Is Mark Carney Failing?

On April 28 Canadians went to the polls and gave the Liberal government a new mandate, their fourth in a row. The election was the culmination of one of the most dramatic political comebacks in Canadian history where the government turned a more than twenty percent polling deficit against the opposition Conservatives into a near majority government.

It is accepted political wisdom this would not have happened had it not been for Donald Trump and his threats to Canadian sovereignty and economic well being. While that was almost certainly true, there were other factors at play too, factors without which it seems likely the Conservatives would have triumphed. First of these was the Conservative leader, Pierre Poillievre who, over his twenty plus years in Parliament developed an image as a scrapper who was rather unpleasant and whose trademark became the one line rhyming jingos he and his core supporters seemed to enjoy but most other Canadians viewed with distaste. That, combined with suspicions he was too similar to the marauder down south, and his penchant for supporting actions by his supporters like the Truckers’ Convoy in Ottawa and Alberta, all contributed to a trust deficit just waiting to be exploited. His saviour was the then Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, who, after nearly ten years of endlessly performative politics was long past his “best by” date.

And that’s when the Liberal Party showed yet again why it is only slightly jokingly referred to as “Canada’s Natural Governing Party”. In what seemed like an impossibly short time, Trudeau was out and Mark Carney was in. The sigh of relief from Canadian voters, myself included, was almost audible as the appalling choice we’d been facing was removed. We no longer had to choose between two different, but equally unappealing, candidates at this moment of national crisis. There was an adult on offer and millions of Canadians voted for him. Within weeks of being chosen party leader, Mark Carney was elected Prime Minister, missing the holy grail of Canadian politics, a majority in Parliament, by just two seats.

The core theme of Mark Carney’s election campaign was that he was the best candidate to deal with the predations from the south. In the slogans of the campaign he was the “elbows up” candidate, the one who promised a strong and direct response to American economic aggression. This was accompanied by full sentences where we were told our relationship with America had fundamentally changed and that Canada’s response must operate on several levels at once, including finding new trading partners, breaking down inter provincial trade barriers, and significantly strengthening our armed forces, all while trying to maneuver through the chaotic and constantly changing political climate in Washington.

We just passed the one hundred day mark since the Carney government was sworn in and the vultures are beginning to circle, looking for signs of weakness or failure where they can attack. They point to a series of moves by the government that don’t seem consistent with “elbows up”, moves like suspending the imminent digital services tax and eliminating many of the counter tariffs Canada had placed on American goods in response to its first tranche of tariffs on Canada. And in the areas where the counter tariffs remain, particularly on steel, aluminum and automobiles, they remain at half the level of the American tariffs they are responding to. None of these moves has resulted in any obvious American reciprocal action except perhaps vague agreements to continue talking. At the same time the Canadian economy is teetering closer and closer to a recession as the impact of the American tariffs affect employment, spending and government revenues. While this is happening Prime Minister Carney and his government seem to be going out of their way to flatter and coddle the President.

On the other hand, in its first one hundred days the government has done some of the things that were in its election platform. It has passed legislation aimed at eliminating federal interprovincial tariffs, while actively encouraging the provinces to do likewise. It has passed a “One Canadian Economy Act” that aims to significantly reduce the time necessary for approvals of projects that are deemed in the national interest. It has created an office of Major Projects and appointed an experienced businesswoman to head it while, simultaneously, asking provincial and territorial governments to identify projects that might qualify to be accelerated. It has implemented a middle class tax cut. It has committed to increase spending on defence, first by two percent and then by a further three percent, as required by NATO. It has increased pay for members of the Canadian armed forces and is moving rapidly to purchase a new and greatly expanded fleet of submarines. Prime Minister Carney has held meetings with European leaders and is moving to integrate Canada’s weapons procurement with that of its European allies.

So what is going on?

Admittedly, I bring a perspective tempered by nearly half a century of negotiating contracts with governments, unions and other organizations so I am more inclined than others might be to wait and see and to trust the silence as a sign some progress is being made in negotiations with the Americans. I remember negotiating quietly while those on the outside were condemning our lack of progress, or our lack of transparency, or, indeed, our competence. In the end they were shown to be completely ill informed as all of the resulting agreements were ratified and accepted, often with great enthusiam. So, for starters, I don’t find it significant that there is very little information coming out and, in fact, suspect that is a sign progress is being made. If they were going nowhere we would hear about it.

We should remember the Prime Minister has been clear that Canada will not sign just any agreement with the Americans, unlike some other countries who seem to have done just that. The latest news that the negotiators are working on smaller, sectoral agreements makes perfect sense and is likely the best that can be achieved outside of the CUSMA renewal negotiations.

It also makes sense that the government re-engage with the Chinese and the Indians despite the angry pressure from their Canadian diasporas, something that is underway. We may not like the way they run their countries or act on the world stage but a trading country like Canada cannot ignore them, particularly when our closest ally and trading partner has gone rogue. And that’s the world we now live in.

Parliament is resuming in two weeks and a budget will be tabled shortly thereafter. That’s likely when the rubber hits the road and we can make a better assessment of how the man we elected to be Prime Minister is doing. When I voted for Mark Carney I was not voting for a Rambo who would charge wildly against the Americans. I voted for someone who I believed had the temperament, intelligence, demeanour and experience to lead Canada through a very difficult time, in other words, a man with the characteristics of our very best Prime Ministers. What’s more, I understood the “elbows up” part of his campaign was only part of the arsenal we would have to employ to emerge from this crisis intact and prosperous.

I have no doubt the most difficult challenges still lie in front of him, whether the continuing truculent and unpredictable America; the opposition from all the vested interests that rise up to defeat most nation building projects in Canada; the continuing slowdown of the economy as the trade war takes its toll or, as Prime Minister Harold MacMillan of Great Britain put it “events dear boy, events”. But so far I think he’s doing just fine, showing an adept and steady hand on the tiller as we navigate these extraordinartily treacherous waters.

Just sayin

GH

Please share this blog. If you would like to be notified each time I post a blog click on the “follow” button that appears on the lower right hand side of your screen when you open the blog.

The Most Important Election in Canadian History (2)

At the start of the federal election I described it as the most important in Canadian history. I still believe that. Although the invective aimed directly at Canada from the White House has quieted over the past three weeks, it will likely resume once the election is over, as it seems Donald Trump and his MAGA followers have taken Danielle Smith’s advice and toned things down in the hope it will get the Conservatives elected. If the polls are correct, that’s not going to happen but, either way, I expect things will heat up after April 28.

Both Mark Carney and Pierre Poilievre have run good campaigns, at least when measured against what they needed to accomplish. Carney’s has been cautious, seeking to avoid the pratfalls of a green politician, and Poilievre has managed to tone down some of his more aggressive instincts although there are still flashes to remind us of the attack dog image he worked so hard to establish as Opposition Leader. It’s ironic that image, effective against Justin Trudeau and in a very different political climate than the one we’re in now, has become an albatross around his neck. The behaviour that endeared him to his base is now a liability as he tries to widen his appeal, particularly with women.

Despite efforts by the Conservatives to refocus the election back onto the Liberal government’s record over the past decade, and concerns about cost of living, crime, street disorder and immigration, the elephant in the room remains Donald Trump and his threats to Canada’s economy and sovereignty. Despite Trump’s silence about Canada over the past few weeks, his other actions and words have upended the economic and political world order in ways that are profoundly unsettling to Canadians, as they should be. It seems the economic and foreign policy of the most powerful nation on earth is being set and changed on the fly, and then announced through late night tweets by the President on Truth Social. What could possibly go wrong? As it turns out, quite a bit. The giant swings on the stock market have drained trillions of dollars from the world’s economy, including in Canada where those of us relying upon investments in retirement are witnessing their shrinkage at an astonishing rate. All this, while some in Trump’s close circle of family and friends are making out like bandits, buying the dips and selling the highs. But maybe that’s just a coincidence.

One thing is certain as we look out over the next three years. The landscape will be constantly changing as the chaotic forces unleashed by the White House upend decades of peace and prosperity for much of the world. Some of it will be economic, some political. We might even see the aggressive use of hard power. And even if the Democrats win back one or both Houses of Congress in the 2026 midterms, the disruption coming from the White House will continue. Not a pretty picture, I know, so, to quote Bette Davis in “All About Eve”, “Fasten your seatbelts. It’s going to be bumpy ride”.

What does this mean for Canada’s federal election? A lot. Donald Trump has done the near impossible fuelling a Liberal Party resurrection that may see them form a majority government and gain an almost unheard of fourth consecutive term. And that’s because the most important question in this election remains: who can lead Canada most effectively through these exceptionally difficult times?

As I’ve said previously, prior to Justin Trudeau’s departure and Donald Trump’s assaults on Canada, I had decided to vote Conservative despite my dislike for Pierre Poilievre’s style of politics and some of the positions he supported in the past. I still think the Conservatives are a better choice on issues like public safety, law and order (although I’m not happy to hear them joining their provincial colleagues promising to use the “Notwithstanding Clause” in the Charter, increasingly rendering it meaningless), getting our resources to world markets, and bolstering defence spending. I do note Mark Carney is saying many of the right things on these issues too. But none of these issues matter if Canada’s economy is destroyed or its sovereignty lost.

Prior to making my final voting decision I wanted to see how the debates turned out and how, if at all, they might change my perception of the two leading candidates. They did not.

While Pierre Poilievre has run a good campaign where he has mostly muted some of his worst partisan instincts, I have seen little to persuade me he has the depth and experience to lead Canada at this very fraught time. He has a very thin resume with seemingly no experience in international relations or economics. And I know virtually nothing about his team, the people who will be populating the government if he is elected, although I suspect I would find some of them problematic. Witnessing the amateur hour playing out in Washington as spectacularly inexperienced and unqualified people now run the American government, I think it important Canada not embark on a similar experiment where, at the very least, we would have a group of inexperienced people trying to navigate us through these extraordinarily treacherous waters.

Everything in Mark Carney’s academic and professional life seems to have led him to this moment when the time meets the man. His resume says it all. By the way, I don’t get the Conservative’s attack on him as “resume man”. Perhaps someone can help me but isn’t it all about that resume vs the very limited one for Pierre Poilievre? In a sense I’m going with the devil I know, hoping Mark Carney will steer the Liberals away from some of their more unsuccessful policies and attitudes of the last decade but, even if he doesn’t, I’m certain he is the better qualified to confront the existential economic and political challenges facing Canada today. I will be voting for Mark Carney.

Just sayin,

GH

Please share this blog. If you would like to be notified each time I post a blog click on the “follow” button that appears at the lower right side of your screen when you open the blog.