Juno News - February 09, 2025


Preston Manning: Trump’s ā€œ51 stateā€ comments should be treated as a joke


Episode Stats


Length

43 minutes

Words per minute

166.93442

Word count

7,274

Sentence count

385

Harmful content

Misogyny

3

sentences flagged

Hate speech

7

sentences flagged


Summary

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

In this episode, I sit down with former Reform Party of Canada MP Preston Manning to talk about the Trump administration's latest trade war with Canada, energy security, and the need for common sense in dealing with Trump's agenda.

Transcript

Transcript generated with Whisper (turbo).
Misogyny classifications generated with MilaNLProc/bert-base-uncased-ear-misogyny .
Hate speech classifications generated with facebook/roberta-hate-speech-dynabench-r4-target .
00:00:00.000 Okay, let's get to the big interview. I recorded this earlier with Preston Manning. And for those
00:00:06.560 of you who don't know, Preston Manning is the founder and leader of the Reform Party,
00:00:10.860 which was active in Canada from 1987 to 2000. He represented the constituency of Calgary Southwest
00:00:17.700 in the House of Commons from 1993 until 2002. He served as the leader of the opposition
00:00:24.140 from 1997 to 2000. And then he founded the Manning Foundation for Democratic Education.
00:00:31.500 He's really just an absolutely incredible leader in Canada. We have so much that we can
00:00:36.220 learn from him. And even, you know, in his retirement, he's still active in government.
00:00:40.780 He recently chaired the review of Alberta's COVID-19 response and the National Citizens
00:00:47.120 Inquiry. Did an incredible job. We get to all of it. This is really a wonderful interview. We talk
00:00:52.100 about North America, about Trump. We talk about energy security and national security,
00:00:56.580 the things that Canada needs to do if we're a serious country, if we wanted to take seriously
00:01:01.540 our sovereignty and our independence. These are the things we need to do. And then later in the
00:01:06.160 interview, we talk about the COVID response, how it diminished trust in institutions, and what
00:01:11.880 Preston thinks that Canadians can do to fight back and to restore faith in our institutions. It's a great
00:01:17.240 interview. And it was really my pleasure to conduct it. So without further delay, I will show you this
00:01:23.240 interview now with myself and Preston Menn. Preston, thank you so much for joining the podcast.
00:01:31.560 Yes, good to talk to you.
00:01:33.720 It's great. Great to see you. And really looking forward to this conversation. So first of all,
00:01:38.200 let's start with Donald Trump and the tariffs that he threatened, and then reversed. So, you know,
00:01:44.760 right off the top, what is your takeaway on all of this?
00:01:47.480 Well, I think it's necessary to go back to square one. What was the first instance in which he linked,
00:01:55.800 even mentioned tariffs on Canada and Mexico? This goes back to November 2019, when he was
00:02:04.120 president the first time. And he mentioned tariffs as a threat to try to get Canada and Mexico to be
00:02:12.760 serious about stopping the illegal movement of people and drugs across the border into the United
00:02:20.840 States from Canada and Mexico. That was what the threat was linked to. So it seems to me the starting
00:02:28.280 point, and Premier Smith has made this point over and over again, would be to tighten up the border and
00:02:34.920 stop illegal movement of drugs and people across that border from Canada or anything connected with it.
00:02:42.120 And if the Prime Minister and the Premiers are getting together, the first thing on their agenda
00:02:46.840 should not be talking about tariffs. It should be talking, here's what we are going to do,
00:02:52.440 here's what we are doing to stop that illegal movement of drugs and people. And I think this
00:03:00.760 business of getting off onto the tariff thing, when it was the illegal movement of drugs and people,
00:03:06.280 it was the thing that triggered this, is a big mistake.
00:03:10.680 Well, certainly. And I mean, we saw everybody jump into action. So going back to last Saturday,
00:03:15.880 when Trump came out and said, yes, it's going to be a 25% tariff, 10% on energy, which I think you can 0.99
00:03:22.600 credit that to Danielle Smith and the advocacy diplomacy that she did, that oil was only going to be 0.99
00:03:28.360 10%. Everything else was 25%. Trudeau instantly jumped in and said that they were going to retaliate
00:03:34.760 with our own 25%. Now, luckily, we avoided all that, or at least for now, because Trump did just say
00:03:39.880 that it's a 30-day pause and that we'll be revisiting it in March. By then, I think we'll have a new
00:03:46.440 Prime Minister, Preston. But I want to point to your essay that you wrote in the National Post on January 30th,
00:03:54.200 where you said Canada's response to Trump needs common sense, not mindless hysterics. So I think
00:03:59.960 you said that the political and media establishment got off on the wrong foot by responding foolishly
00:04:07.960 rather than sensibly. Now, I just want to read a little bit from this, because I think you make
00:04:11.800 such a good point here that is not being made elsewhere. You wrote that Trump is a businessman
00:04:16.680 and a dealmaker. Common sense further suggests bringing a positive response to an item which clearly
00:04:22.920 is on Trump's agenda, which also happens to be very much in Canada's interest, energy security.
00:04:28.600 This is a subject dear to Trump's heart, referenced in his inaugural address and a front on which Canada
00:04:34.760 can lead with its strengths, not its fears. And then you go on to say, thus, surely common sense
00:04:40.840 suggests that the most important component of Canada's response to the Trump administration should
00:04:45.720 be making North America more self-sufficient, especially with respect to energy. I didn't hear very
00:04:51.320 many people making this case in this point, but it's so obvious that Canada and the United States
00:04:57.960 need to be energy secure. So why don't you elaborate on that a little more?
00:05:01.560 Well, and yes, from Canada's standpoint, what is the one front on which we are stronger and bigger
00:05:07.800 than the United States? It's not population. They've got a bigger population than us. It's not
00:05:14.120 financial resources. They've got more financial resources than us. We don't have the smartest
00:05:18.920 government. That's certainly the case. But what we do have, because we're the second largest nation
00:05:25.320 on the face of the earth, area-wise, we have the largest or second largest stock of natural resources.
00:05:33.960 That is Canada's strength. And it seems to me the second item on any agenda in dealing with the United
00:05:41.400 States after cleaning up this border question is to say, what can we do to make North America more
00:05:50.040 sufficient, self-sufficient, which is what Trump has talked about, and particularly self-sufficient in
00:05:56.920 energy. And that's an area where we leave with our strengths, not our weaknesses. Ontario, Quebec, and BC
00:06:06.280 particularly have a capacity to export much more electricity to the United States. Alberta and
00:06:12.120 Saskatchewan, of course, have the petroleum resources. Ultimately, no matter what Trump says, North
00:06:18.920 America will not be self-sufficient in petroleum without the exploitation of the Athabasca oil sands.
00:06:25.160 So that's our strength. And so it seems to me, if we're developing an agenda for talking to Trump,
00:06:31.880 and you notice in his interviews, he uses the word deal about every five minutes. Let's make a deal.
00:06:38.200 Let's make a deal on Gaza. Let's make a deal in the Ukraine. Let's make a deal. He's a deal maker.
00:06:45.560 So our second item, if we want to lead with our strengths, seems to me to be on this area of energy
00:06:52.040 self-sufficiency in which Canada's got a great deal to offer. And let's not talk about tariffs. Let's talk
00:06:57.640 about how to make this continent energy self-sufficient. I'm showing my age on this,
00:07:03.160 but the first time I heard the phrase continental energy security was from J. Howard Pugh with the
00:07:11.160 Sun Oil Company back in the early 1960s. Pugh developed that first oil sands plant in Fort McMurray.
00:07:20.120 He was 80 years old at the time. He was one of the richest men in the United States.
00:07:24.680 You might ask him, what is this old guy doing up in Fort McMurray? He didn't need the money.
00:07:32.280 And the Sun Shipbuilding Company manufactured a lot of the tankers that were used to haul oil in the
00:07:41.800 First and Second World War. Pugh was familiar with how many of those tankers had been sunk
00:07:49.640 by submarine traffic and so forth. And he was convinced that North America was vulnerable from
00:07:56.040 an energy standpoint, particularly a petroleum standpoint. He was going to go let the Texan
00:08:01.080 boys go and find the conventional oil. He was going to go find the unconventional oil and develop it.
00:08:06.600 So this is a subject that's been around for a long, long time. And it seems to me it's very much in
00:08:12.360 Trump's mind and it's something that Canada should cater to. It ought to be the second item on our
00:08:17.400 agenda and talking with them. Well, I agree that the most important issue is immigration and cleaning 1.00
00:08:23.720 up the drugs. I know that Pierre Polyev has tried to hit that straight on with declaring that he would
00:08:29.640 impose life sentences upon fentanyl dealers and kingpins in the drug war. But when it comes to energy
00:08:37.080 security press, and I want to ask you because if it was an easy solution, I think we would have done
00:08:41.480 it already. Obviously, Justin Trudeau's priority and agenda was towards the environment and making
00:08:47.480 sure that everything was green. But it's led to a point where Canada now imports oil from the United
00:08:52.680 States, Saudi Arabia and Nigeria that were not energy sufficient even in our own country, let alone
00:08:59.320 as a continent. So how can we fix this and how can we actually make it so that we don't have to import
00:09:05.800 oil? Well, first of all, we have to permit and encourage pipeline development in this country to
00:09:11.720 be able to get Western resources to Eastern Canada. This has been stalled or objected to or obstructed by
00:09:19.000 the Trudeau government and by the Quebec government. So getting the movement of petroleum in our own
00:09:27.800 country would be an item I think that you're referring to. The other point is that the last people
00:09:35.640 to make these arguments in Washington are the Trudeau gang. Trump thinks of Trudeau as a weak,
00:09:45.800 narcissistic, lame duck leader. He's got no credibility there. Freeland is, in Trump's view,
00:09:53.720 if he gave any thought to it, is the Canadian equivalent of Kamala Harris. Jolie, as a foreign minister,
00:10:03.160 is considered a joke by our own foreign affairs people, let alone the Americans. Guy Beau is
00:10:09.560 considered to be a climate change fanatic. These are people that ought to be sent on a cruise to
00:10:19.800 Antarctica for the next six months and don't let them get anywhere near Washington. This gets back to
00:10:27.320 your point. There needs to be a change of government and get a government that is going to be credible
00:10:33.720 with the Canadian people in dealing with Trump. And the sooner that can happen, the better.
00:10:39.080 But even since all of this news came out and we sort of saw a newfound approach, it seemed like all
00:10:44.760 the parties suddenly wanted to break down interprovincial trade barriers and everybody was suddenly all in
00:10:49.880 favor of trying to figure out pipelines. Even in that scenario, the Quebec Premier still came out
00:10:55.640 and said no to Energy East pipelines. So how do we get something like that approved when you have
00:11:01.880 some sort of veto power by interests in Quebec? Well, I guess maybe the first place is to appeal
00:11:08.600 to Quebec's own interests. Is Quebec interested in exporting more power to the United States as part of
00:11:16.120 the continental energy security. If it wants cooperation from the federal government of the
00:11:20.680 rest of the country with respect to that, then it's going to have to cooperate with respect to the
00:11:25.880 movement of petroleum. The worry in Quebec is that that government is in a lot of trouble too.
00:11:31.720 If there's an election, provincial election next year, you're liable to get a separatist government
00:11:37.960 elected in Quebec, which is even more opposed to pipeline development. So that's going to be a real
00:11:43.640 internal problem for Canada and the next government, no matter who it is.
00:11:49.080 Further to this idea about resource development, it was interesting. Steve Bannon, who used to be a
00:11:54.520 close advisor to Donald Trump, he was on with Global News. I want to play part of this clip because
00:12:01.000 so, Steve Bannon, I'll set it up. He's a US media executive, political strategist, former chief
00:12:07.240 strategist for Donald Trump. And he said that Canada and the Arctic has been thrust into the
00:12:13.320 center of a geopolitical war between Russia, China and the United States. And so whether we like it or
00:12:19.480 not, Canada is the center of that. And we may choose to say we don't want to align ourselves with
00:12:26.280 America, but the reality is if we don't, you have China and Russia knocking at the door. So let's play 0.78
00:12:32.840 this clip. It's a bit longer. It's 45 seconds. But here he is explaining why Canada is so important.
00:12:38.120 China and Russia, the great powers and the United States fighting it out over the Arctic with the
00:12:46.520 vast resources of the Arctic is going to be the new great game of the 21st century. Canada,
00:12:51.240 you are thrust into the middle of that. And quite frankly, you are the greatest, I don't know if
00:12:57.240 target or prize. You're like asking, you're the great prize of that. That is that as you awaken in
00:13:03.240 the geo-economically, he's saying, hey, the United States market is so lucrative,
00:13:07.480 you're going to have to pay a premium to get through the golden door, right? Canada could be
00:13:11.640 all part of that. The geo-economics of North America combined and the geo-strategic interest
00:13:18.760 of North America combined and particularly hemispheric defense all the way from Argentina and Brazil
00:13:23.880 under Bolsonaro all the way up to the Canadian Arctic is what the first half of the 21st century is
00:13:29.640 going to be about. Now, I think it's interesting because he's talking about it strategically.
00:13:35.240 He's being a realist. He's not saying that, he's not trolling. He's not saying like, oh,
00:13:39.640 we're going to take Canada because we want it to be the 51st day. He's saying like, whether we like it
00:13:43.560 or not, this is the future. This is what the 21st century will be about. What's your take on that?
00:13:51.000 Well, I think he makes a very good point. And in fact, I think it's been made even more
00:13:55.800 strongly by Mike Waltz, who's Trump's current national security advisor, that the Canadian
00:14:05.880 Arctic, there's other interests, there's the Russian interests and the Chinese interests in that
00:14:10.680 area. And so Canada is going to have to sharpen up its defense and its development of the Arctic,
00:14:15.720 another area that's been completely neglected by the Trudeau government. So if we're developing an
00:14:22.120 agenda for talking to the United States, now we've got to tighten up the borders, number one. We got
00:14:28.520 the continental energy security and what we can contribute to it, number two. And number three,
00:14:34.600 what are we going to do to beef up our defenses of the Canadian Arctic?
00:14:38.280 I had an author and sort of controversial thinker, Diane Francis, on the podcast a couple of weeks ago.
00:14:44.920 Now, a decade ago, she wrote a book called The Merger of the Century, and how it was a business
00:14:49.160 proposition that Canada could potentially join in with the United States. And what one of the things
00:14:54.120 that she pointed out to me was that Canada has failed to develop the north, like we don't have
00:14:58.760 seaports, we don't even really have roads up there. And if you look at the development of Alaska, and
00:15:03.560 compare it to Yukon Northwest territories, or none of it, I mean, it's just starkly different. The
00:15:09.240 Americans have the ability to build and they focus on that, and they prioritized it. I'm not even 0.64
00:15:13.640 talking about military, I'm talking about even just communities that we don't really have a lot up
00:15:18.120 there. There's not really much that has been built, let alone seaports up there. I wonder,
00:15:23.000 like, why do you think that is? What can Canada do to show that we do have serious sovereignty up
00:15:29.720 there? And maybe talk a little bit about Canada's military, because I know, I think it's the goal is
00:15:36.200 supposed to be 2% of GDP to meet our NATO targets. I think Canada barely spends 1.2% of our GDP. Like,
00:15:43.240 our military is not a serious force. And with all due respect, to the men and women who serve and
00:15:49.400 who wear the uniform. I think everyone admits that our military has become a little bit of a joke in
00:15:55.240 recent years. Well, that's a huge subject. But your first point about there's a need to develop
00:16:02.680 infrastructure into the Arctic, into the Northwest Territories and into the Yukon Territory. Incidentally,
00:16:14.120 the province has done more of that than the federal government has been Alberta. The one big road
00:16:18.840 between Yellowknife and the rest of Canada is from Alberta. It's 600 miles from Yellowknife to Edmonton,
00:16:27.800 and it's 3,000 miles from Yellowknife to Ottawa. So maybe I think the province has got a lot more to
00:16:33.560 do with developing that infrastructure, but that ought to be a priority. And then the second point you
00:16:40.520 make is very valid, that the Canadian military has been neglected, particularly by the Trudeau
00:16:47.720 administration. So the next administration is going to have to beef that up. I think one lesson from the
00:16:52.360 Second World War, while Canada contributed directly in terms of soldiers and equipment, its biggest
00:17:00.760 contribution was basically made by C.D. Howe in organizing defense production. Canada produced a lot of
00:17:10.600 the equipment and the background materials that were needed by the allies in order to conduct
00:17:16.600 activities in the Second World War. And whether particularly NATO would accept if Canada's
00:17:24.680 contribution to NATO included the direct contributions that they're talking about, a percentage of the
00:17:30.360 defense budget, but also what can Canada contribute in that defense production, supporting its allies
00:17:38.200 with equipment and things like that. Will that be counted as a 2%? That's where Canada had a strength
00:17:44.120 in the Second World War and that could be repeated. You need someone like C.D. Howe, though, to do that.
00:17:49.960 And there's nobody like that in the current Liberal government at all.
00:17:53.960 Well, yeah, I mean, Canada does need to focus more on building up its manufacturing base in general. I
00:18:00.040 think that's something that we can take away from these trade threats. I want to go back to this
00:18:04.600 Steve Bannon interview in the Global News report on it. So I'm going to show what that looked like.
00:18:09.400 Their headline says, Trump's plan for hemispheric control. Steve Bannon on why tariffs
00:18:14.120 may only be the start. And they show this sort of scary, ominous picture of Donald Trump pointing
00:18:19.800 to Canada and it's labeled as MAGA land, that, you know, they make it seem kind of dark. But then
00:18:25.720 even if you just listen, Preston, to what Steve Bannon said, he said, you know, Canada's a prize or maybe
00:18:32.520 the target. And he was talking about the golden age of America that Trump has promised.
00:18:37.960 And so I think this is nonsense. I think this is complete nonsense. And the first time Trump
00:18:44.840 mentioned this, he said, well, Canada should be the 51st state with Wayne Gretzky as the governor.
00:18:50.040 Like it was a joke. It was one of his off the cuff jokes. And it should have been treated as a joke,
00:18:57.240 say, haha, that is funny. Let's get on to border security and energy security. But particularly,
00:19:03.480 the central Canadian media, the hysteria in the Toronto Star, for example, and central Canadian
00:19:12.440 politicians took this as a serious policy of the Trump government. And I think I've blown it way
00:19:20.600 out of proportion. It's a ridiculous proposition. For one thing, Trump couldn't get it through the U.S.
00:19:27.000 Congress. There's no way that could happen without getting it through the American Congress.
00:19:32.360 You've got to get that through the Congress as it's formed now. Secondly, Trump's got to watch it.
00:19:39.320 He's a populist leader who's got a populist base. One of those mistakes populist parties can make,
00:19:46.440 and Western Canada has had more experience and knowledge about this than any other part of North
00:19:50.760 America, is if you get elected as a populist government and get off the agenda that got you
00:19:57.640 elected by ordinary people, you will not be the government very long. And there was nothing in
00:20:05.400 Trump's platform about Canada as a 51st state. There was nothing about the Panama. There was nothing
00:20:13.080 about Greenland. And he's got to watch it. His own voters will say, look, we elected you on issues of
00:20:20.680 affordability and controlling this immigration thing. Don't stray from that proposition. The 1.00
00:20:27.320 other thing, why on earth would Trump want to get a hold of Canada in its current condition? If he did
00:20:33.880 annex it, the first thing he'd have is three separatist movements. A separatist movement in Quebec,
00:20:38.520 a separatist movement in Alberta, and a separatist movement in Newfoundland and Labrador. What American
00:20:43.640 president would ever want to get into that kettle of fish? Yeah, I think you're right. Well, and there'd
00:20:51.000 probably be a separatist movement by the Laurentians to separate from the newly formed North America,
00:20:56.200 because they wouldn't want anything to do with it. But the thing that I thought was interesting about
00:20:59.960 what Steve Bannon was saying there was that he wasn't talking about it. I think a lot of the media
00:21:06.760 presented like, you know, Trump has this vision, and it's all about protectionism, and, you know,
00:21:14.520 America first, and all that kind of stuff, which is true. But Steve Bannon said right in his
00:21:20.040 discussion there, that Canada can be a part of it all. So I don't think that he means that from like
00:21:25.080 a sovereignty perspective, like we're going to take Canada. I think he means that Canada can be part of
00:21:29.480 the prosperity, part of the new golden age that Trump wants to build. And we can all be part of this
00:21:35.240 fortress North America, we just need to get our ourself in order, get our get our house in order,
00:21:40.920 mainly with immigration, drugs, and those are the three things. That's an interesting point,
00:21:46.280 Candace, but it bothers me. Why does Canada need to be told by an American president what its future
00:21:52.360 is going to be? Well, why does Canada need some initiative from the United States to restore pride in
00:21:57.960 this country? Where's the capacity to do that ourselves? And what one of my concerns about this
00:22:05.000 whole debate is what it says about the state of Canadian democracy, everything on this agenda,
00:22:11.560 we've talked about beating down internal barriers to trade, strengthening the protection against illegal
00:22:20.600 immigration and importation of drugs, energy security, all of these things have been advocated
00:22:27.720 by Canadians for years, by Canadian think tanks, by Canadian political people, including myself years and years ago.
00:22:38.680 Why is it that that gets nowhere in our democratic institutions? It does not get a reaction from the current
00:22:48.200 government. It's on another agenda that 50% of the country thinks is nonsense. Why does it take some initiative
00:22:56.360 by an American president to do the things that are self-evidently in our own interest and have been
00:23:01.720 advocated by Canadians for years? I think we've got to pull up our own socks, restore some pride in our
00:23:08.840 own country, get rid of these anti-Canadian crowd in the universities and the schools that trash Canada
00:23:17.320 every opportunity they get. How are you going to get pride in the younger people in the country in a future
00:23:22.600 vision? I think we've got to pull up our own socks and we ought not to have to be told to do that
00:23:29.640 by an American president, no matter who he is. Such a good point. And I agree. When the countermeasures
00:23:37.320 were announced, when Justin Trudeau announced the new measures that he was going to take to secure the
00:23:41.160 border, putting more money on, making sure that we have enough people at the border and all this stuff,
00:23:46.440 it's like, why did this take 10 years? This should have been happening from the beginning,
00:23:50.760 not at the very, very end of his role. Well, that leads me to Justin Trudeau and his decision
00:23:56.920 to resign on January 6th. So at least Preston, that's when he told us that he was resigning,
00:24:01.240 but he's still around. So he didn't actually resign. He just intended to resign. He prorogued
00:24:05.560 parliament. And now they're holding a liberal leadership race so that a prime minister can be
00:24:11.560 selected by an elite few. I mean, I think that the leader has already been selected. I think the banks,
00:24:17.800 the World Economic Forum have already given us the next prime minister of Canada, Mark Carney.
00:24:22.840 But as someone who's been advocating for democratic reform and who's been frustrated
00:24:27.800 with the Canadian political system for decades, what did you think of Trudeau's move that he pulled
00:24:33.400 here in early 2025? Well, it's regrettable because it's crippled the country at the crucial time when it 0.60
00:24:41.960 needs strong federal leadership. It's just left the country in limbo. You've got a lame duck prime
00:24:50.680 minister, but still purporting to represent the country. And I'm sure if you could record some of
00:24:58.280 the internal comments that are being made by some of these premiers with respect to whether Justin Trudeau
00:25:04.360 ought to even be convening these conferences, I think it'd be pretty revealing. So it's just regrettable
00:25:11.640 that we've got this lame duck situation. What should have happened was they should have recalled parliament.
00:25:16.520 The fact that you've got this whole crisis situation and the parliament isn't even meeting,
00:25:23.000 they should have recalled parliament. The parliament would have moved a non-confidence motion. We'd be
00:25:28.520 into an election and that would be the process to decide who should be the next leadership of the
00:25:33.720 country. And I know the leaders, they're putting forward Mark Carney, you can imagine what Trump
00:25:40.760 thinks of him. You know, a central banker, an elitist, a snob who has nothing but contempt for the rank and
00:25:51.080 file of people that elected Trump or that will elect the next government in Canada. It's a regrettable
00:25:57.400 situation and the sooner we can get to an election and get a new government, the better.
00:26:03.160 So do you think that the governor general should have said no to Justin Trudeau's request?
00:26:07.160 Yes, I think that should have been done. There's actually a precedent for that occurring
00:26:15.320 in the British parliament and that would have moved things along further. But of course the
00:26:19.880 governor general's Trudeau appointment with loyalties to Trudeau and just did what he said.
00:26:27.800 Well, it's really unbelievable that we don't have a say. I don't know if it's a conspiracy theory
00:26:33.560 because I think it's legal and it could happen, but there's a theory going around online that there
00:26:38.600 won't be an election in 2025, that there's an Act, an Elections Canada Act that says an election should
00:26:44.920 happen every four years, but it's not in the constitution. The law can be changed, it can be
00:26:48.920 amended, that potentially whoever leads the Liberal Party, presumably Mark Carney, could strike another deal
00:26:54.280 with NDP leader Jagmeet Singh to prolong their time in power, blow past that October 2025 election date
00:27:01.800 and possibly not have an election for another 18 months. What do you think of that?
00:27:05.880 Well, I think if they resorted to that, it would be a desperation measure which would
00:27:12.840 almost ensure that they're replaced in that election. And I would think members of parliament,
00:27:18.600 particularly NDP and Liberal members, would think twice about getting part of that kind
00:27:24.840 of an operation. They might be guaranteeing the loss of their own seat.
00:27:28.360 I think they might be losing their own seat anyway. I think Canadians are so frustrated
00:27:33.240 at Jagmeet Singh in particular for propping up this government for so long that he's going to lose his
00:27:38.280 seat. So why would he trigger an election if it just means that he's going to basically get fired? I mean,
00:27:42.600 I think that that's the concern.
00:27:44.360 But again, you can look at the composition of that current department, 153 Liberals, 120 Conservatives,
00:27:51.560 33 Bloc members, three independents. The Bloc members and the independents voting together in a
00:28:01.320 confidence motion would still defeat the government. It's not entirely dependent on Singh, but it's a big
00:28:09.000 mess. What about this story, Preston? We learned at the end of January that Justin Trudeau is going to
00:28:17.160 fill the Senate vacancies before retiring. So he's planning a final wave of appointments to fill
00:28:23.240 the 10 empty seats in the Senate. The move will allow him to mark on parliament for years to come
00:28:29.560 with unelected legislatures. I know you've been a critic or at least someone who has advocated for
00:28:35.640 reform when it comes to Canada's upper house, upper chamber. What do you think of this move by Trudeau?
00:28:41.720 Well, that'd be regrettable too, because that cripples the federal parliament even
00:28:46.840 further. In the end of the day, the House of Commons would have the whip hand over the Senate.
00:28:51.480 The Senate could block legislation from the House of Commons and the House of Commons could pass it
00:28:55.560 again. The Senate can block that, the House of Commons can pass it again. The House of Commons,
00:29:00.360 at the end of the day, can have the whip hand. If the Senate blocked a piece of legislation three
00:29:06.440 times or four times, unelected people appointed by a discredited prime minister, that would make life
00:29:13.960 intolerable. I wouldn't want to be one of those senators. But again, it's a shame that it has
00:29:19.320 to come to that kind of a conflict at a time when the federal parliament should be united and getting
00:29:25.080 down to business. Well, especially when we face a situation where we have an unelected governor
00:29:31.080 general, soon we're going to have an unelected prime minister, and we have a new onslaught of
00:29:37.160 unelected legislatures put into the Senate. No wonder Canadians are losing faith in these institutions.
00:29:43.160 Yes. As I come back to, our democratic institutions need to be
00:29:50.440 strengthened. This current crisis indicates the weakness of those institutions and the fact that
00:29:58.840 it takes some action by an American president to get us dealing with items which our own democratic
00:30:05.000 process should have brought to the top of the agenda and got action on.
00:30:08.680 I want to move on and talk about the Alberta COVID response report. But before we do, I just want
00:30:14.360 to ask you, because we haven't really talked about it, but Danielle Smith, I think, has just been doing
00:30:18.920 a tremendous job advocating for Canada. I heard Ezra Levant, he was on Rachel Parker's show the other day
00:30:24.520 here on True North, and he was talking about how he met with Danielle in the midst of her basically back
00:30:30.920 to back-to-back meetings. She rented a hotel room right in Washington, had a conference room, and
00:30:37.000 apparently her staff had minute-by-minute interview, interview, meeting with different officials,
00:30:42.600 lawmakers, Republican insiders, Republican staffers. It sounded incredible. I mean, just such hard work.
00:30:47.960 The fact that Trudeau and no one from the federal government was doing that, and it fell on a
00:30:52.280 provincial premier is remarkable in and of itself. But I wonder, what do you think of the job that
00:30:59.800 Danielle's doing, and you think she's hitting the right marks in what she's doing? 0.96
00:31:04.440 Yes, I think she's been the strongest Canadian leader on the particular points that we should be
00:31:11.320 emphasizing on the border security. She linked that to the tariff issue the way Trump did on the
00:31:21.640 energy security basis. Alberta premiers have often had a good relationship with the Western governors of
00:31:28.760 the United States who tend to think a lot like we do, and she's been active on that front. So I think
00:31:34.920 she's done a commendable job, and this is a job she never asked for. The provincial premier didn't ask
00:31:42.520 to have to get involved internationally with the United States in this way. She never asked for it,
00:31:47.640 but there's a vacuum. This is not being done by the current leader. Our current federal leader is
00:31:52.840 discredited, and so I think she's doing an excellent job, and people should support her. Some of these other
00:31:58.520 premiers ought to support her. She's providing more leadership than Trudeau, and that is self-evident 0.87
00:32:03.480 to them at these meetings. So I agree with the approach she's taking and believe she should be
00:32:09.560 fully supported. Well, it seems like some premiers are coming around. When they first initially met with
00:32:14.280 the premiers and Trudeau, they signed a joint statement. Danielle said, no, I'm not signing that,
00:32:18.600 and she was sort of the odd man out. But then, you know, over the course of the next few weeks,
00:32:22.440 with her advocacy and Trudeau sort of vacancy, we saw Saskatchewan come around, even Quebec came
00:32:28.600 around to her perspective, and I think it did win the day. I want to talk about this report also
00:32:33.880 commissioned by Alberta Premier Danielle Smith. So she, I think she's one of the only leaders,
00:32:39.480 political leaders in the world to do this sort of introspective look at what happened during COVID.
00:32:45.960 So the Alberta COVID report, it was commissioned by Smith in 2022 with a mandate to explore the
00:32:52.360 province's response to COVID. The task force included prominent medical professionals,
00:32:56.520 including doctors Gary Davidson, Jay Bhattacharya, who's been appointed into the Trump administration
00:33:01.800 now, and Barry Brittle. The final report recommends the provincial government stop providing vaccines
00:33:08.200 for healthy children and teenagers. The report revealed evidence to suggest it was not effective.
00:33:13.960 For example, it highlighted that the original Pfizer vaccines did not prevent death compared to the
00:33:19.800 placebo in their clinical trials in any group. Further, the report alleged that Alberta Health Services
00:33:26.120 removed a dashboard after it showed higher hospitalization rates among the vaccinated than
00:33:32.120 the unvaccinated. It also said there's a lack of reliable data that COVID-19 vaccines protect children
00:33:38.040 from severe cases of COVID. The task force that published the research said that vaccines were not
00:33:43.640 designed to stop transmission. This is all really incredible stuff, things that you could not have
00:33:48.680 even said on YouTube two, three years ago. Now it's out in the open. Again, Alberta is one of the only,
00:33:54.440 if not the only government to do this kind of research and this kind of report. So I wanted to
00:34:00.520 hear your reaction to the report and what you make of it all.
00:34:05.080 Well, first of all, there are two reports that were commissioned by the Alberta government and I
00:34:12.120 chaired the first one. The first one was called the Public Emergency Governance Review Panel and its
00:34:19.880 instructions were to look at the legislation which authorized the initiatives that were taken by the
00:34:26.200 Alberta government to cope with the COVID crisis and to recommend there's changes in the law that had to be
00:34:32.040 made. That report was done, finished February of 2023, recommended a bunch of amendments to the
00:34:41.400 Public Health Act, to the Education Act, to the Alberta Bill of Rights. It takes forever to get these
00:34:46.600 things through. You have to make a presentation to a cabinet committee, you have to be a presentation
00:34:52.200 to the cabinet, there has to be a presentation to the caucus that then has to go to the legal services
00:34:57.240 branch of the Justice Department to do the draft legislation, which then has to be checked with
00:35:01.880 the Treasury branch if it involves spending any more money. But finally, in the fall session,
00:35:08.600 the Alberta government did make a number of those amendments, particularly amendments to the Alberta
00:35:13.400 Bill of Rights to tighten up the protection of rights and freedoms by law during a public emergency.
00:35:20.120 So that was that report. Now this report you're talking about was not to look at the legislation,
00:35:26.360 it was to look at the database that informed the decisions of the government during that period.
00:35:32.200 And as you mentioned, it's produced a number of, it questions the modelling that was done,
00:35:38.920 what was the basis of that modelling, it's questioned the validity of masking of the vaccination program
00:35:47.240 and of the validity and efficacy of the vaccines that were used themselves, the whole list of things.
00:35:52.840 Now the interesting thing too, that panel had about 12, 15 basically medical people on it. It's been reacted to by the
00:36:05.800 College of Physicians and Surgeons, which has a list of people with medical credentials, and its report is
00:36:13.000 contrary to what the scientific advisory group of the government that it had at that time. So you have two
00:36:19.240 groups of medical scientists with conflicting views on what should have been done. And the bigger question
00:36:25.080 is, how do you reconcile it? How does the government bring science to bear on a public issue like the COVID issue,
00:36:32.360 when there's this conflicting opinion within the science community? And we had a recommendation in that report of ours to address that.
00:36:39.560 Two recommendations. One is that the overall coordination of the response to a public emergency like the pandemic should not be assigned to the subject department like the Department of Health,
00:36:55.720 because it's got broader ramifications in health. It should be assigned to the Alberta Emergency Management Agency. That's what it's for.
00:37:04.920 And if it had been responsible, it would have had a lot more than just internal medicine people
00:37:11.080 on that scientific advisory panel. It would have had a psychiatrist and it would have had people dealing
00:37:18.600 with the mental health impacts. It would have had an economist. It would have had a broader group.
00:37:23.960 And our second recommendation was that that Alberta Emergency Management Agency should have a science,
00:37:31.560 a senior science advisor whose job is to have an inventory of the science that you need to deal with
00:37:38.120 the issue and who could adjudicate disputes between groups like the panel that was currently done and the people
00:37:46.440 that actually manage the the the crisis. So that's a long rambling answer. But I think the the bigger problem
00:37:54.200 here is that you've got two two groups with all with good to the layman good scientific credentials, but they
00:38:03.640 don't agree. The College of Physicians and Surgeons has labeled this report as misinformation.
00:38:09.960 So how do you adjudicate that? And our suggestion was with the senior science officer attached to
00:38:16.200 the Emergency Management Agency. Well, I appreciate you laying that all out and explaining the difference
00:38:22.280 between the two reports. But I think both of them had the same goal. And I actually think it's a good
00:38:27.480 thing. Because the fact that that the science doesn't all scientists don't all agree, doctors
00:38:32.840 don't all agree, that's the reality of the world we live in. And that's the frustration that so many
00:38:36.600 of us had during COVID, when people like Justin Trudeau would say, we believe in science, and our method
00:38:42.920 is completely science based. And it's like, well, no, it isn't, because we have scientists over here that
00:38:47.720 are saying the exact opposite thing. So I think proving the disagreement and proving that there are
00:38:52.760 different sides was was kind of the point. I did want to ask you about the media response,
00:38:56.440 because from my perspective, it was quite hysterical, labeling it disinformation, misinformation,
00:39:03.160 you know, saying these people were anti science, it brought me back to 2020. In 2021, it was like
00:39:07.480 we were there all over again, with all of these people in the media, quoting experts, saying that
00:39:13.080 the other side was was wrong. What did you think of the media response there?
00:39:17.480 Yeah, well, I think it was it's misguided. There were headlines, the worst reporting,
00:39:24.840 I think on it was by the CBC, which is almost hopeless when it comes to reporting anything
00:39:29.320 that's going on in Alberta, or anything the initiative by Premier Smith. But they had
00:39:35.800 headlines that Alberta doctors oppose the panel report. Well, there were as many Alberta doctors on
00:39:45.880 the panel as there were with the College of Physicians and Surgeons, that's just nonsense.
00:39:52.520 And what is needed, though, is when there is this conflict, some way of adjudicating it,
00:39:57.640 and somebody with the responsibility to do that, okay, we've got this group that's saying this,
00:40:01.560 and this group saying this, let's hear the arguments out and see who carries our judgment.
00:40:07.160 And we've tried to provide that mechanism, that recommendation has not been acted upon yet by the
00:40:13.240 Alberta government, but we're hopeful that it will.
00:40:15.400 Well, it's such a great initiative. And I appreciate you being one of the ones that was
00:40:20.440 spearheading it. Preston, I want to be respectful of your time. But you know, while I have you,
00:40:24.840 I have to ask, you know, we are just closing up nine, almost 10 years of Justin Trudeau's rule. And
00:40:31.560 I think if you look at public opinion polls, one of the sort of unfortunate, sad things that's
00:40:36.360 happening is that pride in Canada has gone way down. I think only 34% of Canadians now feel a
00:40:42.520 pride in our country. When you look around and you see just everything from crime to homelessness,
00:40:49.800 to drug addiction, the cost of living, cost of groceries, cost of gas, the number of Canadians
00:40:54.040 using a food bank, there's every statistic that you look at economically is bad. I mean, it's a sad
00:41:00.840 state of affairs in Canada, to say the least. I'm wondering what, like, what can be done at this
00:41:05.880 point in Canadian history? What's your sort of final assessment of the Trudeau years? And what do
00:41:10.520 you think it's going to take to turn Canada around and turn ourselves into a great country once again?
00:41:16.520 Well, I think this Trudeau year is something, but he's labeled it a lost decade. Canada's lost
00:41:24.760 international prestige. It's lost credibility with the G7. It's lost credibility with NATO. It's lost
00:41:32.840 credibility internationally. But the worst effect is that it's lost its own self-confidence. And I think
00:41:41.800 a major effort needs to be made to restore that. And that's going to be dependent on the next government,
00:41:46.600 which is not going to be, in my judgment, is not going to be a liberal government. And I think there's
00:41:52.600 things individual Canadians can do. When you hear people trashing the country, and even ask your
00:41:58.920 schoolchildren, ask your grandkids, I say this to seniors that are going to university, if they have
00:42:06.200 a professor or a program that is trashing the country, protest that. This is anti-Canadianism. Try
00:42:14.200 and root out the anti-Canadianism from our institutions. And one simple practical suggestion I've had to
00:42:23.080 friends is to fly the flag. When you go to the U.S. and go through the Midwestern towns or even in New
00:42:32.040 England, every eight or nine house has one of these American flags on it. Americans, for all their 0.87
00:42:41.640 faults that we continually point out, are basically proud of their own country. And one of the ways they
00:42:46.680 show it is to fly the flag. Well, why don't we fly the flag? Why don't we fly the flag? If somebody
00:42:51.800 watching and you're concerned about this anti-Canadianism, at least fly the flag, fly the
00:42:56.040 flag on your house, fly the flag on your business, fly the flag on your church, fly the flag as a
00:43:01.800 symbol that you have pride in what this country is and what it can become, and are opposed to
00:43:08.120 anti-Canadianism in all its shapes and forms.
00:43:12.360 Well, I think that's a perfect note to end the interview. Preston Manning, I really appreciate
00:43:17.400 your time and your insights. Thank you so much for joining the show.
00:43:19.800 Well, thank you very much, Ken. It's good to talk to you.
00:43:21.880 It's always a pleasure.