Meme - Mark Carney as Mountie: "I THINK OUR VALUES ARE NO LONGER MATCHING"
Trump: "YOU DON'T SAY"
*Trucker being stepped on*
Mark Carney: Climate crisis deaths 'will be worse than Covid'
From 2021. The world is ending. The world has always been ending. The world will always be ending
Ironically, the climate change hystericists don't learn from the madness of covid hysteria and the massive overreaction
Meme - Alberta Proud: "Mark Camey skates with the Oilers for a photo-op. I thought this was an Al photo at first.. but nope."
Is Mark Carney 'Canada first' or net zero first? - "Upon presenting himself as a candidate for the Liberal leadership in mid-January, Carney resigned from all these business and government appointments. But he couldn’t and cannot resign from the corporate, government and elite agendas underlying these roles. They are the grounding for his positions on industry, finance, and economics, and — unless he is utterly opportunistic, which would raise another set of problems — will form the basis for his policies as prime minister and the direction of our country as long as he’s in office... Perhaps the most prominent ideological goal for Carney over the years, particularly in his roles as the UN Special Envoy on Climate Action and Finance, and as co-chair and creator of the Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net-Zero (GFANZ), has been net zero. Net zero requires a singular focus on decarbonization and an attempt to build, by 2050, a zero-carbon economy, meaning in practice the phasing out of fossil fuels like oil and natural gas. In Carney’s own words, GFANZ is “relentlessly, ruthlessly, absolutely focused on the transition to net zero.” I would add “recklessly” to that list. Through GFANZ, Carney sought to reshape the global financial system along environmentalist lines... GFANZ members had to commit to aligning their lending and investment portfolios with net-zero carbon emissions by mid-century or sooner. The conscious co-ordination that resulted persuaded the Judiciary Committee that what was going on constituted a “climate cartel” that would only lend or invest in companies that had committed to net zero, even if companies that didn’t meet this criterion would be better investments. Use of the word “cartel” panicked many major financial institutions, which have since withdrawn from GFANZ. In its essentials, Carney’s project — which began to implode right around the time he announced his run for the Liberal leadership — was all about pushing financial institutions to put the net-zero ideology ahead of their fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders. With his selection as Liberal leader and therefore prime minister, Carney has risen to the top of what Benjamin Disraeli famously called “the greasy pole” of politics. If voters let him stay there, he will be in a unique position to promote the net-zero agenda. But that would be disastrous for Canada. Oil and gas remains one of our most productive and prosperity-generating sectors. Nothing exists in Canada without abundant, reliable and affordable hydrocarbon energy — not mining, steel, manufacturing, cement, agriculture, forestry, plastics, petrochemicals, autos, transportation, aviation — you name it. Nor is net zero likely to help the environment in any meaningful way, either. The demand for hydrocarbon energy is projected to keep rising over the next several decades. If Mark Carney’s preferred course of action succeeds in eliminating production in Canada, or, say, in Britain’s North Sea, well, that’s a huge boon to petro-states around the world that aren’t known for their commitment to either environmental stewardship or human rights. Last year’s U.S. election demonstrated Americans’ interest in drilling their way to prosperity. Although President Donald Trump might be happy to see Canada withdraw as a competitor in his quest for energy dominance, we can’t afford to sit on the sidelines. But Carney is showing no signs of backing away from net zero. He has zeroed out the consumer carbon tax but doubled down on the (hidden) industrial carbon tax and he has reaffirmed his commitment to the emissions caps on the oil and gas industry, a continuation of Justin Trudeau’s war on the natural resources sectors. We shouldn’t be surprised. Carney is a true believer, after all, and these policies are consistent with his entire career. At GFANZ his position amounted to putting the net-zero ideology above the interests of shareholders. It isn’t a stretch to imagine that his policies as prime minister will amount to putting net zero above the interests of Canadians and Canada itself. Net zero first, Canada second."
Carney now prime minister of Canada after trying for years to defund it - "Carney is a climate zealot. He may try to fool Canadians into thinking he wants new pipelines, liquified natural gas (LNG) terminals and other hydrocarbon infrastructure, but he doesn’t. Far from it. He wants half the existing ones gone by 2030 and the rest soon after. He has said so, repeatedly and emphatically. He believes that the world “must achieve about a 50% reduction in [greenhouse gas] emissions by 2030” and “rapidly scale climate solutions to provide cleaner, more affordable, and more reliable replacements for unabated fossil fuels.” (By “unabated” he means usage without full carbon capture, which in practise is virtually all cases.) And since societies don’t seem keen on doing this, Carney created GFANZ to pressure banks, insurance companies and investment firms to cut off financing for recalcitrant firms. “This transition to net zero requires companies across the whole economy to change behaviors through application of innovative technologies and new ways of doing business” he writes, using bureaucratic euphemisms to make his radical agenda somehow seem normal... when Carney jokingly suggested it doesn’t matter if his climate plan drives up costs for steel mills because people don’t buy steel, he could have added that under his plan there won’t be any steel mills before long anyway. Or cars, gas-fired power plants, pipelines, oil wells and so forth. GFANZ boasts at length about its members strong-arming clients into embracing net-zero. For instance, it extols Aviva for its “climate engagement escalation program... Aviva is prepared to send a message to all companies through voting actions when those companies do not have adequate climate plans or do not act quickly enough.” To support these coercive goals Carney’s lobbying helped secure the implementation in Canada of rule B-15, the Climate Risk Management Directive from the federal Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions (OSFI), which requires banks, life insurance companies, trust and loan companies and others to develop and file reports disclosing their “climate transition risk.” This requires asset holders to conduct extensive and costly research into their holdings to determine whether value may be at risk from future climate policies. The vagueness and potential liabilities created by this menacing regulation means that Canada’s largest investment firms will eventually decide it’s easier to divest altogether from fossil fuel and heavy industry sectors, furthering Carney’s ultimate goal. Yet Carney will become prime minister just when Canadians face a trade crisis that requires we quickly build new coastal energy infrastructure to ensure our fossil fuel commodities can be exported without going through the United States. I have listened to him say he will take emergency measures to support “energy projects” but I assume he means windmills and solar panels... Ask Carney if he supports the repeal of OSFI rule B-15. Show Carney his GFANZ report. His name and photo are on page vi, in case he has forgotten it. Ask him, “Do you still endorse the contents of this document?” If he says yes, ask him how we can build new pipelines and LNG terminals, expand our oil and gas sector, run our electricity grid using Canadian natural gas, heat our homes and put gasoline in our cars if his plan succeeds and the financing for all these activities is cut off. If he tries to claim he no longer endorses it, ask him when he changed his mind, and why we should believe him now if he seems to change his core convictions so easily."
Conrad Black: Mark Carney has poor values - "The author begins with a paean to the virtues of humility, the quality which he tells us swaddles his work and inspires his personality. His basic premise is a sequence of connected propositions: it is a matter of existential urgency for Canada to achieve net zero carbon emissions as quickly as possible, failing which all human life will be in danger. In seeking this difficult goal, we must inspire ourselves with the example of the country’s and the world’s response to the Covid pandemic. And in order to sustain the economic hardship implicit in such objectives, we must keep constantly in mind that we must rise above the temptation of excessive materialism because economic value does not equal human value and while markets are important, they are amoral and in humanitarian terms, they are neutral. And because, Carney writes, the continuation of life on this planet requires the adoption of his views, we should see this as a huge opportunity for Canada: not only a humanitarian opportunity, but ultimately an economic opportunity. The reward for our virtue will not only be conscientious reinforcement, but ultimately pecuniary enrichment as well... Mark Carney thinks we are facing an equivalent crisis [to the Great Depression] in climate change; we are not and his solution is much more dangerous than the challenge he is proposing to address. He is proud of his role in leading an international group (that is now disintegrating) which requires all financial corporations to demand maximum pursuit of sustainable energy as a criterion for the acceptability of every transaction. Canadians could not possibly support such a regime. He acknowledges that for Canada to achieve the goals he outlines will require the expenditure of hundreds of billions of dollars. And he cites the response to the Covid pandemic as indicative of how to achieve these goals. We must do this because he tells us we must. Carney grudgingly acknowledges that people generally aspire to be prosperous but he does not explicitly recognize that capitalism is the best system because it is the only one that responds to the almost universal human ambition to have more. He assumes, without any serious attempt to prove it, that everybody knows that human life is threatened by climate change as surely as they are aware of their own hands and feet. Of course this is a severely contested issue: the Americans have just done a 180-degree turn on this issue and there are almost no public lamentations about it. Climate change alarm was a fad that is being abandoned in North America and western Europe and never had any currency anywhere else. Carney wishes to lead us into a cul-de-sac from which other countries have balked and fled. The climate is changing and the melting of some glaciers are a matter of legitimate concern. And yet, Carney recites as if it was an unchallengeable canon of human life that failure to pursue the elimination of fossil fuel use is an act of collective suicide, and demands public acceptance of this as a matter of courage, conscience, and self-preservation."
Has Canada Learned From Its Lost Decade? - WSJ - "Mr. Carney, a central banker who became a global face of “net-zero” and “ESG” environmental schemes, won 86% of the Liberal leadership vote. His big advantage: He was off in England, or globe-trotting as a United Nations climate envoy, or working for large U.S. firms rather than serving as a minister in Justin Trudeau’s Liberal government (2015-25). “Trudeauism,” the Canadian policy intellectual Sean Speer writes, “came to be marked by massive deficit spending, large-scale industrial policy, an unprecedented use of the federal spending power, a major increase in immigration in general and temporary migration in particular, and a significant expansion of the federal government itself.” It didn’t work. Government spending nearly doubled, but business investment fell by a third and productivity plunged. Canada is now 30% less productive than America, and Canadian GDP per capita is no higher than it was in late 2014. This has been Canada’s lost decade. The Trudeau carbon tax flopped, and even Mr. Carney now pledges to junk its consumer end. He’d replace it with a more complex scheme as well as a “carbon border adjustment mechanism”—a tariff or quota that is bound to elicit U.S. retaliation. Liberal governance has left Canada in poor shape to face Donald Trump’s tariff onslaught. But irony of ironies, those U.S. tariffs have become the Liberals’ great hope, spurring a recovery of 10 or 15 points in election polls... Mr. Poilievre is pro-American, strong on defense and much better suited to deal with Mr. Trump. That’s an urgent need for Canada, but voters antagonized by Trump tariffs may prefer the hockey fight. Mr. Carney has no experience in electoral politics, but he is recalled fondly for guiding the Bank of Canada through the 2008-09 recession. Further from Canadians’ minds is Mr. Carney’s time atop the Bank of England (2013-20), when he presided over historically low interest rates that sent property prices soaring. As one of the founders in 2021 of the trendy Net-Zero Banking Alliance, lately deserted by U.S. banks, Mr. Carney explained, “The companies, and those who invest and lend in them, who are part of the solution, will be rewarded. Those that are lagging behind, and are still part of the problem, will be punished.” He meant punished by government, or by investors operating under state-imposed mandates. Which is to say that Mr. Carney doesn’t offer Canada a break from Trudeauism. No wonder he’d rather talk Trump and hockey."
Jasmin Laine 🇨🇦 on X - "Mark Carney said that Poilievre is ELIMINATING: Childcare, dental care, & Pharmacare. I cant seem to find any evidence of him saying this as Carney has claimed... have you?"
Conservatives look like they're being outfoxed by Carney: Ivison | National Post - "The Liberals represent “the spirit of Gander” while Poilievre speaks for “the spirit of Donald Trump: everyone in it for himself,” he said. The Liberals have a “balanced approach” that also pays for social programs supporting the most vulnerable, while Poilievre will eliminate child care, dental care, pharmacare and foreign aid, he added (Poilievre has said he rejects a single-payer national pharmacare plan and will cut foreign aid that “often goes to dictators and terrorists” but he has made no commitments on dental or child care)... The Liberal campaign so far has been of a thieving disposition, appropriating ideas that the Conservatives have long been pushing, like axing the consumer carbon tax, taking the GST off new houses and building a national energy and trade corridor. While the Conservatives are “Canada First,” the Liberals are now campaigning as “Canada Strong.”... Poilievre is now in alignment with the CEOs of the largest oil sands producers who signed a joint letter urging that the industrial price be repealed because it handicaps the sector’s competitiveness. They also called for an overhaul of the Impact Assessment Act and the elimination of Ottawa’s planned oil and gas emissions cap. In contrast, Carney wants to raise the industrial carbon tax and introduce a border-adjustment mechanism that would act as a tariff on imports from countries without carbon pricing."
If a left winger says it and it makes the right look bad, it must be true
Carson Jerema: Mark Carney, the conspiracy theory prime minister - "Mark Carney isn’t even prime minister yet, and he is already debasing the highest office in the land by giving oxygen to conspiracy theories. During his speech after winning the Liberal leadership on Sunday, he all but accused Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre of being a national security threat, nodding to baseless allegations that have fermented online for months. Carney must have felt quite clever as he uttered: “And now — and now — in the face of President Trump’s threats, Pierre Poilievre still — still — refuses to get his security clearance.” The soon-to-be sworn in prime minister didn’t offer any context or explanation or reasons why this matters. It is a line that the Liberals are increasingly using to imply that Poilievre somehow has something to hide. It is true that Poilievre has declined to receive a security briefing, which would require passing a clearance, but it has nothing to do with Donald Trump, as Carney seems to suggest. It is in relation to Chinese interference in Canadian elections, a reality that current Prime Minister Justin Trudeau spent months dismissing as a non-problem, despite the fact there was evidence such interference was done to benefit the Liberal party. When the scope of Chinese meddling in elections became widely reported in late 2022 and early 2023, Poilievre said he would decline security briefings that would detail top secret intelligence reports. But the reasoning was hardly nefarious. It was because receiving such briefings would have circumscribed what Poilievre could say about Chinese interference, a point on which everyone agrees. As the leader of the Opposition, Poilievre believed, reasonably I would say, that any briefing offered would be used as a way for the government to get him to stop criticizing it over its lax attitude to election security. It is an argument that has been repeatedly endorsed by former NDP and Official Opposition leader Tom Mulcair. “I think Poilievre was wise not to tie his hands,” he said last year. “I would never want to be told I can’t ask all the questions I want of the government.” Mulcair added that the leaders of the NDP and Bloc Québécois don’t “have as important of a role.” When in March 2023, Trudeau’s chief of staff Katie Telford testified to a Parliamentary committee on foreign interference, she was criticized by Conservatives for refusing to answer questions more fully. Her response was that, of all people, Poilievre should understand why she couldn’t speak as completely as she might have otherwise, as it would violate the rules under which she was given a security clearance. Again, everyone agrees that receiving a security briefing on foreign election interference would limit, if not prevent, the leader of the Official Opposition from criticizing the government on the matter. Suggesting that Poilievre declining a briefing means he is worried he cannot pass the necessary security clearance is entirely dishonest, and lacking in evidence. At the time when this issue first emerged, in spring 2023, Poilievre hadn’t even been offered a briefing, so it was an entirely moot point. That didn’t, however, stop then-Liberal House Leader Mark Holland from attacking Poilievre on the matter, something which he later apologized for. Also, during this time, the most unhinged elements of Liberal party supporters were trading in wilder and more extreme allegations, largely on Twitter. The suggestion quickly became that not only did Poilievre have something to hide, but that he was somehow involved in a vast global conspiracy, theories that grew increasingly dark. This is the constituency that Carney and other Liberals are nodding to. On the weekend, Trudeau released a video attacking the Conservative leader, titled “Why Won’t Pierre Poilievre Get His Security Clearance?” In it, a grave sounding Trudeau talks about election interference, as if he takes it very seriously... Observing Liberals speak as if they are genuinely concerned about Chinese election interference is amusing. When the allegations first came to light, Liberals dismissed them as racially motivated, and accused Conservatives of using “Trump-type tactics” for simply asking questions. MP Greg Fergus, who is now speaker of the House, suggested that media outlets reporting on the issue were the ones truly committing foreign interference. The argument that Poilievre isn’t receiving security clearance because he has something to hide was further debunked in January when it was revealed that CSIS had offered the Conservative leader a briefing without having to go through a clearance. He again refused because after receiving the briefing Poilievre would still “be legally prevented from speaking with anyone other than legal counsel about the briefing”... the twisting of the truth continues as Liberals keep trying to leave the impression that Poilievre is some sort of existential threat to the country, without providing any evidence whatsoever. As deranged and as conspiracy theory inflected it is to make these allegations against Poilievre, there is a certain logic to it for the Liberals. It nods to the party’s fiercest, and most ridiculous, supporters online, while possibly sewing doubt among centrist voters. Political usefulness aside, it is highly disreputable, especially coming from the man who will in short order become prime minister."
One very weird cope I got about security clearance was that Mulcair is unreliable on the security clearance topic because he lost an election to Trudeau
'I am part of her movement': PM's COP26 adviser Mark Carney hails Greta Thunberg
Kelly McParland: Carney's economic plan sounds unsettlingly familiar - "Mark Carney’s blueprint for revitalizing the economy, released as the Liberal leadership contest enters its final weeks, can’t help but disappoint voters hoping for a shift away from the high-spending, big-debt approach of the Trudeau years. Carney’s outline does pledge to alter the accounting process. In place of one big pie to divvy up among myriad supplicants, the former central bank governor would split the pot in two. More effort would go into controlling “operating” spending, which covers ongoing expenses such as pensions, benefits, payrolls, equipment and the like. Spending on capital costs, used to build railways, ports, transport routes and major infrastructure projects, would continue to balloon. Carney promised to balance operating spending within three years, but immediately undermined his ability to do so by promising no change to some of the biggest outlays. Transfers to provinces will remain untouched. Transfers to individuals will remain sacrosanct. He would “initially” put a cap on the civil service, which has swollen by 40 per cent under Trudeau — meaning an extra 110,000 generous salary and benefit packages to be paid — but how long the cap would remain is not specified. Nor does he say what he’d do about the $18 billion spent on outside consultants and contractors despite all the added bureaucratic brainpower. There’s little disagreement that Canada’s infrastructure needs serious upgrading to attract investment, especially given the new dangers emanating from Washington, but Carney’s figures are the sort Canadians have come to dread during nine years in which federal debt doubled, building a mountain of financing charges in the process. To “become carbon competitive and achieve Net Zero” alone, he says, the country would need to spend $2 trillion by 2050, or about $80 billion a year, four to eight times current spending. To find the money for that level of spending — the Carney camp, like Trudeau’s Liberals, refers to it as “investment” — voters are promised “a more efficient and effective government — one that delivers better results while spending responsibly.” A Carney government would “focus first on reining in wasteful and ineffective government spending,” “review our spending with an emphasis on outcomes and technology to reduce inefficiencies,” concentrate on “maximizing the outcomes achieved, while minimizing the dollars spent,” and ensure “responsible financial management while making wise, long-term investments to build for Canada’s prosperity and future.” All echo pledges regularly offered by Trudeau and former finance minister Chrystia Freeland even as spending and debt soared out of control, with promised “fiscal anchors” abandoned along the way. Carney says he’d raise cash for the mammoth rebuilding project by using tax dollars as seed money to entice private capital, hoping that for every dollar kicked in by Ottawa, $3 or $4 could be recouped from outside sources. “A Mark Carney-led government will focus on ensuring that government capital investment dollars catalyze multiple times their value in private investment,” he pledges. As a two-time former central bank governor and experienced financier, it’s an area in which he has knowledge and experience, but it’s also something Ottawa has already tried out numerous times, with limited success... the idea mirrors one adopted by Rachel Reeves, Britain’s Chancellor of the Exchequer and a Carney favourite. Soon after Labour came to power last year, Reeves launched a $10.4 billion (7.3 billion pounds) National Wealth Fund charged, using much the same language as Carney, with “public, private risk-sharing, providing private investors with the confidence needed to fund the technologies and infrastructure needed to drive growth and create new jobs.” Carney’s enthusiastic support of Reeves at a Labour party conference was seen as crucial to reassuring voters she could be trusted with the economy. The going hasn’t been easy, however. Her first budget in October included $57 billion a year in new taxes, more than half of which would hit small businesses via a sharp hike in insurance premiums paid on behalf of workers. It also contained a tax hike on capital gains from stock market shares, and a change in inheritance tax laws that farmers say will make it harder to keep family farms in the family. Labour’s popularity has taken a pummelling in its short time in office, with Reeves identified as the most unpopular member of Cabinet. Grocers warned last week that, due to the extra taxes, food prices are likely to rise about 5 per cent. In “Value(s)” his 2021 book on “Building a Better World for All,” Carney heaped high praise on Canada’s carbon tax, calling it “a model for others.” Regular annual increases in the levy would (once again) “give Canadians and Canadian businesses the certainty they need to make the investments to set our economy on a sustainable path to a competitive and greener future.” While he now says the tax has become “too divisive” and would be scrapped in favour of shifting costs onto the biggest emitters, he remains determined to put carbon reduction at the centre of government decision-making. His campaign lays out a lengthy list of proposals, including a “carbon border adjustment mechanism,” an “efficiency mandate” on certain industries, green bonds to expand EV charging stations, requirements for “climate risk exposure” by Canadian firms and a host of incentives and subsidies to encourage energy efficiency among homeowners. “Value(s)” makes clear he sees climate change as the overriding issue of the day, one to be prioritized even as Canada struggles against an antagonistic Washington. Which leaves us to wonder where the economy stands in this: is the emissions challenge something to be addressed on the road to reviving the economy, or is the economy something that has to be manhandled into serving the masterplan of reducing emissions?"
Comme Trudeau, Carney affirme qu’il n’a pas l’intention d’équilibrer le budget - "Après près d’une décennie de gouvernance libérale, le Canada se retrouve avec une dette fédérale dépassant les mille milliards de dollars, une inflation galopante et une perte de confiance des investisseurs. Plutôt que d’offrir une alternative viable, Carney semble vouloir poursuivre cette trajectoire préoccupante. Ancien gouverneur de la Banque du Canada, Carney tente de justifier cette stratégie en évoquant la menace de tarifs douaniers de Donald Trump sur les produits canadiens. Cependant, ce raisonnement semble surtout servir d’excuse pour poursuivre une gestion budgétaire irresponsable, sans engagement clair vers un retour à l’équilibre. Il promet des investissements massifs dans le logement, l’infrastructure énergétique, l’intelligence artificielle et les corridors commerciaux, mais sans détailler comment ces dépenses seront soutenables à long terme. Or, les promesses d’investissements publics sans mesures concrètes de redressement budgétaire ont déjà conduit à une augmentation de la pression fiscale sur la classe moyenne, un phénomène que les Canadiens subissent depuis plusieurs années. Carney défend également la construction de nouveaux pipelines pour l’énergie conventionnelle, tout en prônant l’accélération des projets d’énergie propre. Toutefois, cette double promesse rappelle les contradictions du gouvernement Trudeau, où de nombreux projets sont restés bloqués par des lenteurs administratives et des régulations excessives, compromettant leur efficacité. Sous Trudeau, le Canada a échoué à développer son secteur énergétique de manière compétitive, tandis que des investissements majeurs ont été annulés à cause de politiques environnementales trop rigides et incohérentes. Carney risque d’emprunter la même voie, en tenant un discours conciliant mais en laissant l’appareil bureaucratique freiner toute réelle avancée."
Carney's campaign admits muddled messaging on pipelines, spending cuts - "Liberal leadership candidate Mark Carney’s campaign said it needs to “tighten up” his message after he said in English that he would use federal emergency powers to push major energy projects through traditional roadblocks if he were prime minister, but then told Quebecers in French that he would not impose any such projects on the province against its will. His campaign is also walking back comments Carney made in French about cutting federal social transfers. Earlier this month, he said he would focus on reducing “operational deficits” by cutting transfers to provinces and individuals. Then on Monday, in French again, he told a different interviewer he would never do such a thing."
Jonathan Wilkinson 🇨🇦 on X - "Canada’s energy future is reliable, resilient, and Indigenous-led. Owned by the Haisla Nation and powered by clean hydroelectricity, Cedar LNG will deliver: ✅ $85M in annual GDP ✅ 100+ long-term jobs, mainly Indigenous workers ✅ Access to Asian markets to displace higher emitting forms of energy like coal Cedar LNG isn’t just an energy project — it’s a blueprint for public-private-Indigenous collaboration."
againstthenarrative on X - "But I thought there was no business case for LNG? What changed? How many more are going to be built?"
Erin O'Toole on X - "I hope Canadians notice that all of these positive energy sector announcements are being made in the final hours of a Liberal govt that opposed all of these investments consistently for 9 years."
Tablesalt 🇨🇦🇺🇸 on X - "🚨🚨NEW Greta Thunberg community member Mark Carney admits he want to grow Canada's economy in order to "redistribute" the wealth He said the quiet, communist, part out loud."
The Counter Signal on X - "Former UK Prime Minister Liz Truss on Mark Carney: "I strongly recommend not backing Mark Carney for his policies on Net Zero. It was disastrous for Britain. It would be disastrous for Canada." ⬇️⬇️⬇️"
bestsongs.com.ng 
