Transcript Season 5, Episode 1

THE WEST BLOCK

Election Edition

Episode 1, Season 5

Saturday, September 12, 2015

Host: Tom Clark

Guest Interviews: Tom Mulcair;

Expert Witnesses: Libby Davies, Bob Rae, Jay Hill;

Unpacking the Politics: Susan Delacourt and David Akin;

Author: Joseph Boyden

Location: Ottawa

This week, on The West Block: the first in our special election series with an exclusive interview with NDP Leader Tom Mulcair. His plan for the Syrian refugee crisis, the role he sees for the Canadian military and his previous support of bulk water exports.

Plus, expert witnesses: heavy hitters from each party are here to breakdown what is going on in the campaign trail. Not running for re-election themselves, they’re free to speak their minds and give us an idea of what might be happening behind the scenes.

Then, we want to bring you voices not usually heard from during an election about the issues closest to their heart. Today is acclaimed author Joseph Boyden and his pitch for why all Canadians should care about making Aboriginal issues a priority.

Welcome to The West Block: Election Edition. From here, until Election Day, you’re going to notice a few changes around this place. First of all, we are now a full hour long and we are on more often. Saturday nights at 7 pm as well as our usual Sunday slots in the morning and the evening. But it’s what we’re going to do with that time that we’re excited about.

Election campaign footage soundbites:

Stephen Harper: “That choice friends, is the right choice”.

Justin Trudeau: “Our plan is the only plan”.

Tom Mulcair: “Then let’s get out there and get the job done. Thank you very much”.

Tom Clark:

Now, if you can believe it, we are wrapping up week six of this campaign and there are five more weeks to go. Over that time, we’ll head out on the road with the party leaders to bring you behind the scenes looks at life on the campaign trail as well as full exclusive interviews with the leaders.

Well, if you believe the pollsters, Tom Mulcair as NDP is either ahead of or tied with the Liberals and the Conservatives. Either way, the NDP has never been here before and Tom Mulcair is now a very serious contender to become the next prime minister of Canada. Late last week, we met up with him in Edmonton on his campaign tour where we had a look at what it’s like behind the scenes before sitting down to discuss the big issues.

Tom Clark:

What goes through your mind just before you step on that stage?

Tom Mulcair:

At the top of a lot of my papers, I often have the word breathe because it’s something that you know in your trade, but it’s something that’s not natural in ours and so you have to remember to try to calm down and I talk too fast. I talk far too fast and my staff—just they bang their heads and sometimes they’ve got these little signs, they’re looking at me and they’re going slow it down.

Tom Clark:

I’m looking at your staff and they’re all going yeah. Yeah, that’s right.

Tom Mulcair:

This is the every night thing, right?

Tom Clark:

Yeah.

Tom Mulcair:

You gotta go through the speech. You gotta adapt it a bit for the local place and a little bit of the local news. So I noticed that Stephen Harper was in Prince Edward Island today.

Tom Clark:

Do you ever get stage fright just before you go on?

Tom Mulcair:

Tom Clark:

Tom Mulcair thanks very much for being here.

Tom Mulcair:

Good to see you, Tom Clark.

Tom Clark:

I want to start with the one issue that has really gripped this country and has made a huge impact on the campaign, of course I’m talking about Syria. You’ve said that you want to bring in 46,000 Syrian refugees within the next four years, but you want 10,000 by the end of this year. Now presuming that you win, that’s going to leave you about two months to try and organize that, so let’s look at the practicalities of this. First of all, what country or countries do you go to, to recruit these refugees and what’s involved in dealing with those countries trying to come up with agreements with them within that very short period of time?

Tom Mulcair:

You know Tom, I’ve been involved in public service for over 35 years and so I’ve learned one thing that where you’re determined to get something done—when you make it a priority—you can get it done. Where there’s a will, there’s a way. You ask which country, I think that the first one where we would start looking to work is our NATO ally, Turkey. They have about 2 million refugees in that country right now. There are other countries in the area that also have large numbers but it think that that would probably be the safest and easiest place. The Ottoman Empire, including today’s Turkey. So there are countries with a history of taking people in. Turkey’s done an amazing job, but they want Canada to be able to do more and we should be doing more, and 10,000 is not that hard to do very rapidly.

Tom Clark:

Okay, but 10,000 within two months is still an enormous number. Give me some idea of what you envisage is going to happen to 10,000 people who are airlifted out of Turkey, who arrive in Canada, are you going to set up refugee camps on Canadian Forces bases? What are we going to do?

Tom Mulcair:

You would use Canadian Forces of course to help coordinate and bring those people in that would be for us, an obvious first choice. We would also name one person, the right person responsible, commissioner responsible for taking care of this issue. The 46,000 number by the way and the 10,000 number are the United Nations numbers suggested for Canada.

Tom Clark:

But when they come, what do we do with them? I mean when they get off the plane where do they go?

Tom Mulcair:

You’d start right away. You’d have to have a plan. So you’d work with non-government organizations. You’d work with faith groups. You’d work with local members of the Syrian community who are already established in Canada. We’ve done this before. We’ve taken in large numbers of people, most recently in Kosovo, but we’ve also taken in large numbers of boat people after the Vietnam War was over. We’ve done it historically, after the Hungarian crisis in the 50’s; we’ve been that open welcoming country. Again, if you’re going to look at all the problems and say it can’t be done, then you’re taking the same approach as Stephen Harper. Our approach is where there’s a will, there’s a way. We will make this a priority. We would put the necessary resources there. We know we’ve got the people to help make this happen and it can be done.

Tom Clark:

But would you need resettlement camps set up in Canada to handle this?

Tom Mulcair:

I’ve never heard anyone suggest that such a thing would be necessary.

Tom Clark:

Well, when you have 10,000 people arriving in, in a matter of days, you’ve got to do something with them.

Tom Mulcair:

Well, don’t forget that you’re going to have lots of institutions and you’re going to have lots of facilities that would be available too. You’d be able to integrate them rapidly. That’s something that we want to do and it’s what the United Nations has asked Canada to do. Again, it’s not a question of saying would it be this specific result in that specific time frame, what we’re saying is that we can meet the United Nations request to bring 10,000 in very rapidly and we would make that a priority. And when you make things a priority, you get them done.

Tom Clark:

You’ve said before that immediately upon taking office you would withdraw the Canadian Forces out of that region of the world and away from that conflict. It sort of raises a broader question that I’d like to ask you and that is, can you foresee or under what circumstances would Prime Minister Tom Mulcair ever use the Canadian Forces in a combat role where their job was to go and kill other people?

Tom Mulcair:

First of all, with regard to the current crisis in Iraq, what we can and should be doing with our allies is restricting the flow of arms, restricting the flow of funds and restricting the flow of foreign fighters, and that includes hard work of avoiding radicalization here at home, something Stephen Harper has refused to do. We have made that tough choice in the past when we were asked whether or not we would support a bombing mission as you recall in Libya. We voted for it because it was under a United Nations mandate of the duty to protect.

Tom Clark:

Would you ever foresee a circumstance where you would send Canadian ground troops into a conflict, into a shooting war?

Tom Mulcair:

Well, I just gave you an example of where Canada was involved in a war where we were using direct military force in another country because it was United Nations mandate.

Tom Clark:

Well, there’s a difference between bombing from 30,000 feet and being on the ground with a gun.

Tom Mulcair:

There is, but that case hasn’t arisen yet. But I’m sure you’re able to understand and what I’m saying that multilateralism is a longstanding Canadian principle in these matters. We are proud members of the NATO Alliance. If in the case of a NATO mission or in the case of United Nations mission under the UN Charter, then that’s the type of thing that of course allows you to move as we did in the case of Libya.

Tom Clark:

I’ve just got one other question on the Canadian military that I’d like to ask you. NATO has asked all of its members, including us, to spend 2 per cent of GDP on defence. Canada spends less than half that, right now, under Stephen Harper. Under Tom Mulcair, would that number go up? Would you spend more?

Tom Mulcair:

Whenever I think of our military and their families, I’m keenly aware of the fact that we’re way behind in a lot of our provisions in terms of the military equipment. Procurement has been a particular problem for the Conservatives. We haven’t gotten the ships built. We haven’t had the planes delivered. It’s been a huge problem and we also know that they don’t necessarily have the best weapon. The 2 per cent goal is something that’s been set down by NATO and we’re so far from that goal that even if we start with the procurement and that’s when the expenses start, we’ll probably still be away from it. There’s also a lot that could and should be done. There’s also a goal that exists internationally for 0.7 per cent with regard to international aid and we think that we should be raising a lot what we could be doing around the world, not just on the military side, but also in terms of international aid.

Tom Clark:

But would you spend more or would you spend less on the military than–?

Tom Mulcair:

I think that the next government is almost invariably going to be spending more because a lot of the procurement has been delayed and the actual spending takes place when that procurement and the delivery start taking place. I don’t think we’re—you said we were less than half—I don’t think we’re under 1 per cent. I think we’re closer to 1.2, but I think that if that one’s going to go up, we’re also going to be making very sure that our international cooperation and aid contribution gets a lot closer to that 0.7 international goal with that as our ultimate target, but it’ll take a while because we’re also very far behind there.

Tom Clark:

On that Mr. Mulcair, we’re going to a break. We’ll be back in a few minutes with more.

Break

Tom Clark:

The rallies have been raucous as the polls show the NDP in a place they’ve never been before. First place and Tom Mulcair is clearly enjoying the moment.

Welcome back. The NDP’s promise of $15 dollar a day child care is a pillar of their election platform. We wanted to dig in a bit deeper on that issue with Tom Mulcair. He says that figure, $15 dollars is what he wants as the maximum, but that doesn’t mean it’s a one size fits all plan. More now with Tom Mulcair.

Daycare, $15 dollars.

Tom Mulcair:

Yes.

Tom Clark:

Across the country for everybody.

Tom Mulcair:

Yes.

Tom Clark:

I’m  thinking of a young couple, maybe collectively they’re making $70 or $80 thousand dollars a year and they say to you, Mr. Mulcair, why are you using my tax dollars to subsidize daycare for millionaires and billionaires?

Tom Mulcair:

Well, when we brought in the system in Quebec, and I get to put that in the first person because I was working as an elected member in Quebec City at the time. A lot of those arguments were made and there were different formulas that were looked at. Now, there’s a different gradation of the amount that’s being paid depending on how much you’re earning and that is something that the provinces are going to be able to look at because Tom, we’ve been careful all along to say it’s not one size fits all. But what’s important is the objective, the goal. We want the result of quality, affordable $15 dollar a day child care.

Tom Clark:

Would you consider raising income taxes on any group of Canadians?

Tom Mulcair:

No and I’ve been very clear on that, and I’m resolute about that. I think that Canadians—

Tom Clark:

Not even the top 1 per cent?

Tom Mulcair:

No, but what you can work on is what they’re effectively paying. So, for example, that top 1 per cent is mostly the ones who are able to benefit from something, I’m sure you know about, which is a stock option tax loophole. We’re going to get rid of that loophole and that will mean that the amount that is effectively being paid by that group would increase because they wouldn’t have access to that type of loophole. We’ve also said in that specific case where that money goes because right now in Canada, hundreds of thousands of children go to school in the morning without having eaten. And that money, by eliminating the stock option tax loophole will be paid over dollar for dollar to help lift those kids and their families out of deep poverty.

Tom Clark:

How much money are you talking about there on that one thing? On that loophole, how much?

Tom Mulcair:

That’s several hundred million dollars a year but it obviously depends a great deal from year to year because it’s not something that is consistent, but it’s several hundred million dollars.

Tom Clark:

So you can close loopholes for certain taxpayers but you’re saying you’re not going to raise taxes on any group of Canadians?

Tom Mulcair:

I’m resolute about that. I’m adamant about that. I am not going to raise tax rates for individual Canadians.

Tom Clark:

I want to take you back to 2004 when you were the Environment minister in Quebec and you spoke eloquently at the time about the need to export bulk water from Quebec.

You said, “We shouldn’t be religious about this. It’s not a mortal sin”. And in fact, you said at the time, “That this could be a great revival for the towns that were suffering because of a lack of forestry and mining jobs”. Do you still believe that we should be exporting bulk water out of this country?

Tom Mulcair:

No and I never did, but don’t forget the context there was a debate that was taking place in Quebec—

Tom Clark:

Sorry, I’ve got to stop you there.

Tom Mulcair:

Sure.

Tom Clark:

You’re saying you never did?

Tom Mulcair:

No, we were having a debate as to whether or not we should renew the rules. So, in the course of that debate we were putting up the different arguments that we were receiving, could it produce this result? Can it be a small amount because don’t forget the rules are that you can export as many 20 litre bottles as you want. So, I can fill up 10 tanker trucks full of that and that’s not a bulk export, but one 30 litre bottle was. So we were having that discussion and that debate, but at the end of that debate, I maintained the very tough restrictions on exports. But when you have a debate and you’re a minister, that’s the type of thing that you do every day. You have those open debates and you discuss what the pros and the cons are, but we shut the door on that and I was categorical about that.

Tom Clark:

Well, you got hammered by the environmental groups. They said you didn’t understand at all the nature of how water tables work. So they didn’t view that as being some sort of academic conversation you were having and if you listen to that tape, you seem to be pretty blunt about the benefits of it.

Tom Mulcair:

I’ve always talked about sustainable development. And when I talk about sustainable development, it includes things like removing inequality in our society and the biggest inequality today is that, that exists between generations, but when I talked about in that quote, the water tables, what I was saying is this, does it make sense to only look at the size of the container and not how much is being extracted from the water table? That’s what we were talking about.

Tom Clark:

Speaking of emotional debates, assisted death has been mandated in a sense by the Supreme Court. It gave the Parliament of Canada until next February to come up with legislation to enable it, to make it legal in this country. What are you going to do to bring this legislation in and pass it by February of 2016?

Tom Mulcair:

I knew you were heading to that date and a lot of what we talked about today has involved catching up and trying to make up for lost time under the Conservatives. But when you know that the rules are that tight because they’ve made it very strict, if you have to read the definition, there’s no reason for us not to be able to have that type of open debate and it is the type of thing where I would allow a free vote. I would never try to tie somebody’s hands on something like that.

Tom Clark:

And can you get it done by February?

Tom Mulcair:

Tom, that one’s going to be extremely tough, if you want it to be an open and honest consultation, but we have an obligation to put something in place, otherwise we fall into a void.

Tom Clark:

Let me ask you one other topic where the Supreme Court will weigh heavily into what you do, is you have said that not only are you not going to appoint any more senators, but you’re not even going to appoint a Leader of the Senate. You won’t even appoint a Speaker of the Senate, but you know that this is being challenged constitutionally. It’s in the federal courts right now.

Tom Mulcair:

Yes.

Tom Clark:

The process has a way to go, but before you make that pledge because Stephen Harper has made the same pledge and he’s been criticized—

Tom Mulcair:

Tom Clark:

Be that as it may, both of you are now on the side of favouring something that may be unconstitutional.

Tom Mulcair:

Well, let it die on the vine is the approach we’re both taking.

Tom Clark:

Well, no, but if the court rules that it is unconstitutional for the prime minister not to appoint senators, now you’ve got yourself an issue on your hands. Would you go to the Supreme Court first for a reference on this before making a hard and fast statement that you are not going to appoint anymore senators, considering that it may be unconstitutional?

Tom Mulcair:

Well, I think that it is heading towards the courts now, but that is one of the prerogatives the government has.

Tom Clark:

If you are not going to appoint senators, it raises the question of how do you get your legislation introduced into the Senate? You’ve got nobody there who’s going to bring your legislation forward.

Tom Mulcair:

You’re right. The legislation has to go into the Senate.

Tom Clark:

Who does that?

Tom Mulcair:

But don’t forget, we’re talking about a new government that will have a mandate from the Canadian voting public—the citizens of Canada will have given our government a mandate. So, I have every expectation that the people who are there in the Senate, they’ll be given our legislation. That’s not going to be a huge technical problem, Tom. And we’re expecting them to act responsibly once they do get it and in respect of that popular mandate from the Canadian voting public. I’m expecting that.

Tom Clark:

Are you trying to create a crisis whereby if a Mulcair government was thwarted in its efforts to pass legislation because of the Senate, are you trying to create a crisis to force a solution?

Tom Mulcair:

I have far too much respect for the public and for public service, and for our institutions to want to provoke something, but I also have confidence that there will be respect for the Canadian voting public, whatever I think of the institution and the fact that I honestly do consider it something that we can get rid of without any harm to the Canadian voting public.

Tom Clark:

Tom Mulcair thanks very much for being here. I appreciate your time.

Tom Mulcair:

Nice to see you again.

Tom Clark:

Well coming up, our expert witnesses: former politicians to help us dissect what is going on, on the campaign trail.

Break

Tom Clark:

Welcome back. A little perspective in politics is always a good thing to have, especially during the heat of an election campaign. And we have just that: three expert witnesses who know politics from the inside out: Former Deputy Leader of the NDP, MP Libby Davies. In Toronto, Former MP and Interim Liberal Party Leader Bob Rae and from Calgary, Former Conservative House Leader and party whip Jay Hill. Welcome to you all.

I want to start with all of you on Syria because it’s an issue that really took over the campaign, not only last week but into this weekend as well. You know, making public policy is difficult at the best of times, but doing it in the heat of an election is almost impossible. But take me into the calculations that parties would make on how to respond to such a gut wrenching issue like this and Libby, let me start with you.

Libby Davies:

Well, I think on an issue like this, first of all, although the crisis certainly accelerated over the last week, this is not a new issue in Canada. It’s been raised in the House of Commons many times in Question Period. Tom Mulcair has been asking questions of Chris Alexander, the minister responsible, so I think when you go into a campaign, you are aware that these are critical issues and you have to be ready to be able to respond to a changing situation and I think that’s a measure of how organized and how disciplined and how well prepared your campaign is overall, and how quickly you can respond to a changing situation. I think what happened here, Tom, is that the Conservatives seem to be caught absolutely flat because really, the action that they’ve given in the previous year was pretty dismal.

Tom Clark:

So let’s go to Jay Hill and talk about it. But Jay, you know, I mean so much of the public response instantly was about that picture of the young toddler on the beach. How do you think the Conservatives reacted to what seemed to be a pretty white hot public mood at the time?

Jay Hill:

Well Tom, I think that all three leaders instantly expressed their concern. I think that all of them, that I saw, were close to moved to tears over that three-year-old’s body on the beach, that photo that went around the world more than once or twice. But, you know I would say that for the government, it was more a question of tone. It was wanting to get into the facts right away. I think that there was a lot of misinformation out there. I mean the most recent thing I’ve seen is now that the father of those two young boys is allegedly was the skipper of the boat and was involved in people smuggling, so there’s a lot of misinformation about that particular incident that brought this to the forefront. As Libby says, this issue’s been around for quite some time. I think that it certainly in my case, and not for partisan reasons, I’ve looked at the positions of all three leaders that they’ve taken before and since that particular incident of the boat and the drownings, and I would have to say that I support what the government is endeavouring to do.

Tom Clark:

I just want to go to Bob for his thoughts on this. Bob.

Bob Rae:

Sure. What we’ve seen in the last while, particularly with this dramatic picture, is public opinion in the country has shifted dramatically, has moved and the test of leadership and it’s always heightened in a campaign is, how quickly can you respond and how quickly can you pivot and turn, and show that you’re in charge and that you’re responsible? I think—I’m not going to be partisan at all. I mean, I think the response of the government most Canadians would think was a little bit tone deaf for the first while. It just didn’t seem to kind of respond to the humanitarian situation and it didn’t look as if the government was doing enough. I think we’re now seeing everybody piling on and trying to say we’d do more, we’d do more and that’s a natural response. I think the key thing though is for everybody to understand that we need to do our job as Canadians in responding to a humanitarian crisis. People want their government to do that. They want their government to be engaged in that. Fair enough, they also want their government to be concerned about security and they want the government to be trying to deal with the underlying issues that are giving rise to this crisis. That’s what people expect from their government and each of the leaders will be trying to present the case that they’ve got a better understanding of it than anybody else, and I think that’s what we’re seeing. I think we’re seeing the government trying to put the issue to bed and that’s what we’re seeing at the press conference this morning. That’s what it’s all about.

Tom Clark:

Let me jump in here on sort of a broader topic for all three of you and we can just sort of lightly touch on this, but Bob, you’ve written a new book called, What’s Happened to Politics? And at the risk of sort of synthesizing it too much, you say that politics is in trouble because we’ve gone to sloganeering as opposed to substance. The permanent election campaign doesn’t leave room for proper debate and a host of other ills. When we take a look at a campaign that gets overwhelmed by an issue like this, given the fact that there is so much poison in the well, as you’ve outlined, is it even possible in an election campaign to have the type of debate that is necessary or was Kim Campbell right back in 1993 when she said, “Elections are no time to discuss policy”? Bob, let me start with you and let’s quickly jump around.

Bob Rae:

Well I actually think a long campaign is a really good time to discuss policy. I think the media, quite frankly, could be doing a whole lot more to look at all the other issues that are out there and what the parties are saying about them. I think the media is much more complicit in simply going along with how the parties are trying to present their message and package their message, and package what they’re doing. And I think that’s really where things are not working through in this campaign. This campaigns no different than any others. It’s just longer. It’s a lot longer. And now we’re looking at a time when it’s hard to get the issues out there.

Tom Clark:

Libby, let me go to you.

Libby Davies:

Well, I think it’s like a double edged sword, Tom. On the one hand, we all want to see open and free debate. We want to see how the leaders and the candidates respond to key issues. We want to see them being honest and frank, but on the other hand, it’s kind of merciless out there, especially with the impact of social media, and any little glitch, any little thing that goes wrong of course is, the media will jump on it. Why shouldn’t you, that’s partly your job, so I do think it’s sort of in a very difficult place and I have to say, ever since I’ve been an MP, since 1997, I’ve seen campaigns like this. I think it has accelerated in terms of the tightly scripted messages and the campaign stops. Certainly the leaders debates is an opportunity where one hopes you can see the leaders and how they respond and what they do, but I do think that the sort of the unknown and the interesting twist is social media. For example, I’m thinking of Miss Universe and the impact that she had about her statements about not voting for Mr. Harper. I mean that had a huge impact. That was social media.

Tom Clark:

Jay, I’m going to throw it for you, for a last word.

Jay Hill:
Okay well, very quickly, Tom. First of all, I want to assure my friend Bob Rae that I did buy his book, the day after he launched it.

Bob Rae:

Careful Jay, I don’t want to hurt you among your friends.

Jay Hill:

Tom Clark:

Break

Tom Clark:

Welcome back. From political ads to campaign shakeups, it’s time to unpack the politics of this past week. And joining me now to do that, author and journalist for the Toronto Star Susan Delacourt and David Akin Parliamentary Bureau Chief for Sun Media. Welcome to you both.

Susan Delacourt:

Thank you.

Tom Clark:

Okay, I want to show you guys and everybody out there, a little bit of two ads, a Conservative ad and NDP ad. You may have seen them but boy, you’re going to see a lot more of these ads in the next day’s head. Let’s take a look.

Conservative ad: Business creates jobs. Stephen Harper isn’t perfect, but when it comes to the economy, we can depend on him.

NDP ad: Stephen Harper, we’ve had a lot of complaints. Yeah, election fraud. Stephen Harper, it’s time to let him go. Nice hair though.

Tom Clark:

David Akin:

No matter who does it, it’s hilarious.

Tom Clark:

Susan Delacourt:

Yeah, I think it’s going to be fun to see—I think they could do a whole series of these as I’ve been joking that I’ve been looking forward to the ads that have that committee vetting Mike Duffy’s Senate appointment. I think that this could be a whole television series. But I agree with you, as for affect, I think it was probably wearing down anyway. This is a long campaign. I talked a couple of weeks ago to some ad experts who said that the normal running time for an ad is about four weeks, then you take a break, then you do another ad for four weeks. So in the private sector, this ad would have been running its course anyway.

Tom Clark:

David Akin:

You’re right. And it is clearly a concession by the Conservative brain trust to say okay, there are some negatives I guess out there about Stephen Harper and any number of public polls will say yes, there’s a lot of negatives about Stephen Harper so here’s a way to maybe neutralize a bit of that. Of course if you’re a journalist, if you’re an opponent, one of the things that you might want to follow up with the Conservatives is okay what was it that he was not perfect at? Was it managing the economy? Was it the security issue? Was it C-51? It kinda opens the door for any number of questions. But again, it’s clearly recognition the Conservatives said not all has been going swimmingly in terms of their messaging. The interview ad I thought was initially very effective against both Trudeau and Mulcair, but now they’ve got to make the case for themselves and like our guy because he is what he is and that’s not perfect, but it’s okay.

Tom Clark:

And if that NDP ad is effective and it’s the NDP shooting against Stephen Harper, not against their rivals for replacement, the Liberals. What affect—is part of that ad aimed at Conservative supporters as well as trying to buck up the NDP supporters and try to bring Liberals over but I’m wondering if part of the effect of that is to undermine the Conservative vote?

Susan Delacourt:

Certainly to, I think, further dampen Conservative enthusiasm. I think that’s been a big problem. We’re hearing that. That the Conservatives already were having problems with motivation in a long campaign, you know, getting the volunteers out. Now they see news like their campaign manager is having to go back to headquarters. Stephen Harper has to admit he’s not perfect. It doesn’t feel like a winning campaign and I think motivating Conservative voters is going to be one of the big issues for them and the remaining—is it a hundred weeks left in the campaign?

David Akin:

I’m gonna just push back a bit on the narrative that the Conservative campaign is as bad as it may have been all cracked up to be. The fundraising I’m told on the local level and the national level is coming in at the regular pace, so that’s often a proxy for excitement, but I do think the NDP, who are just starting really to get into the air war in a substantial way for the first time. Five weeks in, we’ve hardly heard from the NDP on TV yet. Now we’re going to, but there are a whole lot of races where they have to keep the Conservatives at home where it’s you were in Edmonton recently. There was a great case where there were five, six, eight ridings where it’s NDP or Conservative. The Liberals aren’t much of a factor so they need to hammer down that Conservative vote.

Susan Delacourt:

We should remember the BC lesson that the New Democrats, a lot of their federal people here went out to work in the BC election expecting that Adrian Dix was going to win, were bitterly disappointed and one of the big lessons they took from that campaign was being nice doesn’t work.

David Akin:

Dix refused to do a negative ad.

Tom Clark:

Right.

David Akin:

And he blew a huge lead.

Susan Delacourt.

Yeah. And so I think you’re going to see that this start of negative campaigning by the NDP is the lessons of British Columbia.

Tom Clark:

We don’t have a lot of time left, but I want to hit on this, what we’ve seen after five weeks or six weeks of this campaign so far, is a tie. Nobody has made the argument to break from the pack yet. What does that tell us about what we can expect to see in the next week or so? Or it possible, Susan, that nobody’s going to break away from this pack?

Susan Delacourt:

I like the way this race is going. I really do like that it’s a tight race. I like the fact that nobody can be counted out and I think it’s a sign of what a post-partisan world we’re living in. I think it shows us that people are not attached to political parties at all anymore. They think of them as interchangeable. They think of their promises as interchangeable and I think people are going to be changing their minds right up until voting day, maybe even before the moment they cast their ballot.

Tom Clark:

Thirty seconds–

David Akin:

There are some interesting points. I mentioned the advertising is just starting from the NDP and they could their numbers one way or the other. And we’ve got a few debates coming up, including one on foreign policy which we don’t yet, I think, whether Trudeau will be in. but like all campaigns, I think we’re going to see maybe some numbers or there’s the potential to hinge on the debates and I’ll be looking at those with a very different eye because of the three-way race.

Tom Clark:

Okay, and the good news, there’s only five weeks left. Get some sleep. Susan Delacourt, David Akin thank you both very much for being here. I appreciate your time.

David Akin:

Thanks, Tom.

Tom Clark:

Well coming up next, he’s one of Canada’s hottest authors and Joseph Boyden’s Canada includes putting the Aboriginal issue front and centre in this campaign.

Break

Tom Clark:

Welcome back. Well there’s a common complaint that some issues just don’t seem to get noticed during a campaign so we’ve decide to address that in a pretty unique way. We’ll be speaking with some prominent Canadians who will articulate issues that are close to them. These Canadians all have one thing in common: their work is all about Canada; writers, musicians, historians. Today, the plight and the promise of Canada’s Aboriginal community and we look at it through the eyes of one of Canada’s most successful writers, the author of Three Day Road, Through Black Spruce and The Orenda. Here is my conversation with Joseph Boyden.

Joseph Boyden good to have you here.

Joseph Boyden:

It’s a pleasure.

Tom Clark:

What should we be talking about in this election campaign that we’re not talking about?

Joseph Boyden:

I think one of the most important, obviously is the state of the First Nations Inuit and Métis people in Canada and where we’re at, where we’re going, what the Truth and Reconciliation Commission has recommended how we move forward as a country. I think that’s really important. I think the economy also is something incredibly important and the two are inter-related.

Tom Clark:

I want to get to that in a minute, but when we’re talking about our relationship with the First Nations why is that important to you?

Joseph Boyden:

Well, let’s keep in mind, between 2006 and 2011 our First Nations population grew by 20 per cent to over 1.4 million. Now we doing have a long form Census so I have no idea but I’m going to guess and very conservatively that it’s much closer to 2 million and above and this is a large population in our country. First Nations youth is the fastest growing population in the country. If you’re an Aboriginal woman, you’re four times more likely to die violently than any other female population in our country. The poverty rates, in our Northern reserves especially, are horrendous. The education is far lower than national average so we have to look at these problems that we face as a country. It’s not them versus us kind of issue. This is an issue for all of us. Are we going to allow the fastest growing population in our country to remain second class citizens or do we move forward and try to find an equalizer, something that brings us together.

Tom Clark:

You know, you’ve written so eloquently, if I could use this expression about the third solitude in this country. And you were tremendously successful in your writing and connecting your Canadians. It hasn’t really surfaced though as an election issue so how do you engage the political class, the politicians, the voters, anybody and the things that you’re talking about.

Joseph Boyden:

Tom Clark:

You know, I think a lot of people say that yeah, personally they can get attached to this issue, but it’s so big, it’s so broad that it’s almost intimidating for a lot of people.

Joseph Boyden:

Absolutely.

Tom Clark:
So where do you start? What is the single most effective, easiest thing that could be done could be promoted during a campaign to address this issue?

Joseph Boyden:

I’m going to go right to it and say that we need desperately to look into why Aboriginal women are victims so often, and most often to strangers and why four times more likely if you’re an Aboriginal woman to die violently. We have to create a commission to look into this because that’s going to force us to look into a much bigger issue than just the horrendous issue of the violence against women. It’s going to look into where the breakdown is, where things are happening that shouldn’t be happening in our society.

Tom Clark:

This really has been your animating issue in your life, in your professional life. How optimistic are you that we’re making progress on this?

Joseph Boyden:

Well we’ve got this amazing young population who are really owning who they are and where they come from and this is the first generation I’ve seen since the last residential school closed its doors in 1996. That’s not that long ago. And so this is really the first generation I’m seeing who is making a statement and making it nationally and drawing really positive and good attention. And this is why I feel positive about the future. I think that young people are wanting to reclaim their culture. They’re wanting to reclaim their language. They’re wanting to reclaim their religion. They’re wanting to reclaim so much of what was tried to be taken away for generations and this is something really positive.

Tom Clark:

You said earlier that there is a connection between the issue of a relationship with the First Nations and the national economy. You know we talk about pipelines in this country, whether it be natural gas or whether it be oil. Is it a question there of First Nations people deciding what is going to be built? I mean they have the ability to stop it.

Joseph Boyden:

Well, I mean look at what’s going on in BC with the pipeline going through the Great Bear of the majority of First Nations had known. It’s stalled out. This is something that we have to whether we like it or not—you know, whether you like it or not. Whether you’re banging your head against the wall going this is not fair. We should get this oil, it’s best for everyone or why does this small group of people get to stop it. It’s not a question of that at this point. It’s a question of yes, First Nations can and will stop it and continue to in the understanding that we have to respect the land upon which we live and this is not doing that. And again, and I’m not saying I’m anti-anti. I’m saying I’m absolutely pro looking forward and creating an economy that is multi-directional and not just driven by oil. This is something we have to do and this is something that no one’s really addressing.

Tom Clark:

And you are.

Joseph Boyden:

Well, I’m talking about a politician who—I’m talking about the ones in the war rooms. I think that they need to begin looking at and saying to Canada, you know, we are not just a one trick pony with the oil sands. We have to think beyond that for our future economy. And I’m not talking in this next quarter. I’m talking in the next year. We have to make a big change and begin that change soon.

Tom Clark:

Joseph Boyden, thank you so much for contributing to the election debate. Much appreciated.

Joseph Boyden:

It’s my pleasure. Thanks.

Tom Clark:

Coming up next: Tom Mulcair like you’ve never seen him before. A rare–

Break

Tom Clark:

Well we’ve got one last treat for you before we go. Before we get to that though, thanks very much for joining us. Now, let’s go back to that NDP rally in Edmonton and to the secret green room where Tom Mulcair was waiting to go on stage.

What’s worse, thinking that you’re going to lose or thinking you’re going to win?

Tom Mulcair:

Tom Clark:

You know, you may win, you may lose, but at some point in your life, the political thing is going to be over.

Tom Mulcair:

Yes.

Tom Clark:

You going to miss it? Will you miss this? I mean the holding room, the green room, having all your people—well you haven’t got many, but you’ve got a couple. The crowd out there are just waiting for you to deliver some jokes.

Tom Mulcair:

I’ve been blessed and Catherine and I have always had a project to grow tomatoes once this was all over, no matter one way or the other. So this has always been our standard joke, we could be growing tomatoes somewhere.

Tom Clark:

You know, just a pro tip here, if you’re a politician, don’t talk about tomatoes too much.

Tom Mulcair:

Tom Clark:

People may get ideas.

END OF AUDIO