Tristin Hopper on X - "I've never felt more banana republic than I do right now. A longtime expat flies back, *immediately* becomes prime minister and begins trying to woo the electorate using crude and outdated national stereotypes."
Chris Warkentin on X - "So let’s get this straight, Yesterday, Mark Carney was too scared to talk to Newfoundland Fishermen, Today, he’s too scared to talk to Quebecers…… but he’s TOTALLY the guy who will stand up to Trump? 🤔"
Jamie Sarkonak: Mark Carney's boomer campaign - "Mark Carney’s campaign is something out of a time machine. Thin on actual substance, he’s opted to emanate vibes instead, with cultural references to 1950s hockey, 1960s music and 1980s CBC programming, and imitations of nationalism by cheering on the stereotype of Canadian niceness. It’s quaint — but impossible to relate to. Does he have a few policy ideas lined up for 2025 Canada? Sure. But he’s selling them by appealing to the young- to middle-aged adults of the 1990s. People who, by now, are settled in their own homes, fee simple, insulated from the worst consequences of a high-immigration, no-growth economy — and don’t have much care for those who aren’t. People like Globe and Mail columnist Marsha Lederman, who have praised his “positive” yet empty campaign, satisfied with his “reassuring-dad vibes, suggesting he’s got our backs.” And that’s precisely how Carney is trying to run this: wearing a smile while telling those less in the know to think happy thoughts about vintage hockey while letting the grown-ups worry about the mean Americans. “Elbows up” — Carney’s favoured election tagline — is a reference to Gordie Howe, who last played in the NHL in 1980; a phrase that’s been adopted by Liberal elders with the same enthusiasm their younger counterparts embraced BLM. His rinkside chat ad with Mike Myers is merely about how “Canada means everything” and how being Canadian is about “values” and “an attitude, you know, the attachment to this country.” Sure, I guess, but it rings hollow from a pair of men who’ve long been citizens and residents of elsewhere, and who have nothing to say for the lack of housing and work prospects the country’s youth now face, who haven’t watched their downtowns and public transit systems descend into needle-littered no-go zones after dark, and who don’t seem all that bothered by a decade of near-flat economic growth. They’re like a pair of ants who became trapped in sap 40 years ago, only to magically emerge from their orange globs in January. What Carney presents is the paternalistic, low-information version of Pierre Poilievre’s own promises of a more independent Canada through the amendment of specific growth-inhibiting laws that, in particular, have stolen away the earning power of the country’s youth — also with a smile, but one that says “hope is on the way.” And it does seem to resonate well, given the massive rallies never seen by a Conservative in this lifetime, with attendance from all demographics... Carney’s vague nostalgia-rooted pitch is only helped by the fact that he’s yet to speak with Trump. He’s got a near blank slate to write his pitch on, so write he does... Policy-wise, the Liberal leader is committed to raising military spending to NATO’s requisite two per cent of GDP by 2030 — which means he plans to fall short of our international promises for his entire term as PM. He’s promised a GST break on homes below $1 million for first-time home buyers — which is just a subsidy for demand that will do nothing to actually encourage home building. Also, a $2-billion cash injection to the auto industry, that is, more COVID-style corporate welfare. And a one per-cent tax cut on income. In Poilievre, we also have a response to Trump — “knock it off,” with a pledge to retaliate. That’s backed by substantive plans to get Canada to a better footing for retaliation. Repealing onerous federal project approval laws, cancelling industrial emission/production caps, beefing up military capacity, tax cuts — tax cuts that actually encourage homebuilding, and, income-wise, would be more than double Carney’s offer at 2.25 per cent . To appeal to boomers (but importantly, not only boomers), he’s promising tax cuts for working seniors, extended RRSP withdrawal timelines and a frozen retirement age at 65. Oh, and Poilievre can actually speak about crime, a problem that remains live during the trade war, and a problem that Carney has yet to even acknowledge."
Carney's green funds at Brookfield used Bermuda tax haven to attract investors - "experts say their registration in Bermuda raises questions about Carney's approach to fiscal policy in Canada. "All sorts of companies are doing this … but [Brookfield] are one of the biggest users of this kind of scheme," said Silas Xuereb, political analyst with the group Canadians for Fair Taxation... A spokesperson for the Liberal Party refused to answer questions about Carney's activities at Brookfield or whether he had assets in tax havens before they were placed in a blind trust... the NDP stated that Brookfield's use of tax havens has led to the loss of billions in corporate taxes."
Mark Carney faces questions on photos with Ghislaine Maxwell - "The photos began circulating on social media Monday. It appears the original account to share it is a small anonymous account with few followers and only a few posts over the past few weeks. The original post pointed to a photo of Carney and his wife Diana Fox Carney standing with Maxwell, the British socialite-turned-sex trafficker and Epstein associate who is serving 20 years in jail. “This is another example of how Pierre Poilievre and (adviser) Jenni Byrne have always played politics and it shows again how terrified they are to fight Mark Carney,” a source close to Carney told the Toronto Sun when asked about the photos and any association between the Carneys and Maxwell... The published photos of Carney and Maxwell show he and his wife relaxing and in casual conversation with the woman who would go on to become a well-known sex-trafficker to the stars. They certainly can’t be dismissed as just two people being caught in the same frame by a paparazzi photographer. The photos predate Maxwell being charged for her involvement in Epstein’s sex crimes, but after Epstein’s 13 months in prison over 2008-09 for sexual offences that Maxwell was not charged for."
From January
KLEIN: Mark Carney is hiding his globalist agenda: Canadians should be worried - "Mark Carney wants you to believe he’s the leader Canada needs right now. He often is heard saying, “It’s Time to Build.” Build what, Mr. Carney? That’s the question Canadians need to be asking. Because if you dig beneath the surface of his polished speeches and scripted photo ops, it’s clear what Carney really plans to build: a future where your freedoms shrink, your costs go up, and unelected elites call the shots... Pay attention, however, to what he isn’t saying. He’s not talking about his years pushing a globalist agenda at the United Nations and the World Economic Forum. He’s not talking about his book Value(s), where he argued capitalism is broken and advocates for regulatory and financial frameworks that align with climate goals. He supports strong climate action, referring to climate change as an “emergency.” He’s certainly not talking about the fact that under his leadership, Canada will hand more control over our economy and industries to international institutions and NGOs with zero accountability to Canadians. Let’s also talk about the carbon tax. Carney hasn’t cut it. It’s on hold — period. No matter what any media outlet or political pundit tells you, the carbon tax is coming back. It may get a new name, it may be rebranded as something softer and more “fair,” but make no mistake: You will pay. Higher fuel costs, more expensive groceries, and rising costs on everything from heating your home to running your business. That’s baked into Carney’s plan. He’s just not telling you about it while he’s fishing for votes. What’s also missing from Carney’s talking points is any serious plan to strengthen Canada’s economy where it counts. Has he said he’ll fast-track mining for the critical minerals the world is demanding? No. Has he committed to building a pipeline to get Canadian energy to market? Not a word. Has he greenlit new manufacturing plants to create jobs and bring home the supply chains we lost over the past decade? Silence. Instead, we get platitudes. “It’s Time to Build.” Sure. But build what? More layers of bureaucracy? More red tape? More advisory panels stacked with global NGOs who don’t answer to you or any Canadian voter? That’s where this is heading... do we hand over the keys to our economy, our industries, and our way of life to global institutions and unelected elites? Carney likes to say Canada needs to “lead the way” in fighting climate change. His history would suggest he means that we need to lead by shutting down our energy sector while countries like China and Russia expand theirs. He talks about “stakeholder capitalism,” which sounds inclusive until you realize it means handing power to groups who never have to win an election but have a veto over how Canadian businesses operate. While he talks about fairness and equity, Carney’s policies will drive up costs for working families, punish small businesses, and hollow out industries that built this country. He says he’ll “partner” with the private sector. In reality, that means compliance through financial blackmail — if you don’t play by his rules, you won’t get capital. As he’s said himself, non-compliant companies will become “climate roadkill.” Don’t take my word for it. Look at his track record. As the UN Special Envoy on Climate Action and Finance, Carney pushed sustainable finance models that cut investment in Canada’s oil and gas sector by half between 2014 and 2020. Look at where capital is going now: Elsewhere. Countries like Australia and the United States are developing their resources, building infrastructure, and securing energy independence. Canada? We’re still debating whether we’re allowed to build anything at all... Carney says he believes in Canada’s sovereignty. Actions, however, speak louder than words. His entire career has been about centralizing power in the hands of people you didn’t elect and can’t hold accountable."
Carney says he knows new riding well, flubs neighbourhood name-drop - "Prime Minister Mark Carney says he knows his suburban Ottawa riding well but could evidently use some brushing up on its geography. “I know Nepean well… from Barrhaven to Bells Corners and in between,” said Carney, when asked Sunday why he chose to run in the district, located southwest of downtown Ottawa. One issue with the prime minister’s answer is that Bells Corners falls entirely outside of Nepean’s boundaries, after being transferred to neighbouring Kanata in the 2022 federal redistribution... The prime minister also struggled to explain why the party disqualified longtime Liberal MP for Nepean Chandra Arya from the race, after green-lighting his candidacy in the past three federal elections. Arya was tossed from the Liberal leadership race earlier this year after creating a stir with his refusal to learn French."
Carney says 'non merci' to a Quebec debate, revealing French anxieties - "Liberal Leader Mark Carney lost the first French-language debate before it even started. The Liberal Party of Canada announced its leader will not participate in the all-important French language TVA debate, raising yet another question about his ability to speak to francophones across the country and especially in Quebec. The most-watched French-language network in Quebec organizes a parallel event to the French and English-language debates organized by the Leaders’ Debates Commission, both of which Carney will still attend. But the TVA debate has become a must-see event during every election... TVA announced a few days ago that it was asking the four main political parties to contribute $75,000 each to participate, due to a lack of funding. Now, the absence of a single party means the debate won’t go ahead... The party did not explain why he would not participate. A source, speaking on background, said there was a reluctance to pay for the event. “The Liberal leader claims to have the strength and courage to confront Donald Trump, but he doesn’t even have the courage to come and speak to Quebecers. He disqualifies himself, and Quebecers will pass judgment without appeal,” said Bloc Québécois Leader Yves-François Blanchet. The NDP deputy leader Alexandre Boulerice said it was “very insulting to Quebec” and that “no matter what excuse he gives, the truth is that Mark Carney prefers to hide and not answer questions in French.” However, his absence could highlight his difficulties with the French language. The only time Carney debated in French was during the Liberal leadership race, where he showed his limitations, accidentally saying that he was “in agreement with Hamas.” Then, at a press conference in Iqaluit last week, he didn’t understand a French-speaking journalist’s question about his potential conflicts of interest . A growing number of voices, including those from opposition parties, are pointing out that Mr. Carney has not been “tested” in French and in Quebec, where he enjoys exceptional support in the polls. According to a recent National Post-Léger poll , the Liberals have 40 per cent support in the province, and Léger executive vice-president Andrew Enns described the Liberal growth in Quebec as “astronomical.” “Quebecers are quite willing to forgive someone who makes certain mistakes or hesitations in French, but they must feel that there is a real interest in speaking French and in being interested in Quebec issues,” said Antonine Yaccarini, a political analyst and former contributor to the Parti Québécois and the Coalition Avenir Québec. For example, Carney adopted the slogan of Quebec’s Quiet Revolution, “Maître chez nous,” in his speeches . However, the new Prime Minister doesn’t give many interviews in French. He has, for instance, abolished the title “minister for official languages,” raising many criticisms among the francophone minority... there is the elbows-up campaign with Mike Myers, where the famous Canadian actor gives his support to Carney. There is no reference to Quebec in the videos and the Liberal Party put French subtitles for the French version... If he only declined the invitation to the TVA debate, that would be one thing. But the accumulation of small details could upset Quebecers, who are the most volatile voters in the country."
Michael Taube: Liberals try to limit exposure to Carney's 'volcanic temper' - "There was some chatter among Liberal sycophants that TVA’s $75,000 entry fee per party leader had been an issue. (The two CBC leaders’ debates are free.) This seemed kind of ridiculous, since the Liberal campaign war chest is healthy. Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre said that he would pay the broadcaster’s fee on Carney’s behalf if he attended. Unsurprisingly, this wasn’t the reason why Carney said “non” to TVA. Rather, he claimed it was due to the exclusion of Green Party co-leaders Elizabeth May and Jonathan Pedneault... OK, and so what? May, who has been the Green Party leader the longest in terms of political tenure, hasn’t been invited to many leaders’ debates. This includes the 2019 and 2021 TVA debates. I’ve always argued that May should be included, along with People’s Party of Canada leader Maxime Bernier, but that’s beside the point. This isn’t a new development for May and the Greens. There’s no reason why Carney, who was only sworn in as prime minister on March 14, should take offence to her years-long exclusion from the leaders’ debate process... Carney’s political inexperience, awkward performances with reporters at press conferences and inability to check his ego and filter his responses, has likely led his handlers to reduce any opportunity for his “volcanic temper,” as the former economics editor for the UK’s left-wing Guardian newspaper put it, to erupt at the wrong time. One would imagine that Carney’s team feels a bit more secure with him appearing on CBC leaders’ debates overseen by the Electoral Commission. It’ll be a more controlled environment, and the number of tough, outside-the-box questions will probably be more limited. Unless the public broadcaster decides to bring in Rosemary Barton to ask Carney whether she should still “look inside herself,” as he arrogantly told her during one of his press conferences. As for Carney’s ability to speak French, it’s probably passable at best. This seems to go against what senior Liberals said in January during the party leadership race. Former Housing Minister Sean Fraser, who recently un-retired from politics to run again, believed it was “essential” for Trudeau’s replacement to be bilingual. Foreign Affairs Minister Mélanie Joly also said “as a Quebecer and a francophone,” the next Liberal leader’s ability to speak both French and English seemed “obvious.” Since that time, most Liberals have been content to, shall we say, fermez les bouches when it comes to Carney and the French language. Why? The PM’s final comment about skipping the TVA debate was somewhat offbeat, too. “And I’ll add that … I have spent, during my leadership campaign, I spent more time in Quebec than in any other province. I’m going there in two days … I’m very much out in the open.” Huh? Does Carney expect a gold star or participation medal for having spent time in la belle province during his short stint as a Canadian politician? That’s what he and other party leaders are supposed to be doing to win votes, after all. Is Carney the type of political leader who can truly be Prime Minister for Canada’s two solitudes? Non, mesdames et messieurs."
Carney’s French skills not good enough for many, poll shows (aka "Mark Carney’s French skills not good enough for a prime minister, say a third of Francophone Canadians ") - "he remains largely untested in his second language, and has made several flubs already on the campaign trail."
Sheila Gunn Reid on X - "What a clown. Carney agrees to the TVA debate with Poilievre, even mocking the suggestion that he wouldn't. And then immediately backs out of the debate after the cameras stop rolling"
Andrew Scheer on X - "MUST WATCH! This morning, Carney says he will participate in a French debate, even mocking the suggestion he is afraid. This Afternoon, Carney’s team now says he CHICKENED OUT and will NOT participate in a French debate. Cowering Carney! If Carney can’t debate other party leaders, how can he stand up to Donald Trump? No wonder Trump endorsed Carney."
Poilievre says he'll pay $75,000 fee for Carney if he'll join debate - "Poilievre also said another reason why Carney wouldn’t join the debate was because Green Party of Canada leader Elizabeth May wasn’t invited. “I’ll invite her,” said Poilievre."
Terry Newman: Carney is a walking conflict of interest - "Up until the day before he threw his hat into the Liberal leadership race, Carney held two positions at Brookfield, a global investment firm “focused on building long-term wealth for institutions and individuals around the world” — vice chair, and head of transition investing. Brookfield describes itself as having three core businesses: alternative asset management, wealth solutions, and operating businesses in “renewable power, infrastructure, business and industrial services, and real estate.” And like all investment firms, when Brookfield wins, its investors, as well as current and former stockholders, win. As it should be. However, issues may arise when an individual who was formerly involved in these activities, e.g., guiding investments towards specific renewables, infrastructure, and other projects globally, and building relationships with foreign companies and states for the purpose of enriching an investment firm, suddenly becomes the political leader of a country with its own national resource industry interests. Will a Carney government be making decisions that would directly or indirectly affect his financial assets? How can Canadians be assured that Carney’s promise to make Canada a “clean energy superpower” isn’t influenced by the possibility that it could enrich both Brookfield and himself? According to Brookfield’s annual report, as of Dec. 31, 2024, Carney held stock options from Brookfield with a market value of more than $6.8 million. In addition to these stocks, Bay Street insiders in the same line of work as Carney, told National Post that, as a co-manager of Bookfield’s clean energy transition funds, Carney would likely be entitled to potentially tens of millions in “carried interest,” essentially performance bonuses. Carney has not publicly clarified what, if any, Brookfield assets he still holds. Carney’s assets, with the exception of personal real estate, have been put into a blind trust, which would mean his holdings would be managed and invested by a third party, with whom he has no prior relationship. However, the financiers interviewed by the Post noted that his carried interest assets would not be compatible with a blind trust due to the fact that he would know what the funds were invested in and how decisions he makes in government, notably on any policies that affect net-zero and clean energy investments, might affect their value. “The blind trust works for large liquid stock portfolios, but not for specific investments that are known and quantified in a fund that he once controlled,” one financier told the Post’s Catherine Lévesque. Carney finally admitted on March 18, during a news conference in Iqaluit, that potential conflicts of interest related to his past work at Brookfield may exist... Given the extent of Brookfield’s involvement in energy, it’s hard to see how government policy related to renewables or conventional energy could not have an impact for Brookfield in one way or another. How extensive is the list of government decisions that Carney would need to avoid involvement in to limit any potential conflicts? Beyond personal assets, could a public office holder, as strongly motivated towards reaching net-zero global climate goals as Carney, suddenly put those goals aside to encourage development of Canada’s natural resource industry? He’s said he would make Canada an energy superpower in both conventional and clean energy. Carney’s focus on reaching global net-zero goals up until this point is well-documented... Does this sound like the CV of a public official interested in building pipelines? Unfortunately, Carney’s new book “The Hinge: Time to Build an Even Better Canada,” which may have answered that question, has now been delayed. Pity. More potential issues for governance related to Carney’s past work, specifically with China, reared their head last fall. In September 2024, Carney was appointed chair of the Liberal party’s Economic Task Force while still at Brookfield. In October, in his capacity as vice chair of Brookfield, he travelled to Beijing, meeting with Hexin Zhu, Deputy Director of the People’s Bank of China. Two weeks later, Brookfield secured a loan of $256 million from the Bank of China for Brookfield to refinance its commercial property holdings in Shanghai... He’s already admitted potential conflicts may exist, but has still chosen not to proactively disclose what they might be."
Jesse Kline: Trump's still messing with Canada, and Carney's not equipped - "In response to Trump’s trade war, both the Liberals and Conservatives appear to broadly agree that we need to diversify our exports, which includes building the infrastructure necessary to get our resources to overseas markets and strengthening our trade ties with other countries. Yet at a press conference in Winnipeg on Tuesday, Carney emphatically stated that he would stick with the Liberals’ disastrous Impact Assessment Act (IAA), one of the main impediments to building pipelines and other infrastructure projects... Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre, for his part, seems to get it. He’s pledged to scrap the IAA entirely, while speeding up project approvals, removing the oil and gas emissions cap and industrial carbon tax, and making it easier for First Nations to invest in resource projects — steps that are absolutely necessary if we hope to spur investment in natural resources and decrease our reliance on the U.S. market. Unfortunately, when it comes to agriculture, neither leader is willing to take on the powerful Quebec dairy cartel and wind down our system of supply management and its associated tariffs on imported eggs, dairy and poultry, which Trump specifically cited on Wednesday as an egregious example of a trade barrier imposed by one of America’s allies. More importantly, supply management has proven to be a perennial thorn in our side during trade negotiations and will prevent us from negotiating freer trade agreements with other countries in the future. Not only did Carney say that, “Canada’s dairy sector is off the table in any negotiations with President Trump,” he went one step further this week, promising millions of dollars in agricultural subsidies and supports. They include a $200-million fund to build “domestic food processing capacity,” $30 million for marketing, another $30 million to help farmers buy green tech, along with higher loan guarantees and a permanent increase in the AgriStability crop-insurance program. These are the same type of unimaginative policy solutions the Grits have been coming up with for the past decade. Whenever we find ourselves in a crisis — whether it be COVID, tariffs or anything else — the Liberals’ first, and generally only, response is to throw massive amounts of money at the problem by topping up social supports and creating shiny new government programs on the fly. While social programs can help us weather a short-term emergency, they’re not going to sustain us over the long run. The only way to do that is to grow our economy by opening up new export markets and making Canada a more attractive place to invest. Take the example of Brazil. Like Canada, it’s a country with a wealth of natural resources, including oil, and is a large exporter of agricultural products, such as beef. Yet unlike Canada, stock markets, politicians and investors are bullish on the country’s future, as Brazil looks to increase trade with China and other countries affected by American tariffs... At his press conference on Wednesday, Trump said that he tells world leaders, “You gotta take care of your country, but we’ve got to start taking care of our country now.” The message is clear: when it comes to international trade, it’s every man for himself. If Canada hopes to survive this, our politicians need to look past the self-imposed limitations they’ve placed on this country, such as overly restrictive climate policies and Third-World agricultural marketing systems, and get serious about turbo-charging the Canadian economy. For Carney, that would mean turning his back on policies that his cabinet colleagues have spent the better part of the last decade advocating for. But if he doesn’t have the guts to do that, it’s hard to see why Canadians should believe that he represents real change, or that he has the fortitude necessary to take on a strongman like Trump."
The (missing) book on Mark Carney’s plan for Canada - "[A] possible reason for holding back on publishing The Hinge is that it would reveal too much detail about Carney’s interventionist master plan for the Canadian economy. We already know the broad scope of the Carney vision for economic control. In speeches and his first book, Value(s): Building a Better World for All, Carney has laid out his objectives, which include using massive manipulation of markets via policies that use corporations and financial institutions to control investment across the economy in everything from housing to energy and trade. Specific details are missing on how Carney’s interventionist model would be applied to Canada, which makes it unfortunate that The Hinge is not available now for voters to get a clearer understanding of the Liberal leader’s real policy objectives. Instead, voters are left to decipher Carney’s murky economic and moral philosophizing and separate it all from his past and recent speeches. What are Carney’s plans, methods, objectives? An interesting starting point is the recent media fracas over his possible conflicts of interest given his corporate history. In answer to a reporter’s question, he said: “What possible conflicts?” Well, there are examples. Less than a year ago, as chairman of Brookfield Asset Management, Carney told a First Nations Major Project Coalition Conference that Brookfield was “proud to have developed several major projects in partnership with First Nations. For example, we built Kokish, a hydro power facility on Vancouver Island” and other projects. In the same speech, Brookfield’s Carney welcomed the Trudeau Liberal government’s Indigenous Loan Guarantee Program, which Carney said “will offer up to $5 billion in loan guarantees to unlock access to capital for Indigenous peoples.” Last week, Liberal Leader Carney highlighted that the government of Canada will be doubling the Indigenous Loan Guarantee Program from $5 billion to $10 billion and opening it to sectors “outside of energy and natural resources to support more Indigenous-led infrastructure, transportation, and trade projects across the country.” Maybe there will be a section in The Hinge explaining how government versus corporate conflicts of interest are easily resolved, or maybe how such conflicts are ultimately beneficial because they help create essential economic value and benefits for society at large and the environment. In his speeches and public comments, Carney tends to deliver grand summary statements that have no meaning or provide no real guidance as to his specific policy objectives. In his March 9 Liberal leadership victory speech, he referred to his dominant motivation for eliminating the carbon tax on consumers. “I am a pragmatist above all, so when I see that something’s not working, I will change it.” So much for principle: if a policy is failing politically, Carney the pragmatist will change the policy regardless of his previous conviction that a carbon tax would operate as part of an ideal carbon pricing system to reduce demand for fossil fuels. The carbon tax was a market mechanism that Carney has long supported. On the other hand, Carney has no time for markets — unless the government is involved. “We know that markets don’t have values; people do. And we know, we know, as Liberals, that it’s our job, our job, to make the economy work.” What Canada needs, claims Carney, is a national government that makes sure “markets are governed well.” Carney does not place any limits on how Ottawa would govern markets. Maybe The Hinge provides more detail. Oddly, while free markets are allegedly fundamentally flawed and need to be controlled, Carney shifts position when it comes to internal trade within Canada. “Removing barriers to internal trade would lower prices for consumers by reducing trade costs by up to 15 per cent and expand our economy by up to $200 billion or four to eight per cent over the long-term, equivalent to a gain of $3,000-$5,000 for every Canadian.” For unexplained reasons, free trade is good for Canada internally, but bad in principle. Writing in his first book, Carney dismissed the concept. “A belief in free trade may be totemic among economists, but while trade makes countries better off, it does not raise all boats within them.” Maybe The Hinge explains how free trade within Canada can be controlled and managed to raise all boats. For much if not most of his career, Carney has led a global realignment of government policy to focus on the “existential threat” of climate change. As a Liberal leader, however, his major climate message is an attack on his Conservative opponent: “Pierre Poilievre would let our planet burn.” And what would Carney’s Canadian climate policy be? Maybe the answer is in The Hinge."
bestsongs.com.ng 
