Speaker 1: Thank you for listening to Depictions Media Radio. Welcome to
Speaker 1: Policy and Rights the show up Gosh, welcomer Policy Human Joys.
Speaker 1: All right, welcome back to Policy and right here in
Speaker 1: Depictions Media Radio. I'm your host, Michael Clouds. And this, well,
Speaker 1: let's talk about this for a little bit. Mister Carney
Speaker 1: is currently at the White House and he had a
Speaker 1: meeting or it might still be in meetings with Donald
Speaker 1: Trump and they're discussing, well exactly what we think they
Speaker 1: would be trading about, how to build a better relationship
Speaker 1: between Canada and the United States, things such as automobiles
Speaker 1: such as Steele, which you're gonna hear Donald Trump say,
Speaker 1: we don't need those things from Canada. Well, the truth
Speaker 1: of the matter is the way the auto sector actually works,
Speaker 1: that half a car is built in the United States,
Speaker 1: the other half built in Canada, back and forth. That
Speaker 1: if we go to Windsor, Ontario and det Troy, Michigan,
Speaker 1: we're gonna see car parks go back and forth all
Speaker 1: the time across a bridge that is there. It's a
Speaker 1: tale of two cities and the bridge that joins them.
Speaker 1: We're also gonna hear that Donald Trump says we don't
Speaker 1: need Canada steel. We don't need Canada aluminum. Well, mister Trump,
Speaker 1: where's your aluminum mind? Show it to me on the map.
Speaker 1: Where where where these vast aluminum minds are in within
Speaker 1: the US border? Yeah, yeah, there's a problem there, right, Okay,
Speaker 1: So he actually will will have to cave in at
Speaker 1: some point and figure out a better relationship over certain
Speaker 1: products and trade deals. Mister Trump said that NAFFA should
Speaker 1: have ever happened. It was the worst thing for the
Speaker 1: United States ever, And the truth of the matter, parts
Speaker 1: and NAPA were never actually even activated, especially after he
Speaker 1: took office the very first time, and then he created
Speaker 1: a new trade agreement that he thought was better. But
Speaker 1: he takes office this time, he tears up the tear
Speaker 1: tears up the trade agreement that he put in place
Speaker 1: the first time he was in office. Interesting stuff, right, okay,
Speaker 1: But let's get to the heart and meat of the
Speaker 1: whole thing. Mister Trump did make some statements about how
Speaker 1: it would be a great tax advantage for Canadians to
Speaker 1: actually become the fifty first state, and mister Carney at
Speaker 1: some point did say this, and he can compaired the
Speaker 1: old office in the White House as unsellable real estate,
Speaker 1: and he gave it with some other ridiculous answer for
Speaker 1: unsellable real estate, and he ended with Canada is unsellable
Speaker 1: real estate. That he is not willing to sell Canada
Speaker 1: out to Donald Trump. He made it clear, to which
Speaker 1: Donald Trump says, Oh, we don't know what the future
Speaker 1: may actually hold. In other words, Donald Trump doesn't want
Speaker 1: to hear. No, he can't have Canada. The truth of
Speaker 1: the matter is is that it would actually have to
Speaker 1: come down to a vote across Canada. And that's just
Speaker 1: for Canada, for Canadian citizens to say yes, there is
Speaker 1: a whole nother ratification process that is written into the
Speaker 1: US Constitution that Canada is after saying yeah, we want
Speaker 1: to be the fifty first state. That well, mister Trump,
Speaker 1: I hate to tell you this. By the time it
Speaker 1: gets done, you might be dust in the ground. So
Speaker 1: again he did bring it up. But they are actually
Speaker 1: negotiating some trade deals. They are negotiating deals over military
Speaker 1: happenings and military protections. As most of the world knows,
Speaker 1: except for people in the United States that have no education. Uh, well,
Speaker 1: we won't talk about the mag of people too much
Speaker 1: from now, will we. All Right, that Canada is a
Speaker 1: is an Arctic country that a large chunk of the
Speaker 1: Arctic border is North America. And with that being said,
Speaker 1: that makes Canada a huge Arctic country. And it means
Speaker 1: that that there's with the Arctic ice melting, that there's
Speaker 1: chances for for commerce. And it also means that there
Speaker 1: is a need for protection to go across that particular border,
Speaker 1: because now it becomes not the Arctic Ocean now is
Speaker 1: not an ice block, but it is a seaway. So
Speaker 1: a lot a lot to be said. The Canada needs
Speaker 1: to beef up it's uh naval protection across the Arctic
Speaker 1: and it and there's a lot to a lot to
Speaker 1: be done there. And Mark Karney is actually negotiating with
Speaker 1: with NATO and actually stepping up the his military, with
Speaker 1: his government the military so that this particular border will
Speaker 1: be protected. And again Donald Trump's stepping in overall that
Speaker 1: one in saying that oh, the US will always protect
Speaker 1: Canada and always has protect Canada. And and that's just
Speaker 1: how how things work, that the Canada can't protect itself,
Speaker 1: the United States has to do it. So on the
Speaker 1: arms thing, though I'm sure that they are negotiating how
Speaker 1: the the arms trade is going to be carved up
Speaker 1: between the United States and Canada, because well, a lot
Speaker 1: of the weapons sold in the world today are sold
Speaker 1: either through the US or through Canada. A lot of
Speaker 1: weapons are built in Canada or they are built in
Speaker 1: the United States, along with the munitions to go along
Speaker 1: with them, and along with the propulsion systems for different
Speaker 1: missile systems and things like that are developed between the
Speaker 1: US and Canada. So I'm sure that they will carve
Speaker 1: up whatever they figure out how to recarve up the
Speaker 1: profits for the arms trade around the world. Okay, So
Speaker 1: let's move back across the border and we're going to
Speaker 1: talk about Danielle Smith down to Alberta. Well, she is
Speaker 1: talking about going across Alberta and discussing with the Alberta
Speaker 1: people the idea of creating the country of Alberta. Yeah,
Speaker 1: that's right, that she is talking about succeeding away from Canada. Okay,
Speaker 1: there's a lot of it that that is accurate in
Speaker 1: what she's saying, Okay, and becomes and also becomes some
Speaker 1: of that becomes issues into why Alberta strategically should not
Speaker 1: leave Canada. Alberta is landlocked, which means that in order
Speaker 1: for them to sell their resources because they are a resource.
Speaker 1: There are resource state, there are resource province. They have
Speaker 1: to sell the resources nor or to make money. Well,
Speaker 1: it happens to me that their main resource is petroleum.
Speaker 1: The beachamin that they produce can be sold around the world,
Speaker 1: although there are certain countries that think that Alberta beachamin
Speaker 1: is too heavy for the refineries and it takes a
Speaker 1: lot of retolling to actually make it make Alberta beachamin
Speaker 1: work from the Tarzans Okay.
Speaker 2: But.
Speaker 1: Yeah, they do sell product to China. They do sell
Speaker 1: product to the United States, although to listen to Danielle
Speaker 1: Smith talk that Alberta isn't allowed to sell to China.
Speaker 1: But and yeah, we know that the pipeline goes from
Speaker 1: Alberta into Vancouver or Colombia, gets loaded onto tankers and
Speaker 1: it is shipped to China. We know that they're here's
Speaker 1: the issue and with them being landlocked, they would actually
Speaker 1: have to figure out how to pipe their product across
Speaker 1: British Columbia or across the across Canada into Ontario or
Speaker 1: other maritime seaports in order to get their products loaded
Speaker 1: onto tankers in order to sell them to other parts
Speaker 1: of the world to say, say in Europe or something
Speaker 1: like that. Okay, but the issue is if they are
Speaker 1: now a foreign country, that becomes that it becomes an
Speaker 1: added step in actually trying to negotiate how to run
Speaker 1: that pipeline or how to run the railcars. Even if
Speaker 1: they were to go north towards the Arctic and then
Speaker 1: part the tankers there, there's still another province. It's a territory.
Speaker 1: Excuse me, it's a territory that they would have to
Speaker 1: actually run that pipeline through in order to reach the
Speaker 1: Arctic Ocean. And so either way they're completely landlocked, which
Speaker 1: it's easier for them to move their products and sell
Speaker 1: them if they're part of the Canada than if they
Speaker 1: are a foreign country. Biggest reason why they why people
Speaker 1: probably aren't going to vote for Alberta succeeding away from
Speaker 1: the from the rest of Canada. She is going to
Speaker 1: quote some things that Quebec have said, because well, Quebec
Speaker 1: has an ocean they can reach, they can reach the
Speaker 1: Atlantic and makes them makes it easier because they have
Speaker 1: a seaport available to them to actually sell whatever products
Speaker 1: that they have to the rest of the world. Alberta
Speaker 1: doesn't have that, and that is one of the reasons
Speaker 1: why the the federal government, no matter who they are,
Speaker 1: they're conservative or liberal, or even if we were to
Speaker 1: say rebuilt the NDP and they were to create a
Speaker 1: government that you would have to give Alberta is some
Speaker 1: special attention because they are a huge moneymaker for the country,
Speaker 1: which daniel Smith once again has a lot a lot
Speaker 1: of credit to her with that. She knows that she
Speaker 1: also is going to talk about negotiating, of course with
Speaker 1: the current Carney government to to to you know, with
Speaker 1: things like electricity and other utilities that they're trying to
Speaker 1: reduce the carp footprint of those things for Alberta, and
Speaker 1: Alberta is being a little resistant.
Speaker 3: So we have that.
Speaker 1: In Danielle Smith also has a point there. Okay, so
Speaker 1: let's start with it this way. There is a sign
Speaker 1: on a charging station and evolved nearby where we are
Speaker 1: broadcasting from. Okay. It says powered by water and it
Speaker 1: is powered by water. British Columbia use it uses hydro
Speaker 1: electric dams in order to generate electric power and to
Speaker 1: power up the grid. Across British Columbia. They have a
Speaker 1: series of dams to actually do that, not and use
Speaker 1: very few few carbon burning generators. Okay, so here's the
Speaker 1: rub that the environmental impact of building a dam versus
Speaker 1: the carbon footprint of a natural gas generator that Alberta
Speaker 1: uses is in the long run nearly the same. Powering
Speaker 1: everything by water means that you have to build this
Speaker 1: huge dam. Well, that dam means that you have to
Speaker 1: destroy an ecosystem in order to build it. The destruction
Speaker 1: of the ecosystem takes generations to actually recover the damage
Speaker 1: that you have done. It is something that is paid
Speaker 1: for a generation after generation. It could take five, six,
Speaker 1: seven generations in order to actually start to pay back
Speaker 1: that carbon debt that you have created, because what you
Speaker 1: have managed to do is you have destroyed the ecosystem
Speaker 1: that is sinking the carbon back out of there and
Speaker 1: putting it back into the ground. And that means that
Speaker 1: hydroelectric energy isn't any cleaner than natural gas electricity because
Speaker 1: you pay for the carbon footprint along the way. With
Speaker 1: natural gas, it isn't something that you have to tear
Speaker 1: down a whole lot of trees in order to build
Speaker 1: the dam. For the concrete. There's a whole lot of
Speaker 1: things that go into actually building a dam, that and
Speaker 1: the environmental impact that it actually has with different species
Speaker 1: of wildlife being interrupted. That just for instance, a caribou
Speaker 1: run when they when in the construction of the site
Speaker 1: see dam in British Columbia, they now had to find
Speaker 1: a new place to defind their food and numbers of
Speaker 1: caribou were lost from the herds, which isn't really talked
Speaker 1: about much. We don't talk about that, we don't talk
Speaker 1: about how the indigenous hunting grounds were interrupted because of this.
Speaker 1: So daniel Smith has a point that if we're going
Speaker 1: to crash in on Alberta using natural gas generators, that
Speaker 1: we have to take a closer look at the environmental
Speaker 1: impact of a hydro electric dam. So with all that,
Speaker 1: why don't we listen to mister Karney as he visited
Speaker 1: the White House, and well, listen to Danielle Smith as
Speaker 1: he talks about the feature of Alberta.
Speaker 3: His party was losing by a lot and he ended
Speaker 3: up winning.
Speaker 2: So I really want to congratulate him, probably one of
Speaker 2: the greatest comebacks in the history of politics, maybe even
Speaker 2: greater than mine. But I want to just congratulate you
Speaker 2: Rose a great election. Actually, we were watching it with interest,
Speaker 2: and I think Canada chose a very talented person, a
Speaker 2: very good person. As we spoke before the election quite
Speaker 2: a few times, and it's an honor to have you
Speaker 2: at the White House and the Oval Office and you
Speaker 2: see the new and improved Oval Office as it becomes
Speaker 2: more and more beautiful with love, you know, we handle
Speaker 2: it with great love and twenty four character.
Speaker 3: That always helps too. But it's been a lot of
Speaker 3: fun going over some of.
Speaker 2: The beautiful pictures that were stolen in the vaults that
Speaker 2: were for many many years, some cases over one hundred years.
Speaker 2: They restored in bolts of the great presidents who are
Speaker 2: almost great presidents, all having a reason for being up,
Speaker 2: every one of them. So it's very interesting. But I
Speaker 2: just want to congratulate you. And we had a really
Speaker 2: great race. I watched the debate. I thought you were excellent,
Speaker 2: and I think we have a lot of things in common.
Speaker 2: We have some tough points to go over and that'll
Speaker 2: be fine. Will it also be discussing Ukraine Russia the
Speaker 2: war because Mark once it ended as quickly as I do,
Speaker 2: I think it has to end. We had some very
Speaker 2: good news last night. The Uties have announced that they
Speaker 2: are not, or they've announced to us at least that
Speaker 2: they don't want to fight anymore. They just don't want
Speaker 2: to fight, and we will honor that and we will
Speaker 2: we will stop the bombings and they have capitulated. But
Speaker 2: more importantly, we will take their word. They say they
Speaker 2: will not be blowing up anymore. And that's what the
Speaker 2: purpose of what we were doing. So that's just news.
Speaker 2: We just found out about that. So uh, I think
Speaker 2: it's very very positive. They were they were knocking out
Speaker 2: a lot of ships going uh as you know, uh.
Speaker 3: Sailing beautifully down the various seas.
Speaker 2: It uh it wasn't just a canal, it was a
Speaker 2: lot of other places. And uh, I will accept their word,
Speaker 2: and we are going to stop the bombing of the
Speaker 2: Bouti's uh effective immediately. And Marco, you'll let everybody know that. Okay,
Speaker 2: Uh do you have something to say about that. By
Speaker 2: the way, it was a prodig announcement.
Speaker 1: Yeah, this was always a freedom of navigation, you sho.
Speaker 4: Besides, he's a you know, a band of individual with
Speaker 4: advanced weaponry that were threatening global should be and the.
Speaker 3: Job was to get that to stop. And UH, if
Speaker 3: it's going to stop, then we.
Speaker 2: Can stop and uh so, uh it it's I think
Speaker 2: it's an important development and we'll have maybe before we're
Speaker 2: going to it's you know, the Middle East, uh Saudi Arabia.
Speaker 2: We're going to uh u ee and guitar and that'll
Speaker 2: be I guess Monday night. Some of you are coming
Speaker 2: with us. I think before then, we're gonna have a
Speaker 2: very very big announcement to make, like as big as
Speaker 2: it gets. And I won't tell you on what, but
Speaker 2: it's gonna and it's very positive. I'd also I tell
Speaker 2: you if it was negative and positive, I can't keep
Speaker 2: that up.
Speaker 3: It is really really positive.
Speaker 2: And that announcement will be made either Thursday or Friday
Speaker 2: or Monday before we leave. But it'll be one of
Speaker 2: the most important announcements that have been made in many
Speaker 2: years about a certain subject, very important subject. So you'll
Speaker 2: all be here, Uh Mark, would you like to say
Speaker 2: a few words.
Speaker 3: Well, thank you, miss President.
Speaker 5: I'm on the edge of my seat actually, but thank
Speaker 5: you for your hospitality in a at above all, for
Speaker 5: your for your leadership. You're a You're a transformational president.
Speaker 5: Focus on the economy with a relentless focus on the
Speaker 5: American worker. Uh secure in your borders, providing end in
Speaker 5: the scourge of fentanyl and other opioids, and and securing
Speaker 5: the world. And I've been elected with with my colleagues here,
Speaker 5: with the help of my colleagues here, I'm gonna spread
Speaker 5: spread the the credit UH to transform Canada with a
Speaker 5: similar focus on the economy, securing our borders again on fentanyl, UH,
Speaker 5: much greater focus on defense and security, securing the Arctic,
Speaker 5: and developing the Arctic. And you know, the history of
Speaker 5: Canada and the US is we're stronger when we work together,
Speaker 5: and there's many opportunities to work together. And I look
Speaker 5: forward to, you know, addressing some of those issues that
Speaker 5: we have, but also finding those areas of mutual cooperation
Speaker 5: so we.
Speaker 3: Can go for it. That's very nice, Thank you very much. Sure.
Speaker 2: No, it was actually very effective and it's still very effective.
Speaker 2: But people have to follow it, so you know, that's
Speaker 2: been a problem.
Speaker 3: People haven't followed it. But it's a it was.
Speaker 2: A transitional step a little bit, and as you know,
Speaker 2: it it terminates very shortly. It it gets renegotiated very shortly.
Speaker 2: But I thought it was a very positive step from NAFTA,
Speaker 2: and NAFTA was the worst trade deal in the history
Speaker 2: of our country, probably in the history of the world.
Speaker 2: And this was a transitional deal, and we'll see what happens,
Speaker 2: you know, we we'ether it be st starting to possibly
Speaker 2: renegotiate that if it's even necessary. I don't know that
Speaker 2: it's necessary anymore. But it served a very good purpose,
Speaker 2: and the biggest purpose it served as we got rid
Speaker 2: of NAFTA. NAFTA was a very unfair deal for the
Speaker 2: United States. It's a very very terrible deal and it
Speaker 2: should have never been made. It was made many years ago,
Speaker 2: but it should have never been made.
Speaker 6: The United States would like to see your first trade
Speaker 6: deal being Canada or nest I would.
Speaker 3: I would love that.
Speaker 2: Look, I have a lot of respect for this man,
Speaker 2: and I watched him come up and assents through the
Speaker 2: ranks when he wasn't given much of a chance, and
Speaker 2: he did. He ran a really great campaign. He did
Speaker 2: a really great debate. I think that debate was very helpful.
Speaker 2: I was going to raise my hand, you know, I
Speaker 2: don't know if.
Speaker 3: That's good at bet I shouldn't say that. It might
Speaker 3: hurt you.
Speaker 2: But no, he ran a really great election, I thought,
Speaker 2: and yeah, something could happen, something could happen.
Speaker 6: What's the top concession you want out of Canada?
Speaker 3: The top concession you want out of Canada concession friendship.
Speaker 3: But that's not a good session.
Speaker 2: No, I just, I just We're going to be friends
Speaker 2: with Canada. Regardless of anything. We're going to be friends
Speaker 2: with Canada. Canada is a very special place to meet.
Speaker 2: I know so many people that live in Canada. My
Speaker 2: parents had relatives had lived in Canada, my mother in particular.
Speaker 2: And no, I love Canada a lot of I have
Speaker 2: a lot of respect for the Canadians.
Speaker 3: Wayne Gretzky, I mean the great one.
Speaker 2: You happen to have a very very good hockey player
Speaker 2: right here on the capitals who I have a lot
Speaker 2: of is He is a big tough cookie too. It
Speaker 2: just broke the record and he's a great guy. And
Speaker 2: you know, we had the we had the team here
Speaker 2: and I got to know a lot of the players.
Speaker 2: But now, Canada is a very special places a president.
Speaker 3: Or his office too, as a resident. You said that
Speaker 3: Canada's postage. No, no, well I still believe that.
Speaker 2: But but you know it takes two to tango, right,
Speaker 2: But no, I do, I mean, I believe it would
Speaker 2: be a massive tax cut for the Canadian citizens. Uh,
Speaker 2: you get free military, you get tremendous medical cares and
Speaker 2: other things. There would be a lot of advantages, but
Speaker 2: it would be it would be a massive tax cut.
Speaker 3: And it's also a beautiful you know.
Speaker 2: As a real estate developer, you know, I'm a real
Speaker 2: estate developer at heart.
Speaker 3: When you get rid of that artificially.
Speaker 2: Drawing line somebody drew that line many years ago, was
Speaker 2: like a ruler, just a straight line right across the
Speaker 2: top of the country. When you look at that beautiful
Speaker 2: formation when it's together, I'm a very artistic person, but
Speaker 2: when I looked at that beauty, I said, that's the
Speaker 2: way it was meant to be. But you know, I
Speaker 2: just I do feel it's much better for Canada. But
Speaker 2: we're not going to be discussing that unless somebody wants
Speaker 2: to discuss it. I think that there are tremendous benefits
Speaker 2: to the Canadian citizens, tremendously lower taxes, free military, which honestly,
Speaker 2: we give you essentially anyway, because we're.
Speaker 3: Protecting Canada if you have had a problem. But I think,
Speaker 3: you know, it's it would really be a wonderful marriage
Speaker 3: because it's two places. They get along very well. They
Speaker 3: like each other alone well, if I may.
Speaker 5: As you know from real estate, there are some places
Speaker 5: that are never for sale. We're sitting in one right now,
Speaker 5: you know, Buckingham Palace, and you visit it as well.
Speaker 5: And having met with the owners of Canada over the
Speaker 5: course of the campaign last several months, it's not for sale,
Speaker 5: won't be for sale ever. But the opportunity is in
Speaker 5: the partnership and what we can build together, and we
Speaker 5: have done that in the past. And part of that,
Speaker 5: as the President just said, is with respect to our
Speaker 5: own security, and my government is committed for a step
Speaker 5: change in our investment in Canadian security and our partnership.
Speaker 5: And I'll say this as well, that the President has
Speaker 5: revitalized international security, revitalized NATO and us playing our full
Speaker 5: weight in NATO, and that will be.
Speaker 3: Parts I was saying.
Speaker 2: Canada is stepping up the military participation because.
Speaker 3: Mark, you know, they were low and now they're stepping
Speaker 3: it up. And that's a very important thing.
Speaker 2: But never say never, never say never.
Speaker 3: What would take all of Canada.
Speaker 2: Well, we'll be talking about different things. You know, we
Speaker 2: want to protect our.
Speaker 3: Automobile business and so does Mark.
Speaker 2: But we want to protect, we want to make the
Speaker 2: automobiles and we want to you know, we have a
Speaker 2: tremendous abundance of energy, more than any country. We have
Speaker 2: just in Alaska alone, hand War has been reopened now
Speaker 2: and West were probably the largest find anywhere in the world.
Speaker 2: They say it's larger than Saudi Arabia. I don't know,
Speaker 2: but it's a lot. But we have tremendous amounts of energy.
Speaker 2: Other countries don't. We're both lucky that way. They have energy.
Speaker 2: We have energy. We have more than we can ever
Speaker 2: use and more than we could ever sell. Actually, and
Speaker 2: you have the same thing. So with two countries that
Speaker 2: are very lucky. If you look at China, they don't
Speaker 2: have that. You know, it's a big disadvantage other countries.
Speaker 2: Most countries don't have, you know, most countries don't have that.
Speaker 2: So Canada and US we have a lot of.
Speaker 3: A lot of advantages over other places.
Speaker 1: You consider what mister Carney just said that Canada's off
Speaker 1: the sale.
Speaker 4: Does this make the discussion a little more difficult to
Speaker 4: start off?
Speaker 2: No, not at all, No, no, no, no. Time time
Speaker 2: will tell it's only time. But I say never, say never.
Speaker 2: I've had many, many things that were not doable and
Speaker 2: they ended up being doable, and only doable in a
Speaker 2: very friendly way. But if it if it's to everybody's benefit.
Speaker 2: You know, Canada loves us, and we love Canada. That's
Speaker 2: I think the number one thing that's important. But we'll see,
Speaker 2: I mean, over time, we'll see what happens China.
Speaker 3: China said something different.
Speaker 2: They want to meet, and they're doing no business right now.
Speaker 2: And those ships are turning around in the Pacific Ocean.
Speaker 2: Big turn, there's a big ship, so ships take about
Speaker 2: ten miles turn. And you know, we lost a trillion
Speaker 2: dollars to China and trade because of an incompetent president
Speaker 2: that we had who proceeded to me grossly incompetent. You're
Speaker 2: finding it out more and more now and by not trading,
Speaker 2: we're losing nothing. So we're saving a trillion dollars.
Speaker 3: It's a lot.
Speaker 2: But they want to negotiate, and they want to have
Speaker 2: a meeting, and we'll be meeting with them at the
Speaker 2: right time. I have not met with them, of course,
Speaker 2: you would know. If I met, I'd tell you they
Speaker 2: want to meet. But you know we are right now. Look,
Speaker 2: they're suffering greatly. Their economy is suffering greatly because they're
Speaker 2: not doing trade with the US, and they made most
Speaker 2: of their money off the US.
Speaker 3: Don't don't kid yourself.
Speaker 2: They don't make the money off other countries like this,
Speaker 2: and they were making we had a trade in balance,
Speaker 2: we had a deficit, or they had a surplus, another
Speaker 2: way of saying it of more than a trillion dollars.
Speaker 3: Think of it more than a trillion dollars.
Speaker 2: And because of one hundred and forty five percent, the
Speaker 2: only reason, but because of they have now one hundred
Speaker 2: and forty five percent. There there's no trading. You can't
Speaker 2: trade with one hundred and forty five percent. We are
Speaker 2: therefore making in a certain way. I guess one point
Speaker 2: one trillion dollars. In other words, we're not losing one
Speaker 2: point one trillion dollars.
Speaker 3: A deficit is much better.
Speaker 2: When I started, I say, we were losing billions of
Speaker 2: dollars a day on trade. That's rapidly turning around. We
Speaker 2: looked at numbers this morning, So we were losing. The
Speaker 2: United States during Biden was losing more than I won't
Speaker 2: even give you numbers because they're so embarrassing, but.
Speaker 3: Billions of dollars a day on trade.
Speaker 2: Those numbers are rapidly turning between the tariffs self forget,
Speaker 2: we're now getting twenty five percent on cars, twenty five
Speaker 2: percent on aluminum, twenty five percent on steel, and maybe
Speaker 2: more importantly, massive numbers of companies are moving into the
Speaker 2: United States.
Speaker 3: Honda. We have tremendous the car companies.
Speaker 2: They're moving in at levels we've never seen before. The
Speaker 2: biggest investment ever made in the United States is being
Speaker 2: made right now, trillions of dollars. I would say we
Speaker 2: could be at nine nine trillion dollars. You can go
Speaker 2: back to other presidents. They haven't had one trillion dollars
Speaker 2: for their entire term.
Speaker 3: Look at Biden, he had bed numbers.
Speaker 2: People are leaving. They weren't coming in. They were leaving
Speaker 2: with Biden, and he didn't know the difference. The only
Speaker 2: thing he knew is people coming in. You know, they
Speaker 2: were illegal immigrants, okay, from prisons, from mental institutions, from
Speaker 2: all sorts of places that weren't good, from gangs, from Venezuela.
Speaker 2: They were coming in and there were criminals and murderers,
Speaker 2: eleven eight hundred and eighty eight people that murdered, and
Speaker 2: at least half of them murdered more than one person.
Speaker 2: This is what Biden led into our country. I'm bringing
Speaker 2: in big companies. We have Apple is investing five hundred
Speaker 2: billion dollars.
Speaker 3: We have Jensen, as you know, is going to.
Speaker 2: Be five hundred biggest chip maker or a chip thinker.
Speaker 3: I call him.
Speaker 2: He's really a thinker more than a maker. But we
Speaker 2: also have the maker, mister Way. I get to know
Speaker 2: them all. In the last it was a cram course.
Speaker 2: But they're all moving into America because of the tariffs,
Speaker 2: and I don't think people have appreciated it. Some people do,
Speaker 2: some of the smart people do. So we have more
Speaker 2: money coming in. It's really an amazing thing. We have
Speaker 2: more money being invested in the United States now than
Speaker 2: at any time ever before in our history. And it's
Speaker 2: not even close. And I think the real number could
Speaker 2: be nine or ten trillion. We don't know everybody that's
Speaker 2: doing it. We have many. I just heard about a
Speaker 2: plant that's being built right now, very very top of
Speaker 2: the line company and they didn't come to the White House.
Speaker 2: They're just doing it because they're making it. Because if
Speaker 2: they build here, there are no tariffs. And this is
Speaker 2: the big market. This is the market that sets us
Speaker 2: apart from It is the market where everyone wants to be. Now,
Speaker 2: if I didn't come here and do this all of
Speaker 2: a sudden, we wouldn't be the market where everyone wants
Speaker 2: to be. So we're able to do it in time.
Speaker 2: But we're gonna have a great announcement, and I'm not
Speaker 2: necessarily saying it's.
Speaker 3: On trade going to the beginning.
Speaker 2: We're gonna have a great announcement over the next few days,
Speaker 2: an announcement that will be so incredible, so positive, and
Speaker 2: I'm not saying I don't want you to think it's
Speaker 2: necessarily on trade just to finish. We also have a situation,
Speaker 2: because ever it's is when when when are you going
Speaker 2: to sign deals? We don't have to sign deals. We
Speaker 2: can sign twenty five deals right now, Howard if we
Speaker 2: want it. We don't have to sign deal. They have
Speaker 2: to sign deals with us. They want a piece of
Speaker 2: our market. We don't want a piece of their market.
Speaker 2: We don't care about their market. They want a piece
Speaker 2: of our market. So we could just sit down and
Speaker 2: I'll do this at some point over the next two weeks,
Speaker 2: and I'll sit with Howard and Scott and with our
Speaker 2: great vice president who has done a really good job.
Speaker 2: We have some good news to report on a lot
Speaker 2: of fronts. But JD will be there and Marco and
Speaker 2: we're going to sit down and we're going to put
Speaker 2: very fair numbers down and we're going to say here's
Speaker 2: what this country what we want, and congratulations, we have
Speaker 2: a deal. And they'll either say great and they'll start shopping,
Speaker 2: or they'll say not good, we're not going to do it.
Speaker 2: An I say that's okay, you don't have to shop now.
Speaker 2: We may think, well, they have a right, you know
Speaker 2: that maybe we were a little bit wrong, so well adjusted,
Speaker 2: and then you people will say, oh, it's so chaotic.
Speaker 3: No, we're flexible. But we'll sit down and will.
Speaker 2: At some point in some cases we'll sign some deals.
Speaker 2: It's much less important than what I'm talking about. For
Speaker 2: the most part. We're just going to put down a
Speaker 2: number and say this is what you're going to pay
Speaker 2: at the shop, and it's going to be a.
Speaker 3: Very fair number. It'll be a low number.
Speaker 2: We're not looking to hurt countries. We want to help countries.
Speaker 2: We want to be friendly with countries. But you keep
Speaker 2: writing about deals deals. When are we going to sign one?
Speaker 2: It's very simple. We're going to say, in some cases,
Speaker 2: we want you to open up your country. In some cases,
Speaker 2: we want you to drop your tariffs. I mean India
Speaker 2: as an example, as one of the highest tariffs.
Speaker 3: In the world. We're not going to put up with that.
Speaker 3: And they've agreed already to drop it. They'll drop it
Speaker 3: to nothing. They've already agreed. They would have never done
Speaker 3: that for anybody else but me.
Speaker 2: So we're going to put down some numbers, and we're
Speaker 2: going to say our country is open for business, and
Speaker 2: they're going to come in and they're going to pay
Speaker 2: for the privilege of being able to shop in the
Speaker 2: United States of America.
Speaker 3: It's very simple. It's very simple.
Speaker 2: So I wish to keep stop asking how many deals
Speaker 2: are you tyning this week, because one day we'll come
Speaker 2: and we'll give you a hundred deals and they don't
Speaker 2: have to sign.
Speaker 3: All they have to do is say, oh.
Speaker 2: We'll start sending our ships right now to pick up
Speaker 2: whatever we want or to bring.
Speaker 3: Whatever we want. It's very very.
Speaker 2: Simple, and I think my people haven't made it clear.
Speaker 2: We will sign some deals, but much bigger than that
Speaker 2: is we're going to put down the price that people
Speaker 2: are gonna have to pay to shop in the United States.
Speaker 2: Think of us as a super luxury store, a store
Speaker 2: that has the goods. You're gonna come and you're gonna
Speaker 2: pay a price, and we're gonna give you a very
Speaker 2: good price. We're gonna make very good deals, and in
Speaker 2: some cases we'll adjust. But that's where it is. And
Speaker 2: we've been ripped off by everybody for fifty years, for
Speaker 2: fifty years, and we're just not gonna do that anymore.
Speaker 2: We can't do that, and we can't let any country
Speaker 2: do that to us. We're just not gonna do it anymore.
Speaker 2: Can you tell us a bit more about the deal
Speaker 2: that you've reached the Hoofies. No, it's not a deal.
Speaker 2: They've said, please don't bomb us anymore. We're not gonna
Speaker 2: attack your ships.
Speaker 3: And where did you hear about that?
Speaker 2: It doesn't matter where I hear the very good source.
Speaker 2: I get very very good source. Would you say, Marco,
Speaker 2: I would say, pretty good, right, Jay, a very good source.
Speaker 2: They don't want to be they don't want to.
Speaker 3: Be they don't want to be bombed anymore. You know,
Speaker 3: I sort of thought that would happen.
Speaker 2: Behind you said your associate, or is the US parents
Speaker 2: walk away from that act from what packed?
Speaker 3: No? Not, no, No, it's fine. It's there, it's good.
Speaker 3: We use it for certain things. It's there. We have
Speaker 3: the U S m c A is a good deal
Speaker 3: for everybody.
Speaker 2: I won't say this about Mark, but I didn't like
Speaker 2: his predecessor.
Speaker 3: I didn't like a person that worked. She was terrible. Actually,
Speaker 3: she was a terrible person.
Speaker 2: And she really hurt that deal very badly because she
Speaker 2: tried to take advantage of the deal and she didn't
Speaker 2: get away with it.
Speaker 3: You know, I'm talking about it.
Speaker 2: But so you know, I had a we had a
Speaker 2: bad we had a bad relationship having to do with
Speaker 2: the fact that we disagreed with the way they viewed
Speaker 2: the deal. And we ended it. You know, we ended
Speaker 2: that that relationship pretty much. The USMC is great for
Speaker 2: all countries. It's good for all countries. We do have
Speaker 2: a negotiation coming up over the next year or so
Speaker 2: to adjust it or terminate it.
Speaker 5: I'll just say I'll say word on U S N
Speaker 5: T if I mean as present. Uh, it is a
Speaker 5: basis for a broader negotiation. Some things about it are
Speaker 5: going to have to change. And part of the way
Speaker 5: you've conducted these tariffs has taken advantage of existing aspects
Speaker 5: of U.
Speaker 2: S m C.
Speaker 5: Aight, so it's going to have to change. There's other
Speaker 5: elements that have come and that's part of what.
Speaker 3: We're going to discuss. The campaign. You talk about the
Speaker 3: American Journal, how do you react?
Speaker 4: Kind of decided not to shop in the America the
Speaker 4: campaign you talk about the American Journal, how do you react?
Speaker 4: Kind of decided not to shop in the American store
Speaker 4: as much as before.
Speaker 1: I decided to partner with other countries.
Speaker 2: Well, we don't do much business with Canada from our standpoint.
Speaker 3: They do a lot of business with us.
Speaker 2: We're at like four percent, and usually those things don't
Speaker 2: last very long. You know, we have great things, great product,
Speaker 2: the kind of product we sell nobody else can sell, uh,
Speaker 2: including military.
Speaker 3: Look, we make the best military equipment.
Speaker 2: In the world, and Canada buys our military equipment, which
Speaker 2: we appreciate. But we make the best military equipment in
Speaker 2: the world by far. The missiles, the the submarines, everything,
Speaker 2: everything we have is really top notch.
Speaker 3: I rebuilt our military during our last term.
Speaker 2: Stupidly, we gave some away to Afghanistan, which shouldn't have happened.
Speaker 3: But that was Uh.
Speaker 2: I think it was the most embarrassing moment in the
Speaker 2: history of our country.
Speaker 3: Uh. It was just a very incompetent people.
Speaker 2: But if you look the man that's now the head
Speaker 2: of our Joint Chiefs, he led the attack on Isis.
Speaker 2: For me, it's wise the head of the Joint Chiefs
Speaker 2: and uh raising Kaine, He's they was unbelievable. And as
Speaker 2: you know, we defeated Isis in three weeks. It was
Speaker 2: supposed to take five years. We did it in three weeks.
Speaker 2: And he ran the campaign. I said, I like him,
Speaker 2: but I knew him before I went. I went to
Speaker 2: a rack and we agreed to a plan and that
Speaker 2: was the plan, and as you know, we did in
Speaker 2: record time.
Speaker 3: Uh. So we have you know, we have the best,
Speaker 3: We have the best equipment in the world. We have
Speaker 3: the best a lot of things. And uh, but Canada,
Speaker 3: it does a lot more business with us than we
Speaker 3: do with Canada. Yeah.
Speaker 2: Your investments, mister president, When do you think the investments
Speaker 2: that you've announced a trillions will finally hit economic data
Speaker 2: this year?
Speaker 3: Uh? When you're saying about the tariffs, no, no, about the
Speaker 3: investments that you've announced. You you've anounced them.
Speaker 2: Oh it's hitting right now. Look they're already starting AI plans.
Speaker 2: These are not people that look for financing. That's a
Speaker 2: good thing.
Speaker 3: You know, in real estate, you get a site, then
Speaker 3: you have to look for financing.
Speaker 2: You have to get your zoning. You know, five years
Speaker 2: later you side building, you get a bank, then the
Speaker 2: bank's no good. These people have massive amounts of cash.
Speaker 2: The Chips Act was a ridiculous thing because that doesn't.
Speaker 3: Get them to build.
Speaker 2: Though we did is end very wealthy companies money the
Speaker 2: Chips Act that was done by Biden billions.
Speaker 3: We give them billions a thousand. They don't even have
Speaker 3: to do anything with it. And then if you.
Speaker 2: Weren't if you didn't have and I don't want to
Speaker 2: be a wise guy, but if you didn't go with
Speaker 2: the DEI, if you didn't go with all of the
Speaker 2: different things woke, if you weren't woke, you couldn't even
Speaker 2: use the money. You had to have a certain percentage
Speaker 2: of this and that and that and that. It's impossible
Speaker 2: impossible to have the people. The companies actually complained to me,
Speaker 2: They say they gave me all this money but nobody
Speaker 2: can get these people to do anything. I mean, look
Speaker 2: President Obama, and if he wanted help, I'd give him
Speaker 2: out because I'm a really good builder and I built
Speaker 2: on time, on budget. He's building his library in Chicago.
Speaker 2: It's a disaster, and he said something to the effect,
Speaker 2: I only want DEI I only want he wants woke
Speaker 2: people to build it. Well, he got woke people and
Speaker 2: they have massive cost over runs.
Speaker 3: A job has stopped. I don't know.
Speaker 2: It's a disaster, and I don't like that happening because
Speaker 2: it's I think it's bad for the presidency that a
Speaker 2: thing like that should happen. He's got a library that's
Speaker 2: a disaster, and he wanted to be very politically correct,
Speaker 2: and he didn't use good, hard, tough, mean construction workers
Speaker 2: that I love, Marco. I loved those construction workers. But
Speaker 2: he didn't want construction workers. He wanted people that never
Speaker 2: did it before. And he's got a disaster in his hands,
Speaker 2: like millions of dollars many many, I mean really many
Speaker 2: millions of dollars over budget.
Speaker 3: And I would love to help him with it, but.
Speaker 2: Or somebody else, I could recommend professionals, but it was
Speaker 2: not built.
Speaker 3: In a professional man. By the way, nor was nor
Speaker 3: was in California.
Speaker 2: A little train going from San Francisco to Los Angeles
Speaker 2: that's being run by Gavin Newscomb, the governor of California.
Speaker 3: Did you ever hear of Gavin Neuscombe?
Speaker 2: He has got that train is the worst cost overrun
Speaker 2: I've ever seen.
Speaker 3: It's like totally out of control.
Speaker 2: So then they said, all right, we won't go into
Speaker 2: San Francisco, we'll stop twenty five miles short, and we
Speaker 2: won't go into Los Angeles.
Speaker 3: We'll stop twenty five miles short.
Speaker 2: It's hundreds of billions of dollars for this stupid project
Speaker 2: that should have never been built. And then they realized
Speaker 2: that it would have been a lot less costly if
Speaker 2: we just gave limousine service back and forth and gave
Speaker 2: it free.
Speaker 3: They would have saved hundreds of billions of dollars.
Speaker 2: They have airplanes that go there for one to one hundredth.
Speaker 3: The cost, and they have cars. They have a thing
Speaker 3: called the Highway that goes back and forth. It's not
Speaker 3: fully utilized.
Speaker 2: And they got involved with this project and Gavin on fold.
Speaker 2: You know, I always liked Gavin had a good relationship
Speaker 2: with him. I just got him a lot of water.
Speaker 2: You know, I sent ten people to open up that
Speaker 2: water because he refused to do it, and we just
Speaker 2: got him a lot of would if they would have
Speaker 2: had that water, and if they would have done what
Speaker 2: I said to do, they wouldn't have had the fires
Speaker 2: in Los Angeles. Those fires would have been put out
Speaker 2: very quickly. But if you think about it, and you've
Speaker 2: got to take a look at this problem, it's the
Speaker 2: worst cost over and I've ever seen. I've watched a
Speaker 2: lot of stupid people build a lot of stupid things,
Speaker 2: but that's the worst cost over and I've ever seen
Speaker 2: what's happening between San Francisco and Los Angeles. And you
Speaker 2: want to ask about that because this government is not
Speaker 2: going to pay. I told our very great new Secretary
Speaker 2: of Transportation is doing a good job, Sean Duffy, I said,
Speaker 2: we're not going to pay for that thing. They are
Speaker 2: just it's out of control. This is something that you
Speaker 2: don't have things like this. It's not even conceivable, like
Speaker 2: thirty times over a budget thirty times. It's the craziest thing.
Speaker 2: And now it's hundreds of supposed to be a simple train.
Speaker 2: And I think the media should take a look at it.
Speaker 2: And i'd love him to run for president on the
Speaker 2: other side, you know, i'd love to see that, but
Speaker 2: I don't think he's going to be running because that
Speaker 2: one project alone, well, that and the fires and a
Speaker 2: lot of other things pretty much put him out.
Speaker 3: Of the room.
Speaker 1: Would you like to see to the USNCA or what changes.
Speaker 2: I think we're gonna work on some subtle changes. Maybe
Speaker 2: I don't even know if we're going to be dealing
Speaker 2: with USMC. We're just we're dealing more with concepts right now. Look,
Speaker 2: right now we're doing trade. We have trade. They're paying
Speaker 2: a tariff and cars and stealing aluminum.
Speaker 3: And I think we have a.
Speaker 2: Baseline of ten percent or something like that for the tariffs.
Speaker 2: But we're getting along very well right now. Going no further,
Speaker 2: but we have we have an agreement. We did something
Speaker 2: with even parts. You want to discuss that, Howard, with
Speaker 2: respect to Canada, which helps Canada out.
Speaker 7: Sure, So we've UH, we've made car companies that fifteen
Speaker 7: percent of their A U S MCA parts are included
Speaker 7: and then fifteen percent of foreign parts from the UH
Speaker 7: the manufactured suggests a retail price are not tariff to
Speaker 7: help domestic manufacturing really thrive.
Speaker 2: So we gave them a chance to be able to
Speaker 2: build their car parts, uh factories if they're gonna A
Speaker 2: lot of these companies already have factories and what they
Speaker 2: have to do is just fill them out. But they're
Speaker 2: able to build them in the United States. So we
Speaker 2: gave them a pretty substantial period of time stage today
Speaker 2: to change your mind on.
Speaker 3: Therapy Canada tariffing cars.
Speaker 1: Is there anything he stayed in the course of your
Speaker 1: needs within today that gets you to lift terrors on Canada?
Speaker 3: No? Why not? Just the way it is? I don't
Speaker 3: want it? Would you respect that? Sure?
Speaker 2: I would, But this is not necessarily a one day deal.
Speaker 2: This is over a period of time. They have to
Speaker 2: make that decision.
Speaker 5: Yes, go ahead, Yeah, if I make well, I respectfully
Speaker 5: Canadians view on this and is not going to change
Speaker 5: on the fifty first date. Secondly, we are the largest
Speaker 5: client of the United States in in the totality all
Speaker 5: all the goods, so we are the largest client in
Speaker 5: the United States. We have a tremendous auto sector between
Speaker 5: the two of us, and the changes that made have
Speaker 5: been helpful. You know, fifty percent of a car that
Speaker 5: comes from Canada's America. That's not like anywhere else in
Speaker 5: the world. And to your question about is there one thing.
Speaker 3: No, this is a bigger discussion.
Speaker 5: There are much bigger forces involved, and this will take
Speaker 5: some time in some discussions, and that's why we're here
Speaker 5: to have those discussions. And that's that'sh is represented by
Speaker 5: who's uh sitting around.
Speaker 3: The see the conflict is and and this very friendly.
Speaker 2: This is not going to be like we had another
Speaker 2: little blow up with somebody else that was much different.
Speaker 2: This is a very friendly conversation. But we want to
Speaker 2: make our own cars. We don't really want cars from Canada,
Speaker 2: and we put tariffs on cars from Canada and at
Speaker 2: a certain point it won't make economic sense for Canada
Speaker 2: to build those cars. And we don't want steel from
Speaker 2: Canada because we're making our own steel and we're having
Speaker 2: massive steel plants being built right now as we speak.
Speaker 2: We really don't want Canadian steel, and we don't want
Speaker 2: Canadian aluminum and various other things because we want to
Speaker 2: be able to do it ourselves. And because of you know,
Speaker 2: past thinking of people, we have a tremendous deficit with Canada.
Speaker 2: In other words, they have a surplus with us, and
Speaker 2: there's no reason for us to be subsidized in Canada.
Speaker 2: Canada is a place that we'll have to be able
Speaker 2: to take care of itself economic.
Speaker 3: I assume they can. I will tell you that.
Speaker 2: Trudeau, when I spoke to him, I used to call
Speaker 2: him Governor Trudeau. I think that probably didn't help his election.
Speaker 2: But when I spoke to him, I said, so why
Speaker 2: are we Why are we taking your cars? Why are
Speaker 2: we taking your We want to make him moreself, I mean,
Speaker 2: I said, and if the price of your cars went up,
Speaker 2: or if we put a tariff, if we put a
Speaker 2: tariff on your cars of twenty five percent, what would
Speaker 2: that mean to you? He said, that would mean the
Speaker 2: end of Canada. He actually said that to me, and
Speaker 2: I said, that's a strange answer.
Speaker 3: But I understand his answer.
Speaker 2: But no, I mean, it's it's hard to justify subsidizing
Speaker 2: Canada to the tune of maybe two hundred billion dollars
Speaker 2: a year. We protect Canada militarily and we always will.
Speaker 2: You know, that's not a money thing, that's but we
Speaker 2: always will. But you know it's not fair, But why
Speaker 2: are we subsidizing Canada two hundred billion?
Speaker 3: Dollars year, or whatever the number might be.
Speaker 2: It's a very substantial number and it's hard for the
Speaker 2: American taxpayer to say, gee, Waves, we love doing that.
Speaker 3: Thank you very much. We're going to have.
Speaker 8: I had a chance to address Elberton's about our province's
Speaker 8: path forward with the federal government following a special meeting
Speaker 8: with our government caucus last Friday. I also met with
Speaker 8: Prime Minister Mark Carney last Friday, where we spoke at
Speaker 8: length about the policies and legislation that are holding back
Speaker 8: Alberta's economy. This conversation was a positive first step, but
Speaker 8: it will take tremendous effort and cooperation to repair the
Speaker 8: damage to Alberta's economy caused in the last ten years
Speaker 8: by Ottawa's destructive anti resource agenda. Yesterday, I shared the
Speaker 8: bold steps that our government is taking to protect and
Speaker 8: stand up for Alberta's future with strength and resolve, and
Speaker 8: this includes the creation of a special negotiating team to
Speaker 8: represent our province in negotiations with the federal government in
Speaker 8: pursuit of a new Alberta Accord with Canada. This team
Speaker 8: will request reforms to guarantee port access to tidewater off
Speaker 8: the Pacific, Arctic and Atlantic coasts for Alberta energy and resources,
Speaker 8: and all federal interference in the development of our provincial
Speaker 8: resources by repealing harmful federal laws like the No More
Speaker 8: Pipelines Bought Law C sixty nine and the Net zero
Speaker 8: Electricity regulations, require our Alberta's consent before imposing any export
Speaker 8: taxes or restrictions on our resources, and to grant Alberta
Speaker 8: the same per capita federal transfers as Quebec, Ontario and
Speaker 8: British Columbia. We are also launching the Alberta Next Panel
Speaker 8: to explore long term options for economic and constitutional protections
Speaker 8: from Ottawa, and we are preparing for a twenty twenty
Speaker 8: six referendum on key proposals that emerge from these discussions.
Speaker 8: As most Albertons know, I have repeatedly stated I do
Speaker 8: not support Alberta separating from Canada. I personally still have
Speaker 8: hope that there is a path forward for a strong
Speaker 8: and sovereign Alberta within a United Canada. So I am
Speaker 8: going to do everything within my power to negotiate a
Speaker 8: fair deal for Alberta with the new Prime Minister, and
Speaker 8: while doing so, our government will work with Alberton's on
Speaker 8: various initiatives to better protect Alberta's provincial.
Speaker 9: Sovereignty and economy from Ottawa.
Speaker 8: Should those negotiations fail and the economic attacks continue in
Speaker 8: the months ahead, there will be many who will try
Speaker 8: to so fear and anger among us, those who want
Speaker 8: to see Alberta divided. Regardless of what each of us
Speaker 8: believes about this issue and what path we think is best,
Speaker 8: we as Alberton's must be able to respectfully debate and
Speaker 8: discuss these issues with.
Speaker 9: Our friends, family members and neighbors.
Speaker 8: I know that if we do that, in the end,
Speaker 8: our province will find the best solution for this immense
Speaker 8: challenge we face and come out of it stronger and
Speaker 8: more free than ever.
Speaker 9: Thank you, and I'm happy to take.
Speaker 8: Questions perfect and we'll start off with questions here in
Speaker 8: the room before going to the phones.
Speaker 9: One question, one follow up, I see hands wonderful. We'll
Speaker 9: start with Michelle and go through Catherine.
Speaker 8: Mishell about on team CBC.
Speaker 6: Premier chiefs from Treaties six, seven, eight, four, and ten
Speaker 6: are speaking about the possibility of a sovereignty referendum in
Speaker 6: about an hour now. They have overwhelmingly said that the
Speaker 6: opposed is kind of referendum and say it violates their treaties.
Speaker 3: So why are you.
Speaker 6: Giving separatists the chance to force a referendum question next year?
Speaker 8: I'm not sure what their sovereignty referendum would be. I mean,
Speaker 8: they already have sovereignty within a United Canada. They have
Speaker 8: absolute jurisdiction over their own treaty territories, the reserves, and
Speaker 8: so I'm not quite sure what they would be asking for.
Speaker 6: You're a separation, a referendum on separation. It's out there
Speaker 6: and you're the Bill fifty four has made it easier
Speaker 6: for people to force a citizen's initiative referendum and have
Speaker 6: it put to the Albery people. And you have said
Speaker 6: that this would be included next year.
Speaker 9: Well, what would you say?
Speaker 6: What would you say to treaty chiefs who are saying
Speaker 6: we have a treaty with the crown and separating from
Speaker 6: Canada violates our.
Speaker 8: Treatis Well, I would say that we're sort of a
Speaker 8: number of steps away from having that conversation.
Speaker 9: We have put forward a suite.
Speaker 8: Of changes to elections law that included making a petition
Speaker 8: campaign achievable. I think there's no point in having a referendum,
Speaker 8: citizen initiated referend and with barriers that are so high
Speaker 8: that it's kind of vicious compliance. And so that was
Speaker 8: the conversation we've had over the last year, prior to
Speaker 8: the most recent election, and prior to any of the
Speaker 8: discussions you're talking about, is that if you genuinely want
Speaker 8: citizens to be able to identify issues that care about,
Speaker 8: be able to put it forward to the people, you
Speaker 8: have to have a reasonable signature threshold.
Speaker 9: Our threshold is a little bit lower, a bit lower than.
Speaker 8: Saskatchewan's, but a little bit higher than what we see
Speaker 8: in the United States. It's consistent with what we've had
Speaker 8: for many decades in the Municipal Government Act. So it
Speaker 8: shouldn't be that surprising that we're just trying to get
Speaker 8: some clarity so that people know what the is if
Speaker 8: they want to take forward issues that they think matter
Speaker 8: to Alberton's Catherine.
Speaker 10: Yeah, and asking for those guaranteed access to the three oceans.
Speaker 10: How does that respect other provincial jurisdictions.
Speaker 8: The federal government was given trade and commerce power when
Speaker 8: we came together as territories in order to enable access
Speaker 8: to markets. In fact, there's there's quite a bit of
Speaker 8: law internationally that says that if you are a separate nation,
Speaker 8: one nation cannot landlock another. It's sort of a given
Speaker 8: that it is inappropriate use of power to prevent a
Speaker 8: jurisdiction from being able to get as resources to market.
Speaker 8: And so that is the thinking that we have around this,
Speaker 8: is that it's the constitutional authority of Ottawa to enable
Speaker 8: this to happen, and they have managed to in the past.
Speaker 8: The Coastal Gas Link Pipeline, despite a lot of extra
Speaker 8: cost uncertainty, still did manage to.
Speaker 9: Get to get a built.
Speaker 8: Lergy Canada will be opened soon and we'll be exporting.
Speaker 9: And despite six times the.
Speaker 8: Costs associated with Trans Mountain Pipeline, it also managed to
Speaker 8: get built. And so I think we have seen that
Speaker 8: when there are important strategic decisions that need to be
Speaker 8: made strategic infrastructure, the federal government does have the power
Speaker 8: to be able to get resources to market. And so
Speaker 8: I would say that we signed onto it all of
Speaker 8: the provinces along with the new Prime minister just prior
Speaker 8: to the election, saying that we all agree to economic
Speaker 8: corridors that include oil and gas pipelines. So I'm just
Speaker 8: reaffirming that that was the commitment on the part of
Speaker 8: all of the provinces prior to the election, and I
Speaker 8: hope it's the commitment of all of the provinces.
Speaker 9: Now that the election's over.
Speaker 10: And there's a municipal election coming up in October, it
Speaker 10: should the citizen initiative referendum meet the threshold before then?
Speaker 9: Why not hold it then?
Speaker 7: Why the timing was I think.
Speaker 8: There was a referendum question or to ask in conjunction
Speaker 8: with the municipals in the past, and I mean, I
Speaker 8: suppose that's an option. I just don't think that the
Speaker 8: timing will work in this case. It's one hundred and
Speaker 8: twenty day. First of all, we have to proclaim a
Speaker 8: lot has to get through the legislature, has to be
Speaker 8: proclaimed into law. They have to change the regulations with
Speaker 8: elections albert I'm not sure quite when elections Alberta will
Speaker 8: be ready. To be able to oversee and launch a
Speaker 8: petition campaign, any citizen would have to have a question
Speaker 8: that has approved in advance.
Speaker 9: That takes a little bit of time one.
Speaker 8: Hundred and twenty day signature collection period and then a
Speaker 8: couple I think it's a couple of months to be
Speaker 8: able to validate the signature. So as you can see,
Speaker 8: with this whole process, I think would be possible to
Speaker 8: try to get any questions in alignment with the municipal elections.
Speaker 3: We'll go to Emmanuel and then will come to.
Speaker 4: Che Emanuel Custo vet Dada. Canada has had two independence
Speaker 4: referendums in the past. Prior to the nineteen eighty referendum
Speaker 4: in Quebec, Rene Levec did campaign openly on this referendum
Speaker 4: in one in seventy six. Jacques Paraizou did the same
Speaker 4: in ninety four.
Speaker 3: Just before the.
Speaker 4: Ninety five referendum. However, you did not campaign on open
Speaker 4: the door to a separation referendum. You essentially a campaign
Speaker 4: on tax cut and standing up to Ottawa. So do
Speaker 4: you have the mandate to open much your door to
Speaker 4: Alberta separating.
Speaker 3: From rest Canada.
Speaker 8: Yeah, I don't have a mandate and my party doesn't
Speaker 8: support that. My party quite clearly in their founding documents,
Speaker 8: came together and they support as strong United Canada protecting
Speaker 8: constitutional sovereignty, and that's what I've been doing. A citizen
Speaker 8: initiated referenda would be by definition initiated by citizens, and
Speaker 8: so I won't prejudge what issues citizens might want to
Speaker 8: put on the table, but that is up to citizens
Speaker 8: to decide and to get the number of signatures. All
Speaker 8: I've said is I will honor the process and the
Speaker 8: public very clearly knows that we are a party of
Speaker 8: direct democracy, that we do believe in things like citizen
Speaker 8: initiative and recall that happened under my predecessor, and so
Speaker 8: I would leave it to the people. But that's why
Speaker 8: I have been pretty clear that I do not support
Speaker 8: separatism myself. I support a strong Auburn Alberta within the
Speaker 8: United Canada, and that's what I'll keep working towards.
Speaker 4: And one part of your rhetoric against the federal policies
Speaker 4: and energy is that it would bring more uncertainty to
Speaker 4: the sector and also make investments go away from the province.
Speaker 4: Don't you think that such a referendum on separation would
Speaker 4: also be likely to do that. That's certainly what the
Speaker 4: rest of Canada said to Quebec about there too referendum.
Speaker 8: Well, I guess I'll wait and see if any questions
Speaker 8: come forward, if anything gets registered, If one hundred and
Speaker 8: seventy seven thousand signatures get accumulated, I mean I think
Speaker 8: you're jumping ahead a number of steps. None of that
Speaker 8: has happened right now. There isn't a question on the table,
Speaker 8: There isn't an active petition campaign. All there is is
Speaker 8: a process, and I think we have to accept that
Speaker 8: there's a lot of anger out there, a lot of
Speaker 8: anger after the last election, a lot of anger the
Speaker 8: way we've been treated for the last ten years, and
Speaker 8: there's a lot of groups that are organizing to try
Speaker 8: to do something about it. We may disagree about what
Speaker 8: the path forward is. All I can tell you is
Speaker 8: my path forward is to try to do it I
Speaker 8: can to try to get a fair deal for Alberta,
Speaker 8: and that's why I've already engaged constructively with the Prime
Speaker 8: Minister on that.
Speaker 4: Just having the talks in the public opinion about maybe
Speaker 4: Alberta separating from rest Canada is bad for Alberta.
Speaker 8: Well, those could talks have been going on for some time.
Speaker 8: The level of support for a motion like that, I've
Speaker 8: been monitoring this for decades and it's always ebbed and flow.
Speaker 9: Then as high as thirty percent in the past.
Speaker 8: I think it might be a little bit higher today,
Speaker 8: But that has always been in the background in Alberta.
Speaker 9: Electoral politics, and it's just happened to flare up right now.
Speaker 9: But citizens have a right. I believe in free speech.
Speaker 8: Citizens have a right to express their opinion on things
Speaker 8: that they're concerned about, and I think it's my job
Speaker 8: to make sure that debate is respectful, that sides know
Speaker 8: that they have a right to be able to have
Speaker 8: those conversations with their friends and family and not to
Speaker 8: be demonized for it. And so that's what I'm trying
Speaker 8: to do, is create an environment where the conversation can
Speaker 8: be had.
Speaker 1: The show has been produced by Depictions Media. Please contact
Speaker 1: us at depictions dot media for more information.