Carney’s Reputation Is Collapsing… Now Even CBC Sees It

This has been a pretty bad week for the prime minister in Quebec.job as the Bank of England governor.But today we've got Steven Guilbeau once again coming from the Toronto Star says Steven Guilbeau who quit over C word policy says return under different PM possible.Liberal MP Stephen Guilbeau said he wouldn't rule out returning to federal politics under a different Prime Minister.This is even more embarrassing to Carney, basically blaming it all on Carney.Now jumping over to CBC, they got a panel on here.

I know some of you don't like the CBC clips, but this is fascinating.I'll be ping -ponging between CTV clips as well because they're talking about not only Stephen Guilbeau and Carney's reputation getting tarnished, but also him saying, make America great again.And the liberals don't know what to do with this, because it goes against everything Carney campaigned on and what he stands for.Dangerous and divided, rupture with America?

Chantal, what does that tell you about where the government is going?Because certainly Mr. Guilbeau was, he was an activist politician.I mean, I think he would be comfortable with that and obviously now feels like he will get more done outside of the arena than inside.So what does that tell you about the government's direction?

Even before Stephen Guilbeau announced that he was going to move on to other climate challenges elsewhere, it was pretty obvious where the government is headed.There has been every step of the way over the past year has brought the government closer to having dismantled just about every bit of the climate infrastructure put in place by Justin Trudeau.That's one choice.but not replacing it with something other.You rarely, if ever, hear now the Prime Minister explain in the same kinds of details that he likes to offer on a sovereign fund or go down the list, how he is meeting climate objectives, or if they even matter.

Now, That's quite scathing.So this is going out to CBC watchers that Carney doesn't care about the environment.I mean, she's 100 % right.He loves to talk about the Sovereign Wealth Fund, all these different funds that are going to make him and Brookfield rich.When it comes to the environment, he doesn't care.And I've been saying this, he gets rid of the two billion trees program because he can't stick a carbon credit on it.

He has this program where they're going to protect a bunch of wildlife area.Well, it's because Brookfield can manage that as an asset that generates carbon credits, huge swaths of land all around Canada.They can say, oh, this This sucks carbon in, thus it generates a carbon credit.We need a manager.Oh, Brookfield knows how to do that.2 % management fee on millions and millions of acres of land.

It's very obvious to all of us what he's doing, but now even the CBC is saying it.Despite the guy creating net zero, he doesn't care about the environment.

It was, the show in the House of Commons was very civil, including the decision on the part of someone who resigns in theory on principle to continue to sit with the team he has resigned from.until he leaves Parliament.But if you look at many of the interviews that Stephen Gilboa has been giving, and the conclusions that stem from that, this has been a pretty bad week for the Prime Minister in Quebec, where there has been a hit, and we may see consequences from it, because by now, if you do not know that Stephen Gilboa left because what he told voters about Mark Carney turned out not to be true, Then you have been living on another planet and not in Quebec this week.

Let's break this down a little bit.So if this were Pierre Poliev, we already know what happens.It's wall to wall coverage every single day.a little bit of his word, and just the fact she's calling out him for going into great depth on things like the sovereign wealth fund, but never has any detail about the environment, he doesn't care.It's all a facade.

You know, on the other hand, Stephen Gilboa's departure at a time when Alberta is threatening separation, and we're going to talk about that in the next block, is maybe not the worst thing politically for this prime minister in this moment.I take Chantal's point.It might be bad later, but in this moment anyway, Althea.

Can I just say, Alberta is not threatening separation, but the Parti Québécois, the frontrunner in the Quebec election is.So pick your battles.Yes, yes.Okay, Althea.

I think it is really interesting to see how this decision is playing out in kind of the two solitudes in the country.In Quebec, there has been so much ink spilled about who is Mark Kearney.And if Stephen Guillebeau cannot find a place in the Liberal caucus.And he doesn't feel not just that his legacy is still intact, but that he can't advance the things in a way that, you know, will have any results.And he doesn't want to give the government, and this was, he said this in an interview with your colleague from Hudson Canada, he doesn't want to give the government the benefit of being the moral conscience for other MPs who are climate minded or voters who see him and think, well, it can't be that bad because Stephen Guilbeau is still in caucus.Right.

That's why he's.taking his exit.And you do have on the other side of the country, especially in Western Canada, people who are like praising that to Stephen Guilbeau is like good riddance, happy to see you gone.We think you're responsible for 10 years of horrible economic growth.I mean, I don't think it's fair to pin that on.

No, it is fair.That's definitely fair to pin it on Stephen Guilbeau.But I mean, just look at not just Stephen Guilbeau.We've got Jonathan Wilkinson, also big time member of the Green Caucus.Nate Erskine -Smith, also big time member of the Green Caucus.All of these guys are going.

What does it say about Mark Carney.He's not the man that he portrayed himself as.His reputation is getting absolutely slammed here on CBC, of all places.

But there are definitely these different class points.I think it speaks to, and I think this is where Chantal is going, like the things that are good for addressing Alberta separatism actually hurt the cause of the federal government in Quebec.And I don't, from my reporting, I don't believes—and I have not heard that the prime minister's office tried to keep Stephen Ghibaud.If anything, you know, he took his fight.publicly because he couldn't get anything done behind closed doors, writing in my newspaper about what he hoped the memorandum of understanding with Alberta would look like.They did nothing of what he suggested.

And on the things where he did have.

This is getting ugly here.Nothing that he suggested.Guibo in that interview with Vassi Capellos tried to make it seem like, oh, you know, they they tried.Yeah, but you could tell there wasn't really a fight to keep him.I think she's right.They were ignoring Guibo.

So he's like, I'm out of here.

An impact on the nature strategy, on the international climate finance.It's really weird, if we can just like take a moment to reflect, to have somebody leave in these circumstances.And I think it is quite significant.You know, Mark Carney has gotten a lot of floor crossers.Now this is somebody who's choosing to leave because of the government's record.

Ouch.And once again, you got Wilkinson, Nathanson.-Smith.This is not a good look for Carney.He's going to lose his majority government here, which is exactly what needs to happen.Now, let's jump back to Mark Carney's speech that he gave in America, where he says, make America great again.

This one statement here is cascading across Canada right now.

Let's be absolutely clear.Canada strong will help make America great again.

I'm sorry, what?This guy is flip flopping again.Is this his way of negotiating?He doing a deal with Saab for military aircraft.Now he's saying make America great again.Make this make sense.

It is, though, that make America great again line that is garnering headlines this evening.Talk a little bit, if you could, about about that line.We know, for example, that the U .S.ambassador has just posted his own pretty encouraging or happy reaction, I guess you could say, in response to it.What's the genesis of that?

It's a bit of a surprise, as you know, with prime minister.He's very detailed.I'm not sure he wrote every single word of the speech, but he has his hands on a lot of things.So he doesn't do anything.Carney didn't write that speech like somebody else is doing that for him.You know, off the cuff, especially in this environment.

But Pete Hoekstra responding to that line, as you mentioned just a few moments ago on Twitter, saying that's a positive message Americans can get behind.You've been at this longer than me. I don't remember the last positive interaction in public between Ambassador Hoekstra and the Canadian government.There may have been some.But it's pretty clear that this may be a significant thaw, if you will.We'll see if it leads to anything.It's only a speech.

Mark Carney worked for Goldman Sachs in numerous cities, Toronto, New York, overseas in Asia and multiple places.He was with his peers there and he wants those people to invest in, well, Canada.He needs that big American money.One speech and it's only one line.

But it did take us a bit of back when it was in his, the fact that he used the mag of praise and connected it to Canada Strong, I think is significant.It certainly has caught the attention of the American government.

So moving ahead here, Peter Poliev had some statements about this.

The Liberal Prime Minister was off to New York to expand his favorite export, speeches.On the one hand, He says that we are in the middle of a rupture with the United States, while on the other he says he wants to make America, in his words, great again.His elbows were again flapping up and down in the rhetorical chicken dance as he cannot seem to decide if integration with the U .S.is a strength or a weakness.

So what should we make of the Prime Minister's pledge to help make America great again?

Let's bring in our This is so embarrassing, this posturing of Carney.Jumping over to CBC, you got a panel here.They don't know what's going on here.Trying to figure out Mark Carney's statement there, make America great again.

Start with you.You know, a lot of what the prime minister said today sounded familiar.Some of it sort of made me raise an eyebrow, particularly that last line there about a strong Canada making America great again.And I wondered what you made of that and who you think he was actually talking to there.

I think he was talking to Americans.I think the prime minister has developed a tendency to adjust his message, sometimes in conflicting ways, depending on the audience that he is speaking to.And it is increasingly, I think, becoming obvious to Canadians that there's some elasticity in his message, shall we say, in terms of, you know, on the one hand, you have the elbows -up message, you have the framing of the Davos speech, where the rupture is a relationship between Canada's relationshipvis -à -vis the United States.a very important narrative that is set out there that has brought public support for things that previously were more controversial, like pipeline approval and speeding up assessments for other natural resource projects.And on the other hand, you have the message you delivered today, which in the case, the word rupture here was about the global order and the world, not about the relationship of Canada vis -a -vis the United States.

You had and we had a little bit of this floating in the fall.Remember when they were talking about sectoral tariff relief on the 232 tariffs, where we have a deeper integration with the United States on energy, potentially on critical minerals.And I think that that is what the prime minister was hinting at.But building a fortress in North America is in conflict with the idea that Our relationship is forever changed and we have to completely diversify.So kind of it's interesting to see the prime minister trying to square that circle.

Yeah.I mean, she mentions elasticity.That's a nice word of saying that he keeps changing his message.I mean, she said that.I mean, we saw that early on with the election.He says one thing in French, another thing in English.

Carney will say anything, anywhere to get what he wants.He's a chronic liar.The same thing.He's in front of American audiences.Make America great again.Are you kidding me?

He's getting called out here on the CBC.Just wait.This happens multiple times.

I think it could bring potentially some challenges at home.

I was listening to Minister LeBlanc, Dominique LeBlanc, on Power and Politics with David.And certainly, Chantal, there are lots of conversations happening around Kusma and trade.But there doesn't seem to be any sort of concrete progress or a move towards an official negotiating table.And I wondered about that and then what the PM said and how those two things maybe fit together or don't.

Well, I think in the real world, there is no option but to try for Mark Carney to to try to walk and chew gum.at the same time because you are not about to replace the United States as a trading partner by making deals all over the planet.You can diversify.

Wow, they're actually saying this on the CBC.We actually need America.Look at that.They've come to their senses.

But I mostly saw it.as an attempt to walk away from the or break out of the Kuzma box by saying if you're just going to be talking about Kuzma, it's mostly defense.

You're trying to She is so desperately here trying to frame this in the way that's not bad for Mark Carney.I mean, not surprised, but I appreciate Althea Raj said it as it is.Carney says one thing to one set of audience and another for another.And people are starting to catch on now.Now on this panel here, Christy Clark making some interesting statements here.

Will the audience, the intended audience, buy it, Christy, and deliver the message to Trump, do you think?

I think that's exactly why he's there.Remember, the Americans are meeting with the Mexicans on Kuzma right now.And Carney is, I think, trying to find a smart way to get his message out there while that's happening at the same time.Remember, the people he was speaking to in New York, these are his people.They know him.They've worked with him.

They trust him.They like him.And You know, he couldn't be in a more comfortable environment.And these people are not just people who know Carney.There are people who know Trump.They are the most influential people in Trump's world, too.

So it seems like a perfect alignment for Carney to be talking to these guys at this moment with this president.You know, using the America, America great again line wasn't a terrible idea.I mean, we need America to be great in Canada.

Donald Trump is not stupid, he knows what's going on here.Carney can't just say, make America great again once and Donald Trump's going to go, wow, he's changed his mind.Let's do a deal.That's not going to happen.Carney just did this deal for, was it $5 billion with Saab, which Boeing wanted that contract in America.Is Trump going to completely ignore all of that just because Carney said, make America great again once?

There has to be some actions behind his words, not just empty words.That's all it is.

We need America to be great in Canada.They need a strong Canada.We need a strong United States.We don't want America to fail any more than people in that room don't want Canada to fail.So I thought it was a message well delivered.perfect moment.

And I think it's he's delivering it to a crowd that is going to potentially be the most helpful group he could talk to.

This is so unbelievably delusional.Sure, some of those people might talk to Trump and Trump's like, yeah, so what?He said that once, but he just did a deal with Saab, let alone everything else.Right.Carney has spent months, over a year, fear mongering America and Donald Trump.And he says, make America great once.

And suddenly everything's gone.It's all back to sunshine and rainbows with America.I don't think so.

So is it.Do you think stuff indicative of where the non -negotiations are at?Or is it — I mean, Pierre Poiliev, you know, basically slammed the prime minister today because he's now, in his view, saying something different than he did before.

I mean, to pick up on what Althea said, there's elasticity in the prime minister's message.And where he seeks to tailor it, you know, to whatever audience he's speaking to, it's almost as though he forgets there is no singular audience anymore.Everybody is watching what he said.So the American business leaders in that room are watching, but Canadians are also watching and opposition politicians are watching.And when you see the prime minister make that reference to to make America great again, and you think that's a lot of words to fit on a Canadian hat, you know, like what what is he trying to accomplish there, and I do think, to Chantal's point, it is a reframing.

It's awkward watching them here.Even Rosemary Barton doesn't know what to do with this.Make America great again.And that's the evil words that Donald Trump says that Donald Trump has on his hats.They don't know what to do with this because Carney said it himself.

U .S.is bad, that's the bit that gets under their skin.And so for Mr. Carney to come outside that box, as Chantal so well put it, and say, you know, there's bigger gains here, there's bigger things we can do.I mean, we saw the U .S.

ambassador sort of pick up on that and say, thanks for that.

Yeah, but that's disingenuous.Carney's been saying this since the first day.Dangerous and divided world, America, the rupture, it's all over, all this stuff.For him just to switch the tune, it's disingenuous.

Carney's a liar.The opposition, Monty, have a point.Pierre Poliev, they're seizing on like, you know, do we want more integration?Is it a weakness?Is it a strength?I think there I understand the point everybody is making about the merits of the argument.

But there are different points over the last year where it feels like different arguments have been made.

Well, there's no question that the prime minister has done a complete 180 from where we were on election night and elbows up and all of that kind of thing.But I also think the direction he's going now is a much better one than the one he laid out initially.And really he's grounded now.It seems like he's grounded in reality.I mean, America is our number one trading partner.I was heartened to hear the Prime Minister talk about oil and gas very specifically, which is something that is new in a liberal government in the last 10 years.

So quite happy to see that.I do think that this is aimed at an audience that will really frankly outlive the presidency of Donald Trump.Any projects that are talked about in the next little while will extend into the years ahead.So it was a good message to go to a business crowd, absolutely, but it can't end there.They also need to execute on it.And this is my concern, is that it's fine to talk about fast -tracking oil and gas and, you know, the German deal and, you know, and some of the other things that the prime minister talked about.

But he has activists in his own caucus who are opposed to the direction he's going.I'm just concerned that he's going to get sidetracked dealing with some of that and it will cost Canada opportunities.

Is it too on a week where Althea, you've made a choice to buy fighter jets from Sweden instead of the United States.You need to show some goodwill to the United States so that you can get some talks going on other issues.

That's not a way of doing a buying fighter jets.In this case, it's actually surveillance jets from Saab, Sweden, and then say, make America is great again to move things over.That's ridiculous.That's a ridiculous statement.If he really wanted to get a deal, he wouldn't be buying those fighter jets from Sweden.He would get a deal first and then buy that if that's really the direction he wants to go, get the deal first and then do that.

Not the other way around.Carney's playing both sides.

I think it's probably less about the Saab announcement than it is about the June 1st deadline.So we've often and talked about the July 1st deadline.But the June 1st deadline is the deadline by which Canada, the United States and Mexico basically have to have their list of grievances in that they'll discuss on July 1st.And so I think it's more about building towards that front.And then, you know, we've also heard in the last few weeks, for example, we've seen negotiations between Canada, between the United States and Mexico, gain a lot of momentum and public threats from the Americans that, you know, they might do a deal together that would layer on top of Kuzma, and we would have a kind of take -it -or -leave -it approach.And we've had our prime minister play hardball in the sense that, like, we're not going to go to the negotiating table because we don't want to make concessions preemptively.

And why should we?Because you have these tariffs on us that are also illegal.And so you guys should also show some good faith.So I think it's a little bit more about resetting that and making sure that there's a constructive output.I was surprised yesterday hearing from the Ontario representative in Washington, David Patterson, and that he believes we only have a window of up until Labor Day to get a deal struck.Otherwise, the Americans will be busy with their own midterms and then possibly impeachment and whatnot.

And so, if we want to actually have a firm deal on Kusma—and I'm not sure that's actually where the government is, the federal government, that is—but that You could see negotiations heat up.

You hear that by September 7th of Labor Day.They got to get this done.Otherwise, they get they get too busy with all the other stuff, their primaries and whatever else their midterms there down in America.What's Carney going to do?Is he going to get a deal or is he going to does he want to try to get Kuzma ripped up?So Canada really gets devastated, which would probably be great for his stocks in America, because American companies could then buy up a bunch of Canadian companies that are going bankrupt or going under and scoop them up.

Carney's 91 percent invested in America.So what is he doing here?Because it's not in our best interest, we've got to think in his best interest.And how many millions of dollars does he have invested down there?Was he installed to simply tank our economy?Questions that will be answered in time.