Élie Cantin-Nantel: Carney struggles with French and Freeland takes aim at Trump—A francophone’s takeaways from the French Liberal leadership debate

Last night, the Liberal Party of Canada held its official French leadership debate in Montreal.

While I am not a registered Liberal who can vote for the next party leader, I wanted to watch for two reasons:

1. To see how each candidate (seeking to be prime minister of our bilingual nation) performed in my native tongue, French.

2. To see if any candidates would say something in French they would not dare say in English, particularly involving Bill 96, which affirmed that French is the only official language in Quebec, and Bill 21, which bans public servants from wearing religious symbols in the name of secularism.

Mark Carney: Weak French, weaker performance 

All eyes were on Mark Carney, the presumptive front-runner. It was the former central banker’s first time on a debate stage, and it was underwhelming.

Carney struggled with the French language, made errors, and failed to get his points across clearly. He also lacked charisma and energy and failed to articulate a compelling, inspiring vision for Canada’s future.

And don’t just take it from me—Radio-Canada parliamentary bureau chief Louis Blouin said Carney had difficulty standing out, lacked concreteness, appeared hesitant, and had weak attacks against Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre. Blouin also suggested that Carney may face challenges in a general election French debate against Pierre Poilievre and Bloc Québecois leader Yves-François Blanchet.

Carney’s poor French was made most evident in a gaff on Israel’s war with Hamas in Gaza. He tried to say he agreed with all the other candidates that Hamas cannot remain in control of Gaza. But instead of saying “we agree on Hamas”  he instead said “we agree with Hamas.” This was immediately used by Conservatives to attack him.

Carney also made a remark in French he likely won’t repeat in English. He said he respects Quebec secularism (the focal point of which is a law that bans public servants from wearing religious symbols), saying it’s something that differentiates Canada from the United States.

Chrystia Freeland: Okay French and a dogmatic anti-Trump agenda 

Chrystia Freeland’s French was better than Carney’s, though she maintained her speaking tone critics say is condescending and quite frankly resembles a schoolteacher lecturing children rather than a prime minister speaking to Canadians.

She made several attacks against Donald Trump. She said he supports Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine and wants to treat Canada the way Putin treats Ukraine. She said she would not begin negotiations by meeting Trump in person and would instead announce retaliatory tariffs, including 100 percent tariffs on Tesla (the company owned by his senior advisor, Elon Musk).

At the end of the debate, she bragged that Trump “knows who I am,” as if his disliking her is a good thing. She insisted she is the one who can stand up to him because he only respects strength. During previous trade talks, the president allegedly called Freeland “the killer.” He’s since called her a “nasty woman” and “totally toxic.”

Trudeau’s former finance minister and deputy prime minister also claimed that Poilievre “agrees with Trump and falsely suggested he had not been sanctioned by Russia.

On the economy, Freeland insisted Canada’s financial situation is strong, despite the country seeing record debt and deficits under her watch as finance minister.

As for Quebec issues, Freeland, who spent the previous week trying to appeal to Islamic diasporas, did not explicitly condemn Quebec’s bill banning Muslim teachers from wearing hijabs, saying now is not the time for internal fights within the country.

Karina Gould: Fluent in French, unapologetically progressive   

Karina Gould’s French was quite fluent.

It became clear that the former government house leader is the most left-wing of all candidates, as she doubled down on several aspects of the Trudeau agenda.

Gould proudly said she would not cancel the carbon tax, insisting that she “cannot [let] the planet to burn.” It should be noted that Canada contributes 1.6 percent of global emissions, and that the tax only marginally contributes to lowering greenhouse gases.

On the economy, she showed little concern for deficits, stating she was not comfortable discussing spending cuts. She also opened the door to additional spending.

On Bill 21, Gould opted to talk about the supremacy of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and said she would support court challenges against the bill.

Frank Baylis: An underdog with strong French 

Frank Baylis had the best French of all. He articulated ideas with clarity and boldness.

The billionaire businessman and former Liberal MP pledged to balance the budget but said that for that to happen, he cannot simultaneously guarantee tax cuts.

He also called out the Trudeau government’s handling of immigration, particularly when it came to permanent residents  and international students.

Baylis also said Quebecers must “have an honest discussion” about the need to have pipelines go across their province.

On Bills 96 (language) and 21 (religious symbols), Baylis gave the clearest stance of any candidate—saying he strongly opposes both and boasted that he is involved in court challenges against the latter bill.

French rankings

Baylis had the strongest French, followed by Gould, Freeland, and Carney.

Other takeaways

This was not a debate. Over the course of two hours, there was no substantive disagreement between the candidates. They all agreed Trump is a threat to Canada, that Poilievre is bad, that we should not cut transfers to provinces, that they support Ukraine, and that they want a two-state Israel-Palestine solution.

Freeland summarized the night best when she called the event an “excellent conversation.”

The French debate was one of two official debates. The second installment, in English, takes place Tuesday night.