Nuanced. - 229. Trevor Halford: Can B.C. Survive a $13.3B Deficit?

Episode Date: March 23, 2026

Trevor Halford, interim leader of the BC Conservatives, joins Aaron Pete for a conversation on the province’s downgraded credit rating, the 2026 BC budget, small business pressure, DRIPA, Indigenous reconciliation, internal Conservative Party tensions, and what kind of vision British Columbians are looking for next. Send us Fan MailSupport the shownuancedmedia.ca

The BC government's credit rating was just downgraded. Can you give us your reaction to that? We've got the record deficits we've ever had at $13.3 billion. So I always consider that that's your credit card debt, right? So they've maxed out the provincial credit card more than it's ever been maxed out before. How do you make markets more efficient? Get out of the way. That's the biggest thing.

Let the market do what it needs to do. Anytime you interfere with the market, bad things usually do. I interviewed Emily Lohen from the BC Green Party. and she talked about taxing the ultra-wealthy, sent millionaires, the billionaires in our society. Where do you land on that? Anytime that you make a target like this, you're telling the world that British Columbia

is going to target those that are successful. Do you have any advice or reflections on where the premier is at right now? I see a premier that micromanages, and I saw that as the, not an NDP budget, I saw that as the premier's budget that came in. I don't know what's. the conservative plan is other than repealing DRIPA.

And that's not really a path forward. Trevor Helford, thank you so much for being willing to join us again. It's a privilege to chat with you during very challenging times, very controversial times. Would you mind briefly introducing yourself again just to remind people who you are? Yeah, great to be back here. Thanks for having me. It's Trevor Helford, intern leader of the Conservative Party VC, MLA for Surrey White Roth, and Dan to three.

beautiful when we last spoke you had talked about uniting the party and trying to leave it better off than you left it how are you feeling about that journey so far i feel actually really good i feel like we're we're well on our way the work isn't done yet but i feel like we've we've got a lot accomplished here i feel like the caucus is very unified right now and the party's raising more money than it's ever have before we've got a great leadership praise which i'm sure we'll probably get to and talk about But for me, I think that we've spent this last session really holding the NEPs, you know, feet to the fire. And we're going to continue to do that. And I've said that.

I think I said that when I first came on your show, Aaron, that, you know, I'm not taking my foot off the gas. I will continue to lean in hard. And I think British Columbians are expecting us to do that work. I saw a few polls, and I'm sure you've seen them as well, that now have your party in the lead, which is surprising that a part. without a long-term leader was able to move out ahead. What was your reaction to that? It was pretty muted, actually.

I don't get too. Like, I'll be honest with you, the biggest polls that I get are when I'm at the soccer field at the ice rink or in line to get my groceries. Those are the polls that I care about when people approach me and let me know what's going on with them. Listen, I've been on the receiving end of good polls and bad polls. So I know how it feels. It feels pretty dejecting to get negative polls. so I'm not going to get too high and not going to get too low.

But what I want to do is I want to show British Columbians that there is a government waiting with the Conservative Party of BC. We've got a lot of work to do. I think those numbers reflect the frustration that British Columbians are feeling with the government right now. And we want to show them that there's a clear alternative,

but we've got some work to do. The BC government's credit rating was just downgraded. Can you give us your reaction to that? Yeah, I'm not surprised. The fact the matter is, is that I think what the rating agencies are looking for is a plan. And there hasn't been one by this government. The fact is that we have a $13.3 billion deficit. I always think of that as your credit card debt, right?

So the provincial credit card now is maxed out. Providence is maxed to them. So the interest that we're paying is the highest we've ever had before. I think we're paying over $6 billion and it's going to go up now even more in terms of trying to pay pay off debt and pay off interest or servicing the debt. The second thing is, is what are we getting for this? So when we have the biggest deficit we've ever had in the history of this province, our service is getting better? Is our health care getting better? Okay. We've now, the NDP have decided that they're going to try tax their weight of this. So that means for us that seniors are going to be

paying more for their landlines. You're going to be paying more for their basic cable. And not only that, you know, Aaron, like I was just, you know, I go in and get my morning coffee. and I have my routine, I do that. And what do I see when I go in there? I see security at the store. They have to have security there. And I'm sure when you go into different places, you see security more than you've ever seen it before because of what challenges we're seeing with repeat offenders.

But now the province has decided they're going to actually tax the security. So not only does the stores have to pay for the security, right, they now have to pay for the PST on top of the security. So I think people are feeling stretched and I don't blame them. And I'm not surprised to get back to your question that this has happened. The recent 2026 budget got a D from one of the business organizations. I'm wondering what is your reflection on what they were saying they were trying to balance. I tried to steal man the NDP's argument and understand it.

And they don't want to cut core services as their argument. and they don't want to look like they're not investing on those fronts. And then, of course, I took the conservative critique, Peter Milobars and yours. And the argument that I understood was that this isn't a plan forward. What does the next 10 years look like? The budget isn't even attempting to get back to balance over the next three years. Okay. So a couple things.

And you framed that up very nicely. First of all, they are cutting core services. So when you're taking away funding for children with autism, individualized funding that those families fought toothed nail for, that's a cut. When you have a $300 million reduction in youth mental health supports, that is a cut. So they can say all they want, but they're actually cutting. The fact of the matter is that we believe that you should not cut health care or education or the primary social programs that we have in this province.

But I also believe you can't tax your way out of this. So I think the big difference between us and the NDP is that they believe that they can measure economics of success in growing government. I think that is a horrible idea. I think you can manage economic success by growing the economy, growing the private sector. You know, I represent an area where 96% of all businesses are small businesses. That's the bread and butter of our economy is small business. So we need to be helping them, not stepping up. on their throats every chance we can get. And I think that's part of the challenge that we're

seeing right now is is the economy, the people that are driving this economy do not feel supported. And the government's confused on why that's happening. They're confused on, you know, why is it that small businesses are struggling right now? And they're struggling because at some point you got to take your foot off their throat. How do you make markets more efficient? This has been one of your comments that you want to restore confidence in financial markets. How do you go about something like that? get out of the way. That's the biggest thing.

Let the market do what it needs to do. Anytime you interfere with the market, bad things usually happen. And so for me, I get out of the way. You cut small business. So you cut red tape. You cut the red tape does affecting small business. You don't layer on, you know, bylaw after bylaw. You think of different ways.

You know, if you look at the payroll tax, people are taking all the health tax that's now coming in. And the fact the matter is, is that we need to find a way to make it easier to operate. small businesses. Like, don't tax security. That's one thing. Don't do that. It's bad enough that small businesses are now having to hire security to keep their stores safe and to make sure their product is not walking out the door in terms of theft. Don't tax them on that. Okay, find ways, don't make it so difficult for them to access government programs. I have so many times the writing app represent White Rock is that the windows were getting smashed and they were saying it was

way too difficult to access the program for help with vandalism that the government was offering. So, you know, the bigger thing is get out of the way, let the market do what the market needs to do. We have the largest provincial government we've ever had in the history of British Columbia. The challenge that I think in part Pierre Pahliav ran into was that he was talking about downsizing government in a region where there was a lot of provincial or, sorry, federal employees within his riding and that played a role. There were other factors to that. I'm not going to let him off the hook just on that.

But that was a factor. When the provincial government's this large, how do you message out something like downsizing government when it isn't exactly clear what those people would do instead? And it's the largest organization in British Columbia right now. It's a good question. And here, so there's two ways to look at this. You can look at this, the really lazy way,

or you can look at it at the primatic way, right? So the lazy way would be, you know, for the NDP, as soon as I say that we need to reduce the size of government, what they're going to say is that you're going to cut doctors, you're going to cut nurses, you're going to fire teachers, you're going to know. Absolutely. Let me be clear. Absolutely not. No government would ever do that. No government is going to fire, well, the NDP did, but no government is going to fire nurses and doctors, right? We're not doing that.

We need more nurses and doctors. But the one thing is that when you look at it, and this is. part of the problems that we have with small business. It's one of the things that we've, I heard in the forestry industry. You have so many mid-level management now in government, right? So every time somebody comes in terms of trying to phone and figure out their forestry permit, they're talking to a different person every single time. They don't know who they're supposed to be going through.

And then that person has to talk to somebody else and they have to talk to somebody else. That person may be on vacation. And permits are getting delayed months and months at a day. of time. So there's no streamlining in this government. It's just, it is suffocating in bureaucratic block. And for us, that's where a lot of the reductions seem to come in is in the provinces said they're going to, you know, cut, I think it was like 15,000 or something like that. They've added all these jobs. And by the way, when you cut these jobs, it's not, it doesn't, it just doesn't automatically net loss. You actually have severance implications. You have a lot of

factors that need to come in. So your point is well taken. But for us, like, there would be no reduction in frontline workers. There would be no reduction in teachers. What we're looking at is what is not working. And I think the government has bloated every single ministry in terms of mid-level and executive management. Like the amount of vice presidents we have in the health authorities is staggering. Staggering. Hardly any of them have any of them have any health. care experience whatsoever. Right? But what they're doing is they're clogging the system.

They're making it more difficult to streamline the process. And I think that's where government needs to take a hard look and say, are these jobs really relevant right now? And, you know, I would say probably not. And I would like to see those investments go towards more doctors and nurses because they are on the front lines and they are doing the line share of the work. I interviewed Emily Lohen from the BC Green Party, and she talked about taxing the ultra wealthy, sent millionaires, the billionaires in our society. Where do you land on that?

Probably not anywhere close to where Emily did. I want people to create jobs, right? And I can tell you, what defines ultra rich? I don't know the definition of that. He said sent millionaires, the billionaires in our society. Jim Patterson was one of the people she named. Yeah, well, if you go around, you know, if you go around BC, if you go to the Surrey Memorial Hospital, you'll see the Jim Patterson Outpatient Care Center. You'll see Jimmy Patterson's name on virtually, you know, every single hospital you'll ever go to in BC.

And the work that they've done in the flampery, look at Ryan Bidi. Look at some of the stuff that he's done in the philanthropy that he's taken part of it. And for me, you know, it's a really slippery slope when you're looking at it. at some of our, how many people does Jimmy Patterson employ? Right? Thousands, yeah. It's probably more than the provincial government. So, you know, really these guys are driving our economy.

They've been doing it for decades. So we want to attract investment in British Columbia. We don't want to drive it away. So I think Emily and I will disagree on a lot of things, and that would be probably one of them. One of the pieces she brought up, though, that I'd just be interested in your thoughts on. I tried to steal man the conservative argument. but I don't represent your party and I'm not a part of that group. And so I'd just be interested to understand.

Her point was that the amount of philanthropy someone like Jim Patterson would do is, one, he gets the credit for it in a different way than a taxpayer gets credit for building a road, right? And then two, the amount, if you added it up, if he was just taxed on all of his wealth, it would be significantly more that he would need to contribute in his philanthropy. And I think there is a point there, right? Like how much are these people who have been incredibly successful responsible responsible for contributing to the wages of their employees, to trying to make sure that everybody has everything they need?

Like, what role can they play? And I don't think that that's, I don't think we need to go to the extreme. But I also think it's a valid question. How do we approach people who have been hyper successful in our society in comparison to people who've been stuck at $50,000 a year for the past 20 years? Yeah, I think that there's a balancer that you've got to find. I don't believe that taxation is one of them. I think that, you know, obviously, I can imagine that they pay their fair share of tax more than I do.

But, you know, for me is that, you know, how are they giving back in other ways? And I think any time that you make a target like this, you are telling the world that British Columbia is going to target those that are successful. and what defines ultra rich, right? And I think there's going to be clear parameters around that. But any time that you target individuals, I think is it dangerous and a very slippery slope because I can tell you that, yes, they're very wealthy people, but they have brought billions and billions of dollars into our economy. And for us to tell them that they're going to be targeted, I think is sending a sign,

not just to them. And that's actually not my focus. It's sending a sign to investors around the world that British Columbia is going to target those that are most successful. And I can tell you that if you look at their tax and things like that and how they pay, I don't know. But I can tell you, the work that they've done in the communities, just to name the two people that we've been talking about, is huge.

I've known people that I just met with somebody the other day who's very successful in my riding. He's done great work. and he's built the company from the ground up that is a very successful, publicly traded company in the multiple billions of dollars. He has sent over 3,000 kids personally on scholarships. Right? He's done that through his foundation.

So, you know, I think that, you know, are there people that are getting away with more? Yes, but we have to make sure that we have a system that works. And, you know, I think by targeting specific individuals, I'm not sure that's going to accomplish whatever. he's trying to do. So many of your candidates right now are saying repeal DRIPA. It has become a huge talking point. And I just, I need to understand because I don't understand.

I'm not team DRIPA or, like, I don't care about this specific legislation personally. But Trevor, I'm so concerned that all of the candidates are running on this idea that repealing DRIPA will fix the problems with, with private property rights being in question. It will fix the Cowichin decision. It will fix the Muscoaum Agreement. It will fix some of these issues. And it is not the pillar in which if you pull it out, all of those problems go away. And I'm concerned for your party because if they promise this to British Columbians, that this is the cure to the problem.

And some of them are that they're going to miss it. They're going to misunderstand the file. They're going to misunderstand the policy instrument. And they are going to fail British Columbians if they should succeed on running on that. That's not me saying that they're correct or they're incorrect. It's just I actually don't think the cure to the problem is what they think it is. Now, if you want to repeal drip up, your guys' decision as a party, but I just think selling that to British Columbians as the cure to this problem

that British Columbians are worried about is an error. And I just want to get your understanding of what's going on here. Yeah, I know. And Aaron, like, I think that that's a fair perspective. And I applaud you for, and you've been consistent on that. but I've been consistent on our views as well, right? When I first came on your show and when I was first started and actually when I first ran in 2024, it was part of our platform.

Listen, I understand and I agree with a lot of what you're saying. The challenge that we've got is that we've got a premier that's gone out and said one thing to one group and another thing to another. And that is very problematic. That is the chief lawmaker, the chief person in our province that has gone out and done this and whether it was the introduction of DRIPA in 2019, but, you know, in the changes that he's promised, we haven't seen anything. Okay. We're going to be going back in a session in April, and there has been no talk of when these amendments to DRIPA are coming. And so the challenge

that we've got is that the Premier has promised one thing and he's failed to deliver on another. So for us, we've been consistent on the repealing of DRIPA. I actually do not think the part of the problem is, is that the Premier and even Rabbi-K-Lan will make the argument. If you repeal DRIPA, all economic activity in the province is going to stop on that day. That's not true. That's fundamentally not true.

I agree with you. LNG Canada, Coastal GasLink, TMX, Sight-C, all the major projects were done and started before, they were started before DRIP up was even introduced to this. So to say that we are going to lose billions and billions of dollars in economic

investment, because we would appeal drip up, that is categorically false and it's misleague. And it's lazy. I think the biggest thing that we can do is, is have a conversation about what true reconciliation can look like. I'm not sure that that needs to be legislated. Right. I'm not. I, you know, but people may have a better understanding than I do. But what I can tell you right now is it's not working. And there has to be a remedy to it. And the premier has not spelled out what that looks like in his mind. I know. know that they have put this legislation forward to different nations under non-disclosure agreements, and that's their right to do.

But I'm guessing that the reason why they've taken so long to actually put this before the House and the legislature's there is because they're not getting the feedback that they expected. So we have a Premier that has said he's going to go to the wall for property owners. We had a Premier who said that he is going to backstop mortgages. Now he's saying that there's no concern with property rights whatsoever, right? So there's all this different language that's floating around out there and it's inconsistent. But we have, you know, as much as you and I can disagree on this, we have been consistent from day one. I'm not sure if we're disagreeing.

I just, I don't know what the conservative plan is other than repealing DRIPA. And that's not really a path forward. And that's sort of what I worry about. And I'll say from the outset, and I've said this on other shows, my concern is, individuals living in abject poverty on reserves and finding a pathway through that. There are high homelessness rates. There are high addiction rates. There are a lot of sexual abuse that can happen on reserve. There is a lot of challenges being faced in terms of job opportunities and social development that I support any party who is going to develop a plan

to address those living conditions because I want every British Columbian to have a fair opportunity to become something and make a difference. And I think our economy and our province is richer when people are able to do so. And so just repealing things doesn't, to me, chart the path forward for the conservatives and I'll agree with you. I don't know what the NDP's vision over the next 20 years on settling this file. I do think, and I've said this, I think we do need a plan and an end date to reconciliation of when are we going to resolve the issues? When are we going to reconcile? What is the finished product of that look like? And I just, I don't know from either party what the plan is.

To you want a lot of what you were saying, but I'll ask you this, is that DRIPA was introduced in 2019. Okay. And to the challenges that you very eloquently just laid out, especially the challenges that are being faced on reserves, those have been solved. They haven't been solved. But I would say, and the NDP has paused this program, but BC housing, building housing on reserve, does in part help address the amount of homelessness we see in urban populations and the housing crisis we see on reserve. And so that was one policy instrument. I support.

The NDPs paused it. But it will impact my community and prove services childcare is another one where we're building a child care center with the funding they provide. Is that dependent on triple? I don't think so. No, it's not. Right? And that's my point is that we can get this stuff done in partnership.

Like I worked in the energy sector where we signed on coastal gas. I think it was 15 or 17, all nations along the right-of-way signed on. It was before DRIPA. And those nations got in the tens of millions of dollars in benefit agreements, both with the province and with the company, it was TC Energy at the time. And that was transformational. That was all done before DRIPA, but that was done in partnership. Those agreements didn't get done in a month. They got done over five to seven years.

And that's okay. It takes time and those relationships cannot be rushed. And I understand that. But also, too, I'm coming from a view where I'm not sure that it needs to be legislated either. You have to build that. And you have to build that level of trust. And I've seen it work. I've also seen it not work.

So I can tell you right now is that, you know, in terms of some of the other issues that are being said, like I think that the public is wanting a lot more transparency. I think nations are wanting a lot more transparency when it comes to some of the deals that we're seeing at all levels of government. Like the Musquium deal there is, you know, how is it that nobody knew this was going on? And the premier wanders into a signing ceremony has no idea what he's, you know, what he's witnessing. And then comes out of it and says, yeah, I was surprised just like everybody else when I heard the announcement of a deal with Musqueam and the federal government. Like in that, we know that doesn't happen. So I think that there's this desire for transparency and we're not seeing it.

And that's adding to the level of frustration that British Colombians are feeling right now. I get the sense that you're a pretty middle grounded individual and I'll be honest. And we'll get into some of the people running. Some of the people running are much more hardline than you are on this file and on what needs to be done moving forward. How do you think these discussions resolve themselves in a healthy way? way. Like, just as by way of example, we have this post from one of the candidates who just recently dropped out. And it was, it was pretty aggressive on the relationship with First Nations and the land back movement and what all of that means. And the rhetoric is being heightened during this

leadership campaign. And I just, I worry about the impact that's going to have. It used to be 1B.C was the primary driver of some of that. And I am seeing more and more commentary from some of the leaders running that is stronger. I'm not going to say it goes as far as one BC, but it's a stronger rhetoric. And I've invited those people on to discuss the issues and no word back as of yet. Well, I'm here. Anytime you invite me on, I'll come on because I enjoy, I enjoy this conversation. Listen, I can't and won't speak for anybody else that's running for leader. I won't. But they have to do two things. And I want to be very clear on this. They have to have a vision that the members of this party will get behind and support. And that is how they will win

the leadership race. That's the easy part. Okay. The second part they have to do after is they have to have a vision in a plan that British Columbians will get behind. And that is how we form government. So it's important that everybody has that context and understands what it is we're trying to accomplish. And so that's that's my message to your viewers. That's my message to you, but that's my message to them as well, is that, you know, it's very important here. All this is forgotten. And, you know, without, you know, is all kind of down the drain. If we, if we don't form the next government. British Columbians, you saw the polls. The polls were disastrous for the NDP. And as much as I, you know, I don't focus on them, I can tell you, there is a massive appetite for

change right now. It's huge. And we have to rise to that moment. British Columbians are expecting us to rise to that moment. We have not risen to that moment, you know, when we have the opportunity in the last election. But we have to do it now in this one here. I can tell you that people are desperate for change. I get it everywhere I go. Everywhere I go, people are saying we need change and we need it now. And it's every walk of life right now. So I can tell you that's that's where my focus is. And I'm hopeful that the candidates have that focus and that context as well. My understanding is that you were once a BC liberal and there's been a little bit of a purity test taking place within the Conservative Party in terms of the discussions about we don't

want somebody from that background leading the party. We want a true blue conservative. We talked about this a little bit previously, but more recently Christy Clark had gone on Van color and talked about her perspective that you need to create a big tent in oil. order to bring in British Columbians, that the more we're talking about being a strict conservative and trying to be less in the middle and more on the right is going to be a huge challenge to bring in people. What are your thoughts? I have to be right there. Like, man, I have probably watched my language here, but like, it's, yeah, it's complete nonsense to me on these purity tests. It's annoying. Listen, I've,

I don't know how you brand yourself, not you in particular, but people. people deal like 95% of people, people need to realize, have no freaking political card in their wallet. They don't have it. Okay. They don't. It doesn't exist. And the challenge for me is that when you're trying to share your vision with people, if you're going to box people in like that, it's probably not going to have the end result. I never believed in purity tests. I don't believe in left and right political spectrums. You and I've talked to all this. I believe that in right wrong. You know, there is a guy that has in Colonna right now that has 400 police files on him and he just got bail. I don't, I, I don't know how that's successful. Does that make me a

conservative? It's make me a liberal. Does it make me an NDP? Like, you know, I don't understand that. It's a really, you got to be really careful when you have those labels out about who's a conservative and what that's defined by. And I don't subscribe to that. I really don't. I, you know, Senator Neufeld was a BC liberal. You say he wasn't conservative? Dennis McKay was a BC liberal. Are you going to say he wasn't conservative? Bill Bennett, BC Liberal.

You say he wasn't conservative? I, you know, at the end of the day, I honestly don't care. I really don't. I care about putting a vision forward for British Columbians with our party that people are going to get behind. They're not going to get behind labels. They're going to get behind visions and hope for a better. better for better problems. Can you tell us about the process for the debates that will be taking place?

I saw that one is being hosted by Aaron Gunn and Lindsay Shepard. How are these being laid out and designed? And what are your thoughts on that? Yeah, I think we've got a few debates coming up. I think that, and I'll get a list out here of the exact times for those, but I know there's one official one by the party, and I think there's one being put on by Aaron and Lindsay. And I think it's great. I always, I like a debate.

I think it's great. It's a chance for us to kind of really, you know, see the vision of these candidates and, you know, see how they can separate themselves from each other. But, you know, and I would, I'm thinking more or less as an exchange of ideas. I don't know, you know, if the gloves are going to come off. It's, you know, it's great because I've got a front row seat for it. So I'll be, I'll be sitting back and watching like everybody else. Is there anything that surprises? you so far about the people who are running, their strategies. Much was made about Caroline Elliott,

bringing out people from, I believe, Ontario and having their team support her. There was a kind of a reaction on X about that. Is there anything you take away from the approach some of these candidates are taking? Not really. I'll be on. And people are going to say that I'm full of it. But I honestly haven't been paying much attention. I haven't. I have been really busy making sure the trains are on time, making sure the caucus and the party feel supported. This is probably the first leadership race that I've never been involved in, and it's been quite nice, even though my days have been filled with other things. Listen, the campaigns are going to do what they need to do to win,

and they'll be judged after the fact. Judge them on June 1st, not May 29th. That's what's going to happen. They're going to do what they need to do to win and to get their message out to the party members, and I want to give them that flexibility to do that. It doesn't mean I'm going to agree with everything, but more or less I want to see this party grow, and it's going to be up to the members to decide on which way they want to go.

And I think that that's exactly what democracy and the leadership race should be doing. The last question I have on this front is just how is the internal energy feeling within the party? I just think about I saw a post on Facebook attacking Ali a war bus. for being an apple. She was getting some attacks online because an apple, so like within First Nation communities, we get attacked.

If I interview someone like you, I get attacked by some because I'm red on the outside and white on the inside for being willing to engage with you. And she was getting critiques on that end from First Nation communities and it was circulating online.

And then you look at the other side and within the party, there's a lot of talk about indigenous people are getting too much. Indigenous people are getting that. And so I just think about the weight on And I'm not saying we're the victims, but like there's a lot of weight on people who, indigenous people who are willing to engage on this.

And I just don't know if your party's discussions right now about indigenous people is going to tell any indigenous person that our votes are joining the conservative party is something we should be thinking about doing under the kind of discussions that are taking place right now. And I just wonder your thoughts on that. Yeah, that's an important question. And it's an important reminder too. A couple things that have come to mind all that. Number one is I got elected in 2020. And I can tell you that two of the most important elected officials when I've ever had the pleasure of knowing and working with are Ellis Ross,

who was my first seatmate when I came over and was elected in 2020, and Ali Awardless. And these people are leaders. And they're, I just, I like to be in their presence because you can actually. soak up that kind of leadership. And when Ellis or Alia would get up in the house, it was, it was so powerful. But their visions and their leadership, because they've been leading before they were ever held elected office. Right. So, but I also do realize, and I think more people need to realize that. Leadership for them in particular comes at a massive price.

Comes at a massive price. And I'll be honest with your leadership. I guarantee you it comes at a massive price and you're not on a ballot, right? But it still comes at a price. And we have to realize that. I have to realize that. And I think society has to realize them. And, you know, I have, you know, there's times when, yeah, I reflect back and I think about those individuals and I think about their families and what they're experiencing and what this toll takes

on that. and I can't I can't even comprehend that and I reflect on that it also grounds you very much and it doesn't you know I when we talked about the repeal

for DRIPA I did that standing next to Talia her and I had long conversations before we stood in front of the house and did that press moments and you know I wanted to hear where she was and where she was going and how she thought we would get there

And that gave me more confidence to do what we did. You know, we had those same conversations with Ellis Ross, you know, prior to me coming over to the BC Conservative Party. So I'm very much here what you're saying. And I think it's lost on us quite a bit in the reality of the conversation that this is having impacts on those individuals. And I think that we have got to have that context as we go forward here. My last question is just around hope. I do see the sense of hope and the sense of direct. for our province fading.

And this is no disrespect to the NDP, but I just don't think anybody has any clue where we want to be in 10 years, who we want to be in 10 years, what it means to be a British Columbian over others. And I think both parties need to reflect on where are we going and how do we inspire people to have hope that they can own a home, that they can reach their full potential,

that criminals and corruption is going to be held accountable, that when we hear about money, money laundering, that's going to be addressed, that all of these things are important to the fabric of our community. So we do see ourselves as British Columbians and not on political teams. What are your thoughts on how we proceed and build that back? So here's the reality. And I'll tell you my personal situation. I've got two boys that are graduating high school this year. Okay. They're both leaving the province. We've said that. They're both, they're both leaving BC. I, And they're doing that because they want to be able to afford a different life.

Okay? They want to be able to own a home. They want to be able to get in the job sector. They want to do construction. One wants to do construction. And he doesn't see that path here right now. And that's a really, really tough thing to swallow as a parent, that the opportunities in this province, the economic situation is so dire right now that your own kids are not seeing the hope that you just referenced. and I take that and that weighs heavy on me.

I know that I can be a very political person. I can punch hard. I can take a punch. But at the end of the day, your question has a lot of meaning to it. And the meaning is, what are we trying to do here and where are we trying to go? And I think part of the problem the NEP have got, and I say this with respect, is they don't know the answer. They're trying to survive. And anytime you're trying to survive and your government that's been there and you're getting tired and you're out of ideas, the public sees that.

And that frustration continues to mount. And for us, I think it's an opportunity for us to show that we are credible government waiting. But we have to have a vision. We can't just say they're bad, we're good. The public's not going to buy into that. They need to know where we're going and how we're going to get there. I truly believe on May 30th we're electing the next Supreme Court's province. I do. I mean that. But we also, that means that the work is not done on May 30th. It's just

actually beginning. And we've got to set forward a vision that British Columbia is going to get behind. And it's not going to be for the faint of heart. I can tell you that $13.3 billion deficit won't be 13.3 next year. Right? The economic storm clouds are coming. We're paying billions and billions in terms of just paying interest in some of its debt, servicing the debt. So I can tell you, healthcare, the challenges we're seeing there. So, you know, I'm an optimist, but I'm also one that doesn't shy away from hard work. And I can tell you that the vision that we're going to put forward is going to be bold. And it's going to be something that's going to excite British Columbians.

And I'm looking forward to that to rolling out my sleeves and being a part of that work. Thank you for sharing your time. I'll just ask one last question. And I'll do so with the utmost respect. Yeah. I commented, I did a breakdown of the BC budget. and one of the comments I had made is that Premier David Eby

does seem exhausted. And the job, the crown is a heavyweight. He seems exhausted. He seems discouraged and less energized and excited about the future of this province. He doesn't seem

excited. And I think part of this comes back to the references we're seeing about John Horgan and his energy and his excitement for where the province was going. And I just, as a leader, as the weight that you carry right now, trying to navigate all of these things, do you have any advice or reflections on where the premier is at right now? I, with all due respect, I don't think the premier is going to take any advice from me.

But yeah, the job that he's got is, is not an easy one. And I think that there's large differences between him and John. And I knew John. I didn't know him well, but, you know, we had a decent relationship. But I could tell with him is that he really gave his ministers and his MLA is a lot of confidence. He let them do their jobs. I don't see that with this government. I see a premier that micromanages. And I saw that as the, not an NDP budget, I saw that as the premier's budget that came in. That was very much his budget. I can tell you that when you micromanage all the ministries like he has and you've seen the lack of resolves that they're currently I can understand why he's feeling that heat right now,

why his approval ratings are the way they are. And that's not a good spot to be in. But for us, you know, I can only take care of what's going on in my caucus and on our party. And I'm going to continue to do that work. And whether David Eby is not, is there at the end of the day is not going to be up to me. But I can tell you that, you know, people are seeing a government that is tired and out of ideas. And we're going to step up and we're going to fill that void. Thank you for being willing to share your time.

Very briefly, can you tell people how they can follow along with the leadership race and everything that's taking place? Yeah, the biggest thing they can do is buy a membership. By a membership before, I think the middle of April, that will give them a chance to vote. The race is going to be on May 30th. We are electing the next Premier of the province, but log on, go to our website. That'll lay out all the rules, the schedule, and we're growing this party, and I'm excited about what's to come. Thank you, Trevor. I think it's important during, I think, polarized times to have adult in the room type energy of people who are just trying to find the path forward that's going to work for everybody.

So, I just appreciate. Next time, we have to actually be in the same room. I've done this twice, and we haven't. And it looks like you got quite a good setup over there. So I look forward to joining you in person. I look forward to it as well. Thank you so much, Trevor. All right, man.

Appreciate you.