Juno News - Liberals to spend $200 million on online censorship office

00:00:00.000 Transcription by CastingWords

00:00:30.000 Thank you.

00:01:00.000 welcome to canada's most irreverent talk show this is the andrew lawton show brought to you by true

00:01:19.700 north hello and welcome to you all this is canada's most irreverent talk show this is the

00:01:29.780 ed roulott and show on true north on this thursday july 4th happy independence day to the americans 0.90

00:01:35.700 in our midst you are uh dirty filthy traders who betrayed the crown but nevertheless we wish you 1.00

00:01:41.540 well happy uh whatever you know 2024 minus 1776 is if i get the number wrong you'll never forgive 0.99

00:01:47.880 me. So as it happens, I hope you're having a great day. I should probably greet you in the

00:01:53.480 official language of the government of Canada. Now I am not fluent in Minyan, but I believe

00:02:01.000 the proper term is Bello Banana Bapple Choppa Mooka Laka Unana. That's, am I reading that,

00:02:13.400 put the graphic up. Am I reading that right? Okay. Bello banana. I didn't do the long ah

00:02:20.620 on banana. Bapple choppa mukalaka unana. Unana. Unana. Okay. So that's the Canada Revenue Agency

00:02:30.680 there with its minion gif jumping up and down in celebration of what precisely I'm not clear.

00:02:38.600 Hashtag despicable me for. I guess there's a movie coming. I didn't even know despicable

00:02:43.380 me three had happened so i'm a little bit behind the times there but uh that is a minion jumping

00:02:48.900 and cra followed it up with another tweet uh and that second tweet uh is a kind of a bizarre one

00:02:56.180 as well i i lost it here let me see if i i have it handy uh the second tweet was oops the minions

00:03:02.420 were added again what they meant was the kids wearing you out at least applying for the canada

00:03:08.180 child benefit is easy and you can do it one-handed on your phone

00:03:13.380 So this is a bureaucrat trying to be clever and trendy and pop culture.

00:03:17.860 And I don't want to be a total curmudgeon who just can't see the joy in anything.

00:03:21.580 I realize that if you work in the bureaucracy for CRA, you're probably just desiring something that is going to liven things up.

00:03:30.660 So I get that minion tweets and memes are probably desirable there.

00:03:34.420 But if I'm a Canadian paying tax to CRA, which I am, and I file the ATIP, which I have, so in 30 days I'll report back on this,

00:03:42.600 I am willing to bet that there were at least six bureaucrats. My prediction is going to be eight.

00:03:48.260 I think there are eight bureaucrats involved in the crafting, reviewing, and approval of that tweet,

00:03:54.040 of those two tweets. And I'm guessing that we'll find out that this was a long process that spent

00:03:59.660 days and days, if not weeks, has been on the calendar for a while. And as a taxpayer, I'm like,

00:04:04.440 is this really, is this really the way that we want things to be? And this is, of course,

00:04:10.460 going all the way around the internet. The tweet just went up this morning. Pierre Polyev,

00:04:14.380 the conservative leader, has already come out and used what's become his favorite adjective

00:04:19.500 on this. He's called it wacko. He says, you're not hallucinating. This is the kind of wacko stuff 0.82

00:04:25.660 Trudeau's tax department is busy posting to make you forget they are taking more of your money than

00:04:30.820 ever. Sign here to ax the tax and the weird post. So when actually it's kind of useful when CRA

00:04:37.980 calls you and wonders why you haven't filed your taxes this year, you can just say to the tax

00:04:44.140 agent on the line, bello, banana, bapple, choppa, muka, laka, ooh, na, na. You can even improv a

00:04:49.740 little bit. Throw some of your own descriptions in there and say, oh, I'm sorry, I thought this

00:04:53.880 was the language of CRA, and then hang up on them. Asterisk that should not be construed as

00:04:59.100 legitimate tax advice. In fact, any advice I give should probably not be construed as tax advice.

00:05:03.460 But I found it kind of interesting because Pierre Polyev, he had, I think it was during the leadership race, during the conservative leadership race, he came out with this pledge, it would have been back in September of 2022, so I think just near the end of the race, in which he said that he was going to require use of plain language in government if elected prime minister.

00:05:24.240 He said, government was using complex wording that was not only hurting Canadians, but also

00:05:29.580 hurting businesses as they spend hours trying to navigate government regulations. So perhaps this

00:05:34.880 is CRA paying back Pierre Paulievre for that. He says, use plain language, don't use complex Latin

00:05:40.620 terms. And CRA responds with bello banana, bapple, choppa, mucca, laca, laca, una. I'm just, I'm not

00:05:47.380 even bothering reading it. I don't know why I was reading it, why I was like so cautious about

00:05:51.500 getting it right. I don't want to inadvertently swear and minion or something. Or, you know,

00:05:56.320 maybe my minion was sounding a little bit like Klingon. You never know. But this is the language

00:06:00.280 of the government of Canada. But to be honest, bello, banana, baffle, choppa, mooka, laka,

00:06:05.900 unana makes a heck of a lot more sense than most things Justin Trudeau has said in recent weeks

00:06:11.960 and recent months. So maybe we should actually just cede all political communications to the

00:06:16.840 minions and let the minions just have their way. To be honest, the more I think about this,

00:06:21.660 the more I think the minions might actually do a better job of running things. I don't think

00:06:26.120 the minions would ever push the capital gains tax the way they did it. And if so, they would

00:06:30.560 certainly communicate it in clearer terms than Deputy Prime Minister Christian Freeland managed

00:06:36.020 to. There's a serious point underlying all of this, though, which is that when the government

00:06:40.820 is spending your money to do silly things, you want to make sure you're getting things out of

00:06:45.200 Well, the government is, according to numbers released this week by the Parliamentary Budget Officer, the government is spending $200 million, $200 million to establish the so-called Digital Safety Commission.

00:06:59.780 Now, the Digital Safety Commission is the kind, bureaucratic way, again, bureaucratic language, it's the bureaucratic way of describing the censorship office.

00:07:09.940 It's the government office that's going to be set up if the so-called Online Harms Act passes.

00:07:15.000 And this is going to be the office responsible for enforcing the new suite of digital censorship

00:07:21.280 and online regulations that the Liberal government is putting forward and making those happen.

00:07:26.420 So this is going to have 330 staff.

00:07:29.580 It's going to cost $200 million on the low end.

00:07:31.920 You know that government spending on these things never ends up coming in on the budget that's been promised.

00:07:37.000 and at the end of it this is going to be this is going to be a massive massive bureaucracy and it's

00:07:45.360 Canadians that are going to be left paying for it and I say paying for it in more ways than one not

00:07:50.340 only is it the 200 million dollars that we're going to be spending on the office itself but

00:07:54.700 we're also going to be paying in terms of what this body does and I actually think this is a

00:07:59.700 little bit of an incomplete tabulation because there's also going to be a massive expansion of

00:08:04.320 the role of the Canadian Human Rights Commission, which we know will require them to have even more

00:08:08.620 speech enforcers and adjudicators and advocates and all of that. So really what we're seeing here

00:08:14.520 is the Liberal government sticking us with a massive, massive bill for the privilege of

00:08:22.300 censoring and regulating what we do online. Now there's a little bit of good news here in the

00:08:27.780 sense that the Online Harms Act has not yet passed. The Online Harms Act is still in the House of

00:08:33.140 Commons. It has to go through a committee process, has to go through the Senate. There's a possibility

00:08:37.940 that an election comes between now and when this bill passes and we can get rid of it once and for

00:08:42.880 all. But if this goes ahead, $200 million for an office of bureaucrats to regulate what you say and

00:08:48.740 do online. I learned about this from Conservative MP Michelle Rempel-Garner's substack. She did a

00:08:55.100 great job of diving into what these numbers mean and she joins us now. Michelle, good to have you 0.92

00:09:00.280 back on the show. Thanks for coming on today. Thanks for having me. So it's great. We have

00:09:04.800 these two contrasting points today on what the government is spending money on. We have minion

00:09:08.940 tweets from CRA, and then we have the $200 million for what we can say online, which might even just

00:09:15.900 be minion tweets by the end of it, depending on how overzealous this is. But what is this office

00:09:21.140 going to do in your view? What's the scenario that you envision from this? It's a completely

00:09:25.480 unnecessary bureaucracy that will do little to protect Canadians. In fact, I don't think it's

00:09:30.240 going to do anything to protect Canadians from online harassment. And I'm not talking about mean

00:09:36.160 tweets when I talk about online harassment. I'm talking about the stuff that escalates into

00:09:40.460 physical violence. This bill does none of that. And, you know, for them to spend $200 million

00:09:47.740 to hire over 300 new bureaucrats, when we know that agencies like the RCMP are severely under

00:09:54.100 resourced, it just, you know, like that minion tweet, it just shows that nobody's in charge.

00:09:59.360 Nobody's making common sense decisions.

00:10:01.840 And it's something that, you know, Canadians should be deeply concerned about.

00:10:07.100 When we see this, like there are two aspects of this.

00:10:10.660 There's obviously the cost.

00:10:11.740 But even if the cost were $1, the cost were negligible, I still think the function of the office is in and of itself fraught.

00:10:18.380 But we also know that the Liberals have a terrible track record at predicting the cost of things.

00:10:22.640 Like the long gun registry is one notable example of, you know, it's supposed to just be pocket change.

00:10:27.000 then it ends up being a billion dollar boondoggle. I have no doubt that something like this would be

00:10:32.000 the same because they realize that from day one, oh, there's so much more to do. We need more people.

00:10:37.880 And then you also, as I understand it, have other aspects that would increase costs like the Canadian

00:10:42.700 Human Rights Commission, which also is tasked with enforcing parts of this, not under this office.

00:10:48.340 And they could find themselves needing a whole new annex to house all the new investigators they

00:10:53.200 need to hire. And that could be further millions, couldn't it? Well, I think your point is super

00:10:57.700 valid, which is regardless of the cost, this is an unnecessary bureaucracy. The PBO analysis today,

00:11:03.860 you know, sort of use a crude analogy, but it's the cherry on a crap sandwich, right? Like it's 0.98

00:11:09.420 really bad. But to your point, the bill doesn't protect Canadians from online harassment. It

00:11:16.160 doesn't amend the criminal code to do common sense things like include deepfake pornography

00:11:21.140 as part of Canada's intimate image laws.

00:11:24.140 It doesn't do the things that victims' rights groups

00:11:28.220 have been asking for to protect Canadians from crime.

00:11:32.920 But the fact that they're spending all this money on it,

00:11:36.040 essentially, and I mean, this bill has been called Orwellian,

00:11:40.780 an extreme attack on Canadians' freedom of speech

00:11:44.460 by people like Margaret Atwood, by magazines like The Atlantic.

00:11:49.460 Yeah, not hardcore right-wingers here.

00:11:51.640 Exactly. These are not bastions of conservative thought.

00:11:54.280 And everybody's raising the alarm bells on this.

00:11:56.720 And the fact that the government is so dogmatically attached to this, to your point, it just it shows nobody's in charge and nobody cares about protecting Canadians.

00:12:06.060 And that's where, you know, I'm really proud of our party's platform, our leaders, Pierre Polyev, talking about how we need to fix the crime with common sense solutions that don't cost Canadians hundreds of billions of dollars in new bureaucracy.

00:12:20.680 There are one point that you had in your sub stack on this that I found interesting is that the government has not really provided any estimate of how many complaints it thinks the Canadian Human Rights Commission is going to field on this.

00:12:32.300 So they don't even know how big a bureaucratic backlog this is going to cause.

00:12:37.500 And on one hand, you may say, OK, they can't predict the future.

00:12:40.040 I mean, this government can't even accurately assess the present.

00:12:42.720 But it also means that by their own admission, they've not given the PBO the information to really get a sense of how big this number could get.

00:12:49.800 Again, another great point. There's been a lot of articles that have been written and experts talking about how reestablishing section, essentially section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act in an age where, you know, you've got cancel culture, online platforms, there will be a deluge of vexatious complaints to try and get people to be silenced.

00:13:13.720 I mean, again, the Toronto Star, again, not a bastion of conservative thought over 10 years ago, said that this particular part of Canadian legislation needed to be cancelled, which is what the previous conservative government did.

00:13:28.540 The Liberal government want to reestablish it now.

00:13:31.500 There's nothing in the legislation to prevent vexatious complaints.

00:13:34.400 So, again, what we have here with the PBO report is evidence that the Liberal government is willing to make Canadians pay hundreds of millions of dollars for thought police instead of keeping Canadians safe with common sense measures that we've been proposing from the Conservative Party for months now.

00:13:55.640 You know, I think about my colleague, Tim Uppel.

00:13:57.420 He had a really common sense bill to prevent extortion.

00:14:00.860 The Liberals voted against that.

00:14:02.060 And so, you know, it's just so frustrating.

00:14:03.840 And Canadians should be outraged when they see the cost of these things and also see the results of the lack of commitment from the federal level of government to protecting their safety.

00:14:13.660 It's just, I was shocked.

00:14:15.900 And it takes a lot to shock me, Andrew, as you are well aware.

00:14:18.460 When I saw those numbers, I was like, you have to be kidding me.

00:14:21.540 I can't believe it.

00:14:23.380 Yeah, the bill itself, and you alluded to this earlier, Michelle, it lumps in things that few people would take issue with cracking down on,

00:14:30.220 like child sexual exploitation, terror content, with things that are a lot more contentious and

00:14:35.040 a lot more fraught, such as hate speech, where there's not a universal definition of what that

00:14:39.520 is that people can go alongside. Have you gotten any of the sense from your colleagues in the House

00:14:44.900 of Commons that they'd be willing to separate these out when you get to the committee stage?

00:14:48.820 The opposite. So in fact, this was asked in the first round of debate and the minister said, no,

00:14:53.560 not absolutely not. No go. It's right on the record of the House of Commons. I think overall,

00:14:58.100 the bill's approach is flawed like everything that you talked about there um some of the duty

00:15:03.140 of care aspects that social media platforms should have like to protect minors from exposure

00:15:08.260 to really harmful types of content you know like pornographic images or um you know types of

00:15:14.980 material that could induce self-harm the social media companies do have a duty of care to do that

00:15:19.620 but what this bill does is it relegates that responsibility to this new bureaucracy that

00:15:25.780 won't be done for years into the future whereas you know why doesn't it do something like actually

00:15:31.220 legislate that duty of care right into the bill like if they're so concerned about this why aren't

00:15:36.100 they doing that and it's because you know they have an obese government to use the words of pierre

00:15:42.260 right like that's that's really what they're focused on here they're not thinking about

00:15:45.460 protecting canadians and uh you know it it takes away the responsibility from accountable legislators

00:15:53.220 and puts it in a back room behind closed doors where social media companies, big tech companies

00:15:58.440 can lobby whatever they want. And that's not how we should be proceeding here. It's just ridiculous.

00:16:04.900 I know that the Conservatives have obviously come out against Bill C-63 for the reasons you've

00:16:09.980 mentioned. But if this bill does pass before the next election and the Conservatives' foreign

00:16:14.600 government, would this Digital Safety Commission be gone? Would you scrap it? Absolutely. We would

00:16:18.480 absolutely scrap this and replace it with common sense legislation that actually protects Canadians,

00:16:24.400 you know, without impinging Canadians' rights and freedoms. We don't believe as Conservatives that

00:16:29.720 Canadians should have to give up their rights and freedoms to things like speech in order to be 1.00

00:16:34.260 protected from, you know, legitimate online harassment or legitimate online harm. And, you

00:16:42.000 know, like, why the Liberal government thinks that they have to do this? Well, I know why they do,

00:16:46.440 because this is their agenda, right?

00:16:48.100 They have a radical agenda to police speech, to control speech.

00:16:51.480 It's why you have Bill C-11, Bill C-18, why you have news bans in Canada.

00:16:56.060 So, of course, this is something the Conservatives would not support.

00:16:59.040 We will block this bill at every step of the way

00:17:00.900 while proposing common sense alternatives that will actually keep Canadians safe.

00:17:05.340 Is your view that existing government agencies and departments

00:17:08.820 can deal with these challenges and that there's no need for any additional department at all?

00:17:14.220 Absolutely, 100%.

00:17:15.720 Absolutely. Like the fact that the government didn't start from that premise of how do we use existing agencies? How do we use the criminal code? How do we resource things adequately? It is preposterous. Like, like, that's, you should be thinking about that. That's just basic management. It's something that anybody who owns a small business would be thinking about, right?

00:17:38.520 um and not just for cost but also for ease of use for simplicity um so so so these are the

00:17:46.780 things that government should be thinking about it's what we will be encourage continuing to

00:17:50.460 encourage them to do uh but also developing our own plans and announcing those in in due in due

00:17:56.080 course and uh if you get into government any more minion tweets from cra you know when i just have

00:18:02.720 a like five second rant on this yeah go for it constituents like one of the top pieces of case

00:18:09.060 work i get in my office is people not being able to get through to the cra um you know the rules

00:18:14.980 are so crazy and then to see that like i i just like my case worker just she she saw this and

00:18:22.580 she was like you have got to be kidding me and rightly so you know the government can't afford

00:18:26.500 to be cute right now they have to get their jobs done and uh you know this is just you know some

00:18:31.280 people will be like, oh, you know, it's cute. No, it's indicative of a government with nobody in

00:18:35.680 charge. And I cannot wait to see the communications decision chain on who approved that. I'm sure it

00:18:41.120 was approved by 400 bureaucrats over three weeks. Yeah, I was about to respond to your tweet,

00:18:46.660 but I had to go on air. I'm filing an ATIP right after the show. I am too. Okay, well, we'll see

00:18:51.800 who gets the response back more quickly. But anytime I ATIP a tweet, like the stupidest tweet 0.99

00:18:56.340 will have like a chain of 12 people on it, 0.99

00:18:58.660 different departments,

00:19:00.000 third-party consultations for like one tweet.

00:19:02.660 It's insane.

00:19:03.220 This one I know will be in that category.

00:19:06.060 All right.

00:19:07.380 Giddy up.

00:19:08.080 I've got to go to the Stampede.

00:19:09.860 Conservative MP Michelle Remble-Garner,

00:19:11.640 enjoy the Calgary Stampede.

00:19:13.440 I think it's coming up.

00:19:14.340 You should have a good time there.

00:19:15.620 Take care.

00:19:16.440 All right.

00:19:16.760 Thanks a lot, Michelle.

00:19:18.000 I want to pivot to Peter Menzies on this,

00:19:20.440 who is a former CRTC vice chair,

00:19:22.900 knows the internet regulation file inside and out.

00:19:25.660 and also has done tremendous work covering a lot of this at the rewrite on Substack.

00:19:31.240 And I wanted to get a sense of just the bigger picture there.

00:19:35.380 And what we had from Michelle Rempel-Garner was the political dimension of this.

00:19:39.920 The Conservatives coming out and saying unequivocally,

00:19:42.120 we are going to scrap the Digital Safety Commission

00:19:44.640 if it exists by the time the Conservatives may form government.

00:19:47.840 Now, as it happens, even if the bill passes,

00:19:50.580 the idea that they would set up a 330 person bureaucracy quickly is very unlikely. But

00:19:57.040 nevertheless, I think this is a low ball. Peter Menzies joins us once again. Good to talk to you,

00:20:02.080 Peter. Thanks for coming on today. Good to talk to you too. Now, there's nothing governments love

00:20:07.080 more than just creating more departments, is there? Yes, there's no turf that cannot be claimed

00:20:12.980 or department that can't be expanded in a certain worldview. Before getting into the cost aspect,

00:20:20.040 What's your view on the idea that a digital safety commission is even a necessary entity in Canada?

00:20:26.660 Yeah, I don't think, I mean, I think the issues that it's intended to address are genuine issues.

00:20:31.180 I just don't think that's the solution.

00:20:33.000 You could look to, I was listening to Ms. Rempel-Gardner there, and if you're looking for a solution, look to New Zealand.

00:20:42.480 New Zealand came up with a recently, within the last several months, a code of conduct that it had all the social media companies sign on to, which basically it's the same purpose to address all these child safety and make sure that social media is as safe a space as you can make it and that there aren't predators on there or limit that as much as you can.

00:21:05.580 I mean, the world can be a tough place.

00:21:07.780 And once you get into it, I mean, danger lurks.

00:21:10.720 But there's different ways to do it.

00:21:12.100 British Columbia, just last month, signed a deal with Snapchat, X, Google, Meta, TikTok,

00:21:21.400 I think that's it, all again to address child safety concerns and that sort of stuff.

00:21:28.060 So you can do this through agreements.

00:21:31.260 Some people obviously would like to have more power and enforcement, but these agreements

00:21:37.620 can also contain penalties if you don't live up to them.

00:21:40.700 so yeah look to new zealand i think is probably the most sensible um least bureaucratic um effective

00:21:47.340 solution that i've seen of late and it seems as though and i wouldn't say i'm an expert on it so

00:21:53.740 you can correct me if i'm wrong here it seems as though they're looking more to australia which has

00:21:57.340 this e-safety commission and this e-safety commissioner is that a fair analog from what

00:22:01.740 they've proposed in canada yeah i guess so um but i think you know i mean this this bill the online

00:22:06.860 harms act is is is such a like it's sort of a three-headed monster there's this digital safety

00:22:13.020 commission and 330 people is an awful lot of people well you know it's never going to end

00:22:18.700 there like you know that on you know month three they're going to realize oh there's so much more

00:22:22.460 work than we anticipated we need to expand well it doesn't even seem to address the extra workload

00:22:27.820 that's going to happen at the canadian human rights commission because that's where tons of

00:22:31.340 it's going to happen because it empowers people there's the digital safety commission on the one

00:22:36.300 side and on the other side with the amendment to the criminal code people will be able to to

00:22:41.900 complain directly that speech is racism without it being explicitly racist etc etc to the human

00:22:48.380 rights commission and seek justice of some kind there now recently i mean i mean that's just going

00:22:55.420 to get flooded every time somebody says something that bothers somebody on on x or tick tock or

00:23:02.300 something like that they can go ahead and and file a complaint with the canadian human rights

00:23:06.940 commission where you know as often said the process is the punishment it can drag out for

00:23:12.140 years and they usually end up shaking you down for some money no matter how innocent you feel

00:23:17.180 you might be um just the process just wears you down now i can't imagine that there that wouldn't

00:23:24.700 even be more active than the digital safety commission and the costs there aren't included

00:23:30.780 in the estimates that uh the pbo estimates that uh michelle was talking about yeah and the one

00:23:38.460 thing that i find interesting and it's not a perfect comparison for a number of reasons but

00:23:42.380 when the government launched the i forget the the acronym but the air passenger rights bill and then

00:23:48.140 the commission that you could go and file your complaint against air canada or west jet with

00:23:52.620 it ended up where instantly you just had like a two-year-long backlog because there was this

00:23:57.500 deluge of complaints. And I think on the Human Rights Commission side, you're right to point out,

00:24:01.920 Peter, it's going to be even worse because you're going to have people that are abusing the process

00:24:06.120 because they don't respect its legitimacy. You're going to have people like a kind of a civil

00:24:09.860 disobedience of sorts. You're going to have people that genuinely believe everything is an affront to

00:24:14.520 their human rights and are filing complaints. And then, you know, buried in there, you might have

00:24:18.280 the one or two legitimate complaints, but you're going to have to have some system to adjudicate

00:24:23.080 these. And even if they decide that, you know, they're only going to champion or advance, you

00:24:28.560 know, 0.01% of them, a human will have to lay eyes and respond and categorize this. I mean,

00:24:34.720 it's a massive, massive undertaking. And the government has not even really acknowledged

00:24:38.640 how many complaints it expects will be there. Yeah, and that is a huge problem. And one of

00:24:43.840 the sad outcomes too is that the legitimate complaints will get in the same queue as the

00:24:48.020 illegitimate. There's no way to triage that at the front end. I mean, look at Scotland recently.

00:24:53.800 Scotland brought in a very draconian piece of speech legislation, and it used its criminal

00:24:59.680 code to do it. As soon as it came into effect, the police were flooded with thousands upon

00:25:06.460 thousands upon thousands of complaints, many of which were against the first minister who'd brought

00:25:12.620 the law into place. It took them a couple of days to decide that, no, they wouldn't be pursuing

00:25:17.700 charges against him but everybody was complaining i mean the the system just got flooded probably

00:25:24.100 through a certain amount of you know protest and the irony on it but within two or three weeks

00:25:31.060 that first minister who brought in that law in scotland was gone so there is some pushback to

00:25:37.620 this and and i i go back to the conversation i don't know if you caught this part of my discussion

00:25:42.020 with michelle rempel garner but you know the government has so far been unwilling to to parcel

00:25:46.900 out the different parts of the Online Harms Act, the things that are a lot less contentious from

00:25:52.220 the things that are more. And I think that's pretty deliberate. But are you optimistic that

00:25:57.520 at the committee stage, there will be any ability to affect change and make this less of a dangerous

00:26:03.380 piece of legislation? No, I'm afraid I'm not. I mean, I'd like to be, but the way I've seen the

00:26:08.980 process work through, and I've been at some of the House of Commons committee meetings and Senate

00:26:15.300 and Senate committee meetings for Bill C-11, the Online Streaming Act, and Bill C-18, the Online

00:26:21.000 News Act. And there hasn't been much openness. It's kind of like if the really, the Senate's

00:26:27.480 better, to be fair to the senators. There's some genuine questions, people genuinely curious,

00:26:33.100 not that they did anything about it, but they were genuinely curious and receptive

00:26:37.780 to critiques. The House of Commons was just, it's just kind of a battlefield, right, where you go

00:26:44.500 in there and people are trying to get their YouTube clips and that sort of stuff. There's

00:26:50.040 nothing serious about the process that makes you think that intelligence suggestions for amendments

00:26:58.560 would be accepted. And I think we've already seen with Bill C-11, we've now got two decisions and

00:27:05.680 two, or I hear maybe even three, court appeals coming. And the same with C-18, which turned out

00:27:12.100 to be, you know, a very predictable disaster. So yeah, they're not going to listen. I wish they

00:27:20.560 will. You know, I don't like talking about, you know, the next election as though it's a fait

00:27:25.020 accompli, because obviously things change. But as it stands now, the conservatives are on track to

00:27:29.340 have a pretty significant majority government if things hold. How easy would it be to roll back,

00:27:35.760 you know, the C-18 and the C-11? And C-63, I don't think will be too much of an issue,

00:27:40.620 because if it does pass, it won't be that long before the election. But the other things,

00:27:44.660 because government has a tendency of just entrenching itself. So dismantling becomes

00:27:48.860 very difficult. Well, it depends how complicated they want to make it. I mean, you could just

00:27:52.740 introduce one bill that repeals all three acts. It's pretty straightforward if you have a big...

00:27:58.800 And go back to life circa 2022 or something. Yeah, you just reset. But what you should be doing,

00:28:04.520 and I would encourage those in seeking to form government to be doing that is to have a plan in

00:28:11.860 place. Like if you're going to get rid of C-18, right now the media has like a $260 million 1.00

00:28:18.340 rug that they're sitting on that's been provided by the government. And yesterday, Doug Ford gave

00:28:23.680 them some more, right? So they've been very successful in the legacy media in getting all

00:28:30.000 these government subsidies. If you have the courage to go and rip that rug out from underneath

00:28:34.220 them right away rip the band-aid off whatever analogy you want to use um you can do it right

00:28:39.660 away if you want to have another plan for what you know a public policy might look like for the

00:28:48.220 industry you know improved things like improved tax deductibility of my newspaper subscriptions

00:28:55.500 or other online subscriptions um so that you subsidize my behavior but not but not the newspaper

00:29:02.060 you should have those things but if you don't want them just you know you can just rip the

00:29:05.660 band-aid off and go from there there'd be a lot of squawking but you would have to do it fast and

00:29:10.940 you would have to do it efficiently if uh you know if we get to that point there is the change in

00:29:15.660 government can we uh you know put the government up to making you head of the crtc would you would

00:29:19.980 you accept that if called upon i think they're smarter than that oh i think i think we could do

00:29:25.820 a lot worse than uh having you at the helm there but either way i'm glad you're able to to do what

00:29:30.140 what you're doing now. Peter Menzies, check him out at the rewrite on Substack. Thank you so much,

00:29:35.060 Peter. Thanks a lot, Andrew. All right. Good to chat with Peter Menzies as always. I want to turn

00:29:40.500 from the regulation of the internet to education. It's been a recurring theme for so many people in

00:29:46.180 this country, frustrations with what their kids are learning in the classroom. But these issues

00:29:51.360 go beyond just curriculum concerns. It's also about the caliber and quality of education. And

00:29:57.780 a lot of that comes down to the caliber and qualities of quality of teachers. But Kaylin

00:30:01.980 Ford has done her part in Alberta to push back against a lot of the problems in the education

00:30:07.220 system, founding the Alberta Classical Academy. And she also had a great piece in the hub.

00:30:12.660 Universities have a monopoly on teacher training. They don't deserve to keep it. This was an

00:30:18.680 argument I hadn't really entertained before. Actually, a conversation I had with you not that

00:30:23.480 long ago, Kaylin, because I had always just sort of accepted the status quo as being necessary,

00:30:28.540 that, you know, a teacher's college at a university is the way you train and certify teachers. But

00:30:33.900 there's a better way, you say. Tell me about it. Sure. Well, I guess to give a little bit of

00:30:40.600 background here, in Canada, this is different in some other international jurisdictions,

00:30:44.640 but in Canada, you basically need a Bachelor of Education or a B.Ed. if you want to teach

00:30:48.480 in a classroom and be certified by a teacher's college. You can also do a post-degree BED. So

00:30:56.280 after you've already obtained a bachelor's degree, you can then go back and do what is in most

00:31:00.180 provinces a two-year post-degree bachelor of education. And I think that the reason why this

00:31:06.380 has been implemented is precisely for the reason that you alluded to. We think people, you know,

00:31:11.540 teaching is an incredibly important vocation. It's one of the most important jobs for sort of

00:31:16.260 perpetuating and preserving your civilization is the education of the next generation and you want 1.00

00:31:20.860 to make sure that your teachers are well qualified to do that and um i need to sort of preface this

00:31:27.180 by saying of course there are tons of really brilliant teachers there are also some great

00:31:30.900 people in education faculties and not all education faculties are the same so forgive

00:31:36.620 the generalization but typically these programs are not producing the kind of training that we

00:31:42.480 would expect, given the importance of the job. And a lot of teachers will admit this themselves.

00:31:48.080 So one of the things that strikes me as so bizarre is you could have, you know, Stephen

00:31:53.180 Hawking, for example, when he was alive, one of the most brilliant physicists in the world,

00:31:57.300 would be unqualified to teach a high school science class for lack of a Bachelor of Education. I mean,

00:32:03.540 and that's the extreme example. You could have a former Prime Minister of Canada who decides in

00:32:09.120 retirement, he or she wants to teach a civics class at high school and wouldn't be able to.

00:32:13.900 And there are little ways around that, are there not? Well, it's very limited. But yeah,

00:32:20.160 you've hit on one of the absurdities of this B.Ed. requirement. And we've encountered this

00:32:24.800 with our charter schools, of which we now have three. We're a specialized program. So we do

00:32:29.700 things that are a little different than what a standard public school might do. We offer Latin

00:32:34.980 and in high school, ancient Greek, for example. We focus very heavily on history. And it's almost

00:32:42.740 impossible in our experience to find a certificated teacher, that is someone with a B.Ed., who can

00:32:47.840 teach Latin, let alone ancient Greek. So there are a couple of provinces have devised some

00:32:53.640 workarounds, some of them quite rarely used, whereby in Alberta, for example, the minister

00:32:58.120 can offer an exemption for an individual to become a teacher. That's not really a scalable solution,

00:33:03.040 though so it's not just limited to us i mean there are stem focused charter schools it's very hard

00:33:08.720 to find people who can teach high level science and technology or engineering courses or there's

00:33:16.320 arts academies similarly that encounter this problem it's also experienced for vocational

00:33:21.200 traits um you know if you've got someone who's like a master welder or something or a woodworker

00:33:26.720 but they don't also have a bachelor of education then it's very difficult to offer those courses in

00:33:31.280 high schools now the the argument i i suppose if i give the the government and sort of the status

00:33:37.600 quo the benefit of the doubt here is that teaching is itself a skill that needs to be taught above

00:33:43.200 and beyond the knowledge you have and anyone who's taken you know university classes can probably

00:33:48.160 attest to this they're brilliant people that are absolutely atrocious teachers so why does the b

00:33:53.520 ed not do that in your view or not do it well enough to justify its continued existence or

00:33:58.880 requirement so yeah very good point i don't want to imply that just because you have a doctorate

00:34:03.520 in literature that you are qualified to teach uh teenagers right um a phd doesn't qualify you to be

00:34:10.320 a primary or secondary school teacher but neither does it be ed it takes a special kind of person

00:34:16.880 who has the aptitude and the passion to do that and teaching is um you know teaching in the sort

00:34:23.120 sort of modern context is very much, it's an art and it's a craft. And what I would argue is that

00:34:29.900 in addition to having sort of possessing subject matter content knowledge, which all teachers

00:34:34.420 should have, the other dimension is learning the art and the craft of teaching. It takes a lot of

00:34:39.380 special skills. There's a real art to classroom management, to assessments, to explicit and to

00:34:44.460 providing effective instruction, what we would call explicit instruction. And the best way to

00:34:50.100 learn that is in the practicum. So we surveyed 26 of the teachers in our school system and asked

00:34:55.400 them what they learned and what they didn't learn in their B-Ed. And the really devastating thing

00:34:59.600 was a lot of them were saying that the practicum was really valuable, being in a classroom with an

00:35:04.560 experienced mentor teacher guiding them. But very often the mentor teacher was telling them,

00:35:10.200 ignore what you've learned in the classroom, in your university, it's bunk, it's not going to

00:35:14.300 work in practice. So I recall one teacher actually saying, you know, the damage of my coursework,

00:35:20.340 the damage of my B.Ed. was mitigated by having great teachers in the practicum. But the actual

00:35:26.020 coursework was of, according to our teachers, it was typically of little to negative value.

00:35:31.600 It sometimes actively maleducated them as to what effective teaching and effective pedagogy

00:35:36.280 looked like. Interesting. One point that I don't know if it's the same in other provinces, but in

00:35:41.660 Ontario, they've, especially in the last several years, changed the length of time it takes to do

00:35:46.980 a BED, not based on the material you need, but based on, you know, the availability of teaching

00:35:53.080 jobs. You know, at one point, they made it two years because they had too many teachers and

00:35:57.260 wanted to slow it down, and then they had too few, so they expedited it, which proves that in a lot

00:36:01.360 of ways, it is an arbitrary, an arbitrary degree for people, for some people. Yeah, and to that

00:36:07.620 point, you know, there was during COVID era, there were some US states that on an emergency basis

00:36:13.080 hired teachers without sort of certification. By the way, a number of US states don't require it

00:36:18.860 at all. But they found that in the aftermath of COVID, there was no real difference in the

00:36:25.380 academic gains if depending on whether students had a certificated teacher or one of these

00:36:30.480 emergency hires without a teaching background or teacher training. So there was no real difference

00:36:35.000 there. And again, I don't mean to discount the difficulty of teaching in a classroom.

00:36:39.960 It is a really, really difficult job to do it well. But it doesn't seem to be correlated with

00:36:45.480 whether you have a B.Ed. or the length that that B.Ed. program took you to obtain.

00:36:49.780 What would your ideal model be? If you were the education minister in Alberta and you could just

00:36:54.280 start from scratch, what would you make the requirement? Well, I tend to err on the side of

00:36:59.720 sort of local authority. So, you know, the sort of the extreme recommendation would be to say,

00:37:05.300 give superintendents, the people who are actually in charge of school authorities and who are

00:37:08.600 closest to the level of practice and to being able to observe and assess teachers, give them

00:37:13.020 the authority to decide who to hire. I know that this would not fly with a lot of, with the

00:37:19.380 bureaucracy and it would probably, it would get some people's backs up. So I think another

00:37:25.660 solution that we have proposed would be an alternative pathway to teacher certification

00:37:30.220 especially for people who already have a degree that is expedited over the two years we've

00:37:35.180 suggested a paid practicum centered model so maybe one year rather than two years which is what it

00:37:40.700 currently is for a post degree b ed in alberta one year where you're sponsored by a school authority

00:37:46.220 you're being evaluated by them they're paying you at least something maybe not a full teacher salary

00:37:50.460 but something to minimize the opportunity costs that are associated with for many people a mid

00:37:56.300 career uh change in their profession um so make it practicum focused have some coursework but not

00:38:03.340 nearly the degree of credits that are currently required because there's very little value it

00:38:06.860 seems in that coursework and really focusing on on that practicum experience um and shortening

00:38:12.940 the timeline so one of the things we encountered was we have all these people that we've wanted to

00:38:17.420 hire but they have a doctorate in classics or philosophy or physics or something they have

00:38:22.860 families they have mortgages they can't drop out of the workforce for two years to go get a b-ed

00:38:27.580 and so it's about figuring out how you can improve this sort of labor mobility

00:38:31.980 and bring exceptional individuals who do have a passion and an aptitude for teaching

00:38:36.060 into the profession interestingly i don't believe it exists in canada but in several united states

00:38:42.300 states you can do that with law where you can actually practice law without a law degree

00:38:46.860 if you apprentice your way in by working under a lawyer and you know again something like that

00:38:51.340 would sound so shocking to people but this is not without precedent and the law i'd say is

00:38:55.740 again no offense to teachers but a lot more of a complicated thing than uh than teaching is

00:39:02.140 yeah and and like teaching though i mean the idea that law is an academic discipline is sort of

00:39:07.420 bizarre i mean there are sort of legal scholars but legal practitioners are not academics so

00:39:13.500 focusing on coursework doesn't make sense right um actual like articling type experience is where

00:39:18.940 the value is if you intend to be a legal practitioner of course you also need to know

00:39:22.940 things right so i would hope that people in these both of these professions would come at this with

00:39:27.260 a lot of background knowledge that they can contribute um but yeah it's not it's not really

00:39:32.060 an academic discipline and faculties of education again i'll qualify this there are some great

00:39:37.980 people in these faculties but in general they're not known for their academic rigor

00:39:42.380 A lot of the teachers are disconnected both from classroom practice as well as from the serious research when it does occur.

00:39:49.820 They're sort of political monocultures. They're heavily influenced by social reconstructivism and critical theory.

00:39:55.720 So, you know, I think I'm going on a bit of a tangent here, but all the more reason to say this might not be the best approach to training teachers.

00:40:04.780 Well, if you want to learn a little bit more about this vision, Kaylin Ford's piece,

00:40:08.680 in the hub universities have a monopoly on teacher training they don't deserve to keep it

00:40:13.000 uh came out a couple of weeks back but uh very timely now kaylin thanks for coming on today and

00:40:17.240 also if you want your kids to get a classical education the alberta classical academy has you

00:40:22.280 covered there kaylin always good to talk to you thanks for coming on thanks andrew all right thank

00:40:26.200 you uh keeping with the alberta theme this weekend uh one conference that i have had the great

00:40:31.480 privilege of speaking out for the last five years is coming back the alberta economic or sorry the

00:40:37.160 The Economic Association of Alberta's Freedom Talk taking place in Red Deer once again.

00:40:42.280 I first went there in 2019 and then COVID came and everything got all crazy.

00:40:48.140 But I was glad they've kept inviting me back.

00:40:50.520 Danny Hozak is the chairman there and joins me on the line now.

00:40:54.180 Danny, always good to talk to you.

00:40:55.260 Thanks for coming on today.

00:40:57.160 Thanks for having me on.

00:40:58.220 Nice to see you.

00:40:59.360 Now, I should say I'm so sorry.

00:41:01.480 I've made a point of going in person every year.

00:41:03.740 This year, I'm not able to make it out.

00:41:05.400 So I'll be presenting virtually, but you've got a great list of speakers there.

00:41:09.720 The theme is not the cheeriest of themes, the decline and fall of Western civilization.

00:41:16.040 So you're hitting people on their summer weekend with why everything in the West is doomed.

00:41:20.480 But why is that an important topic?

00:41:23.560 Well, I mean, the second part of that is our fate or our choice.

00:41:30.020 And of course, our choice is for it not to be our fate.

00:41:32.760 and so we're trying to come up with some reasonable solutions to keep us from going over this cliff

00:41:38.400 that you know various governments seem to be intent on taking us over and of course we are

00:41:43.820 going to miss you but we're looking forward to hearing from you virtually which as you know

00:41:48.020 your topic is getting the media back on site and we certainly haven't had a lot of a lot of help

00:41:54.060 trying to stop society from going over the cliff from the mainstream media and we certainly thank

00:41:58.780 you and your colleagues for the work you do to try and get the message out.

00:42:03.540 Well, I appreciate that. And yeah, I remember, I think it was, I don't know, two years ago or

00:42:06.880 whatever. I didn't actually know what my speech was about. And I was going, I was in the elevator

00:42:11.980 down to the ballroom and someone said, oh, Andrew, I can't wait to hear what you're going to speak

00:42:15.080 about. I said, neither can I. So this year I do know, and I am going to speak about the media and

00:42:20.040 how it fits into that general question of Western civilization. You have John Robson and Patrick

00:42:25.800 more and mark morano stockwell day a former alliance leader will will be speaking as well

00:42:31.080 among others but i wanted to ask you about that because your first sort of session is why does

00:42:35.960 the west hate itself and that's such a unique thing for the west because every other regime

00:42:41.720 in the world every other civilization in the world is very proud of who it is the west is the only

00:42:46.920 part that tends to focus on why it's so terrible well and i mean and i think uh you know you just

00:42:54.040 We're talking to a lady about the education system, and a lot of the reason that the West hates itself is actually some of our institutions of higher learning have absolutely betrayed us.

00:43:06.440 One of the books that I read years ago was Anne Rand's.

00:43:09.380 It was for the new intellectuals, and she said we need a new group of intellectuals, and to a certain extent, that's what we're trying to do.

00:43:17.600 it's actually called the Economic Education Association and we're trying to get a whole

00:43:23.700 lot of ordinary people that understand these issues that government hasn't been our best

00:43:29.480 friend and they certainly aren't. And it's going to take a lot of work to get us back to where we

00:43:34.600 were. So where would you like to see this discussion go? Because one thing I've always

00:43:39.800 enjoyed about your conferences is you always try for there to be takeaways. So it isn't just a

00:43:44.060 A weekend of navel-gazing, basically.

00:43:46.700 Well, where I'd like this to go is, if you're familiar with the Regina Manifesto,

00:43:52.220 it was created, I think, in the late 30s.

00:43:54.520 I've seen several versions of it, but it was basically a group of socialists

00:43:58.600 that were planning to make a socialist utopia on the prairies.

00:44:02.760 And they were planning this in the 30s, and they were going to get control of the school system.

00:44:06.900 They were going to get control of the county councils.

00:44:09.100 They were going to get control of the school boards.

00:44:11.100 They were going to get control of the legislatures.

00:44:13.820 they were going to get control of the bureaucracy and if you read it today you just go check check

00:44:18.260 check check they've done it all and so uh they really they we've really we really have a left

00:44:24.520 wing ideology at the leadership level of most of the organizations that we have in our government

00:44:30.000 these days and what i'm looking to do is i'd like to i'd like to call this you know for the lack of

00:44:35.780 a better word the wild rose manifesto or the western manifesto where we make a list of things

00:44:41.400 that we're going to do to start taking control back for individual people we all we all claim

00:44:47.100 to believe in individual freedom but we've let so much of it slip away so i think our i think our

00:44:52.660 goal at the end of this will be to have come to a consensus of some of the steps we have to take

00:44:59.180 to try and get control back which again it's a lot of it has to do with taking control of government

00:45:05.260 but having said that we get the government we vote for so some of this is a responsibility that

00:45:10.300 comes back to individual voters and we're trying to have a you know a better educated group of

00:45:16.520 voters. Just to go back a couple of years my first time out at your conference was 2019 I think it

00:45:23.720 was just after the Alberta election so you know Rachel Notley had you know just been defeated so

00:45:29.840 there was a bit of change there. Justin Trudeau was on track to win another election he's won

00:45:34.320 another since then and I know that there has been and you've entertained these discussions about

00:45:39.260 you know western sovereignty and now you have uh premier danielle smith you have the alberta

00:45:43.500 sovereignty act you have a federal change in government looking to be somewhat imminent here

00:45:48.460 are you more or less optimistic than you were five years ago i i think i i think i'm more often

00:45:55.660 optimistic because things have got so much more worse that more people are which is probably a

00:46:01.740 poor reason for being optimistic but things have got so much more worse that there's a lot more

00:46:06.380 people waking up to it and you actually met you mentioned patrick moore and uh he's actually not

00:46:12.600 going to be able to make it he said he feels like he's vaccine injured and he said danny i'm just

00:46:17.000 not well enough to travel so i mean that that's what we're up and so one of the things that i

00:46:22.160 want to talk about uh you know that you start about where do we start on all of this we

00:46:27.380 oh we uh we lost uh lost danny there unfortunately but uh fortunately it was the the last question

00:46:35.180 anyway so we were we were going to be winding things up there but um my thanks to danny hozak

00:46:39.300 for coming on and to those of you in red deer on the weekend i'm sorry i won't be able to be there

00:46:43.320 in person but i'll try to make it up to you with a banger of a speech and uh some of the thoughts

00:46:47.860 i'll uh go oh we do have danny back all right i i was just about to cut you loose anyway danny 0.83

00:46:52.460 but finish your uh finish your thought there well well well you you're on you're on at 12 30 but

00:46:57.840 one of the main things i want to talk about is you know the alberta government is still insisting on

00:47:03.100 you know vaccinate vaccinating our children and you know we talk about patrick moore being he

00:47:07.880 believes he's vaccine injured there i mean if adults want to get vaccinated or drink too much

00:47:13.320 or eat too much or smoke too much that's their business but i i i would like our group to come

00:47:18.200 out of there with an absolute determination to get our government to stop vaccinating our children

00:47:22.940 until we've done more studies on some of the effects of the the vaccine and then once we've

00:47:27.880 got them stopped doing that then we're going to start looking at all these other things at the

00:47:31.760 municipal level like we've got we've got uh you know tom harris talking about how we can take

00:47:36.300 control at the municipal level tanya gaw is going to be here talking about some of the things they've

00:47:41.120 done at municipal councils on one thing and another so uh i think we're going to have the

00:47:45.800 only way we could possibly be going to have a better weekend is if you were actually going to

00:47:49.420 be there in person with us but we'll i think that may i think that makes it worse but you're uh

00:47:53.340 you're very kind there danny look i i believe uh wholeheartedly in society we need to be able to

00:47:57.240 have conversations, have controversial conversations even.

00:48:00.220 It's why free speech is so important.

00:48:01.580 So you've done that and you're set to do it this weekend.

00:48:04.440 Danny, thanks so much for coming on today.

00:48:05.960 Good luck this weekend.

00:48:07.360 Thank you very much.

00:48:08.380 Could I just say, like, we try to bring both sides of the conversation in and have a,

00:48:13.200 we call it an intelligent, respectful discussion, but we like to hear from both sides.

00:48:16.980 And it's a way of bringing people together.

00:48:19.100 So thank you very much.

00:48:20.200 We'll look forward to hearing you speak at noon tomorrow.

00:48:23.100 And if anybody wants to watch it on live stream,

00:48:25.460 they can go to our website at freedomtalk.ca

00:48:27.700 and they can sign up to watch the live stream.

00:48:30.200 Of course, we still have room at the meeting room

00:48:33.200 if anybody wants to come and join us.

00:48:34.740 So thank you very much.

00:48:35.300 You said tomorrow.

00:48:35.920 I'm on Saturday, aren't I?

00:48:37.540 You're on Saturday, yes.

00:48:38.760 You're on Saturday.

00:48:39.660 It starts tomorrow morning at nine.

00:48:41.260 You speak at noon on Saturday, yes.

00:48:42.980 All right, good.

00:48:43.620 Just wanted to make sure.

00:48:44.700 Danny, thanks very much.

00:48:45.780 We'll have a good one there.

00:48:47.260 All right, that does it for us for today.

00:48:49.500 My thanks to all of you for tuning into the program today.

00:48:52.240 I'll give you just a bit of a plug, if I may.

00:48:54.120 I'm still the author of a best-selling book

00:48:57.220 on Pierre Polyev that has now just hit six weeks

00:49:01.420 on the bestseller list.

00:49:03.020 And I don't say that because I like bragging.

00:49:04.680 Actually, bragging does not come naturally to me. 0.95

00:49:06.960 I say it just because the leftist trolls are like,

00:49:09.080 oh, no one's buying your book. 0.98

00:49:10.040 And I'm like, hell,

00:49:10.500 all the Toronto Star bestsellers list begs to differ.

00:49:12.620 But with that out of the way,

00:49:14.000 thanks to those of you who have read it,

00:49:15.620 who have sent in all sorts of kind feedback about it.

00:49:18.460 And even the unkind feedback, I, well, I disregard it,

00:49:20.960 but it's, you know, free speech and all that.

00:49:22.740 All right, we will have Off the Record tomorrow

00:49:24.860 back with The Andrew Lawton Show on Monday.

00:49:26.440 Have a wonderful weekend, everyone.

00:49:27.840 Thank you, God bless, and good day to you all.

00:49:30.820 Thanks for listening to The Andrew Lawton Show.

00:49:33.320 Support the program by donating to True North

00:49:35.380 at www.tnc.news.

00:49:50.960 We'll be right back.

00:50:20.960 We'll be right back.

Juno News - July 04, 2024

Liberals to spend $200 million on online censorship office

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript