Prime Minister Mark Carney rolled out a fresh electric vehicle (EV) “strategy” to transform Canada’s auto industry, and it reads like it was written by a consultant that got paid by the syllable (and we know how much the Liberal government likes to pay consultants).We’re told the world is “reshaping trade relationships,” that Canada will be “more resilient to global shocks,” and that we’ll “harness world-class capabilities” to “build the cars of the future.” That’s the kind of word salad that sounds serious until you try to understand it. How, exactly, does Ottawa “transform” a supply chain built over decades with a couple of funds, a tax tweak, and a new set of sales targets?The announcement leans hard on new spending with $3 billion from a Strategic Response Fund, plus up to $100 million from a tariff response initiative, plus $2.3 billion in new buyer incentives, plus $1.5 billion more for charging..Carney government replaces 100% EV requirement with scaled-back plan.That’s not an industrial strategy. That’s a spending list. It’s also not “certainty” for workers. It’s Ottawa picking winners and hoping the market behaves.Here’s the problem Carney can’t talk his way around. Canadians aren’t buying EVs at anything close to the pace his targets demand. Statistics Canada reported that in the third quarter of 2025, zero-emission vehicles (ZEVs) were 9.4% of new registrations, and registrations fell more than 40% compared with the same quarter a year earlier. .Transport Canada also tracks market share, and its dashboard shows 2025 year-to-date ZEV share sitting in the single digits.Yet Ottawa is still talking about 75% EV sales by 2035 and 90% by 2040, enforced through “stronger greenhouse gas emissions standards.” That is a mandate made with a thesaurus. If it walks like a mandate and quacks like a mandate, what you call it doesn’t matter. It’s still a mandate.And those standards punish the manufacturers who still build what most Canadians actually drive, which are gas vehicles. You can call it “technology neutral” all you want. The policy direction is obvious. Ottawa offers reduced corporate tax rates for “zero-emission technology manufacturers,” then sets targets that make it harder to profitably build and sell internal combustion vehicles in Canada. This isn’t a smooth “transition.” It’s the federal government leaning on one side of the scale, then acting surprised when companies shift production decisions to where the rules are clearer and the customer base is bigger. For example, the US..Now look at the part Ottawa loves to brag about, the EV charging.Carney said $1.5 billion will “enhance our national EV charging network,” making it “easier and more convenient” to charge across the country. Easy to say from an urban podium. It is harder to deliver on a February night outside major transportation corridors, where distances are long, temperatures are brutally cold, and a closed service station can turn into a real safety problem.Cold matters. The Canadian Automobile Association (CAA) has been blunt about winter range anxiety. In its polling and winter testing coverage, CAA found that more than 65% of Canadian EV owners reported lower battery range in extreme cold, and more than two-thirds of Canadians cited winter range drop as a top barrier to buying an EV.It is not a fringe concern. That is Canadian reality. One that Carney cannot change.Rural and northern charging is also not close to “solved.” Natural Resources Canada has acknowledged, citing a federal audit, that many parts of the country still lack access to public charging — including rural, remote, and northern areas..The Office of the Auditor General of Canada flagged similar gaps in its audit of the Zero Emission Vehicle Infrastructure Program. This is where Ottawa’s big-city planning really shows. A fast charger in Toronto is heavily used. A fast charger in a small northern community can sit idle for long stretches, yet still needs power upgrades, maintenance, and dependable winter service. That is expensive. It is also why charger rollouts cluster where the economics make sense, leaving the rest of the map to slogans and pilot projects.Carney’s strategy pretends a national charging “network” will make EVs practical everywhere. It won’t, not for a long, long time. In places like Saskatchewan, Alberta, and the North, vehicles are tools. People haul, commute long distances, and can’t gamble on range loss, charger downtime, or multi-hour detours. Ottawa can subsidize a charger. It can’t subsidize time, or safety, or the simple fact that some routes don’t have the traffic to support the EV infrastructure.If this government wants to help auto workers, it should start with honest math, not word salads. Set achievable goals based on demand. Focus on reliability and affordability without punishing the vehicles Canadians still rely on. Finally, stop selling rural Canada an EV charging fantasy while using their tax dollars to build it.A strategy is supposed to be a plan you can measure. This one is mostly a press conference with a hefty price tag.
