LP_468x60
on-the-record-468x60-white

Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau, left to right, NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh, and Conservative Leader Erin O'Toole take part in the federal election English-language Leaders debate in Gatineau, Que., on Thursday, Sept. 9, 2021.

MONTREAL — They may not have qualified for the NHL playoffs yet, but the Montreal Canadiens scored a win Tuesday against the French-language debate which will now begin two hours early tomorrow to accommodate a key Habs game.

French debate moderator Patrice Roy

announced on social media Tuesday

that the political clash was going to start two hours earlier than originally planned — 6 p.m. instead of 8 p.m. — to avoid too much overlap with the Canadiens game that evening.

That’s because the Habs will be playing a likely make-or-break playoff qualification game against the Carolina Hurricanes starting at 7 p.m. Wednesday. If they win, the team revered by many Quebecers will qualify for the NHL playoffs.

Ironically, the change of schedule could prove to be useless if the Columbus Blue Jackets — the only team that could still knock the Canadiens out of the playoff picture — lose to the Philadelphia Flyers Tuesday evening.

Tuesday, NDP leader Jagmeet Singh and Bloc Québécois leader Yves-François Blanchet said they were concerned that the potentially crucial hockey game would pull significant amount of eyeballs away from the French language debate.

“We’re asking people—especially in Quebec—to choose between a critical democratic 

debate

 and cheering on the Habs in a must-win game.

This kind of political discussion shouldn’t compete with something that means so much to so many,” Singh said in a statement requesting the debate be held at another time.

His statement noted that the French debate was

rescheduled in 2011 to avoid conflicting with a playoff clash between the Canadiens and the Boston Bruins, who would go on to win the Stanley Cup.

National Post

cnardi@postmedia.com

Get more deep-dive National Post political coverage and analysis in your inbox with the Political Hack newsletter, where Ottawa bureau chief Stuart Thomson and political analyst Tasha Kheiriddin get at what’s really going on behind the scenes on Parliament Hill every Wednesday and Friday, exclusively for subscribers. Sign up here.

Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our politics newsletter, First Reading, here.


Alberta Mental Health and Addictions Minister Dan Williams.

In the face of a drug crisis that’s killed more than 1,000 Albertans annually for years, the provincial government is poised to become the first jurisdiction in Canada to force drug addicts into treatment, holding them in secure facilities for up to three months at a time or mandating that they complete six months of treatment in the community.

If Bill 53, introduced Tuesday afternoon by Dan Williams, Alberta’s minister of mental health and addictions, becomes law, it would allow adult family members, guardians, health-care professionals and law enforcement to compel an addict into treatment — a last-ditch effort for severe addicts for whom other treatment options have failed.

“Those who suffer from addiction suffer from an illness, and that illness is treatable, and recovery is possible,” Williams told reporters Tuesday. “Not only is it possible, it is probable, if we build those pathways. And this Compassionate Intervention Act is just one of the tools and pathways that we will have in the province to help those individuals.”

While compulsory treatment is controversial among addictions experts, and the evidence of its efficacy is mixed, the Alberta government believes that with the right set of rules and resources, even the most extreme addict can recover, not just saving lives but decreasing the social disorder that comes with severe drug abuse.

“In our downtown cores, there are visible effects on every street, with individuals who have lost the ability to make healthy decisions, actively putting their lives at risk and causing fear and harm in the broader community,” said Alberta Premier Danielle Smith.

In 2024, 1,414 people died from drug poisoning; 1,182 of them from an opioid overdose. The provincial government estimates that addictions issues cost Alberta $7 billion annually, in terms of health care, lost productivity and justice-system costs.

The idea of mandatory treatment was first floated during the 2023 provincial election campaign. It was the brainchild of Marshall Smith, Smith’s former chief of staff, himself a former addict.

But on Tuesday, the government revealed how it would expect such a system to work. It’s likely to face constitutional challenges, but supporters argue that provinces already have legislation on the books that allows for treatment of those with severe mental-health challenges, and the government believes it will pass constitutional muster.

“Is there some constitutional right to 187 overdoses? Causing death on the street and personal carnage within your own life, leading to death and public disorder as well? I say there’s not,” said Williams. “But if the opinion of our legislature and the court disagrees, we’ll have to address that when it comes there.”

An application would first be made to have a person put into mandatory treatment. That application would be reviewed, and then a lawyer sitting on an independent commission would determine whether they are eligible for a 72-hour detention for assessment. Once the person is apprehended by police, their case would be reviewed by a three-member commission team: a lawyer, a physician and a member of the public. The decisions of the commission would be subject to judicial review, and the commission must find consensus in its decision. As well, the prospective patient would be allowed to have legal counsel present at the assessment.

In order to be committed to treatment, a detained adult would need to be likely to cause harm to themselves or others within a reasonable amount of time. Those detained who are under the age of 18 would not be subject to the “reasonable time” guideline.

The province maintains that it would be a fairly small segment of the population eligible for compassionate intervention, given the severity of addiction needed to qualify. For example, this could include the types of people — more than 780 in Alberta in 2023 — who visited emergency departments for their substance use more than 10 times.

Those remanded to treatment would receive individualized treatment plans, which would be reviewed every six weeks, and patients could be transferred between community care plans and secure facilities as needed.

During this period, they will be unable to refuse medical treatment.

So far, the facilities that would house addicts committed to secure facilities have yet to be constructed. In the 2025 budget, the United Conservative government set aside $180 million over three years to build two 150-bed treatment facilities, one in Calgary and one in Edmonton, for those who will be compelled to receive treatment. Additionally, youth will be treated at the Northern Alberta Youth Recovery Centre, located at a separate facility at the Edmonton Young Offenders Centre, and in repurposed safe houses already established under the already existing Protection of Children Abusing Drugs Program.

Once a patient is deemed to no longer be a risk to themselves and others, they will be released from the compassionate-intervention program, although the province says there will still be supports available. If they remain at risk, treatment plans could be renewed for longer lengths of time. Government staff told reporters in a briefing that the evidence suggests three months or longer is necessary for the brain to normalize.

At least part of the reasoning behind lengthy treatment stays has to do with relapse. A March 2025 white paper by the Canadian Centre of Recovery Excellence, an Alberta addictions Crown corporation, notes that brief stays in mandatory treatment have a “relatively high risk of relapse, overdose, and death,” according to a review of the scientific literature and compulsory treatment regimes in other jurisdictions.

The provincial government envisions having the system fully up and running by 2029 — two years after the next provincial election.

However, by 2026, it expects the system to be at least partially operational, perhaps with temporary treatment facilities or beds at existing facilities.

Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here.


A prefab unit is lowered into place at a housing development under construction in Dartmouth, N.S. in July.

OTTAWA — A new study shows that, not only has the pace of homebuilding failed to keep up with Canada’s record post-COVID population growth, its been stuck at early 1970s levels.

The study, released on Tuesday

by the Fraser Institute

, shows that annual housing starts from 2022 to 2024 almost perfectly mirrored starts from 1972 to 1974, despite the country’s population growing more than three times faster.

Study co-author Steve Globerman says that, while housing is a hot topic of conversation nationally, local factors are a big part of why the supply of housing hasn’t kept pace with population growth.

“We know from other studies… that the rezoning and the various other kinds of regulatory constraints on on construction are a major drag on homebuilding,” Globerman told the National Post.

A total of 747,483 new home builds were started from 2022 to 2024, while the population grew by an estimated 3,018,427.

By comparison, there were

740,566 housing

starts from 1972 to 1974, when population grew by 868,147.

The authors collected annual data from 1972 to 2024, calculating an average of 1.9 new residents for every unit started over the study period. This ratio exceeded three-to-one for the first time in 2022 and peaked at 5.1 in 2023, edging downward to 3.9 in 2024.

Canada’s population also grew by

a record 1.2 million in 2023

.

Housing starts declined as population grew, dropping from 271,198 in 2021 to 261,849 in 2022 and 240,267 in 2023.

2021 was the second-busiest year for housing starts behind 1976, when they hit a peak of 273,203.

The study’s authors noted that these national trends in homebuilding were generally mirrored across all 10 provinces. They added that Canada’s housing affordability crisis will likely continue without accelerated homebuilding, slower population growth, or both.

The study comes in the thick of a federal election campaign where housing has been a key issue.

Conservative Deputy Leader Melissa Lantsman said that the numbers were a direct reflection of failed Liberal policies.

“The architects of the lost Liberal decade took a housing crisis and made it worse,” Lantsman said in an email to the National Post.

Lantsman said that the anemic housing start numbers “

speak for themselves,” noting that the slim pickings have led many Canadians to give up on their dream of home ownership.

Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre has promised to roll out a homebuyers’ tax cut that he says will stimulate new home construction

by 36,000 units per year

, if he becomes prime minister.

He’s also said he’ll pay city halls to lower

development fees for home builders

.

The Liberal campaign didn’t comment directly on the study but referred the National Post to

leader Mark Carney’s plan

to double the pace of homebuilding to nearly 500,000 new units per year.

Both leaders have also said they’ll lower the intake of immigrants to lower the strain on housing, health care and other resources.

Canada’s post-COVID population boom has been driven almost entirely by immigration,

according to government statistics

.

National Post

rmohamed@postmedia.com

Get more deep-dive National Post political coverage and analysis in your inbox with the Political Hack newsletter, where Ottawa bureau chief Stuart Thomson and political analyst Tasha Kheiriddin get at what’s really going on behind the scenes on Parliament Hill every Wednesday and Friday, exclusively for subscribers. Sign up here.

Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here.


Liberal Leader Mark Carney, Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre, NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh, Green Co-leader Jonathan Pedneault and Bloc Québécois Leader Yves-François Blanchet are pitching their visions to voters. Photos by Derek Ruttan/London Free Press, Ernest Doroszuk/Toronto Sun and Adrian Wyld/Canadian Press

With less than two weeks left to go until election day, party leaders are gearing up for back to back debates this week.

So far, the more than three weeks on the campaign trail have seen some stark differences between the two main parties, and some similarities as they accuse each other of stealing policy ideas.

National Post political reporter Chris Nardi joins Dave breakenridge to discuss how Mark Carney and Pierre Poilievre are trying to set themselves apart amid shifts in polling, what to expect in the leaders debates, and what has happened to Jagmeet Singh and the NDP this campaign.

Background reading

:

Carney says pipelines ‘not necessarily’ among major projects to prioritize

Subscribe to 10/3 on your favourite podcast app


One of many posters seen around Vancouver with an apology from an anonymous American to Canada for the U.S. administration's treatment.

Earlier this month an anonymous American purchased advertising space on billboards in Vancouver to express regret over the treatment Canada has received from the U.S. government.

The ads appeared in downtown Vancouver, featuring a maple leaf and the message: “Dear Canada, we are so very, very, very sorry. Your American friends.”

One Vancouver resident posted on X, writing: “One day, America, we can be normal neighbors again. Until then, it seems as though that your voters and activists have some work

to

do.”

The individual behind the ads told a Vancouver TV station that he was distressed by the

disrespectful treatment of Canada

by the U.S. government and emphasized this was a personal initiative, not backed by any organization. However, he said the message reflects the sentiments of many Americans.

The campaign began with paper

posters on kiosks and utility poles

before moving to illuminated billboards.

A few of the ad-posters seen around the city were captured in posts to r/vancouver, a Metro Vancouver community reddit site.

The ads were expected to remain up for about two weeks, with the possibility of returning in different locations or with varied wording but maintaining the same overall message.

Reactions expressed by residents ranged from “delightful” to “sweet.” Many

acknowledged

that the sentiment of embarrassment and empathy from Americans is genuine, given the current political climate and strained relations between the two countries. Some passersby found the ads a bit “corny” or described them as a “weird way to apologize,” but still recognized the underlying sentiment as genuine and empathetic.

Several Vancouverites noted that they have American friends or family who share similar feelings of embarrassment and regret over the current state of U.S.-Canada relations.

In addition to these ads, there has been a broader trend of Americans expressing apologies to Canadians through

letters and public statements

, particularly in response to U.S. government policies and rhetoric that have negatively impacted the Canada-U.S. relationship.

One letter writer from upstate New York to the

Ottawa Citizen

wrote: “

Wishing that this dark time will soon pass.”

Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here.


NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh in Ottawa Friday, April 11, 2025, making a campaign stop at the Broadbent Institute's 2025 Progress Summit being held at the Delta Hotels Ottawa City Centre.

MONTREAL — There is an air of resignation, if not acceptance, about Jagmeet Singh these days.

He seems to know that his time in federal politics is coming to an end.

As he came down the steps of his campaign plane for the cameras, after landing in Montreal on Monday, he cut a dejected figure. I said to him that Justin Trudeau would have waved at the non-existent crowd. He laughed it off.

But in previous campaigns, he would probably have bounded down the steps with a grin on his face.

The playful optimism of the man

who in 2021 tried out his long board on the airport tarmac in Halifax

and did handstands on the wharf in Dartmouth, N.S., has disappeared.

He knows he’s about to take a beating and he spoke wistfully about missing his daughters, Anhad and Dani, who are back in British Columbia, as if he can’t wait for it all to be over.

Back in 2021, Singh had the wind at his back. There were large whistle stops where the crowd bounced around enthusiastically to Bunji’s “Ready Fi Da Road.“

The song has been dusted off again and was played on Sunday night when Singh visited the Toronto office of Spadina–Harbourfront candidate Norm Di Pasquale, but the effervescence has gone, like bubbly left out overnight.

The New Democrats are always the most fun in Canadian politics; they still believe it all. The arrival in Montreal was celebrated by an extended sing-along to Celine Dion’s “It’s All Coming Back to Me Now.”

“It’s a beautiful day in a beautiful city in a beautiful life,” said NDP press secretary, Simon Charron.

Singh buoys his audience by reminding them that as the fourth party, New Democrats set the national agenda and pushed the Liberals to introduce a national dental care program that wasn’t even in their platform during the last election.

But it is the prime directive of any political party to elect members, and it is all but certain that the NDP will have fewer MPs in Parliament after April 28, and may even lose official party status — with fewer than 12 elected members. Singh’s own seat of Burnaby Central is at risk and it would perhaps be a blessing for all concerned if he lost.

There seems little prospect that the party will allow him to continue if the polls don’t shift, given

his predecessor Tom Mulcair was forced out

after winning 44 seats in 2015.

At the turn of the year, the NDP were five points ahead of the Liberals in one poll. The most recent 

Angus Reid Institute survey

 has the Liberals with 45 per cent support, compared to seven per cent for the New Democrats.

Singh has already been forced to acknowledge publicly that he won’t be prime minister. Now, he is being asked by reporters if he is preparing to resign.

For the record, he said he is not, and remains focused on the two remaining weeks of the election. But what else could he say?

He could hardly admit he was played by the Liberals, who gave him a “structural foundation” for a pharmacare program that will probably never be rolled out.

The NDP were the instigators of the dental program but have gotten none of the credit, despite Singh’s claim that he thinks “Canadians know what we did.”

Last September, Singh called time on the confidence and supply agreement with Justin Trudeau’s Liberals, claiming they were “too weak, too selfish and too beholden to corporate interests to fight for people.” He said Trudeau did not deserve another chance — and then promptly gave him one,

by supporting the government in a non-confidence vote

.

Singh’s brand was built on his sincerity, but badmouthing Trudeau while backing him in Parliament made the NDP leader look hypocritical.

The Conservatives have not helped, even though they need a strong NDP. Leader Pierre Poilievre ignored the lessons of 2015 that saw the Harper Conservatives kill the hopes of Mulcair’s NDP in Quebec by pushing a ban on the wearing of the niqab in official citizenship ceremonies, a move that helped

the Liberals to win the election

.

Poilievre used a question in the House of Commons to address the NDP leader as “a fake, a phony, a fraud,” and then launched

an advertising campaign aimed at “sellout Singh”

, that suggested that he had struck a deal with Trudeau to keep the government in power until he was eligible for a lucrative pension.

The smear worked: Singh is currently as unpopular as Poilievre. Both languish far behind new Liberal Leader Mark Carney, despite Singh’s claim that when the former banker was chair of Brookfield Asset Management it registered itself in a tax haven to avoid paying its “fair share” of taxes in Canada.

The NDP’s pre-election ad, “

Fighting for You

,” featured Singh sparring in a boxing ring. He maintains he is still a fighter and will never back down. But one of the two new ads the party released last week, “

We Choose

,” doesn’t feature the leader at all.

Sitting next to family in a downtown Toronto restaurant on Sunday, waiting for the NDP to hit town, I overheard the man lamenting to his wife: “The poor old NDP, they’re not even a party anymore, which kinda sucks.”

However, the New Democrats could yet play a role in this campaign by tapping into the feeling that Canada needs the NDP.

The party has released 

a video

that makes the point: “Ottawa works best when one party doesn’t have all the power.”

It claims that both Poilievre and Carney plan to cut services, especially on health care. “That’s why we need more New Democrats in Parliament, to defend the things that make us Canadian,” Singh says.

The party is promising to bring in national rent control; to cap grocery prices; and on Monday said it would tie federal health transfers 

to the hiring and retention of more nurses. 

On Tuesday, Singh appeared with a number of Montreal area candidates, saying he would retain the capital-gains tax hike that the Liberals introduced in the 2024 budget — and then promptly abandoned under Carney’s leadership.

Singh said the $19 billion the measure was projected to raise in revenue over five years would be reinvested in hospitals like Maisonneuve-Rosemont, which provided a backdrop to the press conference.

“The Liberals defended this idea, saying it is fundamental to building a more fair society and now they’ve flip-flopped on that,” he said.

The press release quoted former Liberal finance minister Chrystia Freeland saying the capital gains tax “is an idea that everyone who cares about fairness should support,” which was a nice touch.

At the announcement on Tuesday, veteran NDP member of Parliament Alexandre Boulerice said the French and English debates this week will allow Singh to show that there is no difference between Carney and Poilievre. “When (former prime minister Stephen) Harper asked Carney in 2012 to be his finance minister, that shows the distance between Carney and the Conservative party,” he said.

The NDP are now so far from power that talking about attracting investment and powering innovation are remote subjects of obscure curiosity, like eunuchs discussing OnlyFans.

But liberation from worrying about the revenue side of the equation has allowed Singh to focus on the spending side.

He said he is committed to making health care a top issue, which it is in just about every opinion poll despite

not being on the agenda for discussion during the leaders’ debates

. This is the first election in my time covering federal politics that the health-care issue has not been raised by the Liberals to bludgeon the Conservatives. The failure to do so, may offer Singh an opening. “It’s not about what’s helpful to me,” he said. “Canadians think it’s important.”

I asked Singh whether he thinks the polls have stabilized enough to make it safe for progressives who are worried about a Conservative win to “come home” to the NDP.

“That’s exactly what we’re going to say to people,” he said. “I think a lot of folks were really worried about the Conservatives and I think what people have seen is Pierre Poilievre, and his message and his approach … that he sounds all too similar to Donald Trump. I think more and more Canadians are saying: ‘No, that’s not for me.’

“(But), having turned your attention away from Pierre Poilievre, if you’re worried that you’re now hearing more and more about cuts coming from Mark Carney, specifically $43 billion in cuts to services — and he said it really clearly that he wants to cut spending in the operating budget — if you’re worried about those cuts, vote for New Democrats.”

Singh’s leadership may be ill-fated, but it is not inconceivable that he could win back some of the voters he has lost to Carney. On the verge of irrelevancy, Singh’s swan song could be a far, far better thing than he has ever done before.

jivison@criffel.ca

X.com/IvisonJ

Get more deep-dive National Post political coverage and analysis in your inbox with the Political Hack newsletter, where Ottawa bureau chief Stuart Thomson and political analyst Tasha Kheiriddin get at what’s really going on behind the scenes on Parliament Hill every Wednesday and Friday, exclusively for subscribers. Sign up here.


Liberal Leader Mark Carney.

OTTAWA — The threat of seeing Japanese automaker Honda move some of its production south of the border, in the wake of a global tariff war, has caused Mark Carney and Pierre Poilievre to stress why they should be in the driver’s seat come April 28.

Japanese news outlet Nekkei threw much of Canada into a panic early Tuesday after it reported that Honda is working on plans to switch its production from Mexico and Canada to the U.S.

However, Canadian officials came out to say the report was not accurate.

Ontario Premier Doug Ford, who spoke to the president of Honda Canada, said the Nekkei report was “not accurate at all” and that Honda instead wants to “increase production.”

Federal Industry Minister Anita Anand also put out a statement to calm the waters.

“Honda has communicated that so such production decisions affecting Canadian operations have been made, and are not being considered at this time,” she said.

Earlier in the day, Carney was asked to comment on the unconfirmed reports that Honda would be moving its production away from Canada. While he remained prudent in his answers, he said it was a possible downfall of U.S. President Donald Trump’s tariffs.

“It’s a war, and we can’t provide guarantees for every situation,” Carney said during a media availability in St-Eustache, a suburb north-west of Montreal.

“That just underscores how important … the negotiation with the U.S. President (is) and who is going to be across the table for that global approach, who knows how to get the deal that will build out for our auto industry and other industries in Canada,” he said.

“I’m running hard so that I can be at the table for Canada to win for Canadian workers.”

In a call last month, Carney and Trump agreed to “begin comprehensive negotiations about a new economic and security relationship” immediately after the election.

On Tuesday, Poilievre also condemned Trump’s targeting of Canada in general terms.

“President Trump deserves nothing but condemnation for the unfair targeting of Canada while he’s lifting tariffs and backing down on tariffs all around the world, continues to terrify our auto sector,” he said at an announcement in downtown Montreal.

“There’s nobody who’s going to be able to control President Trump, as Mr. Carney is learning despite his promises,” he added.

Poilievre stressed that Canadians need a change in government.

“The need is change. This is a change election, change that you can afford food and a home, change that your paycheck grows faster than your cost of living, change that you’re safe in your neighbourhood,” he said.

Until now, Canada has been hit by three waves of U.S. tariffs — on all goods that are not protected under the CUSMA agreement, on steel and aluminum, and on automobiles.

The U.S. tariffs of 25 per cent on Canadian automobiles came into effect on April 3, and Canada responded by imposing 25 per cent tariffs on non-CUSMA compliant vehicles made in the U.S. and non-Canadian content of CUSMA compliant U.S. vehicles on April 9.

This has resulted in hundreds of layoffs and suspension of production in at least two auto plants in Ontario — Stellantis in Windsor and General Motors in Ingersoll.

The news that Honda might shift its production to the U.S. had the workers in the facility in Alliston holding their breath. Just last year, Honda, with the federal and provincial governments, announced $15 billion for two new plants for electric vehicles and batteries.

The Ontario premier said that would not change: “We’re going to keep Honda here.”

“We can confirm that our Canadian manufacturing facility in Alliston, Ontario, will operate at full capacity for the foreseeable future and no changes are being considered at this time,” said Honda Canada spokesperson Ken Chiu in a statement.

“We constantly study options for future contingency planning and utilize short-term production shift strategies when required, to mitigate negative impacts on our business.”

The federal government is not waiting for the situation to worsen and

announced new support for Canadian businesses affected by tariffs

— including automakers.

On Tuesday, it announced a “performance-based remission framework for automakers” which is designed to incentivize production and investment in Canada.

The exemption to some of the countermeasure tariffs announced by Canada in response to the U.S. tariffs is contingent on automakers continuing to produce vehicles in the country and moving ahead with their planned investments, according to a press release.

“In other words, our counter-tariffs won’t apply if they continue to produce, continue to employ, continue to invest in Canada,” said Carney.

“If they don’t, they will get 25 per cent tariffs on what they are importing into Canada.”

Carney said he has been speaking with CEOs of major automotive companies. He said he has been hearing loud and clear that the auto industry is “incredibly integrated” in North America and that tariffs would effectively erase profit margins for automakers.

“They’re very concerned,” he said. “They don’t think that the (Trump) administration is taking into account how integrated the industry is.”

White House spokesperson Karoline Leavitt reiterated on Tuesday Trump’s goal is to put U.S. auto workers “first.”

National Post

calevesque@postmedia.com

Get more deep-dive National Post political coverage and analysis in your inbox with the Political Hack newsletter, where Ottawa bureau chief Stuart Thomson and political analyst Tasha Kheiriddin get at what’s really going on behind the scenes on Parliament Hill every Wednesday and Friday, exclusively for subscribers. Sign up here.


Liberal leader Mark Carney, left, and Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre.

Public trust in the Liberals and Conservatives is nearly equal, according to a new survey. However, demographic and regional splits could shape the final outcome of the 2025 election.

The poll,

conducted by Leger for the Association for Canadian Studies

, found that 35 per cent of Canadians trust the Liberals and 34 per cent trust the Conservatives. The NDP has the trust of 29 per cent of people, followed by 22 per cent for the Bloc Québécois.

Trust is important, especially in such a close contest, said Jack Jedwab, president of the Association for Canadian Studies and the Metropolis Institute.

“Trust in the parties and their leaders is a key determinant in voter decision-making,” Jedwab said. “It’s a critical issue that could make the difference to the outcome of the election.”

The survey reveals a distinct gender divide. While men trust the Liberals and Conservatives at similar levels (37 per cent and 34 per cent, respectively), more women trust the Liberals than the Conservatives. The Conservative party is trusted by 38 per cent of men and just 27 per cent of women.

Jedwab links this to a broader trend across North America.

“Some women associate advances in gender equality with the Liberal brand more so than they do the Conservative one,” he said.

Canadians aged 55 and over (36 per cent for the Liberals compared to 30 per cent for the Conservatives) and university-educated voters (45 per cent compared to 31 per cent) also tend to trust the Liberals more.

Risk aversion and a desire for stability may explain some of the support from older Canadians, Jedwab said, while higher education levels often align with left-leaning views, creating distrust of the Conservatives among that group.

Trust varies significantly by language and region. Among English-speaking Canadians, trust in the two major parties is the same (35 per cent), but among Francophones, the Bloc Québécois is the most trusted (42 per cent) compared to 37 per cent for the Liberals and just 22 per cent for the Conservatives. Jedwab noted that the Bloc’s brand is closely tied to protecting Quebec’s interests.

“The Bloc’s key message is that they’re the most trustworthy in defence of Quebec,” he said. “But they can’t govern — and that’s a challenge when voters are also thinking about who can stand up to threats from south of the border.”

For both parties, Ontario remains the critical battleground in the trust wars. “Ontario voters are the key battleground for the parties in building their trust or eroding that of others,” said Jedwab.

The relationship between trust and voter intention is particularly stark among NDP and Bloc voters. NDP supporters express much greater trust in Liberals than in the Conservatives, while Bloc voters also tend to trust Liberals more than Conservatives. Jedwab said this puts added pressure on the Conservatives to either build trust or erode it in their rivals.

“These are the kinds of signals that parties are watching closely, especially with leaders’ debates coming up,” Jedwab said.

The online survey of 1,631 Canadians was conducted by Leger on April 5 and 6. A margin of error cannot be associated with a non-probability sample in a panel survey for comparison purposes. A probability sample of 1,631 respondents would have a margin of error of plus or minus 2.5 per cent, 19 times out of 20.


What do castles in Sweden have to do with the Canadian election?

Absolutely nothing. But their cost compared to a very modest house in Kitchener, Ont., has been a recurring topic in just about every Pierre Poilievre campaign rally speech since the writ was dropped.

While laying out examples of the “lost Liberal decade” and illustrating the growing cost of housing in Canada, the Conservative Party of Canada will point out “that you can actually buy a castle in Sweden for a lower price than a midsize house in Kitchener,” or something to that effect.

It’s been a familiar refrain from Poilievre since not long after he became party leader.

It was a talking point during his first

Tory convention speech

as leader in 2023 and

again last year

. In Ottawa, he’s brought it up

in the House of Commons

multiple times and

outside the West Block

on Parliament Hill. He’s also referenced it

while speaking with people

around the country

, and in

pre-election events this year.

In an email to National Post, a Conservative party spokesperson cited Poilievre’s source as both an October 2023

CTV News story

about a couple from Fergus, Ont., who upgraded to a French castle and

a National Post piece

from months earlier about a new TikTok series from a user who goes by Millennial Moron.

“I didn’t know that he was doing it recently. But it’s been happening quite a bit over the past couple of years,” he said when contacted by National Post. “I haven’t really kept track of it since then.”

 

In the satirical series, which now has 27 parts, Millennial Moron compares two real estate listings: an average or sometimes run-down home in Toronto or Vancouver and an actual castle or chateau on a sprawling estate somewhere in Europe. It’s his way of illustrating just how unaffordable Canada’s housing market has become in some of its most densely populated areas.

In Part 17

, for instance, he compares 821 Queensway in Toronto — a very modest three-bedroom, two bath on a small lot — with a nearly 60,000 square-foot 15th-century Italian fortress with 23 beds and baths, and other opulent luxuries.

The Canadian property was listed at $9,999,999 while the estate in Italy was going for just under $9.8 million.

Millennial Moron, whose series juxtaposing homes with private islands pre-dated the castles idea, has amassed over a quarter-million followers across his social pages, almost 180,000 coming from

TikTok

. His other content has a slightly more serious tone and deals mostly with the real estate and housing sectors from a statistical standpoint, with semi-regular unbiased dabbles in the political sphere.

(More curious parties should visit his tongue-in-cheek

food pun election survey

pitting Mark Carnitas against steak au Poilievre. The Grit dish was leading 105-61 as of Monday evening.)

He told National Post doesn’t mind that his effort on

one specific video

is being indirectly referenced as part of a political campaign, since it’s bringing attention to an issue he feels should be of paramount importance to Canadians.

“But at the same time, I’m not that enthused about him referencing my work specifically and repeatedly because I think that both the Liberals and Conservatives have some responsibility for this issue over the last 20 years,” he said.

Millennial Moron said only now are governments — municipal, provincial and federal — starting to focus on addressing scarcity and building more homes instead relying on of successive federal governments that have used low interest rates, allowing people to take on onerous mortgage debt, as the primary solution.

“This is an idea for this series I had before Justin Trudeau became prime minister. I just didn’t think of a funny way to do it until a couple of years ago,” the TikToker said.

He likes the CPC and Liberal plans on housing “in principle,” but he doesn’t think either “has a well-rounded and well-developed” enough solution to tackle the significant municipal barriers that sometimes result in purpose-built housing being completed years after they are first proposed.

“So when we have politicians on a four-year electoral cycle saying that we want to get this done by 2030, it makes me quite skeptical that they have any ability to do that,” he added.

Poilievre has promised the CPC

will cut the federal portion of GST on new homes up to $1.3 million and reimburse cities 50 per cent for every dollar of development charge reduced to a max of $25,000.

Mark Carney and the Liberals’

Build Canada Strong

plan aims to “double the pace of construction to almost 500,000 new homes a year.”

They’ll do so by cutting the GST on homes at or under $1 million for first-time homebuyers, incentivizing “red tape” reduction at the municipal level, and establishing a new agency called Build Canada Homes to act “as a developer to build affordable housing at scale, including on public lands.” It will provide $10 billion in low-cost financing and capital to affordable home builders.

“For the projects to actually get built, they still need to be financially viable, particularly for purpose-built rental housing,” said Millennial Moron, who advises people explore all the parties’ position on housing to best inform their decision.

If you’re really serious about housing, he said, become more aware and involved with what’s happening in your own backyard.

“If people actually care about housing as an issue, then they need to get more aware and more involved in municipal politics, where they can’t have a bigger impact because there (are) fewer people involved.

Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here.


Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre in Montreal on April 15, 2025.

MONTREAL — Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre now says he doesn’t have a timeline for when he would defund the CBC despite promising in December to do it “very quick.”

Questioned by National Post on Tuesday on whether the Conservatives would defund the CBC within 100 days of forming government, Poilievre refused to commit to a specific timeline.

“I don’t have a time frame, but we’ve already said, I’ve already made my position clear on that, and it hasn’t changed: We’re going to defund the CBC,” Poilievre said.

His answer is a notable change from his position just a few months ago, at a time when polls suggested Conservatives held a sizeable lead in the polls over the Justin Trudeau-led Liberals.

In December, Poilievre told

Toronto Sun columnist Brian Lilley

that he would defund the public broadcaster quickly after taking power. The public broadcaster receives roughly $1.4 billion in annual government funding.

“I’m going to defund the CBC. That’s my commitment. My commitment has been the same since I first said it at my very first leadership rally in Regina. I said, ‘We will defund the CBC to save a billion dollars.’ That was my commitment then, it’s my commitment now,” he told Lilley.

On Tuesday, he also provided some new detail about what would happen to the public broadcaster’s English service under a Conservative government. He said that Canadians would continue to “enjoy” the CBC as a “nonprofit, self-funded organization”.

He reiterated his commitment to maintaining funding for Radio-Canada.

CBC has previously said that separating its funding from Radio-Canada’s would require legislative change. In January, the new head of CBC/Radio-Canada Marie-Philippe Bouchard said that cutting funding to the public broadcaster would “cripple” both the English and French services.

“It is to some extent an existential threat because it wouldn’t be the same corporation that we have today,” Bouchard said on

CBC radio show The Current

.

“If we are imagining that we are going to go forward with only French, the math just doesn’t work. There’s a serious risk that it will, in fact, cripple not only the English services, but also the French service,” she continued.

A CBC spokesperson did not immediately respond to a request for details on what the public broadcaster’s services would look like if it were transformed into a “nonprofit, self-funded” organization.

Defunding the CBC was a key policy plank for Poilievre from the moment he won the leadership of the Conservative Party of Canada in 2022.

He often repeated his promise to defund the English service at rallies and public events, earning raucous applause from party faithful.

But the Conservative leader has quietly stopped including the promise in public speeches in recent months as his party’s significant polling lead on the Liberals has melted away. Earlier this month,

a Postmedia-Leger poll

suggested the Mark Carney-led Liberals (44 per cent) held a six-point lead on Poilievre’s Conservatives (38 per cent).

Liberal leader Mark Carney has gone the opposite route of Poilievre, promising to double the funding of CBC/Radio-Canada in coming years all the while allowing the public broadcaster to continue running advertisements.

On Tuesday, he criticized Poilievre for his commitment to slash the CBC’s budget and promising tax cuts to supports workers and companies affected by sweeping U.S. tariffs

“How is (Poilievre) going to finance his big tax cut? He’s going to get rid of the CBC. He’s going to get rid of foreign aid. He’s going to get rid of dental care. He’s going to get rid of childcare,” Carney said.

“He’s going to get rid of all those aspects and then think that 1,000 flowers are going to bloom. Well, that’s not the way things work.”

National Post

cnardi@postmedia.com

Get more deep-dive National Post political coverage and analysis in your inbox with the Political Hack newsletter, where Ottawa bureau chief Stuart Thomson and political analyst Tasha Kheiriddin get at what’s really going on behind the scenes on Parliament Hill every Wednesday and Friday, exclusively for subscribers. Sign up here.