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

Harmful content

Misogyny

3

sentences flagged

Toxicity

2

sentences flagged

Hate speech

4

sentences flagged


Summary

Summaries generated with gmurro/bart-large-finetuned-filtered-spotify-podcast-summ .

A Modern Conservative for a Modern Canada is a collection of essays written by the Macdonald-Laurier Institute's Brian Crowley. They focus on some of the issues that come up in the context of the Conservative leadership race, including the carbon tax, Indigenous issues, the rule of law, and the freedom convoy.

Transcript

Transcript generated with Whisper (turbo).
Misogyny classifications generated with MilaNLProc/bert-base-uncased-ear-misogyny .
Toxicity classifications generated with s-nlp/roberta_toxicity_classifier .
Hate speech classifications generated with facebook/roberta-hate-speech-dynabench-r4-target .
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? 0.98
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. 0.95
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 1.00
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 1.00
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 0.82
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 0.99
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, 0.73
00:27:07.580 they don't even hide that hypocrisy. 0.83
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 0.89
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.