The concept behind Bill C-5 is designed to create the illusion that Mark Carney is poised to fast-track major infrastructure and investment projects—not just for his supporters, but also for his political opponents. However, upon closer inspection, the same regulatory barriers still exist, and no formal budget has been presented. As a result, many Canadians, including myself, are left wondering whether C-5 is simply a vehicle to position Carney—and Brookfield, his long-standing financial partner—as beneficiaries of a massive taxpayer-funded spending plan.
ESG: A Misunderstood Framework with Real Consequences
ESG—Environmental, Social, and Governance—is a corporate framework used to measure a private company’s sustainability and social responsibility. In theory, it assesses how companies manage their environmental impact, employee and community relations, and governance standards. These non-financial indicators are meant to guide investment decisions by identifying long-term risks and opportunities.
But in reality, ESG has no viable free-market use case at present. Most ESG-compliant initiatives are liabilities on corporate balance sheets. As such, companies embracing ESG often seek government subsidies to offset these costs—subsidies which Brookfield, the global investment firm closely linked to Mark Carney, has capitalized on for years.
In regions like Europe, ESG legislation allows private entities to profit via taxpayer-funded carbon credit schemes that do little to benefit the environment, but improve optics on corporate balance sheets—making them attractive to institutional investors like Brookfield.
Carney’s ESG Gamble in Canada
This is where Carney’s vision for Bill C-5 becomes concerning. Canada has already started implementing ESG principles. However, our regulatory landscape remains bogged down by red tape, making it difficult for ESG ventures to thrive organically. Enter Mark Carney, who’s promising provinces like Alberta expedited approvals—such as greenlighting pipelines.
But listen closely to B.C. Premier David Eby, and you’ll hear language meant to undercut those promises. For example, Eby emphasizes that the Trans Mountain Expansion (TMX) hasn’t even reached capacity. On the surface, that might seem like a case against further oil investment—until you realize the excessive tolls, taxes, and regulatory fees Canada imposes before any oil can be exported.
Whether one supports or opposes fossil fuel development, the fact remains: ESG projects exist in the private sector, and if the government maintains its high regulatory burden, there’s no viable economic case for resource development—no matter how fast Mark Carney claims he can move.
The Real Game: Follow the Money
From where I sit, Mark Carney appears set on borrowing public funds and channeling them into companies aligned with Brookfield—creating massive cash windfalls with little accountability or productivity in return. This pattern is nothing new in Canada.
Take Umicore, for example. In July 2024, the company abruptly paused construction on a $2.76 billion battery materials plant in eastern Ontario, citing slowing growth in the electric vehicle (EV) market. But many of us saw this coming. These ESG-branded companies often apply for and receive taxpayer funding, only to later suspend or cancel development, having already qualified for grants, credits, and incentives.
Let’s be honest: no rational company spends billions upfront only to walk away from a “profitable” project. The reality is these entities rely on government handouts to stay afloat. Without state support, most ESG business models collapse.
Carney’s Record and Public Support
Mark Carney continues to promote a policy framework that, to date, has produced more hype than results. And if you’re wondering why opposition parties haven’t stood against it, the answer is simple: Carney enjoys overwhelming public support. The only provision removed from Bill C-5 was the censorship clause—likely due to public backlash. But perhaps more concerning is Carney’s unwillingness to table a federal budget, which would finally show Canadians where the money is going.
Until that happens, we’re being asked to believe in “progress” without transparency. That’s not governance—it’s illusion.
Canada is at a crossroads.
We can continue down this path of hidden spending, ESG dependence, and overregulation—or we can return to foundational values that prioritize transparency, liberty, and faith over image management.
Consider making Jesus Christ your Lord and Savior today.