Speaker 1: Hello, and welcome to Stephanomics, the podcast that brings the
Speaker 1: global economy to you. With something different for you today,
Speaker 1: an extended conversation with one of the most impressive individuals
Speaker 1: I've ever worked with, Christia Freeland, a friend who had
Speaker 1: a glittering career as a journalist covering the aftermath of
Speaker 1: the collapse of the Soviet Union. Wrote three books about
Speaker 1: that time, and did several senior jobs for the Financial
Speaker 1: Times and Routers in London and New York. They decided
Speaker 1: to give it all up to go back to her
Speaker 1: home country of Canada and get into politics. That was
Speaker 1: barely seven years ago, and now she's Finance Minister, one
Speaker 1: of the favorites to succeed the Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.
Speaker 1: My interview with Christians going to take up most of
Speaker 1: the show this week, but if you listen to the end,
Speaker 1: you'll also get to hear why milk and eggs have
Speaker 1: both been making news at Bloomberg, So stay tuned for that.
Speaker 1: But now here's the Finance Minister of Canada, Deputy Prime Minister,
Speaker 1: Christoph Freedland, Deputy Prime Minister, thank you very much for
Speaker 1: being here. Um. I remember when I was at the
Speaker 1: BBC writing a blog about Canada, about the goody two
Speaker 1: shoes economy, because they dodged the global financial crisis so effectively,
Speaker 1: and you had very sensible banking and you hadn't made
Speaker 1: lots of mistakes everybody else's pain. When you look at
Speaker 1: how Canada's responded to the pandemic, and particularly I guess
Speaker 1: the vaccine rollout, Um, do you regret that Canada hasn't
Speaker 1: done better and that somehow the US has managed to
Speaker 1: do something right on vaccines that Canada's got wrong? Um so,
Speaker 1: looks Stephanie. I would never claim perfection of myself or
Speaker 1: of any human being, and I think particularly with COVID,
Speaker 1: where not getting things exactly right has meant people dying.
Speaker 1: I hope that every politician everywhere in the world, um,
Speaker 1: you know, with the possible exception of just into our journey,
Speaker 1: should look back and should have moments of thinking, wow,
Speaker 1: I wish we had gotten that a little bit more right. Overall, though,
Speaker 1: I would say I like the idea of Canada as
Speaker 1: a goody two shoes country. We sometimes talk about ourselves
Speaker 1: as being voice scouts or girl guides as the case.
Speaker 1: Maybe I think that is a good thing in our country.
Speaker 1: I would also say where we have done things right,
Speaker 1: it has been where we have demonstrated social solidarity UM
Speaker 1: and so it's quite striking for me that Atlantic Canada,
Speaker 1: which has such strong community ties and a real commitment
Speaker 1: to community, has done remarkably well in fighting COVID. You know,
Speaker 1: Atlantic Canada is basically the New Zealand of North America
Speaker 1: UM and did that by taking some really tough action,
Speaker 1: by closing the borders of Atlantic Canada and of provinces
Speaker 1: in Atlantic Canada to the rest of the country, and
Speaker 1: by having hard lockdowns early on. And I think why
Speaker 1: they were able to do that is because of that
Speaker 1: strong community spirit. Interestingly, the other parts of Canada that
Speaker 1: have done really well are the territories, the Northern territories,
Speaker 1: the UK, in the Northwest territories, in Nunavut UM and
Speaker 1: again it was solidarity preparedness to close the borders. And
Speaker 1: then finally, you know something that maybe isn't noticed outside
Speaker 1: Canada is Indigenous people in Canada UM, who have historically
Speaker 1: been really hard hit by public health crisis, showed real leadership,
Speaker 1: often closing their communities to outsiders, and as a result,
Speaker 1: there has been a really, really effective response to COVID
Speaker 1: in indigenous communities. We are now vaccinating at a really
Speaker 1: really fast pace UM. In terms of per capita vaccination,
Speaker 1: it's in the top one or two or three in
Speaker 1: the G twenty, depending on the day. We always knew
Speaker 1: it was going to be a challenge, UM because Canada,
Speaker 1: as a small country fully integrated into the global trading
Speaker 1: system and into the NAFTA North American economy. UM, we
Speaker 1: went into this crisis without significant national bio manufacturing capacity.
Speaker 1: That has made it challenge to be dependent on the
Speaker 1: factories of other countries. But by acquiring a lot of vaccines,
Speaker 1: and by getting into that vaccine acquisition race early, I
Speaker 1: think we have largely mitigated that. We as a country
Speaker 1: have decided we need to be in better shape going forward,
Speaker 1: and so the budget may makes an investment of more
Speaker 1: than two billion dollars in life sciences and bio manufacturing capacity.
Speaker 1: When we met you were you were a journalist. I
Speaker 1: was thinking about who were the best known journalist politicians
Speaker 1: or journalists who later became politicians, And you'll be interested
Speaker 1: to hear the list is Winston Churchill, Boris Johnson, and Mussolini.
Speaker 1: U does it does that how does that affect the
Speaker 1: way you do your job? Now? Do you think all
Speaker 1: that time as a reporter, do you still feel a
Speaker 1: little bit like a reporter? Yeah, I I feel I'm
Speaker 1: gonna have to think about that list Stephanie and I'm
Speaker 1: gonna left on that and for all listeners. Um, Stephanie
Speaker 1: and I were baby journalists together, so we've known each
Speaker 1: other for a long time, and I've still been a
Speaker 1: journalist a lot longer than I've been a politician. Um.
Speaker 1: It definitely shapes how I approach my job, and I
Speaker 1: would say, in maybe three principle ways, too generic to
Speaker 1: being a journalist and one sort of specific to my
Speaker 1: own time in journalism, I still always want to talk
Speaker 1: to the people who are at the coal face, and
Speaker 1: I want to hear directly from them. I never really
Speaker 1: believe that a briefing note can fully capture as much
Speaker 1: as a conversation with the people who know stuff directly,
Speaker 1: so I continue to do that. The system really doesn't
Speaker 1: want politicians to do that. It's just not designed for
Speaker 1: politicians to be picking up the phone all the time.
Speaker 1: But that's what I believe in doing. The second thing
Speaker 1: that has shaped me a lot is at the ft.
Speaker 1: When I moved from being a reporter to being an editor.
Speaker 1: One of our colleagues it was actually Peter Bruce, who
Speaker 1: I remember saying to me, Um, you're an editor now,
Speaker 1: and you're going to have to make a hundred decisions
Speaker 1: a day, and hopefully more than will be right than
Speaker 1: we'll be wrong. But the important thing is going to
Speaker 1: be not to be paralyzed by uh, you know, feeling
Speaker 1: you need to be perfect. The important thing is going
Speaker 1: to be just to make the decisions because otherwise the
Speaker 1: paper cannot be published at the end of the day.
Speaker 1: You had to take the information that was coming at you,
Speaker 1: absorb it, analyze it as well as you could, and
Speaker 1: then make a decision on which story was in, which
Speaker 1: story was out, which quote was in, which one was out,
Speaker 1: and and not and not be so not be too scared,
Speaker 1: not be too scared of making the wrong decision. And
Speaker 1: I felt that training was really really helpful in the
Speaker 1: heat of COVID, you know, especially last spring. And then
Speaker 1: my formative experience as a reporter was covering the collapse
Speaker 1: of the Soviet Union and really watching this extraordinary thing
Speaker 1: of a whole paradigm changing and breaking down just in
Speaker 1: the course of not even years, but months and days.
Speaker 1: Watching it showed me that systems are not eternal, and
Speaker 1: systems can change really fast. And in particular, what I
Speaker 1: saw was the people who were the most successful in
Speaker 1: that transition were the people who were able to see
Speaker 1: that it was happening and embrace the transformation and understand
Speaker 1: that the greatest risk. It's a little bit like being
Speaker 1: a news editor, right that the greatest risk is in action.
Speaker 1: And when you when you're in one of those shifting paradigms,
Speaker 1: you have to be prepared to act. Arguably, we have
Speaker 1: a different kind of slightly slower, but a different kind
Speaker 1: of paradigm shift that's happening over the last few years
Speaker 1: um in regard to China and how the world looks
Speaker 1: at China. And I just wonder whether you feel maybe
Speaker 1: there's a risk that you're actually out of step with that,
Speaker 1: still carrying the flag for a belief that engagement with
Speaker 1: China and gradual bringing of China into the sort of
Speaker 1: multilateral liberal economic order was the direction the world was
Speaker 1: going to take. And instead now you have clear competition
Speaker 1: much more than engagement, and a very muscular China. Where
Speaker 1: does your vision I mean are you not changing your
Speaker 1: approach fast enough? Oh? Well, definitely. I think a watershed
Speaker 1: moment in Canada's relationship with China has been the arbitrary
Speaker 1: detention of Michael Coverg and Michael's paybor. Uh. That is
Speaker 1: the key issue for our country when it comes to China. Uh.
Speaker 1: These are two really brave Canadian who have been detained
Speaker 1: for no fault of their own, and Canadians are really
Speaker 1: aware of it. And has that changed your view of
Speaker 1: what is possible in terms of future policy with China?
Speaker 1: Is this a country that you can do business with
Speaker 1: and you can continue to engage with positively? Um? Well, look,
Speaker 1: it is a country that Canada and every member of
Speaker 1: the G seven and the G twenty does business with. Uh.
Speaker 1: So that's a reality. Uh. This is very different from
Speaker 1: the relationship of the world's democracies with the Soviet Union,
Speaker 1: for example, UM, where we occupied very separate economic spheres.
Speaker 1: But you know in the game. Um. Turning to that
Speaker 1: Soviet experience of my own, UM, I have always believed
Speaker 1: that shared values are really important and are very important
Speaker 1: basis for deep international collaboration. For Canada, those values are democracy, Uh,
Speaker 1: they are human rights. There has also there has been
Speaker 1: this sea change in attitudes to spending and deficits. President
Speaker 1: Biden has proposed six trillion, just under six trillion dollars
Speaker 1: worth of spending, three big packages. Um. You talked about
Speaker 1: having had your experience in the post Soviet world. You saw,
Speaker 1: we saw there how incredibly damaging it was to a
Speaker 1: society and economy. Sometimes if you lose control of inflation,
Speaker 1: lose control of the economy. Is there a bit of
Speaker 1: you that that things were being too complacent about spending
Speaker 1: and borrowing in this area and it's all going to
Speaker 1: come back to haunt us, not just not just Canada,
Speaker 1: but this this change in the global attitude. Um So No,
Speaker 1: but I am very careful. I am a Canadian finance minister,
Speaker 1: so I am surrounded by economists who are very very careful,
Speaker 1: um with our numbers, with our projections, and I'm Canadian
Speaker 1: two so that comes naturally to me. And I think
Speaker 1: it's a good thing. And I'm going to give you
Speaker 1: an example, Stephanie. Um in our full economic statement, we
Speaker 1: predicted a deficit for of three one point six billion
Speaker 1: dollars and we came in at three fifty four point
Speaker 1: two billion dollars. Economy we you know what we we
Speaker 1: embrace it. Some people say that we are earnest and boring,
Speaker 1: and I say, it's the Median way. It's a good thing.
Speaker 1: But the six Biden is not less. It's not being cautious,
Speaker 1: and we know that there are people on all sides,
Speaker 1: including his supporters, who were worried that the numbers are
Speaker 1: getting a bit big. If the US is incautious and
Speaker 1: gets into trouble, Canada gets sucked into that. You know,
Speaker 1: we talked about paradigm shifts and what shapes your you
Speaker 1: know how the lessons of the past shape your actions.
Speaker 1: I would say something that has shapes my actions, our
Speaker 1: government actions, and based on the conversations around the G
Speaker 1: seven table, I can tell you this is shaping the
Speaker 1: actions of many G seven ministers. Is actually the experience
Speaker 1: of two thousand and eight two thousand and nine, and
Speaker 1: I think what most G seven countries feel looking back
Speaker 1: on the response to two thousand and eight two thousand
Speaker 1: and nine is we didn't do enough and we didn't
Speaker 1: recover soon enough from the two thousand and eight two
Speaker 1: thousand and nine recession. And it's one reason that I
Speaker 1: am very focused on driving a fast and robust recovery
Speaker 1: from the recession Canada has today we still have. You know,
Speaker 1: we're glad to have had the ten growth in the
Speaker 1: fourth quarter of last year, but we still have five
Speaker 1: hundred thousand Canadians who either don't have a job or
Speaker 1: working fewer fewer hours than they were before COVID that it,
Speaker 1: to me is an economic imperative, but also a political
Speaker 1: imperative to get them back to work. All of us
Speaker 1: politically can reap the whirlwind if we don't, if we
Speaker 1: allow economic hardship to fester. And I think a fair
Speaker 1: criticism of elites, you know, including financial journalist elites. Um
Speaker 1: I was a financial journalist in two thousand and eight,
Speaker 1: two thousand and nine, like you stuff me, And I
Speaker 1: think you know, people could quite fairly say uh, in
Speaker 1: the recovery, elite did pretty well pretty quickly, but a
Speaker 1: lot of regular people were left behind for far too long.
Speaker 1: Um I think it behooves all of us to not
Speaker 1: let that happen this time. And I remember, Stephanie. I
Speaker 1: don't know if anyone ever told you this when we
Speaker 1: were baby journalists at the FT, but I remember one
Speaker 1: editor saying to me, you know what the difference is
Speaker 1: between a recession and a depression. It's a depression when
Speaker 1: a journalist's friend loses their job. And something I've been
Speaker 1: mindful of in this recession is the kinds of people
Speaker 1: who you and I know, Stephanie, white collar people, Um,
Speaker 1: have actually been pretty fine. Um. You know. The worst
Speaker 1: we've had to deal with is eye strain from zoom
Speaker 1: and certain and you know, having your kids around the
Speaker 1: house and them struggling from ice stream from zoom to
Speaker 1: One of my children was doing online school today wearing
Speaker 1: sunglasses and he said it was because of the glare
Speaker 1: from the screen. When we look at the numbers in Canada,
Speaker 1: people at the top of the income distribution actually have
Speaker 1: more money than they did before the crisis. They've been
Speaker 1: saving money. And I would just urge all of us
Speaker 1: to remember the K shape also means people at the bottom,
Speaker 1: people who work with their hands, have suffered a much
Speaker 1: greater health risk. They are the ones who have lost
Speaker 1: their jobs. And our economies will be weaker if we
Speaker 1: don't help them. But our societies, and at the end
Speaker 1: of the day, our democracies will be weaker if we
Speaker 1: don't help them too. Robert but Fall and the British
Speaker 1: author he's written about in a slightly different context. He
Speaker 1: writes about book called Underland. He talks about unburials, and
Speaker 1: he's actually talking about, you know, in the Arctic Circle,
Speaker 1: where things have become unburied that people by climate change,
Speaker 1: that people thought were going to be buried for hundreds
Speaker 1: of years. I sort of like there's been massive loads
Speaker 1: of unburials due to COVID. You know, things have come
Speaker 1: onto this surface that we sort of knew were there.
Speaker 1: I mean slightly with your if you were still a
Speaker 1: journalist and you think about the things that have been
Speaker 1: revealed by COVID, maybe permanently changed, you know, what's the
Speaker 1: book that you would be writing. What do you think
Speaker 1: is the most significant thing about this whole period um.
Speaker 1: I think that I would write a book called who
Speaker 1: Really is Essential? I think what really? You know, I
Speaker 1: think what COVID has shown us is who really are
Speaker 1: the essential workers? And you know, again not to sort
Speaker 1: of bring it down to sort of needly gritty policies,
Speaker 1: but it's one of the reasons it was so important
Speaker 1: for me to increase the Canada Workers Benefit UM in
Speaker 1: our budget. You know, we all of us have been
Speaker 1: going out and saying ya, essential workers, thank you for
Speaker 1: your service. Well, I wanted to thank people for their
Speaker 1: service with more money. What I think we've learned, certainly
Speaker 1: in Canada and I think around the world, is the
Speaker 1: people who are truly essential are very often the people
Speaker 1: who are the least well paid, who have the least security,
Speaker 1: and I think we need to support them more. And
Speaker 1: a corollary to that is we need mothers to be
Speaker 1: able to work. Um Our budget makes a historic investment
Speaker 1: in early learning and child care. And the reason that
Speaker 1: I believe the political window in Canada is open to
Speaker 1: do that is with daycares, with schools being closed because
Speaker 1: of covid UH, what had been for fifty years a
Speaker 1: priority for Canadian feminists themed all of a sudden to
Speaker 1: become a real business priority. When there's a childcare challenge,
Speaker 1: it's the mother who quits her job. And you know,
Speaker 1: we have seen a sharp decline of women's participation in
Speaker 1: the labor force. And we all sort of looked at
Speaker 1: each other and Cannon said, oh no, this is a problem.
Speaker 1: It's a problem for our economy. So I think we've
Speaker 1: learned who is essential, and we've learned that it's essential
Speaker 1: to make it possible for parents and particularly mothers to work. Um.
Speaker 1: I have to ask you one more question, Um, When
Speaker 1: you talk about the good management of the global financial
Speaker 1: crisis in Canada, obviously Mark Connie has took some of
Speaker 1: the credit for that because he was the gap Bank
Speaker 1: of Canada's governor at the time. UM, are you I
Speaker 1: see he's kind of stake to claim, as you know,
Speaker 1: as being part of the Liberal Party in the recent weeks,
Speaker 1: would you support him for prime minister if it came
Speaker 1: to it. I support Justin Trudeau for prime minister. I'm
Speaker 1: very I'm very privileged to serve in his cabinets. But
Speaker 1: Mark is a good friend of mine. He's actually son's godfather,
Speaker 1: and uh, we've known each other for a long time.
Speaker 1: And actually, uh he was one of the many many
Speaker 1: people I talked to as I was putting together the budget,
Speaker 1: and I'm grateful for his advice. Are you going to
Speaker 1: go out and do a pact at some make a
Speaker 1: pact at some point about which of you would run
Speaker 1: if and when there was a vacancy? I really, Stephanie.
Speaker 1: I'm wearing a short sleeve, short sleeve dress, so I
Speaker 1: can only metaphorically roll up my sleeve. Um, But metaphorically
Speaker 1: I would have to say, um, my focus is on
Speaker 1: delivering the two hundred and seventy programs we have in
Speaker 1: this budget. There is a lot of work to do.
Speaker 1: And I really would also say the Prime Minister is
Speaker 1: younger than me, he is younger than Mark. He's doing
Speaker 1: a really good job and I am very confident he's
Speaker 1: going to lead are party in our government for a
Speaker 1: long time. Well, in your journalist days, you would have
Speaker 1: said that was a non denial denial. But it's been
Speaker 1: a delight to talk to you and very nice to
Speaker 1: see you. Christian m h. Before we end the program,
Speaker 1: I did want to give you a taste of something
Speaker 1: completely different, food wars. Elizabeth Elkin covers agriculture for Bloomberg
Speaker 1: News in New York, and she's here to explain more. Elizabeth,
Speaker 1: thanks for coming on Stephanomics. This was a story that
Speaker 1: caught my eye in Bloomberg's Supply Lines newsletter, and you
Speaker 1: brought together two stories which showed how changing social morays
Speaker 1: causing trouble down at the farm. Tell us first about
Speaker 1: those milk wars. Yeah, sure, So, basically, there are currently
Speaker 1: flexibilities in the law that are allowing schools to give
Speaker 1: kids low fat flavored milk in schools, so basically chocolate milk, right,
Speaker 1: and these expire after the school year. So the argument
Speaker 1: is that milk is high in nutrients, right, and kids
Speaker 1: need nutrients to grow, and they're more likely to drink
Speaker 1: it if it's like chocolate flavored as opposed to just
Speaker 1: regular milk. But obviously there's some scrutiny around this chocolate milk.
Speaker 1: And you know, all the flavored milks have more sugar
Speaker 1: in them, and so you know, there's a question of
Speaker 1: is it better to give kids the milk and have them,
Speaker 1: you know, taking those nutrients that they need and get
Speaker 1: a little bit of extra sugar, or is it, you know,
Speaker 1: better to just try to give them the non flavored
Speaker 1: milk that has less sugar um and um. And obviously
Speaker 1: the dairy industry has a huge investment in this, right
Speaker 1: UH milks applied to American schools is a key source
Speaker 1: of demand for the dairy industry um and so two
Speaker 1: big dairy groups have issued a joint statement praising some
Speaker 1: of these lawmakers who are coming out and urging the
Speaker 1: U s d a S Secretary to permanently allow this
Speaker 1: low fat flavored milk in schools. Obviously, parents make the
Speaker 1: same kind of trade offs every day. You know, what,
Speaker 1: how much how hard do I have to try to
Speaker 1: get this stuff into my kid? Or should I just
Speaker 1: force feed them? So? How bad are these are these milks?
Speaker 1: Are these milks that probably that many parents would hesitate
Speaker 1: to buy themselves because of the amount of sugar in them. Yeah,
Speaker 1: that's a great question. Um. And so in talking to
Speaker 1: like nutrition experts, um, and you know, people who are
Speaker 1: working to get kids and adults better nutrition. Um, there's
Speaker 1: a lot of you know, saying that it's not necessarily
Speaker 1: that bad, right, I mean, the school lunches and meals
Speaker 1: at school are some of the most nutritious meals that
Speaker 1: kids will get. Um. A lot of kids, it's the
Speaker 1: most nutritious meal that they'll get in a day, right.
Speaker 1: And for some kids it's the only meal that they'll
Speaker 1: get in a day. Um. And so dick getting kids
Speaker 1: to come in and eat these meals and drink this
Speaker 1: milk and get these proteins, it's better for them than
Speaker 1: say soda, right, which is something that a lot of
Speaker 1: kids will drink every day. Um. And they're probably having
Speaker 1: a big plate of fries as well as they sit
Speaker 1: down for that school meal exactly. Yeah, So it's not
Speaker 1: necessarily from a lot of people's perspective, you know, this
Speaker 1: can be kind of an overblown issue. But presumably, I mean,
Speaker 1: these these dairy farms would have had a terrible then
Speaker 1: the milk producers would have had a terrible time last
Speaker 1: year when all the schools were out. I mean that
Speaker 1: must be part of this, that that just they feel
Speaker 1: like it's kicking them when they're already done. Absolutely, absolutely, yeah.
Speaker 1: I mean last year people were actually dumping milk when
Speaker 1: schools and restaurants closed because they just wasn't enough demand. Um.
Speaker 1: And so this this has been a really tough last
Speaker 1: year for the dairy industry. Schools are obviously incredibly important
Speaker 1: for dairy's demand. What do you think is going to happen?
Speaker 1: There is the Biden illustrations. Does it seems sort of
Speaker 1: pro milk? Well, the head of the U s d
Speaker 1: U s d A came out and said, um, in
Speaker 1: a hearing that this was a really important issue that
Speaker 1: kids need more nutrition and that kids need more dairy
Speaker 1: in their diets. And so I think it's a good possibility,
Speaker 1: especially because you know, more than fifty members of the
Speaker 1: House of Representatives came out urging the Secretary to to
Speaker 1: do something about this um to permanently allow these low
Speaker 1: fat flavored milks and schools. And that is, you know,
Speaker 1: people from across the aisle. Its Republicans, it's Democrats. This
Speaker 1: seems to be an issue that a lot of people
Speaker 1: agree on that kids need more nutrition. Sells to be
Speaker 1: talked to. There's there to day. I would imagine that
Speaker 1: it probably will be, but we'll have to wait and see. Now,
Speaker 1: the other thing coming down the track for milk producers
Speaker 1: is a big shift away from dairy altogether due to
Speaker 1: not just health but but environmental concerns. And I did
Speaker 1: see that the other day. It shares in Oakley, the
Speaker 1: world's biggest oat milk maker, jump nearly on their first
Speaker 1: day of trading, and they valued the company at twelve
Speaker 1: billion dollars. It's just a little oat milk company set
Speaker 1: up in Sweden not so long ago. But I hear
Speaker 1: that we're going to start to see some very expensive
Speaker 1: eggs in the grocery store, maybe where chicken farmers are
Speaker 1: also trying to cash in on this desire of all
Speaker 1: of us to be more green. In our purchases. Elizabeth
Speaker 1: tell us more about those eggs. Yeah, absolutely, Um. And
Speaker 1: two of my colleagues, Leslie Patton and Kim Titman, did
Speaker 1: a fantastic long look at this for Business Week that
Speaker 1: I would highly recommend that anyone check out. But the
Speaker 1: egg industry is now bedding on climate friendly eggs is
Speaker 1: the next big thing. Um, what is the climate friendly egg?
Speaker 1: Great question. So basically what it means is that these
Speaker 1: eggs are made on sustainable farms, um, that use regenerative
Speaker 1: agriculture to make these eggs, right to produce these eggs, um,
Speaker 1: And so they can be marketed as climate friendly. Um.
Speaker 1: They're not just happy chickens producing them that we've you know,
Speaker 1: we've often worried that we've bought free range, we've bought organic,
Speaker 1: but the carbon neutral yes, yeah, So it's it has
Speaker 1: to do with like the science of the the way
Speaker 1: that they're producing eggs themselves via the soil that they're using,
Speaker 1: you know, on the farm. Um, it's actually a scientific thing.
Speaker 1: It's not just letting the chickens roam freely, you know,
Speaker 1: it's not just like good for the chickens. It's really
Speaker 1: about the carbon impact of the farm and of making
Speaker 1: how much and if we want to be this sustainable,
Speaker 1: how much are they going to be? These eggs? So
Speaker 1: these eggs can cost as much as eight dollars um.
Speaker 1: And you can still get Please tell me that's for
Speaker 1: like half a dozen or it does not just one? Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: yeah yeah. And you know you can go into a
Speaker 1: store and get eggs for like less than a dollar um.
Speaker 1: And so it's just yeah, it'll be interesting to see
Speaker 1: how much people are willing to pay um, you know,
Speaker 1: and it's marketed as a premium product, right um. And
Speaker 1: there are a lot of people who will pay more
Speaker 1: money for climate friendly you know anything. I mean that's
Speaker 1: ranked pretty highly um, especially like younger generations, you know,
Speaker 1: millennials gen z usually will rank UM sustainability is very
Speaker 1: high on their UH concerns. And so you know, eggs
Speaker 1: are not the only industry that is taking a bet
Speaker 1: on climate friendliness. But but it is fascinating, you know,
Speaker 1: I mean, would you pay eight dollars for a garden
Speaker 1: of eggs? Who the hell knows? I guess it depends
Speaker 1: how much everything else is. But Elizabeth, thank you very much. Yeah,
Speaker 1: and thank you for having me. Well that's it for
Speaker 1: this episode of Stephonomics. I'll be back next week with
Speaker 1: a lot more from around the world. In the meantime,
Speaker 1: please rate the program, and if you want to get
Speaker 1: more news and analysis from Bloomberg Economics, you can follow
Speaker 1: at Economics on Twitter. This episode was produced by Manus Hendrickson,
Speaker 1: with special thanks to Canada's Deputy Prime Minister Christipher Freeland,
Speaker 1: Elizabeth Elkin, and Brenda Murray. Mike Sasso is executive producer
Speaker 1: of Stephonomics and the head of Bloomberg Podcast is Francesca Levi.