VANCOUVER — Wednesday night’s only televised leaders debate put NDP Leader David Eby, interim Conservative Leader Lorne Doerkson and Green Leader Emily Lowan on the same stage for the first time.
Angus Reid Institute president Shachi Kurl moderated. CentreBC Leader Elenore Sturko and OneBC interim Leader Dallas Brodie did not qualify for the card.
The Western Standard analysis below moves through the debate stretch by stretch, section-by-section, names a winner in each, and decides on an overall winner at the conclusion.
The first question noted that two-thirds of British Columbians believe it is too soon for an election. Eby called the snap election an existential moment. He said the one-seat majority, once the Speaker is appointed, would leave the chamber effectively tied.
“Every vote potentially could bring down the government,” he said, adding that BC NDP MLAs Joan Phillip and Darlene Rochford had to vote from hospital beds to keep the Conservatives from dissolving the legislature — only for Eby to dissolve it himself weeks later.
Doerkson said Eby saw an opportunity for himself. He said he sees an opportunity for British Columbians.
Lowan said the NDP is a party of broken promises and recycled ideas. She also reintroduced herself as the "only renter" amongst the major party leaders, which has been a key theme for her throughout the campaign.
This first stretch of the debate — on why an election was called at all — was a clear winner for Doerkson and a clear loser for Eby, who could not coherently explain why the election call he made was necessary in the first place.
Noting British Columbia’s record deficit and worsening public services, Eby was asked where the money went.
He did not answer the question. He said a re-elected NDP government will “never balance the budget on the backs of British Columbians” the way previous governments did when they sold school land. “We will never do that,” he said.
Kurl then asked Doerkson about posts by campaign director Katy Merrifield. In June she had posted “F**ck Islam. Defend Western civilization… expel this abhorrent ideology.” She later removed the post and said her anger was directed at extremism used to justify violence, not at Muslims or their faith.
Doerkson responded by defending Merrifield and committing to keeping her on the team. He said she is a survivor of sexual violence, that the post was made in a moment of trauma, that she had removed it and been apologetic, and that he had given her grace.
Eby said her X feed "reads like the worst corners of the dark web." He noted calls from national Muslim organizations and said Doerkson was minimizing the words.
Doerkson said he was shocked Eby would go after her. “The fact is that I’ve given her grace, I would have hoped that you might have too,” he said. He then added that Eby’s NDP has its own issues with racism and intolerance, referring to Niki Sharma’s post about “unbearable whiteness” and Selina Robinson’s departure from the party over comments she made about Palestine.
Section winner: Lowan. She stayed clear of the culture-war exchange entirely, barely managed to stay somewhere in the vicinity of being on-topic, and left Eby without a coherent defence of the snap call he had just made.
Doerkson called the NDP plan to raise taxes on income over $190,000 an attack on doctors. Eby said BC has the second-lowest tax rate in Canada on incomes of $250,000 and that his party is being up front about how it will pay for its promises. He said the money will fund health care. Lowan said a tax that starts at $190,000 is not a tax on the ultra wealthy. She called it a tax on workers.
Eby took pressure from both sides on the same stretch of the debate.
Lowan said her party had launched a tax on the "ultra wealthy and mega corporations" that would generate $22.2 billion in its first year and around $5.4 billion in subsequent years.
She described it as a "one-time model similar to California’s."
Doerkson said his goal is to supercharge the economy through a tax cut, a tripling of LNG production by 2035, the cutting of regulations, and the temporary removal of the 10 per cent PST on Canadian liquor.
On ICBC, Eby accused Doerkson of wanting to move the province to the Alberta system, which he called the most expensive in Canada and one that would line the pockets of lawyers. Doerkson said it was shocking that Eby would not acknowledge the gaps when people are catastrophically injured.
Section winner: Lowan. While her "wealth tax" proposal remains bereft of details, purely on superficiality and optics, Lowan still somehow managed to eke out the win here. She kept Eby between two critics. Doerkson’s “attack on doctors” line scored, but Lowan’s lines were punchier and more memorable.
The conversation turned to the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act.
Months earlier, after the December 2025 BC Court of Appeal decision in the Gitxaała mineral-tenure case, Eby had said the ruling put the courts “in the driver’s seat” and that the government would review it and, if necessary, amend DRIPA to clarify its original intent.
He spent the summer in consultations with First Nations on possible amendments. On stage Wednesday he shifted to defending the legislation. He acknowledged “a couple of challenging court decisions” and said the government is appealing them to protect private property rights and keep major projects out of the courts. He also said the law has enabled partnerships that moved projects forward, including LNG Canada Phase 2.
Doerkson was direct. A Conservative government would repeal DRIPA. “Court cases are rampant,” he said, and the Act “has to be repealed.” He added: “There has to be a better path forward, and that is to respect relations and certain partnerships with First Nations in this province. And I’m absolutely committed to that.” He argued the relationships are not strong under the current law.
Lowan pushed back hard. She said DRIPA “has no bearing on private property” and “sets out the rules for governments to do their homework, and bring up our legislation.” She accused the Conservatives of “misinformation and blatant fear-mongering” and said both major parties were sowing uncertainty or engaging in a “bad faith argument.” A Green government, she said, would follow the advice of First Nations leaders who have been unequivocal that the province must implement the legislation. When Doerkson described the province as “at odds” because of DRIPA, she called the conclusion “ridiculous.”
Eby accused Doerkson of wanting to “go to war with First Nations,” a prospect he rejected because “we can’t afford that.” Doerkson rejected the framing. The exchange grew heated; Eby later accused Conservatives of residential-school denialism, which Doerkson called “offensive.”
The clear loser on the section was Eby. He promoted DRIPA as the way to avoid conflict with First Nations while simultaneously defending his government’s appeals of court rulings that treated the Act as written law. Doerkson, by contrast, put a concrete policy on the table: scrap the legislation and build partnerships on a different footing.
Section winner: Doerkson. He was the only leader who left with a clear, repeatable policy proposal — a full repeal — rather than a defence of the status quo, a process of ongoing consultations, or a call to implement the Act as is. Eby's stance was muddied and confusing, and Lowan appeared either delusional or unaware of the economic uncertainty created by the legislation.
The debate moved to public safety and the toxic-drug crisis. Eby said the biggest safety challenge facing British Columbians is people on the streets with serious mental-health and addiction issues who cannot ask for care. He said a re-elected NDP government would deliver involuntary care in every region of the province. “We’re going to work with communities and we’re going to fund those sites so that people get the care that they need and deserve,” he said.
Later, Kurl asked Eby what compromises he would make if he won a minority and needed another party’s support to form government. Instead of naming policy trade-offs, his answer turned to Muslims, gays and pedophiles.
The moment pulled the night deeper into culture-war territory.
Lowan cut through it. She told Eby: “I think British Columbians are tired of being stuck on your merry-go-round of broken promises and service cuts.” She added: “This year’s election bribes are next year’s broken promises.” The line landed.
Multiple viewers and reporters singled it out as the sharpest moment of the evening.
Section winner: Lowan. She was the only leader who delivered a clean, memorable line that cut across the culture-war noise and the policy fog. Eby’s pivot on the minority question and Doerkson’s defensive posture on candidate issues left the night’s clearest punch with the Green leader.
By morning the online consensus had settled on one clear winner — at least in terms of generating the most attention. It was the moderator’s hair.
One individual on X said it looked like a haircut you’d see on Saturday Night Live. Another simply wrote that the hair was the night’s real story. In terms of the debate itself, however, the result surprised us.
The debate winner — by the Western Standard’s estimation — was Emily Lowan.
The BC Green Party leader stayed clear of the culture-war exchanges that pulled Eby and Doerkson off policy, and she delivered the night’s cleanest lines. She called the NDP a party of “broken promises and recycled ideas,” told Eby that a tax starting at $190,000 is a “tax on workers,” and closed with the line that “this year’s election bribes are next year’s broken promises.”
Doerkson scored on the deficit and on DRIPA repeal, but he struggled when asked what services he would cut to make room for his public-safety and health-care promises. He was also the only leader without a costed platform. Eby defended the snap call and the legislation his government is now appealing. Lowan left with the sharper performance.
