The Paikin Podcast - Everything Political: Carney Infatuation Syndrome, the G7, and a One-Term PM

Episode Date: June 18, 2026

The Everything Political panel with former MPs Martha Hall Findlay and Tony Clement discusses “Carney infatuation syndrome,” if the honeymoon will ever end, rumours that Carney may stand down after one term, the G7 summit, if the “strands” of a new world order are being woven, and Canada’s “conscious uncoupling” from the United States. They also discuss the World Cup, the corruption of FIFA, and the usual round of “Good on Yas.” Support us: patreon.com/thepaikinpodcast Follow The Paikin Podcast: YOUTUBE: http://www.youtube.com/@ThePaikinPodcastSPOTIFY: https://open.spotify.com/show/1OhwznCIUEA11lZGcNIM4h?si=b5d73bc7c3a041b7X: x.com/ThePaikinPodINSTAGRAM: instagram.com/thepaikinpodcastBLUESKY: bsky.app/profile/thepaikinpodcast.bsky.social Email us at: [e-mail] 

Hi, Tony. Hi, Martha. You too may remember a guy named Tyler Firth, who is from Hamilton, and occasionally, well, I guess I'd call him a friend of the show. He writes stuff, stays in touch with us. And he was talking to me this week about something, well, how do I put this? You guys both have heard of Trump derangement syndrome. Tyler has brought something new to our attention this past week, which is something called Carney infatuation syndrome. Now, he admits he is a critic of Mr. Carney's, but from the left, and he wonders, whether either of you are seeing signs either in politics, in media, in academic circles, diplomatic circles, business circles, where the worlds, those communities are just a little bit too in love with our current prime minister. Martha, what you think? Are you seeing signs of carnian fatuation syndrome? I think it's tied to any new politician's honeymoon period, right? We see this all the time.

So I think there's an element of that. But I also think, and I, and Tony, forgive me, I'm saying this not because of any past liberal ties. I'm actually really glad we have a guy like him leading the country. I mean, he's clearly trying to get stuff done. He's clearly hugely respected from around the world. And right now, you know, he's a grown up. He's thoughtful. He's, he has tons of experience.

So I actually think there's an element of, yeah, we're really happy to have some. like that at the head of the Canadian government. Is this going to fade a little bit this enthusiasm? I'll use a different word. Probably simply because no one's perfect, right? It's a 14 month long honeymoon so far. That's not bad. Tony, you do not suffer from Karni infatuation syndrome, right?

I do not know. It's like a friend of ours, my wife's and my friend for many, many decades posted on Facebook, keep calm and Carney on. And we're thinking, really, that's what we're, that's the level of infatuation now. So yeah, no, I find it quite annoying. Just as I did when Justin Trudeau mania was the top of the pops. And I remember Stephen Harper saying about Justin Trudeau that his followers did not love Justin Trudeau. They were in love with Justin Trudeau. And I think we're in the same boat here with Mark Carney. We all know how the Justin Trudeau story ended.

So I'm eagerly anticipating when people come back down to earth and start judging by normal standards of judgment of politicians, which is not happening now, but will happen in the future, I'm sure. Can I just say, Tony, I was never a part of the Justin Trudeau mania. I did run against them for some very clear reasons. So I actually, it's different for me. Certainly this one is different. Well, we should ask, we should ask Christia Freeland whether she's part of Carney mania.

I doubt she is. So there you go. She certainly wasn't part of Trudeau mania, not by the end. Yeah, that's right. So these things, these things do change or have different perspectives. I think that political observers and citizens generally should. should keep their skeptical, not cynical, but skeptical eyeglasses on when it comes to politicians. By the way, I don't think that successful conservative politicians like Stephen Harper or like Mike Harris ever had the kind of honeymoon from the media and from the establishment elites that the liberal heads of government have.

So that's maybe, again, my perspective. But I never, I never recalled a honeymoon for Stephen Harper like this guy's getting. Yeah. Anyway. So there it goes. Well, Stephen Harper had two minorities before he had his majority. So it took them a little while longer to grow on the Canadian public. Whereas Mike Harris actually got reelected with a higher percentage of the total vote in 1999 than he got in 1995.

Yeah, I'm just talking about the commentariat. And, you know, I don't think they gave Mike Harris a. a lot of breaks, quite frankly. But that's okay because you're governing and you're not there to get breaks from people. But apparently Mark Carney, it's salad days right now. It's the days of wine and roses and, you know, rainbows coming out of his butt. It's all there right now. So we'll see how long it lasts. Maybe he's doing a good job, Tony. Just saying. No, I don't see that at all, actually. Well, Tony, I'm going to give you some advice and I ripped it off a t-shirt. Keep and Carnion. And let's talk about everything political.

Delighted to welcome back to the Paken podcast, our two former parliamentarians, Tony Clement, the former Ontario and Federal Conservative Cabinet Minister, and Martha Hall-Finley, the former Liberal Member of Parliament, now head of the School of Public Policy at the University of Calgary. Tony, I gather we find you in Halifax. What are you doing out there? Our daughter, our middle daughter, has a full-time job here in Halifax on the set of a television show. So she's going to be out here until late September, early October. So we came to visit. Cool. What's the TV show? We were liars. Is there a cameo for a former conservative cabinet minister in the show? I don't think I fit the age demographic of this show, Steve. I'll just

leave it at that. Okay. Well, let's get into block one here, folks. And I do, I wanted to start today by following up on something that the two of you just kind of dropped very briefly, a couple of a couple of weeks ago during our conversation at the Albany Club in downtown Toronto, our first ever show on the field, incidentally. And while I'm at it, let me thank Shelley Lewis again for treating us so wonderfully opening up the club so we could tape our show there. That was awfully generous of her. But in the course of that conversation, Tony kind of let slip that he was hearing speculation that Mark Carney intends to be prime minister for a good time, not a long time, meaning get as much done as quickly as possible, maybe only one term, and then stand down. Let's

that a bit. Tony, where were you picking up that rumor from? I can't remember the exact source. I'm a terrible, obviously, a terrible journalist, Steve. I can't remember the source, but I heard it from a couple of places, actually. I got to tell you, I'm very skeptical of this kind of line of reasoning. I think if I were Mark Carney and his advisors, first of all, it all hinges on. our relationship with the United States and whether we're going to get a decent deal or not with Mr. Trump and his gang. And I actually think if you're looking at it from a political point of view, I can see Mark Carney

not getting a deal. And, you know, because there are, if there is no deal, it's a 10-year process unless you give a six-month notice. The deal still goes on for 10 years unless you give six months notice, which, you know, that would be an extreme position by any of the three parties, Canada, USA, or Mexico. So I could see easily Mark Carney stringing this along, not doing the things necessary to get a deal. I think the Canadian public, I think in his mind, the Canadian public would enjoy that. And then he can run against Donald Trump at the end of next year, 2027. We don't have a deal. Donald Trump is still our clear and present danger, like me, and I can continue to fight for all that is good in Canadian.

I think that is probably the play that is in his mind if he is being a political actor, which every Canadian prime minister is. So I know that is out there. And I thought about it a lot since we were talking about it at the Albany Club. And I just don't, I don't see that. I think every prime minister wants to be prime minister. and there are only two or three ways to get rid of a prime minister, either the prime minister is defeated an election, either or the prime minister is defeated by his caucus, or the prime minister knows that he's going to lose an election or loses caucus and gets the heck out of there before that happens.

So I don't think any of those things are happening right now. And so I don't think that that other scenario is in play right now. Martha, how about you? Are you hearing any rumors about the fact that Mr. Carney may intend to be a one-term only PM and get as much done as possible and then move on? Well, well, after Tony made that comment the last time and echoing the thanks to the Albany Club,

that was so great to be able to do that with people around. So after you mentioned that, Tony, I asked around and the response was an overwhelming, nobody has talked about that. But I will say, knowing, you know, Mark Carney for many years, I don't see him as somebody who wants to be around for a long time. I actually see him as being somebody who absolutely wants to get things done. For me, I think the shocker for the prime minister is that it takes longer to get things done than I think he thinks or is hoping. And so what I can anticipate

is if he gets things done in his first term, he may very well step down. He may very well step I just don't know that he's going to get as much accomplished as he's hoping. And then we'll be swayed by the, oh, well, if you're here for a second term, you may be able to get more done. And if that happens, then I worry that we'll see the government and the politico's involved starting to play more politics in order to get reelected. I love the idea of having a prime minister that doesn't want or care to be elected a second term because then he or she can, I would hope, actually make some tough decisions. So I'd love it if that were to happen, frankly, but I'm just a little worried that not enough is going to get done as quickly as possible. And then we're going to start to see that, oh, but we need to get reelected. And so we're going to have to play politics.

So we'll see. I'm hopeful. I think he's trying and people around them are really trying to get things done. and if they do, and he does step down. I think that's actually kind of an interesting thing for Canadian politics. Yeah, Tony, there is something about coming in as a kind of a turnaround expert and then, you know, just going hard for three, four years and then seeding the center stage to somebody else.

I don't, that having said that, I can't think it, I mean, can we think of anybody who's actually done that? Usually when they get into that kind of high office, they are with their fingernails, you know, clutching onto the floor to make sure that they cannot be dragged out one second before they want to leave that office because I guess the job is so fantastic. Nobody wants to leave it early. Well, the only two that I can think of are Premier Bill Davis and Cincinnati. Those are a few years apart.

About 2,200 years apart. So, yeah, for anyone who doesn't know about whom I'm concerned. speaking, Sinanatus was a Roman general who won the Punic War or something. And then they asked him to become consul to the Roman Republic. And he said, no, I'm going to go back to my farm. I don't like this leading all Roman stuff. So I'll go back to my farm and farm turnips instead. You know, it's funny. George Washington did that. Yeah, they wanted to make him king. And he stood down after two terms. Yeah, he did. That's right. Which, there were obviously no term limits then.

He decided to stand down. You know, it's funny you mentioned Bill Davis because he was Premier of Ontario for almost 14 years, which doesn't sound like a guy who wants to come in, you know, be a turnaround expert and then leave. But you're quite right. He left at about 50% in the polls. And he had easily another election, I think, that he could have won had he stood for a fifth term. But he left early. Yep, had enough.

I'm going to throw another one in just because. A former president, Saolin Nisto of Finland, was just given an honorary degree at the University of Calgary. And I had the great pleasure in honor of spending a fair bit of time with the former president. I didn't know that I was aware of this. He didn't run again. But when he left, I was told that he left with something like 92% a favor from people in Finland. There's only one way to go after that, Martha. Wow.

But a super, super impressive person, very influential, obviously, in getting Finland to join NATO, very, very thoughtful, and chose not to continue in public office. So another one. There you go. Another one for you. Oh, I just wonder about the timing about this rumor about Mr. Carney potentially leaving after one term. Because if we just do the math in our head for a second, you know. There's three more years for this house to sit if it wants to go the full four years. So that takes it to 2029.

So that means he would have to step down. You'd hear a resignation announcement in the fall or the winter of 2028. So the liberals could renew their leadership, say, four to six months before the next election. That's really not that much time from now. So I do wonder whether or not it affects the viability of this theory. I don't know. It's, you know, look, and he's doing, he's really being prime minister the exact way he wants to be prime minister. He's not hemmed in, certainly by parliament anymore.

And he seems to like being on the road, shall we put it that way. And he's on the road. So there's no constraint that way. And clearly he wants to leave his mark in terms of his vision of what Canada should be in this. uncertain chaotic banana's world in which we find ourselves. So to me, that's an ongoing thing. And then, you know, you know what it's like. Both of you know what it's like. People around you want you to stick around, both for personal reasons, probably, but also because they actually genuinely believe that you're the best thing on offer. And I don't think there's a lot of liberals

who would think, well, if Mark Carney goes, then Pierre Paulya would be an acceptable or replacement is prime. And none of them believe that. So that would be like the fear factor on that side. So again, I think that even if this is something in the back of his mind, I think circumstances will dictate that it will not be the way of the future. You've probably noticed something changing at your favorite restaurant. Maybe it's shorter hours, a smaller menu, or longer waits.

Across Canada, restaurants are struggling to find enough staff. not because they aren't hiring, but because there simply aren't enough people to fill the roles in certain areas of the country. And that matters. For generations, restaurants have been a starting point, a first job for young Canadians, a first opportunity for newcomers to build a life here. That's still true today, and it's part of the solution. Investing in Canadian youth and recognizing the role newcomers play in this industry can help fill critical gaps and keep restaurants open and thriving. because it takes many hands to make a restaurant work. There's a short film that brings this story to life.

Take a minute to watch it at manyhandswork.ca. That's manyhandswork.com to see the full story. And now, back to the show. Well, since you said he does like to travel, let's go to Block 2 and talk about the travel that he is currently engaged in because as we sit here taping this, he's over at the G7 meeting in France and he teased an idea the other.

day about new so-called strands of a new world order being established at this G7 meeting, because of course it's not just the G7, the seven, I was going to say the seven biggest economies in the world, which isn't really right because we're not one of them. But let's just say those seven heavy hitter countries. But there's also several other large and important countries like India and Brazil that are at this thing as well. So, Martha, how seriously should we take those comments that he is there to pick up the strands of what he sees as this new world order that he hopes to help create. I think it's terrific that people are talking about how do we move forward. There's an awful lot of talk about the world order that we've known for decades is now seriously challenged.

I don't want to say it's over because I just, I'd like to be an optimist and think that the world order that we've had imperfect as it has been has been beneficial generally for the last, you know, large number of decades. But it certainly has changed and is certainly challenged. And I do think we collectively need to look at what has worked, what has not. Look, the United Nations, they're parts of the United Nations that should not exist anymore. I mean, some of the things that have gone on in the past, and Tony, you and I, this is another, another one that we would agree on. Does that mean that the United Nations itself should disappear?

I think it's been hugely important in a number of ways, certainly in the first few decades after World War II. So is there a strand of the good of the United Nations that can still be pulled out and continued, but then improved upon? I would hope so. It's going to take an awful lot of work. But setting something like that up in the first place took an awful lot of work. It took an awful lot of collaboration among, you know, people or leaders from around the world. Do I think we should have much greater collaboration among like-minded countries with respect to energy supply and energy demand? I do think.

Like we talk about NATO. We talk about adding countries to NATO from a national security and a collective security perspective. I think we should be talking about countries that could actually collaborate significantly more with respect to energy security as an example. They're not necessarily the same countries, right? So I think it's really important that people are talking about it. Tony, where are you on this strands comment on a new world order potentially? Yeah, I think I don't. I just don't get it.

I don't understand how you can have middle power. that can basically overhaul the world economy and geopolitics without regard to the hegemen's. And, you know, we have two of them right now. They happen to be China and the United States of America. So I think you have to have regard for that. I also think that Mark Carney says a bunch of different things. You've talked about one thing, Steve. But the other thing that keeps cropping up with this prime minister is his love affair with Europe.

Well, more particularly the European Union. And always when he's got an opportunity, he says Canada is the most non-European, most European country that is not in Europe or some verbage like that. And then all of a sudden there is cooing from the EU saying, well, maybe Canada could be an EU member in the future. this is just nonsense. I mean, how is protecting our sovereignty against the United States, which is what Canada, Canadians want, then having a subservience to the European Union and it's 10 billion rules and regulations that are part of the European Union. I don't get how our sovereignty is protected in Europe by the dictates of Brussels versus the dictates of Washington. It's bizarre. So putting that aside, I think the difference, look, I think what Martha said is sensible.

I'm a little bit more of the school of thought from 1648 onwards that the basic building block for geopolitics is the nation state. have we had multi-ilateral organizations like the UN, like NATO, like the IMF, like the World Bank? Yeah, I get that. But to me, the basic formulation of, especially in democracies, the democratic accountability can only occur within the nation state. And I believe one of the things that is happening now in geopolitics is a return to the idea that the nation state should be the one having trade agreements, having democratic alliances, that that should be the basis of it, that the globalization that has occurred over the last 30 or 40 years basically went too far. And I think that's where the Trumpers are. And I think

that's where other world leaders are. And I think that that isn't something to to be avoided. I think that that is, I think that's pretty elemental. We, I want Canada to be a nation state. I don't want it to be some kind of, you know, hotel, as was said in the past, that, you know, where we really don't have the accoutrements of sovereignty because we've, we've bargained them all away to all the multilateral institutions that we're very proud of. I don't think that's going to work for Canada. It didn't work in the last 10 years and it won't work in the future. So yeah, I think that there are changes happening. I think that Mark Carney is trying to articulate something, you know, and I think other world leaders are doing the same thing. But his articulation of

rebuilding a multilateral order in the absence of the hegemen's, it's a fanciful dream. I just don't think it's reality. So we have to protect our sovereignty as a nation state. That's where that's where my ships are going to go. Martha, you want to come back on that? Just that we're just not big enough on our own. I mean, we're a nation state. Of course we are. You know, I would think that most of the countries in the European Union still regard themselves each one as their own nation state. And they consciously made a decision to work out arrangements with the among themselves to foster a stronger collective economies, foster stronger security.

I mean, those were nation states who made those decisions to actually. agree on a collective arrangement, they are still nation states, right? Canada agreed to a significant collective arrangement. It's called, it was called FTA, the free trade agreement, the United States, and then it became NAFTA, and then it became Kuzma, USMCA, and look at how we're bending over backwards to try and maintain a relationship with the other two countries in North America. I don't think any of this ignores the hegements. I don't think any of this effort. I mean, look, after World War II, there were still hegemen's, right? I don't think establishing the United Nations was ignoring the hegemen's. I don't think there's anything in Mark Carney's past history

that would suggest that he would possibly do anything that ignores the hegemen. I think this is actually a response to a world order that involves, frankly, a couple of hegemen's, one of which we've relied on for so long and we can't rely on anymore. So I don't know. I think it's great that our Our prime minister is among senior world leaders who are actually talking about what do we, what do we do next? I think we have to because what we had, we don't really have anymore. And so for a country that isn't as, you know, one of the biggest players, our country, Canada, it's, I'm really, really glad that we have a leader in Mark Carney who is actually

trying to figure out what do we do next. Tony, I guess I would ask you if, and I guess in putting the, this question forward, I should quote that great geostrategic thinker, Gwyneth Paltrow, in talking about if we're in the midst of a conscious uncoupling from the United States, you know, if a middle powers alliance of some kind is not the way to go because you think it's fanciful and hasn't got legs. And I guess we don't want to, you know, I don't think we're about to hop into bed with Russia as another significant partner in the world. So what other options are there?

No, I think that the only option is to preserve as much sovereignty as we can within North America. We're a North American country. And that involves the other two big North American countries. There are many smaller ones, but the other two big ones are Mexico and the USA. So I'm in favor of a deal, a trade deal, which doesn't involve other aspects of our sovereignty, by the way. The European Union, you know, there's a European currency. there's one central bank. There's a lot of other things that those European countries, I agree, consciously gave up

to advance the European Union. But I think there's a, I think there was a poll out this week, Steve and Martha, where, you know, a plurality of Canadians were interested in membership in the European Union. Well, sorry, you don't understand what membership in the European Union actually is because we would be giving away such amounts of sovereignty that surely to goodness Canadians would scratch their heads and say, wait a minute, I didn't know that Brussels would be dictating this about our food supply and dictating that in terms of our labor markets, all of these things, taxes. And we're not going to adopt the euro.

No, no, but I don't think, I mean, I look, polls, this is what drives me crazy about polls. is that questions get asked of a bunch of people who in many cases don't actually know enough about the question being asked or the potential answers, right? You're totally right, Tony. Most people have no idea that the challenges that some of the countries in the European Union have with having to comply with the rules that the collective have come up with. No question, right? but they decided to become part of the European Union, become part of the European Union because the benefits outweighed some of those shackles.

Canadians don't know for the most part all of the details of what's involved with belonging with the European Union. So I think those polls are just frankly frustrating. Right, right. But the people in charge of our government, including our prime minister, knows very, very well what would be involved. I don't think there's any thought really about joining the European Union. But then why does Mark Carney talk about? Yeah. We had Canadians fighting on European soil to help Europe actually figure it out in both World War I and World War II.

So, you know, there are lots of connections with Europe that we have had in the past and we may still have them and we may enhance in the future. I just don't. The trade agreement with Europe. Stephen Harper actually negotiated that during the latter part of our term in of office. So, yeah, absolutely. We should trade with Europe. They're wonderful military allies.

But this ever closer reunion with the EU, I don't think it's going to go anywhere. But I think to your question, Steve, you know, Mark Carney, I'm not sure. I just hear different things on different days from Mark Carney. One minute, we can help make America. great again. Another minute. We're close to Europe. There are our best buddies. Another minute. Let's expand our relationship with China. There's a lot of stuff. We could do another show on China. We could do another show on, of course, the state of the trade talks. So to me, there's just a lot of stuff being thrown up against the wall here by the government and by the chief minister.

And I'm just not sure where it's all going, to be honest with you. But I also will say, Tony, I just don't think, I don't think any of the above are inconsistent. I think we have a very ambitious prime minister, no question. But I don't think improving our relationships with China, albeit they should be done with eyes wide open, is inconsistent with him going to New York and engaging with the American business community to say, you know, Canada can help make America gradient. And it's a bit sad because, you know, I always thought America was pretty great already. And I think Canada is pretty great already.

But I don't think any of those things that he's trying to do are actually inconsistent. And we'll be back right after this. Let me get a quick take from both of you on a new phenomenon that I've been noticing in politics lately. And it happened again this past week when the prime minister and Ireland came to some kind of entente or accord. or something. And, well, I want to know if it's a real thing because I've been noticing lately that a lot of either premiers or prime ministers set up these very impressive looking photo ops and there are memorandums of understanding signed and they hold up their documents in front of the cameras and they smile and shake hands. I saw Premier Ford of Ontario just do that

with Governor Shapiro of Pennsylvania. And then you read what's actually in the memorandum of understanding and it's, I mean, if I can say, it's pretty thin gruel. I mean, there's not a lot there. Prime Minister Carney did this with Ireland this past week, and, well, the Conservative Party released this statement. It said Canada already has trade with Ireland. Making expensive trips to sign fake agreements and advance in other countries trade with other countries does not help the steel, aluminum, forestry, and auto workers who are losing their jobs in Canada right now. Canada already shares economic security and people-to-people ties with Ireland. Mark Carney's liberal government has not created anything new with their illusions or non-binding memorandums

of understanding. Okay, can I get both of you? Martha, you go first. Can I get you to weigh in on whether these, you know, these photo ops and the signed deals are actually real or is it more just showbiz? Well, for sure, it's showbiz. I mean, that's politics. And you can never get all of the politics out of politics. Personally, I just said, all these different things that the prime minister is trying to accomplish are not inconsistent one from the other. But I do think he needs to focus. And so when I saw the trip to Ireland and all of this stuff, I thought, oh, you know, like, you only have 24 hours in a day. And we need our prime minister to focus on the super priorities. in Canada clearly has some really big ones,

I'm not sure that that isn't, that kind of thing isn't a bit of a distraction. So it's politics. Would I prefer that we didn't actually spend as much time on some of those things and spend clearly more time of limited time on some of the big things? Yes, I would prefer that.

Tony? I worry that one of the things about the Carney government that is similar to, similar to the Trudeau government before it is, is these photo ups and that they don't really amount to anything over the, even the medium term, let along the long term. So that that is a concern of mine. And I know we've been saying for 15 months now, too early to tell, you got to give the guy, and I think the Canadian public, that's where they're at, you got to give the guy a chance. You know, he's just relatively new there. I get all that. But there's starting to be a track record.

whether you like it or not, he's been in power. And I don't like it. Other people love it. I get that. I get that. But at some point, you have to look at the track record and to see what is being done. And at the same time, the economic indicators, some of them, we had a good jobs number for the month of May in Canada. So I have to admit that.

But the other job and other indicators are not. so rosy. And I still harken back to that indicator where there are more businesses failing in Canada that are being started up in Canada and that capital flight is still happening in this country. So, so yeah, I think at some point you have to measure the prime minister and his government on the results. And this does not move this Canada-Ireland thing. You know, not too many people hate the Irish, I wouldn't think. Maybe there's a few British people, but that's a different story. But by and large, it's a feel-good mission.

I think he went to his ancestral homeland for a visit as well in county something or other. So that's that, you know, I'm sure there's, you know, a lot of photos being having been taken there. But ultimately does it move the needle? Does it, does it track? Martha's point is a very good point that, you know, you have to have a strategy for your government. Because if you don't, if it's just a series of announcements and photo ops, at the end of the day, there's going to be nothing there that actually advances the cause of the country. And I just worry that Mark Carney, you know, is falling down this familiar political trap. Matt, Martha, your comment reminded me of something David Frum once told me, which is that the most diminishing currency that any leader has in public office are.

minutes and that you are spending those minutes the second you get the job and you can't get them back. And at some point, you run out of minutes and you hope you've used them the best way possible. We'll be back right after this. Every story here starts with someone wanting a deeper understanding of the world. So should the AI you turn to. That's why Anthropic built Claude to be ad-free. No sponsored answers.

no third party deciding what Claude shows you. Claude is built to expand your thinking, not hold your attention. Try Claude for free at clod.a.I. slash Paken and see why problem solvers choose Claude as their thinking partner. I want to move on to Block 3 and talk about the biggest story in Canada this week and it has nothing to do with politics, although it is plenty political. And that is the World Cup, ladies and gentlemen, some of which is happening on Canadian soil for the first time ever.

and as we saw this past week in Toronto, Canada got its first ever World Cup point as a result of a one-one tie with Bosnia and Herzegovina. So my question is, Martha, how much World Cup fever are you experiencing in Calgary? Okay. I like, FIFA is so corrupt as an organization, right? It like it kind of rivals the International Olympic Committee, right, in terms of corruption and, I mean, just look at the ticket prices and, you know, rules that say you can't bring in refillable water bottles. If you, if you're a bar and you want to like the rules and the and the corruption associated with this just makes me want to so not be supportive. The problem is that people love it. It is the beautiful game.

People around the world love it. So if we could have all of these soccer games happening without this lurking corrupt organization behind it, I would be hugely supportive. So enough said. It's super frustrating for me. But the game itself is fantastic. If I can just a little anecdote about this, somebody I know who lives in Toronto was saying that they were just doing some renovations to their house. and the fellow who is who is doing some of the final work i think she said he was putting in the downspouts um and he was from bosnia and he was he had made canada his home right so he's an

immigrant from bosnia and this was two weeks ago so before the big game in toronto and he was so excited about his former country his home country and his new home country playing against each other in his new home country. She said he actually told her he could die tomorrow. It's that. There's that much passion. So I'm all for the passion. I'm so frustrated that we allow this extraordinarily corrupt organization to run it.

Well, Tony, I'm wondering whether or not you as a guy who's born in, you're, where are you from Manchester? Manchester. You're from Manchester, England. Got my man united shirt here right there. Oh, there you go. Good for you. Nice. He's from Manchester, England, England.

Beyond the Atlantic Sea. The Atlantic Sea. There we go. I'm wondering if this is going to be England's year. You've been waiting, the Leaf fans have been waiting since 67, but the England fans have been waiting since 1966. So is this finally the year? You can't have a conversation about Team England without mentioning 1966.

You're absolutely right, Steve. And so, yes, this could be the year. Who knows? But, you know, it's, look, it's the biggest show on earth. Martha mentioned the IOC and the Olympics, of course. But this is even, like, I think there's 1.2 billion people watching, right? You know, these games?

I think this is bigger than the Olympics. Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah. I think so. And, you know, 48 teams this year, not the, it used to be 32, I think, now it's 48. So it's a lot of countries. Hey, pop quiz, guys. What is the smallest country at the World Cup?

Do you guys know? by population or area? Either. It's the same country. 80. Okay. I'm seeing silence here. Curacao.

No. Curacao. Oh, Curacao. Very good. Yes. They're in the World Cup. Good for them.

So there's all these, all these, like in any great sports, as you know, it's the stories, right? It's the stories, you know, the, the chippy, you know, the ones who aren't expected to win, who come from nowhere and win a game or win a point in Canada's case. So there's going to be all these stories, all this drama. I think it's wonderful. I have tried to avoid Toronto. I'm in Halifax right now.

But in Halifax, once I landed Friday afternoon in Halifax. The first game, the Bosnia-Herzegovina game against Canada started at five o'clock local time here. I couldn't get it. It took me an hour to get from the. airport to my hotel because of all the people coming into the downtown core for the watch parties, for the bars. Oh, yeah. Like even in, you know, Halifax, right? So, so yeah, I think it's taking the country by storm. And I think Vancouver has the next two Canadian games, as I understand it. So the British Columbia is getting right into it too. I think is great. And, you know, yeah,

you know, look, FIFA, don't get me started on FIFA. But look, they're bringing this great game. Canada's part of it. We're not a bystander. And I think we're putting on a good show. So let's just enjoy it, man. When's the last time Canada hosted a FIFA World Cup game? Never.

So let's enjoy it as it lasts. I must say there was a moment that I experienced the other day when the game was on. I guess it was probably about, I mean, it was well into the game, right? What was that about the 75 or 80 minute mark that Canada finally scored a goal? And I was in an outdoor cafe in Yorkville, which for those outside Toronto was sort of downtown Toronto, close to Young and Bluer area. And all of a sudden, and I had, believe it, I'm in an outdoor cafe and I've got my iPhone there and I am watching the game on the phone while I'm meeting with the other people that I'm with. and all of a sudden for blocks and blocks around,

I hear this massive cheer. And I looked down at the camera and sure enough, Canada had just scored. And I thought, isn't that cool? That's a wonderful moment where people all over, blocks and blocks and blocks in every direction, are experiencing the same thing at the same time and having that wonderful moment to cheer. And we don't have enough in those moments.

We have the added advantage that all of the Italians are supporting Team Canada because, you know, Steve, the Italians are not part of the World Cup this year. I noticed that. Isn't that a scandal? I had to get that dig in. That is kind of scandalous. That is, I mean, Viva Azzuri, but just not this year. Not this year. No, no. Okay, friends, let's go to Block 4.

You know, we like to do a letter to the editor every week. And we got something here from Elaine Faye, who wrote us saying, and we're back on to federal politics here. She said, I've been reading a lot lately about Bill C-22, in which the federal government would lay the legal groundwork for giving the U.S. warrantless access to our data. Why would Prime Minister Mark Carney want to threaten our Canadian sovereignty by passing such legislation? I feel this would be a great topic for one of your upcoming podcasts. And Elaine, I agree. So let's put that to our two ex-parliamentarians. Tony, does this make sense to you?

So there's a number of aspects of Bill C-22. I think it does involve warrants, however. So there's that. I don't think you have warrantless access. I think the problem that she may be referring to is the fact that the legislation compels U.S.-based data organizations, let's put it as broadly as possible, to comply with Canadian warrants. And in addition to that, these data companies like Google or what have you, would be required in their view, although they're, this is contested, but in their view, they would have to require backdoor access for the RCMP and for CIS and for the CSE, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the security's establishment, uh, to, um, uh, to, uh, to have access of certain data. Your location, for example, and, you know, other metadata, not necessarily your activity on social media or that kind of thing, but stuff that would pinpoint where you're going and a little bit of what you're doing. And the concern from the U.S. side is that that might bleed into U.S. citizens being somehow captured by this net. So there's, I don't think it's about warrantless, but there would be metadata collected for a year on each citizen, Canadian citizen, that through a warrant could be accessed if there was an investigation. So, I mean, I think for me, C-22 is, is this the right balance between giving security agencies like the R-DG20? like the RCMP and CESIS, the kind of data they need to catch the bad guys that are using

these platforms for nefarious means, balancing that off with privacy considerations. And maybe it's now a tricorner balancing issue because we've got the privacy concerns. We've got the concerns of the security agencies that they need more data to catch the bad guys. and now we've got the U.S. Congress getting involved saying, wait a minute, some of this could mean U.S. citizens are at risk. And please, Canada, don't go down this path because now is not a good time for us to have this battle with the U.S. Congress on this legislation. So that's the way I see the issue, Steve. I'm trying to be fair and balanced in terms of how I see the pluses and minuses. But there are definitely some concerns that are being raised. Okay, Martha, any comments for Elaine? Well, first, thank you for writing in because it just makes all the stuff that we do at the show so much more fun when we know that people are engaged. So first, thank you. Second, honestly, I have not looked into this bill closely enough to really opine on it.

What I will say is that it is we have this constant battle and technology now is making. making it so much more complicated. The battle of, between protecting individual privacy, individual human rights and the importance of collective security. And given technology now, it's so hard to find any kind of balance. You know,

we, we talk about this, but we also so conveniently forget that we've had, we've had, technology in our cars for years that has allowed, you know, I forget the name of the brand, but it's been in a bunch of cars for many, many years where if you had an accident, the system would actually contact whether it be the police or roadside assistance or whatever it was. We've had that for decades, right? Well, how do you think that works? It works only.

by that technology knowing where you are in your car, right? And I've often thought, well, the capability of if you had an accident, all you needed to do was talk to somebody. And I'm thinking, holy man, is somebody listening to all of my conversations inside of my car? Not just, you know, if I've had an accident. So, so I, the fact of having this kind of technology is at, at, on the one hand, super exciting because it can be really helpful, but also super unnerving. And then we just, this is a constant battle, the protection of individual human rights and privacy

versus collective security. And we will never get, I don't think we can ever get to the ideal. It's just too complicated. Gotcha. Let's move on to our good on you segment, where I asked the two of you to find something that happened in politics over the last couple of weeks, preferably in the party that you did not represent

when you were in parliament and say, yeah, that was good. Good, good on you. Tony, start us off. So, Steve, this Eric Lombardi guy, he's running for a liberal leader. He's a finance and technology. I'm just reading from his website, finance and technology entrepreneur turned civic builder. And I think you help me out on this, but I think he's running on on very interesting set of issues. Like he's kind of a next generation guy, for one thing. Big housing advocate.

He wants to see a lot more home building in Toronto. Yeah, more home building. You know, anyway, the usual stuff. But I remember when I first ran for the leader of the PC Party of Ontario in 2001 into 2002, I think it was March 2020, March 2002 that we had the leadership race, I was like 39 years old. So I was definitely the youngest guy running. And, you know, it was a bit of a burden, actually,

because people didn't, you know, some people didn't think I was ready or, you know, I was happy when I turned 40 in the middle of the leadership race because then I wasn't 39 anymore. And this guy's kind of in this 30s, right? So it might be 31 or two. He's much younger than you. I first was elected to the Ontario legislation when I was 34. So he's much younger.

Yeah, you're right. So, yeah, I would give him a good on you for taking the leap into leadership politics, which, as we know, and Martha knows this as well, never easy. And, yeah, you know, he's going to have some good ideas, I bet. And let's see what happens. Well, as long as you're giving props to 30-somethings who are running for the Ontario liberal leadership, I think two other guys who are in that demographic would want their names mentioned as well. So I'll do that. Rob Serjanick is the MPP for Ajax, and he is running. And a guy named Dylan Miranda, who's, I guess, a senior policy advisor from Justin Trudeau's PMO and Dalton McGinty and Kathleen Wins, Premier's offices.

He is running as well. And I remember, I spoke to Dylan Miranda just a couple of weeks ago, and I said, so you look very young. How old are you? And his answer was, I'm the same age David Peterson was when he won the liberal leadership in 1980. 82. Tush. Wow. So, yeah. So 38.

Which, okay. 3.30 something's going for the leadership. Good on them. Thanks, Tony. Okay, Martha, who gets your good on you this week? Well, I'll just echo. I think it's great to see these younger people engaging because it's too often you hear, oh, I'd never do politics or, you know, there's a lot of skepticism and a lot of negative

vibe out there among some of. of our younger folks. And so I just, hooray, right? Just that we have these people stepping up. It's fantastic. So I tried to retire a few years ago. It apparently didn't work because I took this dream job of being director of the School of Public Policy at the University of Calgary two and a half years ago. It's awesome. But it's definitely not retirement. My good on you goes to Elizabeth May, who has announced her retirement. But apparently Elizabeth has had the same problem that I've had in actually sticking to it. You know, she's announced her retirement before. That didn't work. She, she got drawn back in. Her party didn't let her retire, frankly. And

so my good on you is, is for Elizabeth May, good on you for trying to retire again. And here's hoping you actually managed to make it stick. The leader of the Green Party says she's going to step down in November. And my reaction to it, I think, was the same as yours, Martha, which is, okay, let's see if it takes this time. Because sometimes it's hard to walk away. I'll tell you a completely irrelevant, but I think nevertheless interesting little piece of trivia, which is to say the leader of the federal Green Party, Elizabeth May, and the leader of the Ontario Green Party, Mike Shriner, have the same birthday. They're both June the 9th. Okay.

And happy birthday to both of them, a little bit belated, but there you go. A belated birthday to them both. And they share June the 9th with some other person that you know. Okay. And you're talking to right now. That's right. I was going to say, yeah, happy birthday, buddy. All three of us are June the 9th.

Oh, Steve, I didn't. Dopee me, I didn't know. So happy belated birthday. That was not a creed de cour to get you to wish me happy birthday. That's just a little piece of trivia. But I wanted on the record that I sent Steve. a happy birthday message without any reference to the Montreal Canadiens. I just let it, let it lie, didn't I, Steve?

You're such a pal. Thanks. You're a good man. After 68 trolling messages about the Leafs and the Canadians, he sent me one nice note about my birthday. Well done, Tony. Thanks so much. I'm there for you, buddy.

Friends, let's do a little housekeeping here before we sign off. That is to say, we are happy to let people know. We have a Patreon page here in case they want to throw us a few bucks and support what we're doing here, patreon.com forward slash the Paken podcast. And to that end, can I thank Duncan Irving from Ottawa, who says I'm very happy to support good independent media. Thank you for the important work. You and your team do. The information you provide is always insightful, enjoyable, and timely. There you go, kids. That's pretty good. And Grant Thomas. Oh, Tony, you're in Ontario. Okay. Let's see if you know this. Grant Thomas is from Pontipool, Ontario. You know where that is?

Oh, no, but I certainly, isn't that a place in the U.K.? Isn't it somewhere in the Carthas? Yeah, there's a, good for you. In the UK, too. No, Will, he's not from the UK. Martha Hall-Findley, you are deeply impressive here. Pontypool, Ontario is a half an hour south of Lindsay, which quite correct is out there near the Coorthas.

And, wow, I'm impressed that you know that, because I've lived here my whole life and I've never heard of it. So, Grant, thank you very much, says he loves the pod. And how about this? He says he can't wait. for the Bill Burilco documentary that I'm working on. And this gives me an opportunity to say, to that end, I'm flying to Timmons tomorrow.

I'm going to fly to Timmons. We're going to rent a helicopter. We're going to go then on the chopper to about, I don't know, three, four, four, four, four, Bill Barilco's plane crashed back in 1951 after he scored the greatest goal in Leaf history. If you want to know more about the story,

listen to 50 mission cap by the tragically hip. And then we walk, whatever it is, three, four, five kilometers through the muskeg and the brush to get to the spot where it happened. And I must say I am looking forward to that with a mixture of awe and dread. I just think it's such a tragic demise to what was a 24-year-old kid's wonderful Stanley Cup championship life. And I'm not sure how I'm going to feel when I actually get to the spot. But I'm looking forward to being there.

I think it's how it's. Where can people watch your documentary when it's completed, Steve? Well, I mean, it'll be in theaters for a bit. It'll be at film festivals. It'll be on TVO. But this is probably not until next spring. So we're still got a lot of shooting to do. But we're on the way to Timmons.

And looking forward to that. We'll travel safely. Thanks so much, Martha Hall-Findley. That is definitely our plan. That is our plan. Folks, all our shows are archived at Steve Paken.com. Thanks so much for watching. And peace and love to everybody.

Peace and love. Peace and love.