Feds halt plan to expand MAID to mental illness

0:00For most of the history of professional sports, there was a wall between the game and gambling. Then suddenly it was everywhere. Ontario is all in on sports betting. You could win a shipload of money! But that wasn't supposed to include the players themselves. Rackersport, John T. Porter is under NBA investigation athletes are the perfect gamblers. Understood the big bet. Available now wherever you get your podcasts. This is a CBC podcast. Hey David here. Are you looking to make sense of this chaotic time in Canadian politics? Well power in politics has you covered six days a week with breaking political news and expert analysis. Follow us wherever you get your podcasts and you won't miss an episode. Now on to today's show. The federal government suspends its plan to expand medical assistance and dying to people with mental illness. A Donald Trump ally breaks from the US president saying the trade war with Canada must end.

1:04And with one of the weakest mandates in Canadian history, what can we expect from the party Quebec, while government and Quebec? It's Wednesday, October 7th. I'm David Cochran. The Power and Politics Podcast starts now. The federal government says it will not move forward to allow eligibility for medical assistance and dying for people who are suffering solely from mental illness. The decision follows recommendations from a report made earlier this year. The CBC's Kate McKenna is here with me in the studio. The walk is through what's been an interesting day Kate to say the least. This decision, it's been announced. We don't yet know there's no legislation we haven't seen it. We were walked through it. What more can you tell us about the changes that are coming? We know that Justice Minister Sean Fraser came out and sort of gave an overview saying they're not ready to present a bill yet but a bill will be coming. And that bill is expected to have two main elements. First, as you pointed out, is a plan to indefinitely pause the expansion of medical assistance in dying for people with mental health as a sole underlying issue.

2:09And the other part of it will be changing the criminal code to decriminalize advanced consent for made. So that would be cases like in Alzheimer's where people have degenerative diseases that are expected to remove their ability to consent. They are saying essentially that they're willing to decriminalize it and then it will be up to the provinces whether or not the provinces want to administer that. We know that Quebec already does. We know that Alberta has said that they are not willing to do that. Take a listen to what the Justice Minister said today. The position that we've taken today is not based on where we believe the politics is going to land in the House of Commons or in the Senate. It's based on what we sincerely believe is right. When I hear from my neighbors, from communities, from medical experts and from national associations across Canada, that there are real challenges in communities with access to basic mental health services. It gives me pause when there is a lack of consensus. So the decision on made in the case of mental illness was something that we had been anticipating for months. The committee came out with its report in June.

3:15But you know, they were Sean Fraser-San was sort of forced today to come out and share the government's position because the Conservatives had private members bill that they were going to vote on and impacted, vote on and defeat. That essentially called for the blocking or the barring of made in cases of mental health. So the government was kind of forced to come out and take a position on that especially because they did vote against it most of them, although a couple of Liberals did vote for it, including Kent McDonald on PEI and Marilyn Gladio, the former Conservative. So the liberal position on that bill was that they agreed with the premise, but they believed that the language that was used was too broad and that it could undermine the case of some people who would otherwise be eligible for medical assistance in dying that they would not be eligible if this bill were to pass. Right. There was a disagreement over the use of the word mental disorder as opposed to mental illness and the distinctions that that draws. But it was interesting because we got this rationale and explanation from the minister who would presumably table the legislation but without the legislation.

4:18So it was like a rationale for how they were going to vote on the private members bill and the Conservatives, they've forced their hand to say Kate, they've been against the expansion of made to apply to people with the sole underlying condition of mental illness. But they're still not satisfied with this decision, even though it's going to end up where they kind of want it to end up. So how's that playing out? Pretty much immediately they came out. In fact, it was right after the Justice Minister's announcement they came out and said they're not happy with this and essentially it boils down to the bundling of both the mental health but also the advanced directives. They said that there was a wide study of mental illness as a sole underlying condition, but that same study doesn't exist for the advanced directives. An important part of this is that if there's no legislative change by next March, the mental health provision in the criminal code will come into effect. So this legislation needs to happen by next March. And so now the Conservatives feel that essentially their hand is being forced to work with the Liberals to get this legislation done before the mental health aspect of it kicks in next March.

5:26And it's not like they're not necessarily on board with the advanced directives. Take a listen to what was said. What we saw from the Minister of Justice moments ago was deeply cynical, reckless. To see this political game being played just hours before we are about to vote on a very, very important bill, which would protect vulnerable Canadians' lives is very shocking to me. We don't need a government bill. There's a bill today bill C to 18 to implement the unanimous recommendation of Liberal and Conservative MPs on the special joint committee. And just to reiterate that those clips that that discussion happened before the vote happened this afternoon and in fact it was voted down. The Liberals, as you know, do have a majority in the House of Commons. So they are able to get legislation through without the support of the opposition. But it'll be interesting to see how this very personal and very emotional debate plays out over the next few months.

6:29Okay. Kate, thanks so much. This is the CBC's Kate McKenna. Well, you heard from the Conservatives there. We reached out to the Conservatives to see if someone would be available to join us on the show today to discuss this development. But no one was available. They said they wanted to let their scrum stand. But we've got more reaction for you today from two members of the special joint committee on made. We have Liberal caucus chair, James Maloney and Alberta Senator Christopher Wells. Gentlemen, it's good to see you. Thank you for making some time today. Pleasure. James Maloney, your government is moving forward with its own legislation instead of supporting the Conservative Bill or even amending the Conservative Bill with your majority to change the language you didn't like. How do you justify this route? Well, two things I'll say off the top, David. You heard the Conservatives statement about it being cynical to come out with this just before this important vote. I would say it's the exact opposite. I said it was necessary to come out before this important vote because it is an important issue. And the motives behind that private membered Bill and the views are shared by many people on both sides of the House. This is not a shouldn't be a politically partisan issue.

7:31But the Bill used language that would have caused more problems than it was seeking to solve. So the government legislation will have language that gets around that problem and addresses that issue. So we wanted to make sure that everybody in parliament was fully aware of that. But why not just amend it? I watched even when you were in a minority government with the NDP of taking opposition motions, amending them and then passing them kind of against their will. But the Mayor Jensen said they were open to changing the language here. And look, I've, you know, this is going to probably go to the Justice Committee. I was on the chair of the Justice Committee. I've worked with the Conservatives and private membered Bill and other legislation. Getting amendments through isn't always as easy as it sounds. It's easy to say it's going to be done. But when push comes to shove, you end up with a lot of obstacles. So the easier route and the clearer path is to put forward and support the government legislation because we have this March 17 deadline looming. The legislation that's what the legislation hasn't been table.

8:32As you said off the top, or as Kate mentioned, but you know, the outline in the intention is very clear. And we have to address that issue before March 17th. And there's also the other issue of the advanced request, which is going to be part of the legislation as well, which wasn't addressed in C18. So Senator, we've previously talked about this. You said the committee study was one sided flawed rush. You weren't happy with the way it went. What do you think about what we've seen today, the development today and the direction of the government's going in? I think first and foremost, you know, Parliament has decided this issue six years ago. The focus was supposed to be on getting the healthcare system ready to enable it to effectively provide people with their charter rights to access services without discrimination, including those with an irredeemable mental illness. What was studied at the beginning was sort of the wrong question, or just relitigating whether we should be offering made to certain segments of society. So in essence, whatever legislation would go forward, whether it was a private members bill or now a government bill, is undoing what parliament has already supported six years ago.

9:36So as the evidence changed any since that time, you know, we've certainly heard the Canadian Psychiatric Association is fully on side. We've got court cases moving forward that are going to litigate this issue. And perhaps we should wait for those court cases to actually resolve to get a definitive answer. And that's what the group of senators who provided the dissenting report said that they should go to the Supreme Court for a reference, like, you know, has been done in the past on very socially divisive issues go back to same sex marriage, right, which was an example there where we had different provincial rulings and courts, and we settled it for once and all in Canada that no matter where you live, you have access to the same charter rights. But on this, the Justice Minister Sean Frazier was asked about that today, and he said his preference is that if things go to the highest court, there's a full evidentiary record that can be examined. And if you don't use exercise, your judgment as a parliamentarian, you're going to slow work down in the house, you're going to bog up the court with things that is for the government to decide. Do you buy that argument or do you think this is inevitably going to the Supreme Court no matter what?

10:39Yeah, absolutely, that's the way we're seeing sort of the judgments and the challenges. And fundamentally, you know, how do we, it's about choice and trust, how do we decide who gets the choice over their own bodily autonomy and decisions about their quality of life and who doesn't, right? And we heard a lot of debate about, you know, mental illness, and there are guidelines in place, and there are psychiatrists who absolutely feel qualified and supported to be able to make those assessments. Yes, that's not universal, though. I think it's fair to say some people, they don't want that burden, and they don't know if they can make that judgment, and you know, there is not a full consensus on that. Like many, many issues, if you're comfortable and qualified, nobody's forcing you to provide those services, but the question is, should we prevent those who do, given the fact that the Canadian Psychiatric Association fully supports this option? So it's James Mollani on that, this undoing something that parliament had already decided, and something that may very well end up in the Supreme Court anyway, and other judgments have said this should be expanded.

11:44You're a lawyer as well as a parliamentarian, your thoughts on that? Well, with all the respect to Senator Wells, and we sat on this most recent iteration of the committee, the issue wasn't decided six years ago. A law was passed that it was going to take effect in two years. During that two-year period, there was going to be studies, there was an independent body set up who was going to study the readiness of the system. Right. That was a how to implement laws, not if they implemented, right? It wasn't if they implemented. So what happened was, so we heard from medical, so when that report came out, the committee was struck. We heard from experts, including the people who were on that committee, there was not agreement, so we deferred for another two years. We had a second round of this committee, which I was on as well, and we heard from a panel after panel of experts and first-hand lived experience. The evidence was consistent again, two things. One, the system wasn't ready, and there wasn't agreement within the system on the irremediable aspect of made from mental health.

12:46Take us to this most recent iteration. It's the same, for the most part, it's the same witnesses, because the people involved in this space are the ones that we need to hear from, because we have to take the politics out of it, and we have to hear from the facts. So the decision was not made six years ago, so we decided this time that the committee's recommendation was that the proper course was to not defer it, but to eliminate it from the criminal code. That doesn't mean in some time in the future, in two years or ten years or twenty years, somebody can't revisit this. As for the fact whether or not this is going to be challenged by the courts, in my view, it was going to be challenged by the courts regardless of what the decision was. If you eliminate it from the criminal code, and then send it down to the provinces to allow them to decide what services will be offered, doesn't that in effect allow a patchwork of legalized medical assistant death for mental illness, depending on the Wins of a province? No, not on the mental illness piece, because it will no longer be legal.

13:49So the province will be illegal to provide made for somebody solely on the basis of an underlying medical illness. Do you see it that way, Senator? It's hard to know without the legislation, just the explanation, but what's your view? We haven't seen the legislation yet, but what the Justice Minister has said today is also very concerning, because he's allowing the provinces to choose whether they're going to be able to provide made at all any form of made. He said we can deal with the criminal code, the provinces have the autonomy to decide about what healthcare services they're going to provide. This exactly will create a patchwork approach. Now can you imagine somebody who has an events directive, whose family has Alzheimer's, and it comes to the decision where they want made, and now they have to move them from Alberta to a BC to be able to access made. Do we have a universal healthcare system or don't we in this country? And then the events director of James Muloney, that's where I wanted to go next, because this is a new addition to the legislation from Sean Frazier today that the committee didn't really dig into, right?

14:59Well, so there's got to be new hearings on this. Can you get it done in time because we've got the budget. There's a bunch of other things happening and not a lot of time in the parliamentary calendar between now and March. Okay, well two things on this, it will be studied when it's going to, when the legislation is table, there'll be debated in the house, it'll be debated at committee, but it was studied. The first iteration of this made committee, which was six years ago, which I was on, we did deal with advanced directors. The last two only dealt with the mental illness component, people overlooking the fact that the first one dealt with mental illness, advanced directors, and some other issues. So there is a body of evidence there, and there is a report addressing this. But yes, I mean going forward, it's going to be studied in the course of normal courses, parliamentary process. Senator, you said I was on with that, yeah. Well, I would say again, for advanced directors, we have a court decision on this out of Quebec. Quebec has been leading the way, and we should be complying with that court decision all across the country. So I welcome this edition of advanced directors. I commend the government for adding this. As we said, it's overdue. Canadians have been waiting.

16:01The polls show us that over 80% of Canadians support advanced directors. But also the majority of Canadians support access to made with an irredeemable mental illness as well. So my argument would be this government is actually going against the will of Canadians on this issue. In general, like we've heard from dying with dignity, they have legal challenges. We've heard these extreme stories of people just living with a mental illness that ruins their life, even if it doesn't end their life. They were counting on this, and now here we are. How do we then deal with that as a country? Right? When there are people who have mental illness, their whole life, and say, I'm never going to get better. David, I've been a parliamentarian for 11 years now, and I have never dealt with an issue that is this personal and this difficult to deal with. And it's because it's so important. And every single person, whether they were an expert or from lived experience appeared before this committee every time.

17:03You know, you could feel how important it was. But that's why it's so important to get it right. And addressing mental illness and mental health in Canada is continues to be a priority. But I don't think you necessarily, this isn't the solution, and I don't think that's the link that's fair to make. I think people have to take a step back from the political arena and look at this thing. And I, many times during the course of those hearings, I would ask an expert, what do you think we should do? And the response always, well, that's up to you. I said, well, I'm a politician. You're trained professional. I need your advice. That's why you're here. And that's the way we have to approach this going forward. Yeah, I don't envy anybody who has to make this decision. Like this is, this is an impossible choice, right? It seems in so many levels. Even if rationally, you can get there, can emotionally get there and all these things. It is, it's tough. But look, I appreciate you both coming in and talking about this in Goodfake Senator. Well, it's good to see you. James Woney, appreciate your time. Thank you. Thank you, thank you.

18:04Quebec's incoming premier ran on a number of issues that will are set to put him at odds with the federal government, including a pledge to slash immigration levels seek higher transfers from Ottawa and eventually hold a referendum on Quebec sovereignty. So how will the relationship between Ottawa and Quebec change under this new PQ government? When I intend to collaborate with the Canadian Prime Minister and like the other provinces, when it's in Quebec's interests and that relationship is based on respect, we want to be at the table and not on the menu. Now certain things are not negotiable. No one can defend Quebec's specificity better than Quebec itself. I'm joined now by former Party Quebec-Wall leader Jean-François Lise. It's good to meet you, sir. Thank you for giving us some of your time today. David, thanks for having me. Nobody has ever seen an election night, quite like this one in Canada. You know, five parties, nobody gets over 30%, a minority government led by the PQ.

19:13What can the rest of Canada expect from this new Party Quebec-Wall government? Well, if you thought that Daniel Smith was a tough customer in the Federation, now she has competition. Putt-sempire Plamodon will be a tough customer. I'm told the conversation with Prime Minister Karin yesterday morning was courtous, informative. But clearly, Mr. Plamodon has made no secret of his willingness to have a referendum on independence after the departure of Mr. Trump. That would be in 2029. He doesn't have the votes in the assembly to be able, legislatively, to have this referendum. He certainly doesn't have the vote to win the referendum at this point in the debate, but clearly his determination is firm. But he will have to do exactly what Juanie Leveg did in 76, and then Jacques Parizot and Lucien Bouchard to try to be a partner that gets things done for Quebec,

20:26while still looking forward to having a majority for sovereignty. And it's a very difficult thing to do because people always suspect that you're looking for fights, but you need to have results so you can't... You have to be credible. If you are not credible in picking fights, then you will not get the support of public opinion for your main goal. It is an interesting calibration to try to have success and get victories for Quebec, which in many cases these days might rely on the cooperation of the national government, while at the same time trying to create the winning conditions to leave Canada. So you described him as a tough customer, and compared him to Daniel Smith, Mark Kerny is on pretty good with Daniel Smith. He's doing reasonably well with people like Donald Trump, despite the trade deal. How do you think that interpersonal dynamic with the premier designate and the Prime Minister will go? Well, that's the key. I believe that after Mr. Kerny's election, Daniel Smith made a determination that if she didn't get what she wanted in the year, then she might bring Alberta to independence.

21:42She might flip to the yes side. And I think Mark Kerny understood that. And so his reaction was to take the wish list of Alberta and check all the boxes. And of course that worked, and now Daniel Smith is for the know, and the separatists will be crushed in the referendum. Now turning to Quebec, I mean, this wish list does exist. Now there is no point at which Mr. Plamodon will become a federalist. But if Mr. Kerny goes down, checks the boxes, he will take a lot of wind out of the separatist cause. And I see this as a committed sovereignty. But I know that if he does that, it will be very tricky for Mr. Plamodon to gain traction, for independence. Will he? I think he showed Kerny showed the flexibility. Some people would say the rudder, rudderlessness, but the flexibility to do things that we didn't think a liberal Prime Minister would do.

22:46There are a number of things that Quebec asks for that can be done without putting the foundations of the Federation in peril. But there will be a second type of suggestion is do nothing. Because in any case he will lose his referendum. So these advices will come, and he's going to have to make a choice. Well, certainly it seems that the Prime Minister, he's not going to convince Mr. Stamper Plamodon. I think you're dead right on that. He just has to convince Quebecers. And he does seem intent on economic development in all parts of the country for the overall good and resilience. And he seems to be able to avoid fights that he doesn't want to have with First Ministers. So Mr. Plamodon may want a battle, but he may not get it. I wonder. If you look at the way the Prime Minister seems to handle some of the characters at the First Ministers table. Well, there's a non-going battle on immigration. Now Pierre Trudeau, Renéliéveg, made an agreement giving more autonomy to Quebec.

23:53And then Brian Moroni and Robert Borassa went further. And one of the elements of this long-standing agreement is that Quebec controls all permanent economic immigration, the selection, and all temporary workers. But just as Trudeau opened Renégde on this deal and opened a new federal program of temporary workers that basically flooded Quebec. So Mr. Karney, the request will come from Mr. Plamodon, but also the leader of the Federalist Party, Mr. Chalmiyat, has said that he wants to have all the power on temporary workers back to Quebec. And Mr. Karney could decide that this is one of the Trudeau mistakes that he will correct. And it will be seen as an important gesture of flexibility to Quebec if he decides to do that. Well, I think it's just to say the current Prime Minister has a few concerns about reversing the decisions of the previous Prime Minister that he has successfully run against his own party's record in many ways.

25:03But I wonder, with Mr. Sam Pierre Plamodon, he's still premiered designated at this point. It's a minority, and it's a minority with less than 30% of the popular vote, 28% because of this historically unusual outcome. How aggressive can he be on certain things with that kind of political backing for his government? You know, it's not, you're just a couple of seats short and you got 40% of the vote. It's quite an outlier. Does that limit him a little bit? Well, while it makes his life much more difficult, but there is a smaller independentist party that is Quebec, Saudi, they have nine seats. So with Quebec, Saudi, they have a majority. But these are fighting brothers. So they don't agree on a number of things. They do agree on some things. So even with them, it will be a constant give and take to have their votes. Now, it clearly has a free pass for the first year because the first budget will come in February or March. This is the time in this is the legislation in which he will put 130 million dollars to prepare the referendum and a consultation on what would be a transitory constitution.

26:24Now, all parties will be against that and even the smaller independentist party because that's not the kind of consultation they want. I won't get into the details. But no one in February or March will want to go back to the election. And if they all vote no, some of them, enough of them will be hiding in the urinals to let the government pass. The real crocs of the issue will be at the following year's budget where if the three, now the three opposition parties must agree that it is their partisan, partisan... In their self interest. Thank you David to go in the election because their planets have to align to make the government fall. Look, we've got over time. I've got about 30 seconds. I just want to know, Mr. San Pierre-Pleumadon, the hydro deal, the renewal of the Churchill Falls deal with my home province in Newfoundland, a laboratory. It's changed with the federal government coming into the table. He originally called it an insult or a humiliation for Quebecers. But now we're saying on principle the arrangement looks okay.

27:35Do you think this survives the changing government? Well, he was very harsh with the first version. He was more measured for the second version. And I know that some of the worry is not that the first 50 years is fine, but what about the second 50 years? That's really a real problem because where essentially Quebec is paying for all the infrastructure, well most of the infrastructure and all of the financing, except the federal part, but the structure lives for 100 years. We have a good deal for the first 50, but we're completely at the mercy of Newfoundland for the second 50. And I think this might be what needs renewing the renegotiating. Okay, we'll see because that's going to be a tough sell on the other side of the border. Jean-François Lise is good to meet you sir. Thank you for your time today. Thank you very much. For most of the history of professional sports, there was a wall between the game and gambling. Then suddenly it was everywhere.

28:40Ontario is all in on sports betting. You could win a shipload of money. But that wasn't supposed to include the players themselves. Rackers for a John Tay Porter is under NBA investigation athletes are the perfect gamblers. Understood the big bet available now wherever you get your podcasts. Well the Republican candidate for Senate in Michigan is switching up his take on the Canada U.S. trade war. Take a listen to these clips just over a month apart. What's going on here is the Canadians want 500,000 more Canadian-built cars pushed into Michigan. The Canadians have not been good partners on this. I think they think that Republicans are going to lose in the midterms. Here in Michigan we know that Canada is not our enemy. We need to end this tariff war now. As Michigan Senator, I'll bring both parties together to lower your prices.

29:41Oh, that gave me whiplash. President Donald Trump was asked about Mike Rogers' diversion from his tariff agenda earlier today. I've viewed him as saying that he thinks Canada is making a look. Canada has been ripping off our country for many many years. Tremendously ripping off. Canada would like to make a deal but we're not satisfied. All right the power panel is here to talk about this. We've got Amanda Alvaro. She is a former Liberal Party communication strategist. Rob Benzi is the Queens Park Bureuchy for the Toronto stirrer. And here with me in the studio Tim Powers has worked as a strategist for conservative parties and Jordan likeness is a former NDP strategist. Jordan, that clip, that was Mike Rogers sewing and Mike Rogers reaping. I think in terms of how much he's changed. But Michigan really matters and they're going hard at the Democrat and here they have a Republican walking away from the signature economic policy of the president. Yeah. Quite a sight. It's quite a sight and I mean that whiplash is real up until really recently Rogers was his line on the tariffs was that it was the right thing to do.

30:45And that his closeness to Trump would mean that he could get in there and sort of help get a better deal for Michigan. He's obviously a significant pressure from his Democratic opponent, El Dullesseed, is a very strong candidate. And these tariffs are phenomenally unpopular in the United States. You know some of the recent polling there has shown that only about 20% of Americans support increased tariffs on Canada. More than 60% of those. So what has made this such a losing issue, particularly in border states, is the harm it does to those industries. You do look at a place for example like Maine, Canada's main largest trading partner. So the hit is real to those economies. And then on top of that, these tariffs are making life more expensive for Americans across the country. So a lot of those Republicans that you're seeing in those tight races are reading the writing on the wall, which is that there's going to be a real punishment for the Republican party in the midterms over these policies. Tim, there's this reversal of the U.S. trade deficit, which is what Donald Trump says he was doing this to solve.

31:47It hit a 17 month high because of the tariffs and all of these things. I mean, what do you make of what we're seeing now, South of the border, because the concern and agitation on the knock on effect of this, it seems to be when they're buying ads like that, they know they're in trouble. Well, first of all, if Senator or Congressman Rogers wants a good beer, I can get him. But made an Ontario one, which is a little higher in price because of aluminum tariffs at the moment. I have to laugh though, the president is even backpedaling a little bit. He was saying earlier today, oh, the problem isn't that we're not executing policy. It's a PR problem, but the PR problem as he sees it is only going to get worse. If Mike Rogers and everybody else who's in a tight battle starts to take the same approach and backs away from the president, I mean, it's acute in Michigan because you've had the mayor of Sue St. Maryanne, I've talked to him before. Sue St. Mary Michigan is suffering because the people in Sue St. Maryanne, Ontario, can't afford to go over and shop.

32:48They can't interact and do all of this. This is a lived reality. Trade deficit numbers and the like aside, this has got to be what Mike Rogers is hearing. And I'm sure we'll hear more of it. Look, the president is going to Texas, which should be a safe state for him. They're saying he's going to Texas because he's in trouble down there. If they're feeling it in Texas and we've had Doug Ford's been in Texas, PR polyethics in Texas, I'm not saying that's changed the narrative in Texas, but clearly something is happening in Texas as well. So there's real issues for the president. Yeah, I mean, Amanda, the president, I think, is a PR problem, but it's not public relations. It's the punishing reality of his policies. I'm hitting all of the public. I'm sure. You like that? Nice. But that's what they're dealing with, right? Coss are up. A growth is down. Inflation is up. And their poll numbers are dropping and you're seeing that with this distancing from the signature policies. I mean, I think he has both PR problems. And you know, he does.

33:48And the reality is now coming to fruition. I think what those clips underscore is something that Canada has recognized maybe from the beginning of the dispute that Donald Trump is the president, but he's not the entirety of the US and that building the relationships and continuing the conversations with senators and governors and business leaders and workers who understand that Canada is an economic partner. And that's not an adversary is going to be really important and probably not nearly as important as it is heading into these midterms where it's really mission critical. And this is like you're seeing now the difference between all of the rhetoric, how it's affecting families on the ground and that the conversation is now becoming a political discussion domestically in the US. And that's going to matter a lot because I think when we imagine the end of this trade war or some relief from the tariffs, part of us has to imagine that the argument has to come from internally within the US as well as the arguments that are that are being made externally.

34:53And we know that's happening and we know now that it's having traction because a whip lash whip, whip lash like what we just saw with Mike Rogers doesn't happen unless he feels like he is in a politically disavantageous problem. That he's facing and that's exactly what he's facing heading into the midterms yeah okay lots of politicians course correcting campaigns, but that's swallowing yourself hold right and and Michigan of all states to run in defending the trade war with the integrated auto sector and cross border everything that happens particularly with like Windsor. Michigan is a Democrat seat they're trying to hold so Mike Rogers losing wouldn't be a game for the Democrats, but that of all states that's a tough one to run on Tom's trade agenda. Yeah yeah David there's new polling in USA today yesterday that shows Trump is Trump's favorability in Michigan is minus 24 percentage points. So he is underwater in fact the president is underwater in 39 states there's only 11 states in the United States that Trump is actually in a net positive anyone all of those states in 2016 2020 and 2024.

35:57Now Michigan is a very important state it was a key to his victory in both in 2016 and in in 2024 and he's he's in trouble and I mean Mike Rogers is you know he's the generic candidate of candidates. I mean he's like a blank canvas and like I've got I've got to say that is it is a problematic candidate for the Democrats or has been he's had some issues with the Jewish community in Michigan. I know he's been making overtures to them and I think he's having some success he's also a fearless about going on Fox News and there's all these very right wing pundits on Fox News who have man crushes on on I've got to say add who I guess works out and is very fit and it's very very very important. And it's very very weird and homo erotic frankly but but it speaks to speaks to okay Freud. Sometimes the cigar is just a cigar David yeah but it speaks to a problem that that that they have I mean at the end of the day diesel I was in Michigan last year or what earlier this year.

37:04And diesel diesel is now $6.50 a gallon and that means that means grocery prices are going up in fact it's Thanksgiving weekend here in Canada this week this weekend our Thanksgiving dinners are going to be about 10% more expensive because of Trump's tariffs because of all of the all of the various problems and it's worse for American consumers well Canadian to vote in Michigan that Republicans are being a lot of trouble but you know so it is interesting because like he he's not afraid to fight and he hits back with sort of this internet further like when he's asked about JD Vance he's like oh Peter Teals boy you know he just throws it back so that's Michigan right and that's where the Democrats are looking to hold one where the Republicans are looking to hold is in Maine where the trade wars having effect there. Senator race is getting a lot of attention as a long time Republican there could be at risk that Susan Collins take a listen to this part of the debate last night. I have been strongly voting against the tariffs with Canada but I've also been working behind the scenes try mocked it but I was successful in getting concrete pulp and road salt removed from the tariff list.

38:19I didn't mock the fact that she got road salt back I mocked the fact that what about everything else and we can't eat road salt we we have a country right now all across the northern border they're having trade wars with Canada for absolutely no reason then Donald Trump. Yeah Jordan I'm not sure why I want to make a bad I mean I wouldn't recommend eating road so I would know you can't it's toxic but don't even don't even marry me but like when it's an affordability crisis and you say I got concrete pulp and road salt off the tariff list. Yeah I mean I think look Susan Collins was one of the first Republicans to break with Trump on the tariff policy and that's a sign of the severity of the pressure that she's under as even as an incumbent in the midterms. It may be enough to save her but she's effectively running against maga and Trump's signature policy so that really speaks to the stakes of this election and the degree to which there will be a very serious defeat on the horizon for Trump for sure in the house and now like very strongly a potential path in the senate and the tariff policy is a really big part of that both for those key sectors and then also.

39:43As Benzi has talked about the cost of living impacts for everyday Americans all across the country are massive so they have not been able to pull out of that and Trump's desire to use the tariffs as a power play as a way to gain international attention and to keep other countries responding to him are absolutely harming him at home. I am relieved that when you said it Benzi you only talked about the cost of living and not that other stuff but but you know Tim when I was in Nova Scotia on my vacation the summer I ran into people from Maine. And they apologized to me for the senate and talked about Susan Collins but they made the point that she takes a stand against Trump right up until it would matter and that's the frustration they're having there and now this sort of pivot with her look concrete pulp and roto that matters you know you got to salt your roads in the winter you need concrete you need it does matter but it's just interesting to see them all stamp eating away now. And didn't that remind you David of our youth how we were so lucky to have Maine as our cable television provider. And he drisco in the right money movie.

40:43I mean, not much changed apparently in May. Tales of the Golden Monkey. But it was only what three weeks ago that Susan Collins was chastising our prime minister for talking to the Europeans. Oh, I'm not sure that's a great idea. So again, if you're looking at the credibility of Susan Collins and where she's been standing she might need some road salt so she doesn't slide all over the place. The other thing to point out here too, the governor of Maine as you know has been doing a lot of Canadian meat. The governor of Maine who seems to be very popular in Maine has been saying to Canadians for a long time, we're sorry come here we need you here. Maybe Susan Collins is finally catching on to that. But who knows if that will matter she isn't incumbent and competencies pretty damn important in the US. She had been previously popular but she did look at least in that clip like she is somewhat concerned about what her fate might be because she's getting pulled down by the president.

41:43Well, it's not just the the terrorist Amanda right like Donald Trump was a lot of reasons and maybe Benzie can psychoanalyze this. And so why Donald Trump was elected but you know two central promises was to make life more affordable and stop the forever wars. Now he's stuck in a forever war that is making life more expensive on top of his industrial policy which is also making life more expensive. And the casualties are going to be sort of the enablers in the Senate in Congress it would seem at this point. Yeah, I mean it's so hard on these arguments with Trump because you always think like what is the line you know that is too far for Republicans to go like. This week when you made the comments about Iran bombing parts of California. LA and San Diego is that enough for you yet. And so finally when we start to see some Republicans publicly pulling away from the cornerstone of his mandate potentially maybe we've reached a bit of an inflection point and it doesn't mean that you know Canada's won the argument yet.

42:47It doesn't mean that necessarily that the president is going to reverse course yet. But it does mean that it's entered the political discourse it means that people at the doors are talking about this it means that they're equating their high cost to the tariffs and all of that is going to spell problems for Republicans in the midterms and you know smarter Republicans or more savvy Republicans are thinking to themselves I have to get ahead of this but when we start seeing it in polls and then in ads in our headlines. We know that it's moved to a different place and that tends to be the kind of place that Donald Trump actually pays attention to. But you know bans is remarkable because the president looks at the stock market and assumes things are going fine. But you know it sort of misses the point that you have 19th century trade policy and pursuit of 20th century industrial policy and it's 21st century AI booms that are keeping the economy above water in the United States right now and well November 3rd what a couple of weeks away.

43:49And remember and not speaking of the 21st century data centers is a big issue in the United States and a big problem for the Republicans so he has a massive of concerns. There are billboards in Michigan paid for by the Lincoln project which is a sort of a Republican anti Trump group that say groceries more expensive thank you president Trump. I mean they have successfully tied the tariff policy the trade policy to a cost of living it's not all based on that the war in Iran is part of it there are other their natural inflationary pressures anyway but I think you're right David he's he by adopting sort of president McKinley's tariff policy or president hovers tariff policy he's he's looking backward and the world is as going in a different direction. And frankly if I were prime minister Mark Carney I wouldn't even be returning Donald Trump's calls until Wednesday November 4th you know let let let the let the dust settle and see what happens because I think that I think that the Jordan and Amanda and Timber right that it's going to be a blood bath for the Republicans on November the 3rd and not just in the Senate and in the House I think you're going to see some style a lot of state houses.

45:02Go blue as well yeah I think with the president calls you got to pick up but I take your point you know and the criticism of him let the trade policies making life more expensive is the best kind of political attack because it has the added benefit of being true. But look we're going to switch to something that's happening here the federal government has given the United States owner of Steilco the Hamilton steel plant five business days that come up with a plan to keep jobs at that Hamilton plant or face potential legal action. Cleveland cliffs announced last week that a plan to allow as many as 500 workers there something the government says violates binding commitments the company made when a bot's delco in 2024 in a letter industry minister Melanie Jolie says the government is prepared to go to court to enforce those commitments under the investment Canada act. Jolie writes where an investor fails to comply with an undertaking the act provides remedies for breaches including an application to the superior court for orders that may include directing compliance. Devestiture or monetary penalties I trust that such steps will not be necessary today minister Jolie said the company cannot use the trade war as an excuse to not meet those commitments to keep jobs.

46:07At the same time the CEO of Cleveland cliffs that own Steilco has clearly said that he's in favor of these US tariffs against steel workers and so they cannot say that this is now act of God or force majar and basically say that now they cannot commit to what they have. So Jordan yes the owner or the head of Cleveland cliffs has supported tariffs but I'm no lawyer but there are there is language in the investment act that says circumstances beyond your control the force measure reference can get you out of some of the commitments I don't know if it applies here but what do you make of how this battle is shaping up well I mean this is the latest in a series of chapters for the Canadian steel industry that have put us in I think in a very precarious position when we look at a critical industry for Canada. So of course Steilco has already dealt with struggles when US steel took over prior to Cleveland cliffs purchasing and you had thousands of layoffs and massive impact on the community there we've seen the layoffs and all go miss steel happening in susaint Marie.

47:15The reality is steel is a critical industry for Canada this is a core part of our manufacturing capacity when we talk about increasing our defense capacity when we talk about building major projects you need steel and you need ideally the domestic capacity to produce that. If you want to have some meaningful sovereignty around those things what we're seeing here is an example of the challenge in enforcing these provisions of the investment can act after the fact. So the government is you know it's it's good to see that they are pursuing the company in this case you really I think have a pretty solid case because the CEO has been advocating for the very tariffs that he is blaming for these layoffs and in addition it appears that the company did not seek any sort of assistance from the Canadian government to help maintain those jobs which would be a major omission if the company was indeed acting in good faith try to uphold that agreement you expect them to look for help. Right well not only tamed that they not seek the money they turned down money because the federal government put money on the table and Mr. Gonzalez I think is his name the head of the company didn't interview with our colleagues at CBC business and he said we don't need money we don't have work for these people to do he said it's like if you go see a doctor in your sick and they offer you money well that's great but it doesn't solve my condition.

48:34So that was the argument that he made there but the prime minister when he sort of hinted this legal action was coming when he spoke in Vancouver he was pretty mad it's him. There's the politics of this which the liberals are trying to play very well and then there's the reality of this which is yeah this probably will end up in some legal dispute but unfortunately for all those who are employed or were employed there it's not going to solve anything. I know there's a theory out there that maybe we should nationalize stoke or this particular steel these particular steel entities but I don't think that's the path forward because what do we have two weeks ago we had the prime ministers investments summit so the world is going to be watching how Canada handles all of this I'm melanie july is doing her job I don't begrudge her that but where do they go from here what happens after five days if you're saying to the world come to Canada and do business and then you're going to do business. Yet the government that is encouraging you to do that is going to get aggressively punitive towards a major global player in a time when holding you to your word well that's the balance.

49:42They would hold the government to their deal. But I think again there's a balance they have to strike there of not going too far either a legal dispute I think would be understood globally as the sensible path but beyond that as I say I'm not sure Melanie Jolie or Mark Carney can do more than that and try and do what they're trying to do elsewhere. I don't want to get in but say Lorenzo Gonzalves is CEO of Cliff's natural resources want to give him his proper name and get it right you do you want to jump in there I want to pick up on what Tim said because I think I would argue the inverse with exactly the same point so we did just have the investment summit we know the Canadian government is pushing to get a lot of foreign direct investment in Canada in our critical industries and a lot of that investment is going to come from the United States and a lot of it is going to come in the form of mergers and acquisitions. And so I think this is an example of some you know there there's positive sides to that in terms of what it brings to our economy but there are also risks and you know what is good for foreign capital is not always going to be what's good for our country.

50:49And this is an example of where not only are the workers of Stelco being left to potentially pay the price of what in the end may have been a very bad deal for Canadians but also our country's ability to maintain critical manufacturing capacity in a sector that we need so if you look at other countries for example in the UK when UK steel was in trouble you know they they have gone forward to to take over a couple of those companies with a very explicit sovereignty. And so we have a very good sovereignty recommendation with the idea that this is important because if we don't have the capacity to produce these things we're not going to be able to exercise our full sovereignty so I think it would be premature to take that option off the table in Canada. Let's turn to Wales why not. Great country great. I mean I'm shocked that our conservative strategist under Democrats see this issue differently. What are your thoughts on what the government is doing here before we get to Dr. Benzi. I mean I think they're I think they're right to take a hard line on this issue I think that you can very clearly say we welcome foreign investment but not at any price.

51:53I mean you can't you can't have a situation where you have companies acquire Canadian assets make commitments to Canadian workers and then treat those commitments like they're negotiable. If anything if nothing else it has to be a signal you know to the rest of the world that Canada is not in the business of making bad deals right we welcome foreign investment we're looking for foreign investment but commitments matter and so I do think the next step is enforcement and I think it needs to be has to be legal enforcement obviously as she's as she said that she will do and and she should and it's it's as much about a signal to the rest of the to the rest of the world it's about a signal to. The US about how Canada is going to operate you can't talk about economic sovereignty and not be willing to defend our own interests at a time when it matters but you know Benzi on that and this is not coming to the defense of Cleveland Cliffs or anything but you also can't compel a company to operate itself out of business and you know the argument coming from the company is that these people working in cold rolled steel they do not have orders and work for cold rolled steel.

53:01And if they were getting financial support from the government to keep people employed they just be paying people to be employed not to do work and I'm not taking a side in that I'm just adding that as some context here and there is this broader challenge like yes come in do deals live up to it but circumstances do change in business and sometimes you end up having to go back on what your initial plan was right. Yeah fair enough data and we've seen that with with the auto investments that government the government the government the federal government have done and things have changed circumstances have changed I think what's different though about this is first of all both the the province and and the federal government have helped Stealco get you know get away from the blast for instance get on to a cleaner grid for reduce for yeah yeah the art furnace to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and there is going to be a market for this steel at some point and we were speaking to finance minister Ontario finance minister Peter Bethlehem Fabi about this last week because he was surprised that they had not applied for the funds that the federal and provincial governments had given

54:07the Algonna to help you know that you know the terror relief that both Queens Park and Ottawa are doing a lot on that front trying to help businesses keep paying their workers giving them lots and lots of breaks and but it doesn't help that the president of Cleveland Cleveland of Cleveland is it in fact a Trump or like he's a supporter of president Trump and he's been a public supporter of these tariffs it's it's really unfortunate and it and you do feel for these workers in Hamilton because this is there the human face of this terrible we talk about it every night about how theoretical and and Trump tweets this and now this happens but this is the human face it's coming up for Thanksgiving next it's Christmas you want these folks to be working to be getting a paycheck yeah and look I bring up you know the other part of it just for a broader context on it that you know Jordan you could have a situation where a company and I don't know if that's the case here legitimately can't do it right because something has changed often it applies like a forced measure closet there's a fire at a production facility you obviously can't

55:07leave up to your contractual demands but sometimes there could be trade policy things that could just stop you from doing what you want to do sure but in this case the CEOs running around with a match so so I think the things that they're you know that this is a this is not that this is something entirely different and it seems like there has been very little good faith effort to actually to keep those jobs and to address and to address the underlying issues in fact that CEO has has exacerbated that by advocating for the tariffs and at the end of the day if when we have these investment Canada act reviews if companies are not held to account if they are not held to their word in those agreement what's the point in having these reviews what's the point in trying to secure these protections for Canadian workers and so the government I think in that sense really has no choice but to pursue the company fairly aggressively because of the message it sends to other investors you can come to Canada we want your investment but it but it is not at any cost and it is certainly not at the cost of Canadian workers yes and we did invite the CEO to come on power and politics and talk about this and they declined the interview saying they didn't want to do a full TV interview but you know Tim just quickly on this like how far do you think the government can reasonably push this because there was a commitment made we don't know the fine print of it because these deals are not released under the investment Canada act for a bunch of reasons but they have they have been threatening legal action against the companies in the auto sector and others who don't live up to their words

56:30they are the go close to legal action if not pursuing legal action but the reality is unfortunately for the still co workers that doesn't put them back to work so how is the government going to handle that particular aspect of the story there are support plants and all of those things there but I don't think beyond legal action we're going to see that plant get those plants get back to work anytime soon it's kind of a perfect little metaphor for what we're in right now with the US as a country that you may not be able to undo the damage you just have to make sure they suffer too you know it's kind of the way they do and it's it's amazing it's come to this we've also come to the end of our time Amanda Alvaro Dr. Robert Benzys psychotherapist Tim Hours and Jordan like this thank you all that's it for today if you like this episode please follow the pod and catch our next live show on cbc news network we're on weekdays at 5 p.m. Eastern time I'm David Cochran thanks for listening

57:33for more cbc podcasts go to cbc.ca slash podcasts