William McBeath critiques Canada’s federal election, where conservative candidates like Andrew Scheer push concrete policies—restoring $2B/year children’s tax credits and cutting the lowest bracket from 15% to 13.75%—while Justin Trudeau’s team deflects scrutiny over corruption, including SNC Lavalin, and urban-focused spending like expanded daycare. McBeath’s Save Calgary campaign targets Mayor Naheed Nenshi’s federal funding demands, arguing Calgary’s tax base already sustains growth. The segment underscores how social media amplifies misinformation, forcing voters to sift through partisan noise without institutional truthkeeping, exposing the gap between policy substance and performative narratives. [Automatically generated summary]
You're listening to a free audio-only recording of my show, The Gun Show.
My guest tonight is William Macbeth from Save Calgary with all the federal election analysis that you need.
If you like listening to this podcast, then you will love watching it.
But in order to watch, you need to be a subscriber to premium content.
That's what we call our long-form TV-style shows here on The Rebel.
Subscribers get access to watching my weekly show as well as other great TV-style shows too, like Ezra's Nightly, Ezra Levant Show, and David Menzies' fun Friday night show, Rebel Roundup.
It's only eight bucks a month to subscribe, or you can subscribe annually and get two months free.
And just for our podcast listeners, you can save an extra 10% on a new premium membership by using the coupon code podcast.
When you subscribe, just go to the rebel.media/slash shows to become a member.
And please leave a five-star review on this podcast and subscribe in iTunes or wherever you find your podcasts.
Those reviews are a great way to support the Rebel without ever having to spend a dime.
And now please enjoy this free audio-only version of my show.
One week into the federal election campaign, and I'm wondering, does anybody actually care about the hard issues about taxes, about debt, about unending corruption?
I know I do, partly because it's my job to be explicitly informed about these sorts of things.
But what about the average Canadian voter?
I'm Sheila Gunn-Reed, and you're watching The Gunn Show.
Social media is fantastic, but at the same time, it's also an immoral cesspit.
On one hand, it connects us with like-minded people we probably wouldn't find in the real world.
And it gives us the ability to share information with each other without having to go through the mainstream media information gatekeepers of old.
But on the other hand, it's also a place that displays the worst of people where mobs are formed, where pitchforks are brandished and torches are lit.
It's where cancel culture was born.
And now cancel culture thrives to enforce ideological conformity in the public square.
And social media has become an insurmountable legacy, a catalog of ideas and statements that good people, changed people seeking redemption, will probably never escape.
And so far in this election, more than any policy announcements and far more than Justin Trudeau's unending corruption, social media missteps from nearly a decade ago, where some conservative candidate said something that might be considered impolite in today's age.
Rcmp Investigations Unfold00:14:46
Well, that's all the media wants to talk about.
Is this the election that really solidifies this tactic of mainstream media enforcing cancel culture on conservative candidates?
Or is this the election where we say, enough is enough?
Just give us the information about the candidates and then let the voters decide.
My guest tonight is William Macbeth from Save Calgary.
He and I discuss this and so much more, including some actual tangible policy announcements from the conservatives that will serve to make your life just a little less expensive.
But before I go on, we discussed some breaking news in our interview that we recorded yesterday afternoon.
At the time, Brock Harrison, the director of communications for Andrew Scheer, said that the RCMP confirmed that there was an investigation into the SNC Lavillin fair.
And what he said made sense considering statements made by the RCMP commissioner about quote-unquote investigations.
Let me explain.
Yesterday in a press conference about the arrest of Cameron Ortis for espionage, Commissioner Brenda Luckey was asked if the RCMP wanted Trudeau to waive cabinet confidentiality so they could further their investigation into the SNC Lavalin scandal.
Here's what she replied.
Today we're here for Mr. Ortis's investigation, so I don't want to comment very much.
We do take all investigations very seriously and investigate to the fullest.
Investigations.
So one could reasonably assume, and I know I probably would have from that statement, that the RCMP were also investigating Trudeau's involvement with SNC Lavalin.
The RCMP though clarified later on in the day that the statement was a generalized statement about all RCMP investigations.
You'll hear William and I talk about that breaking news in our interview because we were recording live, but we left it in the show because I think we make some pretty salient points about whether or not the average liberal voter really cares about Trudeau's corruption.
So now that that clarification is out of the way, here's my interview with my good friend William Macbeth from Safe Calgary.
Joining me now is my friend William Macbeth from Safe Calgary.
Now, he's my go-to municipal politics guy, but he is also a longtime conservative activist, both provincially and federally.
And I think way, way back in the Redford days, that's when you came on my radar as someone smart and someone to pay attention to.
So now that we're in the midst of the federal election, of course, I'm going to have my smart guy, William, on the show.
William, we're recording this Tuesday, morning, afternoon-ish.
And we just got word, I see, from Brock Harrison.
So Brock Harrison is Director of Communications for Andrew Scheer, and he tweets out just minutes ago that the RCMP commissioner Brenda Lucky or Lukey, I've never learned how to say her name, has confirmed there is an investigation into the SNC Lavalin corruption scandal.
Now, you and I were talking off camera.
This is great.
We don't think that justice should grind to a halt because an election campaign is on.
That's hardly how things should work.
But I'm wondering what sort of difference will this make to entrenched liberal voters, those voters who, despite, you know, the pragmatism of Stephen Harper, voted for Justin Trudeau because they like nice hair, socks, and sunny ways.
You know, it's a really important question, and I'm sure it's one that folks on the Scheer campaign and on the other ones are asking themselves.
How solid and entrenched is that liberal vote?
So I would say there's a few things to consider.
The first of all is we're still pretty early in to this election.
We still have about five weeks to go until election day.
What campaigns, you know, what a real campaign's about is trying to decide what question voters will be asking themselves when they're standing in that voting booth trying to make a decision about who to vote for.
And for Andrew Scheer, I think that question, he wants it to be, which party and which leader do you trust to help you and your family get ahead?
And for Justin Trudeau, he, of course, wants it to be about which party and leader do you trust to keep moving Canada forward.
Although I'm not 100% sure I understand what that means.
But, you know, this SNC thing has a real potential to derail what the liberals are trying to communicate, which is under us, we've moved Canada forward.
We've made progress, despite the fact that they really haven't in so many ways.
And now people are going to be asking themselves on that who do I trust question.
Well, can you really trust a party and a leader in particular who has been subject to multiple investigations for breaking the law?
Yeah, they're starting to number the investigations into Justin Trudeau's corruption.
There's report number one and report number two.
And I mean, I anticipate there will probably be a Gomery-style investigation either after the next election, if the conservatives win or when Justin Trudeau is finally no longer prime minister.
I think we'll see something like that where the onion is peeled right back so we can see the levels of corruption of this liberal government, because I think we're just started sort of scratching the surface with it all.
No, I think you're absolutely right.
And if you look back to the last time Canada was sort of in this position, we were in sort of that 2005 period where a scandal plagued liberal government was going back to people asking for another kick at the can.
And, you know, a breaking RCMP investigation in the middle of the election campaign really was the final nail in the Paul Martin liberal coffin that time around.
So the question is, will people react the same way again this time?
I think the complication this time around is this campaign, while there have been policy announcements, really hasn't been about policy so far.
It's been about the theater of politics and, you know, who was friends with who half a decade ago.
Apparently, who invited who out for drinks as a liberal MP in Facebook?
We just started having that conversation the last day and a half.
So, you know, we really haven't gotten into the meat of this campaign and possibly we never will if this is how the media are going to choose to cover the 40 days of this 43rd election.
You know, I'm glad you brought that up because I'm not, maybe I am part of the problem because I began digging into the social media histories of liberal candidates back in 2015, way before I worked for the Rebel.
And I ended up nuking Michelle Rempel's liberal candidate.
They had to replace her sort of in the middle of the campaign.
Incidentally, because she had said something about Ezra Levant, like sending him back to Israel or something to that effect.
So maybe I created this monster, but this is now gone beyond telling a Canadian-born Jewish man to go back to Israel.
This is about you can't have been friends with someone.
You can't have known somebody socially.
You can't have been socially polite to someone because now every opinion of that other person that they've made since then, you suddenly wear like a yoke around your neck.
To his credit, and I've been critical of Andrew Scheer when I don't think he's conservative enough.
To his credit, he's sort of drawn a line in the sand.
And I think it's a very conservative ideal to have where he says, look, people have changed from the time where they said something maybe not as polite as we consider it today.
If they've, you know, made amends and have demonstrated, you know, good moral character since then, that's good enough.
And as for me, I think that's very conservative because I'm one of those people who, you know, there were times in my life where I didn't live very conservatively.
And once I started behaving more conservative, life got pretty good.
And I like to sort of preach that message.
If you, you know, suddenly start making good choices and maintain personal responsibility, things will get better for you.
And I like to think that, you know, as conservatives, we should be inviting people who may not have always been the kind of people we would think are conservatives today.
We should really be inviting them into the fold once they've proven themselves.
And I'm glad to see Andrew Scheer say that he sort of believes the same way.
Yeah, I think, you know, digging into a candidate's past is an entirely legitimate tactic part of any election campaign.
And certainly, I think a candidate's past should be of concern to the voters in that writing.
So I'd like to know who I'm voting for.
I'd like to know what that person has said and done.
And I also want to know if that person has subsequently changed their mind or realized they were mistaken or their views have changed on an issue.
Where I think this starts to go off is when we try and hold an entire political party and a leader of a political party accountable for the actions of one of 338 candidates on the team, especially when a political party leader, at least in the case of, say, the conservatives, does not have total control over who is on that slate of candidates.
Candidates are by and large elected by the members in their writing.
And, you know, Andrew Scheer, as leader of the Conservative Party, has a team of 338.
But it's really unfair to say that the entire Conservative Party and Andrew Scheer are responsible for what a single candidate may have said or done in the entire history of that candidate's life.
And I also think you make a really good point about people do change.
And to me, I think when people change, that's something to be celebrated.
It's how society, it's how we make progress on important issues.
One day, people said, I used to believe this.
I now don't.
I now believe this.
Why?
Because I've learned more about an issue or because I've had the chance to think about it or I've seen how it's affected someone in my life who I know and love.
And because of that, I now think something different.
So rather than condemning people for changing their views or for having once held views that were out of step with what we think of today, we should be celebrating people for when they change their mind because they have new information or because they've had a personal awakening on an issue.
Well, and I think there's a vast difference too between somebody who's done something and then lived their life a different way for an extended period of time or someone who has had, you know, held views, probably still holds those views, and only apologized now because everybody found out, or has not even apologized.
In the liberals' case, they don't seem to be all that apologetic.
We've had two candidates from the liberal side, one TERFed, one not, who've made anti-Semitic comments.
We had Hassan Gillette or Gillette.
B'nai Breth accused him of engaging in a pattern of disturbing anti-Semitic and anti-Israel statements.
And, you know, he hasn't really renounced the statements.
He's actually just said, I'm not racist or anti-Semitic.
But that doesn't negate what he said before.
He's not denying the views he held before.
And in that case, the only problem the liberal had with the liberals as a party had with what he said was that Benai Brith didn't keep it under wraps.
B'nai Breth went public with it.
And that's when the liberals decided to do something about it.
Apparently, B'nai Breth told them months ago what they had uncovered their candidate to be saying.
And then the Liberals have just nominated.
His name is Samir Zubairi.
And again, according to Jewish organizations, they say he's promoted conspiracy theories about the terrorist attacks on 9-11 and said that bin Laden's role in 9-11 is still a matter for public debate.
And, you know, given that Canadians died in 9-11, I certainly don't want somebody who's in the House of Commons who's a 9-11 truther.
But the Liberals just nominated him and they're just letting him run.
No, and I think you make a really important point here.
To judge a political party by what a single candidate said or did 5, 10, or 15 years ago, but who has then subsequently changed their position on it, I think is unfair.
But there's a world of difference between that and then judging a political party who is actively recruiting candidates who have problematic views about Canada and Canadians.
And the example that I think hammers at home is with the first candidate you referenced.
Well, after B'nai Brez made public their information, the Liberal Party eventually took action and dropped the individual as a candidate.
But in his statement as to what happened, he expressed shock and surprise because the Liberal Party had been working with him on, to use his words, a PR plan to deal with his problematic comments.
Reporters' Complaints About Trudeau00:11:41
So to me, you're not really sorry about something if you're in the midst of building a PR plan to defend it.
That tells me what you're sorry for is getting caught.
You're not sorry for the views you held at some point in your life.
So, you know, what's interesting is Andrew Scheer has said that, you know, no blanket policy.
We'll examine each one as we go.
But if someone demonstrates real remorse and real offers a real apology for something, that's, in his mind, a demonstration of someone who could still be a great candidate for the Conservative Party.
NDP leader Jagmeek Singh said virtually the same thing.
He said, look, if someone wants to espouse views that I, you know, that are not compatible with what our party stands for, with what Canadians accept, but that person has apologized, that person's views have changed, and here's demonstrable reason for why we believe that.
He's also not going to force them out.
Because otherwise, what will elections become?
Elections will become, you know, and in this round, we lost 600 candidates across all the different parties.
And at some point, once you lose a candidate, you just can't replace them.
So does that mean voters in that riding just won't have that choice?
You know, you're living in a riding, you know, you've lost three candidates out of scandal or out of mispropriety or something they said, you know, at some point in their past.
So now you have to vote for the only one who's left because they're the only one whose name's still on the ballot.
Yeah.
And I mean, on what level does this remove the local autonomy and local democracy of the local riding?
You know, if these candidates have campaigned, they've been vetted enough for the people who helped them win the nomination.
Why can't the local residents decide if they want to send them to Ottawa?
You know, when you are constantly removing candidates because the CBC doesn't like a social media post they made eight years ago or whatever it is, Why should Rosie Barton get to decide the liberal that runs in my riding or the conservative that runs in my riding that just doesn't seem democratic?
No, and I think you raised the other key ingredient.
Political parties would not spend the kind of time, money, and effort they do looking up the past history, social media posts of candidates if those weren't then reported breathlessly by national media outlets as if the candidate literally woke up that morning and screamed it from his bedroom window.
So, you know, I think that the media do have to take a look at themselves and say, look, you know, you profess to say you hate scripted campaigns, you hate the talking points, you hate that you only ever get canned soundbites.
Well, guess what?
That means you cannot also then do 48 hours of around the clock news on what a candidate said 10 or 15 years ago as part of your election coverage.
It's important to the people of that riding, absolutely, but it's not worth a day of national news.
And of course, that's what we've seen happening is fairly breathless reporting from national media about candidates who have said and done certain things and primarily from the conservative campaign.
Although one of the reasons I think the media also have done that is because the prime minister was simply missing an action for two whole days of this campaign.
He took the weekend off.
And even though there were reporters embedded on his campaign within feet of him.
I saw it with my own eyes.
Nobody chose to take that opportunity to ask him a question.
He described it as, well, we're in the rapid riding movement phase.
And as someone who's worked politics for 20 years, well, that's not a thing.
That's just campaign tour moving from one place to the next to shake hands and to flip pancakes or whatever the event is that's going on.
You can easily ask questions on the route.
And let's contrast that with Andrew Scheer, who every single day of this campaign has stood on his airplane and answered reporter questions until they ran out of questions to ask him.
So who is really trying to hide and cover things up in this election?
A prime minister running from the media or Andrew Scheer who takes questions until there are no more questions.
You know, that is a great point.
I saw it with my own eyes in Edmonton after I was removed from the liberal event for being nothing other than a conservative.
He walked onto the media bus or the liberal bus, but I repeat myself, sat down surrounded by reporters.
Since when do reporters need a politician's permission to ask them questions?
It's our duty to ask them questions, especially questions they don't want asked and questions they don't want to answer.
I've seen, I don't know how many hours of footage of Justin Trudeau walking around, followed by reporters, and then the reporters complaining, well, he's not allowing us to ask questions.
Give me a break.
You're three feet from the man.
Ask him a question.
If he ignores you, he ignores you, but at least you tried.
And then to see reporters complaining, I mean, it's just really quite appalling, especially when you, like you point out, contrast that with Andrew Scheer, what Andrew Scheer is doing, but also how the media is treating Andrew Scheer.
I watched a CBC reporter chase Andrew Scheer through a parking lot and chase his car down as the car drove away because she wanted her questions answered.
Why isn't anybody doing that to Justin Trudeau while he's buying fries for CBC reporters?
Absolutely.
You know, media outlets spend a ton of money to embed a reporter onto one of those campaigns.
You know, something in the order of $10,000 a week for a reporter for a major media outlet to be on the liberal plane or to be on the conservative plane.
So you would think with that kind of investment, reporters would be using every single opportunity they have to get questions answered.
And I don't understand why we seem to be seeing one set of rules for Andrew Scheer and the Conservative Party and another set of rules for Justin Trudeau, you know, as prime minister.
Certainly during an election, they're both political party leaders, both wanting to lead our country.
What is this clubby, oh, well, we can't ask questions because what?
He won't give you your free poutine if you yell a question at him, or he'll give you a worse seat on the plane that you paid for to be there.
Like, what's the downside of asking him questions?
You know, the prime minister will get mad at you.
Okay, you'll live.
It's time to be brave, reporters of Canada, and don't just put up with, well, we're not taking questions today.
And certainly, Sen, don't cover the liberal photo ops if they're not prepared to also take questions, because then that's just free media, free criticism-free media for the Liberal Party.
Yeah, and last time I checked, Justin Trudeau already has a private photographer, somebody whose sole job is devoted to taking glamour photos of Justin Trudeau.
We don't need the entire media pool taking pictures of Justin Trudeau.
I mean, especially when the parliamentary press gallery will not accredit our journalists.
And I suspect our journalists are probably the only one who would shout questions at Justin Trudeau over a plate of poutine.
But they're controlling this exclusive access to Justin Trudeau and then refusing to do their job.
It's very bizarre and it's really quite shameless.
You can see, you can see how they're treating Andrew Scheer versus how they're treating Justin Trudeau.
And Justin Trudeau, he knows he's going to receive that sort of passive, glowing treatment.
I mean, he bought fries for a CBC reporter on camera and then said, we know the Liberal Party of Canada always takes care of CBC.
I mean, the gall of saying that right in front of all those reporters, knowing he really wouldn't get any criticism out of those reporters for saying something so, you know, inappropriate, but honest for once.
It's really quite bizarre.
And then we also saw Global News copyright struck that video of Justin Trudeau giving fries to a CBC reporter.
Then they took it down.
Then they re-put up a version of it, despite owning two versions of it.
They re-put up another version of it that's less clear.
And I think it's to obscure sort of the reactions of the reporters because the original version of that, you could see the reporters all there.
You could see the reporter that Justin Trudeau gave the gift to, and you could see their like happy, jokey reaction.
The new version doesn't show that.
And I think it's really strange, being someone who works for a media organization.
If we owned two versions of the same video, we would absolutely put up the more clear one.
And boy, it sure looks like there's a cabal at work here around Justin Trudeau, reporters protecting journalists and reporters protecting Justin Trudeau's bad behavior.
Yeah, and this incident has been so interesting for, I mean, a few reasons.
Well, first of all, we said if you create a media fund, a $595 million media fund to give taxpayer dollars to media, you will influence the coverage of politics in this country.
And in this case, I think you're absolutely right.
And, you know, even if that wasn't their intent, that is certainly what has come to pass.
And the second thing is, of course, is that it really hurts media's ability to say, look, we're doing our tough job and we're trying to hold politicians to account when you see this.
And this incident in particular has had several reporters.
I saw one, I think, from the Globe and Mail today retweet the CBC reporter in questions tweets about the not asking questions.
He was the one who got the Poutine handed to him by saying, well, how can you say this when Andrew Scheer is taking questions each and every day of this campaign and Justin Trudeau isn't?
And I thought, well, that's interesting.
You don't always see division in the ranks of media coverage, but I think it's because some media are starting to come to the conclusion that they're about to suffer irreparable and irreversible damage to their credibility because of how they cover an election in the face of all of this taxpayer money that is now going to their corporate owners.
So maybe you'll start to see more media pushing back against the clubby Ottawa-based journalism journalists who day-to-day cover the prime minister and national politics.
But yeah, it was a very telling incident, the poutine to the reporter from the prime minister and the comment that he made.
Oh, it was so strange.
Now, you did mention that there has been very little policy being announced from the liberals.
I can't really, there's really not much of anything except we're going to increase this amount of money that we're giving you.
But Andrew Scheer has actually made some pretty tangible policy announcements that will put more money back in Canadians' pockets.
Conservative Programs for All00:04:58
The two children's tax credits that were cut by Trudeau, I embrace these tax credits coming back into my life.
I've got some very active kids.
They're always in something.
And when Trudeau took those tax credits away, it really made a difference in my life and a lot of other middle-class families' lives.
You know, it's interesting.
The conservative policy, you know, if you look what's been announced by the liberals and you look what has been announced by the conservatives, it's two very different ideas of what government can and should be in our lives.
In the case of the liberals, for example, the new 250,000 daycare, you know, before and after school care spaces, well, only even their own math suggests that only about one out of every $3 of that program is going to go into the pockets of parents.
The others are going to be consumed by the bureaucracy, by government, by unions, and by the government approved child care options that receive taxpayer funding.
Where the conservative approach has always been, look, we will give you back more of your own tax dollars so that you can spend them in ways that you see fit and best for your family.
So in the case of the child fitness tax credit and child arts tax credit, it's saying, look, we're not going to tell you what sports, you know, or what artistic pursuits are going to qualify.
We're going to say it's a tax credit.
You can enroll your kids and then get some money back from that cost on your taxes.
And it doesn't require an army of government bureaucrats to administer a program like that.
It's done automatically when you file your taxes by computers.
So to me, I think it's a much better way of addressing the required, the flexibility that's needed for national programs.
That's always been the big challenge of creating a national program is a voter living in rural Newfoundland is very different than a voter living in downtown Vancouver.
And so how can you build a program that will possibly meet both of those needs if you're trying to do it from a central big government standpoint?
And the other big program that I think is really great is the universal tax cut that Andrew Scheer announced that would see the lowest income tax bracket reduced from 15% to 13.75%, a one and a quarter percent cut on that tax bracket.
It is a real benefit to those earning.
The lowest amounts of money, and to those families who are getting by um, you know, paying their bills but are struggling to make ends meet.
It will make a real difference and it's a sharp contrast to the tax plan that the liberals introduced, where the benefits disproportionately went to people earning more than 250 000 a year.
So I think that's a great policy from Andrew Shear.
A couple great policies have come out and it tells me they've really done their homework on this whole fight for the middle class, which I think is coming to define uh, this election.
You know Andrew Shear and the conservatives with their slogan, it's time for you to get ahead, and the you in this case is hardworking everyday families who aren't politically well connected, like the Irvings and like SNC Lavillin and like Bombardier uh, who clearly are the first priority of the liberal government.
Yeah, it's been really great to see um a tax credit that provides you choice and, like you say, does recognize um.
It's so funny because the liberals talk about diversity diversity, diversity is our strength and yet they design these cookie cutter programs that uh are.
You know, they don't address the fact that, you know, sometimes hockey is the only game in town um, out in the middle of nowhere and um, you know, hockey is very expensive and if you want kids in rural Canada to have the same access and opportunities as kids, like you say, in downtown Vancouver, these sort of tax credits help, as opposed to these behemoth, uh cookie cutter programs that the liberals have designed, that you know,
everybody lives in a condo in downtown Montreal and everybody goes to the daycare that's directly underneath their, their suite, it's.
We live in a far different world and uh, the conservatives, they have tailored programs that are have something for everybody.
I guess yeah, no it, you know, for people who do claim to celebrate diversity, their view of Canada is uh, very monolithic.
It's very urban yeah, it's um, it's very affluent.
It's very much people who depend, from when they wake up in the morning to when they go to bed at night, on government and on government programs, and it doesn't recognize the fact that we are a big, diverse country.
Lots of different Canadians, lots of different circumstances um, and lots of people who are are struggling, for one reason or another, to to make ends meet, and certainly uh, the tax credits and the tax cut proposed by the sheer uh campaign so far appear to be really hitting on that.
Conservative Programs Tailored for All00:02:07
Let's make life more affordable for you and your family.
Theme now, William, you've been super generous with your time today.
You're here talking about the federal campaign, but Your day job is in municipal politics as a municipal politics watchdog.
I want to give you a chance to plug the work that you do at Safe Calgary and let people know how they can support you.
Well, thanks, Sheila.
I did have to laugh.
The mayor has made his demands of federal political party leaders, and this becomes a big surprise.
He wants more money from local political parties.
I know, what a shocking decision.
What a surprise.
So out of character.
And, you know, frankly, anybody who's paid any attention to Canada's fiscal situation will know there just isn't money available to give to cities to fund whatever pet projects those cities are demanding for this week.
Certainly, you know, with a deficit that's still in the double digits, and even under Andrew Shears, you know, the liberals describe it as austerity.
Andrew Shears' plan still takes five years to balance Canada's budget from all of this liberal misspending.
So I did enjoy the optimism, though, or at least maybe the, I don't care about the facts and reality attitude of the mayor.
I'm just going to ask for more money.
So, Safe Calgary, we've said, and we've made this pretty clear.
We think Calgary has enough money.
We think Calgary takes in from businesses, from homeowners, through all of the fees, taxes, surcharges, and levies that they put on to people.
They have enough money to run the city.
What they need to do is cut their spending, which I know is sacrilege in the world of municipal politics, but it's time to take a good hard look at how the city spends our money.
So, our website, safecalgary.com, you can follow us through our social media channels.
We put out a nearly weekly newsletter which talks about some of the issues happening in Calgary going on.
And if you would like to come and check us out, we'd really love it.
We'd love it if you followed our social media, sign up for our newsletter.
And if you could, maybe after Andrew Scheer's Universal Tax Cut, you could even afford to make a donation to Safe Calgary to keep us wrong.
Social Media's Role in Truth vs. Lies00:01:07
Fantastic, William.
Thanks for your expert analysis today, and thanks for all the work that you do for Calgary taxpayers.
Well, check back in, I bet you, before the campaign is over, if you're willing.
Absolutely.
It's great to see you again, Sheila.
Social media has really given humanity the ability to spread lies like never before.
But it's also removed the mainstream media as the wall citizens have to climb over to get the honest truth.
At the end of the day, no matter what the journalists who would allow themselves to be bought off for a plate of poutine would have you believe, or what the pro-censorship Liberal Party says, the job of deciphering what's BS and what's truth lies solely on the individual and never the state.
Well, everybody, that's the show for tonight.
Thank you so much for tuning in.
I'll see everybody back here at the same time in the same place next week.