Speaker 1: Conservatives want answers from the government after US trade talks
Speaker 1: collapse this weekend. Opposition leader Pierre pauliev Is called on
Speaker 1: Prime Minister Carney to bring MPs back to Ottawa, writing
Speaker 1: in a letter, we must put the national interest first.
Speaker 1: The failure to secure a durable trade agreement, together with
Speaker 1: escalating tariffs, now threatens deeper economic pain. That is why
Speaker 1: I write to ask you to reconvene parliament without delay.
Speaker 1: I'm joined by Alberta MP and Conservative critic for Canada
Speaker 1: US Relations Chavaloyd Majumdar. Nice to see you, sir, Thanks
Speaker 1: for coming in. Thanks to you too, so your leader,
Speaker 1: Peer Polyev. I just read part of the letter that
Speaker 1: he sent to Carneia over the I guess it was
Speaker 1: last night. He calls the bilateral trade negotiations of failure.
Speaker 1: Who's to blame do you think for this failure? Is
Speaker 1: it the Canadian negotiators or is it the Americans.
Speaker 2: We're confident that the Canadian negotiators were professional what they did.
Speaker 2: We know that the Prime Minister and his cabinet have
Speaker 2: to deal with a very tough and unpredictable negotiation. We
Speaker 2: know that the stakes are high for this country. But
Speaker 2: it's really hard to answer your question without actually getting
Speaker 2: a complete, transparent exhibition of what was proposed. And we're
Speaker 2: not asking for trade secrets to be disclosed. We're just
Speaker 2: what was on the table that the Americans already known,
Speaker 2: that the Canadians already know, and what was the actual
Speaker 2: decision points to walk away from the negotiation. All we've
Speaker 2: had is a press conference and some leaks here and there,
Speaker 2: But that's not, i think, to mister Polyev's point, serving
Speaker 2: the national interest, which is a full conversation around what
Speaker 2: was on the table and how do we deal with it.
Speaker 1: Is there not a risk in showing our cards? Is
Speaker 1: there not a risk in showing the American.
Speaker 2: Yeah, we're not asking for them to tip their hand
Speaker 2: on any future negotiating position. We just want to understand
Speaker 2: exactly the Prime ministers talked about the deal. He's talked
Speaker 2: about certain aspects of the deal. He hasn't talked comprehensively
Speaker 2: about what were the reasons he left. He's welcome to
Speaker 2: table that and let Canadians judge for themselves. And the
Speaker 2: reason I say this is on Saturday, he promised dollar
Speaker 2: for dollar counter terrifs across the economy which would have
Speaker 2: been a massive cost to both countries. Today, just hours ago,
Speaker 2: he's proposing well, maybe something more targeted. Well, we can't
Speaker 2: take measure of what his prescription or his solutions are
Speaker 2: unless we understand exactly what the stakes were that he
Speaker 2: walked away from and what the cost will be for
Speaker 2: the Canadians that have to bear the price of his decision.
Speaker 1: On those retaliatory measures we heard. Of course, we're planning
Speaker 1: to fight back. There will be something in place, as
Speaker 1: you say, one of your caucus colleagues, Jamil Giovanni, who
Speaker 1: has a close relationship with JD. Vance, the US Vice President,
Speaker 1: said that dollar for dollar tariffs would be an overreaction
Speaker 1: and that it would only accelerate the conflict with the Americans.
Speaker 1: Do you think that that's a fair assessment, that going
Speaker 1: dollar for dollar, going toe to toe with Trump on
Speaker 1: Taro's would be a mistake.
Speaker 2: It's a big debate and it's one that's worth having,
Speaker 2: and I'm grateful for mis Givine's contribution to it. The
Speaker 2: Prime Minister today walked back dollar for dollar counter tariffs,
Speaker 2: describing that it was an overreach in his own position. Look,
Speaker 2: we have three major decisions in this country that Parliament
Speaker 2: was elected to deal with. We have the decision around
Speaker 2: our relationship with the United States, which can only be
Speaker 2: explained by the deal that the Prime Minister abandoned. We
Speaker 2: have a decision around the true cost to Canadians and
Speaker 2: what we will do to respond in making sure that
Speaker 2: the families who in today and yesterday are really anxious,
Speaker 2: hundreds of thousands of people who are losing their jobs
Speaker 2: and may not be able to plan for the future.
Speaker 2: And we have a decision on what are we doing
Speaker 2: to right now unlock the potential of this country, build
Speaker 2: the resilience we must, the resilience at the Prime Minister's
Speaker 2: dawdled on for over a year and a half, and
Speaker 2: provide the immediate relief for our country in the road ahead.
Speaker 2: These are three big things. They're certainly parliamentary and worthy
Speaker 2: of a national conversation, of a debate on empirical grounds
Speaker 2: rather than on the hints of light that the Prime
Speaker 2: Minister provides from behind the curtain.
Speaker 1: Geovani also said that Prime Minister Mark Karney and Ontario
Speaker 1: Premier Doug Ford have put their political self interest ahead
Speaker 1: of Canadian workers, So he seems to be suggesting that
Speaker 1: there's no deal with the Americans because it's not in
Speaker 1: the political interests of the Prime Minister to reach one.
Speaker 1: What do you say to that, Do you think that
Speaker 1: there is no deal because mister Carniess trying to capitalize
Speaker 1: on this politically. I mean that is quite an accusation, right,
Speaker 1: It's a serious accusation, essentially accusing the Prime Minister of
Speaker 1: sacrificing the Canadian economy to improve his own poll numbers.
Speaker 1: Is that something that you feel like is happening here?
Speaker 2: The issue we have is with the Prime minister's capability
Speaker 2: to be transparent. We've watched him walk back counter terrors
Speaker 2: in the past through a discrete disclosure on a distant
Speaker 2: government website that was ultimately picked up by somebody. We
Speaker 2: watched the Prime Minister not describe the deal around the
Speaker 2: bad Gordy Howbridge deal. We don't know how many tens
Speaker 2: or hundreds of millions are now being siphoned into an
Speaker 2: American fund on the other side of the border for
Speaker 2: priorities that we cannot decide. And so I think there's
Speaker 2: a lot of good reasons to say, listen, Prime Minister,
Speaker 2: you negotiate in good faith. You had a conversation with
Speaker 2: the country and good faith. So in good faith continue
Speaker 2: by disclosing the deal and releasing the deal to Parliament.
Speaker 2: Let Canadians judge for themselves. Exactly what the decision point
Speaker 2: you made was. Was it political? Was it principled. We'd
Speaker 2: like to think it's principled. We'd like to think it's
Speaker 2: for the national interest, But there's only one way to know.
Speaker 1: President Trump today called Doug Ford, he called him out
Speaker 1: by name, He called him a flunky. He says he's
Speaker 1: less impressive than his late brother Rob Ford. The Premier
Speaker 1: in turn called Trump a loser. He called him the
Speaker 1: King of bankruptcies. He told him to kiss his urs.
Speaker 1: Do you think the Premier Ford is hurting or helping
Speaker 1: the cause here? He's getting quite feisty. It's very personal.
Speaker 1: Ford is not holding back in what he thinks of
Speaker 1: the President, the person that the Canadian negotiators need to
Speaker 1: get onside it we're ever going to get a deal.
Speaker 1: Do you approve of what Doug Ford is doing when
Speaker 1: he uses this sort of language.
Speaker 2: I know that the stakes for the negotiations today are
Speaker 2: massive for the future of our country and particularly for
Speaker 2: the people of Ontario. They deserve serious leaders stepping up
Speaker 2: to deal with serious issues. And I also know that
Speaker 2: in the inception of all of this, when naftit was
Speaker 2: first negotiated, that Prime Mister Brian mulroney was capable of
Speaker 2: wrangling the premiers, reading them in and defining what is
Speaker 2: a role of the federal government where the Prime Minister
Speaker 2: has latitude on foreign affairs, and what is a role
Speaker 2: of provincial leaders to ensure that the best deal can
Speaker 2: be accomplished with a team Canada. All of the chaos
Speaker 2: we've seen on the Canadian side, to me is something
Speaker 2: that I ascribed to how the Prime Minister has managed
Speaker 2: the entire negotiation. He has not been transparent with the
Speaker 2: premiers across the board with the deals that he has
Speaker 2: had to work with. He's not been transparent with Parliament.
Speaker 2: He's not been transparent with industry. He has not been
Speaker 2: holding technical briefings with the press or with experts even
Speaker 2: under NBA, so that they can at least inform their
Speaker 2: positions and their opinions. And so the resulted chaos that
Speaker 2: you see is principally because the Prime Minister has failed
Speaker 2: to show the kind of leadership the transformational negotiation that
Speaker 2: he promised.
Speaker 1: The Prime Minister has briefed the premiers though right, I
Speaker 1: mean there was a first minister's meeting as things were
Speaker 1: looking good, as a deal was coming together. He immediately
Speaker 1: met with the premiers right after things fell apart, So
Speaker 1: there certainly has been some dialogue. Maybe there should be more.
Speaker 1: Do you think though, he should be using that time
Speaker 1: to reign in doug Ford? Is that what you think
Speaker 1: needs to happen here? Do you think the Prime Minister
Speaker 1: needs to put his foot down when it comes to
Speaker 1: forward using this rhetoric.
Speaker 2: It depends on whether he thinks that rhetoric is helpful
Speaker 2: to him or not, you know, And I think it's
Speaker 2: easy for us to try and opine on the play
Speaker 2: to play in the personalities that are involved, and that's
Speaker 2: not necessarily constructive for the country. Per Poaliev wants us
Speaker 2: to stay focused on the national interest, to rise to
Speaker 2: the occasion that the country requires, which is a strong
Speaker 2: and constructive opposition. Our country is not so brittle that
Speaker 2: we can't afford a debate, but we also need to
Speaker 2: approach a debate with the seriousness that the people whose
Speaker 2: families and livelihoods are on the line deserve.
Speaker 1: Do you think we can ever reach a deal with
Speaker 1: President Trump. I mean, this is someone who is still
Speaker 1: trotting out this fifty first date rhetoric. He's being very
Speaker 1: personal in his criticisms of our leaders. He's calling Mark
Speaker 1: Carney governor again today. He's talking down our troops and
Speaker 1: our armed forces. He's lying in many instances about the
Speaker 1: trading relationship. He's falsifying statistics when it comes to cross
Speaker 1: border trade. Do you really think we can broker a
Speaker 1: deal with someone like this?
Speaker 2: Canadians are sick and tired of being treated as a
Speaker 2: punching bag by President Trump time and time again. We
Speaker 2: know that we're up against a very tough and unpredictable negotiator.
Speaker 2: We know that every international economic and security arrangement around
Speaker 2: the world is being renegotiated. I would argue principally because
Speaker 2: of the rise of Beijing and the threat that it
Speaker 2: poses to our supply chains, our energy, our investment and
Speaker 2: technology for the world. The world needs to readjust in
Speaker 2: this period of disruption caused by Beijing. But that being said,
Speaker 2: I know that the Conservatives, over a year and a
Speaker 2: half ago, we're ready to make big decisions on unleashing
Speaker 2: our resources repealing anti development legislation, finding ways to fast
Speaker 2: track projects around critical minerals and energy resources that we
Speaker 2: know the United States and the world needs, rebuilding our
Speaker 2: manufacturing base for autos and for defense production, like big
Speaker 2: catalytic decisions that would have built the strength of this
Speaker 2: country up, and we need to make those decisions independent
Speaker 2: of what Washington or what the world does. We need
Speaker 2: to build a country that has a self confidence to
Speaker 2: be able to navigate a world that is disrupted, and
Speaker 2: I think our country has to come to the realization
Speaker 2: that we don't have the luxury that many other country
Speaker 2: around the world have not enjoyed as well. We're now
Speaker 2: in a neighborhood that's tough, and we're certainly up to
Speaker 2: the task of standing up for this country and its sovereignty.
Speaker 1: Let's see but there. Thank you so much, Conservative Canada
Speaker 1: US Relations grig Chavaloy Majumdar, nice to see you, certain
Speaker 1: thanks for coming in.