In one of Canada’s most consequential elections in decades, Mark Carney secured a historic victory.

However, it remains uncertain whether his Liberal Party will reach the 172-seat threshold needed for an outright majority, with full results expected by early Tuesday morning.

The election was widely seen as a referendum on leadership strength against external threats, particularly President Donald Trump, who inflamed tensions by threatening to annex Canada and imposing heavy tariffs.

“As I’ve been warning for months, America wants our land, our resources, our water, our country,” Carney told supporters Monday night. “These are not idle threats. President Trump is trying to break us so America can own us. That will never… ever happen.”

Carney’s firm stance quickly drew praise on the international stage.

Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Commission, wrote on X: “I look forward to working closely together, both bilaterally and within the G7. We’ll defend our shared democratic values, promote multilateralism, and champion free and fair trade.”

Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese echoed the sentiment, posting: “In a time of global uncertainty, I look forward to continuing to work with you to build on the enduring friendship between our nations, in the shared interests of all our citizens.”

Carney’s path to leadership

Carney, 60, brought extensive financial experience to his political debut. A former investment banker, he previously served as the head of the Bank of England during Brexit and the governor of the Bank of Canada during the 2008 financial crisis.

Despite never holding elected office before, Carney was named leader of the Liberal Party in March. His background in finance and calm demeanor helped persuade voters he was the candidate best equipped to counter Trump’s unpredictable policies.

Carney defeated Pierre Poilievre, the 45-year-old leader of the Conservative Party. Poilievre had led the polls for more than a year, at one point with a 27-point advantage over the Liberals. His momentum shifted after former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau resigned in January, giving the Liberals a much-needed boost.

The turning point came as Trump intensified his attacks on Canada’s economy and sovereignty, culminating in a provocative social media post on election day suggesting Canada could become the 51st US state.

Poilievre’s campaign, characterized by Trump-style rhetoric, including a “Canada First” slogan, promises of tighter borders, smaller government, and opposition to “wokeness,” resonated early on. However, his perceived alignment with Trump ultimately damaged his standing with voters.

This loss marks the Conservative Party’s third consecutive defeat in federal elections, leading analysts to predict internal debates over its future direction.

Carney’s promises

In addition to foreign policy concerns, housing emerged as a pivotal issue throughout the campaign. Experts believe no single party has a full solution, but acknowledge progress is being made.

“I don’t think any of the parties are going to have enough to solve the crisis, but they are moving in the right direction,” said Mike Moffatt, senior director of policy and innovation at the Smart Prosperity Institute.

The Liberal Party’s housing platform includes a plan to double the pace of homebuilding, targeting 500,000 units per year over the next decade. A new crown corporation, Build Canada Homes, would lead this effort by directly engaging the federal government in home construction.

Read next: Housing policies a key issue for Canadian voters ahead of election

“Well, the federal government’s been doing this a little bit since 2017. Carney is suggesting he take it further and actually act as a developer and create a new crown corporation,” Moffatt explained.

However, Moffatt cautioned that while the plan is ambitious, scepticism is warranted. “It’s an ambitious plan, but I think a little bit of skepticism is warranted because it is so ambitious, creating a new crown corporation out of scratch to be a developer, it’s going to be a challenge for the government to pull off,” he said.

He also highlighted structural obstacles: the federal government has no direct control over municipalities, limiting its ability to mandate lower development charges, which Moffatt said all parties agree are “far too high.”

“What they can do is, create a bunch of incentive programs and try to incentivize municipalities to do the right thing, but they can’t force them to do it, and there’s always challenges around coming up with agreements and actually making sure that those municipalities live up to their word,” he noted.