Liberal Minority Government 2025 - ???

[brihard]

The problem for many is Carney's past support and position on all the things Trudeau was doing. Only the message during the election campaign was different. All the players are the same now as then.

We'll see if Carney does what he has now said, vs what history suggests me may do.

If Carney pivots from his past stance - I'm stuck between two thoughts:

- Carney recognized his party's policy (that he was behind) were bad and he is changing and now doing good! A big improvement!
vs
- Carney's instincts were terrible, remain terrible, and he pivoted to get and retain power and we'll see a creep back to bad policy. His inner circle suggests this to be accurate.

Only time will tell. I didn't want to take the chance, but enough voters apparently did.

Completely fair to have skepticism based on past articulated positions, or at least one’s interpretations of them. It’s also one thing for someone to be offering positions and policies from a chair that’s not at the head of the table. Advisors offer advice within their portfolio, from where they sit. Once you’re in the big chair, you have many other things to consider.

And, as they teach us in battle procedure, one must ask: “has the situation changed”? I think Carney recognizes at least to some extent that it has.

We’ll have a speech from the throne in three weeks, and a budget likely soon after. From those we’ll get a sense about what Carney’s policy priorities actually are. In that same time he’ll also be working the U.S. problem.

I figure by maybe late June as Parliament approaches the summer recess we’ll be in a position to have a good initial feel for where he wants to take things.

 

[dapaterson]

I figure by maybe late June as Parliament approaches the summer recess we’ll be in a position to have a good initial feel for where he wants to take things.

There are mutterings that the summer recess may be abbreviated or abandoned.

 

[Jarnhamar]

The problem for many is Carney's past support and position on all the things Trudeau was doing. Only the message during the election campaign was different. All the players are the same now as then.

100%

We'll see if Carney does what he has now said, vs what history suggests me may do.

If Carney pivots from his past stance - I'm stuck between two thoughts:

- Carney recognized his party's policy (that he was behind) were bad and he is changing and now doing good! A big improvement!
vs
- Carney's instincts were terrible, remain terrible, and he pivoted to get and retain power and we'll see a creep back to bad policy. His inner circle suggests this to be accurate.

Only time will tell. I didn't want to take the chance, but enough voters apparently did.

Besides losing thousands of dollars (or tens of thousands with the status quo) I'm excited about being humbled and proven wrong about Carney. He might have that new perspective, drain the swamp approach I was crossing my fingers Trump had. If Carney changes the political landscape Canada is stagnated with then (almost) everyone wins.

Let's see if his supporters have the integrity to call him out if he falters or just make excuses the next 4 or 8 years.

 

[Remius]

Not in my book. MPs supported Trudeau lockstep through everything with their nothing to see here mantra every time he, or one of them, got caught.
MP votes are needed in Parliament to pass bills, which Trudeau got.

Welcome to party politics and whipped votes. Nothing new there. The CPC did the same thing when voting against an Ukraine trade deal or against the housing accelerator fund that a lot of their members wanted.

You hit the nail on the head here. Canadians generally didn't care about the scandals because they weren't impacted and it wasn't related to them.
$45678909876.00 gets wasted on who knows what? Who cares, what even is that number? I'm sure someone benefitted so that must be good.

Yes. And when the opposition cried wolf so many times it becomes white noise.

Or GC Strategies. I suppose it was nice Canadian company Brookfield was able to help a Canadian citizen buy Twitter.

Carney when he was there was responsible to his shareholders. By all accounts he did a great job. Your pension plan is likely doing great in part to his stewardship at Brookfield.

But that's not the point. I'm guessing you don't see any conflict of interest behind the Carney government awarding Brookfield contracts as long as Carney isn't signing the dotted line approving it?

If it’s done by the rules, why would I? I don’t expect business to stop just because.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Welcome to party politics and whipped votes. Nothing new there. The CPC did the same thing when voting against an Ukraine trade deal or against the housing accelerator fund that a lot of their members wanted.

Yes. And when the opposition cried wolf so many times it becomes white noise.

Carney when he was there was responsible to his shareholders. By all accounts he did a great job. Your pension plan is likely doing great in part to his stewardship at Brookfield.

All good points.

If it’s done by the rules, why would I? I don’t expect business to stop just because.

That's fair. You might also think the rules need to be strengthened, and perhaps more importantly, the scale of punishment increased. What happened in the SNC case? Fuck all. I'm punished more severely for being late to work.

 

[Remius]

All good points.


That's fair. You might also think the rules need to be strengthened, and perhaps more importantly, the scale of punishment increased. What happened in the SNC case? Fuck all. I'm punished more severely for being late to work.

I’m all for more strengthened rules and enforcement.

 

[Remius]

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/conservative-support-some-liberal-legislation-1.7526468

Looks promising.

 

[Blackadder1916]

But that's not the point. I'm guessing you don't see any conflict of interest behind the Carney government awarding Brookfield contracts as long as Carney isn't signing the dotted line approving it?

I couldn't help but wonder what sort of contracts the PM could spoon-feed Brookfield that would so energize their bottom line that it would override the PM's and the company's sense of self protection that they would risk not only the public outrage but the potential criminal entanglement. But, I suppose my understanding of the present structure of the company, and the part that Carney was primarily involved with (asset management - investing other groups money), overlooked the myriad subsidiaries that the Brookfield heritage contained, particularly facilities management. However, a quick search did find a list of contracts that 'Brookfield' has and the things that they do for government.

Search Government Contracts over $10,000

 

[The Bread Guy]

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/conservative-support-some-liberal-legislation-1.7526468

Looks promising.

Great first step, for sure.

It'll be interesting to see what, if anything, happens on Jenni Byrne's x.com feed after this, given her track record dissing a different former leader more than once already.

 

[MilEME09]

I couldn't help but wonder what sort of contracts the PM could spoon-feed Brookfield that would so energize their bottom line that it would override the PM's and the company's sense of self protection that they would risk not only the public outrage but the potential criminal entanglement. But, I suppose my understanding of the present structure of the company, and the part that Carney was primarily involved with (asset management - investing other groups money), overlooked the myriad subsidiaries that the Brookfield heritage contained, particularly facilities management. However, a quick search did find a list of contracts that 'Brookfield' has and the things that they do for government.

Search Government Contracts over $10,000

I highly doubt the government would risk a conflict of interest that they know would destroy them in the polls

 

[ModlrMike]

I would argue that this is how parliament is supposed to function. It should not be binary, confrontational, and opposition for the sake of opposing. Perhaps a more conciliatory approach would be more beneficial to the Torries than anything they've tried thus far.

 

[IKnowNothing]

I couldn't help but wonder what sort of contracts the PM could spoon-feed Brookfield that would so energize their bottom line that it would override the PM's and the company's sense of self protection that they would risk not only the public outrage but the potential criminal entanglement. But, I suppose my understanding of the present structure of the company, and the part that Carney was primarily involved with (asset management - investing other groups money), overlooked the myriad subsidiaries that the Brookfield heritage contained, particularly facilities management. However, a quick search did find a list of contracts that 'Brookfield' has and the things that they do for government.

Search Government Contracts over $10,000

I highly doubt the government would risk a conflict of interest that they know would destroy them in the polls

I think we are far greyer waters than that given the connections already being made. As we're seeing now, even following the Act there's a very good chance that there's going to be the appearance of impropriety. Carney puts us into a strange place in terms of conflict of interest. An economist with a vision for change who was using markets and investment to drive said change while also making shareholders strong returns- is now in the position to drive that change via the Federal government. Even if the implementation is 100% above board and by the book, his continued pursuit of that agenda is likely to create a business environment more favourable to the sorts of companies BAM Impact invested in.
It's going to draw fire to some degree.

 

[MilEME09]

I think we are far greyer waters than that given the connections already being made. As we're seeing now, even following the Act there's a very good chance that there's going to be the appearance of impropriety. Carney puts us into a strange place in terms of conflict of interest. An economist with a vision for change who was using markets and investment to drive said change while also making shareholders strong returns- is now in the position to drive that change via the Federal government. Even if the implementation is 100% above board and by the book, his continued pursuit of that agenda is likely to create a business environment more favourable to the sorts of companies BAM Impact invested in.
It's going to draw fire to some degree.

The problem is with how inter connected the markets are, it doesn't matter what he does, brookfield stocks will likely increase if the economy does well which the CPC can then scream he is benefiting or helping his former employer. He needs to take public steps to distance him self from any decisions that might directly impact brookfield

 

[MilEME09]

Some good news for AB, oil prices have been tanking, but in a small part due to TMX, the price differential is dramatically less now.

 

[IKnowNothing]

The problem is with how inter connected the markets are, it doesn't matter what he does, brookfield stocks will likely increase if the economy does well which the CPC can then scream he is benefiting or helping his former employer. He needs to take public steps to distance him self from any decisions that might directly impact brookfield

That's what I'm trying to get at- I don't think that's possible without him completely renouncing his agenda. BAM has been built around investing in exactly the kind of products/solutions/etc that he believes in. His platform is shaped around building the future Canadian economy around these types of things. Companies that BAM controls or has invested in will benefit from his platform- it's inevitable. What will be interesting to see is whether a man that has bragged about not changing his mind since being a teenager unironically tries to make issue about another man (who has made a lot of people a lot of money with his judgment) not immediately changing his mind about the companies and industries he thinks will be good investments for Canadians.

 

[Jarnhamar]

I highly doubt the government would risk a conflict of interest that they know would destroy them in the polls

Like the government dared not risk pressuring the attorney general to bend the law for Liberal-Friendly SNC Lavalin...

 

[Jarnhamar]

He needs to take public steps to distance him self from any decisions that might directly impact brookfield

Chances are Carney has connections, stock, and assets associated with Brookfield.

Assets we'll never hear about now because of how quickly they were rushed into a blind trust.

Even if Carney isn't signing on the dotted line, any large scale contract awarded to Brookfield is (very likely) going to benefit Carney. No different if the previous government gave big contracts to WE or the Trudeau Foundation.

Best to put a moratorium on Brookfield getting contracts for 4 years and award them to other Canadian businesses.

 

[dapaterson]

Are you familiar with the concept of a blind trust? You no longer know what assets are in there; the administrator is a fiduciary, and acts as such, but you have no control over those assets.

 

[QV]

At least so far there isn't a "Carney Foundation" with millions of dollars coming into it from sketchy connections to the CCP... that I know of.

 

[IKnowNothing]

Best to put a moratorium on Brookfield getting contracts for 4 years and award them to other Canadian businesses.

Best for who, and for accomplishing what objective?

Would that extend to barring Inter Pipeline from taking part in O&G expansion in the West?
Genesee & Wyoming from bringing their expertise in First and Last Mile to open up the ring of fire?