00:00:00.000What is the proper role for Canada and for NATO in the conflict in Ukraine?
00:00:04.380What can we do and what should we be doing? I'm Candice Malcolm and this is The Candice Malcolm
00:00:08.000Show. Everyone, thank you so much for tuning in. So the conflict continues in Ukraine. The
00:00:18.040bloodshed is horrific and the humanitarian situation is getting worse by the day. I
00:00:23.100wanted to bring in someone who knows and understands the region and NATO better than
00:00:27.600anyone I know. My friend Garnett Janis. Garnett is the MP for Sherwood Park, Fort Saskatchewan. He
00:00:32.040currently serves as a conservative critic for international development. He also sits on the
00:00:35.920Foreign Affairs and International Development Committee as well as being a member of the
00:00:39.820Canadian NATO Parliamentary Association. Actually Garnett, I think the last time I spoke to you
00:00:43.980had just gotten back from a trip with NATO in some capacity. I think it was to Latvia. Correct me if
00:00:50.480I'm wrong. I think it was in January and you sort of talked a little bit about how this was unfolding
00:00:55.380and it seems like, you know, the situation has gotten so much worse in, obviously in the last
00:00:59.740couple of days here, but obviously since then. So can you just set up what's going on, what's
00:01:05.900happening and help us make sense of the situation in Ukraine? Yeah, Candice, thank you for the
00:01:10.600opportunity to speak to you. And a lot has happened in Canadian politics and in international
00:01:15.560affairs since we last spoke. But it was right after I had gotten back from a trip to Latvia and
00:01:22.220Sweden, pairing with the with the Minister of Foreign Affairs. And it was in the context of
00:01:26.500the NATO summit that was taking place in Riga in the sort of late fall. You know, at the time,
00:01:32.820I was really struck by the fact that people were talking very seriously about the fact that that it
00:01:39.000was important for the world to get ready for the possibility of various moves that Putin could be
00:01:43.980making against Ukraine. And really, right up until this, this latest attack, and I think it's important
00:01:51.240to acknowledge that the invasion of Ukraine began in 2014. But this, this renewed invasion, this further
00:01:57.660invasion that took place right right up until that happened, there was a number of possible scenarios
00:02:04.580that were considered in terms of the action he might take, trying to consolidate the Russian
00:02:11.360position in eastern Ukraine, seeking certain certain territorial expansion, kind of jumping
00:02:18.120off from some of those existing, existing points of occupation. But what we've seen is really the
00:02:24.420worst possible scenario, which is a full on assault at all points coming in from, from Belarus, which,
00:02:33.500unfortunately, has more and more fallen under the the effective control of the Putin regime. So, so attacks
00:02:40.880from, from, from eastern Ukraine, previously occupied areas, as well as, as amphibious attacks on the
00:02:47.640Ukrainian coast and incursions from, from, from Belarus, so are really bloody violent all out assault on,
00:02:55.760on Ukraine. It's been, it's been tragic to see. It's also been inspiring to see the courage of the Ukrainian
00:03:02.360people. The, the, the, the kinds of, of things we often see and associate with politicians, being, being that very negative perception, and yet the, the remarkable courage that Ukrainian political figures have shown,
00:03:17.360uh, the president of Ukraine saying, I don't want to ride, I want, I want support and, uh, staying with his people, uh, the, the, the, the resilience, the, the resistance, the courage of the Ukrainian people has just been, been inspiring, uh, to see in the midst of this.
00:03:31.360It's, it's also been inspiring to see how, uh, everyday people in Russia have come out, taken to the streets.
00:03:38.360Uh, I was at a rally in Edmonton, uh, just, uh, just on the weekend, uh, with people of, of Russian and Belarusian origin, uh, who were coming with Ukrainian flags out to, uh, specifically show that they stood with Ukrainian people against the Putin regime as well.
00:03:55.160Uh, and, uh, when, when, uh, people in Russia do this, when, uh, members of the Canadian Russian community who may have family members back home, uh, that's inspiring to see as well.
00:04:05.000So it's a, it's a dark time, uh, and, uh, it's also a time in which we're seeing, uh, these bright lights of, uh, of courageous individuals and communities of people that are standing up against, uh, the, the aggression of the Putin regime.
00:04:18.020That's great. Yeah. So, uh, what do you, how do you see this playing out, Garnett? What do you, what do you, what do you see happening next?
00:04:23.340What do you think the proper role of NATO is, and, and how do you think we can get through and get out of this conflict?
00:04:30.240Well, uh, what we have said as a conservative party, um, and, and I fully support the approach we've taken here is to, is to try to engage and work with the government to, um, uh, to, to have a, uh, be particularly emphatic about the need to have a constructive tone here to put forward, uh, proposals that we think should be, should be undertaken.
00:04:49.700Uh, we support the action the government has been taking to date, and we also have been calling for further action.
00:04:56.560Uh, I, um, I had been at the foreign affairs committee specifically highlighting the benefits of sanctioning individuals tied to the Putin regime, investing Vladimir Putin's own money, uh, abroad and using, uh, Navalny's list.
00:05:11.760Alexei Navalny, a key, uh, Russian opposition leader has put out a list of people who he thinks should be sanctioned.
00:05:17.160So using that list as the basis for, for sanctioning.
00:05:20.280Now I was calling for that prior to the invasion.
00:05:23.040Uh, I thought that the, the, um, the previous invasion, which started in, in, in 2014, uh, the other acts of, uh, of, of violence that the, the regime has been responsible for, uh, justified.
00:05:35.040Those sanctions being put in place prior to an invasion and as a deterrent step, uh, there, there was a failure of deterrence here.
00:05:41.480I mean, there's, there's no doubt about it.
00:05:42.900If, uh, if, if possibly if, if further steps had been taken that could have deterred the invasion in the first place, we wouldn't be in this situation as it is.
00:05:51.220But in any event now, given where we are, uh, those, those, uh, those tough sanctions are really important.
00:05:57.580And, um, and, and I, I was pleased that just today, the prime minister announced that they would be, uh, applying sanctions to individuals based off Navalny's list.
00:06:09.040So it does, it does show that opposition matters that when we repeatedly say something in committee, uh, using Navalny's list as a guide and that it shows up in the prime minister's own talking points later.
00:06:19.660It's, it's, it's, it's encouraging to see that's, that's what we want in opposition.
00:06:22.360It's not to just be able to criticize the government.
00:06:24.460It's to actually see them take our suggestions from time to time.
00:06:26.800So, um, what, what, what, what we want to see NATO do, uh, Canada and, and our partners is to have, uh, sharp debilitating sanctions targeting the Putin regime, uh, that, that force, uh, the, uh, the Putin regime to, to reconsider the approach they've taken.
00:06:43.660Uh, significant support to the Ukrainian people in the form of, uh, of, of, uh, humanitarian and lethal, uh, lethal weapon support and, uh, debilitating sanctions targeting the Putin regime.
00:06:56.200Uh, that, that combination, uh, can, uh, can help, uh, tip the balance hopefully and support the work that Ukrainians are doing.
00:07:04.000So, I, I mean, when, when I hear sanctions, it seems to me like that's, that's something that you take against a hostile regime sort of early on, um, not in the midst of a hot war, right?
00:07:13.000Like we, we have, uh, debilitating sanctions against Iran and the Iranian regime gets sort of weaker and weaker over time.
00:07:20.000Um, but they also sort of strengthen their totalitarian grip on their own people.
00:07:25.000Um, I, I, I, I wonder if there's like, like another non-sanction related, uh, efforts that, that can be made.
00:07:33.000I mean, I mean, you're, you're part of the committee with NATO.
00:07:37.000What do you, what do you think when you hear, uh, people talk about expanding NATO into Ukraine or the whole idea of a no-fly zone?
00:07:43.000Uh, do you think that would, that, that that's going to be necessary at some point, uh, or, or do you see this sort of, uh, ending, you know, with a peace negotiation?
00:07:52.000Do you think that this conflict can end with peace, with a negotiation, or do you think it'll just continue until it hits a hot war or one side surrenders?
00:08:00.000Um, well, I mean, it's, it's a bit of a cliche to say that all conflict ends with talks, um, you know, in, in some form, but, uh, you know, um, the, the, the,
00:08:13.000the circumstances of any negotiations, I think would, would have to be ones in which, uh, the, the Putin regime was, was so, uh, able to see the costs to itself associated with ongoing conflict, uh, that it, that it lost the will to perpetuate the, uh, the ongoing, uh, acts of violence.
00:08:32.000So, um, the, the conversations that, that, that might happen under those circumstances matter, of course, but the, the circumstances that happen in the lead up to that are, are critically important as well.
00:08:44.000Uh, I mean, let's, let's state the obvious that Russia's a nuclear power, uh, that there are significant risks that have to be taken into consideration in the form of, um, of points of, of, uh, of escalation, like, like would be involved in, uh, creating a no-fly zone.
00:09:00.000I mean, that does, that does imply, uh, pretty clearly that we would be, um, we would be shooting down Russian planes and that, and that's, uh, I mean, that would be a very significant, uh, escalation, obviously.
00:09:11.000Um, I, I mean, I, I think, look, the, the, the goal for the NATO Alliance is to, uh, be effective in deterrence first and foremost.
00:09:21.000And, um, and I think I would argue that, uh, NATO expansion has been successful in deterrence in the cases where NATO has expanded.
00:09:30.000Uh, there, there has not been aggression like this against the Baltic States, against Poland.
00:09:36.000Um, I think the, the reality that aggression against those states would automatically mean a hot war between Russia and NATO.
00:09:45.000That's a significant, uh, significant deterrent.
00:09:48.000And the Putin regime went into Ukraine in a context in which, uh, the, the, um, you know, the, the American administration in particular had already made clear that, um, that there would be sanctions and there would be other forms of retaliation.
00:10:03.000But when it came to fighting, uh, Ukraine would be on its own.
00:10:06.000So, um, so there was, there was, I think, uh, in retrospect, clearly there was a failure of deterrence there.
00:10:12.000Um, you know, retrospect is what it is though.
00:10:16.000As, as you say, I mean, we have to deal with, with what we're dealing with right now.
00:10:19.000And, and I, I, I would say it's, it may not feel like enough, but strong coordinated sanctions, uh, can have a, a really powerful impact in terms of starving the Putin regime of the capacity to rate, to wage war.
00:10:35.000Um, so, and there's, and there are so many more things we need to be doing conservatives have been talking for instance, about the oil and gas sector.
00:10:43.000And the fact that, uh, that Europe's dependence on Russian gas has limited their ability to impose sanctions and in response to past events.
00:10:51.000And so we need to step up as a country in terms of being able to supply Europe with alternative sources of, uh, of energy.
00:10:57.000So it's not as dependent on, on, on Russia.
00:11:00.000Um, these kinds of measures do have a significant impact.
00:11:03.000And, um, you know, I, I, I look at what's going on and I, I think, man, I wish we could do more.
00:11:10.000Um, and we should always look for ways to do more, uh, in a way that's, uh, that's prudent and that, um, and that, that leads the Putin regime ultimately to, um, to, to back away or to other actors within Russia to, to say enough is enough.
00:11:27.000Well, I'm glad to hear you, you say, uh, clearly and, uh, unequivocally that, that, uh, you don't want this to turn into a, uh, hot war between NATO and Russia, because that will be, uh, like you, like you mentioned and alluded to really terrifying with a nuclear power.
00:11:41.000I was going to ask you about Canada's oil and gas sector and the part it plays, but you kind of pivoted there yourself.
00:11:46.000So I'll, I'll, I'll move on to a question I wanted to ask you about, uh, our prime minister, Justin Trudeau.
00:11:55.000London had a meeting with Boris Johnson at 10 Downing street.
00:11:58.000And, uh, what we saw were, uh, people protesting him to the extent that he couldn't even get to the front door and he had to go, um, into the back door.
00:12:06.000So I'm, I'm just wondering if, uh, you think that Canada and Justin Trudeau's reputation, uh, have taken a hit, uh, over his handling of the trucker convoy.
00:12:15.000I know you were critical of, of his, of his use of the emergency powers.
00:12:19.000Uh, how, how do you think Canada's reputation has changed?
00:12:22.000Well, I, I think, um, uh, the use of the emergencies act was a big mistake.
00:12:26.000I spoke against it in the house of commons.
00:12:28.000I think it raises significant questions about the health of our democracy, about the government's commitment to civil liberties.
00:12:33.000And, uh, these are, these are arguments that we're, um, we're gonna continue to make.
00:12:38.000And, uh, obviously, um, this also, uh, informed my private members bill, which I know we're gonna, we're gonna talk a little bit about later, trying to provide greater legislative protection for people on the basis of their political views in Canada.
00:12:51.000Uh, it is noteworthy that, uh, countries around the world, uh, that, that, that peoples around the world, media outlets, uh, paid some attention to what was happening.
00:13:00.000And, uh, you know, I, it's sort of interesting for me.
00:13:03.000I, I'm always listening to some, some podcasts and, and, uh, news items from around the world, obviously to get perspectives from around the world.
00:13:10.000And there was a period of time when everybody was talking about Canada and, uh, and, and not, not in a good light.
00:13:18.000Um, I think, uh, people, centrists, progressives, people that weren't invested in the partisan dynamics here in Canada, uh, even from the center left, were very surprised by the heavy handed illiberal approach.
00:13:32.000Uh, approach that Justin Trudeau was, uh, was taking.
00:13:35.000And, um, and I think that that's in the context where people generally have a very positive view of Canada.
00:13:41.000They see Canada as a, as a great country, uh, characterized by freedom and pluralism.
00:13:46.000Uh, and, um, and, and so it was kind of this, this moment of dissonance for a lot of people in terms of looking, looking at what, what happened.
00:13:53.000And let's acknowledge that there was some, some hyperbolic commentary about what was happening in Canada from, from external sources as well.
00:14:00.000Um, but, uh, but look at, I don't think it helped us in terms of projecting a positive image around the world.
00:14:08.000And I don't think it helps us, uh, when we try to, uh, speak to other countries about what, how they're responding to different protest movements that happen in, uh, in other places.
00:14:19.000Um, so, so this was, this was, I think part of the dynamic and, and I think it will have some, hopefully it won't have, have lasting implications for Canada's brand, but I think it will certainly have lasting implications for the prime minister's brand.
00:14:32.000I think one of my favorite videos that came out from the Tucker convoy and so much of it, you know, in today's era, you don't have to go through intermediary intermediaries like the CBC and the global mail.
00:14:41.000You can see for yourself what's going on, uh, in the news.
00:14:44.000And there was this one clip that people were circulating on Tik TOK and it made it onto Instagram and it was Justin Trudeau characterizing, uh, the protests as, uh, you know, people waving intolerant flags, uh, people stealing from the homeless people, desecrating monuments.
00:15:01.000And, uh, people being like racist and hateful, something like that.
00:15:04.000It was, it was a Trudeau speech and someone had taken a Trudeau speech, like the sound and laid it over images of the exact opposite, like the exact opposite of those that, uh, characterization was what was happening.
00:15:15.000It was like people were feeding the homeless.
00:15:16.000There was free food for everyone the entire time.
00:15:19.000Uh, people were cleaning the monuments and keeping the streets clean.
00:15:22.000And, and, you know, you had this like impeccable, uh, you, whatever it was, captains, street captains that were making sure that the sidewalks were shoveled and that there was no garbage.
00:15:31.000Uh, you know, the people of all these different backgrounds.
00:15:33.000So, so everything that Justin Trudeau said, it was the exact opposite that was playing out in real life.
00:15:37.000And I think that that was pretty powerful.
00:15:40.000Garnett, I do want to talk to you about your private members bill because, uh, it's, yeah, it's, it's really interesting.
00:15:45.000So you, you introduced private members bill to amend the Canadian human rights act to protect those who are discriminated against because of their political beliefs.
00:15:53.000So why don't you explain to us what you seek to accomplish with this?
00:15:58.000So, uh, the Canadian human rights act, uh, prohibits discrimination on the, on the basis of various criteria, uh, race, sexual orientation, um, uh, national origin, uh, marital status, religion, uh, age, gender.
00:16:16.000Uh, and my proposal is to add, uh, political beliefs, uh, and activity as prohibited grounds of discrimination.
00:16:23.000Um, I guess a couple of things just to say, uh, off the top on this number one, uh, there is an important distinction between discriminating with among ideas and discriminating against individuals based on the ideas that they hold.
00:16:35.000Uh, clearly it's legitimate to think some political ideas are superior to other political ideas or to think, um, and, and that's already an issue with, uh, with other criteria.
00:16:45.000For instance, uh, you can't discriminate on the basis of religion, but you're allowed to think, Hey, my religion is, uh, it represents the fullness of truth and someone else's, uh, doesn't, um, there's, there's a difference between discriminating about ideas and discriminating against individuals.
00:16:59.000So in terms of prohibiting discrimination against individuals on the basis of their political beliefs or activities, it's about saying that, uh, that, that governments or banks, uh, shouldn't be able to fire someone or deny someone service on the basis of their political beliefs.
00:17:15.000Uh, that if you're, if your employer finds out that you're a conservative, they can't fire you because of that.
00:17:21.000Um, uh, that, that, uh, government, uh, cannot say we're going to treat different groups of people differently on the basis of their political beliefs or their, their involvement in, in, in political activity.
00:17:35.000And, um, and I, I think this intuitively makes sense.
00:17:39.000It respects the freedom of individuals to be involved in, in political speech and activity without fear of reprisal.
00:17:46.000I think many Canadians would actually be surprised to find that it wasn't already, uh, protected.
00:17:51.000Um, but we are seeing cases and, and, uh, the government's response to the convoy is one example where I think a lot of people saw, uh, political, political discrimination, uh, happening.
00:18:02.000Um, in terms of maybe the, the tone and the approach being taken to one group of protestors that was different than, uh, what had been applied in, in the past in analogous cases where people were, were, uh, were protesting with respect to, uh,
00:18:15.000to, uh, to different, uh, causes, but this is something that I was working on long before, uh, this, this particular incident.
00:18:22.000And, and, um, it's in part, uh, inspired by, um, uh, by some of the work just being done looking at, uh, so-called woke capitalism when big corporations are trying to push political agendas.
00:18:34.000Uh, there's, uh, there's, uh, there's a book called woke ink that, uh, that I would, I would recommend by, uh, an American tech entrepreneur named Vivek Ramaswamy.
00:18:43.000And, um, you know, his, his insight is that.
00:18:46.000We are seeing this phenomenon of, of companies that, uh, have political objectives that are, are using their corporate power to advance those political objectives and have, uh, the protections that were invented as being for, uh, for private sector companies to encourage innovation.
00:19:02.000But they're actually now using the, the, the power and the protection that comes with being a private sector corporation to advance political objectives.
00:19:10.000And that's really out of step with what the purpose of a corporation should be.
00:19:15.000It allows, uh, corporations to, uh, by, by influencing their employers, by, uh, by controlling, uh, content within their platform to be able to advance a, a political agenda.
00:19:26.000So, um, kind of looking at it from, from the perspective of government discrimination, as well as, uh, the way that certain corporations may try to, to, uh, exercise corporate power through discriminating on the basis of political views.
00:19:39.000Uh, this is something that I think needs to be addressed.
00:19:42.000Um, and I'll just make one, one final comment about that.
00:19:44.000And it's, uh, that, that, although this is a, a new idea at the federal level that responds to new, new emerging realities and challenges, it's not particularly radical.
00:19:54.000Provinces and territories have some degree of protection, uh, in their, in their human rights, uh, legal frameworks for, uh, some political belief or they use similar terms.
00:20:04.000So, uh, this is, um, uh, this is not unprecedented.
00:20:08.000I mean, many Canadians live in jurisdictions where in terms of, uh, of provincial jurisdiction, they already have these protections.
00:20:15.000Uh, but some provincial jurisdictions and federal jurisdiction, these protections, uh, do not exist.
00:20:20.000So, uh, so I'm putting this out there as an amendment to the Canadian human rights act.
00:20:24.000And, uh, I've gotten a lot of positive commentary on it, uh, so far.
00:20:29.000And, um, uh, so it's, this is, this is where we're at and, uh, and hoping to continue the conversation, get this bill passed at some point.
00:20:38.000I think so many Canadians were just sort of dismayed and beside themselves to see the doxing of people who had donated to the, uh, trucker convoy give send go campaign.
00:20:48.000Uh, so many people ended up losing their jobs.
00:20:51.000Uh, well, at least, at least a handful of high profile ones.
00:20:54.000People, some people were, uh, intimidated, uh, stores had their, you know, vandalized and protested.
00:20:59.000Uh, would, would your private members bill, uh, protect those people?
00:21:03.000Uh, would, would it, would it like retroactively help them, uh, get, get their jobs back if, if it were to be passed?
00:21:09.000Uh, how, how would, how would it work in that situation?
00:21:11.000Well, I don't think a bill like this would apply, uh, retroactively.
00:21:15.000Um, uh, and there is a distinction between someone facing discrimination and someone just having people, uh, be mean to them, right?
00:21:24.000Um, there, there, uh, if, if somebody, if somebody wants to boycott a business on the basis of the political activity of the owner,
00:21:32.000uh, there's no, um, there's no, uh, good, good mechanism for, for dealing with that legislatively.
00:21:40.000I mean, I would, I would generally tell people, you know, if you, if you're looking at what restaurant to go to do so on the basis of, of what food you like, not who the owner votes for.
00:21:49.000Uh, I think, I think, uh, you know, we, we promote a better, more harmonious society if we don't seek to, uh, to punish each other for having the wrong political views through, through commercial means.
00:22:00.000But, um, but it, I mean, a bill like this couldn't, couldn't and wouldn't address those kinds of boycotts, but it would address the case of, of somebody, um, firing an employee or denying someone service on the basis of their, their political views.
00:22:13.000Let's say, uh, somebody had, uh, made a small donation to, uh, to the convoy and their employer found out about it.
00:22:19.000Um, this, this bill would, I think provide some protection, uh, from that person being fired.
00:22:25.000And, and it would apply across the board.
00:22:27.000I mean, you could imagine a case theoretically where there's a conservative employer who finds out that his employee is, uh, is volunteering for, for the NDP on their time off and says, Nope, that's not, that's not how we vote at this grocery store.
00:22:40.000Um, and I think most people would say that that's, that's unreasonable just to someone shouldn't be fired, uh, because of their religion, because of their sexual orientation, because of their marital status.
00:22:48.000Uh, someone shouldn't be, uh, be fired for engaging in political activism that reflects their, their sincere convictions.
00:22:55.000Uh, there would be, would be one area of exception.
00:22:57.000And that would be where it's a bona fide occupational qualification, where it's, where it's actually necessarily related to the work being done.
00:23:04.000So, uh, if a, if a member of parliament who's like, I, as a conservative member of parliament parliament, my, I hire staff that generally share my worldview.
00:23:14.000And that's reasonable because it's a political workplace.
00:23:17.000Uh, there, there may be situations like for, for election workers, where people, uh, part of the criteria for hiring someone is political neutrality.
00:23:26.000And, and that is a case where it's legitimate to take into consideration someone's political activity.
00:23:32.000Um, but in the case of, of most workplaces that are not political by nature, uh, where the activity is, uh, is not political advocacy, but it's just, uh, commerce making things, selling things.
00:23:44.000Uh, people shouldn't face employment related consequences, uh, for, for engaging in political activity that reflects their sincerely held beliefs.