The Current - What message is the King's Throne speech sending?

Episode Date: May 27, 2025

Parliament is back and King Charles delivered his throne speech today. What message is the King's speech meant to send to Canadians, and to one American in particular, Donald Trump? What are the new Liberal government's priorities? CBC’s Catherine Cullen, The Globe and Mail’s Stephanie Levitz, and The National Post’s Christopher Nardi join Matt Galloway to talk about all that and more.

Other People's Problems was the first podcast to take you inside real-life therapy sessions. I'm Dr. Hilary McBride, and again, we're doing something new. The ketamine really broke down a lot of my barriers. This work has this sort of immediate transformational effect. Therapy Using Psychedelics is the new frontier in mental health. Come along for the trip. Other People's Problems Season 5, available now. This is a CBC Podcast. Hello, I'm Matt Galloway and this is The Current Podcast. Well, after more than five months away, Parliament is back. The new session began yesterday. The

first order of business, electing a new speaker. MPs chose Francis Scarpelegia, long-time Liberal MP for the Quebec riding of Lac-Saint-Louis. And then, for the first time since becoming Prime Minister on the 14th of March, Mark Carney rose to address the House of Commons. Mr. Speaker, I have much to learn from the members of this great house. I will make mistakes. I have no doubt that you will call them out for good reason. Because this house has rules. It has traditions. And it's on those traditions that our Athenian democracy is founded. The next order of business, the speech from the throne, which King Charles is slated to deliver today.

And so, as this minority government gets set to work, we're joined by our national affairs panel, Catherine Cullen, host of CBC Radio's The House, Stephanie Levitz, senior reporter in the Globe and Mail's Ottawa Bureau, and Christopher Nardi, parliamentary reporter for the National Post. Good morning, everyone. Good morning. Catherine, let's start with the National Post. Good morning, everyone. Good morning. Good morning.

Catherine, let's start with the Prime Minister. First time he stood in the House of Commons. What did you make of that yesterday? I thought that that note of humility was a smart one, Matt. There's a saying in Ottawa that arrogance is liberal kryptonite. So expressing a little bit of humility, acknowledging what he doesn't know, I thought was a smart move from a man who is often pretty clear about what he feels he does know, he has a background in economics, and he has set an incredibly ambitious agenda for himself and

his government, right? Moving at speeds never seen before, actions we haven't seen taken in generations. He has set the bar high, but there are going to be myriad challenges, no question. The House of Commons itself may be one of them as he tries to get that agenda passed. So I thought expressing a little bit of humility was the right note for the moment.

Stephanie, what did you make of the language? I have much to learn, but also I will make mistakes. And he will make mistakes. I was sitting in the gallery yesterday while he delivered that speech, Matt, and I was watching at points in the proceedings where Mr. Carney appeared to be leaning over to cabinet ministers and sort of remarking on the room he was in. And it's momentous, right? He's never taken a seat in the House of Commons. And one of the things that right now differentiates, for example, Mr. Carney from his predecessor is

that in scrums with reporters, he tends to answer questions at length, like he goes on, which is good. You want more information from the prime minister, but the cut and thrust of question period, for example, doesn't allow for that. Is he going to be able to be on his feet, be accountable, and do it in a matter of seconds as opposed to a matter of minutes? It's a really interesting venue for him and very different than what he's accustomed to. And acknowledging that upfront, you know, maybe in the hopes that the opposition parties

will give him some grace, is probably, as Catherine said, pretty smart. Christopher, do you think that the opposition will give him some grace and give him much space to learn those ropes? I was just about to say, that's very optimistic view. Not that Stephanie is saying that they will give them space, but you could already tell yesterday the conservatives were primed to get back to the regular business

of the House. There was already a touch of heckling, I'd say, during the speeches by some of the speaker candidates that were up that were promising more ejections and more discipline, and ultimately did not get elected. But it was kind of cute to watch actually Mr. Carney operate in the House of Commons and speaking of like small mistakes that he made, obviously this is very inconsequential, but when MPs line up to vote for the speaker they line up on the sides and there's six ballot boxes in the center of the house and I noticed that he wanted to go vote so he kind of walked forward and didn't realize that there

was already someone in the ballot box he'd chosen. I think it was Melanie Jolie, so he kind of goes up, notices that she's there, makes a little face, like a little grimace that he tends to do, and then goes sheepishly back into the front of the line and waited for a ballot box. So, you know, he was figuring out process as he goes, which will be a very interesting challenge for someone who heads a minority government. He doesn't always sound like he thinks he heads a minority government, but there will be significant challenges with controlling the house when you don't have a majority. And I'm very curious to see how he navigates that. Stephanie, what will you be watching for in the King's speech from the throne today?

I'm watching for more substance, I guess. And again, perhaps that's overly optimistic. But we've heard a lot about, you know, Mr. Carney, and we alluded to it in our last discussion there, about moving at breakneck speed, things never seen in a generation, transforming the Canadian economy. How exactly is he going to do that? What are the things that he can get done and get done as quickly as he says he wants to. Because once again, this is a minority parliament. The opposition parties will support him on some measures depending on what they are. But we have a democracy here. We have bills that need to be studied, processes that need to be followed in order to keep

it all on the up and up. And we've yet to see a lot of detail about what Mr. Carney is going to do beyond the top line stuff. So I'm going to be looking for a little bit more specificity, if that's the word, in the speech tomorrow. It's close. It's close. Yeah. What about from you, Christopher? I mean, what has Mark Carney said

about his government's priorities and what are you looking for in terms of how that will be articulated from the King? Well, so he's listed his kind of seven priorities and the one mandate letter to rule them all that he published last week with ministers that kind of fleshed out basically the tenets of his campaign promises too, right? Removing inter-provincial trade barriers, strengthening our sovereignty and security and also renegotiating

our relationship with the United States while diversifying our portfolio of international partners. And so I think his two priorities, and he stated these very clearly, once the House kind of resumes in earnest tomorrow will be to table two bills, the lowering the tax, income tax for the lowest bracket for Canadians, and also, you know, tabling as quickly as possible a bill to remove those inter-provincial trades that still exist at the federal level. Like Stephanie, I'm curious to see how he does it and how he plans to navigate once again the environment of the House where he is a minority government, where there's no clear alliance to, well, you know, the NDP is kind of a dance partner, but they don't

exist as a party within the House. So how he plans to maneuver that, I don't know if he'll necessarily address that in the throne speech. I'm also listening for the short preamble that the king will have written himself surely in consultation with PMO, but he will have his own kind of small set of paragraphs at the beginning of the speech, and I'm very curious to see what he addresses in that. Pete Well, Catherine, one of the things people assume that perhaps will be addressed is issues of sovereignty and what this country means. I mean, there's messaging that's going on here, messaging not just to Canadians, but also people say this is in some ways this

visit is for an audience of one and that's for Donald Trump. Yes, although I think, Matt, it's important to understand that in a way saying that the message is for Donald Trump is a message for Canadians. I mean, it is true that Donald Trump is very charmed by the royal family to the best of our knowledge and there is some hope that he will see this and say, oh, you know, recognize that there's something of a flex, frankly, going on here as Canada shows off its institutions, shows off its sovereignty, shows off its nationhood. But in many ways, that message is meant to be consumed by Canadians at a time when people are feeling, you know, there is still significant anxiety about this trade war with the United

States, what it means for Canada's economic present and economic future. And this moment of sort of flexing our constitutional muscles, even though there are a variety of feelings out there about the monarchy, I think fundamentally that is a message that Mark Carney is trying to send to Canadians of the strength that he hopes that this country can project under his leadership. You spoke with the new US ambassador to Canada. One of the things he said is this idea of annexing Canada that's off the table now, that's over and done with? He said Donald Trump might bring it up again, but fundamentally the plan is to move on. And in fact,

he said Canadians need to get over it and move on. I asked Pete Hoekstra about the speech from the throne and he said, you know, there are easier ways to send a message. Kearney could just call me. Carney could just call President Trump. I do think, I also asked him explicitly whether he had received some sort of assurance from President Trump that all of this was over and done with. And that's clearly not the case. This is the ambassador saying, it is time for the relationship to move forward. We have things to negotiate on security and the economy. Let's focus on that. I would say to you, there are probably still some Canadians who don't love the idea that our country was in many ways insulted by the president of the United States, artificial border and whatnot, and are just being told to move on.

That said, there is incentive to move forward with this relationship and figure out what the new parameters look like under Prime Minister Mark Carney and President Trump. Steph, whatever is in the speech from the throne, the liberals will, to your point, and figure out what the new parameters look like under Prime Minister Mark Carney and President Trump. Steph, whatever is in the speech from the throne, the liberals will, to your point, need MPs from outside the Liberal Party to get anything passed. You've written about this, the block just has seven seats, or pardon me, the NDP just has seven seats.

The block is also out in the hinterland and they're boycotting the King's speech today. It's worth mentioning as well. Where do you think they're going to get those votes? Well, I think part of it will depend on how they choose to introduce their agenda, right? If they return to sort of government practice of omnibus bills, where they try and throw everything but the kitchen sink into a singular piece of legislation, that's going to be harder to get a dance partner for than it is if they're doing narrow targeted legislation. So take the tax cut, for example,

the conservatives under Pierre Pauli have, they too campaigned on the promise of a tax cut. And they've already said they'll support that bill if it's a single one-off issue. So I think it's going to be a return to the minority parliaments of yore, which is to say that Justin Trudeau cut that deal with the new Democrats in which they said, we'll support everything in exchange for doing some of the things we want.

Mr. Carney has shown no willingness or interest in doing that with the current crop of New Democrats. So I expect it'll be just a one issue set at a time, one piece of legislation at a time, which again makes things interesting in the Commons because that could make for a very slow legislative session. For a brief moment in the year 2000, the city of Phoenix was on fire. You could see a glow in the sky. An arsonist was on the loose.

How many more ways can we fuck this thing up? The culprit will shock you. I had several dreams about that house behind me. Your dreams about setting it on fire. One night I did. From Novel and Sony Music Entertainment, listen to The Arsonist Next Door. Subscribe on Apple Podcasts to binge all episodes now,

or listen weekly wherever you get your podcasts. But to your point, they're also looking for velocity. That velocity may run into the obstacle of a parliamentary democracy. There has been some suspicion that perhaps the liberals would try to govern in a minority parliament like they had a majority. Stephanie, do you think that's possible? Of course it's possible. Look what his first act as prime minister was, right? He signed that faux order that was very Trumpy, removing the carbon tax, right?

The consumer price on carbon. And effectively what he did is he used his power to set it to zero. As the conservatives pointed out at the time, that legislation actually still exists. But within so many legislative processes exist the option for the government to use regulation, to use order and counsel, to use all of these other tools to achieve things. And it's going to be very interesting to see if Mr. Carney, who many people refer to as more of a technocrat, more of a bureaucrat, seeks to use the bureaucratic levers he has at his disposal to govern as opposed to the legislative ones. Christopher, you wrote about this in the post, a piece about how the Prime Minister's office may operate, how that's different perhaps than it operated under Justin Trudeau saying that it's focused, that he does not suffer fools. What is your sense as to how the machinery of government

in that office will work? Well, first of all, the machinery of government at the bureaucratic level better buckle up because it's coming fast and it's coming at them very, very intensely. So Mark Carney, the way that his kind of character internally was painted to me is as someone who's very serious, he's very focused.

We've seen that already in the intensity and the speed at which he wants to operate and change kind of fundamentally our economy. But what that means is he also has extremely high expectations from the coterie of both people that work with him at the prime minister's office, but also in the bureaucracy. So he's very demanding in terms of his briefings. He wants them done in a certain way. Someone told me an anecdote recently where a deputy minister was briefing him, and basically the briefing didn't go well. And so, kind of midway through the briefing, the prime minister said, hey, let's stop this here.

Go learn your file and come back to me. And to tell a deputy minister who is the highest ranking bureaucrat of a department, go learn your file and come back to me and brief me again, is not something that is going to be swallowed easily from someone who has presumably spent most of their career in the public service. So, he is very intense. He wants things done right. I don't think that he will hesitate to shuffle not only his ministers that he thinks are underperforming, but also deputy ministers that do not fit with his style of government, who do not seem to be able to deliver on what he expects government to deliver very quickly. At the same time, I think that Canada as a whole has kind of discovered over the last

almost year, quite frankly, with parliament being in a logjam for the entirety of the fall session and then being prorogued since January, how much can be done without the house operating, without legislation? There is a tremendous amount of governing power through orders and council, through regulatory changes, or just implementing new regulations. I'm obviously not saying that Mark Carney's agenda can entirely be done without legislation, that's not true. But there are very wide-ranging powers that he has and the government has. And I think a lot of people have come to understand and even wondered, wait, what does the government even do if over the last eight, nine,

ten months, they haven't had to legislate and things appear to be running more or less smoothly, let's say. Catherine, what kind of freedom do you think Mark Carney as a prime minister has from Canadians to get big things done? Was he given this job in some ways because Canadians want things to happen at pace? I think that that is clear. I would also note, there is a significant amount of overlap in the agenda that the Conservatives set forward in the election and Mark Carney as well.

When it comes to issues around, the tax cut is certainly one of them. Resource issues, Mark Carney has promised to make Canada an energy, the world's foremost energy superpower and in that he is likely to find some partnership with the Conservatives. I think, as is so often true in Ottawa, in politics, the devil is in the details, is his plan of how to go about these things, something he can get conservative support for. I will say there is some danger. We started talking about confidence and humility. There is some danger for the prime minister in a minority parliament of having too much confidence, right?

You miscalculate, you can bring down the entire government on one vote if you don't have the support that you believe that you do. Mark Carney does have a lot of confidence, he does have a lot of ambition, he doesn't have the same kind of flowery language that we are used to from Justin Trudeau, but he has still set the bar incredibly high. It is going to be fascinating to see if he can even come close to achieving the ambitions he set out. How effective do you expect the opposition to be, the conservatives without Pierre Poliev in the house, Catherine? I think for the time being, frankly, not terribly.

I think also because we have just come off an election and Canadians are expecting politicians to get things done that we're likely to see over the course of the next few weeks, that there is some progress on the agenda. I will say when we talked about it earlier, one thing certainly to watch is that resource agenda. This piece of legislation about inter-provincial trade barriers, the Liberals have hinted that it may be more than that. It may be more about making Canada, the various provincial and territorial economies, work together and trying to get some of these big projects done. What the Conservatives would offer in the face of that, I don't think that they necessarily

want to try to stand in the way, although they may critique the way in which Mr. Kearney is going about it. But all of this is temporary and it does seem that it won't be all that long until Pierre Poliev is back in the House of Commons. Mr. Kearney may have found his feet a little bit in politics by then, but I don't think liberals should get too comfortable with the current state of Commons. Mr. Kearney may have found his feet a little bit in politics by then, but, you know, I don't think the liberal should get too comfortable with the current state of things. Stephanie, I spoke with Andrew Lawton yesterday, new Conservative MP. He said that that party is entirely united behind Pierre Poliam despite the fact that he's not in the House. Is that your sense? No. I think that there's, it is true that the knives, the speed at which knives came out for past leaders,

those knives aren't being unsheathed at such a rapid pace this time around. But there is frustration about the conservatives' path forward because the question is who will ultimately be accountable for their failures during the election? I mean, you can stand up, as an MP said to me the other day a Conservative MP it's all fine and well to stand up and point out that you know, we want a historic share of the vote we absolutely have more seats, but we lost the election we lost and Right now there's not a lot of accountability happening for that and I would absolutely say that among grassroots conservatives in particular There is a lot of frustration,

a lot of anger, a lot of demand for change in the way things are run, the way the party itself is run. And that includes, you know, how Mr. Poliev does things, that includes how his second in command, Jenny Byrne does things. So we talked about humility at the beginning when it comes to the prime minister. Does Pierre Poliev need to show some humility publicly for his caucus and for the people around him? Not so much humility as a willingness to change and evidence of change. I think everyone is accepting a Pierre Pauliouf's personality being what it is, and when he tries to sort of change

his voice or change his tone, it doesn't ring authentic. They're looking for signs of change and for signs of a different sort of behavior coming from the top in a different sort of behavior coming from the top in a different direction. Pete Christy Christopher, you, just finally, you expressed some skepticism that the warm fuzzy feelings that we saw yesterday in the house that we may see today will last particularly long.

How long can that collegiality continue? Pete Christy Oh, that's a good question. I actually don't expect us to see Mark Carney in the house as much as Justin Trudeau. First of all, the first suggestion is that this PMQP, as we called it colloquially here, of Wednesday question period being dedicated to the Prime Minister is out the window. That was a Justin Trudeau invention. Mark Carney isn't particularly interested in that. So I don't know how much Firehill faced directly in the House or how interested he is in spending time in the,

a little bit of a spectacle that is QP. I do think that the conservatives need to put on a slightly more amicable face. One thing that they've heard at the doors and Stephanie's alluded to this is this idea that their leader is mean. Pierre Poilieff is mean. He's angry and people don't necessarily need another adversary right now, another kind of aggressor in a sense compared to the US. So I do expect that there will be a tone down. But again, old habits die hard.

A lot of the MPs that are in the House, I was seeing it yesterday with the speaker election, have this desire to heckle. There's this kind of desire to be a little bit raucous and push back. I think there's obviously a way to do that within the confines of socially acceptable, not to say that they were going beyond it yesterday, but there are old habits, they die hard, some will want to push back. A lot of conservatives just deeply dislike liberals and they're going to be fighting against that reflex and the desire to just be better. It's all to play out in the days and weeks ahead.

It's good to have you all three here this morning to set it up. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. You've been listening to The Current Podcast. My name is Matt Galloway. Thanks for listening.

I'll talk to you soon.