With an emergency forcing Kellie Leitch to leave before it began, the second Conservative leadership debate shifted its focus away from Donald Trump and a values screen to other areas of disagreement — a carbon tax, the price of party membership, criminal justice, and CBC funding among them.

Unlike the first debate in Saskatoon, which was organized by the party and attended by all 12 official candidates, only 10 were scheduled to participate in Sunday’s, hosted by Carleton MP Pierre Poilievre in his rural Ottawa riding (neither Steven Blaney nor Daniel Linsday were able to make it.)

Shortly before the debate started, Leitch left without giving an explanation. Her campaign manager, Nick Kouvalis, tweeted that she had to get back home to deal with certain issues, reported to be a home break-in and threats.

.@KellieLeitch was here but campaign says she left because her home was broken into. Campaign says she has received threats #CPC #cdnpoli — Mercedes Stephenson (@CTVMercedes) November 13, 2016

Hours after the debate concluded, the CBC’s Katie Simpson tweeted that the OPP confirmed the incident was not a break and enter.

OPP say there was a call for an alarm at a the home of a local politician in the Creemore area, but it was not a break and enter. #hw — Katie Simpson (@CBCKatie) November 13, 2016

When the debate got underway, Michael Chong soon found himself defending his proposed revenue-neutral carbon tax as his fellow candidates took turns attacking it.

“I believe that climate change is a real threat, and that we have to have a credible, Conservative, market-based solution to emissions. So what that means is putting a price on carbon, and using all revenues to introduce one of the largest income tax cuts in Canadian history,” Chong said.

Andrew Scheer objected to the “price on carbon” language, and insisted it be labelled a tax. On the most extreme end, Brad Trost said he didn’t think climate change was a real threat. Trost’s comments were met by cheers from the audience.

When an audience member asked how each candidate will “deal” with the media, Scheer criticized the media for sharing the same language as Chong, describing it as a “price on carbon” rather than a “carbon tax.”

“Well, it certainly is frustrating when you can see elements of bias filtering through the media. For example, they’ve started calling the carbon tax a price on carbon,” said Scheer.

“When the market dictates the cost of doing something, then that’s a price. When the government sets it and imposes it and collects it, I call that a tax. So we have to watch for that. We have to watch what language they use,” he said.

“I do believe climate change is a threat. However, a carbon tax is not a solution. There are other ways to handle that,” Deepak Obhrai chimed in.

Arguably the loudest applause of the afternoon came when Trost called for ending subsidies to CBC. Chong offered a contrary view when discussing the role the public broadcaster plays in French-speaking Canada.

“I think it’s really important that we protect arts and culture in this country…Radio-Canada is relied upon by French-speaking Canadians across this country. A half a million people in this very province of Ontario are Francophones — their only source of news is CBC-Radio-Canada,” he said.

He was also the outlier in calling for free party membership to grow the party as the Liberals did.

“I don’t agree with free membership. We have Conservative principles. We want people to share those principles when they join. How much is something that’s free — how much is it valued?” Erin O’Toole pushed back.

Answering a question on how they would protect the rights of law-abiding gun owners while also being tough on crime, several candidates spoke about their most recent shooting experience.

“For the record, I own a .270 Savage and 12-gauge Remington. And I know how to use them,” Brad Trost said.

“I was shooting myself two weekends ago,” Chris Alexander said, before correcting himself. “I was myself shooting.”

Like all other candidates, Chong criticized the long-gun registry. But he then pivoted to criminal-justice reform.

“I believe in the punitive aspects of crime prevention, to be sure, but as someone who was born and raised in a Christian household, I also believe in rehabilitation and redemption. And I think we made a mistake in getting rid of some of the rehabilitation programs,” he said.

Corporate subsidies were an additional area of disagreement, but on that subject — it was Maxime Bernier on the defensive.

“There’s $16 billion every year the federal government is giving to big corporations,” Bernier said. “If we believe in a free market…I don’t want to pick GM or Bombardier as a winner.”

As he made his now familiar libertarian case for ending corporate welfare and subsidies, however, both Lisa Raitt and O’Toole cautioned against being too rigid in applying that opposition.

“I don’t support (corporate) welfare. But as a riding that benefited from GM, from the loans that have since been paid back — and Max voted for that package during the depths of recession — it’s important for politicians, when you’re running for leader, not to make promises you can’t keep,” O’Toole said.

“And we can’t predict the future.”

Raitt used the example of steel plant and coal mine closures in the 1960s in Cape Breton, and the 30 years of provincial and federal subsidies that followed, to make the case for some government assistance.

“For 30 years, until 1997, the provincial and federal governments pumped money into Cape Breton to keep some jobs…That was wrong,” she said.

“However, there’s a human tragedy around losing your job in a one-horse, industry town. And we have to look after that. Because as Conservatives, we are compassionate. Does it go for 30 years? Absolutely not. But do we do something to ensure that the people affected are kept safe? 100 per cent.”