It is getting pretty close to crunch time in Canada. In little more than a week, what is likely the most important national election in our lifetime will be over. Its outcome will have a direct effect on the future of this country as we face serious threats related to our economy and our sovereignty from our neighbour and former friend, the United States.
What has become very clear in the last few months is that this election is a two-person race. Most Canadians have come to realize the importance of this election and will not sacrifice a vote on political parties that have no chance of winning.
That leaves the Liberal Party and the Conservative Party and their leaders, Mark Carney and Pierre Poilievre. As the campaign currently stands, it is a horse race between these two parties although, assuming the polls are correct, the Liberals are currently ahead by five points as recent polling shows that party at 44% with the Conservatives at 39%.
There are those who see the 25-point collapse in Conservative support over the last few months or so as a sign that Pierre Poilievre and his party have blown their chance to become government.
That is not factually correct as most of those votes were never to be for Mr. Poilievre in the first place. They were potential votes that were strategically placed, or parked, with the Conservatives by Liberals and intended to send a clear message to Justin Trudeau that his time was up. It worked, and as soon as the former Prime Minister exited stage-left, most of those votes returned to their traditional home.
In my view, the reality is that the Conservatives and the Liberals have been, for some time, relatively close to each other, both in popularity and in voter intention.
And so, the question to be asked now is which of these two men, Carney or Poilievre, is best suited to lead Canada through extremely challenging times? It will be a surprise to many that I do not yet have an opinion on that. Perhaps it is because I have seen too much of Pierre Poilievre and not enough of Mark Carney.
Both Poilievre and Carney have strongly opposed the tariffs and sovereignty threats coming from American President Donald Trump. Which one is best suited to put those issues completely to bed, is still unclear to me.
Both of these leaders have their strengths and weaknesses. We will not end this election with a perfect Prime Minister.
Poilievre and Carney have a few things in common. They both are contesting Ottawa ridings, they are both from Alberta and both of their fathers were teachers. It pretty well stops there however, except perhaps for a mutual determination to find a way to mitigate Donald Trump’s influence on Canada.
To his credit, Mark Carney appears to be moving the Liberal Party back to its traditional place on the middle left of the political spectrum. However, it will be a challenge for him to do so with a caucus and cabinet primarily consisting of those who tolerated being held hostage for a number of years by the left-wing New Democratic Party.
Carney’s greatest strength is his experience and generally positive accomplishments as an economist and business executive. These should not be undervalued.
His greatest weakness is that he has few political skills entering an arena where it is all about politics, especially when it comes to dealing with the Trump Administration.
Pierre Poilievre, on the other hand, has had very little real-world experience but is a consummate politician. In this day and age, with the challenges we face, that too should not be undervalued. This is a political game, not a bureaucratic one.
Recently, Mark Carney unveiled an impressive campaign platform regarding a new direction and fresh initiatives that, by his own admission, will result in billions of new spending at a time when Canadians are increasingly worried about a challenging economy and the need to control government spending.
The Poilievre Conservatives have also tabled some good proposals in their election platform, including cutting unnecessary government spending, being tougher on crime with harsher sentences and parole reform, eliminating the sales tax for first-time home buyers and generally making it easier for Canadians to live their lives without an abundance of government interference.
But then, they also highlight some initiatives, like defunding the CBC and restoring plastic products, which polling shows that many Conservatives are against, although, in the case of the CBC, many also support reform when it comes to political bias. Such proposals may appeal to Poilievre’s base, but it risks losing those who are on the fence when deciding who to vote for. That makes little political sense to me.
I also believe that Pierre Poilievre has spent too much time saying that Canada is broken. Most Canadians, of every political stripe, acknowledge the challenges, but do not believe Canada is broken. They believe we are stronger than that, and that we always come together when the chips are down. In fairness, Poilievre has modified his approach to a broken Canada in recent days and instead focussed on the Liberal’s record as he should.
Notwithstanding the slight lead that the Liberals currently hold in the coming election, I continue to believe that the jury is still out. The last week of any election is often the most turbulent and uncertain.
What concerns me the most, however, is the prospect of a minority government. In my view, we must have a government with majority control in Parliament so that hard decisions and strong leadership can prevail without being held hostage by a minority agenda. This is no time for Canada to be seen as having weak leadership.
Turning briefly to our Riding of Parry Sound Muskoka, it is interesting to note that the election here may be somewhat of a horserace as well. It probably leans toward Scott Aitchison as he is the incumbent and this riding votes Conservative more often than it does Liberal. He is also well known for his community service in Muskoka.
But like the national campaign, we have effectively a two-person race in this Riding and either Scott Aitchison or Geordie Sabbagh will be representing Parry Sound Muskoka in the next Parliament.
Geordie Sabbagh, the Liberal candidate, has run a strong and positive campaign avoiding in most instances partisan attacks and focusing instead on his view that the Liberal Party and its leader Mark Carney are best suited to deal with the serious issues confronting Canada. I suspect the gap between him and Scott Aitchison will not be as wide as one might have anticipated at the beginning of this election campaign.
Scott Aitchison has also run a strong campaign. However, I am aware of a number of Conservatives who, because of concerns related to Pierre Poilievre and, fairly or not, their comparison of him to Donald Trump, plan to vote Liberal this time around.
I sense too that Scott Aitchison recognizes that this is not a run-of-the-mill election in a relatively safe riding, that his leader is not universally liked here, and that many voters are focussed on who can best handle Donald Trump. Some of his actions in recent days, including, not unlike his leader, an attack on local media, are an indication, at least to me, that the race in this riding may be closer than we initially thought.
Voting turnout at advance polls yesterday in Parry Sound and Muskoka was close to a record. Most Canadians, I believe, no matter which side of the political fence they are on, recognize that this federal election will be consequential. As a result, my guess is that voter turnout across Canada will be heavier than usual.
Just days from now, Canadians will decide which party and which leader they believe can best serve Canadians, protect our sovereignty and unite our country.
In a democracy, the voters are never wrong, and this is one time when we simply cannot be.
Hugh Mackenzie
Hugh Mackenzie has held elected office as a trustee on the Muskoka Board of Education, a Huntsville councillor, a District councillor, and mayor of Huntsville. He has also served as chairman of the District of Muskoka and as chief of staff to former premier of Ontario, Frank Miller.
Hugh has also served on a number of provincial, federal and local boards, including chair of the Ontario Health Disciplines Board, vice-chair of the Ontario Family Health Network, vice-chair of the Ontario Election Finance Commission, and board member of Roy Thomson Hall, the National Theatre School of Canada, and the Anglican Church of Canada. Locally, he has served as president of the Huntsville Rotary Club, chair of Huntsville District Memorial Hospital, chair of the Huntsville Hospital Foundation, president of Huntsville Festival of the Arts, and board member of Community Living Huntsville.
In business, Hugh Mackenzie has a background in radio and newspaper publishing. He was also a founding partner and CEO of Enterprise Canada, a national public affairs and strategic communications firm established in 1986.
Currently, Hugh is president of C3 Digital Media Inc., the parent company of Doppler Online, and he enjoys writing commentary for Huntsville Doppler.
Don’t miss out on Doppler!
Sign up here to receive our email digest with links to our most recent stories.
Local news in your inbox so you don’t miss anything!
Click here to support local news
Thanks Hugh and John Barltrop for your words. I also agree with others here – this is an election for the prime minister – not our local MPs. I like Scott and I don’t know Geordie, but that will not affect my decision. I could never vote for someone like Pierre Poilievre and a vote for the NDP or Greens in our riding is a waste. Carney may not be the perfect candidate, but from what I am seeing, he is by far the best. I sat in the house of commons and watched when Pierre was kicked out, and he was behaving like an impertinent child. Regardless of the many other reasons, I could never support him after that.
I am an avid reader of news, and if one were to look at my Apple News feed, they would likely have no idea which political side I lean towards. My absolute favourite is this column. Hugh, you always employ a critical thinking approach rather than a staunch ideological point of view. You raise important questions and prompt the reader to consider many whys. All Canadians would benefit from reading these commentaries and the corresponding comments.
I come from a Conservative Party family background, and my profession has made me fiscally minded. Debts and interest scare me, but they can also have very positive outcomes when used effectively. While getting out of the way of business is mostly beneficial, it’s also necessary to monitor, and some regulations are required to protect against worse evils. Diversification of the economy is equally important, much like a well-diversified investment portfolio. Trump is today’s looming crisis, but tomorrow, it could be the climate or AI, which could quickly eliminate both low- and high-wage jobs, as well as those historically seen as low-risk.
Woke may now be a pendulum swing bad word, but the sentiment should not be (a comment noted that the difference ‘when it’s their own’ holds here, too). Would market forces, trying to get the best people, have naturally offered maternity leave in the past? While it’s human nature to want to prioritize ourselves, we can’t ignore the interconnected impacts of humanity and the broader world. COVID should have taught us that on many levels.
With all this said, the modern Conservative Party strays further from moderation despite having some good ideas. While the presented platform is less debt, and something that should be seen as their strength, it is not without deserved criticism. They already seem unprepared for the financial impacts of global influences and how to incorporate them. A new CEO doesn’t have to eliminate an entire organization to lead change, nor does a captain need to throw the crew out to right the ship. No doubt, it will be a challenge for someone accustomed to the business world, but there is a time and a place when certain leaders’ strengths will shine brighter. While you can only control your own home, we need someone who can quickly see the bigger picture in global economic impacts, so they can make critical thinking decisions on which levers to pull to have the most significant impact at home for strength. While I am sorry for many good candidates in parties that have (or would) represent their communities well, choosing based on the leader feels most important to me at this time. And that leader, in my mind, even with the deficits to make investments, is Carney. I do not believe he will be perfect (no leader is), but he will be the best we can ask for at this moment in time.
Thank you, Hugh, for such a thoughtful and clear-eyed reflection. I especially appreciate how you framed the contrast between political instinct and real-world experience — both matter, but I believe this moment calls for steady leadership grounded in real economic understanding. Like you, I’ve also admired how Geordie Sabbagh has led his campaign — focused on solutions, local priorities, and respect, not partisan attacks. At a time when so much feels uncertain, I believe we need leaders who can bring calm, unity, and clarity — and Geordie represents that for me here in Parry Sound–Muskoka. Thanks again for encouraging such grounded and respectful conversation.
Good commentary, Hugh. Although some readers might have been surprised by your balanced approach given your Conservative bona fides, I was not. I’ve always respected your ability to see both sides and to sometimes take the other side.
I’m a card-carrying Liberal but I’ve voted across the spectrum over many years. I’ve even voted for Conservatives a time or two but not since PCs became CPPs.
A recent interaction with someone I care about really pointed out the difference between the left and the right, as I see it. We were talking about an egregious breach of power at the US/Canada border where a young, Canadian university student was held and interrogated for reasons unknown; he was separated from his family and he was terrified.
My Conservative friend said, “If that happened to my child or one of his friends, I would never go back to that damn county again!” I thought to myself, “Hmmm….she’s passionate when it’s personal, but most ‘lefties’ I know would take that action for anyone’s child.”
That’s how I see Poilievre versus Carney – the former is in it for himself while the latter is in it for us. And, having researched Geordie Sabbagh, that’s what I conclude about him. What a partner he’d make on the Carney team.
The only disagreement I have with your article is the quote, “In a democracy, the voters are never wrong.” To me, that like the saying, “The customer is always right.” They’re not wrong until they are and I think that events south of the border proves that in spades.
My goodness Hughie. You are still the consummate politician too. I am pleased to see you weigh in on this…BUT you really managed to walk the tightrope in avoiding actually endorsing either candidate. I will admit that my vote this time is no secret. I voted for Sabbagh early on. My ballot went to Elections Canada in the diplomatic pouch from Jamaica on April 7. I have always been politically non-partisan. Always voted for the candidate rather than the party – knowing that all politics are indeed local. And thank ‘old’ colleague for Doppler. I read it every morning.
I must confess that I do not personally know any of the candidates for the positions of MP or PM. I know Mr. Aitchison and Mr. Poilievre by reputation. They are both career politicians. Both boldly supported and so condoned the civil disobedience of the so-called Freedom Convoy, which caused mayhem and suffering to the inner Ottawa population by air and noise pollution. They, the Freedom Convoy, were not about freedom. They were not willing to join the common fight against the common enemy, the COVID-19 virus, which presented a deadly threat to the whole world. Mr. Aitchison’s and Mr. Poilievre’s actions on that occasion tell me a lot about their frame of mind. Would they join the fight against any other aggressor? Sometimes I feel that some of the Canadians who had been blessed to be Canadian by the accident of their birth treat their nationality rather frivolously. I am thinking about some of the citizens of Alberta. Conversely, some of the Canadians who are Canadian by choice exhibit much more loyalty to their new country.
Mr Sabbagh and Mr. Carney are not career politicians. Not yet, anyways. So, little is known about them. But their CVs are impressive, and their employment & business histories and their deportment bring a breath of fresh air. I wish them well.
Thank you Hugh for a more open minded view than usual,
I agree that we need a majority government at this time and too much of the vote is split off with a well meaning but hopeless cast of other characters bleeding away votes.
Sometimes you have to pick the lesser of two evils so to speak and concentrate on the the individual that will best benefit our country on the whole. Wishful thinking is okay when you buy lottery tickets but not when you are deciding the future of a nation. As I have repeatedly stated I am a non partisan voter and this is a situation where we have to make our choice based on the likelihood of the elected individual being best able to steer us through what is going to be a rough 4 years or more depending on what the that orange dipstick down south pulls off with his goal of dictatorship. Looking at the accomplishments, background, and education of the to possible choices of leaders for the country I have to say that PP doesn’t offer much in expertise or education. Mr. Carney may lack political experience but his extensive background and education certainly is impressive. Some may point out what might be called failures but to be fair there has never been a politician or government in history that didn’t have blunders. I think the times we are facing deserve a leader with more actual work experience than being a paperboy, bill collector for a com company, or political hobbyist. If you think I’m unfair, I did vote for Mr. Clement, he was a good man that played well with others and did tons of good work for us.
Everyone think about your choice, put aside rhetoric and make a choice for the country not just because daddy and gramps were conservative. We are in a scary spot right now and we need a leader with proven accomplishments.
With so much anxiety and uncertainty about the near future due to the chaotic U.S. tariff policies etc, I really want a PM who invites calm and confidence in all of our people. Out with the blaming and anger, and revenge. I don’t think we want what the Americans have in the current Trump administration, owing to huge funding from oil and gas and tech billionaires and with disrespect of their judiciary and constitutional rights.
A fairly reasoned piece Hugh. Until recently, I was a member of the Conservative Party and voted in the last leadership race, although, I did not vote for Pollievre. Having watched him closely for several years, he is MAGA in sheep’s clothing. His handlers have done a good job with his makeover and it was almost starting to work on me until after the debate when his fake journalist propagandists came out of the woodwork to support him, disrupting and blocking legitimate media from asking necessary questions.
But what sealed it was the latest conservative ads with ex PM Harper stating misleading facts and straight up lying with comments like “he led Canada through the financial crisis” …he was PM but Jim Flaherty and Mark Carney did all the work. He goes on to say Carney “worked for” him…untrue, he did not. BOC governors are appointed by a board of directors and approved by minister of finance. The BOC remains independent of government. Harper did try to hire him as finance minister but Carney turned him down. Regardless, Harper did think highly enough of Carney to appoint him to the Order of Canada…I think that is a pretty strong endorsement on it’s own.
I can’t in good conscience vote for people like Pollievre et al. The situation requires serious thought and experience in crisis management which Mark Carney brings in abundance.
For anyone looking to get to know Mark Carney better, here is an interesting interview by Scott Galloway, an American public speaker, academic, author, podcast host, and entrepreneur. He is a professor of marketing at the New York University Stern School of Business.
https://www.bing.com/videos/riverview/relatedvideo?q=matt+galoway+interviews+mark+carney+&mid=03104D6E366A3FAD93C303104D6E366A3FAD93C3&mcid=C549390627994CE3BF69916CD1CEE3A8&FORM=VIRE
To John Barltrop: Well said. Carney on!
To Hugh Mackenzie: A fairly well balanced opinion piece. Thank you. I must say, Poilievre’s plan to use the Notwithstanding Clause is a red flag – among a number of other, scary red flags. As for Poilievre’s “… determination to find a way to mitigate Donald Trump’s influence on Canada” – time will tell. I’ll leave it at that.
Pierre is being bombarded with liberal lies. I have watched both and the liberals say inaccuracies about pierre. Ive read up and watched Carney. Carney was Trudeaus financial advisor the last 5 years and the economy has taken a hit. People are poor. Middle class is poor. We cant afford rent and groceries. Canada is broken. We need to follow through on the promises and liberals have demonstrated time and again they dont keep their promises. We need to quit wasting money on things that the government shouldnt be involved it. Liberals spent billions helping other countries and never gave a thought to Canadians. We cant afford to live in Canada. 47% of Canadians leaving Canada and moving to more affordable countries are from Ontario. Liberals showed us what they are capable of and that is crippling Canada and Canadians. We need a change and Pierre has talked about all kinds of good changes for Canada and Canadians. The past 9 years have been awful. Lets try someone new. Lets follow Pierre’s platform. He has never wavered in what he plans to do to help Canadians be able to afford to live in Canada. Pierre wants to keep Canada free and it is not free now. Vote conservatives.
Listen up this election is no more important or less important then any. The last three we made a bad choice I hope we do better
Mark Carney gets a free ride as Poilievre dukes it out with Singh
John Barltrop
Fri, Apr 18, 9:25 PM (3 days ago)
to tasha.kheiriddin
Hi Tasha
No PM Mark Carney did not get a free ride in either debate . Yes, my wife and I watched the entirety of both the French and English debates . As an intelligent ,skillful, knowledgeable arbitrator he was able to stay calm, and primisterial and stay above the fray during both debates as his opponents pummelled each other. This is the type of character and value set I want from my PM who will be tackling President Trump over the next four years .
I also want to thank Rebel News for all the attention on both debate nights re the SCRUMS that helped many Canadians to make an informed choice of voting for PM Mark Carney.
Attached below is an email I sent to Pierre Poilievre on April 6, 2025.
Mark Carney for PM of Canada -My email letter to Pierre Poilievre-Resent to Rick Bell Columnist Sun Media Calgary
Inbox
Dear Pierre Poilievre
Let me inform you that on April 28 I will vote Liberal for the second time in my lifetime ( age 81 ) .The first time I voted Liberal occurred when the Harper Conservatives thought they would trash the upstart Justin Trudeau in 2015. On Oct. 2nd 2015 the Conservatives cranked up values clash of identity politics with its promise of a new “tip line”for citizens to report “barbaric cultural practices.”
Not My Values.
From my perspective, I will list my reasons why I will not be voting for you for Prime Minister of Canada on April 28 , 2025.
1) Your values are not mine. You are an arrogant, abrasive, negative , angry young man who has offered no empathy, hope in your messaging and/ slogans over the past two years to Canadians.
2) Pierre, you have run your Freedom Convoy supporters into an electoral wall as both Tamara Lich and Gary Barber were found guilty of Mischief as organizers of the Freedom Convoy that disrupted downtown Ottawa in February 2022
3) Premier Danielle Smith of Alberta and Former Reform Party Leader Preston Manning have really made your life difficult politically. Their values of regional defiance/ Secession from Canada are not my values.
4) Mark Bourrie, author of “Ripper: The Making of Pierre Poilievre”, sees you as a Trumpian figure . I quote :“His vision of this country is one where he can say what he wants, bullies opponents, attacks enemies of his choosing and not be faced with criticism,” Bourrie writes. “We can look south to see what happens when this becomes normalized.”
5) BC premier Eby on Thursday criticized the op-ed of Preston Manning, Former Leader of the Reform Party, about succession from Canada if the Liberals win. He stated “We need to stick together to be successful as Canadians.
I want to inform you that I have never voted for Ontario Premier Doug Ford , but I agree with his Captain Canada message of supporting Ontarians.
In conclusion, PM Mark Carney is the only federal political leader who is in a position to offer real help, compassion, empathy, and hope with a real plan to all Canadians who will be affected by the chaos brought upon us by “the orange elephant in the room” , President Donald Trump of the USA.
John Barltrop
Markham, Ontario
Most diverse, inclusive city in Canada
A very good opinion piece from Hugh Mackenzie.
For me, this time it comes down to who will be the eventual leader of the country, not who will be the local Member. Both local candidates are good people.
Carney has already put Trump in his place vis-a-vis Canada, and is organizing an international coalition of countries to do the same. With his international stature gained both in business and as Governor of both the Bank of Canada and England, he has the ability to quickly pivot Canada’s economy off total reliance to the USA and more toward other industrial countries. For that reason, I support Carney for the next 4 years.