Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
CANADA GOES TO the polls today in an election that will be watched closely by governments around the world and anyone with an eye on how events shape voting.
The election of President Donald Trump in the United States four years after he was voted out has transformed the political climate north of the longest border in the world.
As recently as mid-February, Canadian state broadcaster CBC had given the opposition Conservative party a 99% chance of winning parliamentary elections and kicking the Liberals out after 10 years and three terms in office.
That probability has now completely flipped, with the Liberals being given a 96% chance of victory as of last week.
The polling numbers underlying those probabilities are stark, with the Conservatives enjoying a 23 point lead in the polls in January and seeing that collapse to a point where they are now trailing by about 5 points.
On the face of it, that indicates a tight race but the momentum is all one way and the geographic concentration of where the Liberal support is means forecasters know who they think will win.
There are 343 seats up for grabs in Canada’s House of Commons, meaning the magic number to win a majority is 172.
As of last week, CBC was forecasting that the Liberals were on course to earn 194 seats and a majority, with the Conservatives about 50 seats short of a majority.
Again, to put the shift in context, back in January the same poll tracker had the Conservatives at a projected 225 seats and clearly well on course for that majority.
Whatever the result, there has been a stunning reversal in public sentiment that will likely be studied for years to come.
Indeed, one top Conservative campaigner based in the most-populous province of Ontario recently called the campaign of leader Pierre Poilievre “the biggest fucking disaster” and “malpractice at the highest fucking level”.
Whether Poilievre’s tactics are to blame or not, a succession of events have conspired to allow new Prime Minister Mark Carney eke out a timely lead.
The biggest single event has been the arrival of Carney himself and the departure of Justin Trudeau, who first led the Liberals into power with a majority victory in 2015.
The intervening 10 years saw the shine gradually and then dramatically come off Trudeau, who was forced to preside over minority governments after elections in 2019 and 2021.
Those elections were fought against two previous Tory leaders and Poilievre’s arrival onto the national stage had seemingly set the stage for the Conservatives to return to government.
Poilievre was born in the western city of Calgary and advances policies supported by the region’s oil industry, including new pipeline construction and the removal of other environmental laws.
He also built support nationally as a critic of pandemic lockdown policies and has drawn comparisons to Trump over his attacks on the media and a previous promise to be Canada’s “anti-woke prime minister.”
The nationalist rhetoric seemed to impress even Elon Musk, who back in January shared a number of posts on X supportive of Poilievre, including labelling as a “masterpiece” a viral video of the Conservative leader dressing down a journalist while eating an apple.
The associations led to some Liberals seeking to brand him as “Maple Syrup MAGA.”
But when when the election was called last month Poilievre began his campaign by trying to create distance between himself and the US.
Stressing that Canada needed “a strong leader,” he added that his plan is to “make the economy less dependent on the United States and put Canada first.”
Such clear blue water is needed because Canadians have been overwhelmingly against any suggestion of their country becoming the 51st US state, whether such suggestions by Trump are serious or not.
With Canadian minds zeroing in on the threat from Trump, it’s mean that Poilievre’s more traditionally conservative policies have struggled to gain traction in case they are viewed as being akin to those espoused by the US Republican party.
Paul Wells, veteran journalist who has written books about the last two Canadian prime ministers, recently told a podcast by the Center for Strategic and International Studies that he would classify Poilievre’s economic policies as being more in the mould of Ronald Reagan than Donald Trump.
“Politics in Canada is sometimes not very left-right, polarised. It’s often strongly polarised on energy versus the environment and Pierre Poilievre wants to essentially dismantle all environmental policy and export aggressively our oil and natural gas wealth through pipelines,” he says.
Wells added that Poilievre’s ‘Canada first Economic Action Plan’ which was announced recently should be treated with some scepticism because it envisages a $500 billion injection into the economy mainly from free-market policies like tax cuts and not direct government investment.
Nonetheless, he believes that such policies would have been tempting to many voters were it not for the large elephant in the room, or in this case in the Oval Office.
“It would be at least interesting to a lot of voters if all other issues hadn’t been washed away by this question of, ‘What on earth are we going to do about Trumpism’,” Wells argues.
“This Canada First Economic Action Plan that Poilievre has been releasing in bits and pieces for months now. Last week, when he introduced it in its entirety, it got close to no coverage, not because Canadian news organisations refused to cover this serious campaign, but because we’re just all running around like chickens with their heads cut off trying to figure out how to survive the Trump wave.
And I know, because you can read it in his body language, that this is very frustrating for Mr. Poilievre.
New banker on the block
What’s clear is that regardless of any frustration Poilievre may feel about his policies not connecting as they may have, the main issue has been that he is not facing the opponent he and the rest of Canada was expecting.
When Trudeau stepped down as Liberal leader earlier this year, it could not have been predicted that his replacement would have been as tailored to the times as it appears.
Carney is a political novice who holds the distinction of being the only person to lead the central bank of two G7 nations, the Bank of Canada and the Bank of England.
The first of these he led during the 2008 financial crisis and the second he led during the Brexit crisis.
His leadership during those tumultuous periods has been central to his core message. In essence, that his stewardship during two economic crises gives him the experience to navigate a third.
In this case, Trump tariffs that have targeted Canada’s steel and car production and the potential for the US administration to bring even more economic pain on its northern neighbour.
Various Canadian exports are now subject to specific US tariffs and a recent announcement that General Motors was to pause production at a 1,200-employee assembly plant brought this into stark focus.
While the election may be taking place today, Carney confirmed a number of weeks ago that Canada and the US are set to start talks on a new trade deal next month. With the implication being that he should be the man to lead those talks.
Carney has held just one phone call with Trump since he took office but afterwards did suggest that more talks would follow the election.
“We have only sketchy details of what’s happened, but since they had that phone conversation, President Trump has not called Canada the 51st state,” Wells also noted.
“I would give my teeth to know what on earth Carney said to Trump to get him to shut that down. ”
Only last Friday Carney finally revealed that Trump did in fact bring up the ’51st state’ topic during their phonecall.
Debate
The main contenders in the election went toe-to-toe in two live TV debates over two nights in the closing stages of the campaign.
The first was in French and the second in English, where Poilievre repeatedly sought to attack Carney for his support of Trudeau-era policies. Policies which he said had led to inflation and “growing chaos on our streets.”
“How can we possibly believe that you are any different than the previous ten years of Liberal government?” Poilievre said, repeatedly reminding that Carney had served as “Justin Trudeau’s economic advisor.”
Addressing Poilievre, Carney said: “I know you want to be running against Justin Trudeau. Justin Trudeau isn’t here.”
Carney faced sustained attacks throughout the two-hour English debate from not only Poilievre but Jagmeet Singh of the left-leaning New Democratic Party and Yves-François Blanchet of the Quebec separatist Bloc Quebecois.
In a scenario that should be familiar to Irish political watchers, the NDP had supported Trudeau’s minority government in a 2022 confidence-and-supply agreement until the NDP walked away from the deal late last year.
As the Liberal support has recovered over the past couple of months ahead of today’s vote, support for the NDP has been greatly squeezed, going from a high of 20% in December to about 8% on the eve of the election.
Canada, a country with a population of 41 million, has 28.9 million eligible voters, and record numbers have already cast early voting ballots before today.
Elections Canada estimated that 7.3 million people cast ballots over four days of early voting, a marked a 25% increase over the 5.8 million advanced ballots cast in the 2021 vote.
- With reporting by © – AFP 2025
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
People don’t realise the seriousness of messing with epilepsy meds. Using the proper meds and the generic versions can easily mean the difference between driving and off the road for a year, may easily affect employment. Never mind the annoyance and frustration of having a seizure unnecessarily, especially if its in front of your young children who are frightened out of their minds. It’s not about saving a few bob, it’s about completely turning somebody’s life upside down.
I only visited my consultant neurologist this morning. Whilst renewing my prescription, he strongly emphasised that under no circumstances should I accept generic substitute meds from any pharmacy for the exact reasons discussed here..
totally agree here!! it can take months to get the dosage right and the last thing you want to do is mess that up!! the consequences are unthinkable
If a generic has an equivalent amount of API to the brand then why is this an issue…or is that not the case?
In AEDs it’s not the API that’s the issue but how its absorbed. Info on why generic substitution is dangerous in AEDs is available at http://www.epilepsy.ie
No pharmacist with any ethics would substitute against an epileptics wish.
Having said that the fact that this potentially serious issue has just been ignored is ludicrous and sadly typical!!
I agree – any pharmacist with a brain would not substitute a branded AED with a generic, or substitute any drug with a narrow therapeutic index for that matter. Such a delicate balance involved. Shouldn’t really be an issue, and hopefully it won’t be.
Dylan, as I understand it also relevant are the binding agents in the make up of the tablets hence the issue.
There is documented evidence.
Shameful that vulnerable people are being exploited by the state. But what is new with this Government.
@boll… actually this had been known and written about for some time. Those directly affected are aware – and I know this for a fact as it affects me.
I have already experienced being offered a substitute drug & it has being found with several patients around the country who did accept the generic it has being found to cause seizures.
Generics are IDENTICAL to name brands in their composition of the active ingredient. The only difference might be in the additives…. (speaking as someone who works in the industry)
And it’s those additives that affect the absorbtion into the body of the active ingredient. This is why it is so important that switching does not take place. Again, I refer you to http://www.epilepsy.ie for information.
The additives are the issue so therefore you can’t say they are identical.
This is 100% a non issue.
The act in question will designate which drugs are to be allowed to be generically substituted. There are ABSOLUTELY NO plans to include antiepileptic drugs in it. There is no need to EXCLUDE AEDs from it, simply because there are absolutely no plans to INCLUDE them.
In the case of most antiepileptic drugs, there isn’t any generic available anyway, but in those cases where there is, the pharmacist is well aware that substitution carries with it a slight risk of loss of control of the condition.
Ross, you are 100% incorrect in your statement that this is a non issue. Generic switching has already taken place, Epilepsy Ireland are aware of a number of cases. while not all AEDs have generics available, some do and not all pharmacists are as aware as you might think. Due to the non-action of the Government in including a safety measure in the Medical Bill, Epilepsy Ireland will now have to mount a huge information campaign to ensure that people with epilepsy and their families are aware that they should accept no substitute to their normal medication.
I have already being offered a generic drug in a local pharmacy but refused to accept it.
What does Rick O Shea have to say about this?
No..they are cheaper simply because the don’t have the brand name..compare Nike’s runners with the pennys ones they do the same job Just don’t have the Same price tag
Try running a marathon in penneys runners, you’ll be in Nikes as soon as the swelling and blisters disappear….
I’m guessing your not suffering from epilepsy then?
Eimear,
Your comparison is so wrong and over simplified.
This is quite honestly scaremongering. No pharmacist worth his/her salt would substitute a branded anti-epileptic for a generic medication on their own volition. It borders on crazy.
It has happened around the country. I was offered a substitute generic drug in Boots.
Well, I’m a pharmacist, and I wouldn’t do it. I hope you said no.
Safe to assume it’s levitiracetam or gabapentin?
There’s loads of ‘alternative’ way of treating epilepsy like marijuana, low carb diet etc. only thing that does and will work is epilepsy meds. Fact. This issue can be spoken about til the cows come home but exact meds are prescribed for a reason. If the generic versions are ‘exactly the same’ as the brands while are they so much cheaper?? Cheaper ingredients???
I’m not going to argue against the need for the branded drugs because I don’t know anything about the issue and I assume if the main epilepsy groups are against this there must be something behind it.
However the main reason that generic drugs are cheaper is that the companies selling them didn’t have to fund the R&D to develop them (which can take an extremely long time and cost a fortune). They also can put a premium price on the product as the first to market and recognised brand name
Epilepsy Ireland should be more frustrated and angered that Mirek Bingham, a 16 year old boy was under the care of a consultant neurologist who failed to recognise epileptic seizures, failed to carry out an EEG, failed to carry out neuro obs, withdrew anti-epileptic drugs and placed his patient under “minimal intervention”, after patient was rushed to intensive care with status epilepticus and 9 days later had to be rushed to intensive care again because he was left for hours in respiratory failure and status epilepticus and eventually respiratory arrest and on admission to intensive care was septic and had MRSA and was placed on a ventilator, was unconscious and fought for 3 months before his organs finally failed.
No inquiry to this date has been held into Mirek’s death, no-one in government, coroner’s, judges, state or independent agencies has permitted the full facts of this case to be examined. Surely as a society we have some decency and morale values.
Savita’s death while unacceptable and tragic, does not compare to the mistreatment Mirek underwent, yet no-one is supporting or shouting for legislation to Protect Life of Patient’s from 007′s (Medical professionals licensed to to kill).
It is clear that SAVITA’S DEATH is being used by GOVERNMENT and PRO-CHOICE groups to LEGISLATE FOR ABORTION. The only difference between Mirek and Savita, is that THE EXCUSE FOR SAVITA’S LACK OF MEDICAL TREATMENT AND DEATH WAS THAT THEY DID NOT WISH TO HARM HER BABY BY TREATING HER CONDITION.
Mirek WAS NOT PREGNANT, so why did the medical professionals DO NOTHING.
For a medical professional to put a patient under “MINIMAL INTERVENTION” is surely CRIMINAL, as it goes against THE HIPPOCRATIC OATH and the RIGHT OF ALL PEOPLE TO LIFE UNDER THE IRISH CONSTITUTION.
SO WHY IS NO-ONE SEEKING AN INQUIRY INTO HIS DEATH AND ACCOUNTABILITY FOR “MINIMAL INTERVENTION” WHICH WAS A DEATH SENTENCE FOR MIREK.
Isnt it strange. All the replies re your vile comment have been removed. Why Journal????? Is it the policy to silence contributors who complain about comments?
Im pretty sure qualified doctors know what they’re doing. They wont specify by active ingredient if there is any issue with the absorbtion rates. Anyway i would assume that most epilepsy sufferers would be on some form of long term illness and hence would get them free of charge.
have your say