Connect with us

Business

Mark Carney’s Misleading Actions and Non-Disclosure Should Disqualify Him as Canada’s Next Truly “Elected” Prime Minister – Jim Warren

Published

15 minute read

From EnergyNow.Ca

By Jim Warren

If Mark Carney simply told the truth, he wouldn’t have to remember if what he says in Quebec matches what he says in Western Canada.

When speaking in Kelowna on February 12, Mark Carney left the impression he’d been converted from environmental zealot to missionary for an Energy East pipeline.

Carney said he would “use all of the powers of the federal government, including the emergency powers of the federal government, to accelerate the major projects that we need in order to build this economy and take on the Americans.”

Five days later Carney told CBC those emergency powers wouldn’t apply to Quebec. The government of Quebec would have veto power over any pipeline to the east coast. To clear up any possible confusion he repeated his pipeline veto pledge to Quebec at the French debate for the Liberal Leadership.

Apparently tough measures like the “peace, order and good government” clause in the Constitution and the Emergencies Act can be used by Liberals to arrest and seize the bank accounts of truckers who honk horns and cause traffic jams in Ottawa. But they can’t be used to build pipelines across Quebec even if it will reduce the impact of US tariffs on Canada’s economy. Like any good Liberal, Carney knows the interests of Maritimers and the West are of little consequence when his party needs to boost its support in Quebec.

Ironically, the second national poll in the past few months shows a majority of Quebecers support the construction of an East/West pipeline through their province. It is the Central Canadian political elite based in the major cities of Ontario and Quebec and excessively zealous environmental activists who oppose pipelines. And the Liberals are, of course, the party which represents that environmentally sanctimonious elite.

You read it here first.

On January 28, EnergyNow ran a column with the headline: Trump’s Wake-up Call to Canada, Politicians & Activists… The column outlined how the “peace, order and good government’” clause in the Constitution and/or the Emergencies Act could be employed to override regulatory barriers and court injunctions to ensure new pipelines to tidewater are built. The column says the first step in that process will be booting the Liberals from office. That condition still applies, given that Carney’s one-time mention of using “emergency powers” in support of a West to East pipeline turned out to be just one more Liberal lie to Western Canada.

Pierre Poilievre has aptly pegged Mark Carney as a hypocrite whose corporate interests and behavior are in substantial conflict with his environmental virtue signaling. At a House of Commons committee hearing in 2021, Poilievre spanked Carney for supporting the cancellation of the Energy East pipeline, while Brookfield Asset Management, the company he chaired, had bought pipelines in Brazil and the United Arab Emirates.

Poilievre admonished Carney, “You make billions of dollars off foreign pipelines and you shut them down here at home, putting our people out of work.”

More recently Carney misled Canadians about the role he played in moving Brookfield’s head office from Canada to the US. Carney claimed he had absolutely nothing to do with the move despite the fact he was company chairman at the time.

No less egregious is the fact Carney has used a loophole in federal legislation to avoid the financial disclosure rules for cabinet ministers including the prime minister. The disclosure rules help Parliament determine when ministers are involved in conflicts of interest. Carney will soon be crowned prime minister by the Liberals and will technically be exempt from the rule.

Carney is technically exempt because he’s never been elected as an MP. He will be able to avoid making his financial disclosure until 60 days after he is appointed prime minster. This means there is a good chance Carney’s financial information won’t be available well into the run up to a possible spring election.

Poilievre rang the alarm regarding the loophole and plans to introduce legislation as soon as Parliament reopens to fix the problem. He pointed out that there was nothing preventing Carney from being transparent and voluntarily providing the necessary information to Canadians prior to the Liberal leadership vote.

Poilevre was being too kind. A lack of integrity is what’s holding Carney back.

Carney is on record as a firm believer in carbon taxes. In the book he published in 2023 he wrote, “Meaningful carbon prices are the cornerstone of any effective [environmental] policy framework.”

Now, in support of his campaign to become prime minister, Carney promises to get rid of Canada’s unpopular carbon tax. The claim is clearly deceptive. He intends to replace the current tax on consumers with an upstream tax on oil producers and industry. Carney must think Canadians are too dumb to realize the increased upstream tax burden will be passed on to consumers in the form of higher prices for virtually everything they purchase.

When Carney is pressed to explain his carbon tax 2.0, he mumbles his way through an incomprehensible word salad worthy of Kamala Harris.

Also like Harris, Carney avoids campaign events where non-supporters might show up or media appearances and interviews where he might be asked a tough question. His appearance on US late night talk shows hosted by uber-liberals like Jon Stewart are unlikely to generate hard ball questions—the hosts are ignorant about Canadian politics and wouldn’t have a clue about what to ask.

I think Carney knows how bad the Kamala campaign tactics look. He was clearly taken aback by an incident at a campaign event in Regina. A member of the Liberal party who was somehow identified as a closet Conservative was accosted by two security agents and police who ejected him from the meeting. The guy had done nothing untoward—he hadn’t so much as raised his voice. It seems Mark Carney is very precious and must be protected from the public– including Liberal party members who are potentially dangerous because they supported another party in the past.

Where Carney really stands on environmental issues

Mark Carney didn’t just drink the climate alarmist Kool-Aid, he helped make it and wants to serve it to you.

“He’s the father of net-zero on a global basis,” according to Catherine Swift, President of the Canadian Coalition of Concerned Manufacturers and Businesses of Canada.

Carney has been a steadfast supporter of the environmental dogma underlying the Liberal assault on the fortunes of the oil and gas industries including the legislation preventing new pipelines. For years now, he’s been working on the inside of international organizations dedicated to climate change mitigation and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction.

In December 2019, he was appointed as the very first UN Special Envoy for Climate Action and Finance.

Prior to, during and after his time at the UN Carney has found time to hobnob with the billionaires and national leaders who presumably constitute the global elite. He’s been a regular at the annual World Economic Forum conferences in Davos, Switzerland.

As a member of the forum’s Foundation Board he is a duly qualified member of the modern day Illuminati. He associates with the international bankers who presume to know what’s best for the little people. His promotion of the radical green agenda dovetails nicely with the environmental virtue signaling of the world’s rich and powerful at Davos. They are dedicated to conquering global warming no matter what it costs the rest of us.

At the COP26 conference in 2021 Carney proudly proclaimed he was part of the same social movement as Greta Thunberg. Carney praised Thunberg as the “catalyst” who inspired the youth wing of the environmental movement. I haven’t heard if he’s gone off Greta and her wing of the movement now that she has announced her support for Hamas.

Don Braid recently wrote an insightful column in the Calgary Herald where he proposes that Carney is too deeply embedded in environmental activism and too publicly committed to climate change mitigation and the anti-oil agenda to run away from it when he becomes prime minister. Braid reports what Carney had to say about the environment and the need to abandon natural gas and petroleum in the 600 page door-stopper book he published in 2021, Value(s): Building a Better World for All.

In 2021, Carney was deluded enough to imagine the world’s virtuous emissions cutters would prevent the planet’s average temperature in 2050 from being any higher than 1.5O above what it was in the middle of the 19th century.

Not even serious climate change alarmists like Gwynne Dyer believe that’s remotely possible. The goals of climate zealots like Carney include fanciful, overly ambitious emissions reduction targets. They want change to happen too fast to be affordable for virtually everyone except the sorts of people who hang out at Davos.

In his book, Carney identifies what he believes should happen to the fossil fuel industries. His goals don’t bode well for the future of Canada’s petroleum and gas sectors and can’t help but harm the country’s economy.

Carney writes, “To meet the 1.5o C target, more than 80 per cent of current fossil fuel reserves (including three-quarters of coal, half of gas, one-third of oil)” will need to “stay in the ground, stranding these assets.”

Steven Guilbeault, Canada’s most infamous and politically dangerous environmental extremist backed Carney in the Liberal leadership contest. Guilbeault’s support is in recognition of Carney’s radical record on environmental issues including climate change mitigation.

Nothing to say about Liberal corruption

One of the most disturbing omissions from Carney’s political platform and media coverage of his campaign is any mention of plans for dealing with runaway Liberal cronyism and corruption.

He hasn’t promised to open the books and jail the crooks. He hasn’t promised to release the unredacted evidence of Green Slush Fund corruption. He hasn’t promised to release that evidence and turn it over to Parliament and the RCMP. He hasn’t announced plans for a thorough forensic accounting of Liberal backroom deals. And he hasn’t promised investigations into sweetheart contracts and looting in cases like the ArriveCAN scam.

He can’t do any of the above because it would implicate a number of Liberal insiders and he needed them to support him in the leadership contest. And how will he be able to work with the government caucus if he suggests he wants to get tough with the hogs at the trough? Given that he won’t release his financial information, it could be he doesn’t want to limit his own access to the gravy train.

In the final analysis, you’d have to say Mark Carney is a committed environmental zealot except when it interferes with his business interests or political ambitions.

He appears comfortable giving preference to the environmental extremism of the Davos set over the harm overly zealous climate change policies do to the livelihoods of ordinary Canadians and the country’s economy.

He appears comfortable with hypocrisy and misleading Canadians which clearly qualifies him to lead the Liberal party, but makes for a bad prime minister.

 

 

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Business

Americans rallying behind Trump’s tariffs

Published on

The Trump administration’s new tariffs are working:

The European Union will delay tariffs on U.S. exports into the trading bloc in response to the imposition of tariffs on European aluminum and steal, a measure announced in February by the White House as a part of an overhaul of the U.S. trade policies.

Instead of taking effect March 12, these tariffs will not apply until “mid-April”, according to a European official interviewed by The Hill.

This is not the first time the EU has responded this way to U.S. tariff measures. It happened already last time Trump was in office. One of the reasons why Brussels is so accommodative is that the European Parliament emphasized negotiations already back in February. Furthermore, as Forbes notes,

The U.S. economy is the largest in the world, and many countries rely on American consumers to buy their goods. By import tariffs, the U.S. can pressure trading partners into more favorable deals and protect domestic industries from unfair competition.

More on unfair competition in a moment. First, it is important to note that Trump did not start this trade skirmish. Please note what IndustryWeek reported back in 2018:

Trump points to U.S. auto exports to Europe, saying they are taxed at a higher rate than European exports to the United States. Here, facts do offer Trump some support: U.S. autos face duties of 10% while European cars are subject to dugies of only 2.5% in the United States.

They also noted some nuances, e.g., that the United States applies a higher tariff on light trucks, presumably to defend the most profitable vehicles rolling out of U.S. based manufacturing plants. Nevertheless, the story that most media outlets do not tell is that Europe has a history of putting tariffs on U.S. exports to a greater extent than tariffs are applied in the opposite direction.

Larson’s Political Economy is a reader-supported publication.

To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Facts notwithstanding, this trade war has caught media attention and is reaching ridiculous proportions. According to CNBC,

Auto stocks are digesting President Donald Trump’s annoncement that he would place 25% tariffs on “all cars that are not made in the United Sates,” as well as certain automobile parts. … Shares of the “Detroit Three” all fell.

They also explain that GM took a particularly hard beating, and that Ferrari is going to use the tariffs as a reason to raise prices by ten percent. This sounds dramatic, but keep in mind that stocks fly up and down with impressive amplitude; what was lost yesterday can come back with a bonus tomorrow. As for Ferrari, a ten-percent price hike is basically meaningless since these cars are often sold in highly customized, individual negotiations before they are even produced.

Despite the media hype, these tariffs will not last the year. One reason is the retaliatory nature in President Trump’s tariffs, which—again—has already caught the attention of the Europeans and brought them to the negotiation table. We can debate whether or not his tactics are the best in order to create more fair trade terms between the United States and our trading partners, but there is no question that Trump’s methods have caught the attention of the powers that be (which include Mexico and Canada).

There is another reason why I do not see this tariffs tit-for-tat continuing for much longer. The European economy is in bad shape, especially compared to the U.S. economy. With European corporations already signaling increased direct investment in the U.S. economy, Europe is holding the short end of this stick.

But the bad news for the Europeans does not stop there. They are at an intrinsic disadvantage going into a tariffs-based trade war. The EU has a “tariff” of sorts that we do not have, namely the value-added tax, VAT. Shiphub.co has a succinct summary of how the VAT affects trade:

When importing (into the European Union), VAT should be taken into account. … VAT is calculated based on the customs value (the good’s value and transport costs … ) plus the due duty amount.

The term “duty” here, of course, refers to trade tariffs. This means that when tariffs go up, the VAT surcharge goes up as well. Aside from creating a tax-on-tax problem, this also means that the inflationary effect from U.S. imports is significantly stronger than it is on EU imports to the United States—even when tariffs are equal.

If the U.S. government wanted to, they could include the tax-on-tax effect of the VAT when assessing the effective EU tariffs on imports from the United States. This would quickly expand the tit-for-tat tariff war, with Europe at an escalating disadvantage.

For these reasons, I do not see how this “trade war” will continue beyond the summer, but even that is a pessimistic outlook.

Before I close this tariff topic and declare it a weekend, let me also mention that the use of tariffs in trade war is neither a new nor an unusual tactic. Check out this little brochure from the Directorate-General for Trade under the European Commission’:

Trade defence instruments, such as anti-dumping or anti-subsidy duties, are ways of protecting European production against international trade distortions.

What they refer to as “defence instruments” are primarily tariffs on imports. In a separate report the Directorate lists no fewer than 63 trade-war cases where the EU imposes tariffs to punish a country for unfair trade tactics.

Trade what, and what countries, you wonder? Sweet corn from Thailand, fused alumina from China, biodiesel from Argentina and Indonesia, malleable tube fittings from China and Thailand, epoxy resins from China, South Korea, Taiwan, and Thailand… and lots and lots of tableware from China.

Like most people, I would prefer a world without taxes and tariffs, and the closer we can get to zero on either of those, the better. But until we get there, we should take a deep breath in the face of the media hype and trust our president on this one.

Larson’s Political Economy is a reader-supported publication.

To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Continue Reading

Business

Kennedy to cut 10,000 HHS employees to reduce ‘bureaucratic sprawl’

Published on

From The Center Square

By 

The changes are expected to reduce the agency’s headcount from 82,000 to 62,000 full-time employees.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced a significant restructuring of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services on Thursday in a move to streamline the huge federal agency and cut costs.

Kennedy plans to trim about 10,000 employees from the agency’s workforce in addition to employees who left as part of a Deferred Resignation Program, similar to a buy out, earlier this year. The move is expected to save about $1.8 billion.

Kennedy said the restructuring won’t affect the agency’s critical services. When combined with HHS’ other efforts, including early retirement, the changes are expected to reduce the agency’s headcount from 82,000 to 62,000 full-time employees. The restructuring will also align the department with Kennedy’s goals for a healthier U.S. population.

“We aren’t just reducing bureaucratic sprawl. We are realigning the organization with its core mission and our new priorities in reversing the chronic disease epidemic,” Kennedy said. “This Department will do more – a lot more – at a lower cost to the taxpayer.”

Kennedy also said the restructuring of the department’s 28 divisions will get rid of redundant units, consolidating them into “15 new divisions, including a new Administration for a Healthy America, or AHA, and will centralize core functions such as Human Resources, Information Technology, Procurement, External Affairs, and Policy.” Regional offices will be reduced from 10 to 5.

The overhaul will implement the new “HHS priority of ending America’s epidemic of chronic illness by focusing on safe, wholesome food, clean water, and the elimination of environmental toxins. These priorities will be reflected in the reorganization of HHS.”

Kennedy also said the restructuring would improve taxpayers’ experience with HHS by making the agency more responsive and efficient. He also said the changes would ensure that Medicare, Medicaid, and other essential health services remain intact.

The Administration for a Healthy America will combine multiple agencies – the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health, Health Resources and Services Administration, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, and National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health — into a single, unified entity, Kennedy said.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention will get the Administration for Strategic Preparedness and Response, which is responsible for national disaster and public health emergency response.

“Over time, bureaucracies like HHS become wasteful and inefficient even when most of their staff are dedicated and competent civil servants,” Kennedy said. “This overhaul will be a win-win for taxpayers and for those that HHS serves.”

Among the cuts: The U.S. Food and Drug Administration will shed about 3,500 full-time employees. Officials said the reduction won’t affect drug, medical device, or food reviewers, nor will it impact inspectors. The CDC will drop about 2,400 employees. The National Institutes of Health will cut about 1,200 employees. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services will cut about 300 employees. The reorganization won’t affect Medicare and Medicaid services, officials said.

Continue Reading

Trending

X