Liberal (Minority/Majority) Government 2025 - ???

[Jarnhamar]

Transparency sure, but thats a double edged sword, especially given the issue of his security clearance, and using the average canadians lack of knowing what a ethics screen is to their advantage.

A security clearance isn’t a requirement to lead an opposition party. Poilievre not obtaining it is a political choice, not a security failure. He’s prioritizing his role in public accountability and opposition work over participating in a classified briefing system that comes with restrictions on what he can say publicly. Not getting the clearance allows him to be transparent about what he knows.

 

[Navy_Pete]

Can someone explain to me why the Liberals are spending $27 Billion + on consultants? That is ridiculous

Pierre Poilievre on Juno news Live tonight.

Did he back that up with any actual facts? Was he rolling up 15 years of spending and dropping in contractor support (which is totally different than straight consulting).

PP is spending around $140k a year the last few years on consultants just from his office (with the gap while he was out of office), so does that count towards LPC consultant spending?

If he has some receipts, sure, but he's far too loose with context in his claims to take it seriously.

 

[Czech_pivo]

Here is a suggestion.

How about Mark Carney go on Joe Rogan and/or Diary of a CEO podcast? Anyone?

Out of curiosity, would that make him the first sitting word leader to do either one of these Podcasts while in office?

 

[ArmyRick]

Out of curiosity, would that make him the first sitting word leader to do either one of these Podcasts while in office?

Might be. I have to look that up. Would be a first, trail blazing thing to do.

 

[Navy_Pete]

A security clearance isn’t a requirement to lead an opposition party. Poilievre not obtaining it is a political choice, not a security failure. He’s prioritizing his role in public accountability and opposition work over participating in a classified briefing system that comes with restrictions on what he can say publicly. Not getting the clearance allows him to be transparent about what he knows.

Except he doesn't know anything if he's not getting the security briefings, and getting the security briefing would in no way stop him from talking about topics that are already in the public realm.

It's such a massive red herring, and everyone on here regularly talks about things they have deeper knowledge on the high side while sticking to what's open source already, so weird people with actual clearnances and experience in that kind of thing buy into it.

He's basically just talking out of his ass, and pretending getting a clearance and info briefing would somehow muzzle him, it's asinine. If he's not going to get a clearance, fine, but then he should just STFU about the things he's not getting briefed on.

 

[ArmyRick]

Did he back that up with any actual facts? Was he rolling up 15 years of spending and dropping in contractor support (which is totally different than straight consulting).

PP is spending around $140k a year the last few years on consultants just from his office (with the gap while he was out of office), so does that count towards LPC consultant spending?

If he has some receipts, sure, but he's far too loose with context in his claims to take it seriously.

Pierre is usually pretty accurate and on target with his numbers. I do plan to write my MP to confirm this, however Pierre usually has been spot on with his numbers. Lets get back to this one.

PP is spending around $140k a year the last few years on consultants just from his office (

Did he use public funds or CPC funds?

Wait, Google AI, take with a grain of salt.

• Office Expenses: Data for the first three quarters of the 2023-2024 fiscal year showed that Poilievre claimed $143,201 in expenses for his role as the MP for the riding of Carleton.
• Comparison: This amount was roughly one-quarter of what NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh expensed during the same period ($533,533).
• Context: The $143k expense was for his parliamentary office, not personal consulting fees. Poilievre was noted as one of the few MPs whose constituency expenses for that period did not include costs for "travel" or "hospitality".

 

[Czech_pivo]

Might be. I have to look that up. Would be a first, trail blazing thing to do.

I know he did Scott Gallagher’s podcast during the election.
I don’t follow Podcasts much, I’ve watched a few here and there. At first glance, sitting with one of these folks doesn’t look much different than sitting down with Peter Mansbridge or Barbara Frumm back in the day.

 

[ArmyRick]

hen he should just STFU about the things he's not getting briefed on.

Thats your opinion. He has 2 MPs to get the briefings for him (one of them is mine Alex Ruff), and there is a limit to what they can tell him, but he hopefully gets enough to be able to act.

So you want the leader of the opposition to STFU? Ok, you don't like democracy much?

Your weakly framing your argument to shit on Pierre, bottom line.

 

[ArmyRick]

And AGAIN, we have the microscope coming out for Pierre Poilievre and the blinders get put on for Carney.

I challenge you all to judge both leaders with similar standards. Deeds not words.

 

[ArmyRick]

I know he did Scott Gallagher’s podcast during the election.
I don’t follow Podcasts much, I’ve watched a few here and there. At first glance, sitting with one of these folks doesn’t look much different than sitting down with Peter Mansbridge or Barbara Frumm back in the day.

I think Mark Carney would do well if he can get on with DOAC podcast. Stephen is British-American, very well spoken and would definitely give him a fair shake. Joe would too but Joe will ask the tough and controversial questions.

It would increase the carney Juggernaut. Not sure he ever would though.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Except he doesn't know anything if he's not getting the security briefings, and getting the security briefing would in no way stop him from talking about topics that are already in the public realm.

If something was already in the public realm what's the need to get a security clearance? He doesn't seem interested in information he can't readily share.

 

[Altair]

I think Mark Carney would do well if he can get on with DOAC podcast. Stephen is British-American, very well spoken and would definitely give him a fair shake. Joe would too but Joe will ask the tough and controversial questions.

It would increase the carney Juggernaut. Not sure he ever would though.

Liberals lead by 14, as a majority in every region approves of Carney government performance.

Most of those who voted NDP and BQ, and a third of those who voted Conservative last year approve of Mark Carney's efforts to date.

bruce728.substack.com

We also measure how people feel about the way in which the government has approached 23 different topics. On all 23, a majority offers either a “good” or “acceptable” rating. At the top of the performance chart is the government’s effort to diversify trade relations. The results show the continued stress Canadians are feeling on housing affordability and the cost of living, which are the lowest rated areas of performance. Worth noting is that 72% offer a good or acceptable rating for the position taken by the government on the US and Israel war against Iran.

Perhaps the most interesting thing which these results reveal is that the level of partisan polarization is weaker than it has been in recent years. About two thirds of those who voted BQ and NDP last year are satisfied with the government, and 31% of those who voted for Pierre Poilievre’s Conservatives feel that way too.

He's doing pretty well in my opinion.

 

[Navy_Pete]

Pierre is usually pretty accurate and on target with his numbers. I do plan to write my MP to confirm this, however Pierre usually has been spot on with his numbers. Lets get back to this one.

Did he use public funds or CPC funds?

Wait, Google AI, take with a grain of salt.

• Office Expenses: Data for the first three quarters of the 2023-2024 fiscal year showed that Poilievre claimed $143,201 in expenses for his role as the MP for the riding of Carleton.
• Comparison: This amount was roughly one-quarter of what NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh expensed during the same period ($533,533).
• Context: The $143k expense was for his parliamentary office, not personal consulting fees. Poilievre was noted as one of the few MPs whose constituency expenses for that period did not include costs for "travel" or "hospitality".

Pierre Poilievre - Conservative Party of Canada

It links to the actual expenses; in Q3 of 25-26 alone he spent $140k on contractors as well as 140K on travel, with another $600k in staff salaries for his office, that's all public funds, just in the Sep-Dec period of 2025. But just an example from a single expense report, where about 15% of what his office spent in 3 months went to consultants out of about a $1M.

Which is fine, and have no issue with his office or Carney's spending that much as the leader of the opposition or PM, but again, $27B of just salary on consultants in a single year is almost 200,000 people (using 140k for an FTE). That doesn't pass any sniff test as being a reasonable, and there is no way we're even contracting that many consultants and reviewing/accepting their work, so is definifitely some kind of cumulative number.

If you took the same during the Harper years, and adjusted it for inflation to 2026 dollars, it's probably a lot bigger number than you would think.

 

[RangerRay]

I know he did Scott Gallagher’s Galloway’s, aka Prof G, podcast during the election.
I don’t follow Podcasts much, I’ve watched a few here and there. At first glance, sitting with one of these folks doesn’t look much different than sitting down with Peter Mansbridge or Barbara Frumm back in the day.

Sorry, had to FTFY.

 

[brihard]

Except he doesn't know anything if he's not getting the security briefings, and getting the security briefing would in no way stop him from talking about topics that are already in the public realm.

It's such a massive red herring, and everyone on here regularly talks about things they have deeper knowledge on the high side while sticking to what's open source already, so weird people with actual clearnances and experience in that kind of thing buy into it.

He's basically just talking out of his ass, and pretending getting a clearance and info briefing would somehow muzzle him, it's asinine. If he's not going to get a clearance, fine, but then he should just STFU about the things he's not getting briefed on.

Members of Parliament enjoy immense privilege to speak openly in the context of their Parliamentary duties. Any MP, entrusted with classified information, would be able to disclose same in Parliametary business without fear of prosecution under FISOIA. They would likely lose subsequent access, but the concept of a FISOIA ‘gag’ on utterances made in the course of parliamentary duties simply isn’t true.

*There’s currently a very narrow carve out to that for members of the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians who receive classified information in the course of their NSICOP duties. There’s a Supreme Court decision pending imminently on how that squares with Parliamentary privilege.