• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

The Next Canadian Government

This, by Gary Mason in the Globe and Mail, is an issue with which both provincial and the national government must deal in the not too distant future:

----------

We can’t ignore the fact that some mentally ill people do need to be in institutions​



GARY MASON NATIONAL AFFAIRS COLUMNIST
VANCOUVER

Details continue to emerge surrounding the random stabbing attack on the streets of Vancouver last week that left one person dead and another with his hand severed.

The accused, Brendan Colin McBride, 34, has been charged with second-degree murder and aggravated assault. Police say he has a history of mental illness, violent offences and more than 60 interactions with police across Metro Vancouver.

The incident has triggered a fresh wave of anxiety in the area over random assaults. It can certainly be said Vancouver has become all too familiar with stranger attacks, ones often carried out by people deemed to have severe mental illnesses. Reaction to these events now follow a well-worn script.

Police decry a criminal-court system that releases serial criminals on bail to commit more crimes. Law enforcement officials then promote the idea of enforced institutionalization of those with a mental illness so severe it poses a danger to others. Politicians then chime in to talk about the need to put more resources into mental-health services and promise to examine the idea of institutionalizing people against their will.

NDP Premier David Eby said much the same thing after the last random attack in Vancouver allegedly involving someone with a mental illness. He said it again after this most recent one, promising to soon unveil a plan to deal with the problem.

The merry-go-round of reaction speaks to the complexity of the issue. It’s easy to demand the return of asylums to house those who are not compos mentis and who pose a threat to themselves and society. If it was as simple to actually do it, however, it would have been done years ago.

But locking people up against their will isn’t easy – nor should it be.

The deinstitutionalization of the mentally ill in Canada began in the 1960s and carried on throughout the 70s and 80s. Health and Welfare Canada estimates that the number of inpatient beds at psychiatric hospitals (also known as insane asylums) decreased from four beds per 1,000 population in 1964 to less than one bed per 1,000 population by 1979. According to a report by the Canadian Institute for Health Information, Canada had 50,000 psychiatric beds in 1960. By 2019, the number had fallen to 7,200.

Many of those released from institutions such as Riverview in suburban Vancouver ended up on the streets. In fact, one can plot the shocking degradation of the Downtown Eastside to the release of so many patients from Riverview. Today, the area is populated by people who, once upon a time, might have been getting care in a psychiatric hospital.

There is no question we have a problem – one being faced by cities across North America where deinstitutionalization similarly took place decades ago. Without a place to be cared for, people with severe mental illnesses end up committing crimes, for which they go to jail. Then they get released and commit more crimes. Prisons are not equipped to care for these folks.

Opioids have also had a devastating impact on the brains of many people on the streets, leaving many so damaged they are of no fit mind to take care of themselves. They are effectively being left to die in empty hotel rooms and alleyways.

But here is the reality: we have a mental-illness epidemic in this country. The Canadian Mental Health Association estimates that mental illness affects 6.7 million Canadians. One in two of us in this country have – or have had – a mental illness of some description by the time they reach 40, according to the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH). Only a small fraction have a disability so severe they can’t function as a responsible adult in society and pose a threat to those around them.

We need a place for them.

We need to establish a sanctuary where people with severe mental illnesses can be treated – maybe in some cases against their will. These hospitals can’t resemble those from yesteryear, the ones that gave us the disturbing images depicted in the movie One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest. We have to reimagine – and properly fund – a modern version of Riverview.

It needs to be part of a renewed commitment to improving mental-health services across the country more broadly. While digesting the enormous financial costs this will impose on governments, we need to understand the downstream costs thatmental illness already imposes on taxpayers in the form of visits to emergency rooms, police time, court time, jail time, rinse-and-repeat time.

The total financial impact of mental illness in Canada is more than $51-billion a year, according to CAMH.

We can never go back to a time of forced lobotomies and sterilization. But we can give birth to a new vision for psychiatric hospitals that keep patients safe – and society, too.

----------

This is NOT a law and order issue; it is social policy and health care and it touched, heavily, on civil/human/Charter rights.

Provinces need to rebuild mental hospitals, but the national government needs to come to grips with the thorny issue of treating people against their will.

Over to you, Mr Poilievre.
This is something I have been banging my spoon on my high chair for quite a while about. “Community living” has been a complete failure. It consisted of turning the vulnerable mentally ill onto the streets with no supports. Many of the homeless we see in our towns and cities belong in a setting where they are receiving care and treatment and not endangering themselves or others. When someone explained the concept of “community living” to me back in the 1990’s I thought they were bananas.
 
This is something I have been banging my spoon on my high chair for quite a while about. “Community living” has been a complete failure. It consisted of turning the vulnerable mentally ill onto the streets with no supports. Many of the homeless we see in our towns and cities belong in a setting where they are receiving care and treatment and not endangering themselves or others. When someone explained the concept of “community living” to me back in the 1990’s I thought they were bananas.
You and me both. SOME mentally ill people should be locked up for life. Like those found NCR. Sorry, you murdered someone and you need to be kept away for your life.
BUT I am a knuckle dragging hillbilly according to the so called "elite" who know far far far better what is good for society.....
 
You and me both. SOME mentally ill people should be locked up for life. Like those found NCR. Sorry, you murdered someone and you need to be kept away for your life.
BUT I am a knuckle dragging hillbilly according to the so called "elite" who know far far far better what is good for society.....
OldSolduer, Tim McLean’s mother would agree with you…

 
No, the Electoral College, and also Parliamentary Democracy, is a way to make collecting votes in the 17th century practical. It has the effect of unbalancing votes from populations because a) the US allows sitting congressmen to redraw the lines and b) the Canadian Constitutional system has guarantees of seats no province will sign off on changing.
Actually down here the States redrawn the districts.
Redistricting is a pretty common practice when Governors and the State Attorney General swap parties.

In the ideal world a non-partisan committee would deal with it down here - but...
 
Actually down here the States redrawn the districts.
Redistricting is a pretty common practice when Governors and the State Attorney General swap parties.

In the ideal world a non-partisan committee would deal with it down here - but...
Apologies I was confusing electoral and congressional districts, both controlled by states but one by legislature.
 
Apologies I was confusing electoral and congressional districts, both controlled by states but one by legislature.
Actually by the State's Attorney General - not the legislature.
The theory is that is isn't supposed to be political - but everyone knows it is...
 
Actually by the State's Attorney General - not the legislature.
The theory is that is isn't supposed to be political - but everyone knows it is...
Actually many states have changes to congressional districts as bills to be passed
 
This, from today's Globe and Mail; is one of the policies I expect Mr Poilievre to reverse very, very quickly when he becomes PM:

----------

Joly says Canada will block U.S.-bound ammunition sale destined for Israel​

STEVEN CHASE SENIOR PARLIAMENTARY REPORTER

Foreign Affairs Minister Mélanie Joly said Canada has suspended 30 permits for arms sales to Israel and is taking the rare step of blocking a contract with the U.S. government to send Quebec-made ammunition to Israeli Defence Forces.

Canadian arms sales to, and in some cases, through the United States to third countries are not subject to Canada’s typical authorization procedure and weeks ago the U.S. announced plans to send Quebec-made ammunition to Israel.

The Liberal government, in response to criticism of Israel’s conduct of the war on Hamas, in January stopped approving new permits for the export of military goods to Israel.

Israel was attacked by Hamas militants from Gaza on Oct. 7 in an assault that left some 1,200 dead and about 250 taken hostage. It responded with a bombing campaign and siege in Gaza that has so far killed 41,000 Palestinians, many of them women and children, according to the Palestinian health authority. The Canadian government considers Hamas a terrorist group.

Ms. Joly, speaking to reporters at a Liberal caucus retreat in Nanaimo, announced the government this summer suspended about 30 existing permits that had been issued before January to ship military goods to Israel.

And, she said, Canada will not allow the sale of ammunition through the United States to Israel. The ammunition was to have been produced by a Quebec division of U.S. defence contractor General Dynamics.

“As for the question regarding General Dynamics, our policy is clear,” Ms. Joly said. " We will not have any form of arms, or parts of arms, be sent to Gaza. Period. How they’re being sent and where they’re being sent is irrelevant. And so therefore my position is clear, the position of the government is clear, and we’re in contact with General Dynamics.”

General Dynamics Ordnance and Tactical Systems spokesperson Berkley Whaley, in St. Petersburg, Fla., referred media inquiries to the U.S government and U.S. Defence Security Cooperation Agency. The U.S. Defence Department did not not immediately respond.

In August, the U.S. Defence Cooperation Agency announced the Secretary of State had approved a US$61.1-million deal to supply Israel with 120mm high explosive mortar and that the principal contractor would be General Dynamics Ordnance and Tactical Systems Inc. in Quebec.

The Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs (CIJA) in Canada described Ms. Joly’s Tuesday announcement as “a disturbing shift” in Canadian government policy.

“Let’s be clear: less than a week after six hostages were brutally murdered following more than 300 days in Hamas captivity, and while hundreds of thousands of Israelis remain displaced by Hezbollah’s relentless bombing in the north, Foreign Minister Mélanie Joly continues to proclaim Israel’s right to self-defense – just not with Canada’s support,” Shimon Koffler Fogel, president of CIJA, said in a statement.

He said he feels that under the Liberals the Canadian government has backed away from Israel and accused Ms. Joly’s of making decisions based on leadership ambitions for the Liberal Party should Prime Minister Justin Trudeau step down.

“Canada, once a steadfast ally of the Jewish state, now risks becoming complicit in the ongoing assault against it. While Minister Joly may seek favor in the looming leadership race, it comes at the expense of Canada’s principles and moral standing,” Mr. Fogel said.

Arms tracking experts welcomed Ms. Joly’s announcement.

“It is welcome news that Canada has taken a step further by suspending existing arms export permits, which is the only sensible step forward to ensure Canadian weapon systems are not being used in the conflict in Gaza,” Kelsey Gallagher, a researcher at Waterloo, Ont.-based Project Ploughshares said.

“When explosive weapons are used in populated areas, like those tied to this contract, typically nine out of ten casualties are civilians. "

But Mr. Gallagher said Canada cannot say it has closed the door on military exports to Israel until it has stopped the shipments of parts for U.S.-made F-35 warplanes that are also sold to the Israeli military.

“Canadian officials must be clear that any and all potential arms transfers through the US to Israel will be disallowed. This does not just include mortar rounds made in Quebec, but also Israel-destined F-35 components that are produced coast-to-coast.”

CIJA’s Mr. Fogel said the restrictions Canada has placed on military exports to Israel are also preventing Canadians from obtaining repairs on goods sourced from Israeli suppliers.

“This measure is also adversely affecting Canadian jobs and preventing Canadian Forces from accessing essential equipment like the pilot helmets produced in partnership between Israeli and Canadian suppliers.”

Figures released by the Department of Global Affairs this year showed that exports of military goods to Israel from Canada rose to $30-million. Project Ploughshares’ Mr. Gallagher said this was the highest dollar value on record since exports have been made public to Canadians.

----------

Minister Joly is trying to appeal to the progressive, which almost always equals Pro Palestine/anti_Israel (which almost always means anti-Semitic) left in an effort to outflank the NDP. But she will p!ss off many Québec, voters in the process.
 
I suppose she will put the same effort into prevent weapons/funding getting into the hands of Hamas, right? Right?
We could probably transfer them some of our current in use, obsolete stuff and watch Hamas try and figure out how to run a combat system using a computer running a VPN running another legacy VPN to get the software running on MS-DOS with a win 3.1 interface. Those 602 kb of boot memory won't free themselves up!
 
We could probably transfer them some of our current in use, obsolete stuff and watch Hamas try and figure out how to run a combat system using a computer running a VPN running another legacy VPN to get the software running on MS-DOS with a win 3.1 interface. Those 602 kb of boot memory won't free themselves up!
What if we just give Hamas Treasury Board and PSPC? That should effectively end the war, right there.
 
This, from today's Globe and Mail; is one of the policies I expect Mr Poilievre to reverse very, very quickly when he becomes PM:

----------

Joly says Canada will block U.S.-bound ammunition sale destined for Israel​

STEVEN CHASE SENIOR PARLIAMENTARY REPORTER

Foreign Affairs Minister Mélanie Joly said Canada has suspended 30 permits for arms sales to Israel and is taking the rare step of blocking a contract with the U.S. government to send Quebec-made ammunition to Israeli Defence Forces.

Canadian arms sales to, and in some cases, through the United States to third countries are not subject to Canada’s typical authorization procedure and weeks ago the U.S. announced plans to send Quebec-made ammunition to Israel.

The Liberal government, in response to criticism of Israel’s conduct of the war on Hamas, in January stopped approving new permits for the export of military goods to Israel.

Israel was attacked by Hamas militants from Gaza on Oct. 7 in an assault that left some 1,200 dead and about 250 taken hostage. It responded with a bombing campaign and siege in Gaza that has so far killed 41,000 Palestinians, many of them women and children, according to the Palestinian health authority. The Canadian government considers Hamas a terrorist group.

Ms. Joly, speaking to reporters at a Liberal caucus retreat in Nanaimo, announced the government this summer suspended about 30 existing permits that had been issued before January to ship military goods to Israel.

And, she said, Canada will not allow the sale of ammunition through the United States to Israel. The ammunition was to have been produced by a Quebec division of U.S. defence contractor General Dynamics.

“As for the question regarding General Dynamics, our policy is clear,” Ms. Joly said. " We will not have any form of arms, or parts of arms, be sent to Gaza. Period. How they’re being sent and where they’re being sent is irrelevant. And so therefore my position is clear, the position of the government is clear, and we’re in contact with General Dynamics.”

General Dynamics Ordnance and Tactical Systems spokesperson Berkley Whaley, in St. Petersburg, Fla., referred media inquiries to the U.S government and U.S. Defence Security Cooperation Agency. The U.S. Defence Department did not not immediately respond.

In August, the U.S. Defence Cooperation Agency announced the Secretary of State had approved a US$61.1-million deal to supply Israel with 120mm high explosive mortar and that the principal contractor would be General Dynamics Ordnance and Tactical Systems Inc. in Quebec.

The Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs (CIJA) in Canada described Ms. Joly’s Tuesday announcement as “a disturbing shift” in Canadian government policy.

“Let’s be clear: less than a week after six hostages were brutally murdered following more than 300 days in Hamas captivity, and while hundreds of thousands of Israelis remain displaced by Hezbollah’s relentless bombing in the north, Foreign Minister Mélanie Joly continues to proclaim Israel’s right to self-defense – just not with Canada’s support,” Shimon Koffler Fogel, president of CIJA, said in a statement.

He said he feels that under the Liberals the Canadian government has backed away from Israel and accused Ms. Joly’s of making decisions based on leadership ambitions for the Liberal Party should Prime Minister Justin Trudeau step down.

“Canada, once a steadfast ally of the Jewish state, now risks becoming complicit in the ongoing assault against it. While Minister Joly may seek favor in the looming leadership race, it comes at the expense of Canada’s principles and moral standing,” Mr. Fogel said.

Arms tracking experts welcomed Ms. Joly’s announcement.

“It is welcome news that Canada has taken a step further by suspending existing arms export permits, which is the only sensible step forward to ensure Canadian weapon systems are not being used in the conflict in Gaza,” Kelsey Gallagher, a researcher at Waterloo, Ont.-based Project Ploughshares said.

“When explosive weapons are used in populated areas, like those tied to this contract, typically nine out of ten casualties are civilians. "

But Mr. Gallagher said Canada cannot say it has closed the door on military exports to Israel until it has stopped the shipments of parts for U.S.-made F-35 warplanes that are also sold to the Israeli military.

“Canadian officials must be clear that any and all potential arms transfers through the US to Israel will be disallowed. This does not just include mortar rounds made in Quebec, but also Israel-destined F-35 components that are produced coast-to-coast.”

CIJA’s Mr. Fogel said the restrictions Canada has placed on military exports to Israel are also preventing Canadians from obtaining repairs on goods sourced from Israeli suppliers.

“This measure is also adversely affecting Canadian jobs and preventing Canadian Forces from accessing essential equipment like the pilot helmets produced in partnership between Israeli and Canadian suppliers.”

Figures released by the Department of Global Affairs this year showed that exports of military goods to Israel from Canada rose to $30-million. Project Ploughshares’ Mr. Gallagher said this was the highest dollar value on record since exports have been made public to Canadians.

----------

Minister Joly is trying to appeal to the progressive, which almost always equals Pro Palestine/anti_Israel (which almost always means anti-Semitic) left in an effort to outflank the NDP. But she will p!ss off many Québec, voters in the process.
I wonder if they have given a thought to our arms purchases from Israel. Surely an ethical government wouldnt do such a thing? Equally as surely it wouldnt purchase any weapons systems from a country it was thinking about censoring in such a fashion?
 
Joly is Liberal, right! Did she look to see what the religion of very large voting blocs in four of Montreal's ridings currently in Liberal hands is? And i can tell you that taking a stand on the side of Palestinian is NOT going to get the Liberals any seats in the ridings where expat Palestinians constitute a large voter bloc: they will continue to vote NDP.

On the other hand, unless I am mistaken, her actions constitute a major policy shift from current Canadian government policy of support for Israel right to exist and be secure, which is still the official policy. Does she believe her job makes it her decision as opposed to full government decision?
 
According to the Globe and Mail's Editorial Board, Mark Carney, who is a pretty smart guy, has offered the current Liberal government some good, but likely unwelcome economic advice. I hope Pierre Poilievre takes note of it, too:

----------

The hard truth the Trudeau Liberals need to hear from Mark Carney
THE EDITORIAL BOARD

Mark Carney, the Liberal Party’s newly appointed economic-growth czar, made a couple of critical points on his way in to meet with the caucus this week.

The world is becoming a more “dangerous and divided place,” Mr. Carney ventured. Canada can no longer count on the rules-based international trade system that has underpinned growth in the West since the end of the Second World War. This country must become “an essential trading partner” with protectionism on the rise. And, he added, Canada “can’t win an industrial-policy arms race.”

That’s a good starting point for a diagnosis. The question is what cure Mr. Carney might prescribe. In announcing his appointment, the Liberals said the former Bank of Canada governor would come up with “new ideas for jobs and growth” ahead of next year’s expected federal election.

Sounds great, except for one small hitch: dealing with Canada’s economic woes requires a near-complete break with the current Liberal orthodoxy of rising taxes, soaring spending, big deficits and pricey industrial subsidies. A real program for revitalizing Canada’s economy surely starts with acknowledging the root problem – a continuing and worsening slide in productivity.

The latest Statistics Canada data on second-quarter economic growth are sobering: real gross domestic product per capita fell for the fifth quarter in a row. In the spring, when the streak was just three consecutive quarters, Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland’s budget shrugged it off as “a largely temporary, not systemic” problem that would fix itself.

Mr. Carney – who, in fairness, did criticize that budget for failing to focus enough on growth – could do great service to the Liberals, not to mention Canada, by making it clear that falling real GDP per capita is a real problem, and that it crystalizes not just our current economic underperformance but also the inherent threat of low productivity to Canadians’ longer-term prosperity.

A report released Thursday by Toronto-Dominion Bank lays out the stakes: living standards, as measured by real GDP per capita, were lower in 2023 than in 2014. The bank doesn’t state the obvious political conclusion, but here it is: Canadian living standards have fallen under the nine years of Liberal rule. Indictments of economic policies don’t get much sharper than that.

The consequences of failing to reverse this slide are unpalatable, to say the least. “Without improved productivity growth, workers will face stagnating wages and government revenues will not keep pace with spending commitments, requiring higher taxes or reduced public services,” the TD report states. That would be quite a legacy for a government that has prided itself on expanding social programs.

Acknowledging the problem is a necessary first step, but measuring it is also important. Ottawa needs to start assessing the impact of every budget measure on productivity (as it currently does for gender, for instance.) Additionally, the mandate of the Parliamentary Budget Officer should be expanded to scrutinize and monitor the impact of measures that impact productivity.

We’ll have more to say later in the week on international trade policy and domestic trade barriers, both key areas where Canada needs to take aggressive action. But the need is no less urgent on domestic fiscal policy.

In an interview, TD Chief Economist Beata Caranci said the start of any policy reform should be scrapping Canada’s habit of simply reacting to U.S. decisions in order to minimize the competitiveness gap. Instead, she said, Canada should pursue the much more audacious goal of becoming a more attractive business environment than the United States.

What might such an economic program look like? A sweeping reform of the tax code, including a single rate of corporate taxation. Restoring investment-friendly (and sector-agnostic) measures such as accelerated capital cost allowances that the government is allowing to wind down. Ending the dalliance with 1970s-era industrial policy subsidies that are already looking obsolete as technologies shift.

And, most of all, embracing the private sector (rather than, say, the Prime Minister’s Office) as the wellspring of Canadian investment, innovation and prosperity.

Mr. Carney certainly has the experience, reputation and intellectual heft to propose sweeping change. The question is whether he is willing to tell the Liberals some unwelcome truths – and, if he does, whether they will listen.

----------

One of the things Mr Carney ignored is that Canada remains one of the world's most resource rich countries and, despite climate change, we need to exploit those resources, including heavy oil and natural gas, and sell them to the world.
 
According to the Globe and Mail's Editorial Board, Mark Carney, who is a pretty smart guy, has offered the current Liberal government some good, but likely unwelcome economic advice. I hope Pierre Poilievre takes note of it, too:

----------

The hard truth the Trudeau Liberals need to hear from Mark Carney
THE EDITORIAL BOARD

Mark Carney, the Liberal Party’s newly appointed economic-growth czar, made a couple of critical points on his way in to meet with the caucus this week.

The world is becoming a more “dangerous and divided place,” Mr. Carney ventured. Canada can no longer count on the rules-based international trade system that has underpinned growth in the West since the end of the Second World War. This country must become “an essential trading partner” with protectionism on the rise. And, he added, Canada “can’t win an industrial-policy arms race.”

That’s a good starting point for a diagnosis. The question is what cure Mr. Carney might prescribe. In announcing his appointment, the Liberals said the former Bank of Canada governor would come up with “new ideas for jobs and growth” ahead of next year’s expected federal election.

Sounds great, except for one small hitch: dealing with Canada’s economic woes requires a near-complete break with the current Liberal orthodoxy of rising taxes, soaring spending, big deficits and pricey industrial subsidies. A real program for revitalizing Canada’s economy surely starts with acknowledging the root problem – a continuing and worsening slide in productivity.

The latest Statistics Canada data on second-quarter economic growth are sobering: real gross domestic product per capita fell for the fifth quarter in a row. In the spring, when the streak was just three consecutive quarters, Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland’s budget shrugged it off as “a largely temporary, not systemic” problem that would fix itself.

Mr. Carney – who, in fairness, did criticize that budget for failing to focus enough on growth – could do great service to the Liberals, not to mention Canada, by making it clear that falling real GDP per capita is a real problem, and that it crystalizes not just our current economic underperformance but also the inherent threat of low productivity to Canadians’ longer-term prosperity.

A report released Thursday by Toronto-Dominion Bank lays out the stakes: living standards, as measured by real GDP per capita, were lower in 2023 than in 2014. The bank doesn’t state the obvious political conclusion, but here it is: Canadian living standards have fallen under the nine years of Liberal rule. Indictments of economic policies don’t get much sharper than that.

The consequences of failing to reverse this slide are unpalatable, to say the least. “Without improved productivity growth, workers will face stagnating wages and government revenues will not keep pace with spending commitments, requiring higher taxes or reduced public services,” the TD report states. That would be quite a legacy for a government that has prided itself on expanding social programs.

Acknowledging the problem is a necessary first step, but measuring it is also important. Ottawa needs to start assessing the impact of every budget measure on productivity (as it currently does for gender, for instance.) Additionally, the mandate of the Parliamentary Budget Officer should be expanded to scrutinize and monitor the impact of measures that impact productivity.

We’ll have more to say later in the week on international trade policy and domestic trade barriers, both key areas where Canada needs to take aggressive action. But the need is no less urgent on domestic fiscal policy.

In an interview, TD Chief Economist Beata Caranci said the start of any policy reform should be scrapping Canada’s habit of simply reacting to U.S. decisions in order to minimize the competitiveness gap. Instead, she said, Canada should pursue the much more audacious goal of becoming a more attractive business environment than the United States.

What might such an economic program look like? A sweeping reform of the tax code, including a single rate of corporate taxation. Restoring investment-friendly (and sector-agnostic) measures such as accelerated capital cost allowances that the government is allowing to wind down. Ending the dalliance with 1970s-era industrial policy subsidies that are already looking obsolete as technologies shift.

And, most of all, embracing the private sector (rather than, say, the Prime Minister’s Office) as the wellspring of Canadian investment, innovation and prosperity.

Mr. Carney certainly has the experience, reputation and intellectual heft to propose sweeping change. The question is whether he is willing to tell the Liberals some unwelcome truths – and, if he does, whether they will listen.

----------

One of the things Mr Carney ignored is that Canada remains one of the world's most resource rich countries and, despite climate change, we need to exploit those resources, including heavy oil and natural gas, and sell them to the world.

Meanwhile, Grade 9 me: Carney looks like he needs a good wedgie, probably at recess ;)
 
Back
Top