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