2025 Debate – What Impact on Voters?

From a last-minute broadcast time change to accommodate the Montreal Canadiens game, to the exclusion of the Green Party just hours before the event, the road to this first leaders’ debate was, to say the least, filled with twists and turns. Will this debate help Quebec voters and French-speaking Canadians outside Quebec make a more informed choice on April 28? 

The first question to ask is this: does the place of televised debates remain as significant in 2025, when alternative channels are more numerous than ever? Are we still seeing effects comparable to the historic debate between John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon, or, closer to home, between Brian Mulroney and John Turner? While debates remain relevant, their actual impact on voting is increasingly difficult to measure. 

Debates, hockey game or not, are an opportunity to bring together the leaders of the main political parties in a highly controlled setting. Primarily to offer a platform for those who have not yet made up their minds, but also to reinforce the views of those whose vote was decided before the election campaign even began.  

It is worth noting that television still commands a sizeable audience, particularly among age groups with the highest voter turnout rates. Those aged 55 to 74, for example, stood out with a participation rate ranging between 68 and 75 % in the last federal election. 

Analysis of the 2025 Leaders’ Debate

First, the format. One cannot ignore the quality of the French spoken, which remains a second language for three of the participants, giving Yves-François Blanchet a clear advantage when addressing Quebecers. For French speakers tuning in, the format and pace of the discussions, masterfully guided by moderator Patrice Roy, still allowed the participants to put forward their proposals on the key themes identified: the trade war, cost of living, energy and climate, immigration and foreign affairs, and identity and sovereignty. 

Perception and non-verbal communication carry a great deal of weight on screen. Since the start of the campaign, we have noticed Pierre Poilièvre’s smile, sometimes forced, as his team attempts to shift the narrative around his abrasive personality. The goal is to make him more approachable, even likeable.  

As for Prime Minister Carney, his composure remains unchanged. Not being widely known to the general public, Canadians have not had the time to form a negative image of him. The premise that has taken hold over the past several weeks remains: trust in Mark Carney’s economic expertise to guide us through uncertainty. His few missteps have not dented voter intentions so far, and his debate performance should not reverse that dynamic. 

Yves-François Blanchet, leader of the Bloc québécois, came out objectively as the best debater, with a sharp verbal performance and arguments praised by analysts. Currently holding 33 seats in Parliament, the Bloc québécois is nonetheless slipping in the polls, falling behind the Liberals, who have reclaimed a lead not seen in Quebec for some time. This is largely explained by the safe-haven effect, which, in times of crisis, leads voters to turn to a governing party as the safer choice. Will this debate have succeeded in gaining points for Mr. Blanchet in Quebec? It is difficult to predict whether his performance will have been enough. 

Finally, NDP leader Jagmeet Singh failed to stand out, despite delivering a few pointed lines to his opponents. His insistence on talking about healthcare led the moderator to cut off his microphone. Confronting the moderator in the middle of an already chaotic debate does not leave the best impression on viewers. 

And what about the substance?

In the absence of a financial framework, it became more difficult for the candidates to detail the spending and revenues associated with their various proposals. In the end, each had just over 22 minutes to lay out their vision. As it becomes increasingly difficult for voters to distinguish between four candidates in a tight race, it is not so much the content (figures and statistics rattled off in haste) that determines success in a debate, but the candidate themselves: their posture, what they project, what they manage not only to make people understand, but above all to feel, particularly through positions grounded in values.

Next up: the English debate, where expectations are higher without the language barrier. Reaching an audience twice as large and speaking to the vast majority of Canadians, we will most likely see the visions of the two front-runners clash head-on, following yesterday evening’s first round. 

Most Noteworthy Quotes 

« You have shown that you are as useless as the monarchy » 

– Jagmeet Singh to Yves-François Blanchet 

« There is no social acceptability for the status quo » 

– Pierre Poilièvre on the energy question 

« You claim expertise in negotiations, perhaps in tax havens » 

– Yves-François Blanchet to Mark Carney on the trade war with the United States 

« Mr. Poilievre is not Mr. Trudeau. Neither am I. » 
– Mark Carney in response to Pierre Poilièvre, who accused him of being exactly like the former Prime Minister