The Ben Mulroney Show - Are Carney's elbows up or down? And does it make him look like a chicken?

Episode Date: July 17, 2025

- Craig Baird/Canadian History Ehx - Dr. Eric Kam - Nainesh Kotak/Kotak Law If you enjoyed the podcast, tell a friend! For more of the Ben Mulroney Show, subscribe to the podcast! ⁠⁠⁠⁠��⁠https://link.chtbl.com/bms⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Also, on youtube -- ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.youtube.com/@BenMulroneyShow⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Follow Ben on Twitter/X at https://x.com/BenMulroney Insta: ⁠@benmulroneyshow⁠ Twitter: ⁠@benmulroneyshow⁠ TikTok: ⁠@benmulroneyshow⁠ Enjoy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This podcast is sponsored by BetterHelp. If you've been following the news, like really following it, you know how exhausting it can be. Politics, conflict, uncertainty, it's a lot to carry. And for many men, there's this expectation to stay calm, stay in control and not talk about how it's affecting you. But the truth is, you're allowed to feel overwhelmed.

You're allowed to say, I'm not okay right now. And trust me, I have been there. Whether it's the state of the world stress at home, or just feeling like you've got to have it all together and have all the answers, you don't have to hold it in. Better help is here to help with the world's largest network of licensed therapists. They've already supported over 5 million people, you can connect with a therapist online from wherever you are, no waitlist, no office visits. And if it's not the right fit you can switch any time it's time to put your mental health on the agenda. Talk it out with better help. Visit betterhelp.com slash Mulrooney today to get 10 percent off your first month.

That's better help. H e l p dot com slash Mulrooney. No frills delivers get groceries delivered to your door from no frills with PC Express shop online and get fifteen dollars in PC Optimum Points on your first five orders. Shop now at NoFrails.ca. Welcome to the Ben Mulroney Show on this Thursday, July 17. Thank you so much for spending a little bit of your day with us. Yesterday were the ESPN awards, the ESPN sports awards and the host was Shane Gillis, who is one of the top standup comics working today.

His work as Donald Trump is some of the best. And you'll remember he was, a few years ago, he was hired as part of the new class of Saturday Night Live and promptly fired before the new season started because he said some off-color things in a podcast. Well, he's had the last laugh as his career has exploded in popularity. And I mean, and he hasn't changed anything of who he is. And he has maintained the same brand of comedy. And the world finally

has just realized that it's the world that was insane. And and so more power to Shane. Yesterday as the host, his his entire monologue was sort of sports themed. And and his his his take on the WNBA and its popularity was encapsulated in this one joke. Let's listen. Four time WNBA All Star Brittany Hicks is here. Give it up for Brittany, everybody. listen. Four time WNBA All Star Brittany Hicks is here. Give it up for Brittany everybody. I'm joking around. That's my friend's wife. I knew none of

you knew WNBA players. Yeah, he he highlighted the camera pan to his friend's wife and everyone applauded. And then he pointed out you're all full of it because you don't know who should now to be fair, you could do the same thing with a number of NHL players. And there's some, I'm sure some obscure, obscure people in other sports that would be caught in the same thing. But four time All Star. It points out that, you know, there's there is a lot of, I

mean, we try to will things into existence. And the NBA has had a tough slog for years. But the the the end result should be if the butts are in the seats, and if the people are watching, then the league should be successful. And right now they're enjoying a great moment, due in large part to Caitlin Clark. But I think he liked to call out the crowd for for being performative in their championing of this person that they didn't even know. And I thought that's very on brand for Shane Gillis. So

now it looks like we're getting a sense of what our new arrangement with Donald Trump's America is going to look like what what this trade agreement is going to look like. And apparently, softwood lumber, which has been a sticking point in our relationship with the United States for decades. I think George W. Bush first imposed sanctions on our country and tariffs on our softwood. They've been going back and forth on this forever. And not for nothing. The softwood lumber industry in British Columbia has been decimated over this. There are I was speaking with somebody who's on the board of a lumber company in British Columbia, and who shall remain nameless until I asked for his permission to name him. And he says that one of the most underreported

stories in in in Canada is how many lumber yards and lumber manufacturing processing plants are are closing in British Columbia and instead are opening up operations in the United States. And we just don't talk about that here. And, and so that is a conversation that that is on the table. Mark Carney has also pointed out that that there is going to be help for the steel industry in Canada. He said we're going to be more reliant on our own steel to steel is what has built this

country, he said, a little bit different from what he said in Atlantic Canada during the election campaign where he said I think he actually looked at the interviewer and said how much steel do you use every day to the interviewer and it was a quite a foot in mouth moment forgetting that, as he just said, steel is what built this country. But all that to say, it's a little bit, it's a little bit confusing to figure out like, what position are we taking in our negotiations with the United States?

And Kate Harrison, who is a regular contributor on the CBC, gave her assessment. I'm getting very confused, confused Catherine about where to put my elbows, they're up and they're down. And if they keep moving that way, we're going to look like a bunch of chickens. Yeah, I mean, look, I hate elbows up. I hate the expression. But I didn't invent it. And I didn't write it all the way to 24 Sussex Drive. And by the way, I know nobody lives

there anymore. But it's an expression. I didn't ride it all the way to 24 Sussex Drive. And by the way, I know nobody lives there anymore, but it's an expression. I didn't do that. I got people excited about it. I had it, it was my, it was Mark Carney's rallying cry and it helped get him elected. And yeah, it's a little, he's probably tired of it as well. He's probably tired of people using it against him now, but I'm not the one who brought it into the parlance of our time.

And so I am going to use it to remind people that, that it was a political tool. And I'm not the only one who is taking issue with this government on this file. I'm going to play something for you. Now I'm going to play the, the leader of the block Quebec Y Francois Blanchet's assessment of Mark Carney. I think it's, first of all, I think it's too early to be this negative

about our prime minister. And so I'm playing for you, not because I subscribe to what he says, but because it is one of the opinions on Parliament Hill. When he said that, Mr. Carney said that there would probably be some tariffs left after an agreement. He just mentioned something obvious. I said during the campaign and after that, next free trade agreement would be less free

than before. He should never have said that he would restore the full free trade agreement. You should not have said that because he now has to admit his own failure. Yeah, he went on and said, you know, that the liberal government is obsessed with these national, these these national infrastructure plans that will take 10 to 12 years to build. Meanwhile, 75% of the economy is on the line with this new with this new trade agreement with the United States, and he's not putting enough attention on that. I don't know that either

one of those things is necessarily true. I suspect that in the Trudeau years, it would have taken 1012 years to build a pipeline. And but this prime minister has promised us to work and build at lightning speed. So I think that that timeline could be truncated. But look, if there's a takeaway from the last election, it's that whatever was promised by this prime minister to get elected, he doesn't necessarily want to be held to. So, you know, he promised, for example, that he would, that he would say that he was going to save the CBC is going to give them 150

million new dollars. And now he's telling them that they have to find their own cuts, 15% cuts. a million new dollars and now he's telling them that they have to find their own cuts, 15% cuts. Okay, sounds like that's more in line with conservative thinking that didn't get Pierre Poliev elected. And it feels like, you know, he said he's the guy who's going to get the best deal from Donald Trump. And now we're being told, hey, he's an impossible person to negotiate with. Well, if that's the case, then you could have voted for Pierre Poliev. So it seems like Pierre Poliev was going to, Pierre Poliev telegraphed that, that there was going to be bad news on the horizon. If he got elected,

that he was a, that there were going to be cuts, that there was going to be choices that would be, have to be made. I don't remember. Mark Carney suggesting that if he was elected, that there was any bad news coming our way. It wasn't a wasn't a question of choices and cuts. It was or and priorities. It was vote for me because I'm the guy to steer us through this crisis, or vote for the other guy and he's going to capitulate to Donald Trump. And he's going to take away the CBC and he's going to capitulate to Donald Trump and he's going to take away the CBC

and he's going to cut the silver service. Well, it feels like you're capitulating to Donald Trump. You're going to cut the CBC and you're going to cut the civil service. Like these, at least one guy was telling us the truth. And if you're not going to, if you're not going to, if you're going to govern the way he was gonna govern,

then why are you here? Like what is special about you, Mr. Prime Minister? And I'm more than happy to live in a world where you're the right guy. But right now I'm not seeing a whole lot of difference between the Canada that he said we were living in and the one that you are now governing. I'm I'm I don't know the difference. I don't know that there is a

difference. And if there's if there isn't a difference, then tell me how you're governing differently than the guy that you absolutely rejected and that Canadians turn their back on. That's a that's a conversation for another time. Or maybe we'll just keep it going over the course of the next three and a half years. All right, don't go anywhere. When we come back, class is in session. The professor is here, Craig Baird, to talk about the death penalty being abolished across this country. Welcome back to the Ben Mulroney Show. Thank you so much for joining us wherever you may find us.

If you watch us on YouTube or you listen on Spotify or Apple Podcasts or Amazon Music, wherever you find us, we are glad you joined us because right now class is in session with the professor Craig Baird, the host of Canadian History X. Craig, great to talk to you. of Canadian History X. Craig, great to talk to you. Well, thanks for having me. Okay, so on July 16th, 1976, something very big happened in Canada. Yeah, it was the day that Canada officially abolished the death penalty and was kind of a watershed moment in Canadian history because, you know, over the course of our history from 1867 to about that point,

1,481 people were sentenced to death in Canada, and of those, 710 were executed. But by about the 1950s, we were starting to see a trend to move away from the death penalty, and various changes would happen. So, since the Canadian Confederation, capital punishment was kind of used for murder, sexual assault, and treason. But by the 1950s, it was mostly of used for murder, sexual assault and treason, but by the 1950s it was mostly just used for murder and John Dieffenbaker, who was somebody who didn't really support the death penalty, he began to commute

sentences when he became Prime Minister and commuted most of the death sentences that came across his desk or at least his cabinet did by the time he was he was Prime Minister and then they started to make more changes. So in 1961 murder was reclassified into capital murder and non-capital murder and capital murder would be what we would call first degree murder. Now it was planned and deliberate and that is what would bring the death penalty while non-capital murder would just bring a life sentence. So it was kind of a gradual move. It wasn't a sudden thing that we had to just get rid of the death penalty. It was something that happened over the course of pretty much 20 years through three different

prime ministers. But how much of a contentious fight was it to ultimately get rid of it? It really was because the country was very divided on it. There were many who supported having the death penalty. There were many who didn't support it. And by the time we got both to 1962, that's when Arthur Lucas and Ronald Turpin were the last two people to be put to death in Canada. They were put to death for the murder of a police informant and a police officer. And again, that was something that would be related to capital murder. So Lester B. Pierce, when he came to power in 1963, he had all of the death sentences

commuted as a matter of policy by his federal cabinet, and that was something that continued to through with Pierre Trudeau. So that would be our de facto death penalty, or de facto abolishment. People could still be sentenced to death, but they would usually just have their sentences commuted by that point. And so in 1967, the bill was passed to put a five-year moratorium on the use of the death penalty except in the case of killing a police officer

or a prison guard. And in 1973, that was continued. And then like you said, in 1976, Bill C-84 was passed on a free vote in the House of Commons, 130 to 124. And that officially abolished the death penalty in Canada for everything except military offenses. That wouldn't happen until 1999 and there was an attempt to bring the death penalty back in 1987 but that failed by 148 to 127 and quite a few prominent progressive conservatives including

your father and Joe Clark opposed having the death penalty be reinstated. So that was the last time that Canada kind of had anything go through the House of Commons to bring back the death penalty. Was there a parallel between the voices in the House of Commons and the voices of the people? Were the people generally against the death penalty? They were, yeah, quite a bit. In fact, they were more against the death penalty than they are now. We're about 50-50 now, but back in about the 1970s and 1980s and 1990s, it was about 30-40% who supported the death penalty. And a lot of things related to that, like David Milgaard, you know, being exonerated after spending over 20 years in prison. If he still had the death penalty,

he probably would have been put to death for a crime he didn't commit. So stories like that in the news really had a lot of people against the death penalty so that innocent people weren't being put to death. I mean, to me, the fact that it took 20 years and it was done slowly, right? Like the fact that the Prime Minister of Canada just started commuting people's sentences. That is a great indicator as to where the country was going. Absolutely. And I think it's very telling that it was through three prime ministers, including prime ministers from different parties who kind of started the process. It wasn't just one party that put this in and then, you know, pushed it through. It was something

that happened on both sides of the aisle. Well, thank you for that day in the life of Canada. Now, let's talk about the next episode of Canadian History X. Norman Bethune is the focal point. The only thing I know about Norman Bethune is there is a statue of him in Montreal. Yeah, and that took a while to get put there. So, it's kind of a funny story with Norman Bethune is that he was celebrated in another country much more before he was celebrated in Canada. But he was born in Ontario in 1890 and kind of a cool fact about him is that he's related to our third Prime Minister, Sir John Abbott, as well as actor Christopher Plummer. So from an early age, he was a big advocate for universal health care in Canada,

and he eventually served as a frontline trauma surgeon during the Spanish Civil War in the 1930s. And it was there he actually developed a mobile blood transfusion service at the front lines that would become standard in future wars. So then after the Spanish Civil War he went to China and that was where he would bring modern medicine to rural China and he would treat sick villagers and he would treat wounded soldiers from both sides of the war that was happening between China and he would treat sick villagers and he would treat wounded soldiers from both sides of the war that was happening between China and Japan. And while operating on a wounded Chinese soldier, he actually cut his finger on a bone and that

would develop into blood poisoning and he died in 1939. But in China, he's very much revered. He is one of the few Westerners to have statues in his honor many buildings are named for him schools are named for him and in fact Canada's highest medical honor the Bassoon Medal or sorry China's highest medical honor the Bassoon Medal is actually named for him so he was very much celebrated in China long before we were putting statues up or naming things for him in Canada and that would be because he was very much pro-communist and so he was quite political wasn't he? He very much was yeah and he was part of the Communist Party

of Canada and things like that so because of the Cold War it took a while before Canada started to to appreciate somebody who had a very big impact on especially the history of war medicine through his blood transfusion mobile unit. Yeah, some people say that he is the most famous Canadian because just because of how popular he is in China. Oh, I would say that's quite accurate. Yeah, I mean you have a billion people who know who he is in China. So he definitely is probably one of the most famous Canadians in history and kind of funny that it took so long for him to be recognized for that in his own country, but it was so recognized in another country.

All right, well, let's listen to a little bit of a clip from Norman Bethune on Canadian History X. In China, Norman was appalled by the lack of surgical instruments and medicine and the poor training of the staff working under him. At one point he wrote in his diary that the only doctor he found in the area was also the dentist's druggist and his shop was filled with wounded people waiting for dressings, for which they were charged $1 each. To remedy the situation Norman began training nurses and doctors and invented various surgical

instruments. Normally began training nurses and doctors and invented various surgical instruments One was a wooden carrying case that allowed for easier transportation of supplies and drugs While also allowing for an operating table to be set up for mobile units He also used whatever he could find to help the wounded in one case He used wire as clamps and pieces of sharpened iron as instruments Another time he was forced to use a wood saw to amputate a leg. In April 1938 he gave his own blood to a wounded soldier to convince villagers that they could donate blood without being impacted themselves. This led to the first blood donor clinic in China. In August and September of 1938 he supervised a five-week

training program for staff. On September 15, 1938, he opened a permanent hospital to train doctors and nurses. And within a month, it was destroyed by Japanese forces. Well thank you very much my friend. Another great lesson for Canadians. We really appreciate it. Oh well thanks for having me again. And don't forget you can listen to Canadian history. Where can people listen to it?

I can listen to Canadian history. Excellent. The HX on all podcast platforms and every weekend on the course radio network. Just check your local listings. Thank you very much, my friend. Have a great rest of your week. You as well. So great talking with with our good friend, Craig Baird. He's he's one of those guys who he's he's found. He's found his mission in life. And his mission in life is simple, teaching us about history that we should know. And yes, there

are stories out there that he finds that are quite obscure. But by and large, I mean, should I think we should all know the history of how we got to, to a world where we do not have the death penalty anymore. And the fact that, you know, I knew that we got rid of it, but not why or how really speaks to the fact that he there's a stories out there. We've got a new wireless service coming to Canada. That's coming up next. Now that the warm weather is here, is it time to get rid of your old car? Oh sure, it's served you well, but you know, it'd be kind of nice to have something new. Maybe a convertible. Maybe something with a sunroof. Oh sure, it's served you well, but you know, it'd be kind of nice to have something new.

Maybe a convertible. Maybe something with a sunroof. I know, I know, car shopping can be an overwhelming experience. Is this a good price for the vehicle? Am I even looking at a vehicle that's right for me? This is a big purchase and you need to get it right. With CarGurus, those problems go away. They have hundreds of thousands of cars from top-rated dealers so you can find the best

deal. CarGurus has the tools that you need to confidently shop for your next car. Advanced research, unbiased dealer ratings, in-depth car details, price history, all that. When you're ready, CarGurus will connect you with the right trusted dealer. It's all very transparent and hassle-free. It's no wonder CarGurus is the number one rated car shopping app in Canada on the Apple App Store and Google Play Store.

Buy your next car today with CarGurus at CarGurus.ca. Go to CarGurus.ca to make sure your next big deal is the best deal. That's C-A-R-G-U-R-U-S.ca, CarGurus.ca. Whether you own a bustling hair salon, c-r-g-u-r-u-s dot c-a, cargurus dot c-a. Whether you own a bustling hair salon, a painting company that just landed a big job, or the hottest new bakery in town,

you need business insurance that can keep up with your evolving needs. With flexible coverage options from TD Insurance, you only pay for what you need. Get a quote in minutes from TD Insurance today. TD, ready for you. Welcome back to the Ben Mulrooney show. And we talk a lot on this show about issues that affect your pocketbook. And so to talk about those things more in depth, we bring on people who are far smarter than me,

including Eric Kam, economics professor at Toronto Metropolitan University. Eric, welcome to the show. Thank you very much, Benedict. How are you? I'm well, I'm well. But I read this news today, despite 10 years of the liberal governments,

successive liberal governments, hell bent an intent on social engineering their way into a more equitable country that never before has the income gap between the country's richest and lowest income households has ever been this bad. Right. And this should be very, very scary to people, Ben. And I'm going to tell you why I come on your show. I come on the morning show. We talk about the fact that the economy has not shown any real growth in almost a decade and how you cannot beat that by just dropping interest rates and having some short run spending. That does a few things, but it doesn't grow the ability

of our economy to create goods and services. Well, if I said to you, I wanna destroy a capitalist economy, how do we do it? How do we gut it? This is the playbook. You get rid of the middle class. What you do is you make sure that the wealthy remain wealthy. And that's not a criticism because Lord knows in this country, we need wealthy people to

generate wealth and to do some hiring. But it's not, you know, and again, the poor people, well, all due respect, they don't generate a lot of wealth. And so it's the middle class that's been caught in this mess. And so the division between having more rich and more poor, where you know, there's nowhere else to gut. And so we've lost that middle. And that's really scary because as your father was want to say, it is the middle class, it is small business owners that drive an economy. And we are

driving that class out right now, Ben, and that is a recipe for disaster. Yeah. And you know, we talk about it a lot that that on the left in this country seems hell bent on perpetrating a class, like a war amongst the classes. And, and despite and so so you had a the drumbeat of the liberal government was going to work hard for the middle class and those striving to achieve to enter the middle class. But we're seeing that

the the the results of 10 years of their policies is that there are fewer and fewer people in that middle class, let alone having the ability to join it. Let's make no mistake about this liberal government, Ben. They are not truly interested in economic growth. They are truly interested to kowtowing to special interest groups. They have done that well but that is all they have done and really until they create some supply-side growth and some growth outside of the public sector, this middle-class crunch is only going to get worse and as I said it is truly a much like we make a joke, if you want to destroy an economy, drop a bomb or bring in rent control. But the way to do that from the inside is to get rid of the

middle class. All right. Let's move on to a story that you know, maybe 10 years ago would have excited me, but I've seen this playbook before and it doesn't end up resulting in massive changes for Canadians. There's another wireless service that has a rear to Ted. And I'm like, meh, like it's, it is what it is. We have an overly regulated system. And, and so I don't think I'm getting excited about this, but tell us a little bit more about this new player in the system.

Well, it's Kajiko and they're a pretty big company. I mean, they're billions and billions of dollars worth of company. And so you're right, because again, I talk a lot about one of the biggest three problems in this country is a lack of competitiveness and we don't have enough competition. So, you know, we don't have enough productivity,

research and innovation. So on the surface, you say, okay, well, here we go. Let's try this, but you stole my thunder because of the regulations because of the government controls because of the caps on these companies and their Ability to create wealth and to make money This is probably going to be much ado about nothing and in fact we got to talk again when they release they haven't released any of their information on Pric pricing or availability. But I think you're going to see this to be something that lasts either a very short period of

time, or Bell or Rogers just buy up in the in the end anyway, because we know that we have in the world, the least amount of choice in this country for telecommunications. And we have the least amount of choice in terms of cell phones. And let me tell you, one more player isn't going to fix it. But you know, I can see the other side of the equation. I mean, we have the biggest country, the second largest landmass of any country, but we have a such a small population that in order for them to build out the infrastructure required in this country is a huge outlay of cash,

right? Whereas in the United States, you got so many players and you got so many people that you can you can spread out that investment, the cost of that investment far on a far greater group of people. And you can end up giving them I think lower lower cost cell phone service. Ben, listen, people are not going to like when I say this, especially in this environment where we're taught to be afraid of American people. But I'm not you really want to see competition. You really want to see prices drop. Let Verizon come here and sell some phones.

Yeah, let AT&T come in here and sell some phones. And then my friend, you'll see prices drop because Rogers and Bell won't know what hit them. Well, yeah, but I you know, and that was, frankly, I don't care about my national sovereignty is not hinged on on who's providing me a cell phone service. Like I don't view myself as more Canadian because my phone is brought to me by Bell versus Verizon, you know, it doesn't doesn't matter to me. And if it was opened up, and, you know, as Verizon builds out the next generation of 5g networks, they just tack on the top 10 Canadian cities,

that's a rounding error for them. And for us, it's it's a cost that we can defray over, you know, the continent. So I don't know why we're so afraid of something like that. And frankly, I don't know if Rogers or Bell would be that afraid if they had to say partner with one of these companies, it was Verizon Bell, or Verizon Rogers, I don't know that they would they would be upset with the help provided by their big brother south of the border. Well, that's right. And you know, one of the words I use that's key in an

economy is disruption. Eventually, when something doesn't work, you have to disrupt the system. And I don't want to pile on Bell and Rogers, they're very successful companies, but it's time to disrupt. It's time to say, you don't have a monopoly that you think you have. Well, they do right now, but it would be nice to have some of these other monolith companies come in and say, okay, Bell and Rogers, you got to polish up your act here and offer some more at a lower price, or we're going to kick your, you know what, and take your customers. That just might do something to the research and innovation of this country. Right now, there's no reason for our big companies to fear anything. Well, let's talk about the state of the EV sector. I was really surprised to read an article in the Toronto Star that that there are there are rebates out there for EVs, but not first of all, they're not the rebates I thought they were and they are not applied, I think either evenly or fairly. Sorry, yeah, you know what? Okay, so this is a cluster, you know what?

This is a mess and I really believe in people. I believe that economic agents react to incentives and this is what happens when incentives go haywire. People don't know what the truth is anymore. Some people were offered incentives, they got taken away. They were offered them at the dealerships, they got taken away. You had some people who purchased on the promise of an incentive and now that incentive doesn't exist. So I think what you're seeing right now is not just a general apathy toward the EV market but a good chunk of the population that said I can afford an EV and I like the idea

of not buying gas anymore, but I don't know who to believe and until I know who to believe my money stays in the bank. Yeah, and like, I don't know how you feel about this. But this, at some point, the car companies in this country are going to ask the government, look, you gotta you gotta get off the fence here. What are you going to do with your with your EV mandate, because we can't plan for the future with if we think that this mandate is going to stay in place, we can't like

what are we are we going to convert our factories are we going to convert that the auto every automotive plant to electric now, the uncertainty of that mandate, given how few people are buying into the EV ecosystem right now is I think, of great detriment to the big car companies here in the country. It's the same as the tariffs, Ben, as soon as you throw in all of this risk and uncertainty, even willing consumers are

going to keep their money in the bank and say I need a direct message. And this is the problem with the EV market, the same as the tariff on goods, is that we just have so many conflicting stories. They come in, they come out, it changes. You really can't blame people for not trusting the system anymore because the system keeps changing and moving the goalposts. Hey, Eric Kemp, thank you very much. We appreciate your time today. Stay healthy, Benedict. All right. When we come back, we're going be talking about the rise of of e bikes across this country and

the impact it's having on on our roads is making things far more complicated. Is it also making things more dangerous? Welcome back to the Ben Mulroney show and want to spend some time during this segment talking about the over complication, I believe, on the streets, not just of Toronto, but around this country with the invention and the popularization of e-bikes. There have been, it's an explosion of e-bikes that seem to have popped up all over this country. And it's, they're making, they're making the streets less safe and they're making, and they are very dangerous for a lot of the people riding them.

For context, an e-bike, it has a maximum of assisted speed of 32 kilometers an hour. And what we've noticed is a few years ago, there was one person treated for an accident in the city of Toronto that's gone up over 400% since then. We have liability issues, insurance issues, health issues, responsibility issues, who has the right of way? I don't know the answers to any of those questions. So to break it

down and to hopefully offer some clarity on this increasingly complicated issue, we're joined by Nanesh Kotak of Kotak Law. Nanesh, thank you so much for being here. Thank you for having me, Ben. Yeah, so there's that there are a couple of stories that are in the news, at least in the city of Toronto. But this is a national issue. These these e bikes came out of nowhere. And and they are very, very popular, not just for getting around the city, but they're popular for couriers and food service delivery. And so there's more and more of them out there. And, and so I guess finding out what the rules of the road are and how we can better share it, I think is always an important thing. I think so. Absolutely. I absolutely agree. You know, I look at it this way. Certainly,

we want to encourage green travel. We want to encourage, you know, get people getting out there. But there comes with it significant insurance related pitfalls and obviously safety risks as well. Yeah. And we this this was news to me. It didn't seem like I ever read this headline, but there's an e- bike courier that was charged after a collision with a woman she was just walking across the street. And apparently the the e bike, the rider driver was not paying attention. The she suspects that he was trying

looking down at his phone in order to possibly get that next get that next order. And she sustained significant injuries and he was charged. Yeah, absolutely. This can happen and you could be charged under the Highway Traffic Act. Now, e-bikes are not considered motor vehicles in our legislation. They're power assisted vehicles, but nevertheless you could be charged. And also, in fact, under the criminal code, if you ride these e-bikes impaired, you'll be considered to be driving a motor vehicle under the criminal code and you could actually end up with a criminal conviction and lose your actual driver's license, have that suspended. So that's something to

actual driver's license have that suspended. So that's something to certainly look out for. In terms of safety, we do know this, the hospital for sick children put out a bulletin last year in August, where they said, look, children under 16 should not operate e-devices. They simply should not do so because it places them at risk of serious injury. And in fact,

our regulations regarding e bikes are at least in Ontario, that you need to be 16. Yeah, but I think we see, unfortunately, a lot of younger people on e bikes and also on e scooters on e scooters as well. Yeah, but putting themselves at risk. But the system in place, it's not even a system. It's this confluence of, and in the absence of rules, people are gonna make up their own rules, right? And it just feels to me like we don't have enough guidance or enough leadership on this file. So the e-bikes became popular,

we started throwing around bike lanes, and more and more I see in the city of Toronto, a bike lane is be is used almost like a dedicated food delivery service line. And while you say that the, the bikes are technically not motor vehicles, they're traveling sometimes faster than the motor vehicles, because we have we've lowered the speed limits, we've caused congestion all over the city. And these guys are able to get from point A to point B with with almost unfettered access. And so as a driver, the the the dynamic on the road has gotten

so much more complicated than it ever was before. It used to be me on on as a driver on the road and pedestrians on the on the sidewalk, and cyclists, you know, had to share the road with me. And now it's far more complicated than that and far more accelerated. And the risks to me are far higher than they've ever been. You're absolutely right. Look, e-bikes, they can travel up to 32 kilometers an hour, if they're modified to go beyond

that, then that that will be illegal. And they're considered to be motor vehicles, and you would need they're almost like a motorcycle at that point where you need insurance. It is a significant problem. One thing is, you know, despite them being motorized or you know, you cannot they don't have heavy sound like a motorcycle. Right. So there's a greater risk to them that other drivers on the drivers on the road are not going to hear or see them There's also a great risk to to normal cyclists right who are who are peddling away in that bike lane and maybe unaware that somebody is coming up behind them in an excessive rate of Speed and we are seeing these types of these types of accidents Ben And the thing is here because the e-bike rider is not required to have insurance, just you know, a motor vehicle motorcycle, you have to have insurance to cover you for liability. They don't have to have it. So if you get a situation where an e-bike rider strikes a pedestrian or strikes another cyclist, there's no insurance indemnification. So in other words, the pedestrian

cannot claim accident benefits under their own insurance policy. And if they sue the e-bike rider, you better hope they have assets because there'll be no insurance indemnification. It's a ticking time bomb for serious accidents to happen and where there's lack of compensation. Well, there's also, and this is something that I did not know until I read this story about the ebike rider driver who was who was charged is that as these guys are hustling to get the next order,

so that they don't get beaten to the punch, they they may be developing the habit of constantly looking down at their phone on the off chance that there is an order that comes through. They said if you're not quick off the draw, if you're not one of the first people to, to accept it, you may miss out on business. And that is, I mean, if that's not the definition of distracted driving, which I have been told as a driver is one of the worst things I can do, it's akin to driving drunk.

And these guys are going at the speed of a car. I don't see why we are not more heavy handed on that. We need, you know, listen, they could be charged actually for four of it. You know, they're subject to the rules of the role, just like a cyclist would be as well. And in terms of the Highway Traffic Act. But I do agree. I think municipalitiesist would be as well and in terms of the Highway Traffic Act. But I do agree, I think municipalities in particular, as well as the province need to look at this issue. And instead of having a hodgepodge bit of rules about the weight of the bike and the helmet and your speed, they need to have, but I would, you know, my view is they should

be required to have insurance, first of all. I mean, if you're, if you're using your e-bike for a job and you're out there at a speed that is really much faster than sometimes the car and a regular cyclist, my view is there should be mandatory insurance for e-bikes, particularly if they're commercial use. Well, yeah.

And hopefully, we would see something like that because there's unfortunately avoid in coverage. Now look, if a e-bike rider is struck by a motor vehicle, and yes, they'll be at a claim accident benefits under their own or the other driver's policy to be able to sue, but the loopholes are to the unfortunate cyclists or pedestrians who will not be able to get covered

if there's an accident at the fault of an e-bike. Well, because we've incentivized these, these couriers who are who are making their money on these, these food delivery service, we've incentivized them to ditch their car and to buy one of these e-bikes, they can get around the city faster, which means they can do more deliveries. And they don't have to have the added burden of any sort of insurance. Yeah, and I think that should change. They're likely would be

some coverage, you know, if there's a lawsuit, you might get Uber reaped, you'd name them in the action, right? You're the contractor, you should have checked this person's credentials, but that's a roundabout way of doing the right thing, which should be, listen, if you're using it for commercial use, have insurance, and my view is anybody riding an e-bike should have a rider on at least their home insurance

so they can have coverage. There is apparently, well, it's called a pedal power insurance. I'm not plugging anybody, I don't know much about that, but there are other, there are insurance facilities out there that will provide insurance. And as an e-bike rider, you kind of want that, you don't want to be sued and personally responsible if you do something and you want some coverage for your own injuries as well in case, even if you're at fault, right? So, you know you by riders, look, you're out there, you're trying to make a living, I get it. Or you're just out there having fun, but be careful, get trained properly, and get insurance. Nanes Kotak of Kotak Law, thank you so much for being here and giving us a little clarity around this very, very murky issue. Thank you so much. the road. It's Nissan's number one selling subcompact SUV. With expressive style and advanced tech, Kicks is number one. Right now, lease the 2025 Kicks for

the equivalent of $65 weekly for 48 months. Hurry into your local dealer today. S front-wheel drive for 280 monthly with 3,495 down to 3.49%. Includes 0.5% loyalty reduction for qualifying Nissan owners. Conditions apply. See Nissan.ca for details.