The Bridge with Peter Mansbridge - Is Tony Blair The Answer for Gaza?

Episode Date: September 29, 2025

The former British Prime Minister isn't talked of much anymore but he may become the key to peace in Gaza. He's well liked by Palestinian leaders, by Israel's Benjamin Netanyahu, and by Donald Trump. A meeting at the White House this afternoon may lead to Blair's entry into the equation. Dr Janice Stein has her thoughts on Blair and how this may actually lead to something everyone can embrace. That and more on today's episode of The Bridge. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

And hello there, Peter Mansbridge here. You are just moments away from the latest episode of The Bridge. It's Monday. Dr. Janice Stein is here. The question this week, could Tony Blair be the key to a deal on Gaza? That's coming right up. And hello there, Peter Mansbridge here. Yes, welcome to another week.

It's Monday and, as always on Mondays. From the Monk School, the University of Toronto, Dr. Janice Stein, we'll be joining us in a couple of minutes' time, and we're going to deal with what seems to be the big buzz around Washington and New York and Jerusalem and Gaza and a number of other places as to whether or not there could, in fact, be a real deal in the works to end the situation.

in Gaza. We'll see, and we'll see if Tony Blair, the former British Prime Minister, we hinted at this last week, could be the key to that deal. Talk about that in a minute. But as always, on Monday mornings, we have a little housekeeping to do.

This is a strange week in the sense, well, it's not strange, but it's a week that is disjointed from our normal pattern, because tomorrow is a national holiday for certain institutions across the country. And Sirius XM, Satellite Radio Service that delivers this program on air across North America

and also as a podcast is one of those companies that takes tomorrow as a national holiday for National Truth and Reconciliation Day encouraging its employees and its listeners to think about their role in truth and reconciliation. As a result, tomorrow will be our Encore day.

Wednesday will be what would normally do on every second Tuesday, which is the Moore-Buts conversations, and we have a new one for this Wednesday on this week. So I hope you'll be listening to that. James Moore, the former Conservative Cabinet Minister and Jerry Butts, the former Liberal Principal Secretary to Justin Trudeau in the 2015 government. It's going to be a really interesting conversation, as they always are. I won't tell you any more about it right now.

But the other thing we do on Mondays is we give you the question of the week, which plays out on Thursdays, your turn. The question this week, a number of people have asked over the last year or two, you should really throw this question out there and see what people say. I've kind of hesitated because, well, pardon the expression, but it is kind of a loaded question in the sense that it's a hot-button question. But we're going to try it this week because it's been in the news of light. The question is pretty straightforward.

What is your view on gun control in Canada? All right. Now, that's a big topic, but you have 75 words or fewer to answer it as best you can. What is your view on gun control in Canada? 75 words or fewer, ensure you give us your name and the location you're writing from, that you write to the Mansbridge Podcast at gmail.com. and here's the other condition this week. You have to have your answers in by 3 p.m. Eastern time

on Wednesday. There's a lot of things happening this week to juggle schedules. And as a result, a little earlier close-out time on the answers to the question. 3 p.m. Eastern time on Wednesday. that's when you've got to have your 75 words or fewer on the question of your view on gun control in Canada into us at the Mansbridge Podcast at gmail.com The Mansbridge Podcast at gmail.com

Do not forget your name and the location you are writing from. Okay. Let's get started because there's lots to talk about on what just may be a big week in the story of the Middle East. So here we go. Here's our conversation for this week with Dr. Janice Stein from the Monk School at the University of Toronto. So Janice, last week we talked about this possibility of Tony Blair and how he could fit into the whole Gaza, Palestine situation.

And now it seems like it's more than just fit in. He's going to be a real player. If everything plays out the way it's being rumored to play out in the next 24, 48 hours. What are you hearing? There is a lot of talk, Peter. It is more than talk. There was a meeting between Trump and Arab leaders on the sidelines of the United Nations General. Assembly. It's a so-called Trump or would cough 21 point plan. But what's at the core of it?

And you're right that Tony Blair is right in the middle of this. He's been in the middle of it for months. And he's a credible player with three parties. He's got a really good personal relationship with Muhammad Abbas, the president of the Palestinian Authority. He's known him for years. This goes back to something called the quartet, which Tony Blair headed and his foundation funded. So he's been on the ground. He knows of us very well. Believe it or not, he has a good relationship with Netanyahu and Israel. And he has a reasonable relationship with Donald Trump. He was invited into the White House for many of these planning meetings. So that's why this is more credible than we otherwise might think.

What's his role going to be? And this is something, you know, of a throwback 50 years to 50 years ago. The interim governor, administrator of Gaza, backed by a security for small still. I think that's the weakest part of all this that the Egyptians are currently, we know, training and that if the conditions are right, might be prepared to go in. That's the concrete plan on the ground.

It's the first time we have any concrete plan for the day after. You know, it's ironic, really, that as you say, Blair has got good relations with those three, areas that are involved in these discussions. The area he doesn't have good relations with is his own country. Yeah. You know, so many Brits are still upset at Britain's involvement on the Iraq war. And, you know, and it goes back beyond that.

And he clearly doesn't have a good relationship with Starmor. Now, mind you, he doesn't need any of that for this. and I still want to try and understand what that role. It almost sounds like he's kind of like an interim leader. You know, it's actually, to me, smacks of kind of colonial language, right? Trustee, administrator, governor that you impose, because nobody's asking the garrisons about this Palestinian thing. gas about this. This is a deal fundamentally Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, Trump, Tony Blair.

Those are the core elements in this, not Hamas yet, although there was one leak over the weekend. That's interesting. And it came from an Arab source. That's why I give it a little more weight that I would, if it came only from the Israeli side, there is a request from some of the Hamas leaders on the ground that Israel commit not to go after them, that they begin an amnesty once they leave. So that's another piece. That's been a log jam up until now. So it's clearly about, you won't assassinate us, and it's about some money and a place where they can go and live in relative safety. How much faith should Hamas have in that if it's real?

I mean, the Israelis never forget. I have to say I wouldn't have a lot of confidence in that promise. If it's made, if it's made, but the Israelis have offered it repeatedly. Okay. I want to try and understand what's in it for each of these other elements. I assume what's in it for Trump is just get this thing over with. Fast, by the way, get it announced before, you know, get it done, get it over with, because he hates it, get it over with. And get it over with before the deadline for the Nobel Peace Prize closes for the next one, not this year's, but next year's.

Because Peter, if he can get this done, I'm going to say something. I thought I would never say he would deserve it. Well, that's if you assume he's the one who's pulling all the strings on this. He's provided the umbrella. He met with the Arab leaders on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly. He and others brought Tony Blair into the White House three months ago to work on this. Okay, so what's in it for the Arab countries, and specifically for the, you know, the Saudis, the Qatari's, the Egyptians, I guess, to a degree the Jordanians.

What's in it for them? So let's distinguish because I think there's three different groups here. The Saudis and the Emirates got an unequivocal statement from Donald Trump. It's the one time he really put his thumb on the scale that he will not, and he used this language, I will not allow Israel to annex the West Bank. Why does that matter so much to the Saudis in the Emirates? Because the fundamental premise of the Abraham Accords, which was a Trump deal, which they signed on to, was to stop Nathaniel at that time from annexing any part of the West Bank in Gaza. And this was said with firmness. I don't think there's a lot of running room there.

And why is that? there is a lot of intersecting involvement between the Trump family, the Wickhaw family, with the Saudis, the Emirates, and the Qataris. If Trump is going to keep his word on one thing, he's going to keep his word on that, it's overwhelmingly in his self-interest and overwhelmingly in his role as president. and he's the architect of the Abraham Accords. That's a big one. Yeah.

I'm trying to gauge what you're saying in between the words and the sentences that you're uttering. In other words, what kind of faith do you put in that we're actually at an opportune moment here? The best way I can put this, Peter, We're closer than we've ever been. That doesn't mean we're there because there's so much can go wrong. But we've got all the elements in place. You know, the Saudis and the Emirates have reasons to sign off. The Qataris do because they've been so invested in this mediation.

And they were, you know, Hamas was attacked on Qatari soil. And the countries are furious if they can get a deal. that Trump engineered, this goes a long way towards legitimating them and the process. The Egyptians and the Jordanians would give anything to stop this because they're the ones that are most worried about an outflow of Palestinians to the east and to the west, which, frankly, the Egyptians don't want under any circumstances, nor do the Jordanians want. And what do the Israelis get out of this? And let's ask not what the Israelis get out of it.

Let's ask what Netanyahu gets out of it because it's not the same. All the hostage is back, all back within the first 48 hours. That's huge in terms of an election that Netanyahu knows he's going to have to fight. he can climb back off the branch of the tree where he's gotten himself stuck in a war frankly that has no more military or strategic objectives but he can't find a way to climb down without busting apart his coalition.

If he has to bust up his coalition now because I pledge not to annex any part of the West Bank will do that, he can claim he got all the hostage is back. And Hamas is not the government of Gaza, which is where he started, and the PA, the Palestinian Authority is not the governor. That is a powerful election platform for him as he goes into these elections, which could take place literally as, you know, the Knesset could throw out this government as soon as the deal is announced. There's something big here for everyone, which is when you finally get a deal.

What happens to Gaza? So we're talking about a long process here, Peter. I think it's really important that we understand. We're talking. There's no diplomat that I know who doesn't think this is going to be a decade. So it's, it's, but what does gas get? First of all, it stops the fighting right now. That's huge for Palestinians, huge.

Secondly, humanitarian aid, and that's part of this, part of the 21 points, would immediately start to flow in, and the Gaza humanitarian foundation would be dissolved. So it actually would be a return of all the traditional players who have, provided humanitarian aid to Palestinians, which really means it'll flow through and it'll flow through in time. And there's urgency. There's acute hunger. And I know that famine has been declared, but it's only in one part of Gaza. Worth us to stop now, a full-scale famine could be prevented. There's no question. They get an administration and a security force. And if you don't have a security force on the ground, you can't deliver aid.

You just can't. So the acute emergency people can address, then there's a political process after, which ultimately will go to the Palestine Authority. Aside from the human suffering that would come to an end, and some form of famine relief would be instituted, They've got to rebuild that whole, I mean, it's not just one city, it's like a bunch of cities. The whole of Gaza.

The whole of Gaza. You know, I, you know, we remember through our newsreels and the constant replay of them on YouTube and elsewhere of what, you know, Berlin looked like in 1945. Yeah. Absolutely destroyed. The same year. The same year. And they had to rebuild it. You know, they had to rebuild a lot of stuff.

cities in Europe. But Berlin was unbelievable. It was just a shell. And that took well it took a huge international effort to make that happen and the Berlin airlift and all of that stuff that took place.

So we're talking of a huge task in front of the world if they're going to take that seriously and not just sort of check out after a deal struck. So I don't think people are going to check out right after a deal is struck. Do they stay the course for the five years or the 10 years? That's a different issue. But I don't think they're

going to check out. First of all, the Saudis and the Emirates have already committed as part of this that they will finance a chunk of the reconstruction. The big question is, Peter, how do you rebuild it, right? Because Gaza, the quality of life for Palestinians in Gaza was never good. So if given where we are now,

how do you rebuild this in a way which genuinely creates opportunities for Palestinians which improves housing, which improves the situation of all the wrecked hospitals in Gaza, there is an opportunity

to use a hackney for and we almost always miss the boat, but maybe we won't here to build back better. And all the countries that recognized the state of Palestine over the last year, particularly in the last month just before the UNGA meeting, there's an opportunity for all of them to make it real. You know, for the United Kingdom, for France, for Belgium, for Canada,

to actually have an opportunity. now to contribute in a meaningful way, both to the future of the Palestinians and also to the broader Middle East. If they can succeed in improving life and the political prospects for Palestinian, we may have a once-and-a-hundred-year opportunity. We'll see. Yeah, let's hope that we have that opportunity. As you say, we, you know, the deal's not done yet and there could be any number of, you know, barriers to it in the next couple of days, but it looks promising.

That's right. That's what you and I would say, you know, so much can go wrong, Peter, and we don't necessarily want to talk about that. But let's remember if Blair is there for a year or 18 months, that isn't, you know, that is somebody who can go to Paris, who can go to Berlin, who can go to all, who can go to Ottawa and say, this is somebody who's got a platform, an international platform, and I've met him in the Middle East. He really cares about this issue. He is very personally involved. He comes from a, he comes at it from a religious perspective like others, you know. Yeah. And but it really matters to him.

And he's looking for a new legacy. for himself, right, obviously. I mean, I agree with you. I mean, I've interviewed him, I don't know, three or four times, and the Middle East situation has always come up, even at times when it, you know, it wasn't really on the agenda. But, you know, his legacy position doesn't look that hot right now. No.

This could change that. Everything. It would be game changer for him. Right. Okay. Now, the Middle East wasn't the, only thing that saw, you know, a turn in the last week. The other was a situation in Ukraine. And I'm really looking for your guidance on this because I don't know what to

believe anymore. You see Donald Trump do a 180 of gigantic proportions. I mean, talk about backflops. This was quite something. And, you know, you can read that, oh, it was King Charles who changed his mind about Ukraine or you could, you know, you could read that he was getting different advice and finally clicked on the fact that Putin, you know, has been playing like a fiddle for the last 10 years or more. What are we supposed to believe as to why he did this? I think, first of all, he's personally disappointed that his relationship with Vladimir Putin did not deliver anything. And you can hear that peak in the things he says. I think that's part of it.

The light is going off for him that that relationship is not going to produce anything for him. And it's embarrassing. It's embarrassing for him, given the way he's talked about Vladimir Putin. Secondly, he is hearing from really, I can't exaggerate this, Peter, from really alarmed Europeans. The last two or three weeks in Europe have been very scary for several governments, for Poland. there was a Russian drone incursion and again dummy drones which you could take comfort from the fact they're not armed

or you could and I think draw the correct conclusion that Putin is testing NATO responses there was a ship in the Baltic Sea you know that was buzzed there were those Romanian drones that we talked about and Denmark had to shut down two airports this week because there were reports of Russian drones. I was just talking to a security expert in the United Kingdom

at a really good one. And I said to him, how worried are you? He said, I've never been this worried. This is a unique moment for NATO in Europe. I think what may have happened with Donald Trump is there may have been a glimmer. This is not only about Ukraine. It's about Europe. And what's worrying in Donald Trump's backflip?

I heard it. And who knows? Because you could hear this in so many different ways. I heard it is. Okay. I'm not going to be able to deliver a deal here. over to you, Europe. This is yours to solve.

And it was that instead of, and this is like the old days of primalinology, where you look for one word or somebody who's standing in the line, that's the way I read Truth Social. There's two different endings. So it was when he posts. Thank you for your attention to this matter,

which I use when I talk to my boys. Thank you for your attention. Does this matter? That's one. The other is good luck to you. That's what he said when he talked about Ukraine. So I read this as I've done it. I've done my best.

I can't deliver. I've got a system in place now for the Europeans to pay for your weapons. Go Zelensky. Take it all back. I'm out of this. What do you make of it when he was asked directly? in the last couple of days. What's your advice to NATO countries

with these drones coming in? Or incursions into your airspace by Russian fighters or bombers. What should they do? And he didn't blink. He said, shoot him down. He said, shoot him down. And then there was one more follow-on question

in that interview, which was, well would NATO come to the assistance would you come to the assistance of those countries he said it would depend on the circumstances yeah there are no circumstances with article five it's either cut and dry right you're they're in or you're out if i were a european leader if i were denmark that had to shut down my airport i wouldn't be very encouraged by that answer. And by the way, it's a signal to Putin, too. You know, you could argue, Peter, that Putin is emboldened now to do in Europe, because he's clearly the number of incidents in which Russian drones or Russian jet fighters or Russian ships are involved, has increased. That's just a fact, regardless of one interpretation you're using here. You would argue that that summit in Alaska,

was why emboldened Putin to try, to test? And when you get that answer, it depends on the circumstances. Putin hears that too. It's sober. Yeah. I don't know. It's very sobering. This whole thing, and it's been that way, as you said, you know,

you were talking to somebody in the UK, and, you know, they're nervous. And in fact, it's been kind of this way. for the last six months now. Yeah. Remember when we talked in the spring about the British defense minister saying you guys have got to get with it. We got to prepare for war.

Yeah. Yeah. And, you know, Sikorsky speech, the foreign minister of Poland, who ended his speech, you know, we've heard, you know, British Kirstarmer and others say,

you have been warned to his own public. Sikorsky took it a step further this week. He said to Vladimir Putin in his speech at the UNGA, at the General Assembly, you have been warned, we will respond next time. So you have a flank of countries in Europe, toward the east, Poland, the Baltics,

the Finns, the Swedes, who are not going to wait all that long, Peter, because they know they're on the front line of this. What would happen? Well, there was a discussion in Europe in the last 48 hours over the weekend that should alarm everyone. Because the polls were essentially saying, if Russian aircraft were to penetrate our airspace, we will shoot them down. And Friedrich Mertz, the Chancellor of Germany, said,

oh no, that's not a good idea. You have to be careful because that kind of action could push all of Europe over the edge into war. That is an open discussion and an open rift between the Europeans to the east of Germany and the bigger powers to the West about what the appropriate response to the next Russian test is,

but on the table is a response to the Russians. Let me, just before we leave this subject, let me go back to how we started this situation on Ukraine off with Trump's flip-flop. The happiest person in the room must have also been the most. surprise person in the room, and that was Zelensky. So what does he do with this new position, which Trump almost made it sound like you go back

and take everything. You can go back, take Crimea back, take it all back. Yeah. What does Zelensky do with this? So I think everyone understands that that is not military advice that's coming from Trump. I don't know how much he understands about the military. situation, but Ukraine doesn't have the capacity to do that. And Zelensky knows that, and every European leader knows that.

It is encouraging to Zelensky, because what he needs to do is stay the course, exhaust Russia, survive this so that there is a sovereign, independent Ukraine that comes out of all of this. And that's what that's what the, you know, Starmer is telling him. That's what Nacro is telling him. That's what Poland is telling him.

So, and there were some very modest Ukrainian gains on the ground. And the one in the big picture encouraging factor here, the growth in the Russian economy is anemic if there's growth at all. And it's hard to

to trust their numbers. So that capacity to inflate the Russian economy and finance all this defense spending that Vladimir Putin has used ever since February 2022, it's gone. So we're into a war of insurance, Peter. But for Zelensky, what really matters

is that Ukraine comes out, almost all of it. Let me put it that way, not Crimea. But almost all of it, as a sovereign independent state, could be two more years, could be more. There is a long game now in Europe. At the same time as Zelensky benefits from the fact that every, and this is such a, but Europeans are realistic. They know what worse, but they've lived. that their memories are very alive in ways that memories in Canada are not. They know that Ukraine is their front line now, if they had any doubt.

As long as the Russian army is tied down in Ukraine, there was less capacity on Putin's part to engage with them. So they will be all in for Ukraine. All right. We can take our break. We have one more thing. to talk about and we'll do that when we come back. And welcome back. You're listening to the Monday episode of The Bridge.

That means Dr. Janice Stein from the Monk School at the University of Toronto. You're listening on Sirius XM, Channel 167, Canada Talks, are on your favorite podcast platform. Glad to have you with us. Okay, there was something else that happened at the UN last week that a lot of people probably didn't notice or take note off, but should have because it was historic in its own right. And that was the appearance at the podium of a certain leader from Syria. Tell us about that. You know, I did notice Peter, it's President Ahmad al-Shara, the new president of Syria.

And what jumped out at me is in the middle of all that was happening at the General Assembly. And there was a lot, frankly, there was a lot. This was the first time since the 1960s that a president of Syria had spoken from the podium at the General Assembly. There's a story of a country utterly devastated by civil war, utterly devastated. If you looked at some of those cities, they did not look much better, frankly, than some of the cities in Gaza that we were talking about earlier. A third of the country left Syria as refugees. We in Canada benefited from some of these refugees who have already enriched Canada by their presence. a third of the people inside the country were displaced.

So that's two-thirds of serious population, either refugees or displaced inside the country. Divided up, Turkey had an area that had controlled, that free Syrian forces were largely American controlled, and Assa dug in and everyone lost hope that there was any capacity to remove them. Out of one corner of Syria came a group of, frankly, militia fighters, al-Qaeda based and inspired through two different transitions after that, fighters, militia fighters, who sensing a moment of weakness as the war between Hamas and Israel continued, literally swept down that highway. Syrian soldiers were so badly paid.

Morale was terrible, and within five days took over the country. And Oshara was one of the Al-Qaeda militia figures, comes to power and has learned something over the years and formally swears off. The use of does not want to export violence into the region. not his agenda, is trying to build a coalition inside, although with limited success, but wants to rejoin the international community and rebuilt Syria. So far, he's kept his word. There have been incidents, actually, where remnants of the former regime have provoked fights, and there's been violence.

the Druze who are a small group who self-identify with a form of Islam that the rest of the Muslim world really doesn't recognize but they're long-rooted members and they cross the border between Israel and Syria they live on both sides of the border in these two countries there has been issues of violence against the

Jerusalem, the Israelis have gotten involved in that. But nevertheless, if we lose hope, which it's all too easy to do in the time we're living, there's a country where the least likely person has been able to resurrect that country, turn it around, and open a door for a better future for Syrians. We have had at the Monk School an absolutely wonderful Syrian woman who came as a refugee, got a degree, has joined an NGO, and she was a fighter. Let me go back and just tell you the story, because she was a fighter. She was imprisoned by Assad's forces for 14 months in that famous Syrian jail. Somehow God crossed the border into Turkey and was able to make her way to Canada.

I just saw her 10 days ago. She had been home for the first time. Went back to see her family, to see the community which she had grown up. She never thought she would be able to go back again. Well, you know, we can be surprised every once in a while. Yeah. And it's a good thing we can be. and let's hope we can have more of those kind of surprises in the future.

Just a quick word from you. I mean, we've kind of trashed the UN a number of times over the past year or two. Every fall they have the, you know, General Assembly, where leaders come from different parts of the world, and they speak and, you know, people make judgments about what happened and whether it really made a difference. Donald Trump, aside from everything else he did in the past week, he gave a speech that's got to, nobody's ever going to forget.

You know, they remember Khrushchev banging the lectern with his shoe at the U.N. They remember Castro doing various things as well. But Trump got up there and basically just level into everybody in the room. Every country in the room told them, you know, that the climate change is a con job and just, you know, went through a whole list of things, basically laughed at them. When they had laughed at him the last time he was there, but they just remained silent this time.

They didn't say anything. What did you make of that? What is it signal? Does it signal the end of that place or what? Well, look, you know, two very different reactions. One was, she said the UN is a place. where they just write letters and nothing else happened. I never thought I would say this, Peter,

but I had some sympathy for that description, okay? There are many, many times when there's a all talk and a failure to act. And that's been a frustration where anybody who knows anything about it, he had a moment for me when he went up to escalator. on escalators are just part of the history of this presidency. That's all we could say. And what if his people jumped on the escalator going backwards and it stopped? And he then said, well, look, this is how bad the UN is.

They can't manage their escalators and their teleprompters, even though it was Trump's team. Now, it's always responsible for their teleprompters. right so both sides of the story right unjustifiably blaming the UN but there's a kernel of truth and that's what's always so awful about Trump's mockery you know the names he gives people there's always just a kernel of truth which he owns you know and he did that again the fact that people sat and listened and silence. They laughed the first time. We're seeing that inside the United States, too, Peter. There's a fear. So many people have commented, there are no demonstrations inside the United States. You know, networks cave when they're under pressure. Big law firms, cave. universities some of them cave universities cave and two deals right

big private sector companies cave there's a fear of him there's a fear that he will use this enormous power that he has and the levers that he can pull to do damage he's doing it with tariffs, you know, look at how destabilizing this has been in India, for one example that we don't talk a lot about.

And he's weaponizing the legal system, so people are afraid of him. He was funny the first time. He's scary this time, and you could feel it at the UN. Okay. Well, that sets up a whole other year of conversation. for sure on Mondays with you, Janice. And this has been another great one. Thanks for this.

We'll talk to you in seven days. Thank you, Peter. See you then. Dr. Janice Stein from the Mark School, the University of Toronto, which has become such a popular segment for the bridge. Mondays on the bridge is a real winner. in terms of listener participation, listener audience, listener response.

And we're glad you're finding it stimulating and thought-provoking as well. As Janice has always said, don't have to agree with her. Just think about the things. And, you know, listen, research, come up with your own opinion. That's all good. All right, a couple of quick notes before we leave for this day. Tomorrow, once again, National Truth and Reconciliation Day in Canada. And as a result, it's a holiday for certain businesses and Series XM,

which is the producer of this program across North America, and also for the podcast is one of those institutions. So tomorrow is a holiday for serious exam. As a result, tomorrow will be our Encore Day for programming. Wednesday will be what would have been on Tuesday, which will be the Moore Buts conversation, and I believe it's number 23. I've got to check the number on that.

I'm not sure if it's. 23 or 24. Whatever it is, it's going to be a very good one. I can assure you of that. That's tomorrow. Sorry, that's a Wednesday's program. Thursday is your turn. You heard the question of the week.

What do you think about gun control in Canada? That's your question. You know the rules for entry. 3 p.m. Eastern time on Wednesday this week. It's an early deadline. That's Thursday's your turn, plus the random ranter, of course. And Friday, it'll be good talk with Bruce Anderson and Shuntelli Bear.

That's everything for this day. I'm Peter Mansbridge. Welcome to another week. Hope you've enjoyed it. We'll talk to you again in, well, unless in 24 hours. Thanks for listening today. Bye for now. Thank you.