Chris Selley: Canadian complacency returns to the election debate, from Blanchet of all people

Wednesday evening’s French-language leaders’ debate kicked off with a video montage that mentioned President Donald Trump roughly 175 times. (I exaggerate somewhat.) Thursday evening’s English-language leaders’ debate was much less focused specifically on Trump, to an almost bizarre extent. When moderator Steve Paikin offered each leader a chance to ask a question of an opponent, Liberal Leader Mark Carney chose to ask Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre about the security-clearance drama.

Carney’s campaign clearly believes Poilievre’s Achilles’ heel is Trump. One has to wonder how many Canadians even know the basics of the security-clearance issue. It was a baffling decision.

Ultimately, though, leaving Trump aside was a benefit. One of Carney or Poilievre will be prime minister in a month, and they essentially agree that Trump is too unpredictable to strategize against with any confidence from our current position as a semi-deadbeat country. (Again, I paraphrase.)

The only thing we can really do is focus on our own affairs in ways that would make us more prosperous, safe, happy and independent in every sense. In the long term: diversify our trade partners in every sector, including natural resources; improve border security, not to satisfy Trump’s fentanyl obsession but to prevent the northbound flow of illegal firearms (and because borders are supposed to be secure by definition); rebuild the military, not because Trump demands it but out of respect to our existing commitment to NATO and our self-styled reputation as An Important Country; fix health care; make housing affordable; get a handle on our own opioid crisis; fix our broken justice system. All that jazz.

You might think in a debate on those big national issues Bloc Québécois Leader Yves-François Blanchet would be extraneous on the stage. I saw plenty of people reacting in real time in that vein: Why is this man here? But in fact Blanchet served a very useful purpose: He was the voice of comfy Canadian inertia; the voice of Quebec continuing to plod along in its own way under Canada’s protective umbrella (ludicrous sovereignty-referendum threats notwithstanding).

Blanchet embodied how Canada might very plausibly abandon the opportunity that Trump’s kick in our rear end, however unjustified, offered us to live up to the greatness Canadian politicians always ascribe — often dubiously — to this country.

“The building of (new) pipelines will take at least 10 to 14 years. Mr. Trump will be 90 years old, not president … and somebody of course less terrible will be there before you can even dream of having oil through (a new) pipeline,” Blanchet said, kiboshing (as ever) the notion of any new pipeline running through Quebec.

For the record, a SOM poll conducted for La Presse in February found 61 per cent of Quebecers were in favour of reviving the moribund GNL Quebec project, which involves a natural-gas pipeline to the Port of Saguenay. Only 21 per cent were opposed. Meanwhile 59 per cent were in favour of, and only 22 per cent opposed to, reviving the Energy East oil pipeline project, which would travel from Alberta through Quebec to Saint John, N.B.

Blanchet essentially scoffed when Paikin pointed out that public-opinion phenomenon during the debate. But surely getting our resources to more diverse markets has to be a key element in any Canada-first strategy.

One of Poilievre’s strongest moments in the debate was when he asked Carney, repeatedly, how he could possibly square his “pipelines aren’t necessarily a priority” talking point with the gravity of our current situation.

“Canada was the source of 85 per cent of the electrical energy imported by the U.S. (in 2023),” the Canada Energy Regulator reports. This is what you call leverage — or it would be, if we had more competing bidders whose orders we could fill.

If we’re going to export fossil fuels — and no one on stage in Montreal Thursday night other than Blanchet really said we shouldn’t — then we obviously should be diversifying our customer base, just as any business in any industry would.

But isn’t it so easy to imagine Blanchet’s vision coming true? Every day of Trump’s second term, no matter how chaotic, is one day closer to Trump not being president anymore. Things aren’t quite as crazy on the annexation/51st state front as they were a few weeks ago. Trump’s approval ratings are down. Trump voters didn’t sign up (willingly, anyway) to have their retirement savings diminished.

Maybe we can just ride this out and go back to our half-assed status quo, right? By rights, this election should be about which of Carney or Poilievre can best prevent that. As it stands, it’s difficult to tell.

National Post [email protected]

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.