National
Mark Carney’s Shocking Debate Meltdown
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/00ada/00ada8d4328a348b3b48095b461d81fb90f9c3f9" alt=""
From Hamas Blunders to French Fumbles, the Globalist Golden Boy Crumbles on Stage
We had the French-language Liberal leadership debate last night, and let me tell you, folks—it was a sight to behold. Picture a stage in Montreal, packed with career politicians and establishment darlings, all vying to replace Justin Trudeau. The stakes? Enormous. The Liberal Party is on the verge of collapse, Donald Trump is looming over the border with trade war threats, and Canada’s economy is circling the drain. So, naturally, this was their big moment—a chance to prove they have what it takes to lead the country.
And then there was Mark Carney. The globalist golden boy. The guy the elites have been grooming for years. Former Bank of Canada boss, UN climate czar, best friends with every billionaire and bureaucrat from Davos to Brussels. If there’s anyone who should be able to handle a debate, it’s this guy. And yet?
He crashed. Hard. Because what we saw at the French-language Liberal leadership debate was nothing short of a political car crash—one that Mark Carney, the globalist golden boy, drove straight into a ditch. You’d think the guy who ran the Bank of Canada, played footsie with the UN, and spent years circling the elite cocktail party circuit would be able to handle a few tough questions. But no. Instead, we got a masterclass in stammering, dodging, and faceplanting in real-time.
Let’s start with the Hamas gaffe—because, oh boy, this was a doozy. They’re debating Canada’s stance on Israel and Palestine, and Carney, struggling through his Google Translate French, blurts out: “We all agree on Hamas on a two state.” Wait—what? Did he just say the Liberals agree with Hamas? Even Karina Gould, Trudeau’s handpicked heir-in-waiting, had to jump in and clean up his mess: “No, we don’t agree with the solution. We’re against Hamas.” Folks, this is a guy who’s spent decades rubbing elbows with world leaders, and he just accidentally aligned himself with a terrorist organization on live TV. The guy’s supposed to be an economic genius, but apparently, he can’t even manage basic sentence structure. And in Quebec? Where fluency in French actually matters? This wasn’t just a gaffe—it was an open admission that he’s an outsider with a script, and he can’t even read it right.
Then there’s the Quebec constitution debacle. Simple question: Will you recognize a Quebec constitution and Bill 96? You know, the law that cracks down on English like it’s a public health crisis? Carney’s answer? “I’m not a lawyer. I’m not a constitutional expert either. I’m a progressive.” Oh, that’s just rich. He’s not a lawyer, folks—just the guy who ran Canada’s central bank and negotiated international finance deals. But suddenly, when he’s asked to take a stand, he’s just a humble progressive. Meanwhile, Frank Baylis, the only candidate with a spine, calls Bill 96 “discriminatory” right to the camera, while Freeland and Gould trot out their usual Charter of Rights shtick. Carney? He pivots to attacking Pierre Poilievre for cutting CBC funding. Absolutely pathetic. In Montreal, dodging this question isn’t just cowardly—it’s political malpractice.
And what about the carbon tax? This is supposed to be Carney’s big moment. He’s the UN Climate Envoy, the guy who lectures entire countries about going green. So what does he say? “I’ll be canceling it on consumers and small businesses… replacing it with a system where big polluters pay.” Oh, wonderful. Except—what system? No details, no numbers, no real plan. Just a vague promise to make “big polluters” foot the bill. Sounds nice, but where have we heard this before? Oh right—every failed Liberal climate promise since 2015. Meanwhile, Gould is throwing out “15% emissions cuts” like it’s gospel, and Freeland is hammering home how Trudeau’s carbon tax saved Canada from climate doom. But Carney? Mr. Green Energy himself? He whiffs it.
And let’s not forget Energy East. With Trump ramping up tariffs and economic pressure, they ask the big question: Should Canada revive an east-west pipeline through Quebec? Carney’s answer? “It’s possible… if it’s in the interests of the whole country.” What does that even mean? “Possible”? “If”? Baylis, to his credit, comes out swinging—promising two gas pipelines and arguing they’d be good for both the economy and the environment. Freeland and Gould talk about “resilience” and “indigenous consultation” while sidestepping specifics. But Carney? He just flails around, dropping vague one-liners about being “masters in our own house.” Quebecers hate pipelines—we all know that—but if he had a real stance, he’d say it. Instead, he hedges like a man waiting for a pollster to whisper in his ear.
Then there’s his closing statement—his last shot to sell himself as Canada’s next leader. What does he deliver? “I’m not a career politician. I’m a pragmatist… Canada’s given me everything, I’m ready to give my all.”
Oh, give me a break. This has got to be the most insulting, hollow, out-of-touch line of the night. Carney is literally running to be prime minister, and somehow, he expects us to believe he’s not a politician? That’s like a guy auditioning for American Idol and claiming he’s not a singer. No, Mark—you’re a politician now. You’re begging for votes. You’re standing on stage, pandering like the rest of them. Own it.
And beyond the blatant dishonesty, let’s talk about how flat it all was. Baylis is out there promising the “best health system in the world” and pledging his loyalty to Quebec. Gould is hyping up “innovators and dreamers,” painting some grand Liberal utopia. Freeland? She’s going full war cry—rallying 400,000 Liberals against Trump like she’s leading a resistance movement. But Carney? He sounds like an AI-generated LinkedIn post. No passion, no fire, no vision. Just another soulless technocrat, hoping to win by default.
Look, I get it—Carney is the establishment’s dream. The global elites adore him. He’s got the right credentials, the right connections, and the charisma of a soggy paper towel. The guy spent decades shuffling between central banks and UN climate panels, never breaking a sweat, never making a tough call. But last night? Thrown into an actual political fight? He flopped harder than a beached fish.
If he can’t even hold his own in a controlled Liberal debate—against his own party, in front of a friendly audience—how on earth is he going to stand up to Donald Trump? Seriously. The guy panicked over a Quebec language question and somehow accidentally implied the Liberals support Hamas. Hamas! You think this man is ready to stare down the White House? To negotiate trade deals? To lead a country in crisis? Please.
If the Liberals are looking for a leader with real backbone, they’d better think twice before crowning this guy. Because if this performance was any indication—Carney’s not the future. This wasn’t a leader. This was a clipboard-carrying bureaucrat trying to convince us he’s Winston Churchill.
And if this is what the Liberals want to put up against Trump, Poilievre, or even a toaster with a personality, they’re in for a brutal, humiliating, can’t-look-away kind of reality check.
Business
Here are four ways the next federal government can cut spending
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/d0464/d0464ec6c97c85bc15cd0d289563bf9ce57a53b6" alt=""
From the Fraser Institute
By Jake Fuss and Grady Munro
With a federal election on the horizon, it’s worth reflecting on the Trudeau government’s extraordinary fiscal legacy, which includes record-high levels of spending (even after excluding emergency COVID spending), an uninterrupted string of budget deficits, a near doubling of the federal debt from $1.1 trillion to $2.1 trillion, and sky-high federal debt interest payments, which will reach a projected $51.9 billion (more than all GST revenue) this fiscal year.
Clearly, the next federal government, whoever that may be, must get smarter about government spending. Fortunately, as noted in our new study published by the Fraser Institute, there are many areas within the federal government to find savings.
For example, this fiscal year (2024/25) the government will spend a projected $3.5 billion through the Canada Infrastructure Bank (CIB). Established by the Trudeau government in 2017, the CIB is a federal Crown corporation tasked with investing and attracting investment in infrastructure projects across Canada. Despite approving “investments” totalling $13.2 billion (as of the fourth quarter of 2023-24), the CIB has demonstrated an alarming lack of progress. As of July 2024, only two (out of 76) CIB-funded projects had been completed—the purchase of 20 electric buses in Edmonton and the construction of two solar facilities in Calgary. Small wonder that a 2022 multi-partisan House of Commons committee report recommended the government abolish the CIB.
To find more savings, the government should look at its seven Regional Development Agencies (RDAs), which provide financial assistance (a.k.a. corporate welfare) to businesses in specific regions across the country. Total spending will reach a projected $1.5 billion this fiscal year. But research shows that corporate welfare does little to nothing to promote widespread economic growth but simply allows the government to pick winners and losers in the free market. And rather than using concrete objectives and results to justify their existence, the RDAs rely on vague platitudes such as “businesses are growing” and “communities are developing economically.”
The government should also eliminate its so-called “Strategic Innovation Fund,” which spends tax dollars (a projected $2.4 billion this fiscal year) to simply shift jobs and investment away from some firms and industries to firms and industries favoured by the government, with no net benefit for the overall economy. And “Global Innovation Clusters,” which incentivize firms to spend time and resources modifying their businesses to secure government grants (worth a projected $202.3 million this fiscal year) rather than developing new and improved goods and services.
Finally, there’s the Green Municipal Fund (GMF), which uses federal tax dollars (including a projected $530 million this fiscal year) to bankroll municipal projects that purportedly accelerate the transition to “net-zero” greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. But several current projects (e.g. “climate-friendly” home tours, funding for climate advocacy groups in Ottawa) will not reduce GHG emissions in any measurable way. In other words, the GMF is spending taxpayer dollars on projects that make no progress towards the GMF’s stated goal.
In total, our study highlights eight areas where the federal government should cut spending, with potential savings totalling $10.7 billion this fiscal year alone. By cancelling these wasteful programs, the government could eliminate roughly one-quarter of the current budget deficit.
Until policymakers in Ottawa get serious about cutting wasteful spending, budget deficits will likely continue. Smaller and smarter government in Ottawa is both possible and necessary.
Energy
There is no better time for the Atlantic to follow the Pacific as the next stage of Canadian energy development
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/7a471/7a47113bd81f5ea1dea5eee7233337e096a524a7" alt=""
Premier Tim Houston says it’s time for Nova Scotia to develop its energy industry
In late January, Nova Scotia Premier Tim Houston announced that natural resources would become a major focus of his government, stating that it was time to, “We can’t expect Nova Scotia to prosper when we ban industry after industry after industry.”
It was announced that his government would look into fracking for natural gas, uranium mining, and lifting fossil fuel extraction moratoriums along the coast.
Atlantic Canada is poised to become the next major player in Canada’s energy expansion. With growing global demand for clean energy, a shift toward resource independence, and the looming threat of U.S. tariffs, provinces like Newfoundland and Labrador and Nova Scotia are taking bold steps to develop their energy sectors. Recent developments in liquefied natural gas (LNG), offshore oil, green hydrogen, and critical minerals are positioning the region as a crucial pillar of Canada’s energy future.
Donald Trump’s threats to impose tariffs on Canadian energy exports have forced Canada to reassess its reliance on the United States as its primary customer. This shift has already played out in Quebec, where the government is reconsidering its stance on LNG projects. Similarly, Atlantic Canada recognizes the need to diversify its energy exports to Europe and Asia. With vast offshore oil reserves and new LNG projects in the works, the region is set to capitalize on international markets.
Premier Houston has emphasized the importance of local resource development to secure the province’s economy. Though he has walked back on previous comments about revisiting the Georges Bank offshore drilling moratorium, his government is clearly focused on increasing natural resource production. The seafood industry, a vital component of the region’s economy, has expressed concerns about potential energy developments affecting fisheries, but a balance must be struck to ensure both industries thrive.
Newfoundland and Labrador Premier Andrew Furey has made it clear that offshore oil will continue to play a key role in the province’s economy for decades. Addressing industry leaders, Furey positioned Newfoundland as the future “energy capital of North America,” highlighting new offshore projects and hydrogen development. ExxonMobil’s $1.5 billion investment in offshore infrastructure underscores industry confidence in the region’s potential.
Despite dubious global forecasts suggesting oil demand will peak in the coming years, Newfoundland and Labrador believes its high-quality, low-emission crude will remain in demand, particularly in Europe and Asia. Additionally, the province is exploring hydrogen production, backed by federal incentives and private investment. Companies like World Energy GH2 are pushing forward with large-scale green hydrogen projects, despite local opposition from residents concerned about the environmental impact of wind farms.
As British Columbia emerges as an LNG powerhouse, Atlantic Canada is following suit. The region’s proximity to European markets gives it a significant advantage, particularly in light of geopolitical instability affecting global energy supplies. With European nations scrambling to secure reliable energy sources, Atlantic Canada’s LNG potential is more valuable than ever.
Much like British Columbia, where First Nations have played a central role in LNG expansion, Atlantic Canada has an opportunity to develop Indigenous-led energy projects. Federal tax incentives and emissions regulations will shape how LNG projects move forward, ensuring they align with Canada’s climate commitments while driving economic growth.
The combination of Trump’s tariffs, shifting global energy markets, and renewed provincial interest in resource development has created a perfect storm for Atlantic Canada’s energy sector. With strong government backing, significant private investment, and growing international demand, the region is well-positioned to become a major energy player.
As Canada navigates this new era of energy expansion, Atlantic Canada’s strategic location, resource wealth, and commitment to innovation make it a natural frontier for growth. Whether through LNG, offshore oil, hydrogen, or critical minerals, the region’s energy sector is set to thrive in the coming decades.
-
International21 hours ago
Vatican reports ‘slight improvement’ in Pope Francis’ condition
-
Daily Caller1 day ago
Trump Taps Dan Bongino For FBI Deputy Director
-
Business2 days ago
Bad Research Still Costs Good Money
-
Addictions24 hours ago
Does America’s ‘drug czar’ hold lessons for Canada?
-
Agriculture18 hours ago
How USAID Assisted the Corporate Takeover of Ukrainian Agriculture
-
conflict21 hours ago
Trump meets Macron at White House, says Ukraine war ending soon
-
Artificial Intelligence20 hours ago
Apple bets big on Trump economy with historic $500 billion U.S. investment
-
Business19 hours ago
Trump backs Musk’s ultimatum as ‘great’ idea, but some aren’t responding