Juno News - The Andrew Lawton Show： Red Carpet for Omar Khadr

00:00:00.000 Welcome to Canada's Most Irreverent Talk Show.

00:00:06.660 This is the Andrew Lawton Show, brought to you by True North.

00:00:12.600 Coming up, a hero's welcome for Omar Khadr.

00:00:15.880 A CBC leadership candidate takes aim at cancel culture

00:00:18.860 and what the road to a better equalization deal looks like for Alberta.

00:00:25.340 The Andrew Lawton Show starts right now.

00:00:30.000 Hey, welcome everyone to another edition of the Andrew Lawton Show

00:00:35.460 here on True North, Canada's Most Irreverent Talk Show.

00:00:38.640 And I thank you very much for tuning in.

00:00:41.240 Going to be talking about Western alienation later on in the program

00:00:45.460 and specifically whether Alberta can drive this discussion without national buy-in.

00:00:51.860 And this is something that we see unfolding, a dialogue about whether Alberta,

00:00:56.360 which, under Jason Kenney's government, is at least trying to advance this fair deal notion,

00:01:02.560 can force the federal government to the table, essentially.

00:01:05.880 So we'll be talking about that and a great essay that was written on the subject

00:01:09.320 by a University of Calgary professor later on in the show.

00:01:13.000 Also, a couple of little odds and ends that have come up in the last week,

00:01:16.560 such as the effects of a compelling campaign launch video,

00:01:21.160 which I know is just a riveting topic, but bear with me.

00:01:23.860 It's an interesting video we saw from Aaron O'Toole this week.

00:01:27.280 But I have to begin with a little bit of personal news

00:01:31.380 in the sense that it involves something I'm going to be doing.

00:01:35.100 It's not me in the capacity as Andrew Lawton, the random guy,

00:01:38.040 but Andrew Lawton, the True North fellow and host of the Andrew Lawton Show.

00:01:42.340 On February 10th, which is, I guess, less than two weeks away,

00:01:46.740 I'm going to be going to Halifax, where I will be attending to report on

00:01:52.200 Omar Khadr's keynote address at Dalhousie University.

00:01:56.800 This is his first time speaking at a live public event.

00:02:00.880 He did appear before a studio audience on that CBC show last year,

00:02:05.140 Tout le monde en parle, but this is the first time he's putting himself forward like this

00:02:09.540 to speak before an audience at a ticketed event, a public event.

00:02:13.020 I'm going to be there, and this is something that I will say, first off,

00:02:18.120 we are crowdfunding because it's important that we, as an organization,

00:02:21.740 not getting that media bailout money are able to lean on our supporters

00:02:25.240 to do the work that we're doing.

00:02:27.400 But I also think it's important that there is a fair and honest accounting

00:02:32.520 of what he talks about and what unfolds at that event.

00:02:37.100 And True North, as it so happens, broke the story of this event,

00:02:41.560 which had been announced by Dalhousie, but didn't get any coverage or pickup.

00:02:45.860 And True North reported on it.

00:02:47.200 It's called Children's Rights Up Front, Preventing the Recruitment and Use 0.98

00:02:50.820 of Children in Violence.

00:02:52.800 It's an event at Dalhousie, co-hosted with the Romeo Dallaire Child Soldiers Initiative.

00:02:59.560 And at this event, Omar Khadr is going to be speaking alongside Ishmael Beah,

00:03:04.740 moderated by a CBC host.

00:03:07.180 So you've got all the boxes checked here, and that's Nala Ayyed. 0.99

00:03:11.540 And as the event description says, it's, quote,

00:03:14.300 a rare opportunity for public discussion around the complex issue of child soldiers.

00:03:20.420 Mr. Khadr and Mr. Beah will highlight their experience in conflict

00:03:24.880 and why they are passionate about the protection of children.

00:03:29.320 Okay, let's unpack this a little bit if we can.

00:03:35.860 The child soldier narrative is an important one to dismantle here because

00:03:39.940 child soldiers are victims.

00:03:42.420 When we hear child soldiers, that has a very specific meaning.

00:03:46.120 Child soldier designation was actually something that never applied to Omar Khadr.

00:03:53.020 And this was testified to by Howard Anglin, who's a lawyer,

00:03:56.260 formerly the executive director of the Canadian Constitution Foundation,

00:04:00.260 also worked in Stephen Harper's prime minister's office.

00:04:04.800 And the whole point about this dynamic is that if you call him a child soldier,

00:04:10.400 it naturally follows that everything else has to be awash, that nothing else matters.

00:04:16.400 And Omar Khadr is, as a matter of fact and as a matter of law, 0.85

00:04:20.260 a convicted murderer and terrorist.

00:04:22.100 Now, we understand he wants to appeal that murder conviction.

00:04:26.580 We understand he has since recanted his confession when he confessed

00:04:30.320 to throwing the grenade that killed Sergeant Christopher Spear and injured Sergeant Lane Morris.

00:04:36.360 We ultimately have this idea that has been put forward that we are not to criticize him

00:04:43.740 because, oh, he's just a child soldier.

00:04:45.660 And there is a huge, huge problem with this.

00:04:49.500 Number one, doesn't apply as a matter of law, given the circumstances.

00:04:53.840 And we'll talk about those very shortly.

00:04:56.380 But also, I think the bigger dynamic here is that we are to accept the media narrative

00:05:02.020 that this is not someone who can be challenged, not someone who can be questioned,

00:05:05.800 and not someone who should be criticized, but rather someone who should be celebrated.

00:05:12.100 And I said a couple of years ago, I've been following the Cotter case for quite some time,

00:05:17.260 that if you accept at face value what the media is saying,

00:05:20.780 they're going beyond just the idea that you can't criticize him.

00:05:25.480 They're saying this is something to be celebrated,

00:05:27.900 and this is why he's been getting the red carpet treatment.

00:05:30.960 I remember when he first was released from custody.

00:05:34.260 He was released on bail, and he went to his lawyer's house in Edmonton, Dennis Edney's house,

00:05:40.620 and he had a little mini press conference in the driveway.

00:05:45.140 And what happened in that was one of the questions was like,

00:05:47.560 what are you having for dinner tonight, I recall?

00:05:50.240 And what are you most looking forward to doing?

00:05:53.680 And questions that you would never see asked of anyone else

00:05:57.940 who had just been released on bail from a murder conviction.

00:06:04.520 It just wouldn't happen.

00:06:05.920 So this double standard that the media has had with him is absolutely insane,

00:06:11.660 and it's still going on.

00:06:12.800 And the more time passes between his release from jail and now,

00:06:17.480 or the more time passes from when that initial firefight in Afghanistan happened and now,

00:06:22.920 the easier it becomes to whitewash everything that's happened in Omar Khadr's life.

00:06:28.260 And the facts of the case are actually quite simple.

00:06:30.880 He went over as a teenager to Afghanistan, was part of a terrorist group.

00:06:36.900 His father was an Al-Qaeda financier.

00:06:39.160 He was not just involved in that firefight where he had, again,

00:06:42.940 previously confessed to throwing the grenade.

00:06:45.200 He was also on video making IEDs.

00:06:48.280 And we know that IEDs have killed dozens of soldiers, Canadian and other allied forces.

00:06:54.760 He may have even more blood on his hands than we previously acknowledged or previously understood.

00:07:02.940 That's the reality of Omar Khadr.

00:07:05.140 And this is a matter of fact.

00:07:06.720 This is a matter of public record.

00:07:09.220 Now, whether he has renounced terrorism,

00:07:12.660 whether he has renounced radicalism,

00:07:15.180 whether he condemns the family members that if you accept the victim narrative,

00:07:21.220 were the ones who victimized him,

00:07:23.380 these are relevant questions that I don't see asked.

00:07:26.800 Now, he's done the interviews with the Toronto Star,

00:07:29.980 and he's only really done interviews with people that are going to give him softball questions.

00:07:35.580 In fact, at that press conference with Dennis Edney at his side,

00:07:40.260 one of the things that Dennis Edney said at the beginning is,

00:07:42.520 if we hear any questions we don't like, we're going inside.

00:07:44.860 So there was basically a groundwork laid there that you could only ask him questions

00:07:49.860 that would please Omar Khadr's legal team.

00:07:52.980 So let's have an honest and fair discussion of Omar Khadr.

00:07:58.260 But that involves if he is going to go down this road of being a public figure,

00:08:03.160 answering these questions.

00:08:04.640 And so far, that's not happening.

00:08:06.400 So far, though, no one is actually asking them.

00:08:10.380 The media is not asking them.

00:08:12.060 I mean, this event is moderated by a CBC journalist.

00:08:16.880 He's being presented as a keynote speaker.

00:08:19.840 So already, CBC has its personality complicit in an event that is aimed at promoting him in a positive light.

00:08:28.700 So CBC, which expects us to believe it's fair and transparent and unbiased and accountable and all of these things,

00:08:35.420 CBC is driving this event and the discussion of the event.

00:08:40.040 And it's not going to be a hardball question because the basis of the event is that Omar Khadr is a victim

00:08:45.780 and not to be criticized.

00:08:47.420 And this is happening at Dalhousie University, potentially with public money,

00:08:53.080 which brings me to the interesting aside to this discussion,

00:08:58.140 which I think is not the most important aspect of it,

00:09:02.940 but still is important to look at,

00:09:04.660 which is whether he is being paid by Dalhousie.

00:09:08.020 Now, it is a free country, yes.

00:09:11.520 But I also think that with that freedom does not come a guarantee of being subsidized.

00:09:18.280 So if Dalhousie is using tuition money or government money to pay for Omar Khadr,

00:09:23.080 I think the taxpayers have a right to know.

00:09:25.240 And I asked that.

00:09:26.340 I asked the Dalhousie University Media Relations team.

00:09:29.680 I asked the Romeo Dallaire Child Soldiers Initiative.

00:09:33.720 And they wouldn't even respond to a very simple question.

00:09:37.540 Is Omar Khadr receiving a speaking fee or honorarium?

00:09:41.140 That was the question.

00:09:42.400 Is Omar Khadr receiving any speaking fee or honorarium for his participation in the event?

00:09:48.360 And even if he's not, you still have to deal with travel from Alberta,

00:09:51.760 accommodations, stuff like that.

00:09:53.820 But just would not answer the question.

00:09:57.120 And I think everyone on Twitter was dealing with the idea that,

00:10:01.640 oh, well, if there's not answering, the answer is probably yes.

00:10:04.780 But this is, I think, a relevant aspect of it.

00:10:08.380 Now, I am, if you have not heard, a free speech absolutist.

00:10:12.860 I believe in free speech rights.

00:10:15.360 I believe in free speech on campuses.

00:10:17.400 I believe in free speech for Canadians.

00:10:20.160 And that includes, in my view, Omar Khadr.

00:10:24.100 It does.

00:10:24.980 It includes Omar Khadr.

00:10:26.200 If he is walking free and should be behind bars, that is a failure of the justice system.

00:10:32.620 But the answer to a failure of one system is not to deprive rights that are ultimately

00:10:39.200 would, that depriving would ultimately indicate failure in another system.

00:10:44.540 So I believe that if he is in the eyes of the law walking around free,

00:10:50.540 he has a right to speak freely as an individual.

00:10:56.960 Now, this does not mean that he has the right to be guaranteed a platform.

00:11:01.540 It also does not mean that he has the right to be subsidized, which gets back to the question

00:11:07.160 of who's paying.

00:11:08.440 Now, I do not have any tolerance for deplatforming.

00:11:13.120 So I will be very upset if someone pulls a fire alarm to cancel his speech, like people

00:11:19.760 do for conservative speakers.

00:11:21.540 Or if people shout him down when he's trying to talk and basically disrupt the event so

00:11:26.880 that it can't go on.

00:11:27.860 This is not what I'm about.

00:11:29.640 And I don't think it's what anyone else should be about.

00:11:33.420 It is, in my view, a gross error in judgment that he was invited.

00:11:39.200 It speaks volumes about the priorities of Dalhousie and of the Romeo Dallaire Child Soldiers Initiative

00:11:45.780 that he was invited.

00:11:48.380 But it is their event.

00:11:49.980 And in this particular context, the proper course of action is to let it go on.

00:11:54.180 And that's why I'm going there.

00:11:55.500 Lest there be any doubt, I'm not going to protest, I'm not going to demonstrate, I'm

00:11:59.400 going to report.

00:12:00.660 What he says is going to enter the public record.

00:12:03.740 And because the media has not been asking him any tough questions, we have very little

00:12:09.620 from him to really establish what it is that he thinks and what it is that he feels.

00:12:15.220 And I actually got into a bit of a Twitter back and forth, I won't say a fight, with Jordan

00:12:20.220 Goldstein, a name that may ring a bell because he was on the show last week.

00:12:23.600 And he took aim at a True North petition that was calling on people to sign and remind Dalhousie

00:12:31.820 that Omar Khadr is a convicted terrorist and murderer.

00:12:34.200 And what I said to Jordan is that it's not my petition, so I don't have any skin in the

00:12:38.020 game there.

00:12:38.840 But I do think that it's important to note the petition that True North is doing or did

00:12:44.060 was not to have the speech cancelled.

00:12:46.480 If anything, it was to have the proper context of the speech and of the speaker understood.

00:12:52.820 It was to have people remember what Omar Khadr's background is.

00:12:57.220 Now, Jordan said, yeah, but, you know, people do this with conservative speakers, get them

00:13:00.720 labeled a racist, a transphobe.

00:13:02.500 And I understand the place he's coming from.

00:13:04.660 And Jordan Goldstein is coming at that not from a place of being a sycophant for Omar Khadr,

00:13:10.300 but similarly being a free speech absolutist.

00:13:13.500 So it was something that I very much took as a constructive dialogue.

00:13:18.960 And it actually got me thinking a fair bit about this.

00:13:22.800 Is Omar Khadr the same as anyone else who wanted to speak at a campus in the eyes of

00:13:29.360 the law?

00:13:29.820 And at this point, yes.

00:13:31.080 I mean, he's had some restrictions and many of them have been taken away.

00:13:34.860 I don't know which ones are left, but speaking rights were never curbed.

00:13:38.740 So in the sense that he has a constitutionally protected free speech, I agree.

00:13:43.940 And in the sense that he has a guarantee of a platform, like I said before, no one has

00:13:51.080 an obligation to be invited and paid a speaking fee by a university.

00:13:55.140 But if they decide to do that, that is their and by extension, his platform.

00:14:01.000 So the answer to this is not to shut it down.

00:14:03.700 It is not to silence.

00:14:05.420 But I also don't think that that's the discussion people are having when we say, what on earth

00:14:11.800 are you thinking?

00:14:12.440 The guy is a convicted murderer. 1.00

00:14:14.120 The guy is a convicted terrorist.

00:14:15.800 We're talking about a guy who served time in Guantanamo Bay, which does not make him

00:14:20.700 a victim.

00:14:21.640 It reminds us of the circumstances that led to that.

00:14:26.340 And a guy who on one hand says, oh, well, no, it's just my father and that, but still

00:14:31.420 has not condemned or denounced that family.

00:14:34.720 In fact, his sister, Zainab Khadr, who has said that even if he did kill Sergeant Christopher

00:14:41.040 Spear, it's not a bad thing, she's lionized and supported Osama bin Laden, he wanted to 0.98

00:14:47.120 get bail restrictions eased so that he could have a better relationship with her, so that

00:14:52.180 he could visit her without supervision and talk to her.

00:14:55.400 So correct me if I'm wrong, but if your family was the problem and your past actions were

00:15:03.280 a result of your family's mistakes, why would you want to actively fight to be in touch and

00:15:09.960 in communication with that very same family?

00:15:12.600 And this is one of the several anomalies that we see in the Omar Khadr case, and again, an

00:15:18.860 aspect of this that the media just is not discussing and needs to discuss.

00:15:24.420 So I get very frustrated when people say, oh, he was just a boy.

00:15:29.780 Okay, he was young.

00:15:32.000 He was 15.

00:15:33.340 And I also think we do as a society need to do a better job at letting people grow, giving

00:15:39.240 them the opportunity to grow, giving second chances when they're due.

00:15:43.120 But we're not talking about a guy who he tweeted something unpleasant when he was 15.

00:15:47.240 We're talking about a guy who, by his own confession, killed someone and was involved in a family and

00:15:53.760 an organization and a network that was, in fact, linked with radicalism and family that continues

00:16:00.760 to have links to radicalism and to extremism.

00:16:04.780 So you can't say these aren't relevant questions.

00:16:07.120 You can't say he gets a permanent pass, and you can't say that this is the guy that should

00:16:12.040 be on the cross-country lecture circuit, getting potentially subsidized by taxpayers and getting

00:16:17.920 CBC contributing to the red carpet treatment, which is exactly what's happening when CBC is

00:16:23.340 moderating this exclusive event.

00:16:26.800 So let's be honest here.

00:16:29.240 The people that are saying we shouldn't ask these questions, the people that are giving him

00:16:34.360 this red carpet treatment are people that are essentially turning a blind eye to extremism.

00:16:40.600 They're turning a blind eye to terrorism, and they're turning a blind eye to one of the 0.85

00:16:45.660 most notable examples in Canada of radicalism and terrorism.

00:16:52.820 And that is what happened with Omar Khadr overseas and the family network that was a very high rank.

00:16:59.180 These were not junior players in Al-Qaeda.

00:17:02.260 His father was part of that inner circle.

00:17:04.320 Bin Laden was at one of the sisters' weddings.

00:17:06.720 And then it all comes full circle because she was later married to Joshua Boyle.

00:17:10.480 But I won't even get into the Joshua Boyle stuff in this particular episode of the show.

00:17:15.380 So these are all real questions, and the media just isn't asking them.

00:17:20.080 And to challenge Omar Khadr to say, hey, I think we need to understand who he is and what

00:17:26.240 he is and what he said and what he's done is not anti-free speech.

00:17:30.020 You can support his right to speak while criticizing the judgment of those who are making that speech

00:17:36.900 happen.

00:17:37.360 And you can support the right for people to say, yes, I'm a big fan of Omar Khadr,

00:17:42.020 while also not being a fan of the narrative that they're peddling, which is one that just

00:17:48.480 doesn't hold up under scrutiny.

00:17:50.520 So I still continue to believe that sunlight is the best disinfectant, which is why we're

00:17:56.300 going to Dalhousie.

00:17:57.520 I'm bringing a videographer there.

00:17:59.220 Got my tickets to the event.

00:18:00.820 We're going to watch.

00:18:01.780 And yeah, I am going to legitimately listen.

00:18:04.520 And I must stress, I don't want people to shut it down.

00:18:08.740 This is something that would make us no better than the left and its cancel culture that we

00:18:15.760 decry in every other set of circumstances.

00:18:18.940 And yes, I realize there's a difference between someone who's a convicted terrorist and Jordan

00:18:23.560 Peterson and Megan Murphy.

00:18:25.100 I mean, I don't think there's any equivalence there.

00:18:27.400 But I do think it's amusing to look at the double standard of the left.

00:18:31.340 The same people that think Jordan Peterson's opinions on gender identity are violence are

00:18:38.680 fully prepared to accept someone who has actually been convicted of violence, which I find is 0.95

00:18:45.420 just brazenly hypocritical.

00:18:47.100 But again, we're not talking about stooping to that level. 0.96

00:18:50.580 So we're going to go there.

00:18:51.880 If you can contribute to this, like I said, we don't get the $600 million bailout fund.

00:18:56.180 You can head on over to tnc.news slash donate.

00:19:00.640 Or if you just go to andrewlottonshow.com, there's a link to donate.

00:19:04.180 And we'll actually be doing the show live from Halifax the day after the event.

00:19:09.280 So we'll do a bit of a postmortem of what's happened there.

00:19:12.300 We got to take a quick break when we come back.

00:19:14.800 More of the Andrew Lawton Show here on True North.

00:19:20.360 You're tuned in to the Andrew Lawton Show.

00:19:26.020 You know, the downside of doing a show that's pre-recorded, even if it's recorded a few hours

00:19:31.240 before it's released, instead of doing something live, is that you sometimes just narrowly miss

00:19:37.300 news, which is exactly what happened last week on the show when we had a great chat with Spencer

00:19:42.740 Fernando.

00:19:43.420 We were talking about the Conservative Party of Canada leadership race, had a grand old time.

00:19:47.880 And then literally as the episode was uploading to YouTube and iTunes and all of these other

00:19:54.620 services, the news broke that Pierre Polyev was bowing out of the Conservative leadership race.

00:20:01.440 And at this point, it's too late to do anything about it.

00:20:03.620 And it was great, though, because in the interview, Spencer Fernando was like, oh, yeah, you know,

00:20:07.100 I think Pierre Polyev's got a really good shot.

00:20:08.820 And then as people listen to that, he's already gone.

00:20:11.380 So that is the magic of radio falling apart.

00:20:14.580 But it is interesting still, nonetheless.

00:20:16.900 And one of the things is that with Pierre Polyev out of the race, it's really left a lot

00:20:23.520 of room on the right because Peter McKay is many things, not a fire-breathing blue Tory,

00:20:29.480 though.

00:20:29.600 So it's left some room on the right.

00:20:31.640 And we've seen in this vacuum some renewed interest from people that previously said

00:20:37.100 they were out, most notably Candace Bergen, who said she was out.

00:20:40.640 And now she says, well, you know, according to a National Post piece, she is considering

00:20:44.860 it.

00:20:45.560 You also have the idea of potentially now Aaron O'Toole running as a fire-breathing blue Tory,

00:20:53.320 which brings me to his launch video, which I actually thought was pretty great.

00:20:57.640 Why don't you take a look at this?

00:20:58.620 Who's going to fight for auto workers who just saw the last car roll off the line?

00:21:03.240 Who's going to fight for forestry workers who just watched another mill close?

00:21:07.140 Who's going to stand up for those who wear a uniform of service to protect us at home

00:21:11.460 and abroad?

00:21:12.300 Who's going to defend our history, our institutions against attacks from cancel culture and the 1.00

00:21:17.440 radical left?

00:21:18.420 The stakes are high for Canada.

00:21:20.100 I'm Aaron O'Toole, and I'm running to unite conservatives on the path to victory.

00:21:24.360 Yeah, using terms like cancel culture and radical left, these are things that I do.

00:21:28.940 They're not things I expect politicians to.

00:21:31.000 So it certainly made my ears perk up when I saw and heard Aaron O'Toole take aim at that.

00:21:36.720 And I think the particular context was just the egregious tendency we see of removing statues,

00:21:43.660 because there was actually the image behind of one such statue being removed.

00:21:47.840 I believe that one was from Victoria, but this idea that he is going to be taking aim at the

00:21:54.820 radical left is an encouraging one.

00:21:56.660 It's not the Aaron O'Toole we've seen historically.

00:21:59.780 I've always seen him as a bit more of a consensus builder.

00:22:02.800 But he also said in a follow-up in a National Post article that I'm going to pull up that the

00:22:09.020 party can't be a mushy middle party.

00:22:11.680 And I think this was actually fascinating because Aaron O'Toole was saying that it will

00:22:18.060 just be a liberal party if Peter McKay is the leader, and Aaron O'Toole needs to be the

00:22:23.480 leader for it to remain a conservative principled party.

00:22:26.940 So this is something that I think is very fascinating because Aaron O'Toole is a smart guy.

00:22:35.000 He's a veteran.

00:22:36.240 He is someone who's been in the private sector as well.

00:22:39.460 He was Veterans Affairs Minister.

00:22:40.760 So he's got experience inside and outside of government.

00:22:44.940 And he also knows that the conservative party needs to be a conservative party.

00:22:50.500 And this is something I was talking about weeks ago, I think in the very first episode of

00:22:54.340 the show, that if the conservative party just becomes this extension of the Canadian centrism

00:23:01.880 fantasy that, well, it's a party that just depends, as many people have heard me say before,

00:23:08.800 just basically a list of promises with blue colors.

00:23:13.020 So I think that the conservative party needs to take this leadership race and really go back

00:23:19.780 to the basics and say, what are our non-negotiables?

00:23:22.180 What do we believe?

00:23:23.280 What are the things that we'd like?

00:23:24.820 And what are the things that you can't live without as a party and as a movement?

00:23:28.580 And if the answer to that is something like, take the carbon tax, there are conservatives

00:23:35.580 that like the carbon tax, apparently.

00:23:40.340 Michael Chong got more than one vote.

00:23:42.160 So apparently in 2017 in the leadership race, there are conservatives that like the carbon

00:23:46.220 tax.

00:23:46.900 Well, the conservative party is not a pro-carbon tax party.

00:23:50.020 So if you're a conservative who likes a carbon tax, is that a non-negotiable?

00:23:54.240 If so, you're not a conservative.

00:23:55.680 You're not a conservative in the current context, which means that the conservative movement has

00:24:02.880 to be filled with people that are prepared to take stock of their values, of the party's

00:24:07.440 values, and decide, is this a party in which I fit?

00:24:12.220 Is this a tent that there's room for me under?

00:24:14.740 And this is the dynamic we've talked about with social conservatives in the past, where

00:24:18.860 they have to decide, okay, you know, maybe the party is not a pro-life party, but is it

00:24:24.620 a party that has a respect and an allowance for pro-lifers?

00:24:29.120 And if the answer to that is yes, that might be enough for a pro-life conservative to say,

00:24:34.300 all right, I have a place in the conservative party.

00:24:37.120 Whereas if the party has a leader that's actively hostile to that, and we talked about that Pierre

00:24:42.320 Pollyev comment in La Presse where he was basically saying, you know, you're not going

00:24:46.420 to at all have an inch in my party. 0.93

00:24:50.420 So this is where there's going to be a lot of introspection, I hope.

00:24:56.120 And Aaron O'Toole is saying, listen, we've got to be a conservative party.

00:25:00.200 Now, if he is authentic in this, and this is something that'll come up when we sit down

00:25:04.520 for an interview throughout the course of this leadership campaign, then I think he's

00:25:09.020 really going to take a good chunk of support from Peter McKay and pretty much pick up a lot of the

00:25:16.220 support that Pierre Pollyev would have had, who seemed to be previously the one running as that

00:25:21.080 blue Tory. So that is, I think, fascinating. And just on the note of political videos here.

00:25:27.600 So his launch video, I thought was great for a couple of reasons. I think it was punchy.

00:25:31.840 It gave a bit of his story. It had all the right notes for conservatives.

00:25:36.660 You look at Peter McKay's On the Alternative, and epileptics should not watch it. It's just like 0.72

00:25:43.320 flashing rapidly words at you. But if you string the words together, it's like someone did political

00:25:49.260 slogans by Mad Libs. It's like, Canadians are strong because Canadians make it strong. And

00:25:54.460 strong Canadians strong make strong man Canadians. And I actually think that's his slogan for the

00:26:00.360 general election campaign already done. So my gift to you, Peter McKay. And then like Canadians are 1.00

00:26:05.560 free because Canadians make it free. And if you look at these, I'm like, I have no idea what he's 0.99

00:26:11.500 saying. I have no idea what he stands for. I have no idea. And again, I'm going to listen. I'm waiting

00:26:16.860 for the platforms. And if he comes out and has a really great solid platform, I'll reevaluate.

00:26:22.240 But I get a lot more of what Aaron O'Toole stands for from Aaron O'Toole's launch video than I do about

00:26:29.220 what Peter McKay stands for from Peter McKay's launch video. And that's a huge problem. Because

00:26:35.240 when you're running, not to Canadians, but you're running and directing a campaign only towards

00:26:42.680 conservative members, or potential conservative members, you got to tell them what kind of conservative

00:26:47.120 you are. And you've got to tell them what kind of conservative party you want. And if you don't do

00:26:53.340 that, it's easy to just blend in and be noise, especially if there is a larger field of candidates,

00:26:59.140 probably not 2017 large. But still, you've got a number of people that are running, I think our

00:27:04.140 tally, I don't even know the number now, but we're up to three, four people from caucus that are well,

00:27:09.600 three people from caucus plus Peter McKay, who's formerly from caucus, you've got at least four people

00:27:15.520 from outside of elected office. So you're already up to eight right there. Nine, because Rick Peterson

00:27:20.820 also got in, he got a point 67% of the vote last time. And maybe this is his year, who knows. So

00:27:27.360 that's something that will be interesting to watch as well. Just as a bit of an odd one, I say that I

00:27:33.980 like politicians to give you some clarity about what they stand for. Sometimes they give you too much

00:27:39.420 clarity, such as the case with Luke Fernandez, a Quebec politician who suggested that the coronavirus

00:27:46.400 has had a positive outcome for the city of Wuhan in China, because it has reduced the carbon footprint

00:27:54.340 in Wuhan, China. Yes, he said that there's no automobile traffic, no air flights. And now Wuhan

00:28:01.740 is the only city that will meet its greenhouse gas reduction targets. The way to this necessary

00:28:06.980 degrowth will happen when all the debates have been in vain. And he claimed when he was criticized

00:28:14.860 that he was just trying to convey that we need to take climate action. And I don't think when you

00:28:19.420 celebrate that something that killed people has lowered the carbon impact, that that is the most

00:28:26.320 effective climate change argument. Although previously, and by previously, I mean like three

00:28:31.560 days prior, Monsieur Fernandez had announced that perhaps legalized suicide, assisted suicide should be

00:28:39.840 available for people who want to reduce their carbon footprint. And there's no better way to reduce

00:28:45.640 your carbon footprint than by dropping dead, apparently. So this is going to be the next frontier

00:28:50.580 as the government goes through the assisted suicide battles. But he had said, could we, quote,

00:28:56.400 for environmental, social and economic reasons, decide that we want to receive help to die,

00:29:02.720 so as not to be a burden for our family or society in general. So this is great. So now if you're

00:29:10.020 mentally ill and you want to commit suicide, you just have to claim you're doing it for the 1.00

00:29:14.600 environment and no one can stop you. My goodness. Quebec. I mean, Quebec, it's a part of the country. 0.99

00:29:19.880 I get it. But no politician in Ontario or Alberta could get away with that. So maybe there's something

00:29:25.400 to learn from Quebec, at least about, you know, electing more interesting politicians. We've got to take

00:29:31.380 a quick break when we come back talking about equalization and Western alienation here on the

00:29:36.720 Andrew Lawton Show. You're tuned in to the Andrew Lawton Show. Welcome back. The topic of Western

00:29:51.500 alienation is a big one and one that I hear nonstop from people. And I think that the longer it goes on,

00:29:58.080 the more time passes from the federal election, the more pessimistic a lot of Albertans are

00:30:03.300 that Alberta will have a seat at the table and Alberta will get a fair deal. And that's actually 1.00

00:30:08.520 the name of the panel that the Alberta government has convened, the fair panel. And I spoke about

00:30:13.580 this back in Red Deer at the Freedom Talk with Drew Barnes and MLA with Danny Hozak, this idea of what

00:30:20.880 it would take. And that conference was, you may remember, broken up into three parts. There was

00:30:25.880 people who believe in separation, people who believe in confederation, and the what ifs,

00:30:31.540 the people who, OK, if we were to do it, what would we have to keep in mind? What would we have

00:30:36.640 to look at? And I think that the anger is certainly there. The frustration is there. But what would that

00:30:44.360 process look like? What needs to happen to get there? I want to talk about an aspect of this

00:30:49.180 with Professor Reiner Knopf, who's a professor emeritus of political science at the University of

00:30:54.440 Calgary and a Fraser Institute senior fellow. He wrote an essay on this refining Alberta's

00:31:00.320 equalization gambit, looking at really the constitutional realities of the dynamics that

00:31:06.420 Jason Kenney wants to inject into this. Professor joins me on the line now. Thank you very much for

00:31:12.440 joining me. It's good to talk to you, sir. Well, thanks for having me on. So let's talk about this idea

00:31:17.640 of how you get to that discussion, because there seems to be a lot of disagreement from people,

00:31:24.100 certainly those outside of Alberta, about whether Alberta can force this national dialogue,

00:31:30.660 specifically in equalization.

00:31:34.020 Well, it's a very good question. I mean, the title of my piece is Refining Jason Kenney's

00:31:40.820 Equalization Gambit, and let's think a little bit about what gambit means. It's a move in a game like chess

00:31:48.740 or a political game, where you take the risk of losing something in order to gain an advantage elsewhere.

00:31:56.900 And I think that's what Premier Kennedy is doing here. He wants, you know, equal, he wants, he says he wants to

00:32:09.520 take equalization out of the Constitution. But he knows that that requires an amendment,

00:32:17.760 getting the consent of Ottawa and seven provinces, having 50 percent of the population. And he knows

00:32:23.200 that's highly unlikely, impossible, I would say. So what's his real goal? He's risking a loss there.

00:32:32.000 Well, he just wants to get people to the constitutional negotiating table,

00:32:35.920 so he can fight his good fight for fairness against things like discriminatory tanker bans,

00:32:45.120 no more pipelines laws, getting the TMX pipeline built. And if things don't work in the regular

00:32:55.600 political fashion, then he's saying, well, we'll have a constitutional conference on an

00:33:01.360 equalization amendment in order to elevate our fight for fairness to the top of the national agenda.

00:33:09.280 And that, of course, assumes that he can force people to come to the negotiating table. He thinks

00:33:17.360 he can do that with a referendum. The point of my paper is to argue that that's not enough.

00:33:23.760 He's been bedazzled by arguments about referendum. He still has to have one. But he needs another tactic.

00:33:34.160 So let's talk about two aspects of this. I want to get to what that other tactic might look like in

00:33:40.800 a moment. But there is, I think, an impracticality in that if you can't get other provinces to agree or the

00:33:47.840 country to agree on a lot of those policy issues you mentioned, like pipelines and energy, how likely is it

00:33:53.920 you're going to get them to agree on constitutional reforms, which have a much higher threshold, as you

00:33:59.920 mentioned earlier, to get anything done? Well, it's getting them to the constitutional table

00:34:10.000 is a way of, as Kenny keeps saying, elevating the issue higher up. You don't actually have to get

00:34:19.280 an equalization amendment. You just have to get them around the table to talk about these things.

00:34:25.440 He says many times that no particular outcome is guaranteed. It's just, let's get everybody around

00:34:36.560 the table. I mean, he's trying to do all of this politically in many, many other ways now. And he's

00:34:45.040 quite clear that if some of the things that I mentioned a few moments ago about, you know, the TMX

00:34:51.520 pipeline getting built, some modification of pipelines law, scrapping discriminatory tanker

00:34:59.440 bands, if some of those things happen, then he won't pursue this other option.

00:35:06.400 Let's talk about the duty to negotiate, because this was, you note in your paper,

00:35:11.120 declared by the Supreme Court in the 1998 secession reference as a tool, in Kenny's view,

00:35:17.600 to bring reluctant governments to the table. But you say there's not, there still is a flaw to his

00:35:23.280 belief there. Well, that case, the 1998 secession reference, was about Quebec's secession.

00:35:32.240 And the court introduced this idea of a duty to negotiate. If Quebecers voted on a clear majority,

00:35:42.320 voted in favor of a clear question on secession, there was a duty of the rest of the country to

00:35:47.280 negotiate. Everybody was bedazzled by this new duty to negotiate. And the argument ever since has been

00:35:53.280 mostly about whether that applies outside the secession context. And Kenny thinks it does.

00:36:05.520 It does. But the vast majority of constitutional scholars, now including me, I've changed my mind

00:36:13.200 on this, think it does not. There are too many strong arguments against that. But what nobody's

00:36:21.520 paying attention to, and what I'm trying to focus some attention on, is that the Supreme Court in that

00:36:27.200 same case did say, in very general language, that there was a duty to negotiate just about any kind

00:36:34.720 of amendment, including an equalization amendment, that requires multilateral consent, if that's,

00:36:43.440 if that's initiated in the constitutionally prescribed manner. What's right in the Constitution

00:36:48.560 Act 1982, which is legislatively initiating it, through a legislative resolution. It's a very simple

00:36:55.840 thing. It's a lot simpler than a referendum. Kenny still has to have his referendum for reasons we

00:37:03.280 can talk about. But if he relies just on that, he's inviting other governments to ignore him, pointing

00:37:11.440 to all the constitutional scholars who say that a referendum can't force anybody to the table, except

00:37:17.120 in the case of secession. So, I mean, there are two aspects to this. There's obviously the political

00:37:24.080 route that he might take, and how that impacts the standing of Alberta and other provinces and

00:37:29.760 the federal government, public opinion. And then there's the legal route. And which would you say

00:37:34.160 on the legal side is the path of least resistance to get that outcome that Alberta wants? 0.93

00:37:41.760 Well, I mean, path of least resistance is the right formulation. There will always be resistance.

00:37:48.960 But the path of least resistance, he has to have a referendum because, well, let me turn it around.

00:37:57.200 He has to introduce a legislative resolution in favor of an amendment on equalization. That will

00:38:05.360 get people to, I mean, that clearly triggers the duty to negotiate laid down by the 1998 secession

00:38:13.520 reference. He still has to have a referendum because Alberta has a law on the books called

00:38:19.600 the Constitutional Referendum Act, which says we will not introduce a resolution on a constitutional

00:38:28.080 amendment, the constitutionally prescribed mechanism. We will not do that unless we've had a referendum

00:38:34.160 first. But he does have to do, and so I'm saying he's got to do both. He still has to have his

00:38:39.200 referendum, but he can't just rely on that to bring people to the table. So the referendum, though,

00:38:44.800 is this, I mean, I would argue that the referendum is necessary to obviously go through those legal

00:38:52.240 checkboxes that need to be checked, as you mentioned. But I think that's also important on

00:38:56.160 the political side as well, because he needs to basically show that he's got a lot of strength going

00:39:02.240 into any negotiation. That's true. There's a political dimension to this. So let's imagine,

00:39:13.200 Jason Kenney holds a referendum. He gets a massive support to delete equalization from the Constitution.

00:39:20.640 He calls up all his fellow premiers, and he says, let's come to the negotiating table. And some of them

00:39:28.160 say no. And he says, well, you have to, because the Quebec secession reference said you did.

00:39:33.440 But they might come because of the political pressure you're talking about. But they can

00:39:39.040 ignore him if they want to. And they will ignore him if they really want to. If he adds this very

00:39:47.360 simple second step of the legislative resolution that's prescribed in the Constitution, they can't

00:39:52.640 ignore him. That's all. I mean, people can negotiate at any time for any reason. The question is, can he

00:40:02.560 force them to? Yeah. And I also, though, think that old adage that leading a horse to water doesn't mean

00:40:10.400 you can make a drink applies here is that even if you can compel people to the table, there's no guarantee

00:40:15.920 of any outcome or certainly not a favorable one. And he himself, Premier Kennedy, says that

00:40:24.880 consistently when he talks about this. He says there is no guaranteed outcome. He also indicates

00:40:31.680 that we're not going to do this for a couple of years unless other things fail. It's kind of a last

00:40:37.440 resort mechanism. There is no guaranteed outcome, but it will at least force things a little higher on

00:40:45.600 the agenda by putting everybody around. They may not stay around the table very long. They may tell

00:40:51.040 them to forget about it. But that itself provides opportunities for political pressure. I know it gets

00:41:03.520 outside of the essay specifically in this case, but I do think there's a worthwhile point to put to the

00:41:11.040 table here. Do you think that just with looking at other dynamics in Canadian history and even in

00:41:17.440 Quebec's case, do you think that the solution is going to come from outside of the Constitution here?

00:41:23.360 Well, I think ultimately it will. But, you know, Peter Russell years ago wrote a very famous piece

00:41:31.520 on the political use of legal resources. And constitutional arguments are always invoked in political

00:41:42.000 controversies or certain kinds of political controversies. Legal cases provide legal resources

00:41:48.080 that, you know, each side will try to leverage. And that's what this is all about. I mean,

00:41:54.560 it's ultimately a political question for sure that's the case. But legalities make a difference.

00:42:05.040 Very much so. The essay is Refining Alberta's Equalization Gambit. The author,

00:42:09.840 University of Calgary Political Science Professor Emeritus Reiner Knopf. Professor,

00:42:14.720 thanks very much for your time today. Great chatting. My pleasure. And I don't know whether that's a cheery

00:42:20.560 note or not for Albertans that are wanting more independence. I mean, obviously the answer is that

00:42:25.680 there's no such thing as a seamless route to get what you are looking for out there. But I also think

00:42:31.840 that it stresses that the referendum is pivotal, not just on the political side, but also on the

00:42:36.960 legal side. So one way or another, there needs to be public input on this. And I would say public buy

00:42:43.120 in from Albertans. So we'll be following the Western alienation dialogue. And I'm actually going to be

00:42:48.240 in April back at another conference on this subject. I was at one in November in Red Deer,

00:42:53.600 and I think the other one's in Red Deer again. The Freedom Talk conference put on by Danny Hozak,

00:42:58.320 who I ended up interviewing for True North. And we'll be talking a lot, especially as the fair panel

00:43:05.760 will have gone further along about where things are standing there. But that's coming up in a few

00:43:10.080 months. We got to get to that point first. In the meantime, thank you all for tuning into the show.

00:43:14.480 Thanks to Rainer Knopp and everyone who supports the program. We'll talk to you in a couple of days.

00:43:19.280 Thank you, God bless, and good day Canada.

00:43:21.520 Thanks for listening to The Andrew Lawton Show. Support the program by donating to True North at www.tnc.news.

Juno News - January 28, 2020

The Andrew Lawton Show： Red Carpet for Omar Khadr

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript