CDN NEWS | 
US NEWS 
Carney’s similarity to Justin Trudeau is now clear; a left-leaning, climate-obsessed interventionist leading the old Trudeau team
By Joe Oliver
A Carney government would be the same old, same old. The vote on April 28 will determine whether Canadians endure another four years of decline or seize Canada’s great potential, writes Joe Oliver. Photo by Arlen Redekop/Postmedia files
In Mark Carney’s first month as Liberal leader and prime minister, a picture has emerged of who he is: a technocratic version of Justin Trudeau, without the charisma, great hair or ability to communicate comfortably in French, but with many of his banished predecessor’s other personality characteristics and policy propensities.
Like Trudeau, Carney is a left-leaning, climate-obsessed globalist — a Laurentian elitist who sees big government as the solution to most problems, whether real, imagined or self-imposed. He appears ambitious and narcissistic, is often casual with the truth, is compromised by conflicts of interest and seems beholden to the “basic Chinese dictatorship.” He is advised by Trudeau’s coterie of political operatives, led by Gerald Butts, and presides over a reshuffled Trudeau cabinet. The fourth Liberal term he seeks would, with one or two exceptions, pursue the same dysfunctional policies that inflicted a lost decade on our long-suffering yet credulous electorate. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. Fool me four times? Seriously?
Liberals are practiced at using the fear a crisis generates to achieve big government goals that limit personal freedom and hike costs. Mark Carney built his career exploiting such opportunities. He is guilty of stolen valour in trying to take too much credit for dealing with the 2008-09 downturn, rightfully owed to Stephen Harper and his finance minister, the late Jim Flaherty. As governor of the Bank of England, Carney was a leading figure in Project Fear, whose inaccurate hyperbole failed in the end to derail Brexit.
Carney navigated the halls of power in Ottawa, London and the UN for over 10 years as a fervent climate alarmist foretelling, like Greta Thunberg, civilizational doom if countries do not collectively dispense hundreds of trillions of dollars to achieve unattainable net-zero global emissions. His refusal to say he would revoke Canada’s many statutory and regulatory impediments to resource development (including the No Pipelines act, the ban on tanker traffic and the cap on emissions) renders his campaign promise to develop resources meaningless — rather like inviting someone to dinner but then leaving the front door locked. But resource development will be critical to fostering growth, creating jobs, enhancing productivity and reducing dependency on the U.S. market.
Carney is now exploiting Canadians’ fear and anger over President Donald Trump’s tariffs and taunts about a 51st state. He recently declared that Canada’s old relationship with the United States “based on deepening integration of our economies and tight security and military co-operation, is over.” With Trump’s endgame impossible to know, such a definitive statement is way too premature, despite the current tariff chaos. Our proximity to the U.S. creates significant economic advantages for both countries. Pronouncing the relationship dead, even as we work hard to diversify our trade and build economic resilience, is wrong. And hemispheric security clearly demands co-operation. It would be utterly reckless for Canada to distance itself from the U.S. in its strategic competition with China.
Other recent comments cast a troubling light on where Carney stands on issues central to Canada’s values and national interests. His instinct was to stand by Liberal MP Paul Chiang after he suggested people could collect a bounty for delivering Conservative candidate Joe Tay to the local Chinese consulate. Carney’s apparent indifference to China’s intimidation of Canadians and interference in our democracy is indefensible.
Carney’s recent interview on Radio-Canada was both revealing and chilling. In it, he conflated three fundamentally different events: Russia’s unprovoked invasion of Ukraine, which has killed a million people; Trump’s talk about Canada becoming the 51st state, which, however insulting, would not entail armed force or happen contrary to Canadian wishes; and Israel’s security barrier in Gaza, designed to prevent another terrorist massacre like October 7. For short-term partisan advantage, Carney insulted the notoriously sensitive U.S. president and criticized a democratic ally desperately trying to retrieve hostages still held after two and a half years by a genocidal terrorist organization. Carney set aside moral clarity and national interest during a period of exceptional economic vulnerability and counted the votes.
Carney’s conflicts of interest flow from his former chairmanship of Brookfield Asset Management — where he retains a non-transferable carried interest potentially worth tens of millions. Placing it in a blind trust achieves nothing, so he would have to recuse himself from any involvement in certain industrial sectors. But how can a prime minister, especially a Liberal one, absent himself from discussions about industrial policy, the cornerstone of Liberal interventionism?
A Carney government would be the same old, same old. The vote on April 28 will determine whether Canadians endure another four years of decline or seize Canada’s great potential.
Joe Oliver was minister of natural resources and minister of finance in the Harper government.
Share This:
