The Ben Mulroney Show - This Week in Politics Mid-week Panel

Episode Date: February 18, 2025

This Week in Politics Mid-week Panel Guest: Jas Johal, Host of The Jas Johal Show on CKNW in Vancouver, Former Member of the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia Guest: Kate Harrison, Vice Chair Suuma Strategies Guest: Robyn Urback, Current affairs columnist with The Globe and Mail 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

You hear that? Ugh, paid. And done. That's the sound of bills being paid on time. But with the BMO Eclipse Rise Visa Card, paying your bills could sound like this. Yes! Earn rewards for paying your bill in full and on time each month.

Rise to rewards with the BMO Eclipse Rise Visa Card. Terms and conditions apply. TD Direct Investing offers live support. So whether you're a newbie or a seasoned pro, you can make your investing steps count. And if you're like me and think a TFSA stands for total fund savings adventure, maybe reach out to TD Direct Investing.

Welcome back to the Ben Mulroney show. And what we have recognized here at the show is there is way too much political fodder to leave our political panel to just the end of the week. We've got a, we've now instituted a midweek panel for this week in politics and very happy to be joined by Jazz Johal, the host of the Jazz Johal show on CKNW in Vancouver. He's also a former member of the Legislative Assembly in British Columbia. Jazz, welcome, the host of the Jazz Johal show on CKNW in Vancouver. He's also a former member of the Legislative Assembly in British Columbia. Jazz, welcome to the show. Hey, good to be here.

Thanks for having me. Thanks for the invite. I just enjoy this stuff. Let's also welcome back Kate Harrison, the vice chair of Summa Strategies. Welcome, Kate. Good to be here, Ben. How are you? I'm well. I'm well. And I'm also very happy to be rejoined by Robin Urbach, current affairs columnist with The Globe and Mail. Thanks so much for being here, Robin. Great to be here. Okay, let's start with sort of the big news out of the here Poliev camp, which was his very big, we're calling a pivot in his in his vision for the next election campaign.

He addressed the tariff threat pretty much head on, talking directly to Americans. Here's what he had to say. So let me spell out the possibilities for our American friends and speak directly to them. Option one, you can carry out an unprovoked attack on our economy. Your consumers will pay more and your workers will make less. Gas prices will skyrocket. You will turn a loyal friend into a resentful neighbor, forced to match tariff with tariff, and to seek friends everywhere else. Both our economies will weaken, leaving less money for defense and security.

And our enemies will grow stronger. The problem is, at times, we might be too polite, soft-spoken, and humble for our own good. We are slow to anger and quick to forgive, but never confuse our kindness with weakness. Okay, this is, did he thread the needle? Pierre-Paul Lleve has a difficult road to hoe when it comes to the Donald Trump of it all because whether he likes it or not, whether it's fair or not, there is this natural inclination by a certain type of Canadian to believe that because both he and Donald Trump are on the

right side of the political spectrum, they are one in the same. I think he had to show that he is most definitely not Donald Trump without alienating Donald Trump. Do you think he did that? Yeah, we talk a lot in politics about sword issues versus shield issues. And a shield issue, of course, you know, for the name is one where you're guarding against something. And I think that part of the message this weekend, then, with PR Pauli, I'm shielding against the criticism that, you know, the Conservatives in Canada are

going to take it easy on Donald Trump or that we're a lighter version of the Republicans. I think between the speech and the direct assessment of the threat, calling out Trump by name and now launching an ad campaign with Donald Trump's face on it talking about the threat that exists, I think that they've appropriately shielded from that, but I also think they deserve some credit for talking about what they would actually do to improve Canada's domestic economic performance. And the back half of that speech was a lot of the messaging and the policies that Paulia has already talked about in terms of making sure Canada can stand on our own two feet. So, I think that if the mission was to appropriately shield from this perception that, you know, the conservatives are not taking the threat of Donald Trump seriously, or that,

you know, there might be a different, that maybe there would be softer on the approach to Trump because ostensibly we're on the right of center. I think that they appropriately have rebuked that criticism. Robin, what's your take? Yeah, I think he struck the right tone. The conservatives, when you ask them, they'll tell you he's not pivoting, but he's obviously pivoting. I mean, the sky is blue, water is wet,

and this is a pivot. And I don't think you're gonna hear Pierre Polyev say, Canada is broken again. That's something that the liberals have already taken, and they've spliced together a few different comments and made it into an attack ad. So I mean, he needed to shift because politics is a sound bite sport and that's what you have to do.

But I actually think for the Liberals to do that, I'm a bit annoyed by it, to be perfectly honest, because I think there is this mistaken perception that you can't love your country and at the same time acknowledge the reality that look a lot of things in this country are broken and the things that Pierre Polyev was talking about in more stark terms before he's not going to do it now but he would say you know our immigration system is broken our health care is broken we can't actually produce things in this country we're not selling our national. We can't get things built and done and created and encourage investment here. And these are all the things that he was talking about. Now he's going to do it a bit more gently. But I just think

it's disingenuous to sort of say that in order to be on Team Canada, we have to have this peachy optimistic look, because I'm sort of like saying, well, you can't love your house if you and your family in the basement is busted or something. In my view, I think it's an expression of patriotism to acknowledge that you have flaws in this country and that you want to fix it. So I think Pauliev is going to do that in a bit of a different way because that's kind of, he has to meet the moment in the climate at the time. But I honestly think it's a bit of a shame if we start downplaying the very significant problems that we have in this country because we're in this rah-rah team, Canada, let's wrap ourselves in the flag sort of approach.

Jazz, what do you think? Do you think that he presented a clear path for what a conservative government would do in the face of these tariffs or did he do something else? No, I think in regards to what the Conservatives hoped to accomplish, I think they did a very good job. It is a pivot, as Robin said, and I think it was the right tone that he said. Question is, can he continue to do that in regards to what tariffs being imposed on Canada? It would be 25% across the border whether or not they're focused upon auto parts and how that impact will play out in Ontario or whether there be energy or

softwood here in British Columbia or in Alberta but I think this is what I think Canadians do want to see from Mr. Paulie and I know I don't disagree with Robin's comments that we do have issues and problems in this country absolutely but it doesn't hurt to have a bit of optimism along the way as Canadians as well. And I think this Pierre Pauliap will do well in the suburbs of Vancouver. I think he'll do well in the suburbs of Ontario. Not that he hasn't been doing that already, but I think this is the side of Pierre Pauliap voters want to see as well. And I think it'll serve them well to election day. I want to play this next piece of audio.

The person who probably will be opposite Pierre Poliev as the liberal leader in the next election, Mark, oh, there's no audio, but Mark Carney said that, dropped a bomb with Rosemary Barton and said that Stephen Harper asked him to be his finance minister. I'm gonna give each of you about 40 seconds to tell me what you think this means. Is it going to resonate? I think this something like this could have legs. Kate, we'll start with you.

Yeah, I think actions speak louder than words. It didn't work out, but he did take multiple roles with the Trudeau government, informal and formal as an advisor. And, you know, Mark Carney has held two jobs that no one else has had that's currently living. He's been a governor of two central banks and there's it's an impressive CV and he shouldn't be begrudged that but I do think that his more recent activity and involvement in terms of advising uh the Liberals and Trudeau on their economic policy he went so far on the weekend then to say those policies are now embodied within me, for somebody that's trying to create some contrast from the current administration and the

current government, I think that it's going to be difficult to de-associate him with the Trudeau brand and the Trudeau baggage. And Chas, real quick with you, what do you think? Do you think this is, this exposes the Conservatives? I mean, if he was good enough for Stephen Harper, shouldn't he be good enough for other Conservatives? I think voters are going to view Mr. Carney as certainly competent on economic issues. But at its core, what I want to know as a voter is, am I going to get a Tuto Liberal with large deficits,

or am I going to get a Jean-Claude-Chiapas-Martin Liberal that actually believes that we've got to get our fiscal house in order? I think he's got to provide a clear plan moving forward and that's what he wants to do. I think that's what's going to resonate with voters moving forward to Election Day, unless about what he was offered or wasn't offered by Mr. Hart. Yeah. Well, and Robin, I think to what Jazz just said, I don't think anybody would begrudge the Liberals if they attacked to the center at some point. would begrudge the liberals if they attacked to the center at some point. But to do so just so quickly, to do so while just to ensure the body isn't even cold yet, and they're turning their

back on everything that made them liberals over the past nine years. I just don't know how they can sell that. I don't know how they're going to sell it, but that's their only path forward, right? Like they can't. It's an incumbent government with a new leader at the front almost, and he's going to have to sell something different. It's the only way that they survive. So they're backtracking on the carbon tax and capital gains, et cetera. I think it's an effective way for Carney to sort of neuter some of the attacks against him by saying, I'm desirable to conservatives and liberals alike. Although I do recall him saying that he was a lifelong liberal. He made some comment like that when he was first running or when he made

his announcement or something. So I mean, that's a little bit, but I mean, we're talking general election, I don't think the partisanship is going to be the issue. It's what Jas mentioned. It's we don't- Robin, we're going to have to put it, we're going to have to stick a pin in that. We're going to stick, we'll be back in just a minute minute more on our political panel next on the Ben Mulroney show welcome back to the Ben Mulroney show and welcome back to my midweek this week in politics panel

let's say hello yet again to Jazz Johal, Kate Harrison and Robin Urbach thank you to the three of you for sticking around um let's get into this next story. And I had to issue an apology to our listeners, because when Canadians first started booing the American anthem in reaction to Donald Trump and his insults and his threats towards Canada, I took great issue with it. I think one of the issues was they were booing a 15-year-old in a wheelchair, a 15-year-old black girl in a wheelchair during Black History Month, and that rubbed me the wrong way. But I also didn't like the fact that nothing in Canada had changed, and it was simply a reaction to an external threat.

But the pride in Canada shouldn't have changed. And I also took issue with the fact that some of the people who are now wrapping themselves in the flag were probably those who were more than willing to burn it just a few years ago. So, but I now realize we don't have a whole lot of options as Canadians, but to boo the anthem right now. And I wanted to know what your thoughts were. And let's start with you, Robin. Yeah, I mean, I'm not gonna be precious about it.

I think the fact that people are not being polite before a game where our players are stalking each other in the nose isn't the most, you know, it doesn't offend my sensibilities. And I think you're right in a way that people, especially like average people feel, feel powerless in the face of what could be a really existential threat to our economy and maybe our sovereignty, we'll see. And this is an expression or a way for them rather to express that frustration and that anxiety, I would hope and maybe I'm being too optimistic that it's also a way to reach an audience that maybe wouldn't have

been so well-versed in what's going on with tariffs and with the annexation threat in Canada as much as Justin Trudeau and Pierre Pellet has liked to address Americans directly in their speeches. I don't think Americans are paying attention, but this they might notice, maybe. And that could be another avenue to reach Donald Trump, or they don't know and they just think that Canadians have suddenly decided to be jerks. I do think though that what we're seeing is more so reflexive anti-Americanism, and not that it's not justified. I think it's very justified. We're united against what we're seeing as a common enemy.

But the problems that we've had over the last several years about our lack of collective identity and as a result, the lack of national pride. I think it was at something like a 30 year low over the summer, that hasn't really resolved. I think if you ask the average Canadian on the street, what makes you proud to be a Canadian? I don't think they'd have a more comprehensive answer now than they would have six months ago. It's just that we have this perceived enemy now

that has united us. Yeah. And look at Jazz, when our prime minister went on, I think, Jen Psaki's show on MSNBC, he literally volunteered his definition of what it meant to be Canadian. And he said dot, dot, dot, not not American, which is we're also not French and we're not Chinese and we're not Brazilian. But therein lies sort of, I believe, his sophisticated view of what the Canadian identity is. Where do you land on this? Is the booing of the American national anthem, as Robin just said, reflexive anti-Americanism? Or is it a free speech manner? I mean, it's a way for us to communicate directly with the president. You know that he consumes all of his information through the television screen.

Yeah, look, I agree with Robin. I'm not precious about this. It was unfortunate in regards to that young lady, the example that you gave, that it happened at that event. But, you know, we have to event. And here in British Columbia, if 25% tax, the tariffs are imposed here, you're looking at 130,000 jobs lost over four years. If you think we're angry now, add another four years to that mix with tariffs being imposed. I played a YouTube video the other day that I hadn't seen in a long time. It's that great video produced by Tom Brokaw, the former NBC anchor, talking about Canada

and the US relationship for the 2010 Olympics. I highly recommend everybody YouTube it after this and it just speaks to how we are connected, not just economy to economy, but people to people. The fact that our sons and daughters have sacrificed in wars with American troops, that doesn't change. But the fact that Mr. Trump has made this relationship transactional, that he has jeopardized decades and decades and decades of this relationship, is highly offensive to Canadians. We are great neighbours and will remain great neighbours, but it isn't us, it's them, and it's that administration.

And if Canadians want to boo, boo away, I'm okay with that, but I think we need to be really focusing on being resilient moving forward when it comes to the economy, when it comes to making sure we get things built in this country again and reducing and eliminating as many barriers as we can within Canada. That's what's going to make us resilient not just booing at hockey games. Kate, had you been at this most recent hockey game would you have been one of the people booing the American national anthem? It wouldn't have been me but I think you'll find consensus here that there's no cut cutting that needs to go on or tisks and Canadians are frustrated.

It's an avenue to vent that frustration. I'm not sure that booing the anthem because of one president who's treating us pretty lousy is a sign of that good relationship and good friendship that we do have with America. And you know, I deal in my day job with a lot of American clients then. And some of the things that they are telling me about this groups on the ground, these are retail workers who might have a Southern accent in Canada.

And they find they're being treated differently by Canadians and they're assessing whether or not they might want to participate in sales meetings with Canadians, because they're worried about that anti-American backlash. That's obviously not productive or helpful for our relationship. And I think Canadians are spending a lot of time thinking about this issue far more than Americans are certainly when it comes to tariffs. And rather than channel that frustration at Americans when they are not to blame, it's the president to blame, we should be looking inward to figure it blame, it's the president to blame. We should be looking inward to figure it out.

What it is we actually stand for. I think Robin makes a great point. We can't continue to define ourselves as non-American. We need to get back to what it is that our Canadian values and identity and people should be focusing on that as opposed to venting their sling at the president. Well, yeah, well, let's stay on this topic for a moment. It does seem like Donald Trump is the only one speaking on behalf of America writ large. I'm not hearing a whole lot from business organizations

and business owners, the heads of big corporations who do business in Canada, who work across the border, who are saying, this is not the opinion of every American, you know, speaking directly to Canadians, it seems like they're leaving the stage Robin, to Donald Trump to cast his narrative, however false it might be about this, you know, the big bad baddie from North of North America. Yeah, I mean, we did have a few statements coming out. I'm thinking the US Chamber of Commerce came out with a statement about tariffs not being the answer.

And you have the odd, Mitch McConnell sort of, that Mitch McConnell is on the outs with Donald Trump now. But I mean, you're right in that I think Canada is sort of facing this alone, which is a scary prospect when you think about the stakes that we have to lose here. And certainly our allies have not really come to our defense, which is something that's been noticeable.

When we've been in other sort of trade kerfuffles before, you could sort of, and I'm thinking with regards to China a few years ago over meat exports and canola and that sort of things, we did kind of get backhanded support. Everybody's very cautious when it comes to these sorts of things because they don't want to jeopardize their own trade relationships. But we did have more support, I think, than we're seeing now. And there's obvious reasons for that. Nobody wants to get on the wrong side of the president, obviously, who has proven himself to be that nobody wants to get on the wrong side of the president, obviously, who has proven himself to be purely transactional in the way he approaches international diplomacy.

And I think there's also a reorienting that's happening on the world stage in terms of allies being enemies and vice versa. Nobody knows quite how to handle these things when you have an adversarial relationship with another country like China, it's very easy for countries like Australia that has had its own trade skirmishes with China to back Canada and vice versa and for the European Union and for France and for Germany and all of

these other places to sort of get on side because the relationship is clear. But now that's being reoriented with Donald Trump. And I think Canada certainly, we're trying to find our footing in all of this, but I think our allies are too. And that's what makes it so difficult and sort of isolating to the fact that we feel like we really are on our own on this. Jazz, I'm gonna give you the last word on this

in about 30 seconds. Your thoughts, do you think that Donald Trump, through a combination of stick and carrot is keeping? Dissenting voices at bay in the United States so that he can monopolize the microphone and he can set the narrative You look at the chaos as part of his strategy, but ultimately consensus will build whether it be to the business community Centers and congressmen who's think the are being impacted, and the global community is called. Gotta remind ourselves we're only in February with Donald Trump so it is going to take a bit of time for voices to rise and consensus to go. We're gonna have to leave it there.

Daniel Blanchard is no ordinary thief. His heists are ingenious. His escapes defy belief. And when he sees the dazzling diamond CC Star, he'll risk everything to steal it. His exploits set off an intercontinental manhunt. But how long can CC Star stay lucky for Daniel? I'm Seren Jones, and this is a most audacious heist. Listen on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon Music, or wherever you get your podcasts.