Latest news with #CanadaPolitics
CTV News
18-06-2025
- Politics
- CTV News
At G7 summit, Trump got the spotlight, but it's Carney that got the win
Eric Ham is based in Washington, D.C. and is a political analyst for CTV News. He's a bestselling author and former congressional staffer in the U.S. Congress and writes for Much was unknown about how the annual G7 summit would play out in Alberta this week. Recently-elected Prime Minister Mark Carney sought to use the gathering of advanced nations and other world leaders as a burgeoning opportunity to position both Canada and himself as integral conduits to peace and stability in a world wracked by conflict and instability. The growing war in the Middle East along with Vladimir Putin's stubborn intransigence in Ukraine threatened to overtake Carney's inaugural hosting duties and global coming out party. Moreover, President Donald Trump's return to Canada, along with his abrupt exit, was equally bewildering. The mercurial president's bellicosity towards the Great White North, combined with punishing and exacting tariffs, continue to stifle and vex those in attendance, especially and including Canadian leaders. Yet, to the surprise and delight of officials on both sides of the border, while the president overtook the spotlight, it was the Canadian prime minister that walked away triumphant from his inaugural G7 summit. To the surprise of many global watchers, the president and prime minister agreed to pursue a trade deal within 30 days. In a statement by the Prime Minister's Office, the two leaders 'underscored collaboration on further shared priorities at the summit, such as critical minerals, gun and drug smuggling, illegal drugs, and border security.' Upon arrival, President Trump, perhaps to the chagrin of some, rehashed old grievances and appeared to mimic a Kremlin spokesperson. He chided former U.S. President Barack Obama and former Canadian prime minister Justin Trudeau (falsely), for removing Russia from the group of advanced Western nations. Moreover, the president appeared to suggest removing Russia from the then G8 is what led to the nearly four-year-old war currently in Ukraine. However, in true Trumpian fashion, the American president quickly recalibrated, shocking many by intimating a deal could be worked out. Canada Trump G7 Summit U.S. President Donald Trump wears a pin with the flags of Canada and the United States as he participates in a session of the G7 Summit, Monday, June 16, 2025, in Kananaskis, Canada. (AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein) Perhaps the tell-tale of a pliable president in a conciliatory mood was reflected by the joint American-Canadian flag lapel pin worn by the former real estate mogul as he arrived for the first day of talks. Still, with so much at stake and a range of volatile and tense issues to be addressed, it is the headline of a potential deal between the once-close allies and biggest trading partners that undoubtedly allows the nascent PM a victory lap. Australia's Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, from left to right, President of Mexico Claudia Sheinbaum, President of France Emmanuel Macron, Canada's Prime Minister Mark Carney, President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelenskyy, President of Brazil Luiz Inaci... Australia's Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, from left to right, President of Mexico Claudia Sheinbaum, President of France Emmanuel Macron, Canada's Prime Minister Mark Carney, President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelenskyy, President of Brazil Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva and Italy's Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni during a family photo at the G7 leaders' summit in Kananaskis, Alberta, Tuesday, June 17, 2025. (Stefan Rousseau/Pool Photo via AP) Every leader in attendance from traditional G7 nations such as the United Kingdom and Japan, to invited guests such as India's Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Mexico's uber-popular President Claudia Sheinbaum — and even Trump antagonist Vlodomyr Zelensky — all wanted a bilateral meeting with the American president. Yet, while the U.S. and U.K. reiterated their trade agreement, undoubtedly it is Carney and Trump signaling negotiations that will revive markets, economies, and boardrooms throughout the region. Since winning re-election in 2024, Trump immediately began shattering 60 years of economic integration and 150 years of friendship. However, in one fell swoop, frenemies now appear headed towards a reconciliation (at least for now). The deal still will require enormous effort from both sides, and as mentioned from their initial meeting at the White House and again in Kananaskis, Trump and Carney are equally firm in their respective positions. The U.S. president is making clear tariffs seemingly are here to stay in some form or fashion. In fact, during their meeting with reporters, he bellowed, 'I've always been a tariff person.' Meanwhile, the Canadian PM wants to see the tariffs removed, which will allow Canadian goods to freely move and flourish across its southern border. Thirty days does not provide much time to work through many of the complex and intractable issues, but if one thing has become abundantly clear, it is President Trump's affinity and respect for Prime Minister Carney; and perhaps that is all that is needed. Carney's willingness to express support for President Trump's Golden Dome, his signature missile defence program, along with the prime minister announcing an increase in defence spending, certainly moved the president. Now the PM will have the arduous task of using these enormous carrots to cement a groundbreaking trade agreement in record time. Again, Carney has astutely navigated the treacherous political environment confronting a bellicose leader intent on overtaking Canadian sovereignty. In addition to scoring a major win on a potential trade agreement the confab of advanced nations were equally successful getting President Trump to agree on a joint statement calling for de-escalation in the ongoing Israel-Iran conflict. Now, Kananaskis was always more than a meeting place of global leaders. Prime Minister Carney saw it as the destination to launch Canada to the forefront, geopolitically. Resetting fraught relations and ties with India to re-shaping a deteriorating bond with the United States. Carney campaigned on an ethos of Canada as the centre of the universe. Canada Trump G7 Summit Canada's Prime Minister Mark Carney walks with President Donald Trump after a group photo at the G7 Summit, Monday, June 16, 2025, in Kananaskis, Canada. (AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein) In 48 hours, the PM achieved his aims. President Trump's abrupt and unexpected exit left a tremendous void at a time when the amalgamation of heads of state desperately needed America's voice. Nevertheless, Canada's leadership was able to construct a framework that could be the catalyst for a lasting re-imagined entente with the U.S. Not to mention, achieving success on a unified statement from the G7 nations calling for an end to the conflict in the Middle East. So while the light shined brightly on America's quixotic president and rightfully so, it was Canada's newly elected prime minister that has come through a hectic and chaotic multilateral meeting, victorious.
CBC
17-06-2025
- Politics
- CBC
How to win at an unpredictable G7
How to win at an unpredictable G7 News Duration 7:31 U.S. President Donald Trump's tactics have added a layer of unpredictability to the G7 in Kananaskis, Alta. CBC's Adrienne Arsenault breaks down what world leaders will be navigating and what it will take for Canada to emerge with some sort of win.
Globe and Mail
13-06-2025
- Business
- Globe and Mail
The Prime Minister hits the ground running, unconcerned by deficits, principle or the rights of Parliament
Tuesday marks a couple of anniversaries of sorts for Mark Carney. It will have been 100 days since he was elected leader of the Liberal Party and, as such, became Prime Minister of Canada. And it will have been 50 days since the general election confirmed him in that position. What have we learned in that time about his philosophy of government, and – a related but distinct point – his approach to governing? We know that he is in a hurry, or certainly wants people to think he is. Parliament was recalled less than a month after the election, which would not be considered particularly hasty in other parliamentary democracies – the British House typically returns inside of a week, two at the most – but is lightning-fast by Canadian standards. Mind you, it had been more than five months since it last sat. And having sat for four weeks, it is scheduled to rise on June 20, not to return until September 15. All told, the Commons is scheduled to sit just 73 days this year, the fewest since 1937. (Britain's will sit for 196.) So for all the rhetorical flourishes about doing 'things we haven't imagined at speeds we didn't think possible,' he's maybe not in that much of a rush. Some of us think it would have been quite possible to bring in a budget this spring, but that's been put off until the fall. Still, if he's not in much of a rush to reveal his fiscal plan to Parliament, he is in a rush to make significant decisions without it, and to push through major legislative changes, some of which he had not previously disclosed – as they might have been, for example, in the recent election campaign. So we have the sudden decision to increase defence spending by $9-billion in the current fiscal year, instantly bringing Canadian military spending up to the two per cent of GDP target we promised our NATO allies we would reach years ago. That's praiseworthy, but it's a little different than the 2030 target Mr. Carney ran on. And without further details, or a sense of how it would be paid for – Mr. Carney has ruled out raising taxes, so either there will have to be cross-government cuts in spending that were not previously advertised, or the deficit will have to go higher – it's hard to judge how well considered this is. Looming in the offing, moreover, is the NATO summit later this month, at which member states will be asked to raise 'core' defence spending to 3.5 per cent of GDP by 2035 (another 1.5 per cent would be devoted to defence-related infrastructure). That would mean roughly tripling defence spending in real terms. How that squares with Mr. Carney's pledge to bring 'operating' spending in line with revenues within three years – limiting borrowing to that required to cover capital spending – we can only guess at, but it suggests a whole bunch of operating spending is about to get reclassified as capital spending. And even if it is all legitimately capital spending, it still has to be paid for, which is to say borrowed. The economist Trevor Tombe estimates a purely debt-financed defence buildup would bring the federal debt-to-GDP ratio to north of 50 per cent. One thing we know about Mr. Carney, then, is that he is not overly vexed about deficits. Neither does he seem particularly attached to principle. The carbon tax was a central, even defining part of his economic and political philosophy – until it got in the way of his election chances, at which point it was jettisoned, mercilessly, complete with phony presidential-style signing ceremony. Standing up to Donald Trump, while steering a new, more independent course for Canada, including trade agreements with more 'reliable' partners, was all that he wanted to talk about during the election. Since then it's been all about striking a new economic and security agreement with (checks notes) the United States, tightening up the border, perhaps even participating in Mr. Trump's proposed 'Golden Dome' system of ballistic missile defence. But if Mr. Carney is concerned to protect Canada from Mr. Trump, he is even more concerned to protect his Liberal government from the Conservatives. Of the seven priorities in the mandate letter he sent to his 28 cabinet ministers (it was 22, before the election), fully six ('expediting nation-building projects… bringing down costs for Canadians… making housing more affordable … strengthening the Canadian Armed Forces… returning our overall immigration rates to sustainable levels … spending less on government operations') were directly aimed at Conservative voters. Progressive voters who flocked to his side to save them from Pierre Poilievre may be somewhat dismayed to see him implementing Mr. Poilievre's agenda. Certainly that seems to be the gist of his early legislative agenda, with an admixture of cynicism and contempt for Parliament. The three major government bills introduced so far – C-2, the Strong Borders Act; C-4, the Making Life More Affordable for Canadians Act; and C-5, the One Canadian Economy Act – are noteworthy, not only for their conservative tilt, but for combining in one bill manifestly different pieces of legislation, with different objectives and different impacts: the dreaded 'omnibus bills' that Liberals used to oppose. C-2 yokes together a number of provisions for tightening refugee policy, which might at least be considered part of the promise to 'get control of immigration' on which Mr. Carney ran, with a set of quite appalling measures expanding the government's powers of surveillance that were never mentioned on the campaign trail. C-4 is advertised as enacting the Liberal election promise to cut the base rate of income tax from 15 per cent to 14 per cent. Yet tucked within it one finds – surprise! – a little mini-bill exempting federal political parties from provincial privacy legislation, much as they are already exempt from federal legislation: a transparent attempt to head off a pending appeals court judgment in British Columbia, after a lower court found the province's legislation applied to federal parties. What on Earth does this have to do with cutting taxes? Likewise, C-5 combines measures to implement Mr. Carney's campaign promise to remove federal barriers to interprovincial trade – the provinces' own barriers will take a great deal more work to uproot – with a quite separate, and potentially more controversial, set of provisions to fast-track government approval of development projects that meet a certain list of criteria. As with the other bills, members of Parliament will be forced to vote on the whole package, up or down, as if it were one bill with a single purpose, rather than an ungainly mishmash of different pieces of legislation, some of which they might support but much of which they might oppose. In each case it amounts to an abuse of power, which no amount of urgent-sounding rhetoric ('the largest transformation of the Canadian economy since the Second World War') can paper over. The substance of the bills is in many places as objectionable as the process. Several observers have taken issue with the surveillance-state provisions in C-2 – empowering the government, for example, to demand that internet service providers hand over information on their subscribers, or Canada Post to open your mail. But the refugee provisions are no less draconian. It may appeal to people's impatience to deny asylum applicants a hearing if they file their claim more than a year after they arrive (in the general case) or two weeks (in the case of those crossing the border from the United States), but it does not alter the fundamental right that is at stake: the right to due process, to have your claim heard by an impartial arbiter before you are sent back to a country where you may face persecution or worse. If you are suspected of robbing a bank, but evade capture for more than two weeks, it does not give the government the right, once it gets its hands on you, to imprison you without trial. You still get your day in court. Neither would it be sufficient for the government to make its own assessment of how much danger you would be in if it did, as the bill proposes it should do with refugee claimants: It would have no right to send you there without a hearing, period. C-4's main provisions, likewise, may be odious together, but they are just as odious separately. The tax cut is a massively expensive proposal that will do nothing to improve productivity while conferring a windfall gain on upper-income taxpayers. The privacy exemption is a wholly unjustified special privilege of a kind the parties are wont to confer upon themselves: See 'do-not-call list.' As for the 'Building Canada' provisions of C-5, there are two main lines of objection. One is the danger that important environmental, Indigenous or other concerns may be overlooked in the haste to approve projects with important political backers. The other, perhaps opposite concern: Why should some projects be exempt from the sort of scrutiny to which others are obliged to submit? Is this not 'picking winners' by another name? If there is consensus that Canada's approval process is too burdensome and too slow, doesn't that argue for reforming the process generally – for everyone, not just for the favoured few who tick the right political boxes? But that would take time. Fine. What's the rush? Why not divide each of these contentious bills into its component parts, and let Parliament consider them separately, giving each the sort of scrutiny that we theoretically elect MPs to provide? Or if the matters are that urgent, then why not let Parliament sit through the summer, rather than shutting down until September? I realize that would cut into Mr. Carney's performance of 'Julius Caesar in One Act,' but I'm willing to take that chance.
National Post
11-06-2025
- Business
- National Post
Carney picks Hydro-Quebec CEO Michael Sabia to head Privy Council
OTTAWA — Prime Minister Mark Carney is tapping Michael Sabia, a veteran of the public and private sector, to head up the Privy Council Office in Ottawa. Article content Sabia's tenure as clerk of the Privy Council and secretary to cabinet will begin July 7, replacing John Hannaford who is retiring. Article content Article content Serving as the head of Hydro-Quebec since 2023, Sabia was Canada's deputy finance minister through the pandemic years and early recovery. Article content He served as the head of Quebec's public pension plan for over a decade before that and is a former CEO of Bell Canada Enterprises. Article content Sabia was named an officer of the Order of Canada in 2017. Article content
CTV News
09-06-2025
- Politics
- CTV News
Canadians want politicians to skip summer break, but optimistic about results from Carney's Liberals: Nanos
Prime Minister Mark Carney makes his way through the foyer of the House of Commons on Parliament Hill in Ottawa on Thursday, June 5, 2025. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Sean Kilpatrick The majority of Canadians think the country's politicians should work through the summer to deliver the 'concrete results' they expect this year, according to a Nanos survey. Results of a survey commissioned by CTV News during the first week of June suggest most polled expect to see some type of progress by the end of the year on major initiatives undertaken by the new Carney government. Nearly four-in-10 (38 per cent) surveyed said they expect results, while another 12 per cent said they believe they'll be waiting until 2026 or 2017 to see progress. Respondents were not asked about specific initiatives, but the recently elected Liberals campaigned on a platform that included tax cuts for the middle class, protections against the impact of U.S. President Donald Trump's tariffs, diversified trade and 'Canada's most ambitious housing plan since the Second World War.' Asked when they expect to see the results of initiatives implemented under Prime Minister Mark Carney's leadership, an optimistic three per cent thought they'd see changes by the end of the month. Seventeen per cent said they don't expect to see results from the major Liberal initiatives at all, according to Nanos data. Men were more likely than women to say they didn't expect much from the current government, at 23 per cent compared to 12 per cent. People aged 18 to 34 were more pessimistic about their expectations than those 55 and older, with 25 per cent of the younger group expecting no concrete results, compared to 10 per cent of the older demographic. Sitting through the summer As for what respondents said they'd like to see from federal politicians, about two-thirds said they think it's important or somewhat important that the new government work through the summer, rather than take the usual break. Respondents in Ontario and the Prairies felt most strongly about a summer sitting, while those in Quebec were less concerned. Still, a majority in those regions felt it was important to some extent that leaders forgo the break. The Liberals said previously they planned to delay the budget release until the fall, after the House of Commons returns in mid-September. Opposition parties have been critical of this decision, as well as of the new government's throne speech, which has been described as vague and lacking in detail on economic policies. Canadians appear to be split on whether the Liberal government should table a budget before the fall, with 53 per cent surveyed saying it was important or somewhat important. Men, residents of the Prairies and respondents under the age of 55 were more likely to say they wanted a budget sooner than the fall sitting. Methodology from Nanos This study was commissioned by CTV News and the research was conducted by Nanos Research. Nanos conducted a random-digit-dialed dual-frame hybrid telephone and online survey of 1,120 randomly selected Canadians aged 18 or older, between June 1 and 3. The results were weighted by age and gender using the latest census information (2021) and geographically stratified to represent the Canadian population, Nanos says. The margin of error is ±2.9 percentage points, 19 times out of 20.
