The Ben Mulroney Show - Should governments try to financially incentivize people to have kids?

Episode Date: April 16, 2025

Guests and Topics: -Should governments try to financially incentivize people to have kids? -Taking a historical look at the 1921 Walk Across Canada with Guest: Craig Baird, Host of Canadian History Ehx 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

Now, our change will honour the Supreme Court of Canada, where justice and truth have guided decisions since 1875. As the country's highest court, it plays an essential role in protecting the rights and freedoms of all Canadians. The new one-dollar coin features a semicircle of laurels, symbolising the nine judges and their enduring pursuit of justice. Find the limited edition, 150th anniversary of the Supreme Court of Canada coined today.

Breaking news, a brand new game is now live at Bet365. Introducing Prize Matcher, a daily game that's never ordinary. All you have to do is match as many tiles as you can. And the more you match, the better. We also have top table games like our incredible Super Spin Roulette, Blackjack, and a huge selection of slots. So there you have it. How more you match the better. We also have top table games like our incredible super spin roulette, blackjack and a huge selection of slots.

So there you have it. How can you match that? Check out prize matcher and see why it's never ordinary at bet three, six, five must be 19 or older. Ontario only please play responsibly. If you or someone you know has concerns about gambling visit connexontario.ca T's and Z's apply. Welcome back to the Ben Mo Rooney show. Thank you so much for joining us. It is time now for a segment that I look forward to each and every week. This is when we all get to learn a little bit about our Canadian history that we should know that we don't know. And who better to walk us down the path of Canadian history than Craig Baird, the host of Canadian History X. Craig, welcome to the show. Thanks for having me again. Okay, so we've been talking elections over the past few weeks, the history of our elections.

And today we're going to take a look at the 1957 election. Yeah, this is kind of a pretty big election in terms of the shifting dynamics of the political landscape. Because for the previous 22 years, Canada had been governed by the Liberal Party since they won in 1935. And that's the longest stretch in Canadian history. But by 1957, people were looking for a change, especially with the entire debate of the Trans Canada pipeline and the American company that was brought in to build it. And the Liberals had pushed it through Parliament and evoked closure.

So it was a very divisive issue. And the progressive conservatives were now led by a very dynamic man named John Diefenbaker. And I think today we kind of don't really realize how good of a speaker and how, you know, how popular John Diefenbaker was when this election campaign started. And he really kind of shifted Canadian politics with his election when even though he got a minority government, but then obviously the next year he had a massive majority government and really kind of changed Canadian politics. So talk to me about who he was as a man. What was his appeal? And sometimes a person's appeal is because they are not the other guy, right? So who was he? And talk to me about his counterpoint on the liberal side. Well, he was very much a dynamic leader. He was the first leader who really saw the potential of

television. And so the liberals were led by Louis Saint Laurent, who was the prime minister since 1948. And by that point, he was in his mid 70s. And he had this kind of persona of Uncle Louis. He was very good with children. He was beloved. But by 1957, he was starting to get very tired. He wasn't really into the election campaign. He would speak in large cities while Diefenbaker would go to small towns and speak with people and often speak to like 2000 people crammed into a building. Just because he was so fiery, he had an amazing ability to speak to people. He was probably one of the greatest campaigners in Canadian history. John Deven Baker was really just somebody who really appealed to just regular people

and was somebody that people look to for a change. And you know, we are talking in this election about there's a poll that came out that said conservative voters are more likely to be motivated to vote because of hope. And on the other side of the equation, liberals are more likely to be motivated to vote because of hope and on the other side the equation liberals are more likely to vote out of fear. Was that dynamic present in the 1957 election? Was one somebody who was promising a positive vision and somebody maybe less so? I would say that it wasn't quite like that back then. Diefenbaker was promising you know a lot of nationalism, a lot of you know talking about the Canadian North, where the Liberals were very much campaigning on, we've been governing

for 22 years, look at the things that we've brought in. They've more or less governed, or not governed, but campaigned on their past record while Diefenbaker was saying, this is what I'm going to do for you if I'm elected going forward. So I think Canadians were just looking to the future rather than the past by this point. I gotcha. And so from what I understand, the Liberals, they were campaigning on like, look at what we've accomplished since 1935. And Dieffenbaker was promising lower taxes and making your life easier tomorrow. Absolutely. And he was talking about how we can, you know, be a dynamic nation, how we can develop the Canadian North, how we can do all of these things. And he obviously really did kind of campaign on the Trans-Canada pipeline and the divisive

issue related to that. But more or less he was very optimistic. Talk to me about the lift of trying to promote the Trans-Canada pipeline, because I'm wondering whether it was as hard to push forth in the Canadian Federation back then as it is today. Well, the Liberals really wanted to get this pipeline built. So it would take natural gas from Alberta and send it to Ontario and Quebec. And the company TransCanada Pipelines

was an American company. They were hired to build it. So there was a lot of opposition to that because people wanted a Canadian company to build it. But there was a deadline that the Liberals had to meet. So they really had to get it through Parliament before this deadline. And that's why they invoked closure, which meant that it was essentially they were forcing the vote forcing and they had a majority. So they were able to vote it in. And a lot of people really didn't like that. They felt like this was kind

of an example of the liberals being kind of long in the tooth, maybe not quite corrupt, but feeling like they can do what they want because they've governed for so long. And it was something that Dieffenbaker really sunk his teeth into and it really kind of dominated the campaign for him. Oh, a liberal party long in the tooth thinking they deserve to govern simply because and a young conservative coming in, changing that dynamic. Who knows, maybe everything that is old is new again. We'll have to wait and see in the next couple of weeks. All right, let's move on to something I have I knew nothing about the 1921 walk across Canada.

I really like the story because it kind of starts with these two guys named Charles Berkman and Sydney Carr and they just wanted to find work. So they decided let's walk from Halifax to Vancouver and they left on January 17th, 1921. They promised to send dispatches back to the Halifax Herald. They would make money by selling postcards about their journey. And then about a week later, this father and son named Jack and Clifford Behan, they decided, well, you know what, we're going to race these two guys to Vancouver. And it was kind of just an impromptu race. And then a couple of weeks after that, this married couple named the Dills decided to join the race, and Frank and Jenny Dill. And so they started racing and it became kind of this impromptu race. Now, Sydney Carr didn't want

to race, so he actually dropped out pretty soon after. And Charles Berkman walked the entire distance by himself. But it was just an impromptu race across Canada and it was something that really gripped the nation at the time in 1921. Gripped it how? How were people keeping tabs on this walk that was apparently a race? Well all three teams were sending dispatches back to the Halifax Herald about where they were and so people were following along as they went across the country. So they actually had to go from Nova Scotia to New Brunswick, then through Maine, and then into Quebec. And then they kind of just followed almost really

where the Trans-Canada Highway goes now. And a lot of people just really latched onto this. It was this interesting story, especially because of Jenny Dill. She was the one who kind of had her husband join it. A lot of women were really campaigning for her to win because she was saying anything a man can do, a woman can do as well. So it was just a really, you know, there was a lot of interest in all of this just because of these three teams that decided, hey, let's walk across Canada. Our own little version of the battle of the sexes. It wasn't on a tennis court. It was across Canada. Let's listen to a snippet of the 1921 walk across Canada. Like George Costanza, the Beehans liked making good time. On February 28th, they walked 56

kilometers in one day, more than double what Berkman walked that same day, Jack Behan wrote. We know we are closing the gap on Berkman and can almost hear him pant as he leads us in the race. By the end of February, Berkman had covered 1,490 kilometers in 42 days, the Beehans had 1,382 kilometers in 34 days, and the Dills had 928 kilometers in 27 days. Hoping to stay ahead, Berkman hoped to walk 85 kilometers in one day to Pembroke, Ontario. His feet were filled with blisters and he instead walked 51 kilometers to Chalk River. When people told him the bee hands were catching up, he said he was going to hold the lead. Walking into Northern Ontario and afraid of being attacked by a pack of wolves, Berkman

bought a gun and then lost an entire day in North Bay while waiting for it to be repaired while he was also buying, yet again, new boots. The Dills meanwhile walked into Montreal where they celebrated their second wedding anniversary on March 10th. They didn't rest on their laurels and instead walked straight through. Far ahead of them, the Beehans were now only one day behind Berkman. I'm sorry we got shotguns, we got bears, we got walking across Canada in the dead of winter. One thing we're not good at is the 1921 walk across Canada does not convey the sizzle of the excitement of what this should have been about. Well, absolutely. This story is so little known that I really was happy to be able to share it

just because there's so much to it. Like you said, there's wolves and bears, there's walking through winter storms, you know, Berkman starts out with a friend and then he's walking alone. He eventually gets passed by both the Dills and the Beans. And he decides, you know, I'm just going to take a leisurely walk across Canada at this point, and he just kind of enjoyed himself. And these people were all very famous as they walked across Canada. And then afterwards, kind of everybody forgot about them. Craig Baird, the host of Canadian History X,

remind us where we can find the show. You can find it on all podcast platforms and you can listen every weekend on the Chorus Radio Network. Just check your local listings. I appreciate you, sir. I hope to talk to you again next week. Absolutely. 1921 Walk Across Canada.

I'm telling you, I love these conversations with him. I learn something new every weekend. I hope that you do too. Welcome back to the Ben Mulroney Show. You know, a lot of people think that I am ideology above everything, and that's just not true. I'm a best practices guy. If you show me a plan to make for a project or if you show me a policy and you tell me what the

goal of the policy is, if you show me that it works, then I'll support it if I support the end goal of that policy. And I truly believe that supports by the government that allow mothers and fathers to more freely go back to work, access support so that they can have childcare and daycare and those sorts of things. They allow those people to be the fullest expression of themselves, both as parents, but also as people who go out and earn a living and thus pay taxes. So in that way, I believe that that those things are very real investments by the

government, because the return on that is significant. It's a real investment. It's just not money that's thrown down a rat hole, right? And I think we need to be paying attention to things like that, because we are currently living in a time where our birth rate in Canada is as low as it's ever been, I think it's 1.26 kids per parents.

And that's just not enough to keep up with the growing demands of the economy and the growing demands of what is going to be required to compete with other countries in the world. And there's a story in the National Post that says the government cannot spend its way out of the fertility crisis that we're experiencing. And so I want to I want wanna put the call out to our listeners to give us a call. What is the fix to our fertility crisis? How do we get people having more kids?

Or is immigration the only solution to growing our population? I mean, look, parents can receive a caregiver tax credit of up to $8,000 per child, hundreds of dollars a month in the form of the candidate child benefits, subsidized daycare, if you can get a spot, you get paid time off from work and some provinces like Ontario even offer free daily play centers for babies and toddlers with high quality toys and programming. But all of that has failed.

The birth rate keeps declining. So give us a call and let us know what you think the fix is. I have a belief that a lot of it has to do with how expensive it is to have a family. I think it's such an onerous cost that people are asking themselves questions and making choices that generations past have not had to make. If you can't buy a house that will allow you

a safe space to grow your family, you're probably going to decide against having a big family. You can't get in the job market. If you can't get in the job market, if groceries are too expensive, these are choices. I mean, having one kid versus four kids is a big change in how much money you get to keep from your paycheck every month. So these are real, real concerns that I don't believe any

incentives like the the caregiver tax credit or the Canada child benefit. Those things don't matter because those are drops in the bucket compared to the structural costs of just being able to live your life in Canada. It's too expensive rent maybe you can't afford a house, rent's too expensive. Maybe you can't afford, so if you don't have a place to raise your family, where you're gonna live in your parents' basement and have kids in your parents' basement, I don't know how that makes you feel as a parent.

Part of our identity as parents is wrapped up in the ability to provide. And if you can't provide, then it makes you question whether or not, you know, you should the ability to provide. And if you can't provide, then it makes you question whether or not, you know, you should be a parent. And that's an unfair thing to put on young Canadians today. But one thing is clear,

we, people are having fewer kids, and I'd like to find out from you why you think that is. Jerry, welcome to the show. Hello? Hey, Jerry, welcome to the show. Hello? Hey Jerry, welcome to the show. Hi, how are you doing? I'm well, I'm well. So what do you think of our fertility crisis

and how we can solve it? Well, look, so I come from a family of six kids. And growing up in the 80s and 90s, my mom stayed home and my dad worked and we were able to survive off of my father's income. Now we live in a generation where that's not the case. So, I mean, call me traditional, but maybe promoting more traditional, you know, family and creating an environment where women can choose to stay home because my wife and I, I'm married, I have two kids, I would

have had more kids, but it's just, you can't afford it. And my wife would have stayed home and had more kids if we could survive off of my income. Well, exactly. The income that you have versus what you can afford for that income is not what it used to be. And therefore people like yourself are being forced to make some pretty sad choices, I think.

Yeah, absolutely. I like, if you ask my wife, she would happily, like I'm traditional. are being forced to make some pretty sad choices, I think. Yeah, absolutely. If you ask my wife, she would happily, I'm traditional. I think men working is mandatory, women working is optional. And I think that if a woman wants to stay home and raise children, that is commendable. And we've got to create an environment where women have that opportunity.

And I think that that's been eroded over the last, I'd say 30 years. Well, thank you for your call, Adam. I really appreciate it. And look, I different strokes for different folks. I'm not going to tell anybody who they're how they should rear their family and who should work. But if one person's decided decides to work, then there should be supports. If both decide to work, there should be supports so that they can go out and make the money they need to make and come back and be the best parents

they can when they're at home. So I really appreciate the call. Adam, welcome to the show. Hey, Ben. Thanks for having me on. Absolutely. So I think one of the biggest issues is the housing market. Because you're forced to, as a father with two young kids, I'm forced to live further away from my parents than when I was young and I lived close to my grandparents. So you lose that support system. So as a result, when you can't find a spot for daycare and you don't have any family members nearby to lean on, it gets really, really difficult these days. No, I get it. I mean, we're always lucky if we have someone in our family

that we can rely on, but every couple has to rely on somebody. Some people have nannies, some people have housekeepers, some people have their kids who are a little bit grown up, some people have their family. I don't think anybody can do it alone. And oftentimes there is a cost that is associated with it. But like I said, you get a tax credit for $8,000

for a caregiver, that's great. But if you have nowhere to call home to care for your kids, it's sort of like a moot point. You're putting the cart before the horse. Thank you so much for your call, Adam. I appreciate it. Peter, welcome to the show. Yeah, it's just basically what you what you alluded to. It's first and foremost, it's the cost of

living. And these programs that you mentioned are great, but they're just drops in the bucket. And yeah, it is putting the car before the horse. Yeah, we got to solve these other problems. First, we got to solve the problems of affordability, food inflation, we've got to solve these other problems first. We've got to solve the problems of affordability, food inflation. We've got to solve any number of these things because until those things are solved, until you have a place to call home, you have nowhere to put your family that you want. Absolutely. And sorry, just another point was, I mean, this is just me personally, maybe I am a little old fashioned or traditional, but I just don't, maybe I am a little old-fashioned or traditional, but I just don't feel like the family dynamic exists. People don't have the same morals or ethics anymore.

I'm a little hesitant to raise a family in these times. No, I understand that. I understand it. And look, I'm not as traditional that way. I think families can look any number of ways, and I think it's not on the government to judge those things. But those people who want to be parents need a country in which you don't have to ask yourself questions about, can I have one or can I have,

I wanna have four, but I can only afford to have one. That shouldn't be a choice. I really don't think so. Thank you so much for that call. Let's welcome Steve to the Ben Mulroney show. Hey, Ben, how are you? Your favorite Greek lover here. Welcome back, my friend. How are you?

I'm good. So me and my wife both work. Yeah, we were fortunate enough that we we did well we we paid off our mortgage, but I got two kids, 10 and 7. I would like to have a third but there's no way I It's way too expensive. Yeah. Yeah a funny story. I was talking with my RSP guy goes What do you want to retire and I'm like, I'm 50 with a 10 year old and a 7 year old By the time they go to school. I'm gonna be in my 60s. Yeah, I go. I'm gonna drive my work bench right to the grave There are people like you and me. We're gonna work till the day we die. Thanks so much for the call. We got time for one more really quick Rocco. Make your point very quickly for me my friend. Hey, so like your first caller said, you know, it's hard

with both parents working, especially you know, having more than two kids, I have two kids. Also, I think with the boomer generation, they were able to add more strength and more courage to do it with busy lives. Both parents can't take care of more. Yeah. Rocco, thank you so much for the call. I really appreciate it. I hope you have a great end of your week. And I want to thank all of you for calling and thanks for joining us today on the Ben Mulroney show. Want to transform your space and your Sundays? Well, Home Network is giving you the chance to love your home with We'll see you next time. and win for your chance to win big. Amazing!

The small details are the difference between winning and losing. Watch and win with Renovation Resort on Home Network.