CPAC - Friday, May 24, 2024 - 08:00 p.m. (ET) - Segment #1

they think it's, oh, they're hacking into our systems, they're changing the votes. But it could just go as far asspreading misinformation online and trying to changepeople's different viewpoints and opinions through common,like social media platforms and through the news. It's not necessarily just hacking in. And so I think one of the most worrying concepts is the lack of information regarding what actually foreign election interference is. Well, the business of foreign interference, I suppose we all should be worried about it. But ultimately, I'm just a citizen. So what will be, will be. It does concern me very, very much. It should be the Canadians that should have control over the electionthan any other foreign affair. Not really so much. In the scheme of things, there's a lot more foreign interference going on in other countries, rather than Canada, so I'm not really too concerned about it. It doesn't-- it's not a priority for me. I think it's a lot of political hay that's going on with that right now. Definitely. [Glen] Why? Because it's possible. With the computer age that we're in, it's very possible to just change the numbers just like you do with a control on TV. You want a different channel,you just change the channel. It's that's simple. If it was counted by hand,that would be another matter. And if it was actually monitored. Then I would say, yeah,they got voted in properly. But the way it stands now, it's a joke. I just think it's important for Canadian democracy that it's Canadians to decide, you know, the direction we want our government to take, the policies we want in place. So, you know, it's people here in the country who should be decidingthat, or Canadians abroad. Foreign interference is always going to worry me. Whether or not it's actuallyhappening here, I don't know. No, it doesn't worry me because, well, China kind of focuses on themselves. I don't think they actually need to do anything to sabotage the West because the West sabotages itself. So, it's like-- and I readabout the foreign interference. It was like-- what is it? To be honest, the fact that it helped Justin Trudeau get elected, Ithink maybe it was warranted. Like, if there was-- if the allegations are true, because I wasn't quite fond of the other candidates. But, you know, that's a whole other story. [Glen] Does it worry you? Not personally, though I dosee a lot of stuff on the news. I hear some stuff from, like,family members and everything, but I'm personally not too worried. Yes, of course. Any good citizen shouldbe worried by interference from foreign countries in our elections here in Canada, because, it will not give us the exact thing that we want. Because people do the best they can in offices when they are duly elected properly and they stand in for the people. So if people get into theoffice from the back door, of course they won't do the bid of the people. And that's not really fair for the people. And it gets me worried because I won't get the dividends of democracy in Canada. I think we think, oh, we're safe in Canada, so it could not be that bad. We've been like this for a long time. Our borders are too porous. Whether it is now because of everything is online or whatever or in defence. But, I think Canadians also little bit feeling nothing could hurt us. A little bit. Not too much. I think it's inappropriate thatwe are-- certain politicians are looking outside of thecountry for support and things like that. I don't think that it's beneficial to Canada. [theme music playing] [Music playing]

[Music playing] [ ] >> Michael: on primetime politics back on the defensive. >> Rt Honourable pm Justin Trudeau: we are the ones that are taking seriously can canada's defence needs. >> Michael: a rare letter from U.S. senators forces the prime minister to justify his defence policy. American lawmakers accusing canada of hurting collective defence by failing to meet its nato commitments. We will speak to our journalist panel about the letters impact here in the capital. And... >> Under the genocide convention, "israel must immediately halt its military offensive. >> Michael: the international court of justice says israel must stop its rough offensive. And canada says the ruling must be followed. What will that mean for relations with israel? We will speak to canada's investor to the un, bob rae. This is primetime politics. [ ] >> Michael: hello everyone, on michael serapio. The prime minister finds himself having to defend his nato record. On thursday, a group of U.S. senators wrote to justin trudeau telling him they are profoundly disappointed and concerned that canada will not meet its 2 percent of gdp nato commitment even by the end of the decade. It is a failure that the senator say will harm the alliance and the free world. Here's how the prime minister responded on friday. >> Rt Honourable pm Justin Trudeau: I will say, and the conversations I have had with my american colleagues and counterparts, the massive investments we are making and upgrading our fighter jet fleet with 88 new fighter jets, are investments close to $40 billion in norad modernization, are recent budgets, massive investments in arctic safety and security, recognizing the nato western and northern flank is canada's arctic. They are all extremely well received by the americans and by allies around the world who want to see us continue to step up. We recognize there is more to do when we will be there to do it. >> Michael: let's talk about this as we are now joined by robert fife, the ottawa-vanier chief of the globe and mail, stephanie levitz the debbie ottawa bureau chief of the robert -- starr and robert russo a veteran ottawa journalist who is now with the economist, hello to the three of you. It is rare for U.S. senators to write to the head of a foreign government and say what they said. How embarrassing is it for trudeau and his government, how embarrassing is it for canada? >> It is not embarrassing. It is a lot more serious than that. We have some very serious negotiations coming up in terms of the renegotiation of the free trade agreement and these senators are saying you have to put something on the table and it will have to be something to do with defence. It is a very serious issue. We have been getting away as being freedom holders for a long time but the americans and the very polarized society with democrats and republicans that are on side, that canada and our other allies have to put a lot more money on the table and we are seeing that. Our nato allies in some cases are spending up to 3 percent even though there is a 2 percent target and we are at 1.7%. And even what we committed to is not committed to spending. That is just sort of vague promises of doing something. It will be a very embarrassing moment for the prime minister in washington when the nato leaders meet if he cannot put something more on the table. And I think that there is going to be real consequences for this country unless we can really pony up to the bar and put real money and real commitments that we will do something. >> Michael: and to the point that you raise their, one, the fact that this was a bipartisan letter with both democrats and republicans and that too, there is this meeting in washington in july. What do you of this, stephanie? >> Putting a pin in the argument of the events by trudeau and his cabinet that they are down in the U.S. right now making good relations and getting ready for the next administration because clearly whatever it is they are talking to their american counterparts, they are not listening because what the americans want to hear is defence spending, please. So it is a bit embarrassing for the government in that context because they did make this big show of how we will not get sleepwalked into a trump administration and it again, puts the point that if we can say this, about justin trudeau's longer-term commitment to defence and should raise the question domestically right away to the conservatives, okay,, what is your plan then? Because it could in fact be a conservative government is left to dealing with the trump administration, more demands on defence and we still do not have clarity about how the conservatives would approach this difficult issue.

>> Michael: and underlying the fact that it was trump, his presidency that through nato up in the air saying the united states cannot be footing the bill for everything. What you say rob? >> I think we should be abashed by this. It is not just the americans. We have all been in briefings where some of our european allies who are closer to what is going on in ukraine then we are, are saying they are doing far more than two%. They are looking at five%. They are also looking at a more robust and a more rambunctious russia that is casting its branch beyond ukraine as well. We should not be surprised. If you go back to john manley, he said that we have the reputation of the people who when the bill comes, we get up and we excuse ourselves to go to the washroom and wash our hands. We are not doing that. Our allies are now saying that eleri getting up and going to the washroom, you're going out the back getting into the getaway car which is running and getting out of here. As soon as you can. And this is something -- the call is coming from beyond the united states, it is coming from our other allies. But the other truth is that it is not a vote winner. It just does not seem to make a difference with canadian voters. When political parties -- even the ndp tried this in 2008. They try to have a more robust military platform and found that they lost votes with it. Until we are actually threatened , it seems that chagrin and embarrassment does not seem to make this a vote-getter. That changes if china and russia become more expansionist and are threatening than they are now. But as it stands now, a lot of people running campaigns do not believe it is a vote-getter. >> I would agree with you earlier. But the world has changed since then. And for a long period of time, liberals, where there is non-christian or trudeau saying canadians don't really care about defence spending so we're not going to settle all of the money. If we have to cut we can cut that budget. But the fact that russia has invaded ukraine and is threatening eastern europe and you have germany, which all of a sudden has turned around and scent billions and billions of dollars to rearm all of france and all of these countries, so has japan because of the fear about chinese expansionism. The world has changed and that's why you were seeing all of these countries spending a lot of money now and that's why the americans say, hey,, we will not put all of this stuff, you better do stuff as well. And we better think about this. In the arctic, where they want to spend a lot more money than we have even committed to do, russia has very sophisticated military bases up there and we simply want to rely on f. 35 where the americans alaska, that will not cut it anymore particularly because china is now building nuclear icebreakers to come into their. So the world has changed and I think canadians are not stupid and they understand that we have to -- and we have a very proud tradition, by the way, in military tradition. When the tough gets going, candidate is there and I think canadians -- my view is that canadians will accept more defence spending because it is the right thing to do. >> Michael: and to that, especially alaska because we think of general andrew leslie's interview with the national post because here he is, a former member of the trudeau cabinet saying that justin trudeau does not care about defence or is at least not serious enough about defence. How does that affect the prime minister? Do you think it moves him anyway when there is a debate as to weather or not canadians really care about investing in it? >> Justin trudeau never cared about defence. And the entirety of his political career, slammed as though at one point in time he cared and then stopped caring. It's not that he never cared and then he did, he evidently does not care and I think bob pointed out to rob, canadians will care about the things that matter to them, obviously, but strong leadership means explaining to them and taking them along and saying here is why this matters. And what is wrong with trying to drive canadians to care but the military? What is wrong with saying to them, for example,, did you know that the armed forces can really provide your kid in education and they can go to school and then we get your kid into the military and they have all of the skills? I'm not saying we should go to the american-style military culture, that is a different thing in a different economy. But canadians will care if their leaders can show them a reason to care. If they are leaders themselves don't care, that is what canadians pick up on. >> Michael: I will move on because before done I want to talk about the most recent poll and you talked about leadership. And yes, the abacus poll shows the conservatives still have a massive lead over the liberals. But was interesting to me were the impressions and traits that

Copyright protected and owned by broadcaster. Your licence is limited to private, internal, non-commercial use. All reproduction, broadcast, transmission or other use of this work is strictly prohibited.

Transcripts