Thank you for listening to Depictions Media Radio. Welcome to Policy and Rights.
The show up bas welcomer Policy That Human Joy.
Welcome back to Policy and Rights Here Depictions Media Rate. You know, I'm your host, Michael Clogges And Okay, so let's let's let's get down to this. That Donald Trump has made statements about how he has moved things very quickly and that he has fixed the fighting between Pakistan and India, and without truly understanding what is happening in the region. That just saying hey, let's go make a bunch of money together. It sounds good and theory and and you can sell it to the Western world that
you you solved the problem. But the reality is is that in other parts of the world, in the Eastern world, that that is not going to cut it. That you're going to start to run into problems. And and here is one of the problems is I have been on this planet for for six decades, and I will be totally honest with you. I believe that the issues that are happening between these three sovereign countries has has been
an issue for most of my six decades. That the issues between that exist between India, Kashmir and Pakistan has has has been an issue for decades and that one person saying, hey, let's stop shooting the guns so that we can make some money together isn't going to solve
the problem. The the problem is is that between India and Pakistan, they don't really want to accept the fact that Kashmir itself is also a sovereign country, that is a sovereign territory that should be allowed to form its own government and its people be allowed to appear in the World Forum as sovereign people. So there is an issue right there and that is going to be one of the major issues and it isn't going to be solved by let's do some trade with the United States
and Donald Trump to fix that problem. The tensions are still high there. The families that live outside of the area, that have people who are living in that they cash reason region are saying that the tensions are still high
and that there's still a looming problem. So what did mister Trump fix Until we have real negotiations about how Kashmir can appear on the world for them, there's going to be an issue in that in that particular area of the world, and for the most part, for a lot of people, Kashmir doesn't even appear on the map. You asked the average Canadian or American and they were like, Kashmir is a sweater, so okay to kind of poke
some holes. Add more of the trump things that going back to for the same reason that trying to get Putin and Dolensky to sit down at a table to come up with a ceasefire between those two countries, when there are still the Dundast region, which is which of itself. If you go back through history, you will find out that Dundas Region was its own sovereign state also, and those people also would like to see some sovereignty happen. They want to see their cultures and things be promoted.
Even though they're very similar to the Ukrainian and the Russian culture, there's some differences they want to be they want that to be celebrated also, And the same thing with Crimea. Crimea was a sovereign country and they want their sovereignty back. The people of these other two regions want to have a seat at the table when negotiating the ceasefire between the Ukraine and Russia. And until that happens, there's going to be an issue, and just dealing with
Putin and Zelensky may not fix the problem. That we need to deal with things that have happened in our history, correct them, correct those things that have happened in our history, and learn not to do it again. Oh but wait, that's where some of the issue is coming in at because well, let's look at South Africa. And when we look at South Africa and we see that the United States is opening its door to South African refugees, what
are they running from? And when we look closely at that, what they're running from is the idea that maybe South Africa is becoming a little more equal, maybe the majority of the bodies that actually live in South Africa are starting to get a little more power. But wait, those people have dark faces, and the people who are running from there believe that dark faces do not belong at
an equal table with those who do not. We start to see a pattern happen here, and that pattern is mimicking what Donald Trump truly believes that people who are lesser than him should be oppressed, and there's a long list of people that he would like to oppress rather than everybody thinks, Oh, well, he's trying to promote and take care of the United States and make it a great country. A great country for who is the big question.
And when we look really closely at the Project twenty twenty five and we look closely at mister Trump's agendas and his attitudes, that we start to see a really good picture. And not everybody is on that list to be on equal terms. There are those who are going to have extreme privilege and then there are those who are going to be oppressed. And that is Donald Trump's agenda. So we need to move forward. Let's get past this whole Donald Trump thing, and so let's start talking about
things about commerce in general. And the B seven event that is currently ongoing in Canada. It is going to be part of a series of G seven G twenty events, and in this particular instance, what it is is the business communities from around the world are gathering together in order to come up with resolutions to help bring countries together, help help things trade become a little more easier and a little more convenient for the simple citizens like you and I who just want to be able to go
shop and buy and buy some stuff. But there's a lot more business behind that than just simply being able to go to a store, that there are trade routes that need to be set up. There needs to be things happen happening between all countries so that borders seem to disappear and products can move move easily and swiftly so that we have the stuff we want. Yay, Okay. So uh, we're gonna hear from the US ambassadors to to Canada. As he talks a bit and he's kind
of joking. He talks about how his family moved from the Netherlands Holland to Holland in Michigan, and how he moved from because he's based in Ottawa, Canada. Now he moved from Ottawa County, Michigan to Ottawa, Canada.
Yay.
So we're gonna hear from hear from him Pete Hostetecca uh as he talks talks wonderfully about how we can come up with commerce solutions for some of our woes and help use that to negotiate and eat and bring peace talks to the table. So we're also going to
hear from Aaron O'Toole. Of course you remember him as a Conservative Party leader and he is going to make a couple of comments about the Conservative Party and how maybe the Conservative Party needs to put Canada ahead of any other agenda, the same as the Liberal Party has done. They just simply want to bring about a great Canada.
That let's put all great ideas on the table and let's move forward with all the great ideas so that we have a great country to live in, a free country to live in, and a diverse, equal and inclusive country to live in. Yes, I did use the DEEI thing because it should be there. We're going to hear a brief statement before that, Antonio Guerrara makes about the
Peacekeeping Ministral in Berlin. We don't really have any other recordings from that at this time, but the UN Peacekeepers do a lot of really great work around the world to bring humanitarian efforts and to help negotiate in and end struggles. So we need to listen to what Antonio Guerrerez has to say about the UN peacekeepers and peacekeeping
efforts around the world too. Hey, it's nice to be able to walk down the street and here in Canada we don't have to worry about someone trying to shoot us or a drone attack happening from another country, and it's something that if we can lay down the arms and bring about peace, there's a lot of other great things that can happen in our world if we all sit together, talk and discuss our issues, our fears, rather than shoot them out or using drones and other weapons
of destruction to get our point across. So let's push forward. We're going to listen to Antonio Guerreras first as he talks about the peacekeeping ministrals in Berlin, and then we'll hear from our United States friends and ambassador to Canada as he speaks at the B seven, and we'll hear some other press recordings from the B seven after.
UN peacekeeping operations are a cornerstone of the United Nations. Each and every day, peacekeepers are hard at work in travel spots around the world. Let me be clear, peacekeeping operations today are facing massive challenges, increasing the dangers that our brave peacekeepers already face a record number of conflicts, deepening division and mistrust, terrorism and transnational crime, and the direct targeting of peacekeepers through drones, improvised the clusive devices
and even social media. Today's Ministerial is an important part of this work. As we share ideas and explore ways to strengthen these important functions for the future. Now more than ever, we need the political support of you and member states. The goal is not just to keep a lead on conflicts, but to build political support for lasting solutions that can build peace.
Actually, there's a few things I can say. Been there, done that, all right.
I mean, we've been in Nova Scotia, We've done Montreal, We've done some of the other you know, some of the other provinces, was all. I've landed in Gander, all right, So I've been there. I had a aunt that her husband's soul farm supplies out of Lethbridge, Alberta.
I had an uncle that lived in Richmond, BC.
My wife's sister lived in Smithers, the northern part, five six hundred miles north of Vancouver. And we've loved every minute of it. But we're enjoying we're looking forward to being able to do it again. And what else can I say to somebody. I don't usually get into talking about women's attire, But where where else would you see or how could you ignore the fact that you are.
Wearing Delft blue? All right? So yeah, the.
Uh for the rest of you at Pete Hookster, it's an honor to be with you. You know, I grew I was born in the Netherlands, although it's called Holland by some, especially in America. My parents moved from Holland to Holland in Michigan. Holland, Michigan is located where it is located in Ottawa County, and so you know, their son took the bold initiative. And it's not literally true, but it's it's figuratively. When Diana and I came back from the Netherlands, we moved from Ottawa County.
We moved ten miles.
South, which put us into a different county in Michigan.
But you know, I'm a marketing guy.
We take figurative, you know, license, so I can say my parents went from.
Holland to Holland.
I went from Ottawa to Ottawa and we are glad to be here. In getting ready for today, someone you know, one of the questions that people said, well, there's uncertainty in those types of things, and there is. Won't deny that for a minute, but then.
Someone said, is America open for business?
And it's like, excuse me, have you not been watching America is open for business, and as the B seven a group that leads the world, we anticipate and hope that you are all open for business as well, and that when we are all open for business, it's a better and it's a safer world. Okay, we can lead the world in a number of initiatives. We have strong cooperation.
America is open to doing business. We're open to doing business with with you, our friends, and as you can see that, you know, in the last week, President's also indicated we're open.
For business in the Middle East.
Okay, I think I woke up on I've been in politics for a while, but you know what we are seeing today. We have never experienced anything like this in American politics.
Okay.
You know, the President one of his primary priorities was We're going to secure the border.
Sixty days later, it's secure.
You know, ninety nine percent of illegal crossings across our southern border have ended.
You know, we get to I wake.
Up on Monday morning and there's a whole lot of stuff that's been happening in between, you know, securing the border and those types of things. But you know, you wake up on Monday morning, and what do you have Monday morning we've got an agreement with China. Oh that's good. Chalk this week down. We got a major accomplishment this weekend. So well, no, no, we're not done yet.
Uh.
You know, we did something on pharmaceutical prices.
We we had the expectation that perhaps Putin and Zelensky would meet today.
That didn't happen.
But you know, then we did secure again with our friends. We secured the release of an American hostage on Monday or Tuesday, but it was announced on Monday, and I think we oh, yeah, we got a plane. Okay, just just a little plane. We've got lots of planes in Washington. I suggested that the president. You know, mister president, we.
Don't have a plane in Canada.
You know, if you've got an extra one, you know, we can because this is a big country. I could use a plane to fly from from here to Vancouver to all the places that you mentioned, although I'm not sure it would land in Smithers. But you know, and it's like the pace that we are moving at is unbelievable.
And I've I was at the White House this week and you talk to the folks there, they're working twenty four to seven, working seven days a week on implementing agenda that I think will be good for all of us. And we clearly want to move forward on a number of the objectives that the B seven has outlined that we.
Are in total agreement with. You know, you just go through a few of them. You know, you talk about quantum, quantum computing, chalk that up. Okay, that's something that we think is absolutely essential.
You talk up AI, Yep, we're there. That's something that is critically important. The President, I think, signed an agreement this week for the construction of a massive plant to build the technology that will move quantum computing forward, that will move artificial intelligence forward. And I think, you know, the President in America has now announced that we have you know, generated over twelve to thirteen trillion dollars of investment for the United States, an investment.
That you know, again, I think is good for all of us. We after World War Two and my.
Parents were liberated by Canadians and those types of things, and when I go back to the Netherlands, you know, there's a tremendous and across Europe, there's a tremendous amount of appreciation for what the Canadians did for what the Americans did for what the other allies did, and not only helping to win the war, but then sticking around to build Europe. I go back to my parents left in fifty six and you know, and you say, because you go back to Europe now and yeah, it's a
thriving economy. I asked, how's business in Europe And to one of the folks on your next panel, they said, oh, it's great, good, nothing better that that could be happenings that we are all prospering. And we're prospering on the kinds of we're prospering because on so many of the goals and objectives that we have outlined. Uh, there's a lot of synergy and agreement to that.
The one of the.
Other goals is critical minerals absolutely, okay. The President has signed some agreements around the world in terms of making sure that you know that we all have a stream, a global supply chain that means that we cannot be held hostage uncritical minerals for the kinds of you know, somebody says, well, it's nice you neither, We're not going
to ship into you anymore. It's kind of like, that's okay, We've got we've got a secure supply chain that builds on the strings of each and every one of us around the room today and some of our other allies.
Okay, we need to work that together.
We have done things that we believe are absolutely essential to making sure that some of these goals and objectives are met. You know, the President in the United States of America again working with many of you, believe that not only do we need to be energy independent, but we need to be energy dominant in the world. Because so many of these new technologies are energy independent.
It is going to stretch our.
Ability to expand our energy supplies to make sure that we can power the technology change that is right at our fingertips.
And when we do that, we will all be so much more.
Effective and we will all bring more prosperity to our people.
People in our countries. The people that you're Prime Minister has said he works for. How did he describe him the other day? The owners?
Okay, really, they are the owners of Canada. The people that we work for, they are the owners of America. It's a great way to describe the people that we work for. And you had a meeting today talking about trust and the concern about so many people in our countries no longer have trust in the institutions or trust in government.
And I lived with that in politics for a long time.
But as we as a business community and as governments deliver more prosperity, we deliver more benefits to our owners.
I like that.
I'm just gonna steal it from from Carnie. Okay, I like that, But you know, the guess what, we will build trust with our owners. Just like some of you, maybe many of you, are affiliated with publicly held companies. Sometimes I've invested wisely. Sometimes I've invested not so wisely, and in those companies that turned out to be not such wise investment. It wasn't my problem. It wasn't my fault.
I picked the right companies. Yeah, sure, But what I did is I picked you know, I picked companies where I couldn't try. I found out later on I couldn't trust the leadership.
Just kidding, Okay.
I know that some of my friends in Canada don't have the greatest sense of humor. Okay, but so I have to tell them that I'm sharing with them a joke from a.
Sick Dutch perspective.
Okay, but you know, the bottom line is when a company performs poorly, its leadership loses trust from its employees, from its customers, and from those who have invested and expected much better. And in reality in America, and that's why we had the result from the election that we did, is that there are many in America who are apprehensive about our future and the issues that we were discussing.
That they demanded change, and that they demanded the type of change that they believe would that they could trust in, that they would have leadership that made promises that in a campaign that they.
Would then amlement.
Well, you know, I can't get into politics beyond that. But so here we are. You know, the President has committed we are open for business. We're working on the things that the B seven has identified. It is a great time to be in Canada in that, you know, you had an election two and a half weeks ago, a new cabinet on Tuesday, a B seven summit now for a few days. I think that there will be discussions ongoing over the next couple of weeks about you know, the United States and your hosts Canada.
In terms of where we move forward on a number of serious issues.
Then you've got the King coming, Yeah, and you're going to have a phenomenal I don't know exactly how long he will be here, but is the King coming here, you know, for maybe three four days. I'm sure it will be an awesome experience. Congratulations to the Canadian government for being able to get the King to come to Canada and you know, show that kind of respect for for Canada, and so.
Lots of great things happening here.
And then we have the G seven summit, so it's like, wow, what an awesome time to come to to Ottawa and what an awesome you know, and you're throwing a few tulips and we're okay.
I just want to leave one final thought with you is that.
Many of your governments are also going to be asked. If we want to achieve all these economic goals and objectives, we also also need a peaceful and secure world. It is why America continues to invest significantly.
In our defense.
And why we want to partner with you in things that secure our countries and our people, because if we are safe, and if we are secure, that liberates, that liberates the business community to prosper.
And bring prosperity to all of our owners.
So work with us on economic issues, work with us on the friendships and the relationships that we have on a personal basis around the world, and work with us on security issues so that we can deliver for the people that own our countries and we can rebuild the trust that they demand, and we will be amazed at what we can accomplish in a very short period of time. I'm amazed with the President has accomplished in America, has
accomplished in roughly one hundred and twenty days. But if we're all pushing in the same direction, we'll be even more amazed about what we can accomplish together. Hey, thank you very much, and I hope you had a great conference.
Good afternoon, Gosh, I missed scrums like this. Would you like me to say something off the top. I really want to congratulate the Indian Chamber of Commerce. I've been so proud to be a Canadian kicking off the G seven season for Alberta with a gathering of business leaders from across the world talking about opportunities for our country, but also reminding people of how much benefit there has been from global trade, global security allies and alliances. You're
stronger together, not separate. So there's really been a great undercurrent of collaboration within the business community at this and I'm just so proud to be a part of it now that I'm in the private sector, and I've loved to see all sides of the political domain showing support as well. So if the G seven can be as collaborative as the B seven, we're heading in a good direction.
What are the odds of.
Do you want a couple words in French or is there any oy.
To that point?
Like the business community and all which is semitatries, you're basically similar challenges, similar anxieties on terras.
On the political lead, there may not be that kind of unity.
I guess what are your what are your expectations or I guess advice for commauney efficients heading into these meetings and having to manage those dynamics.
Well, I think there's been good signs actually, the fact that the United States is reaching some bilateral deals, whether they're with the United Kingdom or with China, that's a start that we are maybe getting through the biggest period of uncertainty, and that the Trump administration is wanting to restructure global trade. So in trade. Wars don't benefit anybody, uh, But certainty and and deals do. I think Canada and the other members of the G seven can learn from that.
And at the same time, if the US prolongs this uncertainty, we need to do more together. So I do a lot of work with Europe. I know a lot of European firms, from AI to defense, to to energy are looking at opportunities in Canada and we must do the same. So there's there's strength in global trade. We need to rebalance it a little bit. And I think the G seven is coming out a perfect time. After some of these bilateral deals. It's time for a global approach so
that we stop diminishing shared wealth and shared opportunity. And I'm optimistic about about Alberta.
On that point of collaboration.
Is there a room for your former party, you Servative Party of Canada, to be part of that?
Should they be more collaborative with the government when it comes to celevates trade issues.
Well, it's my current party. I'm a former leader, so I'm proud of the work I did with the Conservative Party. I do think the Conservatives are going to take some lessons from losing an election the leader from losing his seat. I think they've shown a degree already of trying to put Canada first. I know the interim Parliamentary leader has suggested they'll work with the Carnei government on issues related to resolving US Canada trade. But you know, we have
to be honest with ourselves. We haven't. On the last number of elections, the Liberals changed one key part of their team and were able to win back the trust of Canadians. So we have to take some learnings from that. And I think collaborating on North American trade and defense and Arctic sovereignty and meeting our natal commitments, those are all commitments I had made years ago. So the Conservatives
in many ways have been outfront on these issues. So now that the Liberals are advocating that, let's work together on them.
And how does the US call for five percent target at NATO, which sure seems to be saying is going to be extended but maybe with some creative county, How does that change the game for Canada's ability to need it.
Well, As someone who flew on helicopters back in the day that were much older than I was, we used to dream about hitting two percent of GDP as a defense target. I don't think five percent is realistic. I do think the Secretary is probably using that as an incentive for people to get much more serious. I do hear when I was in Europe a significant portion of European countries looking to three percent. The Business Council of Canada, I want to congratulate them on their great report on
Defense and Security from about six months ago. They've advocated for the three percent range. When you think about the infrastructure we would be building in the Arctic, ports, aerodromes, this is going to help food security, economic security, So don't think of it as just three percent for guns and bullets. This is about giving military families the bases and the accommodations they deserve for serving our country, better pay for when they deploy and could be hurt serving
our interests. So I think very quickly, if we right size the military, given the equipment they need, we can spend three percent and help Canadian infrastructure and business at the same time. So I think I hope the Carnei government shows some ambition on their next plans for national defense.
On their ambition, just as a follow up, what is it like for you to see.
This such quick movement on internal trade now that has been a gold for decades.
Well, there was a case a few years ago called the Como case. It went to the Supreme Court of Canada about somebody buying beer at Costco and bringing it home. Let's grow up as a country. We've got to drop all these hundred year old UH regulatory rules and barriers. The real proof will be in the putting around jobs and recognition of of labor standards and work construction jobs here in Ottawa or on the other side in Quebec. That's where the province is. We'll have to get serious
to really make a deal on internal trade. I've seen great progress led by Premier Houston, UH, Premier Ford, Premier's Canoe.
UH.
The West was already ahead of us on some of this. But it's got to be more than wine freeing the grape. It's more about recognizing professional credential, allowing someone who's an electrician in Ottawa to do a job in Quebec. I think we expect not just politicians but union leaders to say we need to have more internal trade, more opportunity at home when the international scene is a little more uncertain what do you think.
The Pier Paulia and the party should deal with what Alberta Premier Daniel Smith is talking about separation, referendum.
You know, the critician federal of climate policies and all these things.
But how should the Conservatives now talk about and address that that threatning. You know, they kind of share some of those concerns, but they're often endorsing a referendum or separation, But how should they approach that in their view?
I think all politicians, including my former colleagues and the Conservatives. I think the Liberals, especially Minister Giebot, but also Premier Smith, all have to approach this very very carefully. The country is more important than all of them. I'm out of politics now. You realize that you're part of something. It's
not about you, it's about the country. So Premier Smith must be very careful because there's a difference between advocating for more fairness on natural resources, on energy, something I did for ten years as an Ontario NP Canadians support Alberta energy, they support potash from Saskatchewan. So I think it is reckless sometimes when politicians lose sight of their most important goal, which is the country. Its unity and the well being of its people. I was very disappointed
by the comments of Minister Gibot. These are the little flames that whip up populous currents. So I hope all politicians, I say this as a former one, are a lot more responsible on how they approach questions on national unity and collaboration.
Gerald Buds earlier said that you setting exact spectations moth the G seven concerns about.
How the many different ways of a those sideways. It was frump Do you share in those concerns? Did did you hear those commonsas.
Well?
Unfortunately Jerry said is his ambitions too low for Canada for far too long. I'm very optimistic actually about what the G seven could be, As I said, already movement on a bilateral level with the United Kingdom. Canada has a new Prime minister who's very well versed on international trade, on energy, on energy transition issues, and I do think there's unity now between many of the European members and Japan,
who I was speaking with yesterday. To make sure that the United States understands that they have been the beneficiary of global trade on the intangible's economy, whether it's Hollywood or AI it's not all just about car parts now. So I think we have an opportunity to really reset the dialogue. And in Alberta, where mister Carney is from having just stolen Stephen Harper's line that we're energy superpower during the election, he should put energy at the forefront.
Any of the G seven countries should be using Canadian LERG. They should be using Canadian uranium, Canadian critical minerals. If you want supply chains that are high ESG standards that have indigenous partnerships that you can be proud of when you're generating energy or fertilizing your fields, that energy superpower could actually be part of not just a solution for Canada US relations, but for the G seven and a path forward.
How does Canada negotiate with the US president as a show he won't honor this all thost traded vie that he.
Himself signed very carefully. This is why I think a bilateral deal, if we can get some certainty in it, is just as important as opening up USMCA or customer whoever puts the acronym first. We've got to be willing to bet the table. And it took us five years to align on steel, aluminum, and auto tariffs with China, something the Conservatives advocated alignment for in twenty eighteen. The
Liberals took until twenty twenty four to do that. So I think now that the Americans can see a fresh approach. We are aligned on those core commodities. We're going to be aligned on defense spending. We're interested in partnering on Arctic sovereignty and on you know, standing up to incursions in the North by near Arctic states and others. So I think I think we can if we're looking a
little more serious. I think we can then hold the administration to account when they backtrack on deals they've signed. If it's the art of the deal, you have to respect the deals you make.
Mister talked earlier about right sizing the Canadian military. The government has a new online recruitment portals for people to sign up to join or be enlist, and they face a series of type little litches that have not elected to sign up.
Uh, what is your response to that?
Do you think that we need a different approach here?
At first down, I think fourteen thousand.
People right now in the military.
The recruiting and retention crisis in the military right now is the most serious issue we're facing for the Canadian Air Forces and for Canadian domestic security. We have to understand the needs of younger Canadians and what draws them into the military. We need better pay. In fifty years ago, Canadian bases used to be the best little communities, whether they were in Greenwood, Nova Scotia or in Germany. We have to make that a spread, a core of being
part of something bigger than yourself attractive. We also have to m draw in people that want to go to war and want to fight for their country. In the last ten years, D and D has been too bureaucratized. It is not public works, it is not parks Canada. People do this and potentially give their life to their country. So the institution needs to be treated a little better. Respect for its history and institutions needs to be brushed off.
So some of the things talked about today is about rebalancing discussions on making sure our military is professional, making sure there's inclusion, but also making sure that we have a war fighting force and that young men and women that want to be part of something that is bigger than themselves feel that pride. So there's a cultural challenge in the military right now that they need to address.
And the clues are actually due to the volume of people trying to sign up right now.
So people are saying this because of a different state.
Do you think that the sovereignty threat to play any role in.
Those wanting to be less?
I think the changing world, particularly some of the young people I speak to, realize that my generation, the exers, maybe had a bit of a holiday from history where there was stability, largely due to trade and other things, and that's changing. And so for some Canadians there's a desire desire to put the uniform of their country on and be willing to stand a post, to be willing to to serve, whether it's in theater or whether it's at home. There's also a great desire to have civic
forces responding to floods and fires. We're going to see more of this. We can't have the military doing that. So how do we harness that desire from young Canadians to serve their country? This is what the Canadian or forces has to update their thinking, and it seems their technology.
I'm val a layer ambassadors, I'm messor alias spoken in term remarks about.
Dei polsteds and how many consumers thought that they.
Were being questioned to.
You have been outspoken for mull culture in the past, and I'm just wondering if you think or if you've heard that Canadian.
Businesses need to better align with the US business side and get rid of some of those dei qulicies.
I think inclusion and respect for difference has to be fundamental, but I do I think the rise of social media has led to a polarization on both left and right, where the left would want to cancel and stop everything, and there'd be pushed back from the right on all those issues. I wasn't perfect when I navigated and tried to find a balance in that, but after a number
of years, people are shutting off. And if we saw the trust index that Ambassador Haley was part of a discussion declining trust in politicians, in business, in the media, some of this is from the polarization. So I think people want respect for difference, they want equal opportunity, but there is a fatigue with the extreme positions on left and right on this. So I don't think this is a war on woke as it is more a need for centrists to speak up and ask for a bit more responsible dialogue.
Just back to the alignment on China.
That's had some questions you see about, you know, especially with the.
US on China, but that has really gotten us not really any protections from the trade war sketchw on Premier Scott Moe was called the trade war with China directly in the intact of Panola uh industry.
They are like far more damaging than the US trade war. Do you think it's time for the Canadian government to talk to China. I'm not suggesting free trade agreement, but is there you think there should.
Bet any open as to the thing?
Maybe or reducing the tires of etis well.
I think we have to be careful. We did not align on trade with China until last year. They asked us to in twenty eighteen. So it was in August twenty twenty four months before President Trump was re elected, that Canada finally came into alignment on steel, aluminum, and evs. Many of US were advocating for this alignment, this sort of fortress North America approach back in twenty eighteen, and we missed an opportunity to to align then with our
most important partner, and it's not just auto. If President Trump wants to rebuild the arsenal of democracy and shipbuilding and all these things, he needs Canadian aluminum, he needs Canadian steel, and they have since the nineteen forties. So we've recently aligned. We now have to show we're serious on defense and we're a serious voice in the Indo Pacific and other parts of the world where our allies have been engaged in serious talks, whether it's you know,
Aucus or other things. We have to be a voice. Doesn't mean we have to join all things. I don't think we need to be in Aucus for a submarine, but we need a submarine on our own, and we need to be a country that's taken seriously. I think the Prime Minister has the chance to do that.
When I asked you about the collaboration between the Conservative Party, that was you brought.
Up saying that when you were as leader you would.
Also probably about the best spending and other.
Things that Mark Carney had brought forward. So maybe there was a path there. And I want to ask you if you think that if you had still been the layer in this last selection, if you think you.
Would have been able to be.
You know I can't sleep every night thinking about that very question. Look, I'm not here to to re litigate past battles. I'm a proud Conservative, but I've also been proud of how Prime Mister Carney has performed so far with us UH a country. I worked as a senior lawyer for one of their leading CONU companies. I served alongside Americans when our navy sailed and visited American bases as an Air Force officer. I've been disappointed by our
closest ally disrespecting UH. I spoke in Congress about the Devil's Brigade, where Canadians and Americans fought together in World War Two. That is our history, and that's more important than any president either. So I want Team Canada to win. I'm cheering for Prime Minister Carney in in his dealings with President Trump, and I think the Conservatives can help. I think the premiers can help, and I think business
can help and the b seven. If all the premiers and and the Caucuses on the Hill followed the collaboration we've seen here, we'll have a lot of success in Alberta. Thank you very much, good to see you all again.
Thank you don't mind this selfless promotion here as I hold our communicate, but welcome everybody. We are on day three of our B seven, our Business Group of seven summit. This has been a remarkable gathering of business leaders from across the G seven countries and the EU. We've had
great conversations, but our work really started months ago. We've been working together on framing priorities, both priorities and solutions for key topics right now impacting our global economy, and that work has culminated in priorities in this communicate that we have and we'll be presenting later this afternoon to Canada's G seven Sherpa to help provide a guidance on the challenges and priorities that need to be discussed at
the G seven gathering this year. And undoubtedly, given the current level of disruption in the economy and global trade, you believe these priorities will feature feature quite quite prominently in those G seven discussions and we're very pleased that we have this opportunity to provide that helpful guidance to shape those discussions this year more important than ever impacting all of us globally as we have this reordering of our economy and impacting so many people worldwide.
So I will pass over to.
My colleague Matt Holmes to talk a little bit about those priorities in our communica.
Great, thank you Candace, and please to see all of you here today. So the communica, as Candace mentioned, has been worked on over a series of months with our counterparts across the G seven business community. This is months of process and consultation, negotiation, series of meetings with different industry groups and sexual representatives, and of course we held
the pen. We had the honor of holding the pen for Canada this year, but it's on behalf of our collective of business communities across the G seven nations and including the European Union.
As well, who has observer status.
The community delivered to well, which will be delivered this afternoon to government and in preparation for the G seven Leaders Summit, carries a number of very important framing and priorities from the business community to the leaders of the G seven, including an emphasis on the importance of efficient and predictable world trade and the systems that underline that
trade system. An emphasis on a clean and secure energy future, looking at the incredible need for energy across all facets of our economies right now and how we build that in a transformative way, with reliability, with security, with sustainability and affordability as fundamentals to that energy need. We also looked at responsible artificial intelligence and digital and the need and the opportunity for the G seven in particular to
lead the world in this emerging and innovative space. And we put particular emphasis into critical minerals sector and how Canada has a unique role and a unique opportunity to provide the world with many of the critical minerals and materials rare earth metals that are essential for everything from today's defense needs to new technologies, advanced manufacturing and of
course telecommunications. So we feel that there is an incredible richness to the conversation here to the consensus document from the business community that is being presented G seven meters in the hopes that at this time, as we all know, the economy is the emphasis is the priority, and we think we have a lot to contribute to that conversation.
How important is it to have.
A unified communicate at the G seven Finance Minister Central Bank meeting, unified especially on the topic of trade or conversely, are you afraid of of, you know, separate communicates or a monopole agreement on that matters.
Regarding the global accormy.
I think that and we've talked about the importance many times over the last few days, the criticality in this
moment more than ever about the multilateral collaboration. And when we looked at this document and worked with our business Group of seven leaders, you know, we we tackled tough discussions and we made it safe to dive into good areas that needed good discussion, and that's been a bit of a theme I would say out of the B seven summit is that we can't turn away from tough discussions, because that's part of what led us to this moment,
is that we haven't directly tackled the courageous conversations to address deep grievances and irritants in trade that we're hearing so much about now. And I think in absence of those courageous conversations and tackling things head on, the adaptation
has been more disappointedly, a lean towards protectionist tendencies. And what we've been very clear about and I think taken a very steadfast approach on as the leaders in the Business Group of Seven is that we are not denying the need for change or defending the status quo, but we are steadfast.
In our promotion of multilateral collaboration.
And as my colleague Matt Holmes said, the consensus in the framing of both the challenges and solutions in our communication should help inform those G seven discussions. A lot of the discussion this morning has been about trust, and it seems like it.
Reflects the fact that this push for multilateralism is at odds with the lack of trust that.
Is fueled where we are today. Can you talk a little bit about why that this has been the theme of today's meeting.
And what the solution is in your yes, I love the trust question. Thank you.
We built into our agenda a good exploration of what is happening when we look at trust globally and for me, you know, working in business, we've been looking at this for years and looking at you could see the trends in trust and the decline of people trusting in institutions, and I think, again, not not tackling the grievances that people were raising or what they're talking about in an economy, or that's not working for them at the individual level,
and so as we tackle both at the Business seven, and I hope as we lead into the G seven, it's really important to bring together both a social and economic context and see how those are connected in order to frame up solutions moving forward and build an economy that works for everyone.
I'd like to ask you about Nikki Haley's comments that's how much when she talks about antidi uh, her personance on that and as a Republican, as a Home governor, as someone who has been part of the former Trunk administration.
How will Canadian, European and other G seven countries other than the US to do business in America, to do business with the Americants will companies other than Americans, How how to align their policies there their diversity policies with the US to get busys.
What we heard from Nikki most clearly Nikki Haley this morning on the topic of trust is that we need to listen to consumers and what they're telling us. And that's what we focused on in that discussion with the Trust panel, is we can't ignore out of the equation what we're clearly hearing from from people in multiple countries.
The Global Edaman Trust Barometer gives us data over thirty thousand people from twenty eight countries, and there are trends and themes in there that we have to reflect on and digest. And Nikki Haley's comments where we have to listen to that we have to listen clearly she's I
think she used the word consumers. I use constituents and our stakeholders, and make sure that as we tackle the tough task of solutioning around key issues in our communicat we frame up the ENTER discussion, the AI discussion, having trust in AI and making sure ultimately we're building that economic security and resilience for everybody that has to be built in a way where we bring people along for
that journey. And I think what we talked about this morning is we've skipped over or we've left a gap, and we have institutions like business and government working on things, but we can't leave workers and the individual people out of those discussions, and we have to understand what's been happening for them even as we tackle really tough discussions
that are very polarizing today like inclusion. And I have done a lot of work on inclusion in my career, and I understand the need that when we're talking about depolicy and inclusion, we have to have the courage to bring everybody along for that discussion. And that means in my career, I've done a lot of work on gender quality, and I've said for far too long, we have to make sure we're not leaving men out of the questions we're asking and the solutions we need to frame on gender equality.
So I hope that answers your question.
Nicki.
Kelly also said that this morning that the US terra situations, businesses need to be quote open minded and flexible and that this too shall pass.
What message do you think that sends to Canadian business managers?
I think the message was clear that she added to that the US is interested in doing business and to not misread what we see in a strategy and tactics as as a turning away from wanting to do business with many valued partners.
Hanna did turn away from the US from Canada, though, sorry, are there shifting some productions through Ohio Kids?
So are we already seeing some sort of irreversible economic damage in.
Canada from this US terraff situation?
We're seeing a ton of damage from this situation.
There is I would say initially, you know, any threat of tariffs provides a chill over business.
And now I know we've gone from a chill to a complete freeze.
Our businesses are not only struggling with decisions, whether it's
on projects or longer term investment decisions. But even if you're not directly as a business as close to those now real impacts on terrace, all businesses are worried about the chill that consumers and their customers, whether you're in the goods or services business, and trying to plan for where Where does that leave a company at the end of the day in their next few quarters if we see that shift in consumer behavior based on the anxiety the whole situation provides.
But is that damage irreversible?
You know businesses are are.
If it's irreversible, like you mean, we wouldn't see the movement of production come back.
Is that can can yeah back economically from this?
Is our business reputation irreversibly damaged?
Is the damage.
Reys of dressed?
Too early to tell?
What's your message to Ambassador Fixture just here speaking on behalf of the US. You just talk about the need for more efficiency and predictability and trade and many arguing to the the US that's made that more difficult. So what's your message to him and to US leaders right now or how to free back that intuition, see your predictability, or what needs to.
To change in this moment.
Well, it's been absolutely wonderful to have our ambassador hit the ground running and and be here because that role provides a critical link, and right now a critical link between Canada and the US is more important than ever to As we've discussed, the Inveassador and I've had really good discussions on making sure we understand the needs and wants and motivations of the US administration and that channel
and those conversations are really important. And I will say, as I've said to the Ambassador, it's very helpful for Canadians, Canadian business leaders, Canadian policy leaders to sort through noise from signal, and that's very helpful as we need to now turn into deeper discussions on our relationship going forward.
What should be the main message that overatching message that should come out from the G seven leaders meeting which can actually give us You'll give a signal that the g SEV is still relevant at a time when US is actually completely.
On a diverging part, I would say hope and bringing that back to the theme of trust we heard this morning, where we know we have deep grievances and anxiety, economic optimism and hope which stems from probably that strong collaboration.
Multilateral collaboration we hope to see you to the G seven discussions is so critical and we've done a marvelous job over the last three days here with the heads of delegation from business organizations from all the G seven countries and the EU, and we hope that provides a really strong springboard from which we can head into those G seven discussions.
But how can these other countries apart from us, what can they really do to bring us on the table on the same page, considering that US is roading back on climate lading back and a lot of other takes, So what can they really do to bring them.
On the data.
Well, we in the B seven discussions have been very thoughtful about this, because if we're going to be very strong and steadfast about the need for multilateral collaboration, we really have to be listening and be willing to have conversations that address grievances, and as we talked about this morning, as much as we are you know, working to protect predictable and efficient global trade, we also at the same time have to be absolutely willing to have the conversation
and acknowledge our global trade has not been perfect and we have really significant areas to address, including making sure there are strong dispute resolution processes that work and are in place in a timely way to address some of what is not perfect about global trade, and that we have a strength and a way to align where we can address the non market practices that are also at the root of some of what we see today in a pulling back or taking different strategies and tactics around
global trade.
And do you think there's a possibility there's a risk that the g is they might not be able to find a common ground in the G seven communicat finally, as we saw in G twenty as well in South Africa.
Oh, of course, everything is high stakes right now, absolutely, and our best hope you haven't asked me the question, what is the best hope from the connection for the B seven to the G seven. It's that we've provided this opportunity for a strong springboard with the consensus on what will be a core topic of the G seven, the current level of global disruption when it looks at
trade and who's at the heart of trade. Businesses are at the heart of trade, and we've just aligned and we have the solidarity and vocabularity on the framing of issues and challenges that tackle that head on, and so that in our view, would be a wonderful outcome, which is where we're headed to later today, is to pass our framing of solutions and recommendations that will support those
G seven discussions. Many last questions, somebody must have one for my colleague Max, please, I mean last remarks, sozeable to the last remarks.
I think I just recognize and appreciate that we had the new Minister of Finance join us and speak to speak to the upcoming Minister's meeting that he'll be convenient with the governors of the banks of the G seven as well. He spoke quite convincingly of the importance they
place in hearing from the business community directly. We also had the privilege of the Minister of Industry, Melanni Jolie, also joining us and speaking with our room and underscoring her commitment and the importance she places in this government will place and hearing from business directly as well, and in a time of change, how they are listening and paying attention to some of the concerns and some of
the needs that we're putting forward to them. And then frankly, we were also very pleased to see the new Minister of AI and Digital Minister Solomon join us and start meeting some of the people and the key players who were in the room with us. And lastly, the Government House Leader, Stephen McKinnon was also able to join our group this week, and so we felt very privileged to have such a strong and an important audience with members of the new Cabinet on the same week that they've been formed.
Thank you.
Absolutely, not only.
So good morning.
I've been invited to speak here today at the B seven Summit because the theme of this year's summit is economic security, and in the current extremely complicated geopolitical situation, economic security is crucial to global security, and so what we really need to muster here is alignment between all the businesses, all the companies of the G seven, with civil society and the public, and the G seven and the governments of the G seven to have unified responses
to deal with these made challenges. The two key challenges that I'm particularly focusing on in my remarks today are the China challenge, the Chinese Communist Party and its agenda. It's in particular it's support for Russia in its invasion of Ukraine. And secondly, of course, the trade tempests that we've had from Donald Trump's administration. Both of those are driving us through a paradigm shift in geopolitics that has huge implications for companies in Canada and around the world,
and it requires a lot of major adjustments. But I think that with strategic approach and really using the business community as a ballast in the relationship with the United States, we should be able to forge unity among the members of the G seven and then to strengthen relations critically between the G seven and other major economies that are broadly like minded, particularly democracies, but also others that share the interests of the G seven.
I'm concerned that.
The US it's trade wars will strength in China and countries towards.
China during these uple times.
What do you think of that?
Do you agree with that kind of analysis?
I don't think that's the objective, but I would agree that some of the ways that that is being implemented could have that consequence. And that's exactly what the business community here, which has many common interests among G seven members, needs to persuade the American public, the American business community that that's not fundamentally in the United States interest. That sowing division and bad relations between G seven members is exactly what China and Russia and their allies like North
Korea and Iran want. They want to see the otherwise powerful industrial economies of the world divided and squabbling amongst themselves.
What we need instead is reasonable negotiations on trade disputes between those countries to come together there quickly, and then ideally the G seven economies, along with other ones, for example in the EU and across the CPTPP and the Transpecific Partnership, would put similar barriers to trade with China across all those economies while lowering them with each other, and face China with a relatively united, liberal, democratic aligned
front of economies to push back against Chinese mercantilist policies that are ultimately threatening to hollow out the manufacturing bases of these traditional industrial economies. You need that united front. By doing that, you can then constrain harmful and menacing behavior from China and to some extent from Russia as well.
What are some comments earlier this morning about maybe one of looking back on the failures of.
The g seven ors of the West, that gas is not being able to bring China on the global trading system.
What do you say is that, I think there was a lot of hope that that could happen. But if you go back and look at the history, even back to the mid nineties, which I've been going back and reading now, there were a lot of doubts about that feasibility, even before China joined the WTO in two thousand and one.
The reality is that the trade tempests that we're seeing now, all these conflicts are actually the result of a trade war that has been going on quietly below the radar for twenty five years or thirty years, since China began to integrate into the world economy. What people need to understand is that a liberal international trading order centered around GAD and then the WTO was built up over decades after the Second World War, supported by other liberal institutions
like the United Nations, the Breton Woods Institutions. The challenge is that system had never before tried to absorb an economy the size of China and an economy the size of China that was fundamentally undermining and exploiting and not playing by those rules. That is what has driven us to this situation.
And in order to.
Constrain China's behavior and incentivize it to play more by multilateral trading rules to get back to that world that we would like to see, we need to take actions to restrain Chinese behavior and then also try to bring the Trump administration back to a unified allied approach to doing that.
There's some of those to restrain Chinese behavior. Is some of that about reducing Canadian trade activity with China. Carnie is talking about finding other partners right now? Should we steer clear of China potentially even reduce our.
Trade with China right now?
What kind of incentives are gus utied?
Yeah?
So there, I would say roughly, there are what I'm talking about today. There are let's say, to simplify, three pillars of that kind of economic security agenda and constrainment with China, and one is on the economic security side is de risking or strategic decoupling, which is exercised through diversification. Rather than the government encouraging and incentivizing businesses to do more in China, it's rather applying certain investment screenings on
Chinese investment in Canada. It's advising Canadian companies and other G seven companies about the risks of investing in China and making it easier for them. Partnering with businesses to smooth the path for more investment in trade between more like minded economies, not to have no trade with China,
but rather to rebalance. Look if you were an investor and you were really excited that your portfolio had two stocks in it the United States in China, I don't think most people would think that's a wise investment strategy.
Right.
You need to diversify, so particularly where is a lot of the growth. It's not in a lot of the older economies, the established industrial ones. It's in the Indo Pacific region. So through things like the Indo Pacific Strategy, we need to have governments and businesses partnering to drive innovation and to open up and smooth the path for more investment in trade with those growing markets of the
Indo Pacific x China. If you take the G seven economies and EU and CPTPP together, you've got thirty percent of the world economy even without the United States. So you need to do a lot of that economic security measures on investment to drive trade with trustworthy partners, friendshoring, reshoring, whatever buzzword you.
Want to use.
That's the idea. It's diversification for security.
The Communicate talks about very specifically, talks about critical minerals and the need for actually but when China is actually controlling one most like what seventy seventy of all these critical minerals, then how do you really think that they can come together and develop critical minerals to actually expand that base, bring in more investments and do that because it's already been controlled by China.
It's a great question. Yeah, that's one of the things that China has quietly done over the last twenty years, right, is develop virtual choke holds or dominance on key supply chains. Critical minerals is one. So trying to grab the commanding heights of the twenty first century economies through high technology electric vehicle manufacturing, drones, batteries, solar panels. China is on track to account for about forty percent of global manufacturing.
That is extraordinary dominance in one country. If the G seven lets that continue, what's going to happen if there's a conflict and China dominates critical minerals and manufacturing capacity, that can't be allowed to continue. So for critical minerals, for example, the problem there is that it's expensive to process them, it's expensive to extract them, and unless you have a reliable market, it's very hard for a private
sector company to take that risk. That's the strength of the Chinese state driven system, right The Chinese government can tell state owned enterprises or compelled private sector enterprises to do things even if they're not profitable. That's not how
our market works in the West. So what you need is government and private sector partnership to create reliable off take, to create an environment in which a Canadian mining company, for example, can have confidence that if they invest years and millions of dollars in developing critical minerals at the mining level, but then also at the processing level, so that the Canadian companies move up the value chain, that there will be a reliable market for that and then
you can also drive private sector investment into it if the public sector takes that first loss potential to make it a more secure investment. That's why we need this kind of B seven and G seven alignment and partnership. The private sector needs to work closely with the government sector and the civil society to ensure that these things are done responsible.
But how can you compete with China when the cost of production is very high in say, Germany, France, Canada, anywhere. I mean, the biggest cost is labor. Weeber is very expensive in all these G seven countries. So how will you really compete with China in any case, even in eves or critical minerals, mining anything, I.
Mean for sure, But if cost of labor were with the greatest competitive advantage, then Africa and India would have a better position against China. Right, But that's not the reality. Labor cost is only one element of the equation. Energy cost is a huge one, and we have lower energy costs in North America than China does, certainly, and cleaner energy on average. Right, we have that advantage second through automation, right, higher technologies and so on. It's less and less about
labor China is actually facing rising labor costs as well. Right, It's no longer the cheapest place to produce things. That's why if you look at, for example, Trump's tariffs, they're targeting a number of other countries like Malaysia and Vietnam. We're Mexico because China is increasingly routing shipments through them to get around trade barriers or moving factories to those
countries to produce them there with cheaper labor. What it is rather is about having a more systematic approach to clus terrain, to developing the infrastructure and the supply chain. Is that actually create an ecosystem for a vibrant economy. Silicon Valley is a classic example in the United States, Right, People aren't in Silicon Valley because of low labor costs. So it depends on what aspect of the economy you're
looking at. We're not looking to compete with China on low end manufacturing, right, We're looking to compete and ensure that things that are critical for the Western defense industrial base, for example, that enough of those things are made in North America, are made in Europe, or are made in partners where it's trustworthy, right, like shipbuilding for example, not
every product needs to be part of that. It's key manufacturing elements and parts of the supply chain, critical minerals, critical energy resources, telecommunications, things that are vulnerable to cybersecurity risks. Those things need extra communication and cooperation between business and governments to manage them properly.
If any other last questions, Nope, thank you very much Michael for coming.
Christally appreciate yours.
I would just close of one final point actually that the media has a critical role to play because one of the other key challenges that the B seven and G seven face is information manipulation, right propaganda, disinformation, misinformation by hostile government actors, by state actors, and the media is a crucial, crucial part of the puzzle for Western liberal democracies and free societies in making sure that people have true narratives about what's really going on, that they
have access to the facts, and you can play that role in debunking false information that's put out there. So thank you, thank you much.
Much appreciate it.
Nothing specific to say, folks, if you have questions for me about angles or data that you want to ask about in relation to what you've been covering over the last two days feel free otherwise enjoy your afternoons.
I ask you questions.
Sure, actually about some of the remarks that Ambassador Ailey had been making about how.
A lot of safe media trust in the US it's stemmed you're related.
Back to some of the diversity of inclusion.
Programs that this has had been putting forward, and that consumers and people working there didn't want to.
Be told what to do.
Is that something that you've put into it, and that it could.
Hurt Soviet Canada and US.
If not my relationships.
So it's always been a divisive issue on both sides of the border, with the majority of people, at least from a Canadian perspective, and maybe a little bit more polarized in an American context, being on various ends of the spectrum in terms of the amount of passion that they had and the amount of attention that they believe. A lot of these issues should garner in conflict or or against the backdrop of where we're at economically right now.
So in Canada, for example, that there are some competing tensions. Canadians are in a very very anxious place and so far as what our economic future is going to look like, what that relationship with the United States is going to look like, given how tired we are, like nothing that you haven't heard before, but that right now, in terms of prioritization is taking the first place. It is the number one issue for them relative to cost of living
and performance of the economy. And we all know how that's all mixed together and you can't really untangle one from the other. So when we think about the so called culture wars, or where DEI policy sits in all of this, or where pronoun policy sits in all of this,
it's not something that Canadians broadly have been against. I think in general they've been on a spectrum that leans about twenty percent incredibly supportive and activists towards seeing those kinds of policies with you again, a good chunk of the country kind of trailing along going it feels like a good idea, But when when you're dealing with competing tensions and competing challenges, I think we've seen a bit of a pivot to more practical priorities, and so as
Canadian businesses maybe are starting to at least react to what they're hearing out of politicians in the US, they may not agree, but they're certainly weighing up the well, how much do I want to take the risk of what this is going to cost me relative to how much do I want to take the risk of alienating a consumer base or a public or a public base that may not be happy with what I'm doing and may speak up about that, but also likely recognizes that
we are in a fairly a fairly stripped down place in terms of priorities.
Is there a risk then of alienating some of those maybe as you might support those policies in order to get that benefit from the US A.
Side of them.
Sure, I mean this isn't Decisions like this are rarely clean. Of course, there will be or there has There is the ris risk of pushback. There's always going to be the risk of pushback when you look at the communities who have fought so hard to go into the boardrooms of Canadian companies and say, you know, these are the things that you need to pay attention to. We've seen a lot of coverage and a lot of voices speak to how disappointed they are to see some of the
backsliding in those areas. But you know, at the same time, businesses, politicians, governments are going to make decisions that they think are going to be palatable to enough people enough number of times, in order to focus on the priorities that right now today, in June twenty in May twenty twenty five, Canadians are signaling they're more concerned about right so everything exists within
a continuum of priorities. It's the same way we've seen and heard a lot from activists on the climate file. And people aren't talking about climate change anymore. They're not talking about issues around environmental protection and carbon emissions reductions. And it's in part because that issue broadly across the country. It's not like people don't care about it, but in that in that continuum of priorities, it's not at the top anymore.
What have you seen about where that DEI stands on the lines of comunians and also for businesses as they.
Make these decisions. I mean, we did some work in late twenty twenty three looking at a number of issues like these, and again what you find it's not we're not as polarized and divided as the United States on these issues. The level of passionate intensity on these issues is not nearly as hot as it is south of the border where the conversations become really binary. It's like you're either on one side or you're on the other side.
In Canada, you've got you know, about a fifth of the population that's very pro, very activist, very much like passionately in support of DEI policies, pronoun policies, these types of policies. You've got about twenty percent who are as passionately against, and you've got the rest of us in the middle with pretty nuanced views saying in general, yes, we're supportive, but is this from a political standpoint or
a policy standpoint or a trade risk standpoint? The issue that you know, is this the hill we want to die on?
Thanks taking questions about.
Yeah, but we're hearing, you know, a tone.
From the United States that says, you know, things may be really bad now, but they'll get better later.
How do you think that's resonating with business leaders?
Are Canadians in general?
Canadians are kind of tired of being, you know, put through the cheese grater of US Canada relations. It's been a very it's been a very emotionally ringing period for Canadians. I think, you know, we kind of forget in Canada or or perhaps and I don't taken for granted.
Maybe sounds a bit judgy.
But you know, we are a nation whose sovereignty has never been tested, It's never been in question. The security of our borders and our existence has never been in question. Compare that to countries in Asia and Africa and Latin America and Europe who have been through these types of crises maybe generations go, maybe much more recently, but the collective societal trauma or the memory of that trauma is there.
We went from being a country that thought that the US president was simply trolling or being himself when he talked about a fifty first state to taking it deadly seriously. So you know, where where are Canadians on the issue of repairing Canada US relations. You know, they're of a view that this is not a fight that Canadians picked. This is a fight that they would like to see resolved.
But in terms of that level of like what it's done to their psyche, you know, it's left Canada and Canadians shaken, for sure, so shaken that it completely changed the trajectory of the last election in ways that nobody saw coming, even eight months ago when you were speaking about Canadians having a level of economic anxiety. We saw Nicki Hailey and there talk about you know this too, shall pass say.
A similar nature to the president's specifically, how do you think.
That message lands with Canadian business leaders in terms of their economic anxiety right now?
Is at the right home?
Yeah?
I want to be careful what I say because I like to root what I'm saying in data, as you know, and it's been a while since I've talked to Canadian business leaders and the aggregate to actually give you scientific data around that. But I think you're hearing it from the business leaders. Look, business in general abhores anxiety and uncertainty, and so it's not just Canadian consumers who are spooked,
and they are spooked. It's really hard then for Canadian business leaders to plan in the face of not knowing what message is going to come next week, and what the message will be, and then how that's in turn going to affect their employees, their consumer bases, not only on this side of the border, but for those who are integrated in the US on the other side of the border as well.
Thank you.
Yeah, other questions, folks, We really appreciate don Does.
Anyone want to hear about defense spending like that's the one thing I talked about.
That's what I did.
I did, I did like my homework on that file.
If not, that's fine, Okay, not.
I think so.
I think again, if if we bring the conversation back domestically to what we've heard out of out of Ottawa and the finance minister just in the last forty eight hours around the production.
Of a budget and where is the budget and when is the budget?
I think one of the big questions will be, you know, how does this government figure out how to amplify and really scale up defense spending, Because there is a moment in time that we are seeing that is generational, where there's a window where a majority of Canadians are really waiving a green flag to government on this issue, saying this is the time to not only spend more, but
to spend more more quickly. So if you go back, you know, to the nineteen eighties or nineteen nineties and ask Canadians what would be the what should be Canada's international priority, that was always a mix of trade and or international aid and fostering, you know, being a good person or a good actor, being a good actor on the international stage, helping poor countries, you know, doing foreign
aid projects, et cetera. Right now, we have seen a doubling the last decade of the number of Canadians saying that spending on defense and focusing on our border security and on security in general. It's doubled in the last decade. It's gone from fifteen percent, which was quite low, to nearly three to ten thirty percent. So that is a significant increase. You've also got majority saying we should be
spending now at the two percent level or higher. And more than half are now saying that the pace of Canada's defense spending is too slow. So this is this is all pretty new within the generational or the long historical context of where Canada's defense spending priorities have been in terms of public opinion. And so the big question is, you know, does Autawa find a way to actually climb through that window while that window is open from a public opinion standpoint.
Thanks for letting me do that.
Yeah.
The thing is the money is limited, right, yeah, I mean if you are spending in to take it.
Out and absolutely yeah.
So one of those buckets where Canada can take.
Out of Oh, that's a better question for Minister Champen. I'm not going to speak to that. Well, again, it comes to trade offs. Everything is trade offs, everything is priorities. But you know, governments have moments in terms of the way they act and the way they communicate politically to make the case for the things they want to do or that they are being asked to do relative to the other things that are important as well. So they have a moment here, let's see what they do with it.
Is there anywhere that you've seen face in your research that Kadians have shown they've been willing to make those trade offs or that defense from there.
Turn your pastime into your full time, your personal style.
Into your signature brand.
Do it yourself on WIS.
Show has been produced by Depictions Media. Please contact us at Depictions dot media for more information.