Opinion
Preston Manning: Three Wise Men from the East, Again

Many years ago, a Liberal Prime Minster, Lester Pearson, failed to secure a majority government after several tries and prepared to retire. But before doing so, he wanted to inject new blood into the upper echelons of his government, and particularly to bolster its base in Quebec where support for secession was increasing. So Mr. Pearson recruited three impressive Quebeckers into federal politics.
Becoming known as the Three Wise Men From the East, they were Jean Marchand, a strong champion of labor rights in Quebec; Gerard Pelletier, a prominent Quebec journalist and intellectual; and Pierre Elliot Trudeau, another Quebec intellectual, constitutional scholar, and champion of individual rights and Canadian federalism.
Trudeau of course is remembered nationally as Canada’s 15th Prime Minster. He was the successful proponent of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and a fierce opponent of Quebec secession. In Canada West, however, he is primarily remembered as the instigator of the National Energy Program (NEP), a federal intrusion into the natural resources sector which transferred billions of dollars’ worth of wealth from the western provinces and petroleum producers to the federal treasury and eastern consumers. More than any other federal initiative since WW II, the NEP laid the seeds of “western ‘alienation”.
Fast forward 60 years, and lo and behold, another Liberal Prime Minister leading another minority government needs to surround himself with strong lieutenants to bolster the ship of state as it sails into stormy seas. And who does he pick? Three Wise Men From The East, again.
This time it’s Marc-Andre Blanchard, formerly a senior executive with Quebec’s Caisse de Depot, appointed by Trudeau the Second as ambassador to the UN, and now selected by Mr. Carney to be his Chief of Staff; Michael Sabia, former CEO of Quebec Hydro and a deputy minister of finance in the Trudeau regime, now appointed Clerk of the Privy Council; and David Lametti, a less-than stellar minister of justice in the Trudeau administration, now appointed as Mr. Carney’s Principal Secretary.
Something obviously had to be done under Mr. Carney’s leadership to visibly improve the competence of the federal administration and only time will tell whether these latest appointments will do so. But many western Canadians will view these latest appointments with great trepidation for at least three reasons.
First, despite the ethnic, regional, and economic diversity of Canada, all three of these appointees are Quebecers with primarily public sector backgrounds and pre-conceived biases on the energy file. Thus the interests of Canada West – with its preference for private enterprise over public enterprise and strong support for the petroleum sector’s key role in sustaining and rejuvenating the national economy – are grossly underrepresented in Mr. Carney’s inner circle.
Secondly, Mr. Carney, in the recent federal election, went to great lengths to distance himself and the Liberal party from the Trudeau administration and its fixations with wok-ism, identity politics, and climate change extremism. But now that the election smoke has cleared, what is the composition of the Carney administration? One third of the current cabinet were Trudeau ministers just six months ago, singing off a very different song sheet. And every one of the Three Wise Men just appointed were once Trudeau appointees and loyalists. Can the leopard change its spots, and even if it could, is it still not a leopard?
Thirdly, and most worrisome of all, as columnist Lawrence Martin has observed, “They (the three appointees) are about as populist as you can’t get.” Or put in plainer English, Mr. Carney and his closest associates are about as elitest as you can get. They are therefore most likely to mis-understand and oppose populist sentiments and expressions at home and abroad in an era when democratic populism versus aristocratic elitism is becoming the defining political axis in much of the western world.
Why is this a worry, especially for western Canadians? Because populism – these bottom up surges of political energy which occur from time to time in freely democratic societies, usually in rection to top down policy prescriptions imposed by political elites – is as much a distinguishing feature of the politics of Canada West as nationalism is the distinguishing feature of Quebec politics. For example, the current increase in support for western secession is fueled in part by populist sentiments. Visibly strengthening the influence of political elites in Ottawa, insensitive or even opposed to western concerns and aspirations, will only further fuel that smoldering fire.
Of even greater concern – a concern which should be shared by all Canadians – is the inadequacy and unpreparedness of an elitist administration in Ottawa to deal with an American President brought to and sustained in office by the recent surge in American populism. Carney cannot approach or deal with Trump on issues such as tariff protectionism or defense the way he approaches and deals with the elitist leadership of the European Union. If he does so, relying heavily on the counsel of the Three Wise Men and other likeminded members of his elitist inner circle, all Canadians will suffer from the inadequacies of that approach.
There are Canadian leaders, in particular several western Premiers, who do understand American populism because populism is a prominent feature of their own political constituencies. Mr. Carney would do well to take counsel from them on dealing with a populist President. Perhaps in doing so he will also discover a healthy and broadening corrective to the increasingly Quebec-centric, Trudeau-tainted, and elitist character of his current inner circle.
Subscribe to Preston’s Substack.
For the full experience, upgrade your subscription.
Automotive
$15 Billion, Zero Assurances: Stellantis Abandons Brampton as Trudeau-Era Green Deal Collapses

Carney issues memos, Joly writes letters, and Freeland hides abroad—while 3,000 Canadian workers pay the price for a green gamble built on denial and delusion.
Stellantis has announced they’re leaving Brampton. That’s it. End of story.
Three thousand workers. Gone. A manufacturing base gutted. A city thrown into economic chaos. And a federal government left holding a $15 billion bag it handed over like a drunk tourist at a rigged poker table.
The Jeep Compass—the very vehicle they promised would anchor Ontario’s role in the so-called “EV transition”—will no longer be built in Canada. Production is moving to Belvidere, Illinois. The same company that cashed billions of your tax dollars under the banner of “green jobs” and “economic transformation” has slammed the door and walked out. And no, this isn’t a surprise. This was baked into the cake from day one.
Let’s rewind.
In April 2023, under Justin Trudeau’s government, Chrystia Freeland—then Finance Minister—and François-Philippe Champagne, the Industry Minister, announced what they called a “historic” agreement: a multi-billion-dollar subsidy package to Stellantis and LG Energy Solution to build an EV battery plant in Windsor, Ontario.
It was sold as a turning point. The future. A Green Revolution. Thousands of jobs. A new industrial strategy for Canada. But in reality? It was a Hail Mary pass by a government that had already crippled Canada’s energy sector and needed a shiny new narrative heading into an election cycle.
And here’s what they didn’t tell you: the deal had no enforceable commitment to keep auto production in Brampton. There were performance-based incentives—yes—but only for the battery plant. Not for the Brampton assembly line. Not for the existing workforce. And certainly not for ensuring the long-term health of Canada’s domestic auto industry.
They tied this country’s future to a globalist fantasy. A fantasy that assumed the United States would remain under the control of climate-obsessed technocrats like Joe Biden. A fantasy that required a compliant America pushing carbon neutrality, electric vehicle mandates, and billions in matching subsidies for green infrastructure.
But in November 2024, Americans said no.
Donald Trump was elected president. And just as he promised, he tore Biden’s green agenda to shreds. He pulled out of the Paris Climate Accord—again. He dismantled the EV mandates. He unleashed American oil and gas. But he didn’t stop there. Trump imposed a sweeping America First manufacturing policy, pairing 25% tariffs on imported goods with aggressive incentives to bring factories, jobs, and supply chains back onto U.S. soil.
And it’s working—because the United States doesn’t strangle its industries with the kind of red tape, carbon taxes, and bureaucratic self-sabotage that Canada does. Energy is cheaper, regulations are lighter, and capital actually wants to stay. So when companies like Stellantis look at the map, it’s no contest.
Now Stellantis, like any rational corporation, is doing what any business does under pressure: protecting its bottom line. They’re shifting production to a country that rewards investment instead of punishing it, a country that actually wants to build things again. That’s Trump’s America—competitive, unapologetic, and open for business—while Canada clings to a collapsing green fantasy and wonders why the factories keep leaving.

So what does Canada do in response? Our Prime Minister, Mark Carney, issues a carefully scripted memo on social media—not action, not legislation, not binding commitments—just a memo—reassuring workers he “stands by” the auto sector while offering vague promises about future budgets and long-term resilience. Lets be clear Carney isn’t saving jobs; he’s eulogizing them. Those 3,000 positions aren’t “paused” or “in transition.” They’re gone. Finished. Packed up and heading south. No memo, no committee, no press conference is bringing them back.
Chrystia Freeland, the architect of this mess, isn’t around to answer for any of it. She’s been conveniently shipped off to Kyiv, far from the consequences of the green boondoggles she helped engineer

And Industry Minister Mélanie Joly? She’s doing what this government does best: issuing strongly worded letters, drafted by lawyers, polished by comms teams, and lobbed into the void like they carry any real weight. She’s threatening legal action against Stellantis—vague, undefined, and almost certainly toothless. As if a global automaker backed by EU investors and billions in international capital is going to flinch because Ottawa wrote them a nasty note.
But let’s be absolutely clear here—what legal action? What’s the actual mechanism Ottawa is threatening to use? This wasn’t a blank cheque handed to Stellantis. According to public records, The $15 billion deal was built around performance-based incentives, structured to release funding only if Stellantis delivered on agreed milestones: production output, sales volume, battery module manufacturing at the Windsor facility. If they didn’t meet those metrics, they wouldn’t get paid. That’s the public line. That’s the defense.
Opposition Calls for Accountability
Conservatives, led by Raquel Dancho, are demanding real accountability, a formal investigation, a full reopening of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Industry and Technology (INDU) under Standing Order 106(4).
This isn’t a symbolic gesture. It’s a procedural weapon. When invoked, 106(4) forces Parliament to reconvene the committee, even if the government doesn’t want to, and compels ministers and officials to testify under oath. That’s what Dancho and her colleagues, Ted Falk, Michael Guglielmin, and Kathy Borrelli, have done. Their letter, dated October 15, 2025, demands that INDU immediately examine the Stellantis debacle — the $15 billion taxpayer-funded subsidy that failed to secure a single guarantee for Canadian auto jobs.
The letter is explicit. It references Stellantis’ decision to move Jeep Compass production from Brampton, Ontario to Illinois, a move that puts 3,000 Canadian jobs at risk despite the billions handed to the automaker under the Trudeau-Freeland-Carney green industrial strategy. It details how the federal and Ontario governments offered over $15 billion to secure battery plant investments, but with no enforceable job protection clauses to safeguard workers at Stellantis’s Canadian operations.
It doesn’t stop there. The letter points directly at Mark Carney, accusing him of breaking his promise to “put elbows up” and negotiate a fair deal with President Trump. It notes that Carney’s October 7th White House visit yielded nothing but new U.S. tariffs on Canadian autos and lumber, while Stellantis and GM expanded their operations south of the border. “Mark Carney broke his promise,” the MPs write, “and his weakness abroad is costing Canadian jobs at home.”

Dancho’s accompanying tweet lays out the message clearly and without spin:
“Stellantis received up to $15 billion in taxpayer subsidies—with no assurances of job retention in Canada. Yesterday, Stellantis announced that they were moving production to the U.S. and investing $13 billion in their economy. Conservatives are calling to reconvene the Industry Committee to study this decision and learn how such a failure happened. While the Liberals pat themselves on the back for announcements and rhetoric, auto workers are being told that their jobs are on the chopping block. They deserve clarity.”
Dancho’s move changes the game. With the NDP gutted and no longer shielding the government in committee, the opposition finally has the numbers and the mandate to dig. Ministers like Mélanie Joly and François-Philippe Champagne will now have to answer, under oath, for the deals they signed. Officials from Innovation, Finance, and Employment Canada will be subpoenaed to explain what oversight, if any, was built into the Stellantis agreements.
Final thoughts
I wrote about this when the deal was signed, and I wasn’t guessing. I said it plainly: this $15 billion green industrial experiment was a reckless, ideological bet that depended entirely on Donald Trump not winning the presidency.
Now here we are. Trump’s back in office — and he’s gone even further than I predicted. He didn’t just rip up Biden’s climate agenda; he imposed broad “America First” tariffs across the board to drag manufacturing back onto U.S. soil. Twenty-five percent duties on Canadian and Mexican goods, combined with tax breaks and energy policies that make it cheaper to produce in America than anywhere else. That single move detonated the fragile logic behind Trudeau and Freeland’s so-called industrial strategy.
So Stellantis did what any corporation would do when faced with a government that punishes production and a neighbour that rewards it: it packed up and left. The company took billions in Canadian subsidies, thanked Ottawa for the free money, then announced a $13 billion expansion in the United States—under Trump’s protectionist umbrella.
Let’s be clear: when I bet, I bet smart. I hedge. I read the table. I make damn sure I’m holding something real. These people—the Liberal government—went all in with a high card and a hollow narrative, betting your tax dollars on a political fantasy. They thought they could bluff their way into an industrial renaissance while ignoring the shift happening just across the border.
And you want final thoughts? Here they are: I am absolutely sickened by the people responsible for this disaster and you know exactly who I mean. Chrystia Freeland, who vanished from Cabinet and failed up into some made up ambassador’s post, her entire political career a string of bailouts, virtue signals, and globalist pageantry. And François-Philippe Champagne, the man who handed out our tax dollars like Monopoly money and couldn’t negotiate a cup of coffee without being outplayed.
They won an election based on this. Based on lies. Based on phony climate promises and fake job projections and polls manipulated by the same Mainstream Media that cashes federal subsidy cheques while calling themselves journalists. Do you think they’re going to hold Champagne accountable? Do you think they’re going to track Freeland down between photo ops in Kyiv and ask how 3,000 Canadian families are supposed to pay their mortgage now?
Of course not. They’re all on the same payroll.
Well guess what, I’m not. I don’t take their money. I don’t need their approval. And I am not shutting up. Not now. Not until that committee gets answers. Not until those ministers are dragged before Parliament. And not until Chrystia Freeland and François-Philippe Champagne are fired for the betrayal they’ve inflicted on Canadian workers.
This isn’t over. Not by a long shot. I’m going to bang this drum until it splits. And every time they try to bury this story, I’ll be there digging it back up. You’ve been lied to. Robbed. Betrayed. And someone is finally going to answer for it.
So stay tuned. Stay loud. And for God’s sake, stay angry.
Focal Points
Trump Walks Back His Tomahawk Tease from Zelensky

By John Leake
The President meets with the Ukrainian dictator but prudently declines to give him the long range missiles he seeks.
Yesterday, after seeing reports of Zelensky meeting with Raytheon executives before his scheduled meeting with President Trump at the White House, I wrote an essay expressing my dismay at how the President has—since he entered office eight months ago—walked back his campaign promise to end the war in Ukraine. Instead, he has recently made statements suggesting a willingness to escalate the war, most notably by giving Ukraine long range missiles that can be armed with nuclear warheads.
Some of my readers objected to my suggestion that the U.S. government’s relationship with Ukraine is now so corrupt that Zelensky could get the missiles he seeks without following proper legal procedures. They should consider that the U.S. government has sent billions of money and weapons to Ukraine—long ruled by a money-laundering oligarchy —without any accounting.
Now comes the news that President Trump walked back his Tomahawk tease in his meeting with Zelensky. As he put it:
That is why we are here. Tomahawks are very dangerous… It could mean escalation – a lot of bad things could happen. Hopefully we will be able to get this war over with without thinking about Tomahawks. I think we are pretty close to that.
We thank President Trump for his prudence and we hope he will continue on the same path of prudence.
Yesterday, our NATO partner Poland allowed the alleged Ukrainian lead perpetrator of the Nord Stream pipeline bombing to walk free. Such is the fantastically corrupt world in which we are now living.
The war in Ukraine is yet another species of globalist, criminal humbug that in no way serves the interests of the American people. Consider that, while we constantly hear about the “existential threat” of climate change from carbon emissions, there has been no talk in the media—including the hysterical “climate change” German media—about the fact that the Nord Stream sabotage released between 150 million and 300 million cubic meters of gas—the equivalent to roughly 5.3 to 11 billion cubic feet.
This was the largest single industrial release of natural gas, which is largely composed of methane, widely characterized as a potent “greenhouse gas.” Bill Gates is always prattling on about the need to get rid of cattle because the ruminants release methane. I haven’t heard him say a word about Nord Stream.
If I were President Trump, I would tell Zelensky the following:
1). You and your predecessors should have never listened to the idiot U.S. foreign policy establishment of my predecessors—an establishment that has ruined every country it has touched since Vietnam. Every single blowhard Neocon foreign policy wonk in this city is a total retard.
2). I am going to use my executive power—provided by the U.S. Constitution—to end the reckless and criminal foreign policies of my predecessors, including their insane policies with respect to Russia and Ukraine since the Cold War ended in 1991.
3). The United States has always maintained elections, even in wartime, and I was elected to end U.S. involvement in your war against Russia.
4). The American people I represent have no quarrel with the Russian people, and they therefore object to American weapons being used to kill Russians. To give you long range missiles to use against Russia would significantly elevate the risk of the Russians eventually using their long range missiles to strike American targets.
5). I am bound by my oath to uphold the U.S. Constitution to serve the American people, and not the interests of warring parties 5,000 miles away, on the other side of the Atlantic Ocean.
6). I will assist you in peace negotiations with the Russians, but I will not escalate this conflict in a gambit to extract better concessions from Russia. Such an escalation will only result in more needless death and destruction, and it risks spinning out of control—a scenario deemed to be unacceptably risky during the Cold War.
7). I intend to inaugurate a new era of friendship and cooperation between the U.S. and Russia, based on the interests of our people, and not the U.S. national security state and Military Industrial Complex that President Eisenhower warned about in 1961. This Establishment has doggedly maintained a state of enmity with Russia for its own selfish interests.
8). I will offer Russia numerous incentives to give Ukraine a fair deal in peace negotiations, but effective immediately, I am terminating all military aid to Ukraine, as well as all military intelligence and targeting assistance.
9). Here’s a $7,000 cash gift from me to you as private pals. Please stop by Anderson & Sheppard tailor in London on your way back to Kiev and get fitted for a suit. You look ridiculous in that silly outfit and you’ll need a suit for our Budapest summit with Vladimir.
Please subscribe to FOCAL POINTS (Courageous Discourse).
For the full experience, upgrade your subscription.
-
Business1 day ago
Canada has an energy edge, why won’t Ottawa use it?
-
espionage2 days ago
Breaking: P.E.I. Urges RCMP Probe of Alleged Foreign Interference, Money Laundering
-
Business1 day ago
Federal Budget 2025: A responsible media would ensure Canadians know about the dismal state of federal finance
-
Business2 days ago
Cutting Red Tape Could Help Solve Canada’s Doctor Crisis
-
International13 hours ago
Poland’s president signs new zero income tax law for parents with two children
-
Daily Caller1 day ago
Trump, Putin Agree On High-Stakes Meetings To Negotiate End To Ukraine War
-
Energy2 days ago
Prince Rupert as the Optimal Destination Port for an Alberta Crude Oil Pipeline –
-
Business23 hours ago
Ethics on Ice: See You Next Year