Memo To Mark Carney: 4 Ideas For Renewal

Some Ideas For The (Hopeful) Next Leader

One of the points I made in yesterday’s piece endorsing Mark Carney is that he is by no means a perfect candidate. Nobody is, and it’s a stupid turn of phrase. My actual point is that there are places I’m hopeful Carney can be moved, or at least where the campaign can listen to friendly advice. And in that spirit, I’d like to offer a few suggestions to the Carney team.

Don’t Just Announce Policy For Quebec, Narrativize It

Wow, shocker, Scrimshaw starts with Quebec, everybody’s shocked. I know, I get it, but it’s true. If you look at what Duclos and Champagne said about the next leader, it wasn’t just linguistic mastery, it was understanding. Quebec is absolutely different than English Canada, and understanding that on a visceral level is what it takes, not just coming up with three special arrangements from a CAQ wish list of further devolution. You need to evoke the history, the heritage, the understanding of the fact that Quebec is special, because the honest truth is they are.

Conservatives have oftentimes wondered why they can’t break deeper into Quebec despite offering things that Quebec ostensibly wants, and the reason is simple - they’re talking to Quebecers, but not about Quebec. They’re making a couple of minor concessions through gritted teeth and then being surprised that people notice the gritted teeth. Carney has no public history with Quebec, at least none that I can find, but that’s not a huge problem. It just means the campaign will have to be strategic.

Carney’s announcement is this week, and then next week will be drowned up by tariffs and responses to said tariffs, so there’s nothing to be done in the immediate. But in a couple weeks, get Carney to Montreal, and specifically Dorchester Square. (Place du Canada is woke nonsense, it’s still fucking Dorchester Square.) Get Carney in front of a crowd in the same place as the Unity Rally, and you’ve got yourself an image that shows he gets it. In terms of the language, it’s not a high bar. Something like this:

Being here reminds me of the jubilation I felt when I saw that Quebec had decided to stay in Canada nearly 30 years ago. While obviously I believe in democracy and self determination, it is as obvious to me now as it was then that Quebec is an indelible part of Canada, woven into the fabric of our country and the soul of our nation. It is one of our greatest accomplishments that we have managed to achieve and strengthen Quebec’s place in Canada without stripping it of the indescribable essence that makes it so important.

Quebecers want many of the same things as their fellow Canadians - safe communities, good jobs, a health care system that works, and a housing market that doesn’t price out those who need it. A government that is good for Montreal can and should be a government that is also good for Moncton and Moose Jaw. But it is also undeniable and inarguable that Quebec has needs and challenges that we must work to meet.

I make a promise to Quebec, and to Canada - I will govern only as much as is necessary. We do not need an overzealous Federal government trying to impose our values on provinces. It must be a fundamental principle that where the provinces have their domain, there will be no incessant and irrelevant Federal intrusion. But that doesn’t mean leaving Quebec on an iceberg, floating away from Canada in a sea of indifference.

The glory of Quebec is in its contradictions and in its idiosyncrasies. Plainly, getting to help Quebec be its best should always be seen as an honour, and not an obligation. Quebec is too important to be relegated to just another issue on a list of priorities. Any leader asking for the honour of serving our great country must understand all of our country, including Quebec, in all its glory. Canada deserves a leader who will fight for what’s best for Canada at all times - and that means fighting with every tool I have to make Quebec the best it can be. There cannot be a truly great Canada without a thriving Quebec. And I hope I never have to see Quebec anywhere but as partners in Canada.

I’m sure there are good policy ideas in the shop, but just plucking a few ideas from the LRB won’t stop this problem. Carney can’t treat it with the rigidity of a banking or economic problem - restoring the Liberals in Quebec is an art, not a science.

Own The Housing Failures Unequivocally

Do the Feds own all the blame for the housing disaster? No. Do they own a majority of it? Debatable, but I’d say no. Will anybody listen to Carney on housing if he’s trying to pass the buck? Also no.

The Liberals in theory have a lot of other people they can blame - namely Doug Ford - but the way to actualize the Ford opportunities isn’t to say that they’ve tried but mean old Dougy is stopping them, but to present a series of forward looking proposals and bounce Ford et al into saying no to them. As much as Liberals complain about the fact they get the blame on housing, they are actually responsible for the fact that the market has gone from bad to horrific in recent years. Their failures on immigration alone have raised prices, and that’s a huge failure. Most importantly, you won’t get anywhere acknowledging the crisis but blaming others.

The real problem with Trudeau’s buck passing on the issue is that nobody listens to the second half of your answer if the first half is buck passing. In this context, the truth about who is actually to blame for past failures is irrelevant. You can pin all of that blame on an entity that will cease to exist (the Trudeau Government) in a way that Canadians will like to hear, even if it’s awkward for some of the staffers. It’s the kind of ritual sacrifice you have to do to convince voters you’re different, but once it’s done it’s hugely effective. And let’s be real - if Justin Trudeau isn’t going to serve as functionally a pinata for you to bash repeatedly, what is the point of running on the fact you haven’t worked for him?

You have a Housing Minister with a national platform and presence, who is your best communicator. Let him run. Make clear to Nate that he is not bound by the rules of politeness and form to be nice about the government’s failures where they exist. Tell him to make use of his maverick credentials and sell that things took too long to get serious, but they did. That's a message that people have some chance to hear, but only if we don’t pass the buck first.

Lean Into The Wonkery

I’m not saying we should be discussing the finer points of European Central Bank policy or whatever, but Carney will be seen as a nerd and a wonk. That is built in, and no amount of time, energy, and effort will make over a decade at Goldman, Governor of two central banks, and now what he’s doing at Brookfield a regular Joe. So lean into it.

If you’re going to be seen as something anyways, just do it. Pretending to be something you’re not is far more damaging than anything else. The reason I’ve given myself the Professional Asshole title is because that’s what I am. I would be significantly worse at this if I was trying to be some faux-nice version of myself in public. Despite the brainrot that Let Bartlet Be Bartlet (and its many real life examples) has done to modern politics, hilariously The West Wing got this right. If you are going to be seen as a wonk, make that a dividing line.

If the future of the Canadian charge to Net Zero isn’t a carbon tax, which it seems like it’s not, then make Pierre Poilievre squirm by explaining how he’s going to reduce emissions and grow our clean energy. Make the fight not about values in some vague sense but how he will do what he says. Force the issue with detailed plans for promoting clean energy in Canada, say, and make the question on climate not vagaries about a tax, but detailed plans.

On housing, Poilievre is deemed to have been first, and he did some solid messaging. But he’s been coasting on that reputation for a while now. Have Carney and Nate put out a 10 point plan on key housing issues (development charges, single stair, incentives for planning reform, etc), and make Poilievre explain either why the plan is great, or attack it and look like an asshole.

Ditch the attacks on Poilievre on vague points of values and lean on plans. Poilievre will be bad for these specific reasons, not just calling him a threat to a woman’s right to choose when he’s on camera saying the words ”I’m pro-choice.” Lead with your chest on policy, not on values.

Pivot Right On Law And Order

One of the stories of the BC Election was the surge in BC Conservative support amongst non-white BCers, and it’s a story that threatens the Liberals in Ontario as well as BC. Scarborough, Brampton, and Mississauga are all the obvious places, but much of the GTA has growing minority populations that tend to be more conservative on drugs policy and tend to favour tougher crime policies.

Every time someone reoffends while on bail it’s a problem right now. We need to take that weapon out of the Conservatives’ hands and acknowledge that some of the “smart on crime” policies aren’t working. It’s a high profile way of showing independence from the Trudeau Liberals and allows us to take a (unfortunately valid) bullet out of Poilievre’s chamber.

Do I want a more right wing Liberal Party in a vacuum? Not really, but the Tories are in the mid 40s and we can’t pretend they’re not. Winning voters who are willing to vote for Poilievre is crucial. We need the Liberal Party to meet the voters where they are. These are four ideas of how to do so, and they constitute a roadmap to a better future for the party.