The two official leaders’ debates of the 2025 federal election are done and dusted, as party leaders squared off in English on Thursday night in an event comprised of spirited exchanges, both substantive and otherwise.

It was the final opportunity for the country’s political parties to make their respective pitches to Canadians before advanced polling opens on Friday, while election day draws ever closer, as voters will head to the ballot box on April 28.

The debate was divided into six distinct categories (affordability, energy, ‘leading in a crisis,’ public safety, and tariffs), while moderator Steve Paikin often interjected to ask specific questions of each of the four leaders who participated.

READ MORE: Carney, Poilievre clash in final leaders’ debate

Here are five of the most important moments from Thursday’s event:

Pipeline perspectives

The first discussion round was intended to focus on Canada’s response to U.S. President Donald Trump’s trade war, but it quickly transitioned into a chippy exchange about pipelines involving all four party leaders.

Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre used the prompt as a jumping-off point to criticize the previous Liberal government’s lacklustre record for what he considers a lacklustre record in support domestic industries. In particular, Poilievre blames the Impact Assessment Act, formerly known as Bill C-69, which was passed during Justin Trudeau’s first term in office and outlines the rules and guidelines governing assessment reviews for large-scale resource development projects.

“You supported blocking pipelines in Canada that gave Donald Trump and the U.S. a near-monopoly over our energy,” said Poilievre. “And now you want to keep in place Bill C-69, the Liberal ‘no new development law,’ which blocks us from shipping our resources overseas.”

“The 14 biggest energy and resource companies say it has to go if we’re ever going to build another project.”

Poilievre then asked Liberal Leader Mark Carney why he hadn’t repealed the law, wondering if “it’s because you are exactly in the same line as Justin Trudeau and the rest of the Liberal team that is now making up your cabinet,” which was the first of several attempts from the Tory leader to draw comparisons between Carney and his predecessor.

In response, Carney noted that he has only been prime minister for one month and committed to a “one project, one review” system, which he said was possible under the existing legislation.

Carney also emphasized that Trudeau’s administration purchased and constructed the Trans Mountain pipeline, a talking point that bemused NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh.

“While these two compete about who’s more pro-pipeline, I think what we need to do is… clear,” said Singh. “If we’re talking about energy in our country, we need to build an east-west grid.”

“Let’s use our power as a nation to build a national project that creates good jobs [and] strengthens us for the future.”

Meanwhile, Bloc Québécois Leader Yves-François Blanchet, who has been staunchly opposed to the idea of the federal government forcing the construction of a pipeline through Quebec without provincial approval, attacked Carney on a different flank, accusing him of making different promises to different regions of the country.

“You are becoming a really Canadian leader, saying one thing in French and another in English,” said Blanchet. “You said in British Columbia… that you would force oil and gas pipelines through Quebec… and that you would emergency powers to do so.”

“Two days later in Montreal, you said that you would never do that without the approval of Quebec.”

Carney commits to ending oil and gas subsidies

Still with the environment, another interesting exchange came when Singh pressed Carney on the previous Liberal government’s subsidies for fossil fuel companies.

“What I have found very troubling is that, in the past number of years, the Liberal government’s record is one where we have spent the most subsidies compared to any other country in the G7 on subsidizing oil and gas,” said Singh. “These are highly-profitable companies.”

“Will you commit to ending oil and gas subsidies?”

While Singh asked his question, Blanchet repeatedly pointed out that New Democrats were the only party that continued to vote confidence in Trudeau’s government well into 2024, and therefore kept said subsidies flowing.

When it became Carney’s turn to speak, he was unequivocal — “yes, end to oil and gas subsidies,” — prompting Singh to declare victory.

“That’s why you need New Democrats,” he said.

“I would have done it independently,” retorted Carney.

Singh got chippy

Speaking of Singh, the NDP leader was considerably more animated during Thursday’s debate, often interrupting his colleagues, most notably Poilievre, during their remarks.

While Poilievre was responding to a question about housing, Singh held up six fingers to symbolize the six affordable housing units he said the Tory leader helped build when he was minister responsible for housing. Poilievre has often claimed that he actually oversaw the construction of 200,000 homes during his time in the file, though reporting from the Toronto Star suggests both figures are exaggerations.

During the back-and-forth on environmental reviews, Poilievre said he believes Canada must uphold strong standards, but that one review is sufficient, prompting Singh to say that it was “the first time I’ve heard you care about the environment.”

“What Mr. Poilievre is saying is have no rules, have no regulation, have no control over any of any energy development,” Singh could be heard saying during Poilievre’s remarks.

“Let big polluters pollute.”

While the temperature of the debate wasn’t overtly hostile, it was certainly more tense than Wednesday’s French-language debate, which was comparatively cordial.

Notwithstanding debate

One of the night’s more substantive exchanges came during the section devoted to public safety, in which the moderator asked Poilievre about his proposed use of the notwithstanding clause to enforce consecutive sentences for mass murders, which would override a Supreme Court ruling on the subject.

“I will use the constitutional powers that are created for this purpose to ensure that mass murders stay in maximum-security penitentiaries for life [and] they will only come out in a box,” said Poilievre. “We cannot allow Liberal crime and chaos to go on terrorizing our communities, what we need is a real plan for change so we can bring back the safety and security that Canadians used to take for granted.”

What followed was Carney’s assertion that “one of the core responsibilities of the federal government and prime minister is to defend the fundamental rights and liberties of Canadians.”

“It’s a very dangerous slope to override judgements from the Supreme Court of Canada,” he said. “The Charter of Rights and Freedoms exist to protect Canadians from people like us on the stage, politicians who may use their power to override fundamental rights.”

“The issue in using for the federal government… is not where you start, but where will you stop?”

When the mic came back to Poilievre, the Conservative leader said he was interested in the “rights of victims.”

“[While] Mr. Carney seems to be very interested in the rights of criminals,” said Poilievre.

Also of note, Singh taking issue with what he called Poilievre’s “ludicrous claim” that Conservatives are the only party that believes mass murderers should be severely punished, which he said was a fundamental position for every leader on the debate stage.

‘Justin Trudeau is not here’

Perhaps the most noteworthy of the one-on-one interactions between Poilievre and Carney came when the Conservtive leader was given the opportunity to directly ask his rival a question, opting to attack his role as economic advisor to Trudeau, which he said led to the implementation of “inflationary policies.”

“You were the economic advisor for Justin Trudeau who gave us the worst inflation we have had in a generation because the policies you implemented and those of the MPs that are still in your ministry,” said Poilievre, before asking Carney if he would apologize to Canadians.

In turn, Carney, who was forced to try and distinguish himself from the previous Liberal leader throughout the debate, gave his most explicit response to Poilievre — “I know you want to be running against Justin Trudeau. Justin Trudeau isn’t here.”

Carney specified that he didn’t provide the advice that led to Canada’s inflationary crisis, and touted his record as central bank governor both domestically and abroad, which he said led to low inflation environments in both countries.

Before time ended, Poilievre snuck in one more of his talking points, saying that “the last 10 years were about the Liberals, the next 10 years should be about you.”