0:00

Are you struggling to save money

0:02

each month? Here are some foolproof

0:04

tips and tricks to help you

0:06

out. You could walk

0:08

your neighbor's dogs, start

0:11

babysitting again, sublet your

0:14

pantry, reuse

0:18

your dental floss, or

0:21

you could talk to National Bank. That

0:24

helps too. National Bank.

0:26

We're here to level up

0:28

your reality. Plus,

0:59

the United Kingdom is not the only

1:01

country where potentially massive political change is

1:03

in the air. Politicians are being tested

1:05

from France to the United States to

1:07

here in Canada, with surging opposition

1:09

parties and calls for new

1:11

leadership. The power panel is here

1:13

to discuss what all this change could mean for

1:15

voters. And the federal

1:17

government enacts a controversial digital services tax.

1:20

It will bring in billions of dollars, but

1:22

may threaten Canada's trade relationships. Could

1:25

our closest trade allies move to retaliate

1:27

against this tax? I

1:31

can tell you, it is not over until the

1:33

final whistle blows, my friends. We've changed our party.

1:35

We're a changed Labour Party. We

1:39

are asking for the opportunity to

1:41

change our country. We continue

1:43

to follow the UK election results where Kir Sarma,

1:46

who you just saw, is on course to be the new UK

1:48

Prime Minister. According to the

1:50

exit poll done for the BBC, ITV and Sky

1:52

News, Labour will win a majority by

1:54

170 seats. Now, these aren't

1:57

just projections, but it has Labour at

1:59

$400. 10 seats, Rishi

2:01

Sunak's conservatives at 131 seats,

2:03

their lowest ever and

2:05

the liberal Democrats, the Lib Dems are

2:07

projected to come third with 61 MPs.

2:10

For more analysis I'm joined again by Hannah Barnes,

2:12

the associate editor and writer at the New Statesman.

2:14

So Hannah, those are unofficial results. We do have

2:17

one official result in, it's one nothing

2:19

for the Labour Party, a hold for

2:21

them. What do you make of what we've seen in that?

2:23

There's some interesting stuff in the vote chairs. Yeah,

2:26

David, as you expect, this

2:29

is Horton and Sunderland, which is

2:31

in the north east of England,

2:33

big Labour heartland and their shadow

2:35

education secretary about to become education

2:37

secretary. Bridgette Phillipson has held

2:40

her seat. She's had that one since 2010.

2:43

But what's really interesting is we've seen her share

2:45

of the vote dip by a fair

2:47

bit, but extraordinary reform

2:50

have beaten everybody into second place

2:52

and not just a little bit.

2:55

They got 29% of the vote.

2:57

Now that is really a

3:00

sign of what we may come to

3:02

expect as the evening

3:04

rolls on. That really is a

3:06

big, big vote share. Bridgette

3:08

Phillipson was always going to be safe,

3:10

but that will have the conservatives running

3:13

pretty scared, I would have thought. No,

3:15

that 29% is a high number for

3:17

what is really kind of a party that's kind

3:19

of on the fringes, right? And where Nigel Farage

3:21

got into it sort of mid-campaign, I think it's

3:23

fair to say, but the exit poll is suggesting

3:25

that they're going to end up with 13 seats

3:28

in the House of Commons. What

3:30

are you hearing about that? I mean, the top line numbers

3:32

in the exit polls are pretty good, but with the smaller

3:35

parties, are there concerns about the precision maybe? Yeah.

3:38

So in the last hour, we've had John

3:40

Curtis, Professor John Curtis, who can only

3:42

be described as the UK's

3:44

polling guru. So he's actually

3:46

responsible for helping to conduct

3:49

and analyze the exit poll here. And

3:52

he's been on the air in the last

3:54

hour or so, and he's explaining that actually

3:56

where we have the least certainty is with

3:58

the smaller parties. for example,

4:01

he said in quite a few of those seats, that

4:04

it could go either way. It's really, really tight.

4:06

So in fact, they could get slightly more, but

4:09

they could get considerably fewer. They could have half

4:11

that number. Similarly with the SNP,

4:14

he's quite surprised at how low that figures

4:16

come out. But again, there are

4:18

so few data points, so

4:20

few constituencies in Scotland that it's much

4:22

more difficult to get a reliable figure.

4:24

So those ones that we see for

4:27

the Conservatives and Labour, because they cover the whole

4:29

of the United Kingdom, and

4:31

obviously England is the biggest country in

4:33

the United Kingdom, they're far more reliable.

4:36

But he's urging a bit of caution

4:38

around those form and SNP numbers in

4:40

particular. Okay, because that's interesting, because with the

4:42

Scottish National Party, they had 43 seats

4:44

at dissolution of the House of Commons, and

4:46

the exit poll has them dropping down to

4:48

10. I know there have

4:50

been issues with the leadership and different things

4:52

in Scotland, but that is still a pretty

4:54

seismic drop to lose 75% of your seats

4:57

essentially. Oh,

5:00

for sure. And it's been expected that

5:02

Labour would become the biggest party in

5:04

Scotland for the entirety of the campaign,

5:06

but really not to that extent. And

5:08

I don't think the SNP would expect

5:10

to have lost quite so many

5:12

seats either. So I think that's probably one to watch

5:14

as we go through the evening. Okay,

5:16

but okay, so that is with the smaller

5:18

parties, nothing that would change the overall trend

5:21

line that is expected here, that Labour is

5:23

not only maybe the biggest party in Scotland,

5:25

the biggest party overall in the House of

5:27

Commons. Reaction is starting to come

5:29

in now, even just based on the exit polls. What

5:32

are we hearing from the top people in the different

5:34

parties? Well, as

5:36

the exit poll was announced live on

5:38

air, Wes Streeting, who will be Health

5:40

Secretary come tomorrow, actually was seen with

5:42

tears in his eyes. He's one of

5:44

these younger Labour parliamentarians, along

5:46

with Bridgette Phillips, and who's just

5:48

retained her seat, who've never known

5:51

a Labour victory. They first came into

5:53

the House of Commons in 2010. They're

5:55

in their 30s and 40s now, and

5:58

they're in the wing of the House of Commons. party.

6:00

So Bridgette Phillips and interestingly refused

6:02

to serve under Jeremy Corbyn, she

6:05

refused to serve under Jeremy

6:07

Corbyn's shadow cabinet. So it's

6:09

those kind of people that this means a huge amount.

6:11

And you have to remember that the

6:13

Conservative Party are an electoral machine.

6:15

They are so successful in this

6:18

country at winning elections. This will

6:20

be only the fourth time

6:22

ever that Labour will

6:24

have won a general election from

6:26

opposition. So for those in the

6:28

Labour Party family, we're

6:31

hearing already, it just means so much that

6:33

we've had Peter Mandelson, who was obviously very

6:35

close to Tony Blair and those new Labour

6:37

years, talk about it

6:39

as an earthquake. He says a

6:41

meteor has hit the UK this

6:43

evening. And really no hyperbole has

6:45

been spared, both from the Labour

6:47

camp and really, the Conservatives sound

6:49

pretty despairing at all. We're hearing

6:51

that Jeremy Hunt, who is the

6:53

current Chancellor, looks incredibly likely to

6:55

lose his seat. And David,

6:58

we talked about Rishi Sunak an

7:00

hour or so ago, but were that

7:03

to happen to Jeremy Hunt, he would

7:05

also be the first sitting Chancellor ever

7:08

in UK history to lose his seat at the

7:10

general election. So we are going to get a

7:12

night of first, I think. Yeah, a

7:14

historic election for your country, no question. But

7:16

just as a final point, you mentioned one

7:18

of the candidates who won their seat tonight

7:20

had refused to sort of sit with Jeremy

7:22

Corbyn. Keir Starmer is taking this party in

7:24

a very different direction, far more

7:26

to the centre than sort of the almost

7:29

extreme left, as Jeremy Corbyn is widely

7:31

viewed. The size of the

7:33

majority, if it was a narrow majority, Keir

7:36

Starmer might struggle to go with the centrist agenda

7:38

because he might be beholden to some of those

7:40

Corbynite sort of MPs. Does this give

7:42

him the license to do, there's a result coming

7:44

in, by the way, Northumberland. Are we going to take that live,

7:47

guys? Okay, we'll just update people

7:49

when it comes in. Does this give

7:51

him the ability to govern as a centrist prime

7:53

minister, given the sheer size of the majority? It

7:55

seems like it would give him that extra flexibility

7:57

and comfort. interesting

8:00

you would think so but it appears that

8:02

labor support is going to be wide but

8:05

shallow so it's

8:07

going to come from all kinds of places

8:09

but the strength of support for labor is

8:12

really not that big so if these reform

8:14

numbers are correct he's going to get pressure

8:16

from the right and he's

8:18

going to get pressure from the left as well particularly if

8:20

these liberal democrat numbers are big so he's going to not

8:23

only have the left wing of the labor party to contend

8:25

with but also the left of central liberal democrat so he's

8:27

really going to have to hold the center ground but

8:30

he's it's going to be difficult but

8:32

I think he can do that speaking

8:34

to his presumably

8:37

the next foreign secretary David Lammy was

8:39

at our new statesmen election party earlier

8:41

this evening he and the

8:43

rest of the labor shadow cabinet have huge

8:46

faith in Kia Stama that he can do

8:48

that that he's principled and he's strong but

8:51

it won't be easy regardless of the

8:53

majority. Okay

8:55

there's a labor hold in Blythe and

8:57

Ashington where hold Hannah so there you

8:59

go we're giving you some updated British

9:02

UK election news in real

9:04

time I think you're going to hear labor hold and

9:06

labor gain quite a bit tonight but Hannah Burns look

9:08

thanks so much for joining us throughout the campaign thanks

9:10

so much for being so available to us on such

9:13

a busy day thank you very much for joining us

9:15

again. It's a pleasure thanks David. That's Hannah Burns with

9:17

the new statesmen in the United Kingdom. Polls

9:27

have closed in the United Kingdom after

9:29

a snap six week election campaign and

9:31

exit polls suggest a huge majority for

9:33

Kia Stama's labor party. Some

9:36

huge changes here as conservatives drop from 344 seats

9:38

to 131 labor doubles from 205 to

9:43

410 and the liberal democrats grow

9:46

from 15 to 61 while

9:48

reform UK is projected to gain 13

9:50

MPs. Now

9:52

these are unofficial results these are

9:55

projections based on an exit poll but it raises

9:57

a lot of questions such as what is next.

10:00

the British Conservative Party after what is likely

10:02

a landslide loss. Former UK Conservative MP Andy

10:04

Percy joins me now from London.

10:07

Andy Percy, good to see you, sir. Thank

10:09

you for joining us today. Good evening. Happy to be here.

10:11

I know they're not the final results, but you know

10:14

from having run multiple times that these exit polls

10:16

are often pretty accurate in their projections. What do you

10:18

make of that sort of stunning drop

10:20

in seats for the Conservatives? Well,

10:23

look, we've had polls now for the last few weeks

10:25

which have been predicting that the Conservatives could

10:27

be facing a 1993 type Canadian

10:31

Tory wipeout. I mean, that's not

10:33

happened. The

10:35

Conservative Party looks to have enough

10:37

seats to survive to

10:39

fight as an effective opposition. But,

10:42

you know, we have to take the exit

10:44

polls on face value. They're

10:46

normally fairly accurate. So, you

10:48

know, it's not a good night for the Conservatives,

10:50

but it's also another 1993 type Tory wipeout. No,

10:55

but one of the things, the 1993 Tory wipeout,

10:58

which was historically catastrophic is

11:00

the only way to describe it, going from government

11:02

to two seats. There was also the rise

11:05

of the Reform Party in Canada, which

11:07

reshaped federal politics, national politics

11:09

for the decades after that. We

11:11

now have Reform UK under Nigel Farage,

11:14

expected to get a dozen 13 seats in the House of Commons,

11:16

and that's a level they have never been at

11:19

before. When you look at

11:21

that, what are your thoughts as a Conservative? Yeah,

11:24

I mean, I think there are some big differences to

11:26

the 93 analogy. For a start, the Reform

11:28

Party in Canada was obviously a regional party

11:30

based out in Western Canada. That's

11:33

not the same for Reform UK. I'm still

11:35

suspicious of this poll as to whether they'll

11:37

hit 13 seats, but the fact they've won

11:41

any seats is obviously, for them, a very good

11:44

evening. And you have other things going

11:46

on here as well. It looks like

11:48

the Scottish National Party, the separatists have

11:50

done very badly in Scotland. That's

11:52

different, again, to that 93 analogy where the

11:55

Bloc did incredibly well in Quebec.

11:58

But there is a problem here for the

12:00

country. Conservative Party with reform actually having MPs

12:02

as it looks like they will do this

12:05

evening. One of those is likely to be

12:07

Nigel Farage. That is a big problem for

12:09

the Conservatives in the next parliament because they

12:11

will face on this right-wing, Eurosceptic flank

12:14

a group of MPs who are going to

12:16

be trying to drag them in that direction,

12:18

whereas at the same time the Conservative Party

12:21

will be trying to find its

12:23

new centre for taking on what is

12:25

a Labour government with a very big

12:27

majority. So it's going to be a

12:29

real challenge for the Conservative Party as

12:31

to how it resolves that conflict between

12:34

this right-wing reform challenge and having lost

12:36

to a Labour Party that has undoubtedly

12:38

placed itself more closely to the

12:40

political centre. Well, where do you think they go

12:42

in the wake of this? I mean,

12:44

it's been 14 years, six prime ministers,

12:47

three of them in rapid succession,

12:50

and Liz Truss and Rishi Sunak

12:52

kind of having fairly disastrous

12:54

political tenures. If you look at her

12:56

short time and this election result, I

12:59

mean, where do they go? Like, where

13:01

is that fight for the Conservative Party

13:03

headed after this, do you think? Well,

13:06

look, this all depends where we end up this

13:08

evening. I'm still hopeful. I think there's good cause

13:10

to think the Conservatives might do a little bit

13:12

better than the exit poll is

13:14

suggesting. But look, there will be a fight for the

13:16

soul of the party now, and the

13:19

challenge will be, does the

13:21

Conservative Party try to lean

13:24

towards this reform, more right-wing

13:28

challenge that it's been facing, or

13:31

does it go and try

13:34

and find a new leader who's going to take

13:36

it to the political centre? Now, the problem with

13:38

Conservative parties, and actually not just Conservative parties, when

13:40

they're going to opposition generally, is parties tend to

13:43

retreat either to the right or to the left.

13:46

And that's not where elections are won

13:48

in Britain, and not where elections are won

13:50

in Canada, really. They're won from the

13:52

political centre. We're not seeing what

13:54

we've seen across the water over in Europe, where

13:56

there's this big surge of the far right. to

14:00

be won from the political center. And there will be

14:02

a fight now for the soul of the Conservative Party.

14:04

And it's not clear at this stage where

14:06

that will go. I personally think and hope

14:09

it will be towards the political

14:11

center because that's where most of the electorate

14:13

is. But you know, Conservative parties in opposition

14:15

in the UK and in Canada tend to

14:17

go through a lengthy period of moving

14:20

to the right and then trying to figure

14:22

a way back to a place where most

14:24

of the electorate is. And that's

14:26

what happened to the Tories here after 97. I

14:29

hope that's not what happens to us after what

14:31

is likely to be a very significant defeat this

14:33

evening. Well, you talk about moving to

14:35

the center to win and that is certainly what

14:37

Kier Starmer has really tried to do with labor

14:39

throughout this campaign. It's a very different Labor

14:42

Party than it was under

14:44

Jeremy Corbyn. I think it's

14:46

quite not an overstatement. I

14:49

mean, what do you make of his ability

14:51

to govern as a centrist party? Oh, are

14:53

we going to... Oh, one second, Andy. All

14:56

right. We have the first result, the official result.

14:59

Labor party is holding the seat. What's the riding

15:01

there, Tyler? Sunderland

15:03

South? Okay, there you go.

15:05

We have the first riding, Andy. There you go.

15:07

Because they don't announce results in the UK until

15:09

every vote is counted. It's not like here in

15:11

Canada where we have like a hockey score rolling

15:13

up on the bottom of the screen. So a

15:15

hold for labor, not a surprise there. But you

15:17

know, this is one of many we expect tonight,

15:19

Andy Percy. And because they've moved to the center,

15:22

this super majority that they warned about, can

15:25

he govern as a centrist party and not

15:27

be beholden to that more leftist flank, the

15:29

Corbyn remnants of the party? Well,

15:32

I mean, some of them are still there. I

15:34

mean, this is for all Kier Starmer has done.

15:36

I mean, he hasn't turned the Labor Party into

15:38

the Labor Party of Tony Blair, right? Which people

15:41

enthusiastically went out to vote for. He's turned them

15:43

into a boring party that wasn't the tall race.

15:45

I don't think that bodes well for him in

15:47

the long run because there isn't that enthusiasm. There

15:50

was there isn't this Blair wave as there was

15:52

in 97. He lived one by

15:54

a similar amount, but with a lot less

15:56

goodwill from the public. But

15:58

actually winning a big majority. does

16:00

mean he's not going to be reliant on

16:02

some of these more fringe left-wing

16:05

elements that had taken

16:07

the Labour Party to a deeply,

16:09

deeply unpleasant place under Jeremy Corbyn,

16:12

and which was so rejected

16:14

by the British public but four

16:17

and a half years ago. So I think the fact that

16:19

you have a big majority will make that task easy for

16:21

him. But as I say, the big problem for him is

16:24

there hasn't really been the same enthusiasm.

16:27

So they'll have a big victory, but

16:29

they're coming into this with very low

16:31

expectations and with relatively poor, poor ratings.

16:33

When you look at the ratings for

16:36

Keir Starmer, he's no Tony Blair. But

16:39

he will have a majority that will allow him

16:41

to do a lot

16:43

that he

16:46

won't be getting pulled to the left by

16:48

the 30 or 40 hard left MPs because

16:51

he'll be able to ignore those to be quite blunt about

16:53

it. It's interesting, though, that

16:56

a Labour landslide with low enthusiasm, as

16:58

you describe it. So you look at

17:01

a majority of 410 seats. You'd

17:04

think this is a mandate for

17:06

nation-changing policy, but that low level of enthusiasm

17:08

makes it difficult to go on a truly

17:10

ambitious agenda because you can squander that very

17:13

quickly, right? You can quickly get into political

17:15

trouble. So how do you think Keir Starmer

17:17

will proceed as Prime Minister? I

17:20

think he's going to have a lot of

17:22

difficulty because he faces the same issue that

17:24

all leaders across the G7 and across Western

17:26

nations face at the moment, right?

17:28

Which is there's still a problem with

17:31

interest rates. Inflation seems to

17:33

be abating, but people have still not

17:35

fully recovered from the effect that's had

17:37

on their household income. You

17:40

know, there are...we have an issue of

17:42

low growth across Western economies. You

17:44

know, the tax burden is already quite

17:46

high here as it is high in

17:48

Canada and in other Western economies. So

17:51

that leaves him with a lot less

17:53

leeway to do things which are, you

17:55

know, popular or radical.

17:58

And he hasn't really laid out. that Blair did

18:00

in 97. When Blair came in 97 people

18:04

thought that they knew what they were voting

18:06

for something that was new, it was positive,

18:08

it was progressive, all those kind of buzzwords

18:10

that people thought they were getting. With Kist

18:12

Armoryt, well he's not the tourist, he's been

18:14

his biggest hand

18:18

this election simply because of

18:20

the fact that my party, I'm

18:22

sorry to say, has gone through

18:24

this period of considerable turbulence and

18:26

lots of leaders. Now in

18:28

some respects he's starting from a point of

18:30

low expectations so that means he may

18:32

well outlive

18:35

those, outperform those low

18:37

expectations. But I suspect actually the opposite

18:39

will be true is that he'll find

18:41

himself with a very big majority, they

18:44

won't have a lot of fiscal headroom to

18:46

do a great deal, there'll be a lot

18:48

of new Labour MPs thinking they're going to

18:50

come in and change the world and they're

18:53

going to realize that actually they're facing exactly

18:55

the same challenges that the Conservative government made

18:57

replaced has faced with, as I say, not

19:00

much fiscal headroom, headwinds economically,

19:02

globally, all those issues. So

19:04

there is a, I think

19:06

the biggest risk for Kist Armoryt, he comes

19:08

in with this big majority and disappoints beyond

19:10

even what people perhaps expect him.

19:13

I can just to pivot back to

19:15

Nigel Farage and Reform UK and

19:17

I know look there, it's a

19:19

big gain for them if they get to these numbers,

19:21

but they're

19:23

still a rump party but he has had

19:25

an outsized influence in UK politics, right? You

19:27

know, when you look at the Brexit referendum

19:29

and his role there and sort of the

19:32

anti-Europe movement, we don't know yet if

19:34

he's won his seat, but what would

19:36

it mean if Nigel Farage gets a seat in the

19:38

House of Commons and that sort of legitimacy and platform

19:40

that goes beyond sort of the conservative media circles? Well

19:43

look, it looks like he has won his seat

19:46

and there are two ways you can read this,

19:48

right? The first one is, as you said David,

19:50

he's been the outsider, well now he's going to

19:52

be on the inside and his pitch has always

19:54

been, put me in there and when I'm in

19:57

there I'll sort this lot out. Well the truth

19:59

is, and you know he's going to

20:01

end up on the political inside he's going to be in

20:03

parliament and you know perhaps he'll

20:05

make such a noise in there and he'll

20:07

result in um you know the

20:09

uh people swarming to his party or

20:11

i think the more likely outcome is

20:14

um people will be disappointed he'll he'll get

20:16

into parliament and face the same challenges the

20:18

rest of us faces it's that he has

20:20

to not just make a good stump speech

20:23

to a load of people who agree with

20:25

you already he's now actually got to practically

20:27

engage on issues which are actually a lot

20:29

more complex than he sometimes uh presents

20:31

them to the public so he'll either

20:33

be found out or he will be

20:36

a rabble rouser who'll be able to

20:38

use this new platform to take his

20:40

party forward the history however of any

20:42

party nigel farad has led be it

20:45

uk be it the brexit party is

20:48

one of internal um in

20:50

discipline uh lots of

20:52

internal ram uh you know arguments and

20:54

normally people end up leaving and the

20:57

party ends up splitting that's what happened

20:59

to uk if it's what happened to

21:01

the brexit party which he previously led so

21:03

time will tell where this takes um nigel

21:05

farash but i also wouldn't take away from

21:08

him the fact that this is quite an

21:10

achievement having tried many many times to get

21:12

into the house of commons it looks this

21:14

evening that he's got in with uh half

21:17

a dozen maybe even a dozen MPs and

21:19

that is quite an achievement um and it's

21:21

unclear yet what that will actually mean for

21:24

him i think okay uh

21:26

yeah while we wait for the final

21:28

results there's a lot to watch in british politics in the

21:30

days ahead a former uk conservative mp andy percy good

21:32

to speak with you thanks for joining us today pleasure

21:34

anytime okay

21:41

these are live pictures of people running votes

21:43

in to be counted in the united kingdom

21:45

election there's a rush to be the first

21:47

riding to declare polls close this

21:49

hour and we're waiting the official

21:51

results but the exit poll done

21:53

by the consortium of broadcasters indicates

21:56

a change of government with a

21:58

massive labor landslide victory So

22:00

that's the situation in the United Kingdom, in

22:02

the United States. There's pressure for Democrats to

22:04

change their presidential candidate. Voters in France have

22:07

given Marie Le Pen's far right party a

22:09

strong lead in the first round of those

22:11

snap elections happening in France. And after a

22:13

week of questions about his leadership, last night,

22:16

Justin Trudeau laid out all of the change

22:18

facing voters. Whether or not

22:20

Canadians want change, we're getting

22:22

change. Climate change,

22:25

change geopolitics, change conflicts,

22:27

change worlds of work,

22:29

change families, change futures.

22:32

The question is, who's got the

22:34

responsibility and the plan and the

22:36

vision to respond to that change?

22:39

Okay. It's a mood of change, sweeping the G7.

22:42

What could it mean for Canada and some

22:44

of our closest allies? We're going to talk about

22:46

all of that with the power panel. Tonda

22:48

McCharles is the Toronto Star's Ottawa bureau chief in

22:50

my hometown of St. John's, Newfoundland and Labrador

22:52

tonight. James Moore is a former Conservative Cabinet Minister.

22:54

Zane Belgee is a former campaign strategist for

22:56

Alberta NDP leader Nahid Nenshi. And here with me

22:59

in studio, Cameron Amott is a former head

23:01

of communications to prime minister, Justin Trudeau. James,

23:03

I'd like to start with you. A tumultuous

23:06

few years for the British Conservatives going back

23:08

to Brexit and the 140 prime ministers I've

23:10

had since then, I think. What do you

23:13

make of what we're seeing in the early

23:15

projections out of the UK? Predicted,

23:20

not surprising. And it happens at a time when

23:22

the government gets stale, loses its right wing flank

23:24

base and has sort of

23:26

demonstrated a lack of competence and coherence for

23:28

quite some time. So it's not quite a

23:31

surprise. On the thesis of the

23:33

conversation that we're having now, though, about sort

23:35

of this continuity of change happening on the

23:37

world, I don't think it's entirely true. There

23:39

have been some surprises. Narendra Modi was reelected,

23:41

but with a diminished margin of what was

23:44

expected at the outset. I don't think the

23:46

voters in British Columbia are necessarily demanding change

23:48

in the provincial election coming up or New

23:50

Brunswick or Saskatchewan. So it's hit and miss.

23:53

President Biden has only been in office three and a

23:55

half years. So we'll see. And he still commands 40

23:57

percent of the vote in spite of the debate performance.

23:59

So. I think trying to shoehorn

24:01

sort of a global thesis

24:03

into localized elections I think is a

24:05

bit of a stretch. But

24:08

we'll see. It's a huge election year globally

24:10

in terms of its long tail consequences. So

24:13

Zane, what are your thoughts on this? I

24:15

mean, a lot of the analysis I read

24:17

has largely been sort of an anti-encompensy sentiment

24:20

in elections across a lot of

24:22

western democracies, looking at the European

24:24

Parliament elections and

24:27

the shift in mood here in Canada. What

24:29

are your thoughts on what we're seeing? I

24:32

think top line is that everyone's got

24:34

an expiry date. And what we might

24:36

be just witnessing right now is several

24:38

expiry dates converging for a lot of

24:40

world leaders who've occupied their seats for

24:42

a while, or at least their party

24:44

in the UK perspective have occupied seats

24:46

for a while. I think it's very

24:48

clear that folks, regardless of

24:50

what they believe, and I don't

24:52

think this is a right-wing uprising

24:54

or a populist uprising, though, I

24:56

think the crisis of credibility that

24:58

Trudeau and Biden might be causing

25:00

internally within their own parties and certainly

25:02

within their countries as an

25:04

outpouring of that has led to the

25:06

rise of the right. I think that

25:08

the easiest sort of thesis is that

25:10

there's a lot of people who don't

25:12

want things done the same. And

25:15

while Cure Starmer is a

25:17

response to maybe regularly scheduled programming and

25:19

doing things with not so much flash

25:21

and not having a lot of turmoil

25:24

in your politics like the UK conservatives

25:26

have brought upon to their public over

25:28

the last decade plus, there

25:30

is a hunger for people to

25:33

either return to that regularly scheduled programming or

25:35

getting tired of what is happening initially. And

25:37

I think maybe if there's a through line

25:40

that we're trying to hamfist into this, it's

25:42

anxiety. It's a need for people to want

25:44

something different, even though that difference in the

25:46

UK's case might look like a lot of

25:49

what they had with the Tony Blair government.

25:51

They're willing to accept that if that's the

25:53

alternative on the table. I think driven more

25:56

so by anxiety and a distaste for what

25:58

they're getting right now. And

26:00

Cameron, you know, there's a common set

26:02

of issues across a lot of these

26:04

countries in terms of inflation and cost

26:06

of living and diminished economic opportunity for

26:09

the young citizens of their country. And

26:12

that is driving politics in different ways

26:14

in different countries, all coming from that

26:16

same common set of issues that they're

26:18

facing. Absolutely. I mean, there

26:20

is one commonality between a lot of

26:22

these countries, which is, as Zane pointed

26:24

out, anxiety, economic anxiety. Since COVID, I

26:26

mean, a lot of the, you know,

26:28

inflation, which has raised the cost

26:30

of living, a lot of people call it a

26:33

cost of living crisis. It feels like it's baked

26:35

in. It feels like it's structural. And no matter

26:37

what governments do, regardless of their stripe, they're really

26:39

struggling to try and change that trend and put,

26:41

you know, put the interest back

26:43

in line with working people. I

26:45

think what's so interesting, and it's such a fascinating time.

26:47

Like, can we just take a step back as political

26:50

watchers and, you know, really bask in this moment

26:52

where there's so much happening around the world,

26:54

democracies for, you know, elections. There's just such

26:56

an, it's such an interesting moment to be

26:59

observing how different parties are dealing with these

27:01

things. But in the UK in particular, you've

27:03

had 14 years of different

27:05

stripes of right wing governments making

27:07

some pretty disastrous decisions from Brexit

27:09

to their mishandling of COVID to

27:11

the Liz Trust, you know, month

27:14

of her premiership. And you're

27:16

seeing voters, British people reject

27:18

that and look for something more progressive. The

27:21

Labour Party has run a pretty cautious campaign. So it's

27:23

not like it's, they're not

27:25

presenting some sort of radical change,

27:27

but people clearly want to

27:30

turn away from this austerity driven right wing

27:33

system of government that they've had for 14 years.

27:35

Well, but in the meantime, you know, Tanda, we've

27:37

got a totally different direction potentially in France, right?

27:40

Where the centrist Macron and his left wing supporters

27:42

are maybe going to be showing the door depending

27:44

on what happens in the second round of voting. So

27:46

it's like there is this undercurrent of

27:49

change and this frustration with voters in

27:51

how the current democratic systems and economic systems

27:54

are functioning sort of post-COVID. What's your thoughts

27:56

on what we're seeing? Well,

27:58

look, I think I take to.

28:00

James's point about you can't just

28:02

overlay a narrative and assume that

28:04

that covers all bases here. Yes,

28:07

there is a certain anti-incumbency movement in

28:10

lots of places, but for

28:12

example, what I found interesting with the

28:14

British election, when the

28:16

BBC overlaid what was voters' priorities,

28:18

be it healthcare, be it the

28:20

economy, their own personal economy, street

28:23

crime, handling of immigration

28:25

and migration, on

28:27

all those metrics that voters care

28:29

about, the outcome, the

28:31

progress over the years,

28:34

over the course of the last 14 years

28:36

of the Conservative government, all of

28:38

those markets have been in decline. So people

28:40

are reacting not just to incumbency and the

28:42

sort of stale stench of a leader sticking

28:44

around too long. They're reacting to real problems

28:47

that they feel in their lives, be it

28:49

street crime, be it can't get

28:51

a doctor, be it a parent stuck in

28:53

an ER. So I

28:56

would caution against a simplistic, this is what

28:59

is the same everywhere. I think what's

29:01

the same everywhere is the source of

29:03

the anxieties, Cameron. And

29:06

that's kind of, James, I know you offered a rebuttal

29:08

right off the top, but that was kind of my

29:10

thesis on this, is that in

29:13

the European elections, for example, where like right-wingers

29:15

had been in power in Poland, more moderates

29:17

were elected. You look at France, it went

29:19

the other way. And we're sort of seeing

29:21

this spinning off effect of frustration with sort

29:23

of the state of everything with a lot

29:25

of people. I mean, is there a thread,

29:27

a commonality you see in it at all,

29:29

or is this total television nonsense

29:31

I'm peddling here? I

29:34

never- Television nonsense? All right,

29:37

James, it's been good having you on the show. No, go ahead.

29:40

No, no, no. I mean, no,

29:42

it's like, this is a heat, by the way,

29:44

this is a Darwinian thing that we're doing right

29:46

here. Human beings, we try to find patterns in

29:48

things to avoid risk in the future. This

29:50

is what we do as human beings. You look

29:53

for patterns in nature, you look for patterns in economies,

29:55

you look for patterns in things. And

29:57

I actually don't think there's a pattern here. I

30:00

don't think anybody in Marseille or Lyon

30:02

or Paris are looking at

30:05

the voters in Bristol and London and Manchester

30:07

and wondering what does that matter to

30:09

me? I don't think anybody who watched the Biden-Trump debate last

30:11

week is looking at it thinking, jeez, I wonder if that

30:13

should cast a shadow on how

30:16

I'm going to vote my provincial ballot here in Saskatchewan

30:18

in the fall. So it's interesting, it's a good

30:21

topic conversation, but I really do think these

30:23

are localized things. The ingredients that are leading

30:25

to the rise of Le Pen in France

30:28

and the dynamics of Rishi Sunak and the

30:30

Tories over 14 years and Joe

30:32

Biden's age and mental cognition,

30:34

these are all very localized

30:36

dynamics about which I

30:39

think very little bridges can be made

30:41

with other jurisdictions. Right, so Zane, but

30:43

on that, Biden even

30:45

before the debate, as catastrophic and potentially

30:47

game-changer, was struggling to get credit for

30:49

an economy that was creating jobs and

30:51

doing well because costs were too high.

30:53

So there is a frustration just with

30:56

whoever is there because the challenges of

30:58

the post-covid world have been so difficult.

31:00

So I don't know if that

31:02

is a common thread to drop on or am

31:04

I being Darwinian, as James would say there? I

31:07

don't know if you're being Darwinian, but I think what

31:10

you may have hit on is, and by the way,

31:12

I saw a wide shot of me in a previous

31:14

segment with a can. I just want to let people

31:16

know I'm not day drinking on this panel. Okay, it's

31:18

stampede, you're welcome to do it, but go on. That's

31:22

not what's happening. You know, despite that though,

31:24

I think what's happening, what you may have

31:26

hit on, is the language

31:28

aspect of progressives right now. If there's

31:30

a lesson to be taken from Starmer,

31:32

it's kind of removing or at least

31:35

making secondary a lot of the virtue

31:37

signaling that has been part of the

31:39

current progressive lexicon and not trying to

31:41

make that front and center, rather trying

31:43

to say this is how we do

31:46

something, this is how we deliver, and

31:48

this is how we advertise

31:50

and talk about it in a way that takes

31:52

credit for it. And if there's a weakness that

31:54

Biden has that also Trudeau's had recently, is that

31:57

they've put the virtue aspect of it in front.

32:00

Ben's being dragged to it and Trudeau may have done

32:02

it on his own with his march to the left.

32:05

But I think that's actually a little bit

32:07

of a trap right now where folks can't

32:09

see beyond what you're talking about and what

32:11

you symbolize and it's hard for them to

32:13

see what you've done. You've spent

32:15

your political capital and your mileage and your

32:18

language credits on something that you believe ambitiously

32:20

versus what you've done and selling that back

32:22

to people and making sure you get credit

32:24

for it. And that may sound like an

32:26

extremely basic first principles but I think that's

32:29

part of the Biden struggle on the economy.

32:31

I think that's part of the overarching Trudeau

32:33

struggle and I think it's part of kind

32:35

of some of the clean up that Keir

32:38

Starmer had to do with his labor party

32:40

because let's be clear this was a Corbyn

32:42

based labor party for years that he had

32:44

to come in, clean up, redirect and maybe

32:47

there's a message there for progressives around how

32:49

we have success. I'll let you know maybe

32:51

Keir Starmer today if these results hold which

32:53

they certainly seem like they will and maybe

32:56

in that local context someone like a Wabkenau.

32:59

Well, look Cameron, obviously there's a whole series

33:01

of really exceptional things to consider in the

33:03

U.K. election but

33:05

on the shift that Starmer has tried to do with the

33:07

labor party, trying to sort of get the stench of the

33:09

Jeremy Corbyn era off the party, if

33:11

these projections are right and he's got what the

33:14

Conservatives are warning of a super majority, that gives

33:16

him the chance to move that party to the

33:18

center and not sort of be beholden to the

33:21

Corbynite sort of flank of a party, right?

33:23

That might have been there in a much narrower

33:26

outcome if these projections hold. That's

33:28

possible and I think what he wants to do

33:30

regardless based on just how he's campaigned as

33:33

Zane said to focus on real issues that

33:35

people are feeling in their daily lives. I

33:37

actually think I agree with a lot of

33:39

both what James and Zane said in that

33:41

there are trends, there are some commonalities around

33:43

the world, there are reasons that

33:45

can be the same in many countries as

33:47

to why people will vote a certain way

33:50

or try and get rid of a different,

33:52

but ultimately the things that they're going to

33:54

make their decisions based on are local, right?

33:56

It matters to them in the context and

33:59

what Starmer has managed to do, and if

34:01

you follow of his campaign for the past

34:03

month and a half, he's been laser focused

34:05

on very specific things, healthcare, the economy, jobs,

34:08

and crime, pretty much. And

34:10

that's something where, Tonda. Well,

34:13

I was just going to say, I mean, it's

34:15

all well and good though to talk about the

34:17

issues are local, but let's face it, leadership does

34:19

matter too. And in Biden's case, right now, that's

34:21

his challenge. In Trudeau's case, right now, that's his

34:23

challenge. I mean, all of these problems, I

34:25

think are part of a bigger pie, but ultimately,

34:29

voters do look to parties to see

34:31

who's leading them and what vision that

34:33

leader represents. And they need to hear

34:35

from that leader that they're

34:37

focused on the things that matter in their lives.

34:39

And I think it can be a mistake for

34:41

leaders to talk in a little bit too lofty

34:43

terms too often. While much of what they say

34:45

may be true about the state of the world

34:47

and the state of democracy and the big threats

34:49

that many countries are facing together, it's really important

34:51

to always bring it back home. Frankly, a big

34:53

reason why Justin Trudeau was successful in 2015 was

34:55

because he talked a lot about the economy. His

34:58

whole message was about the middle class and people

35:00

bought into that. People felt like we need a

35:02

champion for the middle class and he was able

35:04

to position himself that way. Except

35:06

that right now, that message that clip that

35:09

David just played from Trudeau's speech last night

35:11

at the fundraisers is basically stuff he's been

35:13

saying since the 2021 election, addressing

35:18

climate change and some of those

35:20

other big pieces. And also now

35:22

talking about the need for leaders

35:24

to fight against the rise

35:27

of far right populism and

35:29

save democracies. But frankly, the best analysis

35:31

I heard of some of the challenges

35:33

for Biden's campaign came from David

35:37

Axelrod, a democratic strategist who said, look,

35:39

all well and good to be worried about public

35:42

faith and institutions and democracy. But if you're talking

35:44

about democracy, you probably don't have around the dinner

35:46

table, you don't have a worry about the cost

35:48

of the food that's on it. That is not

35:50

perhaps the biggest vote getter for a lot of

35:53

people. the

36:00

country. He's

36:02

a very good person. He's a very good

36:04

person. He's a very

36:06

good fundraiser in Montreal last night. Responding

36:10

to the sentiment of change that exists in this country with the

36:12

very specific disconnect from all the

36:14

other parts of the world sentiment of change. He's

36:18

saying you're going to get climate change, you're going to

36:20

get these other things. What

36:23

do you make of this rhetorical argument to try to focus it back

36:25

on these issues, at least in pushing back against the political calls he's

36:28

saying. He

36:30

didn't say we've heard a message there for this. We

36:34

have a policy with bill. We're

36:36

going to parogue parliament, we're going to come back

36:38

with an economic agenda that will turn the government

36:40

90 degrees from where we're going. We've heard your

36:42

message, believe me now, listen

36:44

to me now and believe me later, we're going to

36:46

come back with something very specific in the fall that

36:48

will address your concerns. Instead he just sort of

36:50

rolls up the sleeves, waves his arm around, loosens

36:52

the tie and thinks that he can charm everybody

36:55

in the room with his own thoughts.

37:00

That's not, voters have had quite enough of that. We've

37:02

had nine years of it and voters have moved on.

37:06

When you have, he got 32% of the vote in the last election

37:08

campaign and 70% of those voters say they don't want

37:10

to hear from Justin Trudeau anymore, it's time to move

37:12

on. I don't think there's

37:14

anything he said there that would be of any

37:17

comfort to anybody who's currently in the liberal caucus

37:19

or even thinking about retaining their liberal membership. Okay,

37:22

we've got a little bit over time to Cameron, I want

37:24

to give you a chance just to respond. You didn't write

37:26

those ones. Well you might have,

37:28

you might have done it four years ago. What

37:31

do you make of where they are now on it? I think that

37:33

there needs, we just listened to a clip, right, I

37:35

do think that there needs to be a sharper message,

37:37

needs to be clear to Canadians

37:39

that they understand how they feel right

37:41

now. As we spoke about last

37:43

week, take the time over the summer to have

37:46

those internal conversations. The end of the

37:48

day, the Liberal Party is a democratic institution and everybody

37:50

who is a member of it, not just caucus but

37:52

everybody, hundreds of thousands of members across the country, have

37:54

the right to speak up and to talk about the

37:57

direction that they want their party to take and

37:59

come back to the table. in the fall and

38:01

deliver that sharper message about exactly what you're going

38:04

to do to help people in their lives with

38:06

the struggles they face right now and how that's

38:08

better than to quote James' belligerent

38:10

nonsense that we hear from Pierre-Paul Yev every

38:12

day. Trade

38:19

associations in the United States are calling on

38:21

their government to fight back against Canada's new

38:23

digital services tax. The tax plans to add

38:25

a 3% levy on foreign tech

38:28

giants that generate revenue from Canadian users.

38:30

But it's not just those in the

38:32

U.S. that are upset with this new

38:34

tax. The Ford government is also pushing

38:36

back. Ontario Finance Minister Peter Bethlenfalvy wrote

38:38

to his federal counterpart last week. Now

38:42

is not the time for Canada to put

38:44

a target on its back. Unilaterally implementing this

38:46

tax not only imposes new costs on our

38:49

economy, it could significantly harm our relationship with

38:51

the United States. Finance Minister

38:53

Christian Freeland responded to those concerns

38:55

today. We have

38:57

specifically been working very

39:00

hard and very collaboratively with

39:02

the U.S. and

39:04

I am confident that a

39:07

win-win outcome, a negotiated win-win

39:09

outcome for Canada and the

39:11

U.S. is absolutely possible. Matthew

39:15

Holmes is the senior vice president of the Canadian

39:17

Chamber of Commerce. I know you've joined me now.

39:19

Matthew Holmes, good to see you. Thanks for coming

39:21

in. Good to see you. You've been calling on

39:23

the government not to go ahead with this. Now

39:25

you think they should reverse the implementation of the

39:28

digital services tax. I mean, how is this going

39:30

to affect Canadian companies? Well, part of the problem

39:32

is we don't know how it will affect Canadian

39:34

companies. There's the business that other companies do here

39:36

in Canada, but there's also a lot of Canadian

39:38

companies that could be captured within the net of

39:40

this new digital services tax. And there could be

39:43

further retaliation against Canadian companies that export to the

39:45

U.S. and other markets. The tax seems to

39:47

be designed though to capture large global multinational

39:49

companies that you need to have more than

39:51

a billion dollars in global revenues and 20

39:53

million of that, anything in

39:55

excess of 20 million dollars in revenue in Canada is

39:57

taxed at 3%. So isn't this a good question? Is

40:00

this precise enough that it's only going

40:02

to hit the big digital giants? Well,

40:05

it's certainly targeting big digital giants, but

40:07

it could actually affect many others. So,

40:09

loyalty programs within Canada, Canadians love their

40:12

travel loyalty points, those could be impacted.

40:14

Our travel sites that we use quite

40:16

frequently, those could fall within

40:18

the thresholds that have been identified

40:21

here. And further, it invites

40:23

retaliatory action from the United

40:25

States. It seems provocative,

40:27

particularly doing this right before July 4th.

40:30

And there have been strong concerns raised

40:32

by US Trade Representative Ambassador

40:35

Catherine Tai, Ambassador

40:37

David Cohen here in Ottawa, has also raised

40:39

concerns, and we just see this as a

40:42

provocation at a very sensitive time with the US. But,

40:45

you know, the US has kind of been seen as

40:47

holding this up, right? Because Canada wanted

40:49

to do the global deal on this through

40:51

the OECD and through

40:53

other G7 mechanisms. And

40:57

it never got there, and a lot of it has been

40:59

resistance in the US and the US Congress. So can a

41:01

country like Canada just wait for the US's

41:03

approval on something like this when the UK, France, and

41:05

Italy, and others have already gone ahead? Well,

41:07

many other countries are waiting. They're working together

41:09

at that multilateral table at the OECD. Canada

41:12

has always been a country

41:15

that really prides itself in following the rule of

41:17

law and working at that multijurisdictional level. And

41:20

so it seems strange and surprising that

41:22

Canada would choose to move unilaterally like

41:24

this, particularly with that sensitive

41:26

and very, very special relationship we have with

41:29

the United States. Is it unilateral

41:31

though when the UK has done it, France has done it,

41:33

Italy has done it? I mean, other G7 partners have moved

41:35

in this direction, and

41:38

they're not facing trade retaliation of any consequences seen. Sure,

41:41

some of them moved, and it was before

41:43

some of that OECD pillar conversation was taking

41:45

place. So there was already those early movers.

41:47

France is a good example. What we saw

41:50

in France, they put this tax in place

41:52

that immediately was pushed on to consumers. So

41:54

this will be inflationary. Canadian consumers will see

41:56

prices go up, in our opinion. invited

42:01

retaliation from the U.S. or the threat of

42:03

retaliation from the U.S. So how do you

42:05

reconcile this though? Because these companies do business

42:07

in Canada but because they're situated elsewhere a

42:09

lot of their activities which are quite lucrative

42:11

and quite profitable they're shielded from a

42:13

lot of tax. I mean is

42:16

it just the way this is being done

42:18

or the very idea of a digital services

42:20

tax that you have discomfort with? No I

42:22

think that's a valid conversation taking place around

42:25

a digital services tax and how is that

42:27

done in a global and a consistent way.

42:29

And I think that's exactly the conversation that's

42:31

supposed to be happening at the OECD table

42:33

and that the countries at that table have

42:35

agreed to extend the timeline on. Canada has

42:37

stepped out of that process and said no

42:39

we're going to move alone. We're going to

42:41

use this as either a pressure tactic or

42:44

we're just doing it outright. The other concern

42:46

we have though which is a very specific

42:48

one on this is the tax is retroactive.

42:50

So imagine David you've followed

42:53

the law, you've paid your taxes and

42:55

then suddenly you're told oh no there's

42:57

a new tax and you owe it

42:59

three years retroactively. You owe back taxes

43:01

for something that didn't exist beforehand and

43:03

that's a concern for us from the

43:05

business perspective. It creates uncertainty and that

43:07

affects investment in Canada. It affects the

43:09

environment to attract investment in Canada. It's

43:11

retroactive but retroactive to a point where

43:13

these big companies would have been told. In twenty-two and

43:16

the government has been signaling for a number

43:18

of years it was moving in this direction.

43:20

So if you're Amazon or Google or Facebook you

43:22

would have seen this coming and perhaps already baked

43:24

it into your planning would you not? Well

43:27

again companies have to follow the rule of

43:29

the land in which they do business at

43:32

that time and they're accountable to their shareholders

43:34

as well. So the government says

43:36

a lot of things. It says it wants to

43:38

do a lot of things. Many of them aren't

43:40

done or it reverses on those things and so

43:43

I don't think you can really run a business

43:45

today based on signals or press releases or even

43:47

just something a minister says in a press scrum.

43:51

You have to actually base it on what are the rules of

43:53

the land and this new law or this

43:55

new tax is being put in place three

43:57

years retroactively. So it's coming in as you

43:59

say. this let's be blunt it

44:01

primarily targets big American tech companies I mean

44:03

that's really who people are talking about here

44:05

and as you say it comes in right

44:07

before the July 4th holiday but also in

44:09

the middle of a pretty intense presidential election

44:11

cycle and you know on cycle Senate and

44:13

congressional elections I mean what are

44:15

your concerns in terms of the the political

44:18

fallout from a move like this given the

44:20

intensity of what's happening in the United States

44:22

right now? Well we feel it's provocative we

44:24

feel that the signals have been sent by

44:26

our most important trade relationship or our trade

44:28

partner that they have concerns

44:30

about us moving in this way it

44:32

sends the signal that we're more willing

44:34

to take you know the 1.4 billion

44:37

a year that this represents for

44:39

the Canadian coffers and jeopardize the

44:41

trade relationship which currently is about

44:43

600 billion a year

44:46

in exports to the United States so

44:48

we're chasing literally two pennies on every

44:50

dollar that we're currently selling

44:52

down to the US. Right but you know it is it

44:54

is 1.4 billion dollars right it

44:56

is money that Canada feels it's entitled to

44:58

because of the economic activity happening inside its

45:01

borders and the OECD process while Canada still

45:03

says it's committed to that it's going slow

45:05

and it keeps going slow and keeps pushing

45:07

it off and pushing it off and pushing

45:09

it off and that's all just reprieve for

45:11

these companies who get

45:14

to keep making money without paying the tax

45:16

right so Canada has at some point to

45:18

act. Well we're looking at that I mean

45:20

look you could have everybody around the world

45:22

all of the jurisdictions put in place their

45:24

own little taxes and and the system quickly

45:26

breaks down what what we would like to

45:28

see is a consistent and coherent approach to

45:30

this being taken. The other thing to keep

45:33

in mind is these companies are putting a

45:35

lot of money into the ecosystem here they're

45:37

they're supporting creators and artisans through marketplaces

45:39

they're putting money into Canadian content

45:41

they're putting money into journalism many

45:44

of these same companies are facing multiple

45:47

new taxes they've they've contributed to HST

45:49

or GST there's there's all kinds

45:51

of other things so we're not arguing against attacks

45:54

per se we're talking about process here

45:56

and about how provocative Canada

45:58

really wants to be at such a sensitive

46:00

time with the U.S. relationship. Well, it seems

46:02

though, I mean, the order in council has

46:04

been posted, the tax has been implemented, and

46:06

we heard from the Deputy Prime Minister and

46:08

Finance Minister, Christopher Freeland, today, and it sounds

46:10

like they're quite content with this decision, so

46:13

absent big retaliation from the United

46:16

States, which is often threatened but

46:18

doesn't always happen, what do you

46:20

think the federal government is going to do about your concerns here? Well,

46:23

I think it's what Canadians do with

46:25

this. We're going to see prices go

46:27

up in a time of inflation, we're

46:29

going to see businesses potentially face retaliation

46:31

in terms of our export relationship with

46:33

the U.S., and of course, as we

46:35

have potentially a new administration coming into

46:37

the U.S., we're going to be

46:39

facing or setting a tone in 2025

46:42

that is right before the review of

46:44

our most

46:46

important trade relationship, our trade

46:48

agreement with COSMA, and

46:51

so that tone that we're setting could

46:53

really compromise the ability for us to

46:55

have a good faith and goodwill negotiation

46:57

across the table or review with our

46:59

trading partners. Matthew Holmes, Senior Vice President

47:02

with the Chamber of Commerce, thanks for your time today, sir.

47:04

Thank you, David. That's

47:08

it for today. If you like this

47:10

episode, please follow the pod and catch

47:12

our next live show on CBC News

47:14

Network with even more interviews. We're on

47:17

weekdays at 5 p.m. Eastern

47:19

Time. I'm David Cochran. Thanks for

47:21

listening. For

48:08

more CBC Podcasts, go

48:10

to cbc.ca/ podcasts.