Summary
Mark Carney has been elected as the new Liberal Party leader in Canada with a commanding 85.9% of votes, following Justin Trudeau’s resignation.
The former Bank of Canada and Bank of England governor will become Canada’s 24th prime minister within days.
In his victory speech, Carney took aim at both Donald Trump and Canadian Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre, vowing to maintain Canada’s tariffs until Americans “show us respect.”
Carney, despite never holding elected office, enters leadership as Canada faces trade tensions with the U.S. and a potential early election. He must secure a parliamentary seat and finalize the transition with Trudeau.
Carney is a neo-liberal banker. Him being the best option really isn’t a good thing.
PC versus CP - at least one is demonstrably less malicious, but I’m inclined to agree this isn’t bullish for the future.
Standards have been wildly reduced in politics. The “nothing will fundamentally change” chairwarmer is roughly equivalent to a Winston Churchill these days. Especially if they at least wring their hands a bit at the thought of genocide, like Carney does.
4 days ago in a conversation with Trump Trudeau said he didn’t know when the elections will take place in Canada. Trump immediately jumped to the conclusion that “Trudeau is using the tariffs to stay in power” and raised a big public stink about it, not once realizing that what Trudeau meant is that the date of the elections (which will have to happen before October of this year no matter what) was completely out of his hands because he was about to step down as prime minister. How the fuck did Trump not know that? It’s not like it was a secret or anything. Everyone knew Trudeau was going to step down today except him.
Wanna bet Trump will be once again confused by this transition and will call it a “coup” now?
How the fuck did Trump not know that?
Really? are you still surprised how dumb and ignorant donald is? he didn’t even know Puerto Rico was an island or part of the USA… AFTER BEING ELECTED PRESIDENT!
Funnily enough, Ontario premier Doug Ford used the tariffs (and $3 billion in bribe money) to stay in power.
Trump is a paranoid, manic, narcissist. So he thinks he knows everything, and everyone is out to get him.
He’s also a fucking moron, end of.
Is this good? For you guys? I hope so. Canada is now the guiding star.
Compared to Pierre Poilievre (Maple MAGA forgone winner of the next election before Trudeau resigned)… 10000000000000x better
Overall? probably a bit better than usual
deleted by creator
He’s still the leader of the opposition. This wasn’t an election between parties, this was the liberals choosing a new leader. We’ll see if the Liberals can hold off the Conservatives before elections are here.
I just heard that many companies are simply eating the tariff costs and going us only…probably spiraling into a path leading to their eventual demise and the loss of investor money. All this will hurt everyone in the US at some point if not already. But its just gonna hit real hard.
He has a PhD in Economics and was the head of the Bank of Canada and more recently the head of the Bank of England. So yeah……can’t think of a better resume to navigate us through a trade war.
Worth noting he was head of Bank of Canada during the 08 crash and was pretty widely lauded for navigating it so well. So he’s proven himself in a crisis.
Would I prefer someone further left? Of course, but as long as we live in a market economy we may as well have someone knowledgeable about it and who has at least expressed a desire to make it more fair.
According to this 2013 BBC article:
My conclusions? He didn’t singlehandedly rescue the Canadians from the worst of the global financial crisis - he didn’t really need to. But boy, did he win over the press.
This is a man who established a reputation as a “working-class hero” to many Canadians, despite having spent 13 years at Goldman Sachs.
I don’t know anything about him, but given the current economic climate, I’m skeptical. Hopefully he’s good for Canada, and can deal with the economic catastrophe Trump is creating.
He at least won’t privatize your healthcare.
Bank director as prime minister…
This will be bad in the long run.
There’s going to be an election this year, so he may not be PM that long.
Well said.
No, he pushed mass immigration, in order to derive what he calls economic growth as we trade homes back and forth for ever larger sums, as zoning and developer fees prevent new development.
Housing and rents doubled in 10 years as we did 4% population growth and bought 50% of mortgage bonds, all as he was a Liberal advisor. He’s a champaign socialist like our NDP, and we have no real worker parties left.
If your rents doubled while your population increase was only 4%, it sounds like immigration wasn’t the issue, now was it?
Blaming poor people for the housing bubble is like blaming a fish for the rain. Look up.
To complete your argument, quote the increase in residential real estate too. If there was a >=4% increase in residential floor space and number of units, the problem definitely lies elsewhere
The problem is nimbyism, sprawled zoning, and large developer taxes used to lower property taxes; which is why matching immigration to housing completions is important, and an obvious thing to do if you care about the poor.
But people downvote criticism of their faux progressives. People got a whole 400$ in dental work as their rents doubled, wholly unfunded and paid with future austerity of course.
Matching population to available housing… Seems a little cart-before-the-horse. In your opinion what is the motivation to build housing, since we are controlling the demand not the supply?
There’s always some being built but not ready to go, so depending on the exact requirement in place it doesn’t exclude massive growth.
Actually, if it was literally letting in an immigrant family for every empty house on the market, you’d still get prices skyrocketing. To achieve the policy goal of continuing growth without sparking a cost crisis and a backlash, you have to leave room for domestic growth in demand, and maybe the effect of the other various push and pull factors on immigration. How exactly you do that, I don’t know. It’s probably pretty complicated.
Profits are why developers build housing, for consumers its an inelastic good obviously.
We have simply made land costs too valuable via regressive zoning and greenbelt, alongside the slow bureaucracy, poor mass transit. Then you have high developer taxes as I mentioned, which directly erode profit.
When supply is diminished and debt is cheap it becomes a liquidity sponge where supply doesnt increase to match capital, and people speculate on rising values like they do Bitcoin or gold, except with cheaply borrowed money that is insured and a liability to our own government as they buy half of all mortgage bonds.
I’m pretty sure Carney is onboard with tying immigration to housing. It seems like it’s basically just consensus within Ottawa at this point.
Our population increased by 10 million during Trudeau. As a homeowner I’m not complaining lol
It’s just 4 million, actually. It was almost 36 million in 2015 and it’s just over 40 now.
deleted by creator
I plan on selling my place here in BC when I turn 40 then I’m going to take over my family’s acreage and retire.
deleted by creator
No, he pushed mass immigration
When? as the head of the Bank of Canada under Harper?!
The last 5 years he’s been advising Trudeau.
No he hasn’t. He was hired in Sept 2024 to advise Trudeau.
Your link is about a Globe & Mail event that Carney was speaking at.
Around Covid, after which we did mass immigration to prop up falling GDP :
Around the same time, in August 2020, Trudeau tapped Carney to serve as an “informal adviser” on the government’s pandemic recovery plan.
- Carney was briefly a consultant during Covid. Not a decision maker, not constantly advising Trudeau
- Population growth greatly stalled during and after covid. Immigration actually helped cover for that.
- The state of the housing market has nothing to do with immigration and those who want you to believe it has wants you to be mad at a scapegoat so that you won’t look at the real issues.
You keep posting links that you think prove your point but they really don’t.
Do I think Carney is the best Canada deserves? Absolutely not
Do I think he’s the man that’s gonna keep our country afloat during this trade war and stand up to the orange buffoon? Absolutely.
- The state of the housing market has nothing to do with immigration and those who want you to believe it has wants you to be mad at a scapegoat so that you won’t look at the real issues.
Alright well, that’s just silly. Even the Bank of Canada admits its inflated housing.
Carney never said a single thing against mass immigration until Trudeau did, and it was only after the polls turned deeply negative for the Liberals. The Liberals didn’t care at all until their polls suffered, even though they ran on fixing housing every single election.
It was done to invert the Phillips curve and prevent a wage price spiral, at the expense of the poor and renters, so I actually assume Carney told him to do it.
where does it say that in the link you posted? looks like just another think tank
Oh. I’m sorry. I guess then pay attention as to how trump’s story goes. I don’t know now how it’s going to go. I hope to be dead by then.
Id guess it knocks over Canada’s housing bubble they built, and we have a lost decade like Japan due to trillions in misallocated capital.
Its mainly full recourse loans as well, its incredibly irresponsible to do mass immigration and stoke demand to distort the market. Its almost like they wilfully broke our country to push climate policy, I can’t see any other way to explain it.
Quit showing off.
-usaAmerican here. I’m jealous.
don’t be jealous bb
Congratulations. Now give us proportional representation, or step aside.
Lol, what you think the conservatives will give you this?
I think there are bigger fish to fry right now.
This guy has legit, real-world experience. He has accomplishments out there ass.
Let’s see if he has what it takes first.
And right now? There are bigger issues at stake.
Y’all, I live in the US. Listen to this. We had the same shit conversation with Harris. How many people I had to tell this “A vote is not a valentine, you’re not professing your love for the candidate,. It’s a chess move for the world you want to live in.”
Yes, I’ll agree our Dems can suck, and I’d love someone else… but for the love to my neighbors up north, don’t do the same dumbass move the US did and go “Eh, they’re not good enough” and bring in someone who’s a terror.
Last I checked this was a Liberal leader race, not a Conservative race, chum. And it was the Liberal party that promised this. Independent of anything else going on, that promise is still on them.
How we vote is meaningless, if we wind up being a 51st state.
I WANT proportional rep. But, again, bigger fish to fry right now.
Carney might be a wartime PM. I hope he does what Churchill did. Churchill declared himself Minister of Defence when he was PM of England. Carney should declare himself Minister of Finance as well as PM. He’s qualified.
He should also consider drawing on a larger pool and not appointing only MPs as ministers, as remains legal to do. MPs can then concentrate on serving their constituents, as remains their responsibility.
I’m fairly certain that is what will happen.
You’re right & if people don’t listen then I have a feeling Canada will end up a lot like America now under Trump.
I also heard it was no takesies backsies too, so you got the libs good.
what you think the conservatives will give you this?
what a bizarre, fragile response
Prop Rep: that thing no boomer will ever understand.
Sweet. Now you got 7 months at most to make enough of a difference for people to keep you in power. Otherwise it’s maple maga millhouse
No way the government lasts 7 months. Carney will, I expect, follow through on calling an election right away.
May vote I expect
I really hope he does well! His past history in banking and financial sector should help in the tariffs situation.
Canada’s new PM is a banker with no political experience—what could possibly go wrong? Clear reporting but lacks deeper analysis of Carney’s potential strategies.
🐱🐱🐱
Carney was governor of the Bank of Canada during the 2008 crash, and did so well that Canada climbed out of the recession/depression quicker than most other nations.
He then went on to become the first non-UK citizen (since the 1600s) to lead the Bank of England during the Brexit crisis. He advised Boris Johnson to not go through with it, but Boris decided to anyway. Many believe that is why the UK has, until recently, held onto a relative economic stability – but even now are also discussing trying to rejoin the EU.
I watched Carney back in 2008-09 when he spoke to Parliament … he didn’t lie, he never waffled on the possible dangers we faced, and he worked hard to pull us through.
He is a different kind of man, and a different kind of economist. He’ll do great as our PM.
Carney’s economic record is stellar, but governing demands more: public trust, coalition-building, and political foresight.
His leadership during the 2008 crash and Brexit showcased technical brilliance, yet these roles lacked the messy compromises of politics. Advising Boris Johnson was impactful, but it’s not equivalent to leading a nation divided by ideology.
Integrity matters, but so do adaptability and vision—qualities Carney hasn’t demonstrated in the political arena.
😺😺😺
Stop selling us to Carney, we are fairly happy with an option that looks strong enough to avoid maple maga PP
And yet Carney doesn’t exist in a vacuum.
I would opine that the other party leaders are MORE susceptible to the criticisms you leveled at Carney.
PP has shown no ability or interest in forming coalitions or an ability to adapt to changing situations. He has no successes to his name in or out of parliament. What he HAS shown is an affinity for gotchas, sloganeering and playing political games with national security (does he even have clearance yet?)
Comparing Carney to PP is a weak deflection. Leadership isn’t about who’s less flawed; it’s about who can effectively govern. Carney’s economic expertise is undeniable, but public trust and coalition-building are critical, especially in a fractured political landscape. His past roles lacked the messy compromises of real politics, leaving doubts about his adaptability and vision.
Your critique of PP is speculative and irrelevant to the discussion at hand. Whether PP has clearance or plays political games doesn’t absolve Carney of his own deficiencies. This strawman argument shifts focus away from evaluating Carney’s ability to lead, which remains the core issue.
Deflection doesn’t strengthen your case—it weakens it. Leadership demands scrutiny, not comparisons.
😾😾😾
I really don’t understand the difference…
Why is PP’s past “speculative and irrelevant” but Carney’s isn’t? If anything, we’ve seen PP be lackluster and ineffective in Parliament while any comments about Carney are speculative.
And during an election where we have limited options comparison is necessary and unavoidable
Vilmos, the distinction lies in the nature of speculation. Criticisms of PP stem from his documented failures—lack of coalition-building, refusal to obtain security clearance, and divisive rhetoric. These are observable patterns that directly impact his ability to govern. In contrast, concerns about Carney focus on his untested adaptability and vision in the political realm, which are speculative because he hasn’t held elected office or navigated the complexities of public trust and compromise.
Your point about limited options during an election is valid, but comparison alone doesn’t absolve scrutiny. Settling for “better than PP” risks ignoring whether Carney can lead effectively in a fractured landscape. Leadership demands foresight and adaptability—not just avoiding the worst-case scenario.
😼😼😼
Is this reporting true?
After maintaining frontrunner status throughout the two-month race, the former Bank of Canada and Bank of England governor will become this country’s next, and 24th prime minister within days.
How does an unelected banker walk into becoming Prime Minister? Doesn’t he need to be elected by Canadians first?
If true, that seems like a horrendous hole in the system.
The PM is like a mayor; they have no actual power (that doesn’t flow from the assembly). Theirs is the face of a legislative body. That body can choose anyone they wish to be their Prime Minister. Essentially, at any time. Parliament governs Canada, not the Prime Minister.
The PM must keep confidence of their own party and MPs. If the party loses confidence in the leader, the leader is turfed. See what happened to JT, his caucus lost confidence in him and he was forced out. I am looking forward to watching the CPC force Millhouse out once he loses.
Because people hated Trudeau that much, prior to. his “Trump is dumb” era and the opposition leader is horrifying. An investment banker who has advocated that we not allow our financial system to be Americanized is the best hope we have in unifying the country against the Mini magas.
It’s how parliamentary democracy works. The Prime Minister (PM) is elected by Members of Parliament (MPs) who are, in turn, directly elected by canadians. Typically, the Prime Minister is the leader of the largest party, but not always since a coalition of smaller parties could theoretically band together to elect their choice for PM. Carney was just elected leader of The Liberal Party of Canada, the largest party currently sitting in the Canadian lower house, by members of said party.
Our head of state and commander in chief is King Charles III, whose power is severely limited by constitutional and conventional traditions. Typically, in a parliamentary system, the head of state is merely a figurehead with no ability to influence policy directly.
Our Cabinet, unlike in the American Presidential system where cabinet members are unelected and appointed by the executive, are by convention chosen by the PM from amongst the directly elected MPs.
The PM can be forced to resign, alongside their Cabinet of Ministers, when a majority of MPs support a ‘motion/vote of no confidence.’ An election can be called at any time, with the maximum period between elections being 4 years.
This system of governance is shared with most Parliamentary and Semi-Presidential democracies with some minor differences.
Thanks for that summary. I think the big gap in my understanding is that the PM doesn’t even have to be an elected official. They essentially always are, but not having that codified is a surprise.
In my nightmare scenario, the cons eke out a majority, toss Pierre, and name Elon Musk as PM is Canada.
One catch: members of the House of Commons have to be elected to have a seat on the floor where debates and voting happens, so until elected in a byelection or national, Carney will be watching from the gallery and directing someone to put out his opinions. It happens sometimes in Parliament. Much of his work will be in meetings anyway.
It is definitely atypical for the PM not to be a sitting MP, but it is within the confines of the constitution. The PM only needs to be elected by and then maintain the confidence of parliament.
It’s almost certain that he will call an election immediately, however. A non sitting PM won’t maintain parliamentary confidence for long.
Or a Liberal MP in a safe seat will resign and Carney will stand in the subsequent by-election.
Look up Kim Campbell. Our only female Prime Minister.
It’s the same way in the US for the house majority leader (not sure about senate)
The elected members could vote for anyone. If Musk wanted to be the house leader, they are so far up his ass it would probably happen.
They can’t toss Pierre. He would have to step down (like Trudeau) or die. Then the party re-elects a new head who would become PM until an election is called or required as mentioned earlier, we will have an election no later than October this year.
Of course they can. They just don’t do what their whip tells them to do once they have a majority. There is no constitutional rule that party leader has to be PM; there is not even recognition of parties per se.
Not at all. The Conservative Party (like all parties) have regular party conventions. They can conduct a leadership review at the convention and start the process to replace the leader at that time.
You should learn about how parliamentary systems work
Good chance you’re a troll, but maybe take 5 minutes and look up how Canadian elections work?
Why discuss anything at all? Why ask any sort of question in a forum? After all, we can just look everything up.
You cannot have a discussion until you have done the basic research. Rather, you impose on others to educate you. That is different than having a meaningful discussion.
Why would anyone ask any question in lemmy comments? They can just google it.
Sometimes it’s fun to ask questions.
Hmm… 2 almost identical comments below mine. That isn’t suspicions at all
Even if the original question was asked in bad faith (not that I think this was the case here, but to address what you’re implying with this comment), responding with “go look it up elsewhere” doesn’t negate its effect for anyone reading. I believe it plays into those bad faith hands because it looks like you don’t want the question answered here to anyone already suspicious of the situation.
Ah yes. Nothing says man for the people like an international bank leader.
Maybe it’s time we let people who know how to handle an economy run countries? It’s not like the alternatives have been that great so far.
Jesus fuck thank you.
I don’t want an administrator or mechanic removing my appendix.
I hate that he’s the best option now and I am actively working to dismantle and replace orphan crushing capitalism, but at least he has a resume that is worth hiring for the job. Singh just hasn’t been very effective.
I would never let toddlers near my oscillating saw nor Poilievre near the Bill of Rights. Everyone who knows Skippy hates Skippy.
Singh is pretty good as opposition. “Pharmacare coverage for diabetes meds and birth control, or I will vote no confidence.” was a small win.
Yes, glad for the minority cooperation and coercion. Don’t think they could pull off a winning election though.
He’ll handle the economy in favor of the rich.
He was Governor of the Bank of Canada and Governor of the Bank of England. Those set policy in a global level and is very far from stock traders as you imply.
Again, it almost another binary race
The alternative is Polievre.
Take however long you like and decide which you’d prefer between the two. Don’t trump us.
The real weird part is he quit Brookfield’s ESG department to be the PM, and one of his only policies announced so far is to replace the carbon tax with a foreign emitters tariff style tax, and to allow them to buy carbon credits from company like Brookfield.
Which is known to be no more than greenwashing, as we are still the only county in the G7 without high speed rail, and he also supports mass immigration from low emitting country. Then there was talk of letting Brookfield manage Canadian pension system, its all very fishy.
We need a better economy and a way to fix things with Trump. This is a prime minister for at least until the elections in October 2025, could end before
I am not interested in appeasing Trump as you suggest It’s time to isolate and neutralize the US because they are unreliable and a danger to the world.
Why do we have to fix anything with Trump? The dumb cunt has blacklisted Switzerland as having “unfair trade”, and has alienated Mexico, China and Canada … and that’s happened in less than 7 weeks!
Within 4 months he’s gonna have a shit ton of nations solidly against him, and the embargos will start happening.
Fuck him and everyone who supports him. They can rot in hell.
“Fix things with Trump” can mean anything including back the American people in overthrowing him.
