Ottawa, April 7, 2025 – In a stunning development, Mark Carney, the newly elected leader of the Liberal Party and Canada’s presumed next Prime Minister, has been declared ineligible to sit in Parliament under Section 32 of the Parliament of Canada Act. The revelation, brought to light by a viral X post from user
@KookyCanooky, cites Carney’s prior role as a paid chief economic advisor to the Trudeau government, which disqualifies him from holding a parliamentary seat. This bombshell threatens to derail Carney’s political ascent just weeks after his landslide victory in the Liberal Party leadership race on March 14, 2025, where he secured 86% of the vote.
Section 32 of the Parliament of Canada Act explicitly states that no person accepting or holding “any office, commission or employment, permanent or temporary, in the service of the Government of Canada, at the nomination of the Crown or at the nomination of any of the officers of the Government of Canada, to which any salary, fee, wages, allowance, emolument or profit of any kind is attached” is eligible to sit in the House of Commons. Carney, who served as an economic advisor to the Trudeau government for nearly five years and was reportedly compensated for his role, appears to fall squarely under this provision. Critics argue that this makes him ineligible not only to sit as an MP but also to serve as Prime Minister, a position that requires a parliamentary seat.
A History of Section 32: Has This Happened Before?
While Section 32 has been part of the Parliament of Canada Act for decades, its application to disqualify candidates has been rare and often mired in legal ambiguity. Historical records show only a handful of instances where this section has been invoked:
- 1911: The Case of William Templeman – Templeman, a Liberal MP and Minister of Inland Revenue, was challenged for holding a government contract while serving in Parliament. The case led to his resignation after a lengthy legal battle, marking one of the earliest uses of Section 32 to enforce parliamentary eligibility rules.
- 1973: Edgar Benson’s Disqualification – Benson, a former Minister of Finance, was briefly disqualified from running for re-election after it was discovered he had accepted a paid advisory role with a Crown corporation shortly after leaving office. The matter was resolved when Benson relinquished the role, but it set a precedent for stricter interpretations of Section 32.
- 1998: Jean Charest’s Leadership Bid – During Charest’s transition from provincial to federal politics, opponents raised concerns about his prior paid roles under Quebec’s government, which received federal funding. However, the issue was dropped after legal experts determined the roles did not directly fall under the Government of Canada’s purview.
These cases highlight the rarity of Section 32’s enforcement, often due to loopholes, legal challenges, or political maneuvering. Carney’s situation, however, has reignited debate about the section’s relevance in modern Canadian politics, especially given his high-profile status.
Carney’s Controversial Candidacy: A Foreigner in Canadian Politics?
Carney’s eligibility crisis is compounded by his unconventional background, which has already drawn ire from many Canadian patriots. The former Governor of the Bank of England holds three passports—Canadian, British, and Irish—a fact that has fueled criticism about his loyalty to Canada. Although Carney announced his intention to renounce his British and Irish citizenships during his leadership campaign, the process has not yet been completed, raising questions about his commitment to Canadian sovereignty.
Further stoking controversy, Carney has not lived in Canada for over 15 years, having spent much of his career abroad in global finance roles, including his tenure at the Bank of England and a stint with Brookfield Asset Management from 2020 to January 2025. Critics have also pointed out that Carney is running for office in a riding he has never lived in and reportedly visited only once, a move seen as opportunistic by many. His rapid rise to Liberal leadership and presumed premiership has been met with accusations of elitism and disconnect from the Canadian populace, with some labeling him a “globalist outsider” unfit to lead the nation.
A Nation Divided: Patriots vs. the Liberal Machine
Carney’s leadership has already rubbed many Canadian patriots the wrong way, particularly in light of his vocal anti-Trump stance and his pledge to maintain tariffs on the U.S. “until the Americans show us respect.” While this rhetoric won him favor among Liberal supporters, it has alienated a significant portion of the population who view his election as a continuation of the Liberal Party’s globalist agenda. The Section 32 revelation has only deepened this divide, with many seeing it as a potential opportunity to halt what they describe as Canada’s descent into a “totalitarian dystopian nightmare.”
Over the past decade, the Canadian government has faced little reprisal for a series of controversies and scandals, from the illegal COVID-19 lockdowns to the unconstitutional actions taken against the 2022 truckers’ convoy protest. The convoy, which saw thousands of Canadians descend on Parliament Hill to protest vaccine mandates and government overreach, was met with a heavy-handed response, including the invocation of the Emergencies Act and the freezing of protesters’ bank accounts. Despite widespread outrage, the Liberal government under Justin Trudeau faced no significant consequences, a pattern that critics argue has emboldened the party to bend or break rules to maintain power.
What’s Next for the Liberals?
The question now is how the Liberal Party will navigate this crisis. Some speculate that the party may attempt to exploit loopholes in Section 32, as suggested by X user
@BEBakker, who noted Carney’s claim that his advisory role was “pro bono.” However, skepticism abounds, with many questioning whether a figure like Carney, known for his high-profile financial career, would work for free. Others, like
@Malcolm49253755, have pointed to potential “loopholes” that the Liberals might use to circumvent the law, a tactic the party has been accused of employing in the past.
Legal experts suggest that the Liberals could challenge the interpretation of Section 32 in court, arguing that Carney’s role as an advisor does not meet the threshold for disqualification. Alternatively, they might push for a legislative amendment to the Parliament of Canada Act, though such a move would require significant political capital and could further inflame public discontent. Another possibility is that Carney could step aside temporarily, allowing a caretaker leader to take his place while the issue is resolved—a scenario that would likely fracture the party’s unity at a critical juncture.
A Test for Canadian Democracy
As the Liberal Party scrambles to address this crisis, the broader implications for Canadian democracy loom large. The past decade has seen growing disillusionment with the government, with many citizens pointing to the COVID-19 lockdowns, the truckers’ convoy crackdown, and now Carney’s eligibility scandal as evidence of a system that prioritizes power over principle. Whether the Liberals will once again evade accountability remains to be seen, but one thing is clear: Mark Carney’s dream of becoming Prime Minister hangs in the balance, and the fallout from this controversy could reshape Canada’s political landscape for years to come.
Stay tuned for updates as this story develops.
Breaking News: Mark Carney Deemed Ineligible for Parliament, Threatening His Prime Ministerial Ambitions
Ottawa, April 7, 2025 – In a stunning development, Mark Carney, the newly elected leader of the Liberal Party and Canada’s presumed next Prime Minister, has been declared ineligible to sit in Parliament under Section 32 of the Parliament of Canada Act. The revelation, brought to light by a viral X post from user
@KookyCanooky, cites Carney’s prior role as a paid chief economic advisor to the Trudeau government, which disqualifies him from holding a parliamentary seat. This bombshell threatens to derail Carney’s political ascent just weeks after his landslide victory in the Liberal Party leadership race on March 14, 2025, where he secured 86% of the vote.
Section 32 of the Parliament of Canada Act explicitly states that no person accepting or holding “any office, commission or employment, permanent or temporary, in the service of the Government of Canada, at the nomination of the Crown or at the nomination of any of the officers of the Government of Canada, to which any salary, fee, wages, allowance, emolument or profit of any kind is attached” is eligible to sit in the House of Commons. Carney, who served as an economic advisor to the Trudeau government for nearly five years and was reportedly compensated for his role, appears to fall squarely under this provision. Critics argue that this makes him ineligible not only to sit as an MP but also to serve as Prime Minister, a position that requires a parliamentary seat.
A History of Section 32: Has This Happened Before?
While Section 32 has been part of the Parliament of Canada Act for decades, its application to disqualify candidates has been rare and often mired in legal ambiguity. Historical records show only a handful of instances where this section has been invoked:
- 1911: The Case of William Templeman – Templeman, a Liberal MP and Minister of Inland Revenue, was challenged for holding a government contract while serving in Parliament. The case led to his resignation after a lengthy legal battle, marking one of the earliest uses of Section 32 to enforce parliamentary eligibility rules.
- 1973: Edgar Benson’s Disqualification – Benson, a former Minister of Finance, was briefly disqualified from running for re-election after it was discovered he had accepted a paid advisory role with a Crown corporation shortly after leaving office. The matter was resolved when Benson relinquished the role, but it set a precedent for stricter interpretations of Section 32.
- 1998: Jean Charest’s Leadership Bid – During Charest’s transition from provincial to federal politics, opponents raised concerns about his prior paid roles under Quebec’s government, which received federal funding. However, the issue was dropped after legal experts determined the roles did not directly fall under the Government of Canada’s purview.
These cases highlight the rarity of Section 32’s enforcement, often due to loopholes, legal challenges, or political maneuvering. Carney’s situation, however, has reignited debate about the section’s relevance in modern Canadian politics, especially given his high-profile status.
Carney’s Controversial Candidacy: A Foreigner in Canadian Politics?
Carney’s eligibility crisis is compounded by his unconventional background, which has already drawn ire from many Canadian patriots. The former Governor of the Bank of England holds three passports—Canadian, British, and Irish—a fact that has fueled criticism about his loyalty to Canada. Although Carney announced his intention to renounce his British and Irish citizenships during his leadership campaign, the process has not yet been completed, raising questions about his commitment to Canadian sovereignty.
Further stoking controversy, Carney has not lived in Canada for over 15 years, having spent much of his career abroad in global finance roles, including his tenure at the Bank of England and a stint with Brookfield Asset Management from 2020 to January 2025. Critics have also pointed out that Carney is running for office in a riding he has never lived in and reportedly visited only once, a move seen as opportunistic by many. His rapid rise to Liberal leadership and presumed premiership has been met with accusations of elitism and disconnect from the Canadian populace, with some labeling him a “globalist outsider” unfit to lead the nation.
A Nation Divided: Patriots vs. the Liberal Machine
Carney’s leadership has already rubbed many Canadian patriots the wrong way, particularly in light of his vocal anti-Trump stance and his pledge to maintain tariffs on the U.S. “until the Americans show us respect.” While this rhetoric won him favor among Liberal supporters, it has alienated a significant portion of the population who view his election as a continuation of the Liberal Party’s globalist agenda. The Section 32 revelation has only deepened this divide, with many seeing it as a potential opportunity to halt what they describe as Canada’s descent into a “totalitarian dystopian nightmare.”
Over the past decade, the Canadian government has faced little reprisal for a series of controversies and scandals, from the illegal COVID-19 lockdowns to the unconstitutional actions taken against the 2022 truckers’ convoy protest. The convoy, which saw thousands of Canadians descend on Parliament Hill to protest vaccine mandates and government overreach, was met with a heavy-handed response, including the invocation of the Emergencies Act and the freezing of protesters’ bank accounts. Despite widespread outrage, the Liberal government under Justin Trudeau faced no significant consequences, a pattern that critics argue has emboldened the party to bend or break rules to maintain power.
What’s Next for the Liberals?
The question now is how the Liberal Party will navigate this crisis. Some speculate that the party may attempt to exploit loopholes in Section 32, as suggested by X user
@BEBakker, who noted Carney’s claim that his advisory role was “pro bono.” However, skepticism abounds, with many questioning whether a figure like Carney, known for his high-profile financial career, would work for free. Others, like
@Malcolm49253755, have pointed to potential “loopholes” that the Liberals might use to circumvent the law, a tactic the party has been accused of employing in the past.
Legal experts suggest that the Liberals could challenge the interpretation of Section 32 in court, arguing that Carney’s role as an advisor does not meet the threshold for disqualification. Alternatively, they might push for a legislative amendment to the Parliament of Canada Act, though such a move would require significant political capital and could further inflame public discontent. Another possibility is that Carney could step aside temporarily, allowing a caretaker leader to take his place while the issue is resolved—a scenario that would likely fracture the party’s unity at a critical juncture.
A Test for Canadian Democracy
As the Liberal Party scrambles to address this crisis, the broader implications for Canadian democracy loom large. The past decade has seen growing disillusionment with the government, with many citizens pointing to the COVID-19 lockdowns, the truckers’ convoy crackdown, and now Carney’s eligibility scandal as evidence of a system that prioritizes power over principle. Whether the Liberals will once again evade accountability remains to be seen, but one thing is clear: Mark Carney’s dream of becoming Prime Minister hangs in the balance, and the fallout from this controversy could reshape Canada’s political landscape for years to come.
Stay tuned for updates as this story develops.