Preston’s Substack

Preston Manning

When the Carney government’s honeymoon is over, and its missteps on a variety of fronts become more evident, the search will begin in earnest for “alternatives”. Looking ahead, what might such alternatives be?

On the fiscal front, the recent federal budget gets off on the wrong foot by attributing Canada’s economic woes to major global events and Trump’s tariffs, without in any way acknowledging the consequences of a decade of mismanagement by the Trudeau regime. The budget also still contains references to Net Zero on the climate change front, a Carney fixation. What an alternative budget might look like is a discussion for the weeks ahead, but it might begin by calling for a federal commitment to an alternative Net Zero: Federal Expenditures Minus Federal Revenues to Equal Zero by 2030.

Balancing the federal budget will require a major downsizing of the massive federal bureaucracy. But the downsizing method chosen by the Carney government is an old and unimaginative approach which simply doesn’t work – charging the bureaucracy itself to define and implement its own downsizing[1]. The alternative? Establishing a completely independent outside agency to tackle the task – an improved Canadianized version of Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) or its UK version as being developed by Reform UK.

On the economic front and the need for industrial projects to stimulate an economic recovery, the Carney government predictably puts its faith in its own ability to pick winners and losers, and in a government-run Major Projects Office to guide the winners. A better alternative? Issue a Request for Proposals from the private sector leaders of Canada’s key industrial sectors – especially those in the natural resource sectors which are Canada’s greatest strength – to identify what the market place and the investment community, not politicians and bureaucrats, believe to be the most stimulative and urgently required projects and the conditions for advancing them. Not surprisingly, one of the main conditions will likely be for an over-regulating over-taxing federal government to “get out of the way”.

On the national unity front, federal-provincial relations are being strained to the breaking point by major federal intrusions in areas of provincial jurisdiction, fueling secessions movements in both Quebec and western Canada. The alternative? A federal Act Respecting Provincial Sovereignty which repeals or amends those statutes authorizing such intrusions in areas the constitution clearly assigns to the provinces – natural resources, health, municipal governance, property and civil rights – to eliminate or reduce federal intrusiveness. Insist also that both levels of government “stay in their lanes”, with the federal government focusing on improving its performance in those areas where no one disputes its jurisdiction or responsibility – foreign affairs, trade and commerce, indigenous affairs, defense, and monetary policy.

Then there is the tariff front where US tariffs and Canada’s erratic and ineffective responses are raising prices and killing jobs, as tariff wars always do, while seriously damaging Canada-US relations. Mr. Carney’s approach has been to first impose counter-tariffs and then withdraw them – elbows up then elbows down – while engaging sporadically in high-level elite-to-elite talks in Washington.

The alternative? Be advised, and be accompanied to Washington, by deal-making representatives of the sectors which the US most needs to become energy self-sufficient – one of Trump’s main objectives. Begin to seek the support of Trump’s constituency for tariff-modification policies – on Main Street not Wall street and in Middle not Washington America – the people Trump must listen to in order to satisfy and maintain his political base. Communicate with that constituency through the independent US media and the Rogan-Carlson-Shapiro media that Trump’s constituency talks and listens to. And begin to ally Canadians more closely with American friends and associates seeking to ensure that more tariff-modifying Republicans are elected to the US Congress in the 2026 Congressional elections.

On the leadership front, more and more Canadians are becoming disillusioned with the “one man show” style of political leadership – first from Justin Trudeau and now Mark Carney – self-absorbed politicians who want to be “the bride at every wedding and the corpse at every funeral, just as long as all eyes are upon them”.

The Budget is the Carney Budget, with Finance Minister Champagne merely the budget speech reader. It is Mr. Carney who goes to Washington and gets the photo ops, with Minister LeBlanc, listed as the Minister Responsible for Canada-US Trade, merely carrying the suitcases. It is Mr. Carney who announces the Big Projects and must even participate in the Grey Cup coin toss, notwithstanding the boos of the crowd who came to watch football not political posturing.

The Alternative? A visible, competent Leadership Team at the federal level, with the PM as the captain but visibly surrounded by strong, regional, and sectoral lieutenants with executive experience – Mackenize King’s War Cabinet a possible model to emulate.

Finally, a key question – who will forcefully and effectively represent these alternatives in the federal political arena? Could it be the current Leader of the Official Opposition? If in the days ahead, he were to become more than the Leader of the Opposition but Leader of the Official Alternative, could he not yet become the Leader of the Alternative Government Canada so desperately needs?

[1] The Comprehensive Expenditure Review described in the recent federal budget asked “federal departments and agencies” to conduct a thorough review of their own organizations, programs, and activities – subject to numerous politically motivated limitations – and under the ultimate supervision of politicians – a Cabinet Committee and the Prime Minister. (Budget 2025, page207)