A genuine alternative or predecessor-in-disguise?

       Since the 14th of March, Canada has had a prime minister who called an election on April 28th. Because Mark Carney does not have a seat in parliament, it is appropriate for the election to be as soon as possible. 2 other prime ministers were always 'seatless', most recently John Turner who was prime minister right after Pierre Trudeau for a grand total of 79 days. Furthermore, in 1896, Charles Tupper was in office for a mere 69 days. 

      Even if he becomes 'seated', not winning enough seats in total would enable Mark Carney to surpass Tupper at a record 46 days. Therefore, who exactly is/was the current prime minister? 

Mark Joseph Carney

     Born in 1965 in Fort Smith, NWT with 1 brother and 1 sister, he grew up in Edmonton. In his teens, his father was the Liberal candidate in the 1980 federal election, finishing runner-up (2nd) in Edmonton South. He became a Harvard graduate 8 years later, going on to earn a master's degree and a doctorate at the University of Oxford in the early 90s. Having held various roles at Goldman Sachs, in 2004 he was named as senior associate deputy minister at the Department of Finance Canada. He became the 8th governor of the Bank of Canada (2008-2013), the 120th governor of the Bank of England (2013-2020), and is the 24th prime minister of Canada. 

       Between his numbered posts, was an (apparently) informal advisor to prime minister Justin Trudeau during the Covid-19 pandemic and was made chair of the Liberal Party's economic growth taskforce in September 2024. After Justin Trudeau's semi-forced resignation, he won the Liberal Party leadership in a landslide. Shortly thereafter, he requested the dissolution of parliament and a snap election. How did his other leadership and so-called advisory positions lead up to requiring the electorate's say-so to gain his 1st ever democratically granted mandate as governor of a purely political office?

Central banker

       As the then youngest central bank governor in G8 and G20 after leaving the Department of Finance, at the beginning of the 2008 financial crisis, he managed to help avoid the worst of it. Cutting the interest rate within a month of his appointment, followed quickly by monetary stimulus to combat a credit crunch, Canada became the first G7 nation in which employment and GDP recovered to pre-crisis levels. This being accompanied by an announcement to keep interest rates as low as possible went on to backfire, spiking housing prices and household debt. His current claims of managing to get Canada to avoid a recession contradict what he said in 2008.

    However, he claimed that the main responsibility was not interest rates, but the onus was on borrowers, banks, and the government's mortgage lending rules. Such sniping from sidelines was the extent of his involvement, as former prime minister Stephen Harper confirmed. Daily management of Canada's economy was the task of finance minister Jim Flaherty. "But let me be very clear: the hard calls during the 2008-2009 global financial crisis were made by Jim." 

     Once he became the 1st non-Briton to be appointed Governor of the Bank of England, he partially reformed his ways. Not to begin with, however, given his quote that the BoE's Executive Director of Financial Stability Andy Haldane did not have "a proper understanding of the facts" on regulation. His pay was a somewhat astronomic £624,000 ($1.149,000 CAD). He reconfigured the BoE's operating procedures and modernized them by making more media appearances than his predecessors. A key policy of his, "forward guidance" was that interest rates would not rise if unemployment was above 7% in order to encourage corporate lending. This policy contained many "caveats", which is bankish for stipulations, conditions, and limitations. Within the BoE, this quickly became notorious for being complicated and confusing. 

    Governor Carney could at least read a situation clearly, such as warning before the Brexit referendum that leaving the EU could cause a recession. Cutting interest rates and restarting quantitative easing was his decisive reaction, similarly doing the same again at the start of the Covid-19 pandemic. Contrary to this display of economic expertise, throughout his tenure as BoE Governor, there was widespread criticism of Carney championing radical environmentalist policies like net-zero emissions, his political inexperience, dull personality, volatile temper, as well as apparently considering himself to be the smartest man in the room. 

    Journalists frequently experienced this, with answers that were several minutes long and therefore unquotable. The consensus among BoE staff is that as governor he was respected, but not especially liked. In a column on March 10 in the Daily Telegraph, Matthew Lynn gives a summary that Canadians should bear in mind when considering his qualities as a potential longer-term prime minister. "In reality, he has been over-promoted all over again." Particularly at the BoE, "Carney was at best an indifferent governor, and, at worse, a disappointing failure." The City (London equivalent to Wall Street) nicknamed him "the unreliable boyfriend for his constant changes of direction on interest rates."

     There's more to his record than the job title which is repeated constantly: “He created a mess which his successors have struggled to clear up. Inflation spiked up to a peak of 11.1% in the U.K., compared to 5.2% in France or 8% in Italy, hardly a country known for controlling prices effectively, largely because the bank had printed too much money.” Money printing is a familiar tactic for any Canadian without a bad memory. The overall summary is also a warning: “Carney is the epitome of a remote, globalized, technocratic elite. He is very good at self-promotion, at collecting trophy jobs and of course negotiating fabulously generous salaries and expenses for himself along the way. He is just not very good at delivering.” 

Politician's advisor, politician and general philosopher

         When the Liberal Party was looking to replace the metaphorically face-planting Michael Ignatieff and Bob Rae in 2013, Mark Carney was approached. He had been courted for a decade, but had repeatedly declined, even asking a reporter a rhetorical question in 2012: "Why don't I become a circus clown?" He became an associate member of the circus in 2020, as 1 of many informal advisors to prime minister Trudeau regarding the government's economic response to Covid-19. This led to speculation of becoming Minister of Finance and also prime minister if Justin Trudeau resigned. 

       Last September, before the speculation was revealed to have been accurate, there were many goings-on. After being appointed as special advisor and chair of the Liberal task force on economic growth, it was revealed that Brookfield Asset Management of which he had been a vice-chairman had solicited the federal government for funding of $10 billion as part of a $50 billion Canada-only asset fund. Because advisor Carney was officially employed by the Liberal party and not the Prime Minister's Office, he did not have to follow standard ethical disclosures. He was mentioned again as a potential replacement for Chrystia Freeland after the finance minister resigned on December 16, mainly (but not entirely) because of policy disagreements with Trudeau about tax breaks, disbursements and tariffs proposed by then president-elect Donald Trump. Resultantly, a question asks itself: Were all of Trudeau's "ideas" those of Carney to begin with?

        3 more years of deficit to invest in and grow the Canadian economy has been promised by both of them, a decade apart. Deficit spending is legally possible, as asserted by Carney himself: "My government is going to use all of the powers of the federal government, including the emergency powers of the federal government, to accelerate the major projects that we need in order to build this economy." The priority in doing so is that "we will speed up approvals of clean energy projects." It entails disguising and also keeping his signature policy, still mostly associated with Justin Trudeau. The consumer carbon tax will be shifted to the industrial sector. "The taxpayer is not going to pay. Our companies, our largest companies, are going to pay." When quizzed whether or not there would be a trickle-down effect to consumers he said, "No, because what the big companies are producing by and large are not products that we are consuming."

        Aside from that questionable statement from a supposed economist, digging even deeper by other economists show that there is more to be concerned about than just the carbon tax itself. The expected deficit is $42.2 billion, so in order to balance the budget, savings of $30 billion need to be found. Some is expected to come from economic growth and resultant increased revenue to the state. There are some holes in this, as pointed out by Jason Clemens, Executive Vice President of the Fraser Institute. In order to meet the defense spending commitment to NATO, it would have to increase by $68.8 billion. 

       Furthermore, the nation's finances have been separated into those of operating spending and capital spending. Operating spending is wages of federal employees and benefits like state pensions as well as transfers to provinces for their own health and social programs. Any revenue collected for these purposes is to be balanced against spending.

     Anything deemed to be "investment" or "capital" is going to be removed, such as spending on infrastructure and defense. The risk is that operating budget spending will be reduced by moving it to the capital budget. The capital budget would be balanced while still increasing government debt overall. To know what is really in store, the following must be answered: What specific operating expense would be reduced over the next 3 years in order to balance the budget? Which parts of operating spending will be moved to or reclassified as capital spending? How exactly will the increase in defense spending be spent? If revenues to the state don't materialize as expected, what measures will be taken to ensure a balanced operating budget in 3 years? 

    Until this is all clarified, it is very hard or nearly impossible to know how extensive the prime minister's plans for more sustainable government finances really are, and how it contradicts with playing politics by promising everything to everyone. While this exists and continues to be unchallenged, the prime minister is effectively cooking the books. 

       The signature economic policy of the now former prime minister, the carbon tax and accompanying regulatory measures were authored by Mark Carney. According to Matthew Lau in the Financial Post, the higher taxes and profligate spending combined with a regulatory burden for the oil and gas industry of the past decade have kneecapped Canada's economy. There is at least an aspiration to ban gasoline and diesel-powered vehicles by 2035. The renunciation of the (consumer) carbon tax is only temporary, and the electorate is overdue to truly realize that with Mark Carney continuing to be prime minister after the end of April, it is here to stay, with his continuous insistence that "a form of price on carbon will be a requirement for Canada to diversify its international trade." 

       The carbon tax underpins much of his general/economic philosophy, as evidenced in his many writings. In Value(s) Building a Better World for All, he proselytizes that to build a successful modern economy requires various elements such as dynamism, resilience, sustainability, fairness, responsibility, solidarity and humility. Citing evidence from the OECD and IMF to support his view that "equality is good for growth" and that "more equal societies are more resilient and are more likely to invest for the many and not the few", he neither analyzes nor comes to any conclusion about the causes of inequality. Much of the general philosophy for the world as a whole does not take account of the characteristics of Canada specifically. 

         This is addressed with greater clarity in his forthcoming book (due on May 13) The Hinge, with the subtitle Time to Build an Even Better Canada. According to marketing material, it is an "urgent path forward for Canada and the world as we collectively face a multitude of existential threats to our long-standing democratic traditions." It extends on Carney's previously slightly known paradigm, an interventionist master plan. Specific details are (conveniently?) missing on how this would be applied to Canada, so reporters and the public are left with scant details to decipher from speeches and even possible conflicts of interest from his corporate history and how they intertwine with previous government policies. While board chairman of Brookfield Asset Management shortly before resigning to run for the leadership of the Liberal Party, the firm received $276 million from state-owned Bank Of China while he was Justin Trudeau's chief economic advisor on November 5, 2024. This could be part of the assets he placed in a blind trust which he has insisted show that he fully complies with conflict of interest rules. He has been pressed for more transparency, as so far this has only been superficial.

        

        A further point of contention, which is also the main one beyond electioneering are the trade tensions with the US in light of the tariffs imposed by President Trump. Former finance minister Chrystia Freeland had a measure of success in dealing with US on trade during Trump's 1st term, although at the Liberal leadership vote, her 2nd place only earned her 8%. The get-tough-on-Trump rhetoric was well received before Mark Carney became prime minister, because many were superficially assessing him based on his central bank governorships. Furthermore, it has also been another opportunity to engage in character assassination of Conservative Party leader Pierre Poilievre: "Donald Trump thinks he can weaken us with his plan to divide and conquer. Pierre Poilievre's plan will leave us divided and ready to be conquered. Because a person who worships at the altar of Donald Trump will kneel before him, not stand up to him." 

        Assuredly, Pierre Poilievre has not taken this lying down, while also refusing to descend to Carney's level: "They're going to try to get elected for a 4th term. A 4th term by replacing Justin Trudeau with his economic advisor, Mark Carney. Carney's advice drove up taxes, housing costs and food prices, while he personally profited from moving billions of dollars and thousands of jobs out of Canada to the United States." This is a reference to Brookfield Asset Management moving its head office from Toronto to New York, a decision made when he was chairman. 

      That reference may have also made Mark Carney think back to his own testimony at a House of Commons committee in 2021. The then vice-chair of Brookfield was questioned by the then conservative finance critic Pierre Poilievre. “Mr. Carney, you stand to profit from these policies, and yet you are regularly intervening and influencing the decisions of ministers and deputy ministers,” then asking him 8 times if he had registered with the lobbying commissioner. It remains to be seen what the forthcoming televised leadership debate(s) will consist of precisely, even with the ridings/constituencies of Carney and Poilievre neighbouring each other in Ottawa. Mark Carney is running to become the MP for Nepean-Ottawa. The fact that the outgoing MP, Chandra Arya, had his nomination revoked over alleged foreign-interference concerns involving India should not add any complications. The election result and the resultant government of Canada will depend on the objectivity of the electorate in its assessment of the platforms of all parties, and of Mark Carney in particular. 

Hybrid prime minister or otherwise?

         The incumbent prime minister's campaign has a dual track approach. Refocusing the economy and concurrently deriding Trump aim to convince a patriotic electorate that his economic expertise will improve life in general. Furthermore, he points out that while he is highly capable, Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre is a contradiction to him: "It's easy to be negative about everything when you've never built anything, when you've never had to make a payroll. But negative slogans aren't solutions. Anger isn't action. Division isn't strength. Negativity won't win a trade war. Negativity won't pay the rent or the mortgage. Negativity won't bring down the price of groceries and negativity won't make Canada strong."

        While engaging in such criticism, policy initiatives are somewhat thin on the ground. The (brief) pause of the consumer carbon tax and removing GST for newly built homes only for 1st-time buyers are partial plagiarisms of the Conservative party's platform. Effectively, it amounts to bargain-basement electioneering. Mark Carney's campaign speeches have almost entirely been grandiose speeches, with an overlarge portion of anti-Poilievre character assassination, such as he "would let our planet burn."

          Pierre Poilievre's pitch is that the Conservatives and he are best suited to tackle Trump, slumping economic growth and affordability while reminding the electorate of more of the credentials of Mark Carney: "The Liberals are asking for a 4th term in power after swapping Justin Trudeau for his economic adviser and handpicked successor Mark Carney. But after the lost Liberal decade, the question is whether Canadians can afford a 4th Liberal term." 

       Their policies would give Canada a certain unfulfilled ability: "The action we must take is to become that nation that's strong, self-reliant and sovereign, capable of standing on its own 2 feet and standing up to the Americans. We will stare down this unprovoked threat with steely resolve because, be assured, Canadians are tough, we are hardy and we stand up for ourselves. I will protect Canada and I will always put our country 1st."

       Further to their own policies has come a reminder to identify with the current government's policies, and not only with the figurehead: "Liberals have replaced Justin Trudeau. It's the same old Liberal MPs, the same Liberal ministers, the same Liberal advisers, the same Liberal elites, the same broken Liberal promises of the last 10 years." This builds on a long-standing habit of dissecting policies and their flaws along with describing a better approach to take with all of them. Further to Stephen Harper's refutation of Mark Carney's role during the 2008 financial crisis, the pre-Trudeau prime minister has clarified the motive for his claims: "The real reason Carney wants to claim our Conservative record for himself is that he dare not speak of his actual 'experience'."

Deciding with greater clarity

         With similar policies and the same(ish) tax cuts being offered by both at the beginning of the post-Trudeau era, it is as if both are saying, "I have the best skills and knowledge to fix a problem that I didn't cause." With hindsight playing a smaller role now that the electorate is considering who to vote for, in order for a (genuine) change of government to take place, they need convincing that there is more to this election than just Donald Trump. The Donald's arrival and Trudeau's departure in January changed everything. Mark Carney's arrival seems to have encouraged NDP voters to defect to the Liberal Party, partially because the NDP still has former Trudeau quasi-ally Jagmeet Singh is its leader. 

          In addition to moving the discussion beyond The Donald, it would be helpful for the electorate to be convinced that the Liberal party as a whole is responsible for higher: cost of living, housing prices, and violent crime. Tactically and electorally, it is vital to remind the electorate of this in the Greater Toronto Area. In particular, the electorate should be reminded of the recent events in the community of Markham-Unionville, just north of the city of Toronto. The incumbent MP is Paul Chiang. 

    During an interview with Chinese-language newspaper Ming Pao, he suggested that Conservative rival Joe Tay should be taken to the Chinese Consulate in Toronto in order to collect an HK$1 million reward. 

      The reward is pursuant to a violation of Hong Kong's National Security Law, as he is a longstanding outspoken critic of Hong Kong civil rights violations. Understandably, Joe Tay released a statement that Paul Chiang must be fired and that "no apology is sufficient." Furthermore, “suggesting that people collect a bounty from the Chinese Communist Party to deliver a political opponent to the Chinese Consulate is disgusting and must never be condoned.”

       When this was brought up to Mark Carney when questioned by reporters in Vaughan, ON, he repeatedly defended Paul Chiang: “The comments were deeply offensive. This is a terrible lapse of judgment by Mr. Chiang. He has apologized for those comments. He is a person of integrity who served this community as a senior police officer for more than a quarter century.” 

        Pierre Poilievre understandably described Carney as "compromised" and "unwilling to protect a Canadian citizen against a foreign government." Even former Trudeau ally/prop Jagmeet Singh has turned against Mark Carney, with the accusation of "putting his party ahead of his country."

        Paul Chiang himself spoke up: "I do not want there to be any further distractions in this critical moment. That's why I'm standing aside as our 2025 candidate in our community of Markham-Unionville." Therefore, Paul Chiang who realized that he had briefly acted as an associate agent of the Chinese Communist Party jumped instead of being pushed. Before he jumped, Mark Carney refused to do any pushing, therefore defending the indefensible. 

         Overall, with the (highly welcome) departure of Justin Trudeau by exiting stage-left, the electoral landscape has changed this year. By the end of this month and decision day on April 28, it has potential to change even more. Therefore, it is incumbent on every single campaign to communicate clearly and avoid excessive sloganeering. This includes the (anti-conservative) scare tactics of the Liberals and NDP, which the electorate should listen to with healthy skepticism. The electorate should listen diligently and assess each program objectively, so that they become even more aware of the issues created over the past decade, what can be done to solve them, and who is most suitable to deal with all of them effectively. While climate change is a genuine phenomenon, I beseech the electorate not to get overwhelmed by it while reconnecting with the concurrent reality that oil and gas is the bedrock of the Canadian economy. Once this has been reset and the past decade's damage has been repaired, this would have its own economic and societal multiplier effect. This is one factor that Mark Carney is still acting against, and while it is still semi-hidden, the electorate should stop misperceiving him.