Nuanced. - 240. Chief Billy Morin: Conservative MP on Poilievre, Carney & Indigenous Politics

Episode Date: May 25, 2026

Member of Parliament Chief Billy Morin discusses Indigenous Services Canada, Pierre Poilievre, Mark Carney, reconciliation, property rights, floor crossing, fiscal responsibility, Enoch Cree Nation’s economic turnaround, and the future of Indigenous politics in Canada with Aaron Pete.Send us Fan MailSupport the shownuancedmedia.ca

You've talked about how First Nations don't simply need more investment from governments. Do they need empowerment? Could you elaborate? InVision of Services Canada is just a broken system. 8,000 employees, $25 billion budgets and KPI's from 2015 that make absolutely no sense. How do you look at reconciliation as we look out into the future? The government has cheapened reconciliation to a little talking point. What are your thoughts on Pierre Polyev? I wish Pierre was Prime Minister.

And Pierre is really good at summarizing complex issues down to results oriented from every Canadian family across the country level. You were recorded saying liberals were trying to poach you. What happened? Minister Galmassy just finally sent me a message saying, do you want to have this conversation? What are your perspectives on Prime Minister Mark Carney? This government for last year's is a lot of talk. We're going to announce something. Then we're going to announce the next step of the plan.

Then we're going to announce the next step of the plan. Then we're going to announce another plan. A plan to have a plan. That's all I really see out of this. this government, going to give Mark Carney a failing grade on the expectations he set into results that we're actually getting a year in. How do we balance having tough conversations

about the realities of the lack of excavation with calling people like Francis Widowson and others denialists? Chief Billy Morin, thank you very much for joining us today. It's an honor to speak with you. Would you mind briefly introducing yourself for people who might not be acquainted? Yeah, not toky-tope, Nitsigason. Muskegsy-Oce.

Not Toki to be exactly a Blackfoot word, so it's Sacred Riders, my name. And I'm from Inok-Kree Nation, which is Muskegsy, First Nation. Just that borders the city of Edmonton, and I'm now the member of parliament for Edmonton Northwest and the Conservative Shadow Minister for Indigenous Services, Canada. You were elected at the age of 28, becoming one of the youngest chiefs. What was that experience like?

What called you to run? Can you give us a little bit of your backstory? story. Yeah, I'm Billy Moran also the fourth. I have a son. Now who's the fifth. And I just recently became a grandpa. So now I'm a mushroom. And he's Billy Moran the sixth. And the first Billy Moran was chief in the 50s. My great great grandfather, his dad was chief. And so it's kind of always been in the family. We don't have a true hereditary system out here in Enoch anymore. But public service was always kind of in. the blood there and from a young age, you know, that's just always what I wanted to do was

be like my grandfather's and help lead the community. So, so that's what I did. And why did you run? Was you called to do so? Did you just feel the responsibility? Were you seeing challenges within the nation? Yeah, yeah. So, you know, I, I'd always wanted to run. You know, I made that known throughout my growing up and it was kind of the positive pressure put on me. But, you know, I did decide to run. We kind of skipped the generation, usually, you know, my, predecessor was he was in his early 50s chief run and we went from early 50s and many, many years of experience down to a really young, young chief and quite frankly came in with another group of people who were under the age of 40. And, you know, our nation just at

the time was, was ready for new leadership, I think. And, you know, we have a great gaming operation, one of the biggest in Western Canada. But we really would desire to be more than that. And I just bring a vision that we can move beyond just, it's still what we're known for, but more than just being a gaming operation and the community was ready for change, quite frankly. May I ask, when you come into these positions, there's a lot of pressure and a lot of people don't understand what that journey can be like. What was that experience like trying to lead a nation? And what do you believe does it take to become a good leader?

Yeah, you know, I often get asked the question, you know, what's harder, MP or chief, like, like and quite frankly, to be blatantly honest, Chief's harder. Chief at this moment in time, Chief was a harder job. You know, maybe asking again in a year or three years where we are from now. I'm in opposition right now, but Chief was harder. I remember one of the first conversations I had when I said I wanted to run for Chief was with my grandmother. And she said, no, you can't. And I've never disagreed with my grandmother in my whole life.

But that time I did. And I said, yes, I am. And we left it at that. And we, of course, she still loves me and I love her. But, you know, when you're chief of a nation, you're really, what I like to say is running a family business. Like most First Nations, whether there are 2,000, 3,000 people, you're operating a family business. And so that's one of the major difference between politics. I think politics is all the same.

Governance is a lot of the same things in democracy. But for First Nations in particular, it's your family, your direct family holding you accountable. And that pressure is really, really immense. And, you know, people, that's why I say we're going to Ottawa. It was my family that hardened me up because, you know, it's a little tougher when you can, they come to your door and they have full access to you. And you really have to, you really have to be accountable to them. I mean, I haven't talked to when I first became chief to, I did some really hard things. I had to do a forensic audit on our finances. And, you know, that was too. That was really hard to do. We were running an $8 million deficit at the time. We were running 1980s administrative aspects for a really huge $60 million, $60 million operation. So I chose to do that. And we had to have some really tough conversations with my own family on misappropriation of things. And again, it's harder when your own family, because you don't talk to them for a few years after that. But now that I'm retired and went out on my own, my own, my own, my own

choice to leave at the time, things are actually good going home. I was actually just my elders yesterday. It was nice to talk to them. What did you learn during the experience of being chief? In Alberta, we have treaties. Obviously, yesterday, it's a big time in Alberta right now when it comes to treaties and their impact on this province and this country in Section 35 and everything. but what I learned is the importance of kind of the base of treaty and it's just at the end of the day it's people working together and before I remember when I first became chief and we walked into Premier Notley's office but the other the other chiefs and again I was I was always I was the new rookie guy there I was really young and the chiefs would go around having asking for for the chiefs would go around asking for for more funding for certain programs and rightly so. But I just took it a different direction. I'm like, hey, can I help you out with something? Can I help you out with health care?

And we didn't agree with the, me and the premier of the time didn't agree. But what I'm getting at is I learned, like, I wanted to stand out and really work with the city of Edmonton. I want to stand out and work with the province of Alberta. I want to stand out and work with Canada rather than just being the old school chief who just like always has grievances. With all due respect to my brothers and sisters who are chiefs and they have rightfully, rightfully so I have the grievances. But the treaty relationship was really just working together. It's two people shaking hands moving forward. And I quickly found out that when you focus on similarities and synergies,

rather than just differences, you're going to get some stuff done. I really love that because I completely agree with that approach. When you sit down and you go, this is where I'd like to go, but we're partners. So what's your feedback? What are your thoughts? How would you like to get there? It just changes the relationship.

And I do hope that's the next generation of leadership from First Nation communities. is showing up and saying, okay, we've got a host of problems, and we're open to your feedback as long as you're open to ours and not taking that old school approach. And I understand why that existed. But it's just, if we're going to be a level of government, we need to be accountable too. And we need to work within the parameters that are available.

Did you have an influence of somebody who helped you come to that conclusion or something that told you to want to move in that direction instead? You know, it kind of just happened organically. the first person we actually hired when I became chief. Again, it was difficult. We were running an $8 million deficit at the time. And we had some really tough financial choices. But we took a risk and hired Willie Little Child.

And Willie became my mentor. And of course, Willie's worked on an international level. He was the first conservative indigenous member of parliament or First Nations member of parliament. And he's built his career on building bridges between Canadians and, quite frankly, Canadians and First Nations people, indigenous peoples. but even on an international level. So, you know, he really kind of molded my thought process in that regard and kind of just reassured me that this was the right thing to do, rather than just saying, Ottawa owes this, banging tables, yelling at them, or the city owes us this,

banging on tables and saying that to them in the province. So, you know, Willie Little Child was a really huge influence on me. As you may have heard, our federal and provincial governments are all running deficits right now. I'd be interested in what your reflections were. how did you approach the deficit your First Nation community was facing? And what lessons do you take away from that? Yeah, you know, when I first became a member of parliament and there's a narrative out there, hey, look, there's always bad actors, whether you're First Nations, Canada, Alberta, or any municipality.

But I always found it a little weird and it kind of hit me when I became a member of parliament. I'm a fiscal conservative. I just, I remember as a kid, Ralph Klein, holding up that sign saying, And there's no more debt in Albert. I just, the political narrative, and you thought that was so cool. And that's what I, I just, I was influenced by that. Maybe even I always say the kind of fiscal conservative I am is, you know, First Nations principle is, of course, you only eat what you take, what you need. So if you're going to use the buffalo, you got to use it all.

And you don't waste anything. So that's probably a basis of where my fiscal conservative comes from, too. But for First Nations in particular, when I went to Otto and there's this narrative out there that, you know, lots of them are corrupt and they use public money and everything. But the actual fact is First Nations actually can't run deficits too much because we'd be put in third party under the Indian Act. And so I always thought in that perplexing that Canada can run $60, $70 billion deficits. But truly, First Nations can't.

They put us in third party. And so, you know, I think that that conversation out there is a little skewed. At the end of the day, for me, what was so important, we're a business nation. We've always been entrepreneurial. We're right next to the city of Edmonton. So we got to play our card. And we didn't talk to the city for a really, really long time. I remember talking to Mayor Iveson and we just went through a history with his council on a board and we're like, well, we didn't know you did that.

We didn't know you did that. So we had to build credibility and we have to build investment. Just like Canada, we have to build a system where people want to put capital in. If we didn't have our financial house in order, we weren't getting buildings beyond just a casino. So we had to fix our financial house and proud that we did that. Now, Enoch probably has over $500 million of investment from external forces coming in to build up our nation. Was that hiring a lot of financial staff? Was that making cuts? How did you end up just reorganizing to that extent? I'm just thinking about where we find ourselves. Like, is it austerity that's going to fix this?

Is it this just growth that's going to fix this? How do you get back to not running giant deficits? Yeah, so on a micro scale for my first nation, it wasn't, it was, it was a balanced approach. So, you know, we cut, we cap spending internally on our own public service. I mean, our public service actually, in my opinion, is still still out of hand with all due respect to my own first nation. And they know my stance on that type of stuff. I mean, again, conservative coming out in me that I want to see more entrepreneurs rather than the nation just owning everything. So we capped, we capped jobs. But at the same time, building up our fiscal house, we had to take risks to expand business and revenue.

So it's both. It's not one or the other. It's both. And, you know, getting our fiscal house in order allowed us to get some loans, allowed us to get external investment. You know, when I first became counsel, I wasn't chief yet. We had to refinance our casino. And we refinanced it for nearly $200 million at 12% interest rates. And that is, that was crazy.

But we had to do it. We don't regret doing it because we could pay off that loan, but that was a crazy amount of interest. And then after we proved ourselves for a couple of years, we put in a new financial law under the FMB process, FMB process with Harold Cal in that group. First one in Alberta, get certified, actually. We brought those interest rates down to lower than municipal rates. And so again, like, like it was both. It was being responsible internally, capping spending. capping public service, really being due diligent and setting up the internal administrative structures,

but also going out and getting that capital to believe in you and to take risk on you to build things in the nation. What did you learn about yourself in that role? That's a great question, actually. What did I learn about myself in that role? I guess I learned that I'm a sucker for punishment. The chief is first role of leadership. Everything's your fault, which is which is, which is, which.

is fine. You know, when I first ran to be an MP, I was asking Pierre, you know, like, why I say conservatives? We always feel like we're cleaning up other people's messes. Like, that's what it feels like. Can he say, I kind of agree with you or he did agree. And I guess I learned that I like a challenge. Like, I like, I like, not that my nation, my nation's bigger than just me as chief or anyone chief, but there was things to clean up, obviously, and things to grow. And I guess I just, I learned that I like a challenge. And so, you know, I, I went on my own terms, which I, I'll pop my own tires. I think that was a great decision. And I think more politicians to do that. And I guess I now just aspire to make a change on a, on a national

level of similar similar similar. I did on my own migration for other first nations. Enoch's not the one model. But I think there's principles that we've used that I can now influence on a national level to to make change. But it's going to be hard. It's going to be punishing, quite frankly. On a personal level, I'd just be curious as to how you developed this philosophy, because what I've experienced, like this is my first year as chief and three years as counsel, is a lot of people were frustrated about housing not being fixed over 40 years. People were frustrated that the band didn't do enough to support and provide opportunities and resources. And so I think we're turning a lot of those corners, but I got hit with a lot of, you're the third person to tell me that

over 40 years that you're going to fix these things. And there was a lot of mistrust. And I think we're still building a lot of that back. But you can't take some of that personally because it's not about you. It's about the system they've operated within. But you also need to stay humble and eager. And you can't take the negativity and let it kind of reshape how you see what you want to do and the impact you can make. And as you describe, like I get calls like, oh, this problem. problems arose. And when I look at my phone, I just know there could be a problem on the other end. And it's, it's, you have to be careful not to get jaded by that to still see it as an opportunity, to still wake up knowing you're the person who fixes problems. And I so see you as a person who

sees all of the problems and goes to there's opportunities to grow. There's opportunities to develop. Like, we can get through these things. How did you develop that? Where did that come from for you? I'm not sure nothing's hitting for me in particular where that came from. But I guess, you know, stepping into the role of chief, you know, it's probably, so my backgrounds, I did civil engineering diploma. I actually didn't, I didn't do too much in the actual field of civil engineering. I kind of immediately stepped into public service for the government of Alberta as my first step in my career. But also with civil engineering, a diploma that I had, a lot of it was project management. So my brain shaped that way now. That's how I do politics. And so, of course, I'm a politician.

I have an ego. I want to do some really cool things. But just results. Like, like, it's a cliche, but I actually hear a lot more politicians on any level saying is like get shit done. Like like and it's kind of a tagline in the community right where when I was chief like we're we're here for results. Like I can give you some cool words and rhetoric. Um, I can I can talk like a politician. I am one. I don't think it has to be a dirty word, but I, I would really just focus on, okay,

what's the result we want? That would be at every level. That would be with my auntie who had a housing problem. And that would be up to how we spending $80 million. in our budget. Like, we need results. We need KPIs. And that was kind of a philosophy that that still resonates in our community. It's something that, you know, we put, every community has their challenges at the end of the day and everything. But when you really focus on the results, it's a positive question because you're building something. Like, I can see that

school. It just got built. Oh, my, my, my. kids going to university for the first time. That's a result. That's what we're focused on. And so that really, that really just less politician, more project manager is what I say is how I've evolved. You've talked about how First Nations don't simply need more investment from governments, that they need empowerment. Could you elaborate? Yeah, you know, I think it was Lisa Raid, maybe through Harrow-Cal. I know was Hal Cal who told me this, but, you know, being a concern, conservative, obviously I'm partisan. I know yourself, you say you're nonpartisan, but obviously I am, clearly. And, you know, at this, at the federal level, a quote was given to me. It was Lisa

Raid in a room who was a good friend of mine. And it was either her saying it or somebody was saying it to her. Liberals will spend more money on First Nations and indigenous communities, but conservatives will empower them more. And, you know, ISC is a $25 billion budget. I'm looking over the the plan I have it right in front of me for the department. And it's a slap in a face insulting on what this plan is for a $25 billion budget. And being a first time MP a year in, basically as of three weeks ago, the Indigenous Affairs, Indigenous Services Canada, is just a broken system. 8,000 employees, $25 billion budgets and KPI's from 2015 that make absolutely no sense. So it's not a money issue to me.

It's a systematic fix. And so, you know, like, I need to see a culture change in our nations to be more responsible to take up leadership and not be under the thumb of Ottawa. And so my mission is to tear down IFC. You know, I've been, it's kind of controversial in some circles, but I want to be last IFC minister. We'll always have a CERNAC minister, but we don't need Ottawa doing 22,000 programs. That's how much they do out of one department with 8,000 employees to 600 plus First Nations, May 18, and U.S. communities. That is a broken system. And we need to empower the nations more rather than just being another huge band office to administer them. Could you elaborate a little bit more on how you

seeing that playing out? Because right now for myself, Indigenous Services Canada is funding our water upgrades, our sewage upgrades. They're supporting with subdivision feasibility studies, infrastructure upgrades. What does that transition look like in your mind? We got a, well, right now, I'm not sure what you're on. Aaron, you could be on a two-year or three-year contribution agreement. My nation moved to the 10-year grant agreement, which is fine. It's a great step in the right direction. And so all these are quantified through inflation and everything through the grant agreement, the 10-year one. Our reporting responsibility is basically an audit and we get the money and we get to spend it. We don't have to go through 50 programs. We just get one lump sum money and we're responsible. So it's worked for us. But that's still not a step in the right direction as much as I see. It's going to take a few years to do this. But I really want to open up a conversation around territorial transfers. So like can we just get transfer some Ottawa that are statute based, not just because Ottawa can take this money away like they're doing in child welfare. They're making cutbacks. But treat us more like we're not provinces. We're our own thing. We're not municipalities. We're our own thing. But the Northwest territories get territorial. transfer agreements. The provinces get their agreements and they get the money how to they want to spend it. I need to see more of that for First Nations and that's got to include capital as well. We've got to be open to different ways of funding First Nations. I love that here.

Came out with the First Nations resource charge. So he was willing to take a hit on large resource projects from a tax base and fund those directly to First Nations. So I got to help quantify this and create a formula, not one size fits all, but flexible enough that we can make the biggest push across the country to get rid of the 8,000, 8,000 bureaucracy and $25 billion budget where things aren't getting better. They're getting worse. And what I hear, like my understanding, we work with Indigenous Services Canada, but it's on our provincial system.

And so we work very well with them, but it seems like a lot of the issues from what I can, the tea leaves that I can gather is a lot of the issues are the Ottawa bureaucracy in how they control funds that reach the provinces and then get sent. out. Is that your understanding as well? Yeah, it, you know, you peel back the onion being in Ottawa for the last year. I worked well with my RDG. Like I said, I'm, I'm, I'm there to work with people. They get a lot of shit, but I worked well with my RDG. It's just, again, like, that's the philosophy I have. You just work with people. You can have differences, but you work with people. And, you know, I had a great relationship regionally in Alberta. But now being in Ottawa, you just realized, like, I was

talking to the deputy minister and this is public. And I don't, I don't wish to. to embarrass or put down public servants. They're real people at the end of the day. But I had to ask them, here's your, here's your, here's your, here's your plan. Doesn't the auditor general's report inform me how you plan? She said, yes. Well, I'm looking at your plan and it has KPIs from 2015, and they're the same for the last three years, the same exact number.

So are these just copy and paste it? And while we don't copy and paste, well, it really looks that way to me that you And again, it just reflects that the Ottawa bureaucrats who hold the pen on a lot of things are still just so disconnected from communities. I mean, how you run, I still just call it a big band office. And you can't have a band office that runs and does things fairly for 600 plus distinct communities. And on top of that Inuit and Méti across the second biggest landmass in the world. So things systematically have to change and a huge thing that I'll hopefully help shake. up one day is less bureaucracy, less odd, one, just more power back than a nation's themselves.

Yeah, I just wanted to ask you about that. The auditor general found that Indigenous Services Canada's spending rows significantly while outcomes still lagged. How do you get them to change their mindset on how they administer it? Well, I, um, you know, I, I always tell people, like, I'm a huge Wob fan. Um, he does good things. Um, I have ultimate respect for my counterpart. Minister Galnasty on the liberal side. And we have some awesome First Nations indigenous representation across multiple levels of government. But we need to be at these tables. And what we need to have is an opposition voice.

You know, when I door knock a lot of people, you're Billy, right? Yeah, yeah. But why are you a conservative? Like, why are you a conservative? And I can get to that in a minute. But the whole point being to answer your question is a good opposition from a First Nations perspective is going to help push the liberal government to do better. And if it was vice versa, I would expect them as much. And we just haven't had a First Nations representative on the

conservative team. We got Elx Ross, of course. That's my counterpart here from BC who helps me do great work. But I really enjoy pushing the liberal government to do better. It's what we're doing right now on Bill S2. And so what we're doing on a few other things. So a good opposition will help them realize that they can't just do reconciliation in a fake way anymore. It's got to be really tangible. You've emphasized economic development transparency, long-term planning, creak culture, and moving away from dependency. How do you look at reconciliation as we look out into the future? Well, I've heard you say it, like reconciliation has to maybe have an end date. And I agree, you know, I feel actually really harsh for saying this, but it's truly how

I feel like, like I said in my last speech before coming on break that the government has cheapened reconciliation to a little talking point. And, you know, I was asked by a few people, do you think reconciliation is done? I think the word is now kind of over. I think we need to find something completely new on what's the next chapter just for First Nations, indigenous relations with Ottawa in particular and probably all levels of government. What's next? And I just see business as a universal language across the globe internally from human to human being. And again, it's something that we can find tangible results on. It's something we can measure.

And it's a language. It's economics. Like it's socioeconomics. I probably sound like the classic conservative that I'm only focusing on that. I'm not. In fact, you know, the ministry I oversees its greatest strengths is also its greatest weakness. you get to deal with a lot. The scope is huge, which is really fun, but also you can get spread way too thin. I think the minister has that problem right now. So when you focus on economics,

you can make tangible change quick, and that's what I just like to do. This is going to be one of my controversial questions. I look at the BCAFN, the AFN, UBCIC, and my frustration with them is I don't feel they truly derive a mandate from members. I don't feel like they derive a mandate from individual First Nations people. The way you as chief are accountable to that family business, the way you're accountable to those members in the same way. So the rhetoric really can drift away from the realities of First Nations communities from my perspective.

And then to your point about like they're just going out always asking for more money, that we need more investment. We need more investment. And there's really no incentive for them to, one, look back at the First Nation communities and go, how are you spending this money? How do you use it best? How do you act fiscally responsible when you receive it? They're not really looking back at communities and going, we've gotten you 25 billion in investments hypothetically. And the quality of living conditions for your members has an improved. How do we help you reach those goals?

They're only looking at governments for more money. And I worry that they're the ones leading a lot of these conversations federally and oftentimes provincially. what are your thoughts on those what I would call lobbying First Nation organizations? Well, to be fair, if I say less Ottawa, I also have to say probably less middlemen when it comes to our own organizations that we're a part of or not a part of the indigenous ones. So the AFN, the regional AFN groups, things like that, because I have seen a lot of them morph into overreach in terms of governance, overreach in terms of being a voice for us collectively. Your podcast, your podcast name is actually really cool. It's nuanced. And I've watched other people on your podcast say that. And these organizations sometimes don't, they lose the art of having nuanced conversations on the people they represent.

So they have overreach in terms of developing child welfare laws. And they didn't have that mandate. They have overreach and running social programs when they didn't have that mandate. They're political. For the most part, they can be political organizations, lobby groups. Because being in a collective is going to get you more power, but obviously they get out of hand. So, you know, I want to see less AFN. I'm not to say the EFN has to go away, but the government often will use them as a sounding board and an excuse to enforce crappy legislation that maybe Enoch didn't like it, but your nation liked it.

Maybe a nation and B.C. like it, but the other side of the country didn't like it. And so the government often uses these organizations as kind of a patsy to get things done when, when again, we have to change the relationship to be more direct. Fascinating. You're heading to Vancouver for a discussion on private property rights with the honorable leader of the opposition, Pierre Pahliav. How should Canada reconcile Aboriginal title with the certainty for homeowners and their private property? Well, I, you know, like I, I live in Alberta, so it's a treaty one. I, I'm not a lawyer, but I get the gist of the challenge you guys have in BC. I will say, probably being a little bit too political here, I hesitate to comment on things BC because I'm not a BC resident, but I have to as a member of parliament and just my role. So of course, I'm going there to be a part of the conversation. Property rights just, it, my mind went to the, worst case scenario. And people with who are experiencing that fear, as you have said, it's a real fear that needs to be acknowledged and empathized with because the worst case scenario

here is if if there's a conflict between property rights and Aboriginal title ownership, it can get really ugly. Like I don't we don't need to focus again on on differences. We don't need conflict that you can see the potential to happen there with property rights. And so we have to put property rights first. I do like it that the First Nations say, you know, we're not after property rights, but there still exists this debate on where things are going. And so we'll have to let that play out with a whole bunch of voices. But we have to put property rights first because the potential for conflict, if that gets convoluted too much more, is pretty dangerous to just to human beings in general. Do you think that the federal government and the provincial government

are doing enough to respond to these fears? No, no. Again, like, I hesitate to comment on your politics in BC, but I think, you know, it's politics is you get out which you put in business and it looks pretty messy from the side of the mountains looking over the hill there from your provincial government perspective. But I'll be as respectful as I can leave that up to the BC residents. But my responsibility, quite frankly, is a federal level. And so I can comment on that a lot more.

And again, what I would say out of the federal government and the liberals at this moment is their First Nations are ultimately Section 35. So they have a pen on this ultimately too as well. And my job is to hold the current government accountable on this. They've been pretty quiet. I get it. Politicians say things with law of rhetoric and that's all I hear out of them. I don't hear any leadership on this one. And I was talking to House leader Warbus, just getting her perspective, getting the lay of land there in B.C.

from an actual BC person. And she gave me a great quote. She said, you know, we have to run towards hard conversations, not run away from them. It's a tough position to be in as an indigenous conservative. But I want to help be a part of a leadership thing. And so that includes the federal government. I think they've been way too quiet on this. I think there's too much uncertainty in the whole thing.

You know, we have, and it's, as you know, it's a complicated thing. People talk about undrip. They'll talk about property rights. Then they'll talk about camloops. then they'll talk about Musqueam, then they'll talk about DRIPA, and all these things are related, but there's nuances as to why they're different. And I have to hold the government accountable at a federal level and all those things,

because ultimately, again, First Nations are a federal jurisdiction, and we have a show leadership at that level too. That's a really interesting point. And I guess I'd just be interested on your take. I find, and you made the point earlier, that when you're in these positions where you're accountable to your neighbor, when you're accountable to somebody right down the road, it just changes your relationship with leadership

and the ability to have hard conversations. And as you may know, I try and do that as much as possible on the show because I feel like I'm being left behind by the federal government and my provincial government of being the only one willing to have really uncomfortable conversations and to demonstrate that it's possible without calling people racist or white supremacist

or just insulting people. What do you think is going on more? broadly about our leaders that they're just avoiding these types of conversations. It feels like there's a real currency right now if you're willing to do that. And I just don't see a lot of that taking place. Yeah. I was watching a few of your last podcasts and I stole from you guys because I was asked, you know, what would you do in D.C.? And again, I was trying to hesitate around commenting because I'm not a BC guy to get in a level of detail. But, you know, I forget you were talking to, but they were talking about, you know, what, what Alberta did.

They did that blue ribbon panel. And, you know, I was even reflecting, I'll play our former prime minister a compliment as much as I think he did a horrible job. But Trudeau, when he first got elected, went out and did these town halls. And he got a lot of crap for it. But the art of just getting back into these spaces and having these conversations was lost for so long. Maybe it was social media era. Maybe it's going to be AR, whatever. however we evolved, but really empowering democracy old school, going door to door, having town halls.

We need more of that. And, you know, the prime minister is this corporate guy who's really good at making announcements and being at a podium. But he's also that corporate guy from Toronto and New York. I'm not sure he knows how to go to have town halls. Can he be the leader? Well, I'm not sure he will be. Conservatives like to do this work for him. And that's why I'm with Pierre tomorrow doing Lidley Town Alls.

We have to get back to those tougher conversations and lead that way for just basic democracy. Why are you a conservative? I align my values as a human being with conservative values, the best ones. You know, when I walk to the doors and people ask me like, you're Billy again, but you're conservative, they give me that look. I'm like, yeah, yeah, let's have this conversation. And so I believe in fiscal responsibility. I believe in less government. And this is primarily from my First Nations perspective.

I believe in less government. I don't believe in government overreach. I believe in traditional values, history, keeping history alive, language and culture, and just Canadian. I believe in, I'm capitalist. I believe in business going forward and having a free market. And a lot of those values don't have to be at all. odds of who I am as a First Nations people and what the, I love having the conversation of

like how these values actually align with our traditional values in a lot of ways too. Not everything, obviously, but that's why I am a conservative because it's a little bit more of a results oriented party rather than just a talking party in my opinion. How did you come to that conclusion after you were chief? What, what shaped your decision to choose a political party and put your name forward? Well, Alberta is kind of the heart of conservativeism in Canada. You know, behind me is this painting with me working with the federal or the provincial government in particular. It's First Nations and, uh, the legislator working together. Um, and I'll, I'll say it this way back, going back to my story when I first became

chief, walking into the room with, um, Prima Notley. And, uh, you know, I was different. I said, hey, can I help me with healthcare? And she said, okay, tell me more. Well, how much do you spend on health care, billions, how much of your budget, a lot? It's the biggest expense. It's going up, right? Yeah, she's like, yeah, it's going up. Well, what if I can help you at that? I'm not asking, I'm not asking for permission. I'm asking for a partner. I want to build a surgical center, and I want to be public and private. And she said, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, you got to know who you're talking to. We're not doing that. Well, I'm looking for partnership, and I'm looking for solutions. And I'm not liking for permission. And so that conversation,

ended. I want to help health care. She just wasn't having it. When the conservatives got in under Jason Kenny, I made the same pitch the day he got elected. And he said, let's do this because we're going to, we just have to take new risks in health care. And so we're going to open up our surgical center here in two months. It's the first on reserve surgical center in Canada. And it's because a conservative government wanted to get results. It's a conservative government wanted to do things new. It was a conservative government that still upholds public health care, but wanted to actually take some risk and do something good with First Nations rather than just saying, no, no, no, we don't believe in that. You and I both know that there is a default position for First Nations and Indigenous

people to go liberal and NDP and not ask any questions and not push back. They're considered very safe voters. What would you say to those individuals who feel like they're obligated to fall under those two parties or they're joining a white supremacist organization that hates them. Sorry, but which individuals, the ones that vote for NDP and liberals? Exactly, yes. Yeah. How do you, are you enjoying the results? Like, are the results good enough for you?

And I'm sure they are for some people, but if you broadly ask First Nations in particular across this country, if things are getting better at the speeds and how they expected them to under the last 10 years in particular, 11 years. I don't think you'll hear a lot of chiefs or First Nations people in general say, like, overall, things are getting better under these governments. So, you know, my interest in these spaces is, you know, I don't go, I'm partisan, I'm conservative, everybody knows that, but I don't approach the conversation with, I need your votes, I need your votes. it's how you actually do it. And this is actually pretty cool. I'm not going smoke, but like, I enjoy the conversation. Can you look at it from this perspective?

Well, here's another way of thinking about it. And I love seeing the light bulbs go off. And people were like, oh, I didn't know that. I didn't know Pierre Pollyov was willing to share tax resources with First Nations. The chiefs from Alberta are always all about resource revenue sharing. And I'm like, well, Pierre's halfway there. and you are always about resource for revenue sharing since the 1930s Natural Resource Transfer Act, you see it as a violation.

These two thought processes align more than the conversations you're having with liberals at the moment. Let's have this one. It seems to open up new ideas and ways to go forward. So that's what I would say that those people is just think about it from a different perspective. Where do you think the bias from First Nations to assume NDP and liberal are going to be better to them comes from? Well, the conservatives aren't perfect. I mean, provincially right now, of course, we're going through a separation referendum here in Alberta. And it was treaty rights that was trying to stop that, obviously. And First Nations are put into a weird spot here in Alberta of wanting to fight for Canada uphold treaty rights, but also being pitted against in this separation question. So, you know, conservatives, conservatives. conservativeists have done some things over the years that obviously weren't exactly indigenous friendly too like all parties do.

I would say liberals have been in power for 11 years and they've obviously not done a good job on anything. And, you know, over the last 11 years, you know, I think with all the money being spent and everything, the other parties have done a decent job at villainizing conservatives. I love my caucus. I feel very heard there. I feel very inspired to contribute. And we just need more people on all parties at the end of the day.

What are your thoughts on Pierre Polyev? Pierre, I wish Pierre was Prime Minister. I aligned with Pierre because, again, he's, he's, I, you know, I was reading his bio from Andrew and, and, Brevity, I actually just appreciate brevity. I appreciate less jargon. I appreciate results. And Pierre is really good at summarizing complex issues down to results oriented from every Canadian family across the country level. And that speaks to me as a First Nations person. That speaks to me as just a kid from Emmington, Alberta. That speaks to me on where this country needs to go because I don't think this country is on the right track. I wouldn't have, I would have, I would have, I wouldn't have run if I just thought if things were going the right way they were supposed to. So I still think Pierre Pollyev, I don't think, I know Pierre Pollyov is the right person for our party.

And I think Pierre Paulyev is still the right person to be Prime Minister Rundee. You were recorded saying liberals were trying to poach you. What happened? Who approached you? Can you tell us the backstory? Yeah. So, you know, last year when Chris Dantramon, left, that was kind of the first, the first iteration of when, you know, we were on, the government

was on track to start poaching even more people. And a few people were musing with me, some of the other MPs on the other side. And finally, it's pretty public now. It's out there. Minister Galmatty just formally sent me a message saying, do you want to have this conversation? And it's always been a no for me at the end of the day. Again, like for, for me, I feel very value in my party. I'm not about to betray the constituents that elect me as a conservative. And the way she put it too, actually, when you really look at the word she used was like, we just need eight more people. That's what's what we're after. So I'm just going to be, I'm just going to be a number over there. Like, like, what would I come over there for? To do what?

Like, I think I have more power influencing you from the opposition and helping you, quite frankly, by challenging it to be better on this team for the ultimate greater good of our communities in Canada. The liberals have tried to push this as anybody who wants to speak to us can come speak to us and they tried to pitch it as they're not going looking for these conversations. Do you think that that's dishonest?

Yeah, absolutely. They tried at least for my personal experience. They came after me. They didn't wait for me. to go talk to them. It was, it was musing and it was, quite frankly, let's get serious about talking about this. And so, yeah, that's dishonest when they portrayed that way. A lot of Canadians are fearful, and I did a breakdown in response to this, about what was offered. Like, how were they getting these people? People who, some of them, who were longtime conservatives, switching over,

who were against vaccine mandates and, like, who had a real roster of, like, stating they were against things, being able to get them to go over. And the liberals have not shared what was offered, how they came to that arrangement. And I think Canadians are rightfully concerned. What would you say to Canadians that are concerned about what was offered to some of these individuals? Well, what's more important? Like, like, staying true to principles and values and how we run this country are just backroom deals. Like, like, and I think that's a reflection of how the liberals, the liberals, um, the liberals, um, the liberals are. as a party. They're just, they're just not principled. And that was what Andrew Shear said, too, is like, they have the advantage of not having any principles. And so I guess they're really good politicians that way. I do believe we're all politicians doesn't have to be a bad word, but it can be bad in that context. Like, who's really running this country? It's a reflection of, of, um, some of the ethics, things that they continuously go through. Um, and that's just not, um,

what I agree with on who should be running this, this country. I think we just needed more principled leader under Pierre Polly of and a conservative government. And again, like, I don't know if there, I do know this country, this country doesn't seem to be on the right path at the end of the day. And it's a reflection of the government. There are individuals like David from Moose on the Loose. I don't know if you know that YouTube channel. He's become very popular. I think he's one of the most influential YouTube commentators. And he's flirting with the idea that there are literally offshore accounts that, that, these MPs are receiving money in that are off the books. Like these are the things he's saying. And I'm just like that, him saying that, I'm not saying he's correct. I'm just saying him saying that really reduces the trust and confidence that British Colombians and Canadians can have in their elected officials.

When this is not being tampered down with clear information from the liberal party saying, this is what was offered. This is how the deal was arranged. This is how it went. This is why this person crossed over. When you just leave it to, they wanted to. and you look at the person's track record and it really looks like they were

on the completely other side of all of these issues and then moved over. I don't think it's unreasonable for people to speculate when there's a vacuum and there's no information filling it. What would you say to that? No, it's not unreasonable at all, quite frankly. And it's, to me, it's a little bit of personally baffling that this doesn't go more noticed, quite frankly, by Canadians.

I mean, when Lori crossed the floor, it came to light that she had to redact a payment to her own company. Again, reflective of her going to the liberals. It's just what they do. And at the end of the day, why are we even having these conversations? We have the, we have the ethics commission. We have all those rules in place.

But this conversation continuously happens and they just luff it off like it's no big deal. And continuously these stories build up without them actually addressing any of the root causes or, let's change. a system to be even more transparent. But they, they slough it off. And at the end of the day, Canadians just, it's a weird paradox in that there's still government, but they have all these scandals coming up.

I mean, Mark Carney, I don't think has ever denied that bike shop on a formal, a formal level where his tax haven is in the Bahamas or Bermuda, wherever it is. And so these stories are going to continue. And it's not going to be a surprise to West Conservatives. And we'll just have to keep the Mark Campbell at the end of the day. What are your thoughts on just staying on the David from Moose on the Loose? He has this whole Moose chart charting out all of Mark Carney's potential conflicts of interest. And I think it's just, if anything else, a statement of citizen journalism and a willingness to kind of grapple with some of these deeper questions.

What are your thoughts on that? I haven't seen David Moose on Loose's chart. I know about a little bit. I don't know about it in detail. But what your question makes me think of as a real instance is, you know, when Michael Sabia, who's on the prime minister's internal team, was asked in committee on whether he divested from Brookfield shares before he took up this role, he said, yeah, I knew it was going to be a conflict. But the prime minister hasn't done that. He hasn't clarified that he's gotten rid of these

conflicts of interest. So his advisor, who's a very smart guy, said, I'll do that. It was pretty obvious to get rid of the conflict. I don't need that, that, I don't need that, um, that conflict on here before I took this job as, as an advisor at the prime minister's office, but the prime minister himself can't do that. I find that, I find that perplexing at the end of the day. I, as you said, I'm nonpartisan, but I will call balls and stripes when I see them. And I see a lot of the media and a lot of liberals going, look it, now that Mark Carney's got his majority, that's proof that Pierre Pauliev's a bad leader and that he's not fit to govern.

And all I think of is like, this is proof of nothing. You did backroom deals. You won't be transparent with Canadians. And you resulted in getting a majority that the democratic system did not give you in the election. This is not proof to me about anything about Pierre Pauliev. He just succeeded in his leadership race,

which everybody was speculating he wasn't going to succeed on. This is, this is, you cannot make a conclusion about Pierre Pauliev's character, who he is based on what the liberal government has been doing. And I just wonder how you grapple with the media and a lot of liberals saying like, this is the end of Pierre Pauliev. It's clearly not the end of Pierre Polyev. In fact, it's pretty happy and I'll be joining Pierre, as you know, tomorrow. But in particular, yesterday, he stood up and said he's going to go fight for Canada and

Alberta to be together. And so I'm pretty excited for that stuff too. It presents an opportunity to lead in our own. backyard in Alberta for conservatives. So Pierre's not going anywhere. He's going to be a great leader. But when it comes to the media and the liberals in particular, you know, the dynamic, I guess, is that everybody was ready to move on from Trudeau. Pierre is probably the most successful opposition leader and was expected to be prime minister. And when Mark Carney won, the media still needed the opposition. It's just, I find it perplexing in that they seem to hold

conservatives more accountable than than than the actual government itself like and I I probably sound like you know the the classic conservative like the media is bad and everything uh it's a it's a it's a flowing it's a flowing it's a bigger picture but even just just in the last 24 hours we had a media story come out that uh what was it 12 or 14 uh liberal MPs penned a penda penned a uh a letter to the prime minister citing the Alberta MOU and walking back environmental, environmental, um, uh, leadership from a liberal perspective. So they're concerned there. But they don't, they don't, they don't, they didn't name any of the MPs. This is from CBC. Like, if that was a conservative letter to Pierre Pauley of rest assured, you'd have names, you'd have, you'd have, you'd have a whole bunch

of things going off. They wouldn't hide it. But it seemed like the CBC's protecting liberals, quite frankly again. And just to that point, again, trying to call balls in strike, you'd have, you'd have, you'd have, you'd have, you'd have a whole bunch of strife's is it's the role of the government to be scrutinized by everyone because they have power, they have money, and they have a budget of approved spending. The role of the official opposition is to be a government in waiting that demonstrates different policy alternatives. And when I've spoken about DRIPA, the big point I made is at the time the BC liberals voted with the NDP to approve DRIPA. And that's not their job. Their job is not to just back what the government's doing when it's a feel good moment. It's to provide other pathways forward.

And so they need to be given more deference, is what I argued on X. The conservatives should be given more deference because they're just providing alternatives. So we don't have to attack the alternatives because that's not what's going to lead the day in the end anyways. We have to hold the government accountable. I don't think any journalist should ever be running cover for the government of the day because they have a PR team and a communication staff to lay out their side. We need to be highlighting what the conservatives think. So we understand what two options are on the table rather than villainizing one, which is what I see a lot on CBC and others, is making it seem like Pierre Polyev's ideas are extreme or crazy.

They're just the alternative to the government leading the day. And I just, I'm often surprised at how much criticism the conservatives get when you have no power and authority to make law. Yeah, again, like I'm in the Ottawa bubble now and it truly is a bubble. That is my reflection, my reflection from an indigenous perspective of the file that I hold with IAC, and it's just the Ottawa bubble with government. And, you know, at the end of the day, the government subsidizes media. I'm not saying that's completely wrong. I think we do need strong media, traditional, and the evolution of independent media and

how that's going forward in this country. But at the end of the day, those people know where their bread and butter comes from in the Ottawa bubble, the media in particular there. And the system's just rigged for them to not attack where their bread and butter comes from. And that's the reality of it. But we'll not use that as an excuse and just keep challenging and empowering, quite frankly, independent media. So I mean, yourself, you represent kind of that new voice that doesn't have to be under that system anymore. And it's what we have to leverage to keep the message to informed Canadians.

A few more quick questions and thank you for sharing your time. What are your perspectives on Prime Minister Mark Carney? He came in with a lot of bluster. He came in saying he's going to fight Trump and stand up to him. He's probably more, he's not probably, he's clearly more focused on politics than rather than standing up for leveraging that fear than actually leading this country. I mean, you know, he said he was going to get a deal done last summer. Mexico is ahead of us, apparently in negotiations with our biggest ally. And so I think he's a lot more of a politician than I, than a businessman than I think people

give him credit for. And, and it's coming at the cost of actually getting this country back on the right track. So for, for Mark Carney, I think he came in with high expectations, but all I've seen out of this, uh, this government for last years is a lot of top. So, you know, like even the Alberta MOU, you know, where we want to build that speed's not seen in generations, but we're going to announce something. Then we're going to announce the next step of the plan. Then we're going to announce the next step of the plan. Then we're going to announce another plan, a plan to have a plan.

That's all I really see out of this government. And again, like the lost art form of consultation and getting there on the ground, I mean, it was even reflective of his minister, his natural resource minister, Tim Hodson's comment when he was asked about First Station's consultation. Well, they want you to go see them. Well, there's a thing called Zoom is what he said. And again, it's like these guys are a little bit more political than they were actual leaders at the end of day. So obviously I'm partisan, but I'm going to give Mark Carney a failing grade on the expectations he set into results that we're actually getting a year in. How worried are you about China's influence on First Nation communities? That's a great question.

I'd be curious to hear a little bit more from the B. First Nations perspectives. I'm going to BC tomorrow, so maybe I'll make some inquiries. Being a member of parliament, I've, again, like I was from a small First Nation. I didn't deal lots with immigration. That's a lot of my role at this moment in time. And, you know, you get educated on your national files being a member of parliament for Canada. And you do see some stuff that surprises you in that I was ignorant towards and it comes to Chinese interference at micro levels across nomination, things like that. So I think it's a definitely real concern that we just can't fluffily, and it's one of those, again, like House Leader Warbuss said, it's probably a tough

conversation that we got to actually run towards and address rather than just keeping it in the shadows at the end of the day. So it raises a new challenge for me that you ask that question and I'll have to be educated more. So am I sounding alarm bells, the real alarm that there has to be investigations today? No, but I think we have to bring this conversation out into the open more as a society and as the indigenous leaders and Canadian leaders. I don't know how much you've kept up on the 215 anomalies in cam loops, but how do we balance having tough conversations about the realities of the lack of excavation with calling people like Francis Widowson and others denialists?

Yeah, this one's tough. I mean, it gets lost in, again, it gets lost in, in Andrip, it gets lost in Drippa, it gets lost in residential schools, it gets lost like in Stephen Harper's apology for residential schools. I was just reading that yesterday actually. And, you know, I have to tell some people who've started the narrative that, you know, residential schools were good. They were, they were intended to do good. And it's just like, guys, like, there's a reason by Stephen Harper apologized. You know, Camlos is a very difficult situation. I think it's gotten to the point, though, that Camloops band owes a little bit more, not a little bit more, owes transparency for public dollars that were spent there.

You know, when First Nations Transparency Act implemented by a conservative government and not implemented by the liberal one, I always actually defend that document because chiefs have to report public dollars and where it goes, even Canadian public dollars. I won't waver from that. I think it's totally fair as a First Nations person and a non-Indigenous person from their perspective. And so there are some outstanding answers I think that are owed for just that one particular ban in sight. And there are real questions that need to be answered at the end of the day. Chief Billy Moran, thank you for being willing to share your time with us today and discuss

a lot of these really challenging topics. I'll be honest when I saw the comments about you not Floral Crossing. It was a refreshing just because I've long struggled with whether or not any of our politicians have integrity, have a sense of principle that they're willing to hold to. And that only comes out through action and demonstration. And I don't believe that there should be an option to cross the floor if I had my way. I think it should go to a by-election. And I understand that that's not our system today. But when I heard that and when I heard your comments, it was just really refreshing and meant a lot to know that people can stand on principles and that that's not removed through the Ottawa bubble. And it just meant to,

great deal. And I enjoy following your work. I saw the comments you had made on stage about not becoming like the reserve system and relying on funding from the federal government come out. And I just, I think there's a way to address so many of the problems, First Nations and others face without getting into partisan politics and with just focusing on results. And I find we've fallen so much in love with 15 billion for this, 20 billion for that, rather than going, what are the outcomes you're willing to deliver? And how do we keep the cost as low is possible. And I hope we can get back to a politics that looks like that. And with individuals like yourself involved, I have confidence that that might be possible.

No, thank you for that. And what you're making me reflect on is between BC and some of the indigenous challenges out there and Alberta separatism. It goes back on what's the topic of the day for me. So today, it's Alberta separatism. In my mind, now, after watching the Premier speak last night. Obviously, I'm not a separatist and will be campaigning with Pierre to keep Alberta and Canada, but, you know, the separatists have valid, had valid concerns with Ottawa, valid frustrations with Ottawa, but you know who else does? First Nations people. And referendum are not, we're not moving, they're not moving. And so let's talk about the similarities and what we can do together rather than just focusing on separatism because we do have things in common. I actually agree

when the Premier says that Ottawa has their foot on Alberta too much? Well, you know who else? They have their foot over? First Nations. And so how do we leverage that challenge and our desire to change that together to push back on Ottawa and the powers that be? So let's focus on our similarities and the results rather than just our differences at the end of the day.

Just briefly on that, because you brought it up a few times and I've avoided touching on it. But I have a feeling we're playing a bit of 40 chests here. and one, my understanding is that there's a lot of pressure within Premier Daniel Smith's caucus to proceed with this referendum. But two, I mean, you could not have more pressure on the Liberal party right now to start performing on some of the things you're describing with this pending referendum. So even just the door being open places a ton of pressure on the Liberal Party of Canada to start delivering on some of their claims about a pipeline and stuff. And I think that That may be a chess move that's being played here.

Well, yeah, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's a game of poker with federalism and a whole bunch of things at the end of the day. Um, but I also reflect on from for them, uh, they have to be leaders. And so, you know, my question before I left, even Ottawa two weeks ago was like, why, why, why, when, whenever there's a, a separation referendum in Quebec, it's a liberal government. why in BC that we see so much division between First Nations and these questions between ordinary residents of BC, there's a liberal government in Ottawa? Why is it, why separatism is at an all-time high and there's a potential referendum in Alberta? There's a liberal government in Ottawa.

Like there's a correlation here, everybody, and I think it's pretty obvious. And it's something the liberals clearly have some work to do. And I look forward with Pierre to actually just the opportunity to lead a conversation here in Alberta in particular to keep us together. Absolutely. Thank you again. Chief Billy Moran for joining us today. Yeah. Thank you.