The Bridge with Peter Mansbridge - The Debut of Raj and Russo, The Reporter's Notebook

Episode Date: September 9, 2025

Althia Raj and Rob Russo work the halls and corridors of Parliament Hill every day that the House of Commons is in session. Althia is a senior columnist with the Toronto Star, Rob is the Canadian correspondent for The Economist. They'll alternate Tuesdays with the Moore-Butts Conversations.

And hello there, Peter Mansbridge here. This is Reporter's Notebook, Althea Raj, Rob Russo, coming right up. And hello there. This is our every second Tuesday, right? Every second Tuesday we'll hear from Althea and Rob. The other Tuesday is conversations with Moore and Butts. So we had them last week. great show, but this is going to be even better.

Althea Raj, of course, with the Toronto Star, has her own podcast as well. Rob Russo is with the Economist, the Canadian correspondent for the economist. Very distinguished, and we're lucky to have him with us. I've removed my monocle and ascot for this podcast. Right. Okay, here's the way I want to start. I want to get into some particular issues in a moment, but I want to talk generally first.

And what I want to know is, aside from the Black Quebecois, is there a caucus in Ottawa that's entirely happy with the way things are going for them? Rob, why don't you start? Well, I think the restiveness of the liberal caucus is overstated. I think that there is a progressive wing of the liberal caucus and of the liberal party. And I think that they're watching, but whether or not they are in any way rebelling, I think is overstated. The people that I've spoken to are still getting used to this prime minister,

are still looking for the channels through which they can communicate with him. but I don't talk to or hear from anybody who is going to in any way challenge the way he's doing things yet. It'll be interesting to see how things go over the next couple of days in Edmonton at the caucus. But I can tell you that if somebody does challenge Prime Minister Carney, that his response will probably be along the lines of let me get this straight. seven or eight months ago you guys were all out of a job and if I hear you correctly you want me to go back and do some of the things that would have put you out of a job well for now I'm going to stick with what almost won us a majority mandate a decade after we were first elected I don't anticipate that there will be much rest of this voiced openly at the liberal caucus as a result

Now, the other ones, the other ones. Before we get to the other ones, you know, there are a few journalists in Ottawa that have their ear to the ground as much as you two do. So it's going to be very interesting to hear what Elthia has to say and whether her ear to the ground is hearing the same kind of stuff that you're hearing, Elsia. I don't expect anybody to challenge Mark Carney

because frankly, most of them are afraid of him at this point. They don't quite know what to make of him. They have heard rumors and stories emanating from the PMO and of the bureaucracy about his demands, how dismissive he can be even publicly of people that he feels like should not be talking when they're talking. And so I don't expect an open challenge,

but I do expect, and, you know, the word is still being talked about between MPs that there are a lot of people, who are unhappy with the direction that Prime Minister Carney has started to take the country, who don't quite understand some of the staffing in the Prime Minister's office, who feel that he's getting bad advice, who feel like there were some errors back in June with some of the bills that were tabled, that don't understand why he said the word austerity and describing his budget last week.

There are a lot of people who are more on the progressive wing of the party, who kind of regrets supporting him because he has not turned out to be who they thought he was going to be. And he still kind of needs color who he is. And so I think people are in a way reserving judgment, but I do think there's a lot of people who are very concerned with the early moves. and fear some of the announcements that are going to come this fall. A lot of people, like, narrow it down for me.

I'm not looking for names here. But there's often unrest in backbenches of a government. That's not unusual. No, and there is some of that. Because, I mean, there are people who thought that a new prime minister meant that they would finally get a chance to shine, right? That they had waited patiently on the back bench or as a parliamentary secretary. And they were hoping to be appointed to cabinet and they're not.

And so there's like some of that bickering happening as well. But I don't think it's a, it's not a number that the PMO would be wise to discount. Because I think that when you have even like, you know, for example, the Environment Caucus, that this is like an ad hocacist that the liberals have started, And they announced, or they started organizing in June, my understanding is, but they told the media or Radio Canada a few weeks ago. So, you know, there's, when people start talking openly about things that they are organizing themselves as doing, that's caused the concern, I would think. So, you know, they would have known that this was happening for months. And instead of, you know, sending somebody to talk to MPs and to have ad hoc meanings about what we're doing on climate and don't worry. and this is what we're doing, that is not what has happened.

In fact, they have more reasons to worry. Rob, do you want to respond to that first? Yeah, I think that there's certainly concerns about the prime minister's style. If not his EQ, there is a sense that he doesn't really know how to deal with a caucus. That, as we've said, I think many times before and many other platforms,

he's never had to deal with anything beyond maybe a board of directors or a board of governors and he was the unparalleled smartest guy in the room. You know, politics in the Westminster system is very, very different, particularly when you're in a minority situation and I don't think we have to, we should ever lose sight of the fact that they are still a minority government, even if they're not imminently threatened with defeat anytime soon. But, you know, there were people, I think Althea mentioned people who were hoping to get into cabinet. Well, there are cabinet ministers who are cabinet ministers for the blink of an eyelash, and they're no longer in cabinet. And they don't know why. They still don't know why. And they're

wondering why. There were other people who were promised that they would be in cabinet after being left out of the election cabinet. And they still don't know why, because the prime minister has never really had a conversation with them. And they're still unsure what the channels are for them to get their concerns or their befuddlement aired out. I think that there's something to that. But I think they're going to have to reserve judgment because there is a general agreement that we are in a crisis.

We are in a moment that is going to be very, very challenging for the prime minister, for the government and for them as well. Just look at what we've seen in terms of announcements over the last couple of days. It's not about preparing for the grand new vision of Canada. It's preparing for the grim new reality that we might have to transition through in order to get to this grand new vision. So there are some difficult times coming, and I think everybody knows it. they would just like to be able to figure out how to get their concerns heard from.

And I think there's somebody who needs to be in the immediate entourage of the prime minister who acts as his distant early warning system, who prepares those lunches, those dinners that the prime minister would have with 10 or 12 MPs every month. There's somebody who needs to do that kind of work. All right. Let's move to the conservatives. And Althea, you start us off on this. How happy are they?

Defensive, you ask. Well, Pierre Pahliav is happy because he got reelected in Alberta, and he does not, from what I gather, fear the results of a leadership vote in January. I do not know of anyone who is actively organizing. I mean, there's people complaining, but I don't know of anybody who's actively organizing to try to defeat him. There are people who were unhappy, unhappy with his leadership style prior to the election, who were still unhappy and feel like the changes that they had hoped to see are not going to materialize within his office and the way he leads his team. And the tone that he has struck since the by-election suggests to them that same old, same old.

So some are not happy. Some are happy because they really strongly believe in Pierre Pauliow's vision. and they think that eventually he will succeed. You know, it's funny because if I'd ask myself that question a month ago, before the by-election, even knowing that he was going to win that by-election, if I'd been asked that question about how safe is he for January, probably would have said, better be careful, there's a lot of talk going on.

There's a lot of stuff going on, especially in Ontario. But in the last couple of weeks since the by-election, kind of hear that turned around. I don't know what turns it around, but I've even heard some conservatives who are not exactly big fans of Bolyev saying, he's safe. I'd say it's a no doubter for January,

the review vote. Rob, what are you hearing in terms of conservatives? Yeah, I think that if you call a convention for Calgary in January, despite all of that city's terms, you are not going to get a turnout of people from Atlantic Canada and Quebec and to a certain extent Ontario, which is where most of the unease about Mr. Polyev's leadership lies.

Exactly. So I think he's stacking the deck. Irrespective of that, I don't think that I think Althea is right. there is nobody wandering around Parliament hills with a sharpened shiv underneath their togas. There's nobody ready now. But there are people who, if they don't have pointed shivs, have pointed questions. Where is the post-mortem after the election? When are we going to get a fuller explanation for where the party fell short so that we can do better next time?

They're not satisfied with the suggestion that they've been hearing in public over the last several months, which is this was all a freak occurrence because of the unusual confluence of the conditions of Trump and Mark Carney's glittering CV. They want to hear more. They want to hear how are we going to grow in an era where there's a two-party system in Canada, particularly given where the new Democrats are going, I suspect we're going to get to them in a second. What are we going to do? Mr. Polyev said in the spring, after his election defeat, he said, what we need is a million more votes? Well, okay, what are we going to do to get those million more votes?

They want to hear that. Nobody expects him to be docile. Nobody expects him to change entirely his style. Even those who might be his detractors say that he's an effective communicator. The job of the leader of the official opposition is to oppose the government's policy. It is also, however, to prepare a government in waiting should the government fall. And that gets me back to the minority government situation. Should the government fall, it's the job of the opposition leader to prepare a government and waiting.

A lot of people are asking, where is the new blood? Where are the people who tried to recruit in the last weeks ahead of last spring's election to come in and join us? Where are those people? They said no in the spring. Are they prepared to say yes now? Can you tell us who they are? Can you bring them in in unofficial capacities? I'll only say this about your Calgary and January situation.

And I get it. I understand what you're saying. But let's not forget in 1983, so those of us were old enough to remember it. You know, when Joe Clark went to Winnipeg, it was colder than you, you use whatever phrase you want, but it was cold. You know, it was minus 25, 30.

The difference then, Peter, was that there was a viable alternative candidate offering an electoral path to victory who was not just well organized, but who was greasing the skids for Joe Clark, who was doing everything he could to make sure that Joe Clark came out of that convention in Winnipeg with, as Rock LaSalle said, buckshot in his wings. He couldn't fly out of that convention. he was going to have to call a leadership vote. Talking about Brian Mulroney, of course. Yes, that is yet another difference.

Before we move to the NDP, is there anything more you want to say, Althea, on the Conservatives? Well, it's really different than when Aronautil lost the 2021 election and there was caucus in rest and basically there were people acting on behalf of Pure Qualia within caucus to try to get rid of Aronotul.

Like the amount of people publicly speaking within caucus, it's not the same at all. And I agree entirely with what Rob said about picking Calgary as a spot. If the convention was held in Quebec, you could bet that there would be a different result. That being said, I think a lot of people may also just be keeping their powder dry thinking, like, well, we don't think that Peer Polyev is going to win the next elections, so let him hang, and then we'll come back and compete when we think that there's a chance, a real chance at winning the leadership. And the other thing I would just say is that a lot of people who are really upset with Pierre Puelev have turned out to be really big fans of Mark Carney.

And so there's a bit of like, well, we don't like our current leader, but we still have someone that we think we could vote for because we like the way that Mr. Carney has started to govern. So it's really interesting. I don't recall every. seeing something quite so similar. Where are you seeing that, both of you? You know, where are you seeing that kind of commentary? Yeah. From eastern and by eastern, I mean like east of Ontario conservatives. Yeah, I did a piece for the magazine a couple of weeks ago, Peter, in which conservatives came on the record and said that that it's a problem that Mark Carney is, I think as we've discussed could be the best progressive conservative prime minister we've had since

Brian Mulroney. I think the other problem is Mr. Poliev himself keeps saying over and over again that Mark Carney and the liberals are stealing his policy book. For a lot of people, that's code with the same code as him saying, he's doing exactly what I would do, so why would you vote for me? and there are people who are telling him to throttle back on that, to stop saying that as often as he's saying, because you're essentially saying it's the same milk from a different cow.

Okay. Can I just say two things? I think that Pierre Poliav has changed somewhat. I agree, again, with Rob about, you know, he's still clinging on to like why he lost, being Donald Trump and shiny Mark Carney. But he's doing many more political interviews. views, even with the CBC, for example. He's made himself more accessible. And his criticisms of the

liberal government have changed. Like, he was veering into this, like, dehumanizing of Justin Trudeau and calling him, you know, a totalitarian dictator. He suggested that he was so egotistical that he put his picture in our passport, which he didn't. It's a drawing of a little boy jumping into a lake. But this idea that he was kind of suggesting that he was purposefully trying to starve people with his policies. He has toned that way down. He is criticizing Mark Carney the same way that Stephen Harper criticized some of his liberal opponents at the time. So I think there is, he has adjusted his tone. I mean, I'll be exactly what some people within the caucus want to see, but there have been adjustments. Yeah, he couldn't have been more critical of Justin Trudeau.

I mean, it was it not at one point where he called him, you know, treasonous? I mean, he went the whole way. He said he was in the pocket of Beijing, yeah. Right. Okay. I think that there's another reality that conservatives are pointing to, and then with some justification. You know, the last election we had was a rarity

where people actually voted for the prime minister, not directly. They didn't cast their ballots for Mark Carney, but they were voting for the idea of Mark Carney. Often in Canada, we throw governments out. We don't elect governments. And so if Pierre Paulyev is going to become prime minister, they're going to have to tire of Mark Carney. And the reality is that there are very, very few prime ministers who increase their plurality after the first time they present themselves to the Canadian electorate.

Stephen Harper was one. He did increase his plurality in 2011 from 2008. It took some woeful ineptitude from the Liberal Party to do that. and they got it. They got the liberals to get their lowest score ever. It also took, however, the most muscular result that the New Democrats ever had, and that's missing. And it doesn't look like it's coming back anytime soon.

Well, that brings us to the NDP. And I, you know, for the life of me, I can't figure out what's going on there. I mean, we kind of saw this coming through the election campaign. You know, it wasn't that long ago, what, two years ago? when they made the deal with the liberals around that time, they were looking okay and the question was, you know,

who's going to come out ahead of this? Is it the NDP or is it the liberals? Well, here we go now, and people are basically writing them off, that they're dead, and they can't recover. What are we hearing on the inside in that tiny little caucus? What is it? Seven? You know, a big statement from that caucus is none of us are going to cross the floor, join the liberals.

That's the kind of thing you're hearing. Althea, you start us on the NDP. What are you hearing? Actually, we just lost Althea, so we'll let you start, Rob, because I know she'll dial it up and get back in here. I listen to some people who worked at senior levels of the Democratic Party when they were successful. I listen to somebody like Brian Topp who says, you know, there are about 150 new Democrats in legislatures across the country. They're in government in two provinces.

One of those provinces is led by the most popular premier in the country in Wab Canoe in Manitoba. They're the official opposition in Saskatchewan, in Alberta, in Ontario. But then he says the only people who can kill the federal NDP are the people. the federal NDP themselves. And he suggests that the performative wing of the New Democratic Party is ascendant right now. And they may just do the job. You know, they've had this struggle forever.

Are they a protest party? Are they the party of conscience? It appears, it appears given from what I've heard from people who are aspiring to lead the New Democratic Party, that their concerns lie more in the Middle East, than they would in Manitoba or Davidson, Saskatch, one of places like that.

At a time when the working people of Canada are falling behind, all you have to do is look at increased labor strife in Canada. We have more strikes now, we have more work stoppages in Canada now than we've had for years. And there's a reason for that, because in the pandemic and post-pandemic years,

working Canadians have fallen behind. And their wages haven't kept up with inflation. It's harder for them to find work. It's harder for them to buy homes. This, you would think, would be a moment ripe for New Democrats. And instead, from what I hear, so far anyway, from the leadership aspirants, they're not occupying what should be very fertile ground for the New Democratic Party at the federal level. Okay.

Althea's rejoined us. We lost her there for a couple of moments. I should say she's on the East Coast, a beautiful Lundonbury. Nova Scotia. She probably just stepped out for a lobster roll on the dock there. I did not, but I have eaten many. Yeah, sorry about that. What are you hearing? I just heard the tail end of Rob. So I'm going to, I think I agree with where Rob was going. This is a moment that you would expect, you know, a strong New Democrat to want to step forward and lead because you have a liberal leader.

who appears to be basically running as a red Tory. And there's all the space being vacated on the left. And unless you live in Quebec and can vote for the Black Quebecois, there's no real progressive option. The Green Party is also real struggling with its own internal turmoil. Like where are the strong union voices, you know, union leaders who might want to lead the NDP? They're not stepping up.

It's quite, I would say almost an embarrassment for the union. New Democrats. So you only have two potential candidates at the moment who have tossed their names in the ring and haven't actually even formally declared yet, Avie Lewis and Heather McPherson. Not to take anything away from Abby Lewis and Heather McPherson, but they're not, you know, the type of names that would have people running down the street in a rush to join the New Democrats to vote for them in this leadership race. So I'm not sure that. I agree that this is going to be entirely consumed with the question of Gaza and Palestine and what's happening in the Middle East. That is going to be one thing.

But I think it's actually an area of agreement between Abby Lewis and Heather McPherson. I think that there are a lot of people who are looking at new Democrats to step forward, especially to reclaim the mantle of who can speak for blue-collar, the unized workers. and are hoping that Heather McPherson will be the person to do that. And I will say that she's not been the most galvanizing of speakers and she's not had a huge presence in Ottawa, but since kind of letting her name be floated this summer, I feel that we are getting a new perspective of who Heather McPherson is. So perhaps we will be surprised.

And there's still ample time for whoever, if you are listening to this broadcast and you want to run, for the new Democrats. You haven't until, I think, the end of January to sign up members. So the contest is not over yet, but it is rather sad for progressive Canadians that there's nobody that seems to want to grab that mantle and run with it in the face of what looks like, you know, two parties competing on the right in this country. The picture that the two of you have painted in the past 25 or 26 minutes.

of a House of Commons where those three parties, the traditional three, I mean, the block is there, seem pretty happy with where they are, more or less. They're the number three party in the house. But the picture you painted of the other three makes one wonder, what kind of session is this going to be? It starts, what, in less than two weeks now? What kind of session is this going to be whether are these kind of things going on in the background for those three parties?

Rob? What do you sense? When your opponents are a noisy disarray, normally, that's a good thing for a prime minister. I don't know that the conservatives are a noisy disarray, but there is still some unease. I'll tell you, it's the stakes, however, that are going to make this a difficult time for Prime Minister Mark Carney and the circumstances. I really do believe when he's, he looks at what surrounds him, that he knows that his as sober cut of this being a hinge moment in history is going to come very, very true for him. Let's have a look. We're in a trade war with our biggest trading partner. We're in a trade war with our second biggest

trading partner in China. The people who might help us in our trade war with our biggest trading partner. Mexico doesn't trust us anymore. That's one of the reasons why Mark Carney is going to Mexico in the next few days. It's to try and mend fences with President Scheinbaum. The Mexicans don't trust us entirely. Our GDP is falling. Unemployment is rising. We have referendums percolating in Quebec with the imminent election, it seems, of the Partisi Queueblo, and in Alberta. We have an unraveling consensus on immigration, a consensus that has been good for Canada for 150 years. And in all of that, we have skyrocketing expectations for the prime minister.

We have expectations of a country that swooned over his CV. But now we're back from Niagara Falls. It's time to figure out whether or not we can afford this house in this dream neighborhood of ours. And it's going to be very, very difficult. for him to square all of those circles. What do you say to that, Althea? I don't think we can blame people for the expectations they have about Mark Carney because Mark Carney laid out the expectations that people were supposed to expect of him.

You know, he's the one who campaigned on this whole elbows up and he was going to reset the relationship and we're moving away from the Americans and he was going to stick it to them. And he's the one who presented himself as this, you know, UN climate savior and this business acumen person who was going to view with best equipped to, you know, help us survive the impeding ugly possible recession that was coming. So I think it's entirely understandable that people have those expectations. He allowed them to have those expectations. I think in terms of the day-to-day management of the House, he is three seats shy of a majority government and he, you know, hopefully knows how to count

because it's really hard to see how the Parts Quebecois would ever support the liberal government, especially after they succumbed for years to the conservatives attacking them for propping up the liberals. And I. Francois-Bin-Banche does not want to do that again. And he made it clear on Monday in a press conference or his statements to the beginning of a caucus meeting with the block. If there is going to be, and we expect there will be a budget in October with a lot of cuts, cuts and to possibly culture, the environment missing likely benchmarks, it's really hard to see how we can meet our 2030 targets without a price on carbon and no announcement have been made to what would allow the government to replace that.

How could the bloc support that? How could the NDP support an austerity budget? So lo and the whole, it may end up being Pierre Paulyev and the conservatives that are propping up Mark Carney and the liberals just as they did in June because, frankly, there are more Mark Kearney fans in that back bench and there are on any of the other progressive parties in the House of Commons. So that's interesting. I don't think he will try to get his own defeat so he can go back to the polls. I would be surprised if that's the strategy being hashed in the PMO. I have not heard that because I think it would be a risky one. The ingredients are not there for the repeat win of the spring. So I don't know.

I think there's a lot of people who are disappointed with what they have seen so far of Mr. Carney and the expectations were so high. It's really hard to see how he's going to deliver. You know, you've both mentioned and wisely so, that we have to keep reminding ourselves that this is, minority government it may be close to a majority but we've seen close to a majority fall before and you know hate to keep bringing the joe clark situation up but it was the same thing it was what four or five seats and they didn't count right and they they fell on a budget

so we do have to keep reminding ourselves and look at the landscape look at the lineups on the other side and who who would support and who wouldn't support so it's an interesting, it's an interesting time. Okay, I want to get to a specific that I don't think is talked about too often. And we'll do that, but first of all, we're going to take our one and only break in today's reporter's notebook without Thearaj and Rob Russo. We'll be back right after this. And welcome back. You're listening to Sirius XM, Channel 167, Canada Talks. or on your favorite podcast platform,

you're listening to Reporters Notebook, one of our new features for this year, and the two reporters are Althea Raj from the Toronto Star and the Economist, Canadian correspondent, Rob Russo, both who have extensive time covering Canadian politics. So here's my question to launch the second half of the program today. It's about crime, and it's about, well, it's about crime and the way governments handle it, the way the courts handle it. And I raise it because, especially in urban centers in the country, especially in the big ones, crime is a real issue.

It's talked about door-to-door, perhaps more than almost anything else. We're at a time where, obviously, trade is a big issue. The relationship with the U.S. is a big issue, inflation, housing, affordability, et cetera, et cetera. But crime, bail reform, you name it, whatever aspect of that issue. Are we going to see that up front in this session? Rob, do you start us? Yeah, and I think even before this happened, the liberals were intent. bringing in legislation to make it harder for people to get bail if they had been convicted of

violent crimes in the past. This is an issue that people vote on. This is an issue that conservatives know that women vote on, particularly in urban and suburban parts of the country, where women have to take public transit to go to work into urban centers and they have fear of doing that and it has moved votes in the past so i think if you look at some polling even liberals are divided on this issue of how much and how much tougher they should be there was a poll i i'm wondering if it was an abacus poll i wish i could remember that showed that this is an area that that um that there might be wedging possibilities for the conservatives to to wedge liberal voters away from the liberal party if they don't do a good enough job on this. I'm pretty sure it was David

Coletto at Abacus. And you just have to look at what's happening. There was the father of the family in Vaughn who was shot in front of his family trying to defend his family during a home invasion. We had a 12-year-old boy last month who was hit by a random bullet in Toronto, no fault of his own, and still nobody has found that person, a completely random act of violence. In Manitoba about 10 days ago, there was somebody went on a stabbing spree and killed a couple of people before killing himself or being killed in a car crash. That person was out on bail. So this is the kind of issue that was going to be addressed even before this happened, but it's now raw.

And we've seen this issue have an impact before on politics in a material way in an election. And that was during Christmas or the post-Christmas period of 2005 when Jane Creba was killed in a kind of random shooting in Toronto. The conservatives were able to make that an issue that was a winner for them again, primarily with women. And where does Pierre Paulyev need help? He needs help with boomers. people like me and maybe you, Peter, I know you might be a little bit younger than me, but boomers and with women.

And so this is an issue that could work for the conservatives if the liberals are maladroit on it. I'll see you. Well, I would probably say this has been an issue that has been very good for the conservatives for years. And we don't need to go as far back as 2005 to look at an election where it had an impact. we can look at the election this spring.

And part of the reasons that we saw Sean Fraser present to cabinet last week on bail reform as legislation that will be coming forward this fall is because the liberals had a blind spot. And they recognized it on election night. And in the days that followed that they did not pay attention to the signs. They lost a bunch of sheets that should have been easy liberal wins. They would have lost a lot. There were a lot of seats that were too close for comfort and they did not see coming at all. I mean, that's why we have Ruby Sahoda and Brampton, who is a secretary of state in charge of crime. They were blind to the auto theft issue.

They were blind to the frustrations over bail. These were all things that the conservators in Piappoliev specifically had given voice to for the past two years. we have not heard the Liberals talk a lot about extortion, but MPs will talk your ear off about it in both political parties. So seats in Brampton and Vaughn have turned on this, and they are now realizing that they have to play catch-up. And so I expect that we will hear a lot more on that. I mean, in fact, when you kind of think through everything that the Prime Minister has announced so far

and everything that we're hearing the liberals talk about wanting to do, it's going to be quite a full House agenda, and it's going to be an agenda, frankly, that resembles a lot what Pierre Paulyev's talking points were just a year ago. So there's going to be a lot on crime. We heard even the prime minister say that he wants to do a criminal code reform talking about consecutive sentences. I mean, this is not things that we normally hear liberals talk about. So it'll be interesting to see what they actually come forward with. That doesn't seem And like it's stepping back from so-called, quote-unquote, liberal values. Are you saying that certainly sounds like you're saying,

that their lack of awareness of the crime issue bubbling away in some of their own writings probably cost them their majority? Oh, I mean, they don't have a majority, but they lost seats that they expected to win, that they did not think were in play because of the crime issue. And they realized on election night, I mean, I talked to people in the war room that were like, oh, I guess we did not, you know, crime and immigration were the two things that they thought, okay, there were seats in the GTA that hung on this and we gave them to the conservatives because we did not do anything about it.

And on the ground, you even had some liberal MPs, candidates in the election, make their own flyers about what they were going to do about. crime because there was nothing coming from the central office on this. And so, yeah, absolutely. It was a big factor. And now they realize it. Now they're openly talking about it. And there will be bail reform coming forward this fall because of it. I think it's also important, Peter, to not let the premiers off the hook. The same premiers work clamoring for bail reform. They're in charge of actually enforcing the bail rules. That means when somebody, doesn't show up for their bail hearing, and they've essentially jumped bail. It's incumbent upon

the provinces and their municipal creatures that they fund to go out and find those people. And police are saying on the street, we don't have the resources for that. We don't have the money for that. So I think we have to, if we care about this issue, also identify that there's a problem at the provincial level as well. They need to fund the efforts to go and find people who are jumping bail because they know that there's nobody who's going to be coming to look for them for a long, long time. And I would add to that because, well, what I've heard is that because of overcrowding in jails, a lot of people that probably would get placed in jail or now out on bail.

And because of prosecution, there's not enough crown prosecutors. There's also delays. So, you know, there's a lack of funding in the system that is contributing to the problem, and it's not just at the federal level. It's especially at the provincial level. Okay. I have one more area I'd like to touch on in this, our first go with this. It was a great conversation, by the way, to credit to both of you.

We've all seen this list of 32 potential infrastructure projects, you know, that are going to define the new country. Draft. Draft list. Draft. Draft list. That's right. But they made sure that we all saw.

right? I love these guys, how they push stuff out. Anyway, the thing is, these are all, you know, very interesting. Obviously, we're not going to do all of them because, you know, even if it was a final list, wish list, because of the expense. And the question is about money. So many times that the prime minister's asked about whether it's pipelines or ports or what have you, he'll say, Well, you know, this is going to be a joint thing. Government's obviously going to have to put a lot of money in this, but we're also looking forward to the private sector stepping forward. And we all know that for quite some time now, 10, 15 years, the big business has kind of sat on the sidelines, hasn't been ponying up with money on some of these big potential projects, especially on pipelines.

And the question becomes, is there, Are we seeing any interest from the private sector to roll out the big bucks in helping defining this new country that Mark Carney wants to build, the new Canada? You're the economist correspondent in Canada, Rob. You must know the answer to that question. What are you hearing? I do not see a clamor or a stampede of Canadian companies

willing to invest in infrastructure in Canada. In fact, I see the exact opposite. I see T.C. Energy. I see Enbridge and I see other companies eager to invest in areas of the United States where they believe that returns are going to be better and there is a much more friendly regulatory environment. I do think that the government is strong-arming privately. some of these companies actually trying to appeal to their patriotism in some instances.

They're talking to pension plans, but capital goes to where they believe the best return on investment is going to be made. And there is a lot of skepticism still that the best return on investment is going to be made on money or capital that's outlaid in Canada. I think it's one of the reasons why the Prime Minister and Minister Hodgson were in Europe, particularly Germany. And I think that you're going to see the Prime Minister doing the same thing later in the fall in Asia. He is going to go searching for capital for investment outside of the country in order to compensate or they hope they actually hope. What's the word I'm looking for?

in addition to what they hope is coming from Canada, but there seems to be no stampede. A little bit earlier, I outlined some of the challenges facing the Prime Minister, but there is also a reality of Canada and an opportunity in Canada for capital. We have what the world wants. We have it.

Whether it's liquid natural gas, whether it's critical minerals, we've got it. What we need to do in Canada is figure out a way to get it to markets in a cost effective way. And I think that's what capital, the business people that I speak to, that's what they're waiting to see. Is there a way for us to get what the world wants to them in a cost effective way? And that's all about, well, it's not all about, but it's considerably worth mentioning the regulatory stuff you mentioned earlier. The problems that businesses in Canada. But it's, you know, Carney's claim that that's part of his process is he wants to

make regulations easier for development. Alcia, I know you're all over this story. So what are you hearing? All parts of the story. It's interesting the way you phrased it, because it's true when you look at like some of the big LNG investment, for example, in this country. It's all from foreign companies investing in this country. I will be curious. to see this list of the projects of national interest. So the short list and we're told it's kind of going to be like a list where names can come in batches. Like this is not, we're going to have a few projects on an initial list and then more and more projects will be added as the government believes that they're ready to go.

So these are projects that are not like fully baked, but almost baked where the government feels. like, okay, you've got your indigenous consultations are done and basically you're just waiting for the government to get its ducks in a row, tell you what the conditions are on the project so you can get started. I have been very critical of the bill that allows this to happen C5 because it allows the government to basically ignore its own laws. It puts a lot of power in the hands of one minister, one designated minister at the moment. it's Damnik Leblanc, but the PM decides it's, you know, there are problems with Dominic LeBlanc, you could appoint somebody else to be the gateholder to this.

And it's not clear what the public would know about what the initial conditions that were placed by the review, what are actually in the end, what are the conditions that are placed on the project. So it's very murky and it's unlike anything that we've seen before. And frankly, if the conservatives have brought a bill like this before, the liberals would have been up in arms and outraged. All that being said. There are a lot of projects on that list of 32 that are not anywhere close to being ready to be placed on a list like that.

And if there is a pipeline on that list, that is going to be a story that generates a lot of work for all three of us for days and weeks to come because it will be hard to see how some people in cabinet and some people in the liberal caucus are in agreement with that. And then another question to ask about all of this is how much public money is going into this projects. Because sometimes you listen to the government speak and it feels like what they're saying is they're willing to put public money into these projects. And sometimes you think, no, they can't possibly be thinking that they're going to be investing in all of these projects. They can't. Even if all the 15% of cuts that Mark Carney has talked about, there is no way that he could cut all that and invest. in all of these, you know, billions of dollars of worth of new projects.

So I think there will be a lot of scrutiny about what the projects are on the list. And it's hard to see how this could be monumental kind of changing the Canadian economy type projects on a short time frame because there's not a lot of things that are ready to approve. On that, we're going to call a close to this, first conversation of the reporter's notebook, we're calling it, with Althea Raj and Rob Russo.

Thank you both. Really good. Really interesting. Look forward to the next one two weeks' time. Thank you. Let the word go forth from this place forward that Raj and Russo are mounting their forces at the foot of the bridge. You got it. All right, just enough time left to remind you of Thursday's question of the week. It'll be part of your turn on Thursday. So you need to get your answer. in. The question of the week was, do you think Mark Carney has retreated on some of the issues that were part of their campaign platform in April of this year? And specifically, I guess, some of those environmental issues. But that's the question. Has Mark Carney retreated on some of the

reasons why Canadians gave him the victory in April? We've already got lots of answers coming in. We'd like lots more. So write to the Mansbridge Podcast at gmail.com. The Mansbridge Podcast at gmail.com. Keep it 75 words or fewer. Include your name and the location you're writing from. Okay. That's what is what you have to do to end up possibly on the program.

And you have to have those answers in by 6 p.m. Eastern time tomorrow. So we'll talk then. I'm Peter Mansbridge. Thanks for listening today. Talk to again tomorrow.