The Bridge with Peter Mansbridge - Your Turn on Bob Woodward and The Random Ranter on Taxes

Episode Date: January 5, 2023

Lots of reactions to the Bob Woodward interview on Monday's The Bridge. Plus more of your thoughts on a variety of issues on this week's Your Turn.  And then the Random Ranter with his #1 new year's resolution.

And hello there, Peter Mansbridge here. You are just moments away from the latest episode of The Bridge. It's Thursday of week one of 2023, and Thursdays mean Toronto on this day of this week. Thursdays are always fun because you get a glimpse of how many of you are feeling. And so looking forward to reading some of those letters. Before I start, this time of year is always interesting, always has been interesting in the reporting on political matters in this country, because there are the year-end and the year-starting interviews. And as many of you know, I took part in many of those over my years at the CBC, and they were at times fascinating, at times interesting,

at times crushingly boring, because they were so predictable not only in the answers we got, but in the questions that we asked. I can admit that now. But every once in a while, there'd be one session that really came alive, and you actually learn something about the political figure you were interviewing, whether she or he really had some new ideas and was ready to discuss them in some detail. But gone are the days when there used to be just one big interview. And I think back, you know, with affection to the days where Bruce Phillips, who was the CTV Ottawa Bureau Chief,

through the 70s and 80s, I guess, had some great sparring matches with Pierre Trudeau in terms of the year-end interview. Those were classics. There haven't really been anything, I can't remember anything like that in the days since. But there's a good one out just yesterday. My old friend, Andrew Coyne, who's now at the Globe and Mail. Andrew's been around. He likes to keep moving around in terms of the different places that he works for. He worked for the National Post. He worked for Maclean's. He's working for the Globe and Mail now as one of their lead opinion columnists.

Andrew has asked for years, going back through more than a few prime ministers, to have a year-end interview. Hasn't been successful. So yesterday, you pick up Andrew's column, and it starts this way. Owing to what one must assume was some kind of clerical error, I was once again excluded from the list of journalistic luminaries selected for the traditional year-end interviews with our Prime Minister. However, I made some inquiries, called in some IOUs, and succeeded in snagging an interview without him.

That's what his column's called. My traditional year-end interview without the Prime Minister. So it has, you know, it's all Q&A, right? So here's a typical Q, typical question in the interview. The Bank of Canada has said it is determined to bring inflation back in line with its 2% target. Yet even as the monetary breaks are applied, the government seems to have stepped on the fiscal accelerator. Spending continues to rise unabated. Are you not working somewhat at cross purposes

good question to the prime minister the answer blank page it's like the old empty chair interview right where the interviewer would sit across from an empty chair because the empty chair's participant, the prime minister or leader of whatever country or province, had refused to do the interview. So they used to go ahead and do the interview anyway, but without anyone there, at least the visuals of it. Well, Andrew went further. He listed all the questions he would ask, but you just get a blank page on the answer.

Anyway, good for you, Andrew. Nice touch. Interesting read. And good questions. All right. As I said, Thursday, it's your turn. And as usual, more than a few letters coming in, usually by email, with your thoughts and comments and questions.

Most of the emails this week, and there were a lot of them on this topic, most of them were about the Monday interview with Bob Woodward, the legend, the icon, the part of the Woodward-Bernstein team that broke Watergate, or was certainly at the leading edge of breaking Watergate. I mean, there were other reporters who worked on the Watergate story as well from other newspapers and broadcast outlets. CBS was very much a contender in that as well. But it's acknowledged that Woodward and Bernstein were kind of the lead of this,

and it certainly made both of their careers, both of which more than 50 years later are still very active in the journalism field. And Bob Woodward, out with his latest book, I don't know how many he's had now, but this is the fourth one that he's written just on Trump, and he's done books on all the presidents since Nixon. Anyway, people enjoyed the interview. If you didn't hear it, you probably would like to go back and listen to it. It was the Monday episode of The Bridge, and it was the full show, full hour, with Bob Woodward.

So if you're at least a bit interested, you probably want to grab it and have a listen. All right, here's some of the mail that I have received on that. Some of it. Once again, I don't, you know, I read all the letters that come in. I only use some of them on the air. And usually I'm only reading a bit of each one. But Adrian Hill writes from Crystal Beach in Ottawa.

As a young lawyer, I was in Washington several times in the spring of 1974. I could feel the tension and depression the moment I got off the plane. The cab driver, office staff, lawyers I met, restaurant and hotel staff, everyone I met was feeling it. The worry, fear, and sadness as the events swirled around Mr. Nixon, like a communal grief or fear on the eve of calamity or war. After he resigned and Mr. Ford became president and then pardoned Mr. Nixon, the mood began to change and it seemed that a huge weight disappeared from the shoulders of those folks in Washington. Again, you could feel the change in

collective mood the moment you arrived. Scott Young, who's been a loyal listener of the bridge over the years, drops a line from Yellowknife. Happy New Year to you. Listened to the interview with Bob Woodward last night and thoroughly enjoyed it. History could be written and taught by the good quality work of investigative journalists like Bob Woodward, Brian Stewart. A wealth of knowledge that you know is reliable, honest, and true.

Thank you so much. And then Scott, who's written before, as I said, he works at the airport in Yellowknife, has two quick side notes. We are getting the Antonov AN-124 here on Friday, tomorrow. We're all excited to see it on the apron here in Yellowknife. The Antonov AN-124 is one of the biggest aircraft, if not the biggest in the world,

and it's a big deal in carrying freight. I can remember Scott sent some pictures last year, around this time, when the Antonov was chartered to go into Yellowknife to pick up a Korean helicopter that had been doing extreme weather winter testing in the Yellowknife area, and it was picking it up and flying it back to Korea.

And those days at northern airports doing that kind of thing, you know, I remember from my Churchill Manitoba days when I worked at the airport there before I started working for the CBC. And I can remember in the fall of 1968, summer of 1968, Churchill, if you look at a map, was on the path for a lot of the flights that were leaving the U.S. northeast. Flights that either had troops on them or weapons on them. And they would fly from bases in the northeast United States to Churchill, then to Anchorage, then to Saigon. So we were kind of one step along the way. And we used to gas these aircraft up.

So you'd watch some of them come in, and there were some big ones. And I think the biggest aircraft at that time in 68, it could be wrong on this, so don't hold me to it, but it was the C-141 Starlifter. And it used to come into Churchill, and it was a big deal. In fact, I helped negotiate the contract when I was like 18 on gassing up with us, Transair, the little airline that I was working for.

We'd gas up the C-141. But I remember people used to come out from town to see this huge aircraft. And there were times, and I can recall being there servicing those aircraft, where you'd look up into what few windows they had. And I would look up and I'd see guys my age sitting on that plane heading to Vietnam. That was the height of the war, 68. Hundreds of thousands of Americans there at that time. All right, I digress. Kate McBurney from Ottawa. Great interview with Woodward. Keep up your fine work. Prince

Harry interview next, okay? That'd be an interesting interview. I see his books making the rounds. He keeps slagging his old family. I don't know. I'm not getting into it. You're either a Harry and Meghan fan or you're not a Harry and Meghan fan. I don't know. I'm kind of in the middle there somewhere. Elio Pecoraro in London, Ontario.

These words from Bob Woodward really stayed with me as he went on with the discussion. The crimes of Richard Nixon pale. These words are particularly poignant as I watch some Trump-infused Republicans try to take over the House of Representatives, as I pair this possible successful scenario to the wall set up by tens of millions of Americans to block evidence-based journalism. I wonder what aspects of American democracy and the U.S. Constitution will survive if these ideas are pushed over the cliff. Ideas are one thing, but, you know, what's going on in the House of Representatives is kind of a clown show that's been going on for the last couple of days and it's going to go again

this afternoon. You know, it's a legitimate procedure. They're voting for a speaker. You can argue about who the crazies are in that group of people. But, you know, they're using a lot of letters on the Woodward interview. And I encourage you again, if you haven't heard it, you might want to go and listen to it. Because it's quite interesting. You know, I've interviewed Bob Woodward a few times over the years, over the last 20 or 30 years, I guess, about various books he's written and just about not only the state of the story he's covering, but the state of journalism and the way they cover it,

journalists cover it in today's world. And there's a very interesting segment in this interview this week about journalism and how Bob Woodward feels about the journalists of today. And as you know, we've discussed that quite a few times on this program over the past months, and his commentary, his thoughts on it are well worth listening to. All right, I received a letter from John Armstrong in Saskatoon this week. And John wasn't happy with me.

And he wrote, I guess he wrote after, it would have been Tuesday's show. Here's what he has to say. I listened to your show today as always, but this was the first time I felt obliged to write in. Last night's junior hockey game against Slovak was the most entertaining game I've seen since Gretzky coached us to gold in the Olympics.

As I mentioned to John, John and I have had a little back and forth this week, respectfully back and forth. Gretzky actually didn't coach that team. He managed that team. It was Pat Quinn who was actually doing the coaching. Now, the reason John was writing was because I dropped a line in the middle of my commentary on Tuesday

where I said I'm kind of done with that part of hockey. I'm still a hockey fan, very much a hockey fan. That very night I was at the Leafs game watching them lose in overtime. But I'm kind of down on Hockey Canada especially and what it celebrates, including the junior hockey. So it's nothing personal against those players. But anyway, John writes on, It's politically incorrect to come down on these fine young lads

over a few bad apples that are no longer on the team. Many of them are playing in the NHL. To be suggestive, to indirectly suggest we shouldn't watch these kids or stand behind them is to judge them for the actions of others. I think you know better. I think you know these emails are coming. Actually, John, yours was the only email that came in on this subject. But once again, I respect your opinion on this.

Every organization has bad apples. That will never change. These are good kids doing their best for our country to make us proud. I wish them all the best and will continue to watch the tournament regardless of what stupid things others they are not associated with have done. Okay. My concern is about the culture of hockey that's been bred by organizations like Hockey Canada over the years. What happened in 2018 with that junior team, gold medal team, was not an isolated incident. There have been millions of dollars paid out to people

who feel they were abused in a number of different ways over the years since then and before then. Millions of dollars raised by Hockey Canada, from parents who support Hockey Canada through the fees they pay for their kids to play various levels of hockey, Canada, from parents who, you know, support Hockey Canada through the fees they pay for their kids to play, you know, various levels of hockey. And it's all been unaccounted for. Nobody's been charged with anything.

It's been covered up. Payments basically made in such a way that the stories were covered up. And it reached the extent so badly that those on the Hockey Canada board all resigned, right? All of them. I don't think it was their choice to resign. but funding from sponsors and government has dried up until hockey Canada cleans up its act and so that's what's what's been going on and that's what I was suggesting I kind of done with that right now and that night instead of watching that hockey game, which is one of the early round games,

see Canada won again last night, good for them, they go to the final. But that night I chose to watch the NFL Monday night football, which I tend to do, as I said the other day as the year progresses and they get closer to the playoffs. And it was the game, of course,

that had that tragic episode. I mean, there are questions to be raised about a lot of different sports that we watch on this continent. And I understand that. But I do worry about the culture in hockey and how it's being bred.

And I think a lot of people feel the same way. And I know that different hockey organizations are trying to come to grips with it. I've also been influenced, you know, I've got to admit, by this film that I've talked about before called Black Ice, which you'll see, I think, on TSN in the next month. But it was at TIFF, the Toronto Film Festival, last fall, and it won one of the awards for the top film of the festival. It's done by the Canadian sports media firm, of which my son is a part of,

and was one of the junior producers on it. So, you know, I guess I've got a conflict on that, but I would suggest when it comes out, you watch that film. You watch that film. Because it too deals with the issue of hockey culture. And it does it through the eyes, the voices, and the stories of Canadian kids. All right. Moving on.

Thursdays, and once again, John in Saskatoon, John Armstrong, thank you for your letter. It inspired a lot of conversation amongst me and my friends, and you're not alone in the way you feel. I know you were watching the game last night. John's a long-haul trucker. And he actually says, I agree with the way you handled the trucker convoy story,

which is interesting. I agree with you on virtually all topics, he said. If people don't want to do their part on vaccines to help lift the strain on our system, then some sort of penalty should be in play. So there's a trucker saying that, right? But mainly what John likes to do on his long-haul trucker voyages when there's something like the World Juniors, he stops. He says he's got his car all hooked up in such a way that he can watch TV

by satellite in his truck. He wrote to me yesterday or the day before, said on the last night he'd be parked and watching with his popcorn. I'm sure he was. Okay. We're almost time for our midway break but first of all the ranter the ranter is here kicking off 2023 you know this time of year we we tend to have new year's resolutions well i guess you could call this one a New Year's resolution.

Let's see how this goes over. Here he is, the random ranter. Here's something to start the new year with. I think we need to pay more taxes. I know it's unpopular, but our social safety net, our justice system, and our health care systems are failing. We don't provide enough for people on welfare and disability. We have too many police and not enough justice. So our courts have turned into a perpetual swirling toilet bowl of repeat offenders who have learned that crime has few consequences for criminals and healthcare. It's overburdened and understaffed. We've known for years that an aging

population was coming, but we failed to train and retain enough doctors and nurses to meet the wave. COVID didn't create this. It only laid it bare. But none of these problems are new. They're just problems reaching a crisis point after years and years of governments managing by doing nothing. Lip service might suffice during an election, but we're paying the price for it now. But that said, there's no denying that it would be political suicide for any party to come out and propose raising taxes to expand welfare payments. So who do we blame? I think the reality is we should be blaming ourselves because we're the ones who've bought into believing that taxes are bad. I don't know if it's due to years of

conservative propaganda or a track record of government ineptitude, but we've lost faith in our governments to manage our tax dollars. And as a result, our relationship with taxes has become transactional. We don't want to pay for things that don't benefit us directly. Why should you pay for people to sit on welfare or get addiction treatments? Well, you really only ask that question if you can't see the big picture. And the big picture is that what's left of our safety net is in tatters. And here's the rub. Most of us aren't affected by it, because this is not a crisis that affects us equally. The only immediate impact the breakdown in the safety net has had on me is when I occasionally see or unfortunately smell the consequences. So unless

I have a health crisis, knock on wood, I'm immune. Some people are lining up at food banks while others are lining up to order new cars. But therein lies the problem. How do you get the people who can afford more taxes to vote for a problem that doesn't affect them directly? Well, I'm here today to say the problem does affect us all. We need a strong safety net because without one, society will start to break down. And no matter how much you surround yourself with suburbia or relax in your rural paradise, it's hard to miss the fact that society is indeed breaking. So what's the solution?

I know some people will say privatize, but I'd like to remind them to read some Dickens, because there's a reason we have a public social safety net in the first place. I believe a social safety net should be fair and inclusive. But the last time I checked, private enterprise is driven by profit and exclusivity. Look, I don't like paying more taxes, but something's got to give. And I do have the ability to give more. When the next election comes, I'm going to vote for the party platform that I think is the best for the country and not necessarily best for me. I hope you consider doing the same. Well, there you go. Now that takes chutzpah, right? There he is, the ranter out of the gate for 2023. I want to pay more taxes.

That he makes a pretty good argument. Or do you think otherwise? I'm sure I'll hear from some of you on that one. Okay, as I said, as I promised, we're going to take a quick break. When we come back, more of your turn on this week's episode on The Bridge. And welcome back. You're listening to Your Turn on The Bridge on Sirius XM, channel 167, Canada Talks, or on your favorite podcast platform tomorrow,

Friday. It's good talk with Sean Talley bear and Bruce Anderson. That one like yesterday's smoke mirrors and the truth will be on our YouTube channel as well. So you can, you can watch every exciting moment on video. Okay. More of your letters on, on this week's episode.

And we'll start with this one. From Greg Walling. And Greg is in Lindsay, Ontario. I listen regularly to your podcast and the discussion regarding the convoy and the use of the emergency act it's funny this story was almost a year ago and yet we still get letters on it almost every week i think we tend to sometimes make issues like this too mindfully strenuous not many canadians would have had difficulty of a protest that lasted a couple of days. But you can't have gasoline and propane tanks in mass that close to physical governing centre. It's a dangerous situation for elected representatives

and our stability of government. And worries about setting a precedent by using the Emergencies Act, I would take the opposite view. A precedent has been set that will now be used if Parliament is threatened again. I can't tell you how much we enjoy the discussions

with Brian Stewart, like going to university again listening to Brian. That's so true. And the sensibility of Bruce Anderson. Okay, well, some of you argue about Bruce's sensibility, but that's okay. Anyway, thank you, Greg Walling from Lindsay, Ontario. Scott Ziliotto

from Minesing, Ontario. That's near Barrie. Last time I wrote to you, I ranted a little bit about our government and public figures' lack of RCMP protection. I promise not to rant this time around. In fact, not long ago, after I wrote you that rant, I happened to run into Chrystia Freeland, walking along Avenue Road in Toronto with her son enjoying a Sunday afternoon. Although my feelings about our officials' protection hasn't changed much,

it was nice to see our Deputy Prime Minister and her family enjoying their neighborhood as anyone else would. It did make me proud we live in a country where you can stumble upon our elected leaders in everyday life. That is beside the point of my email today, though. The question for you and the team is this. Will NATO become involved in the Ukraine war this year? What is NATO doing that we can see to prepare for war in the 21st century? And why do you think NATO will or will not become involved this year? Scott, I don't know whether you listen to Brian every Tuesday on the bridge,

but he's dealt with many of these kind of issues. Like the last thing NATO wants is to get involved in the Ukraine war beyond the way it already is involved in NATO countries helping supply weaponry and advice and training to Ukraine by building up border strength around Ukraine. Are NATO countries preparing for a third world war? They're always preparing. You know, the best defense is the ability to have an offense, right? But one thing the Ukraine war has taught NATO countries is that war has changed.

If you want more evidence of that, listen to Tuesday's episode with Brian, because he goes into that very subject. And the last one is the sort of, what do you think will happen this year? Will NATO become involved? Let's hope not. More than they already are involved. Because if they get involved on the ground or in the air, over Ukraine or in Ukraine, then head to the basement.

Mark Van Curen from Rochester, Michigan. Mark writes, Hello Peter, just wanted to drop you a line and let you know how much I enjoy your podcast. I'm a 72-year-old fellow from Rochester, Michigan, near Detroit. Your program is a refreshing escape from almost everything on TV or radio here in the U.S. It's great to hear intelligent conversation that is not skewed by U.S. politics. We've spent a little time on U.S. politics this week. Also, I love traveling in your fantastic country.

You have a great culture in Canada. Hey, thanks, Mark. We are pretty proud of our country, but we are also proud of our relationship over hundreds of years with those of us who call the US.S. our friends and neighbors. We all go through difficult periods. Clearly, we both have had that in the past year or so. There are some good, intelligent programs in the U.S.,

but I love the fact that you tune in to us. We do try our best to have good conversations and talk about some of the major issues. It's always been interesting for me over the last 50 years from hearing from Americans in border states especially, but now increasingly because of the power of SiriusXM and the broadcast schedule on podcasts, hearing from Americans all over the U.S. and, quite frankly, from people around the world.

We got a mail this week from Argentina about the Woodward interview. So, I mean, there you go. But over time, you know, before podcasts, before satellite radio, it used to be Americans pocketed in the northern states, border states, who were affectionate about Canadian journalism, and especially about the CBC. And we used to hear from them quite a bit. Neil Douglas Fraser from Whitehorse, Yukon.

I understand these emails are best to be kept short, so I'll dive right in. I'm 28 years old and was a lifelong Albertan until November of 2022. Although not the sole reason for me moving, Danielle Smith and her possible long-term leadership in the province was quite the deciding factor for me to pack up and get out of the province. Having lived in Alberta under Jason Kenney's tenure, like so many other

Albertans, I found myself asking, well, at least it couldn't get worse than this, right? Ah, but yet here we stand. I wonder if a possible Smith tenure with four years of far-right separatist libertarian rhetoric will conjure up a mass exodus from Alberta. Will the ultimate irony occur? People leaving Alberta? I look forward to watching the mudslinging from the sidelines and will no doubt tune in to hear what the panel will have to say on the election coming up at the end of May. P.S. I listen to multiple

podcasts pertaining to politics, international news, etc. and I truly love listening to The Bridge. Listening to your discussions with Bruce and Chantel helped me figure out I needed a career change. I have not enrolled in a bachelor, excuse me, I have now enrolled in a Bachelor of Arts in Political Science degree in hopes to one day be a panelist on the bridge. Hey, there's no harm in aspiring to great things. And I mean, what could be greater than being a panelist on the bridge? Neil Douglas Fraser in Whitehorse.

Enjoy your time in Whitehorse. Great northern community. I'm sorry, though, you feel the way you feel about things in Alberta. I mean, part of the encouragement of politics, no matter where you live, is to get involved, as John Turner used to say. You know, if you believe in democracy, then you've got to participate. And part of participating is voting and taking and being active during election campaigns.

And if you feel strongly one way or another, you get involved. But you decided to move on, and hey, no harm in that. I just wanted to make the point, though, that nothing is for sure. Nothing is a given. Nothing is automatic. The election in Alberta in the spring will be very interesting to watch and to cover, and we will do just that.

Gus Livingston from Dunville, Ontario. This looks like the last one for this week. Here's what Gus has to say. As I listen to your show, especially on Wednesdays, I found that Bruce Anderson will, from time to time, like to give you guidance on your golf game. This must feel like taking instruction from Tim Conway's Dorf on Golf. Just remember, keep your head down, keep your eye on the ball. I've tried that.

I tried that for years. It didn't work. I kept my eye on the ball, watched it go right under the bush. Anyway, Gus, it's all good-natured stuff. I know some of you think we talk about golf too much, but golf is what actually brought Bruce and I together in terms of our friendship that has crossed oceans, crossed borders, crossed politics,

crossed a lot of different things. We love to golf. Neither one of us is very good. He's certainly better than I am, but he can't putt. And it all comes down to putting, right? And that's why the trophies are lined up on my counter and not on his. He's going to be asking for equal time on that one. All right. That wraps it up, you know, for an interesting first week of 2023

in terms of your mail. Tomorrow probably generates more mail because Chantel's back in the house and when Chantel's in the house, things happen. And there's lots to discuss with Chantel tomorrow. And Bruce, of course, will join us as well on Good Talk. So that'll be up tomorrow at this time.

We look forward to having you with us to listen in. So that's it for this day. I'm Peter Mansbridge. I hope you have a great day. I look forward to talking to you again in 24 hours.