The leaders' debates seem tailor-made for the Liberals and are skipping important topics like national defence
Author of the article:
By Tasha Kheiriddin
Published Apr 15, 2025
Last updated 38minutes ago
3 minute read
Join the conversation
Article content
As Canadians tune in to the leaders’ debates this week — in French on Wednesday and English on Thursday — they’ll hear about affordability, tariffs, immigration and even an entire segment on climate, an issue that no longer cracks the top five. But one subject is conspicuously absent from both stages: national defence.
THIS CONTENT IS RESERVED FOR SUBSCRIBERS
Enjoy the latest local, national and international news.
- Exclusive articles by Conrad Black, Barbara Kay and others. Plus, special edition NP Platformed and First Reading newsletters and virtual events.
- Unlimited online access to National Post.
- National Post ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition to view on any device, share and comment on.
- Daily puzzles including the New York Times Crossword.
- Support local journalism.
SUBSCRIBE FOR MORE ARTICLES
Enjoy the latest local, national and international news.
- Exclusive articles by Conrad Black, Barbara Kay and others. Plus, special edition NP Platformed and First Reading newsletters and virtual events.
- Unlimited online access to National Post.
- National Post ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition to view on any device, share and comment on.
- Daily puzzles including the New York Times Crossword.
- Support local journalism.
REGISTER / SIGN IN TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES
Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience.
- Access articles from across Canada with one account.
- Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments.
- Enjoy additional articles per month.
- Get email updates from your favourite authors.
THIS ARTICLE IS FREE TO READ REGISTER TO UNLOCK.
Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience.
- Access articles from across Canada with one account
- Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments
- Enjoy additional articles per month
- Get email updates from your favourite authors
Sign In or Create an Account
or
View more offers
Article content
Article content
It’s a baffling omission. While the French debate will touch on identity and sovereignty, and the English debate includes a discussion on public safety, defence is at best buried beneath broader themes — and at worst, completely ignored. That’s unacceptable.
Article content
Story continues below
This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.
Article content
Canada is facing the most perilous global environment in our lifetimes. War continues to rage in Ukraine and Israel’s still battling Hamas. Tensions are rising in the Pacific as China flexes its military muscles. Add to that a belligerent U.S. president eyeing our Arctic — and seemingly our whole country — and the situation is stark. If Canada won’t take its own security seriously, no one else will.
Article content
Platformed
This newsletter tackles hot topics with boldness, verve and wit. (Subscriber-exclusive edition on Fridays)
By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc.
Interested in more newsletters? Browse here.
Article content
Rebuilding the Canadian Armed Forces is not a niche issue. It’s foundational to our sovereignty, our economy and our role in the world. Both Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre and Liberal Leader Mark Carney have recognized this.
Article content
Poilievre would build an Arctic base and hire 2,000 more rangers to patrol the North. Carney has committed to deploy more personnel in the North and create a streamlined, “made in Canada” procurement process, which is long overdue. But both have yet to answer how they would meet Canada’s NATO spending commitment of two per cent of GDP — which the U.S. now wants to hike to five per cent.
Article content
Carney said Canada would do it within a “few years” (during his leadership run, he said by 2030), while Poilievre said Canada will “make our own decisions on exactly how much we spend.” And neither leader has said how they’ll pay for their commitments without ballooning the deficit. Poilievre has said he would cut foreign aid, but that won’t be enough.
Article content
Story continues below
This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.
Article content
Where will the money come from? What other programs will be axed? How will both parties’ proposed tax cuts square with defence spending increases? And even if we spend more money, how will we encourage Canadians to join — and stay in — the Armed Forces, which has seen more people leave than join for the past three years?
Article content
Stories You May Like
- Peter MacKay and David Pratt: Bolstering national defence is critical
- Mark Carney’s brittle image is cracking: Full Comment podcast
Advertisement embed-more-topic
Story continues below
This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.
Article content
Instead of devoting a segment to these questions, the debate commission seems intent on curating the “safe” topics — and ones that favour the Liberal party. Tariffs and Donald Trump? Check. Climate? Check. And in the English debate, “leading in a crisis.” That segment is tailor-made for Carney, the only leader on stage who can say he has actually done so.
Article content
The problem is that without national security, none of those other issues matter. Without secure trade routes, tariff policy is moot. Without a capable military, we cannot defend our borders, ensure public safety or even decide our own destiny.
Article content
As we saw this weekend on Radio-Canada’s must-watch Sunday talk show, “Tout le monde en parle,” there is surprisingly little daylight between Poilievre and Carney when it comes to responding to Trump. Both say that no one can change what he does, so we must focus on changing ourselves: strengthening our internal economy and diversifying our economic alliances.
Advertisement 2
Advertisement
This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.
Article content
If the debates skip over issues where there are competing visions — like national defence — the campaign risks devolving into a superficial personality contest. “Poilievre is too Trumpy.” “Carney is too elitist.” These caricatures may play well on social media, but they don’t help voters make informed choices.
Article content
The debate commission should have done better. But it’s not too late. If moderators Patrice Roy and Steve Paikin are reading, I’d offer a suggestion: clip this column and ask the hard questions that Canadians need answered.
Article content
Postmedia Network
Article content
Tasha Kheiriddin is Postmedia’s national politics columnist.
Article content
Article content
Article content
This advertisement has not loaded yet.
