How Mark Carney would govern Canada
What to expect if Carney is elected prime minister
Mark Carney has built a career convincing powerful people that he’s indispensable—using a blend of intellect, communication skills, an innate charm (helped by George Clooney-good looks), and unmistakable ambition.
The list of people who’ve sought his advice is impressive: Dodge, Goodale, Flaherty, Harper, Osborne, Cameron, Johnson, Guterres, Flatt, Bloomberg. And many more, no doubt.
But being prime minister is a different beast. Intelligence, charm, and economic credentials are not sufficient.
As Chrystia Freeland quipped during the Liberal leadership race, people like Carney are hireable. Up until now, his career has borne that out. But being a great consigliere doesn’t guarantee you’ll make a great boss.
The coming campaign will tell whether Carney has the political chops to be electable—the coalition-building instincts, the retail touch, the stamina under fire, the ability to withstand intense public scrutiny. The big risk for Carney will be how to navigate public opinion when democratic skepticism eventually kicks in; Canadians won’t buy forever the “trust me, I know best” pitch. And if Canada really is facing an existential threat, it seems the real test of Canada’s next leader will be who can inspire and unite the nation, rather than who’s most adept at moving economic levers.
But there are others better than me at political analysis. What I can offer are a few observations, drawn from his career and worldview, on how he sees the role of government—and the challenges his approach will face should he get voted into power.
Is Carney made for the moment?
There is a type.
Carney belongs to a global elite of economic policymakers—Christine Lagarde, Mario Draghi, and the like—who share a mindset: technocratic, regulatory, hands-on.
They’re not driven by money—they could make more in the private sector. What drives them is a shared belief that their vision and expertise make them uniquely suited to lead.
They don’t just play the game. They set the rules.
They respect markets—and generate much of their legitimacy from being able to understand them—but they mistrust them too. Carney’s “tragedy of the horizon” concept highlights the short-termism of markets and the need for state intervention to address long-term challenges like climate change.
This isn’t Trudeau-style excess or heavy-handed statism. But make no mistake—they believe in steering. And they see crises as opportunities for agenda-setting.
Carney wants to be seen not just as a steady hand but as the architect of Canadian economic transformation. And he is more or less saying as much.“I know we need change, big change, positive change,” Carney said in a speech kicking off his federal election campaign.
So, his instincts will be interventionist. He’ll centralize power as much as any recent Canadian prime minister. As a manager, he can be hard on staff—with the intensity of the Eye of Sauron—but he raises the bar everywhere he goes and gets the most out of the people who choose to work for him. He won’t rely on folks he doesn’t trust and will bypass poor performers or obstructive processes.
Being a partisan free agent, he’s less likely to be constrained by Liberal legacy concerns. He probably won’t worry too much about how unpopular decisions could impact the party’s future.
Even though he’s adopting some traditionally Conservative ideas—fiscal discipline, tax competitiveness, resource advocacy—his approach will be fundamentally different from Poilievre’s: more hands-on, strategy-oriented, and state-driven.
Global coordination will be a hallmark. He’s a full-throated globalist: global challenges like climate demand globally coordinated responses. It’s been central to every major initiative he’s led—from post-crisis banking reform to the Net-Zero Banking Alliance. His immediate instinct to rally European allies in response to Trump’s belligerence is no surprise.
And he will make mistakes, as everyone does.
Miscalculation—or perhaps overshooting—is always a risk for supremely confident people with strong track records. While Liberals are selling Carney as an untouchable global success story, even in his areas of expertise, the record is not unblemished.
Carney’s tenure at the Bank of England drew criticism for overreach, mixed results, and communication missteps. He was accused of hyping crises and pushing pet projects.
But what is undeniable is that whatever happens in this election, Canadians face a stark choice.
Poilievre rejects elite-driven globalism outright. He casts Carney as the ultimate gatekeeper—the very type he’s built his movement against. His message is about unleashing markets, cutting bureaucracy, letting Canadians get ahead.
It’s free-market orthodoxy.
Carney’s model is economic statecraft: a more command-style approach, rooted in planning and regulation.
Some might argue that’s what the moment demands. In a world of economic warfare and geopolitical flux, centralization and planning may feel reassuring.
But others will argue this is no time for technocratic idealism. Planning assumes cooperation—which could be a stretch in today’s fractured, zero-sum world. Carney’s struggles to hold together the UN-backed Net-Zero Banking Alliance are already a warning sign.
And in a country grappling with low investment, overregulation, and climate transition fatigue, it’s not obvious that more rules and more climate ambition are the answer.
Sometimes, we get so busy planning that we forget to adapt. Or as John Lennon put it: “Life is what happens while you’re busy making other plans.”
