The subhed, "Thoughts on two days at Davos," might leave the impression I was at Davos. Just to clarify, it's not so. I was watching on my laptop like the rest of you.
I really hope people don't camp out here to fight with anyone who disagrees with them. That's rarely productive. Have you made your point a couple of times? Then you've made your point.
Indeed, it "was only a speech". A panelist on a program that you frequently appear on said much the same offering the thought that it was only a speech but what have you done for us lately. Most ordinary Canadian exist in a state of increasing political depression weighed down by detailed commentary on the latest utterances from the Mad King and threats from the evil empire. "Only a speech" gave us some hope on two fronts. First, we have thoughtful leadership and, second, there alternatives to mindless appeasement out there that we (and others) can rally behind.
The importance of the speech, which couldn't have been predicted ahead of its delivery, lay in the fact that it was noticed around the world, was perceived by people who had not studied Carney in detail prior to Davos as being fresh and courageous, and was seen as a cold, hard shower by people who haven't been paying attention (which is an awful lot of people). If location is everything in real estate, timing is everything in speechifying. And if you get both right at the same time, you are suddenly a new world leader. In that sense, Carney nailed it. And if we care about the import the remarks, and the degree to which Canada suddenly gained considerable stature abroad because of it (something Trudeau had earnestly frittered away), then what does it matter that many of the speech's key points had been uttered in other places in other times? The speech met the moment.
I came here to say something similar. The intended audience for this speech was not us, clearly. It was the rest of the world, specifically leaders facing the same pressures as ours. It's clear from the global reaction that it landed. And, given our erratic neighbour's sudden climbdown today, it landed at just the right time.
I hope it has staying power because if we remember Trudeau was also fawned at Davos when he began and also on the cover of VanityFair. He used that boost to shame the rest of Canada, but I hope and think Carney will be different and his ego already satiated from previous success.
“Collective investments in resilience are cheaper than everyone building their own fortress.”
Carney did not mention or apologize being wrong on everything for the last decade.
Carney has left in place all of Trudeau's never-build-anything-anywhere-ever laws-and-regulations, except for a few projects where Carney and his crony corporatist pals have given themselves the ability to ignore those laws/regulatons, and extract rents for chosen foreign and domestic insiders. While everyone else is still blocked from investing in resilience.
After a decade of Laurentian/Liberal management under Trudeau and Carney, where Carney has been PM or a Trudeau economic advisor for half of, Canada can deliver a few drops of oil and no LNG to Asia or Europe. The Laurentian/Liberal management declared there was no business case for LNG.
Now Europe and the UK is critically dependent on US LNG, and on Qatari LNG (who host the largest US military base in the Gulf States region), and Russian LNG. With zero possibility in the foreseeable future for Canada to ameliorate the leverage two great powers have over Europe and the UK. Russian oil is also still getting to Europe via refined products from refineries in China and India.
Trump now has control of Venezuela's oil, and over the medium term will be able to increase the discount Canadian producers must bear to sell into the US market, and use it as leverage against Europe and Asia. He literally will be able to decide what price he wants to pay for Canadian oil by the dial he will have on Venezuela's oil exports to the US Gulf Coast. Because the Laurentian/Liberal establishment blocked the pipeline to the Northern BC coast and to the Atlantic coast. The east coast pipeline would have eliminated central Canada's dependence on line 5 through the US to receive its oil from Western Canada.
The US has over a decade headstart with energy leverage on Europe and Asia, which means they have the leverage in economic relationships with them over Canada.
The Canadian auto industry was probably a dead-man-walking anyways, but Carney guaranteed it with letting the Chinese in.
We are a year into the Carney government, and things are moving along as slowly as ever, instead of at a speed never seen in recent Canadian history.
Why should we trust the same gang of Laurentian/Liberals management going forward when they were so totally completely wrong for the last generation in preparing Canada for the future, and have accomplished basicallly nothing in the last year.
Hey, but Carney gave a nice speech. So European of him. All hat, no cattle.
Gerald sorry but I really disagree with your rant on the Laurentian elite again. Carney’s speech basically was to state Canada‘s position in the world and what we have to do now the work begins.
1.8 million cars are sold annually in Canada. 50k Chinese cheap EVs represent less than 3 % of the market in volume and probably less than 2 % in dollar value.
Venezuela'oil production is less than 1 M barrels per day and increasing it will require billions of investment that US oil companies are reluctant to do. Medium term you say. Long long term I say.
Your question about trust can be turned around. What is Polievre's plan ? He is quoted saying we should build a pipeline first and then negotiate from strength. Some plan. When 50 % of conservative voters in Canada think Trump is doing a good job, where does that leave Polievre vs Trump ?
PP proposes to defund the CBC to decrease the budget deficit. 2025 deficit $ 64.3 billion, CBC funding $ 1.38 billion, ergo to eliminate the deficit would require defunding the CBC 46 times, or say once a week ! Some plan.
Your rants against the ''laurentian elite'' and Carney's association with it ring hollow. But hey Polievre has been an MP for 19 years and in Ottawa since 2000 at age 21. Basically his one and only job. I guess he is much more qualified to run Canada than Carney.
You may honestly think so but I'm afraid the majority of voters think otherwise.
Would Polievre be as beholden to a voter base of Boomers, NGOs, public sector workers and the beneficiaries of Laurentian Capitalism (i.e. those working in protected industries)? Carney is obviously the better the leader but the new Liberals as still the same as the old Liberals. Balancing the budget and re-energizing private sector investment will require stark choices like massive cuts to the public sector, OAS reform and deregulation.
I feel like you don't understand energy markets and it's notable for all of the state largess directed towards to the energy sector no oil producer wants to sign an offtake agreement to actually make the financing possible for a new pipeline which tells you there is no actual demand for a new pipeline.
“When we only negotiate bilaterally with a hegemon, we negotiate from weakness, we accept what’s offered,” said the man who had almost literally just stepped off a plane directly from concluding a bilateral negotiation with China.
Hey, it was a good enough speech. If only it could translate into some sort of action... ("action" in this case being measured in anything OTHER than airmiles).
I know I pound on this a lot, but we literally elected this guy on a promise to get us a deal with Trump. Where is it? Will there BE a deal? Doesn't seem like it is trending well...
He ALSO said he was going to "get stuff done", and so far, in nine months of being in power, he has passed exactly one (1) bill.
We didn’t elect him to get us a deal with Trump. We elected him to diversify our trade and break down internal trade barriers. We elected him to “handle” Trump as best as anyone can.
And yet, Philip, I distinctly recall the Liberal advertising telling us that he was THE man, the ONLY man, who could handle DJT.
He has (kinda) FEDERAL eliminated internal trade barriers but he has not whatsoever knocked heads of the Premiers to eliminate PROVINCIAL internal trade barriers. The provincial barriers always have been the major impediments so unless and until he deals with those he has done pretty much nothing to increase internal trade.
". . . but we literally elected this guy on a promise to get us a deal with Trump."
I elected him because he wasn't the Leader of the Official Opposition. I don't think "a deal with Trump" is any more likely than a deal with Cocaine Bear.
NAFTA, CUSMA 1, CUSMA 2? So for Arguments sake , lets just say Mr Carney did sign an aggrement. Ten months, a year, hell lets give it a whole eighteen months, every one is " happy" ( not). Then one of Mr Trumps advisors says that the farmers in Wisconsin are hurting, Ford's profits are hurting, and US Steel owned by the Japanese, is contemplating layoffs because of cheap Chinese and Indian steel. How long do you feel that " aggrement" is going to last. Then the advisor whispers elections in Mr Trumps ear.
Yes that is true. But who was saying I want to make a deal. I Want to make a deal. Nafta was not good enough.Then the President signed CUSMA. The greatest deal ever. What happened to the greatest deal ever. If memory serves me right that deal is dead now as well. CUSMA2? There is no deal to be had, that has become abundantly clear, unless of course that deal is submission, dont you understand that.
GS I know that you may have been born at night but you weren't born last night.
If you want to see where this is going please pick up a book from Substacker
Christopher Messina
Messina's Federal Budget.
I assure you it will be an interesting and enlightening read.
Ir seems clear to me that Carney has decided that stalling is the best way to deal with Trump. I bet the Europeans now wish they had followed that strategy rather than striking lopsided deals in hope of appeasing him.
Remember that the world does not end should CUMSA not be renewed. It will be followed by years of continuation of the agreement. Much can change in the mean time.
Not true - We elected "this guy" because he was the best option among those presenting themselves as potential leaders of the country. He has said innumerable times before and after being elected that while the USA is likely to remain the country's preeminent customer, the country must diversify its trading relationships and become less reliant on the United States. Further, the US administration has become even more bellicose, disrespectful, mendacious, menacing and boorish since April of last year and is now intransigent on trade and tariffs. There is no deal to be had with such people that is worth the paper it is written on. So, our PM has been travelling the world with the goal of opening doors for our business people to walk through and of attracting investment from sources other than the Americans. In a 4+ year mandate, it is still early days. But to say that he isn't taking action is nonsense. Perhaps you should direct your ire at a complacent business class in this country or at provincial premieres who dissemble at every opportunity and have made little progress in dismantling interprovincial trade barriers which would boost the country's productivity and GDP.
Sorry, like him or hate him, he did not run on getting a deal done with Trump. This is simply false. He has been referring to the US as a no longer reliable partner since day one.
To make a non-partisan comment about the Carney speech in Davos, I think it is a generation too soon to proclaim that the speech is a game changer, or "the most important speech since _______. "
I say that because it is what happens AFTER that will shape the speech into its historical context. Churchill's magnificent "fight them on the beaches" peroration is memorable in itself, but its galvanizing effect on a nation that went on to fight against incredible odds is an outstanding achievement of political will and leadership.
I wish the Prime Minister all the best as we all should, but the test drive in Davos must be converted into action, not only in partnership with other willing nations but especially here at home. If Carney thinks that trade deals with Washington are a waste of time, he should stand in Parliament and say so, and lay out his plans for alternatives. He should be open to collaborating with opposition parties to build the broad consensus needed for political stability and for true progress in these dark times.
If historians look back at the Davos speech as a positive game changer for the world order and international security, that would really be something.
I believe that carney has already done quite a bit with major trade deals around the world in the last year, including the one with China now and next, he’s going to India. No the USA is not a reliable partner as long as Trump is in office. We can’t wait around for the Americans to be nice to us again we are middle power and they basically have always ignored us or taken what they want. it’s not up to Carney to say in parliament that he doesn’t want to do business with the Americans, what he said over and over again is that we have to diversify our markets all around the world and this is something Canadian have to wake up to.
I don’t believe Carney thinks trade deals with Washington are a waste of time. We cannot wait around for Washington to re-engage in meaningful discussions. While we wait for the inevitable, eventual impact of their punishing tariffs on their own economy, there are other markets we must explore to mitigate the impact on ours, to the extent we can. Washington must be very busy managing all the chaos they’ve created.
He is, no doubt, open to working with a number of opposition party members to achieve political stability. I’m being a bit cheeky but I also support most of what you wrote there.
(I did note how little support my call for action on building homes for Canadians garnered under the post the other day. Maybe folks didn’t see the connection but it seems pretty obvious to me.)
I am disappointed you chose to portray Carney's contribution yesterday as 'only a speech'. True, it wasn't Churchill's 'some chicken, some neck' nor Obama's 2004 DNC keynote address, but 'only a speech' verges unnecessarily on insulting. I saw it as the best rallying cry for the EU to get its big-boy pants on that's I've encountered so far. The speech had real value.
Sorry to disappoint, because I know you’re a careful student of these things. Part of what I meant is that any speech is only a speech. As for this one, we’ll all get to see what real-world effect it has over time.
The speech wasn't "brilliant" as so many Liberal friends, and other commentators, have suggested, rather it was a well crafted summary of what Carney has already said in his (non-Canadian published) book, Value(s), updated to meet the moment. Real-world effect? I figure it should move a few more copies.
At the risk of giving Carney too much credit, perhaps the speech was primarily intended to move the live audience: delivered in the EU to a mostly EU crowd, undoubtedly hitting their news cycle. The first place Carney as PM traveled was to the EU, without any result. So maybe the purpose was another pitch: we will also do one-offs with EU members wherever possible.
Reading german news media, I have not seen a single article mentioning Carney’s speech. Europe’s doing what it should’ve done earlier: changing course.
Thank you for not slobbering all over our PM's...err... legitimately interesting speech. That several were referencing Churchill yesterday was more than a bit hyperbolic and, frankly, shameful.
I'm thankful you were more restrained and reserved in sharing your thoughts.
I watched and read the speech, and while I don't think he was actually trying to be hypocritical....well....let's just say he either lacked self-awareness or ignored it.
Don't get me wrong - our previous PM and current Oppo Leader have never delivered a speech quite like Carney did yesterday, but that's not actually grounds for comparing it to the greatest speeches in history. It was a good speech that hit some important points but ignored the track record of the (still) governing Liberal Party of Canada.
Carney wrote that speech this is what Chantal Hebert confirmed today. The Havel story is not about communism. Havel was not a communist. It is a metaphor for what Canadians must do to stand up to the bully instead of always being on our knees, begging the Americans to buy our stuff at whatever price and also China is our number two trade partner like it or not we can’t ignore China. We cannot ignore India. We have to get away from the Americans, but I believe that there’s quite a few Canadians who like being dictated by the USA.
Paul, I think you short shrift Carney here, mostly I guess in your zeal to not appear too pro-Carney. You are not wrong in your points but you missed the reasons behind the rapturous response. This was in many ways the rallying call people around the world have been waiting for, complete with bracing truths. It was courageous for him to do so on that stage just a day before Trump. That we as close watchers of canadian politics have heard most of it all before is besides the point. Nice CJ Creg reference, though. And thank you for turning the comments on. And glad you got some traction with your first to post.
However you parse it, our PM delivered a corker that we all needed.
Intentions. Lots of visits, lots of travel, photo ops… anything concrete yet? He sure loves to not be here, has he done anything yet that will bring relief to anyone?
It depends what you mean by “trade deals.” If you mean big, full free-trade agreements (FTAs), those take longer to negotiate and then still need legal/ratification steps. So the claim “he signed several trade deals in the last month alone” is overstated.
It was a great speech. But: have we permitted an LNG pipeline? Have we started a civil defence programme and cancelled the seizure of long guns from citizens? Have we done anything that actually will make Europe and the middle powers want to step up to defend Canada?
France isn’t going to go to nuclear war to defend Canada. And we’re the ones under direct threat from the USA, not Europe. (If push comes to shove, Greenland is not exactly core European homeland worth dying over.) Europe’s threat is Russia and Canada can’t help there unless we raise an expeditionary army.
We need to be able to actually offer the world something it wants if Canada is to forge new alliances. I like Carney, I voted for him, I think he’s an intelligent guy, so I’ve given him a year of grace.
But: going to Europe and making great speeches is politically popular. Taking on B.C., Quebec, and the anti-development First Nations in order to get stuff built will cost him political capital. Or defy the anti-military Liberal base and start modestly militarizing society for civil defence. When will we see that? He doesn’t have forever.
There is a curious divergence between the perspective of pundits versus the lay public on Carney’s Davos speech. Equally curious are the contrasting behaviours of factions in the US.
Canadians I’ve talked to here and around the world are thrilled by Carney’s speech. Not because it revealed a Liberal platform for the country or rousing partisan rhetoric to appease the disaffected. They loved it because it was quintessential: calm, pragmatic, intelligent, self-reflective, gutsy and courageous. It contained no hyperbole, no self-aggrandizement, no partisanship, no lies or even half-truths. No theatre just a promise of hard work. It wasn’t even slightly charismatic. It was respectful not spiteful. It was defiant. Don’t touch Canada’s mosaic nation or your hand will be badly bitten. It was quintessentially Canadian.
Great minds in the US were dazzled. Robert Reich’s ‘O Canada’. David French’s essay on ‘rupture’ and many more with sighs of ‘I wish we had said that’. Even the the idiots noticed – suddenly backing off threats to Greenland. And, a curious quiet in the MAGA propaganda machine. It wasn’t a P.E.Trudeau “…just watch me.” It was: “Just watch us.”
So we know now that Carney wrote that speech himself, and we also know that he got a standing ovation after this speech something that never happens at Davos. What Kearney did was to state what our foreign policy will be and what our investment targets will be by diversifying our trade. He has been working very hard at getting trade deals and investments and that’s very important more so today. We were told 60 years ago by Trudeau father that we had to diversify our economy. We didn’t do much we have to do it now. I believe that the government will continue with their program of diversification and he has the provinces on board which is very good and finally signing a trade deal with China is not the end of the world. They are our number two trade partner. The 49,000 EV in Canada is a drop in the bucket and it will be a huge opportunity for all Canadiens not only to get a cheap car but also to create a newer business opportunities for us. As for CUSMA, don’t be surprised if Trump cancels the whole thing and puts even more economic pressure on Canada. So we must prepare and have faith in the future and in our country. Bitching about the Trudeau years is not gonna solve anything you have to get over it.
The subhed, "Thoughts on two days at Davos," might leave the impression I was at Davos. Just to clarify, it's not so. I was watching on my laptop like the rest of you.
I really hope people don't camp out here to fight with anyone who disagrees with them. That's rarely productive. Have you made your point a couple of times? Then you've made your point.
Indeed, it "was only a speech". A panelist on a program that you frequently appear on said much the same offering the thought that it was only a speech but what have you done for us lately. Most ordinary Canadian exist in a state of increasing political depression weighed down by detailed commentary on the latest utterances from the Mad King and threats from the evil empire. "Only a speech" gave us some hope on two fronts. First, we have thoughtful leadership and, second, there alternatives to mindless appeasement out there that we (and others) can rally behind.
The importance of the speech, which couldn't have been predicted ahead of its delivery, lay in the fact that it was noticed around the world, was perceived by people who had not studied Carney in detail prior to Davos as being fresh and courageous, and was seen as a cold, hard shower by people who haven't been paying attention (which is an awful lot of people). If location is everything in real estate, timing is everything in speechifying. And if you get both right at the same time, you are suddenly a new world leader. In that sense, Carney nailed it. And if we care about the import the remarks, and the degree to which Canada suddenly gained considerable stature abroad because of it (something Trudeau had earnestly frittered away), then what does it matter that many of the speech's key points had been uttered in other places in other times? The speech met the moment.
I came here to say something similar. The intended audience for this speech was not us, clearly. It was the rest of the world, specifically leaders facing the same pressures as ours. It's clear from the global reaction that it landed. And, given our erratic neighbour's sudden climbdown today, it landed at just the right time.
I hope it has staying power because if we remember Trudeau was also fawned at Davos when he began and also on the cover of VanityFair. He used that boost to shame the rest of Canada, but I hope and think Carney will be different and his ego already satiated from previous success.
“Collective investments in resilience are cheaper than everyone building their own fortress.”
Carney did not mention or apologize being wrong on everything for the last decade.
Carney has left in place all of Trudeau's never-build-anything-anywhere-ever laws-and-regulations, except for a few projects where Carney and his crony corporatist pals have given themselves the ability to ignore those laws/regulatons, and extract rents for chosen foreign and domestic insiders. While everyone else is still blocked from investing in resilience.
After a decade of Laurentian/Liberal management under Trudeau and Carney, where Carney has been PM or a Trudeau economic advisor for half of, Canada can deliver a few drops of oil and no LNG to Asia or Europe. The Laurentian/Liberal management declared there was no business case for LNG.
Now Europe and the UK is critically dependent on US LNG, and on Qatari LNG (who host the largest US military base in the Gulf States region), and Russian LNG. With zero possibility in the foreseeable future for Canada to ameliorate the leverage two great powers have over Europe and the UK. Russian oil is also still getting to Europe via refined products from refineries in China and India.
Trump now has control of Venezuela's oil, and over the medium term will be able to increase the discount Canadian producers must bear to sell into the US market, and use it as leverage against Europe and Asia. He literally will be able to decide what price he wants to pay for Canadian oil by the dial he will have on Venezuela's oil exports to the US Gulf Coast. Because the Laurentian/Liberal establishment blocked the pipeline to the Northern BC coast and to the Atlantic coast. The east coast pipeline would have eliminated central Canada's dependence on line 5 through the US to receive its oil from Western Canada.
The US has over a decade headstart with energy leverage on Europe and Asia, which means they have the leverage in economic relationships with them over Canada.
The Canadian auto industry was probably a dead-man-walking anyways, but Carney guaranteed it with letting the Chinese in.
We are a year into the Carney government, and things are moving along as slowly as ever, instead of at a speed never seen in recent Canadian history.
Why should we trust the same gang of Laurentian/Liberals management going forward when they were so totally completely wrong for the last generation in preparing Canada for the future, and have accomplished basicallly nothing in the last year.
Hey, but Carney gave a nice speech. So European of him. All hat, no cattle.
Gerald sorry but I really disagree with your rant on the Laurentian elite again. Carney’s speech basically was to state Canada‘s position in the world and what we have to do now the work begins.
1.8 million cars are sold annually in Canada. 50k Chinese cheap EVs represent less than 3 % of the market in volume and probably less than 2 % in dollar value.
Venezuela'oil production is less than 1 M barrels per day and increasing it will require billions of investment that US oil companies are reluctant to do. Medium term you say. Long long term I say.
Your question about trust can be turned around. What is Polievre's plan ? He is quoted saying we should build a pipeline first and then negotiate from strength. Some plan. When 50 % of conservative voters in Canada think Trump is doing a good job, where does that leave Polievre vs Trump ?
PP proposes to defund the CBC to decrease the budget deficit. 2025 deficit $ 64.3 billion, CBC funding $ 1.38 billion, ergo to eliminate the deficit would require defunding the CBC 46 times, or say once a week ! Some plan.
Your rants against the ''laurentian elite'' and Carney's association with it ring hollow. But hey Polievre has been an MP for 19 years and in Ottawa since 2000 at age 21. Basically his one and only job. I guess he is much more qualified to run Canada than Carney.
You may honestly think so but I'm afraid the majority of voters think otherwise.
Would Polievre be as beholden to a voter base of Boomers, NGOs, public sector workers and the beneficiaries of Laurentian Capitalism (i.e. those working in protected industries)? Carney is obviously the better the leader but the new Liberals as still the same as the old Liberals. Balancing the budget and re-energizing private sector investment will require stark choices like massive cuts to the public sector, OAS reform and deregulation.
Gerald, your penultimate paragraph leads with a question, "Why should we trust the same gang of Laurentian/Liberals management going forward ...?"
The answer is that we shouldn't trust them whatsoever.
I feel like you don't understand energy markets and it's notable for all of the state largess directed towards to the energy sector no oil producer wants to sign an offtake agreement to actually make the financing possible for a new pipeline which tells you there is no actual demand for a new pipeline.
“When we only negotiate bilaterally with a hegemon, we negotiate from weakness, we accept what’s offered,” said the man who had almost literally just stepped off a plane directly from concluding a bilateral negotiation with China.
Hey, it was a good enough speech. If only it could translate into some sort of action... ("action" in this case being measured in anything OTHER than airmiles).
I know I pound on this a lot, but we literally elected this guy on a promise to get us a deal with Trump. Where is it? Will there BE a deal? Doesn't seem like it is trending well...
He ALSO said he was going to "get stuff done", and so far, in nine months of being in power, he has passed exactly one (1) bill.
We didn’t elect him to get us a deal with Trump. We elected him to diversify our trade and break down internal trade barriers. We elected him to “handle” Trump as best as anyone can.
What a wonderful and comforting (yet completely revisionist) statement...
I can see why it got a ton of thumbs up. Rationalization is a powerful drug.
You'll have to teach me how to read minds one day. For now you'll just have to take my word on what I was thinking when I voted.
I am not trying to guess what your mindset is and/or was - I am very focused on what Mark Carney said Mark Carney would do (and has not done).
And yet, Philip, I distinctly recall the Liberal advertising telling us that he was THE man, the ONLY man, who could handle DJT.
He has (kinda) FEDERAL eliminated internal trade barriers but he has not whatsoever knocked heads of the Premiers to eliminate PROVINCIAL internal trade barriers. The provincial barriers always have been the major impediments so unless and until he deals with those he has done pretty much nothing to increase internal trade.
". . . but we literally elected this guy on a promise to get us a deal with Trump."
I elected him because he wasn't the Leader of the Official Opposition. I don't think "a deal with Trump" is any more likely than a deal with Cocaine Bear.
I didn’t think it was likely either, for what it’s worth.
But that’s what he promised.
NAFTA, CUSMA 1, CUSMA 2? So for Arguments sake , lets just say Mr Carney did sign an aggrement. Ten months, a year, hell lets give it a whole eighteen months, every one is " happy" ( not). Then one of Mr Trumps advisors says that the farmers in Wisconsin are hurting, Ford's profits are hurting, and US Steel owned by the Japanese, is contemplating layoffs because of cheap Chinese and Indian steel. How long do you feel that " aggrement" is going to last. Then the advisor whispers elections in Mr Trumps ear.
ALL of that was true LONG before Carney made "getting a deal with Trump" his big election promise.
Yes that is true. But who was saying I want to make a deal. I Want to make a deal. Nafta was not good enough.Then the President signed CUSMA. The greatest deal ever. What happened to the greatest deal ever. If memory serves me right that deal is dead now as well. CUSMA2? There is no deal to be had, that has become abundantly clear, unless of course that deal is submission, dont you understand that.
GS I know that you may have been born at night but you weren't born last night.
If you want to see where this is going please pick up a book from Substacker
Christopher Messina
Messina's Federal Budget.
I assure you it will be an interesting and enlightening read.
Even speaks to the Greenland situation.
Ir seems clear to me that Carney has decided that stalling is the best way to deal with Trump. I bet the Europeans now wish they had followed that strategy rather than striking lopsided deals in hope of appeasing him.
Remember that the world does not end should CUMSA not be renewed. It will be followed by years of continuation of the agreement. Much can change in the mean time.
He should have run on that then.
Not true - We elected "this guy" because he was the best option among those presenting themselves as potential leaders of the country. He has said innumerable times before and after being elected that while the USA is likely to remain the country's preeminent customer, the country must diversify its trading relationships and become less reliant on the United States. Further, the US administration has become even more bellicose, disrespectful, mendacious, menacing and boorish since April of last year and is now intransigent on trade and tariffs. There is no deal to be had with such people that is worth the paper it is written on. So, our PM has been travelling the world with the goal of opening doors for our business people to walk through and of attracting investment from sources other than the Americans. In a 4+ year mandate, it is still early days. But to say that he isn't taking action is nonsense. Perhaps you should direct your ire at a complacent business class in this country or at provincial premieres who dissemble at every opportunity and have made little progress in dismantling interprovincial trade barriers which would boost the country's productivity and GDP.
👏🇨🇦
Sorry, like him or hate him, he did not run on getting a deal done with Trump. This is simply false. He has been referring to the US as a no longer reliable partner since day one.
To make a non-partisan comment about the Carney speech in Davos, I think it is a generation too soon to proclaim that the speech is a game changer, or "the most important speech since _______. "
I say that because it is what happens AFTER that will shape the speech into its historical context. Churchill's magnificent "fight them on the beaches" peroration is memorable in itself, but its galvanizing effect on a nation that went on to fight against incredible odds is an outstanding achievement of political will and leadership.
I wish the Prime Minister all the best as we all should, but the test drive in Davos must be converted into action, not only in partnership with other willing nations but especially here at home. If Carney thinks that trade deals with Washington are a waste of time, he should stand in Parliament and say so, and lay out his plans for alternatives. He should be open to collaborating with opposition parties to build the broad consensus needed for political stability and for true progress in these dark times.
If historians look back at the Davos speech as a positive game changer for the world order and international security, that would really be something.
I believe that carney has already done quite a bit with major trade deals around the world in the last year, including the one with China now and next, he’s going to India. No the USA is not a reliable partner as long as Trump is in office. We can’t wait around for the Americans to be nice to us again we are middle power and they basically have always ignored us or taken what they want. it’s not up to Carney to say in parliament that he doesn’t want to do business with the Americans, what he said over and over again is that we have to diversify our markets all around the world and this is something Canadian have to wake up to.
Mr. Wells has kindly opened the door to comments on this article. Last word is yours.
I don’t believe Carney thinks trade deals with Washington are a waste of time. We cannot wait around for Washington to re-engage in meaningful discussions. While we wait for the inevitable, eventual impact of their punishing tariffs on their own economy, there are other markets we must explore to mitigate the impact on ours, to the extent we can. Washington must be very busy managing all the chaos they’ve created.
He is, no doubt, open to working with a number of opposition party members to achieve political stability. I’m being a bit cheeky but I also support most of what you wrote there.
(I did note how little support my call for action on building homes for Canadians garnered under the post the other day. Maybe folks didn’t see the connection but it seems pretty obvious to me.)
War time often brings opposing political forces together in a coalition government situation.
Is Canada at war now, or just trading pot shots in a war of words?
I am disappointed you chose to portray Carney's contribution yesterday as 'only a speech'. True, it wasn't Churchill's 'some chicken, some neck' nor Obama's 2004 DNC keynote address, but 'only a speech' verges unnecessarily on insulting. I saw it as the best rallying cry for the EU to get its big-boy pants on that's I've encountered so far. The speech had real value.
Sorry to disappoint, because I know you’re a careful student of these things. Part of what I meant is that any speech is only a speech. As for this one, we’ll all get to see what real-world effect it has over time.
The speech wasn't "brilliant" as so many Liberal friends, and other commentators, have suggested, rather it was a well crafted summary of what Carney has already said in his (non-Canadian published) book, Value(s), updated to meet the moment. Real-world effect? I figure it should move a few more copies.
A very pointed comment from someone who knows a little bit about word craft. Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
At the risk of giving Carney too much credit, perhaps the speech was primarily intended to move the live audience: delivered in the EU to a mostly EU crowd, undoubtedly hitting their news cycle. The first place Carney as PM traveled was to the EU, without any result. So maybe the purpose was another pitch: we will also do one-offs with EU members wherever possible.
Reading german news media, I have not seen a single article mentioning Carney’s speech. Europe’s doing what it should’ve done earlier: changing course.
Thank you for not slobbering all over our PM's...err... legitimately interesting speech. That several were referencing Churchill yesterday was more than a bit hyperbolic and, frankly, shameful.
I'm thankful you were more restrained and reserved in sharing your thoughts.
I watched and read the speech, and while I don't think he was actually trying to be hypocritical....well....let's just say he either lacked self-awareness or ignored it.
Don't get me wrong - our previous PM and current Oppo Leader have never delivered a speech quite like Carney did yesterday, but that's not actually grounds for comparing it to the greatest speeches in history. It was a good speech that hit some important points but ignored the track record of the (still) governing Liberal Party of Canada.
I admit that I thought it was weird that Carney was hailed for citing Havel's greengrocer, immediately after a trip to cosy up to the CCP.
Carney wrote that speech this is what Chantal Hebert confirmed today. The Havel story is not about communism. Havel was not a communist. It is a metaphor for what Canadians must do to stand up to the bully instead of always being on our knees, begging the Americans to buy our stuff at whatever price and also China is our number two trade partner like it or not we can’t ignore China. We cannot ignore India. We have to get away from the Americans, but I believe that there’s quite a few Canadians who like being dictated by the USA.
Paul, I think you short shrift Carney here, mostly I guess in your zeal to not appear too pro-Carney. You are not wrong in your points but you missed the reasons behind the rapturous response. This was in many ways the rallying call people around the world have been waiting for, complete with bracing truths. It was courageous for him to do so on that stage just a day before Trump. That we as close watchers of canadian politics have heard most of it all before is besides the point. Nice CJ Creg reference, though. And thank you for turning the comments on. And glad you got some traction with your first to post.
However you parse it, our PM delivered a corker that we all needed.
Unfortunately for Canada, Carney is full of clichés but very short on delivery so far.
I think it would be very easy to name some of the trade deals. He signed in the last month alone so to me, those are clear gains for us.
Intentions. Lots of visits, lots of travel, photo ops… anything concrete yet? He sure loves to not be here, has he done anything yet that will bring relief to anyone?
Write to your Premier for help. LOL!
My premier is working hard to try and fix Ottawa’s numerous screw ups.
Hard to believe
How so?
It depends what you mean by “trade deals.” If you mean big, full free-trade agreements (FTAs), those take longer to negotiate and then still need legal/ratification steps. So the claim “he signed several trade deals in the last month alone” is overstated.
It was a great speech. But: have we permitted an LNG pipeline? Have we started a civil defence programme and cancelled the seizure of long guns from citizens? Have we done anything that actually will make Europe and the middle powers want to step up to defend Canada?
France isn’t going to go to nuclear war to defend Canada. And we’re the ones under direct threat from the USA, not Europe. (If push comes to shove, Greenland is not exactly core European homeland worth dying over.) Europe’s threat is Russia and Canada can’t help there unless we raise an expeditionary army.
We need to be able to actually offer the world something it wants if Canada is to forge new alliances. I like Carney, I voted for him, I think he’s an intelligent guy, so I’ve given him a year of grace.
But: going to Europe and making great speeches is politically popular. Taking on B.C., Quebec, and the anti-development First Nations in order to get stuff built will cost him political capital. Or defy the anti-military Liberal base and start modestly militarizing society for civil defence. When will we see that? He doesn’t have forever.
The wheels of the government turned slowly and patience, is a virtue. He has already started the engine let us wait and see.
Best column head ever: “Not for all the Somalians in Iceland”.
There is a curious divergence between the perspective of pundits versus the lay public on Carney’s Davos speech. Equally curious are the contrasting behaviours of factions in the US.
Canadians I’ve talked to here and around the world are thrilled by Carney’s speech. Not because it revealed a Liberal platform for the country or rousing partisan rhetoric to appease the disaffected. They loved it because it was quintessential: calm, pragmatic, intelligent, self-reflective, gutsy and courageous. It contained no hyperbole, no self-aggrandizement, no partisanship, no lies or even half-truths. No theatre just a promise of hard work. It wasn’t even slightly charismatic. It was respectful not spiteful. It was defiant. Don’t touch Canada’s mosaic nation or your hand will be badly bitten. It was quintessentially Canadian.
Great minds in the US were dazzled. Robert Reich’s ‘O Canada’. David French’s essay on ‘rupture’ and many more with sighs of ‘I wish we had said that’. Even the the idiots noticed – suddenly backing off threats to Greenland. And, a curious quiet in the MAGA propaganda machine. It wasn’t a P.E.Trudeau “…just watch me.” It was: “Just watch us.”
So we know now that Carney wrote that speech himself, and we also know that he got a standing ovation after this speech something that never happens at Davos. What Kearney did was to state what our foreign policy will be and what our investment targets will be by diversifying our trade. He has been working very hard at getting trade deals and investments and that’s very important more so today. We were told 60 years ago by Trudeau father that we had to diversify our economy. We didn’t do much we have to do it now. I believe that the government will continue with their program of diversification and he has the provinces on board which is very good and finally signing a trade deal with China is not the end of the world. They are our number two trade partner. The 49,000 EV in Canada is a drop in the bucket and it will be a huge opportunity for all Canadiens not only to get a cheap car but also to create a newer business opportunities for us. As for CUSMA, don’t be surprised if Trump cancels the whole thing and puts even more economic pressure on Canada. So we must prepare and have faith in the future and in our country. Bitching about the Trudeau years is not gonna solve anything you have to get over it.