Juno News - April 29, 2022


Is Canada a conservative country？


Episode Stats

Length

34 minutes

Words per Minute

167.65231

Word Count

5,717

Sentence Count

263

Misogynist Sentences

3

Hate Speech Sentences

4


Summary


Transcript

00:00:00.000 Welcome to Canada's Most Irreverent Talk Show.
00:00:05.640 This is the Andrew Lawton Show, brought to you by True North.
00:00:10.500 Hello and welcome to the Andrew Lawton Show here on True North, Canada's Most Irreverent Talk Show.
00:00:16.520 It is Friday, April 29th, 2022.
00:00:20.720 We are going to be talking a lot in the next little while about the Conservative leadership race,
00:00:25.520 but I wanted to take a bigger picture view of it today.
00:00:28.560 There was a collection of essays that came out from the Macdonald-Laurier Institute
00:00:32.460 by the MLI's managing director, Brian Lee Crowley, called
00:00:36.600 A Modern Conservatism for a Modern Canada.
00:00:40.280 And it covers a lot of the issues that come up in the context of the Conservative leadership race
00:00:45.100 and more broadly, just Conservative politics and politics in Canada.
00:00:49.460 Things like the carbon tax, Indigenous issues, the rule of law, the freedom convoy,
00:00:54.040 And a lot of these bigger picture questions, like, is Canada a Conservative country?
00:00:59.300 And I think the answer to that sways whether the Conservative party has a place as a Conservative party
00:01:05.060 or whether it needs to be this malleable, fluid thing that becomes more and more left
00:01:09.840 just to keep up with a political or cultural shift in Canada.
00:01:13.900 These are some of the big questions.
00:01:15.820 And again, we wanted to get out of the horse race and talk about this from the bigger picture view.
00:01:19.760 Brian Lee Crowley joins me now.
00:01:21.640 So, Brian, always good to talk to you. Thanks for coming on today.
00:01:24.840 Andrew, it's always a pleasure to be on the show.
00:01:27.160 Now, obviously, it's easy in a leadership race or in any election situation to get focused on the horse race of it.
00:01:33.400 But you've decided with this piece, A Modern Conservatism for a Modern Canada,
00:01:37.960 to really take the 30,000-foot view of things and that place that the Conservative party,
00:01:43.560 and I would say conservatism broadly, has in Canada.
00:01:46.980 Why do this now?
00:01:48.160 Well, look, because I think that ultimately, you know, leadership contests within political parties
00:01:54.540 and indeed politics in general, it's a struggle of ideas.
00:01:58.260 It's a battle for the mind of Canadians.
00:02:01.420 And I found that not just in the Tory leadership campaign, but in politics more generally,
00:02:07.940 we neglect this aspect of politics and focus, as you rightly say, on the horse race.
00:02:13.200 I thought that there might be some value in saying, okay, let's have a discussion about what the ideas are
00:02:20.680 that might attract Canadians to the Conservative party, why those ideas might be attractive,
00:02:27.040 why the way that they present themselves now might not appeal to enough Canadians,
00:02:31.140 and get them to think about, okay, if this is a battle of ideas, are we using the right ammunition,
00:02:36.520 and are we directing it in the right way?
00:02:39.620 And so I took a series of issues, which I think are in the minds of Canadians,
00:02:45.280 and said, okay, Conservatives, here's a way to think about them.
00:02:50.520 And if you think it has value, talk about it during your leadership campaign.
00:02:55.360 I want to talk about a few of those issues in depth with you, but I first want to tackle the framing of it here,
00:03:02.000 and I won't delve beyond the cover page for this question here.
00:03:05.360 A modern conservatism for a modern Canada.
00:03:08.300 Often when we hear that juxtaposition of modern conservatism,
00:03:12.220 it's coming from people that are trying to move the Conservative party in a fundamentally unconservative direction.
00:03:18.040 And I find a lot of the time, modern is a proxy for progressive.
00:03:22.660 I know that's not what you're going for here, but so what is modern in your view?
00:03:26.900 What's that framing that you believe the Conservatives need to fit while still being Conservative?
00:03:32.280 Well, I make the point in the collection of essays that the Tories do not need to become liberals in order to win elections.
00:03:40.840 I think the key idea animating this whole series of essays is that there is actually a mainstream in Canada,
00:03:49.880 a set of values that is deeper than politics that, you know, that Canadians feel strongly about.
00:03:58.100 They feel strongly about family.
00:04:00.320 They feel strongly about work.
00:04:01.960 They want to be productive.
00:04:03.420 They want to be, you know, contributing members of society.
00:04:07.820 They care about their community.
00:04:09.860 These are fundamentally Conservative values.
00:04:12.140 And I think that the reason that the Conservative party, in spite of the fact that in the last two elections,
00:04:19.100 clearly the voters were looking for an alternative to the Liberals,
00:04:22.860 the fact that the Conservatives are not the government,
00:04:26.360 shows that they have been unable to modernize their way of presenting themselves to the public
00:04:32.340 in a way that people can connect those deep Conservative, small C Conservative values
00:04:37.320 with the large C Conservative party that is seeking their vote.
00:04:41.000 And so when I said modernizing, you know, the Conservative appeal to Canadians,
00:04:47.680 I was really talking about, OK, look, we have to take Canadians as they are.
00:04:52.740 You can't wish that they were something else.
00:04:55.100 They are what they are.
00:04:56.400 And they have these fundamental small C Conservative values.
00:04:59.880 But clearly, you know, they're not connecting that with the Conservative party.
00:05:03.600 So you've got to bring your message up to date, not to abandon small C Conservatism,
00:05:09.520 not to become Liberals, but to say, OK, look, we've perhaps not diagnosed correctly
00:05:17.660 what the issues are that Canadians really care about and brought to them
00:05:22.620 a characteristically Conservative way of dealing with those issues.
00:05:26.780 I think that's the problem for the Conservative party.
00:05:29.580 I think that's such a key point, Brian,
00:05:31.660 because one of the problems that's always frustrated me immensely,
00:05:35.040 and you tackle this in the compendium here,
00:05:37.580 is that you've got a lot of issues that, generally speaking,
00:05:41.240 in the political and media discourse, the left has claimed as their own.
00:05:44.460 And I think one of those is climate.
00:05:46.400 And whenever Conservatives say, OK, we need to get serious about climate,
00:05:49.940 as you note, it becomes,
00:05:51.700 we need to do whatever the Liberals want us to do on climate,
00:05:54.800 and not creating Conservative answers to these problems.
00:05:59.240 No, I think this is absolutely correct.
00:06:04.700 Climate change is, of course, one of the things I wrote about in this collection.
00:06:08.960 And I said, you know, the Conservatives seem to have got it in their heads
00:06:12.520 that if the Liberals, you know, kind of tear their hair out and say,
00:06:17.780 oh, my God, the world is coming to an end because of climate change,
00:06:21.100 that as the opposition, they must say, no, no, nothing to worry about here,
00:06:26.220 move on, let's talk about something else.
00:06:29.220 I think this is one of the issues on which they're failing to connect with Canadians,
00:06:34.400 because I think Canadian, you know, the average Canadian is,
00:06:37.260 you know, we're kind of an earnest people.
00:06:39.280 We want to do the right thing.
00:06:41.120 And enough Canadians have become convinced, I think, you know,
00:06:46.400 quite reasonably given the, you know,
00:06:48.400 the large number of quite knowledgeable people about this
00:06:51.060 who've said, look, this is an issue.
00:06:53.240 And if the party comes across as rejecting a problem
00:07:01.360 that requires some solution, you know,
00:07:05.040 I think they won't be taken seriously by people.
00:07:06.780 Do they have to set their hair on fire like the Liberals do?
00:07:11.500 No.
00:07:12.560 I think that there are, the adult position on climate change is not,
00:07:18.880 oh, Liberals say climate change, yes, we must say climate change.
00:07:22.280 No, no, it's, no, the Liberals are engaging in extremist solutions
00:07:28.920 to a real problem.
00:07:30.520 We can do it better.
00:07:31.780 We can do it more intelligently.
00:07:33.180 I think that's the right approach for Canadians.
00:07:35.500 So you don't buy into this belief that I think seems to be peddled
00:07:39.720 relentlessly by the pundit class that you cannot run the country
00:07:43.720 without a carbon tax, that this is not even a partisan issue anymore.
00:07:48.000 Well, I happen to believe that a carbon tax is a small C
00:07:52.960 conservative solution to the issue.
00:07:55.580 I mean, you know, look, if it's true that the climate is changing,
00:07:59.900 and as I say, there's, I'm not talking about scientific consensus.
00:08:03.420 I don't believe in scientific consensus, but I am saying that, you know, if you talk
00:08:07.640 to a lot of people who are knowledgeable about these issues, climatologists, etc., etc.,
00:08:13.640 you know, they'll say, look, this is a real problem, this is not imaginary.
00:08:18.600 And so the issue then becomes, okay, if human beings are contributing to this problem,
00:08:23.640 how do we solve it?
00:08:25.520 And, you know, conservatives always believe, I think, rather than giving people orders,
00:08:30.980 you must do this, we have the answer, you must follow our direction.
00:08:35.660 Conservatives always believe that the best thing we can do is offer people incentives.
00:08:40.940 If climate change is a real problem, if our putting carbon into the atmosphere
00:08:46.240 is the source of part of that problem, let's create an incentive
00:08:49.740 that gives people a reason not to do that so much.
00:08:52.700 And that's really what a carbon tax is.
00:08:54.760 And I personally prefer that to a bunch of bureaucrats saying,
00:08:59.060 I'm going to decide what kind of car you can drive.
00:09:01.020 I'm going to decide, you know, what kind of job you can have.
00:09:05.060 I'm going to decide whether we're going to have an oil and gas industry,
00:09:08.360 which is basically the liberals' approach.
00:09:11.340 I think creating an incentive, giving people a reason to generate less carbon,
00:09:15.720 and then letting them get on with their lives and make their own choices,
00:09:20.460 having paid the cost of producing carbon, I think is the best solution.
00:09:26.480 The challenge, though, and I realize this gets out of the intellectual and policy sphere
00:09:30.960 and into just the realities of politics and what conservative politicians are up against in the media,
00:09:36.320 but when Aaron O'Toole put forward what was effectively a carbon tax,
00:09:39.840 I know they didn't call it that, and they tried to get creative about being able to get your money back
00:09:44.540 and use it for green purchases, but it didn't take the issue off the table.
00:09:48.700 It didn't neutralize the criticisms because all of a sudden the liberals just went further.
00:09:52.760 They talked about aggressively raising it, and then still the questions were about
00:09:56.480 why your plan doesn't go farther, why your plan doesn't go to all of these other depths.
00:10:01.020 So is this an issue where conservatives can compete with the liberals,
00:10:04.580 or is it one of those things where if a voter cares about this,
00:10:07.900 their vote's not going to the conservatives anyway?
00:10:09.980 Well, look, you know, I look at the public opinion polling on the issue of climate change,
00:10:17.640 and two things about me, two things about that strike me.
00:10:21.840 One is that Canadians say, yes, it's a problem.
00:10:25.660 We should be doing something about it.
00:10:27.500 The second is when you ask them, how much would you be willing to pay to solve this problem?
00:10:31.980 The answer is a very small amount of money, like a couple of hundred bucks a year, okay?
00:10:37.940 So, you know, the issue is not can you get on side the extremists who think that climate change
00:10:45.960 is a reason for government to reinvent everything, which to my mind is about the worst possible solution
00:10:53.000 to any problem, the issue is Canadians want to see a government that takes this problem seriously,
00:11:01.640 but doesn't say, and you're going to have to give up your pickup truck,
00:11:06.180 you know, you're going to have to give up your natural gas fired furnace,
00:11:10.780 you have to give up your job in the oil and gas industry, etc., etc., etc., etc.
00:11:15.660 Because I think there are a lot of Canadians who think that's an excessive price to pay,
00:11:21.100 and it's the wrong price, it won't solve the problem.
00:11:23.620 So I think that if you look at that public opinion about climate change,
00:11:29.480 it's very clear Canadians think it's a problem,
00:11:31.740 they want to see a government that can say something about it,
00:11:35.120 but they don't want extremism.
00:11:36.760 And to your point about the last election,
00:11:40.660 I thought the problem for the Conservatives wasn't that, you know,
00:11:44.300 the Liberals were saying, well, oh, my God, you're not going nearly far enough,
00:11:47.420 and, you know, we're going to build back better.
00:11:51.980 I thought the problem was that the leader of the Conservative Party
00:11:57.320 said one thing during his election campaign to become leader,
00:12:01.300 a different thing during the election,
00:12:03.100 and that different thing he said during the election
00:12:04.760 was different from the resolution that his party passed,
00:12:07.660 saying, no, no, climate change isn't real.
00:12:09.900 People didn't know who to believe.
00:12:11.280 You see, I think this is a key issue for the Conservatives,
00:12:15.080 is they can't just consult their own preferences.
00:12:18.100 If they're to be a credible alternative to the Liberals,
00:12:21.560 they have to think about what's in the minds of Canadians,
00:12:24.160 not only what's in the minds of small C or large C Conservatives.
00:12:30.420 That's the problem.
00:12:32.080 And I would also add to that, Brian,
00:12:34.140 the importance of not just going to the same old bag of tricks every time.
00:12:38.540 And my frustration has always been the Conservative reliance
00:12:41.820 on balanced budgets and tax credits,
00:12:44.000 which I think are completely fine things.
00:12:46.300 But when you've lost three elections in a row,
00:12:48.540 you have to say, let's offer a little bit more.
00:12:51.160 And one issue that you had a column on,
00:12:53.280 I think it was from the National Post,
00:12:54.540 that I particularly enjoyed,
00:12:55.940 was about Indigenous issues.
00:12:58.000 And how not only is this something that, again,
00:13:00.600 would align with that small C Conservative vision
00:13:03.460 of empowerment, moving beyond victimhood,
00:13:05.700 but also just in Canadian politics,
00:13:08.400 this, I feel like, is a wide open field
00:13:10.960 because everyone would say that the status quo is a failure.
00:13:14.880 What has exactly caused that?
00:13:16.580 There's some debate on.
00:13:17.940 But there's a huge opening here.
00:13:19.320 If Conservatives were to come in and offer a bold solution,
00:13:22.440 or at the very least, a beginning of one.
00:13:25.600 No, look, I feel very strongly about this.
00:13:29.260 You know, again, back to what's in the minds of Canadians.
00:13:31.500 I think the public opinion polling is eloquent on this.
00:13:37.020 Canadians have come to the realization
00:13:38.920 that the way that Indigenous people in Canada
00:13:41.800 have been treated as a national shame and scandal.
00:13:44.120 They want to do something about it.
00:13:45.820 Canadians are committed to this.
00:13:47.680 And the issue is that nobody is offering,
00:13:54.260 I think, the Indigenous communities
00:13:57.840 that have proven their entrepreneurialism,
00:14:01.840 their determination to, you know, end dependence,
00:14:05.220 to become self-reliant, to run their own community.
00:14:07.960 Nobody is saying to them,
00:14:09.420 hey, those are small C Conservative ideas.
00:14:12.320 You are now acting on the values
00:14:14.940 that animate so many Canadians.
00:14:19.160 And, in fact, Indigenous prosperity
00:14:22.040 contributes to Canadian prosperity.
00:14:24.120 So, you know, I celebrate the fact
00:14:27.080 that there are so many Indigenous communities in Canada now
00:14:29.640 where the problem is not managing poverty
00:14:31.640 as it has been for all Indigenous communities for so long.
00:14:34.400 The problem now is managing prosperity.
00:14:35.980 And we want to see that widely shared
00:14:40.300 amongst Indigenous communities.
00:14:43.120 And I think that this really,
00:14:46.660 in the case of the Conservative Party,
00:14:48.420 it also speaks to a very important image problem
00:14:51.060 that I think they have.
00:14:52.540 You know, a lot of people think,
00:14:53.600 oh, Conservatives don't care about social issues.
00:14:55.780 You know, they're kind of mean-spirited.
00:14:57.820 The only thing they want is to stop government spending money
00:15:00.700 even when spending money is important
00:15:03.900 and will achieve something for Canadians.
00:15:05.380 So, I think by having,
00:15:07.960 by embracing this new spirit of entrepreneurialism
00:15:11.820 and innovation and investment
00:15:13.440 that has grown up on so many reserves
00:15:18.640 and amongst so many Indigenous communities,
00:15:21.920 I think this gives the Conservatives a chance
00:15:25.620 to change their own image, which is fine.
00:15:27.900 I mean, that's not the most important thing.
00:15:29.420 The most important thing,
00:15:30.560 in addition to changing their image,
00:15:32.380 is it will address a social problem
00:15:34.700 that Canadians care about deeply.
00:15:36.420 And I think that would be hugely beneficial
00:15:39.380 for the Conservative Party.
00:15:41.420 And I know that there have been attempts in the past,
00:15:44.400 like the First Nations Financial Transparency Act
00:15:47.040 was again trying to bring this aspect
00:15:49.320 of government accountability
00:15:50.260 to empower people in Indigenous communities.
00:15:52.900 I'd say a lot of energy pipe projects,
00:15:55.460 a lot of pipeline projects are very much pro-Indigenous policies,
00:15:59.280 despite the naysaying you get from very specific subsets
00:16:03.000 of the environmental movement.
00:16:04.160 A lot of the times,
00:16:04.980 the beneficiaries of these projects,
00:16:07.080 in large part, are Indigenous communities.
00:16:08.960 But I don't know if that is necessarily communicated
00:16:12.300 as well as it could be.
00:16:13.720 And I don't know what is missing there.
00:16:16.380 I don't know if it's that you need more Indigenous leaders
00:16:18.580 to come out and say this.
00:16:19.680 I don't know if it's that Conservatives need to do a better job.
00:16:22.140 But you're right.
00:16:22.680 Conservatives are up against that reputation
00:16:24.440 that probably the oldest smear in the book
00:16:27.920 of, oh, Conservatives don't care about the poor,
00:16:30.040 Conservatives don't care about minorities,
00:16:31.520 and so on.
00:16:33.060 Well, you know, it's interesting.
00:16:34.660 In Saskatoon, there's this First Nation,
00:16:37.960 which got a, you know,
00:16:39.820 pretty significant land claim settlement.
00:16:42.520 So they had a lot of cash.
00:16:43.520 What did they do with it?
00:16:44.640 They bought a piece of the city of Saskatoon
00:16:46.460 and created an industrial park.
00:16:48.660 And, you know, when they did this,
00:16:49.960 there was much angst and hand-wringing,
00:16:52.460 and people said, oh, my God, you know,
00:16:53.860 this will be unfair competition
00:16:55.160 against the business community, etc., etc.
00:16:57.900 Now they're completely integrated
00:16:59.820 into the economy of Saskatoon.
00:17:02.660 They've got their own industrial park,
00:17:05.660 which they run according to their, you know,
00:17:07.800 their own rules and priorities.
00:17:11.280 And, you know, you now have Indigenous people
00:17:14.660 who have been president
00:17:16.180 of the Saskatoon Chamber of Commerce,
00:17:18.340 etc., etc.
00:17:19.100 I mean, this is reconciliation in action,
00:17:22.780 as far as I'm concerned.
00:17:24.200 This ability now of Indigenous people
00:17:27.460 to escape the dependence on government grants
00:17:31.500 and bureaucratic permissions and so on,
00:17:33.660 which have been the hallmark of their lives
00:17:35.820 for a hundred years,
00:17:38.600 they're now able to demonstrate,
00:17:41.200 look, we can do these things.
00:17:43.140 We can make our own rules.
00:17:44.100 We can take control of our own lives.
00:17:45.760 We can invest.
00:17:46.520 We can create opportunities.
00:17:47.740 We can put Indigenous people
00:17:49.140 and non-Indigenous people to work.
00:17:50.920 And I think that, you know,
00:17:54.160 if the Conservatives came along and said,
00:17:56.060 you know what,
00:17:56.960 we don't just want to communicate
00:17:58.900 to non-Indigenous Canadians
00:18:00.720 that we're on board
00:18:03.580 with this opportunity agenda
00:18:05.880 for Indigenous people.
00:18:07.020 Let's get some Indigenous leaders
00:18:08.760 to run as candidates for the Conservative Party
00:18:11.420 and say,
00:18:11.860 this is the kind of values
00:18:13.720 that will pull Indigenous people
00:18:16.040 out of the terrible dependence,
00:18:18.480 which has destroyed so many lives
00:18:20.700 for them over the last decades.
00:18:24.260 Speaking of Saskatoon,
00:18:26.020 one of the pieces I particularly enjoyed
00:18:28.080 in your call,
00:18:29.600 in your assembly here,
00:18:31.040 is the idea that Canada
00:18:33.220 is not an inherently progressive
00:18:35.940 or left-wing country.
00:18:37.020 And you actually use Saskatchewan
00:18:38.480 as sort of your test case
00:18:39.840 to prove that.
00:18:41.760 Yeah, well, I mean, look,
00:18:42.920 we talk about how dominant
00:18:44.640 the Liberal Party is in Ottawa,
00:18:46.260 you know, for most of the last century.
00:18:49.760 Yeah, the natural governing party,
00:18:51.320 as they say.
00:18:52.640 But, and therefore,
00:18:54.400 you know, that somehow this tells us
00:18:55.620 that Canada is in, you know,
00:18:57.680 irretrievably progressive.
00:18:59.340 But I say, well,
00:19:00.100 well, let's use a different example.
00:19:01.960 You know, the CCF NDP
00:19:03.820 was just as dominant
00:19:05.200 from 1944 until,
00:19:08.980 you know, the early part of this century
00:19:10.880 as the Liberal Party in Ottawa.
00:19:12.860 They were the, you know,
00:19:14.820 sort of the darling
00:19:15.580 of the left in Canada.
00:19:16.720 Everybody looked to Saskatchewan
00:19:18.080 as the progressive,
00:19:19.700 you know,
00:19:19.880 the cradle of progressivism in Canada.
00:19:22.500 And eventually the NDP
00:19:25.280 lost touch with the values
00:19:27.340 of people in Saskatchewan.
00:19:28.800 And you had essentially
00:19:31.240 a coalition of Liberals
00:19:32.760 and Conservatives
00:19:33.640 calling themselves
00:19:34.760 the Saskatchewan Party
00:19:35.880 that came along.
00:19:37.240 And after getting beat up
00:19:38.660 a couple of times
00:19:39.340 in a few elections
00:19:40.140 where they couldn't quite connect
00:19:42.000 with people,
00:19:42.940 they finally figured out
00:19:44.380 how to talk about
00:19:45.580 small-c conservative values
00:19:47.180 to people in Saskatchewan.
00:19:48.880 And the people of Saskatchewan
00:19:50.620 embraced them with enthusiasm.
00:19:52.120 I think in the last election,
00:19:53.100 they got like 60% of the vote.
00:19:55.780 And they've been in office now
00:19:57.480 for 15, 16 years.
00:20:00.160 Now, you know,
00:20:01.160 nobody stays in power forever.
00:20:03.060 But nothing like this
00:20:06.120 has been seen in Saskatchewan
00:20:07.480 since the 1940s.
00:20:11.400 And I think it shows
00:20:13.080 that there's no way
00:20:16.820 in which a smart,
00:20:20.080 aspiring, driven people
00:20:22.420 like Canada
00:20:23.260 should be simply assumed
00:20:27.660 to be, you know,
00:20:29.240 attached to one political approach
00:20:31.660 versus another.
00:20:33.620 I wonder,
00:20:34.600 and I don't know
00:20:35.180 if I'm extrapolating
00:20:36.100 too much from that, though,
00:20:37.180 if this example proves
00:20:38.600 that the word conservative
00:20:39.680 carries a level of baggage
00:20:42.020 that holds it back
00:20:43.200 in some cases
00:20:43.980 or at least creates a need
00:20:46.100 for someone to overcome
00:20:47.460 whatever negative associations
00:20:48.840 they have with it.
00:20:49.560 Because the Saskatchewan Party
00:20:50.740 is, you're right,
00:20:52.060 in terms of policy and focus,
00:20:53.820 a conservative party.
00:20:54.800 It's been one of the parties
00:20:55.720 that was most resistant
00:20:56.780 to a lot of the lockdowns
00:20:58.680 and vaccine passports,
00:20:59.920 though they eventually did it.
00:21:01.100 And it's a party that was taking
00:21:03.120 the carbon tax to court.
00:21:04.860 But again, not the word conservative
00:21:06.360 in the name.
00:21:07.720 Well, yes, that's an interesting point.
00:21:10.920 I have to say that
00:21:12.380 you might remember in Saskatchewan,
00:21:15.440 they had a large seat
00:21:17.840 conservative government
00:21:19.000 for a couple of terms
00:21:20.260 under Grant Devine.
00:21:21.160 And, you know,
00:21:23.200 I think in retrospect,
00:21:25.000 people from Saskatchewan
00:21:26.020 would say that was not
00:21:26.840 a happy experience.
00:21:27.760 They didn't enjoy
00:21:29.180 the large conservative
00:21:31.280 party government they had.
00:21:32.880 And that's what forced
00:21:34.180 the liberals
00:21:35.240 and the conservatives
00:21:36.200 to say, look,
00:21:38.760 if we're going to get rid
00:21:41.220 of the NDP,
00:21:41.840 if we don't want to be
00:21:42.620 governed forever
00:21:43.660 by a left-wing party,
00:21:47.320 the only solution
00:21:49.140 is to come together
00:21:50.140 and, you know,
00:21:52.340 forget about party labels.
00:21:54.360 But let's talk about
00:21:55.680 the values that matter.
00:21:57.580 And I have to say,
00:21:58.820 if I could put this
00:21:59.600 in the larger national context
00:22:01.420 for a second, Andrew,
00:22:03.580 we've got this liberal NDP coalition
00:22:07.140 governing Canada right now.
00:22:09.040 And a lot of people say,
00:22:10.540 well, you know,
00:22:10.960 Canada is a progressive country.
00:22:12.220 And, of course,
00:22:12.840 if you have the liberal
00:22:13.540 and the NDP vote together,
00:22:15.280 you know, that's it.
00:22:17.280 Game over.
00:22:18.460 Conservatives will never
00:22:19.320 form another government.
00:22:20.340 I think that's completely wrong.
00:22:21.840 If you look at every part of Canada
00:22:24.500 where the NDP and the left
00:22:27.140 have become the dominant party,
00:22:29.720 what that has done
00:22:30.900 is it has caused a realignment
00:22:32.480 on the centre-right.
00:22:34.160 And the realigned centre-right party
00:22:36.720 has become the dominant party
00:22:38.280 in every case.
00:22:39.120 It's true in British Columbia.
00:22:40.560 It's true in Saskatchewan.
00:22:41.860 It's true in Manitoba.
00:22:44.180 And so I think that actually
00:22:47.360 what's happening is that
00:22:48.960 there are a lot of blue liberals,
00:22:51.180 liberals who, you know,
00:22:53.000 share a lot of small
00:22:54.100 C conservative values
00:22:55.280 but have been traditionally
00:22:56.320 associated with the Liberal Party
00:22:57.680 because the Liberal Party
00:22:58.620 has been a centrist party.
00:22:59.940 I think the NDP is pulling
00:23:01.060 the liberals to the left.
00:23:03.400 And this creates an opening
00:23:05.780 for conservatives
00:23:07.140 who can do what
00:23:08.660 the Saskatchewan Party did
00:23:09.960 in Saskatchewan and say,
00:23:10.960 look,
00:23:11.100 the most important thing
00:23:13.660 is to get these
00:23:15.340 small C conservative values
00:23:17.660 into government
00:23:19.080 to speak to that,
00:23:21.320 those deep values
00:23:22.340 that Canadians believe in,
00:23:24.020 that we believe in.
00:23:25.020 Let's not get hung up
00:23:26.220 on party labels.
00:23:27.840 And I think this is a moment
00:23:29.960 of great opportunity
00:23:31.260 for a party
00:23:32.380 that could rise above ideology
00:23:35.780 and think about what might be
00:23:37.480 in the interests of Canadians.
00:23:40.020 Growing up, I mean,
00:23:41.640 apart from the general fiscal stuff,
00:23:44.340 which even I don't think
00:23:45.400 that's a given
00:23:45.880 because the Liberals had
00:23:47.200 at the time
00:23:47.960 a record of being
00:23:48.980 good fiscal stewards
00:23:50.300 in some areas in Canada.
00:23:51.700 But one of the big things
00:23:53.040 that conservatives
00:23:53.620 were always known for
00:23:54.900 was the law and order
00:23:56.280 conservatism,
00:23:57.180 this idea of being
00:23:58.540 tough on crime.
00:23:59.480 It was conservatives
00:24:00.260 that were in some cases
00:24:01.880 trying to bring back
00:24:02.560 the death penalty.
00:24:03.740 Conservatives under Harper
00:24:04.740 had the mandatory minimums.
00:24:06.480 And I'm not besmirching
00:24:07.500 any of these policies,
00:24:08.340 just pointing out
00:24:09.100 that it was an issue
00:24:09.760 that conservatives
00:24:10.380 used to, I think,
00:24:11.800 talk about and focus
00:24:13.020 on a lot more.
00:24:14.200 Now, being the tough
00:24:15.600 on crime law and order party
00:24:17.100 is slightly different
00:24:17.980 than rule of law.
00:24:19.540 And you've made a point
00:24:21.360 here in your column
00:24:22.300 on rule of law,
00:24:23.100 which I find quite interesting,
00:24:24.120 that there seems to be
00:24:25.700 a lot of invocation of it
00:24:27.220 by people that don't
00:24:28.040 even understand
00:24:28.720 what it means.
00:24:30.640 Yes, well,
00:24:31.340 so let's talk for a second
00:24:33.340 about the rule of law
00:24:34.200 and what it does mean.
00:24:35.260 For me,
00:24:35.920 the rule of law means
00:24:37.300 that the law applies
00:24:39.100 to everyone.
00:24:40.060 And that means
00:24:40.980 that it applies
00:24:41.740 to governments,
00:24:43.580 it applies to prime ministers,
00:24:45.280 just as much as it applies
00:24:46.800 to people in the freedom convoy,
00:24:49.260 for example.
00:24:51.140 It applies just as much
00:24:52.880 to indigenous people
00:24:54.860 and environmental protesters
00:24:56.820 as it does
00:24:58.540 to ministers of justice
00:24:59.980 and so on.
00:25:01.440 And the argument
00:25:02.900 that I was making
00:25:03.860 was that no political party
00:25:06.140 has yet in Canada
00:25:07.640 in the last few decades
00:25:09.000 quite come to terms
00:25:10.580 with the fact
00:25:11.120 that if you really believe
00:25:13.920 in the rule of law,
00:25:15.480 in this equality of people
00:25:17.440 before the law,
00:25:18.360 the high and the low together,
00:25:19.740 everybody is subject
00:25:20.620 to the law,
00:25:21.720 that you can't pick
00:25:24.260 and choose
00:25:24.840 if you're the government.
00:25:25.700 You can't pick
00:25:26.420 and choose
00:25:27.080 who you're going
00:25:27.800 to apply the law to.
00:25:29.240 I mean, well,
00:25:30.400 I say you can't pick
00:25:31.620 and choose.
00:25:32.320 You functionally can,
00:25:33.700 but morally you can't.
00:25:35.920 They say,
00:25:37.120 oh, well,
00:25:37.700 you know,
00:25:38.140 ecological protesters
00:25:42.860 are blocking pipelines.
00:25:44.860 And so, you know,
00:25:45.620 we or indigenous protesters
00:25:48.620 are blocking railways
00:25:50.160 and highways.
00:25:52.320 We can't really apply
00:25:54.200 the law to them.
00:25:55.460 But, you know,
00:25:56.360 let a bunch of blue-collar truckers
00:25:58.940 descend on Ottawa
00:26:00.060 and honk their horns
00:26:01.500 and, oh, my God,
00:26:02.440 the full rigor of the law
00:26:03.960 must be brought down on them.
00:26:05.180 Because, you know,
00:26:07.740 the first few examples
00:26:09.500 I used are,
00:26:10.660 let's say,
00:26:11.860 you know,
00:26:12.720 supportive of liberal policies.
00:26:15.340 And the last one is,
00:26:16.820 well,
00:26:17.020 we think they're opposed
00:26:18.040 to our policies,
00:26:18.780 so they must be our enemies.
00:26:21.900 You see,
00:26:22.680 I think this is fundamentally damaging
00:26:25.640 the rule of law.
00:26:26.800 And, of course,
00:26:27.400 so I used liberal examples,
00:26:28.980 but, of course,
00:26:29.560 the Tory examples
00:26:30.240 are the exact mirror image of that.
00:26:33.020 You know,
00:26:33.540 some Tories say,
00:26:35.080 oh, you know,
00:26:35.480 let's celebrate the Freedom Convoy,
00:26:38.460 but let's, you know,
00:26:40.060 let's send the troops in
00:26:41.260 if someone,
00:26:43.080 you know,
00:26:43.240 an indigenous protester
00:26:44.760 blocks a national highway
00:26:47.560 or something.
00:26:48.620 My argument is that
00:26:50.220 both of these are wrong.
00:26:52.260 Both of these imply
00:26:54.220 that political authorities
00:26:56.260 ought to pick and choose
00:26:57.420 who we apply the law to.
00:26:59.140 And in my view,
00:26:59.920 that if we allow that to continue,
00:27:01.820 it's the end of the rule of law.
00:27:04.940 Yes,
00:27:05.420 and I would say,
00:27:06.480 I mean,
00:27:06.820 in some cases,
00:27:07.580 they don't even hide that hypocrisy.
00:27:09.300 Like,
00:27:09.440 I recall when Jagmeet Singh
00:27:11.080 was being asked about
00:27:12.120 the Emergencies Act
00:27:13.780 and the NDP's support
00:27:14.860 of the liberal government's
00:27:16.180 invocation thereof,
00:27:17.560 he was asked about
00:27:18.680 the NDP's history
00:27:19.620 of supporting protests.
00:27:20.880 And his answer was,
00:27:22.000 and I'm paraphrasing here
00:27:22.980 quite crudely,
00:27:23.740 but it was basically,
00:27:24.720 oh, yeah,
00:27:25.060 but those protests
00:27:25.720 are things we agree with.
00:27:27.040 And there does seem to be
00:27:28.460 just not even an attempt
00:27:29.700 at cloaking
00:27:30.560 exactly what you're
00:27:31.800 describing there.
00:27:33.360 Well,
00:27:33.920 this is one of the things
00:27:35.120 that I worry about most
00:27:36.260 about the direction
00:27:37.000 that our politics
00:27:38.600 is going,
00:27:39.900 that
00:27:40.180 all political parties
00:27:44.360 are starting to see
00:27:45.700 the population
00:27:46.820 divided into
00:27:47.740 the people
00:27:48.340 who are our friends
00:27:49.200 and the people
00:27:49.720 who are our enemies.
00:27:50.980 And we comfort our friends
00:27:52.680 and afflict our enemies.
00:27:54.480 And I think this is
00:27:55.820 fundamentally the wrong way
00:27:57.520 to think about political power.
00:27:59.540 So you don't,
00:28:01.100 people don't get political power
00:28:02.780 under a liberal democracy
00:28:04.260 in order to be able
00:28:05.560 to protect their friends
00:28:07.300 and hurt their enemies.
00:28:08.520 They are given political power
00:28:10.080 to govern in the interests
00:28:10.940 of all Canadians.
00:28:12.660 And I think one of the reasons
00:28:15.280 that our politics
00:28:15.980 are becoming so fractious
00:28:17.360 and so filled with anger
00:28:19.440 and resentment
00:28:20.080 is that people feel,
00:28:22.140 okay,
00:28:22.520 if the other lot
00:28:23.900 get in power,
00:28:25.100 they're going to use
00:28:26.100 that power to punish me
00:28:27.700 or my friends
00:28:29.180 or the industry
00:28:30.020 I run in.
00:28:31.440 And
00:28:32.040 one of the things
00:28:34.280 that it is so hard
00:28:35.720 for political parties
00:28:36.660 to come to terms with
00:28:37.700 is that
00:28:38.920 even your enemies
00:28:40.460 are Canadians
00:28:41.200 and they have
00:28:42.640 legitimate interests
00:28:43.720 and
00:28:44.500 you are not granted
00:28:46.200 political power
00:28:47.160 in order to
00:28:48.520 reward your voters
00:28:50.280 and punish
00:28:50.920 people who didn't vote for you.
00:28:52.560 You are,
00:28:53.040 you are granted
00:28:54.200 political power
00:28:55.080 to govern in the interests
00:28:56.240 of all Canadians
00:28:56.960 and sometimes that means
00:28:58.160 helping your enemies
00:28:59.240 because they're Canadians
00:29:00.800 and that's what government
00:29:01.960 is for.
00:29:04.040 Just one last question,
00:29:05.540 Brian,
00:29:05.820 are you putting this out
00:29:06.780 because there's someone
00:29:07.760 in the leadership race
00:29:09.160 that you feel
00:29:09.960 is capturing these things
00:29:11.800 or are you really
00:29:12.340 just trying to put it out there
00:29:13.400 for people to take
00:29:14.300 and contemplate
00:29:15.220 as they decide
00:29:15.860 who they like
00:29:16.500 and what direction
00:29:17.500 they'd like the party to go?
00:29:19.320 Well,
00:29:19.600 first of all,
00:29:20.680 let me say,
00:29:21.140 you know,
00:29:21.300 I'm not in the business
00:29:22.160 of endorsing candidates
00:29:23.760 or I'm just,
00:29:24.740 I just don't have feelings
00:29:26.360 about that.
00:29:27.800 What I thought
00:29:29.480 was worth doing
00:29:30.900 was saying,
00:29:32.260 okay,
00:29:32.620 you guys claim
00:29:33.700 to be conservatives
00:29:34.680 and indeed
00:29:35.360 you're arguing
00:29:36.040 amongst yourselves
00:29:36.880 about who's more conservative
00:29:38.180 than, you know,
00:29:39.060 somebody else
00:29:39.700 or, you know,
00:29:40.700 so-and-so's
00:29:41.400 more of a liberal
00:29:42.260 than a conservative,
00:29:42.920 whatever.
00:29:43.060 and yet
00:29:44.540 nobody has
00:29:45.920 laid out
00:29:47.140 what they mean
00:29:48.280 when they say
00:29:48.920 a conservative
00:29:49.520 and so
00:29:50.780 I said
00:29:51.700 I thought
00:29:52.860 there would be
00:29:53.280 some value
00:29:54.080 for all the candidates
00:29:55.780 in laying out
00:29:57.000 my view
00:29:57.680 for what it's worth.
00:29:58.440 It's only
00:29:58.780 it's only my view.
00:30:00.000 I don't claim
00:30:00.880 to be,
00:30:01.460 you know,
00:30:02.040 Moses with the tablets.
00:30:04.060 I simply said,
00:30:06.080 okay,
00:30:06.600 I'm a,
00:30:07.300 I think,
00:30:08.200 a thoughtful observer
00:30:09.220 of Canadian politics
00:30:10.380 and here's
00:30:11.640 what I think
00:30:12.560 small-c
00:30:13.460 conservatism
00:30:14.420 has become
00:30:16.040 in a modern Canada
00:30:17.200 and so
00:30:18.480 this is a,
00:30:19.020 this is a test
00:30:20.160 against which
00:30:21.240 all of the leadership
00:30:22.240 candidates
00:30:22.820 can,
00:30:23.440 can measure themselves.
00:30:25.660 It's a test
00:30:26.740 against which
00:30:27.640 all of the members
00:30:28.580 of the Conservative Party
00:30:29.640 can measure
00:30:30.460 the leadership candidates
00:30:31.860 and it's also
00:30:32.940 a bit of a call
00:30:34.580 to Canadians
00:30:35.500 who don't identify
00:30:37.200 with the Conservative Party
00:30:38.420 to say,
00:30:38.920 okay,
00:30:40.200 you haven't wanted
00:30:41.200 to vote
00:30:41.620 large-c
00:30:42.700 conservative
00:30:43.200 but might you
00:30:44.560 consider that you are
00:30:45.620 in terms of your values
00:30:47.020 a small-c conservative
00:30:48.420 and if you think
00:30:49.640 that Canada
00:30:50.840 would benefit
00:30:51.420 from a
00:30:52.540 real alternative
00:30:54.040 to the Liberals,
00:30:55.460 how can you
00:30:56.760 contribute
00:30:57.320 to making
00:30:58.200 a large-c
00:31:00.040 conservative
00:31:00.540 alternative
00:31:01.160 that would
00:31:02.040 resonate
00:31:03.480 with
00:31:04.060 both
00:31:05.200 large-c
00:31:06.060 and non-large-c
00:31:07.540 Canadians?
00:31:08.920 Conservative
00:31:10.420 Canadian
00:31:10.880 and so
00:31:12.140 it's a bit
00:31:12.860 of a
00:31:13.260 I'm trying
00:31:14.260 to stimulate
00:31:14.800 people
00:31:15.320 to think
00:31:16.140 less about
00:31:16.940 the horse race
00:31:17.720 and more
00:31:18.400 about the ideas
00:31:19.240 that motivate
00:31:19.860 Canadians.
00:31:20.920 Well,
00:31:21.360 I'm always a big
00:31:22.000 fan of your work
00:31:22.660 so I'd read
00:31:23.300 a number of the
00:31:24.000 columns in this
00:31:24.620 collection before
00:31:25.280 but it was good
00:31:25.820 to read them
00:31:26.540 again in order
00:31:27.180 and in the
00:31:28.040 intended context
00:31:29.400 of this
00:31:29.920 that's a collection
00:31:30.900 from
00:31:31.220 Macdonald-Laurier
00:31:32.000 Institute
00:31:32.380 a modern
00:31:33.300 conservatism
00:31:34.100 for a
00:31:34.620 modern
00:31:34.920 Canada
00:31:35.480 Brian Lee
00:31:36.620 Crowley
00:31:36.940 always a
00:31:37.320 pleasure
00:31:37.500 Brian
00:31:37.760 thanks for
00:31:38.140 coming on
00:31:38.620 today
00:31:38.860 Andrew
00:31:39.600 it was
00:31:39.780 great to
00:31:40.120 talk to
00:31:40.420 you
00:31:40.500 thanks so
00:31:40.840 much
00:31:41.040 that was
00:31:42.180 Brian Lee
00:31:43.100 Crowley
00:31:43.580 and I'm
00:31:44.020 glad he
00:31:44.500 addressed
00:31:45.040 head-on
00:31:45.980 the question
00:31:46.740 I raised
00:31:47.240 about the
00:31:47.580 title
00:31:47.840 and again
00:31:48.180 I've
00:31:48.540 known
00:31:48.680 Brian
00:31:48.960 for
00:31:49.200 many
00:31:49.840 years
00:31:50.100 I know
00:31:50.560 he's
00:31:50.820 not
00:31:51.100 liberal
00:31:51.580 I know
00:31:51.880 he's
00:31:52.020 not
00:31:52.140 trying
00:31:52.320 to pull
00:31:52.560 the
00:31:52.720 party
00:31:52.960 to
00:31:53.140 the
00:31:53.280 left
00:31:53.520 but
00:31:53.720 oftentimes
00:31:54.540 the media
00:31:55.480 and I
00:31:56.040 think a lot
00:31:56.380 of political
00:31:56.800 activists
00:31:57.260 try to
00:31:57.760 frame
00:31:58.220 modernization
00:31:59.700 as
00:32:00.280 progressification
00:32:01.420 as
00:32:01.680 liberalization
00:32:02.480 which I
00:32:03.320 don't think
00:32:03.780 is the
00:32:04.080 case
00:32:04.320 but there
00:32:04.680 always is
00:32:05.220 this tug
00:32:05.940 of war
00:32:06.300 in the
00:32:06.520 party
00:32:06.800 about
00:32:07.020 whether
00:32:07.380 the
00:32:07.960 conservatives
00:32:08.460 problem
00:32:09.120 is a
00:32:09.580 problem
00:32:09.940 of
00:32:10.160 messaging
00:32:10.680 or if
00:32:11.660 it's
00:32:11.800 a
00:32:11.920 problem
00:32:12.260 of
00:32:12.620 the
00:32:12.840 core
00:32:13.100 message
00:32:13.540 itself
00:32:13.960 and I
00:32:14.680 mean
00:32:14.780 Andrew
00:32:15.060 Scheer
00:32:15.380 had a
00:32:16.780 generally
00:32:17.200 conservative
00:32:17.780 vision
00:32:18.280 that he
00:32:19.020 tried to
00:32:19.540 cloak
00:32:19.880 in
00:32:20.240 liberal
00:32:20.640 language
00:32:21.120 which I
00:32:21.640 think
00:32:21.780 was to
00:32:22.120 his
00:32:22.340 detriment
00:32:22.740 and then
00:32:23.360 you had
00:32:23.700 Aaron
00:32:23.900 O'Toole
00:32:24.240 that offered
00:32:24.820 a liberal
00:32:25.180 vision
00:32:25.580 in
00:32:25.800 liberal
00:32:26.060 language
00:32:26.520 and still
00:32:27.120 didn't
00:32:27.920 win
00:32:28.160 and now
00:32:28.740 you have
00:32:29.280 a lot
00:32:29.580 of
00:32:29.720 conservatives
00:32:30.140 that are
00:32:30.540 saying
00:32:30.760 no I'm
00:32:31.240 done with
00:32:31.600 that
00:32:31.840 I want
00:32:32.420 the most
00:32:32.780 conservative
00:32:33.240 candidate
00:32:33.740 the most
00:32:34.160 conservative
00:32:34.580 party
00:32:35.000 okay that's
00:32:35.880 fine but I
00:32:36.480 do think
00:32:36.760 there's a
00:32:37.080 question that
00:32:37.580 it needs
00:32:37.940 to be
00:32:38.180 addressed
00:32:38.560 of what
00:32:39.400 conservatism
00:32:40.240 means in
00:32:41.440 the context
00:32:42.020 of the
00:32:42.340 conservative
00:32:42.740 party of
00:32:43.240 Canada
00:32:43.540 I don't
00:32:43.860 mean like
00:32:44.320 you know
00:32:44.580 Hobbesian
00:32:45.140 conservatism
00:32:46.360 or Nozickian
00:32:47.040 libertarianism
00:32:47.880 or whatever
00:32:48.240 oh my goodness
00:32:48.820 I can't talk
00:32:49.520 about Nozick
00:32:50.040 on a Tuesday
00:32:50.560 but the point
00:32:51.380 I'm making
00:32:52.400 here is that
00:32:53.460 you have to
00:32:54.020 have a sense
00:32:54.900 of what you
00:32:55.520 want your
00:32:55.980 party to be
00:32:56.760 and how much
00:32:58.240 you're prepared
00:32:58.780 to fudge that
00:32:59.920 for a leader
00:33:00.960 that comes in
00:33:01.580 that offers
00:33:02.040 a different
00:33:02.460 vision
00:33:02.780 I mean
00:33:03.060 Jean Charest
00:33:03.540 when I had
00:33:04.400 him on the
00:33:04.860 show a few
00:33:05.580 weeks ago
00:33:05.980 he talked
00:33:06.360 about how
00:33:06.680 parties are
00:33:07.160 living trees
00:33:07.780 and they
00:33:08.080 kind of
00:33:08.360 take on
00:33:09.120 different
00:33:09.580 branches
00:33:10.420 and they
00:33:10.900 shape
00:33:11.260 and reform
00:33:11.880 and basically
00:33:13.120 what he's
00:33:13.540 saying there
00:33:14.000 is that if
00:33:14.320 he comes in
00:33:14.860 it's going to
00:33:15.160 be different
00:33:15.660 which I think
00:33:16.900 just as a
00:33:17.520 technical reality
00:33:18.620 is true
00:33:19.080 because any
00:33:19.600 leader that
00:33:20.520 comes in
00:33:21.160 is going to
00:33:21.860 change things
00:33:22.700 and remake it
00:33:23.580 in their image
00:33:24.220 but for
00:33:25.240 Conservative
00:33:25.860 Canadians
00:33:26.360 whether you're
00:33:26.980 a member
00:33:27.500 of the
00:33:27.840 Conservative
00:33:28.200 Party of
00:33:28.700 Canada
00:33:28.960 or not
00:33:29.580 there is
00:33:30.280 still the
00:33:30.600 question of
00:33:31.360 are you
00:33:31.820 represented
00:33:32.380 in this
00:33:33.180 party
00:33:33.660 and are
00:33:34.400 you
00:33:34.540 represented
00:33:35.060 in the
00:33:35.720 country
00:33:36.040 and that
00:33:36.340 was what
00:33:36.760 this piece
00:33:37.380 by Brian
00:33:38.380 was I think
00:33:39.280 in a lot
00:33:39.840 of ways
00:33:40.140 trying to
00:33:40.620 address
00:33:40.960 that does
00:33:41.860 it for us
00:33:42.500 for today
00:33:42.840 we'll be
00:33:43.100 back next
00:33:43.700 week with
00:33:44.100 more of
00:33:44.660 Canada's
00:33:45.160 most irreverent
00:33:46.100 talk show
00:33:46.480 this is the
00:33:47.240 Andrew Lawton
00:33:47.700 show on
00:33:48.260 True North
00:33:48.660 thank you
00:33:49.240 God bless
00:33:49.820 and have
00:33:50.180 a good
00:33:50.360 weekend
00:33:50.680 thanks for
00:33:51.160 listening to
00:33:51.660 the Andrew
00:33:52.060 Lawton
00:33:52.380 show
00:33:52.660 support the
00:33:53.660 program by
00:33:54.180 donating to
00:33:54.760 True North
00:33:55.220 at
00:33:55.580 www.tnc.news
00:33:58.660 www.tnc.o.nc.o.nc.o.nc.o.nc.
00:34:02.620 www.tnc.o.nc.o.nc.o.nc.o.nc.o.nc.o.nc.