Jump to content

Talk:Mark Carney

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Nationality

[edit]

Given that Carney had to take British citizenship in order to take up the "reserved post" of Governor of the Bank of England, should not his nationality be updated to Canadian-British? 86.2.64.179 (talk) 21:05, 29 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

He did not have to take up British citizenship to take up the position as Governor -- he is not eligible for it until about the end of his term, at least according to the transcripts of this interview. [1]

Arun (talk) 05:44, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Can anyone name a reliable source stating that Mark Carney has since acquired British citizenship? The current source used in the article to support the claim of British citizenship appears to state only that he plans to apply for British citizenship.--Boson (talk) 00:34, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed. He does not yet have British citizenship and the only source for the statement he does specifically says that he won't qualify until the end of his term. I'll update it. Harsimaja (talk) 16:34, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Jacob Rees-Mogg as source

[edit]

I have removed a recent addition to the article which I believe to be sourced ultimately from Jacob Rees-Mogg. He has a large undeclared financial interest: much of his £100m+ fortune is invested with hedge funds, especially Somerset Capital Management LLP, of which he is, I think, still a director and partner. The hedge fund industry expects Brexit Britain to be a low-tax, low-regulation haven for financial speculation. Wildfowl (talk) 01:21, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I completely agree that JRM has a conflict of interest; however, he is a prominent (and influential!) politician and I think his comments are worth noting. --Bangalamania (talk) 02:16, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that his comments are worth noting, as he might be the next British prime minister – but not without noting his conflict of interest. Wildfowl (talk) 21:33, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

October 2024 edits

[edit]

We must be mindful of the WP:BLP policies here. An entire section on "controversy" with only a single, far-fetched example, is in absolutely no way shape or form due weight for this article. Those wishing to include this content need to come up with solid, policy-based arguments as to why in order to have any chance at seeking a consensus for inclusion. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk)  17:15, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The material showed no actual controversy, and as listed made false claims, taking a single persons unquoted statement and putting it as a quote from plural "staff members". I have again removed it; it should not be readded until consensus to do so has been found. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 18:20, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just for the discussion record, the material was originally inserted in May 2021 by an IP editor who has not edited from that IP since that month. They cannot reasonably be contacted for involvement in this discussion. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 01:56, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'd add that something being said I'm parliament definitely does not establish due weight. Nor does being mentioned in a single media outlet. Especially not for someone with as hig a profile as Carney. Also "international" needs to be put in context here. While a report on something happening in the UK from Canada may be international in someways, it was about a Canadian who'd worked in the Canadian government in senior roles for nearly 10 years so was actually not so international by that token. You get the same thing with Kiwis outside NZ often being reported on in NZ. So I definitely see no evidence that WP:due weight has been established. 06:33, 13 October 2024 (UTC) Nil Einne (talk) 06:33, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry I didn't notice there were two different disputes and misread the reference to Global News to refer to international news outlets rather than a specific media outlet. So part of my comment was irrelevant and I've struck. However my main point still stands. And having looked at the source, it's even worse than that. This is barely a report and hardly qualifies as secondary source. It's a clip of various things said in parliament, the only non primary or "reporting" element of it appears to be the editing and that Youtube description and title. Nil Einne (talk) 10:11, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As for the Bank of England stuff, again it's only one source from the time this happened. But in many ways this is even worse since that was a long time ago now and Carney's tenure at the Bank of England has ended so it's far easy to evaluate long term significance. Are there more sources especially more recent sources that establish this was a significant part of Carney's tenure at the Bank of England? Did this have any significant effect on his tenure e.g. did he fail to get his contract renewed or was his it ended early because of it? Was he required to attend some sort of training or were his interactions with staff managed because of this? Has it been claimed this affected his work at the Bank of England in some other way? If none of these are the case, I don't see that it's due. Nil Einne (talk) 10:18, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I was sure I read something else and have now found it again [2]. I'll keep my earlier comment struck since it was conflating two different things but I'll remake it here with minor rewording. Regarding the "overseas editor of a major daily" point, while a report on something happening in the UK from Canada may be overseas, it was about a Canadian who'd worked in the Canadian government in senior roles for nearly 10 years so their interest it in is unsurprising. So the fact it was "overseas editor" doesn't significantly add to due weight. You get the same thing with Kiwis outside NZ often being reported on in NZ. In fact, since he's now somewhat involved in Canada again and was apparently also involved with the UK for some time after his tenure ended, this means there are at least two countries with a lot of media outlets where anything significant about his time at the Bank Of England is likely to be reported on. If you can't find anything after his tenure which mentioned this it's very hard to argue it's a significant part of his time at the Bank of England. Nil Einne (talk) 10:50, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]