There’s been an interesting debate going on for the last couple of days in Canada. David Dodge, who was the former Bank of Canada governor from February 1, 2001 to January 31, 2008 has recently spoken out against Mark Carney, saying that he disagrees with the now-Governor when it comes to the housing market in Canada and the high levels of household debt. What’s interesting is that the Globe and Mail took issue with Dodge saying anything at all – and now they have some pretty upset readers to contend with.
First, a look at what Dodge actually said. “I don’t think it’s in trouble,” he said when referring to consumer debt. He pointed to the fact that the areas in the country that have the highest household debt levels are in places such as Alberta, where Edmonton mortgages and Calgary mortgages make up a large portion of the average person’s debt loads. But, he also says that it is in these areas where housing and income levels are the strongest and highest, respectively, so we should not be concerned that these Canadians are drowning in debt they’ll never be able to repay. Dodge did say that in areas like Vancouver and Toronto, where housing prices are getting wildly out of control, it’s a different issue.
So what’s the problem? Apparently, the Globe and Mail doesn’t think it was Dodge’s place to speak out against his successor, and they said so in a post of their own titled “Dodge should not have undermined Carney’s Housing Message.” In that post they spoke about how Dodge’s criticism is not only unfounded and therefore probably incorrect, but also that Dodge has no place disagreeing with Mark Carney. What? Really? We often agree with Mark Carney on this very blog – but we have no problem with those that don’t.
Apparently, readers of the Globe saw the same problem. They too, agree that regardless of Dodge’s accuracy, he is a Canadian and therefore, he has every right to talk about his own opinion on policy matters. These were some of the comments the Globe received:
“The Globe and Mail is always trying to decide who is allowed to speak in Canada.” – Diane
“If he had agreed, they would be praising him. Bad Dodge, under Harper’s Canada, you do not have the right to a differing opinion. Bad, bad Dodge.” – Susy
“Mr. Dodge should have his own view of the world. Why would he be forced not to air his own opinion on important issues simply because he is the predecessor to Carney? I found this editorial disturbing.” – Ecmiss
However, there were a few that disagreed with those comments and agreed with the Globe that Dodge had no business butting in. These were what those comments showed:
“[Dodge’s] judgement on this issue is indeed questionable but his judgement in speaking out as an ex-governor is not open to debate: it was the wrong thing to do.” – Epictitus
“A former CEO shall never question his successor. Once you retire, you are no longer fully informed of all the issues and intermingling effects.” – WinniMiss
“Good for Dodge. Carney’s had plenty of time to settle in his job. Dodge did him the courtesty of staying out of it for awhile, but that should not be a lifetime ban.” – Johnny
What do you think? Do you think Dodge or Carney is correct? And do you think Dodge had the right to speak his opinion?
