April 6, 2025 • 52 mins
When Canada's snap election was called for April 28th, few could have predicted how dramatically the political landscape would shift. What started as a predictable contest with Conservatives comfortably ahead has transformed into a national referendum on sovereignty and resilience in the face of unprecedented threats from south of the border.
Donald Trump's sudden targeting of Canada with punishing tariffs and provocative statements about making Canada "the 51st state" has upended conventional political wisdom. Prime Minister Mark Carney and Conservative challenger Pierre Poilievre now find themselves battling over who can best protect Canadian interests against an increasingly hostile neighbor.
In this episode, Dr. André Lecours, professor at the University of Ottawa and expert on Canadian nationalism, joins the pod to discuss how Trump has become "the single most important person" in Canada's election. We delve into the difficult position of Canada's Conservative Party, which historically sympathized with Republicans but now faces a Republican president attacking Canada directly. Can a party that once emulated Trump's style now effectively oppose him?
Dr. Lecours offers unique insights into Canada's democratic safeguards – from its parliamentary system to its decentralized federalism – that provide resilience against democratic backsliding. We examine how Canadian provinces are responding to Trump's tariffs, whether Canadians distinguish between the US government and American people, and the long-term implications for North America and the global order.
As Canada faces a dramatically changed political landscape, the election outcome will determine whether it pursues greater self-sufficiency, diversifies international partnerships, or finds a new way to manage its vital but volatile relationship with the United States. Whatever Canada decides, the comfortable assumptions that have guided its foreign policy for generations are being fundamentally reassessed.
-------------------------
Follow Deep Dive:
Bluesky
YouTube
Email: deepdivewithshawn@gmail.com
Music:
Majestic Earth - Joystock
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Dr. Lecours (00:00):
MAGA and Trumpism, if you will, interestingly, has
placed the Conservative Canadain a very difficult position,
and it's really the ConservativeParty of Canada that needs
rethinking, because part of itsbase has been sympathetic to
(00:21):
President Trump, but nowPresident Trump is attacking
Canada.
So what is the ConservativeParty of Canada to do?
It cannot, of course, keepsupporting Trump openly and
wholeheartedly.
Obviously, at the same time, itneeds to be a little more
nuanced in its criticism of theTrump administration.
Shawn (00:59):
Welcome to Deep Dive with me, s C Fettig.
On April 28th, canadians willhead to the polls in a snap
election called by their newPrime Minister, mark Carney,
who's facing off againstConservative leader Pierre
Poilievre.
This election comes at acritical time for Canada, with
the country grappling withunprecedented challenges to its
sovereignty and economicstability, thanks to a Trump
effect.
President Trump's recent tariffthreats and provocative
(01:21):
statements about Canada becomingthe 51st state have injected a
sense of urgency into theCanadian campaign.
These developments havereshaped the political landscape
, dominated campaign discourseand shifted the focus from
domestic issues to questions ofa national sovereignty and
economic resilience.
The specter of Trump's tariffs,which took effect on April 2nd,
(01:44):
hangs over the election like adark cloud.
Both Carney and Poilievre arepositioning themselves as best
equipped to stand up to Trumpand protect Canadian interests.
Although Poilievre has beenreferred to as the Trump of
Canada, often himselfhighlighting many temperament
and policy similarities, acomparison he's recently tried
(02:05):
to distance himself from, andthe Liberals have tried to tie
him to.
In many ways, this Canadianelection is much more about the
United States than it is aboutCanada.
So my guest today is Dr AndréLecours, professor in the School
of Political Studies at theUniversity of Ottawa, where he
holds the Forum of Federations,and University of Ottawa
(02:26):
Research Chair on ComparativeFederalism.
He's also a former president ofthe Canadian Political Science
Association and a fellow of theRoyal Society of Canada and a
leading expert on Canadiannationalism, secession and
federalism.
We discuss Trump, theseupcoming Canadian elections, how
Canada can protect its owndemocracy when its largest
(02:47):
trading partner, the US, isstarting to look like a very
real threat, and how Canada canrealign itself with more stable
allies.
All right, if you like thisepisode or any episode, please
give it a like, share and followon your favorite podcast
platform and or subscribe to thepodcast on YouTube.
And, as always, if you have anythoughts, questions or comments
(03:07):
, please feel free to email meat deepdivewithshawn at gmailcom
.
Let's do a deep dive.
Dr LaCour, thanks for beinghere.
How are you?
I'm very well.
How are you, s?
I'm, all things considered, I'mdoing.
Thanks for being here.
Dr. Lecours (03:23):
How are you?
I'm very well.
How are you, Shawn?
Shawn (03:25):
I'm, all things considered, I'm doing all right,
all right.
So it kind of feels like we'reliving in some type of a fever
dream, maybe a nightmare, rightnow.
In a matter of like two months,trump has managed to maybe
permanently destroy one of thestrongest and most enduring
alliances in the world betweenthe US and Canada, and all signs
(03:51):
suggest it will only get worseover time.
Among other things, trump hasthreatened to make Canada the
51st state and has ignited atrade war that will probably
cause severe pain on both sidesof the border.
And then, amidst all of that,canada is holding federal
elections, so maybe we shouldstart there.
How do you think Trump isinfluencing your elections right
now?
Dr. Lecours (04:08):
Well, he's been the single most important person in
these elections.
You know, if we go back sixmonths, we had a federal liberal
government led by PrimeMinister Trudeau, who seemed to
be on its way out very clearly.
So the projection then was aconservative majority government
(04:34):
to happen at the next federalelections.
And nobody, including me, gavethe Liberal Party of Canada any
chance to form the next federalgovernment in Canada.
Why?
Because of a variety of reasonsthe impopularity of Prime
(04:54):
Minister Trudeau.
We have, I think it's fair tosay, a housing crisis here.
The federal, the liberalgovernment is 10 years old, so
it's a little bit, you know,long in the tooth.
So there was a clear projectionfor a conservative federal
(05:15):
government in Canada, first as acandidate in the last, you know
(05:53):
, few months and weeks of the UShas since now implemented
somewhat, we would say, aspolicy economy, because of the
integrated nature of theeconomies of the United States
and Canada, linked to free tradeagreements reaching back to the
1980s.
So there's many jobs and levelsof economic growth at stake with
(06:17):
tariff policies.
And then, of course, came thereference to Canada as the 51st
state of the United StatesFederation, which were first
presented by Canadianpoliticians as a joke when Prime
Minister Trudeau went toMar-a-Lago with some of his
(06:38):
ministers to meet with the thenPresident-designate Trump.
The then president-designateTrump, but repeated such
references since have ledCanadian politicians to
articulate very clearly toCanadians that this reference is
in fact not a joke and thatthis is what President Trump
(07:02):
wants.
So, in that context, theCanadian federal election, which
was, you know, most likelygoing to be run on issues of, on
domestic issues right Housing,you know, cost of living
(07:23):
policies, the carbon tax, forexample are now fought mostly
over the future of therelationship with the United
States between the two mainparty leaders, mark Carney, the
(08:07):
new leader of the Liberal Partyof Canada and the current prime
minister, and Pierre Poilievre,the leader of the Conservative
Party of Canada, who, betweenthese broader spectrum of
Canada's trade policy, if youwill, and international
alliances, so this is wherewe're at, and it's very unusual
in Canada to have an electionthat's focused and whose ballot
question is of an internationalnature.
hasn't happened really since1988 when the then-conservative
(08:31):
government under Prime MinisterMulroney made the free trade
with the United States reallythe ballot question.
So we're in that position rightnow and interestingly the
changes in circumstances haveprovided a major advantage to
the Liberal Party of Canadabecause for all kinds of reasons
Canadians right now tend to seethe current government which
(08:55):
again we thought was long in thetube, with a new prime minister
for sure to be the best optionfor managing the relationship
with President Trump and theUnited States.
Shawn (09:06):
So there is this dynamic that you're touching on a little
bit, as it relates to how otherparties, both domestic to the
United States but alsointernational, respond or
benefit from a Trump presidency.
So in the United States, youknow, all signs suggest that
Democrats will benefit from aTrump presidency because there
(09:27):
will be such a massive backlash,and I think we're seeing that
kind of playing out.
You know you mentioned theLiberal Party benefiting in
Canada to some degree from theTrump presidency.
We're also seeing some of thathappening in Europe, some
European countries as well.
But it brings up an interestingquestion which is, at the same
time, democrats aren't actuallyin the United States really
(09:50):
presenting an alternative visionfor the future of the United
States.
But it feels like this might beshort lived, in that the
support for the liberal partiesis more of an anti Trump
reaction than it is support forany policies, and I wonder if
that has a short you know shorttimeframe in which liberal
parties or progressives need toactually identify some type of a
(10:12):
workable agenda.
Dr. Lecours (10:15):
Yeah, well, first of all, I mean the term liberal,
you know, in politics outsidethe United States means
something quite different thanin the US, right, you know,
liberalism in the US is someonewho's, you know, left of center,
social democrat, if you will.
(10:37):
The Liberal Party of Canada isa different type of political
animal.
Right, it's the party that'sgoverned Canada the most.
It really alternates betweencenter-left and center-right,
but this is in the Canadiancontext, right.
So center right in the Canadiancontext is probably still on
the left in the US.
So that's the first thing tosay there.
The second thing is that, well,really, right now, a month is
all the Liberal Party of Canadaneeds in terms of the Trump
(11:00):
effect on the country right, ofthe Trump effect on the country
right, because the elections arein less than a month, and if
the liberals can form a majoritygovernment after these
elections, well, it would be themost spectacular comeback in
Canadian political history,let's just put it that way.
And with a majority government,of course, then they can
implement whatever agenda theywant, pretty much, and that
(11:23):
agenda will be about, you know,making Canada more self-reliant.
I think Prime Minister Carneyhas been clear on that.
He has said that the UnitedStates is no longer a reliable
ally, that Canada needs to bemore self-reliant and that it
needs to find other reliableallies.
And when he became primeminister a couple of weeks ago,
(11:48):
the first thing he did was go toFrance and go to the United
Kingdom.
So I think that was highlysymbolical of what I think his
government, were it to be formedagain after the next elections,
would want to do so.
You know MAGA and Trumpism, ifyou will, interestingly, has
(12:08):
placed the Conservative Canadain a very difficult position,
and it's really the ConservativeParty of Canada that needs
rethinking, because part of itsbase has been sympathetic to
President Trump, but nowPresident Trump is attacking
(12:29):
Canada.
So what is the ConservativeParty of Canada to do?
It cannot, of course, keepsupporting Trump openly and
wholeheartedly.
Obviously, at the same time, itneeds to be a little more
nuanced in its criticism of theTrump administration, and so the
(12:50):
conservatives here have had ahard time walking this line.
They've attempted, in fact, torun the type of electoral
campaign that they had plannedto all along against Justin
Trudeau, who's gone, against thecarbon tax, which Prime
Minister Carney said he wasgoing to abolish, against all of
(13:12):
these things that are no longerthere, because the dynamic with
the Trump administration isdifficult with the Conservative
Party of Canada.
It's hard to know what to saythat the liberals aren't already
saying, especially consideringthat, as I said, part of its
base, especially in a couple ofWestern provinces, then there
(13:32):
you know, alberta andSaskatchewan has some sympathy
for the Trump administration.
I guess what I'm saying is it'sactually the Conservative Party
of Canada that the Trumpadministration is forcing into a
redefinition of sorts, andthat's highly surprising at
(13:54):
first sight.
Shawn (13:56):
There's another knock-on effect of Trumpism and the MAGA
movement in the global orderthat I think is worth paying
some attention to.
So Trump's argument is that youknow he's making America great
again and that this posturingand this approach that he's
taking, especially with ourallies, is actually all in
pursuit of making the UnitedStates stronger on the global
(14:20):
stage.
And yet what I fear, and what Ithink is more likely to happen,
is that the global order couldvery much shift as a result of
Trumpism, however, that thatglobal order will realign itself
in a way that excludes theUnited States, which I think
will be painful for the worldbecause of the somewhat
(14:40):
hegemonic role that the UnitedStates plays on the global stage
, but that ultimately, we'vealready passed a Rubicon in
which other countries are goingto have to wrestle with or maybe
are beginning to realize thatthe United States is not a
trustworthy and good actor onthe global stage.
I wonder if you think that'spotentially true.
But also, what do you thinkCanada's role would or could be
(15:05):
in a realignment orrestructuring of the global
order?
Dr. Lecours (15:08):
Yeah, well, I think that conclusion certainly is
the one that's been reached byCanadian politicians, right that
Canada, of course, has a middlepower exercising almost
exclusively.
Of course, soft power hasbenefited from an international
order based on norms, and theidea here is that that order is
(15:30):
gone right, that we're enteringinto something new, and
especially for Canada.
What that means, of course, isthat there's new concerns about
not only the economic relationswith the US, but also security.
It's no secret that Canada isheavily dependent on the United
(15:52):
States for its security, andPresident Trump has made it
abundantly clear that that'skind of essentially a benefit
that Canada could now only enjoyif it were to become the 51st
state, just like it could onlyenjoy the absence of it were to
become the 51st state, just likeit could only enjoy the absence
of tariffs if it became the51st state.
So I think that's the newreality.
Now, what can Canada do?
(16:13):
Again, in the immediate term,what we're going to see is most
likely is an increase in defensespending.
So, again, this idea ofbecoming more self-reliant,
which is something that hadnever been important in Canadian
politics, because and therePresident Trump is right because
(16:36):
both Canadian politicians,canadian citizens, always felt
that, as a member of NATO and aneighbor of the United States,
if Canada were to be attacked,it would be defended by the US.
Now, this is highly uncertain.
So there needs to be some moreself-reliance on the one hand
and on the other hand, thereneeds to be, you know, a search
(16:57):
for security partners and youknow candidates here are not
obvious, right, because ofgeography, essentially.
So I think, in the context ofthis search, canada is going to
look to strengthen its ties withEuropean Union countries as
well as the United Kingdom.
But you know, at the end of theday, s, I think Canada is
(17:21):
prisoner, to a large extent, ofits geography.
This relationship, from aCanadian perspective, with the
United States is unavoidable.
We share this longest border inthe world, the economy is
highly integrated, the securityapparatus is also highly
integrated, the intelligenceapparatus is integrated, and
(17:47):
while the US can survive withouthuge problems most likely
certainly with small problems, Ithink, but probably without
huge problems when all thesekind of partnerships
disintegrate, this is not thecase for Canada.
So, you know, while Canadianpoliticians are looking for more
self-reliance and more reliablepartners, I think it's also
(18:08):
crucial that they look to maybenot salvage, but to yeah, in a
sense, salvage the United Stateswith their relationship with
the US.
Right, they need to look torestructure it to make it work
in a different way, and PrimeMinister Carney has said this
many times we're not going backto how things were, but we need,
(18:29):
canada needs to go towardssomething that will work in
terms of the relationship withthe US.
I mean Canada can't justpretend that the United States
isn't there.
United States isn't there.
I mean that's not a feasible orlikely or desirable option for
(18:50):
Canada.
Shawn (18:56):
So one of the things that worries me, if we're looking
into the future here under aTrump presidency and I think
this is directly out of a Trumpplaybook is that he likes to
rattle the sabers and then, whenpeople react, he frames that as
a sign of aggression and thenjustifies whatever further
action he plans to take.
And so, in the context ofCanada, my fear is that as
(19:17):
Canada invests more money in itsdefense, as Canada builds
stronger alliances across theAtlantic that is all as a result
of some of the threats andactions taken by Donald Trump
that Trump will then turn aroundand say that those actions that
Canada is taking are actuallyproactive security threats to
(19:39):
the United States and then usethat as some type of a pretext
for whatever he plans to do next.
I wonder if you think that I'mbeing histrionic in thinking
that, or if you think theremight be some substance to that.
Dr. Lecours (19:53):
No, I think you're.
I think you are taking it alittle bit too far.
So I mean, we've already seenthose kind of accusations from
President Trump.
You know he's called Canadalike a nasty country to deal
with many, many times, which ofcourse came as a shock for
Canadians, because Canadianscertainly don't think of
themselves as nasty.
And you know, my sense on theTrump presidency is that you
(20:19):
know at some point this strangekind of obsession with Canada
will fade and that other thingsaround the world will capture
President Trump's attention morethan Canada and, like I said,
the extent to which Canada canfind new partners and can really
(20:40):
become self-reliant is limitedand can really become
self-reliant is limited.
So I cannot see the type of moveon the part of Canada that
would create, you know, the typeof backlash that you described
in the US and even in the Trumpadministration here politically,
(21:00):
here in Canada.
I think it's important that youknow our leaders share this
message, that you know we can'tgo back to the relationship that
once was.
In all likelihood and somepeople think it's possible,
right, I mean, I guess it alldepends if MAGA is here to stay
(21:21):
or not.
I mean we can come back on that.
If MAGA is here to stay or not,I mean we can come back on that
and you know, is PresidentTrump first of all, I guess, is
he going to stay for anattempted third term?
You know, is he going to?
If and when he leaves, willMAGA remain and perhaps JD Vance
(21:43):
or someone else close toPresident Trump become president
, in which case we could havethis type of fractured
relationship endure.
But there's also a chance, ofcourse, that there's a change in
administration in the US infour years and, while this might
not trigger a return to therelationship that once was, it
(22:07):
might take the relationshipbetween two countries in a
different place than where it'snow.
So I think there is still roomfor change and I think overall,
of course, that's the preferableoption for Canadians right To
have in the US not only aneighbor, but a partner, an ally
(22:27):
, a friend because I think mostCanadians have thought
historically of Americans astheir friends to have that type
of relationship with the US.
Shawn (22:38):
So one of the superpowers I think that Trump has, and the
way that he's been able toamass so much influence and
power in the United States andthen, I suppose, by extension,
on the global stage, is thathe's found the vulnerabilities
within American politicsdomestically and also within
American social and culturallife that he's been able to
(22:59):
exploit, weaknesses that he'sbeen able to exploit, I guess,
somewhat deftly, in retrospect,to presidential ends.
Every country has its ownvulnerabilities in its structure
and also within its society andits cultural life.
Canada is no exception to this.
So Canada does have a federalstructure that is designed to
(23:20):
accommodate some regionalidentities and I'm thinking
specifically of Quebec that havebeen a source of internal
tension for a while.
So we've talked a little bitabout how the Trump presidency,
at least in the short term,could be going a long way to
firming up Canadian unity.
But I'm concerned about theopposite If Trump is providing,
(23:44):
in a way, almost like a roadmapfor any politician that's
interested in exploitingvulnerabilities within their own
system, if he's providing aroadmap to perhaps Canadian
politicians or Canadian leadersor Canadian figures that are
also interested in power andcould learn from Trump how to
(24:04):
exploit those vulnerabilitiesand what that might look like.
Dr. Lecours (24:08):
Right?
Well, so I mean, essentially,what you're asking is, what are
the odds of, you know, canadagoing down the slope of
democratic backsliding, which isthe question that I guess I get
most often?
I mean, of course, it's notimpossible, but I would say that
Canada has a few safeguardsthat the United States probably
(24:32):
doesn't have.
One is the parliamentary systemactually.
So we're in the middle ofelections, we just discussed it.
We're going to vote for aparliament.
So in a parliamentary systemsuch as Canada's citizens don't
vote for a parliament, so in aparliamentary system such as
Canada's citizens don't vote fora government, we vote for a
parliament and then parliamentchooses government, which means
(24:53):
that government requires theconfidence of, here in Canada,
the House of Commons, to govern,which means also that when this
confidence is withdrawn, thegovernment falls.
So essentially, what I'm sayinghere is that you know, it's
(25:17):
much easier in Canada to get ridof a government than it is in
the United States to get rid ofan administration, right, I mean
, we know that in the US, in apresidential system, yes, you
have mechanisms of impeachment,but that's really like a
judiciary, like a legalprocedure that can be triggered
only for treasons and suchcrimes, whereas in Canada.
It's simply about confidence,right.
If government loses theconfidence of the House of
(25:39):
Commons, it falls, the House ofCommons it falls.
So you know, you could expectthat if a Canadian government
were to try to do some of thethings that President Trump is
currently doing or attempted todo, that it might lose the
confidence of the House ofCommons, despite mechanisms of
(26:00):
party disciplines and the like.
So I think that's a reallyreally important distinction and
not to get too politicalscience-y here, but there's a
long literature in politicalscience suggesting that
parliamentary systems areactually better for democracy
than presidential systems.
So I think that's reallyimportant.
Then you mentioned that Canadais a federal state, as is the
(26:21):
United States, of course, sothere's a commonality there.
But the Canadian Federation ismuch more decentralized than the
American Federation.
We have constitutionally andpolitically more powerful
provinces, facilitated by thefact that in Canada, political
parties are not verticallyintegrated.
So you know, if we were to havea conservative government, for
(26:43):
example, at the federal level,it's really not a given that it
could count on the support ofconservative parties at the
provincial level has instructedhis members of the Legislative
Assembly to not activelycampaign or support the
Conservative Party of Canada.
So this is a very differentstructure in Canada in terms of
(27:15):
the federal arrangement Powerfulprovinces which are their own
kind of forum of democraticlegitimacy and accountability
which could fight moreeffectively against, you know, a
federal government that wouldsee us going down the road of
democratic backsliding right.
(27:37):
I would add to that a couple ofmore things courts.
So I think courts are beingtested now right in the United
States in terms of theircapacity to uphold the rule of
law.
Courts in Canada are much lesspoliticized, much less divided
ideologically than in the UnitedStates.
And I think, if you look at thetop, the Supreme Court of
(27:59):
Canada has great legitimacy,right.
I mean, we don't have this kindof view that oh, there's some
conservative and some liberaljudges in the Supreme Court of
Canada, we don't do thesereadings or we can't do them.
So I think there's a betterchance that court judgments, say
(28:22):
, against a federal government,government in Canada, would be
accepted as completelylegitimate than when these
judgments are rendered by UScourts against the Trump
administration.
And I'll finish by this verybasic observation, sociological.
You mentioned Quebec.
So Canada's long had thisFrench-English cleavage right.
(28:43):
So Canada's long had thisFrench-English cleavage right
which in contemporary politicsis often called the kind of
Quebec rest of Canada cleavage,and, as you said, there's been a
strong secessionist movement inQuebec.
Quebec's had two referendums onindependence, so there's
(29:04):
something here for the Canadianpolitical class to constantly
manage.
And so really, the number onetask of a Canadian prime
minister and a Canadiangovernment is to make sure the
country survives, and that'scertainly not the case in the US
, but that is the case in Canada, the case in Canada.
So populist politics in Canada,or even, you know, more to the
(29:26):
point, kind of democraticbacksliding, could be seen as
something threatening to theintegrity of the country and
therefore something that afederal government and the prime
minister needs to be verycareful with.
You know, I think it's prettyclear that no Canadian prime
minister wants to be verycareful with.
You know, I think it's prettyclear that no Canadian prime
(29:46):
minister wants to be the onethat triggered or oversaw the
disintegration of the country.
So the Canadian political classhas to exercise a degree of
prudence.
That is not necessary.
You know, in most othercountries, including in the
United States, countries thatwhose continued existence is
(30:10):
really not in peril.
Shawn (30:12):
So you mentioned Ontario Premier Doug Ford, and I guess I
want to pose my next questionin the context of some of the
stuff that he's been saying.
So he's taken a very bullishapproach to the United.
States.
Yeah, and I think perhaps youknow, premiers in Canada might
have a little bit more influencein international politics as it
relates to Canada than dogovernors, at least with a
(30:34):
relationship to the UnitedStates.
So Ford has taken this postureof inflicting as much pain as
possible on the United Stateswhere he can, in response to
Trump's tariffs specifically.
And in the United Statesthere's kind of a tradition that
governors of states can'treally or shouldn't engage in
(30:57):
the international arena andespecially not run counter to
the national position on issues.
And there is a very realpotential that Doug Ford could
get out a bit ahead of himself,or at least a bit ahead of the
national government or thefederal government in Canada.
And I wonder if this is atypical thing or if you have the
(31:18):
same concerns at all.
Dr. Lecours (31:20):
Yeah, so they have been controversial.
The premier Ford's actions?
Right, because, well, in partwe've been in the middle of
political uncertainty at thefederal level.
Prime Minister Trudeauannounces his resignation, then
(31:40):
he left, then Mark Carney becameprime minister, chosen by the
Liberal Party of Canada as newleader, therefore becoming prime
minister but not being, youknow, elected.
And now we're in the middle ofan election campaign.
So there was somewhat of apolitical void which, I think, a
(32:02):
premier Ford, whose newgovernment just comes out of a
provincial election in Ontario,the largest province in the
country, running on defendingOntario's interests in the
context of, you know, the UnitedStates tariff policies.
(32:22):
So Premier Fortran has a lot oflegitimacy in his province.
Now, to what extent can he?
Can he take this abroad Again?
has been a matter of somecontroversy because, you know,
the question was was heundermining the federal
government?
Was he doing this with theblessing of the federal
government?
As someone who could be likemore aggressive, but then he was
(32:43):
a little bit kind of chaotic,right, he announced a surcharge
on electricity export to NewYork, michigan and Minnesota.
Then, when President Trump said, oh, that would lead to, you
know, an additional 25% tariffson everything coming from Canada
and Premier Ford backtrack.
So it's a little bit.
(33:04):
It's been a little bitconfusing.
Now you're right that Canadianprovinces have typically gone
abroad more than US states, atleast least in a more overtly
political way.
That's something that in thepolitical science literature is
called paradiplomacy, right,parallel diplomacy and in some
(33:25):
cases, mostly with respect toQuebec, sometimes taking
positions that were not, youknow, really federal positions,
were not government of Canadapositions.
But again, that's a Canadianreality.
We have powerful provinceswhich, for now, are quite united
.
Actually, it's something hardto do in Canada because
(33:47):
provinces have differenteconomies, different sociologies
and so on and so forth.
But now there's been a realkind of rally around the flag
effect, if you will, that youfind amongst provincial
leadership and Canadians ingeneral, for that matter, which
means that the Canadian responseto President Trump's tariffs
(34:08):
and other insinuations has comefrom a variety of political
actors right, most importantlythe government of Canada, of
course the federal government,but also provincial premiers.
So I think that's the profoundlyfederal nature of Canada here
coming through in response tothis crisis.
Shawn (34:31):
This is going to be a pretty broad question, so I'll
leave it to you to determine howyou want to respond.
But, given kind of yourexperience and your research and
your work, how would you adviseCanada to, I suppose, navigate
this situation right now assuccessfully as possible?
Dr. Lecours (34:48):
I think it's you know hope for the best but
prepare for the worst, right.
So I think you do prepare as ifthis relationship with the US
will never be the way it oncewas.
I think you do prepare as ifthis relationship with the US
will never be the way it oncewas.
I think you do have to do that.
You do have to encourageCanadians to buy Canadians buy
Canadian products right, whichpoliticians have been doing.
You do have to, I think, designan industrial policy that
(35:12):
doesn't take free trade forgranted right, policy that
doesn't take free trade forgranted right.
Everything that Canadiangovernments have done over the
last several decades has been inthe context of free trade right
.
I mean free trade because itwas viewed by economists as
being mutually beneficial, stillis viewed that way, except for,
I guess, the few economiststhat advise President Trump.
(35:35):
Free trade was seen assomething that would not be
questioned by any, certainly byany advanced, industrialized
kind of liberal, democratic,market oriented states.
But now it is, and so I thinkCanadian governments, both
federal and in the provinces,have to kind of see beyond this
(35:56):
free trade paradigm, not torevert back to protectionism, of
course, but to find differentpartners, again difficult
because of the geography and ahost of other factors, but I
think that's something that theyhave to do.
But at the same time, as I'vesaid, the relationship with the
US is necessary.
(36:17):
It's unavoidable and necessary.
I think there needs to be somepatching up to do, even starting
with the Trump administrationhere that's going to be in place
for the next several years.
Canadian politicians have to.
So Canadian politicians have toyeah, quote unquote be strong.
(36:37):
So presumably you can't lettariffs be imposed by your
neighbor without imposingtariffs of your own right.
It's hard politically to justlet tariffs be and not impose
your own.
So I think that's part of whatneeds to be done here your own.
So I think that that's part ofwhat needs to be done here.
(36:58):
But at the same time, thereneeds to be a conversation on
how this relationship goesforward here.
I think the change in primeministership is helping Canada
and whether Mr Carney or MrPoilievre is prime minister in a
month, I think that person andhis government needs to make
(37:22):
sure that there can be some typeof workable relationship with
the United States Workableeconomically workable,
politically, workable withrespect to security.
I don't quite know how this isdone, frankly, because, as you
know, it's difficult to dealwith the Trump administration.
I think Canadian politiciansand interest groups and
(37:47):
different voices have stressedhow beneficial for both
countries this relationship is,and I think that needs to
continue to be done.
And, of course, you know we'resmall and the United States is
big, so at the end of the daywe're in a way not at the mercy,
(38:07):
but we certainly don't controleverything, if most that's going
on.
So, in short, I think, becomingmore self-reliant, finding
reliable partners, but alsofinding ways to make the
relationship with the UnitedStates work, even though it
could look different than howit's looked in the past.
Shawn (38:30):
One of the things that I've been thinking about a lot
lately is it's easy to, Isuppose, look retrospectively
and cast dispersions and tocriticize, but I do wonder if
we're living through a period oftime right now in global
history in which we could take avery important lesson, and that
is that, in building ouralliances and relationships and
(38:52):
developing our trade deals, etcetera, that we and by we I mean
the global community andindividual nation states take
much more seriously thepotential that any one actor
with too much power cannot berelied upon solely built out of
something like trust.
And I do feel like what'shappened is that the United
(39:13):
States, that a lot of trust wasgiven to the goodwill of the
United States government in thepast that allowed it to amass so
much power and influence thatto disentangle that is going to
be very painful for the entireworld.
Dr. Lecours (39:29):
Yeah, I think you're right.
I think there was always theimage, certainly from Canada.
I mean, you know, I don't wantto speak for any other country
and I know the view of theUnited States from elsewhere in
the world can be radicallydifferent, but it's clear that
from Canada, the United Stateswas always this benevolent power
.
At the same time, I thinkCanadians have always understood
(39:53):
also that, as former PrimeMinister Pierre Trudeau said,
you know, when you sleep with anelephant, when the elephant
sneezes, you're.
You know I'm paraphrasing here,but you're going to feel it.
Right, the elephant moves,you're going to feel it.
The elephant sneezes, you'regoing to catch a cold.
(40:13):
You know again, we're in a sensequote unquote prisoner of our
geography.
So that's why I think it's sodisturbing for Canadians and
Canadian politicians to see theUnited States change its
perspective right on the world,seemingly stopping to see
(40:34):
economic and securityrelationships and partnerships
as win-win, but rather as dealsor bargains where one mostly
wins while the other mostlyloses.
I think in President Trump'sworld it's a zero-sum game world
(41:00):
, or it's almost awinner-takes-all world, and I
think that's a major change forthe partners of the United
States, this view that, you know, relationships are not mutually
beneficial for the Trumpadministration right that it
(41:21):
either wins or it loses.
So that has all kinds ofimplications for world security
and prosperity, and especiallyfor smaller powers like Canada.
Shawn (41:43):
And especially for smaller powers like Canada,
which neighbor the US and arereally really kind of sensitive
to anything that happens there.
Speaking of being neighbors, soI live in Seattle, right, and
we have typically taken weekendtrips up to Vancouver, victoria,
almost like once a month, andwe have not since Trump has
taken office.
In part, the reason is becauseI feel like I'm starting to
(42:03):
realize what it must have feltlike, or it must feel like, to
be Russian or maybe Israeli incertain areas of the world these
days, and I am, I'm not goingto lie I'm a little worried that
we're going to get anaggressive response if we cross
the border, that people will notbe happy to see us, and I guess
I wonder what your sense is, ifCanadians are looking at this
(42:28):
as a US government issue or ifthey are extending this to the
American people.
Dr. Lecours (42:33):
That's a good question.
I don't think I've seen likepolling data on that, but I
think, anecdotally, I would saythat it's Canadians are able to
distinguish between the USgovernment and Americans, and
that's something that PremierFord has done really well.
I think.
You know like he's been verypresent on US media, as you know
, he said repeatedly that heloves Americans media.
(42:59):
As you know, he said repeatedlythat he loves Americans but
that he disagrees with thecurrent administration.
So you know, again, that'ssomething that has changed.
You might know that manyCanadians have decided to, you
know, not travel to the UnitedStates for the foreseeable
future.
I don't know how it's goingfrom the United States to Canada
(43:21):
.
I really do not think thatAmericans need to worry about a
rude reception by Canadiansbecause, again, as I said, I
think Canadians are making thedistinction between the policy
and approach of their federalgovernment and what Americans
(43:45):
think.
But you know, maybe I'm wronghere.
I'm not going on any kind ofsurvey data and I haven't
extensively questioned mycompatriots on this issue
questioned my compatriots onthis issue, but my strong sense
is that, to put it simply, youcould most likely travel to
(44:07):
Vancouver and Victoria and feelquite comfortable, even, you
know, announcing you areAmerican, but perhaps you'll
just have to actually do thetrip and let me know how it goes
.
Shawn (44:16):
Okay, final question Are you ready for it?
Dr. Lecours (44:18):
Yeah.
Shawn (44:20):
What's something interesting you've been reading,
watching, listening to or doinglately, and it doesn't have to
be related to this topic, but itcan be.
Dr. Lecours (44:27):
Well, I think it's going to be, because it's this
electoral campaign, S right.
I mean Right, I mean it's, it's,it's mesmerizing up here
(44:53):
because, as I said, we've neverhad the potential for since 1988
, an international issue or aninternational actor right,
president Trump feature in thefederal election campaign.
I mean, president Trump is thesingle most important person in
the current election, I thinkit's fair to say.
And so all kinds of strangethings are happening.
(45:15):
Right, the Liberal Party isgaining steam.
The New Democratic Party, whichis our small social democratic
party here, is collapsingbecause people on the left, I
guess, want to make sure thatthey don't have a conservative
government, so they're going tosupport the Liberals, which are
a bit more centrist than the NewDemocratic Party.
But if you're even clearly onthe left, maybe that's the
(45:37):
strategic thing to do.
The Bloc Québécois, which is aQuebec-only party that supports
the independence of the provinceand operates at the federal
level is also trying to find away to, you know, articulate the
Korean discourse.
So it needs to kind of be notoverly undermined, this kind of
be not overly undermine thiskind of Canadian front, but at
(45:59):
the same time explain thatthere's particular and peculiar
Quebec interests there that areat play in these negotiations
that can only be defended by aQuebec-only party.
So and that part is, you know,as a Quebecer myself is really
interesting because, you know, Ithink there's a, there's a
(46:19):
structural challenge coming herefor the Quebec independence
movement, which is that, youknow, in the 95 referendum, for
example, which yielded almost amajority in favor of
independence, you know, thecounter argument by supporters
of independence against thosewho said that the province would
be left economically worse byindependence was to say well,
(46:41):
that's OK, we have free trade,we're just going to keep trading
with the Americans, right, wedon't need to trade with with
Canada, we'll just we'll just,you know, keep on going with our
north south economic relations,economic relations.
And of course that argumentseems to be gone now, which I
think places, you know,supporters and promoters of
independence in a more difficultdiscursive situation.
(47:06):
So you see, there's a lot tofollow in Canadian politics and
society, and this is beyondpolitics we're into kind of
society and what Canadians buywhen they go to the grocery
store and so on and so forth.
There's so much to follow as aresult of the last US
(47:26):
presidential election.
So it's again.
It's crazy to think the extentto which that, you know,
american politics and the lastpresidential election is
impacting virtually alldimensions of Canadian politics
and society.
Shawn (47:44):
I mean it is fascinating this kind of Trump effect on
Canadian politics and you cantrack almost right around March
1, cpc was up nationally like 10, 12, 13 points, and then it
started to shift and now itlooks like LPC is up about
anywhere between four to eight.
Dr. Lecours (48:03):
That's right.
And unfortunately for MonsieurPoilievre, you know the leader
of the Conservative Party ofCanada he in the past has
sounded a lot like Donald Trump,right?
He has criticized experts,criticized the media.
He's criticized the WorldEconomic Forum.
(48:24):
He supported that kind ofconvoy, blockade, slash,
occupation here in Ottawa, whereI am in the capital, just like
Donald Trump and Fox News did.
And now the Liberal Party ofCanada, ryan and the Capitol,
just like, you know, donaldTrump and Fox News did.
And now the Liberal Party ofCanada actually is running some
very effective ads against him,where they show a clip of him
(48:46):
for five seconds sayingsomething and then Donald Trump
saying the same thing, and theyrepeat on many different topics.
And the message, of course, isyou know, pierre Poiliev is just
like Donald Trump and DonaldTrump is attacking Canada.
Therefore, why would you votefor a party led by Pierre
Poiliev?
So, so, yes, the Trump effect.
(49:07):
I think that's that's the rightterm and that's it's just been
massive.
It's almost like I'm going touse some of President Trump's
favorite words here.
It's been unlike anything we'veseen before.
It's been exceptional.
It's incredible to see howCanadian politics is being
transformed by what's happenedin the United States.
Shawn (49:29):
Dr LaCour, thanks for taking the time.
Dr. Lecours (49:31):
I really appreciate it you're welcome, it was a
pleasure.
Shawn (49:42):
It's clear that the 2025 Canadian election is going to be
unlike any other in recentmemory.
The interplay between domesticpolitics and international
pressures has created a uniquelycharged atmosphere as the Trump
effect upends what seems like aforegone conclusion to these
April elections in Canada, where, up until very recently, the
(50:04):
Conservatives wereoverwhelmingly expected to sweep
.
It may be that the moreConservative control that Trump
wields in the United States, thebetter Liberal parties do in
other countries, with the firstbellwether being Canada.
Whether Canada emerges fromthis election with a renewed
sense of national identity orfaces further challenges to its
(50:25):
sovereignty remains to be seen.
What's certain, though, is thatthe outcome will have
far-reaching consequences, notjust for Canada, but for North
American relations and theglobal order as a whole.
All right, check back next weekfor another episode of Deep
Dive Chat.
Soon, folks, thank you, thankyou.
MAGA and Trumpism, if you will, interestingly, has
placed the Conservative Canadain a very difficult position,
and it's really the ConservativeParty of Canada that needs
rethinking, because part of itsbase has been sympathetic to
(00:21):
President Trump, but nowPresident Trump is attacking
Canada.
So what is the ConservativeParty of Canada to do?
It cannot, of course, keepsupporting Trump openly and
wholeheartedly.
Obviously, at the same time, itneeds to be a little more
nuanced in its criticism of theTrump administration.
Shawn (00:59):
Welcome to Deep Dive with me, s C Fettig.
On April 28th, canadians willhead to the polls in a snap
election called by their newPrime Minister, mark Carney,
who's facing off againstConservative leader Pierre
Poilievre.
This election comes at acritical time for Canada, with
the country grappling withunprecedented challenges to its
sovereignty and economicstability, thanks to a Trump
effect.
President Trump's recent tariffthreats and provocative
(01:21):
statements about Canada becomingthe 51st state have injected a
sense of urgency into theCanadian campaign.
These developments havereshaped the political landscape
, dominated campaign discourseand shifted the focus from
domestic issues to questions ofa national sovereignty and
economic resilience.
The specter of Trump's tariffs,which took effect on April 2nd,
(01:44):
hangs over the election like adark cloud.
Both Carney and Poilievre arepositioning themselves as best
equipped to stand up to Trumpand protect Canadian interests.
Although Poilievre has beenreferred to as the Trump of
Canada, often himselfhighlighting many temperament
and policy similarities, acomparison he's recently tried
(02:05):
to distance himself from, andthe Liberals have tried to tie
him to.
In many ways, this Canadianelection is much more about the
United States than it is aboutCanada.
So my guest today is Dr AndréLecours, professor in the School
of Political Studies at theUniversity of Ottawa, where he
holds the Forum of Federations,and University of Ottawa
(02:26):
Research Chair on ComparativeFederalism.
He's also a former president ofthe Canadian Political Science
Association and a fellow of theRoyal Society of Canada and a
leading expert on Canadiannationalism, secession and
federalism.
We discuss Trump, theseupcoming Canadian elections, how
Canada can protect its owndemocracy when its largest
(02:47):
trading partner, the US, isstarting to look like a very
real threat, and how Canada canrealign itself with more stable
allies.
All right, if you like thisepisode or any episode, please
give it a like, share and followon your favorite podcast
platform and or subscribe to thepodcast on YouTube.
And, as always, if you have anythoughts, questions or comments
(03:07):
, please feel free to email meat deepdivewithshawn at gmailcom
.
Let's do a deep dive.
Dr LaCour, thanks for beinghere.
How are you?
I'm very well.
How are you, s?
I'm, all things considered, I'mdoing.
Thanks for being here.
Dr. Lecours (03:23):
How are you?
I'm very well.
How are you, Shawn?
Shawn (03:25):
I'm, all things considered, I'm doing all right,
all right.
So it kind of feels like we'reliving in some type of a fever
dream, maybe a nightmare, rightnow.
In a matter of like two months,trump has managed to maybe
permanently destroy one of thestrongest and most enduring
alliances in the world betweenthe US and Canada, and all signs
(03:51):
suggest it will only get worseover time.
Among other things, trump hasthreatened to make Canada the
51st state and has ignited atrade war that will probably
cause severe pain on both sidesof the border.
And then, amidst all of that,canada is holding federal
elections, so maybe we shouldstart there.
How do you think Trump isinfluencing your elections right
now?
Dr. Lecours (04:08):
Well, he's been the single most important person in
these elections.
You know, if we go back sixmonths, we had a federal liberal
government led by PrimeMinister Trudeau, who seemed to
be on its way out very clearly.
So the projection then was aconservative majority government
(04:34):
to happen at the next federalelections.
And nobody, including me, gavethe Liberal Party of Canada any
chance to form the next federalgovernment in Canada.
Why?
Because of a variety of reasonsthe impopularity of Prime
(04:54):
Minister Trudeau.
We have, I think it's fair tosay, a housing crisis here.
The federal, the liberalgovernment is 10 years old, so
it's a little bit, you know,long in the tooth.
So there was a clear projectionfor a conservative federal
(05:15):
government in Canada, first as acandidate in the last, you know
(05:53):
, few months and weeks of the UShas since now implemented
somewhat, we would say, aspolicy economy, because of the
integrated nature of theeconomies of the United States
and Canada, linked to free tradeagreements reaching back to the
1980s.
So there's many jobs and levelsof economic growth at stake with
(06:17):
tariff policies.
And then, of course, came thereference to Canada as the 51st
state of the United StatesFederation, which were first
presented by Canadianpoliticians as a joke when Prime
Minister Trudeau went toMar-a-Lago with some of his
(06:38):
ministers to meet with the thenPresident-designate Trump.
The then president-designateTrump, but repeated such
references since have ledCanadian politicians to
articulate very clearly toCanadians that this reference is
in fact not a joke and thatthis is what President Trump
(07:02):
wants.
So, in that context, theCanadian federal election, which
was, you know, most likelygoing to be run on issues of, on
domestic issues right Housing,you know, cost of living
(07:23):
policies, the carbon tax, forexample are now fought mostly
over the future of therelationship with the United
States between the two mainparty leaders, mark Carney, the
(08:07):
new leader of the Liberal Partyof Canada and the current prime
minister, and Pierre Poilievre,the leader of the Conservative
Party of Canada, who, betweenthese broader spectrum of
Canada's trade policy, if youwill, and international
alliances, so this is wherewe're at, and it's very unusual
in Canada to have an electionthat's focused and whose ballot
question is of an internationalnature.
hasn't happened really since1988 when the then-conservative
(08:31):
government under Prime MinisterMulroney made the free trade
with the United States reallythe ballot question.
So we're in that position rightnow and interestingly the
changes in circumstances haveprovided a major advantage to
the Liberal Party of Canadabecause for all kinds of reasons
Canadians right now tend to seethe current government which
(08:55):
again we thought was long in thetube, with a new prime minister
for sure to be the best optionfor managing the relationship
with President Trump and theUnited States.
Shawn (09:06):
So there is this dynamic that you're touching on a little
bit, as it relates to how otherparties, both domestic to the
United States but alsointernational, respond or
benefit from a Trump presidency.
So in the United States, youknow, all signs suggest that
Democrats will benefit from aTrump presidency because there
(09:27):
will be such a massive backlash,and I think we're seeing that
kind of playing out.
You know you mentioned theLiberal Party benefiting in
Canada to some degree from theTrump presidency.
We're also seeing some of thathappening in Europe, some
European countries as well.
But it brings up an interestingquestion which is, at the same
time, democrats aren't actuallyin the United States really
(09:50):
presenting an alternative visionfor the future of the United
States.
But it feels like this might beshort lived, in that the
support for the liberal partiesis more of an anti Trump
reaction than it is support forany policies, and I wonder if
that has a short you know shorttimeframe in which liberal
parties or progressives need toactually identify some type of a
(10:12):
workable agenda.
Dr. Lecours (10:15):
Yeah, well, first of all, I mean the term liberal,
you know, in politics outsidethe United States means
something quite different thanin the US, right, you know,
liberalism in the US is someonewho's, you know, left of center,
social democrat, if you will.
(10:37):
The Liberal Party of Canada isa different type of political
animal.
Right, it's the party that'sgoverned Canada the most.
It really alternates betweencenter-left and center-right,
but this is in the Canadiancontext, right.
So center right in the Canadiancontext is probably still on
the left in the US.
So that's the first thing tosay there.
The second thing is that, well,really, right now, a month is
all the Liberal Party of Canadaneeds in terms of the Trump
(11:00):
effect on the country right, ofthe Trump effect on the country
right, because the elections arein less than a month, and if
the liberals can form a majoritygovernment after these
elections, well, it would be themost spectacular comeback in
Canadian political history,let's just put it that way.
And with a majority government,of course, then they can
implement whatever agenda theywant, pretty much, and that
(11:23):
agenda will be about, you know,making Canada more self-reliant.
I think Prime Minister Carneyhas been clear on that.
He has said that the UnitedStates is no longer a reliable
ally, that Canada needs to bemore self-reliant and that it
needs to find other reliableallies.
And when he became primeminister a couple of weeks ago,
(11:48):
the first thing he did was go toFrance and go to the United
Kingdom.
So I think that was highlysymbolical of what I think his
government, were it to be formedagain after the next elections,
would want to do so.
You know MAGA and Trumpism, ifyou will, interestingly, has
(12:08):
placed the Conservative Canadain a very difficult position,
and it's really the ConservativeParty of Canada that needs
rethinking, because part of itsbase has been sympathetic to
President Trump, but nowPresident Trump is attacking
(12:29):
Canada.
So what is the ConservativeParty of Canada to do?
It cannot, of course, keepsupporting Trump openly and
wholeheartedly.
Obviously, at the same time, itneeds to be a little more
nuanced in its criticism of theTrump administration, and so the
(12:50):
conservatives here have had ahard time walking this line.
They've attempted, in fact, torun the type of electoral
campaign that they had plannedto all along against Justin
Trudeau, who's gone, against thecarbon tax, which Prime
Minister Carney said he wasgoing to abolish, against all of
(13:12):
these things that are no longerthere, because the dynamic with
the Trump administration isdifficult with the Conservative
Party of Canada.
It's hard to know what to saythat the liberals aren't already
saying, especially consideringthat, as I said, part of its
base, especially in a couple ofWestern provinces, then there
(13:32):
you know, alberta andSaskatchewan has some sympathy
for the Trump administration.
I guess what I'm saying is it'sactually the Conservative Party
of Canada that the Trumpadministration is forcing into a
redefinition of sorts, andthat's highly surprising at
(13:54):
first sight.
Shawn (13:56):
There's another knock-on effect of Trumpism and the MAGA
movement in the global orderthat I think is worth paying
some attention to.
So Trump's argument is that youknow he's making America great
again and that this posturingand this approach that he's
taking, especially with ourallies, is actually all in
pursuit of making the UnitedStates stronger on the global
(14:20):
stage.
And yet what I fear, and what Ithink is more likely to happen,
is that the global order couldvery much shift as a result of
Trumpism, however, that thatglobal order will realign itself
in a way that excludes theUnited States, which I think
will be painful for the worldbecause of the somewhat
(14:40):
hegemonic role that the UnitedStates plays on the global stage
, but that ultimately, we'vealready passed a Rubicon in
which other countries are goingto have to wrestle with or maybe
are beginning to realize thatthe United States is not a
trustworthy and good actor onthe global stage.
I wonder if you think that'spotentially true.
But also, what do you thinkCanada's role would or could be
(15:05):
in a realignment orrestructuring of the global
order?
Dr. Lecours (15:08):
Yeah, well, I think that conclusion certainly is
the one that's been reached byCanadian politicians, right that
Canada, of course, has a middlepower exercising almost
exclusively.
Of course, soft power hasbenefited from an international
order based on norms, and theidea here is that that order is
(15:30):
gone right, that we're enteringinto something new, and
especially for Canada.
What that means, of course, isthat there's new concerns about
not only the economic relationswith the US, but also security.
It's no secret that Canada isheavily dependent on the United
(15:52):
States for its security, andPresident Trump has made it
abundantly clear that that'skind of essentially a benefit
that Canada could now only enjoyif it were to become the 51st
state, just like it could onlyenjoy the absence of it were to
become the 51st state, just likeit could only enjoy the absence
of tariffs if it became the51st state.
So I think that's the newreality.
Now, what can Canada do?
(16:13):
Again, in the immediate term,what we're going to see is most
likely is an increase in defensespending.
So, again, this idea ofbecoming more self-reliant,
which is something that hadnever been important in Canadian
politics, because and therePresident Trump is right because
(16:36):
both Canadian politicians,canadian citizens, always felt
that, as a member of NATO and aneighbor of the United States,
if Canada were to be attacked,it would be defended by the US.
Now, this is highly uncertain.
So there needs to be some moreself-reliance on the one hand
and on the other hand, thereneeds to be, you know, a search
(16:57):
for security partners and youknow candidates here are not
obvious, right, because ofgeography, essentially.
So I think, in the context ofthis search, canada is going to
look to strengthen its ties withEuropean Union countries as
well as the United Kingdom.
But you know, at the end of theday, s, I think Canada is
(17:21):
prisoner, to a large extent, ofits geography.
This relationship, from aCanadian perspective, with the
United States is unavoidable.
We share this longest border inthe world, the economy is
highly integrated, the securityapparatus is also highly
integrated, the intelligenceapparatus is integrated, and
(17:47):
while the US can survive withouthuge problems most likely
certainly with small problems, Ithink, but probably without
huge problems when all thesekind of partnerships
disintegrate, this is not thecase for Canada.
So, you know, while Canadianpoliticians are looking for more
self-reliance and more reliablepartners, I think it's also
(18:08):
crucial that they look to maybenot salvage, but to yeah, in a
sense, salvage the United Stateswith their relationship with
the US.
Right, they need to look torestructure it to make it work
in a different way, and PrimeMinister Carney has said this
many times we're not going backto how things were, but we need,
(18:29):
canada needs to go towardssomething that will work in
terms of the relationship withthe US.
I mean Canada can't justpretend that the United States
isn't there.
United States isn't there.
I mean that's not a feasible orlikely or desirable option for
(18:50):
Canada.
Shawn (18:56):
So one of the things that worries me, if we're looking
into the future here under aTrump presidency and I think
this is directly out of a Trumpplaybook is that he likes to
rattle the sabers and then, whenpeople react, he frames that as
a sign of aggression and thenjustifies whatever further
action he plans to take.
And so, in the context ofCanada, my fear is that as
(19:17):
Canada invests more money in itsdefense, as Canada builds
stronger alliances across theAtlantic that is all as a result
of some of the threats andactions taken by Donald Trump
that Trump will then turn aroundand say that those actions that
Canada is taking are actuallyproactive security threats to
(19:39):
the United States and then usethat as some type of a pretext
for whatever he plans to do next.
I wonder if you think that I'mbeing histrionic in thinking
that, or if you think theremight be some substance to that.
Dr. Lecours (19:53):
No, I think you're.
I think you are taking it alittle bit too far.
So I mean, we've already seenthose kind of accusations from
President Trump.
You know he's called Canadalike a nasty country to deal
with many, many times, which ofcourse came as a shock for
Canadians, because Canadianscertainly don't think of
themselves as nasty.
And you know, my sense on theTrump presidency is that you
(20:19):
know at some point this strangekind of obsession with Canada
will fade and that other thingsaround the world will capture
President Trump's attention morethan Canada and, like I said,
the extent to which Canada canfind new partners and can really
(20:40):
become self-reliant is limitedand can really become
self-reliant is limited.
So I cannot see the type of moveon the part of Canada that
would create, you know, the typeof backlash that you described
in the US and even in the Trumpadministration here politically,
(21:00):
here in Canada.
I think it's important that youknow our leaders share this
message, that you know we can'tgo back to the relationship that
once was.
In all likelihood and somepeople think it's possible,
right, I mean, I guess it alldepends if MAGA is here to stay
(21:21):
or not.
I mean we can come back on that.
If MAGA is here to stay or not,I mean we can come back on that
and you know, is PresidentTrump first of all, I guess, is
he going to stay for anattempted third term?
You know, is he going to?
If and when he leaves, willMAGA remain and perhaps JD Vance
(21:43):
or someone else close toPresident Trump become president
, in which case we could havethis type of fractured
relationship endure.
But there's also a chance, ofcourse, that there's a change in
administration in the US infour years and, while this might
not trigger a return to therelationship that once was, it
(22:07):
might take the relationshipbetween two countries in a
different place than where it'snow.
So I think there is still roomfor change and I think overall,
of course, that's the preferableoption for Canadians right To
have in the US not only aneighbor, but a partner, an ally
(22:27):
, a friend because I think mostCanadians have thought
historically of Americans astheir friends to have that type
of relationship with the US.
Shawn (22:38):
So one of the superpowers I think that Trump has, and the
way that he's been able toamass so much influence and
power in the United States andthen, I suppose, by extension,
on the global stage, is thathe's found the vulnerabilities
within American politicsdomestically and also within
American social and culturallife that he's been able to
(22:59):
exploit, weaknesses that he'sbeen able to exploit, I guess,
somewhat deftly, in retrospect,to presidential ends.
Every country has its ownvulnerabilities in its structure
and also within its society andits cultural life.
Canada is no exception to this.
So Canada does have a federalstructure that is designed to
(23:20):
accommodate some regionalidentities and I'm thinking
specifically of Quebec that havebeen a source of internal
tension for a while.
So we've talked a little bitabout how the Trump presidency,
at least in the short term,could be going a long way to
firming up Canadian unity.
But I'm concerned about theopposite If Trump is providing,
(23:44):
in a way, almost like a roadmapfor any politician that's
interested in exploitingvulnerabilities within their own
system, if he's providing aroadmap to perhaps Canadian
politicians or Canadian leadersor Canadian figures that are
also interested in power andcould learn from Trump how to
(24:04):
exploit those vulnerabilitiesand what that might look like.
Dr. Lecours (24:08):
Right?
Well, so I mean, essentially,what you're asking is, what are
the odds of, you know, canadagoing down the slope of
democratic backsliding, which isthe question that I guess I get
most often?
I mean, of course, it's notimpossible, but I would say that
Canada has a few safeguardsthat the United States probably
(24:32):
doesn't have.
One is the parliamentary systemactually.
So we're in the middle ofelections, we just discussed it.
We're going to vote for aparliament.
So in a parliamentary systemsuch as Canada's citizens don't
vote for a parliament, so in aparliamentary system such as
Canada's citizens don't vote fora government, we vote for a
parliament and then parliamentchooses government, which means
(24:53):
that government requires theconfidence of, here in Canada,
the House of Commons, to govern,which means also that when this
confidence is withdrawn, thegovernment falls.
So essentially, what I'm sayinghere is that you know, it's
(25:17):
much easier in Canada to get ridof a government than it is in
the United States to get rid ofan administration, right, I mean
, we know that in the US, in apresidential system, yes, you
have mechanisms of impeachment,but that's really like a
judiciary, like a legalprocedure that can be triggered
only for treasons and suchcrimes, whereas in Canada.
It's simply about confidence,right.
If government loses theconfidence of the House of
(25:39):
Commons, it falls, the House ofCommons it falls.
So you know, you could expectthat if a Canadian government
were to try to do some of thethings that President Trump is
currently doing or attempted todo, that it might lose the
confidence of the House ofCommons, despite mechanisms of
(26:00):
party disciplines and the like.
So I think that's a reallyreally important distinction and
not to get too politicalscience-y here, but there's a
long literature in politicalscience suggesting that
parliamentary systems areactually better for democracy
than presidential systems.
So I think that's reallyimportant.
Then you mentioned that Canadais a federal state, as is the
(26:21):
United States, of course, sothere's a commonality there.
But the Canadian Federation ismuch more decentralized than the
American Federation.
We have constitutionally andpolitically more powerful
provinces, facilitated by thefact that in Canada, political
parties are not verticallyintegrated.
So you know, if we were to havea conservative government, for
(26:43):
example, at the federal level,it's really not a given that it
could count on the support ofconservative parties at the
provincial level has instructedhis members of the Legislative
Assembly to not activelycampaign or support the
Conservative Party of Canada.
So this is a very differentstructure in Canada in terms of
(27:15):
the federal arrangement Powerfulprovinces which are their own
kind of forum of democraticlegitimacy and accountability
which could fight moreeffectively against, you know, a
federal government that wouldsee us going down the road of
democratic backsliding right.
(27:37):
I would add to that a couple ofmore things courts.
So I think courts are beingtested now right in the United
States in terms of theircapacity to uphold the rule of
law.
Courts in Canada are much lesspoliticized, much less divided
ideologically than in the UnitedStates.
And I think, if you look at thetop, the Supreme Court of
(27:59):
Canada has great legitimacy,right.
I mean, we don't have this kindof view that oh, there's some
conservative and some liberaljudges in the Supreme Court of
Canada, we don't do thesereadings or we can't do them.
So I think there's a betterchance that court judgments, say
(28:22):
, against a federal government,government in Canada, would be
accepted as completelylegitimate than when these
judgments are rendered by UScourts against the Trump
administration.
And I'll finish by this verybasic observation, sociological.
You mentioned Quebec.
So Canada's long had thisFrench-English cleavage right.
(28:43):
So Canada's long had thisFrench-English cleavage right
which in contemporary politicsis often called the kind of
Quebec rest of Canada cleavage,and, as you said, there's been a
strong secessionist movement inQuebec.
Quebec's had two referendums onindependence, so there's
(29:04):
something here for the Canadianpolitical class to constantly
manage.
And so really, the number onetask of a Canadian prime
minister and a Canadiangovernment is to make sure the
country survives, and that'scertainly not the case in the US
, but that is the case in Canada, the case in Canada.
So populist politics in Canada,or even, you know, more to the
(29:26):
point, kind of democraticbacksliding, could be seen as
something threatening to theintegrity of the country and
therefore something that afederal government and the prime
minister needs to be verycareful with.
You know, I think it's prettyclear that no Canadian prime
minister wants to be verycareful with.
You know, I think it's prettyclear that no Canadian prime
(29:46):
minister wants to be the onethat triggered or oversaw the
disintegration of the country.
So the Canadian political classhas to exercise a degree of
prudence.
That is not necessary.
You know, in most othercountries, including in the
United States, countries thatwhose continued existence is
(30:10):
really not in peril.
Shawn (30:12):
So you mentioned Ontario Premier Doug Ford, and I guess I
want to pose my next questionin the context of some of the
stuff that he's been saying.
So he's taken a very bullishapproach to the United.
States.
Yeah, and I think perhaps youknow, premiers in Canada might
have a little bit more influencein international politics as it
relates to Canada than dogovernors, at least with a
(30:34):
relationship to the UnitedStates.
So Ford has taken this postureof inflicting as much pain as
possible on the United Stateswhere he can, in response to
Trump's tariffs specifically.
And in the United Statesthere's kind of a tradition that
governors of states can'treally or shouldn't engage in
(30:57):
the international arena andespecially not run counter to
the national position on issues.
And there is a very realpotential that Doug Ford could
get out a bit ahead of himself,or at least a bit ahead of the
national government or thefederal government in Canada.
And I wonder if this is atypical thing or if you have the
(31:18):
same concerns at all.
Dr. Lecours (31:20):
Yeah, so they have been controversial.
The premier Ford's actions?
Right, because, well, in partwe've been in the middle of
political uncertainty at thefederal level.
Prime Minister Trudeauannounces his resignation, then
(31:40):
he left, then Mark Carney becameprime minister, chosen by the
Liberal Party of Canada as newleader, therefore becoming prime
minister but not being, youknow, elected.
And now we're in the middle ofan election campaign.
So there was somewhat of apolitical void which, I think, a
(32:02):
premier Ford, whose newgovernment just comes out of a
provincial election in Ontario,the largest province in the
country, running on defendingOntario's interests in the
context of, you know, the UnitedStates tariff policies.
(32:22):
So Premier Fortran has a lot oflegitimacy in his province.
Now, to what extent can he?
Can he take this abroad Again?
has been a matter of somecontroversy because, you know,
the question was was heundermining the federal
government?
Was he doing this with theblessing of the federal
government?
As someone who could be likemore aggressive, but then he was
(32:43):
a little bit kind of chaotic,right, he announced a surcharge
on electricity export to NewYork, michigan and Minnesota.
Then, when President Trump said, oh, that would lead to, you
know, an additional 25% tariffson everything coming from Canada
and Premier Ford backtrack.
So it's a little bit.
(33:04):
It's been a little bitconfusing.
Now you're right that Canadianprovinces have typically gone
abroad more than US states, atleast least in a more overtly
political way.
That's something that in thepolitical science literature is
called paradiplomacy, right,parallel diplomacy and in some
(33:25):
cases, mostly with respect toQuebec, sometimes taking
positions that were not, youknow, really federal positions,
were not government of Canadapositions.
But again, that's a Canadianreality.
We have powerful provinceswhich, for now, are quite united
.
Actually, it's something hardto do in Canada because
(33:47):
provinces have differenteconomies, different sociologies
and so on and so forth.
But now there's been a realkind of rally around the flag
effect, if you will, that youfind amongst provincial
leadership and Canadians ingeneral, for that matter, which
means that the Canadian responseto President Trump's tariffs
(34:08):
and other insinuations has comefrom a variety of political
actors right, most importantlythe government of Canada, of
course the federal government,but also provincial premiers.
So I think that's the profoundlyfederal nature of Canada here
coming through in response tothis crisis.
Shawn (34:31):
This is going to be a pretty broad question, so I'll
leave it to you to determine howyou want to respond.
But, given kind of yourexperience and your research and
your work, how would you adviseCanada to, I suppose, navigate
this situation right now assuccessfully as possible?
Dr. Lecours (34:48):
I think it's you know hope for the best but
prepare for the worst, right.
So I think you do prepare as ifthis relationship with the US
will never be the way it oncewas.
I think you do prepare as ifthis relationship with the US
will never be the way it oncewas.
I think you do have to do that.
You do have to encourageCanadians to buy Canadians buy
Canadian products right, whichpoliticians have been doing.
You do have to, I think, designan industrial policy that
(35:12):
doesn't take free trade forgranted right, policy that
doesn't take free trade forgranted right.
Everything that Canadiangovernments have done over the
last several decades has been inthe context of free trade right
.
I mean free trade because itwas viewed by economists as
being mutually beneficial, stillis viewed that way, except for,
I guess, the few economiststhat advise President Trump.
(35:35):
Free trade was seen assomething that would not be
questioned by any, certainly byany advanced, industrialized
kind of liberal, democratic,market oriented states.
But now it is, and so I thinkCanadian governments, both
federal and in the provinces,have to kind of see beyond this
(35:56):
free trade paradigm, not torevert back to protectionism, of
course, but to find differentpartners, again difficult
because of the geography and ahost of other factors, but I
think that's something that theyhave to do.
But at the same time, as I'vesaid, the relationship with the
US is necessary.
(36:17):
It's unavoidable and necessary.
I think there needs to be somepatching up to do, even starting
with the Trump administrationhere that's going to be in place
for the next several years.
Canadian politicians have to.
So Canadian politicians have toyeah, quote unquote be strong.
(36:37):
So presumably you can't lettariffs be imposed by your
neighbor without imposingtariffs of your own right.
It's hard politically to justlet tariffs be and not impose
your own.
So I think that's part of whatneeds to be done here your own.
So I think that that's part ofwhat needs to be done here.
(36:58):
But at the same time, thereneeds to be a conversation on
how this relationship goesforward here.
I think the change in primeministership is helping Canada
and whether Mr Carney or MrPoilievre is prime minister in a
month, I think that person andhis government needs to make
(37:22):
sure that there can be some typeof workable relationship with
the United States Workableeconomically workable,
politically, workable withrespect to security.
I don't quite know how this isdone, frankly, because, as you
know, it's difficult to dealwith the Trump administration.
I think Canadian politiciansand interest groups and
(37:47):
different voices have stressedhow beneficial for both
countries this relationship is,and I think that needs to
continue to be done.
And, of course, you know we'resmall and the United States is
big, so at the end of the daywe're in a way not at the mercy,
(38:07):
but we certainly don't controleverything, if most that's going
on.
So, in short, I think, becomingmore self-reliant, finding
reliable partners, but alsofinding ways to make the
relationship with the UnitedStates work, even though it
could look different than howit's looked in the past.
Shawn (38:30):
One of the things that I've been thinking about a lot
lately is it's easy to, Isuppose, look retrospectively
and cast dispersions and tocriticize, but I do wonder if
we're living through a period oftime right now in global
history in which we could take avery important lesson, and that
is that, in building ouralliances and relationships and
(38:52):
developing our trade deals, etcetera, that we and by we I mean
the global community andindividual nation states take
much more seriously thepotential that any one actor
with too much power cannot berelied upon solely built out of
something like trust.
And I do feel like what'shappened is that the United
(39:13):
States, that a lot of trust wasgiven to the goodwill of the
United States government in thepast that allowed it to amass so
much power and influence thatto disentangle that is going to
be very painful for the entireworld.
Dr. Lecours (39:29):
Yeah, I think you're right.
I think there was always theimage, certainly from Canada.
I mean, you know, I don't wantto speak for any other country
and I know the view of theUnited States from elsewhere in
the world can be radicallydifferent, but it's clear that
from Canada, the United Stateswas always this benevolent power
.
At the same time, I thinkCanadians have always understood
(39:53):
also that, as former PrimeMinister Pierre Trudeau said,
you know, when you sleep with anelephant, when the elephant
sneezes, you're.
You know I'm paraphrasing here,but you're going to feel it.
Right, the elephant moves,you're going to feel it.
The elephant sneezes, you'regoing to catch a cold.
(40:13):
You know again, we're in a sensequote unquote prisoner of our
geography.
So that's why I think it's sodisturbing for Canadians and
Canadian politicians to see theUnited States change its
perspective right on the world,seemingly stopping to see
(40:34):
economic and securityrelationships and partnerships
as win-win, but rather as dealsor bargains where one mostly
wins while the other mostlyloses.
I think in President Trump'sworld it's a zero-sum game world
(41:00):
, or it's almost awinner-takes-all world, and I
think that's a major change forthe partners of the United
States, this view that, you know, relationships are not mutually
beneficial for the Trumpadministration right that it
(41:21):
either wins or it loses.
So that has all kinds ofimplications for world security
and prosperity, and especiallyfor smaller powers like Canada.
Shawn (41:43):
And especially for smaller powers like Canada,
which neighbor the US and arereally really kind of sensitive
to anything that happens there.
Speaking of being neighbors, soI live in Seattle, right, and
we have typically taken weekendtrips up to Vancouver, victoria,
almost like once a month, andwe have not since Trump has
taken office.
In part, the reason is becauseI feel like I'm starting to
(42:03):
realize what it must have feltlike, or it must feel like, to
be Russian or maybe Israeli incertain areas of the world these
days, and I am, I'm not goingto lie I'm a little worried that
we're going to get anaggressive response if we cross
the border, that people will notbe happy to see us, and I guess
I wonder what your sense is, ifCanadians are looking at this
(42:28):
as a US government issue or ifthey are extending this to the
American people.
Dr. Lecours (42:33):
That's a good question.
I don't think I've seen likepolling data on that, but I
think, anecdotally, I would saythat it's Canadians are able to
distinguish between the USgovernment and Americans, and
that's something that PremierFord has done really well.
I think.
You know like he's been verypresent on US media, as you know
, he said repeatedly that heloves Americans media.
(42:59):
As you know, he said repeatedlythat he loves Americans but
that he disagrees with thecurrent administration.
So you know, again, that'ssomething that has changed.
You might know that manyCanadians have decided to, you
know, not travel to the UnitedStates for the foreseeable
future.
I don't know how it's goingfrom the United States to Canada
(43:21):
.
I really do not think thatAmericans need to worry about a
rude reception by Canadiansbecause, again, as I said, I
think Canadians are making thedistinction between the policy
and approach of their federalgovernment and what Americans
(43:45):
think.
But you know, maybe I'm wronghere.
I'm not going on any kind ofsurvey data and I haven't
extensively questioned mycompatriots on this issue
questioned my compatriots onthis issue, but my strong sense
is that, to put it simply, youcould most likely travel to
(44:07):
Vancouver and Victoria and feelquite comfortable, even, you
know, announcing you areAmerican, but perhaps you'll
just have to actually do thetrip and let me know how it goes
.
Shawn (44:16):
Okay, final question Are you ready for it?
Dr. Lecours (44:18):
Yeah.
Shawn (44:20):
What's something interesting you've been reading,
watching, listening to or doinglately, and it doesn't have to
be related to this topic, but itcan be.
Dr. Lecours (44:27):
Well, I think it's going to be, because it's this
electoral campaign, S right.
I mean Right, I mean it's, it's,it's mesmerizing up here
(44:53):
because, as I said, we've neverhad the potential for since 1988
, an international issue or aninternational actor right,
president Trump feature in thefederal election campaign.
I mean, president Trump is thesingle most important person in
the current election, I thinkit's fair to say.
And so all kinds of strangethings are happening.
(45:15):
Right, the Liberal Party isgaining steam.
The New Democratic Party, whichis our small social democratic
party here, is collapsingbecause people on the left, I
guess, want to make sure thatthey don't have a conservative
government, so they're going tosupport the Liberals, which are
a bit more centrist than the NewDemocratic Party.
But if you're even clearly onthe left, maybe that's the
(45:37):
strategic thing to do.
The Bloc Québécois, which is aQuebec-only party that supports
the independence of the provinceand operates at the federal
level is also trying to find away to, you know, articulate the
Korean discourse.
So it needs to kind of be notoverly undermined, this kind of
be not overly undermine thiskind of Canadian front, but at
(45:59):
the same time explain thatthere's particular and peculiar
Quebec interests there that areat play in these negotiations
that can only be defended by aQuebec-only party.
So and that part is, you know,as a Quebecer myself is really
interesting because, you know, Ithink there's a, there's a
(46:19):
structural challenge coming herefor the Quebec independence
movement, which is that, youknow, in the 95 referendum, for
example, which yielded almost amajority in favor of
independence, you know, thecounter argument by supporters
of independence against thosewho said that the province would
be left economically worse byindependence was to say well,
(46:41):
that's OK, we have free trade,we're just going to keep trading
with the Americans, right, wedon't need to trade with with
Canada, we'll just we'll just,you know, keep on going with our
north south economic relations,economic relations.
And of course that argumentseems to be gone now, which I
think places, you know,supporters and promoters of
independence in a more difficultdiscursive situation.
(47:06):
So you see, there's a lot tofollow in Canadian politics and
society, and this is beyondpolitics we're into kind of
society and what Canadians buywhen they go to the grocery
store and so on and so forth.
There's so much to follow as aresult of the last US
(47:26):
presidential election.
So it's again.
It's crazy to think the extentto which that, you know,
american politics and the lastpresidential election is
impacting virtually alldimensions of Canadian politics
and society.
Shawn (47:44):
I mean it is fascinating this kind of Trump effect on
Canadian politics and you cantrack almost right around March
1, cpc was up nationally like 10, 12, 13 points, and then it
started to shift and now itlooks like LPC is up about
anywhere between four to eight.
Dr. Lecours (48:03):
That's right.
And unfortunately for MonsieurPoilievre, you know the leader
of the Conservative Party ofCanada he in the past has
sounded a lot like Donald Trump,right?
He has criticized experts,criticized the media.
He's criticized the WorldEconomic Forum.
(48:24):
He supported that kind ofconvoy, blockade, slash,
occupation here in Ottawa, whereI am in the capital, just like
Donald Trump and Fox News did.
And now the Liberal Party ofCanada, ryan and the Capitol,
just like, you know, donaldTrump and Fox News did.
And now the Liberal Party ofCanada actually is running some
very effective ads against him,where they show a clip of him
(48:46):
for five seconds sayingsomething and then Donald Trump
saying the same thing, and theyrepeat on many different topics.
And the message, of course, isyou know, pierre Poiliev is just
like Donald Trump and DonaldTrump is attacking Canada.
Therefore, why would you votefor a party led by Pierre
Poiliev?
So, so, yes, the Trump effect.
(49:07):
I think that's that's the rightterm and that's it's just been
massive.
It's almost like I'm going touse some of President Trump's
favorite words here.
It's been unlike anything we'veseen before.
It's been exceptional.
It's incredible to see howCanadian politics is being
transformed by what's happenedin the United States.
Shawn (49:29):
Dr LaCour, thanks for taking the time.
Dr. Lecours (49:31):
I really appreciate it you're welcome, it was a
pleasure.
Shawn (49:42):
It's clear that the 2025 Canadian election is going to be
unlike any other in recentmemory.
The interplay between domesticpolitics and international
pressures has created a uniquelycharged atmosphere as the Trump
effect upends what seems like aforegone conclusion to these
April elections in Canada, where, up until very recently, the
(50:04):
Conservatives wereoverwhelmingly expected to sweep
.
It may be that the moreConservative control that Trump
wields in the United States, thebetter Liberal parties do in
other countries, with the firstbellwether being Canada.
Whether Canada emerges fromthis election with a renewed
sense of national identity orfaces further challenges to its
(50:25):
sovereignty remains to be seen.
What's certain, though, is thatthe outcome will have
far-reaching consequences, notjust for Canada, but for North
American relations and theglobal order as a whole.
All right, check back next weekfor another episode of Deep
Dive Chat.
Soon, folks, thank you, thankyou.
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.