The Bridge with Peter Mansbridge - Is the Carney Trip To Europe More Than A Photo-Op?

Episode Date: March 17, 2025

Talk about a quick trip.  In less than 48 hours Prime Minister Carney will talk to Volodymyr Zelensky, meet with President Macron, Prime Minister Starmer and have an audience with the King.  Then an Arctic stop on the way home. What can be accomplished and will the pictures all be in campaign ads by week's end? 

And hello there, Peter Mansbridge here. You're just moments away from the latest episode of The Bridge. Is the Prime Minister's quick trip to Europe anything more than a pre-campaign photo-op? That's coming right up. And hello there, Peter Mansbridge here. Welcome to a new week. Welcome to Monday. Welcome to Dr. Janet Stein, who will be with us in just a few moments time, as she is every Monday, to talk about foreign affairs. The big one on the agenda right now internationally is the upcoming Putin-Trump phone call, probably tomorrow, on the situation in Ukraine. But domestically,

the big story continues to be the new prime minister, just sworn in on Friday. He's on a whirlwind trip to Europe as we speak right now, meeting with a couple of world leaders, meeting with the king, stopping in the Arctic on the way home, all in a matter of hours. What is it all about? And is it anything more than a pre-campaign photo-op? Because the expectation is the campaign will be starting in the next few days, maybe even before the end of this week. But that's all coming up in a moment with Dr. Janice Stein.

Housekeeping, as we always do on Monday mornings. The question of the week for this week's Your Turn is the same question as last week. And the reason is simple. We had so many letters last week that were enough for two weeks. The question was simple, what's on your mind? And not surprisingly, what's on most of your minds is still the situation between Canada and the United States. Whether it's tariffs, whether it's annexation, whether it's the personalities of the leaders, there's a lot on your mind on that topic. So we kept the window open for a couple of days on your mail. It's closed now, so don't bother sending anything new. We're going to be hearing all your letters, or at least the ones that have made the cut. There was the new limit of 75 words per letter,

and I got to say, like 99% of you kept to that. And we really appreciate it. The other 1%, unfortunately, those are great letters that didn't make it on the program. But we're going to keep that going for the next little while anyway, the 75-word limit. But this week, there's no need to run through all the various conditions and rules and timelines because the question is set and the answers are set as well.

And we're still compiling them, putting them all together into this Thursday's program, along, of course, with the Random Renter. That'll be Thursday. Wednesday, of course, is encore edition Tuesday tomorrow will be Smoke Mirrors and the Truth with Bruce Anderson And Fred Delore We'll hear what they have to say on what's likely to be Likely to be the last SMT

Before the election's called So we'll see what they have to say Tomorrow on that subject I'm just assuming The election's going to be called. And I think that's an assumption that most people have right now, that Prime Minister Carney feels he's got most of his ducks in a row now, new cabinet swearing in, and the fact that he doesn't have a seat

would seem to indicate that better to call an election before you meet the House of Commons because you can't meet it yourself because he doesn't have a seat. All right. Enough about all that. Hope you had a good weekend.

Hope you're ready for this discussion because there's lots in it as there always is with our friend the director of the monk school at the university of toronto and member of the political science department at the u of t here we go our conversation for this week with dr janice stein so janice has been been quite the 24-hour period for Mark Carney in one of his first days as Prime Minister. By the end of these 24 hours, he's going to have talked on the phone with Vladimir Zelensky.

He will have met with President Macron in Paris. He will have met with Prime Minister Starmer in London. And he will have had an audience with the King. Now, does any of this impress you? Well I think it's important for Canada right now it is so beleaguered our allies are their jaws are dropping Peter how could this be going on how could the United States, frankly, be going on an all-out economic offensive against Canada? Nobody really gets that. So this is 24 hours. He doesn't have a lot of time.

There's a message here. We are here. We're in business. We're interested. We want to do more with you now since the orange haired guy is in the White House. I think he chose his two vices very carefully. Juan de Macon, who is a big believer in European autonomy, but also an electionist coming. It matters when you go to France.

Keir Starmer, he knows well from the time that he was governor of the Bank of England. And Starmer and Macron have been playing a very big role between Trump and Zelensky, the two of them working together. Good bet. I don't want to underestimate this to the king as well. Okay, let me get to the king in a moment. In terms of Starmer and Macron, Carney was quite specific on the weekend, and so were some of his ministers, that, look, we're not looking for him to say,

we're not looking for either one of them to say, Trump's wrong, shouldn't be talking about this annexation stuff uh he's just he said they're they're making the argument we can deal without ourselves let's just talk future yeah you believe that well i paused a second when you asked, Peter. I think Kearney's experienced enough to know that you can't make that ask. You can't ask Starmer or Macron to come out and say the United States is wrong. Look, they're having trouble. They're doing it for Zelensky, but that's a very different story. So I believe it officially

that they have told Macron and Starmer that is not the ask, and that will not be the ask, and there won't be an answer. But there'll be expressions of friendship, interest, doing more together, changing world order, all of that. Those are kind of hints at the new world in which they find themselves as well as us. We're not the only ones that are struggling to figure this out.

You know, I hate to be cynical uh but politics and domestic politics often gets us to be cynical at times yeah um so the the other way to look at this this visit this 24 to 48 hours of mark carney's time is as one big photo op, you know, I mean, let's not kid ourselves with these pictures of Carney sitting with Macron, Carney sitting with Starmer, Carney, perhaps in the palace with the King. These are, we're going to see these again in campaign ads over the next few weeks. I mean, the campaign is most people are betting now that it's going to start literally within days,

probably later this week. So these pictures, all taken in a 48-hour period, right at the beginning of his term as prime minister, will serve a purpose beyond global affairs. For sure. I think the whole trip, we can understand in terms of the impact on the campaign and domestic politics.

France really matters still in Quebec. And Quebec really matters in the campaign. And also, Peter, let's contrast. Where are the pictures of Pierre Polyev meeting with Macron or Starmer? They're just not there. And so he's telegraphing, I am the statesman. I have experience. I have international experience.

They open their door for me in a minute. You over there? You don't quite make it, right? And that's a subliminal message, but it's real. It's subliminal, but it is real. But what also is real is opposition leaders traveling the globe. That's a trip fraught with peril, as we can all remember from the Joe Clark days. You know, you don't get an entree into all these places as the opposition leader,

you're going to get met and you're going to get a chat, but it's not going to be the same. It's not going to be the same. And given, given the fact that this is a short campaign, I think, um, we would both agree that those photo ops in those first 48 hours with a stop in the Arctic on the way home, those are good photo ops, frankly, for a camping. Yeah, that whole Arctic stop tomorrow in Kelowit is designed to, you know, plant the flag, do a little sovereignty stuff in the Arctic. Yeah. And, you know, in fairness, polyev has done that he's done that

a number of times um but okay let's back up to the palace um and the meeting with the king you know let me let me just say this peter um i thought about this because a British journalist called me late at the end of last week and functionally said to me, do you Canadians realize that President Trump is threatening the king? And I said, well, tell me more. What do you mean? Well Crown Crown lands some of those resources that Donald Trump is talking about are on Crown

lands and water there are historic treaties with the Crown. I said well look you're getting this partly right but you're getting it partly wrong. The partly wrong is he's not threatening the king of the United Kingdom. He's threatening the king of Canada.

My suspicion is, and don't forget this, just to fill in the picture, there was this embossed invitation from the king to Donald Trump. That cursed armor pulled out of his pocket when he went to visit the White House Donald Trump loves royalty and loves British royalty. I'd be very surprised if when Prime Minister Carney goes to visit the king he doesn't say, sir you are the king of Canada. You are going to have a conversation, a private conversation with a visitor from the White House.

You have constitutional obligations here, and as your prime minister, I would expect you to assert the sovereignty of Canada. You know, as I've said on this program at other times in the past few weeks, you know, I would probably classify myself as a monarchist. I've certainly covered the monarchy for the last 50 or 60 years and had enormous admiration for the Queen. I have been really upset on the Charles factor.

Now, I know all the protocol stuff about what he's supposed to say and allowed to say and not allowed to say. But we've been under, Canada has been under direct threat here. Yeah. Maybe it's just words. Maybe it's more than words. Whatever the case, he's said nothing about a country that has you know laid down a hundred thousand lives for a king and country over the last century or so

and he said nothing yeah what you know give me the give me the political science view of that. What do you make of it? Well, let me put you this way. You know, Peter, that the king takes on the advice of his prime minister. So he has to take advice. This is a constitutional monarch. And that's a good thing that they're constitutional monarchs the prime minister of canada is now going to see the king of canada i really do think that is the most important part of this visit believe it or not which isn't what many would say and he's going to give him advice

on what the king should say in a future meeting with the President of the United States. It may not be public. And he may, I don't know what advice Prime Minister Carney is going to give him. He may ask the king to speak out on behalf of Canadian sovereignty, frankly, even in public. Although that, I think for the monarchy, would be a bigger stretch, you know, from having covered the Queen, how careful they are.

But certainly they speak out in private meetings. It's no coincidence, I believe, that that first visit is to England where he gets a chance to advise the King of Canada what he should say and do in that forthcoming meeting with President Trump. And King Charles will have that opportunity. There's no question. And is it legitimate to draw the line between what he was able to do and what he did without advice as Prince of Wales, and now what he's doing or would do as king. Because there's no doubt he stepped out of line with the governments of the day on a variety of issues from the environment to architecture.

I mean, he wasn't shy about saying what he felt. No, he has strong political views. We know what those political views are because he was Prince of Wales for so long. He has to be much more careful. He's king. He needs the advice of his prime minister. Now, you know, the prime minister can call too. Did Prime Minister Trudeau call?

We don't know. But we know for sure now that Mark Carney is going to see him. I can't believe that he will not ask for open support in that meeting with Donald Trump and for the King to do more. He is the King of Canada. It's one of his oldest dominions. This is the moment. And in some ways Peter, it's not a stretch to say. This is the moment. And in some ways, Peter, it's not a stretch to say that this is a moment for Canadians with their monarchy too.

Because as you say, we have been under attack as never before. It's a fine line though, between being abandoned or seemingly abandoned by the monarchy on this and looking like you need the monarchy to stand up for you you know so yeah there is a fine line in there somewhere and um and i'm not i gotta say myself i'm not sure i'm not sure what it is because those

there are those canadians who feel very strongly and passionate against what Trump has been doing, who would also feel strongly and passionately against needing the King to stand up for us. Yeah. And look, I think that's exactly where Carney's trying to thread the needle because that the briefings by the senior officials, you know, that is, we are not asking for them to take sides.

We don't need anybody else to stand up for us we are going to manage this, we can handle this alone that's a message of strength but I think there is a big, those are fellow prime ministers, fellow allies the king, that's a different story he's the king of Canada and he's going to have a meeting

with the president of the United States who admires this king. That was the best part of Keir Starmer's visit to the White House when he pulled out that invitation. I think that's a very legitimate ask from a prime minister of this country. Okay, let me just ask one last question on this on the carney situation the uh the prime minister and the prime minister's people have been saying he has not asked for a meeting yet with trump although he has asked for a phone call. Yeah. So parse that for me. You and I talked about this.

You asked me, as a kind of last question a couple of weeks ago, how soon should Mark Carney seek a phone call or a meeting with Donald Trump? And I said, oh boy, I wouldn't rush. I think that's the right strategy.

First of all, I don't think there's a leader anywhere in the world who said, there but for the grace of God go I, when they saw that meeting with Vladimir Zelensky in the White House. And whether it was set up, whether it exploded out of control, probably more likely on the margins here

to have been a setup. It's terrifying for people who are used to diplomatic protocol. You know, this is orchestrated, these visits. You know them well. The press come in. There's a round of photographs. I don't know if you can ever remember. I can certainly never remember a meeting like that.

I don't think there's a leader anywhere now who isn't doing everything they can to avoid an ambush by Donald Trump in that kind of meeting. They have to be super careful. Frankly, the people who pulled it off, the Japanese prime minister, they're really expert. If I were prime minister, a phone call that's private, it's controllable,

there's a readout in both, you know, in Ottawa and Washington afterwards. It's nothing like the risk. And I think the other part of this is the messaging. We're not rushing to Washington on bend and near. We have assets. purchase of our F-35s, which is a massive expenditure of fighter jets. That has American, these are American fighter jets with American technology. We're committed to buy 16, but there's a lot more that we could order. That's the message.

There are risks to what you're doing. And as in an election campaign, I think it would be the kiss of death, frankly, to go to the White House now. The F-35 issue, I mean, this goes back so far. I mean, how we drag out procurement issues, nobody is like us in terms of dragging these things out. I mean, I can't recall but i i think the f-35s at least the initial discussion on the new fighter goes back to the krejian government it does you're absolutely right that's when it starts and you know let's just pause for a second over our procurement record which is among the allies the slowest. And you know, when people say

we're not a serious country, you can't be serious if it takes 20 years to procure aircraft. And that's not to talk about the helicopter story that bedeviled this country. So I think part of the job of any new prime minister, whether it's Prime Minister Carney, whether it's Pierre Polyev, it doesn't really matter. We have to do something about changing the way we work.

We have a defense minister now who comes from, he's not from the political class. He comes, as you know, he's a former police chief. And he was, he couldn't comprehend how we could have a procurement process of the kind that we have now. So this is a defense minister that is determined to do something about this. But this is going to be a key part of the new Canada,

the post-Donald Trump attack, that we have to be able to buy things and put them in the field at the same pace as our allies do, Peter. Or they won't take us seriously, frankly. As you said, Bill Blair, the defense minister, has said they're going to they're going to review the f-35 contract now that you know that sounds great it doesn't come at no cost i mean if we back out of the f-35s it's going to cost hundreds of millions of dollars yeah and look

it was prime minister carney who asked him to review this contract. That's political messaging. Frankly, we are so deep in to that contract. And as you know, and here's one of the ironies again, you know, hardware matters. Wiring matters. Every major ally in NATO has bought the F-35, and allies in Asia have bought the F-35. It is the only way, I'm going to use one little technical word here, that we are interoperable. We can work together.

We can communicate through the same systems. We're not going to pull back. We could slow it down as a political message, but we are the last country in the world that should be slowing down procurement, Peter. There are certain aspects of the F-35 contract that benefit Canada in the sense of the construction, the putting together of the aircraft, but the overwhelming majority is in the States. Not surprisingly, it's an american fighter plane um but that means jobs and a lot of jobs and that's the pressure

point here that's the that's the behind the scenes really yeah the code that's being expressed when we say we're reviewing the contract uh you know we're gonna put the screws to you potentially on jobs on the F-35s yeah and that's not meaningless and by the way Donald Trump noticed when Doug Ford you know slapped an import levy on an export tax on electricity in the United States he He went up the ladder, but he noticed that it happened. So I think it's very important

as we go through this whole period, we have assets. They need us for some things. We have them. Fertilizer. It's planting season very shortly in the United States states we sell 90 percent of the potash to the united states that makes fertilizer it's very very important for canadian swimmers that we're smaller they're bigger they have more muscle but we have things they need you know every i smile every time i hear the weird potash because as a young reporter on the prairies in saskatchewan and in the 19 mid 1970s when alan blakeney the ndp premier

of saskatchewan was going to nationalize or did nationalize the potash uh business um it cost a bit of a flurry in in toronto when the assignment desk called me and they said, we need a two-minute item tonight on what the hell is potash. That was my introduction to the Canadian people and their introduction to potash. Let's just tell one more Canadian story because sometimes it's important. We have one of the world-leading companies now, Nutrien. In Saskatchewan, it's a conglomerate, right? It's a Canadian champion. Most Canadians don't think about Nutrien, but it's a global player, frankly. It's the world-leading company that makes potash, that makes fertilizer,

that agriculture around the world depends on. So very important. You know, we have assets. We're going to manage this. But hey, listen, guys, if this could happen to us, it could happen to you, too. That's the tone I think that Carney is taking with him. Okay.

We're going to take a quick break, and then we come back. We're going to take a quick break and then we come back we're going to talk about ukraine and a big meeting coming up in a couple of days between putin and trump we'll do that right after this and welcome back. You're listening to The Bridge, the Monday episode. That means, of course, Dr. Janice Stein from the Munk School at the University of Toronto, Political Science Department as well. You're listening on Sirius XM, Channel 167, Canada Talks,

or on your favorite podcast platform. Okay, for the last month, Donald Trump has been trying to get what he said he'd get in 24 hours which was a peace deal between ukraine and and russia um nobody believed him then when he said he could do it in 24 hours um however they're believing him more now because there are real things happening in terms of trying to get at least to a ceasefire between russia and ukraine everybody has agreed to the ceasefire except well except russia um trump is now saying that he has a meeting tomorrow on phone uh or zoom or however they these guys talk these days, with Vladimir Putin,

which he hopes to nail this thing down. What do you make of this? Oh, it's, by the way, how do they do it? It's a secure link with cameras. If you were inside the Oval Office, it would feel a lot like a Zoom conversation. They could see each other. They're translators, so there's a bit of a delay, but it does actually feel a lot like Zoom. Of course, it's all secure. Look, just in the last 48 hours,

they've been tough for Ukraine because they have virtually lost control of that salient inside Russia Kursk. And they are now on the borderline trying to stabilize that line, Peter, to stop Russian forces from pouring over the Ukrainian border. How much military historians will struggle with this for years? How much that cutoff in U.S. tactical intelligence mattered? It certainly mattered.

Whether it was decisive or not, that's a whole different argument, but it certainly mattered. So Putin goes into that call with a tremendous advantage. He has functionally expelled Ukrainian forces from Russian territory. And this was the piece that the Ukrainians were counting on as a bargaining chip. So Putin has the advantage in terms of what's actually happening on the ground now. That matters.

On the other hand, he does not want to say no to donald trump and he has said repeatedly since he's very uncomfortable you can see that you know there's these ceasefires we've seen this before we've seen in the middle east you you want to be the first to say yes and you never want to say no to the President of the United States. So what do you get? You got what you got from, yes, this is really interesting. Yes, this is really, oh yes, I'm saying yes, except or but. And then out roll the buts. And frankly, Vladimir Putin was saying no.

And why was it a no? Because he went right back to the conditions. These are the same set of conditions that we've heard since February 2022. We had functionally regime change in Ukraine. No membership in NATO ever for Ukraine. A demilitarized zone. These are maximalist demands.

He hasn't really moved, Peter. He's, now, really interesting to see what Trump does here. Because he has said, it's easier for me to deal with Putin than it is for me to deal with Zelensky. I find Zelensky more difficult.

Well, he got the yes from Zelensky, and Zelensky's all out there now, pushing. Oh, yeah, let's do this. Let's have a ceasefire for six weeks. So he's actually playing to Donald Trump, whereas Vladimir Putin is playing against. You know, Russia seems, at least militarily, to have Ukraine on on the roads yes um but in one

in one area they've they've actually lost that advantage you know a month or two months ago zelensky appeared personally in real trouble that support yeah in the country for him had dropped drastically. However, through this process and through that bizarre, pathetic, describe it as you wish, meeting in the White House Oval Office, his support has gone up. And Putin's demand that there be an election right away in Ukraine to replace Zelensky has been rebuffed by the people of Ukraine. So it's ironic in a way because Ukraine's in trouble.

There's no question about that. But Zelensky, less so, or at least in this moment, he seems to have rallied his country behind him. You know, it's so predictable that that would have happened, right? There was discontent with Zelensky. You know, look, his popularity went from 72% to 50-something percent. You know, mostly just Democratic world, especially a wartime country would say that's pretty good. But there were rumors about

the opposition um wanting an election solution you know the former chief of the defense staff porschenko that we've seen in canada so many times so former president they were organizing then donald trump attacks well you get a predictable result we've seen it in canada peter rally around the flag support the leader there's no way for example to explain the improvement in liberal party portions um in comparison to the conservative party in this country in this short time period other than as a rally around the flag when you're being attacked from the outside. So Trump's attack on Zelensky, as you rightly put it,

exactly the opposite effect. Now, does that matter to Vladimir Putin? No, because he considers any of those Ukrainians, it wouldn't matter whether it was Poroshenko, whether it's Zelensky, whether it's Zolushin, they're all illegitimate. He wants them gone.

He literally does not accept the independence of Ukraine. That's fundamentally been true for him for years. He's on the horns of a real dilemma now. And my hunch, this is going to be a long conversation with lots of buts, and we're not going to come out of there with a firm agreement,

even for a limited ceasefire. I think it's going to be very, very tough to get. So let me make sure I'm here reading you right. You think the solution is still going to come on the battlefield, not around the negotiation? Yeah. I think we're going to get from Vladimir Putin at this meeting, it'll be done. Whatever that dynamic is between the two of them frankly, which nobody really understands. Nobody

really understands that dynamic between Trump and Putin and why Trump has the admiration for Putin that he seems to have had. Whatever that dynamic, I think, and that actually, I think Putin is going to give him a yes but, he's not going to give him a yes. What is Trump going to do with that, with that yes but

by the way? He'll describe it as a yes. He'll describe it as a yes, but the fighting has to stop. There has to be detailed arrangements. There has to be detailed arrangements. There has to be, this is a complicated ceasefire.

We've had a ceasefire before. We had the Minsk agreements that were negotiated after the first Russian invasion of the small green men in 2014 and there was a ceasefire. This time, if there's a

ceasefire, there have to be monitors, Peter. There has to be a line at which the troops acknowledge that it's a line and nobody crosses. That's the bare minimum for an effective ceasefire, even

a six-week ceasefire. Those are the key elements for any kind of credible ceasefire. Somebody's got to go in and observe. Vladimir Putin would have to agree. So it can't be a yes, but, but, but. It seems awfully difficult to believe he'll ever agree to having what would most likely be NATO forces in his peacekeepers. He's not going to agree to that. No, and he's already said

that's out of the question, even though Keir Starmer and McComb, that's what they're discussing now. But those are the peacekeeping forces. That is to guarantee that a ceasefire holds. Way before we get there, we need observers on the ground. You know, there used to be UN. They could be, you know, there could be, there are European organizations that could monitor the ceasefire.

Putin has to say yes to that. Without a but, if Donald Trump can get that out of Vladimir Putin, Donald Trump is a much better negotiator than I think he is. Tell me, why does it appear that the UN doesn't give a damn about any of this? Oh, look, you know me, I've been a critic of the UN for 15 years. And, you know, and the answer I get back

from people when I talk about the UN because there is this Canadian admiration, affection, history with the UN, all of which is true. So when I criticize the answer, I get back, oh, it's not the UN, all of which is true. So when I criticize the answer, I get back, oh, it's not the UN, it's us, because we are the UN. Well, frankly, Peter, I find that answer unsatisfying, to put it mildly.

That's an institution that doesn't work. It's specialized agencies work, right? The ECOSOC works, and it's our ambassador right now, Bob Ray, who's chair of the ECOSOC. So we have Economic and Social Council. There are specialized agencies in the UN that just do a brilliant job in the field. But the fundamental institutions, the Security Council, which is key to everything else, doesn't work.

It doesn't work because there's big power vetoes. And how do you have the UN involved and able to do anything when Russia has a veto? And the same has been true on the other side about the United States over Iraq. So let's just say it doesn't work. We need to move on and we need to have some smaller, nimbler, more flexible institutions that are fit for purpose

for the world we're living in. Boy, do I get glares when I say that in Ottawa. I bet you do. You know, it's a shame in some ways because at the beginning of this process three years ago, one of the people who spoke most passionately about this subject was Bob Ray, who you just mentioned. He gave some great speeches on the Ukraine situation. And, you know, I mean, I don't think he's changed his mind, but the voice isn't like it was then.

No, no, no. And look at, even if you think about the Canadian position, right, on Ukraine, that's been led by the prime minister, by the finance minister, for a whole variety of reasons, and by our foreign minister and our minister of defense and they haven't um used the un as an instrument really to push this forward under under chretien under malmooney that would have been a wholly different story but that was then. And this is now. And I, you know, I made a comment once in a semi-official circle. I can share it now. In which we were running for a seat on the Security Council, which we'd done twice and not failed. And I said, just maybe we should withdraw our bid. And the question came right back at me.

Well, is that because we're going to lose? I said, no, I'm worried we're going to win. I'm going to find, I'm glad you laughed the faces in the room. Can you just imagine? I said, we're going to be caught in a whole series of conflicts in a dysfunctional institution. And some of those parties really matter to us. And it's not a great place for smaller powers to be

when big powers are not getting along. I think I was right. It certainly is appearing to be that way that you were right. We're going to have to wrap it up for today, but somewhere in the not too distant future, we should try to talk about what the world body is that could make a difference. Because over the last century or so,

we've been through two that, as it turned out, didn't work. that's right um and that's a hard question boy peter yeah exactly yeah but you like hard questions so that's what we'll we'll find a time to do it um great uh conversation again janice as always uh thank you for this and and we'll talk again in seven days. We will. And Peter, how long do you think it will take before we get a leak on what the conversation was between King Charles and Prime Minister Carney? I wouldn't hold my breath. There's something about the palace, you know. It doesn't deserve this kind of secrecy.

I mean, it really doesn't. I mean, come on. But anyway, maybe I'll be surprised. We'll be looking for it. Okay, talk soon. Have a good week. Dr. Janice Stein from the Munk School, University of Toronto. Another great conversation, as always, with Dr. Stein.

I've got time for a quick end bit. Do you remember in 2016 when Donald Trump was running for the presidency? And one of his constant targets was Barack Obama. Even though he wasn't running against Barack Obama, he was running against Hillary Clinton, but he took a lot of time out to go after Barack Obama. One of the things he went after Barack Obama on was that Obama occasionally played golf while he was president.

Usually on a Saturday, but not every Saturday. Just occasionally. And Trump said, you'll never see me doing that. I'm running for office to work, not to play golf, was basically what he said. Really? Isn't that fascinating? So, interesting story over the weekend about Trump's golf time.

Turns out in the two months, just forget the first term where he golfed all the time. Here and now in the second term, less than two months after returning to the White House, Donald Trump has reportedly played golf on 13 of the 48 days he's been back in office. All of them in Florida. And the cost of those trips to Florida has been mounting.

Somewhere around $20 million every time he golfs. Why? Why does it cost so much? Well, here's why. They have to fly him down on Air Force One to Florida. They have to fly him down on Air Force One to Florida. They have to use a couple of C-17 planes. Those are the big cargo planes. What do they use those for?

They use those to fly the cars down that he's going to drive in and his entourage is going to drive in because they have to have those. And they don't have backups in Florida. As I said, $18 million for each trip. So it's interesting. It ain't cheap.

Those are pretty special green fees. Now, I'm a golfer, so I'm not going to argue about the fact that he likes to golf. He also owns a bunch of golf courses. Of course, he did say, I'm not going to do that. I'll be too busy working to golf. Well, it turns out he golfs more than any president in the history of the United States. In fact, he golfs more than

a number of them put together. Anyway, there's your end bit for today. Tomorrow, we'll have Smoke Mirrors and the Truth. Bruce and Fred will be by. Wednesday is an encore. Thursday is the completion of your turn on What's on Your Mind.

And thank you for all your entries. We are no longer taking entries. And Friday, of course, is Good Talk with Chantelle Hebert and Rob Russo. That's it for this day. I'm Peter Mansbridge. Thanks so much for listening. Talk to you again in a mere 24 hours or so.