The Candice Malcolm Show - Legacy Media bias EXPOSED by Juno News analysis. You’ll never guess the worst offender!

00:00:00.000 Hi, I'm Candice Malcolm, and this is The Candice Malcolm Show. I hope everyone had a wonderful

00:00:06.700 long weekend. I don't usually take long weekends off unless they're like religious holidays,

00:00:11.360 but given that Easter happened during the election, we didn't really take any time off

00:00:15.340 around here at Geno News. I took the day with my family, and I have to say I'm feeling

00:00:19.060 very refreshed and energized to start the week, and great to be back with you. Now,

00:00:23.240 folks, you know this, and I know this. The legacy media is lying to you. They are lying to you.

00:00:28.120 They are pretending that they are neutral, that they are the arbiters of facts and the truth,

00:00:32.400 but they're not. And so we decided here at Geno News to do an analysis. We actually worked with

00:00:37.640 ChatGPT, which is an AI search engine, and had ChatGPT analyze all of the news stories by the

00:00:44.520 legacy media during the election and assign them a score. And I'm going to walk you through this

00:00:49.720 report today on the show, and you will be surprised. I was surprised by who the worst offender, who the

00:00:54.700 absolute worst, most biased media outlet is in Canada. We're going to get to that very shortly.

00:01:00.200 First, I am pleased to be joined for this episode by my friend Hamish Marshall. Hamish is a director

00:01:05.180 at One Persuasion, which is a polling company and a government relations firm based in Ontario.

00:01:11.260 He was our in-house pollster during the 2021 federal election. Before that, in 2019, he was the national

00:01:17.640 campaign manager for the Conservative Party, and he ran Andrew Scheer's winning leadership campaign.

00:01:22.580 This time around, we had his colleague, David Murray, also of One Persuasion, as our in-house

00:01:28.560 pollster. And I know we all very much enjoy having David's insights during the campaign. But

00:01:33.420 Hamish, it's great to have you back on the show. How are you?

00:01:36.660 It's great to be here. Fantastic. It was nice to take the long weekend away with the kids as well.

00:01:41.000 Great. Well, I want to walk through this report that we just put out at Geno News because I think it

00:01:46.820 tells us what we all knew, which is that the media lies to us. The media is biased. And so I'll just

00:01:51.720 explain what we did. We worked with the search engine, the AI search engine, chat GPT, and had

00:01:56.540 them look at every single article that was published by the legacy media throughout the course of the

00:02:01.300 campaign. And we had them assign a score. So they looked at the stories that focused on Mark Carney.

00:02:06.920 And if the story was very favorable to Mark Carney, he got a plus two. If it was somewhat favorable,

00:02:12.460 plus one. If it was neutral, zero. And then if it was critical, they got minus one and very

00:02:17.840 critical, minus two. And so and then they did the same thing for Pierre Polyev. So first,

00:02:23.200 I'll talk about CTV. CTV came in third place, the third worst offender in our list here. And overall,

00:02:29.840 looking at all the stories in the campaign, Carney had a score of plus three, whereas Polyev had a

00:02:36.660 negative nine. So you could just tell just from that that Polyev was viewed much more negatively by

00:02:42.800 CTV. Carney much more positively plus three. Second place, second worst offender was CBC. And this

00:02:49.180 may surprise you. I would have assumed that they were the worst, but they're not. They're the second

00:02:52.240 worst. So they had Carney, Mark Carney plus five and Pierre Polyev negative 11. I don't think that

00:02:58.860 would surprise anyone that Polyev was painted in a negative light for more, more often than not. In

00:03:04.060 fact, when we looked at the stories, we couldn't find any examples of positive, of very positive

00:03:08.400 coverage of Pierre Polyev. But the worst offender, Hamish, was the Globe and Mail. The Globe and Mail,

00:03:14.940 they're seen as the national newspaper record in Canada, like to put themselves as being, you know,

00:03:19.800 honest, sincere journalists. But they had Mark Carney at plus nine and Pierre Polyev at negative 15,

00:03:25.920 which was the biggest delta, the biggest difference, the most negative coverage. So Canadians that are 0.51

00:03:31.480 consuming their news from these outlets, I would say these are probably the biggest, the most popular

00:03:35.820 one, CBC, CTV on television. And then the Globe and Mail is still probably the most read newspaper

00:03:40.780 in Canada. All of them would have given you a very negative impression of Pierre Polyev, positive of

00:03:47.620 Mark Carney. What do you make of that? Well, I mean, I'm not entirely shocked. I would have thought the

00:03:52.300 CBC would be worse as well. But the Globe and Mail, Mark Carney is the Globe and Mail's sort of liberal.

00:03:58.360 You know, he hearkens, he presents himself, of course, as this pragmatic, business-friendly liberal,

00:04:03.040 and not the eco-radical that it's pretty clear from his book that he is. So he's a sort of liberal

00:04:09.420 that they would have loved to support. And I think we can see in the in the in these figures that have

00:04:13.480 come out that that's clearly where the mind's at. The thing that maybe helped the CBC not get the

00:04:18.720 worst place prize was that what I found in the election is if there was a story that was bad

00:04:23.200 about Carney, something had happened, he had to fire a candidate or something objectively bad happened,

00:04:27.200 the CBC just wouldn't cover it. So they wouldn't even write a story that was but they wouldn't try to

00:04:31.120 make a bad story look a bit better or put a positive spin on it. They just simply wouldn't

00:04:35.340 mention it at all. So I wonder how much that had an impact on making the CBC not appear quite as bad

00:04:41.040 as the Globe and Mail. Well, I think that there's also been like a decade of preconditioning for the

00:04:46.320 CBC or probably longer, right? But the one thing I noticed throughout the entire Trump era, the first

00:04:51.740 time around his first presidency, was that the CBC lead story would always be Trump related. Like it

00:04:56.780 didn't matter how big of a scandal Justin Trudeau had gotten himself into, how horrible, something

00:05:01.500 horrible that he had done for our country. The lead story on the national news for CBC was always

00:05:06.380 orange man bad, Trump terrible. So you're right, in some ways it's like they don't even need to cover

00:05:10.880 the Canadian election in a certain way. It's just the choice of what stories they cover. And I'm sure

00:05:15.720 that that happened during this campaign where they were, you know, lead story was something horrible

00:05:20.000 about Donald Trump, which would make Canadians who were watching feel fearful without even

00:05:25.140 mentioning the Canadian election. And this is something that we have. And so overall, we did

00:05:30.040 something called the tilt scoreboard. And so this is a number from one to 10. So if you're a one,

00:05:34.980 you were tilting heavily towards Mark Carney. If you were a 10, you would have been tilting heavily

00:05:39.620 towards Pierre Polyev. A five would be neutral. The Globe and Mail score, tilt score was a one.

00:05:46.160 CBC News was somewhere between a two or three. And CTV was three. So none of them even close to neutral.

00:05:51.780 They were all markably, heavily pro-Carney in this campaign. And, you know, in some ways it's

00:05:59.300 predictable, but it's such a disservice. When you look at how close the election was, I haven't had

00:06:03.660 you on since the election results came in. We had the Conservatives coming in at around 41 percent,

00:06:09.140 the Liberals coming in at around 43 percent. You know, that's a close election. Even if it didn't

00:06:14.160 translate necessarily that way, it looks like Carney's going to find a way to edge as close to a majority

00:06:18.720 government as possible. But with such a close campaign, I think it's clear that the media was

00:06:24.420 the deciding factor in this campaign. What do you think?

00:06:26.980 Oh, I think they were absolutely a huge asset in Carney's arsenal. No question. I think it's

00:06:33.180 also interesting that these most biased media are, you know, in television and newspapers.

00:06:40.000 And there's a skew there towards older viewers and older readers, older people. We've seen that

00:06:46.440 there was a huge age difference in this campaign where younger people supported the Conservatives

00:06:51.220 at a much higher level and Liberals were much more likely to be over 55, over 65. And I think it's

00:06:58.020 not a coincidence that as, you know, I don't know anybody. I'm 46. I don't know anybody my age who

00:07:03.980 has cable anymore. I don't know people who watch CBC news anymore. But, you know, who are my age?

00:07:10.080 My parents do. And I think the demographic of people who still watch the legacy media is very

00:07:16.260 much older. And I don't think it's a coincidence. That's a coincidence. It's a bit of a chicken in

00:07:20.380 the egg. Perhaps they gave their viewers who were already leading that way something that they were

00:07:24.720 expecting. They played to their audience. But on the other hand, it probably also influenced a large

00:07:28.600 chunk of their audience to, you know, give Carney a second look or to give them reasons not to vote

00:07:34.440 Conservative. So but the great news is that as this process keeps happening, is this mainstream media

00:07:40.140 becomes less and less relevant as time goes on with each passing week. Well, I want to visit the

00:07:45.660 polls with you because I know you're a pollster and we here at Juno News are quite critical. Actually,

00:07:50.320 we're so skeptical, Hamish, of the legacy media that that's why we decided to do our own Juno polls

00:07:55.180 throughout the campaign. We worked with David Murray and we had our own look. So like when I

00:08:00.300 talked to friends, people were like, oh, were you surprised or disappointed by the election outcome?

00:08:03.660 I'm like, no, that's pretty much what I thought would happen because we had the polls and the

00:08:06.660 numbers that David was giving us is pretty much exactly what it turned into on election night off

00:08:11.680 by a point or two. But I did notice that the legacy media and their mainstream polls and

00:08:16.820 specifically the polling aggravators did not get things quite so accurate. And so I, you know,

00:08:24.040 we've talked about this on the show before that many of the legacy media outlets were projecting

00:08:28.740 that it was going to be a big liberal blowout, that the liberals were going to get historic

00:08:32.460 numbers. Some of the polling at the very end had the conservatives polling in the sort of mid to

00:08:36.940 upper 30s where they ended up getting 41%. I don't think anyone accurately projected the numbers

00:08:41.780 as they came in. I'm curious though, what's your perspective? Are you as skeptical about the

00:08:46.740 pollsters as I am?

00:08:47.620 No, I look, I'm a professional pollster. So I, and I believe most, not maybe not all,

00:08:53.660 but most people in this industry are trying to do their best to get the right numbers. There's

00:08:57.760 parameters, there's things that make that difficult, but I think they're coming there

00:09:00.920 with the intention of being accurate. What I will say is that the, on average, when you look at the

00:09:07.360 final results and you look at what the pollsters had conservatives, they were down about, on average,

00:09:13.260 about 2% lower than what the conservatives actually got. I think it worked out to sort of 39.7 or I'm

00:09:18.500 not sure. So it's 39 point something. If you look at the final poll of-

00:09:23.260 I have, I have the, the final vote based on the aggregate from 338. So they had the liberal

00:09:28.500 party at 42. They projected the conservatives would come in at 39, NDP nine, block six, green two.

00:09:34.900 Compare that to what actually happened was that the liberals finished at 43.8, conservatives 41.3,

00:09:40.440 NDP at 6.3, block at 6.3, and green at 1.2. So yeah, they look like they got the conservatives

00:09:47.200 wrong by 2.3% and the liberals by one point. Some say the bubbles in an arrow truffle piece

00:09:55.020 can take 34 seconds to melt in your mouth. Sometimes the very amount you're stuck at the

00:09:59.640 same red light. Rich, creamy, chocolatey arrow truffle. Feel the arrow bubbles melt. It's

00:10:06.440 mind bubbling. 1.8%. Yeah. So like that's, that's, that's pretty accurate. These polls

00:10:12.040 often have a margin of error of plus or minus 3%. So those numbers are not, they're not, I don't

00:10:16.920 think that's an indictment of, of the industry. And they got there in the end. It's also a bit

00:10:21.220 systematic. If you go back and look at the last two elections, conservative votes, the final

00:10:26.280 projection, projections before the election, they always underestimate conservative vote by an

00:10:31.160 average of about 2%. But it's not like it's 8%. There's a couple of pollsters that are way off,

00:10:35.800 of course, but on average, the numbers are, especially if they were down by the liberals,

00:10:39.560 by a couple of points, it's not, not that bad. What I think happened and, you know, what I saw in the

00:10:44.180 campaign was that we obviously saw polling that in some cases earlier in the campaign, a couple of

00:10:47.940 weeks into the campaign show the conservatives down 8, 10, 12 points, depending on the pollster.

00:10:52.980 And we were hearing from conservative campaigners, this incredible response to the door. And there

00:10:57.760 was this, this, this dichotomy. What ended up happening is that, is it, first of all, a couple

00:11:03.300 of things happened. One is I think as the last three weeks of the campaign, the conservatives

00:11:06.820 ran a very good campaign in the last three weeks of the campaign and made up a lot of votes and

00:11:10.320 actually gained momentum for the campaign. And if the campaign had got another week or two,

00:11:14.260 I think the results could have been very, very different. The other thing that happened is that

00:11:18.460 conservatives at the doors were getting good results because we were, we were, conservatives were

00:11:23.160 finding support of the doors at a level higher than they're ever used to being. To get 41.4%

00:11:29.700 of the vote, as the conservatives did in the end, that's a higher level than any party in Canada

00:11:34.920 since the 1988 federal election. So there's no, there's concert, any conservative that's been

00:11:40.900 involved in campaigning at any point since say 1993 has been, has been used to seeing lower results

00:11:47.260 of the doors overall. This felt very good on the ground. And we heard anecdotal stories. I know your

00:11:52.280 reporters found anecdotal stories of lots of people out supporting conservatives because

00:11:55.880 conservatives did far better than they ever had historically. They got 8 million votes. I mean,

00:12:01.240 no party had ever gotten more than 7 million in the past. And frankly, what Carney profited from

00:12:06.460 more than anything else wasn't the strength of the liberal party, but the complete and utter collapse

00:12:10.340 of the NDP. This is, you know, I think Pierre Pauli have said it after the election. If conservatives

00:12:16.260 had gotten 41.4% in any other election in the last 30 years, it would have been an absolute blowout.

00:12:21.480 Um, and the circumstances were different and obviously it didn't work out this way, but the

00:12:26.920 coalition that has been built that, uh, in the end, I think, uh, it was, is, is extremely exciting

00:12:32.360 and extremely powerful. And if Pauli have can build on that into the next election, he's going to have

00:12:37.180 an incredible base. Well, it's true. I remember talking to some friends who were out campaigning

00:12:42.600 specifically in Toronto in the GTA. And I said, I don't care what the pollsters say. This feels like a

00:12:47.420 winning campaign. It feels like we're winning. And I was looking at the numbers and I was saying,

00:12:51.340 yeah, that's because it's possible that Pauli will get a higher percentage of the vote than

00:12:56.180 Stephen Harper ever did and still lose and still lose to a majority liberal government. I'm just

00:13:01.300 pleased that the conservatives were able to hold Carney to a minority, although it looks like it's

00:13:06.140 getting pretty close and pretty tight. So overall, Hamish, like what is your analysis? Do you think that

00:13:11.660 Poliev ran a good campaign? Is he going to stay on as leader? When do you think the next election

00:13:16.240 will be, do you think Carney will be able to put together a majority here? Or do you think that

00:13:19.420 we'll have a minority that typically lasts, you know, 18 to 24 months? Oh, so there's a lot of that.

00:13:25.540 Look, I, I think, I think the campaign was well run. I think the campaign, especially the last three

00:13:29.960 weeks really came together. Uh, Poliev's performance in the debates, I think were, were, were a very strong

00:13:35.200 asset for him. He did very well. Um, and I think that we saw over that time, uh, the conservative,

00:13:41.540 uh, base grow and got them out to vote in a good way. Obviously not enough, more needs to be done,

00:13:46.820 but I, I think the campaign, uh, especially the part, particularly in April was very, was very,

00:13:51.400 very good. Um, I think that, uh, Poliev should and will stay on. I think he's got the support of the

00:13:58.660 vast majority of conservatives and, you know, even the people I know who didn't support him in the

00:14:04.020 original leadership when he ran it, when he won three years ago are now saying things like,

00:14:08.680 well, last thing we need is more leadership turmoil. We've been dumping leaders after each

00:14:12.380 election. Let's have some continuity. Let's build from here. So I think he's going to stay on his

00:14:16.340 leader. Um, and the, whether, I don't think Carney is going to get to a majority. There's two seats

00:14:22.500 left, uh, to be, to be recounted. Um, the liberals are, uh, on paper ahead in one and the conservatives

00:14:28.940 are on paper ahead in the other. Um, the, the one, the conservatives are the head are head in,

00:14:33.520 and I think is going to, it's by enough that it would be very, very difficult to be overcome in

00:14:36.800 a recount. Uh, the one the liberals are ahead and it's only 12 votes. Anyway, we'll see what happens,

00:14:42.320 um, uh, there, but I don't think he's going to get to a majority. Look, the biggest thing for him

00:14:47.240 is for Carney's ability to stay on comes down to the revival of the NDP. The bloc, we'll see what

00:14:53.420 they do. They said they don't want an election for a year. They need to raise money. If they're

00:14:56.900 polling number, if the bloc's polling numbers get, get good in Quebec, I think we'll see them

00:15:01.340 going on the war path, but that's not enough. Uh, it's going to come down to the NDP or what's

00:15:05.920 left of the greens, I suppose, depending on what the actual numbers are in the end. Um,

00:15:09.500 and the NDP leadership, I don't think is going to be that quick. I think we're going to see the NDP

00:15:13.560 take a year, 18 months. And I don't think there were, there's any chance of there being an election

00:15:18.100 until the NDP have a new leader and, you know, uh, have maybe shown some signs of life,

00:15:24.120 uh, and stop polling in single digits. Well, we showed this image on the show,

00:15:29.340 I think last week that in Canada, I think that the rebate, you get, you get a rebate from the

00:15:33.900 government and taxpayers subsidize political parties. Um, if you get 10% of the vote in a

00:15:38.820 riding. And I think the NDP missed that in the overwhelming majority, like 85% or something like

00:15:43.920 that. So we've talked about this a lot, uh, as you know, news and on the Kenneth Malcolm show that

00:15:48.940 the NDP has financial problems and they take on a lot of debt to run these campaigns. And part of

00:15:53.980 the reason, I know part of the reason why Jagmeet Singh never triggered an election was because he

00:15:58.120 wanted his pension or because he wanted to be in that power seat. And he said that he was doing

00:16:02.500 everything he could to block the conservatives from getting into government, which is not really

00:16:06.420 his job. But anyway, I think a big part of it that is unspoken is that the finances of that party

00:16:11.960 are in shambles and right now they don't have a leader. So I don't see any incentive whatsoever for

00:16:16.600 them to try to force another election when they just aren't organized and don't have that. I do

00:16:22.180 want to talk about Pierre Polyev though, because it seems like we're going to have a parliament

00:16:26.200 without Polyev at first. Anyway, CTV was reporting that the clock starts ticking on the by-election

00:16:32.220 of Polyev as he hopes to return to parliament. So according to federal law, Damien Couric, who

00:16:37.340 stepped aside so that Polyev could take a seat, they're saying that he must sit as member of

00:16:41.560 parliament for 30 days before he could tender his resignation. After that, the Speaker of the

00:16:46.160 House of Commons would have to report the vacancy to the chief electoral officer, at which point

00:16:50.300 the government would have 11 to 180 days to call a by-election. By-elections can last

00:16:55.460 a minimum 36 days. So the soonest that Polyev could be elected would be early August. There's

00:17:01.980 of course a holiday in early August. So we might not be talking until the second week of August.

00:17:07.800 Now, Mark Carney had previously said that he won't delay and that he'll get Polyev the opportunity

00:17:13.080 with a by-election as fast as possible. We have a clip of him saying that. Let's play that.

00:17:19.200 I've already indicated to Mr. Polyev that if it's the decision of him and the Conservative Party to

00:17:25.700 trigger, if I can put it that way, a by-election, I will ensure that it happens as soon as possible.

00:17:33.440 No games, nothing, straight.

00:17:35.680 Yeah. So the CBC was like applauding him and cheering him on last week saying, what a great

00:17:40.860 guy. He's not even being partisan. He's just letting Polyev have a seat right away. But then, 0.94

00:17:45.520 of course, these convoluted rules step in and it looks like we are going to have a summer without

00:17:49.600 Polyev in the House. What do you make of all this? And strategically, what do you think Polyev

00:17:53.160 should be doing?

00:17:54.140 Well, look, I think these are the rules. The reason they have to wait 30 days is that 30 days is the time

00:18:00.060 that someone can legally challenge the outcome of an election. So in theory, if the election, if

00:18:04.640 someone could file a challenge saying Damien Couric cheated and therefore shouldn't be the MP, then he

00:18:10.560 wouldn't be allowed to resign. So they have to wait for that 30 day period to be gone in order for him

00:18:15.060 to be allowed to resign. Look, I frankly think that, you know, that it's going to be a very short

00:18:21.320 session of Parliament starting, you know, next week or whenever it is very soon. It'll be over in

00:18:27.260 three or four weeks. You know, Mr. Polyev, I'm sure, will be around the House of Commons.

00:18:32.000 We'll still be able to scrum in front of the House of Commons, as he always did. And we'll have a few

00:18:37.280 last clips of him in question period. But he'll be back in the House for the return of the House in

00:18:43.500 September, which is when, you know, things will start getting really, really interesting. I think,

00:18:49.220 you know, Carney, most of his MPs are probably still finding their way to the washroom right now and

00:18:53.580 around the House of the Commons. I don't expect this first session to be particularly

00:18:57.220 exciting. So I don't think it makes a massive difference. Of course, we'll have, as I said,

00:19:02.080 a few last clips of Polyev tearing the Liberals to shreds in the House. But I think we can all

00:19:07.780 manage for a few weeks. So I don't think it's that big of a deal. And it gets an opportunity

00:19:14.480 for Polyev to spend the summer out doing the barbecue circuit as well. So I don't think it's a

00:19:22.180 great problem. Now, so one of the big news stories to come out of last week was that the

00:19:27.980 Carney Liberals will not table a budget this spring. They claim that they don't have time.

00:19:33.300 And so instead, we won't get one until the fall. Of course, we didn't get one. I mean, the fall

00:19:39.160 economic budget, it was kind of in shambles. That was right when Chrysia Freeland was resigning. And 0.99

00:19:44.880 it seems to me we don't have any sort of financial accountability right now. And given that Mark

00:19:52.120 Carney said that he's here to help manage the crisis, that this is a crisis that we're dealing

00:19:56.680 with with the tariffs, it just seems wildly irresponsible for someone as professional and

00:20:02.700 grown up and mature as we're told that Mark Carney is, he's the man for crisis, that he can't even get

00:20:07.640 a budget put out. So his finance minister, Francois-Philippe Champagne, basically just said

00:20:14.320 that the world has changed in the last six weeks and that Canadians understand that, therefore we

00:20:19.020 don't need a budget. Let's play that clip. I want to ask you explicitly, will there be an actual

00:20:24.400 budget in 2025? There will be a fall economic statement when we're coming back. How are we as

00:20:29.640 Canadians to hold your government accountable for what you're promising if you're not going to be

00:20:33.980 transparent about it for six months or so? And I take your point about the timeline,

00:20:37.420 there's still another month. And I would say this is a new government. So let's start,

00:20:41.280 if we're going to start, this is a new government, new legislature, new prime minister. So the

00:20:45.800 direction is very clear. He's been very... But you're still the finance minister. Yeah, I'm still

00:20:48.780 the finance minister. And I would say the world has changed also in six weeks. So Canadians understand

00:20:53.160 that. What? What do you make of that, Hamish? I mean, I think it's outrageous, right? I think one of the

00:21:01.300 most important things we always have to remember about liberals is what they say and what they do

00:21:05.560 is different. And we should always measure them on what they do, not what they say. Because they

00:21:09.580 often say things that at first glance seem very reasonable or smart and actually end up doing

00:21:13.880 terrible things. Carney has come up with this whole brand of being this responsible fiscal manager.

00:21:19.340 And instead, we get this idea that, you know, we might not have a budget all this year. He's now

00:21:23.060 backtracked a little and indicated there might be one, but he'll just rename the fall economic

00:21:27.900 statement as a budget. The fact of the matter that he thought that it would be acceptable for

00:21:32.880 him to get elected, claiming to be all new, all different, as a new type of liberal, and then not

00:21:37.520 have a budget on his supposed strength in economics shows that he's actually not a new type of liberal.

00:21:42.300 He's very, very much in the vein of Justin Trudeau and everything we've seen in the past. And that

00:21:47.520 sort of arrogance and dismissal of the way the government's supposed to work, of the accountability

00:21:53.620 the Canadian's desire, I think is going to become a real ring around his neck. He's really going to

00:22:04.060 be, I think we're going to discover that he, that Bloom is going to come off this guy very,

00:22:08.060 very, very fast. The smartest thing he ever did was call that election as fast as he did.

00:22:13.240 You know, I've seen, remember Stephen Harper getting elected in January of 2006, and they still,

00:22:19.460 there was still a budget in March. They managed to do that. I don't know why Mr. Carney couldn't

00:22:24.240 have a budget in June. I'm not saying he has to have one this week, but he could have one in June

00:22:27.920 sometime. That's a perfectly amount of, a reasonable amount of time. He's got a platform full of things

00:22:33.520 he thinks are great. They should do that. They can cut and paste that in large parts into a budget.

00:22:38.240 It doesn't have to, you know, this is something that is doable. He just didn't think he needed to do

00:22:42.380 it. He isn't actually planning and delivering the change he promised. And I think that's a real problem

00:22:46.900 for him. And, you know, Canadians have every right to be annoyed and disappointed. 0.99

00:22:53.060 Well, you're right. I think that to a lot of Canadians, clearly, they felt that Carney was

00:22:57.520 the change that the country needed. They felt satisfied with the change within the liberal

00:23:01.260 leadership and said, you know, we'll give Mark Carney a chance. And I think last week should have been a

00:23:07.280 real eye-opener for many of those Canadians. Because, sure, Carney's totally different than

00:23:12.360 Justin Trudeau. He was advising behind the scene for some period of Trudeau's tenure. But still,

00:23:18.460 you know, he has his own experience, his own person. He steps in and he does represent some

00:23:22.460 kind of change. But then for him to release that cabinet and introduce all of the same characters,

00:23:27.900 like, how is it that Canada is going to turn around its fortunes when he still has

00:23:32.980 Melanie Jolie, Stéphane Galbault, Chrysia Freeland, and, yes, François-Philippe Champagne

00:23:39.160 running the show, right? Like, we're supposed to be impressed by his resume and his Rolodex and all

00:23:45.460 of his connections. Like, where are all these high-profile, you know, globalist types that

00:23:50.860 could step in, right? Why isn't he pulling people from Scotiabank and RBC or, you know, London and New

00:23:57.080 York and Goldman Sachs and all of these, like, impressive people who have saved companies and

00:24:01.940 built empires? Like, why aren't any of them stepping in? Why do we have this same pathetic group of people

00:24:07.840 that were standing side by side with Justin Trudeau and destroyed the country? That's a bit of a 0.99

00:24:12.340 rhetorical question. I want to point out that Mark Carney was in Rome. He was speaking to reporters

00:24:17.200 and he said that there's not much value in a budget, that Canadians just don't really need to know

00:24:22.640 not much value. Let's play that clip. There is not much value in my judgment, and it's considered

00:24:28.740 judgment and it's judgment based on experience, that there is not much value in trying to rush through

00:24:35.520 a budget in a very narrow window, three weeks, with a new cabinet, effectively a new finance minister.

00:24:44.140 Effectively? No. Champagne was the finance minister before the election as well, and it's a new cabinet.

00:24:49.520 No, I mean, there's one or two new faces. I mean, there are some new faces. Many of them will be

00:24:54.380 familiar. Someone like Evan Solomon is a new face, but he's a long-time liberal insider. Same with Gregor

00:25:00.040 Robertson, the longtime mayor of Vancouver, who was an abject failure in that role, and now he's a

00:25:05.080 housing minister. So, you know, you have sort of a new cabinet, but not really. Most of them are

00:25:09.920 Trudeau-era liberal cabinet ministers. The new faces are not that new. What do you make of all that?

00:25:17.580 Well, look, I think he's making a huge, huge mistake with putting a lot of these traditional

00:25:22.020 ministers, these old Trudeau ministers, in these senior positions of power. Because I will tell you

00:25:25.700 something. I worked in the prime minister's office many, many years ago, and the government of Canada

00:25:29.800 is a large, unwieldy beast, and it's only become larger since I was there. It's got so many moving

00:25:36.340 parts, and the prime minister can make change. If the prime minister quits his direct personal

00:25:42.080 attention on an issue, he can get the department to do something dramatically different. But it takes

00:25:47.200 force of will, and there's just too many things for any one human to do, which is why we have a

00:25:52.140 cabinet. And, but in many cases, especially if you've got weak cabinet ministers or cabinet ministers

00:25:56.760 who don't really want to do what the prime minister, you know, wants them to do, or sort of

00:26:00.720 feels, they don't feel the urgency, is that things will just drift along. The bureaucratic inertia in

00:26:06.860 Ottawa is incredible. And if you've got a weak minister or a minister who doesn't really want to

00:26:12.540 change things, things will not change. Things will continue in exactly the same path. So even if we

00:26:18.300 take Carney at his word and believe he wants to change things, which I don't, and I think that

00:26:22.060 would be a mistake. But even if we believe he wants to change things, the fact that he's got

00:26:26.120 a bunch of Trudeau retreads who don't really want to change things, and weak other ministers,

00:26:30.980 many of whom have been elected for 15 minutes, really indicates to me that we're going to see

00:26:36.520 very, very much more of the same, and very, very little change. The way he's dismissive of the

00:26:41.680 budget, I think, is a big mistake. Like, I spent a lot of time polling Canadians and working in politics.

00:26:46.700 There's not a, you know, we all pay attention to politics far more than the average person.

00:26:50.680 But there are a few big things that people pay attention to. People know that the budget matters.

00:26:55.240 They, you know, interest in politics spikes around budgets, whether provincial budget or federal

00:26:58.800 budget. That's a thing that it's a big set piece that governments see as an asset. The fact that he

00:27:04.200 doesn't even see it as a potential asset to drive his own message says a lot about him and how sort of

00:27:10.700 dismissive he is of the way that Canadians interact with politics to understand what's going on.

00:27:17.560 And his very much attitude is, things are fine. Just trust me. I've got it under control.

00:27:22.360 And, you know, I think that's a big, big mistake on his part.

00:27:26.280 Well, I think you're right. And I think that his priorities have been shown, right? Like,

00:27:29.660 he got elected, he got selected leader by the Liberal Convention. And I think the next day,

00:27:35.520 he jumped on an airplane and went to France and then the UK. Here he is in Rome. He's preparing for

00:27:41.180 the G7 meeting, which I think is going to be like the highlight for him of being prime minister,

00:27:46.480 is that he gets to host this G7 meeting in Canada. And he talks about it a lot. It seems to me that

00:27:50.960 his priorities are not inside Canada, not the budget. So him not doing a budget, I think,

00:27:55.000 perfectly reflects that.

00:27:56.620 You know, most prime ministers, especially ones who are long serving, go through a period where

00:28:00.660 they get elected, they're very focused on domestic issues. And six, seven, eight years in,

00:28:04.980 domestic issues are a little less interesting. They've been dealing with them intently for a few years,

00:28:09.100 and they get more involved in international politics. And that happens to all prime ministers,

00:28:13.280 the good ones and the bad ones. There's a draw of internationalism, usually at some point year six

00:28:18.120 or seven. With Carney, it seems to start in day six or seven. You know, instantly, you know,

00:28:24.040 the fact that he's been prime minister for, you know, eight, nine weeks, and he's been to Europe

00:28:28.080 twice is mind blowing. And you're right, he's going to be his greatest disappointment of the G7 is

00:28:35.160 that it's being held here and he doesn't get to go to Europe again.

00:28:37.460 Well, I think he loves hosting it. I think he's going to really lean into that.

00:28:42.440 And again, yeah, he's definitely looking forward to that much more than being held accountable

00:28:48.140 in the House of Commons. Well, Hamish Marshall, great to have you back on the show. Always

00:28:51.860 appreciate your insights and your commentary. Appreciate your time today.

00:28:56.540 Thank you so much for having me.

00:28:58.020 All right, folks. Thanks so much. Solid time we have today. We'll be back again tomorrow

00:29:00.740 with all the news. I'm Candice Malcolm. This is the Candice Malcolm Show. Thank you and God bless.

00:29:04.520 .

00:29:05.100 .

00:29:07.840 .

00:29:09.460 .

00:29:09.520 .

00:29:11.520 .

The Candice Malcolm Show - May 20, 2025

Legacy Media bias EXPOSED by Juno News analysis. You’ll never guess the worst offender!

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript