The Bridge with Peter Mansbridge - Reporters Notebook -- Raj and Russo with the Hill chatter they're hearing.

Episode Date: October 21, 2025

Journalists hear lots of things in the course of a day on Parliament Hill, and then they work towards trying to nail things down. What's real, what isn't? On the latest edition of Reporter's Notebook Rob Russo and Althia Raj talk about it all from Mark Carney and Pierre Poilievre to trade talks and a possible cabinet shuffle. 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're just moments away from the latest episode of The Bridge. What's going on behind the scenes in Ottawa? It's Reporter's Notebook, Althea Raj, Rob Russo, coming right up. And hello from Scotland once again. still here for a little bit longer before heading back to Canada. Of course, we're five hours ahead of normal time for me in Canada, which is eastern time. So that makes it well into the middle of the night before the Blue Jays game is over.

But hey, a lot of yelling and screaming here, too. Can you believe it? What about those Blue Jays? Going to the World Series against the Los Angeles Dodgers. Gladie Guerrero against Shohei Otani. Oh, this is going to be fun. Oh, this is going to be so much fun. Well, congrats to the Boys of Summer in Toronto.

The Jays pull it off. They go down two nothing in the series and come back and end up winning it in game seven. You got to love it. You got to love it. And this next week or so is going to be, well, it's going to be exciting no matter what happens. They're there.

They're in the World Series. They'll have the attention of North America, Toronto, Canada. We're there. We're there, baby. okay enough baseball it just makes you feel good though isn't it all right um before we get started on today's program which is reporter's notebook with raj and russo uh just a reminder about the question of the week after yesterday's you know yet another amazing show with janestine we're asking the question

will this mean everlasting peace in the Middle East are we going to see that it's a big question and already some of the answers are really good quite revealing about what you're thinking in terms of that question

and we had more come in overnight so here's the here's the deal that's the question have to have your answer in by 6 p.m. Eastern time tomorrow 75 words or fewer include your name and the location you're writing from and you write to the Mansbridge podcast at gmail.com the Mansbridge podcast at gmail.com looking forward to your answers make us think and it'll challenge us with your answer to that question. Okay.

Reporter's notebook time. And one of the things that we try to do with Althea Raj from the Toronto Star and Rob Russo from the Economist magazine is try to get behind the stories of the day, behind to where there are other stories that are rumbling around the nation's capital that people are talking about, but they, you know, there's somewhere between gossip and rumor and fact and trying to get at what's really going on.

But it's good to know that these discussions are taking place amongst journalists, amongst politicians, and how much truth there is to them. You sometimes get some of this stuff, but you're never really quite sure whether it's nailed down or not. what's really happening in these discussions and these chats that take place in the hallways of parliament. So that's what we're going to try and get at right now, which is, you know, basically this question,

what are some of the stories that perhaps aren't getting the public attention? They should, but they are going on to some degree in Ottawa. So let's get right to it. Once again, Rob Russo, Althea Raj, there are a reporter's notebook people every two weeks every second Tuesday.

They alternate with the Moribut's conversations. So let's get started. You've heard the question? Let's start with, okay, Rob, why don't you get it started? I think in terms of domestic politics, I think that both Mr. Poyev and Mr. Carney are engendering some resistance in the way that they're leading their parties these days.

I think there's some of that going on. I don't believe that Dimitri Soudas's sortie in the Toronto Star last week was in any way a Harper sanctioned blow against Mr. Poylev's leadership. Just a minute, let me stop you in your tracks for a second. Explain once again who Dimitri is and what his column was about. Sure, Dimitri was a director of communication for Stephen Harper, who is now, I would say, an influential pundit in Quebec in particular, in the French language, who's seen as a conservative. So, but it was his sort he was presented as the voice of Harper, and he said in effect that he was dismayed with the way Mr. Puella was leading the conservatives. And I think it was dismissed and dismissed rightly in a way if people were dismissing it because they thought that it was the voice of Stephen Harper.

He had a rupture with Stephen Harper. It was a brutal rupture over his support for Eve Adams, his then-partum. partner when she ran for the liberals. However, I do believe that there is a growing number of conservatives who are very concerned about the way Mr. Polyev is leading the party, and I think that they will begin to emerge over the next little while. I think that there are concerns about the way Mark Carney is leading the government. We saw, it's not unreported. Steve Marr did a profile of Mr. Carney, which... which lay bare some of the brusqueness associated with his style of leadership, which is quite corporate.

And a lot of people who know Mr. Carney have either reported that or have said those sorts of things in the past. But a lot of liberals were talking about that profile in the last week and asking each other if they had experienced the the Kearney chill that way and that's that's something that isn't a threat to Mr. Carney yet but it it could be I think Mr. Carney's suggestion that or or statement that Benjamin Netanyahu would be arrested if he came to Canada is something that didn't get a lot of airplay it suggests that if we had hopes of playing any kind of role in the Middle East peace process such as a it is, in whatever develops out of Gaza and the Middle East, we're not going to be able to

play much of a role at all. The Israelis didn't really trust us to begin with. That kind of a bold declaration takes us out of the Middle East diplomacy game as well. So those two or three things are the kinds of things people are talking about, but we don't see too too much in the way of reporting apart from those initial sorties. Althea, you wrote a column on Demetri's Soutis' comments and the impact that they might have in terms of the future. Do you want to pick up on that or do you want to venture into your own areas? No, no.

I'll just briefly say underreported stories. You know, I'm a policy geek and I feel like we are not talking about policy enough. But we can talk about policy another time. So let's put that aside. I don't think Dimitri, well, I know, Dimitri did not say in his column at the Toronto Star that he was speaking for Stephen Harper. I think a lot of inferences that people like Lawrence Martin made,

for example, publicly was that, well, Dimitri wouldn't be going out on such a limb if it wasn't the type of comments that he's hearing from other people, especially the people around Harper when he was in the prime minister's office. So basically his conservative cohort. And I think that that is absolutely true. I mean, I know it's true.

These are basically Dmitri Soutis gave voice. And the reason he was moved to write that column is because Pierre Paulyev, the leader of the conservative party, a few weeks ago now, I believe. And I'm sorry, I'm having a momentary lapse. But he went on a YouTube program, a husband and wife team, a right wing, if you wish, channel. And I forget what it's called, something to do with the North. And he was, it's about a half hour interview with the leader. And in those comments, he suggests that Justin Trudeau should have been jailed for accepting the trip to the Aga Khan's island, which he argued, the Prime Minister at the time, argued that he went to the Aga Khan because that's a family friend.

He was a Paul Bayer at his father's funeral, but there were ethical challenges with that, and he got a slap on the wrist, essentially, for that trip. But Pierre Paulyb is saying that Justin Trudeau should have gone to jail for that, and possibly should also have been charged criminally in the S&A Lava Lange case, which the RCP investigated actually came into a few roadblocks because they weren't given all the cabinet documents that they wanted, and essentially ended by suggesting or, saying that they didn't have enough evidence and they didn't believe anything criminal had happened. But Pierre Pauliev, the man who wants to be prime minister, is suggesting that

actually there was more than enough there and then the RCMP leadership acted in a despicable manner by not following through. Those comments, which sound very Trump-like in terms of like jailing your opponents and going after them, raised a lot of alarm bells with conservatives like Dimitri Sudas, and he is still a conservative, despite his support for his girlfriend at the time and the troubles that he had with the conservative party was basically fired as his job as executive director. He is a conservative. And he has a lot of conservative friends, and they're all saying the same thing.

And conservative MPs are saying the same thing behind the scenes. So I don't think that it is a one-off. I think to me, the takeaway from that is that the way. of the Pierre Paulyev establishment, if you wish. And Pierre Paulyev is firmly in control of this conservative party to attack Dmitri Soutis as a liberal to try to dismiss what he was saying. That, to me, was quite something.

It made me think of what happened to Ali Rayaas. Do you remember him? He was the conservative MP from Ahtabaska, who did not support Pierre Paulyev. And after Pierre Paulyev, one, the leadership said, I don't see myself in this party. I don't like the way he does politics. It's much too divisive.

It's, again, Trump-like. And they went after him. They called people in his writing. And just the scale of the attack against the dissenters, to me is my takeaway. Because a lot of conservative caucus members are saying all of these things. And some of them have talked about crossing the floor or sitting as their own party or how do they distinguish themselves away from Pierre Puelev because they're very uncomfortable

and more and more of them think that they can't win their riding. They see Mark Kearney basically running as a progressive conservative and they wonder what they should be doing. And so the kind of full-on attack against Dimitri, I think sent a chilling tone within caucus to say, if you dare to criticize us, even if you say things that lots of other people are saying, but you say them publicly,

we are going to try to destroy you. And so that, to me, is like, is that story, is there going to be more like, does that going to create more dissenters or is there going to be a chill now? Let me pick up on that because you, you suggested there a few moments ago that some of them were, some conservatives were thinking about, you know,

the possibility of crossing the floor, joining the liberals, I assume. Now, I've heard that a couple of times in the last week, that there are four or five conservatives who have been at least having some kind of discussions very informal but discussions nevertheless

about doing something like that are you hearing anything about this Rob you know is there anything like this? Certainly there have been probes made it hasn't gone unnoticed when people like

Danielle Smith tell you that Mark Kearney is the best progressive conservative prime minister that Canada's had in a long, long time. Conservatives feel comfortable with what this guy is doing. Some of them are going on, you know, open line shows, podcasts like this, and actually expressing that kind of support. Those in the benches behind Mr. Poyev while supporting conservative causes also are saying that they are supportive of some of what the prime minister is doing. It hasn't gone unnoted. My understanding is that these probes went out shortly after the election

and some discussions were had. but they were put aside once we got into the nitty-gritty negotiations with the United States and Donald Trump's administration. That doesn't mean that they won't pick up again if they haven't already picked up. But it goes against a lot of the thought that I had and others in that if the liberals were trying to get to a majority number, they're three short of majority government now, 172 seats, and they would do that via the New Democrats. It is a bit of a twist on what a lot of people were expecting

as to where the ardor and where the woo would be pitched in these kinds of discussions. And it tells you a little bit about Mark Carney's style governing. If conservatives feel comfortable about even contemplating that and doing it quietly, tells you a little bit about where Mark Carney is, and it also tells you, I think, that there is an opportunity for a pragmatic New Democratic Party to take advantage of this. But so far, none of those discussions have come to fruition. A lot of them started out as kind of casual

jibes across the aisle. And, and I think I can tell you that sometimes people, some, Some conservatives have reached out to Mark Carney privately and express support for some of the things he's trying to do. And Carney instantly turns it around and jiu-jitsu said it and says, well, you should come and join us. You should come over if you feel that way. I appreciate your support, but come on over. So it's something that the prime minister himself is doing. He's not necessarily always leaving it to lower level people. He's doing some of that.

so you hearing anything like that also um the emissaries in the spring absolutely did happen um at the time speaking to some of the conservators that were approached i think there was two things one they didn't really know what to make of this liberal prime minister they didn't think that they'd be able to win their writings frankly as liberals and i think for a lot well for a lot for a few of them that remains a consideration. You could only either when you're writing on your name recognition or if you were in a seat that could possibly turn liberal. And I think people wanted to see what would happen. I know

of one person who might be willing to cross the floor, but I don't know about four. And I believe quite strongly that if the liberals felt that they were four ready for the picking, they should not be dithering and they should be going out and trying to find those people ASAP. Because despite what the Conservatives say that they believe the liberals want an election, there's no indication of any physical work being done that would support that affirmation. So I think Mr. Carney would love to have a majority government, and the best way to have a majority government without having election is to convince people to come to your side. But I don't see those active discussions happening at the moment. The conversations about having those active discussions are happening, but I don't know that they are.

So I can't tell you that for sure that they are. That makes sense. Well, yeah, I guess Well, sure. People are talking about it, but are they, are the right people doing the right talking, I guess, is the question. I don't know. And I think the budget, a lot of concertives may like what they're hearing from

Mark Carney on pipelines on natural resource projects, the way he's approached the relationship with Donald Trump, for example, that a lot of them have been impressed with that. A lot of them are supportive of the new crime, you know, the bail reform measures that were announced last week, because frankly, they're conservative ideas. But will they really want to support a big, big spending budget, despite the justification that the prime minister will make about this being a once-in-a-generation type of nation-building investments that that's required? I don't know.

I guess where I'm a little confused or worried about this story or this possibility of this story, is trying to understand what's really at stake here. Is it, is it some conservatives who are interested and attracted to some of the things that the Carney government is doing? Or is it those same people who are just upset with their leader on their own side at the moment? There's both. But then there's a third thing that you need to think about. Some of them are upset with Pure Pahlia, but they still want to remain in the conservative fold because they want to support another candidate, were they to be a leadership review? Even if they think that Pierre Paulyev is going to win the leadership review, which frankly, most people overwhelmingly think

he will win, they don't think he's going to be around if he loses the next election. So they're biding their time. The people who are willing to leave are the people who are like, okay, well, I don't have another election in me, or I can win my seat on my own name recognition, or I can win my seat with Mark Carney as a liberal. And that last bit, that has turned in the last few months because Mark Carney is their type of progressive conservative. I would also say that if they thought that Mr. Poyle would change or could change, they might be less inclined to engage in any kind of a dalliance with the liberals.

They just don't believe he will change. he can change, and they don't think they can win with him. If they thought they could win, you know, winning is an antidote to all kinds of things. They wouldn't be involved in any of these kinds of trists or potential trists. So I sense that from some of these people, they are conservatives, and they are doing this kind of thing reluctantly if they do it. I'm going to be surprised if this actually happens, if it's more than one, but I've been surprised before. They would rather stay conservative, but they don't believe that he is changing. And the comment about locking up Justin Trudeau is an echo of Trump and a sign also that Mr. Polyev continues to wage a battle against an enemy who was a phantom and gone.

And instead of waging battle against somebody who's there and has the possibility of scooping up not just conservative votes, but also votes from the regions they might be from as well. Elthia. Rob mentioned that there's a degree of concern on the part of some liberals about the way the prime minister governs. what he expects from people and how he treats people. That's sort of being out there.

Stephen Merris, you know, piece in McLean's kind of hinted towards this kind of relationship or non-relationship that he has with some of the people he works with. What are you hearing on that front? Are you hearing anything on that front? Is it a concern? Is it just something they got to live with? How does that work? I think there's a few things that we should put in perspective.

It absolutely is true that multiple people have told me, you know, people with direct knowledge of this, that he is not good at being criticized, especially not being criticized in a public venue. And he is not tolerant of dissenters. And we have seen that with some of this cabinet picks. but I think it's also worth noting that a lot of people have met Mark Kearney and have come out thinking, I really like this guy. He gave me his phone number.

I feel heard. He made me feel valued. He agreed with what I was saying, or at least he appears to have agreed with what these people are saying because he can't possibly agree with all of the people that come out of meetings with him. But, you know, he can be, if he wants to be incredibly charming. and he's obviously gold-oriented and he knows how to achieve those goals

and his relationships with people. We have also seen, even in, like, you know, public footage from the House of Commons how, like, he seemed to be dismissing Melanie Jolie, the industry minister, by giving her the hand while he was busy writing some notes down on his desk and during question period. Not really, we can't really imagine Justin Trudeau doing that to Melanie Jolie.

So there's obviously some interpersonal relationships that are not necessarily always operating in the smoothest way that they possibly could. But, you know, everybody's not a cartoon character. There's multi-dimensions to our personalities. And so I think it's, yes, he likes to people to be on their A game and he's, you know, incredibly punctual and wants people to dress in a very professional way and expects you to be briefed and to add. value when you're interjecting cabinet. But also, when he meets with people, even people from other opposition parties, they seem to come away thinking like, this guy's not half bad. Rob, you raised this.

What are you hearing? Well, there are lots of people who say, what's wrong with a guy who's demanding? What's wrong with a leader who sets high standards and expects those standards to be met? And there isn't a lot wrong with that. What you do get in political leadership is you do hit rough patches. You do get punched in the nose in ways that you never see coming. And it sends you reeling and you need the help and support of people. Now, in a young government, your caucus is filled with people who might not be in cabinet but who are hoping to get into cabinet.

But at a certain point, caucus members understand they're never going to be in cabinet. And so then there is, in essence, if they're electorally solid, they are free agents, and they can pose a danger to a leader. They can cause trouble. And we're nowhere near that point yet. But some of the people who feel like they're being treated in a way that is not cavalier, just ignored. Their views aren't sought after.

They're not being consulted. You know, I asked somebody if the prime minister was going to do the kind of things that Jean-Claude, San Brian Mulroney did, Mike Harris, other people like that that I've heard of, where they invite somebody over to their residence once a month, like 10 MPs, backbench MPs. And the leader doesn't talk, he just listens. listens to what their concerns are, takes notes, and then gets back to them.

And I was told, no, he doesn't operate that way. He has no interest in doing that. Well, I think that's the kind of thing that actually is a distant early warning system that diffuses a lot of missiles that might be coming over the horizon that you don't see. But he is not interested in doing that kind of thing. And it'll be interesting to see if he pays a price for that because it is being noticed. That's being noticed. So is, you know, the promises he might have made some people before the election about

positions and responsibilities only to have those promises evaporate. Now, again, we're in a very young stage of a young government. And I'm sure we're going to get to the cabinet shuffle discussion, but there will be a cabinet shuffle and there will be many cabinet shuffles probably. head into this government. So a lot of them are going to buy their time until they realize they're not ever going to get into cabinet, and then they may become a problem. What I've always thought about cabinet shuffles in all my years is that when the journals start talking about cabinet shuffles is because they run out of other things that they're

interested in talking about. But we will get to that. But we're going to take our break first, And when we come back, we'll deal with two other things that at least I find interesting at this point. So we'll do that right after this. And welcome back. You're listening to The Bridge, the Tuesday episode. This Tuesday, it is Reporter's Notebook with Althea Raj and Rob Russo. Althea is, of course, with the Toronto Star. Rob is with The Economist.

You're listening on Sirius XM, Channel 167, Canada talks or on your favorite podcast platform. Okay, those two other things that I'm interested in talking about. I mean, there is a big trade negotiation going on. And we keep hearing these rumblings, are they really close to a deal on steel and aluminum? But then nothing happens. We heard that two weeks ago.

We heard that before Carney and Trump met, just before. This is probably what they might come up with. Well, maybe they got close, but they didn't get it all the way. We were hearing it again last week, and we sort of hear some rumblings of that as this week begins. What are we here? What do we know? Do we know anything on this? I'll see you.

What to believe. What we are told is that they are close. Dominic LeBlanc has been spending. a lot of time. This is the minister in charge of the Canada-US file. In Washington, D.C., they are actively negotiating. Michael Sabio, the clerk of the Privy Council, has also been in D.C. a lot. Again, actively negotiation.

We're not really sure what exactly it is that they're going to come up with, but the Americans have given the Canadians a long list of trade irritants. So basically what they want from us. What's unclear is what we're willing to put at the table at this point and what we would be willing to put at the table when the larger negotiation over Kizma happens. They have been leaks about supply management being discussed, culture being discussed. I don't know what's really going to go with the final agreement. But we're told that what they're aiming for is tariff relief on steel and aluminum,

possibly autos, depending on who tells you or who briefs you, copper and softwood is in that list. But just today, for example, what officially I'm told, the steel and aluminum conversations ongoing, we remain hopeful. Rob. I think if our listeners went outside and looked at the tallest tree on their street

and looked at the branch that's bending, that would be me out on that limb. A couple of weeks ago when we did this, I said that there would be no way that Mark Carney wouldn't go down there. He just wouldn't go down there, I said, unless he had a reasonable chance at a trade deal, that he wouldn't come back empty-handed. And it's been two weeks, and his hands aren't full, certainly.

But I continue to hear from people who should know that they are working towards, a deal that goes beyond steel and aluminum that doesn't include autos that is about energy and it's more than just the keystone pipeline that is a resource discussion that is about more than the keystone pipeline. So when I hear fleshed out details like that, when I see Dominic Leblanc and Michael Sabia in Washington day after day after day after day. I still, based on what I'm being told, expect a deal,

a limited deal, and that it could come at any time. Okay, well, that certainly clears everything up. Time will tell. That's it. That's the famous John Drury closer on a television newscast one night. You know, he was a famous CBC reporter in the 60s and 70s and a little bit in the 80s, too. He was a great guy, fabulous guy. But he had one of those stories where, you know, he had two competing sides saying, this is going to happen or that's going to happen.

And he came on at the end and he said, time will tell. Who knows? Who really knows? John Drury, CBC News, Ottawa. It was a classic. Okay, last topic. And Althea hinted at it. I think it was Althea.

It's Rob. Or was it Rob about cabinet shuffled? Mm-hmm. You know, as we said at the time, these cabinet shuffle stories seem to pop up every couple of months. But they're certainly popped up again in the last few weeks that there could be a shuffle and it could be soon. Why a shuffle? Why another shuffle? Anybody want to...

Because some ministers are not performing very well. I think that there is consensus that some ministers are struggling and may be moved because the way I understand it, the prime minister and the people around them, I've put in a sort of CEO style review of everybody in cabinet. Everybody in cabinet is being reviewed on a constant basis to see how they're performing and some are not thought to be performing very well. And there's a sense that some of them won't perform very well in the roles that they've been given. So there's that. There might be a conservative or somebody else who crosses the floor who may request a cabinet level of position.

There will be people moved along. Everybody knows the patronage plums that are, are still to be plopped, including High Commissioner to London, although I keep telling people that Peter Mansbridge would make an excellent high commission. There's that, and there's the position as our ambassador to the European Union. Positions like that remain open, and so those are the reasons. Now, as to when it would happen, I'm told it wouldn't make much sense to do it until during the Christmas break to allow new people to get some time to get to know their portfolios, get familiar with things, and get settled in for the new year.

And they would also like to get this trade business of the sectoral tariffs settled before they have to move people around as well. And they've got a budget in a couple of weeks. Right. Althea, you get to have the last word on this topic. So there's been rumors of a cabinet shuffle. I would say from people who you don't really know, but there's going to be a habit shuffle for like weeks this fall.

The only reason you would have a cabinet shuffle, in my opinion, before early January, frankly, is if you are trying to bring new members in to vote for the budget. So whether it's a conservative or whatnot. And just to kind of, I think a little less add a little a little asterisk, When we think of people who have crossed the floor, you know, it's not always a very successful transition. Scott Bryson is probably the most successful transition, and he crossed on a moral ethical issue for him. You know, Belinda Strannick crossing the floor or what's the guy's name from Vancouver in 2006, who became trade minister under Stephen Harper.

David Emerson. Yeah, David Emerson. you know, D. didn't run again. It was chaos in his writing. Leon and Al-Slav crossed from the Liberals to the Conservatives' Opposition Party. Unless that there is a big move, I don't see why they would risk having a shuffle, you know, next month. That being said, they have let it be known that there will be a shuffle by not splitting Steve McKinnon's two jobs up. So when Christia Freeland left the transport portfolio, they gave the house leader, Steve McKinnon, her job.

He cannot hold both the jobs at the same time. I'm told he would rather be the transport minister. So somebody has to be a house leader. It's a really crucial job, especially in a minority government. Rob was really polite. The immigration minister absolutely should be shuffled. Shaftat, the Treasury Board President, also somebody that is not seen to be performing at all.

But these are picks that they knew, like two, three, one month in, two, three weeks, one month in that they had made bad calls. The question mark is Gary Andesanandisangari, who at the public safety minister, does he remain in cabinet? Is he just shifted to another position? The thing is, you don't want to keep doing shuffles all the time because it actually creates more resentment than it solves problems. You have more of the backbench where like, oh, well, why not me? I'm doing a good job.

Why haven't you noticed me? And so they would be wise to take their time and give a real strategic reasons for why they're doing a shuffle. I love what you said at the beginning of that, which is basically that most Canadians, have no idea who's in the cabinet other than a couple of positions, right? And you float all these names out, as you just did. And for most Canadians, they go, I've never heard of that person.

And, you know, if they disappear, it's not going to make any difference to them, right? I mean, it's one of those things you witness on the day of a cabinet shuffle. You know, or the day of a cabinet swearing in, you see 28 to 38 people standing. standing there, men and women, and you know that for many of them, it's the only day their name is ever going to be reported.

Is they going to be in some kind of minor portfolio that nobody follows that much that the media doesn't write about? It doesn't mean they're not doing a job or working or trying to do something. They're just not very well known. No, but if you're Mark Carney and you're running a corporate-style government and you see these people as VPs in effect, and they're not performing, He has already shown that he can be quite cold and quite quick in getting rid of people who are not seen as competent. The problem is, again, when you're running a Westminster-style cabinet, you have regional considerations, you have religious representations in Canada that have to be considered.

So it becomes quite complicated, linguistic considerations as well. So what was it that Sir Johnny McDonald said, give me good wood and I'll make a good cabinet? Well, you don't always get to choose the kind of timber, right? But I think almost from the beginning, we heard rumblings of him being unsatisfied, dissatisfied with the choices that he was compelled to make in his cabinet. Well, it's clearly he's very demanding of the people he works with,

whether they're in cabinet or whether they're in the bureaucracy, you keep hearing these kind of stories out there about what he expects from people and how unhappy he is if he doesn't see that. So, well, you know, that's one of the differences, obviously, for somebody who's never been directly in politics the way he is now. And being a CEO of a big company demanding certain things

and the relationship you have with those who work for you is not necessarily the same as being a leader of a political party and a government and the people you've got to work with you. I mean, there are people who are sent there by the people of Canada, right? It's a little different than working up the ladders of a corporation or a business. Or even being the president of a republic where you can, in effect, pick your cabinet ministers, pluck them from whatever area or domain, as Donald Trump can do in life, whether it's business, sports, the media, you know, he gets to choose.

Well, Mark Carney or any prime minister doesn't necessarily get to choose. He has to choose from among those who are, as you said, sent to Ottawa by voters. Not necessarily. Could pick a senator. Yes, you could pick a senator. Yes, and that's been done. Yeah. That's been done with limited success. Limited success.

Harper did it. Clark did it. Mulroney had Lowell Murray. Yeah. I think the bigger question is, like, yes, people feel tied with all these like regional breakdowns and political considerations and religious considerations and ethnic considerations, but you also choose to be tied to those, right? Like if you decide that actually I want to have 20 white guys in my cabinet because I think

they are the most competent and they're the ones that I want, then just. just make that choice and own it and explain it. So it's not like there absolutely has to be this. It's there's a lot of people in that backbench that are quite talented. And I think part of it is also that the people offering advice had no clue who was coming in to that team. And so part of it is also Mark Carney getting to know who his team is and who he wants to elevate. And back to an earlier part of our discussion, one thing that I have found surprising is that maybe he's not having the dinners with all these people, but frankly, I don't know how he would have time because he always seems to be in a plane jetting away to some board capital. But when people

have come to him with a proposal about Ix or an idea about why, he has made himself available. So it's not that he's not available at all. It's if you show initiative, he will hear you out. Okay. We'll leave it at that for this week. Thanks to both of you. Good discussion. Good discussion about some things that we're, you know, a little unsure of, but are clearly floating around in the atmosphere around Ottawa in terms of discussions that are taking place in a number of parties. And we didn't even get to the exciting NDP leadership race. We have lots of time to talk about it. It's in March. It's in March. There's a showcase, though, at the end of this month. So maybe we talk about that later. Okay.

We'll do that. Thank you both. Thanks to Rob. Thanks to Althea. We've talked to you again in two weeks' time. Thanks, Peter. There you go. The reporter's notebook for this week, this second Tuesday.

Althea Raj, Toronto Star, Rob Russo, the Economist. Good to hear what they're thinking and what they're hearing in the hallways of parliament. Okay, that's going to wrap it up for this week, or for this day, Tuesday, we'll be back tomorrow. I'm still toying with the idea of what to do tomorrow. I think we may do another NBIT special. We'll see. It's either that or an encore edition.

So you're going to have to tune in to find out that's tomorrow right here on the Wednesday edition of the Bridge. Thursday, of course, is your turn. You've heard the question of the week. The random ranter will be by as well. And Friday's Good Talk with Bruce. Anderson and Chantelle-A-Bear. I'm Peter Mansbridge. Thanks so much for listening. Talk to you again in less than 24 hours.