking points, thank you very much.

7:41 p.m.

- Nojoud Al Mallees

Mr. Poilievre is focused on painting Mr. Carney as no different than former prime minister Justin Trudeau, as the Liberal Leader tries to distance himself from his predecessor.

“Mr. Poilievre, you spent years running against Justin Trudeau and the carbon tax,” Mr. Carney shot back. “They’re both gone.”

The political landscape has shifted considerably since Mr. Trudeau’s resignation. The consumer carbon price, which was supposed to be at the centre of the federal election campaign, has been reduced to zero by Mr. Carney. The new Liberal Leader is also a fresh face in the race, allowing the party to somewhat distance itself from Mr. Trudeau.

Open this photo in gallery:

7:38 p.m.

Federal debates chief unaware Rebel News registered as advocacy group

– The Canadian Press

The head of the Leaders’ Debates Commission said Thursday he wasn’t aware that right-wing media group Rebel News — which was permitted more opportunities to question leaders after Wednesday’s debate than most mainstream outlets — had registered as an official third party in the federal election.

Third parties are groups that seek to influence elections but aren’t parties or candidates, and they’re required to register to run ads.

Rebel News and other right-wing media outlets dominated the question-and-answer sessions with federal party leaders after Wednesday’s French-language leaders’ debate.

Open this photo in gallery:

7:36 p.m.

– Andrew Coyne

Did Carney and Singh do some sort of deal? Singh seems to be acting as Carney’s wingman/attack dog, aggressively needling and interrupting Poilievre so that Carney doesn’t have to, allowing him to appear to rise above it all.

7:35 p.m.

– Robyn Urback

Smart of Poilievre to make a statement directly to young people. Polling shows that there’s a distinct age divide among Canadians – boomers are largely supporting Carney, and younger people, particularly men under 30, are throwing their support behind Poilievre. I’m not sure any of the guys onstage have much credibility in saying they’ll rectify generational unfairness (they’ve all committed to keeping the age of retirement at 65, despite people living longer and healthier, and boomers as a demographic being much better off than young people). But it’s a good tactic for Poilievre.

7:32 p.m.

– Adam Radwanski

I suppose it’s understandable that the opening segment ostensibly on responding to Donald Trump’s tariffs veered somewhat off that topic, since there’s broad agreement on standing up to him, including with countertariffs.

 It’s a bit strange, though, that viewers might have gotten the impression that strengthening Canada’s economic sovereignty in the face of those threats comes down almost entirely to whether we build oil and gas pipelines.

That’s an important subject and a legitimate area of debate among federal leaders (though on substance more Mr. Poilievre and Mr. Carney against the other leaders than against each other). But there’s a lot of other sectors key to this question of how we stand better on our own – from manufacturing to agriculture to technology – that it seems unfortunate to act as though the only question is how we approach being a resource economy.

7:30 p.m.

– Andrew Coyne

The structure of the debate is such as to favour the interests of the Conservatives. Liberal strategy has been to focus the entire election campaign on Trump and the threat he represents to Canada’s economy and its sovereignty, where polls show Carney enjoys a wide lead over Poilievre. On this show it’s just one issue among many. And that’s good! Trump is important, probably the most important issue. But Liberals need to answer for their record on the economy, housing, immigration etc. Carney needs to show how he represents a break from that record. And the country needs a good debate on what is the best way forward on these issues.

7:28 p.m.

– Lawrence Martin

Best blows landed against Carney so far by Bloc Leader Blanchet. Poilievre more ill at ease at the start of debate than I have seen him before. But now, he’s finding his stride and comfort level. Affordability segment of debate should be his best opportunity to shine.

7:27 p.m.

– Marsha Lederman

In the discussion over energy, dominated by pipelines, the opposition leaders are making their target clear: Mark Carney. Pierre Poilievre’s strategy appears to try to tar Mr. Carney with the Trudeau brush – “blocking pipelines,” “killing jobs.” Jagmeet Singh is looking to group the Liberals with the Conservatives – which would make the NDP the true non-right-wing choice. And then there’s Yves-François Blanchet, with quite the zinger: “Mr. Carney, you are becoming a real Canadian leader, saying one thing in French and another in English.”

7:25 p.m.

- Adam Radwanski

Clearly, Mr. Poilievre wants to make as much of this debate as possible about the Impact Assessment Act, which he frames as the biggest obstacle to new energy projects.

Mr. Carney’s point about that law allowing for one-project, one-review deals with provinces is valid, although it’s fair to question how that will work in practice since the government has only reached one such deal so far.

But what I’d like to see Mr. Poilievre pressed on a little more is whether he wants to scrap Ottawa’s role in environmental assessments for major projects altogether and leave it to the provinces (which could open up all sorts of legal challenges about Ottawa abdicating responsibility, and ultimately slow projects down) or write a new law (which could obviously take a while). Because none of these leaders should be able to suggest that they can wave a magic wand and make contentious projects happen quickly – as we know from recent experience under both Liberal and Conservative governments.

7:24 p.m.

– Lawrence Martin

“I don’t know what Pierre is complaining about,” Singh says as he comes to Carney’s defence on the building of pipelines.

7:22 p.m.

– Robyn Urback

Carney has been doing this thing throughout the campaign where he answers questions with a list. “Number 1… Number 2… Number 3…” I think people’s eyes glaze over by the time he hits Number 3, but I think it’s a smart approach. It makes him seem like the guy with the plan. I think Canadians tuning in to this campaign for the first time tonight are seeing that.

7:21 p.m.

– Andrew Coyne

Jagmeet Singh steps in to rescue Mark Carney as Pierre Poilievre was beating him up over pipelines: Liberals built a pipeline! Sure, he means it as an insult, but …

7:11 p.m.

– Nojoud Al Mallees

The English-language debate has kicked off with a discussion on tariffs and U.S.-Canada relations. Steve Paikin, host of TVO’s The Agenda, is moderating tonight. Liberal Leader Mark Carney has run a campaign heavily focused on U.S.-Canada ties. Meanwhile, Mr. Poilievre has criticized the Liberal Leader for that approach, arguing that no one can control U.S. President Donald Trump and that the focus instead should be about strengthening the Canadian economy. Tonight will be an opportunity for the two front-runners to make the case on who Canadians should trust amidst this economic and political crisis.

7:09 p.m.

– Marsha Lederman

The game-show feel of this debate (the time clock!) is bolstered by Pierre Poilievre referring to his fellow leaders as “fellow contestants.” And while we’re on games, if you’re following along with your bingo cards, it took very little time for Mr. Poilievre to utter, “bring home the jobs.” Let the sloganeering begin.

7:07 p.m.

– Shannon Proudfoot

Because I’m a feature writer, I’m often most interested in how people think, why they do what they do and how they process things.

As a result, I’ve spent a fair amount of time drooling over the notion of what the leaders write on the notepads in front of them and contemplating how much I might pay to be able to take a gander at them. So far I’ve mentally bid myself up to $500.

Time to see how those notes manifest in words in the real world.

7:00 p.m.

– Marsha Lederman

Just a quick thought as the leaders make their notes ahead of the actual debate: Looking at the stage, I find it hard to believe that in 2025, our political landscape is still this male-dominated. Okay, let’s go.

Open this photo in gallery:

6:58 p.m.

– Shannon Proudfoot

Pierre Poilievre is in a tricky spot tonight, because his greatest political strength could in fact hurt him if he really leans in on those instincts. He’s a formidable political athlete who loves throwing partisan punches and playing the ruthless prosecutor; that’s how he’s built his entire political career and inhabited the role of Conservative Leader over the past two years.

But polls have shown Canadians responding positively to Liberal Leader Mark Carney’s calm adult-in-the-room routine amid the tariff crisis. Mr. Poilievre and his team obviously see weaknesses in his public perception given how they’ve been showcasing a softer, smilier version of him, which leaves him down in the polls and fighting the debate with one hand – his most powerful punch – tied behind his back.

6:54 p.m.

– Andrew Coyne

Hi, this is Andrew Coyne, columnist for The Globe and Mail. I’m in Winnipeg, and I’ll be looking to see whether Pierre Poilievre can do something to shake up a race he looks likely to lose at present, with only 11 days to go in the campaign. Does he tear into Mark Carney, who leads him by a wide margin in personal approval ratings, at the risk of reminding people of his reputation as an attack dog? Or does he try to shift the focus back onto policy, perhaps by announcing some bold new economic proposal?

6:45 p.m.

- Lawrence Martin

The moderator tonight is the level-headed Steve Paikin. He has decades of experience moderating debates with panels on TVOntario and has done election debates as well.

A major challenge for him, as for any debate moderator, will be to keep the contestants from speaking over one another. Many debates have been ruined by too much of it.

For the party leaders, though, it can be a good tactic. Under attack, it pays to interrupt the attacker.

6:37 p.m.

– Lawrence Martin

NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh upstaged bigger players in the French-language debate with a passionate showing and will try to do so again tonight.

It’s a rare opportunity for him, because in the debate format he gets equal time with the major party leaders.

With his party nosediving to below 10 per cent in most polling, Singh is under enormous pressure to recoup lost ground. Expect him to come out swinging.

Open this photo in gallery:

6:28 p.m.

– Marsha Lederman

Hello. I’m Marsha Lederman, Opinion columnist, and I’m tuning in from Vancouver, where the weather is very fine; lovely enough for the Canucks to be nice and comfy on the golf course. As for tonight’s debate, I will be watching to see if the leaders are any more combative with one another. Things were fairly tame last night – especially with Pierre Poilievre seemingly going for a more prime ministerial (rather than opposition leader/bulldog) tone. Mark Carney will be more comfortable in English; it will be interesting to see how that changes the dynamic.

Another thing I’m curious about is whether the after-debate Q&A will be hijacked once again by right-wing “media” outlets using the time to speechify rather than ask genuine questions. I hope in the aftermath of last night’s debacle that the format for this part of the exercise is reconsidered.

Read Marsha’s latest column on why Canada needs a strong Green Party.

6:21 p.m.

– Lawrence Martin

It would be no surprise to see Pierre Poilievre go for the jugular against Mark Carney in the debate tonight. The Liberals’ lead in polls has been holding and they are in majority territory.

Mr. Poilievre cannot afford to hold his fire as he did in the French-language debate. He needs a gotcha moment.

Being overly aggressive is risky given his attack-dog image. But he has to take that risk.

Open this photo in gallery:

6:19 p.m.

– Nojoud Al Mallees

Liberal Leader Mark Carney has arrived at Radio-Canada headquarters, where tonight’s debate will take place. Conservative supporters outside the building taunted Mr. Carney with chants of “Brookfield.” Conservatives have attacked the Liberal Leader over his time at Brookfield Asset Management, including over a Radio-Canada report last month that found Mr. Carney co-chaired two investment funds worth about $25-billion that were registered in Bermuda, a tax haven. Liberal supporters were also there to encourage Mr. Carney.

Open this photo in gallery:

6:16 p.m.

- Adam Radwanski

I’m Adam Radwanski, a policy columnist and feature writer for Report on Business. I’ll be watching tonight from Toronto.

What I’ll be looking for, other than how the leaders hold up under the pressure, is some greater indication of how exactly they would make good on the current sense of urgency to decrease Canada’s reliance on the U.S. and strengthen our economic (and cultural) sovereignty.

That’s of course been a theme of the campaign so far, but in some cases their pitches – for instance, all the talk around national energy corridors and such – have been overly vague or simplistic. I want to see them push each other on both their ambition and their realism, and see who can strike a balance of recognizing that we need to adapt to a dramatically changed world while not conveying panic or rashness.

Open this photo in gallery:

6:13 p.m.

– Shannon Proudfoot

Hi, I’m Shannon Proudfoot, a feature writer in The Globe’s Ottawa bureau. I’m watching the debate from Montreal tonight (though from my hotel room rather than the CBC studio, just because I find that an easier environment to write in). I’m curious to watch the dynamic on stage tonight with the front-runners in their first language, and to see whether it’s a different debate than last night’s rather flat affair.

6:11 p.m.

– Robert Fife

Tonight’s two-hour English-language debate is expected to draw a large audience – 17 million people watched the federal leaders’ debate in 2021, and 20 million in 2019. But whether they tune into the full event or just pieces of it – or just watch clips later on social media – it’s a chance for those with specific interests to evaluate what the leaders have to offer.

The debate is structured around five themes – cost of living, energy and climate, leading in a crisis, public safety and security, and tariffs and threats to Canada – but pollster Nik Nanos, the chief data scientist at Nanos Research, says polls show the question at the ballot box is still who can best handle U.S. President Donald Trump.

Open this photo in gallery:

6:09 p.m.

– Lawrence Martin

I’m Lawrence Martin, author of many political books, a Globe political columnist for the past 22 years and before that a reporter for the paper in many places. I have spent six years in Washington as a correspondent for the paper and three in Moscow.

I’ve seen or covered countless debates and am looking forward to this one because it’s the only English-language one and it comes just a week and a half before the election. Last big chance for leaders to make a splash. Or a crash.

6:03 p.m.

– Robyn Urback

Hi, I’m Robyn Urback, columnist at The Globe, and I’ll be tuning in from Toronto. Tonight I’ll be watching for whether Pierre Poilievre can somehow make the case to Canadians that he is better poised than Mark Carney to advocate for Canada’s interests against Donald Trump.

We hear a lot from Conservatives about how Carney is a mere continuation of the Trudeau Liberals, and about his alleged shady business dealings, and about his secret plans to revive the carbon tax. Conservatives have tried to change the ballot question, and it hasn’t worked. So I’m watching to see if Poilievre will finally acknowledge the actual ballot question, and whether he can effectively sell himself as the leader Canadians are looking for.

5:58 p.m.

– Nojoud Al Mallees

Hi, I’m Nojoud Al Mallees, an economics reporter at The Globe, and I’ll be reporting from the debate venue in Montreal. Tonight I’ll be watching to see whether Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre ramps up his attacks on the perceived front-runner, Liberal Leader Mark Carney. Mr. Poilievre was relatively restrained in the French-language debate on Wednesday night, but the dynamic might change as (most) leaders debate in their first language tonight.

Open this photo in gallery:

5:56 p.m.

– Robert Fife

Tonight’s English-language debate may be the last opportunity for Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre to knock off Mark Carney, whose Liberal Party has been leading in the polls for weeks.

Pollster Nik Nanos, the chief data scientist at Nanos Research, said there were no winners in the French-language debate, which should benefit Carney, whose French is not as good as his rivals’.

But the English-language debate is likely more crucial for Poilievre, who must deliver a strong performance to undermine the credibility of Carney and change the dynamics of the campaign, Nanos said.

Election debate bingo: Play along with The Globe!

– Globe Staff

While the party leaders are fighting to win the votes of Canadians, you can fight with friends and family to win debate-night bingo.

The Globe has made a customizable bingo card of topics and catchphrases to watch out for as you tune into the debate tonight. And don’t worry, we’ve gone ahead and given U.S. President Donald Trump the free space.

View and print your bingo card here before the action begins at 7 p.m. ET.

Open this photo in gallery:

What happened at the French-language debate?

– Bill Curry, Stephanie Levitz and Nojoud Al Mallees

Last night’s French debate was Liberal Leader Mark Carney and Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre‘s first direct public exchange of the election campaign, and they sparred over who would best steer Canada through trade tensions with the United States and concerns over the cost of living.

“Aren’t you embarrassed to ask Canadians for a fourth mandate after having the worst record?” Mr. Poilievre asked at one point.

“I just arrived,” Mr. Carney replied.

Public-opinion polls show that an increasingly polarized two-party race has emerged between the Liberals and the Conservatives. Down in the polls and at risk of losing a significant number of seats in the next Parliament, NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh and Bloc Québécois Leader Yves-François Blanchet both fought hard Wednesday to insert themselves into the conversation.

Read more takeaways and key moments from last night’s French-language debate.

Do debates actually sway voters?

– Moira Wyton

Open this photo in gallery:

Debates can sometimes be more theatre than substance, but they have played pivotal roles in some Canadian elections. (See former Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer’s poor performance in the 2019 French-language debate that tanked his support in Quebec, or former Liberal Leader John Turner’s successful 1988 attack on Brian Mulroney that almost cost the Tories a second majority government.)

With polls suggesting newbie Liberal Leader Mark Carney is this election’s clear front-runner, he has the most to lose tonight. But debates also tend to benefit underdog parties such as the NDP and the Bloc, which stand to gain a lot from the added airtime and chance to woo back supporters from the Liberals, according to Laura D’Angelo, the vice-president of national strategy and public affairs at Enterprise Canada.

Barring any knockout performances or unforgivable flubs, debates tend “to just confirm or crystallize what people already believe,” says The Globe’s Shannon Proudfoot. Expect the proof to be in the polling Friday morning.

Why isn’t the Green Party in the debate?

- Globe Staff

Open this photo in gallery:

The Green Party had qualified to participate in both debates earlier this month, but the organizing commission revoked their invitations Wednesday, just hours before the French-language debate.

After the Greens said they had deliberately reduced their number of candidates to minimize the chance of a Conservative victory, the Leaders’ Debates Commission said the party fell short of the 309 candidates needed to meet the debates’ viability criteria and that including them “would undermine the integrity of the debates and the interests of the voting public.”

It is the first time the Greens have missed a federal leaders’ debate since 2011.

Read more about why the Green Party won’t be in the debates.

What topics will leaders debate and what are the rules?

– Abigale Subdhan

The English-language debate will be moderated by Steve Paikin, host of the TVO current affairs program The Agenda with Steve Paikin, who will ask the leaders a series of questions based on five main themes:

• Affordability and the cost of living
• Energy and climate
• Leading in a crisis
• Public safety and security
• Tariffs and threats to Canada

The format does not set a speaking order or specific time limits on the leaders’ answers or interjections, according to the Leaders’ Debates Commission. It says the structure aims to emphasize open debate and keep the focus on the leaders and on content, while still allowing for interventions by the moderator and encouraging interactions between leaders.

Last week, the parties participated in draws to determine podium positions for both the French- and English-language debates, as well as the order of arrivals and post-debate scrums.

How to watch the federal leaders’ debate tonight

– Kobe Tulloch, Globe Staff

The Globe will stream the debate live on our homepage and at the top of this blog, along with live updates and colour commentary from our team of journalists. You can find our stream on our website, mobile app and on our YouTube page.

The debate is being produced by CBC and Radio-Canada, and you can watch it on TV via several broadcasters, including

• CBC
• CityNews
• Global
• CP24
• Ici Radio-Canada Télé (with French interpretation)

You can also watch the debate online on multiple streaming platforms, including

• CBCNews.ca or CBC Gem or the CBC News YouTube page
• CityNews.ca
• CP24.ca
• CTVNews.ca

The proceedings will be streamed in 15 languages across various platforms, including American Sign Language, Langue des signes québécoise, and Inuktuk. A full list of platforms and translations being broadcast and streamed is available through the Leaders’ Debate Commission website.

What time does the debate start tonight?

- Globe Staff

The debate begins at 7 p.m. ET at the Radio-Canada headquarters in downtown Montreal. It will run for two hours, until 9 p.m. ET, with no commercial breaks.

Four federal party leaders are slated to participate in the debate, moderated by TVO host Steve Paikin:

• Liberal Leader Mark Carney
• Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre
• Bloc Québécois Leader Yves-François Blanchet
• NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh

The Green Party will miss the debate for the first time since 2011, after the organizing commission revoked the party’s invitation to both debates Wednesday morning.