The Ben Mulroney Show - Best of the Week Part 2 - Peter MacKay, Sylvain Charlebois, Ravi Kahlon

Episode Date: May 10, 2025

Best of the Week Part 2 - Peter MacKay, Sylvain Charlebois, Ravi Kahlon Guests: Peter MacKay, Sylvain Charlebois, Ravi Kahlon, Sharan Kaur, Regan Watts, Chris Chapin If you enjoyed the podcast, tell a friend! For more of the Ben Mulroney Show, subscribe to the podcast! https://globalnews.ca/national/program/the-ben-mulroney-show Follow Ben on Twitter/X at https://x.com/BenMulroney Enjoy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

You've got unlimited access to music, but time, now that's limited. The PC Insider's World's Elite MasterCard gets you unlimited PC Optima points, free grocery delivery, and time back for what matters. Save time and earn $1,100 in average value each year. The PC Insider's World's Elite MasterCard. The card for living unlimited. Conditions apply to all benefits. Visit pcfinancial.ca for details,

values for illustrative purposes only. The My Choice sales event is back at Nissan and the choice is yours. Choose our best-selling Rogue, always ready for adventure, or the Dynamic Sentra, packed with safety features, or the all-new Boldly Redesigned Kicks. And now during My Choice,

you can choose up to $1,500 in Nissan bonus or accessory credit or choose three year prepaid maintenance. Hurry into your local Nissan dealer today. $1,500 applies to Sentra and select rogue models when leasing or financing through NCF conditions apply. See Nissan.ca for details. Welcome to the Ben Mulroney show best of the week podcast. We had so many great chats this week, including former deputy leader of the conservatives, Peter McKay, joining me. Plus the panel was really, really good. Enjoy. Welcome back to the Ben Mulroney Show and please welcome our This Week in Politics midweek panel. Chris Chapin, political commentator, managing principal of Upstream Strategy. We got Regan Watts, Fratton Park, Inc., as well as a former senior aide to Jim Flaherty, and Sharon Carr, political strategist and partner at Sovereign Advisory. Welcome to all three of you.

Hello. All right. So Mark Carney got elected on being the guy who can go down to Washington and fix what is broken. But right before the meeting starts, Donald Trump on his Truth Social wrote this, and I don't know if you guys have read this yet or heard this, but let me read it to you. I look forward to meeting the new Prime Minister of Canada, Mark Carney. I very much want to work with him, but cannot understand one simple truth in caps.

Why is America subsidizing Canada by $200 billion a year, in addition to giving them free military protection and many other things? We don't need their cars. We don't need their energy. We don't need their lumber. We don't need anything they have other than't need their energy, we don't need their lumber, we don't need anything they have other than their

friendship, which hopefully we will always maintain. They, on the other hand, need everything from us. The Prime Minister will be arriving shortly and that will be most likely my only question of consequence. Guys, I'll start let's, Sharon, I'll start with you because you're guy one. How is he supposed to negotiate with a guy like that? So I think what we have to remember is that a lot of what Donald Trump says, it doesn't always make sense. And I don't think he actually cares about reading the room.

I think for Prime Minister Carney, he is going to walk in there and kind of have to ignore that. I feel like partially Trump is trying to poke a bear to see if someone will pick a fight with him. And we have to show that, no, we're not gonna pick a fight. We will have a civilized conversation and see where it goes. But this is the same guy who tweeted out a picture

of himself as the Pope, so really. And I, yeah, Sharon, and I get it. And Chris, I subscribed to the belief that Kevin O'Leary has sort of imbued in me that when dealing with Donald Trump, you gotta know the difference between the signal and the noise. Most times when he's posting pictures of himself

as the Pope, it's pretty easy to know what's signal and what's noise. In this case, I don't know what's signal and what's noise. And so I don't know what signal and what's noise. And so I don't know what my expectations should be for this meeting. What about you? I think you have to look back then at, you know, the guy literally wrote a book on his view of negotiation. Well, he had somebody write a book.

You know, that's true. But I mean, if you believe him at face value, it's always been about dealing from a position of strength. I don't think the United States actually has that strong of a position from a negotiating tactic. I think anybody with a few brain cells can break down that $200 billion trade deficit that he claims and walk you through how much of that's just the value we give them on oil exports. But because of that, I don't think he has that big of a position.

I think unfortunately, I think Justin Trudeau really weakened our negotiating stance when he first went down to Mar-a-Lago. And if you believe the reports told the president that our auto industry would be dead without the United States, and I think that gave the president an opening and an idea. And so I think Mark Carney, I hope Mark Carney is able to go down there with the same tone and grace he apparently showed when he spoke to the president on by phone after he was elected. I am fairly confident he will. But again, I think it's just no way that and I think there will be a far different tone in the actual negotiating room

than there is on on his own private public social media app. Regan, I don't think there's a Canadian alive who doesn't want Mark Carney, at least on this file, to succeed. I think every single one of us is behind him in this moment. But what I saw on the campaign trail was a candidate who didn't like answering questions that he thought were beneath him. And I just wonder if there's going be a clash of personalities in that room or is, and you know Mark Carney, does he have the ability to tuck that away and focus on the task at hand, which is dealing with someone who is very hard to deal with?

Well, there's a couple of things in your question there, Ben. I'll start by saying, you know, I don't take Kevin O'Leary seriously for much of anything, but I do think his observations on the signal and the noise with President Trump are the right ones. I won't pick up on something that Chris said, with respect to Mr. Carney and Mr. Trump, and why I think it'll be different this time. Yeah, it's clear the president did not like Justin Trudeau. None of

us did. The long national nightmare is over and that should be celebrated. However, Mr. Carney is a credentialed, highly experienced, highly educated man who, if you understand or you think to look to understand Mr. Trump and how he thinks, these are the types of people that Mr. Trump has always over his career sought to engage and seek validation from. And so I actually think Mr. Carney and Mr. Trump has always over his career sought to engage and seek validation from.

And so I actually think Mr. Carney and Mr. Trump are going to get along a lot better than people may realize. I agree with you completely that the entire country is rooting for Mr. Carney because he is our prime minister. And we're rooting for him to do well and I expect he will. Mr. Carney, I think shifts showed last Friday that, you know, he can shift from the campaign to being prime minister, you know, and I'm sure Sharon would agree with me. I'm not sure about Chris, but you know, Mr. Carney last Friday, I mean, his press conference, he had me absolutely purring. I mean, it was a 10 out of 10. This is a man who's in control, who's in command of his issues. And I think if there's

one thing I can say, and you're right, I do know Mr. Carney, I worked with him for a number of years, I have enormous respect for him personally. I mean, I think some of his policies I disagree with, but on a human level, on an electoral level, Mr. Carney is without peer. He will be more prepared and ready to engage with President Trump than any Prime Minister in recent memory could. And that is not to say Mr. Poliev could not have prepared if he was the Prime Minister.

But if I know one thing about Mark Carney is that guy does his homework. And he will be ready going into that Oval Office and I suspect it will be a good day for him. All right, well, from your lips to God's ears, let's take just a few minutes here. I want to play some audio of Danielle Smith talking about, you know, of citizen-triggered referenda.

And then I want your take on the other side. To be clear from the outset, our government will not be putting a vote on separation from Canada on the referendum ballot. However, if there is a successful citizen-led referendum petition that is able to gather the requisite number of signatures requesting such a question to be put on a referendum, our government will respect the democratic process and include that question on

the twenty twenty six provincial referendum ballot as well. OK, so I want to take my time with this. So, Chris, I'm going to have you answer. Doug Ford slammed those comments. You know the man. What do you make of Danielle Smith? Is she playing with fire? Yes, yeah. I really do think she is.

I think you can't have this both ways. You can't have the national unity debate and say you're on both sides of the equation. And I think she's trying to. I think the clearest signal was when she lowered the amount of signatures needed to trigger this in the first place. She's trying to make it easier for Alberta

to have this discussion. That said, spending time out in Western Canada, the anger towards Ottawa is palpable, and there is an immense amount of frustration about landlocking their resources and devaluing their economy. It's been going on for a decade plus now and people out in Western Canada are fed up. Unfortunately, I think that just equates to the premier pouring gasoline on the fire but not willing to take the leadership required.

Like if she believes that a discussion needs to happen on separation for Alberta, I think she needs to leave the charge and not make it easier for others to do it. Well, and that's the thing, Sharon. If you're saying that you don't support separatism, but then making it easier for separatists to gain a toehold and ultimately

perhaps even manage the con lead the conversation. I mean those are two different things. Yeah it's honestly I'm really disappointed in in the whole hey we're not going to push it but hey if citizens want to sign the signatories and send it our way, we'll take it seriously. Like to me, that's a bit of a cop out and I think she is playing with fire. It is not defusing the situation. It's actually just fueling it because now you're going to have all these people out there who are going to organize and who make this into a problem for her. And you know what, who it's going to be a problem for? It's going to be a problem for Pierre-Paul Yaffe as well, who is going to be running in a by-election in that same province. So imagine trying to be a leader of a party and then having to defend this.

Like I'm not understanding why she is doing this beyond just really trying to throw gasoline on fire. Well, as I said in a previous segment, if you don't want your car to get stolen, you don't leave the car running with a sign above that says, come take my car. And that feels like what's happening in that province. Regan, I don't want to shortchange you. I want you to be able to comment with enough time. So we are going to get your comments on the other side of the break. Welcome back to the Ben Mulroney Show and welcome back to our This Week in Politics midweek panel, Chris Chapin, Regan Watson,

Sharon Carr. Regan, I want to give the microphone to you. You've been patiently waiting to give your take on Danielle Smith saying that she doesn't stand with the separatists of her province and yet seemingly taking steps to make it easier for them to do what they want to do. I think, Ben, and I know Chris and Sharon on this panel will agree with me, the project that is this wonderful country requires effort

and from time to time, different parts of the country will feel less love than the others. I think it's perfectly legitimate for Premier Smith to communicate concern, gripes, anger, frustration, particularly just towards Central Canada and really towards Ottawa, because of what the last 10 years of Justin Trudeau's leadership has meant for the oil and gas sector. I don't think people in central Canada, and I've said this on your show previously, Ben, people in central Canada really don't understand how much oil and gas floats the rest of the

country. I know that'll drive Max Fawcett nuts that I just said that, but it's true. Oil and gas is hugely important to the Canadian economy and it underpins virtually everything the wealth that's created from it first. And then secondly, it pays for all the social services that we rely on as Canadians. And to have that type of resource stuck in the ground and in the view of Daniel Smith and many in Alberta, because people in Ottawa don't believe in oil and gas extraction, is a source of great frustration. And so what Premier Smith, I think, is doing is being responsible with how she's managing this issue. Some may say that's going a step too far, but you need to let the air out of the ball somehow. And when you have people in the general public who are upset with how things are going,

whether it's public policy or politics, you have to find a way to give them an outlet. And I, Marie, I can see that, but I had Jason Kenney on the show last week where he said that like this whole citizen triggered referendum thing, that was his idea, that was his legislation. But he set the bar for triggering one of them

deliberately high because as he said, he didn't want the tail wagging the dog. This to me is a roadmap on how to succeed at building a sovereignist movement in Alberta. Well, I think so, you know, Mr. Kenny also did the same thing that Premier Smith is now doing, which is appointing a panel of eminent Albertans to help evaluate the future of the province within Canada. I don't believe that Premier Smith or even Albertans deep down in their core want to leave the country.

I do believe that they feel like they haven't been heard and that their greatest export of natural resource is being unfairly punished because of people in Ottawa and their views around oil and gas extraction. I will say to tie this back to our first segment and to some things we're gonna talk about, I'm sure later. I do think Mr. Carney as prime minister is sophisticated and aware enough,

not just as he grew up in Edmonton, but because he's an adult, will pay attention to what's happening in Alberta and is going to take steps to try and address it. You even saw that from premier Smith's comments following their first call. Okay, so we've got a little more to get to. And I wanna talk about Pierre Poliev.

He broke his silence after losing the election, after losing his seat. He put a video on social media. Let's listen to a bit of it. Well, it's been about a week since the election, and it didn't go how we wanted. But when you get knocked down, you get up and get going. And we've got a lot to be thankful for.

I'm thankful for you, the countless people who packed out our rally halls, our 2.3 million extra votes, the 25 extra seats, the breakthroughs in Ontario and BC, the expanded coalition of young people, union workers, entrepreneurs, soldiers and countless others who had never voted before and are now supporting our conservative cause. Now it wasn't enough. We didn't get over the finish line, which means that I need to learn and grow and our team needs to expand. That will be my mission.

All right, I'm going to combine this with my the final story so we can get to both of them. You know, he's now going to be on the ballot in Alberta and the group responsible for giving us the longest ballot in Canadian history with 91 candidates when he was up for election in Carleton is now saying they want 200 names on the next ballot. So a did he strike the right tone and B what do you make of this longest ballot group because I find it to be anti-democratic. Chris we're gonna start with you. Yeah listen Ben I thought I thought the video was strong.

I really did think there were a couple of lines there, him acknowledging that he needs to learn and grow. I thought it was very important. I think there's gonna be a lot more of that that he needs to show over the months and maybe years ahead because as he started off, they did come up short, right? And there were certainly gains made,

but he needs to figure out what he needs to do to beat the Liberals, especially if it turns into a two way race. On the, on the, this ballot initiative, yes, it's absolutely nonsense. I think it's ridiculous. I think it's absurd that we might have a hundred or 200 people on the ballot. And I think there's a very good chance that the Liberals and the NDP don't even bother putting somebody forward. And that used to be once upon a time a tradition in this country that you'd let the leader just get his name on a ballot. And frankly in that seat specifically, I don't understand why we're going to the expense of you know a couple million

dollars for a by-election. Can we not just let common sense prevail and just have him be acclaimed? The conservatives won that seat with 81% of the vote a couple weeks ago. Sharon, saying he's going to learn and grow and actually learning and growing are two different things. Not to say he's not being genuine when he says that, but I think there's an element of people out there who want to see that growth. But do you think that was a good first start? And this longest ballot group? I mean, if if somebody on the other side of the, I mean,

if this is what we do every time we don't like somebody, we're going to descend into chaos. Well, two things on the longest ballot, honestly, people need to get a life. There's so many ways that you can get out there to make a point. But this to me is just nonsensical. But you know why? Hey, you guys do you, if you wanna get signatures and get on a ballot, like great job. Like you've just succeeded annoying people. On Piers video,

I actually thought that the video that he did was actually a thoughtful video. I thought it was the right tone, the right tenor. The one thing I thought it was missing was a thank you to his constituency of 20 years. And maybe that was a thank you to his constituency of 20 years. And maybe that was a strategic decision not to thank the folks of Carleton. But that being said, I thought the video was actually,

like it came off as a bit humbling. And like, you got to give people credit where it's due. He's always been a very good communicator when it comes to being chirpy. But I thought this was a good side of him that people should probably see. Yeah. Regan, what do you make of it?

I had Peter McKay on the show a little bit earlier. He said that from what he was hearing, it looks like Pierre is not gonna have any trouble holding onto caucus support and therefore the leadership of the party. So do you think Pierre Poliev 2.0 is going to be a better leader than 1.0? So there's a couple of things in your question there, Ben. 2.0 is going to be a better leader than 1.0.

So there's a couple of things in your question there, Ben. I'll just say on the longest ballot, if people want to organize and sign up that many candidates, God bless them, we should have more people who get involved in democracy, not less. Oh, you don't think that's- As annoying as it might be. No, you don't think that that's an abuse of the spirit? No.

You don't? No, I don't, because people, this is the world we live in. This is the system we have. And if people want to take the effort to organize, let them like who cares? It's it's not my preference. But who am I to tell political organizers how to how to run their show? That's up to them. Regan signing up on ballots. Well, maybe. But with respect to Mr. Polyev, look,

I actually really liked Sharon's point that he didn't thank or acknowledge the voters of Carleton. I thought that was actually a huge miss. I don't believe, as of the time we're talking, he's even called to congratulate Bruce Fanjoy on his victory. And I actually think if we're going to change the tone from Mr. Polyev and he's going to come back

as a new and improved and better and upgraded version, it starts with doing those little things. And I think it's really important. I just do. Elections are about campaigning hard and fighting for your ideas. But like sports, when the game's over, you shake hands and you move on.

I think that Mr. Polyiev getting back into the house, I agree with Chris, it would be nice if he was acclaimed, I doubt that's going to happen. But he'll be back in the house and we'll see how things shake out over the coming months. I think Mr. McKay is right, that caucus is generally speaking behind him, but there's a mandatory leadership review

that Mr. Poliev and his team are gonna have to contend with. That's not to say they won't be able to manage it, but that's a factor that is well beyond caucus in terms of whether Mr. Poliev will be leading the party into the next election. I expect they'll manage it well, but there's still lots of time to go on that particular question. Lastly, let's go back to the meeting in Washington. And I just want a one word answer from each of you.

Are you optimistic that we are moving the ball down the field at the end of today? Or do you think there's a possibility that the wheels will come off? So up or down? Chris, we're going to start with you. Up. Regan.

I said earlier, Mark Carney had me purring last Friday. Don't have me meowing by the end of today. Sharon Carr. Well, you know, the cat references just really got me going for sure enough. All right, guys. Thank you so much for joining me. I really always appreciate you having on the show. Hi, I'm Donna Friesen from Global National.

Life moves fast these days and we want to make it even easier for you to get the news you need. That's why you can now get Global National every day as a podcast. The biggest stories of the day with analysis from award-winning global news journalists. New episodes drop every day, so take this as your personal invitation to join us on the Global National podcast. You can find it on Apple Podcast podcasts, Spotify, Amazon Music, and wherever you find your favorite podcasts. Welcome back to the Ben Mulroney Show and thank you so much for joining us on the Tuesday

edition of the show. A lot to get to as we know, parties that lose elections have to do a lot of introspection. We know that the NDP are trying to figure out how they're going to navigate a world where they have lost official party status. And the Tories themselves have to figure out what they're going to do because they were in a position to win the election. They didn't win the election. And their leader lost his seat. Pierre Poliev is now gunning for a seat in Alberta. And but that doesn't mean

that his leadership is in any way assured. And joining me to talk about this is a very good friend. Oh, but oh, should we? Yes. Well, let's introduce our good friend, Peter McKay. He's the he was a former minister in Stephen Harper's government, former deputy leader of the former leader of the Conservative Party, a progressive Conservative Party, and a great friend of mine, his father stepped aside in his riding in central Nova, so that my dad could run and get a seat in the House of Commons. And then Peter, Peter, welcome to the show.

Ben, it's great to be with you. And it's, it's kind of ironic that we're talking about opportunities to step aside to get a leader into the house. It's kind of ironic that we're talking about opportunities to step aside, to get a leader into the house. It's history really coming full circle, but just wonderful to be on with you, Ben. Our families have been close for many, many years. Oh gosh, I mean, listen, I spent that summer in Central Nova as dad was running and getting to know the riding.

And it's still one of those memories that sticks with me forever. But Peter, let's talk about the lay of the land for Pierre. And before we do, he broke his silence. It's been about a week and he made a video which he posted to Twitter. Let's listen. Well, it's been about a week since the election

and it didn't go how we wanted. But when you get knocked down, you get up and get going. And we've got a lot to be thankful for. I'm thankful for you. The countless people who packed out our rally halls, our 2.3 million extra votes, the 25 extra seats, the breakthroughs in Ontario and BC, the expanded coalition of young people, union workers, entrepreneurs, soldiers and countless others who had never voted before and are now supporting our conservative cause.

Now it wasn't enough. We didn't get over the finish line, which means that I need to learn and grow and our team needs to expand. That will be my mission. Okay, so what did you make of the video, Peter? Well, first of all, you know, Pierre has shown a much more open, and I would call it a sunny disposition than some people associate with him. He referenced learn and grow. Really important messaging there that, you know, he's chastened, he's humbled. He has seen that there were mistakes made on the campaign trail. He talked about the expanded coalition and the number of people who came out, in particular

young people, union members. I mean, I saw that at that rink rally that he held in central Nova. The numbers were astronomical. I evoked your father's name, by the way, at that rink rally. And it's interesting to me that people are still clamouring and talking about, will he stay on? I think there is no doubt that he'll stay on. Although the party did adopt this, they called it the Michael Chong bill that allows for the caucus to essentially put the leader on the spot and have a vote. I don't see that happening in any way, shape or form. Well, that's what I want to ask you, Peter. Like what is the process by which

Pierre is judged as to whether or not he can continue on as leader? What's the mechanism? Well, it's a timely question because they're meeting today in Ottawa and that meeting includes the entire caucus, new members and those who unfortunately went down to defeat, but they will be there. There won't be any talk of this is what I believe. Now how he prepares from here to get back in the House to be on the point which is where he needs to be as the leader, he did lose his election seat as you

know which means he cannot be in the House of Commons where he has proven himself to be very effective. But look as far as the caucus using that measure, which comes from the British tradition where the caucus can remove a sitting leader, and we've seen that happen, frankly, a number of times in the UK in the last few years, and we saw it happen here in Canada with a Conservative leader. But I really don't think that that is even a possibility. I'm not hearing from a lot of the members who I still talk to. Nobody has brought

this up. And so I think it's move on, it's deal with some of the very practical matters of getting Pierre back in the house and frankly doing the job of the leader of the official opposition, His Majesty's loyal opposition, in holding the government to account. And there's a lot of work in doing that. Mr. Carney, of course, is in Washington today, the Prime Minister, and we'll see how that goes because the defining election issue, among many, including affordability,

those issues are not going away. The issues of dealing with Donald J. Trump, on the other hand, will also be with us for at least four years. Well, and Andrew Scheer has said that the conservatives are willing to work with the liberals and possibly support some of their legislation moving forward if it aligns at least partly

with what their values are. But I want to spend a little bit of time with you, Peter, on the loss in his own riding, because that was something I don't think a lot of us saw. We heard tale that there was a lot of groundwork being done by the liberals in that riding but a lot of us just thought oh that of course not of course he's gonna win his riding and a lot of factors worked against him you know there was the the redistricting and they added a big chunk of territory that

previously had not been part of his riding. But there was also a campaign afoot to, I confused the voter, I guess, with 91 candidates on the ballot. And now we're hearing that that same group wants to put 200 people on the ballot in his by-election. Now when you put all that together and you recognize, as you know, that a federal leader has to campaign across the country and can't just be in their riding. Where does the fault lie? Who dropped the ball and who needs to be held accountable? Well let me unpack a little bit of that. I think frankly, and this is my opinion, we have to change

this ability to flood the riding of anybody for that matter. But a leader in particular, because you're absolutely right Ben, a leader has tremendous demands on them to travel the riding of anybody for that matter, but a leader in particular, because you're absolutely right Ben, a leader has tremendous demands on them to travel the entire country and this is a massive undertaking to do that as Pierre and the other leaders have experienced. There was the other anomaly of the redistribution where, as you pointed out, they brought in a whole new sort of urban part to that writing that didn't exist before. And there was a massive number of public servants who were told in no uncertain terms that they were going to get axed by Mr.

Poliev that the conservatives were going to win. So that's, that's a part of it, the practical part of it. And I think that we need to change any ability to put 90 people or more on a ballot. That just doesn't sound democratic. No, it's absolutely not. And if the argument is that they don't like the guy, well, geez, I mean, there are a lot of groups out there

that if this group is given license to do this, then good luck because somebody could turn around and say, you know what, I've decided I don't like this guy because he's pro-life or pro-choice, and we're gonna make his life a living hell in the next election. I mean, it's a Pandora's box that we do not wanna open. Well, you're right.

And it seems to me that, you know, we can talk about why the conservative campaign team didn't anticipate this coming, because it seems the first time this really became discussed in public was when the Globe and Mail wrote about it and I was like you Ben I just sort of thought now that's not possible leaders don't lose their writings you know that that's of another time back in the 1920s I think but one of one of the liberal leaders

lost their seat twice and had to run in by elections but that doesn't happen anymore well it did in fact both leaders lost their seats. So, and this anomaly and kind of, it just seems a little shifty to me that he was targeted in such a way. But the campaign team should have picked that up sooner. They should have picked it up on the ground, in my opinion, and then taken whatever measures they could.

Well, yeah, because it seems like he tried to stem the tide. It seems like he tried to stem the tide by saying, we're not going to axe the public sector as it's been suggested. He tried to temper what people thought. He said, you know, we're going to we're going to reduce it by attrition. And that certainly wasn't enough. It was probably too little too late. But lastly, and I only have about 30 seconds left, but Ottawa is a bastion of liberal,

it's a liberal stronghold. And do you think it's that way because of how big the public sector has gotten? Yeah, there's no doubt about that because the public sector grew by about 40% in the last decade. And so that was a big impact. And I'll just register one last point.

And that was the advanced poll where Canadians, particularly seniors, were scared. They were told there was a very deliberate campaign of fear to say, Mark Carney is the only one. He's the, he's the Donald Trump whisperer. He's the one that's going to save us all. So you have to elect him. And that number that came out of the advanced poll sunk a lot of Tories across the country, including in central Norway. Peter, I'm gonna leave it there. That we'll find out. We're gonna leave it there. But thank you so much. I hope this is not the last time you join us on the show.

I'd love to come back on that. Thanks. Since as far as I can remember, since I've been on the radio, food insecurity and food inflation has been a dominant conversation across this country. And so I love being able to speak with, I think the foremost expert on all of these questions, Sylvain Charleboix, Canadian researcher and professor specializing in the food industry. Welcome to the show, Sylvain.

And from what I understand, you got a new job. Well, sort of. I'm being borrowed by one of the top agri-usiness universities in the world, Texas A&M. Starting in August 1st, I'm just going to be spending some time there managing their graduate programs in agribusiness. Looking forward to it. It's ranked number one in the U.S. and number three in the world, so I'm very privileged. And so you get to enjoy some barbecue over the summer.

Oh yeah, absolutely. Okay, well listen, you've written a piece in the Toronto Sun, which is quite alarming why Canada will lose half its dairy farms by 2030 with supply management. Why don't you break that down for us? Well, we actually published a report, I think it was two, three years ago, about the future of the dairy sector and I mean supply manager was is not a sexy subject but it apparently I guess more people want to hear about it it's it's not a mystery that we're losing dairy farms despite supply management now you hear to their farmers of Canada saying we need supply

managers to save our farms but I mentioned not saving anything in Tuesday in 1972 we had 45,000 dairy farms in the country. We're down to 9,000 now, and we're likely gonna go down to below 5,000 by 2030. Because there's more consolidation. Well, that's what I was gonna ask. I mean, we're not losing how much dairy we're producing, we're just losing the number of producers.

Exactly. So with genetics and of course with what's happening with production and and processing, we're seeing larger farms. We're producing more milk but we're we're seeing fewer farms. Some of the farms that we have in Canada are pretty decently sized and a lot of people say well we're not doing like the we don't want to do like the US. But well, we're actually doing like the US with supply management. So you're basically making a few richer and highly protected as a result. Yeah. And so so how to play this out, game this out with me, right? You've got a new liberal government that has said they're going to break down every inter provincial trade barrier, but they're not going to touch supply management, which to me is

a false start, right? If you're going to protect that and it's dominant in a couple of provinces, then you're going to have other provinces say, well, if you're protecting that, then I want to protect my little piece of the pie. And somebody else can say, I want to protect my piece of the pie. Next thing you know, you're stuck with inter-provincial trade barriers. Next thing you know, you're stuck with interprovincial trade barriers. Exactly. And the reason why it's a bit of an issue is because quotas... So in order to commercially produce milk and butter fat in Canada, you need to own quotas. These quotas are managed by provinces, okay?

And that's why a province like Quebec produces almost 40% of all the milk we need in Canada with only about 20% of the population. When it was created at the time in 1972 the idea was to actually have an equal regional representation so you'll have the Atlantic produces its own milk and butter fat and so on so forth but the root right now what we're seeing is there are more farms in Quebec and Ontario producing for the rest of Canada. And that's why politically it's become has become a political hot potato because, well, politicians don't want to lose votes in Quebec in particular. So that's why they can't do anything with the system right now.

So, so but at what point like the 2030 is not that far off, right? But if the trend continues to losing the number of dairy farms that we have, is that gonna be a signal? Like at some point, do we reach a red line where politicians wake up and realize that supply management is not necessarily the savior of the industry that it has been touted as and could there be

changes to the system in order to support a healthy dairy industry I Think that politicians know that I think that Prime Minister Mark Carney knows that He can't say it publicly because he'll get clobbered I mean the dairy farmers of Canada are one of the most powerful lobby groups in Canada. Sure, but by definition, I mean, it must have been more powerful back in the day when we had 45,000 of them. I mean, now you only have 9,000. The numbers don't bear out that it's – I mean, it seems like by definition, with fewer members, you're going to have less

clout, no? Well, the arithmetic are fooling you, Ben, because it's not about the numbers, it's about the money. Oh, okay. I see. Shame on me for thinking it was about people. Did you watch the Maple Leaf game last night? I don't watch the Leafs. Didn't you notice the logo on their jersey? It says milk. It's the dairy farmers of Ontario. They spent 20 million dollars to put that logo on the Maple Leafs, hockey club jersey. Nobody else can afford that. I gotcha. Okay. Okay. Well, listen, I'm glad you've highlighted this. And I hope you keep

beating this drum because we need people like you to highlight that. Systems can be improved. And sticking with something because it worked in the past doesn't mean it's a system worth sticking with in the future. I want to talk about a conversation I was having earlier in the show about restaurants Canada suggesting that we need to end the GST and HST on food

permanently, specifically for restaurants. During that GST holiday, there really was an uptick in people going to restaurants. And I gotta ask you what you think about this. Well, the uptick wasn't significant as far as I can see. It was about 3%, which is nice. Of course, restaurants need the business. I don't know how you feel about that, Ben,

but I'm not sure about food service and restaurants, but certainly I have an issue applying GST on food sold in grocery stores. I mean, Canadians are basically spending about two billion dollars worth of taxes at the grocery store, and that's a bit of a problem because, of course, it affects food affordability. And right now we're charging taxes on Caesar salads, healthy sandwiches. Because of inflation, there are more products being taxed now at the grocery store. I certainly would revisit that policy and exempting all food sold retail from the GST. But food service, I think I need to see a sound argument

there. Yeah. And my contention, and I made this public earlier, is that, look, the GST has served a very valuable role in society. It helped us slay the deficit. And after profligate spending by the liberal government, every penny thus far the GST is now going towards paying the interest on our national debt. So there's a value, I think that's a waste, it's a shame that

we have to spend it that way, but it's a tax that everybody is used to paying and if we keep carving out pieces of who gets to save on the GST, it's going to lose its ability to help us through these really tricky times. And if, and if all of a sudden we start saying, well, it's going to, we're going to help this industry, somebody else is going to come asking for their carve out. And next thing you know, there's no value in the GST anymore. I agree.

The, the only thing if you are to eliminate a tax, and we, we spoke about this before, it creates a phenomenal opportunity to stick pricing. Companies will actually try to actually cover that spread that actually that gap left behind by taxes for a while. Things will get back to normal, but taxing food I think is immoral. We shouldn't be doing this in Canada. That's interesting. I mean, I get it. I get it in principle. I just don't know that we as a country can afford to keep carving out from this tax or that. And rather than looking to the GST

as the problem that needs to be solved, perhaps we need to take a step back and more broadly look at our tax system and ask ourselves, all right, where are we hurting people the most and how can we give them relief beyond simply saying, oh, the GST is bad and if we get rid of it, then it's good.

I'll just give you one example of how ridiculous some of our fiscal policies are. So if you have a box of six granola bars in the grocery store, that's not taxable. But if you go down to five, the same granola bars, the same griddle bars, it's taxable. Oh my god, okay. We're gonna leave that there. I want to unpack that with you at a later date. But thank you Sylvain. I really appreciate your insights today. Take care. Bye bye.

Welcome back to the Ben Mulroney Show. And yes, we record this show, we produce this show from Toronto, but we are having a national conversation on the Ben Mulroney Show. And I'm very pleased to welcome our next, oh, so as I was saying, it's a national show, but I like to get a snapshot from different parts of the country to see how things are, you know, life in Alberta

and Saskatchewan, certainly not the same as in Toronto. Life out east in Atlantic Canada, different pressures, different issues, different values. But we are one big Canadian family and to have a conversation across this country is so important. And as you know, during the tariff threats

of Donald Trump before he levied any of them all of our premiers it was an all hands on deck situation going down to Washington talking to the American press doing everything that they could to stave off those tariffs which ultimately came into effect more or less and so I think it's important now for us to have a conversation about what's going on in British Columbia. So please welcome to the show for the first time Ravi Callan, Minister of Housing and Municipal Affairs in BC. He's also Chair of the Provincial Committee that's coordinating the whole of government approach to protect BC's workers, businesses, and economy against those

ongoing tariffs and tariff threats. Ravi, welcome to the show. Thank you so much for joining us. Hi, Ben. Thanks so much for having me. So just generally speaking, talk to me about your job as working on the tariff threat. It seems like every single day, there's

something else to worry about coming from Washington. So how do you deal with it? What's what's it like? Stressful. It's stressful. Then you wake up in the morning and you think when you open your eyes, you think I wonder what the president posted on social media this morning. And, and really, it's it's that and, you know, And yesterday we woke up to hear the President say he's going to bring a tariff, 100% tariff on the film industry. And we have 77,000 people working in the film industry. We have got one of the best film industry crews in the world. And so

waking up for all those people with additional stress of what does that mean going forward for them. And that's why I've been, I'm really realistic about what to expect from the meeting today. I just think that a president that was the one who signed the agreement with us, the trade agreement with us many years ago, is ripping up his own trade agreement and wakes up every morning with different social media posts.

I think we got to be realistic of what can possibly come today. But we all watching it closely. Well, that's it. I think we got to be realistic, but we have to be hopeful as well. With a guy like Donald Trump, as mercurial as he is, there's always the possibility that the meeting could go sideways and we could end up in a worse position after the fact that we did before. And so, yeah, hopeful, but road weary, I'm sure.

But your premier as the leader of the province seems to have to, despite being incredibly stressful, the pressures of these tariffs has to be very measured and come out as calm. He referenced these US terror threats on movies and saying, don't panic, we can get through this. Is there a plan to deal with this if it ever comes to pass or is this just so new and so out of left field

that you're just playing as it lies? Well, again, our message to the prime minister and the team that's coming in and soon the new cabinet is yes, we want you to continue to build those relationships in the US and find a resolution. But it's more so let's get to work on doing the things that we need to do here in Canada and British Columbia to ensure that we're not in a vulnerable situation anymore. That relationship with the U.S. is fundamentally changed. It will not be going back to where it was before President Trump kind of blew it up. And so what do we do in the meantime? We have in British Columbia not been sitting and waiting. We've got, we've announced 18 major projects that we're expediting, anything

from natural gas to clean energy to mining opportunities, 20 billion dollars worth. And so we have some things right now where we can get going to support people locally to support our economy. You know, we eliminated environmental assessments for all of our wind energy projects. We just brought in legislation to say that we're going to fast-track all provincially led infrastructure, schools, hospitals, the trade corridor investments that we need. So those are the types of actions we want to see from the federal government. So yes, continue to build those relationships, continue to find

some avenues to be able to address it. But more so, let's invest in our country, let's invest in our infrastructure so that we have a stronger base to go into those discussions with the U.S. with. Now, we've heard from both Premier Danielle Smith and Scott Moe about unhappiness in some parts of Western Canada, that possibly a separatist movement or multiple movements could take place and the seeds that were planted years ago could bear fruit. And now Premier David Eby, he's thrown cold water on any separatist movements, but he

did say during the election campaign that he was concerned about British Columbia's share of federal funding. Is that sort of code for saying, you know, there, there, there are people here who, you know, if things don't change, could want to go their own way. Well, I think in British Columbia, people, of course, have different opinions and different views. And if you look at election results, it's always a mixed bag. But the reality is,

is people are very proud Canadians. And I can tell you, despite what you hear from Premier Smith, I's always a mixed bag. But the reality is, is people are very proud Canadians. And I can tell you, despite what you hear from Premier Smith, I've got a lot of family and friends that live in Alberta. And I can tell you that there's nowhere more, there's nowhere in the country where there's more patriotism and more proud Canadians than in Alberta. And so yes, there's maybe frustration and yes, the premier may be saying things, but I can tell you that the people understand that we're stronger together. And yes, premier, he's highlighted it in the past. I've certainly spoken about in the past.

We need more attention from the federal government. We need to ensure that we're working together, that infrastructure is dollars are distributed in a more equitable way. And quite frankly, now then, as we go into this new environment, we're going to need to be sending a lot more of our goods to Asian markets. And that means it's going to come through BC. We need to invest in that critical infrastructure so we can have goods flowing. And those are infrastructures we've been asking for for a long time. And now I believe it's a national priority. Now, when you're not worried about the whole

of government approach to protecting the economy from tariffs, you're also the minister of housing. And a lot of promises were made from everyone, but the promises that people said they wanted delivered on were the liberal promises on housing. Have you had any discussions thus far with the incoming government about how they are going to put in practice this massive mobilization

to build more homes in a short period of time than we've seen since the Second World War? Well, not yet. I had an opportunity to speak with the prime minister prior to him becoming the Prime Minister and heard some preliminary ideas at that point. But I'll be watching very closely. In fact, I can't wait for them to appoint someone because we have work to do. You know, when we talk about recovery, we talk about strengthening housing essential. Housing is central to our

economy. Housing is central to our health care, health outcomes. You know, right now, we know employers, we need to be able to track the workforce in our communities, but if housing is just way out of reach for people, and that's going to really inhibit our growth. So the two things that I'm watching really closely for from the federal government is this promise to reduce the DCCs or development costs from local governments by 50%. That is, you know, if it can be rolled out in an effective way, that is going to be game changing in DC because we know a lot of projects are being, you know, reconsidered because they don't pencil at this point. And of course, the changes to MERBS because we need to

have more purpose-built rentals being built. So those two in particular will be things that I'm watching closely and of course looking forward to meeting with the new Minister of Housing, whoever that person may be, as soon as possible. Well, listen, Ravi, I want to thank you for coming on the show. I know you have your hands full with the work of government and the work of, you know, tamping down on the threats and on the worry that comes from these tariffs. So I want to thank you so much for joining us and giving us the lay of the land as you see it in British Columbia. And I hope you know that you've always got to, you'll always be welcome here at the Ben

Mulroney Show. I really appreciate it, Ben. I look forward to coming back and thanks for having me. Absolutely. Thanks for listening to the Ben Mulroney Show. I really appreciate it, Ben. I look forward to coming back and thanks for having me. Absolutely. Thanks for listening to the Ben Mulroney Show podcast. We're live every day nationwide on the Chorus Radio Network, and you can listen online to the Radio Canada player and the iHeart Radio Canada apps.

And make sure to follow and subscribe on Apple podcasts, Spotify, Amazon Music, or wherever you get your streaming audio. We release new podcasts every day. Thanks for listening. To celebrate the days of Our Lives 60th anniversary, W Network and Stack TV invite you to enter for a chance to win the ultimate fan experience.

By watching new episodes of Days of Our Lives, you and a guest could win a three night stay in Los Angeles, a VIP Days of Our Lives set tour, a helicopter ride over LA, and so much more. Watch Weekdays at One and look for the weekly code word to enter. Days of Our Lives, all new Weekdays at One, only on W. Stream on Stack TV.