Juno News - CTV News shows its true colours

00:00:00.000 I have to wonder if there's been a stupider week in the House of Commons than the one we just had.

00:00:04.780 I know we're going to talk about it in a bit, but if you guys can think of a stupider moment

00:00:10.280 in Canadian politics than we've had this week, I think one of you deserve a bonus on the next

00:00:15.900 paycheck. It might be Elbowgate, if you guys remember Elbowgate. Yeah, that was probably

00:00:21.720 up there. You know, question periods always kind of been pretty dumb. And I say that from

00:00:29.920 people who have been in opposition and on the government side, you know, non-questions being

00:00:34.680 given non-answers. But sometimes you wonder, couldn't our elected officials and the thousands

00:00:39.780 of people we employ to support them be doing something better or at least more productive

00:00:46.300 with their time, maybe even less costly? I don't know. I guess we'll talk about it when we get going.

00:00:53.320 Leah, let's get started.

00:00:59.920 Well, happy Friday, everybody. Hope you had a great week. You know, Friday, we like to take

00:01:07.680 a more casual tone, kick back. It's a little early where I live, so we haven't poured ourselves

00:01:12.720 a drink quite yet, but you feel free to go right ahead and do so. You've got us for Off the Record

00:01:18.160 this week. I'm joined with Isaac Lamoureux. Say hi, Isaac. Hello. And Cosming Georgia out in BC.

00:01:27.660 And as I was reminded how to pronounce my own name, I'm William Macbeth, and I'm excited to be here

00:01:32.160 being your guest host. So yeah, as I said, a little pre-roll there. We've had a very stupid week

00:01:37.240 in the House of Commons. Some serious stuff, but some not so serious stuff. But why don't we get

00:01:43.040 started first with the big liars in the mainstream media? Cosman, you want to tell us about CTV News

00:01:49.260 who got caught doing some fibbing? Yeah, for sure. So for those not in the media, there's an unwritten

00:01:56.080 rule that journalists are not supposed to become the story. But this week, we've seen CTV News

00:02:03.580 essentially launch themselves into the national news scene because they were caught red-handed

00:02:11.660 splicing a video of conservative leader Pierre Polyev to make it look like he said something

00:02:18.380 that he entirely did not say. So they took a clip of him talking about a carbon tax election completely

00:02:26.060 out of context and spun it so that it looked like he was opposing the liberal government's

00:02:32.540 dental care plan. So we've got a couple clips here. The first one is actually the original

00:02:39.240 unedited version of this clip. So let's launch that now.

00:02:45.300 That's why it's time to put forward a motion for a carbon tax election.

00:02:54.400 So that's the unedited clip. That's what Pierre Polyev actually said. Here is the clip

00:03:01.020 that CTV News spliced and used. That's why we need to put forward a motion.

00:03:10.380 So that was prefaced by a CTV News reporter talking about the liberal dental care plan and opposition

00:03:18.580 to it, which is not true. So the conservatives, their director of communications, called out CTV News

00:03:26.860 for this tweet, for this video, essentially saying that it was entirely edited, taken out of context

00:03:35.160 and spliced and demanding that CTV News account for this. Now CTV News officials actually came out

00:03:43.600 and gave a sort of muddied statement, you know, half an apology, half an admission of guilt,

00:03:51.920 but they didn't really actually say sorry. And this led the CPC to come back at CTV News

00:03:59.760 and blacklist any MPs, any member of caucus from actually taking interviews showing on appearances

00:04:06.680 on CTV News. So this has been going on pretty much the second half of this entire week. And it's become

00:04:15.140 a scandal in the legacy media because it really shows their bias. And the latest development is CTV News

00:04:23.620 saying they've let go the two editors, I presume, responsible for this clip splicing. And they put

00:04:31.300 out a statement essentially saying, admitting that this was wrong, but they don't actually say that it

00:04:37.940 was done purposefully in that statement. So I'm going to put it to you, Isaac. Is this enough from the CTV?

00:04:44.780 Well, that's a tough question, Cosmin. And I'll put it this way. The statement on Monday that CTV

00:04:55.200 issued got ratioed completely, having far more comments than likes and people just bashing them

00:04:59.900 completely. Whereas their newest statement on Thursday, where they announced firing the journalists,

00:05:06.180 it had a lot more likes than comments, first of all, but the comments were largely filled with people

00:05:12.500 noting their surprise that CTV took any accountability at all. So that was interesting

00:05:19.340 for me. People at least are celebrating that they did take accountability. However, on the flip side

00:05:25.020 of things, there were people suggesting that the CTV News just essentially scapegoated these two

00:05:31.860 journalists, whoever they are, from something that came from the higher ups likely. So it's hard to say

00:05:37.560 whether they truly are taking accountability, because as you said, they didn't necessarily

00:05:41.640 apologize for what they did. But something else that that comes to mind here is, I've seen other

00:05:48.300 people celebrating the conservatives for essentially standing up to legacy media and CTV in this instance,

00:05:55.900 for slandering them, if you want to call it that, or splicing these clips. I mean, this is just

00:06:00.160 a complete fabrication of facts, especially with the video. I can't believe they went to this extreme

00:06:05.340 measure. Like you really thought you were going to get away with this, splicing videos together. I

00:06:10.020 mean, it's ridiculous, especially as a journalist myself thinking about journalistic integrity, who

00:06:15.380 could possibly imagine doing something like this? Now, William, Pierre Polyev has sort of made

00:06:22.200 himself this anti-legacy media figure, a politician willing to stand up to media lies and mistruths that

00:06:31.240 are propagated out there. Did the CTV play into the conservatives hands with this blunder?

00:06:39.120 Yeah, I mean, you got to wonder what CTV was thinking when they came up with this cartoonishly

00:06:45.340 evil plan to try and splice together a fake quote, to misrepresent what Pierre Polyver was saying. You

00:06:51.740 know, I used to work in for the government back in the day for the Harper government. And whenever one of

00:06:56.820 our ministers was doing a press conference or a press event, you would always see a political party

00:07:02.340 staffer or a ministerial staffer recording the press conference on their own phone. And media used to

00:07:08.580 say, well, why would you do that? And our answer was honestly, because we don't trust you to accurately

00:07:14.060 report what we said at this press conference. And they would say, oh, we would never take someone's

00:07:21.880 words out of context. And we would never splice a quote to give it an unfair meaning. Well, when

00:07:27.900 arguably the second largest, maybe even the largest, I don't know, the viewing figures,

00:07:32.780 they're also terrible now for legacy media, it's hard to tell. But one of Canada's largest news

00:07:36.980 broadcasters can't be trusted to put together a simple story without inventing a whole fictionalized

00:07:43.320 narrative that Pierre Polyev was trying to hold an election over the national dental care strategy.

00:07:48.760 You know, it brings out the question of real trouble. And as Isaac's pointed out, I've really

00:07:54.780 enjoyed some of the fallout, you know, because now I'm seeing former liberal staffers say, oh, this poor

00:08:01.220 working single mother has lost her job because of Pierre Polyev's attack against the media. It's like,

00:08:09.000 you know, pretty certain that the person who faked the clip lost her own job when she decided not to do

00:08:15.740 news anymore, but fiction. And I don't think she's got anyone to blame but herself. Certainly,

00:08:21.660 I know conservative supporters have argued for a long time that the legacy media are not fair,

00:08:26.640 that they're biased, that they don't like the conservatives, that none of them come even close

00:08:30.760 to voting conservative in election. And I think you're now seeing, again, an example of that bias

00:08:35.620 on full display. And when they get knocked off their high horse, yes, conservative sorry supporters

00:08:40.560 do tend to enjoy that experience. Well, I just wanted to add because you would expect this sort

00:08:46.120 of behavior from CBC, which is a publicly government funded outlet that receives all of its money due to

00:08:52.640 the graces of the liberal government. But as you were correct to mention, William, CTV News is I'm

00:08:59.520 pretty sure the biggest privately owned media company in Canada. They're owned by Bell Media. And

00:09:06.340 to see this like blatant anti-conservative bias, it's funny, actually, yesterday, they did a segment

00:09:13.940 here in British Columbia, where the BC conservatives are surging, they're actually tied with the BC NDP,

00:09:20.340 they did a segment about John Rustad talking about how climate advocates have been pushing people to,

00:09:27.000 you know, adopt eating insect proteins, alternative proteins instead of meat to save the climate. And

00:09:33.880 they tried to mock him. But then I found a clip from a year before where they went to a bug bake-off

00:09:40.480 talking about how great it is to eat bugs. So the bias is so obvious. And I think more Canadians are

00:09:46.840 waking up to this evident fact that there is an anti-conservative leaning in the legacy media.

00:09:55.020 Yeah, I mean, Isaac, your background has a bit of, well, maybe not full legacy media,

00:10:00.260 but certainly we would say non-independent media. What was your experience like when you

00:10:05.860 had to cover stories? Did you ever find there was either an explicit or maybe implicit direction,

00:10:12.540 if it's a conservative, you know, try and hurt them, mock them, make fun of them, spin them,

00:10:18.340 maybe don't give a full story? I'm just guessing, you know, you can tell me that never happened,

00:10:22.680 and I would accept it. But yeah, no, obviously, for those who don't know, I worked for various

00:10:28.560 French legacy media, but my editors were pretty respectful, I guess, in the sense that they knew

00:10:36.200 I was a conservative. So they really didn't make me do any media bias in the political sense. Although

00:10:43.780 I did have to cover a few conferences on like, yeah, climate craze, let's call it, where they would

00:10:52.500 be, I'd go as far as saying indoctrinating kids regarding eco stuff. And the main thing I, the

00:11:00.240 main problem I had with those conferences, they would raise all these concerns and raise all these

00:11:04.180 problems, but they would offer no solution. So it's like, well, you're saying all of these things,

00:11:07.660 you're saying this is the worst thing that's ever going to happen to you. These kids are scared for

00:11:10.920 their lives. But it's like, well, what's the solution? You haven't offered any. So that was the

00:11:15.840 main thing with me working in legacy media. Last thing I wanted to mention, which I almost forgot,

00:11:21.300 was I saw a statement issued by Anna Polyefre, Pierre's wife, obviously. And she said, quote,

00:11:29.480 my husband is a fighter, and I couldn't be more proud. Canada needs a leader with unwavering

00:11:34.640 principle and conviction, someone who stands firm for what's right. Even when the media critics and

00:11:40.100 so-called experts try to tear him down. He's strong, smart, and exactly who this country needs.

00:11:46.160 The fight for a better Canada continues. And then in parentheses, yes, the media bias is real,

00:11:52.320 but conservatives will keep fighting for the people. So that kind of speaks to what you're

00:11:55.620 saying, William, feeding into this media bias story. You know, I'm sure the statement of support

00:12:02.420 from Sophie Trudeau for her husband will be coming out any moment now.

00:12:07.580 The ex-husband.

00:12:10.760 So, of course, this was all beginning with the comments related to the non-confidence motion

00:12:17.160 that happened earlier this week, following the famous tearing up of the supply and confidence

00:12:22.880 agreement by Jagmeet Singh. There was a motion of non-confidence put forward in the House of

00:12:28.520 Commons by the conservatives. And as we know now, that motion wasn't successful. But I think it

00:12:34.920 kicks off the season of no confidence votes in Ottawa. And we have a bit of a clip showing

00:12:39.980 the end of that confidence vote and some of the subsequent analysis, quote unquote. Now,

00:12:45.120 I should say this is a CTV news clip. We believe that this is accurately what happened. But as we maybe

00:12:52.320 have learned over the past week, take it with a grain of salt in case CTV had also done some

00:12:57.840 splicing and dicing on this one.

00:13:03.300 This was the first, but not the last test of the liberal minority this fall. The conservative-led

00:13:09.220 push to bring down the government was defeated, despite pressure from Pierre Paliyev to send

00:13:14.340 Canadians to the polls. He wants a climate change election. Let's have that election in the right

00:13:19.620 time. Will he call it today? The Bloc and NDP voted with the government, stating they still have

00:13:26.460 confidence in Justin Trudeau. But before the vote was even called, Bloc leader E. Francois Blachette

00:13:32.240 issued an ultimatum, giving the government until the end of October to help enact a pair of Bloc bills 0.54

00:13:38.080 about pensions and supply management, or risk an election before the new year.

00:13:42.920 There's not so much room for discussion.

00:13:44.920 Wasting no time, the Conservatives are set to serve up another non-confidence motion on Thursday,

00:13:50.660 a move the Liberals called lame parliamentary games.

00:13:53.880 But I think it shows the desperation of Mr. Paliyev.

00:13:56.380 Well, yes, along with millions of Canadians desperate to have an election. Also, was it my

00:14:08.580 imagination or in that vote, did Jagmeet Singh bring a baby into the House of Commons? I'm not

00:14:15.240 sure what that was in aid of. Maybe he just couldn't get affordable childcare, despite that

00:14:20.000 being a major promise of his once coalition partner. So with all of that, do you think it's

00:14:27.300 interesting, of course, that political parties like the Bloc and the Democrats, who have been

00:14:31.340 routinely attacking the government, when asked to put their money where their mouth is, actually

00:14:36.460 aren't following through and voting down this government to cause an election? Cosman, what

00:14:40.380 do you think?

00:14:41.960 For sure. I think the Liberals are in a precarious situation. They are backed in a corner, and

00:14:48.860 the Bloc are salivating at the opportunity to get every last ounce of concessions from this 0.84

00:14:56.440 government because they have the upper hand here. The NDP has backed away. And now the

00:15:01.800 next cannibal party that feasts on the corpse of this Liberal government is going to take what 0.62

00:15:09.380 it can. And it's just the situation we're in. It's going to be a volatile period in the

00:15:16.440 House of Commons. You're going to see these pushes for non-confidence motions. But honestly,

00:15:22.840 I have my doubts that either the Bloc or the NDP want an election right now. I know the Bloc

00:15:29.640 had a good running in the recent by-election, but I'm not so sure that will translate in a

00:15:36.200 general election.

00:15:37.120 And Isaac, you know, thinking about the other opposition parties, the ones who aren't the

00:15:42.580 Conservatives, the Democrats, the Bloc, do you think there's any impetus for them to pull the

00:15:47.940 plug on this government? Or do you think they're, you know, in the case of the NDP in particular,

00:15:52.700 do you think they're afraid to face the electorate in an actual general election?

00:15:56.940 Yeah, William, it's funny. I still remember the feeling I initially had when I heard that

00:16:04.360 Jagmeet Singh was going to rip up his supply and confidence agreement, which unfortunately

00:16:08.960 was short-lived. Because then I realized that that really doesn't mean anything, especially

00:16:14.660 as we've seen Singh continue to prop up his government. But now it's almost as if we're

00:16:21.520 in a worse position than we were prior to this development, let's call it, because now both

00:16:26.720 the Bloc and the NDP have shown that they will prop up this Liberal government. And at

00:16:32.320 least the Bloc are doing it for some gain. Obviously, Blanchet said he'd give the Liberals

00:16:38.520 until October 29th to meet his demands, whereas Singh, I don't even know what they're getting

00:16:43.900 out of this agreement right now. But both of these parties would have to turn against the

00:16:48.380 Liberals, which, as Cosmin mentioned, I really don't think either of those parties would benefit

00:16:53.740 from an election right now because they have to be essentially weighing the odds in the sense that

00:16:58.140 are we going to benefit more from a Trudeau government or a Prolivre government? And I don't

00:17:04.700 see Pierre going to either of those parties and saying, hey, let's do this together. I'll give you

00:17:13.080 what you want. Otherwise, he probably already would have done that. And then that might be what it's

00:17:18.060 going to take to bring down this Liberal government. Now, Cosmin, do you think that one of the factors

00:17:24.760 might be happening is the fact that we have a provincial election happening in B.C. right now,

00:17:29.860 very competitive one between the B.C. NDP and the B.C. Conservatives. We have an election, I think,

00:17:35.540 scheduled next month in Saskatchewan, another place where the New Democrats are probably going to be,

00:17:42.920 if not strong contenders, actual contenders, which they're not in a lot of other parts of this

00:17:49.340 country. Do you think the calculus on the part of the NDP is they don't want an unpopular federal

00:17:55.580 leader dragging down the support for their provincial cousins in these two provincial elections?

00:18:02.660 No, for sure. And I'll just add Ontario Premier Doug Ford has also talked about an early election

00:18:08.360 as well. So there's definitely the provincial elements at play a hundred percent. Let's remember

00:18:16.320 that Jagmeet Singh was elected in a by-election in Burnaby. That's where his seat is in British

00:18:22.900 Columbia. So there's no way that he wants to detract attention from the B.C. NDP's shot at forming

00:18:31.660 government again. I think that is definitely at top of mind for Jagmeet Singh. But I also wanted to

00:18:38.920 mention, off of what Isaac said, Canadians are hurting right now. They're suffering from financial

00:18:46.020 woes, cost of living, inability to get housing. And I think what's happening in the House of Commons

00:18:53.960 right now, with all these parties vying to get what they want out of this government with the Bloc and

00:19:00.380 the NDP trying to get concessions, it comes across as very self-interested, cynical politics. And I

00:19:07.460 think it leaves a really bad taste in Canadians' mouths. Yeah, here in my province of Alberta,

00:19:14.120 the new Democrat, new New Democrat leader, former Calgary Mayor Nahed Nengshi, has gone so far as to

00:19:18.660 say he doesn't want to be affiliated with the federal NDP anymore. I think he probably even wants to change

00:19:24.920 the provincial party's name to something new. And part of that is simply, it's tough to run as a

00:19:31.500 new Democrat here in Alberta. Fair enough. But also, I think he particularly doesn't like the

00:19:36.600 association with Mr. Singh, who, of course, has been so anti-Alberta in many of his policy positions,

00:19:42.340 opposes the oil sands, opposes the construction of pipelines, opposes Alberta's major industries. And so,

00:19:49.060 you know, if his own cousins aren't willing to support him, I guess Mr. Singh probably thinks that

00:19:56.200 Canadians from coast to coast won't either. Now, unfortunately, that wasn't the only thing that

00:20:03.440 happened in Ottawa this week. And the next part is probably the genesis of my Is the House of Commons

00:20:10.360 occasionally stupid theme that I put on. We had an argument over a bathtub, and whether or not

00:20:17.200 there was a suggestion that the prime minister might be gay in that bathtub, you know, if you

00:20:24.060 interpreted the remark in that way. Why don't we start by watching this clip, which was following

00:20:29.920 Pierre Polyever, opposition leader Pierre Polyever, talking about the apartment the Government of

00:20:35.620 Canada bought for New York Consul General Tom Clark, and just how luxurious it is with its quartz

00:20:40.860 countertops, a $5,000 bathtub, and a bunch of other very special amenities. This is the

00:20:46.900 prime minister's defense of that luxury apartment.

00:20:51.860 Mr. Speaker, engaging with international leaders on fighting climate change, on solving global

00:20:59.880 crises, on standing up unequivocally for Ukraine.

00:21:08.760 The right honorable prime minister from the top, please.

00:21:11.240 Mr. Speaker, don't worry. On this side of the house, we're used to casual homophobic comments from

00:21:15.460 the other side of the house.

00:21:18.740 Now, in case you couldn't hear, that was what has now been identified to be conservative MP

00:21:24.140 Garnet Jenuous, asking if the prime minister or the consul general was entertaining world leaders

00:21:32.820 in the bathtub. And I actually think Garnet asked a perfectly legitimate question. There might be an

00:21:38.460 argument to say we need a government-owned apartment in a city like New York, where a lot of world leaders,

00:21:44.240 business leaders, and other people come on a frequent basis. And maybe we need it to be

00:21:49.140 sufficiently large to accommodate a reception. But do we really need the $5,000 bathtub in order

00:21:55.620 to maintain cordial relations with some of these foreign leaders? How many of them are we entertaining

00:22:01.300 in the bath? And if we are, should we be worried about foreign interference on one level or another?

00:22:08.160 So do you think that this was a homophobic joke? Or do you think this was an MP pointing out the lunacy

00:22:15.440 of why we needed a $5,000 bathtub? Isaac, what do you think?

00:22:20.780 Yeah, I definitely do not think it was a homophobic joke. And you mentioned, or Trudeau did,

00:22:27.580 how people were interpreting it. No, I don't think anyone would have interpreted it that way before he

00:22:33.420 brought up the homophobia. But we've seen this from Trudeau in response to completely unrelated

00:22:40.000 things. He'll always tie it back to his main talking points, which are homophobia or LGBTQ

00:22:46.040 rights, climate change. You've heard them all before. I don't see how this has anything to do

00:22:52.580 with that, though. And Cosman, what do you think? House of Commons, valuable democratic institution

00:22:58.060 or a place where stupid stuff gets yelled about? Well, we've got a drama teacher for a prime 0.73

00:23:05.140 minister. He's engaging in theatrics every opportunity he can. And I think it's just

00:23:11.660 deflection. Let's be serious. It's an attempt to get off of the issue about why did taxpayers spend so

00:23:19.540 much money for this extravagant apartment and all of these extra features that, as you're right to

00:23:25.760 mention, are not necessary for hosting guests. And just in case you thought that maybe upon

00:23:31.820 reflection, the prime minister would back down from his ludicrous assertion that this was a

00:23:37.280 drive-by homophobic attack when asked to clarify or reiterate his position leaving the House of

00:23:43.360 Commons, this was the prime minister's response. I'm always going to stand up to bullies. When anyone

00:23:49.880 makes a homophobic comment, I will respond. And that's something I need to do. 0.99

00:23:55.940 Sounds like the guy could use a nice relaxing bath with one or more of his closest personal

00:24:00.480 friends in order to de-stress. Yeah, I must admit, when I read the rundown of show stories,

00:24:07.480 I was initially opposed to doing this one out of the opinion that it would add to global stupidity.

00:24:13.760 And I'm sorry to say I still find this entire affair to be pretty dumb. But let's move into,

00:24:21.360 I guess you could argue it's a related area. We're going to talk a little bit about ass there, 1.00

00:24:26.740 Isaac. Do you want to give us the lowdown? Yeah, related in the sense that this is another

00:24:32.560 odd comment, let's call it. So Ontario Premier Doug Ford let able-bodied homeless people who aren't

00:24:41.860 working know that he's sick and tired of them. So he was asked about the more than a hundred,

00:24:47.600 sorry, a thousand people currently on wait lists for affordable housing at a completely unrelated

00:24:51.980 news conference on Monday. And then he said the following, let's just roll the clip quickly.

00:24:56.600 Do you know what the best way to get people be able to get out of the encampments,

00:25:01.560 get out of homeless, get an application and drop it off one of these companies and start working.

00:25:07.280 You need to start working. If you're healthy, bottom line, if you're unhealthy, I'll take care

00:25:12.380 of you the rest of my life. Your life will take care of you. But if you're healthy, get off your

00:25:17.260 ASS and start working like everyone else's very simple. And then I'll just cover a few other things

00:25:25.060 that Ford mentioned at the press conference, which was firstly, he said that Ontario is the fastest

00:25:30.500 growing jurisdiction in North America. He said they added 800,000 people last year, which was largest

00:25:37.060 or sorry, larger than the biggest two States in the United States combined. He went on to say that

00:25:42.840 136 companies came to invest in Ontario, creating over 12,500 jobs, which really doesn't seem like

00:25:50.740 that many jobs when we're talking about 800,000 people coming there. So while I appreciate Ford

00:25:58.200 treating able-bodied homeless people like adults saying, look, if you want to change your woes,

00:26:04.040 you've got to start working. I don't know that it's that simple. Obviously when 800,000 people

00:26:09.140 immigrate to your province and then use the next citation you make is adding 12,500 jobs, obviously

00:26:14.880 there's going to be a discrepancy there. And we've seen the unemployment rates in Ontario,

00:26:20.540 which are quite high. Do you guys think it's as simple as Ford is trying to make it out to be?

00:26:27.020 Well, I'll just start. I found his comment to be a little bit of a non sequitur because he was asked

00:26:32.560 about an affordable housing waitlist. And we talked about this on daily brief, affordable housing

00:26:38.340 doesn't mean you're, you're homeless. There's cutoffs for a hundred thousand dollars a year

00:26:42.800 to get into affordable housing. There's a lot of ordinary middle-class people who rely on affordable

00:26:48.760 housing, sadly in Canada today, so that they can have a place to live because they can't afford to,

00:26:55.720 you know, the multi-thousand dollar rents in Vancouver, Toronto, or Montreal. But you're

00:27:02.380 right to say that immigration has a huge impact on this because the fact is, if you look at the

00:27:09.000 statistics, a lot of new immigrants, international students, temporary foreign workers are going into

00:27:15.820 those entry-level jobs that somebody who's coming off the street, coming out of, you know, living in

00:27:21.700 their car would rely on to get a step up and be able to afford a place to live. And it's, it's just

00:27:29.320 astounding that nobody really touches on that issue. Our politicians don't admit that we're importing more

00:27:35.560 people than we can, you know, uh, afford to, to take care of. And they're also going into homeless

00:27:42.660 shelters, the places where people who are on the street, uh, go to halfway houses, homeless shelters

00:27:50.080 to have that transition from being homeless to actually being a functioning member in society.

00:27:57.000 So if we're not going to deal with the causes of this problem, just saying, go get a job, it's,

00:28:02.720 it's not quite that simple, right? So when I heard the comment, it reminded me, I, I found Rob Ford,

00:28:10.080 uh, sorry, Doug Ford, God rest, uh, uh, Doug Ford, uh, Doug Ford to be channeling his inner Ronald Reagan,

00:28:15.560 uh, cause the president was famously asked about social program funding. And he said that the best

00:28:20.800 social program out there was a job. Um, do you think there's a belief that some people are simply

00:28:28.320 taking advantage of Canada's generosity as opposed to doing what the rest of us do, which is to get

00:28:34.000 up each morning, go to work, work at a job, earn a living and use that to pay for our bills and our

00:28:40.680 living expenses. Do you think there are some people who said, nah, I'd rather not work and

00:28:45.640 take advantage of Canada's generous social programs and SCED. Do you think it's a problem?

00:28:51.120 Yeah, I do. And some people, uh, for many streams, not just the immigrant side of things,

00:28:56.340 but also Canadian employers we've seen have exploited in some instances, the temporary foreign

00:29:02.180 worker program, for example, where they're only supposed to be hiring temporary foreign workers when

00:29:06.580 they have an essential need for them. But of course they're going with them instead of Canadians 1.00

00:29:10.440 because they can pay them less or other instances. So, yeah, I mean, there's very, there's many

00:29:15.700 different streams of exploitation, let's call it, but we've seen the videos in Toronto for these

00:29:21.380 entry-level jobs. I mean, the lineups for them are hours long. So, so as you mentioned, Cosmin,

00:29:26.760 for, for someone who's homeless and, and would rely on a job as such to, to get back on their feet,

00:29:33.360 if you will, they, it's not as simple as just going to McDonald's and getting a job when

00:29:38.300 these places are pretty much impossible to get a job at.

00:29:43.520 And I'll just say this as somebody was born in a different country, Canada, barring Scandinavian 0.93

00:29:49.700 countries is one of the hardest countries to become homeless in. Let's be real. There are so

00:29:55.660 many opportunities, so many safety nets for people to rely on where they don't have to be in that

00:30:01.420 situation. Now I'm not going to discount the serious things such as like addiction, mental health

00:30:07.760 issues, you know, trauma, being a victim of abuse, having to flee an abusive household. Those are

00:30:13.400 very real, but there are definitely people who choose to be out on the streets here in Vancouver

00:30:20.540 in, you know, downtown East side, there's a lot of people who decide to be there because it's a

00:30:26.520 lifestyle for them. Almost. They, they, they don't want to get a job. They do get either, you know,

00:30:32.800 employment insurance. They have other means to get social grants and money, and they, they'd rather

00:30:39.820 be out here than actually live their life. And, and that asks, begs the question, what has happened

00:30:46.140 where people are choosing that over a meaningful life where they can be productive members of society?

00:30:52.620 I think there's some fundamental questions we need to ask about why people are choosing that path.

00:30:58.120 And if you, with the drug crisis, a lot of these people are actually young men, men between the

00:31:04.620 ages of 20 to 40 who have just found no purpose in society any longer. Uh, I'm just reading a quick

00:31:12.320 note from the producer saying that I should have given a warning that I was going to use the word

00:31:16.760 ask. This is now a PG 13 segment. And that segment should not have been watched by young children

00:31:23.640 without preventable supervision. True North apologizes for anyone scandalized by the use of

00:31:29.360 that word. Um, just heading into just a related story there, Cosman about, uh, affordable housing

00:31:34.860 and homelessness. Um, we see, uh, uh, quote unquote, innovative housing strategy coming out of British

00:31:42.420 Columbia. Some, some actually aren't convinced it's innovative at all. What is happening on the

00:31:47.620 affordable housing front in British Columbia's election? Right. So in the last week, premier

00:31:53.540 David Eby has made two significant housing announcements, but what they essentially entail

00:32:00.260 is they are leasehold schemes. So we have a situation where the government is partnering with

00:32:08.740 first nations and certain private investors to build these homes that will still be owned by the land

00:32:17.480 at least will be owned by the first nation, but people will be able to, uh, essentially sign up for

00:32:23.240 a 99 year lease, 40% of which is, uh, funded by taxpayers. So the government will be using taxpayer money

00:32:32.660 to spend on 40% of the value of these properties. Whereas 60%, uh, the buyer will be able to put a down

00:32:40.460 payment on, but like I said, this is a leasehold. So if you know anything about real estate, a leasehold

00:32:46.340 means that you might have, you know, some stake on the building, but the, you don't have the land

00:32:51.280 title. So you don't actually own the piece of land that the property on is on. And that raises

00:32:56.280 a lot of, uh, consequences. First of all, the property doesn't appreciate. So when you go to

00:33:02.820 resell it, you're not going to make any sort of profit on it. And then secondly, there, the person who

00:33:09.160 owns the land could kick you off theoretically if they really wanted to. So it's very troubling.

00:33:15.100 And I spoke to a realtor from Vancouver who was, who put this in plain terms that this is glorified

00:33:21.520 rentals. The government is becoming a land Lord. So you're going to have people who need housing and

00:33:28.820 premier David Eby is calling this a housing owner, home ownership dream. As if this is what people

00:33:35.400 want. They want to lease a property for 99 years from the government. That's not it. They want something

00:33:41.040 they can have for their entire life and then pass it on to their next generations. So William, what's

00:33:47.460 it like, is this the solution to the housing crisis? Yeah, I was going to say, it sounds almost like a

00:33:53.620 timeshare plan where you buy in for a set amount of time and then it reverts to the property owner. And

00:33:59.680 certainly the idea that your house isn't going to gain any value. And in fact, we'll lose value over the course of you

00:34:05.700 owning it is not attractive for a lot of people who see their property as a place to build some equity,

00:34:11.420 to build up some revenue or some wealth that they can use in order to fund their retirement or

00:34:17.500 something else. So Isaac, what do you think? The dream of home ownership or government scheme that you

00:34:24.540 try and get sold upon visiting a hotel in Mexico and say, oh, you could live here full time for

00:34:31.120 only $9.99. Yeah, so many different things I want to mention about this. First, we'll start off with

00:34:38.640 the quote from EB, home ownership dream. I mean, that in itself is a lie. You don't own the land. How is

00:34:44.720 it a home ownership dream? And you mentioned one of the two most important things that I think of

00:34:52.540 owning property are, firstly, as you said, building equity, but next, owning the land. You literally own

00:34:58.720 land that those are the two most important things of owning a property, in my opinion. And obviously,

00:35:03.000 one of these things just is not true with these. Something that you didn't mention, Cosmin, which I

00:35:08.500 think needs to be said was the price of these properties are $850,000 to $1.5 million. So

00:35:17.400 we were talking about affordable housing. This is far from affordable. Who can afford this? Of course,

00:35:24.540 you take 40% off of that. It's still a ridiculous price.

00:35:28.660 Well, yeah, I want to jump in on that, Isaac, if I may, because I was astounded by how the housing

00:35:34.840 minister arrived at these property valuations. If you actually look at where this property is,

00:35:40.860 it's in the dead center of Vancouver in a neighborhood called Canby. And it's not a special

00:35:47.600 area. It's literally in the middle of a metropolitan area. But for, and this is the three bedrooms are

00:35:53.720 valued at $1.5 million. This is the market valuation that the government arrived at for these properties

00:35:58.800 in this area. But you can get a leasehold property with a ocean view on False Creek for $1.5 million

00:36:09.800 with a beautiful view of the harbor for the exact same amount of money. You can find a leasehold for

00:36:16.900 three bedrooms in Kitsilano for $999,000. So it doesn't make sense. And the reason they put this

00:36:27.420 valuation so high is because they wrote into this deal a profit for the private developers and the

00:36:34.740 First Nations developers. That's the reason they get the payout. You know, the question that goes 1.00

00:36:40.620 through my head is how much is the bathtub worth? If it's not worth $5,000, then I'm not dropping $1.5 million

00:36:46.060 on a home. I think that's completely outrageous. So, well, I think that brings us to the end of our

00:36:52.820 news segment there. You know, I'm always amazed at the value for our tax dollars we get whenever we

00:36:59.920 take a good look at what our governments are up to across the country. So I hope that we haven't

00:37:05.060 depressed our viewers too much by telling them just how much their tax dollars were wasted.

00:37:10.220 And of course, a general reminder that everything you've heard today is off the record.

00:37:16.060 Well, now I'm worried that we're actually going to have a segment of our viewers who own very

00:37:29.540 expensive bathtubs and I'm going to be accused of being pejorative or bigoted against the wealthy

00:37:36.000 bathtub community. That is not what I'm saying. I'm saying if you own an expensive bathtub that you pay

00:37:41.160 for yourself, that's perfectly fine. It's the publicly funded bathtubs are the ones that I object

00:37:47.020 to. So just to clarify for anybody with a very expensive bathtub, it's not you. It's when it's

00:37:53.000 paid for by taxpayers.

Juno News - September 27, 2024

CTV News shows its true colours

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript