The Ben Mulroney Show - Best of the Week Part 3 - Michael Barrett, Marcus Kolga, Adam Zivo

Episode Date: March 22, 2025

Best of the Week Part 3 - Michael Barrett, Marcus Kolga, Adam Zivo Guests: Michael Barrett, Marcus Kolga, Adam Zivo, Brad Smith, David Cooper, Craig Baird 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

At Desjardins, we speak business. We speak startup funding and comprehensive game plans. We've mastered made-to-measure growth and expansion advice, and we can talk your ear off about transferring your business when the time comes. Because at Desjardins Business, we speak the same language you do, business. So join the more than 400,000 Canadian entrepreneurs who already count on us, and contact Desjardins today. We'd love to talk business.

Hey, are you in the mood for something new? Why not fly with Air Transat to an eclectic music scene? A vibrant nightlife. And your next big discovery. Starting this summer, you can fly direct from Toronto to Berlin, exclusively with Air Transat. Now all things Berlin feel closer than ever. Air Transat, travel moves us.

Welcome to the Ben Mulroney best of the week podcast. We had so many great conversations this week, including a chat about Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin playing nice and what that means for the rest of us. Plus, our dilemma panel was full value. Enjoy. Welcome back to the Ben Mulroney show. And our Prime Minister, Mark Carney, believes that part of his strategy to win the next election is, in my opinion, punt the ball on Donald Trump until after the election and ask Canadians to live in this limbo world right now where nobody's

really talking to him because he wants us to trust that he is the best person, the strongest person for Canada to have negotiating on its behalf versus Donald Trump. So he wants it to be a jump ball and he thinks that Canadians will select him. Why test it now when you can test it after the fact? That's my cynical view, but that's what I think he thinks is part of his winning strategy. Yesterday on Fox News, Donald Trump gave us some insights into who he thinks is part of his winning strategy. Yesterday on Fox News, Donald Trump gave us some insights into who he thinks is the strongest or weakest person, liberal or conservative, to negotiate up against.

The liberal party is going to win now in the next election, most likely. And they were a down and I. Isn't that going to make them more hostile to us and possibly open the door for China closer to Canada? And that would really put us in a bind. The conservative that's running is stupidly no friend of mine. I don't know, but he said negative things. So when he says negative things, I couldn't care less.

I think it's easier to deal, actually, with a liberal. OK, so that's what he said. Here's what Pierre Poliev said in reaction to that. It's clear that President Trump wants the liberals in power because they will keep this country weak after 10 years in power. The liberals have given us the weakest economy in the G7. They've doubled their housing costs, driven half trillion dollars to the south. All right, so there you go. You know that that is going to be a football that the conservatives pick up and run with. Here to talk about that and many more stories is a conservative himself, MP Michael Barrett. Michael, welcome to the Ben Mulroney Show.

Hey Ben, thanks for having me on. So that dropped on my social media feed, that Trump positioning yesterday. And at first blush, I was like, will this help? Won't it help? What are your thoughts as somebody who's going to be going into the fire and fighting this out in an election? When you heard that, what did you think? Well, I wasn't surprised to hear that Donald Trump thinks that it would be easier to deal

with Mark Carney than it would be to deal with Pierre Poliev. And the two things that come right to mind are one, you know, Mark Carney's shown, you know, his willingness to bend to what Donald Trump's looking for, like he did with his Brookfield move, moving the headquarters from Canada to New York City, right after Trump threatened us with tariffs. And the other thing is, Pierre has admitted to being a bit tough. And some people think that that's, you know,

that he needs to soften his edges or his image. And this is exactly the kind of guy that we want dealing with an aggressive US president who's looking to get all kinds of concessions from us. And that's who we need. So we don't need someone who's going to bend to Donald Trump. So I'm not surprised by it at all. Every day feels like Groundhog Day with Mark Carney, where he says something and then the

next day has to walk it back. So he did it with the semiconductors. Apparently we make all of America semiconductors. Oh, no, we don't. And then, and the, the, oh, I've canceled the carbon tax. Oh, no, I haven't. And now, he, after dressing down Rosemary Barton for suggesting, for deigning to suggest that there may be some conflicts in his blind trust, he turns around and promises a conflict of interest screen

to prevent him from making any decisions for companies on which he served. And in other words, there may be conflicts in his blind trust, so he needs to set up a system to avoid them. At some point, this is going to stick to him, right? Well, look, it only takes anyone who can see or hear what Mark Carney says one day to know that the next day it's probably going to be the opposite that's in fact true as you pointed out. This issue with the conflicts of interest is just brutal.

This is a completely unforced error. Mark Carney just needs the antidote to this poison is for him to just be honest with Canadians. Tell us what the conflicts of interest are. Tell us what discussions you're going to have to recuse yourself from. And what's his plan for from now until election day? Because he doesn't have a screen in place. That's something he's going to work on. Meanwhile, he's set in policy and he's making commitments and he's meeting world leaders.

And what's that doing to his assets, to his investments? And I don't understand how the Prime Minister can recuse himself. He's the ultimate decider. Like at some point he has to weigh into every decision because a decision in government doesn't get made without the say so of the Prime Minister. Well, and this is why when he says that he's divested, he hasn't sold anything. He's putting them into a blind trust and all kinds of the money that Mark Carney is eligible to continue receiving aren't things. These are funds that he set up.

He knows exactly what's in them from his time at Brookfield. He raised the capital from billionaires, got them into these funds. So he built them. He knows what's in them. So they're in a blind trust, but they're not going to change. So, so the decisions that he makes on infrastructure, energy, transportation, communication, you name it, Brookfield's in it. So is this going to be a prime minister who's, who's not able to go into the cabinet room? It doesn't make any sense. I want to talk about a big announcement that came out of Pierre Poliev. It sounds like he listened to Ontario Premier Doug Ford on the day that he, the Premier, congratulated Mark Carney in becoming Prime Minister. He said, congratulations, now get out of our way in the Ring of Fire. And it looks like Pierre listened to that. So why don't you explain to our listeners

about this announcement, what the Ring of Fire is and what the conservatives are prepared to do. Well, the Ring of Fire is basically a massive, untapped potential resource in Ontario's North. And it's got all kinds of rare earth minerals. And the federal liberals, Justin Trudeau and his ministers Wilkinson and Guiibo, they've blocked permits for Ontario to realize this. So this is huge potential money for the First Nations communities in Canada's north, huge potential for northern Ontario communities.

And what Pierre said is that it'll start with a billion dollar commitment over three years to get a road built so that we can actually connect it to Ontario's highway network and so that we can green light all of the permits within six months. Now that might seem like, well that doesn't sound very fast, it's been five years of the Liberals who have been, you know, ragging the puck, they're not getting these permits approved. This has a potential bend to boost our economy with billions of dollars and these are strategic minerals. We need these and my goodness, it also has some added benefit because the investments that we'd make would actually

contribute to our defense spending because these are militarily strategic resources that we'd be tapping into. But Michael Barrett, by making this announcement today, I mean, we're technically not even an election campaign yet, and you guys are putting a lot in the window, and some of that stuff is getting pilfered by the liberals. Any fear that by putting this out there now,

they might find a way to take bits and pieces, if not the entire thing and claim it as their own? Look, we've seen from Mark Carney that they just can't help themselves. So like he said, he was gonna get rid of the carbon tax because it's a very popular common sense policy from Pierre Polagyov's conservatives. He lasted three days before he walked back

that promise. And we've seen for nine years that they just can't get stuff done. So if they weren't able to do it in the first nine years of their mandate, Canadians are going to recognize that they're not going to do it in the next, in a fourth liberal mandate. If they want to put Canada first, if they want us to build, they're going to have to vote for common sense and vote for Pierre Poliak. Real quick at the end here, Michael, what's your sense? Is Mark Carney going to call an election or is he going to recall the House on the 24th, at which point the government will probably fall and we will be in an election campaign? Well, I'm not supposed to make predictions, Ben.

Here we go. And look, they padlocked parliamentarians, locked us out of the House of Commons at the end of January. Mark Carney doesn't have a seat in the Commons and doesn't have the confidence of the House. I don't think he'd get it. I think we're going to go to the polls. I think he's going to drop the risk this weekend.

Michael Barrett, Conservative MP, thanks for joining us. Come back any time. Thanks so much, Ben. Take care. The Ben Mulroney Show marches on and I want to take a look at a different aspect of Donald Trump's conversation that he had yesterday with Laura Ingraham on Fox News. We've been spending the day focusing on his choice words for, as he calls them, Governor Trudeau and liberals versus conservatives, but they took a broader view of the globe. And we know he doesn't like Canadians, he doesn't like the leadership in Canada, he's got very negative things to say.

But here's how he sees his relationships with Vladimir Putin, Xi Jinping, and Kim Jong-un. He actually said to me, if you're my friend, I'd hate to see you as my enemy. He said that very strongly. But with all of that, I had a very good relationship with Putin. I had a very good relationship with President Xi, a very good relationship with Kim Jong-un of North Korea, lots of good relationships and that's a positive thing, that's not a negative thing. All right here to discuss that as well as what's going on between the United States,

Russia and Ukraine. We're joined by two people with far more knowledge on the subject than I, Marcus Kolga, senior fellow of McDonald's Laurier Institute and founder of DisinfoWatch and Adam Zivow, national post columnist, as well as the executive director for the Center for Responsible Drug Policy. To both of you, I say hi. Good morning. Thanks for having me on the show. Marcus, let's when you hear Donald Trump referencing friendships with Putin, Xi

and Kim Jong Un. What what does that say to you about his worldview? Well, I mean, it's jarring. I mean, I think that we've spent the past century looking to the United States to be a defender of democratic values of human rights, and also as a strong ally of Canada. When he says things like that, that he sees Putin and Xi and Kim as his friends and his allies, it's utterly shocking. And I think that it's an indicator of where Donald Trump is clearly taking the United States,

but also a deeply concerning indicator of where the world is headed. Look, I was listening to Russian state media and sort of the Russian reaction to the Trump Putin phone call yesterday, Alexander Dugan, who is known as Vladimir Putin's sort of philosophical guru, neo-fascist or even a neo-Nazis, you might call him. And he said very clearly, there's a question about where he sees Donald Trump's current alignment. And Dugan said, Donald Trump is clearly aligning with Vladimir Putin's worldview

and has abandoned what traditional Western liberal democratic worldview. So the Russians are recognizing it. We need to start recognizing this as well. Adam Zivov, I want to turn our attention to the readout of President Trump's call that he had with Vladimir Putin. Specifically, and they talk

about the need for peace in Ukraine and the possibility of, you know, good faith peace efforts and a ceasefire. But at the end of it is where I want to draw our attention. The two leaders agreed that a future with an improved bilateral relationship between the United States and Russia has huge upside. This includes enormous economic deals and geopolitical stability when peace has been achieved. Now, Adam, everyone wants geopolitical stability, but if this dynamic of friendship between Russia, who is no friend to the West, and the United States, who is accepting them like a good faith acceptance that they have suddenly

become that. What does that say for this geopolitical stability that they're claiming they both want? Well, I don't think there is going to be any geopolitical stability from a rapprochement between the United States and Russia. I think that Trump is being played for a fool. And I think that he underestimates Russia's ambition in the world. Let's not forget that Russia and China have for decades yearned to overthrow American hegemony they are actively challenging the international rules based order because they correctly perceive that it That it's to the United States advantage to have this system in place, right?

So they're trying to dismantle these international institutions They're trying to reduce the use of the American dollar as an international reserve currency. Uh, they are not friends with the United States at all. And that was even illustrated yesterday where Putin blatantly disrespected Trump by being over an hour late to their scheduled phone call. Let's not forget that this phone call was very high stakes. He joked about it publicly to an audience of oligarchs. So how is it that Trump can tolerate this disrespect and still imagine that Putin respects him?

Now, when it comes to the potential economic benefits to the United States, I don't see any. Russia's economy is what, one-tenth the size of the US economy or that of the EU, and they're not complimentary. So Russia predominantly exports oil, gas and weapons. And those are all things that the United States already has an abundance of, which is why you see a close relationship between China and Russia, which are symbiotic and why they benefit from

international trade. But you can't recreate that between the United States and Russia. So I've got to ask Marcus, what are the intelligence agencies in the United States feeding to Donald Trump if what's coming out of his mouth is things like this? I mean, surely there are people within the intelligence apparatus

who are giving him the straight goods on who Vladimir Putin is, what his motivations are, what fingers, what pies he's got fingers in and why all of those things are a work against the interests of the United States. I mean, wouldn't that, that seems, that seems as plain as the nose on my face, but clearly he's getting something that is turning it in so that what he says is stuff like this. Yeah, look, I would imagine that the US intelligence apparatus understands completely who Vladimir Putin is

and is probably producing reports that indicate that. But that's not what Donald Trump is necessarily reading. I mean, he is getting his information filtered through individuals who he has placed into positions of power to create those briefings for him. And it's entirely possible someone like Tulsi Gabbard, who's known to be very closely aligned in her worldview with foreign authoritarians, including Vladimir Putin, this is someone who's really ultimately responsible in briefing the president. So if that intelligence is being filtered through someone like that, you can be sure

that I think Donald Trump is receiving an alternative version of what's happening in the world and who Vladimir Putin is compared to the truth. And we also know that he's influenced by all sorts of illiberal populist influencers in the United States. So he may be getting his information from from those individuals. And that's clearly painting his world view. Adam Zivow, are we at a point now where Ukraine's President Zelensky is just shaking his head saying I guess I have to, I'm going to have to sign something with these guys because

they're ganging up on me. and there's no change in their mind. They've created this wall that I can't seem to get around. Put my, put yourself in the head of Vladimir Zelensky today as they talk about ceasefires and, and potential peace deals. Well, I think it depends on what kind of ceasefire and peace deal is presented to Ukraine. So if this ceasefire sets up Ukraine for a military defeat in the future, for example, by prohibiting Ukraine from receiving intelligence and further munitions or prohibiting the future training of soldiers, something that, you know, would essentially allow Russia to increase its power while Ukraine just treads water. I think that there is no obligation for Zelensky to accept

that kind of deal. And there's no obligation for Zelensky to accept a deal where he cedes huge swaths of territory, including, for example, Odessa blast and gives the Russians, you know, a bridgehead across the Dnieper River. So if those kinds of deals are presented to Ukraine, Zelensky can always say no and gamble on continuing the war using just European support. From my understanding, Ukraine produced about 30% of its military needs right now. Europe produces about 30 to 40% and the United States produces about one third. So it's possible to survive without accepting a bad peace deal. Uh, Marcus Colga, uh, and Adam Zivow, I wish we had more time.

We have barely scratched the surface. I really wanted to get your take on Trump and Putin, apparently discussing a US-Russia hockey series, but that'll have to wait till the next conversation. I hope that happens soon. Thank you to the both of you. Thanks for having us. I mean, yes, when Canada's the enemy, Russia's the friend, we are in fact living in the upside down. jalapeno peppers pile in a perfect bunch and if you plead please if a cheesy taste came in threes with cheesy jalapeno pepper sauce poured with ease and if smoky strips of bacon

make burgers better you'll love our cheesy jalapeno and bacon quarter pounder. Get this beefy bold bacony melty mouthful only at McDonald's for a limited time. Breaking news coming in from bet 365 where every nail-biting overtime win, breakaway, pick six, three-point shot, underdog win, buzzer beater, shootout, walk-off, and absolutely every play in between is amazing. From football to basketball and hockey to baseball, whatever the moment, it's never ordinary at Bet365. Must be 19 or older, Ontario only.

Please play responsibly. If you or someone you know has concerns about gambling, visit connectsontario.ca. Welcome to the Dilemma Panel. No question is too awkward, no problem too petty, and no opinion goes unchallenged. Our panel of over-thinkers is here to dissect, deliberate, and sometimes derail the conversation entirely.

Grab your popcorn. This isn't just advice. It's a front row seat to life's most hilariously relatable train wrecks. Here's your host, Ben Mulrooney. Welcome back and welcome to the Dilemma Panel. A lot of you think that my opinions in life and the opinions I spot on this show are very unhelpful. So this is my attempt to restore balance and be as helpful as I can possibly be. And don't forget we can't do this unless you give us your dilemmas and the best way to do that is to email us at askbenn at chorusent.com. That's askbenn at c-o-r-u-s-e-n-t dot com. And here for the 70th time

is Brad Smith, the host of the Big Bake on the Food Network, former host of Chopped Canada, the first contestant on The Bachelor Canada, and former CFL player. Welcome back, Brad. Ben, good to see you. And for the very first time, please welcome new to the chorus family, David Cooper, the host of the last show with David Cooper

on the Chorus Radio Network. David, welcome. Oh, Ben, what a pleasure. All right, listen, let's be as helpful as we can, right? And let's jump right into dilemma number one. Dear Ben, my husband is going through what I think is a midlife crisis and it's causing a lot of tension in our marriage. Lately, he's been talking a lot about wanting to switch careers completely. He's feeling

unfulfilled in his current job and believes that a change is what he needs to be happier. While I understand his desire to feel more satisfied with his work, I'm really worried about the financial implications of making such a big leap at this point in our lives. We have a mortgage, kids in school, and a pretty solid routine that's built around his current job. A career change would likely mean starting over, and I'm not sure how we'd manage the financial strain, especially if the new career takes a while to take off or doesn't pay as well as his current position.

I want to be supportive, but I can't help but feel like we're not in the best position to take such a risky move. How do I express my concerns without seeming unsupportive? Signed, Jane. And look, I think we've done something similar on the Dilemma panel before, but let's go to the fresh face for a fresh take. David, what do you make of Jane's Dilemma? Well, I did this like I didn't have a kids or a mortgage, but I made a major career change into media and radio five years ago. The thing that helped me and it's like the least sexy thing in the world is I planned a budget for

the next year. I know that's not cool at all. But I think that could help right? Yeah, these unknown anxieties of how much things are going to cost at least turn into real anxiety. So that's where I would start. Yeah, I like that. Listen, it's true. Like if you could sit down and also because Jane, if she sits down with her husband and they try to build a budget, if they sit there and realize they can't make the economics work, maybe that's her telling him, maybe slow your role player just a little bit without

actually having to say it. Yeah, I think- It's telling her that without telling her that, you know? maybe slow your role player just a little bit without actually having to say it. Yeah, I think- And telling her that without telling her that, you know? I think she answered her own question in her statement to you. You have to do exactly what you said. Sit down, have a conversation.

I love what you said. The budget isn't sexy because that is exactly what my dad instilled in me at a young age. And that is the most important part. We're going through crazy times right now. And you have to prepare yourself for every possible outcome, especially Ben, you're talking about the time that we talked about, this person wanted to change

their life, but they had none of these external forces and internal, so you have all these things, you probably know best, you've done it yourself. Yeah, yeah, and I'm still not there yet. Like it's, my reality is far different today than it was when I had, you know, that steady TV job. It's a completely different thing. It's been risky, it's been stressful.

I have a lot of pressure on me, but I wanted to assume that pressure, right? And it feels to me like Jane senses that her husband may not be paying attention to those pressures that his change would bring to their lives, in which case this conversation has to happen now. Are you saying that the husband isn't listening to his wife? Are you making that assertion? I'm well you know what no I think we're all saying the same thing. He can't listen if you're

not talking. Yeah. Right. Also just a recommendation start a side hustle of like drop shipping. I see that on Instagram and apparently you can apparently you can make 20 grand a day. So Jane, try the drop shipping angle. Okay, here's the next dilemma. Hello to Ben's panel. I grew up in a pretty nasty household. My father had issues with alcohol and he was physically abusive to me, my mother and my two siblings. While he's sober now after 20 years, our dynamic is not a real father-son relationship, which brings me to the difficult part. I have my own family now and two young boys.

My father comes around at the holidays and loves being around my children. He asks me if he can come more often and I truly haven't forgiven him. I always make excuses for why we're too busy, but he knows in his heart the reason. Am I wrong to withhold my children from their grandfather based on my old trauma?

Signed Larry. What do you think Brad? This is a tough one because my mom actually grew up in a very similar situation, except her father passed away when she was at a very young age. And I think there's moments in her life where that was a good thing for her at that time, even though that's a rough thing to say, but I know there's a lot of times for us as a family where we missed that part of knowing where my mom came from and who my grandfather was. So when it comes to the kids, I mean, she's got to be the one that's okay with having that relationship. Yeah. But also if Larry, I'm just reading what Larry wrote and he said, I truly haven't forgiven him. Uh, and in his heart, he knows the reason. So I'm,

I'm worried that Larry hasn't taken the steps to process the trauma and then have the ability to communicate that to his dad. Because I think that like the airing of grievances is really important, right? And if he hasn't done that, then I think that's a step, David, I think that's a step that he's gotta take. Yeah, it's not wrong to withhold your kids

from your grandparents, but you gotta look at it from a bit of a different angle. Forget about your dad. Are you holding onto this stuff and is it causing you pain? It's not your responsibility to forgive anyone, but when you do, you can go through a lot of healing. When I see a murder trial, as an extreme example, and I see the victim's family saying,

we forgive the murderer, I'm always so moved by that. I'm not saying anybody has to forgive anybody for anything, but holding onto that anger, maybe doing you a disservice. So I'd look at it more from that angle than from, is it right in terms of what my grandfather, the father, the grandfather thinks. And you're absolutely right. I hear time and time again in those situations,

I didn't forgive him for him, I did it for me so I could move on, so I could have the best life possible. And I have to take those people at their word. I mean, why would they make that up? But yeah, look at it from your angle. How would this help you? But also if you're living in a world where your dad is not the same person

and you're withholding the kids because of trauma that happened to you, then your children might be missing out on having the relationship with your dad that you didn't get to have. So I think Larry, you know, I think what you're experiencing is normal, but there are steps that you can take

to possibly find a way through this. So we wish you the very best. All right, dilemma number three. Dear Ben, my brother recently went through a breakup with his long-term girlfriend, but they were very close to me too. We all hung out together frequently and I actually got along really well with his ex. Now that they're no longer together, I'm not

sure where I stand. I've stayed in touch with his ex, and we've even hung out a few times since the breakup. My brother, however, is pretty upset about it and says I'm being disloyal by maintaining a relationship with her. I don't want to hurt him, but I also value the friendship I have with his ex. What should I do? Am I crossing a line by staying friends with her? Signed, Becky. This is a tough one. Brad, I'm gonna go to you first, because my sense in you when I see you

is you have exes littered all over the place. I appreciate that. Or don't, maybe that says a lot about me. This is a very tough one, because I've actually never maintained a relationship with after, but specifically I can think about one instance where I met a family through one of my long-term relationships.

It was just one of the greatest families I've ever met. And the hardest part of that relationship wasn't the exit of the actual relationship. It was not being able to be around those parents because they treated me so well. Now, is it right or wrong? That's for the brother to decide. Because that is your brother. And if you want a relationship with his ex and that's more important than a relationship with your brother, then I think there's larger issues here. I agree with you. But David, don't you also think it has

something to do with like why they break up? I mean, if the brother cheated on the ex, you could make an argument for like, okay, well, you were a dog. And so she did nothing wrong. And so you have to figure like, if they communicate it, there could be a path there. But I do think Brad is onto something. Yeah, I don't know. My brother is still good friends with my ex-wife, like years later, he was at his wedding when he married his husband. And I had to hang out with my ex-wife with my girlfriend. My answer for this that I think is a surefire is every case is different and I don't know. But I will take it back to the last dilemma,

holding onto anger is exhausting. Yeah, forget the murderers. Go sorry, go ahead. No, no, go ahead. Yeah, do you really wanna have that anger blocking you? So at first it was weird, I don't know if I get along too well with my ex, but I've grown to be happy that my brother and her

are still friends. But yeah, this is a tricky and weird one. We make it work though, that's all I'll say. And you're absolutely right. Every one of these is particular to itself and unique to itself. Like if it was a toxic relationship and they both brought the worst out of each other,

but all things being equal, you side with family. And you give them what they want in those moments. Because maybe the breakup was tough on your brother, and you're making it worse by reminding him that you're making it work with his ex in a way he couldn't. Hey, more- You're posting this frame of sides on them, which I don't agree with.

It's not always sides in a breakup. And you're absolutely right. But I did say all things being equal. Hey, more on the dilemma when we continue including should we ever rekindle things with an X. That's next on the Ben Mulroney Show. This is the Ben Mulroney Show, but it's not all about me all the time.

As much as some of you think it is, or at least how you see it in my own head, I'm joined now for our dilemma panel where we solve life's not so important issues sometimes, but they can be very important to the people writing in. And so I can't do this all on my own. So let's welcome back Brad Smith and David Cooper. Hello. Hello.

All right, let's go. Let's move. When you introduce two people at the same time, who says hello first? That's the question. I just want to see you guys fight it out. All right, let's go on. Dilemma number four.

Dear Ben, I've been married for 12 years now and we have one beautiful child together who is eight. During the first four months of my marriage, I had some overlap where I hadn't completely broken things off with my ex. Wait, hold on. During the first four months of my marriage, I had some overlap where I hadn't completely broke.

Okay. What is overlap? It sounds stupid, but I was still unsure of who to be with and I was hedging my bet until I was sure my now husband was the right guy. Well, he found out from my sister, accidentally said something one night at dinner. I've tried to explain to him what my thinking was,

but he was still angry. Yeah, no, okay. Sorry, I don't mean to editorialize. He's threatening divorce, but I know it's only because he's hurt. We've had a great marriage together. And then remember, they've been together 12 years. And I'm trying to get him to sign up for couples therapy

so we can move past it. I'm in a really tough spot here. Anonymous. Uh, anonymous. I think if he was going to be hurt, like, this would have gone down a heck of a lot easier had you been the one to tell him. He was going to be hurt, like this would have gone down a heck of a lot easier had you been the one to tell him.

He was going to be hurt regardless, but something tells me the fact that he found out from your sister was the worst possible scenario. Brad, what do you think? This is the worst. I mean, was it written by anonymous or narcissist? Because this is a tough one. And this happens more often than you'd think.

And I think the biggest issue here is He's not really hurt about what happened in the first four months What he's thinking about is everything that's happened in the 12 years in between and how many other things you didn't tell him That's where your mind goes is if you can lie to me about that and we have a family and we have a child And you lied to me in the first four months and you were overlapping, what else could you have been hiding from me? Yeah, yeah. Go to couples therapy, please.

Well, I think he deserves the right to be angry for a while, David. And if that means being on his own and not seeing her for a while, I think he's entitled to that. I'm gonna drop a truth bomb. Anonymous says he's hurt and it's exactly that, but you've built a life with this dude on dishonesty

at the very foundation of your relationship. So he's grieving the person he thought he'd married because you're not that person. You're still a person. You may be able to repair your relationship with him, but you gotta let the guy grieve process and yes, try to get him into therapy. But if he doesn't wanna do it, he's entitled to do that.

You've done a really bad thing. There are consequences people. And you can't just say, oh, well, let's go to therapy. Let's go to therapy. No, no, no, no, no, no. He's got a process he's gotta go through. And I'm sorry. And you're gonna have to answer some really tough questions

from him saying, explain to me when I asked you to marry me and you said yes, that is implicit in that is your belief that we are right for each other. So explain to me why you had overlap because you didn't know if we were right to be together. That's some really hard conversations are gonna happen. And even after you were honest with him on that, he owes you nothing at this point.

David. I just heard you say, marry me, Ben, and I saw your dough, I said I got distracted. What was the question? Even after you give him everything he is asking for throughout this process, he still reserves the right to say, you know what, I'm done with you. Yeah, he can walk, let the guy walk.

You know, you've done a bad thing and there are consequences, I'll say that again. Sorry, Anonymous, but we can't help you with this one. Let's move on to number five. Dear Ben, I recently reconnected with an ex on Facebook. We dated in our early 20s and now we're both in our late 30s. We're both divorced without children, for context.

The relationship was really good back then, but ended because of trust issues she had. Time, growth, and life experiences have shaped us both since then. We went for a coffee. It feels like there's something there, but I can't shake the past. She told me her past insecurities

won't be a hurdle again. Is it wise to give this another shot, or am I just inviting heartbreak all over again? Signed Ian. It's like, Ian, people do change between their 20s and 30s. And look, it's just coffee at this point, man. It's not a high-risk scenario. And the rewards could be great.

So my really easy, fast take is do it. Like just see where it goes, Brad. See, as somebody, I'm going to, this is an admission of, I have double dipped every single relationship, every single relationship that I've been in, I've gone back to. That's just because I'm a glutton for punishment. But you have to understand that the relationship that you had with this person, when we date somebody, when we stop dating them, that person ceases to evolve in our mind. And that person that you were so in love with, you were great friends with, is not the same

person that you're with now. And you have to understand that that relationship moving forward is with a completely different person. So don't hold onto the past, move forward, enjoy the greatest things of what she was before, and just understand that they're going to be different moving forward. David, trump that because that was a great answer. Well, I'm generous with forgiveness. You know, I'd rather forgive the people I want to love than be cynical and let one betrayal make me ditch someone.

So I would, I'd go for it. I'd even let it develop. And if the person breaks my trust again, I'm not of the mind that it's my fault. I'd rather forgive people when I shouldn't then never trust anyone again when they've done something wrong. And look, the action of the betrayal consequence, you broke up the crime. He did the time or she did the time. Like there you go. Um, and if, but like I said, right now it's just coffee. Like it, take it slow. Yeah. Don't have any expectations just move forward and enjoy it. Don't put a label on it. That was the first time you've

said I've said anything right. Oh correct yeah you're here enough at some point Coffee is the most sensual of the caffeinated coffee. So I don't know, just coffee, I don't know. Go get some jobs. That's good. Okay, hello, Ben. My wife and I have a fundamental disagreement when it comes to disciplining our children. She believes that spanking is an acceptable way to correct bad behavior while I strongly disagree and think it does more harm than good.

We've had several discussions about it, but we can't seem to find common ground. I worry about the message it sends to our kids, but she insists it's how she was raised and that it worked for her. How do you navigate this disagreement without it causing a major rift in our marriage or confusion with our children?

David, over to you. I know I just said I'm a very forgiving person, but I am not forgiving with violence and I'm an extremely non-violent person. I just think it's totally unacceptable. That's my view. The husband might hate me for it, butviolent person, I just think it's totally unacceptable. That's my view. This person, the husband might hate me for it, but I would, I don't know.

I would let my marriage blow up over something like this. Yeah, I would not want that in my household. Corporal punishment is a pretty, it's a big rubicon to cross. As someone who grew up in a family where my life was like delirious, you know, when she threw the shoe from anywhere and it hit, my mom had a penny loafer.

And you grew up in the 80s and 90s. It was a different time. We didn't know what we were doing to the kids at that time. Now we live in a different world. We have to teach our kids mindfulness, being present, understanding what your actions are and what the reactions are and the consequences. And it's just not acceptable. Yeah.

Listen, when I was a kid, my dad only threatened to spank me once. He threatened it, and that was enough. That was my father, too. And my mother never threatened corporal punishment. She just threatened to give us a talk, interminable talks where I was told all the things I was doing wrong.

You didn't get the penny loafer. But the fact is, and I completely agree with you, Brad, we are not living in the world of our parents. It might have worked then. I do not believe that our kids are being shaped by the same dynamics. So bad behavior today isn't, you can't just say it's analogous to the bad behavior that you experienced

because the world is different. And so I agree, like this is a fundamental issue. And to simply say, well, I'm gonna spank the bad behavior out of you, that is, that's something that you really have to go deeper with her on. It's fine in the bedroom with two consenting adults. And my parents spanked me as a kid too,

but yeah, I'm just so against it. I'm kind of black and white on this one. And maybe that's not the best point of view. Well, listen, our parents grew up and they were doing what they were taught by their parents, but at a lighter, you know, at not the same pace they were doing. And our generation is taking away that

because it was detrimental to us growing up in a lot of ways, and you just have to evolve. Yeah, there are elements. I'm old school on so many things with my kids, tons of things. I tell them to solve their own problems. I'm not a snow plow parent, I'm not a helicopter parent, I'm not a tiger parent, and I'm not their friend.

I hate it when a parent says they're a friend. Why would you diminish the most valuable relationship? You're like a snowflake, there's only one dad, there's only one mom, I could throw a shoe like your mom did and hit a friend right now. That's so funny that you say that though, Ben, because my parents were the exact same and then I always wished that my parents would be my friend and to this day

I will go back at 41 years old and I am their little baby. That's my best friend Well, that sucks for you because my dad was my dad. Hey Brad Smith. I want to thank you very much I'll see I'll see you around the office David Cooper host of the last show with David Cooper. I hope you're having a great time on the chorus radio network my friend Oh, what a pleasure. Thanks, Ben. This episode is brought to you by Samsung Galaxy. Ever captured a great night video only for it to be ruined by that one noisy talker? With audio erase on the new Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra, you can reduce or remove unwanted noise and relive your favorite moments

without the distractions. And that's not all. New Galaxy AI features like NowBrief will give you personalized insights based on your day's schedule so that you are prepared no matter what. Buy the Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra now at Samsung.com. My parents have had a lot of time on their hands lately. At first, it was nice. Hey Mom, can you drive me to soccer practice? Sure can. We're having slow cooked ribs for dinner. It was awesome. And then it became... a lot. Some friends are coming over to watch a movie. Oh, what are we watching? I'll make some popcorn. Thanks to Voila, they can order all our fresh favorites from Sobeez, Farmboy, and Longos

online, which is super reliable. And now my parents are reliable. A little too reliable. Voila. Your groceries delivered just like that. Now it's time for the educational portion of the show, which also happens to be highly entertaining. And to learn something new this morning or this afternoon or this evening, we are joined now by Craig Baird, the host of Canadian History X. Craig, welcome back to the show. Oh, thanks for having me. So 40 years ago yesterday, there was a summit

that went down in Quebec City that was pretty seminal. And also, given the toxic relationship between Canada and the United States these days, pretty important. And I think a lot of people miss what it represented. Why don't you tell us about the Shamrock Summit? Yeah, so the Shamrock Summit was kind of a very unique period in our history. And it was seen as a way to really mend the, the

relationship between the United States and Canada, because, you know, during the Trudeau years, we didn't always have the best relationship, especially when Nixon and Reagan were presidents. But with the Shamrock Summit, you know, uh, you know, your father, Brian Mulrooney and then Ronald Reagan came together and really hashed out some important things.

And one of the, I think one of the more important things was the fact that they looked at controlling acid rain. I mean, you probably remember growing up just like I do, all we heard about was acid rain and how bad acid rain is. And now it's not really an issue. And a big reason for that was your father,

uh, who really pushed this and was, you know, a very environmentally conscious prime minister. And I think a lot of people forget that. But the Shamrock Summit was a big part of that, of getting this acid rain treaty in place. But the thing is, everybody, what they remember of the Shamrock Summit is everybody singing when Irish eyes are smiling during the televised gala.

That kind of overshadows everything to do with the this Shamrock Summit itself. That's right. There were a lot of protesters who wanted action on acid rain and this summit was sort of a catalyst to help shepherd that forward. And but there were plenty, plenty of people in the press who had it in for my dad's on on day one. And despite what is now viewed as two great leaders coming together in friendship, which is something sorely lacking today, he was a bootlicker. He was a kiss ass. It was demeaning to Canada.

It was a pretty, it was a hot take, and it was a take that did not age well. No, absolutely. And I think these days what we actually see is the fact that he was using this strong friendship that he had with Ronald Reagan in the United States to get a lot of things put into place that were important to him that might not have been able to happen without having that relationship. And this was all part of it. And that's why we had things like the acid rain treaty or the Montreal Protocol to deal with the ozone layer along with a variety of other things. I want to talk I want to learn something new you I love when you come on the show and you teach me about a historical figure who's important to Canadian history that I had never heard

of so tell me about Peter Fiddler. Peter Fiddler is a really interesting figure. He's been more well known where I am out in Alberta because we have a couple statues of him. But he was a fur trader who really did a lot to, you know, map the West and explore the West. And he spent his entire life with the Hudson's Bay Company, or at least his working life with the Hudson's Bay Company, and traveled from Hudson Bay all the way to Lake Athabasca and was a really important individual. He helped to settle southern on Manitoba that eventually became the Red River area, but he was always kind of overshadowed by David Thompson, who was somebody who was also working at that time and you know is much more well known today than Peter Fiddler. But in Elk Point,

there's about an eight meter tall statue of Peter Fiddler that is very impressive. It's all carved by chainsaw and it's really quite beautiful, but he just is not as well known as he should be. You know, I'm so glad that you've now told me sort of a second story about someone who settled the West. I mean, in a previous conversation we had, we talked about this, I can't remember, the guy from Britain who came over and tried to settle. Oh, I can't remember where it was. But anyway, but these are stories that we don't tell each other.

We have this, we stop short and we say, okay, well, they built the railroad. First they sent in the Northwestern Mounted Police and then they sent in the railroad. That's sort of all we really hear or learn about settling Canada's west. But there are people involved and there was sacrifice and it was hard and those people deserve to be remembered. Oh, absolutely. And somebody like Peter Fiddler definitely needs to be remembered. And one really

unique thing about him is that when he died in his will, he actually left money to the direct descendant of his firstborn son and it was supposed to be given to that person in 1969, so 200 years after his birth. So in 1969, all these people who were descended from him were expecting this huge fortune because of, you know, 160 years of interest accumulating and then they found out that it was all gone. It was like 10 years after he died that his children had actually been able to access the will and the estate and took all the money. So there was no money in 1969 for his descendants, unfortunately. I'm talking with Craig Baird, the host of Canadian History X. And Craig,

we're currently living in a time of renewed Canadian pride, renewed Canadian optimism in our country and our identity. And so I think this next story is perfect to talk about because it's the most Canadian thing we could possibly talk about. Tell me about the Big Maple Leaf Heist. Well, the Big Maple Leaf Heist is a really cool story because what happened was the Royal Canadian Mint had made this million dollar gold coin. It weighed 100 kilograms. It was just massive. It was about the size of a car tire and it was the largest gold coin ever minted to that point. And it was the purest too. And I think it still is. It was 99.999% pure.

Wow. So it's valued at $4 million and five were made. They went to a variety of places. A Saudi prince actually bought one and turned it into a coffee table. So that's like a $3 million coffee table, but one wound up in a museum in Berlin and in 2017 it was actually stolen. Did they find the guy? They did arrest the people who were involved with it. It was a kind of an organized crime syndicate that was there but they never did find the coin. They never found the coin? We're very sure it was melted down. Oh my god. It's long long gone. Okay let's listen to a

snippet of the big maple leaf heist. The men climbed down into the employee locker room, took a skateboard, and you'll see why soon, and then quickly reached the door to the museum. They jammed the door to keep it open and then hurried to the coin room. The thieves walked past priceless coins from human history, and they only had one target in their sights, the big maple leaf. The gold coin was protected by a glass case, but the thieves weren't worried. They had a plan for that too. Glass cutting equipment? No. A fancy laser cutter so they could easily

grab the coin and escape? No. One thief brought out an axe and he swung it like Paul Bunyan straight into the glass case. The thick glass case shattered into several pieces, and some pieces were so heavy that they left gouges on the floor which can still be seen to this day. The men then grabbed the 100 kilogram coin and put it on a skateboard they brought with them. The guard was still in another part of the building and the thieves hadn't been heard so they made their way back to the locker room. And as they did the hefty cargo bumped

into walls leaving deep cuts in the plaster and the coin was so heavy that it flattened the tires leaving marks on the floor. In the locker room the foreman lifted the coin up towards the window. No pulley system needed. And with one final push they shoved it out the window. The coin worth a fortune fell to the ground with a dull thud. Craig, this is amazing for so many reasons, but I just assumed when I heard that this was a heist, that it was going to be an Ocean's Eleven sophisticated style heist. And now to hear that it was a bunch of guys with an axe and a skateboard. And like this, this sounds like the type of heist that would have made more sense in, say, the 1920s, a simpler time where we trusted people more.

But the fact that happened in 2017 at a museum in Berlin, where was the security? There really wasn't much security. They'd actually come a few days earlier and they had attempted to get in through a window and they actually were trying to open the window and it cracked the window. So they fled and then security came by and saw that, you know, there was these tools and everything. It didn't really think anything of it. That window had no alarm on it. It was supposed to, but it hadn't worked since 2013 and nobody really thought anything of it either. And yeah, it was, it was an organized crime, but it really feels like it was just people trying to,

you know, break into a brewery and steal a bunch of cases of beer. Like, it doesn't really fit with the how valued this coin was. And, you know, they had things on their phone and everything like that, that made it very easy to convict them. Kind of felt like they deserved to get away with it, with this, how lax the security was. Craig, real quick, how can people find the show? You can find the show on the Course Radio Network every weekend, just check your local

listings and you can find Canadian History X on all podcast platforms and that's EHX. Craig Baird, thanks so much. We'll talk to you next week. Thanks, talk to you again. 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. At Desjardins, we speak business. We speak equipment modernization. We're fluent in data

digitization and expansion into foreign markets. and we can talk all day about streamlining manufacturing processes. Because at Desjardins Business we speak the same language you do, business. So join the more than 400,000 Canadian entrepreneurs who already count on us and contact Desjardins today. We'd love to talk business.