This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Finance & Investment, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Finance and Investment on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Finance & InvestmentWikipedia:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentTemplate:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentFinance & Investment
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EconomicsWikipedia:WikiProject EconomicsTemplate:WikiProject EconomicsEconomics
This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ireland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ireland on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IrelandWikipedia:WikiProject IrelandTemplate:WikiProject IrelandIreland
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom
This article is within the scope of WikiProject University of Oxford, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the University of Oxford on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.University of OxfordWikipedia:WikiProject University of OxfordTemplate:WikiProject University of OxfordUniversity of Oxford
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ice Hockey, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of ice hockey on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ice HockeyWikipedia:WikiProject Ice HockeyTemplate:WikiProject Ice HockeyIce Hockey
This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the |auto= parameter.
Page history
Severe bias
This entire article basically reads as Liberal party propaganda - there is plenty of controversy surrounding Carney, yet absolutely nothing is mentioned here. Even his surprising claim about the proposed Canadian Finance minister position is worded as if it's verified! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.58.171.237 (talk) 23:19, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The controversy is the propaganda. Accusations are confessions. It's all fabricated. The controversies surrounding Brookfield don't have anything to do with Carney himself, and in fact, it's all allegations and accusations while they passed every ethics investigations. Allegations of tax evasion against Brookfield are largely unfounded and speculative. The company operates in full compliance with international tax laws, utilizing legal structures and strategies that are common among large global corporations to optimize its tax obligations. These practices, while sometimes complex, are transparent and subject to rigorous oversight by tax authorities in various jurisdictions. Any accusations of wrongdoing are typically based on misunderstandings or misinterpretations of Brookfield's legitimate business practices, not evidence of intentional evasion.
His role at Brookfield is purely as a board member, and there is no indication that he has been involved in any activities related to tax avoidance or evasion. These allegations are baseless and seem to be a misrepresentation of his professional responsibilities, which are conducted with the utmost integrity and transparency. Asavvz (talk) 20:07, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We decide what to include in articles based on our core content policies, such as WP:NPOV and WP:NOR. If reliable sources are widely discussing his French skills, then we should reflect that in this article. Anne drew (talk · contribs) 20:35, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Add a section on his "Globalist" ties/tendencies
He is closely linked/tied/friends with the World Economic Forum (WEF) which is in the public sphere known as a globalist organization. We should have some points or even a full section regarding this because it is a core tenet of Carney. 98.45.134.246 (talk) 07:16, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There is already information in this article about just that information in /*International organization memberships*/. If you need to suggest an expansion of that section or to create a whole new section, please suggest a reliable source. Qwerty123M (talk) 07:24, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You can see in this publication about Hybrid Warfare from the Canadian Special Forces Command. P.37: "Unlike in the Cold War, when Soviets largely supported leftist groups, a fluid approach to ideology now allows the Kremlin to simultaneously back farleft and far-right movements, greens, anti-globalists and financial elites. The aim is to exacerbate divides and create an echo chamber of Kremlin support." Asavvz (talk) 20:11, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The most recent head photo of Carney on Wikimedia Commons appears to be from 2020. Fortunately (for him and the article), his appearance doesn't seem to have changed much from the 2015 picture used now. If you prefer, WP:BEBOLD and change it. Zefr (talk) 23:19, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah there definitely isn't many great photos in the commons for him, hopefully there are some more added soon
Usually I think head photos should represent the figure as close to their peak role as possible (which in Carney's case would be at present and I am sure we will get good options for him in the coming months/years while he is Prime Minister) but the 2020 headshot is not the best looking to put it nicely XD. I think given how little his appearance has changed over the last decade, the current infobox photo is the best of the options we currently have. ToadTendo (talk) 23:04, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Because Carney visited the UK recently and met with Starmer, the Number 10 photographer took a couple of pictures which thankfully we can use. The best one of them (in my opinion) is File:Starmer and Carney 2025-03-17-19-43-C (cropped).jpg which is the picture to the right. It is up to date and usable for copyright (which are both good) but he is facing away from the camera (which is bad). Just an option. There's also File:Reunión en el Bank of England (41427941425) (cropped).jpg which looks like the photo below the one on the right , which is from 2018 and is lower quality but slightly more recent than the 2015 photo. DimensionalFusion (talk · she/her) 21:27, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The Prime Minister is appointed by the Governor General and takes office solely upon appointment. It is a convention that the viceroy always appoints the person that commands the confidence of the House of Commons. It is naturally expected that Mr Carney will be appointed Prime Minister in the next few days, but constitutionnaly speaking, it is not a given. All the more so given that the Liberal Party does not currently hold a majority in the Commons and that the House has not yet formally expressed its confidence in Mr Carney. Absent a general election with clear results, the shortcut is constitutionally objectionable.
In my view, the expression may be used as a colloquial descriptor, but should not be listed among offices held in a politician's infobox, as it is not an actual position. It is merely my opinion as a Canadian constitutional lawyer. Cortom2 (talk) 00:06, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think what you're describing applies more to the term "prime minister-elect" but I do see where you're coming from given the no. of Liberal Party seats in Parliament. I do think Prime minister-designate is fine and, since it will be in the article couple of days only, I'd say its not a big deal. It also lets people who don't know much about the Wesminster system and its running but are curious about Carney know what is going on. Omnis Scientia (talk) 00:28, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This isn't how this is ever done in thousands of articles every transition. PM-designate is not a separate office to be tracked from March 9, that is extremely silly. We are tracking his upcoming term as PM. Therequiembellishere (talk) 00:42, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I wasn't talking about it being an office. Of course its not. Just that Cortom2 removed every mention of the term PM-designate - its now been reversed by someone else - from the lead and the infobox. My point is that the term is okay to use when a PM-to-be is still transistioning to becoming PM, like with Keir Starmer a couple of months back. Omnis Scientia (talk) 00:51, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wouldn't this just make him the "leader of the party" and Trudeau the leader of the party in parliament/parliamentary leader. The article implies that Carney will be sworn in soon but how?! Is there a by-election expected or is he going to be appointed to the Senate? If he's only expected to run in the next general election is calling him the PM-designate not pre-mature? ash (talk) 04:25, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You don't have to have a seat to be PM, a provincial premier, or a cabinet minister. The convention is that if you don't have a seat you seek one within a reasonable period of time. There are several people who became PM or a provincial premier, or who remained in office, despite not having a seat. John Turner became PM without a seat. William Lyon Mackenzie King lost his seat in 1925 and again in 1945 but remained PM. Danielle Smith and Christy Clark were both sworn in as provincial premiers without having a seat. Carney will be sworn in as PM within ten days or so. Wellington Bay (talk) 06:02, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No you don't. By convention someone who is not in parliament but has been appointed to cabinet (whether as PM or cabmin) needs to seek a seat in the Commons (or be appointed to the Senate) within a reasonable period of time. There is no rule about what this time is but I think it's always been within a few months. Usually they would seek a seat in the House of Commons rather than being appointed to the Senate, particularly if it's a senior cabinet position and if they lose the by-election they quit cabinet. Cabinet ministers sitting in the Senate are rare other than, until recently, Leader of the Government in the Senate or a minister without potfolio. We have had more senior positions occasionally, usually when, a government has no or too few MPs (or no suitable MPs) in a province as PMs try to have at least one minister in each province. For instance, if a Conservative government doesn't have enough MPs in Quebec or a Liberal government doesn't have enough MPs in the west. Or, the government may have a star candidate they wish to add to cabinet and either get an MP to step aside (say by appointing them to the Senate) or use an existing vacancy to try to get that person into parliament after appointing them to cabinet. For instance, Pierre Juneau was appointed Minister of Communications by Pierre Trudeau only to fail to win the seat of Hochelaga in a by-election, resulting in his resignation from cabinet a few days later. Famously, General Andrew McNaughton was appointed Minister of National Defence in December 1944 but lost his attempt to win a seat in a by-election in February 1945 in Grey North - but he actually remained Defence Minister and ran for another seat in the June 1945 general election, was defeated a second time, and then finally resigned from cabinet in August. Wellington Bay (talk) 16:09, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Common usage has been prime minister or premier-designate even if the GG or LG has not yet formally invited the person to form the government, when the request is a formality as it's more correct than "prime minister-elect". For instance, the CBC News item on Carney is headlined "Mark Carney becomes prime minister-designate", iPolitics "PM-designate Carney reportedly set for closed-door meetings with current cabinet, Liberal caucus" and others. It's not our job to be proscriptive or pedantic but to reflect the widely accepted usage in reliable sources. If over time that changes to prime minister-presumptive because of some of the technical arguments being raised, great, but until then it would be pedantic or original research for us to introduce a new term as being "more correct" or promote an outlier term that isn't widely used in Canada. For instance, from 1935 to 1971 the technical title of the head of government in Ontario was Prime Minister of Ontario. Should we go back and rewrite the articles on those premiers in order to refer to them as "prime minister"? No, because that's not the commonly accepted usage. Wellington Bay (talk) 16:33, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Just raising to attention this is not the first time this has been argued about on talk pages, see Talk:Tim Houston#Premier Designate. The precedent from previous is even if in a very pedantic way it is technically not correct to refer to him as Designate until he is invited by the GG, Wikipedia:Reliable sources already refer to him as that, and it is not worth edit warring with 200 uninformed editors a day over something this minor. WanukeX (talk) 18:08, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Error: Prime Ministership Doesn't Depend on HoC Seat
The section titled "2025 leadership campaign" claims that "[Carney] won't be Prime Minister until he wins a seat in the House of Commons." This is inaccurate: according to Canadian law he can become PM before gaining a seat (although he still needs to be sworn in), although he's obviously expected to try to get one as soon as possible. Neither of the sources linked (88 and 89) appear to mention anything about him needing a seat. MOctave (talk) 04:50, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please review: three fiscal views draw from the supplied CBC citation; two of which "run a deficit" and "balanced budget" are not supported by the source. Thank you. 2600:1700:9DD0:3130:8696:B55F:A315:5ED4 (talk) 15:20, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"Informal" Advisor - 2020
From the reliable sources that I can find, most report Carney as an "informal advisor" specifically.
Not done: I'm not convinced this particular article, of the hundreds covering Carney's selection, is particularly notable for inclusion. PianoDan (talk) 19:05, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Westminster parliamentary system
Currently the article states "Under the Westminster Parliamentary system, the Crown may invite anyone to form a government, whether or not they hold a seat in the Commons or the Senate." While this is the case in Canada, it is not universal to all Westminster parliamentary systems. For example, in New Zealand under section 6 of the Constitution Act 1986, all ministers including the Prime Minister need to become Members of Parliament within 40 days of appointment.
It also applies to Westminster, where the PM does not need to be an MP, and has sat in the Lords or otherwise before. -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 22:37, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Please *read* the infobox carefully before changing it again. What office is he assuming on March *14*? Prime Minister. He does not *become* prime minister designate on March 14 but that is what your changes state. He is actually *assuming* the office of PM tomorrow so the infobox is correct to state that. The infobox says "assuming office" of Prime Minister on March 14. Once he is sworn
it will change to "assumed office" on March 14. Please stop changing the office in the infobox to PM-Designate because it is nonsensical to say he is assuming the office of PM-designate tomorrow.
Once he is sworn in change move Justin Trudeau to "predecessor" instead of "succeeding" and the infobox will then say Carney "assumed office" on March 14. Wellington Bay (talk) 19:04, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
there's no change. This is how the infobox is designed to be used. Succeeding= is used when someone hasn't yet taken office and the predecessor= is used when the person has taken office. Your formatting has the infobox stating Carney is assuming the position of Prime Minister-designate in March 14 when in fact he already is PM-designate and is assuming the position of PM on March 14. Wellington Bay (talk) 19:15, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We've been using 'designate' or 'elect' in incoming office holder's infoboxes, for years. You may not like, but that's how its been done. GoodDay (talk) 19:20, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's not a matter of liking it but of using the infobox correctly. Is Mark Carney assuming the position of Prime Minister-designate tomorrow? I've asked you this several times but you haven't responded. The infobox as you have edited it states that he is assuming the role of Prime Minister-designate tomorrow and this is clearly incorrect. Wellington Bay (talk) 19:42, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The office is prime minister, Carney is the designate to assume the office, he assumes the office on March 14 and is succeeding its current holder, Justin Trudeau. Does that clear it up? Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 19:45, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The issue is how to address that in the infobox. If he is assuming the office of Prime Minister of Canada on March 14 then that's not what it says now. Wellington Bay (talk) 20:36, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think readers will understand that the combination of "Prime Minister-designate" and "Assuming office" means that the office of PM is the one being assumed. That being said, I've proposed using the status field below, which incorporates both. -- Patar knight - chat/contributions22:02, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If we want to get technical about infobox parameter usage, there's the status field, which would allow the identification of a actual office in the office parameter as well as its designate status. Condensed infobox example below. ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions22:00, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No, that's not workable, as he's not the 24th prime minister 'yet'. Also having "Designate" in its separate place, makes it look clunky. GoodDay (talk) 22:58, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What if we comment out 24th, since that's not technically part of the title, and then re-adding it after the transition? -- Patar knight - chat/contributions23:09, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You have refused to answer the question. Could that be because the answer to "Is Mark Carney assuming the office of Prime Minister-designate tomorrow?" is "No"? Wellington Bay (talk) 23:53, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"Nobody claiming he's about to becoming anything else" The infobox version you prefer does. That's literally what it says and why it doesn't make sense regardless of how many times it's been done that way. Wellington Bay (talk) 00:03, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
After Carney takes office? I recommend somebody put together and RFC for situations like this (i.e. transition periods), in the infoboxes of all incoming office holders. GoodDay (talk) 23:00, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it would be helpful. Just from a very quick look, there's definitely some variability. Hipkins who was designate for a few days, appears to have variously used the status field [4], the office field [5], or no mention in the infobox at all [6]. Sunak used the bare PM title [7], designate in the office field [8], or no mention at all in the infobox [9]. Starmer was largely empty in the infobox [10], except for a brief and obviously incorrect use of "elect" in the office field [11]. Albanese mostly used the office field [12]. Looking at the US, presidents seem to have mostly used the office field for "elect" while cabinet nominees seem to use the status field for "nominee". -- Patar knight - chat/contributions15:21, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Right Honourable or Honourable?
In elementary school, I was taught that an unelected Prime Minister (who takes over when the elected Prime Minister steps down) is referred to as "The Honourable [Prime Minister's Name]" instead of "The Right Honourable [Prime Minister's Name]" until the next election where, if they get elected, their title will change to "The Right Honourable [Prime Minister's Name]"
Has something changed, or is this not the case? Shouldn't Mark Carney be "The Honourable Mark Carney" until the next election (assuming he gets elected) where it would then change to "The Right Honourable Mark Carney"?
I’m afraid your teacher got it wrong. 🙃 The Prime Minister is entitled to be called « The Right Honourable » upon appointment. See the « Table of Titles to be used in Canada », published by the Federal Government:
Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 16 March 2025 (2)
1. Reword the final sentence right before the Early life and education section, using "winning by a landslide" instead of "winning a landslide victory".
Never mind. My previous comments were because someone else changed it to a low quality photo without a discussion. The previous photo was reinstated. AsaQuathern (talk) 02:37, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Stephen Harper's citation
on the wiki page, it is said: "In March 2025, former prime minister Stephen Harper stated in a Conservative Party fundraising letter that Carney was not involved in the daily management of Canada's economy during the global recession, and Carney was "undermining former finance minister Jim Flaherty's legacy."
However, multiple people have responded to that.
Chisholm Pothier, who worked with Carney and Flaherty said on X:
" I was there and Carney played a big role. Flaherty and Harper provided the political leadership that was key, but Carney was on deck with insight and smart monetary policy. Trying to erase that for partisan reasons is, well, beyond disgraceful"
It is also worth nothing Stephen Harper said years ago through an official message from the Canadian Government:
“In this time of global economic uncertainty, Governor Carney has done an admirable job in fulfilling the Bank of Canada’s mandate and has been a valued partner as the Government has worked to steer Canada away from the worst impacts of the global economic recession. As a result, Canada remains an example to the world with its strong banks, effective regulatory environment and sound economic policy.”
Flaherty himself said: “Mark Carney has been a visionary leader, an economic partner and a friend. Over the past few years we have faced some unprecedented economics challenges and we surmounted”
It would be good if all the information was added and not just the what Stephen Harper said to smear Carney.
Stephen Harper going back on what he said multiple years ago actually affect his overall credibility and it seems like what he is saying is purely politically motivated, and not based in facts. Asavvz (talk) 22:23, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
from 2020. Fortunately (for him and the article), his appearance doesn't seem to have changed much from the 2015 picture used now. If you prefer, WP:BEBOLD and change it. Zefr (talk) 23:19, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Cannolis (talk) 07:39, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Not done: I'm not convinced this particular article, of the hundreds covering Carney's selection, is particularly notable for inclusion. PianoDan (talk) 19:05, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
You must be logged in to post a comment.