Prime Minister Carney, like the British Prime Minister, is First Among Equals. He can be replaced by his own party without need for a general election. Massive majorities is not a guarantee of personal political survival. Ask Maggie, Boris or Sir Keir. In fact, having a large majority makes it more likely. If there is a large majority, MPs have little fear that removing the PM will cause the government to fall or trigger an election. They can replace the leader while retaining power. This gives rebels considerable freedom. If there is a small or marginal majority, removing the PM is much riskier. A leadership contest can destabilise the government, and a new leader may immediately face confidence votes, rebellions or an election. MPs therefore have a stronger incentive to tolerate an unpopular leader. What is important is Carney's popularity among the Canadian public. Now he is a technocrat; he says some very intelligent, and observant things. But he is not a naturally charismatic man. If he was, he could have made much more of his excellent Middle Powers speech; the idea that Canada isn't alone in this dispute, that it has friends and allies. So far, he maintains decent popularity among the Canadian public, according to various polls. I don't know enough about Canadian politics to know what MPs majorities look like; are they a mile wide, but an inch deep, as is the case of the Westminster Labour Party (which is why they ditched Starmer so quickly; the Labour majority looks big, but the gained seats have slim majorities, meaning the best chance for Labour winning the next GE is for spoiler parties, like Reform, Restore, to split the vote).
Create an account or sign in to comment