By Matthew Mendelsohn | The Toronto Star
Mark Carney had a chance to weigh in one of the defining issues facing Canada. The answer he gave suggests he isn’t ready for public life
Mark Carney made a speech last week and many people had plenty to say about it. But one of his replies during the Q & A deserves more attention than it received.
MP Nate Erskine-Smith asked Carney what he would do about Canada’s growing wealth inequality. Carney’s answer was a bit unfocused, but he made two points clearly: 1) Let’s hope wealthy people give more to charity, and 2) We shouldn’t only focus on redistribution.
This was not a serious answer.
If Carney wants to play a constructive role in Canadian public life, he should have thought deeply about the staggering and growing wealth concentration in Canada and around the world. This concentration is creating anxiety and anger among many young people, it is destabilizing democratic societies and he should have something meaningful to say about it.
Given his professional history, Carney knows that the benefits from economic growth in recent decades have increasingly gone to capital rather than workers. Even if he doesn’t want to serve up big pieces of blame pie, he should at least have critical reflections on the role of finance in producing obscene wealth alongside real hardship.
Unfortunately, Carney’s instincts on wealth inequality are reflective of what has been on full display from many business leaders over the past few weeks who have been bemoaning Canada’s “productivity emergency” — and then having a bit of a fit about small changes in the capital gains tax.
We share these concerns about the long-term decline in productivity, which has real and negative consequences on our quality of life.
But Canada’s long-standing productivity challenges have been debated for three decades, their causes are not well-understood and the solutions are not obvious. We certainly shouldn’t assume that realistic solution just happen to coincidentally lineup with all the prior positions and economic interests of corporate Canada.
“Given his professional history, (Mark) Carney knows that the benefits from economic growth in recent decades have increasingly gone to capital rather than workers,” writes Matthew Mendelsohn. “Even if he doesn’t want to serve up big pieces of blame pie, he should at least have critical reflections on the role of finance in producing obscene wealth alongside real hardship.”
We are even more concerned that many of Canada’s industry leaders who shape our public debate have seemingly missed the most important economic policy debates of the past 20 years. Around the world, almost no serious person continues to believe that cutting taxes on the wealthy will unlock growth for working and middle-income people.
Most advanced industrial democracies are dealing with inequality and challenges to economic growth by rejecting market fundamentalism and investing in things like public transit, child care, affordable housing and ensuring that low- and middle-income people have money to spend in the local economy.
So, Carney’s answer was disappointing.
When he was asked about wealth inequality, Carney could have talked about his views on this emerging consensus. He could have talked about housing and its relationship to both inequality and productivity.
He could have shared his thoughts about global processes to confront wealth sheltering and corporate profit shifting.
He could have talked about how oligopolistic markets hurt working people, innovation and productivity and how we should break them up.
He could have discussed ways to get more capital into underserved communities or how we should confront the worst features of modern extractive capitalism and private equity.
And when he chose to toss the word “redistribution” on the table, he could have at least noted that we are living through a period when concentration of ownership is redistributing upwards toward the extremely wealthy. Or that it is important that we stop talking narrowly about income redistribution and focus more deeply on how to broaden ownership of the economy.
But his instinct was to say none of these things, just as the instinct of our business community when talking of productivity is to discuss their taxes rather than the housing crisis.
Authoritarian populists are winning in many places because, in part, the benefits of economic growth have been accruing disproportionately to capital. Everyone who aspires to play a constructive role in public life needs to address this head on.
Highly unequal societies — with wealth, opportunity and privilege passed along intergenerationally — are not safe, healthy or happy societies. They are not in anyone’s interest, even the wealthy.
Share with a friend
Related reading
Advice to the public service: Five ways to confront monsters and chaos
Canada's political and bureaucratic leaders are quickly trying to re-wire the federal government to confront a belligerent Unites States, but systems can’t deliver what they were not designed for. This is a time like no other in our history, writes Matthew Mendelsohn, and those making decisions have not been trained for this—because we haven’t experienced anything like this before. Drawing on his own time in Ottawa, he walks us through five priority “machinery of government” changes our public service needs to make to meet the threat of an increasingly authoritarian, imperialist America.
Four key steps can help secure Canadian sovereignty
Gas station giant Parkland is already shedding Canadian employees in the wake of TX-based Sunoco’s recent takeover of the Canadian fuel chain, which owns 15% of our gas stations and a key refinery in Burnaby, B.C. These layoffs were a predictable outcome of Ottawa's decision not to flex its new regulatory muscle through the Canada Investment Act to quash foreign investment deals that pose an economic security threat. As SCP chair Jon Shell writes, the government has not defined a clear strategy to build and maintain Canadian ownership of our assets. Combined with the federal budget’s focus on attracting private capital, there’s a real danger that Ottawa will enable a sell-off of Canadian firms to foreign investors.
What the new World Inequality Report tells us, and why it matters for Canada
The 2026 World Inequality Report is out and the results paint a picture of a world in which a tiny minority commands unprecedented financial power, while billions remain excluded from even basic economic stability. As SCP Director of Policy Dan Skilleter writes, Canada is far from immune to these global trends: although our own GDP keeps rising, wealth gains have been concentrated at the very top, while many households struggle to afford food and housing. The top 1% in Canada hold about 29.3% of total wealth, making our country's wealth inequality even more pronounced than our own Canadian Parliamentary Budget Officer reports. The good news is, momentum is building in Canada for better wealth data, shedding light on our "Billionaire Blindspot."


