Mark Carney’s political advantage is no longer confined to handling Donald Trump or managing the economy. New Léger polling finds the prime minister ahead of Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre across all six major policy comparisons highlighted by the firm, including immigration, pipelines, defence and Canada-U.S. trade negotiations.
The result is especially striking because Léger presented respondents with essentially the same policy positions and changed the leader attached to them. Carney came out ahead every time, with advantages ranging from nine to 14 percentage points. The Aug. 1–3 polling of 1,514 Canadians arrives with the Liberals at 46% among decided voters, compared with 34% for the Conservatives, while Carney maintains a 55% approval rating. That makes the findings as much a test of political credibility as ideology.
Major Projects Give Carney a 13-Point Advantage
One of Poilievre’s most consistent political arguments has been that Canada needs to build faster, yet Léger found Carney holding the stronger hand when that broad objective was tested. Sixty-four per cent of respondents asked about Carney trusted him on dramatically speeding up major infrastructure and energy projects, compared with 51% of those asked about Poilievre. That 13-point difference is significant because the proposition itself is hardly traditional left-versus-right territory: both leaders were attached to the same pro-development statement.
Carney also has something tangible behind that perception. His government created the Major Projects Office to coordinate large nation-building investments and streamline federal decision-making. By May, Ottawa said the office was advancing 22 projects and broader strategies representing more than $126 billion in potential investment, spanning nuclear power, LNG, critical minerals and transportation. For businesses waiting years for permits or communities hoping a mine, port or transmission line finally moves forward, that turns an abstract argument about “getting things built” into a measurable political test. The challenge for Poilievre is that a message long associated with Conservatives is currently generating more trust when Carney delivers it.
Carney Even Leads on Pipelines and Expanding Oil Production
The pipeline result may be the most politically uncomfortable finding for Conservatives. Léger asked whether Canada should increase energy production and build new pipelines so more oil and natural gas can reach markets beyond the United States. Carney drew 62% trust, compared with 51% for Poilievre—an 11-point advantage on an issue that traditionally gives Conservatives an opportunity to attack Liberal energy policy.
The political environment has changed substantially. Ottawa and Alberta are now advancing a proposed west coast oil pipeline that would be capable of carrying roughly one million barrels per day from the Edmonton region to a deepwater port in British Columbia, with Asian export markets a central objective. The proposal remains at an early stage and still faces consultation and regulatory steps, but its existence gives Carney greater room to present himself as both pro-development and pro-diversification. Ottawa has tied that effort to the Pathways carbon-capture project and a broader emissions-reduction agreement with Alberta’s oil sands producers. In practical terms, Carney is attempting to occupy territory once considered almost automatically Conservative: more production, more pipelines and less dependence on the U.S. market.
Immigration Produces Carney’s Strongest Trust Rating
Immigration produced Carney’s highest score of the six comparisons. Léger found 69% trusted him when presented with a policy of allowing fewer immigrants into Canada to reduce pressure on health care and housing. Poilievre received 56% on the identical proposition. That 13-point advantage is notable because immigration levels became one of the Trudeau government’s biggest political vulnerabilities and helped fuel Conservative criticism of Ottawa’s handling of housing and public services.
Carney has inherited that record, but federal policy has moved sharply toward lower intake. Canada’s current plan targets 380,000 permanent residents in 2026, while the target for new temporary workers and students has been cut to 385,000. Ottawa is also aiming to reduce temporary residents to less than 5% of Canada’s population by the end of 2027. The change is already visible in demographic data: Statistics Canada estimated 2.68 million non-permanent residents at the beginning of 2026, down from a peak above 3.1 million in October 2024. For families confronting expensive housing or crowded services, the distinction between promises and actual population flows will ultimately matter more than polling. For now, however, Carney is winning the credibility contest.
Trump-Era Trade Talks Are Carney’s Weakest Issue—and He Still Leads
Canada-U.S. negotiations produced the weakest scores for both leaders. Léger asked whether Canada should negotiate a trade agreement with the United States even if Ottawa has to make concessions. Only 50% trusted Carney on that approach, but Poilievre performed considerably worse at 38%. Carney therefore maintained a 12-point advantage even on the file where half of those asked about him withheld their trust.
The wording matters. Léger was not simply asking which politician Canadians trust to confront Donald Trump. It tested acceptance of the harder political reality that an agreement with Washington might require Canada to give something up. That question has become increasingly relevant. Canadian and U.S. officials are engaged in intensive negotiations ahead of an Aug. 19 deadline for additional American tariffs, while Ottawa is seeking relief from existing sectoral duties and progress toward a modernized CUSMA. Reuters has reported that possible concessions under discussion include autos and dairy-related issues in exchange for tariff relief. That leaves Carney balancing two conflicting demands: reaching an economically useful agreement without appearing to surrender Canadian interests.
Defence and the Arctic Give Carney His Biggest Lead
Carney’s largest advantage comes on military spending and Arctic security. Sixty per cent trusted him when presented with the argument that Canada needs to spend significantly more on defence to meet NATO commitments and strengthen its Arctic presence. Poilievre received 46%, producing a 14-point gap—the widest of the six comparisons examined by Léger.
That advantage arrives after one of the fastest shifts in Canadian defence policy in decades. Ottawa announced more than $9 billion in additional defence investment for 2025-26, and the Department of National Defence confirmed in March that Canada had reached NATO’s benchmark of spending 2% of GDP on defence. The alliance has since moved toward a much larger long-term commitment: NATO members agreed to work toward total defence and security-related investment equal to 5% of GDP by 2035, including at least 3.5% for core defence requirements. Canada has also put more attention on Arctic surveillance, infrastructure and military capabilities. These are expensive commitments, but they have transformed defence from a perennial Canadian weakness into one of Carney’s strongest leadership files in the Léger numbers.
Carney Also Wins the Energy-versus-Climate Balancing Act
The smallest gap between the leaders still favours Carney. Léger tested whether Canada can expand its energy sector while continuing to make meaningful progress on climate commitments by working with industry on technologies such as carbon capture and storage. Carney received 56% trust against Poilievre’s 47%, a nine-point advantage. It is a revealing result because the proposition attempts to bridge two constituencies that Canadian politics has frequently treated as opponents: voters who want stronger energy development and those who want emissions reductions.
Carney’s emerging energy strategy is built around that same bargain. Ottawa’s agreement with Alberta and major oil sands producers calls for expanded production and market access alongside a shared objective of cutting annual emissions by 16 million tonnes through the Pathways strategy and other measures. Federal policy also provides substantial tax support for carbon capture investment. The stakes remain enormous: Canada emitted 685 megatonnes of greenhouse gases in 2024, about 10% below 2005 levels, while its 2030 target requires a 40% to 45% reduction below 2005. Whether technology can reconcile those goals with growing production remains contested. Politically, however, Léger finds more Canadians willing to trust Carney with the balancing act.
