The Ben Mulroney Show - Best of the Week Part 2 - Robyn Urback, Chris Chapin, Adrienne Batra

Episode Date: March 8, 2025

Best of the Week Part 2 - Robyn Urback, Chris Chapin, Adrienne Batra Guests: Robyn Urback, Chris Chapin, Kieran Mcmurchy, Adrienne Batra, Derek Burney, Katherine Martinko 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

Welcome to the Ben Mulroney Best of the Week podcast. We had so much great stuff on the show this week, including our panel reacting in real time on the day the tariffs got implemented, a former ambassador who laid out how he'd deal with Donald Trump and why the cell phone ban in schools is not working. Enjoy. We should be working together to ensure even greater prosperity for North Americans in a very uncertain and challenging world. Now it's not in my habit to agree with the Wall Street Journal but Donald they point out that even though you're a very smart guy this is a very dumb thing to do.

All right that was our Prime Minister who just moments ago was speaking to the nation following the levying of 25% tariffs by Donald Trump and Canada's reaction. And to make sense of this and where we go next, I'm joined by a terrific mid-week, this week in politics panel. Let's say hello to Robin Urbach, current affairs columnist with the Globe and Mail, Chris Chapin, political commentator,

managing principal at Upstream Strategy, and Kieran McMurtry, senior consultant at Navigator and political strategist. To all three of you, I say welcome. Hello. All right, let's let's jump right in. Robin, what are your thoughts on Justin Trudeau's response? Did he strike the right tone? I think for the most part he did. I mean, he emphasized what he needed to emphasize, which is that this is going to hurt Americans. We've been saying that for 30 days, for longer than 30 days.

He mentioned that these are unjustified tariffs, they're needless, they're punitive. And he also emphasized that we stuck to our word to the extent that that means anything because we had a trade agreement with the US before all of this and no one's sticking to their words. The one thing that irked me was that quote that you played right before we got on here

was Justin Trudeau quoting the Wall Street Journal saying that these tariffs are dumb, which they are. And I have no problem with that. The thing that gets me though is that when you're dealing with a guy like Donald Trump, and I know it feels great to sort of punch back and to say, we're not gonna be bullied and we're gonna stand up to Trump,

but when you say something like that, that's the only thing he's gonna hear. And of course he's gonna listen, right? And he's gonna hear that and interpret it and say, you know what, that Justin, I don't like that guy anyway, now he called me dumb, why don't we raise these tariffs a little bit more? Why don't we tinker with the gas that goes through our country and supplies Eastern Canada? So,

you know, I audibly sort of sighed when Justin Trudeau said that. And I was thinking like, my God, really, just, just don't poke the bear. And again, I understand why it feels good. But I think it's in disservice to the country to do something like that. Chris, I agree with Robin. I do like, however, that he did lay out that we are taking this fight to court as well, or we're going to be fighting, we're going to be litigating this at the World Trade Organization, as well as through the dispute mechanism in the new NAFTA. What did you think? I agree with you and Robin. I you know, it was nice to remember we had a prime minister again. Yeah. Hadn't seen it hadn't seen him in a couple weeks,

but feels like a couple months. So it was nice to be reminded as a Canadian that we have a leader that's actually supposed to be the one standing up against Donald as he referred to it. It definitely irked me. I don't like calling the guy by the by his first name. Like, you know, it might not seem like diplomacy when we're dealing with Donald Trump, but he is the president of the United States of America, whether we like it or not. And we're learning a good lesson of how much we need to respect that. And I think the president knows that. And I think we've come to kind of forget that at times.

And so to Robin's point about not poking the bear, I'd prefer we not poke the bear. I would have preferred the prime minister to have been in Washington several times over the last several weeks and months, instead of gallivanting around Europe on a Euro trip. So I think he struck the right tone on a bunch of things. But again, it was I kind of come back to it was nice to see him pop up again. Yeah, I almost forgot we had a prime minister. Here in your thoughts. I think that Trudeau nailed it. I mean, to everyone's point,

the comment about these tariffs being done, I take that we don't want to poke there. I will say he did sort of cage it in saying that Donald, you're a smart guy. But I think more than that, off the bat, he sort of laid out the dichotomy of whatever issues that we may have along the border with fentanyl and illegal immigration.

By Trump tariffing Canada and Mexico at the same time that he's playing footsie with Putin regarding sanctions over their invasion of Ukraine, I think it's nuts. And I think laying that out so categorically was really good messaging. Yeah, I thought he did a good job with that as well. But I agree with Robin. All he's going to hear is that he was called Donald and not Mr. President.

And he's not going to like that one of his moves was called dumb. But we'll have to see. We'll see if there's any reaction from him. So that's the federal response. Ontario is getting a lot of oxygen right now in terms of what the premier Doug Ford is looking to do to exact some pain south of the border. He has said that Ontario is going to issue a 25% export tax on electricity to the United

States. And if the tariffs go up on April 2nd, as they're meant to, he's going to shut off the power to $1.5 million homes in the United States. And on top of that, the LCBO has already taken action. There is no, there is there are no American products for sale in the province of Ontario. Is that is that we'll start with you, Chris, is that too heavy handed? No, I don't think so. I think, you know, we probably should have followed suit when we started doing this back a month ago, when we thought this was coming in the first time. And I think we thought cooler heads would prevail and they didn't then. And I don't know whether it's because the president just didn't take us seriously.

I think there's definitely a component about that. I know we all follow this closely and I didn't feel like we were ever getting any kind of an update on whether things were moving closer to a resolution or whether any traction was being made with the states. I mean it wasn't until we heard last night that there was no room for further discussion. So I think it's about time. I thought the premiers showed strength. I think premiers across the country have also showed strength. I saw Premier Wabkanoo in Manitoba make the similar announcement about taking U.S. liquor off of Manitoba Liquor Marts. These aren't going to, you know, cripple the U.S. economy, but they're a darn good reminder that

you need us to, you know. I saw somebody point out just but they're a darn good reminder that you need us too. You know, I saw somebody point out just the amount of you go to a grocery store and the amount of American beef that's on our grocery store shelves. And we have lots of Canadian beef, we have lots of great Ontario beef here in Ontario, but you know, we relied on trade for, you know, decades now between the two countries. And I think maybe it's a time to remind the United States that we can punch back to. Yeah, I guess, Robin, I guess my concern would be if if we go to our nuclear option, and like, let's assume that Ontario is using that nuclear option right now, then what's what's their equivalent? Their equivalent could be to shut down our access to cloud computing,

and all of a sudden, our banks don't work. Yeah, that was that's my concern, too. I kind of see it as like, if you get in a fight with a rabid dog You can punch it in the nose once but then it goes through your throat and there's blood everywhere, right? The other thing that I think about is that the pain that the Americans are going to experience right now both at the grocery grocery store at the pumps and just in seeing how the markets are sort of Reacting to all of this all of that can be tied back to Trump, right? It's Trump's actions that are causing these effects and I know that's a hard thing to sort of reacting to all of this, all of that can be tied back to Trump, right? It's Trump's actions that are causing these effects.

And I know that's a hard thing to sort of telegraph to the population that these tariffs are actually things that you're going to pay for, not Canadians. But if we can get that message across, then it becomes a consequence of Trump's decision. If we do something like cutting off electricity to these places, then we sort of become the enemy. And I share your concerns about what the Americans will do, both in attitude and in intangible retaliation. You mentioned a couple of things and also the oil for Eastern Canada again. Yeah. If it goes through the US, are they going to start tampering with that? And-

Oh, I think they've already mused at that, Robin. I think they've already, they've already said, okay, if you're going to do this, we're going to we're looking at everything as well. And Kieran, I just I, you know, the idea of being strategic and and using terrorists as a scalpel, I think that makes a lot of sense. But throwing everything in the kitchen sink at the Americans, I think they can do that back to us tenfold. And I'm just concerned with what that what that could mean. Oh, absolutely. I mean, the one thing I'll say is that Premier Ford ran on a, his entire election campaign was to secure a strong mandate. Now he has one and he has the mandate to implement his action.

I think it's good, starting with the 25% reciprocal tariff and then, you know, a month long off ramp that only on April 2nd when Trump's second round or third round by that point of tariffs come in, will Ontario close the taps off completely. But I absolutely agree with Robin's point. I think it's an escalation that there is no coming back from. Yeah, it's this is there's a there's a lot a lot on the table here. And I do like that, you know, that we are getting responses from both levels of government across the board. And I spoke with Tim Huston, that we are getting responses from both levels of government across the board. You know, I spoke with Tim Houston from Nova Scotia a little bit earlier.

He's been very vocal as well and active south of the border, you know, going down to Washington. So that's been great to see. Robin, just real quick thoughts from you before we go to break. Is this, I mean, Donald Trump, Dow Jones, it's not looking good in the stock market. Do you think that's going to? Could that could that impact his decision here? In fact, I think that might be the only thing that will impact his decision. He knew that all the other stuff was coming, but he we know that Donald Trump pays attention to the market. And

that's the thing that could really influence his opinion. So for all of the rallying that we've done in our retaliatory measures and the effect that it's going to have on the population, I really think that the market taking a big hit, that might be something that Trump will say, you know what, I'm going to reconsider this. All right, Kieran, we're gonna start with you when we come back from the break. We got more with our political panel when we continue including Mark Carney ducking and avoiding Canadian media that is next on The Ben Mulroney Show. continue including Mark Carney ducking and avoiding Canadian media that is next on the Ben Mulroney show. Welcome back to the Ben Mulroney show and welcome back to my political panel Robin Urbach, Chris Chapin and Kieran McMurray. Thank you so much for sticking around guys. Kieran, Mark Carney is hitting back at former Prime Minister Stephen Harper who sort of downplayed his importance during the the 2008 financial crisis.

He's hitting back saying no amount of revisionist history can change what I accomplished. What's your sense? Is he right to punch back or is this image that a lot of people have of him that's sort of settling in as a bit of a fabulous taking hold and he needs to do something? He needs to hit back then, otherwise it's just bad politics. What I'll say is I think it's interesting that the Conservatives are already essentially running a general election against Carney before he's even won the leadership. I mean, we all know he's probably going to win the leadership, but I think it shows that they're bringing in the big guns. I think definitely when you have someone who hasn't been a politician as the Carney team has been saying about Mark Carney, you're going to have someone who misspeaks at times,

who doesn't have a perfect story. And I think those are the growing pains that we're starting to see. And I'm going to push back on that, Kieran, but I'm going to send this over to Chris. I mean, with all due respect, Mark Carney's brand is one of deliberation and thoughtfulness and being the adult in the room. Unlike his predecessor, who you could argue was all about the sizzle, he's about the steak. Chris, what do you think about that? I completely agree. And I think that's why you're seeing the federal conservatives go after him on many of these mistakes. There was the very bizarre clip that was going around

the other day taking credit that Canada supplies 98% of US purchased semiconductors, which is like absolutely false by like 100%. It is the growing pains. And I think there's a reason you've seen him be hidden from media interviews. They kept him just focused on the campaign trail. They've done very little media across the country because he's not battle tested.

And I mean, that's why we have leadership races. I thought that was very interesting to see neither of his opponents in either of the debates really go after him and try to land a punch on him because I think this man has a habit of Speaking out of both sides of his mouth You can say one thing in the boardroom and one thing in public but you know this time it adds up and so some of These mistakes and gasps he's made They better get them fixed quickly. Yeah, because Pierre Paulia is not going to let him off the hook as easy as you know Liberal party members are across the country, you know Robin I want to hear from one of your colleagues, Laura Stone, before I bring

you into the conversation. Let's hear what she had to say about Mark Carney. You know, he owes the public a straight answer on it, and we didn't get that on Friday. You know, we got a lot of deflection and kind of turning away in technical language, but we didn't quite hear what he had to say specifically on that point. I think kind of the issue is here that Mr. Carney seems doesn't feel like he owes the public an explanation. He doesn't feel like he owes clarity on things that he doesn't want to talk about. He wants to frame things in a certain way and push forward his campaign. I've heard

similar complaints from Bob Fife as well as there's a tweet that the CBC's David Cochran says he's repeatedly asked Mark Carney to appear on his 5 p.m. politics show with 30 minutes of airtime. Cochran says the Carney team has yet to agree. Meanwhile, I can tell you speaking personally, we have tried to book Mark Carney for weeks and weeks with no success. Robin, these are well-respected journalists who have a job to do,

and part of that job is to battle-test this man who will become prime minister. I find it flummoxing that he is he is keeping everybody at arm's length. Yeah, I mean I understand what his team is doing. He's running a safe, quiet, front-runner campaign and they're keeping him sort of from the media so that he doesn't make these mistakes that we're seeing him make offhand when he does. I actually think it's a mistake though. I think if he's going to make his mistakes and he's going to become battle tested and

he's going to learn how to deal with these tough questions, if I were him, I'd do it now in the leadership race, which it seems like he's got locked down. And when a public isn't paying attention the way that they will in a general election. So if I were him and what do I know? I don't know anything about this stuff, but let's say I was in that position. I'd say, okay, you know what? Let's call up that Ben guy. He seems okay. Um, you know, he's actually occasionally and, and we'll, we'll have an interview there and I'll work out some of these kinks and I'll

learn how to answer these tough questions because when everybody's paying attention, I really don't want to make those mistakes done. So again, I understand what they're doing. They're keeping him quiet. They're keeping him behind closed doors so that he can sail to liberal leadership and then get all those tough questions. But I think it's a mistake to put him on stage when he hasn't practiced behind stage beforehand. Well, yeah, it feels like he's a bubble wrapped candidate. And when they take off the bubble wrap, yeah, it feels like he's a bubble wrapped candidate. He's and when they take off the bubble wrap, ultimately, he's going to be, he'll be proven to be made of China and find China.

And meanwhile, you've got a guy in Pierre Poliev who has been sharpening his skills in the arena for a couple of decades. I don't know that this is the right tactic, Ciarán, to prepare him for what will be a very bloody political battle in a general election. Definitely. I mean, he's either going to sink or he's going to swim, right? I take Robin's point that you want to get some of these kings out now before people are paying attention. But on the flip side, you know, if he's coasting to a leadership win, what's the benefit in risking that now something that could

sink his campaign in a general when everyone is paying attention? Why arm the conservatives with up material that they can use to put out, you know, millions of dollars worth of ads? But Kieran, isn't that a little cynical? I mean, the guy's going to be Prime Minister. I mean, he doesn't have to fight an election. He will be Prime Minister. It's sort of, I mean, I know that right now he's fighting for votes in the Liberal Party, but he will be speaking for all of Canada. And therefore Canada, Canadians,

don't you think they deserve a little more from this guy? Oh, absolutely. I think they definitely need to hear from him. I think it'll be a dereliction of duty if come March 9th. He's not out almost every day as we're dealing with these terrorists, right? But I just wonder if right now, you know, we're five days away from that, what's the risk reward benefit to the Carney team? Chris, what do you make of Mark Carney's seemingly his

willingness to play up moments in history where he probably didn't play as large a role as he's stating but in this pivotal time where he has been an advisor to Justin Trudeau he's almost poo-pooing that as if he had nothing to do with where we find ourselves as a nation today. Yeah he's absolutely picking and choosing his resume as he goes along on the campaign trail which I think is perplexing because you know that's what on the campaign trail, which I think is perplexing because you know that's what gave him the head start and I think is why he's going to be coronated in a few days time is because of that resume. I don't understand the desire to exaggerate the role

he played in balancing Paul Martin's budget or the role he played you know since then that you're downplaying the role he played with Justin Trudeau. I suppose the Trudeau angle makes a bit more sense, but at this point, the Liberal Party is going to have to stand in a reelection effort on its record. So distancing yourself from it, no matter how hard you try, is just not going to work when we get around to a general election. So I think it's been a very bizarre approach, but I think it goes back to a couple of things we've talked about. I mean, the Liberal Party and cynicism has gone hand in hand for what feels like the last five years or so. And you know, he's not battle tested.

And Robin is completely right. They're running a textbook front runner campaign. They're not getting questioned by the media. He's not being asked and really challenged the way you'd think the man who's about to become our next prime minister, hand selected by 100,000 people in this country, should be. But that's how our system works. And so you can get away with the flubbing the truth a little bit when nobody's paying attention. It's a completely different ballgame when people start watching and tuning into the debates for when they all get to vote. Yeah, Robin, I just think that the more he speaks, it runs counter to his brand.

He's not as deliberate in his words. He makes mistakes I wasn't expecting him to make. His French is also far poorer than I think anybody expected. I don't know that this is the candidate that most liberals who are voting for him expected him to be at this point. Yeah, I don't know if it matters, though. I think they've they've sort of made up their minds.

I think for the conservatives, though, they're relishing in the fact I think they finally found a line, right? Like they ran a few ideas against Mark Kearney calling him carbon tax Kearney. And that kind of fell apart. And then here, probably I was coming out and saying he's just like Justin. The problem is he doesn't, you know, for whatever flaws you want to attach to Mark Kearney, he doesn't seem like Justin Fadali. He doesn't talk like him.

He doesn't propose policy like him. He doesn't sound like him, et cetera. None of those really got me traction. But this one is because this is something that people can understand at its most basic level. This guy is exaggerating his rule in some important event or he's not being 100% truthful about where he was when a company that he was chairing decided to move to the U.S.

So I think this is something that the Conservatives can actually run with and I think the Carney team needs to be prepared to counter it. And look, if he fails at becoming Prime Minister, he can always lead Canada's massive semiconductor industry. I want to thank Robin Urbach, Chris Chapin, and Karen McMurtry for joining me. Welcome back to the show. It's all about Donald Trump and his tariffs today

and the impact that we as a country are going to feel because of this unilaterally aggressive move that I cannot make hair nor hide of. Because look, Demitris Soutis formerly of the Conservative Party said US Commerce Secretary Lutnick said that tariffs on Canada and Mexico will be lifted if they halt fentanyl flow into the US. I mean okay sure how are we gonna like all of it all of it this doesn't make any sense to me the Donald Trump posted on Truth Social

that now it's about American banks that aren't allowed in Canada even though there's 16 of them operating in Canada. Okay, so it's not about those things. To talk about this and more, Adrienne Batra, Editor-in-Chief of the Toronto Sun is joining us. Adrienne, thank you so much for making time out of your day.

It's great to be with you, Ben. Thank you. So if it's not about fentanyl and if it's not about banks, what's this about? We've all been trying to figure that out. Look, we heard President Trump throughout the entire campaign, which he won overwhelmingly. Big mandate.

Tariffs is something that he was going to do. But no one in Canada thought that that iron would be directed at us because we are going to have to renegotiate the USMCA within a year anyway. All of these trade-related issues could be dealt with and addressed then. I mean, is it that President Trump has become an expansionist? You know, all the jokes about the 51st state, he wasn't clearly joking about that. You know, it's buying Greenland, all these sorts of things.

So it's unclear that it started out as a fentanyl issue and then morphed to this massive trade deficit, which doesn't exist. And now we can only assume that this is his desire to expand the US footprint. It's so unclear and it's so frustrating, Ben, that it's hard to pinpoint. And that is the frustrating thing. I don't think anybody in this country wants to have a bad relationship with the United States. And if they are good faith operators and tell us that there is an issue on x y or z

Canadians in good faith will try their best to address it, but it's the moving of a goalpost It's trying to build a relationship on shifting sands that I think is so frustrating to so many The one thing that can't change here Adrian is how the market is reacting the market's gonna do what it's gonna do and right now the market is not liking this to the tune of a sell off of just over 700 points at this point on the Dow Jones. They've been it's been open for less than an hour. So that is not a good look. And Donald Trump does does pay attention to what the Dow Jones is doing. at it, Ben, as one of Donald Trump's sort of KPIs, he is going to look at that. He is going to see that his secretary of commerce, Howard Lutnick, is looking at that. His secretary of the treasury, Scott Bessent, is looking at that. Those are indicators to Trump that either this is going to be a short term thing, you

know, they're reacting negatively now, but once this makes its way through the system, and by the way, we still don't know how this is even going to be implemented, but once these tariffs make their way through the system, does the market bounce back? Is the consumer confidence coming back? All of these things right now in this moment are not good. And for Trump to look at that, I would hope, we would hope he sees that and says, okay, maybe it's an overreaction, but it's unclear because maybe he just thinks this needs to be course corrected anyway. But we've got all of this economic uncertainty at a time when there was already economic uncertainty in our

country through nine years of bad policy and now this is just compounding. Yes and the fact that we could have had at this point we could have had political certainty. Had Justin Trudeau a few months ago when he stood in front of the microphones said he was he was stepping down had he called an election then instead of forcing the entire country to sit through his party's internal debating about picking a new leader. Instead of doing that to us,

we could have had a national general election and we could be sitting here today in a completely different situation. We would have a federal government that has a strong mandate to negotiate with the United States. And let's not forget, they parodied parliament.

They parodied, they shut down the opportunity for Canada's house to, for the voice of Canadians to be heard at a time when we could argue this is an existential crisis. And so for the vanity and the ego of one political party, one person, we are in this position. And look, it's all important that we are looking internally now. We're looking at tearing down our own inter-provincial trade barriers. We're looking at manufacturing back here. It's all good and well that we're doing that now as a country. And I think that's important. We should have been doing this for the last 20 years, Ben. But let's not forget how we have made ourselves as a nation so vulnerable to issues such as this, not the least of which,

not shipping our LNG, not opening up pipelines, not allowing East-West pipelines, our natural resources. These are self-inflicted wounds that we are now put in a position where we are beholden to the winds and the changing of the mind of a president. These are long-term economic things that Canada should have been doing, but here we are now. So now Trudeau's announcing the retaliatory tariffs, which everybody supports, and I understand that, but let's not forget how we found ourselves in such an unmovable position in the first place.

Well, I find it really interesting because the liberal government and the liberal party is trying to reframe itself as the agent of change, despite the fact that it would be a change from an environment that they single-handedly created. Actually, not single-handedly, they did so with the help of the NDP. And the guy it looks who's going to be taking over from him is Mark Carney, who I have not seen this level of foot-and-mouth disease from a politician in a very long time, just

yesterday calling us essentially the pillars of semiconductors that couldn't be farther from the truth. I've heard now journalists like Bob Fife and others who've expressed great dissatisfaction with the level of accountability of this man who will ultimately become our prime minister. You're a journalist. You've been working in this arena for a very long time. Is this something new, a guy who's trying to accede to the highest office in the land, who seemingly has insulated himself from any accountability? It's the most extraordinary thing I've seen, particularly because of what's at stake here.

This is someone who's never run for political office before and not that there's anything wrong with that, but now he is going to be crowned as our prime minister automatically, forget leader of the Liberal Party, he's going to be prime minister as of Sunday. And it is incredible that to this day, with in spite of all the attempts from journalists from your newsroom, our newsroom, at the Toronto Sun, the Globe and Mail, we're all trying to get answers. But his team, his political team, has probably recognized that the more he talks, clearly he has a problem. He is not particularly familiar with the truth or is prone to hyperbole on so many things. We saw Prime Minister Harper even saying that, how is this guy taking credit for the economic

adjustments that the government of Canada made way back when Harper was prime minister. So Carney has a problem with exaggeration and taking credit for things to make himself sound good. So his team has clearly said, okay, we can't let him out there for too long, one or two questions, and then we shut it down. And then, yeah, this is going to be the most significant move in the coming days and weeks as we face this tariff issue, we face economic challenges, massive economic challenges here. We still have problems with inflation, we still have a housing crisis. And he's barely answered anything.

It's extraordinary to me, Ben. And Canadians are pissed off right now about what's happening coming from south of the border. How are we not as pissed off about what's happening inside our own borders with all of this? And he's being touted as the guy who's going to go toe to toe with Donald Trump. But neither of them seem to have a grasp on, you know, the actual facts on the ground. One says fentanyl is flowing in. That's not really true. One says that we are, you know, we are, you know, at the top of the industry when it comes to semiconductors. That's not true. I mean, the two of these guys together, it would just be, it would be chaos on

chaos. And that's what's scary. And Canadians recognize that. Look, I mean, as much as he likes to say, I'm an outsider, but Mr. Kearney has been an advisor to Justin Trudeau for a number of years now. The policies, to use a phrase, because it's carbon, is our carbon copy of what we've had for the last nine years. So we should make no illusions about that. Even though they're trying to,

you know, him and Krista Freeland are saying, oh, well, we need to do better on housing. Hey, Adrian, Adrian, I don't want to interrupt, but we're going to take a quick break, but you're going to stick around because we've got Justin Trudeau is slated to speak to the nation about this tariff threat. If he's not, if he's not on time, which is likely, I'd love to chat with you a little bit more. So don't go anywhere coming up. Like I said, Justin Trudeau slated to speak and

we're gonna cover that live next on the Ben Mulroney show. Welcome back to the Ben Mulroney show. And we're talking Trump tariffs pretty much all day. It is dominating every conversation, it is affecting every industry. And so that's that's the topic du jour. But it's not about fentanyl. And it's not about the border. And I've been racking my brain wondering, you know, what is this about? We've addressed the border. We pumped over a billion dollars into beefing it up. We've listened to what the border czar wants, what the administration wants. And by and large, it seems like if we haven't given it to them yet,

we have a plan to give it to them. And yet still, 25% tariffs came into effect. So it's not about fentanyl. What's it about? Well, Donald Trump on Truth Social today said if companies move to the United States there are no tariffs. This is what he wants. He wants entire industries from Canada and Mexico to roll up the carpet wherever they are and set up shop in the states. That's what he wants. Now, just think about that for a second.

Does he really think that every auto plant and every auto part manufacturer that exists in Canada and Mexico are just going to up and move? Is that what he thinks? And okay, is this how he thinks he's going to get it? Flavio Volpe, who knows more about the automotive industry than most people, has said that if these tariffs stick around, the automotive industry won't move, it'll just shut down. It will just close. It'll be too expensive to make a car.

And it won't be in the financial interest of these companies to do anything until this gets sorted out. Oh, let's welcome Adrienne Batra back to the show. Adrienne, sorry. I went on a little bit of a tirade there. But welcome back. We're waiting for the Prime Minister to speak. And what do you think we're going to hear from him? We're going to hear much of a repeat of what we heard about 30 days ago when we got the pause. $155 billion on goods that are coming from the United States.

We will hear hopefully some sort of other long-term plan. But one of the other things that we need to hear from him today, Ben, is that they are not going to increase the carbon tax on April 1st. Yeah. Because to what you were saying just before I joined you again, with respect to the desire of President Trump to bring manufacturing back to the United States to drop it, like he's America

first. And I understand that companies are responding to that Honda from Mexico, for example, has said we will open up our plants back in the US. I mean, he's bringing in chips manufacturing. So he's seeing what he wants is a fundamental change to how the US economy is driven. And other countries need to pay attention to that, like Canada. At the World Economic Forum, right after he was sworn in, President Trump spoke at the WEF, and he's obviously no fan of large, these global entities. But he went there with a message, and he's like,

it's not business as usual anymore. The United States is going to cut red tape. We are going to open up our markets. We are going to provide workers. We are going to open up our markets. We are going to provide workers. We are going to provide a low tax environment. We are going to create a place that the United States is the number one place in the world you want to do business. Yeah. And a lot of people can say, oh, that's bluster and that's his whole thing. But he genuinely

means that. And if you see the moves in the executive orders he's made in the last month between unleashing American energy, opening up their environmental regulations, shutting down a lot of the red tape, he is really trying to reshape the American economy. And Canada needs to pay attention to that. We haven't paid attention to that. And we haven't paid attention to that. Adrian, when Pierre Poliev released his mini doc on Twitter about the productivity gap between Canada and the United States and how it started in 2015, I thought to myself,

and this was prior to these tariffs even being a remote possibility, I thought, you know what? The best thing that could happen for Pierre Poliev would be Trump getting elected because the argument to elect a conservative government here is if you want that gap to continue to grow, vote for anyone but Pierre Poliev. He will at least have, he will unleash a Canadian version of what Donald Trump sees for his

country in terms of cutting red tape and lower taxes and unleashing a wave of entrepreneurial ship, the likes of which we haven't seen in a couple of generations. And yet through, I don't know, I don't know what they've done, I don't know how they've positioned it, but somehow the liberals have convinced a swath of people

to give them a second look. I don't get how we've gotten here. It's extraordinary. But we've said for some time, the opportunity for the Liberals is going to be to run against Donald Trump. Well, Donald Trump has just made it really easy for them. Look, I hope that Canadians don't go down that road again, because we could be in an election as soon as next week potentially, it's possible, but I really hope that Canadians recognize that it and maybe they don't think about it in such a nuanced fashion, but policies we've had

for nearly the last decade have resulted in many of the adverse economic effects that we're having today. Maybe they don't make the connection, but the challenge, Ben, is that, you know, Pierre Poliev has come out with some really thoughtful policies, really good ideas on the housing crisis. But if you step back and look at every aspect of public policy in this country for the last near decade, everything from immigration to the economy to housing to productivity, the Trudeau Liberals have failed us. And we're not in good shape. And we again remain, I think the most frustrating part is just a few weeks ago, Japan was in the global office with with

President Trump signing a massive multi billion dollar LNG project that could have been us. Yeah, no one said Europeans came. The Europeans came. Yeah. And one of our LNG that could have been us. Our prime minister was has been off in Europe and doing you know, acting as prime minister early as he can until until he runs out the clock. I think it would be quite, symbolically, it would be quite telling if one of his final addresses to the nation would be him essentially signing the death knell of the carbon tax by saying,

it would be fitting, it would be, in my estimation, poetic. But I think you're right. I think he really has to do it. Yeah, I believe he has to do it. He absolutely has to do it. And one thing it would do is certainly buttress the liberals' chances in what will be an upcoming election. But that said, I don't know if he will, I mean, this is a guy that really married himself to this policy. And, but speaking of that policy, there are other pieces of legislation

and other policies. Oh. That the Trump people are saying, hang on a second here. But again, we're Canada first now. Trudeau is gonna come up and look pretty darn good today in light of all of this, which is an extraordinary turn of events. But again, let's not forget how we managed to find ourselves in part in this financial turmoil, economic turmoil, is because of their policies.

Yeah, I'm, I'll be looking forward to hearing what the prime minister has to say. Equally, I'd like to hear what the person I believe will be the next prime minister, Pierre Poliev, to hear what his reaction is. I haven't seen an opposition leader put as many policy initiatives in the window as Pierre has prior to an election campaign. That to me is, it is almost counterintuitive. It's typically, you typically wait until the election campaign starts and if you're the leader, you certainly don't give your opponents anything to punch at. But I very much like the fact that he's confident

enough that he's willing to put that stuff out there, even though the liberals are copying a great many of them. Well, absolutely, because the liberals recognize, you know, the liberals' ideas of their policies, they know they all sound good and people get excited about them, you know, socialism's great or everything for free sounds great, but in theory, but in practice, it doesn't work out so well. And that's a result. And we saw consequences of that in the United States with four years of Biden.

Harris was rejected. We're seeing that for almost a decade of the United States with four years of Biden. Harris was rejected. We're seeing that for almost a decade of, uh, the liberals buttress by the NDP. You know, eventually the bill comes due. But, but with respect to the Poliev, what's interesting about how the policies he's coming out with and the positions he's coming out with, it's very, um, understandable. He he's put out these long form policy videos, as you just mentioned, on housing, for example.

It's understandable. It explains how we got here, what we need to do to address it. It's really quite an extraordinary thing. Adrian Batra, we're gonna have to leave it there. Editor-in-chief of the Toronto Sun, thank you so much for taking time to join us on the Ben Mulroney show. It was my pleasure. Thank you.

Welcome back to the Ben Mulroney show and we are dealing with Donald Trump all day. How do you deal with a bad faith operator? At least that's my my editorials question. I don't believe that he is he's being honest with us terms of what he wants. We I thought he we addressed the issues at the border. Turns out I think he wants every business that exists in Canada and Mexico to close up shop and open in the United States. I'm joined now by someone who probably was thought along and hard about questions just like that. Derrick

Bernie, the former Canadian ambassador to the United States, and he led the Canadian delegation in concluding negotiations of the Canada US free trade agreement. Mr. Bernie, thank you so much for joining us on the Ben Mulroney show. Oh, you're most welcome, Ben. So you wrote a piece in the National Post that says, 10 tips for dealing with Donald Trump. I guess in order to deal with someone, you got to know what they want and you got to know how they operate. So how do you think we deal with someone, you got to know what they want and you got to know how they operate. So, how do you think we deal with this, man? Because I thought we were dealing with them in good faith. Yeah, that was a momentary feeling, right?

Well, we've had a good run as long as it's lasted, but unfortunately, it looks like Mr. Trump is retreating to a law of the jungle rule on trade. Might is right. No justification whatsoever for his actions. It's very sad. It's very sad for Canada-U.S. trades. Very sad for Canada-U.S. relations. You know, in a very more minor vein, I was reminded of what your father said at a time

when Ronald Reagan's administration imposed a 35% tariff on our cedar shakes and shingles for roofing in the midst of the free trade negotiations. And your father said to the parliament, you know, there are days when the Americans make it very difficult to have good relations with them. Yeah. Well, that's where we are. You know, my suggestions were pretty clear. We have to contain our emotions and not react to some of the obviously off the rail comments the president makes. But we have to conduct a war of fact rather than a war of emotion.

I hope we will come a little more clear with our retaliation measures. I mean, we announced essentially what we announced a month ago. I think we need to be more strategic, both politically and economically, in addition to the kind of items that we target. There's no question about that we have to react. I would suggest, for instance, that, you know, in a political context, we should target the 17 states for whom Canada is the largest export market. I would also suggest that we look at the Senate, the states in which the Senate has competitive

contests in 2026. And we should target those specifically because these actions are not just going to hurt Canadians. They're going to hurt Americans. Everybody knows that. That's basic economics. And Donald Trump desperately wants to hold the House and the Senate. And so if we can put pressure on those key races, those are pain points and leverage that we could use.

That's a very good point. Ambassador Bernie, is there a role for the courts in this new relationship? Well, I assume that we've recruited top-flight US trade lawyers in order to litigate this because it's a total violation of the USMCA and the WTO. And I'm tempted to agree with you that there may be scope in the US courts. I mean, the US courts are reacting to some of the things he's doing domestically in a principled manner. And I think there's scope for them to do the same. But I would, you know, I think we have to stress that this is a blatant violation of

the USMCA, an agreement that he signed 18 months ago, or whatever it was, no, it was longer than that. That has to be the first point of attack. Because when your partner violates an agreement that they signed, you don't have much recourse other than to do that. But Ambassador, therein lies the rub as I see it. You said that we have to conduct ourselves, it's a battle of facts, not emotions. But when our partner is refusing to acknowledge the facts, then that's a problem.

When he refused to acknowledge that he himself renegotiated NAFTA and then he turns around and says it's the worst deal has ever been cooked up and whoever signed it's an idiot. I mean, I don't know how you reason with that when he says that fentanyl is pouring over the border when it is in fact not. I don't know how we engage facts in an arena where facts to a large extent are meaningless. Well, that's why I think we have to push the political pedal where they're vulnerable. I mean, the Americans are going to see the economic consequences very quickly, and that's going to impact on their economy. I mean, some are predicting that they may go into recession

if he goes full flight with this terror war. And that's a possibility. I like what Premier Ford is doing. I mean, I think he's being both bold and assertive when he says, OK, you do this to us, you damage our economy in this way, I'm going to cut off electricity to Michigan, Minnesota, and New York. I'm also going to cut off nickel. 50% of America's nickel imports come from Canada. That is what Americans need to hear. We're not

going to convince, Ben, we're not going to convince Donald Trump. He's in his own world on many things, Ukraine being another one. Yeah, but Ambassador, what about, I mean, he's not going to listen to us, but will he listen to the Dow Jones? Yes, I think the market reaction tumbled yesterday when he made the announcement. I don't know what it's gonna do. Oh, it's it's not it's not good. It's in the red. Well, yeah, well, you know, he will. Well, I don't know whether he pays attention to anything other than his own speeches, but his administration can't ignore market instability, especially if the economy and the economic numbers in the U.S. start to go down.

And don't forget, this is just the first phase. In April, he's going to hit the European Union. We need some friends and allies, genuine allies, in this tussle, and I'm hoping we can count on the European Union to support us with whatever we do. Well, yeah, we could try, we could kick that can because we didn't exactly get the support we wanted out of the UK and Keir Starmer, who is apparently kissing the ring in Washington to the point that he wanted nothing to do with Canada's precarious position with Washington. Well, everybody's afraid of the United States because they've been intimidated by the current administration. I understand that. That's power politics. That is worst. But we have to find ways around it. We have to be strategic. When I

say we have to conduct a war of facts, have to be strategic. When I say we have to conduct a war of facts, as I said, I'm not trying to impress Donald Trump with facts. He ignores facts every statement he makes, but we can get support from the American people. I have to believe that because they have no reason to be negative even if we did win the hockey tournament. So you know, I think we have to rely on waking American business executives in particular. I also am intrigued, I read this this morning, that there may be a possibility of a carve carve out on autos for Mexico and Canada given that the USMCA has very explicit terms in it which govern the trade in autos. If that were true, that would take a lot of the edge off

the blunt 25% across the board tariff they're imposing. That would be something we should be trying to negotiate if it isn't a fact. When Donald Trump posts on his truth social, if companies move to the United States, there are no tariffs. When you hear that, is that what he's really looking for? Is he looking for every business in Canada to close up shop here and move down there?

Ben, you can't separate bluster from truth. Okay? I mean, it's impossible. Yeah, I mean, I don't think he even knows what he's talking about. That kind of thing. But to think that these companies are going to move their their operations from Canada into the United States because of this, I think is about as unrealist. You know, one of the only American executives who's spoken about this and criticized the administration for contemplating tariffs is the CEO of Ford. Well, all of the auto company executives know this to be a fact.

They're not going to move operations into the United States because of a tariff. They're going to look for exemptions. And as I say, the USMCA provides very precise rules of origin on where parts have to be made and how much has to be made in North America. Ambassador Bernie, we're going to have to leave it there, but I want to thank you so much for your time today. I really appreciate it. Welcome back to the Ben Mulroney Show. If you've ever listened to me talk about cell phones in schools, you know that I was quite bullish on this new cell phone ban that came into effect this year, this academic school year.

I have said many times that the role and job of a teacher and the role of a cell phone in a kid's life are diametrically opposed. A teacher's job is to get kids to think deeply, to work in tandem, together, to calm them down, to create an atmosphere of learning. And cell phones do the exact opposite. They create isolation or hyperactivity, they distract,

they can make kids aggressive. So all the things that a teacher is trying to do are stymied and countered by a cell phone. And there are 30 of those phones in a classroom. So the teachers already have a tough enough job. I was very glad to hear that the cell phone ban came into effect. Very disappointed to read in the Globe and Mail that the cell phone ban isn't working. Here to

talk about the article in question is the contributor to the Globe and Mail Catherine Martinko. She's also an author of the author of Childhood Unplugged practical advice to get kids off screens and find balance. Catherine, welcome to the show. Hi, Ben. Thanks so much for having me. Yeah, so this is a very disappointed. What did you learn in writing this article about the ban and why did you call it toothless? Well, I've been observing the ban in action. I've got three kids in the public system in Ontario. And like you, I was very hopeful when it was first announced at the beginning of the year. But over time, I've seen that it really can't even be called a ban because

the kids are still allowed to keep the phones on their person if they're between the ages of grade seven and grade 12. And that means that that's not going to stop them from looking, you know, they can sneak a peek anytime they want. There's no way that a teacher can possibly be policing that they have access to the phones during recess, during their lunch breaks, anytime they go to the bathroom. So really, they're just as scattered as it's ever been. And one simple interaction with your phone can derail you completely. I mean, you can be focused on your work, and then you take a look at your phone, and there's an emotional connection, especially with kids, that can completely derail whatever they were working on before.

So even if it's just a short period of time, it can have effects over the course of the rest of the day. Yeah, it said that it takes 20 minutes to regain your focus after glancing at it. But there's also been a very infamous 2017 study called the Brain Drain Study that found that the mere proximity of a phone can affect a kid's cognitive performance. So the closer the phone is, even if it's face down, silent, in a bag beside them, the closer it is physically, the poorer they perform on tests. Catherine, we've got this data.

It is unequivocal. The phone has no business in a place of learning like a school. Why can't we get this right? It feels like this ban, if your article is to be believed in, there's no reason not to believe you, it feels like this was either a ban, a performative ban or a half measure, which by the way, Canadians are well known for,

but why can't we hit this out of the park? It seems pretty simple. I think there's a lot of factors at play, but a common theme that came up with the people that I interviewed and spoke to is that parents want to be able to reach their kids. And this is troublesome because parents should not feel the need to reach their kids during the school day. Your kid is not that special. Whatever you have to talk to your kid about, it's been talked about before in the past. Get over yourselves.

There are established protocols for being able to reach kids at school. You call the office like parents have always done. And kids need, they need phone free spaces. The fact is kids are spending upwards of nine hours a day on average screening on their phones, scrolling on their phones for entertainment based purposes only. They have the right to have some screen free time and to be able to focus on what they're doing.

So I think really we need to make a school conducive to that. We need to implement bell to bell phone bands where the phone is physically separated from the child and they're not tempted to look at it. So whether that takes the form of introducing yonder pouches, which are these magnetic pouches that you lock a phone into, some schools are using cheaper options like manila envelopes or just cubbies in the back of every single classroom at the front door of the school. There are ways around this. Yeah. It's going to be unpopular with parents who have to realize that they might not

be able to talk to their kid throughout the day. I mean, Frank, I don't have time for parents like that. Because those parents are very likely also saying, telling the school, I'm in charge of rearing my kid. You're in charge of educating my kid. There is a line between the two. Don't get confused. I don't want to hear that you are teaching my kid stuff

that I should be responsible for. And yet, you as a parent are not staying in your lane and you are introducing yourself into the classroom where you do not belong. Yeah, I understand the desire to be able to communicate with a child. I think that's sort of a natural instinct, but parents do need to push back against that because it undermines the ultimate goal of parenting, which is to raise an adult, a child who's, you know, independent, able to do things on their own, and of course, getting the education that they need. So I think even even a bigger thing that I would encourage parents to do is not even

to send phones to school at all with their child. Yeah. You know, your parents want their kid to have the phone to be safe on the trip to and from school and yet is that really necessary? We all went to school without cell phones in our pockets, or certainly not smartphones. There are cheaper dumb phone workarounds, flip phones, basic phones that you can give your child instead

if you want to make sure that they can reach you in an emergency, but even that is not necessary much of the time. So phones do not belong in schools at all. I think that we could avoid a lot of these problems if the phones never even left the house to begin with. What's frustrating is there are absolutely places in North America and in Canada where they've gotten this cell phone ban right. And rather than adopt a best practice where we've seen it work, we pull this half measure where it sounds like we're helping teachers

and God knows frontline teachers need that help in the war against the cell phone. And yet it's a ban in name only. Yeah, and the schools where they have implemented real bell to bell phone policies have seen, you know, a boost in teacher morale, they've seen a reduce in bullying in the classroom, improved focus, improved academic scores, lower requirements for mental health services, even like everything just improves when they do that. So really, it's sort of a win win situation all around if schools are able to do that. The problem is a lot of schools want to meet the students where they're at. You know, too often they're using social media for school related

extracurricular teams and clubs. They're throwing up QR codes on the smart boards in the classroom. There's all a host of activities that are now based on the expectation that students are going to be carrying these devices in their pockets. And we really need to get away from that. We need schools issuing statements in favor of families delaying, giving their kids smartphones as long as possible, getting them off social media if possible, and just really showing support for families

who wanna do things differently. Yeah, I listen, I am a very big proponent of not listening to kids in this situation. I don't care what a kid has to say. I don't care how important their phone is to them. You're the kid, you're gonna listen to the parents, and then having an adult conversation with the parents and saying, you guys are the ones mucking this situation. I don't care what a kid has to say. I don't care how important their phone is to them. You're the kid, you're going to listen to the parents and having an adult conversation with the parents and saying you guys are the ones

mucking this up. You're complaining that test scores are down at the TDSB. And yet you're also contributing to it by calling your kid in the middle of the day, like pick a lane, figure out what you want. And do you want to do you want to connect with your kid or do you want your kid scores to test scores to go up? It's because it's it's an either or proposition. Yeah, I think there's a lot of things we do as parents that are not going to make our kids

happy. And we do it because we know that it's the right thing for them. And it's even hard for us. You know, it's there, there are lazy parenting tactics that might feel good in the moment. But ultimately, we will pay the price down the road when our kid has failed to develop the study habits and the sleep habits and the focus habits that they really need to succeed in life. So yeah, as parents, we have some tough questions to ask ourselves for sure. And we should not be outsourcing that tough work to the teachers. By all means, I do not blame the teachers for this. I think very hard job as it is to manage a classroom of 30 kids and then to throw smartphones into the mix too and expect them to be setting their own rules every single day and having to constantly battle with the

students about that. I do not envy them that position. They need much, much clearer rules handed down from the administration than what they're currently getting. Yeah. And they need to have the, they need to have the force of a real ban behind them so that when a parent comes in or a student comes in and says, I need my phone, you say, I don't care. The rule is the rule. Like that, that's, that's how a teacher can be helped. But when it's when it's this willy nilly kind of milquetoast ban, the teacher is the one that feels the stress of it. Yeah, yeah, for sure. And I'm hearing that from teachers. One teacher I spoke to said that you wouldn't even be able to tell the difference between walking into a classroom

today as opposed to a year ago before this so called and was even implemented. So I think that that's very frustrating for them. And even though there are rules in place, another teacher I interviewed said that the teachers union has explicitly recommended that teachers not seize students phones because they're afraid of this, of the phone getting damaged, getting lost. And then the teacher would ultimately be on the hook for the thousand dollar device. Oh God. So, you know, there's a lot of incentives not to even implement the rules when the teacher would ultimately be on the hook for the $1,000 device. Oh, God. So, you know, there's a lot of incentives not to even implement the rules when the teacher wants to and when there is an issue. The article in the Globe and Mail is called Ontario's Toothless School cell phone ban

isn't working. It's time to rethink it. And the author of it is Katherine Martinko. And she just joined me. Thank you so much, Katherine. I really appreciate your time today. Thank you. 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 through 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. Daniel Blanchard is no ordinary thief. His heists are ingenious. His escapes defy belief. And when he sees the dazzling diamond CC Star, he'll risk everything to steal it. His exploits set off an intercontinental manhunt. But how long can CC Star stay lucky for Daniel? I'm Seren Jones, and this is a most audacious heist. Listen on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon Music, or wherever you get your podcasts.