Preston Manning: Trucker Convoy was a legitimate expression of concern
Episode Stats
Words per minute
173.29413
Harmful content
Misogyny
4
sentences flagged
Hate speech
3
sentences flagged
Summary
In today s political lexicon, populism is now synonymous with Donald Trump, with Brexit, with right-wing politics, and with an undesirable rebellion against stable political institutions. But is populism always a bad thing? My guest today rejects this basic premise and has been working his entire political career to try to understand and harness the potential good side of populist movements here in Canada.
Transcript
00:00:00.240
In today's political lexicon, populism is now synonymous with Donald Trump,
00:00:04.880
with Brexit, with right-wing politics, and with an undesirable rebellion against stable
00:00:10.080
political institutions. But is populism always a bad thing? My guest today rejects this basic
00:00:15.680
premise and has been working his entire political career to try to understand and harness the
00:00:20.640
potential good side of populist movements here in Canada. I'm Candice Malcolm, and this is The
00:00:25.280
Candice Malcolm Show. Hi, everyone. Thank you so much for tuning in today. It's a pleasure and
00:00:33.760
honor today to be joined by Mr. Preston Manning. Preston Manning is one of the most prominent
00:00:39.120
conservative politicians and political leaders in Canadian history and has a thorough understanding
00:00:44.720
of the rise of populism in Canada and around the world. He's often called the father of modern-day
00:00:50.480
Canadian conservatism. Preston was a founder and the only leader of the Reform Party of Canada,
00:00:55.440
which became the Canadian Alliance Party, which eventually merged with the progressive
00:00:58.720
conservative parties to form the Conservative Party of Canada, which was led by Stephen Harper
00:01:04.080
and was held government for nearly a decade. Although no longer a politician, Preston remains a prominent
00:01:09.920
voice in Canadian politics and is in promoting Western Canadian interests. In 2005, Preston created the
00:01:17.440
Canada Strong and Free Network. Well, it was called the Manning Centre before and now it's called the
00:01:21.200
Canada Strong and Free Network. The group has helped shape national conversations around conservatism,
00:01:26.720
influence government policies and helped create a university program at Carleton University, the first
00:01:31.680
program aimed at political management. So Preston, thank you so much for joining us. It's an honor to
00:01:36.320
speak to you today. Preston Manning Well, thank you very much. It's great.
00:01:40.480
Okay, well, I want to I want to first start off by talking a little bit about just what just happened,
00:01:45.920
what just happened in our country with the trucker convoy, the sort of political uprising against the
00:01:50.720
Trudeau government, and how was handled by both Justin Trudeau, his government, as well as the media
00:01:56.160
here in Canada. I think the audience knows my position on this issue thoroughly. But I'm wondering
00:02:01.600
what what what is your take? How do you think it folded out? How do you think it could have been
00:02:05.440
handled differently by the politicians and the media in this country?
00:02:08.080
Well, I think I know some truckers, independent truckers. Our family has a small ranching operation.
00:02:15.920
We use truckers to take cattle to community pastures and to processing plants. But I felt this
00:02:24.240
truckers conflict was a legitimate expression of concern by people who were affected by the vaccine
00:02:31.760
mandates. In their case, it put some 15,000 of them out of work. And I feel it was a legitimate
0.96
00:02:37.760
bottom-up political protest. It had these populist dimensions. And the sad thing was the way the
00:02:44.000
federal government responded to it. They wouldn't even meet with these people. And the prime minister
00:02:51.840
immediately characterized them as extremists and that this was financed or originated in the United
00:03:00.400
States, which is completely false. So I think it was a legitimate expression of political concern by
00:03:07.680
a legitimate group of people and that the Ottawa government responded inappropriately.
00:03:13.520
Well, I mean, just beyond that, if it was a legitimate and peaceful movement, a group of people
00:03:20.560
who just wanted their demands to be heard, and the response wasn't just to dismiss them, smear them,
00:03:26.880
refuse to meet with them, but actually use an emergency act that had never been invoked before,
00:03:32.800
was created in 1988 with the desired impact of use only during severe national emergencies and
00:03:40.800
potentially war. What kind of precedent does it set as a government who was so unwilling to talk to
00:03:46.480
a group of people that he would take such drastic action against them?
00:03:50.800
Yeah. Well, I think it was an enormous overreaction. And the question it raises is the question you're
00:03:57.520
raising if the Trudeau government would overreact to legitimate protests like that by invoking the
00:04:05.040
Emergency Act, on what other occasions would they do the same thing? And I feel that the justification for
00:04:13.040
invoking the Emergency Act was never really proven by the government. They very hastily retreated from it.
00:04:19.280
But again, it's just an extreme overreaction and a misunderstanding or deliberate misunderstanding of what
00:04:26.160
these people were trying to do and what they're trying to accomplish.
00:04:29.120
One of the things that was striking to me about the people who were behind the trucker convoy, the people
00:04:34.560
who characterized the protests in Ottawa, was sort of the difference between them and the normal people,
00:04:40.160
the normal type of people you see in Canadian political life, the normal kind of people that you see protesting. It's usually
00:04:45.280
these sort of aggrieved left-wing people who protest, who go out and gather on Parliament Hill and occupy.
00:04:52.000
The whole Occupy movement came from Occupy Wall Street, which was an anti-capitalist left-wing movement.
00:04:59.600
What do you think about the idea that many of these truckers were sort of apolitical or are not necessarily
00:05:05.840
politically engaged? And the action of them coming and becoming political, coming to Ottawa,
00:05:14.160
was met with such scorn and name-calling. How do you think that'll impact those individuals or the
00:05:22.000
I think it shows to Canadians the contempt that the Ottawa elites have for just ordinary folks
00:05:29.680
and the fear that they seem to have of them. And then the inconsistencies when left-wing protesters
00:05:37.680
shut down rail lines that carry 20% of Canada's exports to Asia over them, that the government
00:05:44.720
almost sided with the protesters and didn't regard this as an emergency. But somebody shuts down the
00:05:52.240
bridge at Windsor and this is a national catastrophe calling for the invoking of the Emergency Act, the
00:05:58.160
inconsistency in that response, in addition to its overhandedness and inappropriateness.
00:06:05.280
I think all of this, the net effect of it, is to reduce the confidence of Canadians increasingly in
00:06:10.560
the Trudeau administration. This is just one of a number of things, but it adds to the list. It adds to the list.
00:06:18.000
What do you think of the sort of class divide that was on display? I know that many people in government
00:06:23.600
and media have dismissed this idea that what we saw was a sort of working-class uprising that was
00:06:29.200
dismissed and disregarded by a group of elites in Ottawa, but you can't help but notice the sort of
00:06:35.760
the idea that there's a New York Times op-ed that put it really well and it sort of talked about the
00:06:40.400
not necessarily class divide, but the difference between people who live their life virtually,
00:06:45.120
whose jobs that can be done remotely, can be done on a computer. COVID didn't really have a huge,
00:06:51.600
huge impact on them versus people who lived in the practical world. So they had virtuals versus
00:06:56.880
practicals. People who lived in the practical world are the ones that own small businesses,
00:07:00.960
that own restaurants, that drive trucks, that work at the frontline workers. The people who've
00:07:04.880
been harmed disproportionately by COVID were many of the sort of loudest voices praising and pushing
00:07:13.360
the trucker convoy because they've gone out to the real world and lived in COVID and they're ready to
00:07:18.160
move on. Whereas the people who are kind of sheltered behind their screens haven't had to have the same
00:07:23.120
interaction and many of them are legitimately and reasonably perhaps afraid to go back out into
00:07:28.880
the world. And so you kind of have these two different camps of people that are very much
00:07:32.960
have different interests and perhaps it's hard for them to understand what it's like to be on the
00:07:37.280
other side, but certainly the sort of virtual side of the elites disregarding the working class or the
00:07:44.160
practicals was really quite stark. Did you notice a sort of class element to these products?
00:07:50.560
I don't think the establishment even understands how its messaging was impacting or being received
00:08:01.040
or even being considered relevant by those people. I mentioned the ranching operation. You have guys that
00:08:09.680
are looking after cattle sitting in a mobile home on a wintering corridor that I know of watching this
00:08:17.200
nice lady on TV in a warm studio in Edmonton or Ottawa telling them to stay home and be safe.
00:08:24.960
These guys start to laugh. If we stay in here those cattle won't get fed. You know our job by city
00:08:33.360
standards is never considered safe. So just a complete lack of resonance of that message with
00:08:42.080
people that were in those situations. And this is true for thousands and thousands of workers,
00:08:47.520
particularly in the resource sectors that are out there doing something, whether it's agriculture or
00:08:52.560
energy or mining or forestry or the fishery. You take Aboriginal people. I mean I think the mining sector in
00:08:59.680
BC is the largest single employer of Aboriginal people, but they're out there doing things. They
00:09:05.760
can't stay home and be safe the way this message is coming to them from the health authorities. So that
00:09:13.680
lack of resonance between the source of the message and the receiver is part of the root of this
00:09:20.880
misunderstanding I think over the whole COVID crisis. That's such a good point. I want to touch on
00:09:27.360
populism because I know this is an area that you've talked about and worked on a long time. I
00:09:30.640
listened to your podcast with Jordan Peterson where you talked about sort of positive populism. I hope
00:09:35.360
you can sort of help us understand because usually it's used as a negative word to describe people who
00:09:40.160
are trying to sort of undermine the political stability. But you see a different side of populism,
00:09:45.680
so I'm hoping you can sort of talk a little bit about what populism means. It's so unfortunate that
00:09:50.480
populism is misunderstood by Canadians and I've argued and I think I can prove it that the Western
00:09:57.600
Canada has had more experience with populist movements, populist parties and populist governments
00:10:04.240
than virtually any other part of North America. And while populism has its wild and woolly side,
00:10:12.480
our Canadian experience with it, let's say in the 20th century, has been relatively positive.
00:10:19.920
And just to give a few examples, the first woman that got elected to the Parliament of Canada,
0.97
00:10:26.160
how did she get there? Through what movement? She didn't get there through the Liberals or the
0.81
00:10:30.880
Conservatives in that day. The Liberals did everything in their power to knock her out of that
1.00
00:10:34.800
parliament and eventually they did. She came up through the old progressive movement, which is
00:10:39.520
basically a farmers movement, which was a populist bottom-up party. The so-called Famous Five,
00:10:45.600
the women that got women elected or recognized as persons in Canadian law. All five of them were
00:10:52.400
populists, two or three of them were elected as populists to the Alberta legislature. So there's a
00:10:59.200
populism can accomplish some pretty positive things, whether you agree with Canadian Medicare or not.
00:11:05.360
That came out of Saskatchewan through the CCF, which was a bottom-up populist party, particularly at that time.
00:11:16.240
It was the champion of that particular social reform. The constitutional change that got
00:11:24.480
natural resources, finally the ownership of natural resources recognized in terms of the provinces,
00:11:32.160
particularly the Western provinces, that that was achieved by farmers' governments. The UFA in Alberta,
00:11:38.080
a small group of progressives in the federal parliament. So you can list off these positive
00:11:43.760
accomplishments by populist movements and populist government. Now it doesn't mean they don't have a
00:11:51.040
wild and woolly side. Whether they end up making that positive contribution or whether they turn
00:11:58.720
negative very much depends on the leadership and it depends on the reaction of the establishment.
00:12:04.800
Most of these populist parties and governments are a reaction to what was there before. Trump is the
00:12:10.640
legacy of Obama. Doug Ford is the legacy of Catherine Ford in Ontario. So I argue there's a positive side
00:12:19.280
if they're properly led and properly understood. Well, so it's interesting now because you sort of see
00:12:26.000
different camps in the Conservative Party right now. Erin O'Toole stepped down and without a certain
0.51
00:12:31.760
leader, there are sort of different elements of the party popping up. What would your advice be
00:12:36.480
to the Conservative Party and anyone looking to run it on how best to connect with the grassroots, how to
00:12:42.960
utilize the sort of success and the growth of the truck convoy in helping to sort of steer the party
00:12:51.520
in more of a positive populist way that really connects with voters, connects with the grassroots,
00:12:56.800
understands their concerns, and can relay those messages to Ottawa without the sort of effect of
00:13:02.240
being in Ottawa for too long, which is that you start to sound more like the establishment and less
00:13:05.760
like the people who sent you there. Well, I think you use the right word when you say connect. I think the first
00:13:10.480
step is to connect with them. And the first step to connecting with people is just to listen to them,
00:13:15.600
just to listen to them. And I use the analogy, and I think you've heard me on this before, of
00:13:24.800
in the oil patch there's such a thing as a wildcat well that's drilled into a formation where you don't
00:13:30.320
know what's down below. And then there's such a thing as a road well that drills into a formation where
00:13:36.000
there's an enormous amount of oil or gas under pressure. And it can be very dangerous. You can
00:13:40.320
blow the drilling platform off the wellhead, it can catch fire, it can be enormously dangerous. But
00:13:48.000
one of the ways of bringing a road well under control is you drill in a relief well from the side.
00:13:54.720
And the angle has to be right. If it's too shallow, it won't take off enough pressure. If it's too deep,
00:14:00.160
it can turn into a road well. But if it's just right, it can take off enough pressure that valves
00:14:06.080
can be installed and all that valuable energy can be harnessed to useful purposes. But the important
00:14:12.400
thing there is that that relief well has to connect with that whatever is underneath that rogue well.
00:14:18.240
You have to identify with whatever is causing all this energy and all this activity. And that's the first
00:14:26.400
step. And in a sense, that's what reform was in the 1980s. There was a strong anti-federal government,
00:14:35.280
anti-federal party atmosphere in Western Canada. It produced separatist movements,
00:14:40.640
separatist party elected a member to the Alberta legislature. And what reform did was drill in that
00:14:46.800
relief well from the side. And so we had to identify with what was making those people mad. We said,
00:14:50.960
yeah, you got a right to be mad. And we're mad too. But instead of blowing the whole thing up,
00:14:56.000
how about doing this, this and this? You know, Senate reform, balance the budget,
00:15:01.040
regional impact assessments, et cetera, et cetera. And I think that's the challenge for
00:15:06.080
as there's populism developing today. I think it's going to be very interesting whether this
00:15:11.440
freedom convoy morphs into a broader common sense movement of some kind. But the challenge for the
00:15:18.080
political leadership, conservative and others will be to identify with the root causes of it and
00:15:24.240
and then propose better alternatives, perhaps in how to achieve the objectives.
00:15:30.800
One of the things that I see as sort of a clash within conservatism, within the conservative movement,
00:15:36.880
is that conservatives by nature, you know, the reason that they're conservatives is because they want to
00:15:42.160
conserve something. So they tend to be patriotic and supportive of our institutions and our networks
00:15:49.760
that have created this sort of very stable, prosperous society. But at the same time in Canada,
00:15:55.120
the institutions that we have are also built and crafted around sort of big L liberalism in many ways,
0.73
00:16:02.480
Preston. And a lot of the institutions are simply not holding up to scrutiny under the pressures of
00:16:08.400
COVID. The reality, for instance, of the media landscape. One of the things that was just so,
00:16:14.400
I observed it over the entire period of COVID, but during the protest, just so blatantly obvious how
00:16:19.920
corrupted and how focused on a narrative and not willing to look outside and not willing to paint an
00:16:26.720
objective picture to Canadians. You know, there's so many examples, but to an almost partisan sense,
00:16:34.560
the media is corrupted. How do you think that this relationship between protecting institutions
00:16:42.640
and a need to identify and remove corrupted institutions or institutions that are no longer
00:16:49.760
serving their good, how do you think that conservatives can kind of approach and fix this issue?
00:16:57.280
You got to make the argument, and it's not made much in the public arena, that it's possible to both
00:17:01.760
conserve an institution and to change it for the better at the same time, that conservation and
00:17:08.480
change are not mutually exclusive. In fact, you could argue that they almost have to go together.
00:17:14.720
Edmund Burke argued this, that, you know, he was all for conserving certain things, but he advocated
00:17:21.840
certain things had to change in order to conserve them. And I think that argument needs to be
00:17:26.320
refined. One of my own illustrations, I used to do community development work up in north central
00:17:32.720
Alberta, and there was a sign on an old road away back in the bush, and it was on a big post and had
00:17:41.120
a huge crossbar on it, it had one word on it, Saw Ridge, and an arrow pointing west. And it was supposed
00:17:48.880
to tell you how to get to the town of Saw Ridge. The only problem with it was if you followed that sign,
00:17:53.360
you'd never get to Saw Ridge. Well, why was that? The sign never changed. The sign always said the
00:17:58.480
same thing, it always pointed in the same direction, it was as conservative as you can get. But
00:18:04.240
during the years back, there was a flood that the town of Saw Ridge had to move its location,
00:18:10.480
it changed its name to the town of Slave Lake. The roads to get there had been changed half a dozen times.
00:18:15.760
So the very fact that the sign didn't change was a source of error rather than truth. And I think
00:18:26.880
there's a lesson in that, that you've got to have signposts and you've got to have them firm
00:18:31.840
in the ground and everything else. But sometimes what's on them has to change in order to get to the
00:18:36.720
original objective. And I think that's true whether you're talking about how to conserve democracy or
00:18:42.160
a viable private sector in the economy. And if conservatives could refine that, we want to conserve,
00:18:49.120
here's what we want to conserve, but here's the changes we want to make in order. I think people
00:18:52.960
could understand it. I think they could understand that. And just going back to the point you made
00:18:57.360
earlier about how when the Reform Party came around as sort of a relief valve for those who
00:19:01.520
were sort of fed up with the status quo, the result was very real and substantive change. I mean,
00:19:07.840
talking about some of the things that you mentioned, what the conservatives stood for,
00:19:10.880
was really sort of an overhaul of some of the institutional decay that was happening.
00:19:16.000
Do you think we're at a time now, you know, this was 30, 40 years after the birth of the reform
00:19:21.040
movement, we're ready for another set of drastic reforms to our political system to save it?
00:19:27.520
I think you have to do this every so often. When the Reform Party was put together,
00:19:31.520
the lawyer that put this constitution together was a fellow by the name of Bob Muir, a real fine
00:19:36.320
lawyer in Calgary. And when we were talking about it, I said, Bob, I want a clause in a sunset clause
00:19:44.080
in the constitution of this party. Well, he says, well, what do you mean? I want it to come to an end
00:19:49.280
in 10 years. If the party members decide to just renew it the way it is, they can. But I want a sunset
00:19:55.920
clause in it. And by golly, we had one in there. And it was to be 10 years that the party would cease to
00:20:03.440
exist. And that's the members re-instituted it and recreate it, either in its original form or
00:20:08.560
something else. And by golly, by 1997, it was clear that reform had gone about as far as we could go
00:20:15.600
with it. And we needed this bigger, broader thing. We wanted to form an alliance with the
00:20:20.640
particular provincial conservatives in Alberta, Manitoba, and Mike Harris in Ontario. And that's what
00:20:26.720
gave the opportunity to create the Canadian Alliance, which then morphed into the Conservative
00:20:34.400
Party of Canada. So you don't want to do this every day. You don't want to rethink your fundamental
00:20:40.640
principles or organizations every day. I mean, political parties have to have some continuity
00:20:45.680
and stability. But I think periodically, and particularly in the age in which we live, when
00:20:49.760
change is so fast, everything else is changing, that there should be a recognition. Every so often,
00:20:54.480
we've got to make some fundamental changes in order to be relevant or to be able to address the
00:21:00.240
problems that are confronting the country. The federal Liberals to do this is going to end up
00:21:05.040
being their Achilles, Achilles heel. And in a way, I think one of the consequences of this post,
00:21:12.880
of this COVID thing is there's going to have to be changes in leadership. There's rumblings within the
00:21:18.080
federal Liberals already that Trudeau has to go, people looking for Mark Carney or somebody else.
00:21:22.480
There's rumbles within the NDP. You've got the NDP members that come from writings where they've
00:21:28.560
got private sector union members who've lost their jobs and their incomes. And these guys are starting
00:21:33.440
to resent the support of the public sector unions. There's other people in the NDP that support them,
00:21:39.920
who were not only protected throughout this whole thing, some of them got wage increases. So you've got
00:21:44.880
internal forces that are going to force the NDP to decide where it's going to go. So you've got
00:21:50.160
internal forces for leadership changes within the Liberals, within the NDP. It's already starting.
00:21:55.200
In this sense, the Conservative Party of Canada is ahead of the others. And that's one of the
00:22:00.560
consequences of this turmoil that's been created by the COVID crisis.
00:22:06.400
Okay. Well, let's shift and talk a little bit about COVID because when you look at the trucker convoy,
00:22:11.600
even though sure they got cleared out with excessive force by police, but some of the things that they
00:22:16.080
were advocating for, they started to see real impact almost immediately, Preston. Quebec reversed its
00:22:22.800
vaccine mandate tax, vaccine tax, anti-vax tax. If you weren't vaccinated, you were going to get an extra
00:22:27.840
tax. They reversed that almost immediately. Several of the provinces have since lifted most of their
00:22:33.280
restrictions. We have seen that the major points of the truckers were advocating for,
00:22:40.080
those goals were accomplished. So let's talk a little bit about the post-COVID agenda. What should
00:22:46.080
it look like in Canada and how can we get there?
00:22:48.000
Well, I think one way to come at the agenda is to look at what has the COVID crisis, what weaknesses
00:22:57.120
has it revealed in our systems that are going to have to be addressed. And one of them is just
00:23:05.280
the whole way the thing was managed. So I think one of the things on the post-COVID agenda is going to
00:23:09.600
be an investigation into it. It probably won't be done by this government, but if it's the government,
00:23:15.440
the federal government's replaced, I think that would be one of the first things any new government
00:23:19.360
would do. It'll appoint a commission of some sort to get at what went wrong in the management of the
00:23:25.680
crisis. And then what was another weakness that was revealed? What was the weakness of the Canadian
00:23:30.560
healthcare system? That the Canadian Medicare is 60 years old and was simply incapable of meeting the
00:23:38.880
surge in demand that the COVID crisis feels. So what are we going to do about that? What changes,
00:23:44.400
healthcare changes, are we going to make? And we have to look at other countries. The countries that had
00:23:48.240
mixed systems, public and private systems, were able to cope with the surge in demand better than
00:23:55.280
our system. So that's going to be another, I think, another missing on the agenda for the post-COVID period
00:24:04.640
will be that sort of healthcare reform thing. And then a third thing will be what has to be done
00:24:11.760
to better protect the rights and freedoms that people thought were guaranteed by the Constitution.
00:24:17.680
It was clear that the government could override those. There were literally millions of violations of
00:24:22.160
the so-called sacred rights in the Constitution. And so what's going to be done to address that?
00:24:32.480
I think one of the areas you're going to get into there, and you're familiar with it, there's a test
00:24:37.520
called the Oaks Test. It comes out of a legal case in 1986 where the Supreme Court of Canada said if
00:24:44.480
you're going to limit the rights and freedoms that are guaranteed in the Constitution, you have, the government
00:24:50.560
has to demonstrate, it's the government that has to demonstrate it, has to demonstrate that the
00:24:54.640
benefits of the limitation outweigh the negative impacts. Now that was never done in this case.
00:25:02.480
If you want to show that your limitation outweighs the negative impacts, for one thing you've got to
00:25:08.000
measure the impacts or at least try to estimate. There was never any impact assessment made on the
00:25:14.080
health protection measures as to what their impact would be on the health system itself,
00:25:18.160
let alone on the civil liberties of Canadians. And there was never any economic impact assessment
00:25:24.640
done on those health protection measures. And so I think that's something that's going to have to be
00:25:30.560
written into law. You want to limit those rights in the Constitution, you've got to show that the
00:25:35.280
impacts are, that the benefits outweigh the impact, and you've got to make an assessment of the impact,
00:25:42.080
or else the courts will declare your, whatever your health protection measure is, your protection
00:25:46.560
measure is as unconstitutional. So there's, I see this list, the investigation into what went wrong
00:25:53.760
and what went right with respect to the management, what has to be done with the healthcare system,
00:25:59.040
because this crisis proved it to be inadequate. What are the additions to the, what has to be done to
00:26:06.000
strengthen the limits, the protection of rights and freedoms, because obviously the, whatever we had
00:26:11.600
before wasn't sufficient. And I can see a list of about eight things being not part of the, the post
00:26:19.920
COVID agenda that somebody is going to have to get after. And one of them is even that thing you
00:26:24.960
mentioned before is leadership changes, what changes have to be made in the leadership of the federal
00:26:29.520
political parties in order to make some progress on that agenda.
00:26:33.280
Amy Quinton One of the things, I mean, we've been talking about populism and the sort of rise of
00:26:37.760
the anti COVID mandates and practices, you know, that we saw with the charter convoy. One of the
00:26:44.240
things I was, I was talking on a panel earlier with John Williamson, who's an MP out in New Brunswick.
00:26:49.680
And, you know, I hear a lot of people criticizing the conservatives for not standing up against these
00:26:55.040
abuses against our charter, for not standing up and talking about the healthcare issues. And, and he
00:27:00.160
mentioned that, you know, at the time during the kind of height of COVID and for the last two years,
00:27:05.360
public opinion has not really been on the side of freedom. People were afraid, people were very
00:27:12.640
worried. They wanted, they wanted lockdowns, they wanted mandates, they wanted, you know, people who,
00:27:19.920
the example that John used, were that people who refuse to get vaccinated, they shouldn't just
00:27:24.720
lose their job and their pension and their EI, they should also get removed from our healthcare
00:27:29.600
system and not be an NB like denied access, if they needed healthcare. And I saw a lot of that
0.71
00:27:35.120
sentiment in the media as well. There's a infamous Toronto Star front page, it said, let them die,
00:27:40.560
I hope, I hope unvaccinated people die. And that was sort of the, the narrative that we're hearing from
00:27:46.800
media and the sentiment. And I personally noticed a lot of sort of adversarial combativeness among
00:27:53.840
Canadians that frankly struck me as un-Canadian people fighting on social media, fighting with
00:27:58.720
their families, disinviting people to Christmas dinner. What could be done about the sort of,
00:28:07.360
I don't even know how to describe it, like a totalitarian impulse of people when it came to an
00:28:12.320
emergency to just use every law possible. And how can we mend these, you know, it's a divided country
00:28:19.520
right now. How can we start to mend some of these divides that have been really, really evident
00:28:25.040
throughout the pandemic? Well, I think there's a couple of things that can be done. One is that
00:28:29.760
there has to be a discussion on the appropriate, appropriateness of these measures. And this business
00:28:34.240
of the cancel culture, we can't talk about that, because it's already been decided, whatever, I think
00:28:38.880
that has to be very strainlessly resisted. And the way everyone resists is by insisting that it be talked
00:28:44.160
about whether it's in your own family or in your own circle or in your own company or in your own
00:28:48.400
community. The second is to take some of these polls with a grain of salt, because a lot depends
00:28:54.000
on how you ask the question. If when at the height of the controversy over the truckers, the only
00:29:02.720
question you ask is should the emergency act be invoked in order to make these people adhere to the
00:29:10.000
vaccine mandates. And all you've heard is the propaganda from the government when it introduced
00:29:14.320
this. It's not surprising that 50% of Canadians would say, yeah, I guess that's what you should do.
00:29:19.120
If you ask the question, which of these two options would you prefer? Stopping the truckers by simply
00:29:24.640
canceling the vaccine mandates, which caused the protest in the first place, or invoking the
00:29:30.560
emergencies act, which came out of the war matrix act, which of those, I think a lot of average
00:29:35.760
people said, no, just cancel the mandates that caused this. Other countries are already doing
00:29:40.880
it. The provinces are already doing it. So it very much depends on how you ask the question.
00:29:45.840
And then the third thing is that polls will give you a measure of where the public's head is at
00:29:52.240
today, but you don't have to assume that's where it's going to be for three months or four months from
00:29:56.080
now if you work on trying to change it. And I recall back in our day when the Charlottetown Constitutional
00:30:03.920
Court came out and it was announced by the prime ministers and all 10 of the premiers said it was
00:30:08.000
the greatest thing since sliced bread. And the first polls have said, well, the public said,
00:30:11.840
I guess it's a good thing. Everybody else thinks that they had 65% support. But after a debate,
00:30:20.080
because that had to go to a national referendum, that side lost. People changed their minds. And
00:30:28.400
the people that want to oppose that accord, which included ourselves,
00:30:31.920
that became what the majority position was, but it took some time. So I think there's things that
00:30:36.960
can be done, but somebody has to do, institute the discussion, the counter discussion,
00:30:43.200
frame the questions in some different ways that reveal some different options,
00:30:47.200
and then persist if you really think you're on the right track and eventually you can bring people
00:30:51.200
around to it, persist on that until you do. Well, I think that's very good advice. Hopefully,
00:30:57.120
the future leadership of the Conservative Party will take note and try to lead rather than just
00:31:03.680
following the polls. Unfortunately, we've seen too many politicians who govern that way, Preston. Well,
00:31:08.000
I really appreciate your time. It's so delightful to speak to you and hear your wisdom on Canadian
00:31:13.600
politics. So thank you so much for joining us. Well, thank you, Candice. It was really a pleasure.
00:31:17.200
All right. Thank you so much for tuning in. I'm Candice Malcolm, and this is The Candice Malcolm Show.