The Ben Mulroney Show - When media start censoring our brilliant voices

Episode Date: April 2, 2026

GUEST: Sylvain Charlebois / The food professor  Guest: Dr. Eric Kam, Economics Professor at Toronto Metropolitan University If you enjoyed the podcast, tell a friend! For more of the Ben Mulroney Show, subscribe to the podcast! ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://link.chtbl.com/bms⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Also, on youtube -- ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.youtube.com/@BenMulroneyShow⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Follow Ben on Twitter/X at https://x.com/BenMulroney Insta: ⁠⁠⁠@benmulroneyshow⁠⁠⁠ Twitter: ⁠⁠⁠@benmulroneyshow⁠⁠⁠ TikTok: ⁠⁠⁠@benmulroneyshow⁠⁠⁠ Executive Producer:  Mike Drolet Reach out to Mike with story ideas or tips at [e-mail] Enjoy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This podcast is brought to you by the National Payroll Institute, the leader for the payroll profession in Canada, setting the standard of professional excellence, delivering critical expertise, and providing resources that over 45,000 payroll professionals rely on. When West Jet first took flight in 1996, the vibes were a bit different. People thought denim on denim was peak fashion, inline skates were everywhere, and two out of three women rocked, the Rachel. While those things stayed in the 90s, one thing that hasn't is that fuzzy feeling you get when West Jet welcomes you on board. Here's to Westjetting since 96. Travel back in time with us and actually travel with us

at westjet.com slash 30 years. Okay, when I sell my business, I want the best tax and investment advice. I want to help my kids, and I want to give back to the community. Ooh, then it's the vacation of a lifetime. I wonder if my out of office has a forever setting. An IG Private Wealth Advisor

creates the clarity you need with plans that harmonize your business. your family and your dreams. Get financial advice that puts you at the center. Find your advisor at IDPrivatewealth.com. I've said this before. One of the most informative people in Canada, someone you can learn from every time he picks up his phone

and posts something on Twitter is my next guest, Silvan Charleaubeau, the food professor. And normally I learn about food policy, food inflation, all sorts of aspects of the food that we consume where it comes from and how much it costs I learn from him. Well, I learned something today that I didn't think I was going to learn. And he's joining us now to tell the story. Food professor, welcome.

Hey, Ben, how are you? Well, you know, I'm a little bit sad, to be honest. I've read you in Laplace, you know, on top of being a very outspoken on television. on radio, on social media. You also have been, you've written over a thousand columns for La Prés, which is a storied newspaper in Quebec. Yeah, absolutely. And I was, I was proud of it.

I still, still am proud of collaborating with La Price for over 25 years. Over a thousand, I can't believe it's been 25 years. And I enjoyed it. I was not paid. It was all volunteered because I felt it was part of my job as a, academic to inform the public based on our research. And I think a few weeks ago, I did post something on Facebook and ask about my concerns in relation to news coverage.

Yes, I'm going to read a little bit of it for our listeners because I guess what you posted was this. It's a long post, but I'll just read a little bit of it. During the latest spike in food inflation, several outlets turned to the same small circle of commentators who dismissed any potential role of federal policy carbon pricing GST holidays, counter tariffs, despite mounting evidence that policy decisions can and do affect food prices. Instead of investigating structural drivers of inflation, much of the coverage focuses on fact-checking opposition rhetoric, even though the opposition is not governed since 2015.

Scrutiny should be applied equally, not selectively. And then you even are quite graceful towards Quebec media, where you say they appear to have a broader range of debate. So you post this and your media overlords are none too happy. Well, one, because I'm still collaborating with Quebecaire and other outlets. You and CTV and Global and I'm still working. I do 20, 25 interviews a week. And I'm still doing that this week, even after the posts.

And I think that most media really respected my opponent. You probably didn't agree with my point of view, but respected it. Until Monday, I get a phone call from La Price, and they said, well, you know, we've defended you so many times over the years with your opinion, and that was our job. But for this one, we can't defend you. We're not agreeable to what you said on social media, and therefore we can't continue to collaborate together. that is just so odd especially given what you just said where there are a number of other media stakeholders like this show and this radio station and indeed global and you know you said you've got a relationship with kibikov they they they we all saw the same thing I read it

and I said you know it's um I appreciated your candor I appreciated your sense of um you know you felt a little despondent you know and I think every now and then, the media needs a little kick in the keister to be reminded to do better. And I thought that's all you were doing. That's kind of that was my attention and I

did not want to undermine reporters because I think they're probably victims as much as anyone else because we're talking about policy here. Ottawa decided many years ago to support media and frankly between you and

I've been, I have nothing wrong There's nothing wrong in my view to see the state support media. But the problem we have in Canada is that supporting media is now a partisan issue. Yeah. Right? So when you talk to a reporter, you can't avoid thinking that the person holding the pen may actually compromise his or her job, depending on what he writes or she writes if there's a change in power in Ottawa. Yeah, no, listen, it was always going to be fraught with peril, right? This idea that the government was going to subsidize and support a media.

That was always, it was always going to be under scrutiny and it was going to be, it was going to be facing a PR uphill battle to explain it and justify it and and, and, and, um, deflate any fears of propaganda. And exactly. And so when, when you got this. decision, when you heard this decision from La Press, did you think maybe they just made their jobs all the more hard by doing this? I honestly, I don't, my impression is that it came from up above. I think someone called someone and said, listen, this is not acceptable. We need to do something about this. And I did get a phone call from François Cardinal, who I respect.

He was who, Francois Cardinal. Francois Gelsan is the chief editor of La Pranks. Okay. Yeah, and a very well known person in Quebec, very well respected as well. And so, but, yeah, I think he was basically, he was clearly uncomfortable, obviously, telling me the news. But, yeah, I mean, as an academic, my job is to inform the public. And when I see that sometimes, well, it's been going on for several years that I felt that Keynes were well served in terms of football. policy, food inflation, allowing them to understand why things cost so much at the grocery store.

I just felt that I need to say something in writing. And that was the end of it. I moved on and I did. I said my piece and that's it. But I was not expecting that price to make that kind of decision. Do you feel that this was an act of censorship? I don't know. I don't know, Ben.

I haven't, I'm hurt. Seriously. I have a relationship with post media, which I, I, joy. So I'm still writing in English, but in French, I'm now an orphan. Yeah. But I haven't really processed the whole thing right now. I'm just stuck with this overwhelming feeling of hurt, basically, because I feel like I, I had a good relationship with someone that clearly they, they, they felt that I, I didn't, I, I wasn't allowed to express my concerns about what was going on with media.

You wrote over a thousand columns for them for free. You even paid. for your own subscription to the newspaper. So, like, they were getting a lot out of this relationship. And but sometimes, see, then what happens is, is some people can be too close to a story or they can be in a bubble or they can fire each other up. They're in a room. And one person eggs the other person on. Next thing you know, they're in a frenzy over something that really isn't that big of a deal. And I put that out there for you because, as we said off the top, plenty of people in media.

saw what you wrote and very few people took such issue with it that it got to the point that it got to with La Prés. So maybe they're the ones who are a little off base here. I know I collaborate with many shows in the country on a regular basis. I don't include yours because we're not regular. I mean, once in a while we talk, but that's it. But I'm a regular on many shows and all of them saw my piece and all of them have continued to collaborate with me. And I really appreciate that. Yeah.

Well, of course, because honestly, look, if those who are trying to scrutinize our decision makers cannot be held to a similar level of scrutiny for their work, then that's a problem. I think it is. I think we need to debate on this. We need to let Canadians know what is going on here. I mean, to go back to your censorship question, I think it's a really. really critical one. Is it about censorship? I don't know, but it certainly feels like it.

Yeah, like, I would be really curious to understand where the pressure came from there. Because if the editor-in-chief called you, like, did it come from him? Did it come from? Who contacted him and created such pressure on him that they had no choice but to end a 25-year relationship with somebody who's been working for free? Like, there's a lot. lot of questions here. A lot, like, what spurred this on? And until we get an answer to it, was it was a sternly written letter to the editor? And that's all it takes? I don't know.

But let me tell you a food professor. Anytime you want to talk about the thoughts that you have, you always have a home here at the Ben Mulroney show. Well, thank you, Ben. I appreciate that very much. Courage, my friend. All right. Take care. Okay. Talk to you soon. That was Syvin Charlebois, the food professor. And yeah, this is a, This is a story that I don't think is going to go away. And the law of unintended consequences dictates that La Press, what they thought was going to be the end of the story, there's no way the story begins today. When we come back, Dr. Eric Cam joins us because when you invest, do you care that you were invested in a company that may be doing business with ICE? We'll talk about that next.

Well, apparently, Canadian banks, pension funds, and other institutions afford billions of dollars into contractors working with the immigration, customs and enforcement agency, ICE in the United States. It's a very controversial organization. We've seen the images of the deportations and the arrests and the detainments in the United States. And so the question is, now that people know this, should you really care if you want your pension to grow? What's more important today? Your principles or having money for retirement? Because, you know, somebody's getting rich. So on that note, let's welcome our good friend to the conversation.

Dr. Eric Cam, economics professor at TMU. Eric, welcome. Thank you, Ben. Yeah, there's been a push for years, right, for ethical investing. and making sure that people are, you know, you're invested in green technologies and fair trade, you know, fair trade companies and companies that don't use sweatshops. And is this an extension of that? Well, it's absolutely an extension of that. But I really think that we've kind of, I won't say lost the plot, but I think there's two things going on right now.

In terms of economics, right, if you're allocating, if banks are allocating this type of money to isolate, linked firms, this is real capital outflow as opposed to domestic investing. And this is just going to weaken Canada's capital deepening, right? And productivity, growth and other things. And yes, of course, this gets more pressure for things like the environmental social governance about investing and the whole tension behind ethical investing versus non-ethical investing. You're probably not going to be shocked when I tell you. I don't think the word ethical and investing go together.

No. And I think the only thing green about investing is the dollars that you get in your return. I mean, this is not television. This is about your retirement, the ability to feed yourself and clothe yourself once you have finished your working years. So I don't want to kind of, I don't want to give people the idea I'm saying, you know, I don't even care about corruption and theft. No. What I'm saying is, is that when you live in a country that, frankly, has. abandoned macroeconomic growth and you basically cannot cannot hope that the government is going

to take care of you because it can't anymore, then you better be willing to take care of yourself. And so when you're talking about investing, there's only one line you have to worry about, the bottom line. And you have to worry about are those funds that are going to increase between now and when you finish working? Because not to be too repetitive, if you believe that the government's going to take care of you in your senior years. Ask how they're doing, taking care of you in your middle-aged years. Well, yeah. And look, you know, I, I always think it's important to go into your investing with your eyes open. And if you are somebody who holds very tightly held views on the environment, for example, then yeah, you may prioritize green

technology companies over oil and gas. And that's absolutely your right. But the idea of trying to pressure these institutions of ours to get out of that business, that's something different. That reminds me of the boycott divestment and sanctions movement against Israel, wanting to make sure that pension plans don't invest in any Israeli companies, for example. That is politics by other means. That's politics by way of economics and by way of finance. And I don't want to be a pawn in somebody else's game.

And so I think it's important to sort of look at the, like, who's highlighting this? Who is farming the outrage? And I think I looked into the organization that stand dot earth. And, you know, they are a left-leaning group. They've got, they're very, I think they said that the climate crisis is the single greatest crisis facing humanity. I think that's on their website. Now, you may agree with that. You may not, right? And so, and if your values don't align with stand.com earth, I don't know why on God's Green Earth you'd listen to them. Well, you would. Okay. There is a key economic question here,

Ben, and you really struck on it, should pensions, or anything else, for that matter, optimize returns or social preferences? Returns. And what I'm saying is if, well, yeah, the only answer is returns. I mean, if you are maximizing yours and your family's self-interest, that is not a question. And if you are somebody who invest based on your social preferences, that's okay. I respect that. But then you're not allowed. You don't get to then say to me, hypothetically one year, my investments are down. I'm going to say, that's too bad. You didn't maximize your opportunities. And by the way, I want to wish everybody, before, you know, before I forget, a wonderful Easter and a wonderful Passover.

And to your point, if you are investing based on BDS, you're an idiot. Yeah, more startups are coming out of Israel than all of Europe. So, yeah, if you don't want to get on that rocket ship, no problem. You can be left behind. There's a new survey by EQ Bank that says Canadians are prioritizing Canadian investments with nearly a fifth, about 17% are increasing investments in Canadian stocks, specifically to support the domestic economy. Listen, every time I talk to you, you don't sound too bullish on the Canadian economy.

So is this smart investing? No, it's not smart investing at all. It's just a continuation of the previous topic. I mean, again, if you want to, you know, economics always says, Ben, something has to give. So if you're going to invest based on you want to maximize your returns, then to me, the world is your oyster and go wherever you want. If you're going to, for whatever preferences you have, going to restrict your investments to non-tobacco companies, non-marijuana companies, you're going to keep it within Canada, that's all right.

But you just have to know something is going to give and you are only going to do so well. And if you are really, really going to put your faith today in the Canadian economy and bet on it for your long-term survival, I would really ask you to pick up any news organization. daily and read about how our macroeconomic statistics are doing. And by the way, do not believe the rhetoric you hear out of the prime minister's office where he says we've never done better because ironically, we've never done worse. Last story I want to hit with you is Polymarket. And Polymarket is that online platform that allows you to essentially bet on anything. And it's an absolutely crazy platform.

It's banned in Ontario. So what is the future of predictions market? it's in the province of Ontario if flyers advertising Polly Market were handed out outside a J's game. What are they doing here? Are they trying to get popular support? You know, I got to tell you, Ben, quickly, I didn't know what this thing was. So I went and actually read up on it and took a look at it. It might be the craziest thing I've ever seen.

Because, you know, you can lay odds on whether you're going to sneeze on your walk home. It is absolutely insane. But it's a classic case right now. regulatory arbitrage, right? And when the legal supply is restricted, demand doesn't disappear. The left wing thinks it does. It doesn't. It just shifts to gray and offshore platforms.

So all this does is reduce government oversight and pushes activity into less transparent channels. Listen, we know that gambling is on the rise. All you have to do is we talked about last week, grab your kid's cell phone and check a look at his apps. And kids are gambling more. Parents are gambling more. So if you think you're going to put a stop.

to polymarket, you're not. You're not going to stop it and you're not going to slow it down. So the best thing that we can do is figure out at best how to selectively enforce it. All right, my friend. That was Dr. Eric Cam from Toronto Metropolitan University. Happy Passover, my friend. Stay healthy, Ben. Hello there. Thursdays on Global. I'm Madeline Matlock.

She's the lawyer with a legendary name. Don't underestimate Miss Matlock. This woman's a shark. You know it, baby. The one you can trust. even if she has to bend the rules. Things aren't always as black and white as they seem. To crack a case.

This is how I get things done. Emmy-winning actress Kathy Bates is Matlock. All new Thursdays at 9 Eastern on Global. Stream on Stack TV.