My intuition tells me that Mark Carney would like to save free trade. He was there in the UK during Brexit and he’s seen what trade barriers can do to markets that are isolated in broader regions that promote the free flow of goods. But he also couldn’t stop Brexit like he isn’t in a position to singlehandedly stop the U.S. from throwing CUSMA into a ditch.

So you can listen to his speech from March 27, 2025 and think two things can be true simultaneously. He says (at about 7:20 or so in this video) the relationship between the U.S. and Canada [as it was in the past] is over. He then begins to lay out a groundwork for reshaping the economy. Not just reshaping — after two generations of free trade with the U.S., it would have to be a complete overhaul.

Those two things are that 1) it might be a negotiation tactic to get the U.S. to come to the table and drop the trade war; 2) it might be a sincere statement of intent to rethink, restructure, and reinvent how we do things in Canada.

As I said here, I felt my stress go down a few points while listening to this speech. That speaks to Mark Carney as a masterful politician. He is a novice when it comes to retail politics, but he is no stranger to public life. He knows precisely how to use his voice, his body language, and (especially) his facial expressions to maximum effect.

So as he started talking about us as Canadians being masters of our house, it took a few minutes for his point to really sink in, what building a post-U.S. free trade economy might look like. I felt this heaviness, that this was a significant shift that would impact all of us. And, crucially, that we would be fine.

That’s the Mark Carney masterstroke: convincing others do be on board with doing something radical and somehow feeling safe to do it. Because the proposal to remake the Canadian economy is radical, bold, and necessary.

But let’s imagine switching up the personalities: put any Canadian in Mark Carney’s place at this same moment to say the exact same words he said on Thursday. I can’t imagine I’d be on board. I’d say, yeah, ok, I’m with you in theory. But can we maybe just ride this out for awhile and just hope we get a new person down south in four years and things will go back to normal?

Meanwhile, when he-who-shall-not-be-named responded to Carney’s speech the following day, calling him “Prime Minister” Carney instead of the grating and insulting “Governor” with which he’d saddled Carney’s predecessor, and said he and Carney had a “productive” conversation, I thought, “but we’re still going to remake the economy, right? Masters in our own house, right Prime Minister?”

There is a point in that speech on March 27 where I swear I saw a brief shift in Mark Carney’s countenance, something in his eyes and the movement of his face, where he seemed to have doubt. Then it went away. Does this mean Mark Carney is shifty? Not at all. He’s just human.

With a specific set of very valuable skills. As I write this, there’s a circulating news story about Mark Carney’s Ph.D. thesis and allegations he didn’t properly attribute quotes (or something like that. I didn’t read the story and don’t plan to.) Those who would push stories like that not only reek of desperation, but they miss the point. Carney’s appeal isn’t in his academic letters, past positions, or a paper he wrote 30 years ago. It’s in this masterful talent he possesses to understand and execute on the fact that personalities, attitudes, fears, and confidences are as important to economics as dollars and cents.

He also doesn’t have the energy of someone who, in a position of leadership, pushes others off to the side. He seems to be someone who listens (and hears) as much as he speaks. If he-who-shall-not-be-named has taught us anything, it’s how dangerous an unchecked, isolated ego can be.