00:11:17.680Yes, Ms. Khalid, your point of order is?
00:11:21.680When Conservative colleagues call it an arrived scam instead of an arrived cam app, then it's impacting the public trust of what I was trying to get at.
00:11:32.020Ms. Khalid, that is not a point of order.
00:11:35.220That is a term we're hearing both in this committee room but also throughout Parliament Hill.
00:11:40.620Mr. Jennings, you have the floor. Four minutes and 40 seconds, please.
00:13:00.780It's great comedy, but as John Williamson pointed out, it is not by any stretch a point of order.
00:13:07.360But this is what the Liberals would love to focus on.
00:13:09.840Again, I would say let's perhaps focus on the fact that you're trying to censor what Canadians say and do online.
00:13:14.780But instead, they're like, they're already actually policing it.
00:13:18.080This is a perfect segue because Ickra Klin is already showing there that she thinks that arrive scam is a word that you shouldn't be able to use.
00:13:25.580And this is the member of parliament from a party, from a government that is trying to police what you say and do online.
00:13:31.400So maybe if she gets her way, arrive scam will be an example of hate speech that Bill C-63 will not let you discuss.
00:13:41.340That may be the way that we go from here.
00:13:44.160But this is exactly why I've been talking about this and why I should probably do at some point a segment on this show.
00:13:49.900Maybe we'll do it next week where I just go through all of the things that the liberals have said are hate.
00:13:54.520just to give a sense of the things that they may feel are within the regulatory purview of Bill
00:14:00.920C-63. For example, officials from the Department of Justice yesterday said that, this is literally
00:14:09.360what they said, they said that comparing people to human excrement may be in fact a violation of
00:14:18.140online hate speech. So you could actually make a comparison of someone to human excrement, which
00:14:22.740again, I don't believe is kind. I don't believe you should generally go after people and make
00:14:29.140these excremental comparisons. But if you compare people to excrement, that could prompt a hate
00:14:33.600speech probe. And also if you compare them to vermin. So if you think someone is a crappy person
00:14:39.500or as Sean just called me a rat bastard piece of crap, I don't know if we can say rat bastard piece
00:14:45.040of crap on the show and keep the clean tag on iTunes, but I've already said it. So a rat bastard
00:14:49.280piece of crap. This could be hate speech. So Sean, if you want to file a human rights complaint
00:14:53.740against me, actually I could file it against you because you said it to me. Yeah, Sean just called
00:14:58.540me a rat bastard piece of crap in our show chat. So I am triggered and traumatized by this. So that
00:15:04.680is, I believe I get $20,000 under C63, but he has to pay $50,000 to the receiver general. So Sean,
00:15:13.200you're out $70,000, which means you should think twice about your language. You should have that
00:15:18.240chill that we all hear about in the course of free speech he wants to know if he can expense it now
00:15:23.740to to true north well uh as uh no i'm just gonna go out on a limb and say no um so anyway let's
00:15:30.360discuss this do we have bruce bruce party we do so bruce party is a law professor and as i said
00:15:35.560earlier uh the one who outflanks me on my libertarianism which is already too radical for
00:15:40.740uh some of you so i don't know what you're going to make of him you'll be calling him a rat bastard
00:15:44.800piece of crap before long. But it's always great to get his insights on this. Bruce, thank you for
00:15:49.700coming on the show. This is something you've been warning about for years. And I've quoted a
00:15:55.400presentation I heard you give at SAFS in London a few years ago about these sorts of things. And
00:16:00.940one of the ones that stands out is your claim that if something is illegal offline, it's illegal
00:16:06.620online. So this idea that we need a law to create this special category of online speech is in and
00:16:12.120itself flawed is it not yes yes entirely now there might be a jurisdictional reason for the feds to
00:16:20.120pursue this because they don't generally have jurisdiction over civil rights and so speech in
00:16:27.720general is mostly a provincial matter but they have jurisdiction over telecommunications so they're
00:16:33.720using that as a justification to cover for essentially wanting to walk into the role of
00:16:40.680censoring our online speech which is becoming a greater proportion of our speech in general all
00:16:46.920the time so this is this is one way in which the feds are are elbowing their way into a matter that
00:16:52.040the provinces traditionally have have had the major role one of the things that i i find so jarring
00:16:58.600about it and i don't know how much you read into this briefing that department of justice officials
00:17:02.680gave which was basically because they thought journalists weren't getting it and they just
00:17:06.440needed to be you know given some more of the the state propaganda on this but one of the things
00:17:10.920that they that i've really taken from this is that the government's leaning very heavily on the just
00:17:15.400trust us they're saying no no the canadian human rights commission will make sure that this isn't
00:17:19.800abused that's the whole point of this though is that we're empowering these bureaucrats to decide
00:17:24.920what we can and can't say online oh exactly so so you know there have been many lawyers who since
00:17:34.360the draft of the bill came out have pointed out all the flaws and and they're absolutely right
00:17:38.200but yes so that the trust in the administration to deal with the online platforms the trust in
00:17:46.600the human rights uh mechanisms to make the right calls about where the line's supposed to be and
00:17:53.120even the trust in the courts in defining what falls on one side and the other side of the idea
00:18:00.320of hate speech but so one of my concerns about bill 63 in addition to all of the very valid
00:18:08.480criticisms that it's received i mean it's a terrible terrible draft i mean it had it it
00:18:13.840cannot be let through but an awful lot of those problems already exist including the one that you
00:18:21.840just referred to we already have a major portion of our law in the hands of these kinds of bodies
00:18:28.720whether they're executive bodies or legal bodies per se the lines drawn in our laws
00:18:36.320are terribly vague so just take the most basic one we have freedom of speech in section two of
00:18:42.240our charter what does that mean who knows it's always up to the courts to decide so when you
00:18:50.000think well i have freedom of speech because it says so in the charter you don't actually know
00:18:54.480what that means and so we we've got a very basic problem in our law that this is making worse to be
00:19:02.720sure but we haven't attacked the actual problem yeah and it's it's so difficult because the whole
00:19:10.960point of speech regulations for example in the united kingdom they have a like in canada broadcast
00:19:16.960regulator called ofcom and and they have to adjudicate if you use a dirty word on television
00:19:22.640whether that word was something you could say on tv before nine o'clock which is their watershed
00:19:27.680hour and they publish this annual list of all the words they've said are violated and it's
00:19:33.440actually hilarious because you read through this list and you learn of like slurs and swears that
00:19:37.840you didn't even know existed that some bureaucrat has just decided but this list gets longer and
00:19:42.400longer every year because someone looks at it and makes a judgment call and in the end you have
00:19:47.120these absurd boundaries and borders and you know i've been making a point on this show of talking
00:19:51.680about this uh what what the government thinks is this uber clear delineation of it can't detest or
00:19:58.640vilify but it can disdain offend hurt harm and and they they think that this is clarity but it
00:20:04.880actually is no such thing no no and i don't i my guess is that they know there's there's no clear
00:20:11.840line there that that is simply to empower the kind of discretion that you're talking about
00:20:16.400but remember we we have these kinds of restrictions in our laws already i mean again this is adding to
00:20:26.320them making them worse it cannot stand but we have a speech a hate speech provision in the criminal
00:20:32.820code already that for my money shouldn't be there we have restrictions on speech and various kinds
00:20:38.400of human rights codes across the country already they shouldn't be there and we've accepted them
00:20:43.400and so this is just a piling on it's a bad piling on it needs to be defeated but it's a piling on
00:20:50.160we have accepted the idea that hate speech whatever that happens to me should be restricted
00:20:57.580that in my for my money that is incorrect if you live in a free country you're allowed to hate
00:21:07.540other people now we don't recommend it it's not a good thing we're not going to encourage it but
00:21:13.240if you're free you're allowed to for the reason that you're free and if that's what you think
00:21:19.540then again if you're free you're allowed to say so because that's what you think and that I saw
00:21:26.720yeah go ahead no I saw you post on Twitter the other day something about that which I found
00:21:32.460interesting whereas in the U.S. they've actually specifically protected hate speech whereas in
00:21:37.940Canada we've done the opposite so the U.S. doesn't have to deal with this question of where to draw
00:21:42.640the line whereas in Canada we do that that's right and as a population we seem to have accepted the
00:21:50.340idea that it's appropriate for the government to draw that line somewhere and tell us that we're
00:21:58.000not allowed to express our our distaste for other people well now you're being managed and you know
00:22:05.260being free includes a lot of uncomfortable ugly things it involves a bit of chaos so there's a
00:22:12.000choice here it's been with us for a long time and i think we are failing to choose correctly but
00:22:17.980we are choosing to be managed for the sake of of i don't know for the sake of of of you know
00:22:26.560civilizational manners in in instead of deciding that actually yeah we are a free country right now
00:22:36.860that's very much in doubt. One of the most, I mean, generally speaking, a win is a win and a
00:22:43.920loss is a loss, but sometimes a win can be a loss. And by that, I'm referring to the Mike Ward case
00:22:50.040before the Supreme Court. This is a Quebec comedian that told a joke about a disabled
00:22:55.340teenager. Again, you may think this is incredibly in poor taste. You may think it's unfunny. You
00:22:59.400may think it's rude. You may think that people should boycott him, but he did this. His life
00:23:03.960was dragged through the ringer. Comedians would rather be performing and doing comedy, although
00:23:08.480he was subjected to more of a tragedy and a drama by going before the Quebec Human Rights Commission
00:23:14.160and all of that. And in the end, this goes to the Supreme Court of Canada. He wins. But it was a
00:23:19.1005-4 decision. Now, the fact that it came down to one judge on whether you have a right to tell
00:23:25.720offensive jokes in this country is incredibly dangerous. And that's why I'm not all that
00:23:30.380pessimistic or I'm not all that optimistic about C63 because I think since the Ward case there have
00:23:36.240been one if not two more appointments to the Supreme Court by Justin Trudeau so that case
00:23:43.000today may end up being you know seven two or something well I totally agree with you on this
00:23:49.640and I would go further so yes it was a it was a five four decision but even the basis of the
00:23:55.140majority decision was not what you want so basically basically they said no this he's oh
00:24:00.620he's okay in this instance because you know he didn't intend to target this person on the basis
00:24:06.440of the prohibited ground so in other words if he had wanted to make fun of this person on the basis
00:24:14.080of a prohibited ground maybe that would not have been okay you know that yeah so you're right it's
00:24:19.460not even a it wasn't even a free speech argument that the majority gave it was uh like he he got
00:24:24.760off on a tech. It was the Al Capone tax evasion thing. He got off on the technicality. That's
00:24:29.340right. That's right. And so we are missing a robust endorsement of the idea that you are free
00:24:36.940to say what you think. And the so-called perceived harm on others because of hearing your dreadful
00:24:46.320thoughts really should be irrelevant. And we have not gotten there yet. Let me go out to the bigger
00:24:54.620picture here because you and i have had many discussions on this show and elsewhere where
00:24:59.020we've lamented the state of things in canada and are you and i advocating for something that is
00:25:05.020fundamentally not what the law in canada is supposed to be and by that i mean is this an
00:25:10.460issue where the law has been designed in a way and it's just diverged so far from that point
00:25:16.300or are we in the wrong country has this actually been a case of canada was never meant to have
00:25:21.340very robust freedom of expression well this is a question that that that has no clear resolution
00:25:27.580right i mean some people would say the former and that our tradition has not been like that in the
00:25:34.020u.s and of course you know u.s jurisprudence of freedom of speech has come in peaks and valleys
00:25:40.700as well it's not you know black and white it was not one thing from the very beginning but
00:25:45.100their first amendment in our section two basically both say people have freedom of
00:25:51.100speech and the words are very vague and they in in neither case do they exactly say what that means
00:25:57.200and it just so happens that it's played out one way in the U.S. and the other way in Canada so
00:26:02.400there's nothing inherent in our provisions that suggest that we ought not to have free speech but
00:26:08.160our institutions our legal institutions our courts in particular but also our governments
00:26:12.620have insisted that that's actually not not the case in this country. Beverly McLaughlin the
00:26:19.980the former Chief Justice did an interview the other day, and I haven't watched the whole thing,
00:26:24.040but I read little snippets of it. And it sounds like she's generally supportive of Bill C-63 and
00:26:29.380what it tries to do. And the issues that she flags are ones that are more like, well, you know,
00:26:33.900I might be concerned if, and it's quite interesting because that aligns with what I expect from
00:26:38.520Beverly McLaughlin. But if you look at some past decisions, I mean, she used to be quite strong on
00:26:43.580freedom of expression. And it's amazing that there's been this flip where it's only freedom
00:26:48.940of expression for certain people now and for certain groups and i i mean she i i think would
00:26:54.620be mortified by some of the things she's said in the past about it i mean i she's defended the
00:26:59.100right to deny the holocaust but now the right to misgender someone i don't know yes you'd think
00:27:04.860that that that a former version of herself might be appalled with what the present version of
00:27:09.340herself is saying maybe maybe but but it is also the case though that even at the supreme court and
00:27:14.300even from uh from reverend mclaughlin the justification for free speech has has sometimes
00:27:21.340run along the lines of well we need free speech because it it's it's effective it's it's important
00:27:27.660to maintain our democracy for the for the you know free marketplace of ideas to get to the truth we
00:27:33.420need yada yada and that's that's good that's fine that's true it's a very utilitarian argument
00:27:38.700extremely utilitarian. And so the implication is, look, if it doesn't benefit the society
00:27:46.400to have this, then you can't have it. And that is not what free means. Free means you can say
00:27:53.140what you think because you think it and for no other reason. Wow. Yeah. And there was a quote
00:28:00.660I was hoping you would talk for 10 seconds longer so I could pull up the quote. I'll paraphrase it
00:28:05.100in the absence of that, because Beverly McLaughlin had said in a speech at some point
00:28:09.600that her job as a judge was to take a step back and after hearing a case and decide what's best
00:28:14.620for society, which I mean, it's entirely par for, I think, how the Supreme Court deals with these
00:28:20.440things, but very dangerous in kind of on the back end of what you've just said there, which is that
00:28:25.460you have judges that all of a sudden start looking at speech as a tool instead of speech as an
00:28:30.880inherent good and free speech as an inherent good and that I think is especially concerning when you
00:28:35.500go up against these equality rights in the charter and all of a sudden you're going to get a judge
00:28:38.860that's saying well yes but your freedom of speech isn't good if it makes someone feel unsafe because
00:28:44.660of their gender identity or their race or or whatever this case is yes and we should note how
00:28:51.020that changes the idea of the nature of rights right the whole for my money the whole idea was
00:29:00.700that these these were things these were lines in the sand where the group could not invade the
00:29:06.860ability of the individual to do as he chose but now these rights are being interpreted through
00:29:12.940the lens that you're describing which is well the right is okay as long as it serves society
00:29:18.140well but that's completely the opposite of the first idea the the the an individual right has
00:29:24.460to stand regardless of its effect upon society for the very reason that it is an individual right
00:29:30.700and not a societal right all right we'll end on a lighter note bruce who do you think is
00:29:36.460getting hauled before the tribunal first you or me oh geez um well you talk uh more frequently
00:29:44.540than i do andrew so i'd have to go with you all right well i'll get you as my uh council of record
00:29:50.540then uh when it happened uh bruce party the executive director of rights probe law professor
00:29:55.420at queen's university always a pleasure bruce thanks for coming on thanks andrew cheers all
00:29:59.900All right. I'm glad Bruce is always like the downer when I have him on. He was surprisingly
00:30:03.460chipper today, which I quite like. So now that being said, the bill hasn't yet become a law.
00:30:09.420So who knows what will happen then. Nevertheless, I mentioned earlier this week, there was a big
00:30:14.240win in Durham, not altogether unsurprising, as I said, and I put the caveat there because
00:30:19.420it has been a conservative stronghold for 20 years. But the margin of victory by which
00:30:24.580the conservative candidate, Jamil Javani won, was actually quite strong. And I think there is a
00:30:30.600message in this to Justin Trudeau, either that conservatives are in fact looking beyond or
00:30:36.160conservative voters, voters in general are looking beyond all those evil, scary conservative Trump
00:30:40.540comparisons. And also that the liberal vote is just not motivated to show up. People that voted
00:30:45.780for Justin Trudeau in the last three elections, and especially the last one election, are just
00:30:51.240not motivated to show up and do it again so there's a lot to unpack there but i'd rather
00:30:55.800focus on the guy himself we've had him on the show in the past on a number of occasions in
00:31:00.360a number of different capacities both as a broadcaster as president of the canada strong
00:31:04.680and free network and now as the mp elect for durham jamil javani good to talk to you thanks
00:31:10.680for coming on and congratulations i thank you andrew it's always good to good to chat with you
00:31:16.120and uh yeah being called an mp is still something i gotta get used to so well mp elect i don't want
00:31:22.280to jump on too much uh formality do you know when you are going to be uh sworn in i don't know yet
00:31:27.640no so elections canada still has to go through their process of ratification and stuff so once
00:31:33.160that's done that's when we can schedule the swearing in so we're sort of in their hands
00:31:37.640for the moment but it'll be soon it must be very exciting i know you've gone through in the last
00:31:42.760few years a lot of change i mean you've had to deal with cancer you obviously got fired from
00:31:47.480bell you turned around and tried to and i think successfully stick it to bell with a with a lawsuit
00:31:52.760you uh you know taken over the the canada strong and free network for a time like how do you begin
00:31:58.440to sort of decide what to do now when you get to ottawa well i mean the the good thing about this
00:32:05.240job is that uh we were elected to accomplish the goals that we set out so that's what i think our
00:32:11.880focus is you know it's uh it was a 12-word uh promise that we made many many times during the
00:32:18.680campaign which is ax the tax build the homes fix the budget stop the crime that is the agenda
00:32:26.120and uh certainly at this point where our job is to hold the current government to account
00:32:31.240we want to focus as much as we can on pushing for ideas that we think are going to help accomplish
00:32:36.680those objectives. And also for me locally, here in Durham, to make sure that I'm a good strong
00:32:42.740voice for the issues that people care about. We knocked on over 111,000 doors in the last few
00:32:49.800months. And so I've talked to as many of our voters as possible, as many of our community
00:32:55.000members as possible. And I think I have a sense of what they want from me as the MP. And that's
00:33:00.080what I'm out here to do. One of the questions that always comes up in politics is how much
00:33:06.420of a candidate's performance as them and how much as the leader. And you can never quantify it,
00:33:11.380but I'm curious if you got a sense when you were out knocking on doors, how Pierre Polyev is
00:33:16.120perceived or if he's even perceived by people. Because obviously there's been a bit of a change.
00:33:20.560This writing was formerly represented by Aaron O'Toole, who was the previous conservative leader.
00:33:24.800We get from the media, no shortage of claims about, you know, Pierre Polyev being the big,
00:33:29.060evil, scary conservative meanie. How was that actually on the ground when you were talking to
00:33:33.580voters? Well, I think people are very happy with what they've seen from Pierre Polyev up till this
00:33:39.940point. Since he became leader of the party, I think a lot of folks unhappy with our current
00:33:45.580government and unhappy with our current economy in particular, see Pierre as the change leader,
00:33:51.680that if you want something other than Trudeau, if you want an economy that, as we say, works for
00:33:57.280those who do the work, that is actually responsive to the needs of middle class and working class
00:34:02.580families that pierre is the guy to make that change happen so on the ground a lot of support
00:34:08.820for pierre a growing amount of support as people get to know him better and the reality is that
00:34:14.580you know the reason we won by the big margin that we did the biggest margin in the 20-year history
00:34:19.940of the conservative party of canada in durham was won by us on monday and i think that is because
00:34:25.620you know, Pierre Paglia has become a symbol of change for people. So we drew support from
00:34:32.340neighborhoods that Conservative Party candidates in the past may not have been able to get as much
00:34:38.580support from, because we are now seen as the change party. So that's a very exciting thing
00:34:44.080for us, you know, nationally, but also locally. It's very exciting because I think people have
00:34:49.540expectations for us that we're going to deliver. And now it's on us to actually hold up our end
00:34:53.980the deal you made some waves on monday night when you took aim at liberal elites which i played the
00:35:02.140clip on the show and i think the audience was very much on your side on that one but i was curious in
00:35:06.700who you included in that because you weren't just talking about the capital l liberal party led by
00:35:11.580justin trudeau you talked about uh telecom companies you even talked about i mean what i
00:35:16.460read as the ontario pc government did you not well i specifically mentioned the ontario ministry of
00:35:22.220Education because I mean the facts just bear it out they have upheld a policy agenda that is very
00:35:29.900similar to what you might have seen with a liberal government in power they have focused on a lot of
00:35:35.340virtue signaling they have focused on race politics meanwhile the average student in Ontario is still
00:35:41.820struggling with math with reading with writing they have tried very hard to do in my view
00:35:47.740superficial things, while the effects of pandemic school closures are still being felt by middle
00:35:54.780class and working class families. You know, my job as an MP is to care about what people in Durham
00:36:00.700care about. And I'm knocking on doors, I'm talking to parents every day, I'm talking to students
00:36:05.420every day. And they're telling me the school system isn't working for us. So I feel it's
00:36:10.200important to tell the truth. And when I say liberal elite, you're absolutely right, Andrew,
00:36:14.520i'm not just talking about people who are in one political party a lot of our voters were
00:36:20.280former liberal voters and i don't hold them in contempt because i grew up in a community where
00:36:25.240i was taught the liberal party is where you belong and it took me a while to figure out that that
00:36:29.720wasn't true and it might take others a while to figure out that out too so i don't hold that
00:36:33.880against people but when i talk about liberal elites i'm talking about the people who have
00:36:37.480abandoned the middle class and the working class and as i said whether they're big bank ceos big
00:36:43.320telecom ceos the ministry of education the activists and academics pushing for um you know
00:36:50.040anti-law enforcement anti-public safety policies what all of these folks have in common is that
00:36:55.880they are serving a privileged few while turning their backs on the majority of people in this
00:37:00.360country and i gotta tell the truth about that and if it ruffles feathers and it makes people unhappy
00:37:06.040get used to it because my job is to get is to work for the people of durham my job is not to
00:37:10.360worry about offending people in the halls of power who are actually making everybody's life harder
00:37:16.360one of the things you and i have spoken about this in the past and i know you've spoken about
00:37:19.640it in speeches when you were at bell as a radio host you there was kind of an expectation that
00:37:25.320was put on you that because you fit a certain demographic mold you would fit an ideological
00:37:30.440mold as well and i know that was one of the things you took aim at when you spoke out against them
00:37:35.160and i i can't help but notice that the narrative around you and your candidacy would be different
00:37:40.120if you had a different political view.
00:37:42.160Like I'm convinced, and you may disagree with me, Jamil,
00:38:12.240Well, I do not expect fairness from the media.
00:38:16.140So Lex and I learned even before I worked in it, but certainly when working in it and
00:38:21.100just seeing all the pressure put on employees by these big media corporations to serve a
00:38:26.740certain agenda, you know, it's not easy to be fair in the media.
00:38:31.600You do have to sometimes put your career on the line because you've got management who
00:38:35.800doesn't want you to be fair and doesn't want you to be impartial and objective.
00:38:39.160So I don't expect it to be fair. The truth is this. If you want to make a difference in this country right now, you have to fight for the middle class. You have to fight for the working class. You got to fight for the people who are not represented in the media.
00:38:53.820They don't work in the media by virtue of the type of training and education and lifestyle that the media rewards.
00:39:02.440The voices of the middle class and the working class are often not in these organizations, whether it's a radio station or a TV station.
00:39:09.600And there are exceptions to that. But by and large, it's just not the case.
00:39:13.100So just look at the polls. You know, in every poll that comes out, Pierre Polyev is at the top of the list because many, many Canadians, a growing number, want change.
00:39:22.800but you don't see that reflected in news coverage because they're out of touch.
00:39:26.940And our job is not to be beholden to out-of-touch media organizations.
00:39:31.920They can call me names when Justin Trudeau was calling me names and a twofer and all that nonsense.
00:39:38.440Most of these media organizations didn't cover that either.
00:39:41.140They're not interested in providing an objective view of what's happening.
00:39:45.200They have their own values. They have their own agenda.
00:39:47.720When I say liberal elites, I am talking about the companies that own many of the media outlets that Canadians rely on for information.
00:39:56.020So this is why I'm always keen to do independent media like True North to do local media like we have here in Durham.
00:40:03.520We've got still a number of newspapers, TV stations, radio stations, because this is where you get a more accurate sense of what's going on in the country.
00:40:11.500and I'll tell you now as the MP elect for Durham that is some that is wisdom I take into my new
00:40:17.780job I will not be someone who's going to get pushed around by journalists who think if they
00:40:22.120give me bad coverage I'm going to change my values I was elected because of my values and
00:40:27.180I will continue to stand for them let me just ask you about where you have to direct your attention
00:40:32.760now because you know unlike anyone who gets elected in a general election and has you know
00:40:37.100two, three, four years of breathing room, you're being elected in a by-election,
00:40:40.940which means you could see, I mean, you could theoretically find yourself campaigning in like
00:40:44.280a month's time. It looks like it's probably going to be about a year, a year and a half until the
00:40:48.960next election. But what pressure does that put on you to, you know, perform as an MP to navigate
00:40:55.000this new life, this new world, like, you know, figuring out everything from where the bathrooms
00:40:58.900are on Parliament Hill to, you know, how you can get a bill passed and then have to turn around
00:41:03.340and do it again? Yeah. Well, it's one thing that a lot of people might not know is that
00:41:07.980getting elected to parliament, there are things you have to do just like with any other job.
00:41:13.080There's orientation and there's the tech guy who has to explain how you use your phone and log into
00:41:18.960your new email address. So there's a lot of those steps that I'm just figuring out now and trying
00:41:23.980to learn how it all works as quickly as I can. But the truth is that the fact an election or
00:41:30.940general election could be coming so quickly is, you know, this is exactly why we have to stay
00:41:36.160close to our people, close to our voters, close to the community, because I want, I'm not going
00:41:41.920to be surprised. I want to know what people want from their MP every step of the way. I'm not going
00:41:47.240to be one of those politicians just comes and knocks on your door every few years. I want to
00:41:51.900be someone who the public feels this guy has our back. He's there to do a job. He works just as
00:41:56.980hard as we do, and we can trust him to speak for us. So that's the mentality I come into the job
00:42:02.260with. And that's why I have the confidence I have that we can take positions that the media might
00:42:07.200not like. We can stand for things that the liberals are going to attack us on. They can throw all
00:42:12.020their darts and all their stones all they want. And I'm fine to take it because I really believe
00:42:17.860I have a sense of what people want, what the majority of people in our community here want.
00:42:22.640And that's what I'm trying to be accountable to.
00:42:25.880Is there like a bucket list thing that you'd love to achieve in your first, I don't even
00:42:30.380want to call it a first term because it's like a partial term, but is there, there's
00:42:33.380something that you want to be able to get to the end of the next, you know, 12, 18 months
00:42:37.120and be able to say, I've done this when you go to campaign for reelection?
00:42:41.900Yeah, well, I guess there's two things I have in mind.
00:42:44.820One is, you know, I think nuclear energy is a really, really important part of the future