Who wins, who pays, part 5

The interference scare, in the order it happened

Quebec heard about a federal warning first. The dated record starts with a think tank's public blog posts, and its dated actions are on the Quebec side.

By W.F.Published Updated 22 min readSources and method

Updated since publication: 1 update

Also in French: La crainte d'ingérence, dans l'ordre où tout s'est passé

Ten days before the vote, Quebeckers heard that Ottawa had warned their government of a possible US effort to help elect a sovereigntist government. That is the order the story arrived in: a warning, then an alarm. The dated record runs differently. The documents are public blog posts by a small US think tank, the dated actions are on the Quebec side, and no authority has shown any interference.

When it happened What happened When it became public Kind of evidence
Aug. 12, 2025 Think-tank post: the US "could support" Quebec and Alberta separatists Same day, on its website Document
Nov. 21, 2025 Second post: the US should consider "support for Canadian separatist movements" Same day Document
Feb. 26, 2026 Third post proposes "covert support for PQ ahead of the election" Same day; mentioned in the press in March Document
Feb.–March 2026 The PQ plans a Washington trip and tells the US consulate; the US Embassy says it asked for a State Department meeting, the PQ denies it; no meeting Oct. 3, in The Gazette and from the PQ Statements, disputed
Spring 2026 US approach to Quebec about a separate trade deal Sept. 25, confirmed by the premier Action, confirmed
June 2026 Canada's intelligence service offers interference briefings to all Quebec parties Sept. 25, by the service Action, self-reported
Early Sept. A federal official reportedly hands the posts to a Quebec official Sept. 25, in one newspaper Unverified
Sept. 12 The premier's team starts passing the posts to journalists Sept. 27, by Radio-Canada Action, one source
Sept. 22 The governing party contacts the intelligence service Sept. 25, in the premier's statement Action, self-reported
Sept. 25 Newspaper report; the premier's alarm, then her walk-back Same day Statements

What the documents say

The source is a private website. The Defense Analyses and Research Corporation (DARC) is a private US think tank.1 Thomas Juneau of the University of Ottawa called it "very amateurish, very small and marginal."2

Its posts propose; none reports anything done. In August 2025 one said "the United States could support the Alberta and Quebec separatist movements."3 In November another said "the American government should seriously consider support for Canadian separatist movements," without naming Quebec.4

Event · 2025-08-12 · document · USDARC post 'Our Canadian Problem' says the US 'could support the Alberta and Quebec separatist movements'
DARC post 'Our Canadian Problem' says the US 'could support the Alberta and Quebec separatist movements'

Caution: unproven allegation A private think tank's proposal; no tie to the US government has been established. A claim someone made that nobody has confirmed.

A post by John Waterman dated 12 August 2025 on the site of the private US think tank DARC argues that "in a strategy of the retrenchment, the dismemberment of Canada becomes a wise decision" and that "the United States could support the Alberta and Quebec separatist movements". It ends by calling for "targeted intelligence operations, diplomatic pressure, structural revisions, and possibly support for regional separatism". A public document that proposes; no link to the US government is shown.

Documented by
Event · 2025-11-21 · document · USDARC post 'The Trump Corollary' says the US government 'should seriously consider support for Canadian separatist movements'
DARC post 'The Trump Corollary' says the US government 'should seriously consider support for Canadian separatist movements'

Caution: unproven allegation A private think tank's proposal; no tie to the US government has been established. A claim someone made that nobody has confirmed.

A post by Anthony J. Constantini dated 21 November 2025 on DARC's site argues for reviving the Monroe Doctrine and says: "the American government should seriously consider support for Canadian separatist movements, and – if necessary – Canada's western regions should be territorialized by the United States". It does not name Quebec or the PQ. A public document that proposes; no link to the US government is shown.

Documented by

The February post is the one behind the September story. Signed with a pseudonym, "Mukden", it says: "The United States should consider covert support for PQ ahead of the election. These include (1) overt financial support for PQ in the election and (2) psychological operations to foment Quebecois and Albertan separatism, (3) behind-closed-doors trade negotiations with the PQ, where the United States commits to offering lower tariffs on Quebec than on the rest of Canada."1 The PQ is the Parti Québécois, Quebec's sovereigntist party.

Event · 2026-02-26 · document · USUS think tank DARC blog post proposes 'covert support for PQ ahead of the election'
US think tank DARC blog post proposes 'covert support for PQ ahead of the election'

Caution: unproven allegation A private think tank's proposal, signed with a pseudonym; no tie to the US government has been established. A claim someone made that nobody has confirmed.

"The Centrifugal Strategy", a post dated 26 February 2026 on the website of the Defense Analyses and Research Corporation (DARC), a private US think tank listing offices in Arlington, Virginia, El Segundo, California and London, and signed with the pseudonym "Mukden", argues the US should seek Canada's "fragmentation, not annexation". It says: "The United States should consider covert support for PQ ahead of the election. These include (1) overt financial support for PQ in the election and (2) psychological operations to foment Quebecois and Albertan separatism, (3) behind-closed-doors trade negotiations with the PQ, where the United States commits to offering lower tariffs on Quebec than on the rest of Canada." It also says "The United States should covertly bankroll these indigenous lawsuits" and lists "covert litigation financing for indigenous land lawsuits" and "State Department funding for Indigenous scholars in Canada". These are the texts behind the September 2026 Quebec interference allegations. Radio-Canada reports The Globe and Mail and Le Devoir referred to them in March 2026. A public document that proposes; no link to the US government and no actual interference has been shown by any authority.

Documented by

The same post makes a second proposal, about First Nations. Citing Aboriginal title claims in British Columbia and New Brunswick, it says: "The United States should covertly bankroll these indigenous lawsuits to facilitate the disintegration of Canada." It then lists "(1) covert litigation financing for indigenous land lawsuits, (2) State Department funding for Indigenous scholars in Canada, and (3) psychological operations to marginalize 'denialism' of indigenous claims."1 The September coverage we read said only that the post urged Americans to "weaponize" reconciliation.5

Nothing shows a government adopted any of it. We found no record that the US government, or anyone else, endorsed, funded or acted on these proposals. They were public from the day they were posted, and Radio-Canada reports that The Globe and Mail and Le Devoir referred to them in March 2026.6

What US officials did

One confirmed US approach cuts the other way. On September 25, Premier Christine Fréchette confirmed that "there was an approach last spring" seeking a deal with Quebec on sectors linked to the North American trade agreement, and said: "I closed the door right away."7 (Quotes from French sources are our translations.) Québecor media, citing two unnamed Quebec government sources, said the US Embassy made it;58 CP24 reported that it touched tariffs including aluminum.9 Neither detail is confirmed.

Event · 2026 · action · CA-QCFréchette confirms a US approach last spring seeking a Quebec-only deal on USMCA-linked sectors, which she says she turned down
Fréchette confirms a US approach last spring seeking a Quebec-only deal on USMCA-linked sectors, which she says she turned down

Caution: anonymous sources The US embassy and aluminum details come from two unnamed Quebec government sources cited by Québecor media. The premier confirmed only that there was a US approach last spring seeking a Quebec deal and that she refused it. Reported by an outlet citing unnamed sources.

Quebec Premier Christine Fréchette confirmed on 25 September 2026 that "there was an approach last spring" seeking a deal with Quebec on sectors linked to CUSMA (USMCA), and said she "closed the door right away" because Quebec cannot sign its own agreement with the United States and a global agreement and a united front are needed, Radio-Canada and Le Droit reported (quotes translated from French). She described it as an approach by the Americans but did not say which US office or official made it. Québecor media had reported earlier that day, citing two senior Quebec government sources, that the US embassy in Ottawa had contacted her government in recent months to negotiate lower tariffs directly with Quebec, notably on aluminum; Noovo, relaying those reports, said there had been no concrete negotiation. The embassy and aluminum details rest on those anonymous sources. No exact date for the approach was given.

Documented by

It echoes one of the post's ideas, but nothing links the two. The post proposed lower tariffs negotiated with the PQ. The approach was about trade, and no source ties it to the think tank or to the election. A reply attributed to the US Embassy appears in secondary accounts; we did not find it in any source we could open.

And it didn't go to the PQ. It went to the sitting government, the Coalition Avenir Québec (CAQ), which is not a sovereigntist party. The CAQ calls itself neither federalist nor sovereigntist, and during the campaign its leader called herself an "autonomist" and would not say how she would vote in a referendum.10

Our fragmentation test watches for exactly this kind of approach. A US offer made to one province rather than to Ottawa would count toward the reading that Washington wants Canada to come apart, whichever party governs. The test counts it only once we know who made the offer and on whose behalf. The premier confirmed the approach but not who made it, so for now it is logged, not counted.Prediction P10 (open)

The PQ, for its part, planned a trip to Washington. On October 3, The Gazette reported that the US Embassy in Ottawa said the PQ had asked for a State Department meeting in Washington in early March, and that it did not take place because the trip was cancelled. Asked by The Canadian Press, the State Department would not confirm the request, and said the election is a decision that belongs to the people of Quebec.11

PQ leader Paul St-Pierre Plamondon called the report a "manoeuvre" to tie him to the Trump administration. He said his party had announced a US tour and told the US consulate, but never sought a meeting or set a date.12 Both sides agree no meeting took place. Any contact went from the PQ to US officials, and no source ties it to the think tank.

Event · 2026-02 · statement · QCUS Embassy says the PQ requested a State Department meeting in Washington for early March 2026, which did not take place; the PQ says it only told the US consulate of a possible trip
US Embassy says the PQ requested a State Department meeting in Washington for early March 2026, which did not take place; the PQ says it only told the US consulate of a possible trip

Caution: second-hand account The embassy spokesperson's words were given to The Gazette (paywalled; not quoted here) and reach us free only as The Canadian Press's indirect relay. The State Department declined to confirm to CP. The PQ disputes the meeting request and says it only told the US consulate of a possible trip. Someone recounting what others said or did.

On 3 October 2026 The Gazette reported, citing US Embassy Ottawa spokesperson Rebecca Archer-Knepper, that in February 2026 the State Department told its consulates in Quebec that the Parti Québécois had sought a meeting with State Department officials in Washington, set for early March, and that it did not take place because the trip was cancelled. The Canadian Press relays the spokesperson's account: party representatives visiting Washington often ask for meetings, the Department informs the embassy as a courtesy, and in this case the meeting did not happen because the trip was cancelled (Noovo/CP). The State Department itself, asked by CP the same day, declined to confirm the request. The PQ's own account (PSPP and Radio-Canada, 3 October): it had announced early in 2026 that it wanted to tour the United States, its team told the US consul general in Quebec City of that intention, nothing followed, and no meeting was scheduled. The tour plan was public since November 2025 (Global News/CP). In June 2026 PSPP told La Presse he had postponed the US tour until after the election (Radio-Canada). Common ground: the PQ planned a US trip, told the US consulate, and the trip did not happen. Disputed: whether the PQ asked for a State Department meeting and whether one was set. No meeting took place. The purpose was not disclosed. Nothing links it to the DARC posts. It was a PQ-initiated step toward US officials, not a US act.

Documented by

What happened on the Quebec side

The intelligence service briefed the parties in June. On September 25, the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) said: "in June we proactively offered briefings on foreign interference to all political parties in Quebec."9

Event · 2026-09-25 · statement · CACSIS says it proactively offered foreign-interference briefings to all Quebec political parties in June
CSIS says it proactively offered foreign-interference briefings to all Quebec political parties in June

Caution: self-reported The June briefings are known only from the intelligence service's own statements. Only one side’s own account of itself.

Asked about the Quebec allegations on 25 September 2026, the Canadian Security Intelligence Service said through spokesperson Eric Balsam: "This is why in June we proactively offered briefings on foreign interference to all political parties in Quebec" (CP24/CTV), and that this is in line with its practice of briefing any party when a federal or provincial election is called (CBC/CP). The agency gave no details about being approached by the CAQ and made no finding about interference.

Documented by

From September 12, the premier's team pitched the posts to reporters. Radio-Canada reported that Fréchette's team began contacting journalists at several outlets that day, passing them the DARC posts in the hope of stories about the PQ and the United States.6 Radio-Canada is the only source for the date.

Event · 2026-09-12 · action · CA-QCFréchette's team begins passing the DARC texts to journalists, hoping for stories on the PQ and the United States
Fréchette's team begins passing the DARC texts to journalists, hoping for stories on the PQ and the United States

Caution: single source The start date rests on Radio-Canada's own reporting; the CAQ confirmed one person passed on a document but gave no date. Only one outlet has reported it.

According to Radio-Canada (27 September 2026), from 12 September members of Premier Christine Fréchette's team contacted journalists at several outlets and sent them DARC's publications, hoping they would write about the sovereigntist party and the United States; Radio-Canada says the team tried for more than two weeks. On 28 September Fréchette said "il y a effectivement une personne qui a transmis un document", called it "malavisé", and said the employee kept their job. The CAQ has not confirmed the 12 September date.

Documented by

Ten days later, the party went to CSIS. Fréchette's written statement says her team told her of the posts on September 19, that her party, the Coalition Avenir Québec (CAQ), contacted CSIS on September 22, and that a meeting followed the next day.86 Radio-Canada reports that the party's director general made the contact and, from its own information, that CSIS told the party the posts were already known and public.6

Event · 2026-09-22 · action · CA-QCThe CAQ contacts the Canadian Security Intelligence Service about the DARC texts; a meeting follows on 23 September
The CAQ contacts the Canadian Security Intelligence Service about the DARC texts; a meeting follows on 23 September

Caution: self-reported Known from the CAQ's own statement; the intelligence service did not confirm or describe the contact. Only one side’s own account of itself.

In a written statement on 25 September 2026, Premier Christine Fréchette said she was told on Saturday 19 September of the DARC posts, and that "Une rencontre avec le SCRS s'est tenue mercredi" (Noovo). According to Radio-Canada, she added that the party had contacted the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) on Tuesday 22 September, and CAQ director general Brigitte Legault made the contact. The intelligence service did not comment on the CAQ's approach.

Documented by

The federal handover is unverified. The Journal de Montréal reported that a federal official gave the posts to a Quebec official in early September, somewhere neutral and without phones, and that Ottawa had warned Quebec three times.67 We could not open that report, and no one has confirmed it on the record. Asked about the handover, Fréchette said: "I cannot assess whether that part is true."13

What the public heard, and when

September 25, in the morning: the alarm. The Journal de Montréal story ran. Fréchette said "serious information on possible risks of foreign interference in the Quebec election has just been disclosed," and wrote to Prime Minister Mark Carney.8

Event · 2026-09-25 · statement · CA-QCJournal de Montréal reports Ottawa warned Quebec of possible US interference to help an independentist government
Journal de Montréal reports Ottawa warned Quebec of possible US interference to help an independentist government

Caution: unproven allegation Reported by Le Journal de Montréal; Premier Fréchette said the claims had not been confirmed, and PQ leader Paul St-Pierre Plamondon denied any attempt to meet US officials; on 3 October he said his party had told the US consulate of a planned US trip that did not take place. A claim someone made that nobody has confirmed.

Le Journal de Montréal reported that Ottawa had warned the Quebec government of possible US interference to help elect an independentist government. The claim is unproven: Premier Fréchette later said, in Radio-Canada's account, that nothing led her government to believe "ces allégations, ces hypothèses" (these allegations, these hypotheses) were true, and PQ leader Paul St-Pierre Plamondon denied any attempt to meet US officials; on 3 October he said his party had told the US consulate of a planned US trip that did not take place.

Documented by

The same afternoon: the walk-back. Her written statement said "no information has been confirmed to us indicating that interference was observed in our electoral process," and that "without this morning's media report, I would not be talking to you about all this today."8 Foreign Affairs Minister Anita Anand said she had no evidence of interference.5

Event · 2026-09-25 · statement · CA-QCHours after calling the reports 'serious', Fréchette's written statement says no information confirming interference has been received
Hours after calling the reports 'serious', Fréchette's written statement says no information confirming interference has been received

On the morning of 25 September 2026 Premier Christine Fréchette said "Des informations sérieuses sur de possibles risques d'ingérence étrangère dans l'élection québécoise viennent d'être divulguées" and that she had written to Prime Minister Carney (Noovo). In a written statement that afternoon she said that to date "aucune information ne nous a été confirmée indiquant que de l'ingérence aurait été observée dans le cadre de notre processus électoral" and that "sans la sortie médiatique de ce matin, je ne vous parlerais pas de tout ça aujourd'hui" (Noovo). The statement dates her knowledge of the DARC texts to 19 September.

Documented by
Event · 2026-09-25 · statement · CAForeign Affairs Minister Anand on alleged US interference in the Quebec election: 'Right now I do not have proof'
Foreign Affairs Minister Anand on alleged US interference in the Quebec election: 'Right now I do not have proof'

Caution: second-hand account Words as reported by The Canadian Press after a correction; no transcript found. Early versions of the same wire story quote her differently. Someone recounting what others said or did.

At a news conference in Ottawa on 25 September 2026, Foreign Affairs Minister Anita Anand said the federal government takes the allegations seriously ("Protecting our democracy is of the utmost importance to our country") and, per The Canadian Press's corrected account: "Right now I do not have proof." She said she did not believe anything was affecting Canada's democracy at that time, and that when issues arise she raises them with counterparts including US Secretary of State Marco Rubio. She did not say she had raised this matter with him. An early CP version, still carried by RCI, said she would speak to Rubio after reviewing evidence; RCI and CP24 still quote her as saying "Right now I have not seen the evidence". CP later called the early version a misquote. No transcript or video was found. The minister did not confirm any interference.

Documented by

September 27: the pitching. Radio-Canada published the September 12 date, fifteen days after the fact.

Event · 2026-09-27 · statement · CA-QCRadio-Canada: CAQ staff pitched the DARC texts to reporters from 12 September, before the party contacted the intelligence service on 22 September
Radio-Canada: CAQ staff pitched the DARC texts to reporters from 12 September, before the party contacted the intelligence service on 22 September

Caution: single source The 12 September date rests on Radio-Canada's own reporting; the CAQ later confirmed an employee passed on a document but gave no date. Only one outlet has reported it.

Radio-Canada (Thomas Gerbet, Sébastien Bovet) reported on 27 September 2026 that from 12 September Premier Christine Fréchette's team contacted journalists at several outlets and passed them the DARC texts, hoping for stories about the PQ and the United States. Fréchette and minister Ian Lafrenière say they learned of the texts on 19 September; CAQ director general Brigitte Legault contacted the Canadian Security Intelligence Service on 22 September and a meeting followed on 23 September. Radio-Canada reports, from its own information, that the service told the CAQ the publications were already known and public. The CAQ replied in writing that it followed the procedure taught in the Directeur général des élections du Québec's foreign-interference training. On 27 September Fréchette said "[Mon équipe] aurait dû m'aviser plus tôt"; on 28 September she said one person had passed on a document and that it was "malavisé". PQ, Liberal, QS and Conservative leaders attacked her handling. Radio-Canada says there is no proof the CAQ leaked to the Journal de Montréal. The interference claim itself remains unsupported by any document or action.

Documented by

September 28 and October 1: the admissions. Fréchette said "there was indeed one person who passed on a document," called it "ill-advised," and kept the employee: "There is nothing criminal about sending a document that is already public."13 On October 1 she said: "I should have waited for more information before speaking."14

Event · 2026-09-28 · statement · CA-QCFréchette says a CAQ employee passing the DARC document to journalists was 'ill-advised'; the employee stays
Fréchette says a CAQ employee passing the DARC document to journalists was 'ill-advised'; the employee stays

In Mont-Tremblant on 28 September 2026, Premier Christine Fréchette said "il y a effectivement une personne qui a transmis un document", that it was "malavisé" and "il aurait fallu m'en parler avant de contacter des journalistes", and that "Il n'y a rien de criminel à envoyer un document qui est déjà public" (Noovo/CP). The employee kept their job. Asked about the Journal de Montréal's report that a federal official handed DARC texts to a Quebec official, she said "Je ne peux pas analyser la véracité de cet élément-là". Minister Ian Lafrenière said "That initiative wasn't orchestrated by anyone" (CBC/CP, translated).

Documented by
Event · 2026-10-01 · statement · CA-QCFréchette says she should have waited for more information before speaking about the interference reports
Fréchette says she should have waited for more information before speaking about the interference reports

Caution: single source Known from one Canadian Press report of the radio interview. Only one outlet has reported it.

In an interview with Patrick Lagacé on 98.5 FM on 1 October 2026, Premier Christine Fréchette said: "J'aurais dû attendre d'avoir plus d'informations avant de me prononcer, et c'est ça que je ferais différemment" and "J'aurais dû me limiter à mon commentaire en fin d'après-midi, parce que j'avais, à ce moment-là, plus d'informations et j'étais rassurée" (Noovo/CP).

Documented by

October 21: the same charge, aimed the other way. The US Embassy in Ottawa published a fact sheet saying Canada's ministers and premiers "openly describe plans to influence American politics" before the US midterms.15 Its evidence is public: ministers' remarks about aiming retaliation at Republican states, meetings with Democrats, Ontario's ads, an MP campaigning in Florida, and Canadians charged with illegal voting. It alleges no covert action. Prime Minister Mark Carney said the claims have "no merit."16

Event · 2026-10-21 · statement · USUS Embassy publishes 'Fact Sheet: Monitoring Canadian Activities in U.S. Politics', accusing Canadian ministers and premiers of planning to influence US politics ahead of the midterms
US Embassy publishes 'Fact Sheet: Monitoring Canadian Activities in U.S. Politics', accusing Canadian ministers and premiers of planning to influence US politics ahead of the midterms

Caution: unproven allegation An assertion by the US Embassy resting on public statements and activities; no evidence of covert action is presented. A claim someone made that nobody has confirmed.

On 21 October 2026 the US Embassy and Consulates in Canada published 'Fact Sheet: Monitoring Canadian Activities in U.S. Politics'. It says: 'The Canadian government brushes off concerns about potential interference in U.S. elections, even as its ministers and premiers openly describe plans to influence American politics in official documents and public appearances.' Its evidence is public: Mélanie Joly's remarks on aiming retaliation at Republican states (March 2025, August 2026) and her September 2026 meetings with Democratic officials; Doug Ford's August 2026 letter and his 2025 Reagan ad campaign; MP Anthony Housefather campaigning in Florida; a consul general appearing with two Democratic members of Congress on 13 October; and 11 Canadians charged or sentenced for illegal voting in US elections held from 2012 to 2024. It ends: 'Americans decide America's elections.' No covert action is alleged or shown.

Documented by
Event · 2026-10-23 · statement · CACarney: US Embassy claims that Canada is interfering in the midterms have 'no merit'; Joly: 'That is diplomacy'
Carney: US Embassy claims that Canada is interfering in the midterms have 'no merit'; Joly: 'That is diplomacy'

In Istanbul on 23 October 2026, Carney said of the US Embassy fact sheet: 'There is no merit to these claims, so I'll call it out that way' (CBC via Yahoo). Joly: 'That is diplomacy, that's what we do'; earlier (21 Oct): 'Fundamentally, what I've done in the US is to attract investments' (Al Jazeera).

Documented by

What the record shows

The part heard first is the least documented. The federal warnings and the handover rest on one newspaper's unnamed sources. The best-documented parts are a think tank's public posts and the governing party's own handling of them.

No authority has found interference. CSIS described only its June briefings. Michelle Tessier, a former CSIS deputy director of operations, told Radio-Canada: "If it isn't covert, it isn't necessarily seen as foreign interference by CSIS."17

Speculative explanations fill the gaps; we leave them there. Rivals suggested the CAQ leaked the story to the newspaper. Radio-Canada says nothing shows that it did.6 We report who did what, when, and what they said.

The open question is money. Of everything in the February post, the plan to "covertly bankroll" Indigenous lawsuits is the most concrete, and it can be checked against the record. In a companion piece, we look at where US money actually appears, and what it pays for.

Sources

  1. Defense Analyses and Research Corporation (DARC), “The Centrifugal Strategy”, 2026-02-26. ↩ ↩ ↩
  2. National Post (via Yahoo News Canada), “How the CAQ's foreign interference bombshell turned into a dud in the Quebec election”, 2026-09-28. ↩
  3. Defense Analyses and Research Corporation (DARC), “Our Canadian Problem”, 2025-08-12. ↩
  4. Defense Analyses and Research Corporation (DARC), “The Trump Corollary”, 2025-11-21. ↩
  5. CBC News (The Canadian Press), “Federal intelligence agency contacted as U.S. interference claims swirl in Quebec election”, 2026-09-25. ↩ ↩ ↩
  6. Radio-Canada, “La CAQ, l'ingérence et les services secrets, une chronologie intrigante”, 2026-09-27. ↩ ↩ ↩ ↩ ↩ ↩
  7. Radio-Canada, “Les partis ébranlés par des allégations d’ingérence américaine dans la campagne”, 2026-09-25. ↩ ↩
  8. Noovo Info, “Guerre commerciale: Fréchette se plaint à Carney d’allégations d’ingérence américaine dans les élections québécoises”, 2026-09-25. ↩ ↩ ↩ ↩
  9. CP24, “Quebec election: Possible interference from U.S. raises questions”, 2026-09-25. ↩ ↩
  10. Noovo Info (La Presse canadienne), “Souverainiste ou fédéraliste, Christine Fréchette? «Autonomiste», rétorque la cheffe de la CAQ”, 2026-09-11. ↩
  11. Noovo Info (La Presse Canadienne), “Demande de rencontre de PSPP: le Département d'État refuse de confirmer”, 2026-10-03. ↩
  12. Radio-Canada, “Élections Québec, jour 38 (couverture en direct) : « PSPP nie qu'une rencontre soit prévue avec le Département d'État américain »”, 2026-10-03. ↩
  13. Noovo Info (La Presse Canadienne), “Ingérence étrangère: l'employé de la CAQ responsable du coulage reste en poste”, 2026-09-28. ↩ ↩
  14. Noovo Info (La Presse Canadienne), “«Fake news»: la ministre France-Élaine Duranceau compare PSPP à Donald Trump”, 2026-10-01. ↩
  15. U.S. Embassy & Consulates in Canada, “Fact Sheet: Monitoring Canadian Activities in U.S. Politics”, 2026-10-21. ↩
  16. CBC News (via Yahoo News Canada), “Claims Canada interfering in U.S. midterms have 'no merit,' Carney says”, 2026-10-23. ↩
  17. Radio-Canada, “Possible ingérence : tirs groupés contre le leadership de Christine Fréchette”, 2026-09-26. ↩

Changes since publication

A correction fixes something that was wrong. An update records the world moving: odds revised, a prediction settled, data refreshed. Newest first.

The charts, odds tables and other records embedded in this article always show the current data, so some figures may differ from the day it was published. This list records what changed since then.

  1. UpdateThis article

    Text of the article

    Why: Added the US Embassy's fact sheet of 21 October, which accuses Canadian ministers and premiers of trying to influence US politics, on public evidence only, and the Prime Minister's reply (sources: the embassy's fact sheet; CBC).

    In the corrections log