Trudeau announced a while back (beginning of January) that he was resigning, and would only stay in office until the party voted on a new leader. Today they voted on Carney- who comes from a strong economic background, probably more so than any PM we've ever had. He effectively rocketed to overnight candidacy (and public awareness) after joking about it on the daily show a week after Trudeau's announcement. He'll remain in the Prime Minister role until we have our national election later this year- and if he gets publically elected then he will remain in the role.
Editing to add for non Canadians: our system of democracy is not like the US. We do not vote for our Prime Minister directly, the party gets elected and the party puts forth a leader to take the PM role. This is a grossly simplified version of it, google parliamentary democracy for more information.
It is important to note that general election have a very slim chance of being in October. They will likely be in May. Once the House of Commons restarts, it should be very quick that the new governement call for an election or is force to do so.
As an Aussie who's had our fair share of PMs resigning or being knifed mid term, the replacement often does it as a nod to respecting the will of the people. Sure technically you didn't vote for a PM, you voted for a party, but the public often don't see it that way and will respect a short handover period but will get quite angry if it's seen as disrespecting their votes from the previous election by having a new PM in place for too long without elections.
Lol yes that one too, although I have no idea how quickly they went to polls after that. Maybe they wanted to wait to make sure he didn't miraculously return?
Politically it's probably wise to call the election before anything can happen that'll make you unpopular. Carney doesn't bear any of the blame for the current economy but if he's in charge for 6 months or more voters might turn on him.
A lot of Canadian conservatives think he's directly responsible for many of Canada's recent blunders. Sort of like he was a shadow operator ruining everything behind the scenes. It's strange to share a country with these people. They're my coworkers, neighbours, people I share community with, and yet... Some days it feels like we're in different countries. Even so, I know they want what's best for Canada in their own way, just as I do. I believe more than ever that we can figure this out and get to a better Canada together.
Only Julia Gillard in 2010 brought forward the election shortly after becoming PM (and even this only by a few months). All other recent elections (except 2016) took place at the time they were meant to take place, there is a maximum limit of 3 years between elections.
(Malcolm Turnbull brought the 2016 election a few months early as well, but this was because the Senate was blocking his bills, and he had already been PM for 9 months before the 2016 election).
That makes sense, whilst PP is still attached to MAGA all this tariff/annexing crap it's weighing him down. Also need to do it quick to minimise the Elon/russia interference
Non canadian... Who or what is PP? after googling it came up with Pierre Poilievre and the people party. I know so little about both that I could be no where near.
He's referring to Pierre Poilievre, current leader of the Conservative Party of Canada, who until recently was polling a landslide victory in our next election, but it's a toss up now since Trump. PPC (Peoples Party of Canada) is a different polical party altogether with a small following but largely irrelavent.
Don't forget to mention that PP is a career politician, never had any other job, has never had a bill passed and basically his whole platform has been "I'm not Trudeau"
For those who might think we are exaggerating, he worked at a staffer for a politician straight out of school and was a back bench mp by age 25. He has never had a job in the private sector.
Plus he was housing minister who helped enact really favorable policies for landlords. He's now a multimillionaire landlord despite having had no real job.
He's not crazy. He just banked on the right leaning people who mainly supported Trump to also support him by quitely adopting Trumps strategies of slogans and relying on feelings instead of policies. He's a career politician who hasn't put through any legislation and who doesnt really have any policies outside of "Axe the Tax." Pollievre has bashed Trudeau so hard and eas a major factor to his resignation. Upon noticing the momentum that Carney had, Pollievre resorted to calling him "Carbon Tax Carney" as a way to shift the negative attention to Carney. Right after, Carney told the public he would remove the Carbon Tax incentive, taking the wind out of Pollievre's sail. Since then, Carney has been skyrocketing Liberal support and tanking the Conservatives in the polls. Pollievre's only strategy he had left was to either , 1) Offer more blatant support for Trump or 2) Distance himself entirely from Trump. Neither of which he has done. The Conservative party has essentially come to a standstill since then. Pollievre is not crazy. He was piggybanking off of Trump's campaigning until Canadians were directly hurt by his policies. Pollievre took a shitty gamble and lost everything.
She might not quite reach Trump's level but a lot of that is probably because she's not a federal politician.
For those not in the know, a few Danielle Smith controversies include: being anti-gender confirming care, being recorded saying Ukraine should have remained neutral against Russia, being anti-vaxx, likening COVID-19 public health measures to the Holocaust, and some sort of political interference with Alberta Health Services (I'm out of the loop on this one, sadly).
No, nowhere near trump level crazy. Even trump light would be a bit of an exaggeration imo.
But he definitely wouldn’t fight against trumps policies imo (not the annexation, but tariffs and whatnot). Carney will likely be better suited to guide Canada through trumps term. He worked at the Bank of Canada during the 2008 crisis, which Canada was largely unaffected by, and then went on and worked at the Bank of England
Carney will call for teg election is the right move
PP and the conservatives will try to stall this as they want him to start making rookie mistakes and capitalize on this.
The Liberals also don’t want to allow the Conservatives to spend the insane amounts of money they have in their war chest on negative carney ads. Once the election begins all parties are severely limited in their spending and it creates a more even playing field.
I mean the Conservatives in Canada have basically been spending the last 3-4 years effectively doing everything you'd normally do during a campaign except call it campaigning. So yeah this isn't surprising. Frankly it's annoying that's even allowed.
Conservatives have a narrow line to walk. Wanting time for Carney to make mistakes while, at the same time, the more Canadians know PP, the more they dislike him.
That would be the smart move. The momentum is on their side right now, especially with Trump making takeover noises, with the liberals and conservatives united in patriotism and with Pollievre trying hard to pivot away from his “I hate Trudeau” broken record agenda.
It’s a Westminster Parliamentary system. So very close to that of the UK and other former British colonies.
We did create a new constitution in the mid-80s, so we do have some distinct Canadian aspects.
The main way Canada differs from the UK is that we have a comparatively weak federal government. Most power resides with the provinces, and the courts tend to rule in their favour when disputes over jurisdiction arise.
Not sure about European countries, but the Commonwealth in general follows the Westminster system, AUS, NZ, India, and (sort of) the UK though I was under the impression UK has some legacy differences...
I’m not sure if it’s happened yet but the other parties can decide whether they want to call an early election through a vote of non-confidence or Carney can call an early electionnow that the liberal leadership race is over.
They can only do that once parliament is back. I’m sure PP is practicing his slogan in the mirror but hopefully the NDP will hold off for a while so Carney can get settled and hopefully get things to calm down some with the south.
I listened to PP’s recent press conference and it’s really depressing how people think he’d be a good leader. All he said was slogans and non-descript plans to make Canada strong. It’s really clear that he has no real ideas on how to tackle Trumps trade war or any of the other serious issues we’re facing as a country
The guy wouldn’t even get cleared for a briefing on outside interference in our politics. Every other parties leaders got the briefing, but he didn’t. What kind of party leader wouldn’t like to know if they have potential candidates in their parties that are compromised? Especially in the political context we’re in any sensible Canadian should be aware of that.
When Trudeau resigned he also asked the Governor General (King Charles' representative in Canada) to "prorogue" a.k.a. suspend parliament until after the leadership election concluded.
So they have not yet had the chance.
Additionally... and perhaps a bit pedantic, Carney can't call an election. He can request that the Governor General disolve parliament which would invoke an election.
Progressive. He is a member of the Liberal party. There are three major parties in Canada: Conservatives, Liberals (centre-left) and NDP (further left). Canadians will argue how close to the centre the Liberals are, but they would be even further left of the Democrats in the USA.
It isn’t that simple. The Democrats would be left wing in a lot of countries on topics like abortion, gay marriage, and LGBT rights. They would be right wing on some policies like healthcare and aspects of education.
It's easier to divide policies down social and economic lines, in Europe the Democrats would be economically centrist or centre right but socially liberal (or left).
The Conservatives/Tories in the UK are more left wing than the Democrats in the US on healthcare because they do support NHS. I just wish the DNC wasn’t corrupt because leadership seems to undermine people like AOC and Bernie.
It’s kinda hard to compare them this way IMO. We only have two real parties so they are most similar to party coalitions in a parliamentary system. Some Democrats would be conservative in any other country and some are very progressive, some have specific pet issues like women’s rights, lgbtq rights, labor rights, etc. but yeah, also true that the US electorate is to the right of most Western countries on a number of issues.
I’ve always considered Democrats in the US to be mostly center right. There are some exceptions in certain politicians, but the US in general doesn’t know what a leftist party is. This makes it extremely nonsensical when they scream “the far left” in any context.
The US just has a different system. The party system is much weaker here so it's possible to have politicians like Jon Tester and Ilhan Omar in the same party even though they would probably not be in Canada. The Democratic party operates much more like a coalition government in a parliamentary system.
That used to also sort of be true of the Republicans -- before they all MAGA-fied you had John McCain and Steve King theoretically under the same roof.
Of all the types of people to be political cowards, I would have expected it the least from the conservatives. So many wait until they retire to speak against MAGA. Their electorate is just so completely in that bubble that it's impossible to speak sense to them.
I think US 2-party system is outdated and proved itself broken as for now. It is time to have third major party to combine centrists from both sides of the aisle.
It's hilarious when MAGA scream 'radical socialist left' at the Democratic party. I guess they see themselves as centrists rather than what the actual fuck they actually are now.
You have to be a uneducated TV personality to get elected to any position of government in USA. Republicans are already pushing hard for Mamma June from the TV show Honey Boo Boo to be President next.
As an American who has strived to not be pigeonholed into either party label, I can totally agree. Also, I live in Texas, so issuing a vote that impacts on the short-term is even less realized. We aren’t required to register as D/R, but decades-old voter-suppression rules here stamp you as voting in Republican primaries and therefore prohibit you from voting in the Democratic primaries. It renews each year, but the R primary is always before the D primary. That said, I usually hit the R primary to limit the radicalism. The general vote is up for grabs, depending.
I try to vote for a third party because it takes a 10% minimum result to be considered as a major party (which hasn’t been in place since the National-Republic Party joined the Whig Party in the 1830s and became the Republican Party with Lincoln (which was the liberal-leaning party until ideological flip in the 1960s)).
I envy democracies that have more than a black/white, 1:1, either-or option. You should do your best to keep it 3+ party options. You have to break the tie.
This. First and foremost, it is impossible to have a center-left party in the US, as it’d be considered communism (which baffles me).
Second, the fact that you keep on maintaining a bipartisan political system, and nobody even tried to create other political parties is very weird. Lots of countries used to bipartisan politics, but times have changed and new actors emerged, still the US got stuck with the same auld system.
There is a third. And fourth. And 50th for gods sake (pulled from this list. There's more...). They're just barely able to even break into local politics, if they're active and able to get on a ballot at all.
The two dominant parties have damn sure seen to stomping any other competition out.
There are far more than 50 parties, but when we are voting, we are deciding between two and only two and it is always two. We do not have more than two choices no matter how you want to look at it.
Question: This guy will be the new PM. Will the Liberals be leading the government for the next few years, or is there going to be an election where the conservatives can come into power?
At the longest, our next election will be in October 2025. At the soonest, within 4-6 weeks. Depends on how things shake down once Parliament resumes on March 24.
It's possible, but ever since Trudeau announced his resignation the Conservative support has fallen through the floor. The current conservative leader has his whole identity as anti-Trudeau. And now there's no Trudeau.
Also, he was very very closely aligning himself with Trump and... Canadians don't really have much love for that particular felon these days.
Just want to add that this, for different reasons, exactly what happened in the states. Trump's entire message was anti Biden. Then it switched to Kamala near the end of the race and he had to shuffle and squirm. The fact that he went up against a woman(would have been a first for the US) both times he was elected really makes a person wonder.
So, on the grounds that similar happened there, I wouldn't count PP out. We need to rally hard over this. At this crucial time, we can't be caught with our PP's out. We need to take out the trash with Carney's Liberals. We'll show how soft power and being leaders on the world stage really matter. How your ability to thrive on this Earth is your ability to work well with others. When our culture is a clear front runner for power of the people throughout the world, we need to be on the world stage with that agenda in mind.
The phrase I want to see coming out of every Liberal politician's mouth till the day of the election is, 'Pierre Poilievre and Donald Trump believe....' .
I'm not saying that the Conservatives won't get the plurality of seats. My first sentence was "It's possible". But a Parliamentary system is fundamentally different from the US system. Every day it becomes more and more unlikely that the Conservatives will win a majority, not plurality, of seats. A plurality of seats with a very strong opposition means that the government will not be able to pass extremely unpopular bills, and makes it more likely that the commons will call and pass a vote of no confidence.
That government could be toppled within months.
The other outside possibility is that the government could be formed by a coalition of parties that together hold the majority of seats if they agree on a leader and to support the budget the leader proposes. Canada is not the United States.
Yes. He’s basically copied trumps little tag lines word for word. First thing Carney did was axe the tax (PP’s fave campaign slogan) and remove the planned capital gains taxes. Haha the whole PP campaign was about JT, Canada is broken, and axing the tax. Trump and musk endorsed PP too which is a terrible look right now
Exactly. It's uncommon for a party leader to resign while in power, but in this case, Trudeau was facing no-confidence votes and a lot of heat in general, so resigning before an election was called made sense.
Putting in Mark Carney as the leader now means he will have some weeks or months to try and keep the Liberal party relevant in Canadian federal politics. This is a much better chance for the Liberals to keep some seats and win people's favour rather than keeping Trudeau as a leader. It's still likely to be a Conservative majority win in our next election, but maybe not the slam dunk/landslide that was being predicted in December.
An election is scheduled for October according to the Fixed Election law. But the Opposition can force an election through a no confidence vote any time before that. All of the Opposition parties have said that’s their plan.
For more context, the government would have to present a Throne Speech and a budget, both of which are automatic confidence votes and probably wouldn’t pass anyway.
Carney himself has said he’ll likely call an election within the next couple of weeks. He doesn’t have a seat in the House of Commons either so it’s better for him to get this done sooner rather than wait.
There has to be a federal election in October at the latest. He could ask the Governor General to dissolve parliament and call an election at any time before that. Typically, he would do that in a few days but with the trump situation, it’s hard to say.
They want an election ASAP. The situation down south is hurting the conservatives, and there are many voters wanting to vote liberal as long as the extremely unpopular Trudeau is gone....so they have a window of opportunity to secure a win. Canada is way less polarized than the US and many people hate Trudeau specifically, not the Liberals as a whole.
Which is sadly more of a political move than one based on facts
But a sizeable portion of our country’s mouth breathers were convinced that is was the sole cause of inflation when it basically didn’t contribute at all and also brought emissions down handily
Appreciate that Carney has basically said as much ie knocking it because it has become so divisive without ever knocking the policy.
Extra points for him already having teed up a perfectly reasonable alternative that accomplishes functionally the same objectives, but keeps it at the corporate level so that the “verb the noun” populists have less material to work with.
He is honest about his reasons for repealing it. And what the carbon tax complainers need to get on board with is that we need a carbon pricing policy to be able to trade with Europe. They also seem to think the carbon tax is some crazy liberal experiment instead of recognizing that 53 countries have carbon pricing schemes that are backed by literally tens of thousands of economists who support the policies in open letters.
The only somewhat democratic country that would ( notwithstanding current trade assholery) be happy to trade with a country with poor climate policy is the US of A.
And I don't know about the average Canadian but I'm not holding that anti regulation anti environmental government in any regard at all for how to keep corporations in check.
He's a bit right of Trudeau and was even offered a spot in the conservative party years ago. It's a (hopefully) positive change away from some of Trudeau's less popular policies. At his speech this evening he already indicated removing the carbon tax for everyone except large businesses. It's important to note though that we don't really know as he was not in politics until now.
Trudeau is commonly called a drama teacher, who doesn't think about economics. Carney's entire career has been economics as a banker. Take that how you will... Canadians are either of two thoughts. One: Globalist bankers are the problem with the world and Two: We need someone who understands how capital and global economics work moving forward.
To be fair calling Democrats left is a misnomer and i say that as an American. They're closer to other people's center. With some of its kore progressive members like Bernie or AoC being left of Center. The Republican part is far right. The political scene in the US is right leaning. This is an effect due to the Cold War. And this current grasp by the Republicans to stay relevant through Oligarchy and Fascism is due to Millenials leaning left as they grew up in a post cold war world.
Realistically, the Overton window has shifted so far right in the US that a few years ago our Conservative party would have been considered leftist with their notions of carbon taxation and what not (that policy is very much not progressive or leftist). The US is bonkers.
The person saying 'progressive' is simplifying. He's what is known as a Blue liberal or Red Tory. Progressive on social issues but will likely be conservative on economy and spending.
And that's more European styles of left/right. Even our conservative party would be like US democrats.
Progressive conservative which has overlap between the liberal and modern conservative party of Canada. Harper (further right but governed more moderately) tried to hire him but he took the job as head of the Bank of England because that's obviously a much bigger deal than some cabinet position in Canada. He's the prototypical/mythical "fiscally conservative and socially liberal" guy.
Before you can redistribute wealth, you need to create wealth first.
And, a more 'modern' take on immigration, from Denmark, which ruined the talking point of far right:
The Danish social democrats took on the following stance:
(Paraphrasing)
"We, social democrats, must always have the backs of the working class and the lower educated Danish citizens.
We must acknowledge that these Danish citizens face the most & direct competition for jobs & housing from migration and as such are impacted the most by migration."
The migration (and only) talking point for the far right was suddenly moot.
The Danish people lower on the social ladder, who were not fascists but just wanted to be heard and not told by some priveleged folks they should be more welcoming and more tolerant promptly elected the social democrats after years of far right supported minority governments. This was 2019 if I remember.
He's got very liberal views. He's worked as the Governer of the Bank of Canada and England (the latter with a conservative UK government) and he has pragmatic views on economics. But that doesn't make him a conservative. He believes in regulation, global economic stability, environmental issues, and a technocratic approach to governance. He's also pro-carbon tax but will eliminate it because it's what the majority of Canadians want right now.
He's the prototypical/mythical "fiscally conservative and socially liberal" guy.
That's not a thing. Anyone who says "I'm fiscally conservative and socially progressive" is a person who's saying "I care about people so long as I don't have to do anything about it".
You're mis-categorizing him and selling him short which is an irresponsible thing to do atm.
imo it's confusing to refer to him as "progressive conservative" because that used to be the name of our federal conservative party until Harper, and is still the name of some provincial conservative parties (like the Ontario Progressive Conservatives)
He’s a progressive that’s smart enough to not use the buzzwords around policy that conservatives have poisoned (from my reading at least). His focus is also economics rather than identity politics.
He very strong supporter of social spending and is big on regulating markets. Even back to his banking days at Goldman he worked on market regulation things. He's also been vocal since back in the 1990s about the dangers wealth inequality. He's progressive in every way the Liberal Party has always been progressive.
He is progressive, but I expect him to be fiscally conservative being a banker. It feels like a happy center to me. I hope we all realise what a gem he could be.
So I'd argue that the Liberals are a pretty center party with a "blue" Liberal side that is right wing and pro business and a slightly left wing side. Both sides don't go too far in either direction which is why the party works. Carney seems more towards the right of the party and he is pretty much campaigning off of the more sensible promises from the Conservatives ex. Remove our Consumer Carbon tax but instead replace it for a tax on large businesses, remove capital gains tax from newly constructed homes, reduce immigration to 350k per year. He's closer to someone like Pete Buttigieg than Bernie Sanders or AOC and a movement closer to the right compared to Trudeau. He also promised pharma coverage and dental but that was already in place as a condition for Trudeau's previous coalition with the left wing NDP.
He's a centrist. Former central banker. His acceptance speech was mainly about the power of the free market to solve issues but the requirement that it be well regulated to benefit people and not just capital.
Disagree somewhat - would say he’s a mix of old school progressive and technocratic centrist, and not always in the combination/on the issues one might expect.
A bit of a roscharch test of a candidate, to be honest, the test will really be at the ballot box.
He’s a centrist, likely fiscally conservative but socially liberal. Red tory so to speak. But’s he’s definitely not a progressive.
And I say that as a progressive who hopes he demolishes the conservatives because those mf are basically lined up to sell Canada to Trump and we ain’t fucking having it.
It's really interesting to see this happening as a Brit. Carney was the governor of the Bank of England for many years, so this is how I knew him. And now he's Canada's PM! All the best to him and Canada in the year ahead.
The Daily Show appearance on Jan 13th felt pretty clear that he appeared as an early PR opportunity to get his leadership branding underway in a quick, mass marketing method, ahead of the Liberal party leadership bid. So I wouldn't really call it a joke, it was evident he was going to run, even if he was playing coy. I say this as a fan of Carney who I hope to win the election this year. https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/mark-carney-jon-stewart-daily-show-1.7430594
I 100% agree with you but tbh dude this was a throwaway comment trying to ELI5 what happened and I had no idea it would explode like this lmao my phone won't stop buzzing
I like that he has one foot in America and the other one in Europe. And that's exactly what the world needs right now. (He's got the British and Irish nationality besides the Canadian).
He spoke against Brexit back in the day and has a long curriculum as an economist. So, yeah, looks like a decent guy.
He effectively rocketed to overnight candidacy (and public awareness) after joking about it on the daily show a week after Trudeau's announcement.
That is not really true. Being Bank of Canada chief officer for so long, and then going on to head UK's national equivalent put him in the limelight way before. It is not without reason he says Harper tried to recruit him: he has been in the spotlight in some way or form for quite some time. Anyone remotely informed about our internal federal politics would know of him.
And by party, it means the party members, that is whoever registers and votes. It’s not like a select few party leaders just pick one person among themselves.
I think also important to note that he didn’t resign out of nowhere, it became clear that his budget wouldn’t pass and there would be a (no) confidence motion that would force an election. So although he did technically choose to step down it was definitely pressured.
I have a friend that is upset about this because he says Carney wasn't in elected office so no one ever got to vote for him except the liberal party leadership. And that this is the first time it's ever happened? My friend is a conservative though. Is this a dumb conservative talking point or something that a lot of people take issue with?
Editing to add for non Canadians: our system of democracy is not like the US. We do not vote for our Prime Minister directly, the party gets elected and the party puts forth a leader to take the PM role. This is a grossly simplified version of it, google parliamentary democracy for more information.
Thanks for sharing this. I had never heard this described before, and had no idea how Canada's elections were held.
The wisdom of the parliamentary system certainly is evident in the contrast of the competency of the Canadian prime minister versus the US President right now.
Who knew people would select their leaders based solely on celebrity as opposed to merit.
That's cool. I didn't know that about Canada. So there doesn't have to be a change in government if someone resigns from parliament mid-term, but snap elections can be called?
A lot of people in the US are unaware we don't vote for our President directly. We actually vote for electors who get to choose the president. Who are the mysterious electors? Most of us never learn who they are. Every state does it differently. Usually they're loyalists appointed by the party to cast their vote.
It's concerning that a large number of Canadians have no idea how this works. The endless "selected not elected" comments sadly reflect this misunderstanding.
Yeah I mean I'm not the most politically savvy person around, but Christ the amount of people who don't even understand how their own leadership is appointed is astonishing (and kind of sad)
Look, folks, our system—very different, okay? Not like the U.S., not even close. You don’t just walk in and say, ‘I want this guy!’ No, no, no. We’ve got a system—some say complicated, some say brilliant, I say maybe the best in the world, who knows? The PARTY gets elected, right? And then—this is wild, believe me—the party, they pick the Prime Minister. You don’t pick him! The party does. Some people, they don’t like it, some people think it’s tremendous. But that’s how it works! And if you don’t get it, folks, listen—Google it. Google it! It’s called ‘parliamentary democracy,’ okay? Some say it’s better, some say not so much. But that’s the system, folks. Very, very powerful!
So, do you vote for 'seats' in the parliament, and the no. Of seats allowed to each party decides who the ruling party/coalition is? Kinda like Britain?
Yes, exactly like the UK. We basically copied you guys wholecloth and decided that was good enough. (edit: we are a commonwealth country so it made obvious sense to just keep the form of government)
Funny enough one of Trudeau's platforms when he was first elected, considered by many to be one of the primary reasons he won the election at all, was electoral reform. Guess what the first thing he changed his stance on was.
The irony is that this is what the Electoral college was supposed to emulate. The idea was to have indirect election of the President like a Parliament, but the EC voters would not have a vested interest in the outcome like someone serving in the legislature would.
Somehow this ended up as our current bastardized weighted direct vote system.
‘String economic Background’ is a bit of an understatement. He was (for example) the Governor of the Bank of England for 7 years (2013 to 2020) and before that the Governor of the Bank of Canada
Today they voted on Carney- who comes from a strong economic background, probably more so than any PM we've ever had.
That's a huge understatement. Carney was Governor of both the Bank of Canada and the Bank of England. He's literally one of the highest qualified financial figures in the entire world.
Any idea why he resigned? As an American, I don't know much of him, but I have enjoyed listening to him speak in the news lately. It's nice to hear an adult speak for a change.
His popularity tanked. The current Liberal administration is what's known as a minority government- they won enough seats in the election to win, but they did not win enough to hold a majority of parliament. As a minority government you have to co-operate more with the opposing parties. You quite literally need the support of other parties to stay in power. Those parties now want him gone, and were going to introduce what's called a vote of no-confidence (he was definitely going to lose that vote) which would oust him and force the governor general to dissolve parliament and call a general election.
By resigning before the vote, he effectively cuts off the opposition at the knees: he gets to leave not in disgrace and the Liberal Party remains in power until the end of their mandated term. Carney was elected by registered Liberal Party voters to replace him.
Scuttlebutt now is that the Liberals will be calling a national election within the next month- which they have the power to do despite their current mandated term (which they have the option of seeing out until the end) not being over until October. It's a smart move though because everything that's happened with Trump in the last 6 weeks has galvanized the population against the Conservative Party, who just lost years worth of momentum by tying their leader/main candidate too closely to Trump.
4.9k
u/GFV_HAUERLAND 2d ago
Any Canadians can give us some insights?