The West Block Transcript: Season 6 Episode 12

THE WEST BLOCK
Episode 13, Season 6
Sunday, December 4, 2016

Host: Tom Clark

Guest Interviews: Minister Mark Holland, Minister Scott Reid, Minister Alexandre Boulerice, Minister Jim Carr, Chris Sands

Location: Ottawa

—

On this Sunday, the government attacks the Electoral Reform Committee and its members demand an apology. What happened after that? Well, we’ll go to the committee members to find out.

Then, Prime Minister Trudeau says no to Northern Gateway and yes to Kinder Morgan, setting off outrage on the Hill and out west. The decision comes amid charges of pipeline politics. Natural Resources Minister Jim Carr is here to talk about that.

And President-elect Donald Trump appoints a long-time NAFTA critic as his secretary of commerce. But could Washington really be targeting the GST?

It is Sunday, December the 4^th. And from the nation’s capital, I’m Tom Clark. And you are in The West Block.

Late last week, a committee on electoral reform submitted its report and all hell broke loose. It called for a referendum on changing the voting system to some sort of proportional representation. That’s not what the government wanted. And in Question Period last Thursday, Democratic Reform Minister Maryam Monsef lashed out so harshly that a day later she was forced to apologize. Take a listen to before and after:

Minister Maryam Monsef: ‘Mr. Speaker, while they did not complete the hard work we had expected them to, this is consistent with what we heard from Canadians.’

‘Yesterday in this House, I used words that I deeply regret. And if you’ll allow me, I’d like to sincerely apologize to the members of this House, to Canadians and to the members of this special all-party committee on electoral reform.’

Tom Clark: Well joining me now, three members of that committee. Joining me here in Ottawa is Mark Holland of the Liberals, Scott Reid of the Conservatives, and joining me from Montreal, Alexandre Boulerice of the NDP. And Alexandre, let me start with you. On Friday afternoon, Maryam Monsef apologized profusely for the criticism she made. So is that over and done with now? Stupid things were said and then there was an apology, we can move on from it?

Minister Alexandre Boulerice: You know what has been said has been said and it was insulting quite frankly, not only for the members of the committee who worked really hard and reached a consensus among the four position parties, but also for the thousands of citizens who participate in the process and all the others who believe the Liberals making the promise that 2015 will be the last first past the post system which is a really unjust and unfair system. So I hope that now the government will take the recommendations of the committee and move forward with a good bill to increase our democracy.

Tom Clark: Okay, well we do have a member of the government here to answer that directly. But Scott, let me ask you first of all, you heard first of all what happened on Thursday. Then you heard the apology on Friday. Are we sort of over that part of this story that we can now just deal with the substance of it?

Minister Scott Reid: I think we should deal with the substance. Yeah, I mean the minister apologized not once, but I think I counted three separate times during Question Period and I take what she said in her apology at face value.

Tom Clark: Okay, so Mark over to you. And the very question that Alexandre brought up and I think the Conservatives have said as well that it’s outside of the apologies and strange words that were said. Nevertheless, it does appear that you have basically just kicked the committee report down the stairs and going we don’t care about that report.

Minister Mark Holland: No, I mean I think first of all, the minister, myself, I would say the prime minister of caucus is very appreciative of the work that all members of the committee did. It was an incredible undertaking and they met with all kind of Canadians and took the opportunity really to give up six months of their lives to devote to the subject.

Tom Clark: I don’t mean to press this but your minister openly mocked the committee, openly mocked this Gallagher formula or whatever it is and held it up as a prop in the House. When you start mocking or making fun of committee work, it’s pretty hard to say that we take it seriously.

Tom Clark: Okay, let me go to Scott on this. Scott, the committee report comes in. Now they’re sending out postcards across the country and so on. Are you satisfied with the direction of this?

Minister Scott Reid: Well I would be satisfied if on the website: mydemocracy.ca the government would include the questions that the committee asked in its own consultation. We had our own electronic consultation. We had over 20,000 responses but a fraction of what the government will get. They have a unique opportunity to get concrete answers to specific questions, such as should there be a national referendum on this issue? Which kind of model suits you best as an alternative to first past the post? Is it MMP? Is it the preferential ballot? Is it STB? They would get literally—they have a unique opportunity to get more data than has ever been possible for a government before but only if they change the questionnaire from what it is now.

Tom Clark: Did you ever decide; meaning the Conservatives, ever decide what your preferred model is?

Minister Scott Reid: No, we haven’t stated a model and the reason is that we believe that as long as the Canadian people get to decide on the model, there is no danger to either Canadian democracy or to our own parties’ interests. Nothing that is prejudicial to fair voting outcome is going to make it through the test of a referendum.

Tom Clark: And let me get Alexandre in on this. In terms of the process, it seems to me that what the committee found and what pollsters are finding is that Canadians simply aren’t engaged in this process. Some polls have it down around 1 or 2 per cent of Canadians who say that they’re really intrigued by this whole notion of changing the electoral system. So how do you take even what you heard in the committee from your journeys across the country as anything representative of public opinion when so few people are engaged?

Tom Clark: Okay, I want to come back to that but widen it out a little bit. And we’ve all talked about this before. The three major parties come to a position on this. The NDP want proportional representation because it suits them, it’s going to give them greater representation. You want ranked ballots because you’re always going to be everybody’s second choice which means you’re going to be in power forever and a day. And you want a referendum because you don’t want any change whatsoever, right? I mean is this the simple explanation what’s going on here because–?

Minister Scott Reid: No, I mean look our caucus has many different opinions, even inside of our own caucus in terms of what system people would like to have. I’m constantly lobbied every day by people in our caucus. And so we don’t have a Liberal position on this issue and that’s why we thought it was incredibly important to go to the special committee. What we were hoping out of that process was something that would make a specific recommendation of a specific system that would have been easier to advance—

Tom Clark: But Scott, I don’t think—

Minister Scott Reid: Just to finish this off—

Tom Clark: Yeah, okay quickly though.

Minister Scott Reid: Because there are a lot of people who are saying well you know why don’t the Liberals change the questions or the questions should be this. These questions aren’t written by us. They’re written by political scientists. We went to them and said if we want to understand where the public stands on democratic reform and changing their system, ask them to formulate those questions. And they’re all integrated in a way where one leads to the other to be able to—

Minister Mark Holland: Scott, the question here you’re referring to?

Minister Scott Reid: Absolutely, yeah.

Tom Clark: Go ahead.

Minister Mark Holland: Well, when I spoke to the minister, I spoke to her directly about this and she said ‘What do you think I should do?’ And I said keep your questions; add on these additional questions that were designed by the committee to reveal more specific inputs. And then of course the committee actually passed a motion to that affect. So I think you would get a very clear, not just 50,000 foot values issues dealt with, but issues that are concrete that would allow the government to then move forward with a specific model.

Tom Clark: Can I ask all three of you because I’ve only got 20 seconds left so I need like a three-word answer on this. Next election is it going to be first past the post or is there going to be a new system in place? Scott, what do you think?

Minister Scott Reid: That depends on the Liberals.

Tom Clark: Okay.

Minister Mark Holland: It’s my hope that we can get to change.

Tom Clark: That’s not what your election promise said. Now we’re down from—

Minister Mark Holland: Well look, we need the buy in of the Canadian people. We have to work with the other parties. We have to ensure that what we put forward demonstrably improves the system. So it’s what we’re working towards, Tom.

Tom Clark: Okay, Alexandre.

Minister Alexandre Boulerice: I think Canadians deserve a fair system where every vote counts and I hope the Liberals will keep their promise.

Tom Clark: Okay, Alexandre Boulerice in Montreal, Scott Reid and Mark Holland joining me here in Ottawa. Thank you very much for your time. I really do appreciate it.

Coming up next, the government says yes to two new pipelines, including the controversial Kinder Morgan project. But will it go ahead?

Tom Clark: Welcome back. Well, it is no to Northern Gateway but yes to line three and to Kinder Morgan. And it’s that last pipeline, Kinder Morgan that has so enraged environmentalists and even led Green Party Leader Elizabeth May to say that she would be prepared to go to jail to stop anybody from building that. Meanwhile, the government is saying that if protests do indeed get out of hand, it’s going to call in the army.

Well joining me now from Winnipeg, Natural Resources Minister Jim Carr. Minister thanks very much for being here. Listen, about this army business, are you serious? You said that last week. Are you serious about calling in the army if there are protests on this line?

Minister Jim Carr: Well, Tom, what I said last week is that one of the reasons that Canada is such a great country is because we protest peacefully and we encourage peaceful protests. You know that this is a controversial issue. There are people on many sides of it. And we also know that we’re now making the argument to Canadians that it’s very important to have a balance in these decisions between job creations and there will be at least 22,000 jobs created through the expansion of these existing pipelines. And that we are committed to what we have said already that we’re phasing out coal by 2030. There will be a Pan-Canadian climate framework. We have worked very closely—

Tom Clark: Okay, but if the protests get out of hand though, if they get violent, if they get out of hand, you’ll call in not only the police but the army, right?

Minister Jim Carr: I’m saying that we are anticipating that the protests will be peaceful. They have been peaceful. We know that people feel very strongly about these issues and we respect that. We know that across the country people are looking at ways that we can sustainably develop our natural resources to move them to markets in such a way that we don’t have to rely exclusively on exports to the United States. And these decisions are all designed to make that happen.

Tom Clark: Okay, we’re getting away from the point. We’ll point out last week you in fact did say that. But let’s move on. One of the things in dealing with especially the Kinder Morgan pipeline, it is a pipeline to tidewater which has always been a precondition of the Chinese for wanting to invest further in the oil sands, particularly in Alberta. Now that this pipeline is going to go ahead, are you going to loosen the rules for Chinese investment in the oil patch?

Minister Jim Carr: That’s a subject that the government is discussing right now. We’re looking at trade and investment. We are a trading nation. Our government says that it’s very important to expand free trade in the interest of Canadians so that we know that in order to establish these export markets, we have to find a way to get our resources to port sustainably. And we believe, and I’m sure many people would agree, that a better way to move the product is through pipelines rather than by rail. By expanding our export markets, we open up new opportunities for Canadian product.

Tom Clark: Okay, but what I was asking about was Chinese investment, something that was very problematic for the last government. Something that’s very sensitive in this country about letting the Chinese have control over our natural resources so I’m not talking about export markets. What I’m talking about is investment, specifically Chinese investment in the oil sands. You say you’re talking about it. Do you expect that that is in fact going to happen that the rules are going to be loosened so that there can be more Chinese money coming into the oil business?

Minister Jim Carr: I know that my colleagues are talking about trade and investment opportunities for Canadians. And I know that we are having conversations with many countries around the world. We know that there is a thirst for Canadian resources. I know that myself travelling to Japan and to India, you know that we have approved the Pacific Northwest LNG project because we know that there are Asian markets for that. So that the Government of Canada is very interested in taking full advantage of our resource potential, sustainably with all of the necessary safeguards.

Tom Clark: Okay, I’ll try one other subject and see if we can actually get something out of this. President-elect Donald Trump has said that within the first 100 days he is going to approve the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline. Do you think, does the Government of Canada think that the Keystone will be built? Will you in fact encourage the Americans to go ahead and build it? You’ve always been in favour it. Do you suspect that the Keystone XL will be built starting say in the next 100 days or so?

Minister Jim Carr: Well you’re asking me to assume what the president-elect might do. We know that all of the approvals for Keystone XL are in place north of the 49^th parallel. We know that we supported the application in the first place. It’s up to the company to determine whether it wants to proceed. Then it’s up to the American administration to determine how it wants to respond to that. And we supported—

Tom Clark: But you still want that pipeline built, do you?

Minister Jim Carr: Yes, we do.

Tom Clark: Okay, Jim Carr joining us from Winnipeg. Thanks very much for your time today.

Minister Jim Carr: My pleasure.

Tom Clark: I really appreciate it.

Minister Jim Carr: Okay.

Tom Clark: Coming up next, President-elect Donald Trump selects an anti-free trade commerce secretary. How is this going to affect Canada and NAFTA?

Tom Clark: Welcome back. Well President-elect Donald Trump is still naming his cabinet. Late last week, he announced that 79-year-old Wilbur Ross, a billionaire, will be his commerce secretary. That’s of interest to Canada because Ross is a vocal critic of NAFTA. He is also a vocal critic of the value-added tax, otherwise known as the GST that we have here in Canada.

Well joining me now to talk about what this may mean is Chris Sands, Johns Hopkins University in Washington. Thanks very much. Chris, this is really sort of the—he hasn’t done anything yet but if past is prologue, Wilbur Ross is going to go after the whole idea that American companies should have to pay the GST which would be a huge tax hit for Canada. How seriously should we take his candidacy in terms of what sort of threat it may pose to us?

Chris Sands: Well I think it’s interesting. If you look at the business community in the United States, then you can really subdivide into those who’ve done really well on international trade, including the companies that have North American supply chains like the auto firms. And then others, you were able to prosper but you don’t really do as much on the international side. And Wilbur Ross is in that second category, he has done very well in the U.S. He has some international activity but the commerce department, unlike the U.S. trade representative which negotiates new treaties, the commerce department is the enforcement arm on trade disputes. They’re the ones who bring the charges on soft wood lumber or any other area that comes up that’s a dispute. And to put somebody who is very much a critic of the way other governments manage things, who’s a low tax, low regulation kind of person and who’s very aggressive in pushing U.S. business interests so very much an America first kind of commerce secretary. To put him in charge of enforcement certainly suggests that it’s going to be a tough period for Canada-U.S. relations in those areas where we really are in dispute.

Tom Clark: Yeah, and you know I mean if he’s playing bad cop, I’m not sure who good cop is yet in the Trump administration but let’s say he’s playing bad cop. You know one of the things that both countries have been so proud of is that this long border between our two countries, undefended. We’ve spent a lot of time and effort in the last number of years making it easier for goods and services and people to go back and forth. Are you concerned at all that we’re heading into a new era where that border’s going to get a lot stickier because of these confrontations?

Chris Sands: Well I do worry about it a little bit. We want to accentuate the positive always and it’s certainly a mistake to look back and say we haven’t had disputes like this in the past. I think about during the Obama administration, the effort to enforce our tax laws extraterritorially. So if you’re an American citizen or dual trying to tax what goes on in Canada, we had this big dispute this year with the IRS gong after dual citizens who haven’t been back to the United States in quite a while and trying to garnish their income or make them renounce their citizenship. So we’ve had issues like that before, but during the Obama years we tried to manage that because we had relatively well disposed governments on both sides. This one’s going to be a little bit rougher. And putting American interests first is both symbolic and real. So, on the one hand you want to be assertive for American business. But on the other hand it’s partly a show. And so the tough talk could be really meaningful for Canada or it could just mean like Donald Trump, a rude, crude in your face kind of approach from the United States that behind the scenes can be managed with some civility.

Tom Clark: And that’s the real problem for a government like Canada or any other government around the world dealing with Donald Trump is you don’t know that very thing that you were talking about. Is it real or is it imagined? But put yourself for a second in the position of the Canadian government on everything from soft wood lumber to a possible attack on the GST to demands to increase military spending, to meet NATO commitments, on and on and on, all sorts of issues there. You know the people who surround Donald Trump. You’ve studied them at the very least. What’s the correct response? What should Canada be doing with the Trump administration not that we’re seeing the shape of it?

Jim Carr: Well there are a couple of things I think that are really important. First of all, I think Canada should stand its ground. One of the things about Donald Trump that we’ve seen on display this entire campaign season is that his personality—he’s a bit of a bully. He comes on strong and he’s used to dominating the room. And he was like that as a kid as he’s told us but he’s still like that now. I think it’s a big mistake with bullies to appear to cower or offer concessions for nothing because they don’t respect you. And I think Canada is right to take a nationalist position just like Donald Trump takes a nationalist position and defend Canadian positions. I think you have to do that rather than cower. At the same time, I think as much as you can deal with the permanent bureaucracy and the people who actually make Washington run, as opposed to the flashy personalities in front of the cameras, is really helpful. If Donald Trump can pick a solid ambassador to Washington or to Ottawa, that person can be wonderful for helping Canadians to navigate in the new Washington, D.C. And so making sure you have a good interlocutor. And then the third thing, for Wilbur Ross, for Donald Trump, Canada just isn’t target number one. It might be China. It might be Mexico. And I think that’s an advantage, not being right in the target sights means that I think Canada’s issues, while important, may not get the full attention or the full court press from Wilbur Ross, from Donald Trump simply because a fight with China over trade or a fight with Mexico over trade or even a fight with the European Union over trade will just consume so much more of their time and attention. So with all those three things playing it below the surface trying to separate rhetoric from reality and allowing other fights to distract the presidency to the extent you can, I think Canada will navigate it somewhat well.

Tom Clark: And quick answer on this one. Are you being considered for the next ambassador to Canada?

Jim Carr: Not rich enough unfortunately. The CTV appearance fees are too low. The Global appearance fees are too low. I can never quite make the money so I’ll just have to comment from the sidelines.

Tom Clark: And that is our show for today. I’m Tom Clark. Join us again next Sunday for another edition of The West Block. Until then, have a great week.