It is no great achievement for Carney to remind the most leftist elements of his caucus that he is in charge.
No credible CEO would act any other way.
But who really cares?
The real question remains how punitive will Carney be towards Alberta in respect of his extremist climate demands - decarbonization via CCS and open ended carbon pricing, divorced from any regard for fundamental competitiveness.
Time is running out.
A breakdown with Alberta on climate would only add to separatist momentum and justifiably.
And Carney is no better on trade negotiations with the US. Concessions to Trump are inescapable or losing any vestige of the USMCA becomes ever more likely.
Carney is at heart an over-credentialed leftist, who can't really accept that Canada's long standing dysfunctions can only be changed without real change to reliance markets, merit, and more integration with the US , not less.
What is the credible evidence that the climate policies of this government would make the oil sands non-competitive, let alone the Canadian economy at large?
What is the credible evidence that the climate policies of this government will benefit Canada in any way? The null hypothesis should be "prove any regulation will be useful".
I do not know that the Carney climate policies are the best choices, but bad or not the best policies does not equal a provocation to separatism.
The correct climate policies would improve Canada's reputation among its peers, thereby improving the willingness of other countries to support or otherwise engage with Canada in international affairs and trade.
"No matter how terrible the climate policies we implement are, it will make other countries think we are cool and they will want to trade with us." Man, that's a blast from the past. Do the "we need more immigrants to build housing" trope next.
That's not what I am saying, at all. A policy that improved Canada's reputation at minimal economic cost would be a good policy. I did not say that any climate policy of any economic cost would be good.
Literally no one of relevance is arguing for policies that would deliberately harm the economy, this government included.
Carbon capture is a dubious technology. To what extent is the Carney government insisting on private companies paying for it, as opposed to public spending on the technology?
The latter would be bad policy but would not specifically affect "competitiveness".
If Canadians were truly inspired by the Prime Minister punching down on his caucus, why not elect Prime Minister Poilievre, and be done with the bunch of them?
Canadians don’t want change; Canadians want harmony, comfort, and a lack of disruption, even if it means accepting reduced living standards, economic stagnation, and stultifying bureaucratic inertia .
It is nice to see that Jen has removed her head from the “National A-Hole”, but she can do so much better than this offering.
I don’t know where you live, but I know that a big portion of former ndp voters couldn’t bring themselves to elect pollievre. They believed he was Trump-lite.
That being said I think many people voted for carney because they were afraid to vote conservative. And the liberals picked up a ton of ndp votes after there was no longer a difference between ndp and liberal policies.
I think the bigger truth is nobody cares if Carney tells. But I am happy to know that there is a leader with actual expectations in the prime minister office. Pretty sure I’ve heard rumors about Polievre yelling at times too. (Maybe I’d tell too if I was responsible for herding cats who wanted to look nice but not do anything substantial?)
$300/tonne carbon pricing , which approaches the cost of making Pathway CCS "economic" is a cost no country Canada competes with for the production of heavy oil imposes on itself.
Moreover, reducing carbon emissions in Canada has little to no present value to the Canadian economy.
More oil production unburdened with extreme climate costs has enormous economic rents for Canada.
Carney knows all of this even if he cannot yet overtly concede it.
Even Tony Blair now concedes the lunacy of net zero.
Had Liberal MPs voted at their first caucus meeting to implement the Reform Act provisions, I suspect Carney would be a touch more diplomatic in his interactions. Instead they voted to be sheep and now complain about being sheared.
Thinking that this Punch and Judy show amounts to real change is absurd. Endorsing the Liberals means endorsing the Liberals. But it should serve as an example for Poilievre: if he focused less on not frightening Toronto matrons, they would probably like him better.
It is just so cute that Carney when yells at his MPs or yaps out "I can outlast her" to a Grassy Narrows resident. But it is so mean when Pollievre criticizes the government.
Canada is an unserious nation that can't get anything done. People are glad there is an adult in thje room *the majority anyway*. Much better than funky socks and forced progressivism or you're a racist under Justin Trudeau.
I think Carney's communication style is going to have to change. He uses terms like 'a new age of variable geometry', pragmatic coalescence, complementarities are positive sum, (WTF), The Performance of Sovereignty (which I thought was the title to a recently discovered Tolstoy manuscript.) I suspect he dislikes the word 'no' or any reasonably sounding synonym. I think it's evident that he doesn't like hearing criticism (constructive, suggestive or otherwise).
He can yell all he wants. Knock yourself out. Now, tell me how and when we can expect all these international deals to come true? Time line and no banker language please.
Also, Carney needs to remember this is the Liberal party. The knives came out for Chretien by the Martin people. The knives will come out for Carney sooner or later.
Liberals seem to often make decisions from the place of election calculus. Trudeau wasn’t spilled as long as they thought they could win the next election. When it became clear how deeply disliked he was even internally, he was gone.
I think more than anything, liberals think if they’re the ones in power Canada is safer. It means their internal accountability sucks because they haven’t actually thought about what comes with being in power and they’re not willing to hold each other accountable as a group.
I’ve found the whole yelling story funny. I have a leadership position. I don’t yell. Carney could be effective without yelling, but he either doesn’t know how or chooses not to. And I don’t really care either way because the bigger point is his caucus wants to complain anonymously but not sign their name. So that puts this in the funny camp that ironically does make me think carney is miles better than Trudeau. Even though I still wouldn’t vote for him.
It was looking clear that Trudeau could not win the next election long before the caucus spilled him. The immediate spark that lit the fire for revolt was the public letter by Chrystia Freeland, which made clear that the temporary GST tax cuts occurred purely for political rather than economic or policy reasons. Basically, the Liberals showed spine only when it became clear that they were going to lose the coming election in a distinctly *un*-dignified and aimless manner.
I would agree that based on what we know about Carney as a person, he is more likely to be a demanding leader than an unprofessional or emotional one. But we ultimately barely know anything about what really happened and lack enough information to properly judge.
Carney has often throughout his life been the actual smartest person in the room. A strong leader will need to self-restrain from the urge to be over-confident accordingly; we will see how Carney does on that front.
On one hand I agree and find it amusing they are complaining. On the other hand I am also in a leadership position with around 300 people, and I would never yell or take on this arrogant position for someone that is suppose to be their leader. Time will tell.
Spot on. The following passage was particularly apropos, in my view:
QUOTE
I suspect this is a man who owns only three kinds of socks; charcoal socks, blue socks, and white sports socks. If we get nothing else from this government, I will never again write about a prime minister’s socks. This is better.
END QUOTE
The “socks” reference brings to mind the reaction of former Australian PM Malcolm Turnbull, whose biography reportedly included an acid reference to PM Trudeau’s penchant for striped socks.
Turnbull is also famous for having expressed his unabashed admiration for PM Carney.
Carney love him or hate him is stuck with Justin's Ship of Fools. It will be interesting to see how many of Justin's MPs/ministers run in next Fed Election.
I said this on the last article on this subject: what is really appalling is that it has taken a year for him to realize they are bumbling fools that need to be yelled at before anything will sink into their heads.
Thank you for this. I have no real problem with Mark Carney, it's his caucus I dislike - sometimes intensely - including most of his Cabinet Ministers. They're all Justin's folks so of course they'll never speak out against anything publicly. Why would they, the house whip would take away their little perks. Fact is, Mr Carney seems to be one of a small handful of mature adults in that caucus room, which can be refreshing.
The Liberal Caucus had the opportunity way back when to show some backbone but it never did. After Jody Wilson-Raybould and Jane Philpott were summarily kicked of of caucus for telling the truth, what did we hear from that esteemed caucus. Nothing. Even after the Ethics Commissioner ruled on the SNC-Lavalin affair, the caucus held their collective tongue. 'Ol Justin had taught 'em good and they still have a hard shaking off those fetters.
Canada and the LPC have been trapped, unable to overcome their collective inertia. We appear to have a PM who rejects this as the bullshit it is. We are now living in a time when inertia is not an acceptable trait. The consequence of that is that they're going to make mistakes, but at least they'll be doing something. Stagnation doesn't work. No, I'm not happy about everything he's doing. Some of it, I think, is patently stupid. ALTO as it's currently laid out, for example. Great idea...terrible execution. In the works of Arthur Fonzarelli, "I'm going to get my battery cables and see if I can jump-start this kid's brain". Seems to apply well to the Liberal caucus. Actions, not words, please.
It is no great achievement for Carney to remind the most leftist elements of his caucus that he is in charge.
No credible CEO would act any other way.
But who really cares?
The real question remains how punitive will Carney be towards Alberta in respect of his extremist climate demands - decarbonization via CCS and open ended carbon pricing, divorced from any regard for fundamental competitiveness.
Time is running out.
A breakdown with Alberta on climate would only add to separatist momentum and justifiably.
And Carney is no better on trade negotiations with the US. Concessions to Trump are inescapable or losing any vestige of the USMCA becomes ever more likely.
Carney is at heart an over-credentialed leftist, who can't really accept that Canada's long standing dysfunctions can only be changed without real change to reliance markets, merit, and more integration with the US , not less.
But delusions die so hard for most Canadians.
What is the credible evidence that the climate policies of this government would make the oil sands non-competitive, let alone the Canadian economy at large?
What is the credible evidence that the climate policies of this government will benefit Canada in any way? The null hypothesis should be "prove any regulation will be useful".
I do not know that the Carney climate policies are the best choices, but bad or not the best policies does not equal a provocation to separatism.
The correct climate policies would improve Canada's reputation among its peers, thereby improving the willingness of other countries to support or otherwise engage with Canada in international affairs and trade.
"No matter how terrible the climate policies we implement are, it will make other countries think we are cool and they will want to trade with us." Man, that's a blast from the past. Do the "we need more immigrants to build housing" trope next.
That's really the last-bastion argument for any policy that "makes us look like nice people but is provably otherwise useless at any cost point".
That's not what I am saying, at all. A policy that improved Canada's reputation at minimal economic cost would be a good policy. I did not say that any climate policy of any economic cost would be good.
Literally no one of relevance is arguing for policies that would deliberately harm the economy, this government included.
The commercial carbon tax is still there. C-69. C-48.
Carbon capture costs money (which, as Boundary Dam has proven, is money wasted).
Do you really think companies will pay a premium for carbon neutral O&G that isn't carbon neutral?
Carbon capture is a dubious technology. To what extent is the Carney government insisting on private companies paying for it, as opposed to public spending on the technology?
The latter would be bad policy but would not specifically affect "competitiveness".
The former is also bad policy which will lower competitiveness. Squandered money hurts Canada, it doesn't matter from whom the money is extracted.
Exactly: squandered money hurts "Canada", not Alberta specifically. It's not a specific provocation to separatism as Dennis alluded in this thread.
It is funded by Canada and Alberta.
That is quite a rip.
If Canadians were truly inspired by the Prime Minister punching down on his caucus, why not elect Prime Minister Poilievre, and be done with the bunch of them?
Canadians don’t want change; Canadians want harmony, comfort, and a lack of disruption, even if it means accepting reduced living standards, economic stagnation, and stultifying bureaucratic inertia .
It is nice to see that Jen has removed her head from the “National A-Hole”, but she can do so much better than this offering.
I don’t know where you live, but I know that a big portion of former ndp voters couldn’t bring themselves to elect pollievre. They believed he was Trump-lite.
That being said I think many people voted for carney because they were afraid to vote conservative. And the liberals picked up a ton of ndp votes after there was no longer a difference between ndp and liberal policies.
I think the bigger truth is nobody cares if Carney tells. But I am happy to know that there is a leader with actual expectations in the prime minister office. Pretty sure I’ve heard rumors about Polievre yelling at times too. (Maybe I’d tell too if I was responsible for herding cats who wanted to look nice but not do anything substantial?)
I live in London, Ontario. My riding is London Centre, and my Liberal MP is Peter Fragiskatos.
MP Fragiskatos is the Sgt. Schultz of MPs: he knows nothing, he sees nothing, he hears nothing, and he says nothing.
He has been in office since 2015.
He has supported every initiative of the Liberal Government for eleven years.
The voters of London Centre will dutifully elect him again, should he choose to run.
If Canadians truly sought substantive change, this would be a great place
in which to start.
PP couldn't, or wouldn't, meet the moment and for all to see. The vote was the outcome of terrible strategy and comms.
$300/tonne carbon pricing , which approaches the cost of making Pathway CCS "economic" is a cost no country Canada competes with for the production of heavy oil imposes on itself.
Moreover, reducing carbon emissions in Canada has little to no present value to the Canadian economy.
More oil production unburdened with extreme climate costs has enormous economic rents for Canada.
Carney knows all of this even if he cannot yet overtly concede it.
Even Tony Blair now concedes the lunacy of net zero.
Had Liberal MPs voted at their first caucus meeting to implement the Reform Act provisions, I suspect Carney would be a touch more diplomatic in his interactions. Instead they voted to be sheep and now complain about being sheared.
Reform Act should be not only mandatory but burned into the constitution with a branding iron.
Thinking that this Punch and Judy show amounts to real change is absurd. Endorsing the Liberals means endorsing the Liberals. But it should serve as an example for Poilievre: if he focused less on not frightening Toronto matrons, they would probably like him better.
No. Poilievre yelling would get the full JWR/Payette treatment. Come to think of it, he already does.
Remember: completely different rules apply.
It is just so cute that Carney when yells at his MPs or yaps out "I can outlast her" to a Grassy Narrows resident. But it is so mean when Pollievre criticizes the government.
I contend that this is because Poilievre isn't frightening the matrons. He's just annoying them.
Canada is an unserious nation that can't get anything done. People are glad there is an adult in thje room *the majority anyway*. Much better than funky socks and forced progressivism or you're a racist under Justin Trudeau.
I think Carney's communication style is going to have to change. He uses terms like 'a new age of variable geometry', pragmatic coalescence, complementarities are positive sum, (WTF), The Performance of Sovereignty (which I thought was the title to a recently discovered Tolstoy manuscript.) I suspect he dislikes the word 'no' or any reasonably sounding synonym. I think it's evident that he doesn't like hearing criticism (constructive, suggestive or otherwise).
He can yell all he wants. Knock yourself out. Now, tell me how and when we can expect all these international deals to come true? Time line and no banker language please.
Also, Carney needs to remember this is the Liberal party. The knives came out for Chretien by the Martin people. The knives will come out for Carney sooner or later.
Liberals seem to often make decisions from the place of election calculus. Trudeau wasn’t spilled as long as they thought they could win the next election. When it became clear how deeply disliked he was even internally, he was gone.
I think more than anything, liberals think if they’re the ones in power Canada is safer. It means their internal accountability sucks because they haven’t actually thought about what comes with being in power and they’re not willing to hold each other accountable as a group.
I’ve found the whole yelling story funny. I have a leadership position. I don’t yell. Carney could be effective without yelling, but he either doesn’t know how or chooses not to. And I don’t really care either way because the bigger point is his caucus wants to complain anonymously but not sign their name. So that puts this in the funny camp that ironically does make me think carney is miles better than Trudeau. Even though I still wouldn’t vote for him.
It was looking clear that Trudeau could not win the next election long before the caucus spilled him. The immediate spark that lit the fire for revolt was the public letter by Chrystia Freeland, which made clear that the temporary GST tax cuts occurred purely for political rather than economic or policy reasons. Basically, the Liberals showed spine only when it became clear that they were going to lose the coming election in a distinctly *un*-dignified and aimless manner.
I would agree that based on what we know about Carney as a person, he is more likely to be a demanding leader than an unprofessional or emotional one. But we ultimately barely know anything about what really happened and lack enough information to properly judge.
Carney has often throughout his life been the actual smartest person in the room. A strong leader will need to self-restrain from the urge to be over-confident accordingly; we will see how Carney does on that front.
For 12 years Carney had staffs of thousands helping choose between 25, 0 and -25 eight times a year. The man must be a genius.
On one hand I agree and find it amusing they are complaining. On the other hand I am also in a leadership position with around 300 people, and I would never yell or take on this arrogant position for someone that is suppose to be their leader. Time will tell.
Spot on. The following passage was particularly apropos, in my view:
QUOTE
I suspect this is a man who owns only three kinds of socks; charcoal socks, blue socks, and white sports socks. If we get nothing else from this government, I will never again write about a prime minister’s socks. This is better.
END QUOTE
The “socks” reference brings to mind the reaction of former Australian PM Malcolm Turnbull, whose biography reportedly included an acid reference to PM Trudeau’s penchant for striped socks.
Turnbull is also famous for having expressed his unabashed admiration for PM Carney.
Carney love him or hate him is stuck with Justin's Ship of Fools. It will be interesting to see how many of Justin's MPs/ministers run in next Fed Election.
I said this on the last article on this subject: what is really appalling is that it has taken a year for him to realize they are bumbling fools that need to be yelled at before anything will sink into their heads.
Thank you for this. I have no real problem with Mark Carney, it's his caucus I dislike - sometimes intensely - including most of his Cabinet Ministers. They're all Justin's folks so of course they'll never speak out against anything publicly. Why would they, the house whip would take away their little perks. Fact is, Mr Carney seems to be one of a small handful of mature adults in that caucus room, which can be refreshing.
The Liberal Caucus had the opportunity way back when to show some backbone but it never did. After Jody Wilson-Raybould and Jane Philpott were summarily kicked of of caucus for telling the truth, what did we hear from that esteemed caucus. Nothing. Even after the Ethics Commissioner ruled on the SNC-Lavalin affair, the caucus held their collective tongue. 'Ol Justin had taught 'em good and they still have a hard shaking off those fetters.
Bravo...again. Another journalistic triumph.
Canada and the LPC have been trapped, unable to overcome their collective inertia. We appear to have a PM who rejects this as the bullshit it is. We are now living in a time when inertia is not an acceptable trait. The consequence of that is that they're going to make mistakes, but at least they'll be doing something. Stagnation doesn't work. No, I'm not happy about everything he's doing. Some of it, I think, is patently stupid. ALTO as it's currently laid out, for example. Great idea...terrible execution. In the works of Arthur Fonzarelli, "I'm going to get my battery cables and see if I can jump-start this kid's brain". Seems to apply well to the Liberal caucus. Actions, not words, please.
Spot on article, Jen Gerson !
I remember when the Governor General, Payette, had to resign over yelling at her staff.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/julie-payette-workplace-report-1.5890757