Front Burner - Conservative Leader Erin O’Toole (part one)

Episode Date: May 18, 2021

Erin O’Toole says he supports a ban on conversion therapy, but that doesn’t mean everyone in his party has to share his beliefs. Ahead of a looming federal election, hear more in part one of a wide-ranging interview with the federal Conservative party leader.

In the Dragon's Den, a simple pitch can lead to a life-changing connection. Watch new episodes of Dragon's Den free on CBC Gem. Brought to you in part by National Angel Capital Organization, empowering Canada's entrepreneurs through angel investment and industry connections. This is a CBC Podcast. Hi, I'm Jamie Poisson. So yesterday I had the chance to spend an hour interviewing Aaron O'Toole, leader of the Conservative Party of Canada and the official opposition. We covered a lot of ground.

We talked about how his beliefs square with social conservatives in his party, why polling shows that young women aren't backing him. We talked about why he campaigned against a carbon tax and then introduced a price on carbon, and whether he supports a union at places like Amazon, and whether struggling politicians like Doug Ford in Ontario and Jason Kenney in Alberta are going to make it hard for him to win a federal election, because there is almost certainly one of those on the horizon. There was too much to fit into a single episode. So today, part one, big tech, values, vaccines, Ford and Kenney. Mr. O'Toole, hello. Thank you very much for coming on to the podcast.

It's great to be with you. So first up, I'd like to start with Bill C-10, which is something that you have been talking a lot about recently. So for our listeners, this is a bill that the liberals have put forward geared at regulating big tech platforms like Netflix, so that they have to follow CanCon rules like the CBC and Rogers and Bell Media does. And the bill has been criticized because it could also police what individuals do online. And you have said that if elected, you will repeal this bill. But my question for you is, why do you want to repeal the whole bill instead of just making sure individuals won't be targeted? Do you think that big tech platforms shouldn't have to pay their fair share?

Great question, Jamie. First, I do feel big American tech giants should pay their fair share and there should be an equal playing field. And my concerns from C10 all stem from Minister Guilbeault, who has changed his own views on what the bill is intended to do several times. And really, if you look at when they introduced C-10, we said we had some concerns, but we were working with them on the bill because we think Canadian culture and leveling that playing field for our artists, our content creators is the right thing to do. But then at the last minute, Jamie, the Liberal government pulled out a specific protection that would have kept Canadian social media accounts out of regulation under C-10. When they removed that at the last minute without any consultations, that's when we

lost our trust in their intentions. And the minister kind of said, well, depending on the size of your social media following, the CRTC might regulate you. We can see that's what they want to do. And what I've said to Canadians is you can protect our culture and really showcase it without eroding people's freedoms on the Internet. Because now, especially young Canadians, that's how they consume their news. That's how they build communities. That's how they engage politically. We don't want to start restricting that. Why not just work to fix this one part of the bill? Because as you said, there are a lot of people who like the meat of this bill. ACTRA, for example, the union that represents

27,000 Canadian performers, has said it's this much needed step in updating our very old Broadcasting Act that was designed for what wasn't designed for digital age. And it's also very popular in Quebec. So why not just work to fix this one part and get moving? Because we really need to modernize this bill, according to a lot of people, and it needs to happen quickly. Well, we have been trying to amend it and that's what we spent our time doing at committee. The challenge with a minority parliament, as you've covered on FrontBurner, the government has the support of enough parties to really not take our concerns seriously. And that's why we tried to push for a greater examination of the issue.

But at the end of the day, we've lost confidence in the minister himself when he has changed his own views on his bill several times. And the more we've spoken to former CRTC commissioners, leading internet law experts like Michael Geist and everything, we have concerns that are fundamental. So we think you can showcase Canadian culture, you can level the playing field without any erosion of people's Internet freedoms. So because we know we don't have the votes,

we've said this is what we will do in government. We will start fresh with a clear pronunciation that there will be no erosion of people's freedoms on the internet. I'd like to move on to a pandemic related question. So Alberta Premier Jason Kenney and Ontario Premier Doug Ford are both under fire right now for their handling of the pandemic, specifically their handling of third waves. So much so that it's been reported that Doug Ford has been kept out of the public eye recently to, quote, protect the king. Jason Kenney had to deal with a caucus revolt. His province is the worst hit in the country. You well know that to win an election, you need to win big in Alberta,

and you need parts of Ontario. Are these guys hurting your chances? Are they hurting the Conservative brand? No, I think all Canadians are frustrated by the third wave, Jamie. You know, we see what's happening in the United States. We see reports of the pubs back open in the UK, people going, traveling and on vacation in the UK. Count We see reports of the pubs back open in the UK, people going traveling and on vacation in the UK. Countries that had a better vaccine response, a better logistical rollout, have fared better. And so what premiers are now having to do is to go through, in some provinces, third rounds of lockdowns with small businesses in trouble, people tired, the mental health and the strain on folks. So the front lines, the municipalities and the provinces are having to deal with the failure of Mr. Trudeau to secure vaccines swifter and to have a steady flow starting in January and February that would have allowed us to avoid these lockdowns.

So I think Canadians understand that. I think they understand the federal government is responsible for approving and securing the supply of vaccines, and the provinces administer them. They put the jabs in the arms. But without the jabs, that's why we have lockdown. So I think most Canadians can see the difference. And by the time an election comes, my pledge is going to be I will never allow Canada to be so unprepared, so slow as a G7 country again. I think it's been a failure of historic proportions. The idea that it's been a failure of historic proportions. Right now, we have enough vaccines to get 17 million Canadians a second dose by the end of June, according to the Globe and Mail.

We are relatively in lockstep with according to the Globe and Mail. We are relatively in lockstep with other countries like France and Germany. Why is this a historic failure? Well, because at the beginning last year, when I was calling for, actually last March, when I was calling for a domestic sourcing of PPE, of critical medicines and vaccines and rapid tests. Mr. Trudeau said he would deliver all those things. We have none of them. We don't even have a rapid screening and testing system in Canada that's uniform now. And he decided, for unknown reasons, last spring to partner with China for a Canadian-made vaccine.

That lost us such critical time, Jamie, that by the time he started negotiating with Western pharmaceutical companies, we were slow. We were not going to secure access. So they have also then extended the dosing regimes to four months between first and second dose. That is why they're able to use a very low supply in comparative terms and spread it out more. There is some data that supports that, but they're doing this because there is no supply.

And that's what he failed to secure. And look, I wish he'd had a better outcome. You know, in this pandemic, I've tried to work with the government to put the needs of Canadians first all the time. That's my nature. But I also don't like to see us fail. I'd like to push back on three things there. First, on the rapid testing front, the feds did procure millions and millions of rapid tests that have been sitting with several of the provinces, in particular, Ontario. On the CanSino deal, I take your point, but I would say, you know, can't this government walk and chew gum at the same time? So I understand that the CanSino deal did fall through, but they were able to get relatively close to the line in their deals

with Pfizer and Moderna. And on the dosing regime, there has been recent evidence that actually a delayed dose is beneficial, is actually good, especially in older people. But I want to come back to the premiers here. We knew the vaccines were not going to be here until late spring. And so don't these premiers have a great amount of responsibility for what has been happening in their provinces? Doug Ford and Jason Kenney. Well, the provinces have the tough job to do, Jamie. They have to make the restrictions on retail closures, on limiting gatherings, these sorts of things. That's the tough things that actually impact people's lives.

And I know there's a reluctance after a year full of lockdowns for more of them the most common issue that comes up in my talks with Canadians and I've probably talked to more Canadians than any politician in the last year is the mental strain the mental health costs of this pandemic and so I think provinces are trying to get the balance straight. But let me reiterate, it wasn't just the CanSino failure on why we're so late with vaccines. The Trudeau government was fighting the pharmaceutical companies with patented medicine pricing. And they were doing that right up until Christmas when they finally abandoned their push to sort of strong arm the industry as part of Mr. Trudeau's national pharmacare plan. These are reasons why they won't release the contracts, Jamie. So walk and chew gum? No, they didn't do those things together, sadly.

And this is why we're not ready. And on the national screening, we were six months after other countries approving basic diagnostic tests. These are not cancer drugs. These are a diagnostic test that are almost over-the-counter type things. And they were slow approving so that when the supply came for the provinces, they were in the second wave and they couldn't deploy it. and screening and testing because we're so far behind in this area that we're going to have trouble with a safe and effective reopening once we get vaccination levels high enough. One more question about your provincial counterparts before we move on. If a federal election was called tomorrow, would you campaign with Doug Ford?

I will deal with anybody that wants to get this country working again. Doug Ford, I had a good call with John Horgan several months ago, premiers of all stripes. I want to see Canada lead in an economic recovery. I'm tired of us lagging. So you would campaign with Doug Ford? Anybody that wants to get this country working, Jamie. In fact, I'm a little disappointed to see more and

more barriers being struck between people. And even you're suggesting, you know, should I not talk to mayors and provinces and non-profit leaders, Indigenous leaders? I can assure you, I've probably talked to three times more Canadians in the last year than Mr. Trudeau has. And they're worried about our future. They're worried about Canada trailing. And Jason Kenney, would you campaign with Jason Kenney as well? I'll work with anybody that will get this country moving. I don't divide people.

And I've got friends on all sides of the spectrum that I will work with to make sure Canada leads again. I'll also be an ethical leader that won't be under constant investigation by the ethics commissioner like our current prime minister. So I think Canadians, as they get to know me, they're going to know I'm pretty fair-minded. I build teams and I'm willing, like I have for eight years with Romeo Dallaire on mental health, to partner with people of other political stripes for the well-being of Canadians. I'm going to go. Hi, it's Ramit Sethi here. You may have seen my money show on Netflix.

I've been talking about money for 20 years. I've talked to millions of people, and I have some startling numbers to share with you. Did you know that of the people I speak to, 50% of them do not know their own household income? That's not a typo. 50%. That's not a typo, 50%. That's because money is confusing. In my new book and podcast, Money for Couples, I help you and your partner create a financial vision together.

To listen to this podcast, just search for Money for Couples. Speaking of those barriers between people, I'd like to move now to a broader conversation about you and your party, which you're already kind of heading there, and what you're offering Canadians. And if we could start with values. So last month, Conservative MP Tamara Janssen spoke out against liberal legislation that would prohibit conversion therapy on LGBTQ people. Conversion therapy is widely condemned. The United Nations says it may amount to torture and should be banned globally. Jansen also talked about a woman who she said dealt with unwanted, quote,

lesbian activity and quoted from a Bible verse that suggested that she was calling LGBTQ people unclean. She has since said that it was a misunderstanding. I know that you voted in favor of this bill and that you support a ban on conversion therapy, but what would you say to a potential voter who sees the Conservative Party as a welcome place for Janssen's views? Well, I'd repeat what you just said. I think conversion therapy should be banned. I've spoken on this personally in the House. I think it has harmed people in such a severe way that it needs to be banned. And what I've tried to suggest throughout all of these debates in the House is let's have an informed and respectful discussion. And there have been

some people that want to see more clear language that would allow conversations between young people and people in their life as they're coming to grips with issues or tackling challenges in life. I think one thing we've learned from the pandemic is we need more conversations, in life. I think one thing we've learned from the pandemic is we need more conversations, not less. But I expect a high degree of compassion and respect from my team in debates, and Ms. Jansen knows that. Have you spoken to her? If so, what did you say to her? I repeated just that, you know uh people people should approach debates where the the well-being of someone is at the heart of the argument and not lose sight of a debate in the house of commons that seems removed from people that have been harmed by something like conversion

therapy means you have to be more more respectful of the fact that words matter and that a debate in a chamber when the Liberal MP quotes the Bible and you're quoting the Bible, it becomes an academic debate. And what's lost in that debate is people. It's a house of commons after all, and we've got to say we're in it for the people and to make sure that their views are heard and respected. I think for many people listening, that wasn't an academic debate. That was very hurtful. And that's why I said we cannot lose sight of the fact that you may be in a chamber with only six people because of social distancing, having a debate across the aisle with one person. But when you're in the House of Commons, that debate is impacting the lives of everyday Canadians, including people from the LGBTQ community that in some cases may have even been personally impacted from the harsh, harmful practices of conversion therapy.

So never lose sight of that is is what i always tell my team and i tell myself i i haven't been perfect in the house but i'm always striving to be respectful informed and to make sure that that the house of commons is a place where canadians can can see their their hopes, and aspirations reflected. You talk about your own support and leadership on these issues as you just have, but I'd like to ask you about some of your own stances, particularly during the leadership race. So in January, you and your party booted Derek Sloan from caucus because he accepted a campaign donation from a well-known white nationalist. But Mr. Sloan, who ran a leadership campaign that appealed to the social conservatives in your base,

was controversial before this, right? He was widely criticized for questioning Chief Public Health Officer Theresa Tam's loyalty, asking if she, quote, was working for China or Canada. This was roundly criticized as racist. Yet you said to give him the benefit of the doubt. And at the time, and according to sources, you didn't vote with many of your colleagues to have him apologize. What would you say to a potential voter wondering why you didn't call him out sooner? What would you say to a potential voter wondering why you didn't call him out sooner?

Well, I take everyone at their word, whether it's someone in my own caucus or in another party. If they say, no, that's not what I meant by my words, I was critical of his decision. Well, what did he mean by those words, do you think? Well, when our party made the decision with respect to Mr. Sloan, it wasn't one single thing, Jamie, that led to that decision. It was the combination of seeing a reckless approach to their role as a member of parliament. After a while, he had an explanation for everything or an excuse for everything. So that pattern of behavior became the reason why we took a decision. You know, Mr. Trudeau has removed some of his MPs personally because of their misconduct. We conform to the Reform Act. So in our case,

it took a majority vote of our MPs. It's not a unilateral act by the leader. But this is the expectation I have on myself, on my caucus, and I would hope all MPs that you need to conduct yourself in a way that brings people together. When you say that you try to give people the benefit of the doubt, again, what do you think he meant when he questioned whether she was working for China or Canada? when he questioned whether she was working for China or Canada. Well, he said afterwards that he did not question her fidelity, her loyalty to the country. That's how some people took it. And I could see how people found it outrageous. How did you take it? I took him at his word at first. You know, you got to remember, we have a number of MPs that

were elected in 2019. They haven't even sat for a normal year yet. They had a few months of kind of normalcy, and then the pandemic hit. So I will always give people the benefit of the doubt. I'm known as a pretty fair person, but I have high standards. And so myself, other members of our caucus saw a pattern of behavior and we took that decision. And around the same time, I've said repeatedly, and you probably read this, Jamie, I want the Conservative Party of 2021 to reach out and reflect more Canadians and the issues facing our country in 2021. I'm trying to grow our support and people that undermine that through repeated bad conduct or questionable judgment. Our team is going to hold ourselves

to a high standard and we did that because we're trying to put the country first. It's been a tough year for Canada and we can't afford a slow economic recovery. That will be our focus. Did you not call him out sooner because you needed social conservatives to vote for you to become leader? I ran and won the election as leader of the Conservative Party as a pro-choice, pro-LGBTQ MP with a strong and clear record on that.

I always have a respectful approach to people that I don't agree with or they don't agree with me on certain issues. That's how I won. And that's how I hope Canadians will see my approach going forward. You don't have to agree on 100% of the issues. In a democracy, that will actually never happen. And I think what's happening with social media is people are demanding 100% alignment with their views. And if you don't agree, you're somehow a bad person or you need to be canceled. I'm always going to try and bring people together. What would you say to a

voter who looks at a party that has people in it with these views and just says, I don't want to touch a party like that. I don't want to vote for a party that has people in it that have these views. for a party that has people in it that have these views? Well, our party is a cross-section of Canada. We have people with all faith backgrounds, cultural backgrounds. We have an LGBTQ number of candidates and a member of parliament who's done great advocacy on ending the gay blood ban, for example, and I've supported his efforts in that regard. And so what we have is a cross-section, and this is what democracy is like.

We don't say you have to share every single view with the leader or you can't be in our party. The challenge, which I think you've been quite steadily trying to highlight, is how do you move forward when there are some areas of disagreement? I've said my role as leader is to support Canadians and a strong future. It's not eroding rights granted to any Canadian. I'll fight for those rights that Canadians have, whether the LGBTQ community, whether women, whether minority groups, the vulnerable. I'm here to fight for those people and to make sure that we have a prosperous country so that people can get back to work after the pandemic. And our debates are important because it's a way to try and bring people together. And we've got disparate views across this country. We've got people that are losing faith in Canada and Western Canada right now.

We've got people that are at the margins and are losing faith in politicians and our national institutions and the Canadian Armed Forces. We've got a lot of work to do. And I think we don't need leadership by photo op or by press release. We need someone that tries to take on the tough issues and bring people together. All right, so there's a lot more to this conversation that you'll hear tomorrow. We'll talk about how conservative convention delegates voted against putting the phrase climate change is real into party policy and the party's climate plan, namely the carbon pricing program that O'Toole argues isn't a carbon tax. And I'll ask him about workers' rights and whether he thinks Amazon workers should unionize.

I'm Jamie Poisson. Thanks so much for listening to FrontBurner. Talk to you tomorrow. For more CBC Podcasts, go to cbc.ca slash podcasts.