The Bridge with Peter Mansbridge - Smoke, Mirrors and The Truth - Inside the Palace Walls

Episode Date: March 10, 2021

This is a master class in communications strategy.  Bruce Anderson and our guest in London, former Stephen Harper Communications Director Andrew MacDougall, take us inside what likely happened as Buckingham Palace put out a statement to counter the Harry and Meagan interview.  What likely happened, how did they decide what to say, how to say it and when to say it.  You'll learn a lot about how these things are done.

Hello there, I'm Peter Mansbridge. You're just moments away from the latest episode of The Bridge, and it's Wednesday. That means smoke mirrors and the truth. Bruce Anderson is here from Ottawa, and so is a special, which is good to hear. Summer, spring weather at least is starting to sweep across parts of southern Ontario, which is always nice. Gorgeous weather here right now. It's really lifting the spirits a little bit. Well, I think we're only going to be teased on that front because there's supposed to be colder weather coming in in a couple of days. Anyway, enough about the weather.

Our special guest today is coming to us again from London, England, where it's been an exciting week. And that, of course, is Andrew McDougall, who many Canadians will perhaps remember as the former Director of Communications for Prime Minister Stephen Harper. But Andrew now lives in London, where he's part of the Trafalgar Group, a director of the Trafalgar Group, where among other things, they handle communications issues and problems and try to give people a sense of the best way to handle those kind of difficulties. So we've actually been

watching quite the story unfold, you know, actually all over the world. I mean, it's something like 50 million people, Andrew, have watched this interview with Harry and Meghan already around the world, and obviously a lot in England and a lot in America. Here's where I'd like to start. The Palace spent about 48 hours trying to decide what to do and what to say after the interview aired with its variety of bombshells, which we've been over quite a bit. They came out finally yesterday with a statement that runs 70 words, and 70 words is not very long.

In fact, I can read it. The whole family is saddened to learn the full extent of how challenging the last few years have been for Harry and Meghan. The issues raised, particularly that of race, are concerning. While some recollections may vary, they are taken very seriously and will be addressed by the family privately harry megan and archie will always be much loved family members so that's it that's all that's what the palace says so andrew given your background when you hear that statement and read

that statement what are they actually saying? I think it is, as you hinted at, Peter, it's a very carefully crafted statement. That opening line in particular is, to me, a shot across the bow. It's a version of, well, nobody told us this, implying that these criticisms that are now made in the public after the fact were never raised in private uh and then even then they go into then disputing in a way in a polite way the central allegation you know the thing that's dominated all the headlines here was about the thought that the baby might be too dark to be a monarch so they're basically calling that out saying well we don't remember it that way but without dismissing it out of hand, because these issues, as we all know, play so hot across the media and social media in particular.

You know, this has kind of put everybody back into their tribal camps of how they view the world via race, etc. So it was meant to kind of get to that. And then closing with a touch of love and warmth and and by saying they'll always be loved and i think that's to combat this this idea that that was very much painted by the duchess in the interview that's a very uncaring unloving unfeeling family which is of course the public sentiment right now after watching shows like the crown so when you're putting these words together you have to think about well who's speaking them her majesty her Majesty doesn't open her mouth that often, and she certainly doesn't open her mouth on things like this, very rarely, if at all. And that was, if you remember the kerfuffle around the time that Princess Diana died, was the fact that the palace tried to maintain this stony silence of, you know, never complain, never explain, is the family motto, and just realizing that that wasn't tenable. So you had to say something. You don't want to advance the story. You don't want to give them a target to shoot back at,

but you want to dispel some of the most pernicious stuff that's going around there. Basically there's a racist and unnamed racist, by the way, in the Royal family and do that in a way that doesn't put kind of, you know, like I said, guarantee another 10 days of this, which we'll get probably anyway. And the determination you make is what can I say without the other side coming back on me? And that's the thing I think that's the hardest to predict for me, because typically, that's not even up for discussion. You know, that you just don't air your dirty laundry in public

like this, but they've done it now. So that precedent has been, has been broken. Would they do it again? Well, they might. So we better not be too definitive or nasty in response, lest we kind of provoke a backlash that we might not win. And then you set that against how do people be the monarchy while people respect her majesty, queen Elizabeth the second, do they respect anybody else in that family? And I know in countries

like canada that's the kind of fear is what comes after them and and will the will the affinity for the institution last beyond that so that's a lot to get into 70 words yeah i was gonna and i think they did it 70 words just about right yeah how long about right and it's a version how long do you think it's a version of when they go when they go low we go high that's that was their thinking i think because they've done something a bit dirty or that just isn't done whatever you think about what happened and the motives for it that they just had to respond in keeping in their voice and and i think they did that without being too confrontational now i know bruce wants wants to jump in here and he should,

but let me just follow it up with one thing. As you said, 70 words, which is not much, takes him two days to come up with something like that. Can you take us inside what you think would have been happening during those two days? Who were we talking about? Who's sitting in the room? Who's in the room where it happened, where those 70 words happened?

Yeah, so I think, you know, in the palace? Who's in the room where it happened, where those 70 words happened? Yeah. So I think, you know, in the palace, there is a communications team. They are tasked kind of routine with, with the kind of run of the mill stuff that, that the firm has to do and has to communicate on whether that's important anniversaries, you know, passing of global figures, et cetera. The queen has asked for words quite frequently. So there is a team in place to do this but i think what makes this different is there's nothing a courtier can put down on paper that

doesn't have to be checked against kind of the mood in the room and that's what would have made this different so i think you would have had and we obviously have prince philip who's in hospital and has been for weeks now um so this, I think, would have been some version of Her Majesty and those next in line, particularly Charles and William, just to make sure that the words convey. And I think first it's you set the boundaries. What do we want to achieve? And then you set the team away to say right against that brief

and then check it back with the principal to make sure that it's good to achieve. And then you set the team away to say right against that brief, and then check it back with the principal to make sure that it's good to go. And there was no way I don't think that statement went out with without the Royal seal of approval. Hey, Bruce. Well, you know, Peter, I, I was trying to think about this question from the standpoint of let's say that one member of the Royal family called me and said, can you come over here and meet with us and we'll talk about what to do about this. And I've been in conversations of nowhere near as much magnitude as this story. I know Andrew's been involved in some as well.

You know, just those days when some really kind of pretty unexpected and pretty awful stuff is happening. And people who are at the heart of it need to be able to talk to somebody who's not them, who's not so close to them, who's going to be able to give them some honest kind of takes on it, even if that conversation is a little bit uncomfortable. So if I had been asked to go over and sit in Buckingham Palace with them all looking kind of gloomy and nervous or angry and irate, I don't know what they would be feeling. I would have said, look, there's really three questions that we should address. The first is, do we think that public sentiment after this interview is generally going to be with us or tilting more against us? And that would, you know, be a meaningful conversation in the sense of if you think that a public that you care about, and, you know, I know some people say, well, the only public that they really care about are people who live in the UK. And I think Andrew touched on the idea that, well, you know, Commonwealth countries also matter too, to the longevity and the sense of permanency of

the monarchy. So I think the broader public and the question of whether or not sentiment is tilted against them, based on the interview or largely sympathetic with them is the first important question to kind of think through, as you're thinking about what kind of response. The second question is, are the allegations true or not? And if they're not true, then you have a really tricky question that's subsequent to that, which is, do you say they're not true? And if you say they're not true, because they're not true, is everybody going to hold that line? Or is somebody going to go a little bit like, well, I don't know, it could be true, or somebody said something that might have sounded like that. And I'm talking about the combination of the race comment, and also the indifference to the mental health issues that Meghan Markle was suffering. So is it true?

And if it's not true, maybe you do need to say it's not true. But when you think about doing that, that takes you to the third question and maybe the most important question for the royal family in this situation, which is, do you want this story to end as quickly sentiment with you if you're going to say that the allegations are not true then you better expect that this is going to continue to be a story because i think harry and megan markle made it clear that they were not going to be bullied by members of the royal family and that they were going to stand up for themselves and clearly that they can get a platform a huge platform to say whatever they want to say whenever they want to say it. So I would have actually liked to be in that meeting. But maybe there'll be another one, maybe we'll get invited. Yeah, but I think you'll see, but based on your criteria, I think they answered that brief in the affirmative that it's not true, but without nakedly saying it's not true.

And this is like the recollections differ. And it's sorry to hear the full extent of that means that maybe this stuff wasn't aired. And the interesting bit, and of course, there's kind of endless coverage of this here in the UK, as you might imagine. And one of the most interesting was a podcast that was looking at some of the staff that Harry and Meghan had, you know, because they're the center of bullying allegations from the Sussexes their way. And it wasn't the British staff, it was the American staff that was brought in that were the people that were getting the worst treatment from the couple, apparently. So this isn't a case of kind of worlds colliding or cultures colliding it was really just about behavior and look we've been in politics like if i had had kind of cried bullying every time the prime minister had a few sharp words for me like i probably would have done

nothing else right i mean it's part of the not in a nasty way it's just the kind of hothouse environment of of you know people go hot and, and everything's the most important thing in the world at the moment. And you have to be able to step back and go, this isn't personal. This is just kind of the way the world is going. And I can't imagine stepping into the fishbowl of the monarchy. But then again, I would like to think I would go into that with my eyes wide open, realizing that there are boundaries that are put around that. And when you're brought in, you know, as a minor character, in terms of the monarchy and lines of succession, and will you ever be the show, you know, to make it a political comparison, you know, when you're the minister of culture, you have a voice, yes, in the government, but you're not the prime minister.

That's the queen in this case. And everything you have to do has to be in service of the queen and the institution. And having that expectation settled right when you go into it, I think, prevents a lot of problems on the end of it. And I suspect we'll never know, really, the full extent of this. Because I think people now have kind of seen the mutually assured destruction path that we're on. And have maybe now realized that we've had our say, they've had their say. I want to raise two other things and get your guys take on this. I mean, I was, I was, I was struck by something that was kind of in the margins of what Harry was

describing and that Oprah is good a job as I think she did interviewing didn't really kind of fully develop as a topic. Which is the idea of a royal family almost terrified of public will turning against them. And feeling vulnerable, so vulnerable that they had to be really careful how they dealt with these kinds of things. And how they dealt with Meghan Markle's mental health issues and basically that everything was, every instinct that they had seemed to be described as being, let's not get out of place. Let's not get out of line. Let's not draw attention to ourselves because people might come for us and say this monarchy thing it it's over and and so I was really I think I kind of heard it in the margins of Oprah saying well how

could anybody feel trapped and how could anybody feel that they were powerless and that kind of thing and in the family writ large not just with respect to that couple and I thought that was quite interesting and I'd love to hear what you guys think about that notion of a kind of a timid, almost trapped in place, worried that it might be ended at some point, royal family. And then the second thing was the allusion to a cozy relationship between the tabloids and the palace. So cozy that there were holiday parties at the palace with the tabloids and that that relationship was so symbiotic that in theory anyway, the royal family could have called off some of the most vitriolic coverage

about Meghan Markle but chose not to. I don't know whether that's true or not, but I was really intrigued by it. And there hasn't been much discussion that I've seen since then. All right. Let me let Andrew deal with the tabloids because he loves talking about the tabloids. Let me try a little bit on the first one. You know, as somebody who was there at the time of Diana's death, You know, that was a very revealing week about the monarchy and the way it related to the people

and the way they related to a common feeling about the issue. Because if you recall, you know, it went for days before the Queen reacted in a real way. Meanwhile, there are literally hundreds of thousands of people were in the streets taking flowers to the gates of Buckingham Palace, taking flowers to the gates of Kensington, where it was like 10 feet high of flowers. And the people were devastated, open weeping in the streets.

And the Queen was in Scotland,land i believe it was up at belmoral and there was this whole hesitation for five or six days about whether or not the flag should be at uh half mass at buckingham palace uh and it was concluded after that whole thing sort of passed in time that it had been a terrible mistake on the part of Buckingham Palace, the whole way they'd handled it. And the communication strategy was awful. And they brought all these professionals in to totally revamp how the palace would handle things, because the conclusion was they were totally out of touch with the people. So the question must have been circulating around over these last 48 hours about we can't god we can't look like we're out of touch with the way the people are

on this story even though in in in britain i i'll leave it to andrew to tell me but it it seemed like there's kind of a divided opinion there to some degree. But nevertheless, that was the challenge. Don't look out of touch. We have to stay in touch because there's so much at stake here in terms of the future of the monarchy. So that's how I'd handle the first part of your question. I'll let Andrew try and deal with the tabloids. Yeah, I would second a lot what you said, Peter, by the way, about that. And I think that it's always this fear of changing times and are we changing

with them? And, and, you know, I like to picture Prince Charles going like mental health, like where were people thinking of my mental health when they sent me to Wales for a year to learn Welsh? Cause I was the Prince of Wales and I had no friends, you know, nobody was talking about my mental health then. So you get that generational thing. And plus it's the monarchy. You just don't talk about these things, right? I'm sure they've all kind of gone through similar periods of this and they're just not used to people talking about it. So it caught them off guard.

But I think you're absolutely right. In terms of the tabloids, I think it's important to qualify here because this cozy relationship came out of, in effect, two things. Princess Diana's death and the kind of paparazzi harassment that she was subjected to. Unregulated, unfiltered, unadulterated harassment. And so the decision was taken to, we have to work with the beast and not always in opposition to it. And so every time you see the royals release a picture of the kids getting older,

that goes on all the front pages because it sells papers. And that's the deal they've done. And the other thing is the phone hacking scandal that happened over here, where particularly the royal correspondents got a kicking for some of their practices and how they got stories. So you have to, you have to weigh up the interest in the subject matter, and the access to it. And the palace, you know, certainly when you when you deal with it on a political level are super strict in how you interact with them, you know, barely get our official photographer in because the palace selects one photographer and they supply all the pictures and that's the way it is um so i think i think it's a bit uncharitable to frame the cozy relationship without kind of understanding the history and where it came from and that's not to say it's perfect or it's right and i think also the third issue i'd throw in there is

obviously the the last year has not been without scandal in the royal family particularly my namesake prince andrew who's who's kind of rightly battered for for getting creamed by emily mateless on the bbc and looking horribly out of touch you know straightforward shooting party weekend and all the greatest hits that we all remember it was a disaster from start to finish so i think the royal family goes it's better to manage these things in careful ways that are largely visual largely good news um and and maybe you know realized and they couldn't really um maybe speak out as forcefully against them when when they were taking a kicking themselves and and there's only so many chits you can trade and and deals you can do um and ultimately again not

not to excuse uh the tabloids here but like what do you expect from a snake but a hiss it's what they do they do it to everybody and the daily mail Mail was cheering Meghan Markle during the wedding. It was like a new era. I don't remember this period. I remember, sorry, this period, you know, my significant other was at the wedding and covering and there was euphoria. And finally, the family's modernizing. And this is a great thing. And that was universal. There wasn't anybody going, oh, my God, I can't believe a Black person is going to be in the family. You know, I'm sure some people thought it, but nobody actually said it. And I think it was what happened subsequent to that, that somehow changed the dynamic. And I don't think we've gotten the full story about that. And I think it's always that kind of jarring moment where you realize that I'm going to change the way things are done when I get into that family, and boy, I'm going to get them going here, here. And then you realize you just, you have no ability to affect change and you're kind of stuck in this thing. And how do you deal with that? And I think we've seen them deal with it by getting out of it.

But if you're out of it, you're out of it. And that was the deal. And now they're back into it. And I think that's kind of where a lot of the resentment in the tabloids comes from is you don't kind of, you know, you don't take a shit on her majesty's door, basically. That's just not done. And nobody thinks that that should be done because everybody loves the queen. There's one unifying thing, even amongst the Republicans here, there is a respect for her that is deep and long, long lasting.

And to have this done, no matter what you think about the particulars, has put Her Majesty in an awful position. Particularly with the unnamed kind of racist in the family that just put a cloud over everybody, which even they felt they had to walk back by having Oprah say, look, it wasn't Her Majesty or Prince Philip, when I think everybody had Prince Philip in their head. But then is it Prince Charles? Is it Camilla? Is it Will?

Is it Kate? And that's not fair on them to leave that hanging out there as well. So what an awful mess. And it's just the tone of regret that it's come to this is the kind of overwhelming. And then that feeds anger on the tabloid side. And it's a struggling business, right?

They got to sell some papers. So they're going to give us 30 pages on this because people are buying it. I've probably come at this a little bit differently than Andrew on some of those points, but you know, I do, I do get the, I think the background in terms of the relationship between the tabloids and the Royal family is, is an important part of context. I guess I look at it and go, it was at,

it was at some point in time when the royals accepted maybe they didn't have a choice that their essential value proposition for most people was going to be as celebrities as dispensers of pictures um and that's a little bit of a deal with the devil and whether or not it was right to make that deal or it was right at the moment because the alternative seemed horrible but ultimately now it looks to me like other than the queen who i agree with andrew is is very much loved but she isn't going to live forever and then what happens after that when you've got all of these people who are tarnished, with the exception of so far Will and Kate? But I think that Harry kind of signaled in the interview that he's holding a card that he may play at some point in the future by saying this happened and I'm not going to say who it was. And then the next day, excluding two people from the who it was, he was actually, you know, maybe he was protecting himself from criticism,

but maybe he was just kind of narrowing the message to the family, which is if you come after me anymore, if you do more things to try to damage me or my wife or put me at risk, this story isn't over. I kind of interpreted what he was doing there as quite deliberate and a signal to the family that he wasn't going to be pushed around um now who was pushing him around when you're when you're after getting exiled like the thing the issue just kind of dropped off the radar here it was accepted that they were over there and nobody was like what were they responding to with this interview i guess is my question to that point bruce is i don't think anybody had a gun to his head saying we're going to take another run at you

um unless i missed unless i missed that uh well i don't know that there was an active uh there was certainly nothing public but it did sound as though there were some things behind the scenes and i don't know whether they were true or not. And I'm not here kind of saying I thought that Harry and Meghan covered themselves in glory in this thing. But just it feels to me that, you know, that race question was denied if it's not true. Don't just say interpretations can vary. And they didn't deny it. And interpretations may vary doesn't, you know, exclude the fact that it might have happened. And then the other question really about mental health, I don't think that today, it makes a difference whether I don't think you

were saying this, Andrew, whether in Prince when Prince Charles went to Wales, that people ever talked about mental health. And so if you grew up in a family that didn't talk about it, then you don't talk about it now. I think we live in a different time, and I think it's good that we live in a different time. I think the expectations are that institutions of leadership are supposed to be better than what Meghan Markle was describing or be able to say that happened and it was unfortunate and we're

going to fix it or something like that rather than just interpretations may vary. But, you know, I do think that issue and the prominence of social media mean that the royal family are on thinner ice than ever on that issue of mental health and how it's dealt with. You know, Bruce mentioned something a few moments ago that, you know, everybody thinks about, but there really isn't much discussion about because nobody wants it to happen anytime soon. And that is the fact that the Queen's not going to live forever. She's 94. You know, her mother lasted into, you know, past 100. So there's reason to believe that, you know, she's got a number of years left but it is going

to end at a certain point and the question becomes you know can the monarchy survive when she's gone i mean if she went today charles becomes um king he's 72 he could be king for 30 years. Will could be an old guy by the time he gets his turn. So there's much hope placed in Will and his sons as to the future, but that's not the future. The future is no Elizabeth. And how that changes the big equation, frankly, for a lot of people, whether it's in Britain or in the Commonwealth, including in Canada, as to whether or not the monarchy can and should survive.

How common is the discussion about that in Britain these days, Andrew? And has it picked up in these last two days or is that just not an issue? I think it should be. And I think it's avoided strenuously here for that very reason is that, you know, if you think about what's changed in this world you know forget like the last 50 60 years 65 years whatever it is you know that i guess we're coming up on 70 years for her majesty right um a lot has changed and she's a constant and and i think we undervalue i would say this is conservative the kind of constancy and things and symbols that you can point to that you understand that have always been there with you in your life.

And that whole idea of change and how much change do you take? And I fear the monarchy is going to be reduced and, and I'm probably okay with this, but it's going to be some version of like Senate reform in Canada. It's like, yeah, the system sucks, but when you actually have to change it, how can you actually change it? And is it worth changing? And is it worth making Canada Republic? Well, then that opens up a whole constitution. We just can't be bothered. And that conversation gets parked as long as the figurehead on top is somebody that we kind of all, you know to will and kate kind of try to try to

bridge that and and not bridge it in a way that i think harry and megan want to bridge it by being celebrity royals but by reincarnating the spirit of elizabeth the second and and being the institution that's there that doesn't say much that doesn't get involved in the mucky day-to-day details but provides that kind of lodestar of that's something I understand and something that I just know is there. And that's my comfort blanket. And we don't have to talk about all the other awful stuff if it should go. But, but look, I think, you know, when she, when she goes, when she goes,

it's, it is going to be, you know, it will almost be the last figure of global standing really like Mandela type that everybody around the world will go, oh, my God, that person's gone. And then, you know, the world is now so atomized that I don't think we'll have that. And I think we underplay how years ago, it looked like he embarked on a very determined effort to say, look, if you had thought I was controversial and I had strong opinions and I was kind of curious and notable, I don't want you to think that anymore. I want you to understand that I will have nothing to say if and when this wonderful opportunity finally comes to rest on my shoulder. I will make no waves, rock no boats, just let me have this. Just a simple organic farmer. Yeah, that's right.

Yeah, with a huge duchy of corn. Is it the duchy of Cornwall? Anyway, I kind of find the whole, in the world, you talk about what things have changed. I do think that the income inequality conversation has been changing too. And I don't think it matters as long as Elizabeth is the queen. But I think that the prospect of all of that wealth, all of that property, all of that permanent entitlement accruing to Charles, who I don't think has the popularity or the skill set to become popular, I think that's going to be a challenge in a modern time. I don't think it would be, I agree with you, as much of a challenge if it skipped a generation,

because I do think that on some level, people appreciate the permanence of the symbol, especially if the symbol, the aspect of the symbol that they really enjoy is the idea of acting with dignity and a sense of, you know, public service and class and not class in the upper class sense, but just, you know, with, with grace. And I'm not sure how easily Charles will inhabit that role, given just the way he comes across and the way he, you know, we've watched him for 72 years. I haven't, I'm not 72 yet, but Peter's watched him for 72 years. Every day. I've watched every single day. I will tell you one thing. If you think he's got a grudge

or has the possibility of having a grudge for spending a year in wales can you imagine what he'll think when they come to him say actually we'd like to skip a generation here you're on the bench it's the ultimate it's the ultimate proof of service and and belief in the institution though if you can kind of sublimate your own self-interest to the greater good right and i think that would be a litmus test for them. And, you know, I could see him as the cuddly grandpa in that scenario who kind of has his pet issues and can lead on whether it's the environment or other issues that he's shown that he's cared about.

I think he can dip into that water in a way he couldn't as sovereign. And, you know, just speaking about conversations that would be interesting to be in the room for, I think there's a case to be made. And, yeah, I mean, God, I can't imagine, you know, just speaking about conversations that would be interesting to be in the room for, I think there's a case to be made. And yeah, I mean, God, I can't imagine, you know, you spend your whole life waiting for that chance to kick the football, and then somebody says, like, no, you don't get a chance, you know, the joke's on you, that would take a lot. But what action would show greater understanding of the institution and the concept of service than declining service, as paradoxical as that might be. But if they're serious about wanting this thing to kind of keep going on for all the attendant

reasons, I think they have to look hard at it. And if anybody in Buckingham Palace is listening and wants to hire me to advise on that, I think you have just about enough money. Yeah, you imagine how much they spend already this week on communications. Actually, you know, maybe he'd come up with a solution like the Catholic Church did, where the Pope sort of sits there for two years and then says, okay, you know what, that's enough for me. Let's move it over to the next person. And, you know, I can't even remember that Pope's name. And, you know, I should.

My gosh, I was there for his uh installation and i was there for uh when pope francis benedict wasn't it benedict you're right ratzenberger yeah benedict yeah that's right ratzenberger all right listen andrew it's been fabulous having you on we wanted to talk a little bit about canadian politics we're gonna have to bring you back to do that because this is an exciting landscape here right now. Who knows what's going to happen in these next couple of months. And through the rest of

this year, the expectation now is that there's likely to be an election, but there's so many balls in the air and there's so many people's futures, including leaders, where there are big questions about their performance. And we'd love to get you in on that discussion, and we will in the next little while.

But this has been a real insight, I'm sure, for a lot of people as to how these kind of decisions are made about what to say and how to say it and when to say it. And we've really appreciated your time. Yeah, absolutely. Great to talk to you again, Andrew. Yeah. Thanks so much for having me on. It's always fun. Great.

So that's Smoke, Mirrors and the Truth for this week. Tomorrow, the potpourri Thursday. Friday is your letters on the weekend special. And if you have thoughts on this issue, including whether or not the monarchy should continue in this country, don't be shy. Send it along to mansbridgepodcast at gmail.com, the mansbridgepodcast at gmail.com.

Also tomorrow, Good Talk with Chantelle Hebert. That's 5 o'clock Eastern on SiriusXM. Go to siriusxm.ca slash Peter Mansbridge. There's specials on there right now for you to get access to that podcast. And you'll want to hear it. It's a good one. All right. That is it for this day.

Thank you so much for listening to The Bridge, Smoke, Mirrors, and the Truth. We'll talk to you again in 24 hours.