Speaker 1: I'm very pleased today to be joined by James Moore,
Speaker 1: a former member of the Canadian Parliament, a good friend
Speaker 1: of mine. We're going to talk about the bilateral relationship.
Speaker 1: We're going to talk about Canadian politics, and we're going
Speaker 1: to talk about our shared North American history, our culture,
Speaker 1: the differences in the country and what binds us together. James, welcome,
Speaker 1: gonna be with you.
Speaker 2: Steve.
Speaker 1: You live in the great city of Vancouver, which I
Speaker 1: think is the most beautiful city on the on the
Speaker 1: North American continent. Uh. You've served as a senior minister
Speaker 1: in the in the Canadian government, in government as a
Speaker 1: member of Parliament. This is a mostly American audience, but
Speaker 1: not universally. Talk about Canada. What makes Canada unique and
Speaker 1: special amongst the English speaking countries. It wasn't supposed to work,
Speaker 1: Probably the fact that it's not an English speaking country
Speaker 1: but is viewed by the other English speaking countries as
Speaker 1: such because of its Commonwealth affiliation.
Speaker 2: Canada is the country is not supposed to work. You
Speaker 2: are the second largest country in size, the thirty seventh
Speaker 2: largest in population. We're born out of divisions Indigenous Canadians
Speaker 2: versus the English versus French. We have linguistic barriers across
Speaker 2: the country. So you have this massive continental footprint with
Speaker 2: a thin population, eighty percent of whom live within a
Speaker 2: two hour border with the United States. Our relations with
Speaker 2: the United States are enormously economically and culturally important. We've
Speaker 2: had two referendums on Quebec sovereignty and separation. Of course,
Speaker 2: we've gone through world wars, We've gone through all kinds
Speaker 2: of crises and political ones as well, scandals as bad
Speaker 2: as the worst of the America have ever seen. So
Speaker 2: we've had a lot of stresses and stress tests on
Speaker 2: the fact of Canada, and yet we've endured. You know,
Speaker 2: there's a parallel narrative there with the United States as well,
Speaker 2: But in Canada, you know, it is true. We're less jingoistic,
Speaker 2: so we expect more practicality from government. Ideology isn't and
Speaker 2: we don't dump as much of our identity and sense
Speaker 2: of self worth, sense of community into government. Because for
Speaker 2: where I am in Vancouver, Attawa's a very far off place.
Speaker 2: It's not wouldn't be very different from somebody in Bend,
Speaker 2: Oregon looking at Washington, d C. And saying, well, what
Speaker 2: happens there doesn't really matter. But there's a dissociation here,
Speaker 2: and a lot of our identity and sense of purpose
Speaker 2: and sense of community and sense of justice is not
Speaker 2: invested in politics as much, it seems to me, as
Speaker 2: a degree it is in the United States. We're a
Speaker 2: proud country, you know. We we think that we're more
Speaker 2: important in the world than we are. I think part
Speaker 2: of that is because we get sort of drawn into
Speaker 2: the narrative in the language and the vocabulary of American
Speaker 2: politics and all that. Being on the right side of
Speaker 2: history and some of the big fights Second World War,
Speaker 2: Cold War, the war against terrorism that gives us a
Speaker 2: sense of righteousness that I think has earned it, but
Speaker 2: I think could sometimes be overstated in our posture around
Speaker 2: the world. You see that with Justin Trudeau getting over
Speaker 2: skis a little bit and being a little bit luxury
Speaker 2: is certainly from the left. But we were a country
Speaker 2: that also has our challenges, right, I mean the urbanization
Speaker 2: of Canada. You know, the cost of living in Canada
Speaker 2: is is sky high. Vancouver is and one of the
Speaker 2: most expensive cities in the world. We have tensions indigenous
Speaker 2: and non we have you know, you know more, Canada
Speaker 2: is a population of forty million last year alone. We
Speaker 2: drew in Now there was a there was a backlog
Speaker 2: because of COVID, but had a million new Canadians where
Speaker 2: it became Canadian citizens last year. So there's those tensions
Speaker 2: of new Canadians coming in, economic, social, cultural. So we're
Speaker 2: a country that is that is struggling, fighting doing well,
Speaker 2: but we have our challenges.
Speaker 1: What is the role of the United States with regard
Speaker 1: to this issue, given the historic tizes, the closeness of
Speaker 1: the mill Tarry allianced in Canada standing as a Five
Speaker 1: Eyes partner in a NATO member.
Speaker 2: So I was a member of parliament. I remember I
Speaker 2: was home on nine to eleven when that happened. And
Speaker 2: there was a spook that happened in Canada, not just
Speaker 2: on the substance of that day and in the policy
Speaker 2: in the long term fallout of that event, but from
Speaker 2: that moment forward, all Canadians were became very anxious, particularly
Speaker 2: those of US in government, about any attack on the
Speaker 2: United States that was born in Canada. A sleeper cell
Speaker 2: an errant ne'er do well who crossed the border, who
Speaker 2: demonstrated that in some way that the Canada US border
Speaker 2: was ineffective in protecting Americans from American interests and from
Speaker 2: outside threats. So that threat and any incoherence in competence
Speaker 2: in the Canadian side of the border that leads to
Speaker 2: the loss of American life. In a time of economic nationalism,
Speaker 2: nationalism broadly sort of you know, ethnic nationalism, you know
Speaker 2: in the blood and soil parts of the Trump movement,
Speaker 2: any opportunity to sort of push away and to block
Speaker 2: the Canada US relationship and to close border would be
Speaker 2: devastating for Canada. About one in five Canadian jobs is
Speaker 2: dependent on trade with the United States. It's the most
Speaker 2: prosperous relationship in the history of the world. We do
Speaker 2: about two thirds of a trillion dollars in two way
Speaker 2: trade every year. I mean, what's one of the most successful.
Speaker 2: It is the most successful economic partnership in the history
Speaker 2: of the world. And if you had any kind of
Speaker 2: attack in Canada that was a consequence of Canadian government
Speaker 2: and competence that led to a death of an American,
Speaker 2: the ability to weaponize that and to use that to
Speaker 2: thicken the border between Canada the United States would be
Speaker 2: economically detrimental to both of US, but particularly for Canada.
Speaker 2: So these incidents on their own are problematic, but in
Speaker 2: terms of what it means for the broader relationship and
Speaker 2: the security that we can feel as partners and neighbors,
Speaker 2: that would have a very long and devastating consequence if
Speaker 2: it went, if it went badly.
Speaker 1: Is justin Trudeau in his last term.
Speaker 2: Probably whether he knows it or not. You know the
Speaker 2: history of Canadian prime ministers, We've had, you know, lots
Speaker 2: of prime ministers in Canadian history, but he is deep
Speaker 2: on the back nine of his time as prime minister.
Speaker 2: He was elected with the majority in twenty fifteen, minority
Speaker 2: government in two and nineteen, a minority government again in
Speaker 2: twenty twenty one when he thought he would win because
Speaker 2: the Conservative Party was disorganized and not quite prepared for
Speaker 2: that campaign. In politics, you know, as you know, you
Speaker 2: start with a lot of friends and you tend to
Speaker 2: lose them over time. The degree to which that slope
Speaker 2: is straight south depends on your behavior and the way
Speaker 2: which you carry yourself. He's lost a lot of friends
Speaker 2: pretty fast. You know, he is deeply unpopular. He's probably
Speaker 2: the most unpopular. I would say his unpopular in Canada
Speaker 2: now would probably be comparable to the unpopularity of George W.
Speaker 2: Bush and towards the end of his campaign or the
Speaker 2: end of his time in his second mandate, it's almost
Speaker 2: that hot. There's not unissue like Iraq, there's not an
Speaker 2: issue like in like that in Canada. But it's just
Speaker 2: people are just tired of him, tired of being lectured,
Speaker 2: tired of the elitism. They look around and they see,
Speaker 2: you know, divisions with India, divisions with China, tensions with
Speaker 2: the United States, whether it's with President Trump overall, you
Speaker 2: know those tensions or even with President Biden over the
Speaker 2: inflation reduction active what that means for Canada. We see
Speaker 2: your tensions with Europe, you see housing prices going up,
Speaker 2: cost of gas going up, like everything just seems to
Speaker 2: be not going right. And in Canada we have a
Speaker 2: parliamentary system, but we have a presidential style of politics.
Speaker 2: So so it is as you phrased it, it's the
Speaker 2: Trudeau government. It'll be the you know, peer pauliev alternative,
Speaker 2: It'll be That's how we phrase our politics. It's not
Speaker 2: quite conservative liberal, even though people sort of identifying camps.
Speaker 2: But you know, the candle that burns the brightest, burns
Speaker 2: the fastest, and he's he's a super nova in terms
Speaker 2: of his personality. You take in Justin Trudeau for about
Speaker 2: five minutes and you kind of immediately have an opinion
Speaker 2: of the guy. You don't you don't osolet you lock
Speaker 2: in with you like what you see, you don't like
Speaker 2: what you see, and the like what you see crowd
Speaker 2: is getting smaller over time.
Speaker 1: Is they is?
Speaker 2: They're presented with disappointment after disappointment relative to the hype
Speaker 2: and expectation of him becoming prime minister. You know, he was,
Speaker 2: he was hot stuff, he was a he's a good
Speaker 2: looking guy, well spoken of a new generation. And then
Speaker 2: as we've sort of seen, you know, in your third mandate,
Speaker 2: you get nowt he's more than halfway now through his
Speaker 2: third mandate as prime minister. You kind of look around,
Speaker 2: you go wow. You talk about an over hypestock. And
Speaker 2: that's just kind of a natural reflex that a lot
Speaker 2: of swing voters are having about him.
Speaker 1: Talk about Pierre Polyab, who is he? Is it fair
Speaker 1: for him to be labeled as Canadian Trump the way
Speaker 1: that Justin Trudeau and the party leadership is doing so.
Speaker 2: People that I know who are very close to Justin
Speaker 2: Trudeau said that if he was going to run for
Speaker 2: a fourth term and if he's going to be successful
Speaker 2: in that effort to try to hold onto power, three
Speaker 2: things had to happen. Number One, Pierre Paulyev when he
Speaker 2: took over the Conservative Party last year, he would have
Speaker 2: to crash and burn on the runway. That hasn't happened.
Speaker 2: When he took over leader the leader of the Conservative Party,
Speaker 2: the Conservatives are about five points down, they're now fifteen
Speaker 2: points up. Second, is they needed to have the economy
Speaker 2: have a turnaround and not go into recession. Well, we
Speaker 2: had a contraction in the second quarter of this year.
Speaker 2: There's every reason to believe we're in a technical recession
Speaker 2: right now and it's not like they're going to get
Speaker 2: better before years in. So that's the third thing that
Speaker 2: the Liberals need, Justin Trudeau needs for him to want
Speaker 2: to run again, is that Donald Trump has to come back,
Speaker 2: and Donald Trump has to come back with gusto and
Speaker 2: with you know, the belligerent, crazy and the worst iterations
Speaker 2: of Donald Trump, which is I can tell you as
Speaker 2: toxic in Canada like it is. You know, he talked
Speaker 2: about his unpopularity in Canada. Donald Trump's popularity is probably
Speaker 2: you know, ninety five to five net negative like it is.
Speaker 2: He is as toxic in Canada's as it can be.
Speaker 2: And to try to tie here quolity to Donald Trump
Speaker 2: is the last sort of thing that Justin Shrudeau has
Speaker 2: and that that dog is not gonna haunt. It is
Speaker 2: just not there. Canadian conservatism has always been very different
Speaker 2: from American one. It's just like British Tories, Canadian Conservatives,
Speaker 2: American Republicans. It's very different. Right. We align, I so
Speaker 2: pose on a lot of broad themes about trust in
Speaker 2: the private sector, belief in free markets, the responsibility of
Speaker 2: families to take care of each other, the value in
Speaker 2: virtue of community is the backbone of quality of life,
Speaker 2: and the importance of protecting what it is that's most
Speaker 2: sacred to us, which is our family and our kids
Speaker 2: and our schools in our neighborhoods. Like that, that ethos
Speaker 2: is all there, strong national security, strong strong justice policies.
Speaker 2: But that's but when it comes down to the technical stuff.
Speaker 2: Like Pierre Paul Yev, he is a perfectly bilingual Franco
Speaker 2: file Canadian, which is said he's angle phone, but he's
Speaker 2: French speaking from outside of the province of Quebec. He
Speaker 2: is pro choice, pro game marriage, doesn't care who sleeps with,
Speaker 2: who believes in lower taxes, smaller government, responsible, responsible use
Speaker 2: of government power in a limited consequence. Now that that
Speaker 2: is not a Donald Trump Republican like he is. Pierre
Speaker 2: is clearly he's out there saying that he will march
Speaker 2: in Pride parades. He has, he has been out there.
Speaker 2: The deputy leader, the deputy leader of the Conservative Party
Speaker 2: of Canada is a woman named Alyssa Lansman, who is
Speaker 2: a married lesbian from Toronto. That's the deputy leader of
Speaker 2: the party. I don't think he would get that in
Speaker 2: a Marjorie Taylor Green party. I don't think he would
Speaker 2: get that, you know, an Iran Paul party. But in
Speaker 2: Canada it's very different. I mean, I was a Conservative
Speaker 2: cabinet minister for Prime Minister Stephen Harper, who's seen as
Speaker 2: probably the most small seat conservative prime minister in Canadian history.
Speaker 2: And I voted in favor of gay marriage in two
Speaker 2: thousand and five, you know, three years before Barack Obama
Speaker 2: ran for president, saying he would never vote for gay marriage.
Speaker 2: So that's the tilt of left right in Canada is
Speaker 2: very different than is the United States. So Donald Trump
Speaker 2: is toxic. Liberals will try to make Pierre Pauliev the
Speaker 2: alternative prime Minister to Canada. They'll try to make him
Speaker 2: Donald Trump light, but it's just very different. He doesn't
Speaker 2: speak like Trump. He's talk like Trumpy. Pierre speaks into
Speaker 2: very aspirational terms about empowering families, growing the economy. It's
Speaker 2: a very positive message. I know, make America Great Again
Speaker 2: was positive for some people who heard it a certain way,
Speaker 2: but it was dog whistle for a lot of other people.
Speaker 2: There's none of that with Pierre. He's a straight shooting
Speaker 2: If you wanted an apples to apples comparison to what
Speaker 2: you've seen in contemporary American politics, I would say he
Speaker 2: would be kind of a Canadian version of sort of
Speaker 2: peak Rand Paul, pre speaker, Rand Paul on the rise, Energetic,
Speaker 2: you know, in shape, you know, reaching out to shake
Speaker 2: hands with the voters, sort of jogging in the parade,
Speaker 2: Enthusiastic to talk about public policy. Smart guy. That's that's
Speaker 2: what Pier Paulie is.
Speaker 1: When you when you think about this moment, do you
Speaker 1: think that Canada has a higher immunity, a higher tolerant
Speaker 1: to the type of demagoguery and popularism. We've seen break
Speaker 1: out in the United States that it has a cultural
Speaker 1: prophylactic if you if you will, that armors it a
Speaker 1: bit more.
Speaker 2: Yes, but it's fragile. It's there to it's there to
Speaker 2: be exploited because the tensions do exist. So the number
Speaker 2: one issue in Canada, it's been the case for about
Speaker 2: six months now, is the rise and cost of housing.
Speaker 2: Like the cost of owning the home in Canada is
Speaker 2: almost completely out of reach for most Canadians. Like it's
Speaker 2: ludicrous and for a whole bunch of reasons, but it
Speaker 2: is what it is. So you have a million new
Speaker 2: Canadians on a population bath to day for forty million
Speaker 2: and million new Canadians come into the country in one year.
Speaker 2: So you have this massive demand for housing, and so
Speaker 2: that's right for exploitation. You have more people looking for housing.
Speaker 2: Houses aren't being built, so you have Canadians who have
Speaker 2: been here for generations not being able to buy homes.
Speaker 2: The link and for exploitation for hardline populism is right there,
Speaker 2: but nobody picks up the bat and swings it. It
Speaker 2: just isn't done. It's not that somebody might not do it,
Speaker 2: but it just isn't done, perhaps because Canada is so
Speaker 2: diverse now that to do that would be sort of
Speaker 2: politically suicide because you know other other Canadians, whether you're Chinese, Canadian, Japanese,
Speaker 2: South Asian, Filipino, whatever, that you would say, well, if that,
Speaker 2: if the majority is going to go after that minority,
Speaker 2: we could be next. And there's kind of the solidarity
Speaker 2: of people who are new to Canada against the exploitation
Speaker 2: of other new Canadians. That's kind of a pressure valve
Speaker 2: against it, but in some ways it also blocks off
Speaker 2: important conversations about that stress that doesn't exist. You should
Speaker 2: know as well that since Stephen Harper was defeated in
Speaker 2: twenty fifteen, there was a Conservative leadership race in twenty
Speaker 2: eighteen or twenty seventeen, there's a second Conservative leadership race
Speaker 2: going into the twenty one campaign, and then there was
Speaker 2: the Conservaive leadership race that resulted in Pierre Paul Up.
Speaker 2: Those three leadership races combined, there were i would say
Speaker 2: about thirty or thirty two people ran for the leaders
Speaker 2: of the Conservative Party of Canada. Not one out of
Speaker 2: thirty plus people who ran in those three cycles, not
Speaker 2: one person ran for the leader saying if you like
Speaker 2: Donald Trump, you'll love me, and parroted Donald Trump. Not
Speaker 2: one person did that. Is that does not fly in Canada.
Speaker 2: US against them, banning Muslims, making fun of a disabled reporter,
Speaker 2: ostracizing the other, talking down, you know, belittling stuff that
Speaker 2: does not fly in Canada. There's no interest in that,
Speaker 2: even within a diminished Conservative Party on its back legs
Speaker 2: deep in the wood in opposition against a liberal majority
Speaker 2: government period and justin Trudeau on the March, even when
Speaker 2: a party is shrunken and broken and depressed and trying
Speaker 2: to find its soul. Even in that rubric, a guy
Speaker 2: like Donald Trump had no purchase in the Conservative Party.
Speaker 2: Nobody even tried to pairrot him because it was just
Speaker 2: there was no interest in it. So to a lot
Speaker 2: of people who try to make Pierre that guy, it's
Speaker 2: not going to work. People who try to dial up
Speaker 2: that politics in Canada, it's not going to work. There's
Speaker 2: a People's Party that still exists that has tried now
Speaker 2: for two elections to elect people kind of on us
Speaker 2: soft Trump mandate. It's sort of more of a libertarian
Speaker 2: populism type thing of Maxime Bernier as the leader. You know,
Speaker 2: he has failed now I think four times five times
Speaker 2: in a row to get a seat. There's no interest
Speaker 2: in that stuff in Canada.
Speaker 1: Why.
Speaker 2: I think it's the diversity of Canada's there. I think
Speaker 2: there's a temperament in Canada and also in Canada, like
Speaker 2: in the United States. And as you know this very well, right,
Speaker 2: there's you have three co equal branches of government Washington,
Speaker 2: d C. The US Capitol Building sits symbolically in the
Speaker 2: physical center of Washington, d You see as a demonstration
Speaker 2: that the Article one of the Constitution is Congress. Article
Speaker 2: three is the President of the United States. And so
Speaker 2: there's this tension in this push and pull. So because
Speaker 2: there's this actually this balance of power and check and
Speaker 2: balance in the United States, that you can go hard
Speaker 2: and you can elect a demagogue like Donald Trump who
Speaker 2: will beat drums and tell the proud boys to stand
Speaker 2: ready and stand by and say things that he did
Speaker 2: about immigrants and Muslims and Mexicans and shithole countries. He
Speaker 2: can see he can get away with some of that
Speaker 2: stuff because you kind of know instinctively that there's going
Speaker 2: to be a counterbalance, you hope in the Congress and
Speaker 2: the counterbalance in the Senate, and then they'll be the
Speaker 2: Supreme Court, and then they'll be the States, and then
Speaker 2: of course there's the Bill of Rights. So I mean,
Speaker 2: you have these counterbalancing pressures. In Canada, there's counterbalances, but
Speaker 2: it's not as hard as that. In Canada. If you're
Speaker 2: elected the Prime Minister of Canada and you have a
Speaker 2: majority government, you control everything you control. And so the
Speaker 2: idea of electing somebody into that office who is unhinged,
Speaker 2: or is on an ideological vendor, or is disruptive and
Speaker 2: will divide the country against itself in order to lead
Speaker 2: the bigger mass of people that they can animate. People
Speaker 2: see the inherent risk in that because they know that
Speaker 2: if you're on the winning side of that, that that
Speaker 2: pendulum will come back the other way, and then eventually
Speaker 2: that pendulum becomes a wrecking ball against the soul of
Speaker 2: the country, and that's not sustainable. And people have an
Speaker 2: instinct to just I don't like that. I want my
Speaker 2: side to win, but I don't want to. I don't
Speaker 2: want to blow up my neighbor. I don't want to
Speaker 2: I don't want to destroy you know. I don't want
Speaker 2: to go to a Pta meeting with my son and
Speaker 2: not be able to even make eye contact with somebody
Speaker 2: across the room because they saw my party's laun sign
Speaker 2: on my lawn. People are very instinctive against that because
Speaker 2: the power that's vested in the office the Prime Minister
Speaker 2: of Canada is extraordinary and and and it's it's it's
Speaker 2: it's very very much recognized by most Canadians that you
Speaker 2: trust that power with somebody who's who's who's thoughtful with it,
Speaker 2: and whose temperament, whose temperament is appropriately moderate.
Speaker 1: I think for the Americans watching what you said about
Speaker 1: the American system, presidency is the Article two branch, the
Speaker 1: Supreme Court Article three, but the Article one branch. The
Speaker 1: capital is the center of American life. There is this
Speaker 1: moment in American history where George Washington, who could have
Speaker 1: been a king, this picture, this painting, hangs in the Capitol.
Speaker 1: The throne chair is unoccupied. He's draped his military cloak
Speaker 1: over it. He won't be a caesar, and he bows
Speaker 1: and subordinates himself to Congress as he resigns his commission.
Speaker 1: And one of the facets the differences in the country
Speaker 1: culturally that I always think is interesting. On the periphery
Speaker 1: and was reminded of in Prince Edward County in Toronto
Speaker 1: last weekend, coming up the Loyalist Parkway, and you're on
Speaker 1: the Loyalist Parkway and it was dedicated by the Queen
Speaker 1: in nineteen eighty four, and you and you read the
Speaker 1: history of it, and this was the root that the
Speaker 1: Pioneers came into Prince Edward County in the summer of
Speaker 1: seventeen eighty four fleeing the new United States. They were
Speaker 1: loyal to the king. And all these years later, many
Speaker 1: Americans don't appreciate this. But when Charles the Third succeeded
Speaker 1: his mother, among his realms is Canada. He is the
Speaker 1: King of Canada.
Speaker 2: He is he is our king. But you know there's
Speaker 2: the King's representative of to Canada, our governor General. But
Speaker 2: you know that there's another part of that relationship. Now,
Speaker 2: of course, one in four Canadians lives in the province
Speaker 2: of Quebec, and their relationship with Westminster in the Crown
Speaker 2: or not Westminster, with Buckingham Palace and the Crown is
Speaker 2: is very different, of course than the rest of the country.
Speaker 2: So we are a commonwealth country with the I think
Speaker 2: the only country in the world that is a member
Speaker 2: the Commonwealth, but we're also a member of the Thankofy.
Speaker 2: So we are a diverse country from our founding through
Speaker 2: until today. And so those tensions and those balances, but
Speaker 2: from our founding of trying to balance French and English,
Speaker 2: Protestant and Catholic in the early days as well, which
Speaker 2: is also sort of code for French and English, and
Speaker 2: in a lot of parts of the country, as well
Speaker 2: as the indigenous dynamic, you know, from the very beginning,
Speaker 2: trying to balance these tensions and helping folks get along
Speaker 2: and making accommodations for each other. From you know, from
Speaker 2: the third quarter of the nineteenth century all the way
Speaker 2: through until until today. Modern Canada has served not only
Speaker 2: English and French speaking Canadians and indigenous Canadians I think
Speaker 2: for the most part, but also for as we adopt
Speaker 2: and diversify and bring in folks from other parts of
Speaker 2: the world. So it's served us well. There's also I
Speaker 2: think a thing. I mean, I'm not a I'm not
Speaker 2: a strong monarchist in a lot of ways, but there's
Speaker 2: there's a there's a there's a virtue thing about it,
Speaker 2: which is that the royal family is a family, and
Speaker 2: so to have a family as the head of your
Speaker 2: you know, the head of state is is something that
Speaker 2: is There's there's kind of a virtue in that that
Speaker 2: at the end of the day, the family is an anchor,
Speaker 2: an anchor institution that doesn't go away, can never give
Speaker 2: up on each other, will always be supportive of each other,
Speaker 2: will always have each other's back, and there's a there's
Speaker 2: sort of a virtue in that that's sort of unspoken
Speaker 2: that I think a lot of people have a little
Speaker 2: bit of a romantic notion about that. You know, politics
Speaker 2: can come and go, Tensions can come and go, strife
Speaker 2: can come and go, crises can come and go. But
Speaker 2: at core and at the backbone, we're a family. And
Speaker 2: the family never gives up on itself and never gives
Speaker 2: up on each other, and we always have each other's back.
Speaker 2: And so that's that there's kind of a strain of
Speaker 2: that that exists in the Commonwealth sentiment amongst nations.
Speaker 1: Is the monarchy important in Canada today.
Speaker 2: Not explicitly, not on a day to day basis. It's
Speaker 2: not as though you know, in the nightly news it's
Speaker 2: you know, here's what happened in politics, here's what's happening
Speaker 2: in the markets. You know, Here's what's happening with our
Speaker 2: hockey teams. By the way, here's what here's the latest.
Speaker 2: You know, missive about a Buckingham palaceis it's not like that,
Speaker 2: you know, we don't we don't obsess on the megan
Speaker 2: market side of things. But but you know, but when
Speaker 2: there's a royal visit, it matters. It matters to communities
Speaker 2: and it matters to you know, the people who are
Speaker 2: who are sort of of the generation who is sort
Speaker 2: of more connected with Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth than they
Speaker 2: are perhaps with Charles. But it matters. So we we
Speaker 2: we keep an eye on what's happening in the UK.
Speaker 2: Brexit matter to Canada a lot as well. Our fifth
Speaker 2: largest trading partner is the UK. So the economic relationship,
Speaker 2: the historic relationship the crown matters, but not nearly as
Speaker 2: much as who the Prime Minister is, because the Crown
Speaker 2: is never, i think, not in my lifetime, has ever
Speaker 2: in any way flexed or threatened to flex or or
Speaker 2: to do anything that would in any way impede the
Speaker 2: independent operating of operation of the Government of Canada.
Speaker 1: I want to come back to the organization of Canadian
Speaker 1: Society because I think this is interesting and it's visibly
Speaker 1: evident if you land in a Canadian airport and you
Speaker 1: go through a customs line. Forty million people, one million
Speaker 1: people were admitted into Canada in a calendar year. That's
Speaker 1: an extraordinary amount of people. How many will come this year.
Speaker 2: Unknown because part of the million was a COVID backlog
Speaker 2: that built up and brought in. But there's a goal
Speaker 2: and every year the Government of Canada, all governments, whether
Speaker 2: it's conservati or Liberal, they actually have to post what
Speaker 2: their goal is for a population growth. And it used
Speaker 2: to be a big deal if you made two hundred
Speaker 2: and fifty thousand new Canadians per year. The goal is
Speaker 2: sort of crept up over time. When we were in
Speaker 2: government was four hundred thousand. I think it'll probably settle
Speaker 2: in the four hundred to five hundred thousand per year
Speaker 2: growth over time. I mean, we're well on our track
Speaker 2: to be a a population of about seventy five million
Speaker 2: people by twenty fifty, so that's, you know, more than
Speaker 2: tripling the size of the country that exists that when
Speaker 2: I was born and I'm forty seven, so like it.
Speaker 2: It's an exponential growth. Most of it. Most of those
Speaker 2: New Canadians reside in Toronto, Vancouver and Montreal, urban centers
Speaker 2: of the country. Calgaries growing as well, so they become
Speaker 2: urbanized and all that. But the Balkanization does and can happen.
Speaker 2: You know, you have large South Asian invent the Vancouver area,
Speaker 2: large South Asian community in Surrey, you know, Asian mandar
Speaker 2: in New Cantonese speaking down in Richmond, and that can
Speaker 2: create some tensions locally as well. So the absorption of
Speaker 2: New Canadians is by most Canadians is seen as a
Speaker 2: shot in the arm of adrenaline, of economic growth, people
Speaker 2: bringing in capital bringing, people bringing in talents. It's not
Speaker 2: just family reunification for its own sake, but people coming
Speaker 2: here with skills and capacities, investment dollars and brain power
Speaker 2: to invest into the Canadian family. So it's welcome that way.
Speaker 2: But it's interesting that you know, to your point though,
Speaker 2: is that with that spike and that consistent trend up
Speaker 2: of New Canadians, there is not a political party that
Speaker 2: has risen up to say this is too much. Gosh,
Speaker 2: we've got to close the door, We've got to turn
Speaker 2: it back. We've got to shut it down. We need
Speaker 2: to you know, in the path you can in language
Speaker 2: of ninety two ninety six of saying we need to
Speaker 2: time out on immigration. We need to stop this because
Speaker 2: it's there. They're you know, they're over they're you know,
Speaker 2: stressing our schools and overpopulating the emergency rooms and all that.
Speaker 2: Some people whisper about, you know, can we absorb this?
Speaker 2: This is it good? You know, we're not building enough
Speaker 2: houses for this. Therefore we have you know, a price
Speaker 2: inflation on housing that's disproportionate to income because we have
Speaker 2: too many people coming in we can't build the houses.
Speaker 2: So there are tensions there, but it never really tips
Speaker 2: over at all into a racial component or a blood
Speaker 2: and soil conversation or US versus them, And you don't
Speaker 2: see the dog whistle politics, and that you do see
Speaker 2: frankly in parts of the United States where there's an
Speaker 2: exploitative nature about it. You know, racial tensions exist, racists exist,
Speaker 2: intolerance exists, but for that to be seen as an
Speaker 2: opportunity politically, nobody does that. It just doesn't happen. It's
Speaker 2: it's pushed back against and rejected as soon as anybody
Speaker 2: even thinks of going down that road. I think too.
Speaker 2: By the way, a big difference in American and Canadian
Speaker 2: politics is that in America, because you have the open
Speaker 2: primary system, you declare yourself a Republican. You declare yourself
Speaker 2: a Democrat as a citizen if you want to or
Speaker 2: an independent if you want to participate in primaries. In
Speaker 2: different states they have different rules. But in Canada, political
Speaker 2: parties are close chops. You pay money. You have to
Speaker 2: be a you don't have to be a citizen, but
Speaker 2: you pay money to join the political party. You have
Speaker 2: to be a citizen to run for office, of course,
Speaker 2: but you have to join the party. But if you're
Speaker 2: a member of the party, just a rank and foul member,
Speaker 2: you put down your twenty bucks, you join the party.
Speaker 2: Then all of a sudden, you go to your Facebook
Speaker 2: page and you put up a bunch of intolerant, racist,
Speaker 2: homophobic or bigoted stuff against any group. The political party
Speaker 2: will turn on and say, no, no, your membership is canceled.
Speaker 2: You're out of here. When you are not, you're not
Speaker 2: welcome in our club. You're not welcome in our group
Speaker 2: because even you, as a member not interested. And so
Speaker 2: that's why you have you know, in January sixth, they're
Speaker 2: in Charlottesville. You have people who are you know, the
Speaker 2: county chair of whatever member or whatever branch of the
Speaker 2: Republican Party showing up in marching with these with these
Speaker 2: you know, weirdos, and then that gets it creates a
Speaker 2: brand identity, it gets infected up into the party. Whereas
Speaker 2: in Canada, the leader of the party can throw you
Speaker 2: out of caucus, throw you out of the elected caucus,
Speaker 2: and so you have to be forced to sit as
Speaker 2: an independent. The party itself can throw people out of
Speaker 2: the party if they're expressing crazy and bizarre views on
Speaker 2: social media. So there's a there's a there's a a
Speaker 2: check mechanism of accountability and all that where the public
Speaker 2: will say, if you want to govern my country, you
Speaker 2: govern yourselves and show me what you've got. You've got
Speaker 2: this guy over here, that person gets exposed, they get
Speaker 2: thrown out, and so it creates demarcation lines of expectations
Speaker 2: and values that the public can very quickly audit.
Speaker 1: When how is Canada doing with regard to when we
Speaker 1: were kids would have been called the melting pot. The
Speaker 1: concept of assimilation that no matter where you come from,
Speaker 1: that there is now a higher identity binds you to
Speaker 1: everybody around you together, rooted to the place you're standing,
Speaker 1: which is Canada. Right when you arrive, you're on the
Speaker 1: beginning of this journey to become a Canadian. How is
Speaker 1: Canada doing explaining to its new arrives what it means
Speaker 1: to be a Canadian, helping them with that journey.
Speaker 2: It's a needle that moves and we had a lot
Speaker 2: of debate about this when Stephen Harper's Prime Minister. Your
Speaker 2: first question of how are we doing with this sort
Speaker 2: of influx of diversity. I think we're doing very well.
Speaker 2: As I said, you don't see whether it's on the
Speaker 2: municipal level, provincial level, of federal level. You don't see
Speaker 2: an organized political party. You don't see some flamboyant or
Speaker 2: articulate personality trying to exploit divisions in Canada. It doesn't exist.
Speaker 2: So you know, politics is a reflection of society, not
Speaker 2: the other way around. If there's a market for that
Speaker 2: kind of stuff, it'll show up. There isn't a market
Speaker 2: for and I think, and as I said earlier, it
Speaker 2: is because I think if you're a new Canadian, you're
Speaker 2: an ethnic minority. You judge how you judge the system
Speaker 2: by how it treat treats others, and therefore you can
Speaker 2: assume that the worst of what others are facing is
Speaker 2: what you might face, and so you create those tensions exist.
Speaker 2: So I think we've done a good job of sort
Speaker 2: of blowing through that. I think most people who come
Speaker 2: to Canada do have, I think a lot of understanding
Speaker 2: expectations of the Canadian system. Voter participation, by the way,
Speaker 2: amongst New Canadians, it is higher than it is amongst
Speaker 2: the second, third, and fourth generation of Canadians. People who
Speaker 2: come to Canada want to participate in our democracy, and
Speaker 2: they do. A lot of people who are landed but
Speaker 2: they're not yet Canadian citizens, so they can vote in
Speaker 2: nominations which are primaries but we call them nominations for candidates,
Speaker 2: and vote for leaders of the party. They get involved
Speaker 2: in party politics before they can vote in the general
Speaker 2: election campaign. When I was a candidate, you know, I
Speaker 2: had a lot of people who are volunteered to my campaign.
Speaker 2: They said, well, we can't vote in the election, but
Speaker 2: I sure want you to win. You know, Let's go
Speaker 2: out and do some door knocking and hammer up some
Speaker 2: signs and meet some neighbors and talk to some people
Speaker 2: because you know, I can't vote, but it matters to me.
Speaker 2: And so that spirit of immigration inflow, sort of contributing
Speaker 2: to the Canadian democracy into the Canadian family is very common,
Speaker 2: and it crosses, by the way, whether you're Chinese, Canadian,
Speaker 2: where you're from, Hong Kong, Philippines, Vietnam, Europe, wherever you're from.
Speaker 2: Canada is a very diverse and welcoming country. And it's
Speaker 2: also growing. This where where I'm sitting right now, which
Speaker 2: would have been my district when I was first elected
Speaker 2: back in twentys, twenty three years ago, this area was
Speaker 2: eighty percent Caucasian. Now it's about two thirds visible minority.
Speaker 2: Like the diversity is growing and changing constantly. I look
Speaker 2: at my son's classroom. My son is ten turning eleven
Speaker 2: in a couple of weeks. You know, his classroom is
Speaker 2: as diverse as the community is. But I think it's
Speaker 2: important as well that not only that you welcome the diversity,
Speaker 2: but you host the diversity. And I think one of
Speaker 2: the things we've noticed as well is that you have
Speaker 2: to have diversity of housing stock. If you just have
Speaker 2: big mansions and middle class homes where we live. We
Speaker 2: have higher and condos and townhouses and duplexes and detached homes,
Speaker 2: and so economic diversity also feeds ethnic diversity as well,
Speaker 2: and we think it's good, it's healthy. I mean, I
Speaker 2: understand the instinct of a lot of people to want
Speaker 2: to feel more who might feel discomfort with the classroom
Speaker 2: where not everybody in the classroom speaks perfectly English and
Speaker 2: can be friends with your kids, but over time, that's
Speaker 2: the world that they're going to go into. And so
Speaker 2: to have a classroom that's diverse, where kids get to
Speaker 2: see other people of other differences, I think is a
Speaker 2: healthy thing. And it's by the way, it's not just ethnicity, right,
Speaker 2: Like my son has physical disabilities, and so to be
Speaker 2: with other kids who have disabilities is important. To have
Speaker 2: kids in the classroom who are on the spectrum is important.
Speaker 2: And you know, you know of from private schools or
Speaker 2: charter schools kind of isolate kids from people of different
Speaker 2: ethnic backgrounds or religious, religious teachings and physical differences. I
Speaker 2: think the more you break down those barriers, the more
Speaker 2: that we create a better bond between citizens and you
Speaker 2: create a better world through healthy citizenship.
Speaker 1: How worried are you about the United States.
Speaker 2: At times quite worried, you know, in my time, and
Speaker 2: like you in politics, right, like I want my team
Speaker 2: to win and I don't, and I don't want the
Speaker 2: other the other side. But I always want the country
Speaker 2: to succeed. Never in my life, and again I'm forty seven.
Speaker 2: Never in my life, and I'm not even an American.
Speaker 2: Have has there been a politician where I just my
Speaker 2: blood boils when I see them on television. That was
Speaker 2: Donald Trump, As I said, I have a son with disabilities.
Speaker 2: And for me, the breakaway like when he when he
Speaker 2: launched his campaign for president, you know, and he said,
Speaker 2: you know, we're gonna we're gonna stop Muslims from coming
Speaker 2: into the United States. I thought, well, that's it. He's
Speaker 2: he's done that. That goes against all conventions and all everything.
Speaker 2: So he's it's over. And then when he mocked the
Speaker 2: New York Times reporter and his disabilities, for me became personally,
Speaker 2: I thought, oh really. And then when, of course, when
Speaker 2: he won the presidency, I thought to myself, one day,
Speaker 2: my son is going to say, how the hell did
Speaker 2: he say that? And then he became president, like people did,
Speaker 2: he made fun of people who have disabilities, like and
Speaker 2: he won, he became after that, he won, but like,
Speaker 2: what is that? How do you explain that? And so
Speaker 2: so for me, you know, it was a bit personal.
Speaker 2: And so when America is divided against itself, that's very
Speaker 2: dangerous for the world. You see a rise of a
Speaker 2: belligerent and in imperial China in a lot of ways.
Speaker 2: If you think about intellectual property, theft, the grabbing up
Speaker 2: and the bribing away is the way to think about it.
Speaker 2: The bribing away of raw materials and resources across Africa.
Speaker 2: You see that imperial creep forward of China. You see
Speaker 2: the belligerence of Russia. That doesn't happen in a world
Speaker 2: where the United States is united and engaged and forward
Speaker 2: leaning in the world. I understand, and the world does.
Speaker 2: By the way, to say to all my American friends,
Speaker 2: we and the rest of the world, we do understand.
Speaker 2: The exhaustion of America after nine to eleven, and the
Speaker 2: exhaustion of the Afghanistan War, the exhaustion of the Iraq War,
Speaker 2: the exhaustion of what's been burdened on the United States
Speaker 2: as a superpower in the expectation game. This spending on
Speaker 2: military relative to your G seven and G twenty partners.
Speaker 2: When a partners when it comes to military spend, I
Speaker 2: recognize that, and I think the vast major of the
Speaker 2: world recognizes the exhaustion and the burden that's been that
Speaker 2: that has been shouldered in the United States. However, the
Speaker 2: United States we're treating from the world is a dangerous
Speaker 2: thing for not just the world, but for the United States.
Speaker 2: What happens over there matters over here. When the rest
Speaker 2: of the world goes sideways, eventually that will come to
Speaker 2: America's short You cannot detach and just say we will
Speaker 2: only focus on what we're doing. That's as absurd as
Speaker 2: somebody in Vermont saying we will only focus on what
Speaker 2: happens in Vermont, and it doesn't really matter what happens
Speaker 2: in Massachusetts, New Hampshire and Maine. We were just going
Speaker 2: to focus on Vermont issues in Vermont. That doesn't work.
Speaker 2: It doesn't work within the United States, it doesn't work
Speaker 2: in the rest of the world. And so, I you know,
Speaker 2: to your question, am I worried about the United States?
Speaker 2: I'm worried about the United States that becomes so internally divided,
Speaker 2: so neighbor versus neighbor, that they can't that America can't
Speaker 2: come together, and the rest of the world therefore takes
Speaker 2: advantage of America's isolation. There's I'm a detachment from the world.
Speaker 2: That is what I worry about. What happens when America
Speaker 2: disengages because it's so internally divided. That makes the world
Speaker 2: a very dangerous place.
Speaker 1: I have a hypothetical question for you that I actually
Speaker 1: see coming down the lane, and I'm wondering how you
Speaker 1: think Canadian society reacts to this. Let's imagine this scenario
Speaker 1: where Trump is re elected and he's been quite explicit,
Speaker 1: and I have a policy which I'm quite clear about,
Speaker 1: is I take everything that everybody says literally and seriously.
Speaker 1: So when Donald Trump threatens to lock up political opponents,
Speaker 1: shut down media companies, is talking to the chairman of
Speaker 1: the Joint Chiefs of Staff about shooting people in the
Speaker 1: leg I take all of this very seriously. What has
Speaker 1: in Canada when the first prominent American ask for asylum
Speaker 1: from a political prosecution from the Trump administration in Canada
Speaker 1: with merit.
Speaker 2: That would be very interesting. I mean, obviously it would
Speaker 2: depend on the instance. In the circumstance, there would not
Speaker 2: likely be an agreement on the surface, but it would
Speaker 2: depend on who's in government in Canada. In Canada, we're
Speaker 2: not expected to have an election probably until twenty twenty five,
Speaker 2: and I think Justin Trudeau, as I said earlier, one
Speaker 2: of the it's sort of the Hail Mary pass of
Speaker 2: what he is. He could if he decides he's going
Speaker 2: to run again, he would be banking on Donald Trump
Speaker 2: coming back, Donald Trump being crazy, Donald Trump being belligerent
Speaker 2: and offensive, and therefore exploiting that in two thousand and
Speaker 2: so when Donald Trump ran in twenty sixteen, Justin Trudeau
Speaker 2: is the fresh new prime minister, and he too, We
Speaker 2: just kind of stayed away from American politics, as we
Speaker 2: instinctively do in the two thousand twenty campaign. You know,
Speaker 2: we had just come out and we were just having
Speaker 2: the ink dry on the new Canada US NAFTA agreement,
Speaker 2: and so picking a fight with an incumbent president who
Speaker 2: might beat Joe Biden's probably not great, especially also when
Speaker 2: we're trying to get access to ppe and vaccines from
Speaker 2: the United States like this was. This was a not
Speaker 2: just an important economic relationship, but a life and death
Speaker 2: relationship in Canada the United States. You probably don't want
Speaker 2: to pick a fight with Donald Trump and exploit, you know,
Speaker 2: the unpopularity of Donald Trump in Canada when the guy
Speaker 2: could get reelected and block vaccines from coming into Canada.
Speaker 2: So it was a tactical thing. Gloves are off. Now
Speaker 2: when you have Justin Chrudeau going for a fourth mandate,
Speaker 2: he's desperate, he's way back in the polls to draw
Speaker 2: and drag and to pick a fight with Donald Trump
Speaker 2: so that he can get Pierre Paulyev to be aligned
Speaker 2: with him. In a dynamic like that, I wouldn't be
Speaker 2: surprised if he would look for somebody who would try
Speaker 2: to say that, you know, their human rights are being abused,
Speaker 2: and then justintrure to welcome somebody into Canada, hold them
Speaker 2: up as a sort of a poster child of how
Speaker 2: compassionate he is versus Donald Trump. And of course that
Speaker 2: would be you know, toxic for Canada and the Canada
Speaker 2: US relationship. But for Justin Trudeau to stand power. There's
Speaker 2: a further left wing party, the Socialist MDP. They would
Speaker 2: love all this and so it. But again, all of
Speaker 2: this is bad. All of it is bad because it
Speaker 2: just spirals out of control. The Canada US relationship is
Speaker 2: the most successful economic partnership and security relationship in the
Speaker 2: history of the world. The platform, the North American platform
Speaker 2: of job creation, wealth creation, the use of the effective
Speaker 2: and integration of supply chains and resources for our prosperity
Speaker 2: and benefit is unmatched in human history. And if it
Speaker 2: breaks and cracks because Justin Trudeau was desperate for a
Speaker 2: fourth term, or because Donald Trump wants to exploit a
Speaker 2: minority community or stand in to power, because his psycho
Speaker 2: psychopathy is such that he can't even imagine the world
Speaker 2: a world without him, that he's not only narcissistic, but
Speaker 2: nihilistic to that degree. And then you have Lopez overdoor
Speaker 2: in Mexico, you know, welcoming in China and threatening the
Speaker 2: now after relationship. If domestic politics and exploitation of division
Speaker 2: and desperation to stay in power, whether it's Trump or
Speaker 2: Trudeau or anybody else, gets to the point where they
Speaker 2: crack this North American platform, which should be sacrosanct for
Speaker 2: the well being of our continent and all of us,
Speaker 2: then shame on all of us if we tolerate politicians
Speaker 2: who do that.
Speaker 1: Last question for you, because you have alluded to something
Speaker 1: that is true but not talked about often enough. Justin
Speaker 1: Trudeau wants Donald Trump back in the White House because
Speaker 1: it's good too, because it's good for Justin Trudeau in
Speaker 1: the same way that President Biden wants Trump is the
Speaker 1: Republican nominee because they assess Trump incorrectly, I believe, as
Speaker 1: an easy foe to be. So my question for you
Speaker 1: is what is Trump? Is Trump a real threat or
Speaker 1: is he just a great prop And when you look
Speaker 1: at the American election ahead, how do you see it?
Speaker 1: Is it an election between democracy and autocracy, which is
Speaker 1: how I see it? Or is it an election between
Speaker 1: the ambition of two guys and it basically hues to
Speaker 1: align somewhere in the middle, on automatic pilot no matter what,
Speaker 1: because I reject that worldview. I think it's well, I
Speaker 1: think it's the former. I think it is.
Speaker 2: It is a like elections are about choosing the values
Speaker 2: that will that will, you know, forever stand the test
Speaker 2: of time and demonstrate the modern era of fraternity. And
Speaker 2: to tolerate that, you know, to tolerate Donald Trump as
Speaker 2: present United States for everything that we've seen, after everything
Speaker 2: that's gone through, after everything that's happened, the division that
Speaker 2: the ugliness that just you go down there, you go
Speaker 2: down the rabbit hole of all this stuff, and you
Speaker 2: know you have so are so effectively for years now.
Speaker 2: It's just to me, it's unimaginable. It's unimaginable. I don't
Speaker 2: get it. You know. It's like I was in Cleveland
Speaker 2: in twenty sixteen when Donald Trump won the nomination. I
Speaker 2: was there doing political analysis for a Canadian television network,
Speaker 2: and I just remember watching and I walking around the
Speaker 2: concourse in the arena there in Cleveland and talking to
Speaker 2: people with the red Maga hats on, and just so
Speaker 2: like like your own governor John Kasick is not even there,
Speaker 2: Like like the Bushes and the mccains and the rod
Speaker 2: like none of them are there. Like he's really gonna
Speaker 2: build the wall, and like talking to people who believe
Speaker 2: in this stuff, it was, as I say, it's like
Speaker 2: talking to people who think professional wrestling is real. It's
Speaker 2: like you do you not see the charade? Do you
Speaker 2: not see that he's just a grifter, he's not a
Speaker 2: successful businessman, he's gone bankrupt. Like there's nothing about this
Speaker 2: guy that he's not about you. You know, you got
Speaker 2: the Oliver Anthony song, right, Richmond north of Richmond, Who's
Speaker 2: Donald Trump? Like the people who love that song or
Speaker 2: what like this, it's all this bizarre charade of contradiction
Speaker 2: and hypocrisy and ugliness and cruelty and ridiculousness and now
Speaker 2: corruption with ninety one felony charges and four indictments in
Speaker 2: four different jurisdictions. Like what, it's just bizarre world that
Speaker 2: he's even contemplated as a credible candidate for president of
Speaker 2: the United States. And so the game of chicken that
Speaker 2: some people play of saying, well, Joe Biden, like as
Speaker 2: you get into your sunset years, the escalation of the
Speaker 2: of the health risks is ten x year by year,
Speaker 2: like it gets more and more and more dangerous. And
Speaker 2: you know, twenty twenty four and the aggressiveness of the
Speaker 2: campaign that's starting now will go through for the next
Speaker 2: you know, for the next year is going to be
Speaker 2: grueling and vicious and brutal. And Joe Biden and his presentation,
Speaker 2: I think is such that it absolutely hastens the possibility
Speaker 2: that Donald Trump president of the United States again. And
Speaker 2: I think the rest in Canada we just see this
Speaker 2: as bizarre that these are the choices, these are the choices,
Speaker 2: not that Joe Biden isn't a decent and honorable and
Speaker 2: good man who's done a lot of things as president
Speaker 2: that one can agree or disagree with. But it's just
Speaker 2: this seniority grip that exists on American politics that you know,
Speaker 2: how does New Gingrich become Speaker of the House because
Speaker 2: he's from at that time one of the safest was
Speaker 2: Georgia's fifth or sixth district, which at that time was
Speaker 2: one of the reddest districts. So he just endures me.
Speaker 2: He climbs up the ladder of leadership. And then you
Speaker 2: have Nancy Pelici in San Francisco. So just that by
Speaker 2: virtue of seniority and duration over time, you just kind
Speaker 2: of spiral up the ladder of leadership and you take
Speaker 2: over and you own these political parties Joe Biden and
Speaker 2: Donald Trump. Now because the cult of Trump, it's just
Speaker 2: kind of bizarre that this great democracy doesn't spit out
Speaker 2: great democratic choices that you know, the churn is not
Speaker 2: there of new talent coming in. It seems to happen
Speaker 2: on the state, state level, seems to happen on the
Speaker 2: city level, but the churn at the national level is
Speaker 2: doesn't seem to be there in a way that gives
Speaker 2: people a sense of fresh renewal on the national level,
Speaker 2: and I think that's that's very disconcerting.
Speaker 1: Perfect place to leave it, Minister James More, thank you,
Speaker 1: thank you,