The Ben Mulroney Show - This week in politics -- AC strike and electoral reform plus BC lands case

Episode Date: August 13, 2025

GUEST: Regan Watts, Founder Fratton Park Inc., former Senior aide to minister of finance Jim Flaherty GUEST:   Guest: Tom Parkin, Principal at Impact Strategies and Canadian columnist and commentator Chris Sankey is President/Chief Executive Officer for Blackfish Enterprises and Chairman of Blackfish Industries, a Heavy Civil Construction company. Chris is a member of the Coast Tsimshian community of Lax Kw’Alaams near Prince Rupert, British Columbia. 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 Enjoy   Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This is a paid advertisement for better help. These days, it feels like everywhere you turn, someone's got a new theory on how to improve your mental health, from ice baths to meditation apps. There's a lot of noise out there about what's supposed to make you feel better. But the truth is, finding what actually helps you isn't always that simple. When it comes to mental health, there is no one-size-fits-all solution. That's why speaking with someone who is trained to listen and to help,

someone who can meet you where you are and help you figure things out, can make such a difference. Trust me, I know what I'm talking about. BetterHelp connects people with mental health professionals from around the world offering access to a huge range of experiences and expertise. They've worked with millions of people already and with thousands of therapists available,

it is easy to find somebody who fits your needs. It's flexible too. You can schedule a session with just a click and you're free to change therapists whenever you need to until you find the right fit. Talk it out with BetterHelp. Visit betterhelp.com slash Mulruni today to get 10% off your first month.

That's BetterHelp, H-E-L-P.com slash Mulruni. This is a paid advertisement for Better Help. These days, it feels like everywhere you turn, someone's got a new theory on how to improve your mental health. From ice baths to meditation apps, there's a lot of noise out there about what's supposed to make you feel better. But the truth is,

finding what actually helps you isn't always that simple. When it comes to mental health, there is no one-size-fits-all solution. That's why speaking with someone who is trained to listen and to help, someone who can meet you where you are and help you figure things out can make such a difference. Trust me, I know what I'm talking about. BetterHelp connects people with mental health professionals from around the world offering access to a huge range of experiences and expertise. They've worked with millions of people already, and with thousands of therapists available,

it is easy to find somebody who fits your needs. It's flexible, too. You can schedule a session with just a click, and you're free to change therapists whenever you need to. until you find the right fit. Talk it out with BetterHelp. Visit BetterHelp.com slash Mulrooney today to get 10% off your first month. That's BetterHelp, H-E-L-P.com slash Mulruni.

Welcome back to the Ben Mulruni. Wednesday, which means it's time for our midweek this week in politics panel. So please welcome Regan Watts, the founder of Fratton Park, Inc., former senior aide to the Minister of Finance, Jim Flaherty, as well as Tom Parkin, principal at impact strategies and Canadian columnist and commentator to the both of you, I say happy Wednesday. Bonjour, my chum. Gentlemen, I think we've got to talk about probably the most important cultural news of, I don't know, the past few months, and I need to get you on record.

It's very important. Thoughts on Taylor Swift's announcement of a new one. album. Regan, we'll start with you. Look, Ben, I'm an unabashed, Swifty. I think that she's a remarkable artist. In terms of cultural impact, you know, there's been a few artists in our lifetime who've had this type of impact on pop culture. The Beatles, of course, being the greatest of all time. But then Michael Jackson, I think of Madonna, Britney Spears, the boy band phase, Justin Bieber, of course. She is a marketing machine. Her music is uplifting and positive.

I was fortunate enough to go to her concert, one of her concerts last year in Toronto with my daughter, and it was amazing. And so that she is dropping a new album is exciting news. And I wish her all the best. And as a businesswoman, she's an absolute gangster. And I respect not only her hustle and her marketing prowess, but some of the chess moves she makes, like when her back catalog was purchased by arrival. And she went into the studio and recorded every single song again so she could take away

the economic value. That's gangster move right there. I did not expect such a fulsome and comprehensive answer, Regan. Tom, your thoughts on your thoughts on this next chapter for Taylor Swift. Wow, who knows? She's obviously, you know, very talented and she knows how to keep her name in the headlines. And, you know, mostly she's seen by young women especially, but also guys, parents as kind of healthy. Yeah.

Right? Somebody who gets out there does her thing. is proud of what she does. Doesn't take a lot of, you know, guff from people, but also, you know, lets it roll off her back because she gets a lot of grief. Are you saying she shakes it off? She shakes it off.

She shakes it off. All right. Hey, yeah, Tom, I'm going to stick with you because we are girding for some interruptions in summer travel with what looks like another work stoppage, and we just, we're dealing with it with Canada Post, and now we've got this issue with Air Canada. The sides are so far apart, and I wanted your take on the lay of the land, so to speak.

Yeah. Well, I guess the context here is I worked for many years in the labor movement and have bargained on both sides of the table as management and representing workers. And I think this is very, very, I'm, you know, usually when I do radio shows and we talk about labor issues, people get over-excited. In fact, what happens is that things tend to get settled and people get excited. and then the issue gets settled and the worry goes away. Tom, can I jump in because I want your take on this? I think a lot of people forget that one of the reason we had labor peace for so long was they signed a 10-year contract, right? And that's great for a lot of things, right?

It gives stability and you know where your next paycheck's coming from. However, given the... Not inflation. It doesn't take into account what we just went through. Does that account for why these sides are so far apart? In part, yes, I think so. it was a long deal, and then we had this big dose of inflation. And so I'm thinking it's very likely that this will go to a strike because it doesn't seem

like Air Canada wants to play, and there are two issues in here. One is wages and wages lost to the erosion of inflation. But the other is, and many people do not notice, the onboard staff don't get paid to the flight takes off. So, you know, all those frustrating times when you sat on the tarmac waiting for a gate, those folks are not getting paid they are working and not getting paid and so Air Canada said let's take this to arbitration

we're not going to negotiate anymore let's do an arbitration well again I've worked in that field for a long time an arbitrator is never going to fundamentally resystem in industrial relations industrial workplace relationship they're not going to not going to say well a rule from the past that's being there forever I'm going to overthrow as an arbitrator

that is only going to come through the parties actually agreeing. So I take that as a signal that Air Canada does not want to negotiate this at all. And I think that the on-air staff are very committed because they've been really impoverished by this deal. And it's just injustice of Air Canada flies late a lot in case you didn't notice. And that means those guys are sitting there not getting paid while working a lot. Regan, I want your take on this. And as you know, one of my best friends in the world has been a flight attendant for Air Canada for years. a lot of time for the flight attendants. I have a lot of time for Air Canada writ large.

And just show me that this is a, what we just discussed about only getting paid when the flight takes off. Show me that that's a best practice at other top level international airlines. And I'll probably say fall on the side of the flight attendants. So Ben, I will start by saying that I accept that flight attendants have tough jobs. And I would suggest that they probably become tougher over the years. And I'm sort of with Tom and that maybe their pay should reflect that. But in this case, and let's be clear, the flight attendants are not pilots, but they want pilot-sized wage increases. The pilots are the ones who run the flights. And they are the ones who really have the pressure when it comes to collective bargaining, not the flight attendants.

You know, we should be clear about who the flight attendant employee base is. This is one of the most diverse employee groups in the world, women in Francoph, for Canada, particular, women in Frankopon's and LGBTQ, et cetera, et cetera. It is very attractive work. There is no shortage of applicants. And when it comes to flight attendants, there is a very high loyalty rate among flight attendants to the airlines that they work for. By the way, mechanics and bag carriers and others, they change airlines from time to time in a rate, pardon me, that is a much greater rate than the flight attendants. You know, we have to think about Air Canada as a business. And as a business. And I'm just taking some public numbers. I could be off a little bit here and there.

But Air Canada last year transported 47 million passengers. Their net income, that is the money, the profit they made. And let's be clear, net income is the profit after all the taxes and fees have been paid was about $1.72 billion. Let's just do some very basic math. 1.72 billion divided by 47 million passengers, about 36 bucks per passenger per flight and profit. And if If airlines eat into that profit margin, we won't have airlines in this country. And if airlines paid every worker group the demands that they had, there would be no airlines here. I will say two things on the politics of this. Under Prime Minister Trudeau and then Labor Minister Seamus O'Regan, and Seamus is a nice man,

but he was absolutely hopeless when it came to labor relations and supporting business in this country. Labor unions knew they could demand anything because back-to-work legislation was never on the table. With a new prime minister, I think this will be a real test for Prime Minister Carney. He'll have to decide whether he's going to order this to arbitration or bring back to work legislation. Labor had run amok with Prime Minister Trudeau for many, many years and got what they wanted. In the case with, and Tom talked about this, Air Canada has suggested this should go to binding arbitration. That's where this thing is going to end up anyway. And so I think that we should just cut out the unnecessary steps.

I think with the airline proposing is reasonable. And if anybody thinks that Air Canada is somehow going to get a better deal through binding arbitration than they might otherwise, I think they really need to read the history and understand how labor relations in this country, particularly with airlines, have gone over the years that they've been operation. Yeah, I don't want to start another topic until after the break. So instead, what I'm going to do is, Tom, is there anything that Regan just said that you want to push back on? Well, I think in an airline business, it's a very capital intensive. When you are on a big airplane, you look around, everybody's on there paying several hundred dollars for the pleasure of flying. and there's four or five staff

and they're getting paid you know, I think the starting rate for Air Canada on board staff is about $26, $27. So even if you give them a 10% raise and, you know, we're talking about $2.70, you take one hour flight from Toronto to Ottawa. How much are you really paying in labor costs

for those onboard staff? My point is that the price of fuel, the price of those very expensive pieces of equipment, all the infrastructure that goes around it, the taxes that they have to pay but the airlines have to pay for the airports to pay for the airport. Which are ridiculously high. The airports are very, very high in this country.

Yeah, the airports are a problem. Tom, you're right. This is one thing I want to say. This is a major, major problem that the airlines face in terms of profitability. Regan, in one sentence or two, finish it up. The national pastime of bashing air Canada and airlines is unacceptable. I saw a post from Anna Polyev, Pierre Polyev's wife yesterday, complaining that her flight was delayed.

that is not what we should be doing in this country, particularly as public figures. We should be supporting our large companies and supporting the employees who work there, not bashing them from being late. I think Ben Warrows that's a, yeah, we're going to, we've got to end it there. When we come back, we're going to talk about the state of play in the by-election in Alberta and so much more. Don't go anywhere. This is the Ben Mulroney show.

Welcome back to the Ben Mulroney show. Welcome back to Regan and Tom, who joined me. on our midweek this week in politics panel. Let's talk about the changes that were required after the longest ballot initiative. And now people have to, for those people who will be voting in the by-election that could see Pierre Poliyev finally readmitted it

into the House of Commons. I mean, this is tricky. It's a very simple ballot. It's essentially a white piece of paper that said, I voted for. And then there's a line and you have to put the person's name in. But the problem is, if you misspell the person's name, that could be considered a spoiled ballot. I don't know, I mean, I know a lot of smart people.

Most of those smart people don't know how to spell Pollyev. So, Regan, what happens here? Oh, I don't know. I mean, my faith, actually, in the elections process in this country, is pretty high. Yeah. We don't have a lot of fraud, really, relative to. to a country our size and we do you know i am one of these people who prefers an old-fashioned paper ballot and pencil i think it's pretty hard to screw up an election in those circumstances i would hope that the chief returning officer uh who will be running the by-election in that right in the

writing of crowfoot on behalf of elections canada will instruct his or her uh team on the ground to make reasonable conclusions if somebody writes the name pierre uh and misspels his last name, I think it's reasonable to assume the intent of that ballot. Yeah. And I think that's, you know, it's okay if people misspell a name. I think that's a reasonable expectation given the last name and the type of ballot we are now facing because of the longest ballot initiative. Yeah. Tom, you know, I think everything that Regan said is reasonable, but I think it's,

it's understandable if somebody wants to take a more hardline approach, unless you get the name right, then that doesn't necessarily mean that you. wanted to vote for that person well you know the political party sit in there to scrutinize the ballots after their cast and and they will you know fight it out but the the line the the the the interpretation from the chief election officer has already been set which is uh as long as the voter has made their intention clear uh a spelling is of somebody's right is is not going to factor and that's you know i mean if you've ever been involved in a political party or or or a union or wherever you where you vote and it's like here's a piece of paper write down the

person you're voting for right this is normal right you write down mulrooney you write you spell it wrong but everybody knows that it's malruni that you're voting for it because you know starts with an M and has the name been in front of it um you know what I mean yeah so it's just a very reasonable approach and in reaction to um the long ballot committee effort which which I think is I know what they're trying to do but I really think they're going about it the wrong way oh yeah being annoying. No, absolutely. Ben, did I just hear that Tom volunteered to be the campaign manager for the Ben Mulrooney for mayor campaign? Oh, my God. Okay, that's not happening.

Yeah, it was interesting. No, that's not happening at all. Hey, let's shift our focus to policing in Washington, D.C. Day one of the federalization of the D.C. cops by Donald Trump's administration is in the books. He now controls Washington. But on one hand, you'll have people saying this is massive overreach. This is Donald Trump behaving like a king. And on the other side, you've got people saying there are a lot of people in Canada wishing that there were politicians in power. Not politicians generally, but politicians who actually control the levers of power who would say some of the things that some of people in his administration are saying that it's time that criminals were held to account.

It's time that the rights of everyday law-abiding citizens were placed above the criminals. And so I wonder, Tom, how you feel about this new – it's temporary. It's a 30-day thing in Washington, but I wonder how you feel about it. Well, I'm kind of heartened by the idea that it's temporary. You know what? I have, as many of us do, I have extreme trepidation about Mr. Trump and where he's trying to take politics in the United States and by virtue of that dragging our country into the mess that he creates.

Having said that, Washington, D.C. has the highest murder rate in the United States, and it's not even close. I think Louisiana might be second, and it's well below. So there is a reason that connects about why people in Washington, D.C., need to be better served by policing. and but it's you know any crime is not simply a policing police tend to respond to crime not so much prevent it and so we've got to look at both sides of this so anyway I'm not worried about it it is temporary if it continues after 30 days if he's not showing that he's trying to get the police

to do something different than they've done in the past and if he's not also you know addressing the causes of crime as well as punishing crime then I think maybe those kind of evil ideas about what Mr. Trump is up to. Maybe it would be true. Regan, I think there are a lot of people in Canada, like I said, who wish that we had politicians who would say some of the things that we heard over the past couple of days

from the Trump administration. Not necessarily the right messenger, but the right message. And the federal liberals were very good at getting elected based on showcasing the best parts of themselves and also downplaying parts of themselves that

were problematic. And one of the problematic things was their record on a law and order. They didn't talk about it during the last election campaign because they knew they couldn't run a campaign on it and they did so successfully. But it really would be nice if from this federal government we heard some of the things that we hear from Donald Trump's administration. Sure. I think, well, I think Tom raises some interesting points. For anybody, and the most important, by the way, is that it is a 30-day project. And let's see how it goes. And I'll remind listeners, that he was duly elected by the people of the United States with an overwhelming majority and the number of popular votes in the electoral college. So he's the president. He gets

to make these decisions and he's doing so lawfully. What I would say, though, in this country in particular, is particularly those on the left who have Trump derangement syndrome and full-on Trump arrangement syndrome. What he's doing, i.e. using the powers and tools that are reposed in him as president, is no different on a temporary basis than what the Trudeau government did during the Ottawa Convoy when they temporarily invoke the Emergencies Act in order to deal with a law and order issue there, whatever you think of the use of the Emergencies Act, and I happen to believe that that was an outrageous overreach of power. It's the same thing. And so people get elected. They're accountable to their electors and to the voters. Tom is absolutely right

that Washington, Washington, D.C. has a crime problem. I was there a couple of summers ago with my family. I love Washington. Yeah. It's a beautiful city. I know then you've been there. I suspect Tom, you have his time. Oh, I go once a year. And it is, you know, Ronald Reagan, the great Ronald Reagan, one of your dad's closest friends was absolutely right when he called it the Shining City on the Hill or referred to Washington, D.C. and the country of America is the shining city on the hill. And it has its problems. And it is, it can be a bit of a dump in places. So cleaning up crime is, is never a bad idea as far as I'm concerned. I think Tom's right on both enforcement and deterrence. But if this helps clean up some of the mess that is in D.C., then I think Trump will be lauded. If it doesn't. doesn't clean up a mess or if things get worse or if he extends it to an unreasonable on a time frame, then we can revisit discussion at that point. Yeah, let's stick with this because I don't have, we don't have time to open up another

conversation. I just keep bringing this back, Tom, to, you know, people in this country where we, there's, you know, the, the federal conservative party is putting forth a bill that wants to stop leniency in criminal procedures, in, in front of the, the federal conservative party, is putting forth. of courts for people with different immigration statuses. You know, we want consistency in this country, regardless of who it is. We want to know that the rules apply to everyone the exact same way. And it feels like in big cities in Canada, just as in the United States, we're living in a place where if you are a criminal, you're going to be treated differently than if you are

somebody who's just trying to get by and live your life. Now, that may not be accurate 100%, but that's how it feels. And it looks, I just, I wish, like I said, I wish some of that moral clarity that we're getting from the American administration, whether you agree with them or not, I wish some of it would get applied here. I think there's a little too much nuance in Canada. Yeah, I think, you know, a fundamental difference between the United States and Canada, you look at the American Bill of Rights, it applies to citizens. And you look at the charter of rights and freedoms. It applies to all people in Canada. You could be on a plane transferring from Europe to Japan touching down in Vancouver. And you're protected by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedom, which means that if you're arrested, for example, you are entitled to due process. That doesn't apply in the United States. And that is exactly why they're going down the drain in the bad way that they have. So I have a big problem with this proposed conservative bill because what it is saying isn't, it is to take away that idea that is in our country.

Sorry, I wish we had more time, Tom. I wish we had more time. Thank you so much. And more to come on the Ben Mulroney Show. In the 70s, four young women were found dead. For nearly 50 years, their cases went cold. I'm Nancy Hixed, a senior crime reporter for global news. In the season finale of Crime Beat,

I share how investigators uncovered shocking evidence of a serial killer, and hear exclusive interviews with the killer's family. Listen to the full season of Crime Beat early and ad-free on Amazon Music by asking Alexa to play the podcast Crime Beat. Welcome to the Ben Mulroney show on this Wednesday, August 13th. Thank you so much for joining us. If you're tuning in on YouTube, then you see me with my hat on backwards. I slept too well last night.

That's the problem. And I know I went two days without it. And here we are today with the hat. I'm on vacation, a short little vacation as of tomorrow, so you won't have to worry about it at all. And we had a wonderful time celebrating my son's birthday yesterday. Brian and John turned 15. I've got two 15-year-olds.

I don't know what to do. They're such good kids. They're such good kids, and I love them so much. And I hope that you hold your kids close and you cherish every second with them because I promise you I do as well. It's now time to talk about a big story that sort of surprised a lot of people. It landed in everybody's news feed like a bomb, right? None of us really expected this. The British Columbia Supreme Court ruled, I think it was late last week, on property rights as they relate to vast swaths of a city in British Columbia.

And they essentially said that individual property rights may be trumped by Aboriginal. land and treaty rights and with the implications of this moving forward could be seminal. First of all, it's precedent setting. This could lead to far more court cases where Aboriginal, well, where certain tribes will be able to come out and say, whoa, hold on, you can't build that there. That's on our land, even though somebody might own the title to that land. it's a it's a very very big um case uh and i i'm still trying to figure out what it all means there are people who are sounding the alarms and the judge in the case in her ruling essentially

said there's this won't change anything dot dot dot until certain tribes challenge this and she's essentially looks like she's opened the door to a a permissive uh system that will allow for those challenges to occur so to talk about this this and to talk about, you know, how we move forward in a productive way. We're joined by Chris Sanky. He's the president, chief executive officer for Blackfish Enterprises. He's also the chairman of Blackfish Industries. It's a heavy civil construction company.

And Chris is a member of the coast submission community of, oh, my goodness, I'll butcher it, but it's an Aboriginal group near Prince Rupert, British Columbia. Chris, thank you so much for being here. Thanks for having me. So look, I think we all want to live in a world where true reconciliation happens, where we as an entire nation of people from whatever cultural background can move forward together so that Canada can be the best version of itself. If I knew somebody who didn't believe that, I wouldn't want to know them. But that's a very high level, the devil's in the details sort of thing. This is the details.

What we're talking about right now is the details. And this could be a stumbling block for us to achieve what I just said. How do you see it? Yeah, look, in our protocols, we have our own laws. And in my case, I'm Simchiann from Loch Klohams, which means island of roses. And in our laws, which is our dows, we don't speak into other people's problems, house groups, or communities. That being said, obviously, I would imagine the people of Muscum, Tuosun, Tawas, are very upset.

I think the judge's ruling really takes away from the true meaning of reconciliation when you're talking about leadership to leadership dialogue to create a safe place to talk about these very difficult issues, which is overlap. Right. And so in the crossfire of all of that, you have fee simple land owners are saying, okay, what's going to happen with us? The uncertainty that one of them are feeling in the feedback that I get, that I receive is that, I mean, what do I do here? I'm not the problem. I mean, I just bought a piece

of property that I wanted in my family. And on the side of that, the courts are saying, well, a lot of this stuff was sold unwillingly back in the day, but I mean, you could go back forever in a day and argue. But the reality is that it's really unfortunate that this judge made this decision because the protocol should have been between the two, the three communities of Cowchin and Tuassohn. Yeah. And it really does surprise me then that they made this room because if you take a look at the Sparrow test,

the Sparrow case where Ronald Sparrow was arrested or charged for fishing and open commercial fishing opening during a food fishery. He went to the BC courts and lost, but he had to take it to the Supreme Court and won. And in that decision, the sparrow case is that the people of Mosquim have been there since time and memorial and they had the right to food fish of the section 35 rights and title to do so they're one of the only few if not the only community in the whole province I could sell

their food fish as a commercial entity through a commercial entity so I'm really surprised because if I'm not mistaken this judge was appointed I think by the Harper government back in the day to the Supreme Court. Yeah. Yeah. And then, yeah. So it... Well, you know, it seems to me, Chris, that the goal of taking something to court, one of the goals should be clarity moving forward, right?

And it feels like this lays the groundwork for just for more litigation moving forward, that this is now how things will proceed moving forward. And it reminds me on a very high level of a problem that's looming on the horizon in Cuba, right? After the 1959 revolution, the Cuban government expropriated and nationalized a whole bunch of property that had been owned by Americans. The Americans were kicked out and they ceased diplomatic relations. So they took back all the land. And a country like Canada that had normalized relations with China, they were still there. So they were able to buy this nationalized land. Then in 1996, the U.S. government, with the Helms-Burton Act,

authorized the former owners of that land, the former U.S. owners of that land that had been taken from them. It gave them the legal right to sue for that land in the future. So now you've got a Canadian who owns a piece of land. You've got an American who used to own that piece of land. And you've got a pathway to sue that person. One day, if the communist regime ever falls, you are going to see a mountain of litigation of Germans defending their title, Americans defending their previous title. This is Canadians and Americans in court. It's going to be a massive litigation that's going to go on for decades.

I see that happening in Canada because of this. Well, look, great now, from what I'm witnessing, the litigation process, and when you talk about recognition, reconciliation. Reconciliation to me, for some of these lawyers, has become a national piggy bank. Yeah. And you have these lawyers jumping on the hereditary bandwagon. And what's happening is you're having hereditary versus elected. I've nowhere anywhere in Canada, this has happened but British Columbia. And it's causing all sorts of problems and backlash, as we can see. And I know people from Moscow and Mentwasson and Lake Couch.

And I feel for both sides here. But the reality is here's what I think is going to happen. I could only give you an example of what I went through in the Coast Simshan Territory. So we had an island called Lidoo Island as well, if you recall at the time, Pacific Northwest Island Gene was going to be built there. Yeah. There was a community, Gat, who was also a neighboring Simchian community, who I currently work with as well, wanted the right to fish in and around that territory. That territory belongs to local lambs and matlacalla, in particular nine tribes. But back in the day, before contact, we allowed other nations to fish, the right to harvest food for sustenance for ceremonial purposes.

And so when our community went to challenge it, the lawyers, that is, we and myself and another colleague, we said don't do it because we actually granted them permission to fish there. We did that with every community. Well, I end up losing. but the difference between our court case of loss and this particular one is that they are granted rights and title, not just the fish, but the land. Yeah. Which puts now, it really puts Mosquin, Lawson, the BC government, and the federal government at probably at odds.

Yeah. And when you've got, Chris, we're going to have to leave it there. But when you leave it there with so many questions, that is a recipe for investment to stay away. investment hates confusion investment gravitates towards clarity and we have anything but so I want to thank you for adding your voice to this and we hope you come back soon because as

this situation changes on the ground we'd love to hear from you absolutely one last thing alignment de-risk projects and investment without indivance alignment you're not going to get investment and right now Moscow and Swasson we're in that position now this could create a lot of uncertainty

Chris Sanky thank you very much you're welcome thank you then Canada is best known for politeness maple syrup and hockey, but beneath the surface lies something far darker. I'm Mike Brown and along with my co-host Matthew Stockton, we uncover the sinister side of Canada on the award-winning true crime podcast, Dark Poutine. Each Monday, we dive into chilling criminal cases, eerie historical events, strange disappearances, and spine-tingling tales of the paranormal, all with a uniquely Canadian twist. With over 300 episodes to binge for free, our stories reach far beyond Canada's borders, drawing in curious minds from around the world. If you're drawn to

the dark, the mysterious and the downright weird, it's time to join us. To explore the shadowy side of the True North. Search for Dark Putine. That's P-O-U-T-I-N-E on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon Music, or wherever you're listening right now.