Off the Record - September 27, 2024


CTV News shows its true colours


Episode Stats


Length

37 minutes

Words per minute

162.80685

Word count

6,170

Sentence count

316

Harmful content

Misogyny

1

sentences flagged

Hate speech

13

sentences flagged


Summary

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

This week, CTV News caught red-handed splicing a video of Conservative Leader Pierre Polyev to make it look like he said something he entirely did not say. And they fired two of their own journalists for their part in the mess.

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 I have to wonder if there's been a stupider week in the House of Commons than the one we just had.
00:00:04.980 I know we're going to talk about it in a bit, but if you guys can think of a stupider moment
00:00:10.340 in Canadian politics than we've had this week, I think one of you deserve a bonus on the next
00:00:15.960 paycheck. It might be Elbowgate, if you guys remember Elbowgate. Yeah, that was probably
00:00:21.780 up there. You know, question period's always kind of been pretty dumb. And I say that from
00:00:29.980 people who have been in opposition and on the government side, you know, non-questions being
00:00:34.740 given non-answers. But sometimes you wonder, couldn't our elected officials and the thousands
00:00:39.840 of people we employ to support them be doing something better or at least more productive
00:00:46.360 with their time, maybe even less costly? I don't know. I guess we'll talk about it when we get going.
00:00:53.380 Leah, let's get started.
00:00:59.980 Well, happy Friday, everybody. Hope you had a great week. You know, Friday, we like to take
00:01:07.740 a more casual tone, kick back. It's a little early where I live, so we haven't poured ourselves a
00:01:12.960 drink quite yet, but you feel free to go right ahead and do so. You've got us for Off the Record
00:01:18.220 this week. I'm joined with Isaac Lamoureux. Say hi, Isaac. Hello. And Cosming, Georgia, out in BC.
00:01:27.740 And as I was reminded how to pronounce my own name, I'm William Macbeth, and I'm excited to be here
00:01:32.220 being your guest host. So, yeah, as I said, a little pre-roll there. We've had a very stupid week
00:01:37.300 in the House of Commons. Some serious stuff, but some not so serious stuff. But why don't we get
00:01:43.120 started first with the big liars in the mainstream media? Cosman, you want to tell us about CTV News
00:01:49.320 who got caught doing some fibbing? Yeah, for sure. So for those not in the media, there's an unwritten
00:01:56.140 rule that journalists are not supposed to become the story. But this week, we've seen CTV News
00:02:03.660 essentially launch themselves into the national news scene because they were caught red-handed
00:02:11.700 splicing a video of conservative leader Pierre Polyev to make it look like he said something
00:02:18.440 that he entirely did not say. So they took a clip of him talking about a carbon tax election completely
00:02:26.120 out of context and spun it so that it looked like he was opposing the liberal government's
00:02:32.580 dental care plan. So we've got a couple clips here. The first one is actually the original
00:02:39.300 unedited version of this clip. So let's launch that now.
00:02:45.360 That's why it's time to put forward a motion for a carbon tax election.
00:02:54.560 So that's the unedited clip. That's what Pierre Polyev actually said. Here is the clip
00:03:01.080 that CTV News spliced and used. That's why we need to put forward a motion.
00:03:10.460 So that was prefaced by a CTV News reporter talking about the liberal dental care plan and opposition
00:03:18.500 to it, which is not true. So the conservatives, their director of communications, called out CTV News
00:03:26.920 for this tweet, for this video, essentially saying that it was entirely edited, taken out of context
00:03:35.220 and spliced and demanding that CTV News account for this. Now, CTV News officials actually came out
00:03:43.660 and gave a sort of muddied statement, you know, half an apology, half an admission of guilt,
00:03:51.980 but they didn't really actually say sorry. And this led the CPC to come back at CTV News
00:03:59.820 and blacklist any MPs, any member of caucus from actually taking interviews showing on appearances
00:04:06.760 on CTV News. So this has been going on pretty much the second half of this entire week. And it's
00:04:14.620 become a scandal in the legacy media because it really shows their bias. And the latest development
00:04:22.320 is CTV News saying they've let go the two editors, I presume responsible for this clip splicing. And
00:04:31.040 they put out a statement, essentially saying, admitting that this was wrong, but they don't
00:04:37.000 actually say that it was done purposefully in that statement. So I'm going to put it to you,
00:04:41.920 Isaac. Is this enough from the CTV? Well, that's a tough question, Cosmin. And
00:04:50.420 I'll put it this way. The statement on Monday that CTV issued got ratioed completely, having far more
00:04:57.980 comments than likes and people just bashing them completely. Whereas their newest statement on
00:05:03.700 Thursday, where they announced firing the journalists, it had a lot more likes than comments,
00:05:08.280 first of all. But the comments were largely filled with people noting their surprise that CTV took any
00:05:15.960 accountability at all. So that was interesting for me. People at least are celebrating that they did
00:05:21.820 take accountability. However, on the flip side of things, there were people suggesting that the CTV
00:05:29.300 News just essentially scapegoated these two journalists, whoever they are, from something that
00:05:35.020 came from the higher ups, likely. So it's hard to say whether they truly are taking accountability,
00:05:39.780 because as you said, they didn't necessarily apologize for what they did. But something else
00:05:45.240 that comes to mind here is, I've seen other people celebrating the conservatives for essentially
00:05:52.060 standing up to legacy media and CTV in this instance for slandering them, if you want to call it that,
00:05:58.460 or splicing these clips. I mean, this is just a complete fabrication of facts, especially with the
00:06:02.940 video. I can't believe they went to this extreme measure. Like, you really thought you were going
00:06:07.680 to get away with this, splicing videos together? I mean, it's ridiculous, especially as a journalist
00:06:13.180 myself, thinking about journalistic integrity. Who could possibly imagine doing something like this?
00:06:18.900 Now, William, Pierre Polyev has sort of made himself this anti-legacy media figure,
00:06:25.580 a politician willing to stand up to media lies and mistruths that are propagated out there. Did the
00:06:33.820 CTV play into the conservatives' hands with this blunder? Yeah, I mean, you gotta wonder what CTV was
00:06:42.100 thinking when they came up with this cartoonishly evil plan to try and splice together a fake quote
00:06:48.920 to misrepresent what Pierre Polyver was saying. You know, I used to work for the government back in the
00:06:54.940 day for the Harper government. And whenever one of our ministers was doing a press conference or a
00:06:59.300 press event, you would always see a political party staffer or a ministerial staffer recording
00:07:05.260 the press conference on their own phone. And media used to say, well, why would you do that? And our
00:07:10.720 answer was honestly, because we don't trust you to accurately report what we said at this press
00:07:17.320 conference. And they would say, oh, we would never take someone's words out of context. And we would
00:07:23.740 never splice a quote to give it an unfair meaning. Well, when arguably the second largest, maybe even
00:07:31.040 the largest, I don't know, the viewing figures, they're also terrible now for legacy media, it's
00:07:34.760 hard to tell. But one of Canada's largest news broadcasters can't be trusted to put together a
00:07:40.040 simple story without inventing a whole fictionalized narrative that Pierre Polyev was trying to hold an
00:07:46.060 election over the national dental care strategy. You know, it brings out the question of real trouble.
00:07:52.740 And as Isaac's pointed out, I've really enjoyed some of the fallout, you know, because now I'm seeing
00:07:58.100 former liberal staffers say, oh, this poor working single mother has lost her job because of Pierre 0.96
00:08:05.520 Polyev's attack against the media. It's like, you know, pretty certain that the person who faked the
00:08:11.620 clip lost her own job when she decided not to do news anymore. But fiction. And I don't think she's
00:08:19.400 got anyone to blame but herself. Certainly, I know conservative supporters have argued for a long
00:08:24.020 time that the legacy media are not fair, that they're biased, that they don't like the conservatives,
00:08:29.320 that none of them come even close to voting conservative in election. And I think you're
00:08:33.860 now seeing again, an example of that bias on full display. And when they get knocked off their high
00:08:38.160 horse, yes, conservative party supporters do tend to enjoy that experience.
00:08:42.620 Well, I just wanted to add because you would expect this sort of behavior from CBC, which is a
00:08:48.500 publicly government funded outlet that receives all of its money due to the graces of the liberal
00:08:54.300 government. But as you were correct to mention, William, CTV News is I'm pretty sure the biggest
00:09:00.760 privately owned media company in Canada. They're owned by Bell Media. And to see this like blatant
00:09:08.620 anti conservative bias. It's funny, actually, yesterday, they did a segment here in British
00:09:15.100 Columbia, where the BC conservatives are surging, they're actually tied with the BC NDP, they did a
00:09:20.820 segment about john rustat talking about how climate advocates have been pushing people to, you know,
00:09:27.420 adopt eating insect proteins, alternative proteins instead of meat to save the climate. And they tried
00:09:34.340 to mock him. But then I found a clip from a year before where they went to a bug bake off talking
00:09:41.060 about how great it is to eat bugs. So the bias is so obvious. And I think more Canadians are waking up
00:09:47.540 to this evident fact that there is an anti conservative leaning in the legacy media.
00:09:55.020 Yeah, I mean, Isaac, your background has a bit of, of, well, maybe not full legacy media,
00:10:00.320 but certainly we would say non independent media. What was your experience like when you had to
00:10:06.940 cover stories? Did you ever find there was either an explicit or maybe implicit direction? If it's a
00:10:13.360 conservative, you know, try and hurt them, mock them, make fun of them, spin them, maybe don't give
00:10:19.240 a full story. I'm just guessing, you know, you can tell me that never happened. And I would accept it.
00:10:23.740 But yeah, no, obviously, for those who don't know, I worked for various French legacy media,
00:10:30.560 but my editors were pretty respectful, I guess, in the sense that they knew I was a conservative. So
00:10:37.260 they really didn't make me do any media bias in the political sense. Although I did have to cover a few
00:10:44.940 conferences on like, yeah, climate craze, let's call it where where where they would be, I'd go as far
00:10:54.360 as saying indoctrinating kids regarding eco stuff. And the main thing I the main problem I had with
00:11:01.120 those conferences would they they would raise all these concerns and raise all these problems, but
00:11:04.760 they would offer no solution. So it's like, well, you're saying all of these things, you're saying
00:11:08.040 this is the worst thing that's ever going to happen to you. These kids are scared for their lives. But
00:11:11.400 it's like, well, what's the solution you you haven't offered any. So that was the main thing
00:11:17.040 with with me working in legacy media. Last thing I wanted to mention, which I almost forgot was I saw
00:11:22.120 a statement issued by Anna Polievre, Pierre's wife, obviously. And she said, quote, my husband is a
00:11:30.360 fighter, and I couldn't be more proud. Canada needs a leader with unwavering principle and conviction,
00:11:36.080 someone who stands firm for what's right. Even when the media critics and so called experts
00:11:41.080 try to tear him down. He's strong, smart, and exactly who this country needs. The fight for
00:11:46.880 a better Canada continues. And then in parentheses, yes, the media bias is real. But conservatives
00:11:53.060 will keep fighting for the people. So that kind of speaks to what you're saying, William feeding into
00:11:56.720 this media bias story. You know, I'm sure the statement of support from Sophie Trudeau for her
00:12:04.560 husband will be coming out any moment now. The ex-husband.
00:12:10.860 So, of course, this was all beginning with the comments related to the non-confidence motion that
00:12:17.460 happened earlier this week, following the famous tearing up of the supply and confidence agreement
00:12:23.340 by Jagmeet Singh. There was a motion of non-confidence put forward in the House of Commons by the conservatives.
00:12:29.800 And as we know now, that motion wasn't successful. But I think it kicks off the season of no confidence
00:12:37.200 votes in Ottawa. And we have a bit of a clip showing the end of that confidence vote and some of the
00:12:43.100 subsequent analysis, quote unquote. Now, I should say this is a CTV news clip. We believe that this is
00:12:49.880 accurately what happened. But as we maybe have learned over the past week, take it with a grain of salt in
00:12:55.940 case. CTV had also done some splicing and dicing on this one.
00:13:03.920 This was the first but not the last test of the liberal minority this fall. The conservative-led push
00:13:09.620 to bring down the government was defeated, despite pressure from Pierre Paliève to send Canadians to
00:13:15.140 the polls. He wants a climate change election. Let's have that election in the right time.
00:13:20.020 Will he call it today? The Bloc and NDP voted with the government, stating they still have confidence
00:13:26.920 in Justin Trudeau. But before the vote was even called, Bloc leader E. Francois Blanchet issued an
00:13:32.980 ultimatum, giving the government until the end of October to help enact a pair of Bloc bills about 0.98
00:13:38.560 pensions and supply management or risk an election before the new year.
00:13:42.760 There's not so much room for discussion. Wasting no time, the Conservatives are set to serve up
00:13:48.680 another non-confidence motion on Thursday, a move the Liberals called lame parliamentary games.
00:13:54.280 But I think it shows the desperation of Mr. Paliève.
00:13:59.200 I do love that analogy. That's what has been the desperation of Mr. Paliève. Well, yes,
00:14:04.720 along with millions of Canadians desperate to have an election. Also, was it my imagination or in that
00:14:10.120 vote? Did Jagmeet Singh bring a baby into the House of Commons? I'm not sure what that was in
00:14:16.280 aid of. Maybe he just couldn't get affordable childcare, despite that being a major promise of
00:14:21.880 his once coalition partner. So with all of that, you know, do you think it's interesting, of course,
00:14:28.300 that political parties like the Bloc and the Democrats, who have been routinely attacking the
00:14:32.640 government, when asked to put their money where their mouth is, actually aren't following through
00:14:37.600 and voting down this government to cause an election? Cosman, what do you what do you think?
00:14:42.080 For sure. I think the Liberals are in a precarious situation. They are backed in a corner. And the
00:14:49.400 Bloc are salivating at the opportunity to get every last ounce of concessions from this government, 1.00
00:14:56.900 because they have the upper hand here. The NDP has backed away. And now the next, you know,
00:15:02.880 cannibal party that feasts on the corpse of this liberal government is going to take what it can.
00:15:09.900 And it's, it's, it's just the situation we're in, we're gonna, it's going to be a volatile period
00:15:15.800 in the House of Commons, you're going to see these pushes for non confidence motions. But honestly,
00:15:22.900 I have my doubts that either the Bloc or the NDP want an election right now. I know the Bloc had a good
00:15:30.720 running in the recent by election, but I'm not so sure that will translate in a general election.
00:15:38.420 And Isaac, you know, thinking about the other opposition parties, the ones who aren't the
00:15:42.640 conservatives, the Democrats, the Bloc, do you think there's any impetus for them to pull the
00:15:48.020 plug on this government? Or do you think they're, they're, you know, in the case of the NDP in
00:15:52.420 particular, do you think they're afraid to face the electorate in an actual general election?
00:15:57.020 Yeah, William, it's, it's funny, I still remember the feeling I initially had when I heard that Jagmeet 1.00
00:16:04.840 Singh was going to rip up his supply and confidence agreement, which unfortunately did was short lived,
00:16:10.300 because then I realized that that really doesn't mean anything, especially as we've seen Singh
00:16:16.300 continue to prop up his government. But now, it's almost as if we're in a worse position than we were
00:16:23.140 prior to this development, let's call it, because now both the Bloc and the NDP have shown that they
00:16:28.940 will prop up this Liberal government. And at least the Bloc are doing it for some gain. Obviously, 0.56
00:16:36.520 Blanchet said he'd give the Liberals until October 29, to meet his demands, whereas Singh, I don't even
00:16:42.760 know what they're getting out of this agreement right now. But both of these parties would have to
00:16:47.800 turn against the Liberals, which, as Cosmin mentioned, I really don't think either of those
00:16:52.680 parties would benefit from an election right now, because they have to be essentially weighing the
00:16:56.580 odds in the sense that, are we going to benefit more from a Trudeau government or a Prolivre
00:17:02.340 government? And I don't see Pierre going to either of those parties and saying, hey, let's do this
00:17:11.900 together. I'll give you what you want. Otherwise, he probably already would have done that. And then
00:17:16.780 that might be what it's going to take to bring down this Liberal government.
00:17:19.880 Now, Cosmin, do you think that one of the factors might be happening is the fact that we have a
00:17:26.780 provincial election happening in BC right now, a very competitive one between the BC NDP and the
00:17:32.800 BC Conservatives? We have an election, I think, scheduled next month in Saskatchewan, another place
00:17:39.440 where the New Democrats are probably going to be, if not strong contenders, actual contenders,
00:17:46.860 which they're not in a lot of other parts of this country. Do you think the calculus on the part of
00:17:51.620 the NDP is they don't want an unpopular federal leader dragging down the support for their provincial
00:17:59.280 cousins in these two provincial elections?
00:18:03.100 No, for sure. And I'll just add, Ontario Premier Doug Ford has also talked about an early election as
00:18:08.760 well. So there's definitely the provincial elements at play 100%. Let's remember that Jagmeet Singh was
00:18:18.160 elected in a by-election in Burnaby. That's where his seat is in British Columbia. So there's no way
00:18:25.000 that he wants to detract attention from the BC NDP's shot at forming government again. I think that is
00:18:34.020 definitely at top of mind for Jagmeet Singh. But I also wanted to mention, off of what Isaac said,
00:18:41.680 Canadians are hurting right now. They're suffering from financial woes, cost of living, inability to
00:18:49.600 get housing. And I think what's happening in the House of Commons right now, with all these parties
00:18:56.420 vying to get what they want out of this government with the bloc and the NDP trying to get concessions,
00:19:02.400 it comes across as very self-interested, cynical politics. And I think it leaves a really bad taste
00:19:09.420 in Canadians' mouths. 0.52
00:19:11.900 Yeah, here in my province of Alberta, the new New Democrat leader, former Calgary Mayor Nehed Nengshi,
00:19:17.760 has gone so far as to say he doesn't want to be affiliated with the federal NDP anymore. I think
00:19:22.920 he probably even wants to change the provincial party's name to something new. And part of that is
00:19:29.380 simply, it's tough to run as a new Democrat here in Alberta. Fair enough. But also, I think he
00:19:35.420 particularly doesn't like the association with Mr. Singh, who, of course, has been so anti-Alberta in
00:19:41.000 many of his policy positions, opposes the oil sands, opposes the construction of pipelines,
00:19:45.960 opposes Alberta's major industries. And so, you know, if his own cousins aren't willing to support him,
00:19:53.120 I guess Mr. Singh probably thinks that Canadians from coast to coast won't either. Now, unfortunately,
00:20:01.980 that wasn't the only thing that happened in Ottawa this week. And the next part is probably the genesis
00:20:09.100 of my Is the House of Commons Occasionally Stupid theme that I put on. We had an argument over a bathtub
00:20:15.740 and whether or not there was a suggestion that the prime minister might be gay in that bathtub,
00:20:22.700 you know, if you interpreted the remark in that way. Why don't we start by watching
00:20:27.460 this clip, which was following Pierre Polyevre, opposition leader Pierre Polyevre, talking about
00:20:33.320 the apartment the Government of Canada bought for New York Consul General Tom Clark and just how luxurious
00:20:39.680 it is with its quartz countertops, a $5,000 bathtub, and a bunch of other very special amenities.
00:20:46.640 This is the prime minister's defense of that luxury apartment.
00:20:51.980 Mr. Speaker, engaging with international leaders on fighting climate change,
00:20:58.080 on solving global crises, on standing up unequivocally for Ukraine.
00:21:03.640 Mr. Speaker, don't worry on this side of the house. We're used to casual homophobic comments
00:21:15.300 from the other side of the house.
00:21:18.640 Now, in case you couldn't hear, that was what has now been identified to be conservative MP
00:21:24.200 Garnet Jenuous asking if the prime minister or the consul general
00:21:29.600 was entertaining world leaders in the bathtub. And I actually think Garnet has a perfectly
00:21:36.480 legitimate question. There might be an argument to say we need a government-owned apartment
00:21:41.120 in a city like New York, where a lot of world leaders, business leaders, and other people
00:21:45.760 come on a frequent basis. And maybe we need it to be sufficiently large to accommodate a reception.
00:21:52.160 But do we really need the $5,000 bathtub in order to maintain cordial relations with some of
00:21:58.980 these foreign leaders? How many of them are we entertaining in the bath? And if we are, 0.99
00:22:03.860 should we be worried about foreign interference on one level or another? So do you think that this
00:22:10.480 was a homophobic joke? Or do you think this was an MP pointing out the lunacy of why we needed a 0.52
00:22:18.020 $5,000 bathtub? Isaac, what do you think?
00:22:20.860 Yeah, I definitely do not think it was a homophobic joke. And you mentioned, or Trudeau did,
00:22:27.480 how people were interpreting it. No, I don't think anyone would have interpreted it that way before
00:22:33.240 he brought up the homophobia. But we've seen this from Trudeau in response to completely unrelated
00:22:40.060 things. He'll always tie it back to his main talking points, which are homophobia or LGBTQ
00:22:46.140 rights, climate change. You've heard them all before. I don't see how this has anything to do
00:22:52.640 with that, though. And Cosman, what do you think? House of Commons, valuable democratic institution
00:22:58.120 or place where stupid stuff gets yelled about? Well, we've got a drama teacher for a prime minister.
00:23:05.960 He's engaging in theatrics every opportunity he can. And I think it's just deflection. Let's be
00:23:13.320 serious. It's an attempt to get off of the issue about why did taxpayers spend so much money for this
00:23:21.020 extravagant apartment and all of these extra features that, as you're right to mention, are not
00:23:26.800 necessary for hosting guests. And just in case you thought that maybe upon reflection, the prime
00:23:32.980 minister would back down from his ludicrous assertion that this was a drive by homophobic attack
00:23:39.700 when asked to clarify or reiterate his position leaving the House of Commons. This was the prime
00:23:44.980 minister's response. Sounds like the guy could use a nice relaxing bath with one or more of his
00:23:59.780 closest personal friends in order to de-stress. Yeah, I must admit, when I read the rundown of
00:24:06.900 show stories, I was initially opposed to doing this one out of the opinion that it would add to
00:24:12.680 global stupidity. And I'm sorry to say I still find this entire affair to be pretty dumb. But let's
00:24:20.400 move into, I guess you could argue it's a related area. I guess we're going to talk a little bit
00:24:25.860 about ass there, Isaac. Do you want to give us the lowdown? Yeah, related in the sense that this is
00:24:32.220 another odd comment, let's call it. So Ontario Premier Doug Ford let able-bodied homeless people who
00:24:41.700 aren't working know that he's sick and tired of them. So he was asked about the more than a,
00:24:47.580 sorry, a thousand people currently on wait lists for affordable housing at a completely unrelated
00:24:52.040 news conference on Monday. And then he said the following, let's just roll the clip quickly.
00:24:56.680 Do you know what the best way to get people be able to get out of the encampments,
00:25:01.180 get out of the homeless, get an application and drop it off one of these companies and start
00:25:06.900 working? You need to start working if you're healthy. Bottom line, if you're unhealthy, I'll
00:25:12.060 take care of you the rest of my life. Your life will take care of you. But if you're healthy,
00:25:16.700 get off your ASS and start working like everyone else's. Very simple.
00:25:20.740 And then I'll just cover a few other things that Ford mentioned at the press conference,
00:25:27.380 which was firstly, he said that Ontario is the fastest growing jurisdiction in North America.
00:25:33.300 He said they added 800,000 people last year, which was largest or sorry, larger than the biggest two
00:25:39.440 states in the United States combined. He went on to say that 136 companies came to invest in Ontario,
00:25:46.160 creating over 12,500 jobs, which really doesn't seem like that many jobs when we're talking about 800,000
00:25:52.780 people coming there. So while I appreciate Ford treating able-bodied homeless people like adults 0.89
00:26:01.240 saying, look, if you want to change your woes, you got to start working. I don't know that it's that simple.
00:26:07.100 Obviously, when 800,000 people immigrate to your province and then use the next citation you make is adding
00:26:12.980 12,500 jobs. Obviously, there's going to be a discrepancy there. And we've seen the unemployment
00:26:19.640 rates in Ontario, which are quite high. Do you guys think it's as simple as Ford is trying to make it
00:26:25.640 out to be? Well, I'll just start. I found his comment to be a little bit of a non sequitur because he was
00:26:32.320 asked about an affordable housing waitlist. And we talked about this on Daily Brief. Affordable housing
00:26:38.380 doesn't mean you're homeless. There's cutoffs for $100,000 a year to get into affordable housing.
00:26:45.180 There's a lot of ordinary middle class people who rely on affordable housing, sadly, in Canada today,
00:26:51.520 so that they can have a place to live because they can't afford the multi-thousand dollar rents in
00:26:58.740 Vancouver, Toronto, or Montreal. But you're right to say that immigration has a huge impact on this
00:27:06.460 because the fact is, if you look at the statistics, a lot of new immigrants, international students,
00:27:13.520 temporary foreign workers are going into those entry level jobs that somebody who's coming off
00:27:19.680 the street coming out of, you know, living in their car would rely on to get a step up and be able to
00:27:26.000 afford a place to live. And it's just astounding that nobody really touches on that issue. Our politicians
00:27:33.560 don't admit that we're importing more people than we can afford to take care of. And they're also going 0.96
00:27:42.020 into homeless shelters, the places where people who are on the street go to halfway houses, homeless
00:27:49.660 shelters, to have that transition from being homeless to actually being a functioning member in society.
00:27:57.040 So if we're not going to deal with the causes of this problem, just saying, go get a job, it's not
00:28:03.160 quite that simple, right?
00:28:05.500 So when I heard the comment, it reminded me, I phoned Rob Ford, sorry, Doug Ford, God rest Rob Ford,
00:28:13.040 Doug Ford to be channeling his inner Ronald Reagan, because the president was famously asked about social
00:28:18.940 program funding. And he said that the best social program out there was a job. Do you think
00:28:24.840 there's a belief that some people are simply taking advantage of Canada's generosity, as opposed to
00:28:32.180 doing what the rest of us do, which is to get up each morning, go to work, work at a job, earn a living
00:28:38.320 and use that to pay for our bills and our living expenses? Do you think there are some people who
00:28:43.240 said, nah, I'd rather not work and take advantage of Canada's generous social programs instead? Do you
00:28:49.360 think it's a problem? Yeah, I do. And some people, for many streams, not just the immigrant side of 1.00
00:28:56.220 things, but also Canadian employers, we've seen have exploited, in some instances, the temporary
00:29:01.900 foreign worker program, for example, where they're only supposed to be hiring temporary foreign workers
00:29:06.400 when they have an essential need for them. But of course, they're going with them instead of Canadians 1.00
00:29:10.500 because they can pay them less, or other instances. So yeah, I mean, there's very, there's many
00:29:15.760 different streams of exploitation, let's call it, but we've seen the videos in Toronto for these
00:29:21.440 entry level jobs. I mean, the lineups for them are hours long. So so as you mentioned, Cosmin, for
00:29:26.940 someone who's homeless and would rely on a job as such to get back on their feet, if you will,
00:29:34.900 it's not as simple as just going to McDonald's and getting a job when these places are pretty much
00:29:40.700 impossible to get a job at. And I'll just say this, as somebody was born in a different country, 1.00
00:29:47.200 Canada, barring Scandinavian countries, is one of the hardest countries to become homeless in.
00:29:54.300 Let's be real. There are so many opportunities, so many safety nets for people to rely on where they
00:30:00.440 don't have to be in that situation. Now, I'm not going to discount the serious things such as like
00:30:05.840 addiction, mental health issues, you know, trauma, being a victim of abuse, having to flee an abusive
00:30:12.540 household. Those are very real. But there are definitely people who choose to be out on the
00:30:18.500 streets. Here in Vancouver, in, you know, downtown Eastside, there's a lot of people who decide to be
00:30:25.700 there because it's a lifestyle for them almost. They don't want to get a job. They do get either,
00:30:32.500 you know, employment insurance. They have other means to get social grants and money. And they'd
00:30:39.560 rather be out here than actually live their life. And that asks, begs the question, what has happened
00:30:46.200 where people are choosing that over a meaningful life where they can be productive members of society?
00:30:52.680 I think there's some fundamental questions we need to ask about why people are choosing that path. And
00:30:58.400 with the drug crisis, a lot of these people are actually young men, men between the ages of 20 to
00:31:05.620 40, who have just found no purpose in society any longer. I'm just reading a quick note from the
00:31:13.100 producer saying that I should have given a warning that I was going to use the word ass. This is now a
00:31:18.080 PG-13 segment. And that segment should not have been watched by young children without prevental
00:31:24.820 supervision. True North apologizes for anyone scandalized by the use of that word. Just heading
00:31:31.220 into just a related story there, Cosman, about affordable housing and homelessness. We see a
00:31:38.100 quote unquote innovative housing strategy coming out of British Columbia. Some actually aren't convinced
00:31:45.120 it's innovative at all. What is happening on the affordable housing front in British Columbia's election?
00:31:49.980 Right. So in the last week, premier David Eby has made two significant housing announcements,
00:31:57.740 but what they essentially entail is they are leasehold schemes. So we have a situation where
00:32:06.700 the government is partnering with first nations and certain private investors to build these homes
00:32:14.140 that will still be owned by the land. At least we'll be owned by the first nation, but 0.93
00:32:19.920 people will be able to essentially sign up for a 99 year lease, 40% of which is funded by taxpayers.
00:32:30.160 So the government will be using taxpayer money to spend on 40% of the value of these properties,
00:32:36.600 whereas 60% the buyer will be able to put a down payment on. But like I said, this is a leasehold.
00:32:43.160 So if you know anything about real estate, a leasehold means that you might have some stake on the
00:32:49.540 building, but you don't have the land title. So you don't actually own the piece of land that the
00:32:54.220 property is on. And that raises a lot of consequences. First of all, the property doesn't
00:33:01.500 appreciate. So when you go to resell it, you're not going to make any sort of profit on it. And then
00:33:07.020 secondly, the person who owns the land could kick you off theoretically if they really wanted to.
00:33:13.020 So it's very troubling. And I spoke to a realtor from Vancouver who was, who put this in plain
00:33:20.020 terms that this is glorified rentals. The government is becoming a land Lord. So you're going to have
00:33:26.940 people who need housing and, and premier David Eby is calling this a housing owner, home ownership
00:33:33.340 dream as if this is what people want. They want to lease a property for 99 years from the government.
00:33:39.280 That's not it. They want something they can have for their entire life and then pass it on to their
00:33:44.400 next generations. So William, what's your, like, is this the solution to the housing crisis?
00:33:51.760 Yeah. I was going to say, it sounds almost like a timeshare plan where you buy in for a set amount
00:33:56.500 of time and then it reverts to the property owner. And certainly the idea that your house isn't going
00:34:01.800 to gain any value. And in fact, we'll lose value over the course of you owning it is not attractive
00:34:07.080 for a lot of people who see their property as a place to build some equity, to build up some
00:34:13.060 revenue, some, or some wealth that they can use in order to fund their retirement or, or something
00:34:18.060 else. So, uh, Isaac, what do you think? Uh, the dream of home ownership or government scheme that you
00:34:24.600 try and get sold upon visiting a hotel in Mexico and say, Oh, you could, you could live here full time
00:34:30.780 for only nine 99. Yeah. So many different things. Uh, I want to mention about this first, we'll start
00:34:38.220 off with the quote from EB home ownership dream. I mean, that in itself is a lie. You don't own the
00:34:44.000 land. How is it home on a home ownership dream? Uh, and you mentioned one of the two most important
00:34:50.120 things, uh, that I think, uh, of owning property are firstly, as you said, building equity, but next
00:34:56.920 owning the land, you literally own land that, that those are the two most important things of
00:35:01.040 owning a property in my opinion. And obviously one of these things just is not true with these
00:35:05.880 something that you didn't mention Cosmin, which I think needs to be, uh, said was the price of these
00:35:12.400 properties are $850,000 to $1.5 million. So, uh, we were talking about affordable housing. This is far
00:35:21.420 from, uh, affordable who, who can afford this. Of course you take 40% off of that. It's still a
00:35:27.420 ridiculous price. Well, yeah, I want to jump in on that, Isaac, if I may, because the, I was astounded
00:35:33.580 by how the housing minister arrived at these property valuations. If you actually look at where this
00:35:40.060 property is, it's in the dead center of, of Vancouver in a neighborhood called Canby. And it's
00:35:47.020 not a special area. It's literally in the middle of a metropolitan area, but for, and this is the
00:35:52.820 three bedrooms are valued at 1.5 million. This is the market valuation that the government arrived at
00:35:58.040 for these properties in this area, but you can get a leasehold property on, uh, with, with a ocean view
00:36:06.860 on false Creek for $1.5 million with a beautiful view of the Harbor for the exact same amount of money.
00:36:14.440 You can find a leasehold for three bedrooms, uh, in, in Kitsilano for $999,000. So it doesn't make
00:36:25.260 sense. And, and the reason they put this valuation so high is because they wrote into this deal a profit
00:36:32.280 for the private developers and the first nations developers. That's the reason they, they get the
00:36:37.640 payout. You know, the question that goes through my head is how much is the bathtub worth? If it's not
00:36:43.300 worth 5,000, then I'm not dropping 1.5 million on a home. Uh, I think that's completely outrageous.
00:36:49.280 So, uh, well, I think that brings us to the end of our, uh, of our new segment there. Um, you know,
00:36:55.540 I'm, I'm always amazed at the value for our tax dollars. We get whenever we take a good look at
00:37:00.860 what our governments are up to across the country. So I hope that we haven't depressed our viewers too
00:37:06.260 much by telling them just how much their tax dollars were wasted. And of course, a general reminder
00:37:11.720 that everything you've heard today is off the record. Well, now I'm worried that we're actually
00:37:26.640 going to have a segment of our viewers who own very expensive bathtubs, and I'm going to be accused
00:37:31.820 of being pejorative or, uh, bigoted against the wealthy bathtub community. That is not what I'm
00:37:37.920 saying. I'm saying if you own an expensive bathtub that you paid for yourself, that's perfectly fine.
00:37:43.460 Uh, it's the publicly funded bathtubs are the ones that I object to. So just to clarify for anybody
00:37:49.420 with a very expensive bathtub, it's not you, it's when it's paid for by taxpayers.