(Texte français disponible ici)
The first real leaders’ debate was held this Tuesday. Were you looking forward to it? I wasn’t, particularly, because I spent the entire day wondering what intelligent thing I could possibly write twenty minutes after the debate that you wouldn’t read a hundred times elsewhere, and I still haven’t come up with anything.
So we’ll start by talking about money, then the debate, then some other stuff that has nothing to do with the debate.
Let’s dive in!
How Much Are the Leaders Worth?
Louis Lacroix, a journalist with 98.5 FM, asked each party to provide a financial statement for its leader, and every one of them complied. Still, credit where credit is due for the transparency.
I turned the numbers into a chart. Here it is:
Oops! Sorry, that’s the version for Le Journal de Montréal.
Here’s the right one:
A few observations:
Éric Duhaime’s assets are reported to the nearest $10,000;
Christine Fréchette’s and PSPP’s assets are reported to the nearest $1,000;
Charles Milliard’s assets are reported to the nearest $10;
Ruba Ghazal’s assets are reported down to the cent: $1,008,092.82;
Éric Duhaime drives a hybrid Volvo. I’m not sure his supporters will forgive him;
Charles Milliard has a $49,000 car loan;
PSPP has a $1,200 credit card balance and $81,000 in cash. He should pay off his card if he doesn’t want to incur interest;
Ruba Ghazal lent $25,000 to her party. I didn’t realize things were going that badly for QS;
Paul St-Pierre Plamondon received $1,775 in royalties in 2025. Perhaps I should reconsider my choice of career;
Sol Zanette, Quebec Solidaire’s other
co-leaderspokesperson, has net assets of $254,810.44, and I don’t think anyone cares.
Face-à-Face-à-Face-à-Face-à-Face
For two hours on Tuesday, five politicians tried to talk over one another. For two hours on Tuesday, five million Quebecers tried to understand what they were saying.
Earlier in the day, LCN had assembled its panel to offer advice to the leaders.
A question for Fox News Quebec LCN: could you honestly assemble a more lopsided panel? Could you at least pretend?
(Two former federal Conservative staffers and Karima Brikh, a very conservative commentator who also happens to be Mathieu Bock-Côté’s partner, for anyone wondering.)
Later that evening, we were treated to an interview with a former MNA and former commentator, now a candidate for the same party she once represented.
How shall I put this? I don’t see a huge difference between Elsie Lefebvre the commentator, who promoted the PQ on LCN, and Elsie Lefebvre the candidate, who promotes the PQ on LCN.
Back to the debate, which was divided into three themes: “An Economy Under Strain,” “Our Taxes, Our Services,” and “Quebec’s Future.”
With five candidates, the head-to-heads produced ten different pairings, or x(x−1)/2. We got Duhaime–PSPP, Milliard–Fréchette, Duhaime–Ghazal, Fréchette–PSPP, Ghazal–Milliard, Milliard–Duhaime, PSPP–Milliard, Fréchette–Duhaime, Fréchette–Ghazal, and PSPP–Ghazal, and vice versa.
From time to time, Paul Larocque let everyone speak at once.
It then looked something like this:
Which, predictably, sounded like this:
My favourite screenshot of the evening remains this one:
Fifteen minutes after the debate ended, Mathieu Bock-Côté had already found time to write, edit, submit, and see published a column declaring Paul St-Pierre Plamondon the clear winner. I’m sure you’re just as surprised as I am.
An hour later, Léger released a poll of its own that also gave the PQ leader the win.
What did I think?
PSPP is generally very articulate, and this debate was no exception. The only danger was that he might lose his temper. He didn’t.
Éric Duhaime is an equally effective communicator, with an even stronger command of his ideas, whether they are good or bad.
Charles Milliard was also very good. Natural, likeable, and occasionally incisive. Nothing like last week’s cringeworthy address to the nation.
Ruba Ghazal’s indignation is sincere and well placed, but it is hard to take seriously someone who wants a government-owned grocery store and calls it “competition.”
Things did not go well for Ms. Fréchette, who constantly interrupted others so she could squeeze in her canned, none-too-subtle lines.
In fact, when you think about it, the post-debate Léger poll fairly closely mirrors voting intentions among francophones for the PQ, QCP, QLP, and QS.
Image: Le Journal de Montréal
Source: Qc125.com
That confirms that the leaders generally met their respective electorates’ expectations: supporters saw what they expected to see. Christine Fréchette was the exception. She was clearly uncomfortable in a setting where she had to do more than recite canned answers.
At times, she managed to get through her talking points, but only to defend the indefensible, including her government’s record on homelessness (near-total neglect as homelessness rose 60% in eight years) and its health care “investments,” which are essentially the same hospital-renovation announcements already made two, three, or four times and which somehow never seem to come to fruition. (Maisonneuve-Rosemont, where are you?)
Ms. Fréchette was once again unable to answer a simple question: “Would you be able to represent the No side?”
Finally, Ms. Fréchette’s closing statement sounded like an unholy cross between a poorly rehearsed monologue and an old Au Bon Marché commercial.
One more debate like that, and the PQ won’t have to work very hard to win its majority.
Debate Leftovers, in No Particular Order:
“The last time I saw a government-owned grocery store was when I went to Cuba.”
— Éric Duhaime, to Ruba Ghazal“Canadian provinces are sovereign… within their areas of jurisdiction.”
— Charles Milliard, to PSPP“I would like to address artists in the cultural community.”
— Christine Fréchette, subtle as ever“We have a vision for society, not a pessimistic message.”
— Paul St-Pierre Plamondon, trying to erase the last year“Quebec is in my gut.”
— Charles Milliard, reaching into the Jean Charest playbook. Not sure about that one.
Dumb Dumas
The charming Quebec Conservative candidate in Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, Dominique “DooM” Dumas, had taken care to scrub his social media accounts before entering politics.
Unfortunately for him, the internet has a long memory. Journalists have dug up numerous posts in which the would-be MNA insults an actress over her weight, attacks the founder of an organization that helps vulnerable young people, questions sexual-assault statistics, disparages the #MeToo movement, suggests that an artist turn to pornography, mocks Caitlyn Jenner after her transition, denounces the cancellation of a hazing game that promoted rape culture, and ridicules efforts to call out prostitution during the Montreal Grand Prix.
This poetic anthology comes on top of other comments in which the former shock jock radio host called people who disagreed with him “morons,” “fucking thieves,” and “airheads.”
In short, an articulate mind that will undoubtedly illuminate debate in the National Assembly, where Mr. Dumas still has a fairly good chance of winning a seat.
Today’s Baloney
“I’m certain I would have been a very good premier because I know how to surround myself with the right people.”
— Olivier Primeau, entrepreneur and special envoy for the CAQ, January 16, 2026
“Would I be a good premier? I’m certain I would, because one of my greatest strengths is knowing how to surround myself with the right people.”
— Olivier Primeau, January 19, 2026
He was “asking for a friend.”
— Olivier Primeau, reacting to the news that he had asked about the rules and launch date for the QLP leadership race.
Odds that Olivier Primeau wasn’t asking for himself: 😬
Odds that Primeau finds it awkward to campaign for the CAQ after considering a run for the QLP leadership: 🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥
A Serious Issue
Stéphane, a homeless man, died a few days ago in Trois-Rivières, where Christine Fréchette is running.
People die every day. Homeless people just die a little more often, and it usually doesn’t make the news.
What is absurd is that there was a shelter not far from Stéphane’s tent, with 30 warm beds. They are closed until December because of a lack of funding.
What is even more absurd is that the premier visited Halte Douceur one week before Stéphane died. She was told that the shelter could not afford to open during the summer.
Image from the Le Soleil website.
Even in the winter, the shelter barely gets by. It needs $500,000 to stay open. Three years ago, it received $400,000 a year. Last year, it received $303,000. The people who run it have to beg for the rest to make it through the spring.
It would take another $1 million to shelter 30 people for a full year, give people in desperate straits a safer place to sleep, help them get back on their feet, and save a life now and then. The beds would always be full, according to the shelter’s managers.
After Stéphane died, Christine Fréchette promised to think about it.
“As for the warming-centre service, we will speak with our partners so that it can be available year-round in Trois-Rivières.”
It took another death to produce a bland statement that promises nothing and offers no apology.
In twenty years, the shelter’s managers have seen 296 homeless people die. Only one died of old age. Not Montreal. Trois-Rivières.
+++++
Homelessness has surged by 60% in eight years. It happened on the CAQ’s watch, but the same thing would have happened under another government.
Ten days ago, QLP leader Charles Milliard presented his party’s proposals on homelessness, promising to spend an additional $60 million a year.
“I would have liked us to put in a billion, but look, we’re $7 billion in the hole right now.”
I have no doubt that Mr. Milliard was sincere, because this is how politicians have always responded to homelessness.
“We’d like to.” “It isn’t possible.” “What can you do?”
Notice how, regardless of which party has been in power, there has always been money for dubious projects proposed by multimillionaires. If homeless people were multimillionaires, there would always be money for them.
I don’t know how much money it would take to solve homelessness in Quebec.
What I do know is that four parties are promising a bridge or tunnel of dubious usefulness between Quebec City and Lévis, the least expensive version of which would cost at least $3 billion.
I also know that the governing party, the party likely to form the next government, and the party likely to hold the balance of power have each introduced or promised tax breaks on groceries, used goods, or gasoline that will do almost nothing for most of us, except those who can afford to spend more, while costing the public treasury a fortune every year.
I also know that homelessness already costs all of us a fortune every year.
We can choose to spend that fortune while allowing misery to fester, or spend the same amount addressing it and helping those who want help and who, with our support, will move on.
Homelessness is a choice we make as a society.
-30-
My name is Patrick Déry. I write for a living, and I am trying something different here. If you enjoyed reading this piece, you can support me by buying me a coffee. You can also subscribe to this publication (for free or as a paid subscriber; the choice is yours).
Comments, shares, and “likes” are always appreciated. It also helps the Substack algorithm notice me, so don’t be shy!