Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

Business

Mark Carney’s “Worst of All Possible Worlds”

Published

12 minute read

Matthew Ehret's avatar Matthew Ehret

Originally published on Pluralia

Is it possible that Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney has selected the worst of all possible pathways in his tight-rope balancing effort to resolve severe tensions with the USA on the one hand, while simultaneously increasing trade/security relations between Canada and the EU?

The incredible untapped resource potential of Canada, fused with a vast northern territories, undeveloped lands, and low population levels makes Canada a living embodiment of potential and value for the entire world.

If a spirit of genuine multipolarity, cooperation, and future-oriented thinking were alive among policy making circles of Ottawa, then there is no doubt that Canada could offer much to the world both in terms of resources, energy, and ingenuity. The vast Arctic, which Canada shares with partners like the USA, several European states, the Russian Federation (and near Arctic partners like China), provides an opportunity for dialogue, scientific cooperation, and economic development, the likes of which humanity has never seen.

Sadly, a different spirit is currently shaping Canadian policy, which lacks that positive vision.

Carney’s Canada–EU Integration Gambit

On June 23rd of this year, Mark Carney signed the Canada European Strategic Partnership for the Future on the basis of increasing trade and security relations with the European Union.

Despite proposing to increase Canada–EU trade and Canada energy/mineral exports to the EU, the program is entirely driven by a military agenda, which sadly threatens the lives of all Europeans and Canadians alike. The “Strategic Partnership” moves in tandem with another pact enmeshing Canada into the $800 billion Re-Arm Europe plan and additionally ties Canada into the Security Action for Europe (SAFE) program. The ironically-named “SAFE” program serves as a sort of “World Bank,” specifically designed for building up the military defense capabilities of participating nations.

Capitalized with $235 billion, this fund allows the European Union to take loans out at preferential rates and then extend those loans to all European (and soon possibly Canadian) members who may then invest in military industrial capabilities while simultaneously evading the 3% of GDP debt ceiling imposed on all EU nations.

With Trump’s recent appeal to EU states to increase their NATO spending to a dizzying 5% GDP, it appears that both SAFE and Canada’s participation in the EU War gambit are two vital parts of solving this bewildering challenge.

The new Canada–EU Strategic Partnership promises to “boost cooperation on maritime security, cyber security, and other threats to peace, expand Maritime security cooperation and coordination activities, increase defense industrial cooperation” and will “increase ties between Canada and The European Defense Agency.”

De-Growth and Militarization: The Challenge of Mixing Water and Oil

After many decades of slow de-industrialization, Europe now finds itself trapped within a paradigm that demands military confrontation with Russia, on the one hand (requiring a robust industrial powerhouse that hasn’t existed in generations), while simultaneously holding firm to the decarbonization program outlined by Agenda 2030, Paris Accords, and EU–Canada Green Alliance.

The Fraud of ‘Global Warming’

In a recent article, Defeating the Depopulation Agenda, I took aim at an insidious ideology which has infiltrated society in the form of a movement to ‘protect nature from humanity’.

While satisfying both dynamics may be impossible (as decarbonization, carbon prices, and windmills have not been known to enhance industrial growth), the ivory-tower technocrats surrounding the likes of Mark Carney and Mario Draghi appear to believe that this circle can be squared… and hence Canada’s participation in the new plan is vital.

In tandem with Canada’s partnership with the EU, on June 26, 2025 Canada’s Governor General gave “Royal Assent” to the passage of one of the most comprehensive omnibus bills in history called the “One Canada Economy Act” (Bill C5).

This bill sets the stage for the repeal of decades of environmental legislation and the end of all trade barriers, which have held back inter-provincial cooperation for generations. An Ottawa press release stated: “The government of Canada is fulfilling its promise to build one Canadian economy out of thirteen” (referencing the 13 provinces and territories making up Canada).

Despite a backlash of First Nations leaders who have recognized that a cancellation of centuries of treaties is taking place amidst a dictatorial gambit to override their voice in any economic or military plans for Canada, it appears the reset in governance is going forward in full steam.

If this bill had been advanced as a genuine endeavor to create for the first time in history a unified Canada capable of executing top-down mega-projects devoid of red tape (not dissimilar from China’s capacity to wield the forces of the nation state in the building of the Belt and Road Initiative), it would appear that Bill C5 were a truly positive blessing. After all, Canada has never been permitted to have free trade among the provinces since its earliest days and has thus been kept artificially underdeveloped and divided within itself, so an end to this unfortunate fate would be most welcomed.

However, when we are reminded that a logic of Orwellian geopolitics is shaping the new emerging iron walls and AI-driven-space-based warfare is now threatening world peace, then a more dystopic reality presents itself.

Not Just Canada: Three of Five Eyes Go for a Eurotrip

However, it is not only Canada that is being drawn into this new dystopic vision of an Eastasia, Eurasia, Oceania division of the globe, but other British Commonwealth nations have also been brought onboard with simultaneous Strategic Partnerships with the EU, beginning with the UK–EU Strategic Partnership, first announced in April 2025, and followed weeks after by an Australian–EU Strategic Partnership, which reads like a replica of the Canada–EU pact.

In all three Commonwealth/Five Eyes pacts with the EU, we find a special focus on intelligence sharing, minerals exports, cybersecurity, countering disinformation, and military industrial/national cooperation enhancement.

But does Canada’s re-alignment with the EU indicate that Ottawa’s relations with Washington are truly as dismal as some have been led to believe, or is there evidence of another game afoot?

The Golden Dome

Beyond the threats of tariffs, the shattering of rules-based order, and US ambition to acquire Canada as a 51st state, another more insidious war plan has emerged in the form of a $540-billion continental defensive shield, first announced as an Israeli-modelled “Iron Dome” for North America by Trump in January of 2025.

Rebranded “The Golden Dome” after its first two weeks of dismal publicity, both Mark Carney and leading strata of Canada’s defense establishment have shown themselves to be remarkably in favor of the integrated “defensive” security shield, which calls for surrounding North America with medium- and long-range ballistic missiles, space-based weapons, and integrated AI command systems.

This shouldn’t be entirely surprising, since it was only in April 2024 that then-Prime Minister Justin Trudeau (advised by Mark Carney and Chrystia Freeland) approved a Canadian Arctic Defense strategy upgrade permitting for the first time in history long-range missiles installed in Canada’s high Arctic.

The Golden Dome appears to simply be the next logical step.

Instead of showcasing his typical nationalist bravado in opposition US jingoism, which served him well in winning the latest Canadian elections, Carney has shown himself to be in favor of Canada’s participation in the Golden Dome, which will cost Canadian tax-payers approximately $100 billion, according to current estimates.

After meeting with President Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on May 21, Carney stated“We are conscious that we have an ability, if we so choose, to complete the Golden Dome with investments in partnership. And it’s something that we are looking at, and something that has been discussed at a very high level.”

Carney ended by stating“Is it a good idea for Canada? Yes, it is good to have protections in place for Canadians.”

On June 10, CBC (the official state broadcasting service of Canada) featured a report outlining ongoing secret meetings being held between Ottawa and Washington policy makers to craft a final agreement on the Golden Dome says the draft agreement now under negotiation states “that Canada is willing to participate in the Golden Dome security program, originally proposed by U.S. President Donald Trump… It also mentions Canadian commitments to build more infrastructure in the Arctic, Canada’s pledge to meet its NATO defense spending targets, as well as previously announced border security investments.”

It is clear that a vast re-alignment of global relations is now underway, and it also appears that a consensus has been reached to adapt to a multipolar model… at least for a limited time. However, the word “multipolar” does not mean the same thing to everyone.

While a multipolar model premised on inter-civilizational cooperation and respect for the UN Charter would be a blessing for all nations, it appears increasingly likely that the pilots at the helm of the trans-Atlantic ship have read their George Orwell and prefer to live according to the rules of the jungle instead of embracing a more civilized identity at this stage of history.

By Matthew Ehret · Hundreds of paid subscribers
Historical analysis, geopolitics, cultural warfare and other studies in Conspiracy Science

Business

Upcoming federal budget likely to increase—not reduce—policy uncertainty

Published on

From the Fraser Institute

By Tegan Hill and Grady Munro 

The government is opening the door to cronyism, favouritism and potentially outright corruption

In the midst of budget consultations, the Carney government hopes its upcoming fall budget will provide “certainty” to investors. While Canada desperately needs to attract more investment, the government’s plan thus far may actually make Canada less attractive to investors.

Canada faces serious economic challenges. In recent years, the economy (measured on an inflation-adjusted per-person basis) has grown at its slowest rate since the Great Depression. And living standards have hardly improved over the last decade.

At the heart of this economic stagnation is a collapse in business investment, which is necessary to equip Canadian workers with the tools and technology to produce more and provide higher quality goods and services. Indeed, from 2014 to 2022, inflation-adjusted business investment (excluding residential construction) per worker in Canada declined (on average) by 2.3 per cent annually. For perspective, business investment per worker increased (on average) by 2.8 per cent annually from 2000 to 2014.

While there are many factors that contribute to this decline, uncertainty around government policy and regulation is certainly one. For example, investors surveyed in both the mining and energy sectors consistently highlight policy and regulatory uncertainty as a key factor that deters investment. And investors indicate that uncertainty on regulations is higher in Canadian provinces than in U.S. states, which can lead to future declines in economic growth and employment. Given this, the Carney government is right to try and provide greater certainty for investors.

But the upcoming federal budget will likely do the exact opposite.

According to Liberal MPs involved in the budget consultation process, the budget will expand on themes laid out in the recently-passed Building Canada Act (a.k.a. Bill C-5), while also putting new rules into place that signal where the government wants investment to be focused.

This is the wrong approach. Bill C-5 is intended to help improve regulatory certainty by speeding up the approval process for projects that cabinet deems to be in the “national interest” while also allowing cabinet to override existing laws, regulations and guidelines to facilitate such projects. In other words, the legislation gives cabinet the power to pick winners and losers based on vague criteria and priorities rather than reducing the regulatory burden for all businesses.

Put simply, the government is opening the door to cronyism, favouritism and potentially outright corruption. This won’t improve certainty; it will instead introduce further ambiguity into the system and make Canada even less attractive to investment.

In addition to the regulatory side, the budget will likely deter investment by projecting massive deficits in the coming years and adding considerably to federal debt. In fact, based on the government’s election platform, the government planned to run deficits totalling $224.8 billion over the next four years—and that’s before the government pledged tens of billions more in additional defence spending.

growing debt burden can deter investment in two ways. First, when governments run deficits they increase demand for borrowing by competing with the private sector for resources. This can raise interest rates for the government and private sector alike, which lowers the amount of private investment into the economy. Second, a rising debt burden raises the risk that governments will need to increase taxes in the future to pay off debt or finance their growing interest payments. The threat of higher taxes, which would reduce returns on investment, can deter businesses from investing in Canada today.

Much is riding on the Carney government’s upcoming budget, which will set the tone for federal policy over the coming years. To attract greater investment and help address Canada’s economic challenges, the government should provide greater certainty for businesses. That means reining in spending, massive deficits and reducing the regulatory burden for all businesses—not more of the same.

Tegan Hill

Director, Alberta Policy, Fraser Institute

Grady Munro

Policy Analyst, Fraser Institute
Continue Reading

Business

Poilievre: “Carney More Irresponsible Than Trudeau” as Housing, Jobs, and Energy Failures Mount

Published on

The Opposition with Dan Knight

Dan Knight's avatar Dan Knight

50,000 lost manufacturing jobs, 86,000 more unemployed, soaring housing costs, and blocking every LNG project while vowing to end the TFW program

Pierre Poilievre opened his press conference with a direct attack on Mark Carney and the Liberal record on housing, framing the crisis as the product of government mismanagement rather than market forces.

He began by pointing to Conservative MP Scott Aitchison, a former mayor, as an example of what can be done when local leaders “cut the taxes and the development charges and the wait times so that building can happen.” Then came the pivot: “What a contrast with Justin Trudeau — excuse me, with Mark Carney,” he said, before slamming Carney’s choice of Gregor Robertson as housing minister. Robertson, he reminded the crowd, presided over a 149% increase in Vancouver housing costs and more than doubled homebuilding taxes. Carney, Poilievre said, rewarded that record by handing him the national housing file.

The setting itself — Deco Homes, a family-run builder founded by Italian immigrants — was chosen deliberately. Poilievre praised the Gasper family for their role in building Canada’s homes and businesses, but then asked whether such families could do the same today. His answer was no. “After a decade of Liberal taxes, Liberal spending, out-of-control Liberal immigration, reckless crime policies… the Canadian promise is really broken.”

From there, he broadened the attack. He spoke of an entire generation priced out of homeownership, of immigration growing “three times faster than housing and jobs,” of crime rising, and of what he called “the worst economy in the G7.” And then he turned squarely on Carney: “Mr. Carney is actually more irresponsible than even Justin Trudeau was,” citing an 8% increase in government spending, 37% more for consultants, and 62 billion dollars in lost investment — the largest outflow in Canadian history, according to the National Bank.

The message was simple: Liberals talk, Conservatives build. Poilievre painted Carney as a man of speeches and promises, not results. “The mistake the media is making is they’re judging him by his words rather than his deeds,” he said.

It was an opening statement designed less to introduce policy — those details came later — and more to frame the battle. For Poilievre, Carney isn’t just Trudeau’s replacement. He’s Trudeau’s sequel, and in some ways worse.

During the Q and A portion of the presser; Pierre Poilievre was pressed on immigration today, and what he said was blunt. Canada, he argued, once had the “envy of the world” system: immigrants came in at numbers the country could absorb. There were jobs, housing, health care. Everyone integrated. Ten years later? He says the Liberals have destroyed that.

The facts he used were stark. According to Poilievre, Canada is bringing in people three times faster than homes and jobs are being created. He accused the government of allowing “massive abuses” of the international student program, the Temporary Foreign Worker program, and asylum claims, with what he called “rampant fraud” right under Ottawa’s nose.

He tied this directly to the economy: youth unemployment, he said, is the worst in three decades. At the same time, employers are importing more temporary foreign workers than ever, this year at a record high and using them for cheap labor under poor conditions. His line: “While our young people can’t find jobs, employers are able to exploit temporary foreign workers by giving them lower wages and terrible working conditions.”

But here’s the part that stands out politically. Poilievre said, “Immigrants are not to blame.” He put the responsibility squarely on Liberal governments, calling their immigration numbers “reckless and irresponsible.”

His fix? End the Temporary Foreign Worker program. Cut immigration levels back to “the right numbers and the right people” to fill jobs Canadians can’t do. Tighten border standards to keep criminals out. And, in his words, “always and everywhere put Canada first.”

Pierre Poilievre didn’t hold back when asked about Mark Carney’s record. His words: “Mr. Carney is actually more irresponsible than even Justin Trudeau was.” That’s not a throwaway line, he backed it with numbers.

According to Poilievre, Carney inherited what he called a “morbidly obese government” from Trudeau and made it worse: 8% bigger overall, 37% more for consultants, and 6% more bureaucracy. He says Carney’s deficit is set to be even larger than Trudeau’s.

Then the jobs number: 86,000 more unemployed people under Carney than under Trudeau. That, Poilievre argued, is the real measure, not the polished speeches Carney gives. His line: “The mistake the media is making is they’re judging him by his words rather than his deeds.”

He also went after Carney for what hasn’t happened: “He has not approved a single major national project.” Meanwhile, Poilievre says food price inflation is even worse today, crime policy hasn’t changed the same “catch and release” approach and every big promise Carney made has already been broken.

 

Pierre Poilievre was asked about Ukraine, and his answer wasn’t about speeches or handshakes in Brussels. It was about pipelines.

“The best way to put Canada first while helping Ukraine is to sell our oil and gas in Europe.” His argument: Vladimir Putin bankrolls his war because Europe still buys his fuel. Poilievre said if Canada had built the Energy East pipeline, we’d be shipping a million barrels of oil a day to Europe right now.

He went further: approve LNG plants immediately, liquefy tens of billions of dollars of Canadian gas, and ship it overseas to “fully displace” Russian sales. His line: “Instead of the money going to Putin’s war machine, it will go to the trades workers in this country.”

And then the indictment of the Liberals: “Mark Carney and the Liberals have blocked every single LNG project that has been put before them. As a result, we only have one plant and it was approved by Stephen Harper.”

So the contrast is stark. Carney talks about climate virtue. Poilievre says: build pipelines, sell fuel, kill Putin’s war economy, and pay Canadian workers. His closer: “That is how you put Canada first.”

Final Thoughts

So let’s just be honest. Under Mark Carney’s leadership, the numbers aren’t just bad they’re devastating. In a matter of months, Canada has lost 50,000 manufacturing jobs. These are not low-skill jobs; they are the backbone of the economy, the kind of work that built the middle class in this country. Add to that another 86,000 unemployed overall compared to when he took office. This is what Carney calls stability.

Now, if you’re a Temporary Foreign Worker, life looks pretty good. Ottawa has built an entire system around you cheap wages, little recourse, and companies happy to import you as disposable labor. If you’re a Carney insider, it looks even better. The government is 8% bigger than when Trudeau left, consultants are raking in 37% more, the bureaucracy is swelling. It’s one of the greatest insider rackets in modern Canadian politics.

But if you’re part of Canada’s middle class, if you’re a young person trying to buy a home, if you’re a worker trying to hold onto a job in a plant, a mill, or a construction site you are being hollowed out. You’re watching your wages stagnate, your housing costs explode, your jobs disappear overseas or into government-mandated “green transitions.” And when you ask for answers, what do you get? You get Patty Hajdu telling you not to be afraid of robots. You get Mark Carney telling you his deficits are “investments.” You get speeches about “climate virtue” and “AI literacy” while your livelihood collapses.

That’s the contrast Poilievre is trying to draw. On immigration, he says: let’s end the Temporary Foreign Worker scam, bring people in at a pace we can actually house and employ, and put Canadian workers first. On energy, he says: build the pipelines, approve the LNG projects, and stop funding Putin’s war by leaving Europe dependent on Russian fuel. On the economy, he says: stop measuring success by the size of government or the smoothness of a prime minister’s speeches, and start measuring it by the number of Canadians who can work, buy homes, and raise families in their own country.

So the choice is simple. Carney offers more of the same consultants, insiders, deficits, slogans, and the slow managed decline of a once-prosperous nation. Poilievre is offering something completely different: a chance to reverse the hollowing out of the middle class and to put Canadian jobs, Canadian energy, and Canadian sovereignty first.

If you’re an insider, Carney’s Canada works just fine. If you’re a middle-class Canadian, it’s a disaster. And that, in the end, is the dividing line in this country.

Subscribe to The Opposition with Dan Knight .

For the full experience, upgrade your subscription.

Continue Reading

Trending

X