Front Burner - Jason Kenney’s case for a Conservative government

Episode Date: April 9, 2025

Today our guest is Jason Kenney, the longtime federal Conservative MP and former United Conservative Party premier of Alberta. Kenney worked closely for many years with now-Conservative party leader Pierre Poilievre, and he has been outspoken on the trade war with U.S. President Donald Trump. So today we’re having him on to talk about tariffs, the Canadian election, and tensions within the Conservative movement.For transcripts of Front Burner, please visit: https://www.cbc.ca/radio/frontburner/transcripts

On the 80th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz comes an unprecedented exhibition about one of history's darkest moments. Auschwitz, not long ago, not far away, features more than 500 original objects, first-hand accounts and survivor testimonies that tell the powerful story of the Auschwitz concentration camp, its history and legacy, and the underlying conditions that allowed the Holocaust to happen. On now exclusively at Rom. Tickets at Rom.ca. This is a CBC Podcast.

Hi everyone, Jamie here. Today my guest is Jason Kenney, the former United Conservative Party Premier of Alberta. Before that, he spent decades in federal politics. He started as an MP in the erstwhile Reform Party, which, if you don't remember it well, was a Western Canada-based Conservative populist party led by Preston Manning. And he eventually became a cabinet minister in Stephen Harper's Conservative Party. We wanted to speak to him today in part because under Stephen Harper's conservatives, he worked alongside Pierre Pauliup.

And because in a moment where there's a lot of talk of tensions within the conservative movement in Canada, talking to someone who's seen those up close at both a federal and provincial level has a lot of value. But also in the last couple of months, Jason Kenney has been very outspoken about the trade war with the US, about Trump and Trumpism, and about the kind of unified front he believes Canada and its provinces need to be showing right now. That's where we're going to start our conversation today. Jason Kenney, thank you very much for coming onto the show. Good to be here.

It's a pleasure to have you. So you have been very outspoken on the US Canada trade war and Trump's tariffs. How important do you think this moment is for our country right now? How big of a threat do you feel Canada is facing? Yeah, I think with the exception of the civilizational threat during the Cold War, it's the greatest threat we faced in decades and since the Second World War economically, so like materially,

but also politically the greatest explicit threat to our sovereignty. And I'm not one of these people who dismisses the seriousness of the president's repeated assertions of his intention to effectively annex Canada and to destroy our economy as his strategic path to doing so. So this is, you know, quite bizarre. I think of the old-school Canadian nationalism of the post-war era, which was informed by a kind of anti-Americanism that was in our political DNA, Canada being founded by the United Empire loyalists who fled the American Revolution, of course, and their loyalty to the crown and a different kind of a different set of political

values, and also by French Canadians who were very purposeful about and their loyalty to the Crown and a different kind of a different set of political values. And also by French Canadians who were very purposeful about preserving their language and culture in a sea of Anglophones. So we always had this a certain anxiety, I won't say fear, but anxiety about the huge power to our South. But we moved past that in the free trade debates because we saw the huge economic advantages, a path to greater prosperity by becoming more closely integrated to the world's largest economy.

And that worked very well for us, let's be honest, for most of the past 35 years, but suddenly, all of that is gone and the old anxieties are back. Last month, you wrote a post. I'd like to read part of it to you now. We Albertans have long pleaded with central Canadians to understand the importance of the energy industry in our economy.

Well, now we have to show Ontarians that we share their outrage with this betrayal and stand in solidarity with those whose livelihoods and communities are in real danger. Let's not allow Trump to divide Canadians. What sort of divisions do you worry about in this trade crisis in this country? Many divisions.

The country's economy is quite radically trade crisis in this country? Many divisions. The country's economy is quite radically different in different regions. And so the effects of this massively renewed American protectionism is hugely different in different regions. I often say that Alberta is the most Canadian province because it has received by far the highest number

of Canadians moving there, inter-provincial migration. And so if you go door-to-door in Fort McMurray or Lethbridge or Calgary you'll find every other home is somebody who moved to Alberta from another province. And so there is I think actually on the ground a greater sensitivity to the economic challenges faced by let's say central Canadian manufacturing, by the auto industry, by say East Coast fishery and so forth. We don't always feel that that is reciprocated in other parts of the country and that has come out in the debate about how to best to deal with Trump. I

think some Albertans and Westerners, when I say Westerners, I really mean Western people who live in Western resource industries. So that generally excludes metropolitan Vancouver but the interior BC, Alberta, Saskatchewan, much of Manitoba have for decades, since their founding have felt that central Canadian political elites haven't always fully appreciated the

importance of those industries and now we see them in stark relief with you know because the the entire American trade deficit quote-unquote with Canada is attributable to our large oil exports primarily from Alberta and yet the impact of right now of most of the Trump tariffs are on Ontario and Quebec through aluminum steel and auto. And so, you know, we have to, my point is we can't allow him to divide and conquer. I don't think we can afford to regionalize ourselves in the debate about how best to defend ourselves. As Abraham Lincoln said in the American Civil War, quoting from scripture, a house divided against itself cannot stand. That's why I have said,

contrary to some in Alberta, that everything has to be on the table, including oil and gas exports, and for that matter, electricity, and potash and uranium, and those things primarily made in the West which are the most important Canadian exports to the United States and when Central Canadian manufacturing is hit the heartland We Westerners have to understand the huge impact the anxiety the anxiety that we've often felt Mm-hmm, and and I really I really think this is a critical moment like not for just Some veneer of rhetorical unity, but actual sense of deep patriotic unity. I wonder if you could tell me a little bit more about your beliefs there, because that's

clearly a real point of tension in your province, right? This idea that everything should be on the table, including perhaps an export tax on Alberta energy or restricting energy exports. Yeah. You know, I think that it's just totally imprudent when in dealing with a hyper aggressive counterparty like Donald Trump to start taking your biggest cards off the table, that's his favorite metaphor,

the one he used with Volodymyr Zelensky, you don't have any cards to play. Well, the biggest cards, the highest cards we have to play are the fact that 20% of the oil consumed in the United States is produced and shipped from Alberta. That is a massive impact on the American economy. Just think back to the mid-1970s, the OPEC oil crisis, when OPEC restricted supply and spiked prices, it caused a near economic catastrophe in the United States.

And Canada is now filling an equivalent role to what OPEC did then. We export five times more to the United States in terms of crude oil than all of OPEC combined, 10 times more than Saudi Arabia itself. And to just completely take that off the table as a card to be played, but only in extremists. I'm not suggesting that would ever be one of the early measures is I think rash and imprudent. It shows

weakness. The one time we seemed to get Trump's attention was when Doug Ford threatened this tariff on American electricity exports, on US exports on electricity. That's what I mean by keeping all of our cars. Potash, we could shut down American agriculture. Not that we want to, for God's sake. The farmers need it, yeah. Yeah. These are the high cards. Now, I actually, as a technical matter, I don't think reducing supply is, except in the most extreme situation, plausible.

And so we'd be hammering ourselves. Um, and I think in export tax, there's, there's lots of rational arguments against it, but my point is in extremis, everything should be on the table. So your words, um, when you made them, I think it was, well, it was recently, uh, they had been interpreted by some as digs at the position of Danielle Smith, who became Alberta Premier after you stepped down. Just

before I ask you about that, I just want to recap some of her positions for our listeners here. So in January, Premier Smith refused to sign a joint statement from all other Premiers and former PM Trudeau, vowing a collaborative approach to terror. She specifically has taken the issue of bans and exports of energy off the table. Last month, after meeting with current Prime Minister Mark Carney, she put out a statement saying that whoever is the next prime minister will have six months to roll out policies friendly to Alberta's energy industry or face an unprecedented national unity crisis, which was interpreted by some as kind of a threat. And last week she described the fact that Trump hadn't slapped any new tariffs on Canada as a big win for Alberta and Canada, which many took issue with since, as you've mentioned, several Canadian industries, particularly in Ontario, are being hit hard by the existing tariffs. And what should

Albertans and Canadians read into the different things that you and the current current premier are saying? Well, I've avoided now and since I left office, I've purposely avoided criticizing my predecessor because I just don't think it's helpful for previous office holders to sit around as an armchair quarterback. So I'm just stating my own view and principle on this, which is

this. There are real tensions and real frustration in Alberta, in particular the West in general. I'll just say the resource regions of the country in general, towards a set of policies emanating from Ottawa that have hampered the country's largest and most productive industries. When I say most productive in terms of means of national wealth, tax revenue, employment, etc. And there is deep concern that if the current government is re-elected that the core those core policies will continue. However, and by the way, my view is this, the talk of separation, this recent poll that shows some, you know, growing support for that. Yeah, in Alberta,

on a bad day, you can get roughly a third of the population to say that they would notionally it's in some way support separation in a referendum. There is a core, let's say around 15% of the population who actually think that. But beyond that, it's largely a proxy for their frustration, which should not be dismissed. So I think the Premier and others need that, that part of their message needs to be heeded. However, I am, and I believe the vast majority of Albertans are patriotic Canadians who don't believe that national unity is conditional. I mean, we have a higher than average representation in the Canadian Armed Forces and RCMP in our

national institutions. We are proud of the economy building role that our resource industries have been in the modern Canadian economy. If you're going to make a threat, you better be prepared to keep it. And I see no circumstances under which a majority of Albertans would actually vote to leave Canada, to become a landlocked province, to lose coastal access.

And, and by the way, if we're talking about trade, we go back to the beginning with zero, uh, trade agreements, uh, either with the rest of Canada or for that matter with the United States. So it makes no sense commercially, but for me a country is more than a set of commercial transactions. It's a set of abiding loyalties, of particular meaning, of institutions grounded in history, and for us that is a Canadian history, and that for me at least, and I think the majority

of Albertans is irreversible. Just to state the obvious here I mean you what you just did there was was a pretty clear criticism of her approach right and is it fair for me to say that obviously you and the Premier do diverge quite starkly on this issue. Well if her condition to Canada is conditional like do this or I'll go, then yes, I fundamentally disagree with that approach. If her approach is please pay attention to these concerns because otherwise you're going to have a deeper problem of alienation, I would agree with that. On the 80th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz comes an unprecedented exhibition about one of history's darkest moments.

Auschwitz, not long ago, not far away, and on my new podcast, Bite Back with Abbey Sharp, I'll be dismantling the multi-billion dollar diet industry that keeps us in a cycle of self-loathing and food fear. Join me every Tuesday for expert interviews, engaging conversations, and my signature science and sass to bust myths, correct misinformation, and help you break free from die culture for good. Listen for free on the Seeker app or wherever you get your podcasts. You have just laid out how consequential a time this is for Canada. Of course, it is happening in the middle of a federal election. So I want to ask you now about that.

We know from polling that one of the most central questions on voters' minds is which leader will do a better job dealing with Donald Trump and navigating us through these uncertain waters, very unpredictable waters. You, of course, are supporting conservative leader, Pierre Polyev. And in your opinion, what makes him the best candidate for this moment? Well, I think what makes him the best candidate, and by the way I've known Pierre since he was 16 and he was an intern for me and I mean I obviously work closely with him in Ottawa, so

I know him just about as well as I think anybody in politics, so I think I'm qualified to say that he's one of the smartest people I've worked with in 35 years in political life. He is, I think, a tremendously strong leader. And here's the thing. I think that in terms of dealing directly with the Trump threat, I actually don't see a vast difference between his position and that of Mr. Carney in terms of reciprocal tariffs. In fact, I think rhetorically, everybody keeps saying that liberals are running hard against Trump, I think

rhetorically Pierre has been perhaps even tougher on Trump. But- That's interesting, how so? Well, I mean, I don't hear Mark Carney actually using very, I don't hear him using strong language. I mean, he's, you know, we are going to fight the Americans as far as he goes. And we were, as Pierre, for example, has referred to Trump's economic vandalism and so forth.

Like, I think he's been more, but I think broadly speaking, they are actually fairly aligned in how to deal immediately with the Trump threat. But what is the bigger deeper issue in this election for me is what we do here domestically to make ourselves more resilient. That is for me, perhaps has to be the key issue. We're not going to get out of this obviously with a tariff war. Inevitably at the end we lose a tariff war against an economy 10 times our size. That's not, by the way, I don't think we should at all surrender. I think we need to,

as I say, keep everything on the table. But, you know, Mr. Carney was a key economic advisor to Mr. Trudeau, wants to basically continue the same direction of economic, energy and environmental policies which have led to the lost decade, to Canada having the worst per capita GDP record in the developed world over the past decade. And what he's proposing to do in the energy sector in particular will further impoverish this country. I think we'll not get us out of this downward cycle in terms of competitiveness and productivity, this massive flight of investment. The fact that he's simply an economist

doesn't magically change that if the policies are fundamentally anti-growth. And so I think we absolutely, as a matter of national existence, as a matter of national existence, as a existential issue, have to get out of this decade long decline in national wealth and productivity,

and that's going to require urgent reform. I wonder if you could, yeah, sorry, I don't mean to interrupt you, but I wonder if you could maybe give me some specific examples here of how you see that they're continuing what you think is a decade of bad policies. I mean, I'll note that Mark Carney has canceled the consumer carbon tax. He's talked about the possibility of an East-West pipeline, West-East pipeline. Well, first of all, let's look to the record.

The government which he leads effectively killed the energy east pipeline, by imposing new regulatory burdens about requiring pipeline companies to be scored on the emissions notionally associated with up and downstream emissions notionally associated with the energy ship through it, which is bizarre. We don't do that for the, for example, OPEC tankers that come into Eastern Canada, or the energy in it. They cancelled Northern Gateway, Mark Carney explicitly supported that they did absolutely nothing, nothing to fight Joe Biden's cancellation of Keystone XL,

which would be producing 10 tens of billions of dollars of Canadian economy by now if you've not done so. The emissions cap is a production cap on the country's largest industry, the third largest oil reserves in the world. And we're basically going to walk away from further production or growth in that, which will mean a further massive flight of capital

going to other energy producing areas of the world, not reducing emissions, a massive increase in the industrial carbon tax which will hugely affect our trade exposed industries and cause further carbon leakage with capital shifting to the US and other countries that don't have that kind of policy. By contrast, I see policies like Mr. Polyev's deferral on capital gains for investments in Canada, I think would unleash a boom of new venture capital for startups, of new rental housing stock, etc. I think he's much closer to a pro-growth tax agenda and most importantly, a rapid deregulation

agenda, a regulatory reform agenda to expedite major projects and obviously huge and unequivocal support for energy exports and market diversification. What do we produce that the world most needs? Energy and commodities. And the way to get those to global markets is through infrastructure like pipelines, also an expansion of ports and so forth. And liberals have had a decade to get that right. Mr. Carney's been on the wrong side of that and I think we need a fundamental change of policy. I mean just you mentioned those pipeline projects. We had Andrew Leach on the show yesterday. He's economist, I'm sure you know him at the University of Alberta, and he was talking about how a lot of those projects were languishing in the regulatory process before the Trudeau government ever got elected, right? And Mark Carney certainly is talking about

using some flexibility in Bill C-69 to do like a one project, one approval thing, right? To streamline the process for approvals. That's what he was talking about the other day. Okay, thank you. These are all fair questions. Let's say, Professor Leach is wrong. Like he was on the retail carbon taxes, which everybody except like a handful of economists now admit.

Right, he's a proponent of the consumer carbon tax. He was one of the key proponents, yeah. No, they weren't languishing. Northern Gateway had gone through the process and the proponent, Enbridge, had spent like a billion dollars through a seven year process, extensive indigenous consultations that received approval with conditions from the National Energy Board,

the regulator, and then from the Canadian government. The Trudeau government went back and retroactively, politically cancelled it by fiat. Energy East wasn't, wait, I mean it was a slow process which is part of the problem, but it was going through the process and TransCanada Energy had put 800 million dollars. Like when, this is the point, why has capital been fleeing by the tens of billions of dollars? I tell dollars? I was just at the world's largest mining conference in Toronto about a month ago and the big mining companies are saying like why would we we pulled out of investing in Canada because you don't have a functional regulatory process. That's what they observed with these

pipelines. So Professor Leach is exactly wrong. And in terms of Mr. Carney's support, I'll remind you that as premier, I challenged the constitutionality of the Impact Assessment Act Bill C-69, which I'm the guy who coined as the No More Pipelines Act. And one massively at the Alberta Peel Court and then on a five to two decision

at the Supreme Court of Canada, refining it to be unconstitutional violation of provincial jurisdiction and they've made some Trudeau government has made some minor minor technical amendments clearly the the act is still unconstitutional and Mr. Carney has announced he's not going to change it so I think he's completely on the wrong track here here. One of the main criticisms you hear of Mr. Polyev in the conservative campaign right now is that they have failed to adequately pivot their focus as Canadians' political concerns have shifted.

Numerous conservative insiders have told reporters at both the Globe and the CBC about infighting within the campaign. Many of them said that the messaging has remained too focused on attacking the liberals and not enough on the trade war. Do you think that the poly-up campaign is meeting the moment right now? Were they meeting the moment before?

Well, I think they are now. And yes, I would say they were before. I mean, listen, in some respects, Pierre Polyev is a victim of his own success and effectiveness as a leader. I mean, he's this guy, remarkably, first of all, was I think hugely responsible for effectively driving Justin Trudeau out of office. I mean that consistent 20-25 point conservative lead in the polls created

the political conditions that led to Christie Freeland and others as they, to coin an Australian phrase, tipping, spilling, spilling the leader. And I mean, he knocked, he crushed the biggest fundraising records, etc., in Canadian political history. So he created political facts that led to the change in leadership, A. B. He created a very powerful issue matrix. He set up inflation and affordability as a central issue with source credibility. His focus on the connection of those issues to the impact of the retail carbon tax led to its cancellation, etc. So I think he set up this issue matrix so powerfully, the liberals reversed their leader and adopted a bunch of these policies. Now, none of us, I mean, none of us, I think, saw,

I didn't see, I thought we were gonna be dealing with a request to exempt Canada from a 10% global Trump tariff. I don't think any of us saw this 51st state nonsense or the prejudicial tariffs against Canada. So I think everybody's been kind of trying to course correct I don't think any of us saw this 51st state nonsense or the prejudicial tariffs against Canada. So I think everybody's been kind of trying to course correct and find the right balance to address that primary threat

well, without losing focus on the need for domestic policy reform for a more resilient candidate. Given all that though, given how successful you think he's been in all of those areas, how is it then that he blew like a 25 point lead? How did that happen? Well, I don't accept your characterization with him blowing the lead.

I think the world changed for Canada dramatically when Donald Trump decided to launch economic and rhetorical war on us with deep, with, with apparently serious threats to our sovereigns. But then how is it then that he didn't come out in the lead there? I always I don't think I was alone in this. I always thought that if Mr. Trudeau left before the next election that the 20 25 point conservative lead would would come back down to earth. Right. I imagine you did not anticipate that it would turn into what polls are now saying will be

a liberal majority? No, I think we're all surprised with how significantly those polls have shifted. I think right now as we speak things might be tightening a bit. I think this thing is far from over. I think it's very fluid and as an observer very exciting election. But primarily I think what we've seen Primarily, I think what we've seen is a collapse of support for the NDP, who are terrified, you know, whose older supporters in particular are, I think, understandably terrified of the Trump threat. And they just don't see the NDP as having played any credible role to oppose that. And so, I'll just say, you're correct,

but the conservatives have also shed, shed voters. Yeah, you know what, I think on average, going from like, like whatever, like 43 to 38, 39. Let me just say this. The high watermark for Stephen Harper in his, what, four elections,

five elections was 39% in 2011. The last time conservatives broke 40% in the popular vote was Mulroney in 88, 37 years ago at 42%. So, you know, he has reassembled the biggest conservative coalition in terms of popular vote, may not be geographically as efficient, we'll see, with still, I think, some upside growth potential here.

So I think, you know, the pundits who are canceling out, the concertos are canceling out, the most energized campaign, perhaps ever, if you measure that by attendance at events, which is remarkable, in terms of fundraising and in terms of polling. I think Mr. Poliev has found his footing in connecting his focus on a more resilient and productive Canadian economy to the fight against Trump and for Canadian sovereignty. You know, one thing we haven't talked about yet

is of course, you'll know Mr. Poliev has been dogged by comparisons to Donald Trump, which is increasingly seen as a liability for him. Uh, the liberals have used this in their attack ads. We've also heard it from analysts who pointed to like his pension for derisive nicknames, his

attacks on mainstream media, his criticism of woke ideology. Uh, Corey Tenyke, one of Canada's top conservative strategists, uh, has also said Poliev sounds too Trumpy. And, you know, we talked about Danielle Smith earlier, but she also told the right-wing media outlet Breitbart that Poliev was very much in sync with the new direction in America. Of course, she meant this as a positive thing when she was giving that interview. Of course, Poliev has pushed back on this, on these comparisons. He said he's not a MAGA guy. He has criticized Trump's tariff policies

and 51st state comments, as you've said, but I'd love to get your take on this. Do you think that these comparisons are fair? No, I don't think at any time Pierre Poliev has intentionally imitated Donald Trump, either substantively or stylistically. I think some of those things are now in retrospect. There is, has been, in Pierre's style, a populist flavor, to be sure. And he came originally out of the Reform Reform Party and that's part of his own kind of political background. But stylistically there's also been a populist flavor from the very

successful Doug Ford whose campaign Mr. Trenike managed. And Mr. Kupolev has been very conscious about assembling a new kind of conservative coalition, focused more on working people and very explicitly on union working people. He's been endorsed for the first time ever as a conservative leader by a whole whack of unions here. So I think he's been, you know, he's been trying to change the approach to build a broader, more popular conservative electoral constituency. And so I think sometimes people take that. And he's also been in a world where there's been an obviously, obvious decline in audience and influence of traditional mainstream media.

He became the most effective political practitioner in the world of social media, right? And so that requires a kind of communication style, which may be great for some people. So I think all of those things are true, but I also think what's true is know that Donald Trump has at least on three occasions, has dismissed Mr. Poliev and said he prefers the liberals. And I actually think he does. Now I know I know that some liberal some people on the left here

think oh that's all some kind of a setup. Yeah like a reverse a reverse a good old fashion reverse endorsement. Sure so believe what Donald so people in the Canadian left believe Donald Trump when he says he wants to make us the 51st day but they don't believe him when he says he wants a liberal government so they choose what he what to believe. I think that's inconsistent. Secondly, you need to understand Donald Trump's psychology. The Donald Trump's biggest enemies, the people he who take up the biggest room in his head are conservatives who have refused to to bend the knee. Paul Ryan, the late John McCain, Mitch McConnell, Liz Cheney, Mike Pence, the list goes on. That's how he sees Pierre Poliev. He thinks, of course he thinks a conservative leader should be another, you know, should be some kind of extension of Maggie. He knows

that Poliev is not, and I think that's why he'd rather deal with a guy on the left that he can understand. I just want to pick up on something you said when you were talking about Doug Ford. I take your point on the populism, the similarities around the populism. But what you do hear about with Poliev, far more than you hear about with Ford, is this negativity, right? Like the derisive nicknames, uh, people often bring up to me that, that video of him talking to that reporter when he's eating the apple.

On the, on the topic, I mean, in terms of your sort of strategy currently, you're obviously taking the populist, uh, pathway. Um. What does that mean? Well, appealing, appealing to people's, people's more emotional levels, I would guess. Certainly you tap very strong ideology. And some people, of course, love that video and think it was really entertaining and smart

in that he dressed that reporter down. But other people you talk to look at that and think, like, he's just mean, and he's that reporter down. But other people you talk to, you look at that and think like, he's just me and this is just, he's just punching down here. And I just wonder like how you might respond to that? The people find him too negative. I, well, I would respond by saying, first of all, I would respond by saying, first of all, if you think the, apropos Mr. Tenik and all of that, if you think the Ford campaigns have all been sweetness and light, go and check

the ads they ran against Bonnie Cromby and Kathy Muin and so forth. You know I'm a new leader and they're trying to look at my past record. Cromby doesn't want to talk about her past record of supporting the carbon tax, but her anti-affordability agenda hasn't changed. Ontario residents will get to choose. Do we want Doug Ford to cut taxes and make life more affordable? Or do you want Bonnie Crombie to raise taxes and tolls making your life less affordable than ever. They've been very effective at highlighting the negatives of their opposition. So and secondly, yeah, I as I

said I think there's been some things in Mr. Poliev's style that perhaps some people find have found grating. And I you know what the the mark of an effective leader is to listen, learn and change as necessary and I think he's done that. His campaign message here is, you can't, by the way, you can't be an opposition leader without opposing at some level, okay? So that's a structural, let me tell you, the hardest job in Canadian politics is being leader of the opposition, because every morning you got to get out of bed opposing the government. You're not doing your job if you don't do that. And then you fall...every leader of opposition falls into this kind of cycle of appearing to be too Debbie

Downer and too negative. That's always a challenge. He's been...and he has been, I think arguably, the most effective opposition leader in at least a couple of generations in Canada. Does that make you a good Prime Minister? So, he's been effectively in opposition. And now, suddenly, with the Trump threat, it's a different challenge. And in a sense, it's about being in opposition, not just to the incumbent Canadian government, but to a foreign power.

And doing so in a way that is not rashly and imprudently incumbent Canadian government, but to a foreign power. And doing so in a way that is not rashly and imprudently undiplomatic. I think he has found the right balance in that. I think that's a good place for us to end this. Mr. Kenny, thank you so much. This was great. I really enjoyed this. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. All right. That is all for today.

I'm Jamie Poisson. Thanks so much for listening and we'll talk to you tomorrow. For more CBC podcasts, go to cbc.ca slash podcasts. And if you'd like to see more of our podcast videos, click on the link in the description. And if you'd like to see more of our podcast videos, click on the link in the description. And if you'd like to see more of our podcast videos, click on the link in the description. And if you'd like to see more of our podcast videos, click on the link in the description. And if you'd like to see more of our podcast videos, click on the link in the description.

And if you'd like to see more of our podcast videos, click on the link in the description. And if you'd like to see more of our podcast videos, click on the link in the description. And if you'd like to see more of our podcast videos, click on the link in the description. And if you'd like to see more of our podcast videos, click on the link in the description. And if you'd like to see more of our podcast videos, click on the link in the description. And if you'd like to see more of our podcast videos, click on the link in the description. And if you'd like to see more of our podcast videos, click on the link in the description. And if you'd like to see more of our podcast videos, click on the link in the description.

And if you'd like to see more of our podcast videos, click on the link in the description. And if you'd like to see more of our podcast videos, click on the link in the description. And if you'd like to see more of our podcast videos, click on the link in the description. And if you'd like to see more of our podcast videos, click on the link For more CBC podcasts, go to cbc.ca slash podcasts.