The Ben Mulroney Show - How a Trillion dollar lawsuit changed the music industry forever

Episode Date: February 24, 2025

Guests and Topics: -The day the music industry sued someone for $72 trillion with Guest: Alan Cross, Host of the Ongoing History of New Music  -Local News Is Dying. The Consequences Are Worse than You Think with Guest: April Lindgren, professor emerita at Toronto Metropolitan University. Taught Journalism -Ben Goes Digging for Audio Gold -The decline of the federal NDP party with Guest: Julien Newman, Former Head Organizer to Tom Mulcair, Entrepreneur 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

I've got this condition where I don't feel pain. You're a superhero. No, I'm not. This is how intense Nova Kane sounds. Oh, wow. Imagine how it looks. Is there more? Yeah, big time.

Nova Kane, forming theaters March 14th. Want to own part of the company that makes your favorite burger? Now you can. With partial shares from TD Direct Investing, you can own less than one full share, so expensive stocks are within reach. Learn more at td.com With partial shares from TD Direct Investing, you can own less than one full share, so expensive stocks are within reach. Learn more at td.com slash partial shares. TD, ready for you. Welcome back to the Ben Mulroney Show.

And I remember seeing something on social media last week and point out that people of my generation grew up with records, then eight tracks, then cassettes, then CDs, then MP3 players, and now streaming. No other generation has had to buy more different types of media and then get rid of it because it was discontinued, got went obsolete, and then buy something else. And the reason I tell you that is because our next guest, Alan Cross, who's the host of the ongoing history of new music, has written the story about how, what, 25 years ago, the music industry sued

a couple of upstart companies for $72 trillion. Navster and Limewire, they changed the music industry forever, but it wasn't without some significant growing pains. Alan Cross, welcome to the Ben Mulroney show. Oh, glad to be here. So talk to me, Alan, about how significant this moment in history was for the music industry. Well, let's let's go back to June 1 1999. That's when Napster was first introduced into the wild.

And within a couple of years, well, not quite a couple, yeah, a couple of years ahead, about 25 million users. The music industry had been completely caught flatfooted by the transition from physical to digital. And they couldn't really figure out how to combat it other than to try to sue everybody into existence. They had a lot of success with Napster. It took a while, but over about two years, they

managed to shut Napster down. And then they turned their attention to all these other file sharing programs. There was Grokster, there was Bear Share, there was Limewire, there was Kazaa, there was Audio Galaxy. There were a whole bunch of them. If you grew up in the early 2000s, you probably went from one to the other to the other, trying to find the songs that you were looking for and to make sure that the service was still in functioning. So what happened was that there were several companies that were sued by the Recording Industry Association of America. And the biggest of those lawsuits was against LimeWire, which was run by a guy named Mark Gorton.

He wrote the program in early 2000, and it was a file sharing program. Now when they finally got to him, they determined the Recording Industry Association of America went to court and they found out that he had and I should also point out that by 2007 about two-thirds, sorry about one-third of all computers on the planet, all personal computers on the planet had limewire installed. Wow. So that tells you exactly how many people were stealing music. So they sued for 72 trillion, I'm guessing they didn't get 72 trillion. No, what they did was they focused on 11,000 songs, there is a statutory allotment of $150,000

statutory allotment of $150,000 per song infringed. And then they tried to make this connection between a sale and a download and money lost as a result of that. And doing some quick back of the envelope calculations, they determined that if you were to add everything up, they would ask for 72 trillion with a T, 72 trillion dollars in damages, which was completely insane. Given the fact that the GDP of the entire planet was about 70 was was less than 72 million. Yeah. So but at this point, what I'm realizing in talking to you is that the game was changed forever because the appetite of the public was now had been changed from buying albums to a more a la carte bespoke musical experience, buying songs one at a time

and eventually being able to pick what you want streaming. And that informed all of our buying choices and all of our, what we were looking for from our media forever. And that's where we find ourselves today. But the question is, if the music industry isn't selling albums anymore, it's certainly not at the clip they used to be,

how is the music industry making money today? Oh, they're making a ton of money on streaming. About 70 to 80% of all the revenue coming in to record labels these days comes in from streaming. The record labels get their piece of the pie right off the top long before the artist does. And the four, three major record labels all own equity stakes in Spotify, believe it or not. Oh, they do. Oh, they do.

Yeah. Yeah, they, you know, it depends on it's, you know, 10, 12, 17%, something like that, but they do have a piece of the pie. And the reason they have a piece of the pie is because they don't want to find themselves in the same position they were with Steve Jobs. Steve Jobs came in and said, listen, I can rescue you with iTunes, and it's either me or nobody. And they had no choice, but to go with Steve and to go with iTunes, which turned Apple into the, you know, helped turn Apple into the monster that it is today. So they're not going to let go with iTunes, which turned Apple into the, you know, helped turn Apple into the monster that it is today. So they're not going to let go of distribution.

They're not gonna have any sort of situation where they don't have their fingers all over how the music gets distributed. Oh, see, that's interesting to me because I remember having a conversation years ago about the television industry. And somebody said, someone from LA said, yes, in the face of streaming, everything is going to change. But the CBS is the

NBC is the foxes of the world. They will all still exist 2030 years from now, because they're all going to participate in their own cannibalization. They're going to do essentially what you just said, the music industry did with Spotify, which is recognize that there is change, but they want, they're gonna be part of that change. Yeah. And it took until about 2016 or 2017

before revenues stopped falling from when they did in 2000 and began to turn around when there was a critical mass of people streaming music around the world. So yeah, if they're making about a million dollars a minute, the record labels. What? Oh yeah, they're making a ton of money. I mean, when you consider that in a given week, about 2.7 billion songs are streamed in Canada, 10 times that many in the United States.

And then you can extrapolate that through the rest of the world. Billions upon billions of songs are getting streamed every single day. And the amount of money that generates is incredibly huge. I mean, Spotify has paid out well over a billion dollars just in the last year in royalties. And of course, the record labels don't have to worry about manufacturing or producing or shipping a single CD anymore. It's all happening in digital ones and zeros.

Yeah. And then the interesting thing is, if you go back and look at some of the contracts held by some heritage acts, you'll still find that there are things like breakage, and promo copies and a whole bunch of other things that are deducted from their royalties because they're still operating on the under the assumption that they're selling pieces of plastic. Do the record labels get a piece of the touring that the acts do or is that exclusive to the musicians? It depends. It depends. Some artists have something called 360 deals and a 360 deal

encompasses every form of revenue that you get. So it could be everything from ticket sales to, to t shirt sales. And what are some of the headwinds on the horizon for the music industry? Because it sounds based on what you're saying, like it's smooth sailing going forward, they own a piece of Spotify, they're making money hand over fist. But are there headwinds that they have to be worried about?

Yeah, there are one of the things that the record industry has been very terrible at doing is creating new superstar acts over the last 25 years. We have a number of acts that can fill arenas and stadiums, but not nearly as many as we used to back in the day. So this is why we're seeing a lot of people, a lot of promoters go back and get those heritage acts back on the road, charging big dollars

for nostalgia purposes. Most of the money is coming, if you take Taylor Swift out of the equation, most of the money is coming from heritage acts when it comes to touring. The other thing is that if you look at what is being streamed, about 75% of all the music being streamed right now is by a music by heritage artists. It's more than two years old. Only about 25% of all the streaming is done to current music these days. And one thing I heard and maybe you can confirm it for me, but one of the unintended consequences of streaming is that song lengths have gotten, the songs have gotten shorter because it allows people to listen to more songs over the course of say an hour.

Or what they do is they get into the song and as soon as it's over, they go, hey, wait a second, I was just starting to get into that, so I'm gonna play it again. Alan Cross, I wanna thank you so much. It's a fascinating piece. I remember when it looked like the music industry wasn't going to survive, but clearly some smart people around the boardroom found a way to survive and to fight another day. And I'm so glad that you chronicled it for readers.

I appreciate it. You're very welcome. That was Alan Cross, the host of the ongoing history of new music. host of the ongoing history of new music. I'm going to say something now that won't surprise anyone, but local news is dying in this country and the problems facing local news are myriad. To be able to address the problem would require, it's not just one issue, the headwinds are great and there are a great many of them. And a wonderful piece explaining this very well is in The Walrus at thewalrus.ca. The author is April Lindgren, a professor emerita at Toronto Metropolitan University who's also taught journalism and she was a journalist herself for a long time. April, welcome to the show. who's also taught journalism and she's was a journalist herself for a long time. April, welcome to the show.

Thank you very much. It's nice to be here. So this is it's not a good time to get into the business of local news in this country, is it? Well, I want to be completely negative. I mean, there are some thriving local news outlets that are making it work using business models that are different than the old basically rely on advertising models in the past. But it's definitely not easy and I think the numbers tell us about that. I run something called the Local News Map that shows that about 529 local news outlets

have closed since 2008 and only about half as many have launched and stayed open. So it's not for the faint of heart but it can be done if the news outlets are really prioritizing producing news that's important to their communities. Now you know I'm broadcasting from Toronto. I live in a big city. There's a lot of great things that come from living in a big city and I think in a lot of ways we're probably insulated against some of these issues. So talk to me about the impact of when a community loses, you know, their access to local news. What happens to that community? Well, I mean there's a variety of impacts and that I tried to get at when I was

writing this piece in The Walrus where, you know, we have a variety of impacts and that I tried to get at when I was writing this piece in the Walrus, where we have a bunch of research and I wanted to connect that research to what was happening on the ground. So I talked to people in Kingston, Ontario, where this very vibrant local television station they had basically cut their newscast in half and a lot of people were wondering why and feel a little bit like stuck about where to go for local news now. There and in places like Cornwall, people have to go to multiple places to find out what's going on. So first thing that happens is you have to work a lot harder to find out what's going

on and then you may not have a sense of what it is, what's happening, because you know, you have to go to work every day and raise your kids. And, and therefore, you're not finding out what council did lately, and that they're, you know, building a four lane highway at the end of your street, and you only find that out when the bulldozers show up. So your ability to participate in these decisions is also and have a say early on is also proving to be challenging. Yeah, I hadn't even thought about that, but the impact is on the democratic process. I hadn't even considered that as an impact of losing local news, but you're absolutely right.

And the irony to me is in a small town, you would think it would be simpler to convey information than it is in say a big city like Toronto or Vancouver but it's I guess it's the business model itself you you set off the top of this conversation that there are business models that do work to sustain local news what are some of those business models well they're still evolving but one of the things that's clear is you have to have multiple sources of revenue. So it used to be in the past that maybe you had a bit of subscription revenue, but you sold ads, and that gave you enough money to finance your newsroom operations.

Now what's happening is the research is suggesting that news outlets, you need to find at least three or four sources of revenue. So that might be tapping, trying to get some grants from foundations, some government funding which is available now and who knows how much longer it will be available, holding events. You would you know hold it organize an event where maybe your journalists are going to interview the mayor and local councillors. You don't sell tickets, you make it open to the public, but you find sponsors who will who will pay for the event and allow you to make a bit of

profit on the side. But the thing is, you know, a lot of these startups are just very small news organizations and the people that are working there are struggling to report the news and get the news out the door. So to add on to it the challenges of three or four more, having to pursue three or four different funding models at the same time, it's just not that easy. You know, we hear a lot of talk from the Conservative Party of Canada of defunding the CBC. They receive over a billion dollars a year

in federal funding. Let's assume for a moment, April, that they do follow through with that promise and defund the CBC. Could you see a scenario where that money is put, like you said, into alternative, into trusts and into bursaries to support local journalism? Well, possibly.

But, you know, there's a big infrastructure for local news that the CBC has created. You know, it's not that easy to just throw money at news organizations across the country and hope that they're going to produce quality news. You know, sometimes that works and sometimes it doesn't. So maybe, but I don't think the whole point of canceling the billion dollars spent on the English language CBC is Just take that money and give it to other privates give it to other media because as I understand the conservatives They don't like the idea of government giving money to media. Yeah, that's true So that so that's not that's not in that's not in the books

And also they're looking to they're talking a lot about trying to trim budgets, right? What I don't think it's going to be a transfer of funds is what I'm saying. What has been the impact of the Liberal government's online news act on local journalism? Well, there's the good and the bad. I mean, on the one hand, it's made it more difficult for people to discover local news because Metta has banned news from Facebook. So people that used to count

on, you know, links on their Facebook feed or something posted by their friends or family to flag stories to them are no longer seeing that. So it's one less avenue for people to find local news and access local news. On the other hand, the online news act is also, we see Google, you know, having to pay a bunch of money every year that's going to be distributed to local news outlets because Google has been using their content online is the theory behind this. So that's another revenue source for these news outlets. So there is that. Now the headline in your piece in the Wallerist is local news is dying,

the consequences are worse than you think. So before we end this conversation, let's talk about the dire aspects of the situation, and then we'll end on a high note. So what are the worst consequences than people think? People don't have enough information to participate in decisions being made on their half by their councils. People don't have journalists keeping track

of politicians and what they're up to. People don't know their communities very well and know the people in them. And it undermines their ability to participate in their communities. And it also, we know it has been shown to undermine the likelihood that people will vote in local elections, for instance.

So those are some of the problems. And lastly, let's try to end this on a silver lining. Is there a path back, besides what we talked about earlier on about these sort of these new, newfangled business models, is there a path back? I think the key to the future is that local news organizations need to recognize they have to produce news that matters to the community because it's no you if people don't see the stories and and content that is going to make them sit up and say oh wow that matters to me I think I'm going to you know send some money to this news organization as a donation or subscribe

or go to an event and support the presence of this news organization in our communities. I think in the absence of that, it's going to be pretty difficult for a news organization to get out there. The good news is there are still lots of news organizations that can produce this kind of content and they are. They're becoming increasingly rare but you know don't don't don't undermine don't forget that these stories are really important and somebody journalists are still doing it. We need to get behind them. Yeah we absolutely do. You know when I first started in radio one of the things that I one of the missions that I had on my

week weekend radio show was to tell those stories of community was to like let our listeners know what was going on in their neighborhoods and in their communities across the city. And if that voice is gone in even a small town, that connection can be lost. And so we got to remember the real value of local journalism. I want to thank you April so much for joining us. And I want to thank you, April, so much for joining us. And I want to thank you so much for writing that piece. It's very much appreciated. Oh, I appreciate your kind words.

Thank you. Yes, it's called Local News is Dying. The Consequences Are Worse Than You Think. And it's in the walrus.ca. This is Carry the Fire. I'm your host, Lisa LaFlamme. Carry the Fire, a'm your host, Lisa LaFlamme. Carry the Fire, a podcast by the Princess Margaret Cancer Foundation

featuring inspiring personal stories about what happens when world leading doctors, nurses, researchers, and their patients come together to ignite breakthroughs. Carry the Fire launches Monday, January 27thth wherever you get your podcasts. All right this next segment is called Digging for Gold. It's coming right off of the weekend. Lots of great audio out there. Some of it funny, some of it head scratching and I want to play it for you. Donald Trump has a way with

words. I think we can I think it's a nice way of saying it. He has a way with words. Here's what he said about when talking about Elon Musk and computer nerds and their relationship with their computers. Let's listen. The trait that they really have was that they're extraordinary with computers. They can take them, he said they make love to their computer.

I said, I don't want to hear about that. Doesn't sound too good. So they can take apart the most complex computer instruments and literally put them back blindfolded. So when they go into some guy that's ripping off the country by doing some of the things you've just heard or what you're going to hear, they can't be bullshitted. You know, they can't say, oh, gee, there was a mistake.

OK, I highly doubt that Elon Musk said that these guys were making love to their computers. That's a Donald Trumpism if I've ever heard one before. That's him. He's either searching for a word and he landed on that. But what you've got to recognize is everything he says, he says with complete confidence, even if it's a ball of face lie, or if it's factually inaccurate, or if the word that he's using is not the right one. He says it with enough confidence that you just roll right through it. He continued on about his relationship with Elon Musk. And he said he learned something very important from Elon. Let's listen to what he learned from Elon Musk. And he said he learned something very important from Elon. Let's listen to what he learned from Elon Musk.

Most of you can do that. And some of you do do it. Some of you do, you know, you have surplus states, you have incredible states, and you have to do that because every time somebody sends you a bill, they expect to be negotiated. And in the past administration, and sometimes I guess in this it happens because people don't care. You know, Elon talks about caring. Caring is very important. And they have to care. If they care, they say, no, no, I'll pay you.

They'll send you a bill for $10,000 and you say, no, I'll give you five. And they'll say, no way, no way, no way. And you'll end up paying six or seven or something. But all you have to do is care a little bit and try and get it down. And literally every contract, I think there's not a contract that's sent in government that I couldn't come and that many of you couldn't cut and cut very substantially. And boy, what a difference it would make for the government. I mean, that was just one heck of a meandering point. He took us all he took us on a tour of his brain there. And I'm not quite sure whether he was saying

that it's important in contract negotiations to care about the other side, or in this case, caring about the taxpayer, which is why you're trying to bring down the contracts and paying the contracts. I'm not quite sure, but I think he learned from Elon Musk that caring is important. And that's the lesson of the day. It's, it will come to no surprise, there's no surprise to a lot of you that generally speaking, trust in the mainstream media is very low. But Ben Shapiro from the United States decided he was going to look into how we got to this

point, why we got to this point, and why he believes that it can never come back. Here's what he had to say was the reason why people don't trust legacy media. I think that the legacy media has been definitively castrated here. And I think, by the way, the turning point is not just the perseverance of people in the alternative media, which obviously is a huge thing. The thing is that Joe Biden is guilty. Joe Biden did this. And the reason Joe Biden did this, I think that the most under covered story of

the last election is maybe the most covered story, but still, I think people underestimate its significance. Joe Biden effing that debate with Trump, was the single most important political moment probably of our lifetimes, because it wasn't just that it forced him out of the race. What it did is it exposed the entire

legacy media infrastructure, all of them, all at once. Right. They had been saying for years, for years, you and I were talking about Joe Biden being senile in like 2019. Right. And they were like, no, no, he's fine. He's totally fine. It was a cheap, like weeks before, literally weeks before that debate, they were saying it was a cheap fake to show tape of him

on stage with Obama, Obama guiding him off stage because he didn't know where the hell he was. I don't think he's wrong. I really don't think he's wrong. I remember watching that debate and I thought to myself, but I've been told for the past few months that he is the sharpest version of himself ever. Well, and Shapiro did the homework for us. Why don't we listen to a super cut of the mainstream US media telling people don't believe your eyes, don't believe your ears. Joe Biden is just fine. Does the president have the stamina, physically and mentally, do you think to continue on even after 2024? Don, you're asking me this question.

Oh my gosh, he's the president of the United States. You know, he, I can't even keep up with him. The most difficult part about a meeting with President Biden is preparing for it because he is sharp, intensely probing, and detail-oriented and focused. I can testify because I've been working very closely with this president for the past two years. I've been knowing him for 30 years. And I'm telling you, this guy's tough. He's smart. He's on his game.

Joe Biden has vision. He has knowledge. He has a strategic thinker. The president is focused. He's detail- oriented. He's always thinking about the big picture is engaging. He is capable. He has an incredible record as president. And I'm often with him on foreign trips. He's at the top of his game. Yeah. And nobody was pushing back on these Democrats who are saying all these things. The press just ate it up and parroted it back. And I remember one case in particular where Joe Scarborough on MSNBC's morning show, Morning

Joe, looked in the camera and with bold bluster and bravado said, this version of Joe Biden is the best version of Joe Biden. And this, by the way, was weeks, I believe, but just weeks before the debate that saw him, that saw him begin the end of his presidency. How bad has it gotten for the mainstream media in the United States? 29% of Americans say they have a fair amount

or great deal of trust in the media to report facts fully, accurately, and fairly, 29%. Compare that to how many people say the same thing about the Trump administration, 44% of Americans trust the Trump administration to report facts fully, accurately, and fairly. So that should tell you everything you need to know about how bad things have gotten

for the media in the States. But you can trust us here at the Chorus Radio Network. Of course you can, you can trust me, listen to my voice. There's a podcast, I don't know who that this guy's name is, but there's this podcast, it's gotta be the densest human being on a podcast in the world. He doesn't know the difference between a quarter and a quarter.

People that say it's a quarter till this a quarter till this time, that always angered me. Why? That's some of those. Okay, what's a quarter? I didn't learn this. So this year, a quarter doesn't mean 25 minutes. It's a quarter past nine 925 completely wrong completely wrong. What is it? So it's 15 correct What tell me what the how does that make sense explain that to me because a quarter a court you're thinking straight to currency Yes, a quarter is a fourth. That's all quarter is well. Okay a quarter is a fourth of anything It's a fourth of anything. Don't think of the actual- I don't understand that. A fourth.

A quarter of 10 is 2.5. It's 2.5, 25. Where is this 15 coming from? Yeah, where's 15 coming from? It's 60. An hour is 60 minutes, so if you break it into fourths, a quarter is 15. 25, 50.

When did we start speaking in currency? Like, what am I saying? It's a dollar 30 until 18? What am I supposed to, like, what It's $1.30 till noon? Who are we? Okay, this guy's an idiot. I mean, he should be he should be bubble wrapped so he doesn't walk into incoming traffic. And I believe on another podcast, he didn't know that fish were

animals. He thought he didn't, the debate that these two guys had about whether fish were animals was five minutes of my life I will never get back. And I guarantee you this guy makes a million dollars a year. I guess you know, you go viral for all the wrong reasons and you get paid. A lot of people thought that the 2025 election, federal election, when it ultimately comes, would be a breakthrough for the federal NDP. Having been in a position of power and influence by forming a coalition of sorts with the federal liberals, they were able to take credit for a number of policy initiatives, pharmacare, dental care, you name it. But things

have changed for the for the NDP quite significantly. They're down in the polls, they haven't raised a whole lot of money. And people are fleeing the NDP. Voters are fleeing the NDP and we got to figure out why. What is going on here? So joining us to talk about this is Julian Newman, former head organizer to Tom Mulcair and entrepreneur and a good friend of mine, Julian. Welcome back to the show. Happy morning, Ben. Happy Monday morning even. You know, the knock that I get in supporting Pierre Poliev these days, people will say, Ben, your dad would be rolling over in his grave.

The conservative party of today is not the conservative party of your dad. And that may be true, but the same is also true of the Liberal Party. It is not the same Liberal Party from 30 years ago. And the same can be said of the NDP. This NDP is not the same NDP of Ed Broadbent or even Jack Leighton and Tom Mulcair. Agreed. And it's a NDP that, at least at the leadership level,

has, let's say, a lack of talent that is much more acute than back then. Well, yeah, and off the top of this segment, I mentioned some of the policies and some of the initiatives that have come to pass that the NDP can take credit for. But do you think, Julian, the NDP held on too long by voting with the Liberal government for too long that whatever wind in their sails they could have gotten from pharmacare and dental care, that it's gone because they were seen carrying the Liberals' water for too long?

That's definitely part of it. I think tactically they could have done a better job. Although, you know, we can get into the specifics for the actual members of parliament who are currently elected, for most of them in their actual districts where they run, including Jagmeet, they mostly go up against conservatives. So in a way, a rising liberal party, while it tanks the NDP, it kind of helps the current caucus and Jag Mead personally. But more broadly, you know, I think the issue is dental care and stuff, I think it's good, people like it, but that's those aren't the issues Canadians really care about. And on the issue of Canadians really care about, like the NDP is MIA. Well and not only that, it seems to me that they've picked up the torch of the identity politics and the colonizer versus colonized and the oppressor versus the oppressed.

This binary view of the world that polls suggest the vast majority of Canadians do not see the world that way. And they have, it's almost like they are speaking a different language to the point that I wonder whether that is what explains why so many working-class Canadians are abandoning the NDP in favor, surprise surprise, of the Tories. Yeah if you go on Jagmeet Singh's Twitter, the number one thing you see is that he's brow-beating you about how to pronounce his name. He thinks that that somehow convinces anybody to like him. What is this? No one cares if your name is pronounced Jugmeat or Jagmeat. Why is this the number one thing you want people to know about you? But that's exactly what you're saying. It's this kind of identity politics, doom spiral that at least Jagmeats has gotten caught up in.

Julian, how did the party get here? Part of it is just they've gotten taken over by the Toronto crowd. I mean, Jack Meats, the Toronto guy and, you know, the Quebec NDP collapsed. They were more, more reasonable. And, you know, there's still, you know, a lot of BC folks, but most of them are just, you know, people from Vancouver. So the roots, like, the NDP has zero members of parliament in Saskatchewan, which is where they originated.

Yeah, so what turns this around? Because if the polls hold, they're not going to do very well in the next election. Does Jugmeat have to resign? Normally the NDP are a little more forgiving with election losses because they don't win elections that often federally. The only path forward where you can see quickly and without several election cycles, a good outcome for the NDP is Jack Meek losing his seat. He's an elected official, like he's a member of parliament. He's in a three-way race, not super safe seat, and it's possible that he would just lose and no longer be the member of parliament for Bernabe South and at that point he probably would need to leave but you're right if like if that doesn't happen it's unlikely that the party just the

way the NDP is that the party would would give him boot and assuming he doesn't lose in his seat you know the NDP stuck with him for at least one more cycle. There are good things that come from electoral collapses. You can take the party down to the studs. In the case of a collapse, you can take it down the studs and rebuild it in a new image, which to me is something that the party should seriously look at

because they are not a left-leaning party anymore, in my opinion. They are an activist-driven party. Yeah, well that's when I joined the NDP. I was 18 and Jack Layton had just, well, when I started working for the NDP, I was 18. Jack Layton had just gone elected as leader. I was 18, Jack Laiton had just gone elected as leader. He was there taking over from two not particularly charismatic leaders where the party almost lost their official party status, worse than where it is now. And that was an amazing opportunity for Jack and his team because he brought in a fresh team of competent people and we were able to, I was a small part of it, but we were able to Rebuild the party into the juggernaut that it eventually became and and as you say like

When I think of the NDP long-term, so let's say over the next decade I think there's a really great opportunity for exactly the reasons you say just wait for these guys to just crash and burn either with I'll be right now or I'll be the next election and Then you need to rebuild it as an actual left-wing party Which appeals to working-class people and just like normal people? Yeah, no, yeah normal working-class people for whom the affordability crisis is an issue, for whom it's hard to buy a home, it's hard to save, all those, it's hard to find a family doctor,

all of those things the the NDP should be speaking to, but it seems instead they're focused on these niche, micro-targeted policies that don't matter to the working class in this country. And young people. And young people, exactly. Julian, the job of rebuilding this party with a new vision becomes better and easier with a new leader. Who do you think is primed to assume the leadership of the NDP at some point soon. Yeah, there are a lot of rumors about, you know, a variety of like premieres, let's say, honestly, it gets possible. That's not really how it usually works.

The premieres, it's hard for them to take over. They're too, too used to governing. They're not used to governing, they're not used to campaigning, their base of support is too narrow. So like the way it would work in an NDP campaign probably is they'd have a total outsider. Someone's not on the radar of anybody and who comes in and manages to win. Actually, Tom Mulcair was that. Everyone thinks Tom Mulcair was, you know, seen as the, the guy who, who, who, who is the front runner. Tom Mulcair is not the front runner.

It was like me and Tom on his campaign at first, and then his local staff. Uh, we were just like two guys and, uh, we were able to take over the party and that's kind of the, you know, that's what Jack did, that's what Tom did. Presumably that's what Jagmeet did. I wasn't really around. But I'm telling you, like, the story would be great if Wab Kanu, the Premier of Manitoba, stepped aside from that role to take over the federal NDP. That would be a great Wab Kanu, the Premier of Manitoba, stepped aside from that role to take over the federal NDP. That would be a great, great story. Julia Newman, I want to

thank you so much for joining us. Really appreciate it. Thanks, Ben. At Desjardins, we speak business. We speak startup funding and comprehensive game plans. We've mastered made toasure 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.