Juno News - 2021 Meets 1984

00:00:00.000 Welcome to Canada's most irreverent talk show. This is the Andrew Lawton Show, brought to you by True North.

00:00:12.800 Coming up, yet another Canadian pastor thrown behind bars, Stephen Gilbo flip-flops again on Bill C-10, and a novel idea to end political discrimination.

00:00:24.580 The Andrew Lawton Show starts right now.

00:00:30.840 Welcome to the Andrew Lawton Show, Canada's most irreverent talk show here on True North.

00:00:36.640 It is Tuesday, May 11th, 1984, and wait, wait, sorry, what was that?

00:00:43.980 No, it's, okay, sorry, no, 2021.

00:00:46.860 Well, forgive me for getting those years wrong.

00:00:50.320 On Saturday, Calgary pastor Archer Perlowski literally carried away by police for having a service in violation of a court order.

00:01:01.880 He and his brother were arrested.

00:01:03.740 Police took them down on the side of a highway in Calgary, and if you look at the footage, it's actually not clear how many police had to be there for this.

00:01:12.200 It's like they were doing some raid on some heavily armed person, when in actuality, they were taking away a pastor and his brother.

00:01:20.040 You're not, you're Gestapo, you're psychopaths.

00:01:25.040 You're Gestapo, psychopaths you are.

00:01:29.640 No, it's a Nazi style. 0.51

00:01:32.040 No, it's a taser.

00:01:33.580 Now, he is not going away easily, as you hear.

00:01:39.780 He yells that they're Gestapo and psychopaths and Nazis terms.

00:01:43.080 We heard from Pastor Perlowski a few weeks back, when he literally chased police and health inspectors out of his church,

00:01:50.400 when they were there to shut him down, and he said, as a pastor, I'm not playing ball with this.

00:01:56.680 Pastor Perlowski has joined a club in which no one wants to be a member.

00:02:01.500 Pastors put in jail.

00:02:03.580 Because of their insistence on practicing their religious beliefs.

00:02:07.920 This happens in China.

00:02:09.300 This happens in Pakistan.

00:02:10.820 This happens in Laos.

00:02:11.920 This happens in North Korea.

00:02:13.800 And yes, it happens in Canada, specifically in Alberta.

00:02:17.200 A couple of months back, it was Pastor James Coates, who spent days and days behind bars.

00:02:22.560 Now it's Pastor Perlowski.

00:02:24.040 And while he was later released, you can never get back freedom that is taken away from you.

00:02:31.480 You simply can't.

00:02:32.820 So this is now the norm in Canada.

00:02:36.080 That if the pastors won't shut their churches, you can lock them out of their churches, as we talked about last week with Pastor Jacob Rayom.

00:02:43.040 And you can also go even further and haul them away to jail, which is exactly what happened to Archer Perlowski.

00:02:50.260 Now before you do what happens every time I talk about one of these cases, I get emails from people saying, well, but he says this and he believes this and I don't particularly care.

00:02:59.860 You don't get to choose your martyrs.

00:03:02.400 But when people are being persecuted, you can decide whether they or the ones hauling them away are the ones in the wrong.

00:03:09.900 And in this case, the orders from politicians that justify this, that make this normal, that make this in some way upholding the rule of law rather than spitting on the rule of law.

00:03:22.080 They are the ones that must be hauled to account here, not Pastor Pulaski, not Pastor Coates, not Pastor Rayom, not Pastor Hildebrandt.

00:03:30.920 I don't need to agree with anyone theologically to realize that their rights are being violated.

00:03:36.580 I don't need to join the church to stand up for the church because an attack on a church and an attack on a pastor is an attack on all churches.

00:03:45.000 It's an attack on all mosques, all synagogues, all temples, all gurdjwaras. 1.00

00:03:49.320 It's an attack on all religious liberty, which means it's an attack on the very fundamental freedoms of this country. 0.94

00:03:55.600 For the people that were looking at this video and cheering on the police, what the hell is wrong with you?

00:04:05.520 What is wrong with you?

00:04:06.720 This is not what a society should strive to be.

00:04:10.140 In fact, this is what people in societies risk their lives to fight against.

00:04:16.100 It is this sort of overreach that people will fight against to form new societies that protect and preserve freedom.

00:04:24.480 And Pastor Archer Pulaski knows this all too well.

00:04:28.100 He grew up on the other side of the Iron Curtain.

00:04:31.000 He knows what it's like to live under tyrannical rule.

00:04:33.600 He knows what it's like to live under a communist dictatorship.

00:04:37.160 And well, even with what's happening here, I don't stack up Canada in the same ranks as those dictatorships.

00:04:43.700 I also realize why for someone who's lived that life, it all looks too eerily familiar for him.

00:04:49.780 At one point, not that long ago, you had people from Poland fleeing to the free world.

00:04:53.580 And now you have Christians that will be fleeing to Poland. 0.95

00:04:57.720 Not talking about Archer Pulaski specifically, but in general.

00:05:01.420 And here's the thing.

00:05:02.540 This is one more example of how protest is only selectively allowed under the law enforcement regime we have right now.

00:05:12.260 Calgary police send out a statement announcing its enforcement of this court injunction,

00:05:17.100 in which they said this.

00:05:18.820 It is important to understand that law enforcement recognizes people's desire to participate in faith-based gatherings,

00:05:25.380 as well as the right to protest.

00:05:27.600 However, ah, here's the rub.

00:05:29.720 As we find ourselves in the midst of a global pandemic,

00:05:32.320 we all must comply with public health orders in order to ensure everyone's safety and well-being.

00:05:38.500 When Black Lives Matter protests were taking place last summer,

00:05:42.440 it was all fine because they had a moral worthiness to their cause in some people's eyes.

00:05:46.740 But if you want to protest the order saying you can't have church by having church,

00:05:50.360 well, we are going to haul you away. 0.70

00:05:52.760 Now, here's the thing.

00:05:53.760 A lot of people laughed last week when I'd said that Trinity Bible Chapel

00:05:57.540 had been on the receiving end of $50 million in fines.

00:06:00.920 I actually don't have as much of a problem with that as I do with what happened to Pastor Pulaski,

00:06:06.140 with the reason being that if you get fines,

00:06:08.320 you don't have to pay them until you've exhausted all your options.

00:06:12.500 You can fight them.

00:06:13.640 You can appeal them.

00:06:14.820 You can do all of this without actually losing anything.

00:06:18.320 If you've been arrested, or in the case of Trinity,

00:06:21.720 if your church doors have been locked on you,

00:06:24.680 you cannot get that back.

00:06:26.840 You can have it restored in the sense that,

00:06:29.140 yes, you can be allowed back into your church,

00:06:30.920 or in Pastor Pulaski's case,

00:06:32.440 he can be sent away from jail and sent back home on bail,

00:06:35.660 as happened that weekend.

00:06:37.400 But what you can't do is reclaim what was lost.

00:06:42.120 When that liberty is taken, it is gone forever.

00:06:45.640 And the best case scenario, the best thing you can hope for,

00:06:49.340 is a recognition from some court that,

00:06:52.160 yes, your rights were in fact violated.

00:06:54.840 Well, let me tell you, you don't need a court to tell you

00:06:57.800 that religious liberty is being violated

00:07:00.100 when pastors are being hauled to jail

00:07:02.220 for daring to practice their religion, 0.71

00:07:05.160 for daring to assemble as Christians have for 2,000 years.

00:07:09.780 But the problem with this,

00:07:10.960 to go back to Ontario for a moment,

00:07:13.020 Trinity Bible Chapel, Church of God in Elmer,

00:07:16.260 and another one that I haven't focused on on this show as much,

00:07:18.920 which is the Wellandport United Reform Church in Niagara region,

00:07:22.080 those three have constitutional challenges against the Ontario government.

00:07:26.960 Those will be heard in October,

00:07:29.860 which means that we are looking at six months from now,

00:07:33.760 not six months from when the issues first started,

00:07:36.360 six months from now,

00:07:37.780 before they will be able to have their day in court

00:07:40.080 and make their claim that the government

00:07:41.580 has violated their constitutional rights.

00:07:43.940 Six months from now.

00:07:45.280 And some of these cases have gone back, by the way,

00:07:47.640 to the very beginning of the pandemic,

00:07:49.380 almost a year ago.

00:07:51.440 So it will have been 18 months

00:07:53.620 since some of these violations started

00:07:55.580 before they can even make the pitch in court.

00:07:59.360 And as I know firsthand,

00:08:00.580 even after you've had that hearing,

00:08:02.080 it's still a significant delay

00:08:03.620 to actually get a result on this.

00:08:06.860 And yes, you want to do it right,

00:08:09.000 but justice delayed is justice denied.

00:08:12.060 So the fact that it takes so long

00:08:14.040 to have the day in court

00:08:15.100 to make the case before the government

00:08:16.720 and then perhaps get a finding

00:08:17.920 that yes, your religious liberty was violated

00:08:20.200 is why it's so dangerous

00:08:21.700 to look at interim measures

00:08:23.520 and injunction measures

00:08:25.080 that are being used quite routinely now

00:08:27.840 to violate people's rights 0.86

00:08:30.040 pending the outcome of larger cases down the road.

00:08:35.200 And this is monumental.

00:08:36.900 If provinces start to go systematically

00:08:39.500 and realize that there's now a framework

00:08:41.860 and there's now precedent

00:08:42.880 because of what happened in Alberta,

00:08:44.200 what happened in Ontario,

00:08:45.560 there's now precedent

00:08:46.540 to start locking church doors

00:08:48.680 and locking up pastors.

00:08:50.660 And anyone who cheers this on

00:08:52.320 is ignorant of the fact

00:08:53.560 that when you allow this

00:08:55.180 or celebrate it,

00:08:56.280 such as the case may be,

00:08:57.980 you are not just supporting

00:08:59.700 a targeted measure

00:09:01.020 on one person, on one church.

00:09:03.140 You are supporting something

00:09:04.800 that will take away

00:09:06.760 your rights and freedoms.

00:09:08.220 Not if, when.

00:09:10.480 You know, I mentioned earlier

00:09:11.580 that you don't get to choose your martyrs.

00:09:13.620 And I want to make it clear,

00:09:14.600 I'm not making a judgment call

00:09:16.240 about any of the people involved in this.

00:09:18.440 I'm saying that I don't think people,

00:09:20.240 particularly Christians,

00:09:21.820 should be nitpicking

00:09:22.780 about this theological belief

00:09:24.420 or this past controversy

00:09:25.780 when that takes away

00:09:27.700 from what is happening

00:09:28.680 and what is demonstrably happening

00:09:30.220 in front of our very eyes.

00:09:32.040 And lots of Christians, by the way,

00:09:33.800 Christian churches have been saying,

00:09:35.080 well, you know,

00:09:35.520 these people shouldn't open.

00:09:36.660 We can do our service by Zoom,

00:09:38.460 so why can't they?

00:09:39.620 That's fine.

00:09:40.340 But I want that dialogue

00:09:41.940 to take place between churches

00:09:44.200 and among Christians.

00:09:45.660 I don't want it to be

00:09:46.760 a government-led dialogue.

00:09:49.640 And that's the whole point here,

00:09:51.100 is that the government

00:09:51.760 is trying to position,

00:09:53.360 and a lot of people, by the way,

00:09:54.880 in the media are trying to position

00:09:56.420 anyone who protests these lockdowns

00:09:59.180 as being fringe,

00:10:00.220 as being a particular type of person.

00:10:02.400 And this is something we heard

00:10:03.680 from Calgary Mayor Nahed Nenshi

00:10:05.820 just a few days ago.

00:10:08.180 Those people at those anti-mask protests,

00:10:10.560 let's not kid ourselves.

00:10:11.640 They are people who are marching

00:10:13.500 in thinly-veiled white nationalist,

00:10:15.720 supremacist, anti-government protests,

00:10:17.980 and they don't deserve

00:10:19.020 that kind of sympathy.

00:10:20.180 Wait, so people who don't want

00:10:22.420 their businesses shut down

00:10:24.060 or their churches shut down

00:10:25.360 or their livelihood taken away

00:10:26.700 are thinly-veiled white nationalists?

00:10:30.480 Okay.

00:10:31.340 So minority-owned business owners 0.70

00:10:33.200 that don't like being told what to do,

00:10:35.100 they're just white nationalists as well.

00:10:37.020 Okay.

00:10:37.440 That seems a little bit weird.

00:10:38.800 And then he says

00:10:39.580 that they don't actually care

00:10:40.800 about their livelihood,

00:10:43.520 their well-being.

00:10:44.300 He says these are not people

00:10:46.160 who are protesting

00:10:47.340 because they need to eat.

00:10:49.460 No, they're just white nationalists,

00:10:51.080 supremacists, evil, racists,

00:10:52.720 all of this stuff.

00:10:53.460 This was a comment

00:10:54.480 that was echoed by NDP leader Jagmeet Singh,

00:10:57.100 similarly, without any evidence or basis.

00:10:59.880 Yes, I do think that there is

00:11:01.420 a connection with people

00:11:03.020 who aren't wearing a mask

00:11:04.980 or who aren't following

00:11:05.680 public health guidance

00:11:07.000 and the extreme right

00:11:08.520 and the idea that folks

00:11:10.000 in the extreme right

00:11:10.720 don't care about people around them,

00:11:12.760 aren't concerned about

00:11:13.960 the safety and well-being

00:11:15.280 of people generally,

00:11:17.020 their neighbours.

00:11:18.040 And an extreme right,

00:11:19.280 that kind of ideology,

00:11:20.260 is connected with

00:11:20.900 not really caring

00:11:21.620 about the people around you.

00:11:22.800 it's a selfishness

00:11:25.800 where personal interest

00:11:29.300 takes over from a community

00:11:30.600 protection and interest.

00:11:32.220 So now anyone who's

00:11:33.760 not wearing a mask

00:11:35.020 or is protesting

00:11:36.140 is an extreme right-wing ideologue.

00:11:39.400 And again, they're, you know,

00:11:40.520 racist, nationalist,

00:11:41.560 white supremacist types,

00:11:42.560 all of that.

00:11:43.280 One of the interesting things

00:11:44.320 that I've seen,

00:11:45.060 just as an aside,

00:11:46.000 is how much of a coalition

00:11:47.400 there is against lockdowns

00:11:49.520 between people on the right

00:11:50.680 and people on the left.

00:11:52.480 I've seen a lot of, you know,

00:11:54.020 hippie, new-agey types

00:11:55.140 that are finding this egregious.

00:11:56.460 I've seen a lot of

00:11:57.360 middle-class, moderate,

00:11:59.040 liberal types

00:11:59.700 that are against this.

00:12:00.640 I've seen people

00:12:01.540 on the right who are.

00:12:03.140 So the fact that this is something

00:12:04.580 that we can pigeonhole

00:12:05.680 into one side

00:12:06.860 of the political spectrum

00:12:08.080 and at that fringify,

00:12:09.860 if I can coin a term here,

00:12:11.200 I'm sure actually someone else

00:12:12.280 has used that term

00:12:13.320 in some contexts before,

00:12:14.640 is actually quite despicable.

00:12:16.920 But what's happening here

00:12:17.960 is politicians who have

00:12:18.980 committed themselves

00:12:19.680 to big lockdown,

00:12:20.840 capital B, capital A,

00:12:22.100 L, actually maybe

00:12:23.360 capital B, capital S,

00:12:24.700 but I digress.

00:12:25.720 These politicians

00:12:26.620 are really reframing it.

00:12:28.340 They're redrawing

00:12:28.960 the battle lines.

00:12:29.880 You're either with the state

00:12:30.980 or against the state.

00:12:31.960 You're with the state powers

00:12:33.060 or against the state powers.

00:12:34.480 But the way they frame it

00:12:36.100 is you're for health

00:12:37.760 or you're not,

00:12:39.220 which is a gross

00:12:40.160 misrepresentation

00:12:41.180 of what it is

00:12:41.800 that people who oftentimes

00:12:42.960 are protesting

00:12:44.280 against restrictions

00:12:45.260 are actually advocating for.

00:12:47.500 And, you know,

00:12:48.820 some people might not

00:12:49.580 agree with this,

00:12:50.200 but in my experience,

00:12:51.500 a lot of the most

00:12:52.540 conscientious people

00:12:54.020 when it comes to health

00:12:54.980 have been business owners

00:12:56.320 who are against lockdown.

00:12:57.680 They're not against lockdowns

00:12:59.060 because they are COVID deniers.

00:13:00.840 They're against lockdowns

00:13:01.920 because they don't think

00:13:03.080 it's fair to sentence

00:13:04.460 a business to death

00:13:05.660 because of a risk

00:13:07.580 that can be mitigated

00:13:08.740 through proper measures

00:13:09.860 and adaptations,

00:13:11.460 which business owners

00:13:12.380 are willing to do,

00:13:14.060 which a lot of churches

00:13:15.200 are willing to do.

00:13:16.720 But now,

00:13:17.420 if you don't go along

00:13:18.200 with big lockdown,

00:13:19.520 you are just a white nationalist,

00:13:21.300 supremacist, racist type.

00:13:22.620 And you know what?

00:13:23.240 At least they're being honest about it.

00:13:24.660 At least they're being honest

00:13:25.660 about that being

00:13:26.680 how they see the world

00:13:28.140 and anyone who disagrees with them.

00:13:30.440 We've got to take a break.

00:13:31.540 When we come back,

00:13:32.180 more of The Andrew Lawton Show.

00:13:33.600 Stay tuned.

00:13:36.420 You're tuned in

00:13:37.520 to The Andrew Lawton Show.

00:13:45.200 Welcome back to The Andrew Lawton Show.

00:13:47.600 I apologize if this is

00:13:49.460 sounding a bit repetitive now,

00:13:50.960 but I want to talk about

00:13:51.860 Bill C-10 a little bit more.

00:13:54.120 And one of the big reasons

00:13:55.120 is because every couple of days

00:13:56.820 it seems to change

00:13:58.020 when Stephen Gilbeau

00:13:59.460 does an interview

00:14:00.120 and colossally steps in it

00:14:02.280 or offers a bit of

00:14:03.860 unintentional honesty

00:14:04.940 about what the Liberals

00:14:05.860 are trying to do.

00:14:06.940 Now, this bill is still

00:14:08.240 going through committee review.

00:14:09.600 They're still amending

00:14:10.400 and going back and forth.

00:14:12.000 And in fact,

00:14:12.680 even the most recent development

00:14:14.840 is I think a bit of a step

00:14:15.860 in the right direction

00:14:16.660 in that MPs agree

00:14:17.920 it's time to do

00:14:19.180 a legal review of it

00:14:20.740 to make sure it is consistent

00:14:22.420 with the Charter of Rights

00:14:23.880 and Freedoms,

00:14:24.500 which technically I think

00:14:26.240 has freedom of expression in it,

00:14:27.760 although I may need to

00:14:28.660 check the most recent version.

00:14:30.400 Perhaps they're amending

00:14:31.080 that on a daily basis too.

00:14:33.060 But the interesting thing

00:14:34.440 is that it went from

00:14:35.700 having user-generated content

00:14:37.560 exempt to then not exempt

00:14:39.480 to then exempt again

00:14:40.700 that Stephen Gilbeau said.

00:14:42.760 And then he did an interview

00:14:43.780 on CTV's Question Period

00:14:45.700 in which Evan Solomon

00:14:46.700 gave him the gears

00:14:48.240 and he talked about again

00:14:49.660 going after individual

00:14:51.140 content creators.

00:14:53.020 I want you to watch,

00:14:53.940 it's a long clip,

00:14:54.620 it's about two minutes,

00:14:55.540 but I want you to take

00:14:56.560 a look at it

00:14:56.980 because in that clip

00:14:58.200 you see kind of how

00:14:59.600 difficult it is

00:15:00.460 for him to claim

00:15:01.180 on one hand

00:15:02.160 that users are not

00:15:03.340 going to be targeted

00:15:03.920 and on the other hand

00:15:04.660 start talking about thresholds.

00:15:06.720 But do you understand,

00:15:07.820 if the CRTC

00:15:08.720 is regulating discoverability

00:15:10.600 of Canadian content

00:15:11.760 on social media,

00:15:12.720 that is regulating social media.

00:15:16.060 You are now calling

00:15:17.540 user-generated content

00:15:20.560 programming,

00:15:22.180 and so it's subjective.

00:15:23.180 This is the fundamental debate.

00:15:25.200 I feel like we're driving

00:15:26.780 past each other here.

00:15:27.820 If the CRTC can put that,

00:15:29.600 you're regulating it.

00:15:30.620 So, as I said,

00:15:33.900 individuals are exempt 1.00

00:15:36.440 from this law,

00:15:38.920 or will be

00:15:39.360 once it's adopted.

00:15:42.160 And what we want to do,

00:15:45.000 this law should apply

00:15:46.580 to people who are broadcasters

00:15:49.020 or who act like broadcasters.

00:15:51.500 So if you have YouTube channels

00:15:54.660 with millions of viewers

00:15:56.180 and you're deriving revenues

00:15:57.880 from that,

00:15:58.420 then at some point

00:15:59.700 the CRTC will be asked

00:16:01.440 to put a threshold.

00:16:02.700 But we're talking about

00:16:04.080 broadcasters here.

00:16:05.320 We're not talking about

00:16:06.240 everyday citizens

00:16:07.560 posting stuff

00:16:08.520 on their YouTube channel.

00:16:10.900 It has to have a material...

00:16:12.560 I mean, the criteria here,

00:16:13.820 I think you're looking for it,

00:16:15.440 it has to have a material impact

00:16:17.560 on the Canadian economy.

00:16:19.440 That's what we will ask

00:16:21.240 the CRTC to look for.

00:16:23.120 This...

00:16:23.520 But this, you nailed...

00:16:25.140 This is the nub.

00:16:26.560 People who are posting things

00:16:28.040 on YouTube

00:16:28.540 or TikTok

00:16:29.220 or Instagram,

00:16:30.240 they have hundreds

00:16:31.160 of thousands of followers.

00:16:32.660 So I...

00:16:33.200 And now you're saying,

00:16:34.120 okay,

00:16:34.960 at some point

00:16:35.840 there is a threshold

00:16:37.280 and they're generating content.

00:16:39.180 Of course they are.

00:16:39.900 They're generating revenues.

00:16:41.020 They're selling ads

00:16:41.680 all over the world.

00:16:42.400 That's how they make money

00:16:43.420 on TikTok and YouTube.

00:16:45.460 That's my question.

00:16:46.720 At what point,

00:16:48.260 what is the threshold

00:16:49.360 that they will be subjected

00:16:50.720 to CRTC regulations?

00:16:52.440 You've admitted they will be.

00:16:54.040 Now we're just debating

00:16:55.180 when?

00:16:55.980 So I ask you again,

00:16:56.960 when?

00:16:57.900 Well, obviously,

00:16:59.140 this is why we have

00:17:00.300 a body of expert

00:17:01.260 like the CRTC

00:17:02.180 to make those determinations.

00:17:03.540 It's not up to politicians

00:17:05.140 to decide that.

00:17:06.680 We've deliberately decided

00:17:08.340 to depoliticize this system

00:17:10.180 so that governments

00:17:11.380 come and go,

00:17:13.060 but these experts are there

00:17:14.900 and they will be making

00:17:16.200 this determination

00:17:17.460 after having consultations

00:17:19.760 with organizations

00:17:21.000 of different opinion

00:17:22.720 on the subject matter.

00:17:24.780 And then this was,

00:17:25.920 by the way,

00:17:26.240 an interview he was doing

00:17:27.340 to try to clean up

00:17:28.280 the mess he had created

00:17:29.340 on this.

00:17:30.120 And then later on,

00:17:31.040 he needed to issue

00:17:31.700 a statement to clean up

00:17:32.780 the mess he created

00:17:33.700 in the interview.

00:17:34.640 And his office said

00:17:35.820 that he used unclear language

00:17:37.580 and further said

00:17:39.140 that all regulations

00:17:40.580 or financial obligations

00:17:41.960 will only apply

00:17:42.920 to the platforms.

00:17:44.400 Accounts run by individuals

00:17:46.040 still fall under

00:17:47.900 the category of people.

00:17:50.680 And then Rachel Aiello

00:17:52.980 from CTV had said,

00:17:54.320 well, hang on,

00:17:54.700 how is he talking about

00:17:55.500 people being regulated

00:17:56.800 in the interview?

00:17:57.480 And they said he could

00:17:58.300 have been more careful

00:17:59.180 using his words

00:18:00.480 in order to reflect

00:18:01.540 what the bill does.

00:18:02.780 So there are a lot

00:18:03.680 of problems here.

00:18:04.340 Number one is the outsourcing

00:18:06.460 of the individual regulations

00:18:09.040 to the CRTC.

00:18:10.560 So the problem there

00:18:12.460 is that if C10 passes,

00:18:14.300 you don't even entirely know

00:18:16.240 what it's going to be doing

00:18:18.220 because the regulations

00:18:19.380 are going to be made

00:18:20.200 by a much less transparent

00:18:21.960 and much less accountable body

00:18:23.420 down the road.

00:18:24.500 So you're passing a law

00:18:25.720 that gives carte blanche

00:18:27.100 in a lot of ways

00:18:27.780 to regulators.

00:18:28.840 The other part of this

00:18:30.060 is that if you make money

00:18:31.960 from it and you're an individual,

00:18:33.660 well, you're a business.

00:18:35.020 You're a business.

00:18:35.800 And I could be, you know,

00:18:36.840 some influencer on TikTok,

00:18:38.440 probably not a good one,

00:18:39.420 but I could try.

00:18:40.400 And if I make money,

00:18:41.480 even if it's a couple

00:18:42.160 of thousand dollars a month

00:18:43.400 or maybe a couple

00:18:44.100 of thousand a year

00:18:44.900 or maybe 500,000 a year,

00:18:46.760 who knows?

00:18:47.260 And I set up my taxes

00:18:49.300 and finances in a way

00:18:50.620 that makes sense.

00:18:51.960 Does that make me a publisher?

00:18:53.520 I'm still an individual

00:18:54.380 with an account.

00:18:56.020 Does that mean I have to do,

00:18:57.300 you know, a random number

00:18:58.580 of Canadian jokes per hour

00:19:00.320 that the government says

00:19:01.300 to ensure CanCon?

00:19:02.840 Are they going to start

00:19:03.420 cracking down on content?

00:19:04.900 You can't regulate platforms

00:19:07.040 or so-called publishers

00:19:08.460 without regulating the users

00:19:11.020 who post on those platforms.

00:19:13.640 And an individual

00:19:14.860 who runs a website

00:19:16.220 that has any monetary component

00:19:19.420 is someone who is engaging

00:19:21.800 in business.

00:19:22.680 So I'm not buying this distinction

00:19:24.480 that platforms run by people

00:19:26.780 are going to be the issue.

00:19:28.560 Are they talking about

00:19:29.680 sole proprietors,

00:19:30.680 corporations, individual?

00:19:32.240 I mean, again,

00:19:32.740 the reason this is so dangerous

00:19:34.440 is because they're not even

00:19:35.860 being fully transparent

00:19:37.020 with what they want to do.

00:19:38.780 So you have to assume

00:19:40.320 that they will crack down

00:19:42.600 on any content

00:19:43.980 that has a monetary component to it,

00:19:46.180 which means if you click

00:19:47.000 that little checkbox

00:19:47.980 on YouTube or Facebook

00:19:49.360 that says, yes,

00:19:50.240 put some ads in this

00:19:51.460 and give me a few bucks

00:19:52.660 here and there,

00:19:53.360 you are going to be subject

00:19:54.680 to regulation.

00:19:56.060 And the implications of this

00:19:57.260 for content providers

00:19:58.340 outside of Canada

00:19:59.560 that Canadians like

00:20:01.200 are significant.

00:20:02.440 It's one thing

00:20:03.200 if someone is posting

00:20:04.100 on YouTube or Facebook

00:20:05.280 and those platforms themselves

00:20:07.320 have agreements

00:20:08.080 with the Canadian government,

00:20:09.320 which is in and of itself

00:20:10.880 dangerous.

00:20:11.360 But what about some website

00:20:12.920 that I might want to go to

00:20:14.140 from the Czech Republic

00:20:15.820 or from Japan

00:20:16.720 or something else?

00:20:17.780 Those countries

00:20:18.760 are not particularly relevant.

00:20:20.200 It could be any country.

00:20:21.680 What happens?

00:20:22.440 Are those websites

00:20:23.300 going to be blocked?

00:20:24.340 Are they going to be

00:20:24.840 subject to regulation

00:20:25.820 if a Canadian

00:20:26.580 wants to access it?

00:20:28.800 The whole point

00:20:29.860 of the internet

00:20:30.400 is that it's supposed

00:20:31.580 to be above these,

00:20:33.100 you know,

00:20:33.900 Westphalian state-based regulators.

00:20:37.060 But that's not

00:20:38.060 what's happening here.

00:20:39.340 So Stephen Gilbo

00:20:40.400 wants to take

00:20:41.060 this Canadian lens

00:20:42.320 to regulate

00:20:43.280 the entirety

00:20:44.000 of the internet,

00:20:44.840 which will only

00:20:46.340 penalize Canadians 0.99

00:20:47.760 who happen to be

00:20:49.060 using social media

00:20:50.020 for personal

00:20:50.680 or for professional reasons.

00:20:52.980 And the fact

00:20:53.560 that the Liberals

00:20:54.120 keep flip-flopping on this,

00:20:55.400 the fact that every time

00:20:56.320 he does an interview,

00:20:57.740 he seems to reverse

00:20:59.120 the intent of this bill

00:21:00.480 is exactly why,

00:21:02.120 as I've said

00:21:02.620 time and time again,

00:21:03.780 these are not the people

00:21:05.000 who can be trusted

00:21:05.860 to regulate

00:21:06.620 what you can say

00:21:07.900 and what you can post

00:21:08.860 and who can post online.

00:21:11.080 We've got to take a break.

00:21:12.120 When we come back,

00:21:12.860 we will be talking

00:21:13.560 about political beliefs

00:21:15.360 and should they be protected

00:21:16.940 in human rights law.

00:21:18.080 That's up next

00:21:18.720 here on The Andrew Lawton Show.

00:21:20.460 Stay tuned.

00:21:22.240 You're tuned in

00:21:23.340 to The Andrew Lawton Show.

00:21:29.900 Welcome back

00:21:30.740 to The Andrew Lawton Show

00:21:32.220 here on True North.

00:21:33.080 We talk about stories

00:21:34.220 all the time

00:21:34.840 of people being fired

00:21:36.420 or cancelled

00:21:37.480 or losing some appointment

00:21:39.040 or subjected

00:21:40.220 to some form of punishment

00:21:42.460 that is oftentimes

00:21:43.720 very real to them

00:21:45.240 and the rationale behind it

00:21:47.000 is that they believe

00:21:47.980 the wrong thing.

00:21:49.660 And interestingly enough,

00:21:51.000 in human rights law

00:21:51.800 in Canada,

00:21:52.340 people have protections

00:21:53.620 for virtually every aspect

00:21:55.240 of their identity imaginable

00:21:56.880 except for one

00:21:58.220 and that is

00:21:58.920 their political beliefs.

00:22:00.720 Bruce Party,

00:22:01.420 who is a fantastic lawyer,

00:22:02.840 a law professor

00:22:03.600 at Queen's University

00:22:04.720 and you may remember him.

00:22:06.000 He was a great panelist

00:22:07.160 on our Big Tech Censorship panel

00:22:09.300 a few weeks back.

00:22:10.720 Had given some remarks

00:22:11.780 on this to the

00:22:12.520 Canada Strong and Free Conference

00:22:14.060 which he synthesized

00:22:15.560 into a very great essay

00:22:16.980 in the National Post.

00:22:18.360 Bruce Party joins me now.

00:22:20.200 Always good to talk to you, Bruce.

00:22:21.440 Thanks for coming on.

00:22:23.140 Thanks for having me, Andrew.

00:22:24.280 Now, you note

00:22:25.280 in your column here

00:22:26.780 that there are protections

00:22:28.040 for sexual identity,

00:22:29.700 gender identity,

00:22:31.060 gender.

00:22:31.680 In fact,

00:22:32.760 in Ontario,

00:22:33.420 even Creed

00:22:34.300 is protected.

00:22:35.780 It seems like,

00:22:36.700 as I mentioned,

00:22:37.360 every aspect

00:22:38.180 of one's identity

00:22:39.100 imaginable,

00:22:40.220 but beliefs

00:22:41.060 haven't made it

00:22:41.920 into any provinces

00:22:43.020 protected human rights grounds.

00:22:45.800 Well, actually,

00:22:47.060 there are several provinces

00:22:48.180 that do list it

00:22:49.360 in their human rights codes

00:22:50.840 as a protected ground

00:22:52.520 of discrimination,

00:22:53.020 but it really hasn't

00:22:54.460 amounted to much.

00:22:55.900 And you'd be pretty hard-pressed

00:22:57.160 to say that political beliefs

00:22:58.560 are really genuinely,

00:23:02.240 robustly protected

00:23:03.160 anywhere across the country.

00:23:05.240 Yeah, you mentioned something

00:23:06.860 that I wanted to read here.

00:23:08.440 You said,

00:23:08.900 the baker must serve 0.72

00:23:09.920 the transgender woman

00:23:10.980 because his private shop

00:23:12.300 is a quasi-public space,

00:23:14.200 but he can ban the guy

00:23:15.380 in the MAGA hat

00:23:16.200 and Twitter can censor

00:23:17.320 right-wing speech

00:23:18.100 because, after all,

00:23:19.300 private businesses

00:23:20.100 are private.

00:23:21.000 It does seem like

00:23:22.140 we have a very significant

00:23:23.800 double standard

00:23:24.740 in when we say that,

00:23:26.380 no, it's your business,

00:23:27.220 you can do what you want,

00:23:28.280 and when we say,

00:23:29.080 oh, no, no, no,

00:23:29.560 if you open your doors

00:23:30.440 to the public,

00:23:31.200 you have to treat yourself

00:23:32.500 like the town square.

00:23:34.140 That's right.

00:23:34.960 And you'll hear this argument

00:23:36.160 all the time

00:23:36.920 with respect to the

00:23:37.700 big tech companies, right?

00:23:39.100 So, Twitter, for example,

00:23:42.440 is a private company,

00:23:43.920 and so, therefore,

00:23:44.760 it should be able

00:23:45.600 to censor

00:23:46.440 whatever views it likes.

00:23:47.840 Well, okay,

00:23:49.000 but if you're going

00:23:49.460 to go with that,

00:23:50.100 then that theory,

00:23:52.100 if you extend it,

00:23:52.880 means that the baker

00:23:54.180 can serve anybody

00:23:55.060 they like

00:23:55.700 and the hairdresser

00:23:57.880 can serve anybody

00:23:58.700 they like

00:23:59.320 and so on down the line.

00:24:00.460 So, what I'm trying

00:24:01.820 to get at is

00:24:02.660 let's have it

00:24:03.800 one way or the other.

00:24:05.160 Either everybody

00:24:06.220 is protected

00:24:06.880 or everybody is free

00:24:08.820 to choose as they wish.

00:24:10.740 And the problem

00:24:11.180 we have right now

00:24:11.940 is it's sum of one

00:24:14.060 and sum of the other.

00:24:15.480 And the sum of one

00:24:16.580 is almost inevitably

00:24:19.140 favoring and protecting

00:24:21.220 those causes

00:24:22.560 and identities

00:24:23.640 championed by the left.

00:24:26.000 And the right

00:24:26.780 is hung out to dry.

00:24:27.760 And they often do it

00:24:28.900 to themselves, too,

00:24:30.060 by saying,

00:24:30.680 well, we believe

00:24:31.340 in freedom

00:24:32.720 to do what you want.

00:24:33.440 And I agree.

00:24:34.400 I agree with that.

00:24:35.540 I think people

00:24:36.540 and companies

00:24:37.360 should be able

00:24:38.640 to choose as they wish.

00:24:40.080 But the problem is

00:24:41.120 that that's not

00:24:41.700 what we have.

00:24:42.560 And we have no prospect

00:24:44.680 of getting there.

00:24:45.460 And so the question

00:24:46.440 remaining is

00:24:47.260 do we extend

00:24:48.740 the protection

00:24:49.300 to political beliefs

00:24:50.200 or do we just

00:24:51.020 leave things

00:24:51.680 in the mess

00:24:52.280 that they are?

00:24:53.540 Yeah, you have

00:24:54.520 identified this gap here.

00:24:56.340 You've identified

00:24:56.880 the double standard

00:24:57.780 and from that

00:24:58.460 the choice we have

00:24:59.440 is either expand

00:25:00.920 these protections

00:25:01.680 to include political beliefs

00:25:03.100 or strip away

00:25:04.200 all of the other ones

00:25:05.720 as they pertain

00:25:06.660 to what people can do

00:25:07.920 and who people

00:25:08.700 associate with

00:25:09.560 and who people

00:25:10.480 sell to as customers.

00:25:12.900 Is your ideal version

00:25:14.740 though that one

00:25:15.540 which is we actually

00:25:16.480 kind of scrapped

00:25:17.400 the whole thing?

00:25:18.680 Oh yes,

00:25:19.140 that would be my ideal.

00:25:20.420 My ideal,

00:25:20.940 so human rights began,

00:25:22.760 it's an excellent idea,

00:25:24.520 right?

00:25:25.380 The idea is

00:25:26.420 that people

00:25:27.560 should be protected

00:25:28.600 from an overbearing state.

00:25:30.360 I mean,

00:25:30.500 we don't want people

00:25:31.160 being thrown in jail

00:25:32.040 arbitrarily

00:25:32.640 or being subject

00:25:33.800 to torture

00:25:34.460 without due process

00:25:35.900 in terms of

00:25:37.080 prosecutions

00:25:39.240 and so on.

00:25:40.220 That's where

00:25:41.420 the idea

00:25:42.080 of human rights

00:25:42.940 originates

00:25:43.520 and it's a really

00:25:44.200 great idea

00:25:44.800 but the problem

00:25:45.940 is that modern

00:25:47.280 human rights

00:25:47.960 have morphed

00:25:49.780 into this other thing

00:25:52.020 wherein some people

00:25:53.940 can impose upon

00:25:55.100 other people

00:25:55.960 to recognize

00:25:57.380 and validate

00:25:58.320 their identities

00:25:59.200 and beliefs

00:26:00.400 and yeah,

00:26:02.200 we'd be better off

00:26:02.960 without that version

00:26:04.120 of human rights

00:26:04.880 altogether

00:26:05.480 as far as I'm concerned

00:26:06.400 but the political problem

00:26:08.200 is that's not

00:26:09.600 going to happen.

00:26:09.980 There is no political party

00:26:11.640 of any political stripe

00:26:12.980 with the guts

00:26:14.900 to take that step

00:26:15.880 and so what we're left with

00:26:17.540 is do we want

00:26:19.200 to extend

00:26:19.960 protection

00:26:21.100 to political beliefs

00:26:23.080 that right now

00:26:23.740 are being subject

00:26:24.460 to an awful lot

00:26:25.780 of punishment?

00:26:28.140 One of the things

00:26:29.420 I've always found

00:26:30.240 about human rights commissions

00:26:31.960 is that inherently

00:26:33.080 they have to create

00:26:34.240 some sort of a hierarchy

00:26:35.960 of identity groups.

00:26:37.440 I mean,

00:26:37.660 one of the most notable examples,

00:26:38.900 I think it was a year

00:26:39.760 or two years ago

00:26:40.620 in,

00:26:41.540 I want to say,

00:26:42.280 Windsor,

00:26:42.820 there was a waxologist

00:26:44.920 from some salon

00:26:46.260 that didn't want to wax

00:26:48.160 a transgender customer

00:26:50.000 but the reason

00:26:51.460 was that the waxologist

00:26:52.820 was a Muslim.

00:26:53.960 So all of a sudden

00:26:54.800 you have

00:26:55.360 her religious rights

00:26:57.020 to not have to wax

00:26:58.520 a man's genitals 0.99

00:26:59.340 and the transgender person's

00:27:01.460 rights to be recognized

00:27:02.480 as in fact a woman

00:27:03.740 and in these cases

00:27:05.220 there's no right answer

00:27:06.540 once you make

00:27:07.320 the government

00:27:08.120 the arbiter of this.

00:27:09.140 The right answer

00:27:09.740 I would say is

00:27:10.680 well,

00:27:11.260 the transgender person

00:27:12.360 should go to a business

00:27:13.200 that wants her business 1.00

00:27:14.100 and the waxologist

00:27:15.740 should be able to say

00:27:16.660 I don't want your business

00:27:17.740 but we as a society

00:27:19.160 do not want to have

00:27:20.540 these discussions

00:27:21.180 on our own.

00:27:22.020 It seems like people

00:27:22.820 have just welcomed

00:27:23.480 in the government

00:27:24.100 to be the arbiter

00:27:24.860 in every single disagreement.

00:27:27.600 That's exactly right.

00:27:28.720 Exactly right.

00:27:29.280 And you'll notice

00:27:30.000 that those cases

00:27:31.260 that involve waxologists

00:27:32.940 and transgender customers

00:27:35.160 are actually avoiding

00:27:37.120 the more basic problem

00:27:38.640 according to the logic

00:27:40.380 of the human rights codes.

00:27:42.640 As soon as a waxologist

00:27:44.040 says well I don't want to do

00:27:45.480 not forget

00:27:46.140 the transgender question

00:27:47.460 I don't want to wax men. 0.98

00:27:50.280 I'm a woman.

00:27:51.260 I don't want to wax men. 0.98

00:27:52.700 Maybe it's because

00:27:53.420 I'm a woman.

00:27:54.480 Maybe it's because

00:27:55.000 I'm a Muslim

00:27:55.560 but I don't want to wax men.

00:27:57.240 Now before you even get

00:27:58.400 to the transgender problem

00:27:59.560 that's discrimination.

00:28:01.760 On the face

00:28:03.240 of the human rights code

00:28:04.200 that's discrimination.

00:28:05.540 You're not supposed

00:28:06.000 to be able to discriminate

00:28:07.460 on the basis of sex or gender.

00:28:10.700 So there's a lot

00:28:12.660 of left hand, right hand

00:28:15.540 not really telling the truth

00:28:16.940 about these things

00:28:18.040 because if you extended

00:28:19.260 the logic to all cases

00:28:20.620 then we would all be

00:28:22.060 locked down

00:28:23.560 in terms of the choices

00:28:25.040 we were able to make.

00:28:26.480 Now one of the arguments

00:28:27.860 I've heard in defense

00:28:29.360 of some of these

00:28:30.260 is that you know

00:28:31.520 it's important

00:28:32.100 to protect race

00:28:33.200 and sex

00:28:34.300 but not political beliefs

00:28:36.500 as an example

00:28:37.160 because one is a choice

00:28:38.780 and one's not.

00:28:40.140 But we also do see protection

00:28:42.220 you mentioned earlier

00:28:43.100 in a very narrow way

00:28:44.220 of political beliefs

00:28:45.100 Ontario protects creed

00:28:46.800 generally religion

00:28:47.920 is protected

00:28:48.560 so things that are choices

00:28:49.960 do have some level

00:28:51.600 of protection

00:28:52.200 under the current arrangement.

00:28:53.460 Well let's go further

00:28:54.900 I mean there are

00:28:55.620 other kinds of choices

00:28:56.780 that are fully protected

00:28:57.900 and quite clearly so

00:28:59.220 so let's go back

00:29:00.300 to the transgender question

00:29:01.400 if you were born a man

00:29:03.640 and decide

00:29:04.960 that you believe

00:29:06.400 that you're a woman

00:29:07.400 that's protected

00:29:09.100 because that's a listed

00:29:10.860 ground

00:29:11.740 of discrimination.

00:29:14.620 If you are

00:29:16.100 a member of a particular religion

00:29:18.660 you believe in that religion

00:29:21.140 that belief is protected

00:29:22.520 these are no more

00:29:23.980 inherent characteristics

00:29:25.080 than a belief

00:29:26.700 in a political ideology

00:29:28.180 and to say

00:29:29.660 that a political ideology

00:29:30.840 is well

00:29:31.320 it's just a belief

00:29:32.040 and therefore

00:29:32.460 it's not inherent

00:29:33.160 and therefore

00:29:33.520 you can change it

00:29:34.380 is to suggest

00:29:35.300 that oh well

00:29:35.940 we can require you

00:29:38.460 to change

00:29:39.580 the central propositions

00:29:41.320 of your political

00:29:42.320 or philosophical beliefs

00:29:43.760 that's no more reasonable

00:29:47.060 than expecting somebody

00:29:48.200 to be able to change

00:29:49.080 their religious beliefs

00:29:49.920 and that's something

00:29:51.020 that we would not

00:29:51.560 require them to do.

00:29:52.960 And your point's a valid one

00:29:53.920 which is that

00:29:54.360 if we can't strip this all away

00:29:55.900 if we can't get politicians

00:29:57.140 to stand up

00:29:57.860 and realize that

00:29:58.660 we are robbing people

00:30:00.160 of their right

00:30:01.280 to run their business

00:30:02.360 the way they want to

00:30:03.180 to live their life

00:30:03.820 the way they want to

00:30:04.620 then we have to go

00:30:06.040 the next step

00:30:06.800 and say alright

00:30:07.280 well let's talk about

00:30:08.340 real protection

00:30:09.080 and a lot of people

00:30:10.140 would roll their eyes

00:30:10.940 at this

00:30:11.220 but there is

00:30:12.480 there's voluminous evidence

00:30:14.600 that people with

00:30:15.780 conservative beliefs

00:30:16.840 face discrimination

00:30:17.900 in a multitude of areas

00:30:20.140 in academia

00:30:21.000 you mentioned a couple

00:30:22.320 of cases

00:30:22.840 in the private sector

00:30:24.640 in all sorts of areas

00:30:26.320 so yeah

00:30:26.760 if you want to talk

00:30:27.500 about protecting

00:30:28.100 minority views

00:30:29.000 well it doesn't get

00:30:29.820 much more minority 0.63

00:30:30.660 than a conservative

00:30:31.420 on a university campus.

00:30:33.160 You're not kidding

00:30:34.040 that's absolutely true

00:30:35.800 and it happens

00:30:36.480 all the time now

00:30:37.160 it's happening

00:30:37.540 all the time

00:30:38.560 and in many

00:30:39.940 most cases

00:30:40.940 people are not aware of

00:30:42.400 you'll see the occasional

00:30:43.400 case written about

00:30:44.200 in the paper

00:30:44.720 and so on

00:30:45.360 and those are

00:30:46.400 those are serious

00:30:47.240 and wrong

00:30:47.700 but there's a whole lot

00:30:49.920 of things happening

00:30:50.560 that people don't see

00:30:51.380 let's say this though

00:30:55.420 one of the objections

00:30:56.780 of this idea

00:30:57.560 is that the whole thing

00:30:58.940 will become

00:30:59.420 totally unmanageable

00:31:00.600 unwieldy

00:31:01.540 the restrictions

00:31:02.920 to be placed upon

00:31:03.860 on the

00:31:05.500 into the lap

00:31:06.620 of employers

00:31:07.300 would be untenable

00:31:08.640 and

00:31:09.940 you know

00:31:10.840 in a way

00:31:11.320 that might turn out

00:31:12.620 to be true

00:31:13.160 but my point is

00:31:15.600 look

00:31:16.680 if that turns out

00:31:17.800 to be true

00:31:18.340 if that makes

00:31:19.440 the whole regime

00:31:20.420 so untenable

00:31:22.040 that it sort of

00:31:23.060 collapses under

00:31:23.800 its own weight

00:31:24.440 that's a good thing

00:31:26.460 right

00:31:27.400 so

00:31:27.600 so either way

00:31:28.540 it's a win

00:31:28.960 either it works

00:31:30.020 and

00:31:30.680 and political beliefs

00:31:31.860 are actually protected

00:31:32.800 or

00:31:33.880 it extends

00:31:35.400 the human rights

00:31:36.060 code idea

00:31:36.940 to such an extent

00:31:38.020 that the whole thing

00:31:38.780 sort of collapses

00:31:39.540 either one of those

00:31:40.780 two things

00:31:41.360 is a win

00:31:42.080 in my books

00:31:42.560 yeah you raise

00:31:43.900 a great point

00:31:44.660 conservatives should

00:31:45.440 actually be

00:31:46.280 on the front lines

00:31:47.280 of trying to expand

00:31:48.080 these commissions

00:31:48.700 powers

00:31:49.160 just to

00:31:49.840 bring about

00:31:50.920 attention to how

00:31:51.700 absurd a lot

00:31:52.660 of them are

00:31:53.020 I just want to

00:31:53.840 pivot very briefly

00:31:54.660 here Bruce

00:31:55.440 because we've been

00:31:55.960 talking on the show

00:31:56.720 for weeks now

00:31:57.420 about Bill C-10

00:31:58.380 which is the

00:31:59.040 bill that will

00:32:00.220 put the internet

00:32:01.040 and internet content

00:32:02.200 under government

00:32:03.060 regulation

00:32:03.700 your perspective

00:32:04.940 on this one

00:32:05.580 I'm curious about

00:32:06.580 because we know

00:32:07.720 that the Federal

00:32:08.420 Human Rights Act

00:32:09.620 doesn't deal with

00:32:10.760 what you do

00:32:11.900 in your own

00:32:12.320 business

00:32:12.640 for the most

00:32:13.140 part

00:32:13.420 but it does

00:32:14.320 deal with

00:32:14.800 federally regulated

00:32:15.920 areas

00:32:16.380 and one of those

00:32:17.200 is very key

00:32:18.420 which is the internet

00:32:19.580 and that was where

00:32:20.520 years ago

00:32:21.140 there was Section 13

00:32:22.120 which regulated

00:32:23.060 internet speech

00:32:24.340 is there a direct

00:32:25.640 connection that we

00:32:26.480 can draw between

00:32:27.460 Bill C-10

00:32:28.400 and a lot of

00:32:29.680 these things that

00:32:30.200 you're talking about

00:32:30.960 in a provincial context

00:32:31.940 at the federal level

00:32:32.900 with the online

00:32:34.040 harms bill

00:32:34.840 or online hate speech

00:32:35.860 bill that

00:32:36.460 Stephen Gilbeau

00:32:37.460 is talking about

00:32:38.300 wanting to introduce

00:32:39.320 any day now

00:32:40.040 yeah the problem

00:32:41.960 is that the

00:32:43.260 that the

00:32:44.540 Bill C-10

00:32:45.420 as it is currently

00:32:46.440 constituted

00:32:47.360 and probably

00:32:48.880 the the bill

00:32:49.820 that hasn't arrived

00:32:50.480 yet that you just

00:32:51.080 mentioned

00:32:51.420 will not be

00:32:53.840 quite so

00:32:54.420 straightforward

00:32:54.860 as to simply

00:32:56.160 ban discrimination

00:32:58.080 in the way

00:32:58.640 that I'm talking

00:32:59.220 about

00:32:59.520 what it does

00:33:00.180 instead probably

00:33:01.120 will be

00:33:01.920 to give

00:33:02.980 a federal agency

00:33:04.640 the power

00:33:05.440 to make

00:33:06.020 arbitrary decisions

00:33:07.140 about what's okay

00:33:07.960 and what's not okay

00:33:08.640 and so that's

00:33:09.600 that's the worst

00:33:10.160 of all worlds

00:33:10.780 not only do you

00:33:11.960 not have a list

00:33:12.900 of criteria

00:33:13.460 you have taken

00:33:14.980 the power

00:33:15.820 of speech

00:33:16.800 away from people

00:33:18.120 and given it

00:33:19.200 to the government

00:33:20.180 to supervise

00:33:20.980 you know that's

00:33:21.880 that's just bad news

00:33:22.920 all around

00:33:23.580 well

00:33:24.380 well I appreciate

00:33:25.420 your voice on

00:33:26.320 these matters

00:33:26.920 always we'll have

00:33:27.500 to have you back

00:33:27.940 on once we see

00:33:28.780 at long last

00:33:29.860 the text of

00:33:30.780 this online

00:33:31.980 hate speech bill

00:33:32.820 although you know

00:33:33.860 come to think of it

00:33:34.460 I think the proper

00:33:35.620 position on this

00:33:36.440 is that if we never

00:33:37.060 see it

00:33:37.440 it will be a good

00:33:38.080 thing for Canada

00:33:38.940 and a good thing

00:33:39.980 for free speech

00:33:40.660 but nevertheless

00:33:41.200 we'll have you back

00:33:41.860 on anytime

00:33:42.560 Bruce thanks very much

00:33:44.020 and you can check out

00:33:44.680 his National Post column

00:33:46.000 about this political

00:33:47.340 speech protection

00:33:48.260 in the National Post

00:33:49.680 political beliefs

00:33:50.620 must be protected

00:33:51.840 from discrimination

00:33:52.640 because cancel culture

00:33:54.820 is winning

00:33:55.660 Bruce always a pleasure

00:33:56.560 thanks for coming on

00:33:57.780 good stuff I do

00:33:58.340 thanks very much

00:33:59.400 that was Bruce Party

00:34:00.980 and with that

00:34:02.120 we have to bid adieu

00:34:03.180 for today's show

00:34:04.520 but fear not

00:34:05.120 we'll be back

00:34:05.620 in just a couple

00:34:06.380 of days time

00:34:06.920 with more of

00:34:07.940 Canada's most

00:34:08.900 irreverent talk show

00:34:09.840 this is the Andrew

00:34:10.780 Lawton show on

00:34:11.600 True North

00:34:12.020 thank you

00:34:12.700 God bless

00:34:13.240 and good day

00:34:13.900 thanks for listening

00:34:14.820 to the Andrew

00:34:15.420 Lawton show

00:34:16.020 support the program

00:34:17.080 by donating to

00:34:17.860 True North

00:34:18.300 at www.tnc.news

00:34:21.480 hearts

00:34:22.940 no

00:34:24.820 we'll be back

00:34:26.680 by

00:34:29.740 we'll be right

00:34:30.680 to

00:34:43.280 get

Juno News - May 11, 2021

2021 Meets 1984

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript