EX-CONSERVATIVE MP MATT JENEROUX CROSSES FLOOR TO JOIN CARNEY’S LIBERALS

“The Curious Developments in Canada’s Political Landscape”; and let’s start with the latest development in Canada. And as alluded to at the beginning of our discussion, Canada’s liberal Prime Minister Mark Carney has lured yet another Conservative MP across the floor, tightening his grip on Parliament and pushing his government to being within a single seat of a majority government.

This comes as, on the morning of the 18th of February, Carney announced that Matt Jeneroux, the longtime Conservative MP for Edmonton Riverbend, is joining the Liberal caucus. Effectively, this means that Jeneroux becomes the third Conservative MP to defect to Carney’s government, following Chris d’Entremont and Michael Ma. The back-to-back losses also leave the Conservatives down two seats in two days and the Liberals just one seat shy of a majority government.

Well, following Matt Jeneroux announcing defection to the Liberal caucus, Carney took to social media to frame the move as an act of national unity and economic necessity. Carney stated that (quote): “I am honoured to welcome Matt Jeneroux to our caucus as the newest member of Canada’s new government,”; adding that 

“Building a stronger, more resilient, and more independent country will require ambition, collaboration, and occasionally, sacrifice.” And, this is where I would ask whose sacrifice? In any case, Carney also immediately handed Jeneroux a new title, appointing him as a special advisor on economic and security partnerships.

Prior to this new appointment, Jeneroux has represented Edmonton Riverbend since 2015, after first being elected to Alberta’s legislature in 2012. He secured four consecutive mandates in Ottawa and held several high-profile critical roles under Conservative leadership, including supply chains, innovation, infrastructure, health, and housing. He also served internationally as Vice-Chair of the Canada-UK Interparliamentary Association and founded the Canada-ASEAN Parliamentary Group.

Well, against this backdrop of his time in public office, it would appear that the floor-crossing from Jeneroux also comes after announcing in November that he would be stepping down a series of conflicting public statements where he claimed he was NOT preparing to join the Liberals. Meanwhile, a statement initially provided to CTV News flatly denied the reports, stating that (quote): “Despite the rumours being circulated in Ottawa, MP Jeneroux is not crossing the floor and is remaining a member of the Conservative caucus.” Needless to say, that statement or that report did not age well.

POLITICAL CONSERVATIVES DO NOT HAVE AN ENTITLEMENT TO VICTORY, SAME AS LIBERALS

As concerning as this trajectory is for the Conservative Party in Canada, I believe it serves as a necessary indictment of Canada’s conservative party, while also giving a serious warning to conservatives in other political jurisdictions. And the warning is that political conservatives do not have an entitlement to victory, in the way we make this same argument for Liberals.

I raise this because of a number of frustrations with political conservatives. First, is that in an era where conservatives learnt the art of winning a narrative war, many of them thought it was enough to only hold the political conservative card, without doing much work to gain political legitimacy to increased influence in the political landscape; this is work like implementing policies for which they were voted, or devising strategies that gain the conservative caucus a majority, or even winning liberals to the conservative caucus. And so, in the absence of this work, conservatives lose their appeal in political office, rendering their politically conservative inclination as symbolic at best. In Canada, being  politically conservative is perhaps less than symbolically significant seeing as how easily Carney is winning conservatives to the liberal caucus in quick succession. 

Second, a number of conservatives seem to lack a perspective of who their opponent is. For instance in the status quo, we have observed liberals in various political jurisdictions abase themselves to the worst of politics. From weaponising institutions in an effort to keep their conservative opponents in court perpetually or even in prison, from demanding the creation of concentration camps for conservatives, from trying to block conservative parties from contesting in elections, and even outright calling for violence and the murder of conservatives. And yet, conservatives would hold investigative committee hearings, write strongly worded letters, and (in the case of the US) maybe pursue formal legal recourse through the courts until the supremacy clause was raised.

But, this lack of fighting instinct is most seen in elections. As an avid watcher of the Station, you’d recall that in covering the Canadian Election, where Mark Carney emerged as Prime Minister last year, on the Election Report, we highlighted the concern from many Canadians and spectators around the world that Pierre Poilievre did not run an aggressive or effective election campaign. Carney dominated the key points of contention in Canada, including on how to frame Canada;s relationship with Trump, despite the fact that conservative parties and figures were on the rise in other political jurisdictions like Europe (where conservative views get people arrested).

In the US, a similar concern arises as America gears toward the midterms. It has been jarring to me how much Trump is doing to help the Republican party win, in comparison to the actual individuals contending in the midterms. Liberals have incredibly visible, and viscous campaigns, while conservatives just capitalise on endorsement from Trump. That is good, but voters expect candidates to have direct message and engagement with them, beyond appeals to endorsement. For example, I know so much about the democrat candidate who contested in Tennessee’s 7th congressional district special election in December 2025, in comparison to Van Epps, the Republican candidate. And for a while I thought this was an issue on my part, until I would listen to conservative commentators and analysts in the state of Tennessee arguing the same. So much so that  Speaker Mike Johnson once even called President Trump and put his phone on speaker during a stop in Tennessee to assist with the campaign. And the result was that in Tennessee (which Trump won by a wide margin for the third time in a row in 2024, with him winning the state by 29.7%), the 7th congressional district special election was a tight race.

And so, I think what is happening in Canada should serve as a wake-up call to conservatives around the world. Being a political conservative is good, given our understanding that the left is led by the devil, but being a political conservative is not itself a metric for success of good leadership. It is your work, your track record that builds political legitimacy.

LIBERAL LEADERSHIP IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH PATRIOTIC SERVICE

Now, what we’ve just outlined is not to imply that conservatives are inherently bad. Emphatically no. But, it is to highlight that they have the potential to be strategic adversaries to a left that is headed by the devil, and therefore are too important not to act like it.

In essence, in a world where patriotic persons are not always in leadership, having liberal leaders is not in the best interests of people. For example, Carney himself appears to have joined liberals because he knew it would be easy to financially gain from the decision.

CARNEY HAS TAPPED EMERGENCIES ACT ADVISOR TO HEAD US TRADE NEGOTIATIONS

But, conservatives crossing over to the liberal caucus is not the end of the curious developments in Canada’s political landscape. And I say this because, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney has chosen a former high-ranking official who advised the Liberal government to use the controversial Emergencies Act to crush peaceful protests, to now lead Canada’s turbulent trade negotiations with the United States and Mexico. And this is Janice Charette.

For some context, in February 2022, widespread demonstrations known as the Freedom Convoy converged on Ottawa and other border crossings to oppose COVID-19 vaccine mandates and related public health restrictions. The protests, largely peaceful but disruptive to commerce and daily life, prompted the Trudeau government to invoke the Emergencies Act for the first time in Canadian history. This allowed extraordinary measures, including freezing bank accounts, towing vehicles, and arresting participants, to clear the blockades.

Well, Janice Charette, then serving as Clerk of the Privy Council and Secretary to the Cabinet – which is Canada’s top public servant – played a key advisory role in those events. She recommended that the government meet the legal threshold to invoke the Emergencies Act, arguing that the situation constituted a national emergency warranting federal intervention. In testimony before the subsequent public inquiry, Charette defended the decision, noting a broader interpretation of threats to security and emphasizing the need to use the full powers of the federal government to address the crisis.

HOWEVER, the invocation of the Emergencies Act was actually unjustified and an overreach, especially given that courts later found aspects of it unlawful. The Federal Court of Appeal upheld a ruling that the invocation was not justified in key respects, highlighting ongoing debates about government authority during protests.

And so, it is against this backdrop that Charette’s appointment, announced on February 16th, is concerning. Her new role positions her as a senior advisor to Prime Minister Carney and to Minister Dominic LeBlanc, who oversees Canada-US trade. She will also work closely with Canada’s Ambassador to the United States, Mark Wiseman, to lead negotiations ahead of the scheduled review of the Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement (or CUSMA, also known as USMCA). This agreement, which replaced NAFTA and came into force in 2020, includes a clause requiring a joint review six years after entry – meaning discussions must begin by July 1st this year.

Now, crucially, the review comes at a peculiar time for North American trade. Canada relies on the United States for about 70-75% of its exports, making the relationship vital to the economy. Recent tensions, including threats of tariffs from the US administration and uncertainties over the pact’s future, have heightened the stakes. Some US voices have suggested shifting to bilateral deals rather than maintaining the trilateral framework, though Canadian and Mexican officials, including LeBlanc following recent meetings in Mexico, have reaffirmed their commitment to preserving the integrated trilateral structure. Well, in all of this, Charette’s role will ideally involve advancing Canadian interests in sectors like automotive, agriculture, energy, and manufacturing, while seeking to strengthen investment ties and shield workers from potential disruptions.

But, her selection seems primarily to underscores Carney’s preference for seasoned Ottawa insiders to handle complex files amid economic pressures. However, to Canadians, the decision to point her is controversial, especially for those who see irony—or poor judgment—in entrusting someone associated with the Emergencies Act’s use against domestic protesters to now defend Canada’s sovereignty and economic interests on the international stage, particularly against a US counterpart known for aggressive bargaining.

A VIOLENT TRANS PERPETRATOR WAS LET OUT ON BAIL IN CALGARY

You’d recall that we recently discussed the horrific Tumbler Ridge mass shooting by yet another individual identifying as transgender. Well, while many have tried to argue that there is no pattern of transgender violence in Canada, a disturbing case has come to the surface, highlighting flaws in Canada’s justice system. And this case pertains to a transgender individual named Alice Michael Atwood, biologically male, who was released on bail in Calgary after committing a heinous act of violence against his own children. The incident, which occurred in February 2025 in Grande Prairie, Alberta, involved Atwood allegedly slashing the throats of his seven-year-old son and eight-year-old daughter during a violent episode. The daughter suffered catastrophic injuries, including a severed esophagus, necessitating an emergency airlift to Stollery Children’s Hospital in Edmonton. She endured months on a feeding tube and extensive medical care, while the son also required hospitalization.

And yet, despite the severity of the assault – even charged as aggravated assault and assault – Atwood was granted bail after just two days in custody, which raises serious questions about public safety and judicial priorities in Canada. Meanwhile, upon release, Atwood returned to the family home, where he casually live-streamed video games on social media, seemingly indifferent to his daughter’s critical condition. Additionally, reports indicate no stringent bail conditions were imposed, allowing him to live in a van and travel freely between British Columbia and Alberta. And eyewitness accounts place him in Calgary, where he has been observed offering tarot card readings to young girls. What is going on in Canada? How is a biological male identifying as a woman out of bail after two years for gruesomely attacking his own children, and then just causally allowed to offer tarot card readings to young girls. 

Well, following this, a family member has actually attempted to file what is called a Form-8 application to revoke his bail, citing concerns over his mental instability and risk to the public, but no such action was pursued by authorities. Atwood’s sentencing, originally set for January 2026, was inexplicably postponed, leaving him at large as of February 2026.

Now, here’s the additional indictment on Canada’s justice system and mainstream media: Antwood’s case actually resurfaced recently when Atwood posted a bizarre video online, proclaiming he was “being safe and secure” and “just chilling” until his court date. In the footage, he displayed erratic behavior, avoided naming his children, and showed no remorse, further underscoring potential mental health issues that went unaddressed during his bail assessment. Media coverage has been scant, with local outlets like CTV Alberta and Global News providing minimal details, often under publication bans to protect the children’s identities. Meanwhile, mainstream national media has largely ignored the story, referring to Atwood vaguely as a “person” rather than acknowledging his biological sex or the gendered dynamics of the violence.

Honestly, this lenient treatment of transgender offenders exemplifies how the Canadian government, under progressive influences, fails to adequately protect citizens. The Liberal administration’s “catch and release” bail policies, enacted through reforms like Bill C-75, are notorious for prioritising offender rights over victim safety, especially as they often cite rehabilitation and equity. And in Atwood’s case, some have argued that his transgender identity afforded him undue leniency, influenced by diversity, equity, and inclusion (or DEI) mandates that permeate police, courts, and media, in a manner that suppresses critical, even when public endangerment is at stake. 

But, ultimately, this incident fuels broader debates on bail reform and ideological biases in justice. With violent crimes rising, many Canadians question if government priorities—shaped by social justice agendas—compromise safety. Releasing a perpetrator capable of such brutality without robust oversight erodes trust in institutions. Urgent calls for tougher bail standards and unbiased enforcement grow louder, as families like Atwood’s victims grapple with ongoing trauma. Until reforms address these “woke” blind spots, vulnerable Canadians remain at risk.

MEANWHILE, CANADA HAS A CONCERNING TRAJECTORY OF LGBT INDOCTRINATION

MEANWHILE, in all that we’ve discussed, for the fathers who do not try to kill their children, Canada has made it difficult, or even criminal for them to intervene against state sponsored LGBT indoctrination. You’d recall th twe highlighted here on The War Room the case in British Columbia, where a father – widely reported as Rob Hoogland – found himself fighting to halt his teenage daughter’s medical gender transition, leading to his imprisonment for defying court orders.

The case began around 2015–2016 when his daughter, then in elementary school, faced challenges and began seeing school counselors. By seventh grade (approximately age 12–13), she started identifying as a boy at school, coinciding with the introduction of gender identity education programs like SOGI 123 in British Columbia schools. The school socially transitioned her—using a male name and pronouns—without initially informing her parents, aligning with provincial policies allowing student privacy on gender matters.

Her mother supported the transition. The school further  referred her to psychologist Dr Wallace Wong, a registered psychologist specializing in gender dysphoria and youth mental health. Dr Wong, who has worked with the Ministry of Children and Family Development and claimed involvement with numerous transgender youth cases (including hundreds in care), recommended proceeding toward medical steps. He referred her to the endocrinology team at BC Children’s Hospital Gender Clinic.

There, clinicians assessed the daughter and determined she met criteria for puberty blockers followed by testosterone to affirm her male identity. The father strongly objected, citing concerns about her mental health history, potential long-term effects (such as infertility, bone density issues, or other risks associated with cross-sex hormones), and her age. He even  sought court intervention to stop the treatment.

But, in 2019 rulings by the British Columbia Supreme Court (and upheld on appeal), judges determined the child—deemed a “mature minor”—could apparently consent to her own treatment under Canadian law. The father lacked authority to veto it. One decision limited him to a supportive “friend and advisor” role regarding her medical decisions. Courts further imposed publication bans and gag orders prohibiting him from publicly discussing details, using her birth name, or referring to her with female pronouns, allegedly to protect her privacy and dignity amid heated online commentary.

But, the father violated these orders multiple times by giving interviews, speaking publicly about the case as “state-sponsored child abuse,” and sharing documents. In March 2021, he was arrested for contempt of court. In April 2021, he received a six-month prison sentence (later reduced on appeal in 2023 to time served, around 45 days). He served time in jail for breaching the gag order. And so, this case highlights judicial overreach in enabling irreversible interventions on minors; this father was (in actual fact) arrested for loving his daughter and fighting to protect her innocence and health. BUT, this is not even the only father who’s experienced this. This following excerpt shows Canadian veteran Jeff Evely describing the indoctrination of his daughter and how the Canadian Children’s Hospital of Ontario began contacting her at 16 – the age of consent for gender transition in Canada.

Written By Lindokuhle Mabaso

Carney, who has emphasised the importance of re-establishing broad engagement with China after a period of strained relations, is scheduled to attend the APEC summit in Seoul. Last week, he stated that he expected to meet senior Chinese leaders in the coming month.

“We’re hoping there will be a meeting and will plan accordingly … we would like to see a meeting at APEC if possible,” a senior government official said when asked about a possible meeting with Xi.

Trade tensions remain between the two countries. In August, China imposed preliminary anti-dumping duties on Canadian canola imports, following Canada’s decision last year to introduce a 100% tariff on Chinese electric vehicles.

Senior officials from both sides held discussions last Friday regarding the canola and electric vehicle disputes, though Ottawa indicated there was no immediate progress.

The leaders focused on deepening economic ties and modernizing trade frameworks, with President Trump hinting at a comprehensive deal that could cover key industries including dairy, manufacturing, and energy.

“The United States and Canada are two of the hottest economies in the world,” Trump said during a joint press briefing. “We share values, we share borders, and we’re working toward a trade deal that reflects the strength of our partnership.”

While the meeting marked a continuation of trade discussions, the tone signaled progress. Trump emphasized mutual respect and the need for balanced agreements, stating that “Canadians will be very happy” with the terms being negotiated.

Prime Minister Carney echoed that sentiment, noting that both nations are seeking “durable, fair, and forward looking trade solutions” in an increasingly unstable global economy.

Historical Context

The current talks build on the legacy of previous trade frameworks like the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), which replaced NAFTA in 2020. While USMCA modernized various aspects of trade especially in digital commerce and automotive content rules it left some sectors, like dairy, contentious between the two nations. Canada’s protected dairy industry has long been a sticking point in bilateral negotiations, something Trump alluded to when referencing “broad” industry coverage.

President Trump, now in his second term, has prioritized renegotiating key trade relationships to favor American industry and reduce trade deficits. Canada remains one of America’s largest trading partners, with over $700 billion in annual bilateral trade.

Though details remain scarce, officials say the next few weeks could be critical in shaping the final terms of a new deal.

Speaking Monday in response to Prime Minister Mark Carney’s newly announced military budget increase, Poilievre said boosting spending is not enough without addressing what he sees as a deeper cultural decline within the Canadian Forces.

“We need a warrior culture that actually inspires people to join the military again,” Poilievre told reporters. “Right now, we don’t have that.”

Carney’s government recently committed to increasing defence spending, aligning more closely with NATO targets. The move has reignited debate over whether Canada should aim for even higher benchmarks including the 5% of GDP figure floated in NATO circles.

Poilievre appeared skeptical of such figures, questioning their realism: “Who has actually hit 5%? Does anyone hit 5% right now?” he asked, implying that the focus should be on impact and reform, not just metrics.

Canada currently spends approximately 1.4% of its GDP on defense, below NATO’s baseline recommendation of 2%.

The comments come amid broader concerns over military recruitment shortfalls, equipment modernization, and Canada’s global defense commitments. Critics have warned that without cultural and structural reforms, increased spending alone may not solve the Armed Forces’ long-standing challenges.

He reduced the size of the cabinet to 29 members from the previous 39 under former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, though several prominent figures remain in their roles. Finance Minister Francois-Philippe Champagne stays on, as does Dominic LeBlanc, who continues to handle matters related to U.S. trade.

Although Carney met with Trump in Washington recently, the talks did not lead to the lifting of tariffs placed on Canadian goods.

“Our government is ready to act with speed and purpose,” Carney said during a press conference. “Canadians are still burdened by unfair U.S. tariffs, and we intend to defend our workers and industries.”

Carney emphasized the need for Canada to reduce its economic dependence on the U.S., calling for significant domestic investment, fewer internal trade restrictions, and a reduction in government spending.

Matthew Holmes, policy director at the Canadian Chamber of Commerce, welcomed the push for reform, noting the urgency of addressing internal trade barriers and modernizing regulations.

There were notable changes in cabinet roles: Melanie Joly, previously the foreign minister, now leads the industry portfolio and is succeeded by Anita Anand. Chrystia Freeland, who stepped down as finance minister last year in a move that contributed to Trudeau’s political decline, remains in charge of transport and interprovincial trade. Tim Hodgson, a former executive at Goldman Sachs, has been appointed natural resources minister.

According to Cameron Anderson, a political science professor at Western University, Carney’s choices for key positions signal a strategic focus on strengthening Canada’s stance in cross-border relations.

Ten junior secretaries of state were also named. Among Carney’s early promises are a broad tax cut and the elimination of trade barriers between provinces by July 1.

His fiscal plan includes approximately C\$130 billion in new spending over four years, projecting a deficit of C\$62.3 billion for 2025–26—substantially higher than the C\$42.2 billion estimated late last year.

One structural change drawing criticism is the replacement of the labor minister position with a secretary of state for labor. The Teamsters union expressed concern, suggesting the move downplays the challenges workers face. “It raises serious doubts about how seriously the government takes labor issues,” said union spokesperson Christopher Monette.

Trudeau’s previous administration had intervened in several high-profile labor disputes, including strikes in the port, rail, and postal sectors.

In the recent election, Carney’s party narrowly missed a majority in Parliament. The opposition Conservatives had been leading earlier in the year but lost momentum after Trudeau stepped down and Trump introduced new trade penalties while hinting at possible annexation.

Commenting on the new cabinet, Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre criticized the appointments. “This is just a continuation of the old Trudeau government,” he said. “Canadians were promised change, but this isn’t it.”

The visit marks Carney’s first official talks with President Trump since taking office. While both leaders described the meeting as productive, a brief moment of levity quickly drew attention after Prime Minister Carney firmly stated that “Canada will never be for sale.”

President Trump appeared to joke about closer integration between the two nations, saying, “We’re not discussing Canada becoming part of the United States but it would be a wonderful marriage.”

The remark sparked immediate reactions on social media and among political analysts, though both leaders quickly moved on to more conventional matters.

Trump called the meeting “great” and emphasized that he and Carney have developed a strong rapport. “We get along very well,” Trump noted, praising Carney’s leadership and Canada’s role as a key U.S. ally.

Focus on Shared Interests

According to a joint statement, the two leaders discussed issues including cross-border trade, energy cooperation, defense partnerships under NATO, and continental infrastructure. Both sides reiterated their commitment to modernizing trade frameworks and strengthening North American competitiveness.

While no major agreements were signed, both leaders signaled interest in further collaboration on climate resilience, economic security, and regional stability.

Carney, a former central banker, is seen as a pragmatic and globally minded leader. His visit to Washington is viewed as an important early step in reaffirming Canada-U.S. relations under his tenure.

“Who is ready for change in Canada?!” he shouted, energizing the crowd.

Poilievre, a seasoned 45-year-old politician, reminisced about the 1970s when, he claimed, Canadians could pay off a mortgage in seven years—far faster than the many decades it now takes in certain cities.

While the Conservative Party had a 20-point lead in the polls just months ago, they are now expected to lose Monday’s election to Prime Minister Mark Carney’s Liberals, largely due to Carney’s critical stance on U.S. President Donald Trump.

However, Poilievre’s emphasis on the cost of living has resonated with younger voters, particularly men. A recent poll by Nanos on April 24 revealed that 49.3% of voters aged 18-34 favored the Conservatives, while only 30% supported the Liberals. Among all age groups, the Liberals still led 42.9% to 39.3%. The poll also showed that 45.5% of men, across all ages, preferred the Conservatives compared to 36.7% for the Liberals.

Conducted from April 21 to 23, the survey included 1,307 Canadians and has a margin of error of ±2.7%, 19 times out of 20.

For younger Canadians, Poilievre symbolizes a change from nearly a decade of Liberal leadership under Justin Trudeau, which Poilievre often criticizes as a “lost decade.” Their main concerns are financial—how to afford housing and living expenses, rather than international relations.

Carney, who took office in March, has distanced himself from Trudeau’s policies.

“I’ve been through the struggle of paying for groceries, covering bills, and trying to save up to start a family,” said Joshua Dwyer, 24, a journalism student at Toronto Metropolitan University, who was attending his third Poilievre rally. “It doesn’t work under the Liberal government. We’ve had a decade to try, and it’s not working.”

Polls have tightened in recent days, and Poilievre has been drawing large crowds. Although such rallies and voter intentions do not always translate to election victories under Canada’s electoral system, turnout among young voters, especially in Ontario and Quebec, could be crucial. The youth vote could determine if Poilievre pulls off a surprise victory or if the Liberals secure a majority, potentially relying on support from other parties. Historically, young people are less likely to vote. To engage them, Conservative youth TikTok accounts are encouraging younger conservatives to convince their parents to vote for Poilievre.

The Liberals have tried to draw comparisons between Trump’s populist style and Poilievre’s approach, which includes proposals to cut government funding for the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation and dismantle homeless camps in urban areas. Additionally, Poilievre’s campaign has kept a low profile on Trump, mentioning him only once during his Vaughan rally.

Poilievre’s campaign did not respond to a request for comment.

Both Carney and Poilievre have made housing a central issue, with each advocating for the removal of the federal sales tax on new homes. Poilievre’s approach has garnered support from some voters, like Cameron Pinto, a 24-year-old paramedic student at the rally. Pinto expressed more confidence in Poilievre’s stance, believing less government intervention would allow the private sector to drive new housing developments.

“I’m here because I believe the mismanagement over the past 10 years has caused a lot of the issues we face now,” said Pinto.

Carney, 60, brings a wealth of experience from his time managing central banks in Canada and the UK during the 2008 financial crisis and Brexit—events that occurred when many Gen Z voters were still children.

Young Canadians’ frustration mirrors similar trends seen in the United States and Europe, where younger generations have also leaned towards Conservative politics in recent years.

“There’s a sense among young adults that the opportunities their parents had are no longer available to them,” said Paul Thomas, emeritus professor of political studies at the University of Manitoba.

Whether this shift will have lasting significance is still uncertain, according to Thomas. “They haven’t developed the voting habits of older generations, who see it as more of a duty.”

“Trump’s goal is to weaken Canada so the U.S. can dominate us,” Carney said, prompting scattered boos from the audience. “We’ve moved past the initial shock, but we must hold onto the lessons learned.”

With just under two weeks until voters cast their ballots on April 28, Carney—only two months into his political career—is drawing heavily on his past leadership during global financial crises. As a former central banker in both Canada and the UK, he’s presenting himself as a calm, competent alternative in uncertain times.

That strategy seems to be resonating. After trailing significantly at the start of the year, the Liberals have now opened a six-point lead over the Conservatives, according to recent poll averages. Projections suggest they’re on track for a parliamentary majority, extending their hold on government.

Carney’s approach—firm messaging paired with a steady demeanor—is seen as a calculated contrast to Trump’s confrontational style. Meanwhile, Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre is reportedly struggling to recalibrate his campaign in response to the shifting landscape.

When Carney took over leadership from former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, some within the party questioned his low-key style. But insiders suggest the party is intentionally leaning into that understated presence as a strategic counter to louder political voices.

“We will retaliate against the U.S. tariffs with our trade actions, ensuring they have the greatest impact on the U.S. while minimizing effects on Canada,” Carney remarked at a press conference. He acknowledged that a trade war would be particularly damaging for Canada, given that 75% of its exports are directed to the United States.

Carney also indicated that he would consult with provincial premiers and business leaders on Friday to discuss a coordinated response to the recent auto tariffs introduced by U.S. President Donald Trump. He noted that responding to each U.S. initiative individually would not be effective, and added that a more comprehensive understanding of the situation would emerge within a week. “Nothing is off the table to defend our workers and our country,” he asserted. One potential measure being considered is the imposition of excise duties on exports such as oil, potash, and other commodities.

Carney took a brief pause from his campaign ahead of the April 28 general election to address the matter. He urged voters to provide his Liberal Party with a strong mandate to manage relations with the U.S. Recent polling suggests he is poised for a substantial victory. “When President Trump threatens us again, we will fight back… with everything we have to secure the best deal for Canada,” Carney emphasized, reiterating calls to strengthen Canada’s auto sector and diversify trade to reduce reliance on the United States. “It is evident that the United States is no longer a reliable partner. While there remains a possibility that trust may be restored through comprehensive negotiations, there will be no return to the previous status quo,” he added.

Carney confirmed that he intends to engage with President Trump in the coming days to stress the importance of cooperation and respect for Canada’s sovereignty. He also responded to Trump’s recent remarks suggesting the possibility of larger tariffs on both the European Union and Canada if they collaborate to harm the U.S. economy, saying, “I take note of the President’s comment. However, I do not take direction from it.”

“Our sovereignty is facing unprecedented threats. The world is becoming more divided and dangerous, and this plan will ensure that Canada remains strong both domestically and internationally,” Carney stated during a televised address at a shipyard in Halifax. “We are safeguarding our borders, sovereignty, resources, land, and way of life,” he added.

Although Carney did not specify the exact amount of funding, he outlined plans to acquire new submarines and heavy icebreakers, as well as to modernize Canada’s outdated military procurement process. He also revealed intentions to revamp recruitment efforts to attract more military personnel, and promised a pay increase for all active service members, though further details were not disclosed.

Under pressure from successive U.S. administrations, Canada had already committed to a significant boost in defense spending last year, with plans to meet NATO defense targets by 2030. Polls suggest the Liberals are likely to win more seats than the Conservative opposition, but may fall short of securing a majority government.