To the Point for the Week of March 30th, 2025
To the Point for the Week of March 30th, 2025
In this week’s edition of To the Point, we’re zeroing in on a standout feature of this election: the sharp contrasts between Mark Carney and Pierre Poilievre. Unlike recent federal election cycles where differences blurred at the margins, the Liberals and Tories are delivering starkly opposing policy proposals and visions for Canada’s path forward, set against a shifting global and domestic landscape. Economic uncertainty, geopolitical turbulence, and domestic pressures have turned this into a battle of ideas, not just personalities. Voters now face a rare chance to weigh fundamentally different blueprints for the country’s future.
A CAMPAIGN OF CONTRASTS
Elections thrive on contrasts. Differentiating yourself from your opponent in governing philosophy and policy specifics is the backbone of a voter’s decision-making process. Without that clarity, your party or candidacy risks looking like the other side of the same coin, a muddled echo rather than a distinct voice. If you can’t spell out how you diverge, particularly as the opposition, voters tend to stick with the familiar, even if it’s bruised.
Not all election cycles lean on contrasts equally, and history backs this up. Consider the Conservative Party’s losses in 2019 and 2021. A compelling argument ties those defeats to a failure to carve out a bold alternative to the Liberals, who limped into both races with political baggage like scandals, fatigue, and uneven economic results, yet held a steady grip on core positions. Conservative strategists banked on tacking to the centre, softening edges to court small-“l” liberal voters irritated with Trudeau but not ready to abandon the Liberal brand. The pitch was to play it safe, mirror enough of the Liberal playbook to seem palatable, and let voter annoyance do the rest. It flopped. Turnout didn’t surge, swing voters didn’t budge, and the results buried the notion that a watered-down conservative stance could unlock broader appeal. Erin O’Toole’s 2021 pivot to a “progressive conservative” vibe with carbon pricing nods and labour-friendly rhetoric only muddied the waters further. Voters were left unsure what the party stood for and deferred to the devil they knew.
Now look at 2015, where the stakes flipped. Stephen Harper, after nearly a decade in power, faced a restless electorate itching for change. He saw the Liberal game plan coming: tax hikes on the wealthy, deficit spending to juice infrastructure, a chokehold on resource development, and a shift toward redistributive policies over raw economic growth. Harper’s counter was his record of low taxes, balanced budgets, and resource sector wins. He leaned hard on metrics like GDP growth and unemployment rates to argue the case. The mood wasn’t about numbers, though; it was about fatigue. Trudeau’s “sunny ways” and vague promises of renewal trumped Harper’s data-driven defense. Voters didn’t care about the fine print. They wanted a reset, policy details or not. If Trudeau were still PM now, this election might echo that vibe, focusing less on competing visions and more on a referendum on his tenure.
This cycle is a different beast. It’s not a change election in the 2015 mold, as Justin Trudeau’s exit shifts the frame. External pressures like U.S. trade threats from tariff rumblings in a volatile White House, plus global economic wobbles, have forced the Liberals and Conservatives to stake out polar-opposite turf. Carney and Poilievre aren’t tweaking the edges. They’re pitching wholesale rewrites of Canada’s playbook. Let’s unpack the meat of it: housing, resources, and beyond.
HOUSING: DEMAND VS. SUPPLY, SCALE VS. SPEED
Housing offers a clear lens for the policy divide. Mark Carney’s opening move is to scrap the GST on new and resale homes under $1M, but only for first-time buyers. This demand-side play aims to juice affordability for a narrow slice of the market, hoping to pull younger Canadians into homeownership without flooding the broader pool. Critics call it a half-measure, arguing it might nudge prices up as demand spikes without tackling supply bottlenecks. Carney’s not done, though. This week, he rolled out a blockbuster supply-side answer to double annual housing starts to 500,000. Enter Build Canada Homes, a federal developer tasked with churning out affordable units at scale, using public land, modular designs, and a $25B financing pool for prefab homebuilders with Canadian tech and timber. Add $10B in low-cost capital for affordable housing projects, and it’s a hybrid pitch blending housing fixes with an industrial strategy to boost domestic manufacturing. The catch is its top-down, state-heavy approach, ambitious but reliant on Ottawa’s execution muscle and bureaucratic heft.
Pierre Poilievre fires back with a broader swing. His GST cut hits all new homes under $1.3M, with no first-time buyer cap, aiming to ease affordability across the board. On its face, it’s demand-driven too, as more buyers could chase that sub-$1.3M sweet spot, potentially inflating prices. He pairs it with a supply twist, though, prodding municipalities to slash red tape, cut development charges, and fast-track permits, targeting a 15% annual construction bump. It’s less about federal muscle and more about unleashing local builders, less splashy than Carney’s mega-plan but leaner and market-friendly. Poilievre’s betting on private-sector hustle over government blueprints. Skeptics wonder if cash-strapped cities will play ball without bigger carrots.
RESOURCES: EXPORT BOOM VS. STATUS QUO
Resource development splits them even wider. Polls show Canadians want infrastructure to ship natural gas, oil, and minerals to global markets, especially with Asia hungry and Europe scrambling post-Russia. Poilievre’s all in with a National Energy Corridor spanning coast-to-coast, including pipelines and LNG terminals. He’d axe Bill C-69, the “no more pipelines” law, to clear the regulatory chokehold. It’s a growth-first pitch to draw investment, lock in export deals, and cement Canada as a resource powerhouse, banking on jobs and GDP gains to outweigh environmental pushback.
Carney’s plan is cagier. His National Trade and Economic Corridor sounds similar but pivots to roads and rail near extraction sites, not the pipelines or LNG terminals Poilievre champions. A “one-window” approval process nods at efficiency, but he’s firm on keeping Bill C-69 and the draft Oil and Gas Sector Greenhouse Gas Emissions Cap, which critics slam as a stealth production ceiling. It’s a balancing act, signaling support for resources without alienating climate-conscious voters or global partners. The result is a cautious lean-in, not a full sprint.
VISIONS: STABILITY VS. SELF-RELIANCE
Both the Liberals and Conservatives are offering competing visions of the country as well. Carney’s Canada exists in a world battered by chaos: think economic tremors, climate upheaval, and geopolitical uncertainty. His answer? A steady, nurturing government that steps in to hold the line—bringing people together to look after one another through coordinated action, robust safety nets, and a collaborative spirit that leans on global partnerships to weather the storm. It’s a vision of stability, where the state plays the role of guardian, guiding a rattled nation toward collective security. Flip the script, and you’ve got Poilievre’s take: a Canada brimming with optimism, ready to grab the reins of its own fate. He’s not here for hand-holding or outsourcing destiny to international bureaucracies—his plan is about igniting self-reliance, unshackling the country’s potential, and betting big on a future where Canadians, not faceless global institutions, call the shots. Carney offers a steady hand in uncertain times; Poilievre emphasizes individual agency and national self-reliance. One approach prioritizes collective resilience through coordinated action, the other focuses on enabling growth through decentralization and market-driven solutions.
SO, WHAT’S THE POINT?
This election cycle boils down to a fundamental choice, with Carney and Poilievre laying out sharply divergent paths for Canada’s future. Carney’s vision hinges on a proactive government stepping in to stabilize a nation rattled by global disorder—offering a cohesive, collective response to keep the country afloat. Poilievre counters with a confident, forward-looking Canada that rejects external meddling, prioritizing self-determination and unshackled growth over centralized control. Housing and resource development only hint at the broader divide—immigration and criminal justice, untouched here, amplify the contrast even further, with each carrying its own weight in the public’s mind. This isn’t a rote exercise in picking a caretaker; it’s a decision on Canada’s core values and trajectory.
ABOUT TO THE POINT
To the Point – ONpoint Strategy Group's weekly roundup – cuts through the noise to deliver insight and analysis of key federal, provincial, and municipal stories shaping Canada's policy and political landscape. Designed for decision-makers and thought leaders, this newsletter is your go-to resource for staying ahead. Share these trusted insights with your network to spark meaningful conversations. Simply hit forward or follow ONpoint Strategy Group on X and LinkedIn to spread these valuable perspectives."
About ONpoint Strategy Group:
ONpoint Strategy Group is all about helping clients make an impact where it counts. Specializing in government relations and strategic execution, our team—Nico Fidani-Diker, Mariana Di Rezze, Krystle Caputo, David Morgado, Christopher Mourtos, Ellen Gouchman, Brandon Falcone, and Mike Britton—works closely with clients to navigate complex political landscapes and bring their goals to life. With a practical, results-driven approach, we build strong relationships, craft winning strategies, and make sure every step brings clients closer to meaningful outcomes. We’re passionate about making sure our clients are heard, supported, and positioned for success.
