Mark Carney can and should travel the world. But he must still be accountable to Canadians

Open this photo in gallery:

For the past decade, the phrase “Canada is back” has been a punchline.

It was deployed earnestly in the hours after the 2015 federal election, when Justin Trudeau announced to the world that, under his stewardship, Canada would reclaim its place on the global stage. “On behalf of 35 million Canadians,” he said, “we’re back.”

But Canada was not back on the world stage; worse, we were flailing in the orchestra pit, becoming an ever-less desirable place for foreign investment and struggling with stagnant domestic growth. Ottawa tried and failed to secure a free-trade deal with China.

Mr. Trudeau played dress-up during a trade mission to India and returned only with an embarrassing story. The government tried and failed to win its much-coveted seat on the United Nations Security Council. It shattered the function and reputation of Canada’s immigration system. And our global peacekeeping presence shrunk to historic lows.

When Mark Carney became Prime Minister one year ago, his task was to turn “Canada is back” from a punchline into a promise. Foreign policy doesn’t traditionally dictate the outcome of Canadian elections, but U.S. President Donald Trump turned that adage on its head with his threats of tariffs and annexation. So to a plurality of voters, Mr. Carney seemed like the best choice to represent Canada’s interests abroad, with an understanding that domestic growth would be predicated on forging new international partnerships.

Campbell Clark: Carney was finally in the House, but his opponents had already lost interest in the war

Mr. Carney has taken that mandate and run with it, with more than a dozen trips to two-dozen countries within the span of 12 months.

And he has plenty to show for them: a new Security and Defence Partnership with the European Union, an investment agreement with the United Arab Emirates, deals with China, India, Australia, Indonesia and so on – plus a widely acclaimed speech to the Davos crowd that seemed to position Canada as a viable contender for leader of the middle powers. We can and should quibble with the specifics – and in many cases, the risks – of each new partnership, but it’s undeniable that Mr. Carney is getting things done, and doing what he was elected to do.

That’s why opposition attacks on Mr. Carney for the speed at which he seems to be accruing frequent flyer miles rings a bit hollow. In September, Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre lambasted Mr. Carney for hopping back on his “taxpayer-funded jet” en route to Britain “for more photo ops.” In the House of Commons this week, Bloc Québécois Leader Yves-François Blanchet said that Mr. Carney was “travelling the globe like Marco Polo.”

The criticism does have some effect in holding him accountable, however; after skipping the debate called by his own government Monday night, and initially indicating he would also skip Question Period the next day, the Prime Minister showed up in the House Tuesday to defend his evolving stance on the Iran war. But for the most part, the charge that Mr. Carney is ignoring domestic concerns in service to international gladhanding is ill-conceived; most Canadians understand that his gladhanding is in service of domestic concerns.

MPs press Carney on Ottawa’s response to fallout from Iran war

But where these criticisms have stronger footing is in the charge that Mr. Carney is not making himself available to answer for his decisions. Indeed, he cancelled what would have been his first press conference in India after not taking a single question from journalists, citing scheduling concerns. When he finally hosted a press availability, Mr. Carney was flippant with reporters who challenged him on his government’s contradictory messages about whether India is meddling in Canadian affairs. He didn’t actually answer many of the questions as asked, and instead leaned on talking points about approaching threats of foreign interference with “vigilance.”

Mr. Carney abruptly cancelled a scheduled press conference after his cabinet’s retreat in January. Journalists also were not invited to join him on a last-minute trip to Egypt for the Gaza peace summit in October.

Concerns have been raised that government departments are only responding to questions from journalists belonging to organizations certified as “qualified Canadian journalism” organizations, effectively sidelining independent media and freelance journalists. And Library and Archives Canada is planning deep cuts to its access to information department, which already takes years to respond to requests and turn over documents.

Mr. Carney doesn’t need to physically be in Canada to be accountable to Canadians. But he does need to respond to journalists who, conveniently for him, follow him wherever he goes. And he must make himself available to opposition parties in the House, whose questions represent an integral part of the functioning of our parliamentary democracy.

Mr. Carney can at once restore Canada’s presence abroad while fulfilling his obligations at home. That just means showing up to QP once in a while. And maybe giving an actual answer to a question.