In a stunning move that has rattled Canadians from coast to coast, Mark Carney, a man with no seat in Parliament, was quietly sworn in as Canada’s new Prime Minister following the resignation of Justin Trudeau. Already alarming to many is that Parliament has been prorogued since January 6, 2025, and won’t reopen until March 24—leaving Canadians with no Parliamentary oversight and an unelected leader at the helm.
Prorogation is a formal process in the Westminster parliamentary system (which Canada follows) where the current session of Parliament is suspended by the Governor General on the advice of the Prime Minister. When Parliament is prorogued:
All parliamentary business (bills, debates, committee work) comes to a halt.
Existing bills that have not yet passed die on the order paper (unless reintroduced in a future session).
Parliamentarians (MPs) no longer meet or sit in the House of Commons.
A new session of Parliament begins later with a Speech from the Throne, setting a new legislative agenda.
In what is arguably one of the most controversial moves in recent Canadian political history, Mark Carney, a man who has never been elected to Parliament, was recently sworn in as the Prime Minister of Canada, replacing Justin Trudeau.
While Canada has seen non-elected Prime Ministers in the past, this situation is different—and deeply concerning.
Why? Because while this transition was happening, Parliament has been prorogued, effectively silencing debate and leaving Canadians without a functioning House of Commons for weeks.
An Unelected Prime Minister? Yes, It’s Legal—But Is It Democratic?
Under Canada’s Westminster parliamentary system, it is technically legal for the Governor General to appoint as Prime Minister anyone who can command the confidence of the House of Commons, even if they aren’t currently a sitting MP. This rule was designed to offer flexibility, such as when a Prime Minister resigns mid-term and a party leader takes over temporarily.
But what happens when:
Parliament has been prorogued since January 6, 2025?
The new Prime Minister is not an elected Member of Parliament?
No general election has been called?
No by-election has been scheduled for Carney to seek a seat?
You get a perfect storm of constitutional loopholes and political maneuvering that feels—to many Canadians—like democracy has been put on hold.
The Prorogation Problem
Proroguing Parliament is a legal parliamentary procedure where all legislative business is paused, but its use here raises eyebrows. Parliament is set to remain shuttered until March 24, 2025.
During this time:
There will be no question period.
The opposition cannot test the government’s confidence.
Important debates affecting Canadians are effectively frozen.
Critics are calling this a democratic deficit, arguing that prorogation under these circumstances acts as a shield, protecting the new Carney government from immediate public accountability. Is this the responsible use of executive power, or is it a way to consolidate control while the electorate is sidelined?
Historical Precedents — and Why This is Different
Yes, Canada has seen unelected Prime Ministers before:
John Turner (1984) became PM without a seat but called an election swiftly.
Kim Campbell (1993) took over from Brian Mulroney and promptly faced voters.
The difference? Parliament was open in those cases, and the new leaders immediately put themselves on the line with voters.
With Mark Carney, prorogation prevents the normal checks and balances that are core to our parliamentary democracy.
But wait—there’s more.
Mark Carney is no ordinary Canadian. He is a globalist figure, holding three passports: Canadian, British, and Irish. And with deep roots in international finance, the question now is not just about democratic norms, but about conflicts of interest and national sovereignty.
The Carney Resume: Banker-in-Chief
Mark Carney is not just a former banker—he is a global player with deep and influential connections across some of the most powerful international institutions.
In addition to serving as:
Governor of the Bank of Canada (2008–2013),
Governor of the Bank of England (2013–2020)—the first non-Briton to hold the role,
And a senior executive at Goldman Sachs earlier in his career,
Carney has also been at the forefront of shaping the global climate finance agenda.
Since 2019, Carney has served as the United Nations Special Envoy on Climate Action and Finance, where he has played a key role in driving international efforts to align the private sector with the UN's Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the broader push for net-zero carbon emissions by 2050.
This aligns directly with the UN’s 2030 and 2050 climate strategies.
Carney is also deeply involved with the World Economic Forum (WEF), where he has been a prominent voice on ESG (Environmental, Social, Governance) investing, stakeholder capitalism, and the “Great Reset” initiative. He has pushed for a fundamental transformation of the global financial system to integrate climate risk into every investment and lending decision worldwide.
Carney’s influence extends further:
As former Chair of the Financial Stability Board (FSB), he launched the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD), which aims to compel corporations to reveal how exposed they are to climate risks.
He has worked closely with central banks and the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) on policies including central bank digital currencies (CBDCs) and green finance regulations.
His priorities also closely align with initiatives of the International Monetary Fund (IMF), particularly regarding carbon pricing and “greening” the global financial system.
In short, Mark Carney has been a chief architect of global climate and financial reforms, embedding himself in an international network that is reshaping economic governance well beyond national borders.
The question now facing Canadians is:
How will this international agenda influence Carney’s leadership at home—and will Canadian interests take a backseat to global priorities?
Triple Citizenship: A Built-In Conflict of Interest?
It’s no secret that many countries—including allies—expect their leaders to hold only one citizenship, ensuring their loyalty and decisions are guided solely by their nation’s interests.
Mark Carney is:
A Canadian citizen by birth.
A British citizen due to his extensive work and residency in the UK.
An Irish citizen through descent.
While there is no law that forbids a Canadian Prime Minister from holding multiple citizenships, should there be?
Does it raise red flags when the head of Canada’s government could, at least in theory, have divided loyalties or conflicting interests when dealing with the UK, Ireland, or international financial bodies?
Imagine a scenario where Carney must negotiate trade, security, or financial agreements involving the UK or Ireland—would Canadians feel confident that his decisions are solely aligned with Canada’s national interest?
One should also be aware of Mark Carney's connections to China:
Corporate Engagements through Brookfield Asset Management:
Before entering politics, Carney served as Vice Chairman and Head of Impact Investing at Brookfield Asset Management, a global investment firm with substantial interests in China. Under his tenure, Brookfield expanded its investments in Chinese real estate and energy sectors, collaborating with entities linked to the Chinese government.Notably, in 2013, Brookfield invested approximately $750 million in Shanghai's commercial real estate market, partnering with a Hong Kong tycoon associated with the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC), an organization identified by the CIA as a central "united front" entity of Beijing.
Soft Power, Prorogation, and Soft Coup Talk
With Mark Carney stepping into the role of Prime Minister during an extended prorogation of Parliament, alarm bells are ringing across Canada. This isn’t just about a legal appointment—many are asking whether this represents a dangerous expansion of executive power hidden behind the veil of constitutional procedure.
This smells like executive overreach, where the usual safeguards of parliamentary democracy—opposition scrutiny, public debate, and transparency—are deliberately being neutralized. By proroguing Parliament for months, the Trudeau/Carney government has avoided facing the elected House of Commons, stalling any opportunity for opposition parties to test the government’s mandate or force a confidence vote.
Combine this with Carney’s deep globalist ties—from his tenure at Goldman Sachs and the Bank of England, to his participation in high-level World Economic Forum initiatives—and it’s easy to see why many are drawing comparisons to a “soft coup.”
Unlike a military coup or a violent overthrow, a soft coup operates in the gray areas of the law:
No tanks in the streets, just executive actions that quietly erode democratic norms.
No suspension of the constitution, just a suspension of Parliament itself.
In this case, Carney’s swearing-in as an unelected leader, combined with the use of prorogation to block immediate accountability, creates what feels like a legal coup-by-stealth:
Parliament is silenced.
The Prime Minister rules without facing a sitting House of Commons.
The public is left wondering who is actually steering the ship.
Further fueling suspicions is Carney’s triple citizenship—Canada, the UK, and Ireland—which raises uncomfortable questions about where his ultimate loyalties lie. Would a leader with such extensive international affiliations always put Canadian interests first? Or is Canada now being run by someone whose worldview is shaped by the priorities of global finance and transnational elites?
Supporters might argue that this is simply an "interim arrangement" or "smart political strategy," but the optics—combined with the timing of the prorogation—have led many Canadians to worry that this is not just business as usual.
Is this a calculated power grab designed to avoid democratic oversight?
Or is it just constitutional mechanics playing out at an inconvenient political moment?
Regardless, the erosion of public trust is real, and Canadians across the political spectrum are beginning to ask:
When the lights come back on in Parliament, will democracy still be intact?
The Confidence of the House — The Numbers Don’t Lie
In Canada's 338-seat House of Commons, a government needs 170 seats to command a majority and demonstrate confidence.
Currently, the situation stands as follows:
Liberal Party (Carney’s party): 153 seats
Conservative Party: 120 seats
Bloc Québécois: 33 seats
New Democratic Party (NDP): 24 seats
Green Party: 2 seats
Independents: 3 seats
Vacant: 3 seats
With only 153 seats, the Liberals do not have enough to govern alone. They need at least 17 more votes to secure a majority.
To maintain the confidence of the House, Trudeau/Carney’s Liberals will have to align with one of the two other major parties:
Partnering with the Bloc Québécois (33 seats) would push them well over the line.
Striking a deal with the NDP (24 seats) would also give them enough.
The question will is will Mr. Jagmeet Singh once again sell out Canadians, after all - he has already gotten his pension?
Or will the Bloc sellout Canadians for the scraps they may get from the Liberals?
Without support from either the Bloc or the NDP, the Liberals cannot govern alone. Smaller players like the Green Party or a handful of Independents won’t cut it.
So, while Trudeau/Carney’s government currently rules in a prorogued vacuum, the moment Parliament reopens, they must prove they have the confidence of the House—or risk triggering a government collapse.
Globalist PM in a Sovereign Nation?
Mark Carney's leadership is emblematic of a deepening shift toward global governance, where decisions affecting Canadian families, industries, and communities may increasingly be shaped by international priorities rather than domestic interests.
Carney’s record, affiliations, and policy direction signal a pattern that is raising alarm bells for many Canadians—especially in provinces like Manitoba, Alberta, and Saskatchewan, which have long pushed back against federal overreach and international interference.
Here’s what critics are worried about:
1. Global Governance Models Taking Root
Carney is widely regarded as a key figure in the World Economic Forum (WEF) and United Nations circles, both of which advocate for transnational governance models such as:
“Stakeholder capitalism,” which could blur the lines between corporate, governmental, and international bodies.
Public-private partnerships where global corporations and institutions like the UN or IMF influence national policymaking.
Harmonized regulations designed to fit international climate or economic frameworks, sometimes at odds with local or national priorities.
This raises the fear that Canadian sovereignty could be incrementally eroded under Carney’s leadership as Ottawa aligns more closely with the mandates and agendas of non-elected international bodies.
2. Climate-Driven Economic Policies
Carney is one of the most vocal advocates for net-zero by 2050 policies, the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), and ESG financial mandates. While environmental stewardship is important, Carney’s approach could impose aggressive climate regulations and decarbonization mandates that disproportionately impact:
Energy-producing provinces like Alberta,
Agriculture-dependent regions like Manitoba and Saskatchewan,
Resource extraction sectors critical to Western Canada's economy.
Policies that fast-track the shift away from fossil fuels, restrict emissions, and “green” supply chains may exacerbate regional divides by penalizing industries essential to these provinces, leading to job losses, higher costs of living, and further alienation of rural and working-class Canadians.
3. Centralized Financial Controls
Carney has championed the integration of climate risk metrics into global finance and supported discussions on the development of central bank digital currencies (CBDCs). While framed as modernization tools, CBDCs raise serious concerns about:
Financial surveillance, where every transaction could be monitored by central authorities.
The potential erosion of individual financial privacy.
Increased power in the hands of central banks and global financial institutions to control the flow of capital based on compliance with ESG or climate-related rules.
For many Canadians, particularly in the West, this smells of an emerging “technocratic economy,” where digital tools and centralized monetary policies could be weaponized against those who deviate from politically favoured or climate-aligned practices.
4. The Feeling on the Ground
To rural and working-class Canadians, this feels like the final step in a long-term agenda that marginalizes their voices. Many believe they are being asked to sacrifice their industries, livelihoods, and autonomy to satisfy the demands of urban elites, international institutions, and unelected global bodies.
The fear is not just economic—it’s cultural and political.Is Canada still a sovereign nation where the people govern themselves, or is it drifting toward becoming an administrative outpost of the global financial and climate governance apparatus?
Why This Matters to Manitoba
Manitobans have long been skeptical of Ottawa’s growing disconnect from the provinces. The rise of Carney—unelected, internationally networked, and at the helm while Parliament is shuttered—feels like a direct challenge to Canadian sovereignty and regional autonomy.
Will western Canada’s agricultural, energy, and transportation interests be safeguarded under Carney’s leadership?
Or will Manitoba be expected to fall in line with international economic strategies crafted in boardrooms in London, Geneva, or New York?
The Big Questions for Canadians
This moment is bigger than one man, bigger than one appointment, and even bigger than one political party. What we are witnessing may be a pivotal crossroads in the future of Canadian democracy, national sovereignty, and the voice of everyday Canadians.
Here are the questions we all must grapple with:
1. Should Canadians accept a Prime Minister who holds multiple foreign citizenships while Parliament is silent?
Mark Carney's appointment may be legal, but is it right?At a time when the nation faces challenges ranging from inflation to foreign policy instability, should Canada be led by someone who simultaneously holds citizenship in the UK and Ireland—two other sovereign states with their own national interests?
How does this sit with Canadians who expect their leader to be wholly and singularly committed to Canada first?
While past governments have occasionally tolerated MPs with dual citizenship, this is the first time in modern historythat a Prime Minister holds triple citizenship and yet lacks a seat in Parliament.
Is this precedent one we’re comfortable setting, or is this the slippery slope to the normalization of divided loyalties at the highest level of power?
2. Does this risk turning Canada into a "branch plant" democracy, where domestic affairs are quietly subordinated to global priorities?
Critics have long warned about the creeping influence of supranational organizations, such as the World Economic Forum, International Monetary Fund, and central banking networks, on Canada’s policymaking. Mark Carney is a central figure in this ecosystem.
Is our national agenda now being shaped in Ottawa—or in Davos?
Will Carney’s leadership align Canada’s domestic priorities with global financial institutions and climate governance bodies, regardless of the will of Canadian voters?
Will rural and resource-dependent provinces like Manitoba, Alberta, and Saskatchewan be expected to swallow policies designed to appease international frameworks?
Are we on the verge of becoming a "branch plant democracy," where local industries, family farms, and national sovereignty are sacrificed on the altar of transnational corporate and bureaucratic interests?
3. Should we demand immediate elections to let voters decide if this is the future they want?
At its core, democracy is about consent of the governed. Right now, the Canadian people have not been given a say.
Should the people—not party elites—decide whether Mark Carney is fit to lead this country?
Should we demand that the prorogued Parliament be recalled immediately to test the government’s legitimacy in the House of Commons?
Should Carney, as an unelected leader without a seat, call a snap election to secure a mandate directly from Canadians?
The decision to prorogue Parliament, install an unelected Prime Minister with international ties, and postpone a test of confidence feels like a deliberate sidelining of the electorate.
Do we sit quietly, or do we demand accountability, transparency, and the democratic process we’ve been promised as Canadians?
The Caretaker Convention in Canadian Parliamentary Tradition
The Caretaker Convention is an unwritten constitutional convention in Canada that guides the behavior of the federal government during periods when its democratic authority is in transition or potentially in question. It generally applies in three scenarios:
During an election period (between the dissolution of Parliament and the swearing-in of a new government),
During a transition between outgoing and incoming governments, or
When the government’s ability to command the confidence of the House is uncertain (such as a hung Parliament or prior to a confidence vote after a new Prime Minister is appointed without a seat).
Core principles of the Caretaker Convention:
The government should restrict itself to routine, non-controversial, or urgent matters of public business.
Major policy decisions, appointments, or spending commitments should be deferred until the incoming or re-confirmed government has the confidence of Parliament.
Actions that could limit the freedom of decision-making of the next government should be avoided unless absolutely necessary.
The convention is meant to ensure that while Canada continues to be governed, no major new initiatives are taken without proper democratic accountability.
How Does the Caretaker Convention Apply to Mark Carney?
Mark Carney’s situation triggers questions about the application of the caretaker convention, for a few key reasons:
No Democratic Mandate Yet:
Carney was appointed as Prime Minister without holding a seat in Parliament.
He has not yet faced a confidence vote in the House of Commons, which will be necessary after Parliament reconvenes on March 24, 2025.
Prorogued Parliament:
Because Parliament has been prorogued since January 6, 2025, there has been no opportunity for Carney’s government to formally secure the confidence of the House.
Caretaker Status:
Technically, Carney’s government could be considered a caretaker administration until it demonstrates it can command the confidence of Parliament.
Therefore, Carney is conventionally expected to avoid making major policy announcements or launching controversial new initiatives until that confidence is secured.
Potential Breaches:
Critics argue that if Carney were to announce major structural changes (e.g., sweeping environmental policies, major spending initiatives, or foreign policy shifts) during this period of prorogation, it could be seen as violating the spirit of the caretaker convention.
The Unique Twist with Carney
Unlike Kim Campbell or John Turner, who immediately went into general election periods (thus falling more cleanly under "caretaker" status leading to an election), Carney’s situation is unique because:
Parliament is prorogued, but no election has been called.
His appointment happened without a by-election or general election on the horizon (at least so far).
This gray zone creates heightened political tension because Carney's administration could technically exercise executive power without the democratic check of a sitting Parliament, which is at odds with the intended purpose of the caretaker convention.
Summary
Caretaker conventions require restraint, transparency, and a focus on continuity until democratic legitimacy is re-established.
Until Carney wins a seat in Parliament or passes a confidence vote, he is expected by convention to operate in a limited caretaker role.
The longer prorogation persists, the more controversial any substantial policy actions taken by his government will become under the caretaker framework.
A Crossroads for Canada
This is no longer just a constitutional technicality or a procedural maneuver. This is a moment of national reckoning—a confrontation with the fundamental question of who really governs Canada.
Is it still the Canadian people, or is it now the quiet forces of global finance, international agreements, and elite institutions?
The choice is ours.
What Can You Do? Stand Up and Be Counted
Canada’s democratic integrity now depends on whether ordinary citizens are willing to push back. We cannot afford to stay silent while the pillars of Parliamentary democracy are sidelined.
Here’s how you can take action today:
✅ Contact your MP: Demand to know where they stand on this issue. Insist that Parliament be recalled immediately, and that a confidence vote be held to test the legitimacy of Carney’s government.
✅ Organize locally: Host a community town hall or public forum in your region to discuss how this shift could impact Manitoba, and western Canada more broadly. The strength of grassroots democracy lies in face-to-face conversations.
✅ Sign petitions: Support calls for an immediate election or a constitutional review of leadership appointment processes. Show Ottawa that Canadians are watching.
✅ Share this article: The conversation starts with awareness. Help spread the word by sharing this blog post with your networks on social media, email, and in your communities.
✅ Hold the media accountable: Reach out to journalists and editors demanding fair, critical coverage of this unprecedented situation. Canadians deserve to hear the full story, not just official talking points.
Your Voice Matters Now More Than Ever
History has taught us that democracies are rarely lost overnight—they are eroded slowly, step by step, while people are told to trust the process.
At Manitoba Stronger Together, we refuse to trust blindly.
It’s time to raise our voices, assert our rights, and defend the Canada we believe in. The question isn’t just about Mark Carney. It’s about whether Canada’s sovereignty and democracy will be safeguarded for future generations.
Will you stand up for Canada?
Let the Debate Begin
At Manitoba Stronger Together, we stand for open dialogue, grassroots empowerment, and a democracy that answers to the people—not to technocrats, bankers, or unelected elites.
We challenge Manitobans and all Canadians to speak up:
Is this a slippery slope toward globalist governance?
Does this undermine Canada’s sovereignty and democratic integrity?
We want to hear your voices.