ADAMS: TMU's NDP Leadership “Debate” Was a Masterclass in Avoiding Leadership
I've followed Canadian politics long enough to recognize a fake fight when I see one. And make no mistake: what's currently being sold as a leadership race in Canada's New Democratic Party is not a contest of ideas. It is a carefully managed exercise in mutual reassurance. Everyone agrees with everyone else. Everyone applauds. Everyone smiles. And nobody—absolutely nobody—seems to believe strongly enough in their own ideas to challenge the others.
I attended the recent TMU debate energized, hopeful even. Seeing a room full of engaged supporters reminded me that the NDP still has a base that wants to believe. People who are hungry for a party that actually fights for working Canadians instead of mimicking Liberal talking points with slightly better branding. But that optimism didn't survive the debate.
The Absence Of Conviction
When a candidate can stand on a stage and seriously claim that nuclear energy is just as bad as oil—and no one meaningfully challenges it—that tells you everything you need to know. Not about nuclear policy, but about the culture of this race. It is a culture that confuses ideological purity with intelligence, consensus with strength, and politeness with courage.
The candidates are nice people. I'm sure they're sincere. One of them is even an MP. Some can string together a few sentences in French, though that didn't stop the so-called “French debate” from being conducted almost entirely in English. But niceness is not leadership. And sincerity without backbone is politically useless.
The debates themselves are painful to watch. Not because they're aggressive, but because they aren't. Each candidate spends their time agreeing with whoever spoke last, offering minor rhetorical flourishes, sometimes tossing in a swear word or a cheeky emoji joke to sound relatable. It's politics for people who think “caring” is a substitute for thinking.
There is no clash of visions. No real disagreement. No attempt to say: this is where the other candidates are wrong, and this is why I am right. Instead, we get a parade of near-identical statements delivered with different vocal cadences. This doesn't feel like a leadership race, it feels like a group project where nobody wants to hurt anyone's feelings.
And then there's the most absurd part of all: candidates fundraising for their opponents so they can “stay in the race.”
I'm sorry. What?
Do these people actually want to lead the party, or not? Do they believe in their own ideas strongly enough to fight for them? Or is the leadership just a rotating chair in a think tank for people who already agree with each other?
A leadership race is not a team-building exercise. It is a contest. If you are unwilling to compete, you have no business asking Canadians to trust you with power.
Some will say they hate negative campaigning, they'll tell you that unity is strength and that criticizing other candidates is divisive. Nonsense. Criticism is how ideas are tested. Conflict is how leaders are forged.
If you can't handle legitimate criticism inside your own party, you will be eaten alive in the House of Commons. One day, the next NDP leader will stand across from other party leaders who will heckle them, ridicule them, and attack every weakness they show. That is the job. If you can't sharpen your arguments among allies, you will collapse under real pressure.
A leadership race is supposed to produce clarity. What this one has produced is fog.
Nobody outside the NDP base cares about this race. That should terrify anyone who actually wants the party to win. While other political figures dominate headlines, spark controversy, and force national conversations, the NDP leadership contest barely registers as background noise because there's nothing here demanding attention.
Charisma matters. Conflict matters. A sense of urgency matters. You don't inspire volunteers, candidates, or voters by politely agreeing with each other while the country burns with affordability crises, failing infrastructure, and collapsing trust in institutions.
And before anyone tries to deflect by pointing to the loudest critic on the fringes, Yves Engler: I am not making an argument for chaos or performative outrage. Charisma without credibility is useless. Anger without discipline is counterproductive. Canadians don't want a wrecking ball, they want a leader who can fight and win. Yves Engler is none of these things.
The NDP desperately needs a real leadership race; one where candidates believe in their own ideas enough to defend them, challenge others, and accept that politics is not a feelings-based profession. It needs a leader who can command attention, articulate a distinct vision, and actually inspire people beyond the already-converted.
Because here's the truth many supporters don't want to hear: nobody respects a party that doesn't know what it wants to be. A party that's afraid of conflict will always lose to parties that aren't.
If the NDP wants to matter again—if it wants to represent Canadians who feel politically homeless—it needs to stop confusing consensus with strength and start acting like it actually wants power.
Right now, this race isn't just boring.
It's a failure of ambition.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial position of The Provincial Times or Left Lane Media Group. Read our Content Policy here.
