Phil Little, Ladysmith, BC

There are few coincidences in my life with Liberal notables. The newly minted Canadian Prime Minister, Mark Carney, and I crossed paths, sort of, with a 19 year gap. We both attended the same Oblate run high school in Edmonton, St. Francis Xavier High School, me in the early 1960s and Mark in the early 1980s. We both have lived in London England, me visiting grandchildren and Mark running the Bank of England. There could possibly be some other coincidences. If not for the upcoming federal election my interest and curiosity in this fellow St. FX alumni would be fairly low. However circumstances change and require more consideration.

Without a doubt Carney’s greatest asset is the absolute lack of quality in his main competitor in the federal ring. Other than this strategic political advantage what does he bring to the Canadian mosaic? He has never been tested in the political circus and has a reputation as a rather dry intellectual business type person. As an economist he has enjoyed the confidence of both Conservative and Liberal Prime Ministers on both sides of the pond.

Untypically for an international economist Mark Carney wrote a book in 2021 titled Value(s): Building a Better World for All. In a 2021 article for the Guardian, Will Hutton writes: “he blames the three great crises of our times – the financial crash, the pandemic and the climate emergency on twisted economics, an accompanying amoral culture, and degraded institutions whose lack of accountability and integrity accelerate the system’s dysfunction.” Carney even begins his book quoting Pope Francis. This, thought I, sounds impressive and even interesting.

“Underpinning a successful modern economy, Carney cites seven essential values and beliefs: dynamism, resilience, sustainability, fairness, responsibility, solidarity and humility.” Marc Lee writing for Canadian Centre of Policy Alternatives (CCPA) suggests that “values” can have different nuances. Taking “solidarity” for example as one of these values, it can mean something quite different from a union perspective seeking fair wages and safe working conditions than from an industrialist employer perspective in providing training that makes the worker more useful. The trusted analysis of CCPA does take the shine off the halo of Carney’s prose. Lee writes. “We can only conclude (Carney) is a very competent centrist whose plans for Canada won’t depart much from the status quo.”

One would think that Mark Carney, who is married to a strong woman successful in her own right and with four young adult daughters, would have a somewhat modern attitude to the position of women in today’s society. Yet in one of his first Prime Ministerial decisions he eliminated the positions of Minister of Diversity, Inclusion, and Persons with Disabilities, Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Labour, and Minister for Women and Gender Equality (WAGE). Such abrupt shifts in considering a meaningful attention to such communities merited a swift response from the President of my former teacher union OECTA, Rene Jensen, who said “These decisions risk undoing the progress made toward a more just and inclusive society. Now more than ever, we must stand together to advocate for policies that protect workers and empower women, diverse communities, people with disabilities, and all equity-deserving groups.”

As never having had to face question period or having voted on issues in the House of Commons, it is unknown how exactly Carney will define himself. The brutal election period may help to learn where he actually stands on many issues.

One of my great concerns is Gaza and Palestine, perhaps coming out of my religious heritage and training. As a teacher I was instrumental in introducing Holocaust education in the curriculum of all religious courses. I am a member of Catholic for Justice and Peace in the Holy Land (CJPHL). I applaud the decision of the new Carney government to send nearly $100 million in humanitarian and governance support for Palestinians in Gaza and the occupied West Bank. Carney has also opposed the Trump plan for development in Gaza.

“I support the hard work of reaching a two-state solution, with a viable and free Palestinian state living side by side in peace and security with the state of Israel”, a statement of Carney highlighted in the Jewish “Forward”. In the same article in reference to the October 7 Hamas attack, Carney is quoted using the words of Holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel, and said: “I learned the perils of language and those of silence. I learned that in extreme situations where human lives and dignity are at stake, neutrality is a sin.”

Carney inherits the leadership of the Liberal Party and government of Trudeau which fully supported the genocidal policy of Israel and provided funding and weaponry to hasten the ethnic cleansing. Talk of a two state solution is empty rhetoric and highly unlikely given the occupation and proliferation of settler colonies. For Liberals the retaliatory slaughter by Israel of more than 70,000 Gazans and the daily bombardment of Palestinian refugee camps in Gaza and the West Bank seems to fall under the category of the “perils of language”. The focus of the upcoming election will undoubtedly be around the nuisance to the south, which may take the heat away from the debate about Palestine. Will Carney decide on expedience, maintain course to avoid the wrath of the Zionist lobby or will he truly deep in his soul realize that “neutrality is a sin”.

When I met as a member of a Peruvian clergy group way back in the 1970s, I was advised that we should be reading the economic or business section of the morning papers, something I found terribly boring and nearly unintelligible. I understand now why this would have been more important than the regular digest of world news, for in that section the movers and their values were highlighted and for which ethical exorcism may have played a role. Alas, our theological training had many gaps but that is another issue.

I am retired with a modest but adequate pension so I experience the financial crisis (so far) as an inconvenience, but I know young working families are struggling to make payments and to be able to put good food on the table for their families. I am not confident that a Liberal government will support the working class, while I am convinced that the alternative would be disastrous for most Canadians. Of particular concern is the elimination by Carney of the position of Minister of Labour to be replaced by a Minister of Jobs and Families. The downgrading of this century old cabinet position is a threatening insult to the labour movement and an omen of dangerous times ahead.

I know that Carney is well trained and has a track record as a crisis manager in the field of national and international economics. As Governor for both the Bank of Canada and the Bank of England he is credited for having stabilized those economies and prevented significant downturns. However unemployment, higher costs of living and increased inequality have become signs of this new recovery. Some have done very well, including his friends at Goldman Sachs and Brookfield Asset Management. As Prime Minister, will Carney be required to protect the interests of this rarified economic class, accustomed to the perks of tax dodging while receiving government subsidies? As Jeremy Appel nicely put it, “Carney looks like a return to 1990s-era Liberal politics, complete with spending cuts and fiscal orthodoxy.”

As the Catholic world has had a month of concern over the health of our Pontiff, we have had the time to reflect on his 12 incredible years as Pope. Since his first appearance dressed in white from the papal balcony, Francis has proven to be a leader with different priorities. His great encyclical Laudato Si’ “focuses on care for the natural environment and all people, as well as broader questions of the relationship between God, humans, and the Earth.”

My trips to Honduras have shown me where the “Care for Our Common Home” is a life and death struggle. The power of this formal teaching of Pope Francis in supporting and encouraging those who defend “La Pachamama” (Mother Earth) far too often comes, as in the situation of Berta Cáceres and Juan López, with a price of their lives. Canadian corporate interests, particularly in mineral extraction projects, notoriously degrade the land, water and air of impoverished nations, and have been implicated in the assassinations of environmentalist workers, while still receiving Canadian government support and funding.

Though not super-rich, Carney has been tagged as a “Davos man”, one of those often found among the exclusive venues of international decision makers. Of Carney there is a list of his leadership or collaborative initiatives in the arena of environmentalism. He has been a special U.N. envoy on the matter of climate finance and sits on the World Economic Forum. Perhaps little known is his involvement in the “Steering Committee of the Council for Inclusive Capitalism at the Vatican”, which is where he first met Pope Francis and hence the reference to the Pope in his book “Values”. On this “Council” the Pope and the Vatican have an advisory role. Perhaps the concern I have is who will have the greater influence over the other?

Prior to his public political ambition phase, Carney implied a leaning towards encouraging a worldwide “green economy”. While still governor of the Bank of England Carney warned that climate change could trigger a financial crisis affecting the value of virtually all financial assets. He even advocated phasing out all fossil fuel industries. However political expediency has intervened and even before becoming Prime Minister Carney announced that the carbon tax would be scrapped and that more attention would be given to Alberta’s quest to build a pipeline to the east requiring more drilling for fossil fuels.

On March 18 Mark Carney visited Nunavut on his first official trip as Prime Minister. He was after all born in Fort Smith, in the NWT. While there Carney said “Canada is strong when we recognize Indigenous Peoples as the original stewards of this land, who remind us of the deep roots from which we grow and underscore the values to which we aspire.” Could this be the beginning of an honest federal relationship building initiative with First Nations? His former company Brookfield had a contentious and litigious relationship with First Nations. While northern indigenous communities face severe housing and clean water difficulties, Carney also had time to announce a $6 billion upgrade to northern radar facilities. Indigenous communities fear that the announced fast-tracking of resource extraction projects will undermine Crown to Indigenous communities relationships.

The visit of Pope Francis to Canada served to deepen the efforts of “reconciliation” between the settler community (all of us who are not First Nation or Métis) and the original peoples of Turtle Island. There have been valiant steps forward but the appearance of a new economic policy towards development, resource extraction, fossil fuel exports, and military objectives threatens the peace and the quest for justice.

“Can a leopard get rid of its spots? So what are the odds on you doing good, you who are so long-practiced in evil?” (Jer 13:23)

I honestly wish him well, our new Prime Minister, be it for the short or the long term. As politicians go he is perhaps original and the least corrupted by the toxic fumes of the House of Commons. There are many positive indicators coming from Carney talk: “Green Economy”, a better world based on “Values”, “neutrality is a sin”, “the original stewards of this land”, and of course going to St. FX High.

I reserve my hope in this new PM, for Mark Carney comes from a different stratosphere and may not be able to breathe down here at the level of the common working class. To value the labourer over the job, the intrinsic value of land and water over its price as a commodity, to defend a taxation system that fairly taxes all, to restore a Ministry on the Status of Women, to clearly oppose genocide, to develop a “green economy” leaving the carbon in the earth, and to abolish the colonialist “Indian Act” with a new deal with Indigenous peoples, may be simply too much for someone who is more accustomed to live and dine among the powerful elites.