
The most important election of our lifetime? These Albertans say it's high stakes
You might've heard a politician, advocate, or friend say this is the most important election of our lifetimes.
People of all political stripes are weighing the stakes of the upcoming federal election as they make their choice for who Canada should have at the helm in the midst of the U.S. trade war. CBC asked Albertan voters, experts, and businesses if this election feels different.
"I think given the political environment right now — especially with our U.S. counterparts — this election is weighing heavily on a lot of people's minds," Tom Tsoumpas told CBC Edmonton this week.
Tsoumpas said voters need to be thinking past a four-year election mandate, and consider the next 10.
"However this election goes, it is going to hopefully lay the groundwork for the economic future of our country."
Speaking in downtown Edmonton on Thursday, John Maclean said the biggest thing for him this election is pipelines and commerce.
"We have to become more self-reliant, get a better economy for Canada, stand on our own a little bit more — maybe trade with Europe and other countries."
Kenzie Fragoso said her priorities include trans and Indigenous rights. But added that she worries about the influence from south of the border.
"I think Canada bases a lot of their stuff off of the United States, so it's kind of scary what's happening over there. What could possibly happen here?"
Janet Brown, a Calgary-based pollster and political commentator said she's expecting a high voter turnout for this election, because the current political climate is driving higher engagement.
Voters have to decide what kind of leadership approach is best for standing up to Trump, Brown said.
"What is the right combination of strong versus smart to get through the challenge of Trump and to get Canada to a new place economically?
"It's going to be a nail-biter."
It's also not the first time Canada's economy and relationship with the United States has been on the line. In 1988, Canadians watched Brian Mulroney and John Turner passionately debate the merits of free trade on television.
Brown remembers 1988 as the first election she worked on a federal campaign — and today's circumstances take her back to that time.
"I see tremendous parallels between what Canadians are grappling with then and what they're grappling with now," Brown said.
"I can see people 30-40 years from now looking back on this election as a pivotal moment in electoral politics and in Canadian history."
Leaving politics at the door? A tall order
Adam Corsaut, president and co-owner of Analog Brewing, said he opened their business in the midst of Trump's first trade war in 2018, putting tariffs on aluminum imports. Today feels like round two.
"It is going to be unavoidable that the impact from these tariffs will increase our operating costs at a time where everything has gone up year, after year, after year," Corsaut said.
He says the brewery strives to keep politics out of the bar, but in the current environment, it's a tall order.
"The atmosphere is so supercharged right now. There are people who are very tribal right now. And we try not to be."
"As long as you're on team Canada in this fight, that's all I ask."
Economic stress
Dr. Peter Silverstone, a psychiatrist and professor at the University of Alberta, said that many people feel overwhelmed at the current news cycle, and it can be a source of anxiety, but it's also an occasion where people feel they can make an impact.
"One of the biggest problems is when we don't have agency, when we don't have the ability to make any difference. Right now we do."
But it can go further than just political stress, Silverstone said.
"I've unfortunately lived through three major recessions as a psychiatrist, and every time there's a decrease in the economic environment, people's mental health goes down, sometimes profoundly."
"A lot of people are worried that we are heading towards a major economic downturn," he said.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Canada Standard
28 minutes ago
- Canada Standard
Wildfires Push Climate Onto the Agenda as G7 Leaders Meet in Alberta
With the G7 leaders' summit due to descend on Kananaskis, Alberta June 15-17, questions are swirling about what Canada can accomplish with this year's G7 presidency and how agreement is possible with Donald Trump in the room-while swirling smoke from a devastating Prairie wildfire season helps bring climate change back onto the leaders' agenda. Now in its 50th year, the G7 brings together the leaders of seven of the world's biggest economies plus the European Union in what is described as a "forum for co-operation, stability, and shared prosperity." The leaders' summit each year is meant to end with a consensus statement of all the countries. But community voices on everything from climate change to international finance and justice have rarely been satisfied with the outcome. Much of the news analysis leading up to this year's event has cast the G7 as a diminished institution, reduced to handshakes, photo ops, and carefully-worded generalities that are the most the countries can agree to. Coming into this year's summit, the G7's "legitimacy is hanging by a thread. Its promises have fallen flat, its unity is strained, and its moral voice is fading fast," retired civil servant Bhagwant Sandhu writes for The Hill Times. "Originally conceived as a multilateral pact among Western democracies to steward global economic control, the G7 was never intended to serve the desires of its most powerful-and now unpredictable and illiberal-member: the United States," he adds. "The group's initial goals have been obscured by authoritarianism, unilateral action, and creeping militarization." That leaves Prime Minister Mark Carney with a choice, Sandhu says. "Canada can, of course, preside over the usual choreography of communiques and handshakes-or try something more ambitious: restore the G7 to its founding mission." Carney's office kicked off that discussion June 7 with a list of the three "core missions" the PM will pursue in his role as G7 president, all "anchored in building stronger economies"-the same priority, CBC points out, that he has brought to the domestic scene in Canada. The list includes: "Protecting our communities and the world" by "strengthening peace and security, countering foreign interference and transnational crime, and improving joint responses to wildfires"; View our latest digests Building energy security and speeding up the "digital transition" by fortifying critical mineral supply chains and using technologies like artificial intelligence to spur economic growth; Investing in stronger infrastructure, creating higher-paying jobs, and fostering "dynamic", competitive markets for business. But much of the attention so far has been on the chaos Trump will bring to the table, just as he did in 2018 when Canada last hosted the G7 in Charlevoix, Quebec. Then, as now, U.S. tariffs were at the centre of the discussion, and Trump issued two angry tweets pulling the U.S. out of the leaders' final communique, just hours after countries had signed off on the text. "A show of unity on big geopolitical problems that holds longer than a few hours after President Donald Trump's participation will be seen as success after the American president in 2018 blew up a fragile consensus even before he left the last Canada-hosted G7 in Charlevoix, Que., later angrily insulting then-prime minister and G7 host Justin Trudeau," writes Toronto Star Ottawa bureau chief Tonda McCharles. This time around, "a key performance indicator for the summit will [be] getting something down that all leaders can agree upon that will also include the U.S.-and that will be a challenge," Deanna Horton, a diplomat who served twice in the Canadian embassy in Washington, told The Hill Times. On June 11, McCharles reported that organizers of this year's summit are not looking for a final communique that represents a consensus of all G7 members. "Instead, G7 host Carney is expected to issue a G7 chair's statement and the closed-door high-stakes sessions that could nevertheless produce some heated discussions will be summarized in documents likely to be so whitewashed of the juicy bits, that they could almost be written in advance." The Star has details on how the Summit agenda is likely to play out. Carney has also stirred controversy with the list of "middle power" countries he's invited to the summit. In addition to the leaders of Ukraine, Mexico, Brazil, South Africa, Australia, and South Korea, the list includes Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, whose government has been linked to acts of murder and extortion on Canadian soil, and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, who has been connected to human rights crackdowns, mistreatment of migrants, and the 2018 murder and dismemberment of journalist Jamal Khashoggi. Meanwhile, Carney's plan for the summit makes scant direct reference to past G7 commitments in areas like power sector decarbonization, methane controls, forest and land degradation, and elimination of fossil fuel subsidies-a promise the countries made in 2016 and were supposed to deliver on by this year. "Its climate commitments remain stalled, and the vaunted $600-billion infrastructure pledge to the Global South-first announced in 2021 as the 'Build Back Better World' initiative-has been more frequently rebranded and re-announced than realized," Sandhu writes for The Hill Times. Moreover, "the G7 has yet to fulfill its decades-old promise to allocate 0.7% of each member's gross national income to humanitarian aid. At the start of the 2023 Hiroshima summit, it was still short by a staggering US$4.49-trillion. More troubling still, members like the United Kingdom have diverted aid funds from humanitarian crises to finance NATO expansions, raising serious questions about the group's priorities." In a release this week, Oxfam warned the G7 is in the midst of its biggest-ever foreign aid cut. The member countries, which account for three-quarters of the world's official development assistance, are on track to cut their aid budgets 28% in 2026 compared to 2024 levels, the organization said. "Rather than breaking from the Trump administration's cruel dismantling of USAID and other U.S. foreign assistance, G7 countries like the UK, Germany, and France are instead following the same path, slashing aid with brutal measures that will cost millions of lives," said Oxfam International Executive Director Amitabh Behar. "The G7's retreat from the world is unprecedented and couldn't come at a worse time, with hunger, poverty, and climate harm intensifying. The G7 cannot claim to build bridges on one hand while tearing them down with the other." Meanwhile, in a G7 agenda stripped bare of any language that could rile up a volatile U.S. president, author Arno Kopecky says the massive wildfires covering swaths of Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta, and British Columbia are playing into Canadian officials' plan for keeping climate change in the conversation. When officials first began planning the meeting last year, "Canada's Liberal government wanted the G7 to discuss climate change (the host nation sets the summit agenda), but what if Donald Trump was there as President?" Kopecky writes for the Globe and Mail. "This was no abstract worry either: the day before Jasper caught fire, Joe Biden had dropped out of the presidential race, and the Democrats' prospects looked dismal." Officials "knew that if they start with the standard stuff on climate change, Donald Trump and his people would get out their red pens and just say 'no way,'" John Kirton, founding director of the G7 Research Group, told Kopecky. "So then, what is your strategy? And wildfires was the answer." The difference, Kopecky writes, is that while Trump refuses to listen to climate science, he's seen a rash of wildfires since he returned to the White House in January, and his country is now receiving smoke from the blazes in Canada. "So Donald Trump's got a reason to be seen to be doing something about it," Kirton said. It also "speaks volumes" that the energy security section of the G7 agenda talks about artificial intelligence, but makes no reference to oil and gas, Kopecky writes. Source: The Energy Mix


National Observer
41 minutes ago
- National Observer
Canada's Conservatives still aren't serious about housing
He was so close to getting it. Jacob Mantle, the newly-elected thirty-something Conservative MP for York-Durham, rose in the House of Commons on Tuesday to make a point about housing costs. 'Oxford Economics reports that Toronto's housing market ranks among the worst in the world for affordability. At the same time, mortgage delinquency rates in Toronto are higher than at any time during the pandemic. The financial burden is suffocating the next generation of homebuyers.' But Mantle wasn't actually interested in proposing solutions to that problem. Instead, he wanted to whine about the fact that the Carney government isn't going to table a budget until the fall, which the government has defended on the basis that it will be better able to account for the fallout from Donald Trump's tariffs by then. And despite his supposed concern over housing, Mantle was dismissive of the government's plan to embrace and scale up modular housing in Canada. 'My generation refuses to live in a shipping container,' Mantle said. For what it's worth, I suspect many members of his generation (and mine) would be happy to live in the sort of modified shipping containers that are being designed and built right now, including the ones in his own city. But modular housing is so much more than just the use and conversion of shipping containers. It's an entirely new approach to homebuilding, one that uses factories and their inherent economies of scale to drive down costs. They can be one or two-storey, single or multi-family, and configured in any number of layouts and sizes. In an environment where driving down construction costs is a nearly existential issue for Mantle's generation, you'd think he would be more open to new ideas and economic innovation — especially when it promises to use more Canadian materials and labour. Then again, if you've been paying close attention to the Conservative Party of Canada's approach to this issue, his behaviour was entirely predictable. Under Pierre Poilievre's leadership, the party and its MPs have repeatedly highlighted the very real problem of rising housing costs in Canada and the disproportionate impacts they have on younger people. But when it comes to actual solutions to that problem — ones, at least, that don't involve cutting taxes or regulations and assuming the market will magically solve the problem it has helped create — those same Conservatives either disappear into the metaphorical bushes or come out on the other side of the issue. In Calgary, for example, opposition to a city-wide measure to increase affordability and density while reducing sprawl came mostly from Conservative-leaning councilors like Dan McLean, Peter Demong and Sean Chu, with some conspicuous cheerleading work coming from federal Conservative MP Greg McLean. In British Columbia, provincial Conservative party leader John Rustad decided to go to bat for the very 'gatekeepers' standing in the way of new housing that Poilievre had repeatedly promised he would eliminate. Even in Ontario, where Conservative politicians have been more visibly and vocally on-side with pro-supply measures, the results of the Ford government's efforts have been underwhelming, to say the least. We are not in a moment where we can afford to reflexively turn our noses up at potential solutions. And yet, Conservative politicians like Mantle seem determined to find fault in every proposed approach that doesn't flatter their own pre-existing ideological and political biases towards cutting taxes and reducing government involvement. Modular housing will not be, in and of itself, the solution to a problem that has been building for more than two decades. But that's only because nothing on its own will, or could, be the solution. The Carney government has embraced modular housing as a way to lower costs and improve affordability in Canada's housing market. Canada's Conservatives, on the other hand, seem determined to miss the mass timber for the trees. Instead, we need every possible lever being pulled right now, from regulatory reform and improved operating efficiencies to direct government involvement, procurement, and even development. Mantle is right that the status quo has failed his generation. But he's wrong to indignantly oppose a good-faith effort at challenging and changing it, and all the more so as he pretends to speak on behalf of an entire generation. We can only hope that his party and its online proxies don't decide to turn modular housing into this year's iteration of the 15-minute city and throw a self-evidently good and decent idea into the stew of online conspiracies it always seems to have at low boil. Yes, that might feed the eternally hungry appetites of their increasingly online political base. But it won't do anything to address the problem Conservatives like Mantle claim to care about. At some point, Canadians may conclude that they're not actually all that interested in solving it.

National Observer
41 minutes ago
- National Observer
NDP grassroots buck against 'top-down' leadership race
After the unmitigated disaster that was the NDP's 2025 election result, prominent members are pushing back against an 'elitist' leadership race and want the party to rebuild from the grassroots up. 'We lost touch, and we have to be honest about that,' former MP Charlie Angus said at a June 11 press conference in Ottawa. 'We have to re-engage with people.' When asked about Angus' comments, NDP interim leader Don Davies said it was a 'tough election' but he doesn't think the party lost touch. The question of how to rebuild has become existential: the NDP is down to seven MPs and lost official party status for the first time since 1993. This limits the party's influence significantly. They no longer get a seat on committees to study issues and amend legislation, and no longer have the right to ask daily questions of the government during Question Period, among other lost privileges. The party is searching for a way out of the wilderness, and doing so without a leader. According to Angus, the party needs two things: a strong leader and a return to grassroots organizing. But the NDP must do more than just rally behind a leader, he emphasized. 'Nothing against Jagmeet [Singh], but we stopped being the New Democratic Party. We became Team Jagmeet, and that wasn't selling,' Angus said in an interview with Canada's National Observer. With the NDP reduced to seven seats, Former MP Charlie Angus and party activists are pushing back against a "top-down approach" to the NDP leadership race and instead are advocating for a return to grassroots organizing. 'If it's all about just going to cheer on the leader, then the riding associations start to disintegrate,' he said. Proposed leadership contest rules controversial Angus, who once again ruled out a bid for the leadership, has run before: he ran against Singh in the 2017 NDP leadership race. At the time, the entry fee was $30,000. Now, there are rumblings among a handful of prominent New Democrats that the entry fee could go up to $150,000, the Globe and Mail reported last month. Angus said he doesn't know what an acceptable fee for entry is but said $150,000 'seems like a high number.' Brad Lavigne, a key member of former NDP leader Jack Layton's leadership team who also participated in Thomas Mulclair's race, said the leadership campaign needs to strike the balance between duration, financial viability and broad support. Running a long leadership race can make the costs of a campaign for both the candidates and party unsustainable, Lavigne said. Lavigne didn't speculate about an appropriate leadership fee, but noted fee thresholds self-select tenable candidates that have grassroots support from across the country. "If you can't find 1,000 people to contribute $20, then how viable are you as a leadership candidate?' Lavigne said. The primary objective of running any leadership campaign is to find a leader that has broad support from party members and get the majority of Canadians to vote NDP at the polls so it can implement the party's policies, he said. 'Grassroots members that I've talked to want to see a successful electoral game plan,' he said. 'It's not enough to make the case for policy ideas in the hopes that other parties will adopt them and enact them in Parliament.' Grassroots 'tired of this top-down approach' Des Bissonnette and Ashley Zarbatany, co-chairs of the Indigenous People's Commission, criticized the proposed leadership race fee and short race, arguing the plan is the brainchild of an unelected party elite that wasn't vetted by the executive council and will potentially exclude grassroots supporters and ideas. 'There are a lot of grassroots and team members who are tired of this top-down approach by the consultant class in our party,' said Zarbatany, who added the proposed fee is 'abysmal' and didn't represent the values or pocketbooks of a working-class party. Ideas about the leadership race were floated in the press before discussing them with the federal executive, she added, reflecting the poor internal communication that also led to pushback by half the elected caucus around the selection of the interim leader, Don Davies. Bissonnette, the NDP candidate for Lakeland, Sask. in the last election, agreed. 'There's never really any consultation with [federal NDP] council members on what direction the party is going to take most of the time,' she said. 'You're rubber-stamping decisions that they've already made, rather than actively engaging in the democratic process.' The party has also shifted away from grassroots progressive values, she said, citing the decision to remove socialist language from the party's constitution and the failure to push hard for electoral reform while backing the Liberal government or in the election campaign. 'People like myself in the grassroots, the volunteers who are passionate about progressive politics want to see a real progressive party,' Bissonnette said. Bissonnette and Zarbatany said the climate crisis is a key issue with many grassroots members of the party who feel environmental policy proposals get ignored. Doubling down on centralist ideas that are too similar to the Liberal Party isn't going to lead to the renewal of the party, Zarbatany said. 'They are the reason why our party has suffered catastrophic electoral losses.' 'Kill Zoom' Rebuilding the party is about far more than the leadership race, and last time round, the party's leader-centric focus undermined the role of local riding associations, Angus said. 'People living in 12 ridings probably decided the leadership last time and that left a lot of parts of the country out in the cold,' he said. The party must find a way for members in New Brunswick or rural Saskatchewan to feel like a part of the movement. Angus' main recommendation to bring the party back to its grassroots origins? 'We need to kill Zoom,' he said. 'Everything by the NDP is done on Zoom. Zoom doesn't include anybody,' he told Canada's National Observer at Parliament Hill. 'We used to do pub nights. We used to do bean dinners,' he said. Angus said 'doing old-school organizing' with an emphasis on public meetings and getting people involved to vote at the party's convention are key, adding that TikTok views did not translate into votes. Mobilizing the grassroots is trickier when you're strapped for cash, Dennis Pilon, a political science professor at York University, told Canada's National Observer last month. 'On the right, they just buy people, they just hire people to go out and go door to door, but the NDP don't have the resources to do that,' Pilon said. With fewer people voting in general elections, the NDP is suffering more than other parties, Pilon said. In the postwar period, voter turnout was about 75 to 80 per cent, but in recent elections, it has slipped to between 60 and 65 per cent. 'The missing voters aren't just anyone. They tend to be poor. They tend to be less integrated with the political system. They tend to have less sense of social entitlement,' Pilon said. The NDP needs to reconnect with these missing voters, but it will be challenging because you have to actually go out and meet them, he said. The party lost touch with its traditional working-class base because it lacked an 'on-the-ground force,' Angus said. 'We need an honest appraisal of what went wrong,' he said. 'New Democrats aren't very honest when it comes to disasters. We sort of blame strategic voting, or we blame something. We made a lot of mistakes. I think people just want an honest accounting.' Angus would not speculate on who might run for the party leadership. 'At the end of the day, this has to be about winning,' Angus said. Rather than repeat the mistake of gambling everything on a likeable leader, Angus prefers to focus on how the party finds its people again. 'We don't need big ideas. We've got tons of big ideas … We don't need dramatic and bold moves. We need to re-engage and be the party that ordinary people feel has their back. It's pretty simple stuff, but maybe that's the hardest thing, is just going back to the grassroots, going back to coffee shops, going back to inviting people in and making them feel like they belong and that they're welcome, regardless of whether they say the right thing or not.'