Exclusive interview with Prime Minister Mark Carney — Power & Politics

[0:00] Ernie's plan for the country, a plan the Prime Minister hopes will unite Canadians in the face [0:05] of threats from the South. We are seeing the danger of over-reliance on the United States. [0:10] We're spending over 75 cents on every dollar of capital spend for defence goes to the United [0:16] States. That's not smart. We look to Europe, we look to Asia, we look to new partners. [0:21] In our one-on-one conversation, the Prime Minister lays out some benchmarks for his government. [0:26] When can you expect to see change? One of the things that's going to [0:29] characterise this government is being straight with people. We are in a crisis. We have to get [0:35] moving. We have to get moving on these major projects. Plus, new insight into Kearney's [0:39] relationship with President Trump and what Kearney is hoping to get out of trade talks with the U.S. [0:45] The Oval Office was the end of the beginning, re-establishing sovereign-to-sovereign dialogue [0:49] that the President is recognising, as others are, just how strong and free Canada is. We've got more [0:55] that we need to do before we're satisfied. [0:58] The full interview is just ahead, as Power in Politics starts right now. [1:02] Prime Minister Kearney, thank you for meeting with us today. Thank you, sir. [1:13] Thanks for having me, David. [1:14] I want to start, if I can, with a moment near the end of the speech that drew some sustained [1:18] applause when the King said, as the anthem reminds us, the true north is indeed strong and free. [1:23] Very subtle. Was that for a Canadian audience or for an American one? [1:27] Well, I think it starts, everything is for Canadians, first and foremost. Speech from the throne [1:33] for setting out a bold, ambitious plan for Canada, the government's plan. And I think a clear message [1:39] there that we are strong, we are free, and it's time to reinforce those strengths and those freedoms. [1:46] How much progress do you think you've made since the Oval Office meeting with President Trump [1:50] on resolving some of the issues around trade, in particular the sectoral tariffs? [1:53] Well, I would term it this way, since we're at historic moments, epoch-making, to quote [2:00] the speech from the throne. So to be slightly Churchillian, it was the end of the beginning. [2:06] The Oval Office was the end of the beginning, re-establishing sovereign-to-sovereign dialogue, [2:10] much more constructive engagement on some of the big issues on both security and economics. [2:16] We've had fairly intensive discussions since then. Minister LeBlanc, for example, and our [2:22] ambassador were down for a number of meetings last week. Conversations continue. We've got more [2:28] that we need to do before we're satisfied that we have a partnership that is in Canada's interest. [2:33] But how would you characterize it? I mean, have you moved closer? I mean, [2:36] he's going to be in Canada on around the 15th of June for the G7. Could you have a deal by then, [2:40] a deal by Canada Day, or does this sort of thing that moves into maybe, you know, the Kuzma review [2:45] time period, which Mexico is now saying could start in September? [2:48] I don't think it's in either of our nation's interest for it to drag out that long. I think [2:53] the issues are getting a sharper relief. But we're going to take as much time as necessary to get [2:59] the right deal for Canada, but no more. Okay. So do you agree with the Mexican [3:04] economy minister, I think, said today, end of September is when Kuzma starts. Is that the period [3:08] between now and then that you think you can have this resolve with the United States? [3:11] I would have a slightly different view. I didn't see the specific comments, [3:16] but the actual Kuzma review period starts in 2026. So look, there are specific issues, [3:22] the border fentanyl tariffs. Canada's made tremendous progress. We're securing our border. [3:27] You heard the speech from the throne doing even more. Another thousand border CBSA agents, [3:32] border services agents, another thousand RCMP personnel, a series of other measures, [3:36] which will exhaust our interview time if I go through to secure the border. So we're making huge [3:41] progress. The amount of fentanyl going across our border is down 90 percent. We're less than 0.1 percent [3:48] of the U.S. imports of that horrible drug. And the bigger issue now is northbound drugs and guns. [3:58] So look, we've made a lot of progress. We think we should be moving off of those tariffs. The U.S. [4:02] should be moving off those tariffs. We are stronger together in autos. The auto pack's been in place my [4:07] entire life. I'm not that young anymore. So it just shows you the value of being together. Same [4:12] with steel and aluminum and the other trade challenges. So we want to make direct progress [4:18] on those issues before we have the broader review of U.S.M.C.A. On the relationship, though, [4:24] overall, Prime Minister, I mean, there seems to have been progress on at least… [4:27] There is progress. Without question, there is progress, Dave. [4:30] For sure, but on the recognition of sovereignty, right? The President said he still likes the idea of [4:34] the 51st state, but he's not going to talk about it. Ambassador Hoekstra says… [4:38] I like that idea of me playing in the NHL, David, but it's not going to happen. [4:40] Yeah, absolutely fair. But he still talks about getting the auto sector, the President does. [4:47] He still has the tariffs against the auto sector and talks about making it economically unviable to [4:52] make cars in Canada and to move it to the United States. So the economic threat still persists. [4:56] I think one of the issues for the United States, and by extension for Canada, [5:02] is can the U.S. auto sector be viable and truly competitive versus Asian competition, [5:09] particularly coming Chinese competition, but broader global competition? Can it be viable [5:14] if it's just an American auto sector, U.S. auto sector? The answer is no. And Canada, [5:20] Canadian, we have a great auto sector, great auto parts sector, and that integration of the auto [5:26] sector is part of what will make North America competitive, and that's what we're working towards. [5:31] The line you said with some frequency during the election was, he wants to break us so he can [5:36] own us. Do you still believe that's true? I think the President, I won't look into his [5:41] soul, but the President is recognizing, as others are, just how strong and free Canada is. [5:47] And so if you look at the speech from the throne today, as you did, this is about investing in [5:53] Canada. This is about building Canada, about making one Canadian economy out of 13. It's about nation [5:58] building projects. Each of those and those together give us much, much more than could ever be taken [6:04] away by trade action. This is a confident country moving forward, and it's an exciting time. [6:09] Look, I do want to go through some of the specific measures on the speech from the throne, [6:12] but just one more on the United States, because when you said the process of deepening integration [6:17] is over, is that a permanent state of affairs in your view? Is that something about the changing [6:22] nature of America as a country, or is it specific to this period under President Trump? [6:26] Well, I'd roll back 40 years, since we're looking at the broader sweep of history, [6:32] maybe even a little more. A steady process of integration, integrating the auto sector, [6:37] as I mentioned when I was first born, then moving to broader goods, services, financial services, [6:43] even some people talking, as little as a few years ago, about having a customs union with the United [6:48] States, greater freedom of movement of labor. That's not going to happen. That reliance, [6:54] we are seeing the danger of over-reliance on the United States economically, and also from a security [7:01] perspective. So we will, as I said the other day, we will cooperate where necessary, where it's in [7:07] both of our interests very clearly, but we won't necessarily cooperate. So we, as a confident country, [7:13] with an ambitious plan, we look outwards. We look to Europe. We look to Asia. We look to new [7:18] partners that we're going to deepen with. And that's a big element of what we're laying out in the [7:22] speech. So when you look to Europe on the security and defense arrangements, is that to sort of augment [7:26] the ones that exist with the United States, or to reduce the reliance there? Is it a hedge or a [7:30] replacement? Well, it's both. Diversification depends. Look, I say it's both. I'm not trying to [7:37] avoid the question or be clever. The point is, we need to do much more to secure our borders, [7:43] to secure our Arctic, to secure Canada. So we're going to need to spend more. We recognize that. [7:48] Now we're going to do it in a way that is in the best interest of Canada, with partners on which [7:52] we can rely, get best value for money, but also make more of that investment here in Canada, [7:59] so we're growing jobs and livelihoods in our own country. You know, you know this, some may not [8:04] have followed this closely. We're spending over 75 cents on every dollar of capital spend for defense [8:09] goes to the United States. That's not smart. What's better if we spend more at home, if we have [8:15] diversified partnerships? Look, part of what's been happening in the last few months, since I became [8:22] Prime Minister, is a number of conversations of increasing specificity with our major European [8:28] partners, so that we become defense partners with them, that we become part of a very big build out of [8:36] their defense industrial base, which will have big benefits for jobs here in Canada. We're making great [8:41] progress on that, and by Canada Day, we'd like to see something concrete there. [8:46] Okay, but you also… [8:47] Canada Day is going to be an important day in our calendar. [8:49] What do you want to see on Canada Day specifically, sort of on the defense side? [8:52] Well, so you see a couple of things by Canada Day will happen. First, we have… [8:56] Tax cut and free trade. [8:57] Right. [8:58] Well, we have a tax cut, middle class tax cut, and you know, first item that we put on the [9:02] table as government, following being elected, is go straight to affordability, that tax cut, [9:07] for 22 million Canadian taxpayers, up to $840 a year for a two-income family. So, real money, [9:14] four people delivered on July 1st. That's the first build. In fact, the Minister of Finance [9:18] tabled the Ways and Means today in Parliament. But on defense, on defense, two things. One, [9:24] we have a summit, EU-Canada summit, just before the NATO summit, third week of June. At the NATO summit, [9:32] NATO partners are going to be asked to spend more, to do more, for mutual protection. We're going to [9:39] participate in that. But part of the way we want to participate in that is with new partners, [9:45] with European partners, yes, with the United States, yes, on our own, in a way that's best [9:50] for Canada. So, look for some agreement and some progress in both of those. [9:54] But Mark Ruda said, I believe it was yesterday, that they think the target is, forget 3.5%, [9:59] they want to go maybe as high as 5%. Now, that feels like an aggregate number, [10:02] maybe for the alliance in general, but Canada is not at 2% and won't be until at least 2027, [10:07] maybe a little bit later. Can you reasonably commit to something even beyond 2 at this point? [10:11] Well, I think there's a couple of things. One is, we start with results. What is [10:17] necessary to secure our country? First and foremost, our borders, the Arctic, our sovereignty. [10:23] Then, what do we need to do with our partners, our partners in NATO, for a safer world that has an [10:28] impact on Canada? And that would include our commitments in Ukraine. What do we need to do, [10:36] then what could it cost, then how do we get those costs down and how do we make sure those expenditures [10:41] benefit Canada as much as possible? I'm not a fan of picking an arbitrary number and then trying to [10:47] figure out how to spend up to it. All of that said, we are definitely going to have to spend more. [10:54] We are going to have to spend more sooner. That's one of the reasons why we will have a fall budget, [11:00] not a budget tomorrow, because we're part of these deeper discussions on the defence side. [11:06] Okay, I want to dive into the seven priorities in your mandate letter. It appears to be a mission-driven [11:11] approach to government, I would take from that. The list is limited, but each one of them is quite [11:16] broad in terms of what fits in there. But I want to ask specifically about housing. Now, [11:20] I know you said you don't want to force down the price of existing houses. You want to reduce the [11:25] cost, increase the affordability of new builds with the GST cut at the front end, driving down [11:29] development fees to make it more affordable while driving up wages. So, buying power, it makes it [11:35] easier to own a home. So, a simple measure of that is the price to income ratio. And over the last 20 [11:41] years, that has just gotten impossibly unbearable in a lot of big markets. Like, 20 years ago in [11:46] Toronto, it was five to six times an average salary. Now, it's like 11 to 12. What sort of a ratio are [11:51] you aiming for with this policy? What's an affordability standard? [11:53] Well, it comes back into, it comes into several things. Now, you've asked a very complicated [11:58] question and you've layered it down, and the bottom line is for Canadians, can I get a mortgage? [12:03] Can I afford the mortgage payments and I can buy the house? Part of what's shifted is the length of [12:08] those mortgages and the cost of those mortgages. So, there's multiple factors that have to happen [12:15] here. One is, we've got to get take-home pay up for Canadians. The first easiest way to do that is [12:21] to cut taxes. Cut taxes now. We're cutting that middle class tax cut. That's why that's the first [12:26] thing we're doing. Cut taxes on first-time home buyers. Younger Canadians, they're buying a new home, [12:32] saving up to 50,000. In fact, in some markets, Toronto would be an example, more than $50,000 [12:38] off the price of a home. That's all, you know, big money, obviously. Then we need to get supply [12:44] up in order to get that. At the same time, and we have a very ambitious plan, you'll see that roll [12:50] out more into the fall setting of Parliament for that to roll out, to get supply up, double the rate [12:56] of home building. All while growing the economy because what we need to see is incomes grow. So, you combine all of that, [13:04] with mortgage terms, you've got to pull collectively, we've got to get those numbers back, those ratios [13:11] you quoted, back towards those that you started with. What's the horizon here? I bought my first [13:17] house at 28, so if you're a 28-year-old now looking to buy a home, it's tough depending on where you [13:22] are. How old will you be before it gets to that affordability level? Look, there is no, here's an [13:28] insight, there's no monolithic houses, there's different types of houses, different types of [13:32] housing markets, it's a segmented market, first point. Second point is, are we building houses more [13:40] cheaply? The answer is, we have to build those houses more cheaply, and there's several ways to [13:44] do that. Again, cutting GST on housing, that's one way to make the house cheaper, sorry. The second thing [13:51] is to cut development charges. So, we are putting, we committed in the platform, we will cut development [13:56] charges in half. Development charges flow through, that's a fancy word for building the infrastructure [14:01] for houses, it flows through to the end price. So, we're looking at another savings on the order [14:06] of magnitude of that $30,000, $50,000 off the price of houses if we do it and match, or as we do it [14:12] and match by the promises. Third way you do it is you change how you build houses. So, much more effectively, [14:19] the productivity in the housing sector in Canada has not grown for a quarter century, over the period [14:24] of time that you quote those figures. We've got to get that down. You can do it at scale, you can do [14:30] it with prefab, modular, you can do it using Canadian timber, Canadian technology. That's what we want to [14:36] catalyze. Last point, David, we're going to focus first and foremost on deeply affordable housing. [14:44] We have a homelessness problem in this country. I think everybody knows it. There's multiple causes. [14:49] One way to address it is actually to have deeply affordable housing. We're going to focus in on that. [14:54] That is a role for government. It's a role for the federal government to catalyze and then move out [14:58] across the spectrum to affordable housing, mainstream affordable housing. [15:02] But this is a medium term. This is like five, seven, eight years. Is that what we're talking about? [15:08] We're more ambitious than that, but you have years, not weeks. And you know what? One of the things that's [15:14] going to characterize this government is being straight with people. There are things we can do in [15:19] the short. First off, let's be straight. It's a sunny day. It's beautiful out there. We are in a crisis. [15:26] We have to get moving. We have to get moving on these major projects. We have to get moving on [15:30] building one Canadian economy. That is why the First Ministers, the Premiers and myself are meeting [15:35] next Sunday in Saskatoon because we have to get moving. That's why a number of the Premiers are [15:40] here in Ottawa today. That's why some of the Western Premiers have banded together on some big ideas [15:44] that we're really looking forward to getting behind and on and on. So we got to move, but the idea that, [15:52] I'm not saying you suggested that we can just snap our fingers and all of a sudden housing in this [15:56] country, a housing crisis will be solved overnight. No, that's not going to happen, but that's not a [16:01] reason to wait. We're going to get going. Well, it's the same thing with the major projects, [16:05] right? And you set me up perfectly for where I wanted to go, was looking ahead to Saskatoon with [16:09] the meeting with, appreciate it. You know, it's time to build. It applies to houses, projects, [16:14] and the relationships. The Premiers all have a list of national projects that have big price [16:18] tags and require federal approval and federal money. I mean, are we going to see specific projects out [16:34] of Saskatoon? These are the two or three priorities for this year, next year. What are we going to see [16:39] in terms of moving this? What we're signaling in a bold ambitious plan that's part of the Speech [16:43] from the Throne is that we need to move on these nation-building projects. So projects that bring [16:48] Canada together, projects that diversify our economy, projects that help us export to new markets [16:53] and really move this economy forward. So, yes, the ask of provinces, the ask of the private sector is [16:59] which projects do you have that reach those criteria? What we're going to do is fast-track the [17:06] approval, truly fast-track the approval of those projects. And we are going to name specific projects [17:13] to which these fast-track approvals apply so that the country can get moving. Now, part of what we're [17:19] going to do collectively, in effect, we're going to have a competition with projects. Some projects [17:25] are good ideas but they're not ready. Others are ready but they're bad ideas. Some projects can purely [17:30] be driven by private sector interests if the federal government and provincial governments can make [17:36] approvals quickly so province, you know, investors can have the uncertainty. Other projects may provide [17:42] such benefits to our country in terms of diversification as an example in jobs that it may make sense for [17:49] there to be some support in some way by the federal and provincial governments. But we look at all [17:54] of that, we designate the ones we want to, we collectively want to move forward. And when I say we, [18:00] I very much include, we very much include indigenous partners, indigenous people because this free, [18:05] prior and informed consent applies to all of this and will apply to virtually every project will have an [18:10] indigenous component. Okay, look, I know you've got to go but I need to just, to build on the project [18:15] question, I need to ask you about Alberta and I need to ask you about the oil and gas sector because [18:19] I know you said you want to create an energy superpower, clean and conventional energy. A pipeline is a [18:24] possibility but not a certainty. And Alberta would say one, at minimum, is what is needed, maybe three, [18:32] to the north, to the east, and to the west. This is what the Premier said. Is that a reasonable [18:36] expectation for the Premier of Alberta? And the frustration over this, and you know as someone [18:42] who grew up in Edmonton, it's driving a lot of the resentment to the national government of Alberta. [18:46] So, as Prime Minister, how do you confront that? Well, I think there's a couple of things. One [18:50] is, let's recognize a few facts in terms of pipelines that have been built to Tidewater and projects [18:56] opening up, whether it's TMX, whether it's Cedar LNG and beyond. There's a series of LNG projects. [19:03] More can be done, more should be done, and from our perspective, more will be done. So, we will be [19:09] moving through this process to make these types of projects possible. Now, we don't begin and end [19:17] the conference. It's remarkable, in some circles, this conversation starts and ends with pipelines. [19:23] But that's what it's become politically, right? No, that is not what it's become politically. [19:29] That is not what it's become for Canada. Canada is a nation. Canadians want, yes, they want energy [19:36] pipelines that make sense. They also want grid interconnect, connections between our clean grids. [19:43] They want actually less carbon. So, they want carbon capture and storage pathways project to move [19:48] forward. They want broader corridors, for example, you know, Grays Point in Nunavut, that open up whole [19:57] swaths of the country to new trade. They want critical minerals, so that we are sovereign in [20:04] the most important components of the future. All of those things are possible. And the more we're [20:11] doing more of them, the more likely this is going to succeed. That's why these meetings and this process [20:18] is so important. That's why the legislation that we're putting forward, we will put forward in coming [20:23] days, is so ambitious. We are in a crisis. We can control our destiny. We are a bold, [20:31] confident nation. We are the true north, strong and free. But freedom is something you earn every [20:37] day. And that strength is something we need to reinforce. But how do you confront the separatist [20:41] sentiment that is there in Alberta? Is there a possibility of a referendum next year? I mean, [20:45] how do you approach it? Look, this is the greatest country in the world. [20:48] And this is a country that works. It's a government that's committed to working with Canadians across [20:54] the country. And I know you're pressed for time now. You're pressed for time. One of us, [20:59] we're both pressed for time. I've got things to do. We've got projects to build. But, you know, [21:03] I was born just north of the oil sands. I grew up just south of the oil sands. When I was born, [21:09] the oil sands was a concept. And it was the ingenuity of Canadian, many Albertan engineers and entrepreneurs, [21:17] and the partnership between the federal government and the provincial government that made the oil [21:21] sands what they are. This is what we need today. We need all of the actors, private sector. We need [21:28] research. We need scientists. We need the federal and provincial governments working together. And [21:31] what's going to happen, and I do feel that this spirit is building, is that we're going to see the [21:37] projects we're talking about aren't just contained within one province. So it needs multiple provinces. [21:44] It needs indigenous partners. And the only way to get it, in my view, is to recognize what a moment [21:53] that we are in, the need for ambition, the need to work together. And I tell you, David, you saw some [21:59] of this, I'm sure, in your coverage. I traveled across this great country over the course of the [22:03] last several months. That's what Canadians want. We're going to go to the wall to get it. [22:07] Prime Minister Carney, I know it's a busy day. I appreciate your time today. Thank you, sir. [22:12] Okay, so that was my exclusive interview today with Prime Minister Mark Carney. The power panel's [22:16] been listening in on that, and I want to bring them in now for some analysis and reaction to that. [22:20] Amanda Alvaro is a former Liberal Party communication strategist and the co-host of the Beyond a Ballot [22:25] podcast. Tim Powers is a former strategist for conservative parties. Jordan Likeness is a former [22:30] NDP strategist. And Sherelle Evelyn is the managing editor of The Hill Times. [22:36] Look, a large day at King's Speech and the Prime Minister there. Sherelle, [22:40] just your quick takeaway, what stood out from what Mark Carney had to say there in your view? [22:45] Well, he clearly has an ambitious agenda. He clearly has plans in his mind. I know that the [22:51] opposition Conservatives say that, you know, Mark Carney has no plan. He clearly has a plan. [22:57] What is still missing, I think, for me at least anyways, is how was the method and how are you going to [23:03] get there? There's, you know, there was an interesting comment that Black Quebecois leader [23:08] François Blachemey today, he said he views Mark Carney as kind of like this, or he says that Mark Carney [23:14] sees himself as the CEO of Canada. I think that's fair. Yeah. [23:18] Or he's approaching it like a CEO. Approaching it as a CEO and, you know, he puts out the order, [23:23] you know, the provinces are the regional offices, is how Blanchard put it, and everybody else has to [23:28] kind of fall in line and make things happen. And, you know, maybe that's the case, and maybe that is [23:33] oftentimes the role of a prime minister as the head of government to set the direction and move forward. [23:39] But I do think that people are still looking for, okay, but how are we going to get there? [23:44] Tim, what are your thoughts, your high-level takeaways? [23:46] Yeah, I just build off something Sherelle said. He is taking a different type of leadership approach [23:51] than we've seen in a long time. Back almost to the Paul Martin era when transformation was in, [23:57] until it wasn't. I'm all for what he's talking about in terms of transformation. [24:02] What is fascinating to me is he seems to care less, could care less about any political expectation [24:10] management. That may be a good thing, that may be a bad thing, but it's a reality. He's setting up a [24:15] real interesting set of KPIs, key performance indicators for himself. You tried to get some specific [24:22] ones off of him, but he seems unencumbered by the worry that most politicians have that, [24:30] oh, I better keep things down low. The laws of political gravity don't scare him. [24:35] So we'll see how long that lasts, and maybe he does succeed, but he certainly set up potential [24:42] challenges around expectation management. Yeah. Amanda, that's kind of my take too, [24:47] expectations. They're above the golden dome, you know, with Prime Minister Carney. [24:51] Well, nothing can shoot Canada down. I was going to probably save. [24:53] What are your thoughts on sort of what he said there? Because he expanded on a few things, [24:57] and we'll go through one by one a little bit, but your high-level takeaway there. [25:01] Yeah, I mean, I think that there are some themes that will be really appealing to Canadians. I think [25:07] we saw them in the throne speech, and they were reinforced again in this interview, this idea of how [25:12] important it is to unify the Canadian economy, going from 13 economies to one, the way that he [25:17] describes it, this idea of diversifying our trading partners, and then getting to work at home on [25:24] affordability, things like the middle-class tax cut, you know, and home building. And these are, [25:30] you know, these are themes that we heard in the campaign, but I see some of those themes really [25:34] solidifying for him. And whether or not you like the CEO analogy, I think the way that he's delivering [25:40] will be welcome. It's a refreshing change. He has a point of view, he has a direction, [25:46] and you really get the sense, while we may not know all of the details of the plan, [25:50] my takeaway is he's going to get stuff done. Well, he's going to try, Jordan. You know, [25:55] there's a lot of things that can stop it, but right now he certainly has political capital and some [25:59] political momentum. What are your thoughts on what you heard from the prime minister there? Well, [26:02] he certainly brings the energy of a shareholder pitch meeting to the task. And I actually, [26:08] I do think energy is part of it, right? Signaling that change, that engagement, [26:12] that is a real shift from what we saw under the Trudeau government. So, look, I mean, [26:17] this is a very ambitious agenda. Tim's absolutely right. They're not doing anything to tamp down [26:22] the scope of these expectations. And I think part of it is the hope that some of that energy can carry [26:28] them forward. Now, I will say, I think I was struck in his remarks, you know, there's a lot of stuff in [26:34] here that is achievable in a short time period. So, things like the interprovincial trade bearers, [26:39] already there's really good progress on that. That seems likely to beat its target. [26:43] Reaching out and working with the Europeans on defense, this makes a lot of sense. There's [26:46] ready pathways for that. But when I look at some of the things in here and in the throne speech [26:50] today that actually touch on Canadians' lives, immediately you're coming up with sort of not a [26:56] whole lot. Like, really, it's the income tax cut, which is $800, a little bit more than $800 a couple. [27:04] And it's taking the taxes off some home purchases. But, like, I got to tell you, [27:10] for the half of Canadians who are living paycheck to paycheck, they're not one tax cut away from [27:15] changing that. So, the problems that underlie the lack of popularity that we saw for Justin Trudeau [27:21] in the dying days of his government are still there. And I question whether they're going to be [27:25] immediately touched by this agenda. A question, though, on that. Do you think the issue [27:28] with sort of the unpopularity of the Trudeau government at the end was that [27:32] those issues were there or they didn't seem to be a priority? Yeah, I think it's both. Do you know [27:36] what I mean? I think it's both. And I think that there's certainly a risk here for Prime Minister [27:41] Carney as well. One of the things that the Trudeau government, over time, it became increasingly [27:46] disconnected from those struggles that Canadians were facing on affordability and things like the [27:50] housing crisis. And I think that with Prime Minister Carney, you have somebody walking into that role [27:54] who, yes, brings incredible strengths in terms of international networks and competence on [27:59] financial and fiscal matters, but who also does bring a sense that this is not a guy who knows what [28:05] the prices are at a grocery store. So, for today, that's not a problem. But as we go down this path, [28:11] that could become an issue for them. Right. Okay. Look, one thing I want to play is a segment from [28:16] that. And this is when I asked him about what's going to happen in Saskatoon next week, because he is meeting [28:19] with the premiers. The first ministers are going to meet for a couple of days. You know, Scott Moe [28:23] is going to play host. And it's about the issue of these projects of national significance. And [28:28] Wab Kanu was here yesterday and suggested we're going to get news out of this next week that we're [28:33] going to get specific projects. I asked the Prime Minister, excuse me, about that. Here's what Mark [28:37] Carney had to say. We need to move on these nation-building projects. So projects that bring Canada [28:43] together, projects that diversify our economy, projects that help us export to new markets and really move this [28:49] economy forward. So, yes, the ask of provinces, the ask of the private sector is which projects [28:55] do you have that reach those criteria? What we're going to do is fast-track the approval, [29:01] truly fast-track the approval of those projects. And we are going to name specific projects [29:07] to which these fast-track approvals apply so that the country can get moving. So, Tim, it's interesting. [29:14] It's not just talking about moving fast. It's very quickly, like within a week, [29:19] we're going to get names of specific projects coming out of Saskatoon that this is what we're [29:24] going to fast-track, at least in the first wave of these projects. [29:27] Hallelujah, if he can pull it off. I mean, what I really found fascinating in the throne speech [29:32] that the King read, I think he said, project review is down from five years to two years. [29:37] That will be a world record-like pace. Let's see it, because there is lots of development there. [29:41] But I go back to something else he said to you. You know, you can't escape, nor should you, [29:47] your duty to consult with indigenous people. So the premiers may be here. The federal government may [29:53] be there. In the areas where indigenous consultation is important are indigenous partners and others [29:59] there. Maybe they are. But again, I think he is trying to use the turbo. He keeps calling this a [30:06] crisis. And it's a really smart thing to do, because as Amanda will tell you, any of us have worked in [30:10] crisis communication, there's a greater imperative to move. So as long as people believe that they are still [30:16] in a very difficult period and quick decisions must be made, they will throw away perhaps other [30:21] considerations. I'm not saying that's disingenuous by the Prime Minister, and I think we probably are, [30:26] as long as Donald Trump there is in some kind of crisis. But can he continue to funnel that, [30:31] and for how long? But you know, just on that, there is what Mark Carney is saying of getting [30:35] alignment on review processes and on timelines. It's still making sure you do the environmental [30:39] considerations and the indigenous consultation processes. And then what is in Bill 5 in Ontario, [30:46] where a cabinet can declare things essentially commercial zones where you don't have to meet [30:50] regulations, you don't have to meet laws. David Evey in British Columbia with Bill 15 doing a similar [30:55] sort of thing, not quite to the same extent of Doug Ford. I know they want to move fast, [30:59] but there's a risk here. If you move too fast, you start trampling into things that the throne speech [31:04] says you need to protect. Yeah, but it seems like it's a risk they're prepared to take. And right now, [31:09] I mean, this is, I don't know what the critique has been of these things in the throne speech yet. I've [31:14] not seen or heard them. But usually, if there is going to be a critique, it comes rapidly, it comes [31:19] quickly. I'm not hearing it. So he may sense he has a broad public audience that's prepared to give [31:24] them some space and then course correct after the fact. Yes, it comes with risk, but that seems to be [31:30] what it is. And it's also the possibility his premiers at the provincial level are moving faster [31:34] than maybe he's comfortable. So I have to see on that. But, you know, Sherelle, this is a big part [31:38] of, you know, the Kearney promise. Quick decisions, quick action, quick moves. So, you know, depending [31:44] on what comes out of these meetings next week, we know the Western premiers talked about, you know, [31:48] an economic corridor getting to the port of Churchill. Wab Kanu has talked about this, you know, as a big [31:54] priority for him because it also opens up things to the north, gets resources to tidewater. I mean, [31:59] it sounds like there's the potential for actual real news from a summer meeting between the [32:04] Prime Minister and the premiers. Potentially, which would be interesting. But there's something [32:09] I do keep coming back to, which is a word that he used, the Prime Minister used, and I can't [32:13] immediately recall if it was in direct correlation to these specific nation-building projects or if it [32:19] was later on when he was talking more about energy. But he used the word competition. And he said that [32:24] there's essentially going to be a competition for these projects. And that kind of sets up a really [32:29] interesting dynamic because now you have, you essentially have people fighting over what is [32:33] going to be, you know, which of their projects is going to be. You're picking winners and losers, [32:37] right? You're picking winners and losers. Who is going to be the most nation-building of the nation? [32:42] Who is going to be, you know, the putting forward something that is supposed to be seeing as more [32:46] important? So, as that comes together, and I do think that's where we will start to see, [32:51] you know, everybody will be talking unity and everybody will think, be thinking, okay, yes, [32:56] we want to move forward, we want to move forward quickly. However, there's always going to be that [33:00] thing in the back of everybody's minds going, oh, but what about me? Why aren't you prioritizing my [33:05] project? Right. And, Amanda, that leads you to potential regional tensions, obviously, and [33:09] intra-provincial tensions. But it strikes me that the competition that the Prime Minister is talking [33:14] about there is between the private sector proponents of the specific projects to try to get them to do what [33:21] they can to get into the fast track process. And he also pushed back that unless it's like a massive [33:26] nation-changing project, don't expect big bags of federal cash to go into it, which I also found [33:31] was interesting. Yeah, he was pretty direct on that point. And listen, I think that he, I think a couple [33:38] of things. I think that he's, I agree with Tim, he's using the circumstances of our times, he's using the [33:45] crisis as a catalyst to be able to push some of this forward. He's also using this kind of unity [33:51] building, country building dialogue, the kind of rhetoric that is about, you know, let's pull [33:57] together this critical time, we're going to diversify our trading relationships, we're going to look [34:03] internally, domestically at all of the riches that we have in this country and how we're going to [34:08] utilize them to the greatest extent. But then he's also addressing one of the biggest criticism, [34:13] not just of this government, but of any government. And that's the slow pace to get projects to market, [34:18] right, any kind of project. And so he's saying, I'm going to move it from five, five years to two [34:23] years, we're going to set up a major federal office, he didn't say two weeks or two minutes, [34:27] it's still two years, and says that we're going to be able to do that by addressing some of the [34:32] long standing things that we've all talked about as not getting in the way, but presenting unique [34:38] challenges like environmental considerations, obviously constitutional obligations, indigenous [34:44] people's issues surrounding some of these projects. So saying these are the things that if we're going [34:50] to move these projects along and we're going to do it quickly, we're still going to do it in the [34:53] confines of our reality. But I'm going to have the buy-in of the provinces to get it done, [34:58] and I'm going to bring the private sector along for the ride. [35:01] But you know, Jordan, the calibration on this is going to be really important, [35:04] right, because industry will complain that the pendulum swung too far one way under Justin Trudeau. [35:08] You look at Bill 5, you look at Bill in Ontario, Bill 15 in BC, you can see the pendulum swinging [35:13] too far the other way, and then environmental considerations and certainly indigenous considerations, [35:20] people get anxious, right? So it's finding that Goldilocks spot on this, right? [35:25] Yeah, and I think that there's a sense, you know, sometimes you hear this talked about, [35:28] that all that's missing is political will to speed up this process. And that's just not the case. [35:33] There are real political and material and environmental and rights trade-offs around [35:39] a lot of these projects, and that's why they are difficult to get approved. And so that doesn't [35:43] disappear just because we now have a little bit more national consensus about moving things forward. [35:50] So that's going to all be compressed into this process. But I do think that, you know, [35:54] one element of what he's doing here that's smart is that, you know, the federal government doesn't [35:58] appear like it's going to be picking winners and losers. They're really leaving that to the [36:01] provinces to do. And so each premier has their own set of political incentives to expedite development [36:08] in their own provinces in specific ways. And so what Carney is talking about there is partnering [36:12] with provinces for projects that are already going to be sort of successful within that own [36:17] provinces framework, and then working to bring those forward more quickly. And so I think in a [36:22] certain sense, that's a way that's a little bit smart to get around some of that notion that the [36:26] federal government is picking winners and losers among the provinces. Now, the question is, of course, [36:30] what are premiers like Daniel Smith going to say about this? Are they going to take yes for an [36:35] answer on this? Or are they going to continue to insist that this is not a sufficient pullback [36:42] from the federal government on that? Right. And on the picking winners and losers comment, [36:46] just to clarify, I think the first minister's table will be picking the winners and losers. Like, [36:50] I don't think it's Mark Carney dictating it, though. I do think it's going to be a harder sell. [36:55] For example, Doug Ford's tunnel under Toronto, which he thinks is a national project, [36:58] I think it's going to be hard to get buy-in for everybody on that. You know what I mean? [37:03] But on that, the trade-offs, this is going to be the question in terms of rushing things to a [37:11] point, right? This is what they need to watch for here because that's where the backlash can come in, [37:15] especially with the progressive side of a liberal voting coalition. Of course. And not even just a [37:20] backlash among voters. There are very real consequences to not getting these processes right. [37:25] Indigenous communities have legal rights in terms of free prior and informed consent. And if those [37:31] rights are not respected in the course of these consultations and these reviews, then they will [37:35] have recourse to the courts to slow and even stop projects. And we've certainly seen that in the past [37:39] in Canada. And I would expect that we will see that again if these processes are not meeting those [37:44] benchmarks. So there is possibly a sweet spot to be found here. But the reason that this hasn't been [37:50] done in the past is because it is very difficult to do. Right. And look, on that, there's been no more [37:54] difficult big project to get done than a pipeline. And pipelines have, for economic reasons, for [37:59] political reasons, for environmental reasons, it has fueled frustration and some Western alienation. [38:04] And I talked to Mark Kearney about pipelines and Alberta separatism. And here's what he said about that. [38:09] It's remarkable in some circles this conversation starts and ends with pipelines. [38:15] But that's what it's become politically, right? No, it's not. No, that is not what it's become politically. [38:20] That is not what it's become for Canada. Canada is a nation. Canadians want, yes, [38:26] they want energy pipelines that make sense. They also want grid interconnect connections between [38:33] our clean grids. They want actually less carbon. So they want carbon capture and storage pathways [38:39] project to move forward. Tim, what do you make of that? You know, a pipeline is a probability, [38:47] a possibility under Kearney, but not a necessity. Alberta would argue it's a necessity. Certainly, [38:51] that's what Daniel Smith has put on the table. How do you view his answers on that issue? [38:54] I think he's being as evasive as he probably needs to be at the moment. He's not gone all Stephen Guibault, [39:01] nor do I expect him to do so. I think he is looking for others to do the work there. Look, [39:07] we've had what Quebec recently suggests that, oh, maybe these things aren't so bad. I think [39:12] he's trying to play and get a feel for where others are going there. Pipelums, yes to your question, [39:19] have become a symbol. You only need to look at Keystone XL. I mean, that was Biden's first big [39:24] move to shut that down and the opportunity that it provided. But I also get, in his comments, [39:31] David, and in the comments of his energy minister in Calgary last week, that they are at least- [39:37] That's a big change. Yeah. [39:38] Yeah. Well, and as you always say, you know, until they prove us wrong, let's look at what [39:43] they've said so far. Hodgson's first speech says, you know, it's about delivery. It's about getting [39:49] things done. Carney has not backed away from that. He has not put 14,000. He's been a bit evasive, [39:54] but he's not put a million caveats on it all. And in other places, he said he's not opposed to a [39:59] pipeline. So we should expect as he is calibrating and looking at options that pipelines, [40:06] a pipeline of some variety or two could be in the mix. [40:10] Well, sir, you want to jump in there? [40:11] Well, as you say, and like, we'll see, right? Because right now, this is also a hypothetical. [40:15] There's no- There's no proposal. [40:17] There's nothing on the table. So it's a lot easier to be enthusiastic about a notional [40:21] project than it is about a real one that has more intense political trade-offs. And I would also say [40:26] that it's not even so clear necessarily that approving a pipeline is sufficient to get a check mark [40:33] on that in the minds of voters in resource-intense regions. Just look at the Trudeau government. [40:38] They purchased a pipeline in order to facilitate it as an economic project and are still given credit [40:45] for blocking that type of development. So it's not so clear that in practice, this actually works out [40:51] quite that way. Yeah. That's the point I was going to make sure. There is no proponent right now. There's [40:54] no project to green light, but there's certainly not a, I don't sense a hostility towards the idea. It's a [40:59] question of where it goes. But, you know, the expectation, the political expectation, [41:04] certainly that Premier Daniel Smith lays out, it's like, she wants access to the north, [41:07] access to the east. Now, maybe the Churchill port option that, you know, that has been floated [41:12] satisfies that. David Eby doesn't seem to like the Prince Rupert idea, even though it's not quite [41:16] where Northern Gateway was going to go. But what do you make of the political risks there and the [41:21] needle that the prime minister is threading? Well, it is a needle that he has to thread carefully, [41:26] because he has to be the prime minister for the entire country, not just for Alberta or any other [41:31] oil producing or energy producing, conventional energy producing region. He talked about, you know, [41:37] it's not, he tried to say that, you know, this isn't, this isn't necessarily what the question is, [41:43] because this isn't all that Canadians want. And I do think he's right on that. Not everybody is, [41:48] is clamoring for a pipeline. Not everybody is clamoring for oil or oil sands development. And he has to [41:55] walk that line because he said, like you said, he's the prime minister for the whole country, [41:59] not just for Alberta. Right. But Amanda, you know, there is a stated desire for a boost in productivity. [42:06] And, you know, it's crude, but crude boosts productivity, if you can do that. And there is, [42:11] you know, it creates jobs, it creates wealth, it creates revenue. Look, I'm not here for my looks. [42:17] But you know, it is, it is, it is also the absence of it does create this frustration in Alberta that [42:24] that needs to be addressed in some way. So what do you think of the approach they're having? Because [42:28] Tim Hodgson did lay out a pretty open view of the fossil fuel sector that we maybe didn't, well, [42:35] not that we maybe, that we haven't really seen in 10 years from the Liberals. [42:38] Yeah, so I think a few things, I think, obviously, in the throne speech, the words, [42:43] we will become the leading energy superpower, part of that speech, he talked to in reference directly [42:50] in reference to pipelines and projects in your interview, he said, more can, should and will be [42:56] done. So I think that I think both the the way that he communicates about pipelines, as well as [43:04] Canadians appetite to have a discussion in a different way has changed. I think that this [43:09] is a significant difference from what we saw from the Trudeau government. And I think even the [43:14] willingness to be open to these conversations, because the world has changed, and because [43:19] Canadians understand that we have to get our resources to other markets, allows him to be [43:24] able to be potentially, I think, a little more broad in his language. But at the same time, [43:29] this is an area where he is actually setting some expectations. He pushed back quite a bit. [43:33] These aren't the only projects, he says, right? And he talks about the grids, and he talks about [43:37] carbon, and he talks about other projects in the north. And if this government is able to start [43:43] laying some framework to have a broader conversation about some of these projects, [43:48] I think that's really interesting territory for him, because pipeline has become sort of the catchphrase [43:53] that takes it all in, as opposed to the number of things that could be done across the country, [43:58] which really, we're not talking about the same degree. [44:01] Can I just add, because I think there's something we're right on top of that's really important. [44:05] There's a real brand remake happening here on two levels, right? Whereas Justin Trudeau, [44:11] fairly or unfairly, was accused of making Canada too woke and closed and focused on [44:16] very niche things related to the prime minister. Mark Carney is now saying, hey, [44:20] Globe, of which you know me, I'm a global player. We're open for business. That's why he's not saying no to anything. [44:25] He's also very deliberately stepping forcefully away from everything that was the previous Trudeau [44:32] government. He's borrowing Harper government branding, energy superpower, new government. [44:38] And that in and of itself is a degree of audaciousness that, you know, he may end up getting [44:45] inflamed by it all in the end. But this is a big brand remake. And he's trying to show himself as, [44:52] you know, you may have trouble with a guy a little further south, but the guy up north, [44:55] he wants to do deals. He wants your money. He wants to play. And that's the world Kearney knows. [45:00] That's why people, I think he thinks, elected him. But you know, Jordan, I wonder, like, I agree, [45:05] right? He wants to say, we are a port of calm and stability with abundant natural resources. And we're [45:10] going to, you are going to train up our workforce. Your money is safe here. Look at the deals we're going [45:15] to have with Europe and with Asia. But the pipeline thing with like, open to it, but not emphatically [45:21] endorsing it necessarily. I think it comes back to a point your podcast partner Corey tonight made [45:26] that what Daniel Smith is advocating for are projects to go through like four provinces. [45:31] And once, you know, on her terms, you know, just let's just do it. And you just can't do that [45:37] as a prime minister in a country structured like this one. That's right. And that's not the only [45:41] problem there. If you look at what is one of the biggest factors creating investment uncertainty [45:47] in the oil sands right now. Yes, it's Trump and tariffs, but it's also Daniel Smith and separatism, [45:53] right? Like, you know, you have an environment that's becoming very difficult for investment, [45:59] in part because there's political instability around some of those questions. So I think that [46:04] there is a big gap still between what we're hearing from Prime Minister Carney and what you're hearing from [46:09] Premier Smith. And I expect that we're going to see more fireworks around that coming out of the [46:12] first minister's meeting next week. Right. Maybe that's why it's in Saskatoon. They're going to [46:15] bridge the divide right next door. Look, as they pivot away from the United States, [46:21] they're looking at deeper integration with the European Union, in particular on defence. [46:26] The prime minister is suggesting that, look, he's off to a couple of summits, NATO, European Union summit, [46:31] and they want to have some sort of an agreement in place by Canada Day, [46:34] another Canada Day deal. Have a listen to this. We're spending over 75 cents on every dollar of capital [46:40] spend for defence goes to the United States. Right. That's not smart. What's better if we spend more [46:46] at home? If we have diversified partnerships? Look, part of what's been happening in the last few [46:52] months since I became prime minister is a number of conversations of increasing specificity with our [46:59] major European partners so that we become defence partners with them, that we become part of a very [47:07] big build out of their defence industrial base, which will have big benefits for jobs here in Canada. [47:12] We're making great progress on that. And by Canada today, we'd like to see something concrete there. [47:19] Okay. So that's defence policy, industrial policy, trade policy and foreign policy all [47:23] bundled into one. And I have to show you why this is happening. This is the latest from the president [47:28] on True Social. I told Canada, which very much wants to be part of our fabulous Golden Dome system, [47:34] capital D G DNS, that it will cost $61 billion if they remain a separate but unequal nation, [47:41] but will cost $0 if they become our cherished 51st state. They are considering the offer. [47:49] Yeah. Okay. I don't know if that's a response to the throne speech or what, [47:55] but here we are. Setting aside, Sherelle, what the president is saying, I'm not going to ask you to do [48:00] that. But what the prime minister is saying is, you know, he's, sounds like they're in the pretty [48:06] advanced stages of inking at least a framework agreement with Europe to start selling things [48:10] back and forth, reduce the reliance on the United States and build up capacity on both sides of the [48:14] Atlantic to start, I guess, making weapons and building ammunition together because with the U.S. [48:21] going the way the U.S. is going, you just kind of can't rely on that anymore. [48:24] Yeah. I mean, I'm sure it's, it's what everybody who is, you know, at the grocery store and looking [48:30] at the prices and looking at their bank accounts, they're going, God, if only we could make more [48:34] weapons in Canada, everything would be just dandy. Well, I think they would like a better supplied [48:39] calf, maybe the ability to give Ukraine things other than loans. You know, I, I don't know. Like, [48:43] I think there's an appetite for some of that out there, uh, beyond, you know, basic affordability [48:47] challenges. Well, that's what I'm saying. I think for a segment of the population, absolutely. [48:51] There's, uh, there's a big appetite for it. I don't know if the appetite is massive amongst, [48:56] you know, the average Canadian citizen, like I said, who's looking to, you know, figure out their [49:01] day to day. Um, Mark Carney said something interesting. He said he's not a fan of picking [49:07] an arbitrary number and then trying to figure out how to spend up to it, but he's kind of doing [49:11] exactly that. Um, you know, we have the NATO commitments. We have, he said, we're going to hit [49:16] that by a certain, you know, point in time. And he's still trying to figure out how we're going to [49:22] fulfill that commitment. And this is part of that. So yes. So yes, we have a, as a country, [49:28] we have a commitment to, we've made a commitment. NATO is, as a, as a whole is, is going to be asking [49:34] for more. And the, and Canada as a member is going to be trying to figure out how are we going to [49:39] fulfill that? How are we going to look like we are pulling our weight? And, you know, as, and as [49:43] everybody's moving away from the United States, and that is part of it, you know, wanting to be sovereign, [49:47] wanting to diversify where our money is going. Um, that is still going to be part of, uh, the [49:53] prospect of how are we going to manage to spend that money? Because the defense budget has always [49:59] been the defense budget. It's been a matter of, we cannot seem to spend the defense budget that we [50:04] have. And that is what's going to have to change. Yes. And, and Amanda, what I sort of, I don't know [50:09] if I've reversed engineered it from, from the prime minister's answer. Um, I, I think he has done the [50:15] assessment of the national security requirements and the basic requirements of the Canadian Armed [50:20] Forces. And that goes past the 2%. So I think that's an easy, you know, target for him to commit [50:26] to. It's going three and a half or even 5%, as Secretary General Ruta was talking about, that I [50:30] think is more problematic there. Uh, but it seems like, uh, the disentangling it from the reliance on [50:37] the U.S. and of sending 75 cents of every dollar you spend on munitions and stuff to America, that becomes [50:44] a value proposition to Canadians and Canadian industry to, to buy into this, right? [50:47] Yeah. And this is the pitch that he made to Canadians. This idea that we've been over reliant [50:53] on the U.S. both economically and from a security standpoint. So he said really clearly, [50:59] we're going to spend more. We're going to spend more at home. We're going to strengthen the Arctic. [51:05] We're going to, um, he said, we're going to spend more sooner and we're going to spend more with our [51:10] European partners. So it was pretty, I mean, he was clear. He wasn't going to commit to a new [51:15] NATO target per se, but I think he was certainly clear on both the direction. And I think, I think [51:21] also kind of the appetite that he feels that Canadians have to do this at this time. He also linked it, [51:27] which I thought was really interesting to needing a fall budget, right? He said, and that is why we will [51:32] have a fall budget because we're not going to make these determinations next week or in the coming [51:37] weeks. These are things that we're going to have to spend more on and we're going to need more time [51:41] to do. Well, it sounds like, Jordan, he's going to go to these summits, right? And that will give him [51:46] greater costing certainty. So then they figure out where that goes into a fiscal plan. Whereas if you [51:50] did do a budget this month, which I think a lot of us, well, not this month, but June, um, you'd have [51:55] to tear it up in September or your fall economic statement would be essentially a, a, a supercharged [51:59] defense mini budget, it seems. Yeah. Well, look, I mean, I think they're obviously going into the NATO [52:04] summit with a good sense of what they'd like to spend and how quickly they'd like to get there. [52:09] But there is a real challenge coming for this government in terms of these budget commitments, [52:13] because on the one hand, you have prime minister Carney talking about fiscal restraint, talking [52:18] about cuts to plan spending, talking about getting it down, uh, 2%, which over time could be an effective [52:24] cut. Um, and at the same time, even for Canada to start to get to that 2%, you're talking like that, [52:30] you know, billions and billions up, uh, you know, $14 billion of, of new spending to get us there. [52:35] Um, and let alone going beyond that, if we get to the 5% target that, uh, is likely going to be [52:40] agreed upon at the NATO summit. So there is a bit of a collision course on the numbers there. And I can [52:45] see wanting to push that conversation off a few months, but look, I mean, I think to the question [52:50] of involving Canada in NATO rearmament in Europe, this is a smart thing for Canada to be doing. [52:56] Um, defense integration with the United States is so significant here in Canada. It will be one of [53:01] the very last spheres, um, that is able to be separated. And so leadership sort of from the top [53:07] to indicate that we're going a different direction, I think is really important. But there's a tension [53:12] here with what we were hearing out last week about Canada potentially being in these discussions [53:17] around Golden Dome. So, you know, at a moment where NATO itself is in crisis because of what the United [53:23] States is doing, where increasingly, you know, we have a land war in Europe and we're seeing that [53:28] matters there are now sort of an ally, uh, uh, matters are for European allies without the U.S. [53:35] Where is Canada going to be on that? And I think it's smart for us to be making investments there. [53:39] But Tim, there's this tension, right, on defense, uh, industrial policy, how you buy things, [53:43] procurement and building things, and then the need for continental security with the United States. [53:47] Because even if you move away politically, you can't move away physically, right? So, [53:50] Golden Dome may be nuts to some people, but there's going to need to be some sort of continental [53:55] cooperation on these things. Well, and, and also as, uh, people in the military will tell you, [54:00] our adversaries aren't, uh, targeting the difference between Calgary and, uh, Connecticut. Uh, we're one [54:06] big land mass and we are a target of opportunity. But I, I think first on the, on the Golden Dome, I think, [54:12] you know, Kearney's actually played this pretty well, I think, because look, if we look at history, [54:17] going back to Reagan, whenever any of these big, audacious, crazy space-based defense things come [54:23] up, they all fall apart eventually. Um, and, you know, Donald Trump may be the great deal maker, [54:28] and you are, Mr. President, um, that, you know, three years, this thing is probably not going to [54:34] happen. So what does it hurt Kearney to say he's part of the discussions? I think if Pierre Polyev [54:39] was prime minister, he would probably say the same thing. Go in there, be part of whatever these [54:44] discussions are and let the domestic politics of the United States sort it out as it always has. [54:49] On continental security, yeah, we, we are always going to be part of that. We're part of NORAD, [54:55] where we have been and will continue to be. I think the play that Kearney and Macron and [55:01] Starmer and others are looking at is like, they're going to call Trump's bluff on Europe and say, [55:06] all right, Mr. President, you don't want to do any work in Europe anymore for now. All right, [55:11] we'll take that on. And how will you calculate that as it relates to your, your arbitrary number [55:17] of two percent or five percent? And it'll be interesting to see how that discussion plays [55:21] out at NATO. That arguably is something Canada with, uh, the European, its other European-based [55:29] NATO allies and other European-friendly powers could do on a short-term basis. Because this is all about [55:36] timelines, right? This is a risk management exercise over three to four years too. There are real [55:41] reinvestments we have to do in the CAF and then there are the, the, the Trump management exercises [55:46] of the next three years. Okay. Uh, look, I want to move on to the, the very historic moment we saw [55:52] today for Canada at this critical time. King Charles delivered the speech from the throne today, [55:56] outlining the new government's priorities, reaffirming the country's sovereignty, [56:00] and officially opening the 45th session of parliament. I've always had the greatest admiration [56:08] for Canada's unique identity. On Juneau Beach at Dieppe, on the Somme at Beaumont-Amel, [56:18] at Ypres and on Vimy Ridge, Canadians fought and died alongside our closest allies. Today, Canada faces [56:27] another critical moment. Democracy, pluralism, the rule of law, self-determination and freedom are values [56:38] which Canadians hold dear and ones which the government is determined to protect. A confident [56:46] Canada can seize this opportunity by recognising that all Canadians can give themselves far more than any [56:55] foreign power on any continent can ever take away. As the anthem reminds us, the true north is indeed [57:03] strong and free. Well, much of the throne speech, of course, was written by the federal government [57:12] laying out its plans for the return to parliament and it was criticised by other federal leaders [57:16] saying it doesn't meet the mark. All right. The phrase that came to my mind is that this is not [57:22] a worker-centred throne speech. I guess another way to put it is it also struck me as a bit of a [57:29] conservative light throne speech. We did see a lot of the right slogans and political talking points [57:38] but no clear plans to get it done. We will try and I will try to find common grounds in order to work [57:46] together. Okay, that's the next thing we're going to discuss here at the power panel. Sherelle, [57:52] the sustained applause at the end for, as the anthem says, the true north is indeed strong and free. [57:58] Very subtle line, whoever wrote that for the king to say it. I just wonder, you know, Canadians kind [58:04] of rallied around the flag in response to Trump. I don't know if they rallied around the crown or the [58:08] monarch, but still it was an interesting moment to have, you know, King Charles open up parliament with [58:15] that speech. What do you make of what we saw today? Yeah, I mean, did it do its job? I think it did. If [58:22] the idea behind it, aside from the actual procedural pomp and circumstances, you know, to send that [58:28] message to the U.S. president, yeah, I think that worked. I know that the U.S. ambassador, Hoekstra, [58:34] he's said that, oh, there's better ways to send that message, but I don't know if that's true [58:38] because to this specific audience, somebody who loves nothing more than, you know, a big show, [58:45] this is about as, for Canada anyways, this is about as big as it gets, and to have the king come over [58:52] and be seen on camera with, you know, Donald Trump's Canadian adversaries, if you want to call them, [58:59] call us that, being very chummy, glad-handing, getting the kind of welcome and having the sort [59:05] of rapport that he can only aspire to. He has to be invited to go to the U.K. to, you know, [59:12] have a state visit and, you know, get all that pomp and circumstance, and you have King Charles [59:16] coming to us, and he is coming here and is in our backyard. So that is, I think, absolutely going [59:24] to be having the right effect that they wanted it to have. You know, Amanda, I never know how [59:31] effective these things are as a communications exercise, right, because there's all this subtlety, [59:36] like, oh, he wore this medal and he had this particular ribbon, oh, look at that maple leaf brooch [59:40] the queen is wearing. Like, I don't know if that level of subtlety works with the American [59:45] precedent in the year of our Lord in 2025, you know? But, you know, it met the standard of the [59:51] Hippocratic Oath. This did no harm, and it may have potentially done some good. Oh, no, I think it did [59:58] a lot of good. Maybe some of the subtleties. I don't know that everyone picked it up, but we're talking [1:00:03] about it. I think that the reason why this worked is because it reinforced a lot of the themes that the [1:00:11] Carney government wants Canadians to talk about and care about. Canadian identity, sovereignty, [1:00:17] unity. And it was laid out by a prominent and respected, we'll call it third party, right? [1:00:24] A global voice that is going to attract global headlines. This is about as good as it gets in [1:00:31] terms of thinking through, you know, how do we deliver this message in a new way? Remember, [1:00:36] the monarchy hasn't been part of delivering a throne speech since the 70s. So even just the [1:00:42] novelty of this happening in Canada, you know, made it so that everyone was paying attention. [1:00:47] I don't know that everyone's paying attention to our throne speech otherwise, but again, [1:00:51] reinforced some of these themes. And I'll just take one moment to share. I think [1:00:55] one of the most powerful aspects of this was certainly the line that was quoted at the end, [1:01:01] true north, strong and free. But it was something else. It was this idea that Canadians are feeling [1:01:06] anxious. They're feeling worried that, you know, the globe, there's this unsettled feeling. And yet [1:01:12] this presents a new opportunity to think big and act bigger. And I thought that part of the speech, [1:01:18] this idea that there's new relationships to be forged, new allies and trading partners to work with, [1:01:25] there's opportunity and hope and optimism. And I thought that some of that that came through [1:01:31] outside of the domestic stuff that they got into was really critical and will land well with Canadians. [1:01:36] So Jordan, I mean, certainly Canadians probably watch this in significant numbers, right? Live [1:01:42] coverage on the networks and online. I don't know if it penetrated into the United States, right? I don't [1:01:48] know. But certainly in the UK, when you're trying to do things with the government there, having the [1:01:54] monarch with the new prime minister being the former Bank of England governor during the time of Brexit, [1:02:00] there's going to be it's going to hit some of the some of the notes in the United Kingdom. I don't [1:02:05] know. What do you think of this today? Sure, I think it's just as much of a flex about Carney's [1:02:09] relationships in the UK as it is about anything else. And that's fine enough as a communication [1:02:14] strategy. You know, I think to Amanda's point, it's true that more Canadians likely tuned in and paid some [1:02:20] attention to the throne speech than they might have otherwise if the king wasn't there. As to whether [1:02:25] it's effective with Trump, you know, we'll all watch True Social to know. But the Golden Dome [1:02:31] tweet or whatever that whatever you call those things out. I mean, and look, and there's real [1:02:35] limitations, I think, in terms of of the king's ability to actually deliver a tough message about [1:02:41] Canada's sovereignty. He can't be political. And so it is very subtle. And so, you know, I too would [1:02:47] question. He can't be partisan, but sovereignty isn't political. Sure. When you're the sovereign. Sure. [1:02:52] But yet, you know, he can't speak directly to the issue at hand is what I mean. And, you know, [1:02:56] and I think that I think rightly, you know, Buckingham Palace came under some criticism [1:03:00] for extending the hand to Trump not once but twice for a state visit. And so there's maybe a bit of [1:03:06] repair happening here in that. But, you know, when I look at the throne speech more broadly and, [1:03:11] you know, and I I appreciate Amanda's enthusiasm and optimism, but I was so struck like today, you know, [1:03:17] to hear that idea that this is this crisis with the U.S. and this crisis of the tariff war with the [1:03:23] United States is a great opportunity for prosperity here in Canada. Look, like we just heard today that [1:03:29] 8000 people are being laid off at at the bay. OK, we have the highest unemployment rate that we've seen [1:03:37] in the last eight years outside of Covid last month. We have only about 40 percent of unemployed [1:03:43] Canadians who can access EI. And there was not a word about any of that in the throne speech. [1:03:48] So Canadians are worried, but they're worried in a very concrete, a very real sense in their own lives. [1:03:54] And I think that the aspirational stuff that was put forward in here is all well and good for [1:03:58] building on that communications momentum that this government is so wedded to right now. [1:04:02] But it really does not touch the true crisis that a lot of Canadians are feeling right now. [1:04:07] Jordan's not wrong about that, and the data is very compelling. But I think in the hierarchy [1:04:13] of needs to Hall and Maslow here, Trump is still at the top of that pyramid. [1:04:17] Yeah. Well, he's the cause of a lot of these. Not the Bay specifically, but the other things. [1:04:22] All of this. I would just go back to what Trump said of Carney or was reported to have said of Carney. [1:04:29] Well, he likes the way he dressed. He likes the way he is. He seems like a good gentleman. [1:04:32] So what have you seen today? If this was about Trump and getting him to buy in more? [1:04:38] Well, and to use Trump parlance, which isn't very erudite, it's this guy, Carney, he's got juice. [1:04:44] You know, he can haul over the King of England and get him here and have him do this. [1:04:49] Oh, I like the King of England. He was thrilled when Keir Starmer said you can have a state visit. [1:04:54] As simplistic as that may sound, as moronic as that may sound, that's the sort of stuff that it appears [1:05:01] this president cares about. Who do you know? Can you get the right audiences? Are we going to be [1:05:06] in the same places? It builds for him a level of credibility that the last prime minister [1:05:14] wasn't able to achieve. Now, Mark Carney's challenge is to be able to maintain that in a positive way [1:05:19] with a very, to be polite, erratic leader who could change his perspective on a dime. [1:05:26] Right. Okay. So, Sherelle, just his last word to you. I mean, the throne, look, Mark Carney has been [1:05:32] prime minister for 75 days. He was sworn in on the 14th of March. He won the leadership on the 9th of [1:05:39] March. And just think, like, it's moving. There's a lot of things that have been happening. He's going [1:05:44] to have his first question period tomorrow. He's already had a trip to the Oval Office to the UK [1:05:48] and to Paris. His first question period tomorrow, like, now that he's got his cabinet, won his election, [1:05:54] laid out his throne speech, we get to see him in Parliament. It's not Pierre Polyev, [1:05:57] it's going to be Andrew Scheer leading off. I mean, what are you going to be watching for tomorrow [1:06:01] when Mark Carney takes his first question? Assuming he goes. Well, assuming he goes out. Maybe he'll [1:06:06] want to sleep in a little. I mean, it's late in the day. I don't know if he sleeps in. No, [1:06:09] 5 a.m. may be late for him. I don't know. Takes a 2 p.m. nap. I don't know. How is he going to [1:06:15] handle being questioned? That is something that we keep seeing. And he doesn't seem to love it. He [1:06:24] doesn't seem to love being needled and having that pushback. And that is all that question period [1:06:29] is going to be. And coming from and going up against Andrew Scheer, that is, I mean, you have [1:06:34] Pierre Polyev and you have, and Andrew Scheer comes, you know, right underneath that in terms of being [1:06:39] able to needle at somebody. So I think that'll be a really interesting vantage point of seeing how is [1:06:45] he going to move going forward? Because we haven't really seen him. We've seen him wander through politics, [1:06:53] but we haven't seen him be a truly political animal. And that's kind of where some of these [1:06:56] things are going to have to come to light. Yeah. The pomp of today will give way to the [1:06:59] pugilism of tomorrow and we'll see, you know, how he handles all of that. All right. We got to leave [1:07:04] it there. I want to thank you all. Thank you to the power panel, Amanda Alvaro, Tim Powers, Jordan Likeness, [1:07:07] and Sherelle Evelyn. They're going to say goodbye, but there's still lots more to come here on Power and [1:07:11] Politics. Reaction from the official opposition to today's throne speech. Conservative MP Adam Chambers [1:07:17] is standing by. And former Prime Minister Kim Campbell was among the dignitaries in attendance [1:07:21] at the throne speech today. What she had to say about the King's visit and its symbolism. And [1:07:26] the Power Rankers panel is here to talk about who's up and who is down on Canada's political stage today.