15 Comments
User's avatar
Paul Austin-Menear's avatar

It's good that you note PM Carney viewed it as constructive criticism and positive feedback. In this century, the PMO has often centralized power too much... under both colours of lawn sign who have formed government. We must remember that our system is intended for citizens to vote for MPs, not parties, and that MPs represent first and foremost the interests of constituents. Not parties.

When party is put before country and constituents, the wheels come off the cart really fast.

Expand full comment
Gerry Dunn's avatar

Your perspectives on principles and integrity are what originally drew me to support you. Now they are the things that I share with friends as a example of what electoral politics could be, when discussing PR or Electoral Reform.

Expand full comment
Kathleen Kells's avatar

Dear Nate, thank you for your thoughtful critique of Budget 2025. I just ignore what Poilievre and his gang say. As you say, he’s only deflecting from his own lousy leadership and disunity in his caucus. If we had been forced into another federal election so soon after the last one, I don’t doubt that our part would have won a majority. If the CPC membership is so stupid as to continue with his leadership after the review in January albeit with a new campaign manager, the CPC will once again fail to form government. Our PM is working extremely hard to shore up existing trade agreements with other trading partners and build new ones. Until such time as Trump decides he needs to deal with Canada again, frankly I agree with PM Carney: who indeed cares. Trump is already having to backtrack on tariffs on certain food items that Americans struggle to afford. Time is on our side. Trump will have to relent soon on steel and aluminum. The US automobile manufacturers are complaining about the tariifs on these commodities. MAGA is fragmenting. Trump is losing his grip. He could even be impeached again.

Expand full comment
Réal Lavergne's avatar

I'm with you on this Nate, and very pleased that Carney took your comments positively. Hat's off to both of you.

Expand full comment
Walt Thurtell's avatar

Nate offers reasoned, reasonable and measured ideas, not just grandstanding. Glad that we have a PM who is able to see the worth of ideas freely exchanged.

Expand full comment
Francois's avatar

That's a good evolution from just stealing and not giving credit during elections.

Expand full comment
Leanne Rapley's avatar

Thank you Nate. You exemplify why authenticity matters in this age of fake news, grandstanding and trying to get ahead by casting stones at others.

Expand full comment
Henry Porter's avatar

Nate, I am one of your constituent voters and I would like to know how we can stop the spread of misinformation and disinformation through foreign owned media products. They are not telling Canadians the truth but are peddling American far-right propaganda. I understand it was Harper's government that allowed for that and it seems Harper is still pushing his anti-Canadian agenda.

Expand full comment
Calandra Mulder's avatar

From Byrnes to Outhouse, indeed -- ha ha ha. Hope Pepe Le Pew🦨 appreciates the cheap dig(s)!

Expand full comment
James Rubec's avatar

Okay. You've won me over by controlling the budget's negative media narrative and it is interesting having the only constructive criticism of it hitting headlines being intra-party.

On the flipside, it also presents a whole ton of Liberal and that itself becomes a problem when the voices of Quebec, or the West and those debates are overshadowed by All This TM.

Whatever, medium-term risk, the fun was seeing a government that could Fight Club itself and still walk away with a budget deal.

Expand full comment
Hume's avatar

We need to run away, not walk, from the failed policy ideas of the “missing middle”. Yes, we should get rid of development charges. But massive investments in modular homes and factory construction is a costly mistake, it’s the one thing that will have me switching my support to the CPC. There are better solutions.

Forcing a handful of cities and suburbs to bear the entire burden of national growth leads to strong local resistance for a reason: it’s deeply unfair, and ineffective. If we stop doing this, development charges will be cut without a federal carrot or stick.

The path to restoring the home building market to the level of efficiency required to build “deeply affordable” family homes, does not require spending or “investment”. It requires cuts.

We have 175 years of evidence that lower regulatory thresholds are the difference between affordable and non-affordable housing. This is why Alberta builds more homes than Ontario. And why Texas builds more homes, as Paul Krugman pointing out, than any other state.

The silent generation was the last generation in Canada to reap the benefits of affordable construction, largely due to distortions caused by poor regulatory rollout. But we don’t need to return to asbestos and ungrounded wiring to get back to sub-$200K home construction.

Smart cuts to the National Building Code (section 9 in particular), along with leading a multi-province agreement on up-zoning (to reduce impacts on individual communities), creating Universal Building Exemption regions in provinces with the lowest total fertility rates (Nova Scotia for example).

Yes, evidence increasingly shows the connection between a lack of true affordability and a lack of family formation. This will inevitably lead to a deficit in human capital in Canada’s future. But this is also the political ammunition for restorative changes.

Tackling these challenges by embracing self-sufficiency would be broadly popular, particularly with the young angry men who see no path to prosperity and feel a lack of control in their lives.

Happy to discuss in detail at any time.

Expand full comment
Maria Radford's avatar

I am glad to hear that the PM welcomed constructive criticism. However, if leadership is something you aspire to I recommend another read of his book in the section toward the end where he talks about types of leaders. P. 306 in the latest edition discusses the transactional as opposed to the transformational leader. I used to tell MBA students that good followers (as in assignment directions) make good leaders. So keep up your constructive approach.

Expand full comment
David S.'s avatar

Have you reflected on how your anti-Israel stance emboldens the Jew-haters in your riding and elsewhere?

Expand full comment
Alexis's avatar

Have you reflected on the fact that you support genocide?

Expand full comment
Miguel's avatar

It's your measured and thoughtful constructive criticism, which is your superpower. Those of us who took the time to listen to your budget follow-up immediately noted the selective editing that Polievre performed on your grown-up response.

Expand full comment