The Ben Mulroney Show - Hot topic friday! CBC covering for Libs? Alberta separation talk

Episode Date: May 22, 2026

Guest: Chris Chapin, Political Commentator, Managing Principal of Upstream Strategy   GUEST:  Ashley Waters  —  co-hosting The Party Lines on The News Forum  If you enjoyed the podcast, tell a friend! For more of the Ben Mulroney Show, subscribe to the podcast! ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://link.chtbl.com/bms⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Also, on youtube -- ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.youtube.com/@BenMulroneyShow⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Follow Ben on Twitter/X at https://x.com/BenMulroney Insta: ⁠⁠⁠@benmulroneyshow⁠⁠⁠ Twitter: ⁠⁠⁠@benmulroneyshow⁠⁠⁠ TikTok: ⁠⁠⁠@benmulroneyshow⁠⁠⁠ Executive Producer:  Mike Drolet Reach out to Mike with story ideas or tips at [e-mail] Enjoy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This podcast is brought to you by the National Payroll Institute, the leader for the payroll profession in Canada, setting the standard of professional excellence, delivering critical expertise, and providing resources that over 45,000 payroll professionals rely on. Staples Preferred Business Membership, built for busy business owners, because you've got bigger things to think about.

With Staples Preferred, get free delivery, no minimums. Staples Preferred unlocks up to. 3% back. Plus 10% savings on print and exclusive wireless offers. One less thing on your plate. Actually, a lot less. Visit staples.ca slash preferred. That was easy. It's Friday. So we thought we'd get our Friday gang together. We got Ashley Waters, co-hosting the party lines on the news form. Ashley, welcome back. Happy Friday. Happy Friday. I do hope Chris Chapin is going to be joining. There he is Chris Chappen. How are you, my friend? How are you doing, bad? I'm good. Political

commentator, managing principle of upstream strategy. Guys, I want to start. I just did a rant. I don't know if you heard it. I did a rant. I have a real problem with the CBC, not giving us the names of the 14 MPs within the Liberal Caucus who have a problem with the MOU

signed between Alberta and the federal government. I think this is a real problem. I would like to be able to interview those people. What are your problems? Can you find a way back? Is there something that the government could give you that would allow you to then do what you got elected to do, which is Shepard Fourth Mark Carney's vision. And if not, does it, does it signal a rift within the party that if left unfixed could disintegrate the coalition that Mark Carney has? I think it's an important thing.

Ashley, let's start with you. What are your thoughts? Am I making too big of a deal out of this? I think it's good. There's amenity, like for their names not to be listed because I think it's a call to action and I don't think there needs to be drama around it, right? Like if all of a sudden MP speaking out against climate policy in this case, right, then all of a sudden we're going to have reporters sticking on, well, are you going to support certain votes? Does this minority, like majority that he just got, right? Is that in jeopardy in some way, shape, or form?

But Ashley, how is that, how is that the responsibility of the CBC? Why should they care about that? It's news. They're accountable to the people. We should know where their heads are at. It feels to me that that is a justification for the CBC to be able to run interference and protect the prime minister and protect his majority. I think it's more their sources. But they're not sources.

They're not confidential sources. They're not MPs who sign their names to a letter. But that's how they got the letter, whoever their source is, right? So if they don't want to say these are the names attached because they would know that's who did the lead. They're bringing this up because they think that it's important to address to say, you know, there's at least 14 people that aren't, you know, towing the line and just going along because they have a problem with how we're advancing through pipelines or certain bills being brought in up that maybe they don't necessarily agree with. Chris, the way I see this is the prime minister took control of a caucus that was not his, that had extremely left-leaning environmental radicals in it. And despite that, he said, I can get this country where it needs to be with this team. And we are now seeing one year in to a four-year mandate.

There is, this is a hurdle. I'm not saying it's, you can't get over it, but it's a hurdle. I don't see why the CBC has any business doing caucus management for this man. Well, I mean, Ben, I think my first thought when I saw this story this morning was I, I wonder what the odds are that the PMO handed the letter to the CBC. because I think the timing of this letter coming out looks tremendous for the prime minister because it gives them some cover. I mean, the day after, you know, Danielle Smith's address, and I'm sure we're going to get to that later on this show,

about how they're going to allow a referendum-like question on the Alberta, or, you know, a separation-like question on the Alberta referendum this fall. And he's actively, obviously, trying to do things like promising a pipeline to Alberta to make sure our country stays as one. The fact that this letter anonymously gets leaked to the CBC, where there's 14 signatories, but the CBC won't mention who one of them are. Seems a little rich to me.

And I mean, having worked in politics and having leaked things before, usually there's a quid pro quo, you know, with your reporter. And this one screams, the PMO handed it to the CBC just to get this story out there. Yeah, it's to me,

and listen, again, if you zoom out and you compare how they were, it was a practical fever dream for the CBC, talking about all the rumors of all the floor crossers. I mean, that, that was, they played the exact opposite, role in terms of caucus management for the conservatives back then that they are playing right now for the liberals. But it's one rule for the one rule for me.

All right, let's move on. Well, let's move on to that story. Chris, Alberta is going to have this vote on whether to hold a binding separation referendum. So explain this to me because I'm a supporter of Daniel Smith. I've liked what she said. I'm trying to figure out, I mean, sometimes saying something and if you behave a certain, way than saying something creates a disconnect. Make this make sense to me. Well, I think we talked about this last week, Ben. To me, I'm not sure how much of a choice Daniel Smith has in this matter.

There are hundreds of thousands of Albertans that want to see this question be asked. And I'm not sure what the harm is of putting it to the people. I don't think it's anywhere close to being remotely successful. And if that quells this movement for a while, I think that's a good thing. I don't think it's going to go through. I want to see Alberta remain a united part of this country. But I think if we look at Quebec and the efforts at times through our history that we put to avoid letting them ask that question, I mean, we still have the party Quebecois and the Black Quebecois in Quebec that still want to see Quebec separate.

And I think what bothers me the most is we don't seem to make that big of a deal that those separatist parties still exist in the strength they do in Quebec. but the rest of Canada, especially here in Ontario, whether it's Toronto or Ottawa, seem outraged that Alberta would be frustrated with Ottawa. And Alberta would be frustrated with the rest of the country when the party, you know, the party, Kibokwa is still leading in the polls in Quebec and very well likely may form the next majority government who have explicitly said to the people of Quebec,

the first thing we will do is put forward a separatist, you know, a separation movement. Yeah, well, if they're leading, it's within the margin of error and it looks like they'd be leading to a minority, government, if that were the case. I don't see how the PQ can do anything on a referendum with a minority in the Assamblee Nacional. But Ashley, I got to ask, do you see things the same way? Because I get it. Like last week, I was of that opinion. But it just feels like it feels like the government is plowing the road just a little too much for the, for those hundreds of thousands of people that want a referendum. Making it just a little too easy. Not easy.

but just making their lives a little easier. Right. And I think it's less about immediate separation, more about a warning shot to Ottawa. Like Western alienation has been building for years and whether it's energy equalization or federal decision making. And so I think Daniel Smith understands that like even the conversation around separation creates leverage with Ottawa.

And so that danger is that right now Mark Carney is inheriting, you know, a country that could be regionally fractured. we don't want that right now we want to be sovereign we want to be unified we want to come across strong especially when we're dealing with the united states tariffs um so this right now i think any way they can push forward and whether that's with the mow that was just signed and i think that's why certain premieres are worried when you when you look at david eb and so there's a lot of um there's a lot of spin that has to kind of happen i would say right now to make sure that every everybody's happy.

But at the same time, we do have to push forward with these energy projects, like these big projects, because how else are we going to stand on our own two feet? So do you think the calculus by the Premier of Alberta is, look, we're going to do this thing and we're going to set this up and they can ask their question. But meanwhile, I'm going to get a pipeline built. And once I do that, and once we start really sort of expanding what we can do to grow this economy. That's going to quiet these guys down. By the time it's that referendum comes up, that their numbers are going to shrink because the pie is just going to be bigger. Chris,

do you think that's what it is? I think that plays a huge role in it, Ben. I think, you know, we can't discount and Ashley mentioned it. The amount of distrust there is in, you know, the provinces of Alberta and Saskatchewan towards Ottawa over the last 10, 15 years of liberal government, right? Like these, these provinces have come to loathe Ottawa and loathe the Liberal party of Canada. And so there's a huge amount of distrust. So yes, if this leverage gets them a pipeline gets Premier Smith that much closer, I mean, you think about the trade talks with the United States. Yeah. Well, the government of Canada will not touch supply management. Yeah. If our, if our country's unity depended on it. And so I think the West has learned a

lesson from that. Yeah. That if we threaten that unity and especially you threaten the economic wealth of a province like Alberta to Canada's unity, that I think Ottawa has no choice but to take it seriously. All right, we're going to take a quick break. When we come back, Ashley, I'm going to ask you a very simple question. What does somebody have to do in this country to get kicked out? Don't go anywhere. This is the Ben Mulroney Show. We'll be right back from coast to coast to coast on the Chorus Radio Network. Last summer, the coolest place in the house was in your freezer. This year, it's time to level up. Reliance home comfort has over 160,000 five-star reviews for delivering the type of outstanding customer experience Canadians have counted on for over 60 years. Right now, don't pay for 12 months on a featured air conditioner or heat pump. Call on the experts that know how to beat the heat.

Conditions apply. See website for details. Well, yes, it is the Ben Mulroney show, but for the next segment, it is also Chris Chapin and Ashley Waters Show. Thanks, guys, for sticking around. Thanks. Ashley, I got to ask this question because there are new guidelines issued by the immigration and refugee board that are essentially going to make it more convoluted and more difficult to ensure that foreign nationals who are convicted of serious criminality are going to face expedited, expedited hearings to be sent back to where they came from. And I'm struggling to understand.

Please tell me what I'm missing here. it seems like if you are here and you are not a Canadian citizen and if you don't behave in a way befitting of a Canadian citizen, someone who respects the laws, and you have been convicted of serious criminality, haven't they done the job for us? Haven't they shown us? We're not Canadian material.

What is this hold up? And what is this incessant need to try to find ways to keep people here that are, I don't think it's a hot take, net negatives on society. Right. And this story hits a nerve because, you know, public trust confidence in immigration systems depends on fairness and accountability. But when people are convicted of serious crimes, like you're saying, can remain in

Canada for extended periods through appeals and tribunal delays, it kind of undermines public trust. And so at the same time, Canada is a country governed by law, but we also know that the due process matters. but with this political challenge, it's almost a balancing of compassion and legal protections and public safely. And so I feel like it's important that we don't necessarily demonize newcomers in a certain way. No, I'm demonizing criminals because they've proven to be demonstrating some pretty negative behavior.

I don't want to keep them here. I don't want to house them here. I don't want to pay for it. I want them gone. Yeah. And that's the thing we have to see trials through. Yeah. And so that is because we are Canadian.

And so it's not a matter of all of a sudden just because they were here and they committed a cry that you can necessarily send them back because again, everyone's innocent until proven guilty. Yeah. But once they are proven guilty, bye-bye. Chris, Chris, what is it? Like, I mean, these are new guidelines. We, 2026, 2023, 2024, 2025.

All evidence of we need to fix the system. And the refugee bore says, you know what, hold on. We're actually going to reverse course, and we are going to find a way to allow these bad seeds, bad apples, to stick around longer. We're going to get harder to kick them out. Yeah, I couldn't agree more, Ben. I think what frustrates me the most or certainly up there is it's once again a decision out of Ottawa that's being made by an unelected board. Yeah. You know, and there isn't political decision making, and there's not political leadership or accountability here.

Yeah. I think if this was a debate in the House of Commons, I think it'd be a lot more black and white in terms of what we need to. to do, but instead the bucks passed to the immigration and refugee board to make these decisions and make these guidelines. And then the rest of us sit around and to Ashley's point, start to question our immigration system that much more. And if these people have convicted crimes, I don't think there's a Canadian, you know, whether they've, you know, lived here for generations or a new Canadian that's got an immigration and citizenship in this country that thinks a criminal should be able to stay here and delay and delay and delay. And God knows we have created a system

that you can find as many delays in our criminal justice system as you want. And for a lot of these people, why wouldn't you try to exercise those opportunities? Because it means not having to go back where you came from. Yeah. But if, and I've said this before, if you really don't want to go back to where you came from, then you should,

you should be the greatest example of a newcomer to Canada. Like, yeah, you know what's waiting for you if you run afoul of the rules if you break the law. Absolutely. So, like, we've got to have the courage of our convenience. convictions. Like, we know how bad it is over there and you still committed those crimes. Off you go. Thank you. Goodbye. We don't need you. We don't want you. And also, not to forget, Ashley, we don't have the capacity. We don't have the bandwidth. We don't have the budget to take

care of these people. I would love to say we have the budget to take care of the best of the best that we bring in, but we've even broken our word to them. This is, this is what I thought Mark Carney was going to come in and do and say, you know what? Some of that stuff that happened before I got here was boneheaded and I'm not doing that. I'm a numbers guy. These numbers don't, don't work. And so here's what we're going to do. And I'm not seeing enough of that. Yeah, and federally, you know, their hands are kind of tied

provincially, right, when we're looking at the court system. And so in each province, we know that it's overrun, you know, with our jails and with certain court dates being delayed or thrown out just because there aren't judges to actually preside over them. So, yeah, it's a bigger issue at hand for sure. Okay, in our final few minutes here, I want to change the tone. Instead, I want to look at sort of our imminent trade negotiations with the Americans and how the CRTC seemed to come in and say, you know what?

It's been quiet for too long here. Let's give Donald Trump something to complain about. Let's give him, let's throw him a bone. And the CRTC came out and said 15% of the top line revenue of American streamers in Canada has to go into a fund to support Canadian content. Off the top, this isn't their profits. This is their revenues. And so they've essentially tripled what they said they were going to do.

There is no way that anybody, if people thought, if people thought, Chris, that the Ronald Reagan commercial was a bad idea. Now do this. I mean, Ben, I mean, I just talked about, you know, the immigration, refugee board, making these kind of decisions. Now you hand it over to the CRTC as a regulator that's unelected and unaccountable, making such a ridiculous, coming up with such a ridiculous position. I mean, you think back to the digital sales tax and how important that was in our trade negotiations. And we just walked away from it because we understood that this was such a massive impact on American

companies. Literally an albatross. And now we've had the CRTC just come in and say, we're going to tax 15% of Netflix's revenues. Yeah. We're going to tax 15% of Amazon Prime's revenue. you know, that Jeff Bezos doesn't have a direct line to the White House and isn't going to call the president and say, what the heck is Canada doing? Mark Zuckerberg and all these guys aren't going to do the exact same thing.

And if the core concept of it made sense and it felt like it was that important for Canadians, I could support it, but it simply isn't. Like there's no rationale for the size and the scale of this, you know, to triple it from 5%, which they were already being taken to court for. Yeah. But to go to 15% is just utterly absurd. Yeah. And, you know, to your point, yeah, if we thought the right.

getting pissed off the Americans. Wait until they react to this. Yeah. Ashley, this is, I'll go back to Mark Carney. Like, I believe he sees stuff like this and says, what's going on here? Like, we're trying to run a country here and we got clowns dropping bombs

that I'm going to have to deal with. CRTC doesn't have to go to the White House. CRTC doesn't have to negotiate a trade deal. So, like, I kind of, I wish that I could get behind him a lot more if he would go and like, Like you do with a dog that keeps pissing on the couch.

You wrap them over their nose with the newspaper. They've got to start doing that with these guys. Come on. But maybe this is more of that irritant, right? Like we've seen crazy stories come out the U.S. Left, right and center. Maybe this is something that this is a lever that they feel like they can pull on, right? In order to get more money, in order to try to get more money this way towards us as Canadians.

I'm not saying that it's going to work. I know that maybe they're just throwing that dart at the board, hoping that it gets hit. I don't know in this case. But yeah, it would have been great in our trade negotiations if we were able to do the digital service tax. Things like that, I think when we first went at the U.S. with negotiations, we felt like we were playing nice and we were kind of going along. But that should have been a sticking point, right? And it's hindsight because we can say that now. and I think because they're taking a harder line

and we are looking elsewhere and not just looking to the U.S. and bringing other powers into the fold with us to push forward. So yeah, this one is a head scratcher though. Yeah, and look, when the digital services tax got wiped off the map, I was surprised that we didn't try to leverage it

to get a concession from the Americans and they still got pissed with us. So this, it's again, like we got to be walking in love. lockstep. Like we've got to, it's, we've got to be note perfect. We've got to be smarter than the Americans. We've got to be more efficient than the Americans. Or we're going to get eaten for lunch. And if our CRTC is saying dumb stuff like this, uh, on the eve of renegotiations, when we saw what happened to that digital services tax, I don't know what hope we've got going to the negotiations,

but I, listen, I'll remain optimistic. Ashley, thank you. Chris. Thank you. I hope you guys had great weeks. I hope you have even better weekends. Thank you. And thank you so much. As a reminder, if you want more BMS, we put out a podcast every day and you can find more content on X, on Instagram, and on YouTube.