And they’re off. As you know, Canada is close to wrapping up the first week of an incredibly tight and important election campaign. How’s it going? What’s at stake? And what of our relationship with America as our democratic process unfolds? Good questions! Let’s get into it.
The Election
Canada’s sovereignty might be at risk. Our economy almost certainly is. The international rules-based order is being upended. Nothing is certain. Against this backdrop, Canada’s six major political parties are facing off for the right to govern our nation and advance their vision to protect Canada. For this reason, it’s why some are arguing this is the most consequential election of our lifetime.
Vassy Kapelos: This isn’t just another election campaign
Who’s in the race? Well, the two major contenders for power are the Pierre Poilievre-led Conservatives and the Mark Carney-led Liberals. Don’t know much about these would-be prime ministers? Start here:
Gravity(s): Mark Carney brings the Liberals down to earth. Watch that landing
Not a MAGA guy: Pierre Poilievre’s Trump problem
Slightly cynical? Maybe, but important takes nonetheless. As is understanding how each leader might govern the country should they win the election. To that end, here are two takes on the two leaders (one article being slightly older, but still incredibly relevant) from The Hub:
Theo Argitis: How Mark Carney would govern Canada
Ginny Roth: If you want to know how Pierre Poilievre would govern, try listening to him
Of course, this election isn’t just about picking between two leaders or two ideologies, but also about understanding who can best tackle the crisis our nation faces, as well as an assortment of other issues that haven’t gone away.
This election is about Donald Trump — and a lot more
The Issue
Yes, this election is all about the trade war with America. And if you’re curious as to where things stand with the US as of today? Well, we still have a problem, and a growing one (possibly) as of next week:
Trump announces 25 per cent tariff on all auto imports to the U.S.
That bit of news led Liberal leader Mark Carney to say the quiet part out loud:
Canada’s ‘old relationship’ with U.S. ‘is over’ amid Trump tariffs: Carney
Pierre Poilievre, and the other federal leaders, made a similar, if less dramatic, statement about the trade war, calling on US President Trump to “knock it off.” But what’s noteworthy about Carney’s words is that he isn’t just a candidate for election, he’s also our sitting prime minister (don’t forget the caretaker rule we discussed earlier this week!). Carney’s words carry real weight in terms of our relationship with America today. Which is why today’s conversation between Prime Minister Carney and President Trump is consequential:
Whether Carney gets to work with Trump to create that new economic and security pact, obviously, will be a decision made by Canadian voters. But whoever does form the next government, it will be important for them to understand this emerging reality:
U.S. could lose democracy status, says global watchdog
The (Somewhat) Unspoken Issue
National unity. As we keep saying, it’s about a centimetre deep, as this week reaffirmed.
Former MP wants to explore Alberta’s future with U.S.
That might seem like minor news, based on the relatively low profile of its champions, until you realize they’re not without influence in the office of Alberta’s premier (rightfully and understandably, as they’re both constituents and part of the premier’s political base). And all of that is important context when trying to understand Alberta Premier Danielle Smith’s actions and statements this week:
Alberta premier says she’d form second Fair Deal Panel if Ottawa doesn’t meet policy demands
Amid criticism, Alberta premier entering ‘lion’s den’ for U.S. fundraiser with Ben Shapiro
Is Premier Smith right? Is her approach addressing a gap in Canada’s response to the trade war? And is Canada sleep-walking into a national unity crisis, with Alberta genuinely willing to separate from Canada if specific actions aren’t taken? Here are two takes:
Chris Selley: Done properly, Danielle Smith’s brand of American outreach is the way forward
Alberta vows diplomacy with U.S. — and threatens ‘unprecedented national unity crisis’ in Canada
And don’t forget, national unity won’t be defined by Alberta’s actions. There’s also Quebec to consider.
Donald Trump says chat with Mark Carney went well: ‘We agree on many things’
The Other (Increasingly Overlooked) Issues
If how best to address the American threat is the ballot question in this election, don’t forget how we address the problem will have vast trickle-down impacts across the nation. While these issues aren’t necessarily making headlines, they very much should be on our radar:
Geoff Russ: Canada needs an Arctic empire no matter the cost
Why Canada must treat its food system as a matter of national defence
François Poirier: LNG projects must be a national priority
Countries must bolster climate efforts or risk war, Cop30 chief executive warns
Biodiversity loss in all species and every ecosystem linked to humans – report
Of course, that last link – the new study that highlights the reality of human-caused biodiversity loss – raises big questions. After all, even efforts to curb climate change, at times, can have a negative impact on biodiversity, a critical issue that is misunderstood and often overlooked. And, as you know from class, Canada, more than most nations, will have an outsized say in how, or if, we’re able to safeguard global biodiversity.
In Canada, the decisions we must make to grow our economy, address the trade war, protect our sovereignty, advance reconciliation, combat climate change and safeguard biodiversity are becoming increasingly complicated:
‘Metals are the new oil’: B.C. fast-tracks critical minerals projects to counter tariffs
Pierre Poilievre blasted over pledge to fast-track Ring of Fire permits
The how, as you’re well aware, is often where tangible action gets stuck and becomes divisive, but new research suggests that shouldn’t stop us from thinking big when it comes to biodiversity:
Want to preserve biodiversity? Go big, researchers say
And though this next article focuses on Australia, the point remains: Big action for biodiversity can’t just be action for the sake of action (say, planting billions of trees just because it sounds nice on X). If we’re serious about protecting biodiversity – in line with global targets, for example – we need to be strategic:
A budget splash to conserve 30% of Australia’s lands will save species – if we choose the right 30%
Yet doing right by biodiversity – setting aside 30% of Canada by 2030 – doesn’t seem to gel with what Canada needs to do to protect our sovereignty and grow our economy, as discussed earlier. According to some scientists though, fear not:
What If the Best Way to Save Nature Is to Let It Change?
Whether you agree of not – whether their scientific peers agree or not – the bigger point is this: we can’t be dogmatic. We need to be open to different ways of looking at old problems, and we need to listen to new research that might uncover uncomfortable truths.
Maybe coal is better for the climate than Liquified Natural Gas:
Maybe we can help biodiversity and speed up development.
The take home message is that we need to find creative ways of solving multiple hard problems all at once – and quickly at that.
One Last Thought
That local news coverage is in decline is hardly surprising, and it’s also not surprising that this decline has corresponded with a rise in misinformation. But the remedy to this problem might not be bringing back local news, but rather could be found in your history class:
Why history instruction is critical for combating online misinformation
In fact, history class might be critical to keeping all Canadians onside with the idea that Canada is worth protecting:
Why are younger Canadians more susceptible to Trump and the lure of the 51st state?
We’d argue that history – and history class – is incredibly important, now more than ever. But history class can’t be forced upon you; it only works if people want to learn history. For that to happen? We need great teaching, great storytelling and great resources in order to make history compelling, fun and relevant. In other words, we have to meet you where you at, you know? Hopefully, to that end, Nature Labs is helping and if are, certainly, we hope a history-specific Nature Labs course isn’t in the dim and distant.
Until next week!