Keean Bexte & Sheila Gunn Reid dissect Alberta’s contradictory climate policy, where Premier Jason Kenney’s government funds a $30M anti-oil "war room" yet sends Mark Cameron—Clean Prosperity’s ex-analyst—to a climate conference alongside fossil-fuel-opposing groups like WWF. They mock Andrew Scheer’s 1980-style resignation amid scandals (Blackface, Gropegate) and his $900K pre-election spending, questioning if he’d have lost to Maxime Bernier. The episode also tackles Eastminster United Church’s Detained Christ nativity display, critiquing Canada’s Safe Third Country Agreement while fielding listener backlash—some defending immigration laws, others mocking the church’s "political" art—before reinforcing the sacredness of depicting Muhammad. [Automatically generated summary]
Welcome to the Rebel Roundup, ladies and gentlemen, and the rest of you, in which we look back at some of the very best commentaries of the week by your favorite rebels.
I'm your host, David Menzies.
Well, say it ain't so.
The province of Alberta is sending someone to a climate conference who is anti-oil sands and pro-carbon tax.
Sheila Gunnreed shall attempt to explain the seemingly unexplainable.
And Kian Bexti goes to Andrew Scheer's Stomping Grounds of Regina with a photo of Mr. Charisma himself.
Why?
Well, Kian just wanted to find out if Regina locals would be able to recognize Scheer.
Spoiler alert, most did not.
And finally, letters, we get your letters.
We get them every minute of every day.
And I'll share some of your responses regarding my report about a Toronto United Church nativity display that depicts the baby Jesus as a caged illegal migrant.
Oh, Merry Christmas indeed.
Those are your rebels.
Now let's round them up.
And I see the Eurasia group is also there.
As you'll recall, they are Gerald Butt's new employers.
Oh, and Gerald Butt's old employer is also there too.
That's the Anti-Oil World Wildlife Fund.
Also on the list of attendees of this greenwashing summit is Ed Whittingham, formerly of the Pembina Institute.
You'll recall they're a group referenced in the Rockefeller tar sands campaign documents as the point group in Alberta to help landlock our oil and gas.
He's a man the Kenney team made a big stink about, the Notley government appointing to the Alberta energy regulator.
And yet now, the Alberta government legitimizes him by sending an official envoy to meet with him.
Why did the Alberta government, currently busy fighting the carbon tax in federal court this very week, send pro-carbon tax bureaucrat, a senior policy analyst named Mark Cameron, to join this League of Subversives?
Cameron was hired by Jason Kenney after spending years advocating for carbon taxes from within the conservative movement as the head of clean prosperity.
Yeah, I know what you're thinking, folks.
When there was regime change big time in Alberta last year, wasn't the UCP and Jason Kenney supposed to be pro-oil sands?
So how is it even possible that someone such as Mark Cameron is representing the province at what is essentially a gathering that is meant to denounce the energy sector?
And joining me now with more on a story that is downright inexplicable is the host of the gun show, Sheila Gunn Reed.
Welcome to Rebel Roundup, my friend.
Hey, David, thanks for having me on the show.
Always a pleasure.
So Sheila, assuming the buck stops at Premier Kenney's office, how in blazes is Someone with Cameron CV being sent to this awful conference in the first place.
Let's go back a step.
How is someone like Mark Cameron employed by Jason Kenney with this gravy bureaucratic position?
Mark Cameron, by all accounts, is a genuinely nice human being, from what I understand.
I've never met him personally, but I understand that he's a very nice man, good family man.
That's great, but that doesn't mean that he should have a job with Jason Kenney's government.
When Jason Kenney's government was elected to repeal the carbon tax, but not just to repeal it, but to fight it when the federal government tries to impose it on us, and then to go after the enemies of Alberta's oil and gas sector.
That's why Jason Kenney was elected.
And yet, he has appointed Mark Cameron, who used to be the head of something called Clean Prosperity, which was a front group to push carbon taxes within the conservative movement.
Like, conservatives are generally against taxes to start with, but especially carbon taxes.
But that was his job to sort of move the needle forward on carbon taxes within the conservative movement.
And once Jason Kenney got elected, he became this, you know, policy, senior policy analyst for Jason Kenney's government.
So Sheila, though, what is the unspoken story here?
Yeah, Mr. Cameron might be a nicer guy than Santa Claus on Christmas Eve.
I get that.
But the thing is, why would somebody with his background and his political viewpoints be appointed?
In other words, I'm asking if you were to ask Jason Kenney that and get an honest answer, what do you think it would be?
I don't know what Jason Kenney would say, but I know what I'll say, and I'll say it's cronyism.
Good old-fashioned cronyism.
He's, you know, I think, you know, he's been, Mark Cameron's been around the conservative movement a long time.
And from what I understand, he's sort of friendly with Jason Kenney.
And, you know, get on the gravy train with biscuit wheels.
And this is exactly what we unelected the former Redford Tories because of, because there was so much entrenched cronyism.
That backlash against cronyism left us with Rachel Notley.
We don't want to see it starting again.
And this, you know, Jason Kenney has had a lot of really great appointments, and he's done a lot in the short time that he has been elected.
But this one appointment has really left a lot of conservatives with a bad taste in their mouth because it harkens back to the conservatives we threw out of office a few years back.
No, it's absolutely stunning.
And I don't know why, if it is indeed cronyism, Sheila, why is it needed in this case?
Jason Kenney has a super majority in Alberta.
He promised to say it loud, say it proud, that he was pro-Oil Sands, that he was against the carbon tax.
So this kind of policy is, it's kind of like this policy and this person is a holdover from the old Notley regime.
And I just can't connect the dots here, Sheila.
And there must be a feeling of people in Alberta, especially those who are swelling the unemployment lines, that this is a betrayal.
Yeah, well, it certainly is.
If Mark Cameron were appointed by Rachel Notley, we'd all be lighting our hair on fire.
But because he's appointed by Jason Kenney, we're just supposed to defer to Jason Kenney's wisdom on the subject.
And I'm just not, I'm not going to do it.
And even worse still, okay, let's just say Mark Cameron is a cronyism appointment.
Great, fine.
Keep him in a position where he's not doing any damage.
Just, you know, give him some busy work.
I don't like it, but if he's going to have a job, keep him out of places where he can make trouble for the rest of us.
But no, he's been sent to this soi of anti-oil activists, Freddy Cat oil companies who are still working on the idea of social license, appeasing your enemy to hope that you can get some pipelines done, and big banksters.
I mean, we sent Mark Cameron, we as the Alberta government, sent Mark Cameron to this conference, the Energy Futures Forum, with Gerald Butz's former employer,
the World Wildlife Fund, and his new employer, the Eurasia Group, as well as the Pembina Institute, which was listed in the Rockefeller tar sands campaign as the point NGO in Alberta to go to if you're looking to block oil and gas development here.
I mean, it is crazy that we have somebody who's even sitting at this forum when back at home, Jason Kenney has just opened up what they're calling the war room.
It's the energy center, and it's there to dispel the myths by the ante's against Alberta oil.
It's a $30 million project to combat the lies from the likes of the World Wildlife Fund and Pembin Institute.
And we didn't send a war room representative to this forum.
We sent a sympathizer, Mark Cameron.
It is absolutely staggering.
But, you know, the conference itself, Sheila, will anything tangible come out of this that will further affect in a bad way the Alberta gas and energy industry?
Or is this just, I don't know, a bunch of executives and so-called do-gooders virtue signaling and taking stances like that that at the end of the day it doesn't mean the proverbial hill of beans.
Well, the federal government has representatives there, so that should tell you just how serious this thing could get.
But also the banksters, there's this movement within the international banking establishment to divest from coal and divest from oil and gas to stop financing these things.
So when we have organizations like RBC meeting with these activist NGOs who are pushing the kinds of divestment and sanctions against oil and gas, we should all be very worried because these mega projects, like the ones that we need to go forward to get Alberta working, they require a lot of financial backing.
And if the banks have been convinced to pull out of financing these things, it doesn't matter if they get approval because they'll never get financing.
You know, how shameful.
I mean, Alberta needs someone that is a champion for the energy industry there.
Instead, it looks like they're sending somebody that's going to take the knee.
Sheila, one last thing.
We're not taking the knee on this.
Justin Trudeau's Political Maneuver00:14:38
In fact, you've got a new campaign to engage people when it comes to Mr. Cameron.
Tell us about that.
Well, it's a new old campaign.
When Cameron was first appointed to this policy analyst position, I started a campaign calling on Jason Kenney to fire him.
You know, there are a lot of good people in Alberta who are ideologically in line with repealing the carbon tax, smart people who are capable people who would be better suited for the job.
And, you know, I don't think Mark Cameron's that guy.
So back then, I started a campaign to fire Mark Cameron.
And people can sign that petition and see my first video at firecameron.com.
And, you know, when I saw that Mark Cameron now is actually, you know, going to these sorts of forums as a sympathizer instead of an adversary, I thought, what a great time to remind people exactly who Mark Cameron is.
And again, they can do that at firecameron.com.
Well, good for you, Sheila.
And listen, again, it's a staggering story.
I almost can't believe it.
And but listen, have a Merry Christmas nonetheless, and all the best to you in 2020, my friend.
Same to you and yours, David.
You got it.
And that was Sheila Gunn Reed with folks, what is just an incredible story of this guy going to this conference.
Keep it here.
More of Rebel Roundup to come right after this.
Now, Andrew Scheer announced his resignation, but perhaps it was just like what Pierre Trudeau did to keep the heat off of him in a time of scandal so he could bide his time and wait for the government of the day to collapse.
That could happen.
Trudeau's in a minority position with parties biting at his heels, hoping for the government to collapse.
Now, you might be wondering why I'm walking around with a picture of Andrew Scheer while I'm in Regina at his swamping grounds at his alma mater, the University of Regina.
And I'm going to ask the folks who would be voting for Andrew Scheer if they even know who he is.
And if they do, if they still think he's leader.
We're doing a story on this man here, and we're wondering if you could tell us who he is.
I don't know.
Never heard of him?
No.
Would you be able to identify who this is?
No.
Do you recognize this man?
No.
He just fought a federal election and he's actually from Regina.
Really?
Yes.
Yeah, no.
No idea who this is.
Okay, just asking folks if they can identify who this is.
Can't, sorry.
Stephen Harper.
Would you be able to identify who this man is?
No.
No?
Milk shrinker.
There you go.
Would you be able to identify who this man is?
Boris Johnson.
Boris Johnson.
Close.
Close.
Ouch.
Now, that's embarrassing.
Yet, by the same token, it speaks volumes when you're the leader of the official opposition party and you're a man that could have been prime minister.
How is it even possible that most people interviewed at a university campus couldn't put a name to that milk chuggin face?
And joining us now is our roving reporter, Kian Bexte.
Welcome to Rebel Roundup, Kian.
Thanks for having me, David.
Always a pleasure.
So, Kian, looks like Andrew Scheer still lives up to his facetious nickname of Mr. Charisma, eh?
That's exactly what we found in Regina.
We went there to, it was kind of a fact-finding mission to figure out exactly how well he is known.
You know, people just went to the ballot boxes across the entire country, and there's three names at least people should know: Justin Trudeau, Andrew Scheer, and maybe Jake Meet Singh.
You'd think at least Justin Trudeau and Andrew Scheer would have nationwide name recognition as the two major parties.
One of them was going to be prime minister.
One of them actually came from Regina, went to school at the University of Regina, yet it was a crapshoot as to whether or not someone could identify him.
Some people thought he was Boris Johnson.
Some people thought maybe he was Stephen Harper.
One person said, Oh, is that Andrew Sharp?
Sorry, Andrew.
You know, Kian, it brought on a feeling of deja vu for me.
Last year, I went to Young Dundas Square in Toronto, and it was almost surreal.
By this point, Mr. Shear had been the leader of the party for a solid 18 months.
And we were asking people there, and there was actually a huge jumbotron in the square where Andrew Scheer was addressing people.
I think it was during the Halifax convention, with his name and everything.
And even with that spoiler, if you want to call it, I think only maybe two or three people out of more than two dozen got his name.
In fact, the most embarrassing guess was one lady thought he was Paul Bernardo, Canada's most notorious serial killer.
But the thing is, you know, Kian, is this part of the problem in that if you can't even recognize the guy, and these are people in his own backyard, is this indicative of what Peter McKay said post-election that when he likened Mr. Scheer to a hockey player on a breakaway that missed on an open net?
You know, was there just a failure to resonate with people out there for whatever reason?
That's exactly it.
It's not just that he failed to score on the goal.
It's like he went onto the ice with the blades broken off of his skate already.
I mean, he couldn't get any traction whatsoever with anyone across this country, least of all at Regina, his hometown.
That's where he's elected as an MP.
That's where people actually scratch his name on the ballot.
People still couldn't recognize him.
It just goes to talk about his failure of his entire leadership tenure.
And it makes me question why the Conservatives are so comfortable keeping basically no name conservative on his leader for however many months, perhaps even over a year while they try and find a new one.
Would it not be maybe a little bit better to replace him with someone in caucus who can be effective and can actually start moving on from this failed past, this blip in the Conservative party where nobody could figure out what was going on.
No one could figure out what the direction of the party was, what the platform of the party was even.
I mean, think about it yourself.
In the election, what was the actual platform that the Conservatives were running on?
Nobody can really tell me, least of all, people who aren't really engaged in politics.
They can tell you what Justin Trudeau ran on.
They'll tell you that Justin Trudeau ran on, oh, he's going to cut my cell phone bill down by some amount, 25%, 50%.
I forget what he promised.
But Justin Trudeau had promises.
Justin Trudeau resonated with people, and that's why he's prime minister right now.
Indeed, and you know, Kian, in light of last week's announcement where Mr. Scheer was saying he was going to step down, I don't know about you, but with the conservatives I know, certainly there was no outpouring of grief like, oh, please don't go.
No, no, like you're watching your cat being run over by a tractor.
It was quite the opposite.
But I want to get on the other part of your commentary, which was very interesting, which was you have this suspicion, and some others share it, that maybe Andrew Scheer is really not going.
Maybe he's pulling a Pierre Elliott Trudeau circa 1980 where he's going to have a comeback and still be leader of the party.
Personally, I think the kindest thing I can say about Andrew Scheer is I don't think he's that devious, but what do you make of the comparisons to Pierre Trudeau in 1980?
Well, his staff are smart.
His staff want to be in the PMO one day, and his staff will know exactly what Pierre Trudeau did when he orchestrated that vote of non-confidence of Joe Clark's government so early.
Andrew Scheer's hand is a little bit restricted right now because when it was Pierre Trudeau, he was bartering with two parties who were possibly going to support Justin Trudeau's budget.
Andrew Scheer pretty much is in a position as a conservative party leader that any budget he has to vote against.
And the NDP, maybe they'll support it.
The Bloqué Baquis, maybe they'll support it.
But the NDP and bloc aren't assuredly no votes on the budget.
Andrew Scheer should be pretty much all the time assuredly no vote.
But this is what Pierre Trudeau did.
He orchestrated this vote of non-confidence.
And then he, even after he announced his resignation as leader, he orchestrated this vote and then he ran the election.
But his party sort of kept him in the background.
His party didn't put Pierre Trudeau running for prime minister on the masthead of all of the party posters and on the lawn signs.
They just pretended like he didn't exist.
But that was really effective against an ineffective leader.
And that ineffective leader is Joe Clark.
And that ineffective leader also could be Justin Trudeau.
So when he got elected, and this could be easily something that Andrew Scheer's staff are looking at as a possibility, at least.
But surely, Kian, the chances of success in such a scenario, I mean, given what the Justin Trudeau liberals were responsible for in the last several months, and I'm talking Blackface, the SNC Lavalin affair, the disastrous India trip, Gropegate, his treatment of some female MPs.
I mean, it was like a silver platter of negatives that were handed to the Andrew Scheer conservatives, and they couldn't close the deal.
Who knows when the next election is going to be called, but moving forward, I don't see that kind of opportunity existing as what Mr. Scheer had on his plate in late October.
Oh, don't get me wrong.
I'm not saying that this would be a successful bid.
This is more a warning to people that Andrew Scheer might be trying to take another stab at it just as unsuccessfully as the first one was, because there's something in him that makes him believe like his campaign did nothing wrong.
There's something in him that believes that treating conservatives so contemptuously like he did with you, David, outside of his campaign stop.
Andrew Scheer wasn't governing.
He was leading the party for centrists.
And you know what?
It was Pierre Polyev who said this to me when I was a conservative intern back in 2014.
He told the entire intern class, you know, voters will never respect someone who runs a party as liberal light.
They will just vote for the real thing.
They'll vote for the real liberals, and you and your party will be decimated.
And that was about seven years ahead of its time when he predicted that Andrew Scheer was going to catastrophically lose because he was running for the center rather than running as a defined alternative to Justin Trudeau's government from the right, for the right to do the right things.
Oh, I completely agree with you, Kian.
I mean, his stance towards the rebel, I mean, we've got almost 1.3 million YouTube subscribers who are presumably most of whom are red meat conservatives, didn't want to deal with us, wanted to go to the mean girls of the media party.
Then that story came out in the final days of the election where he had hired Warren Kinsella, the liberal, the master of smear and fear, to dig up stuff on the People's Party of Canada.
It just rubbed so many people on the right the wrong way.
And also, I should say, Kian, they're saying it's not related to his announcement, but the story came out where party funds were being used to fund his kids' private school education.
And this kind of stuff does happen in politics.
But, you know, Mr. Scheer was trying to portray himself as the common everyday man, you know, the common man driving the common van, the guy you see down at Tim Horns.
Yeah, but, you know, he's already making in the six figures.
Why is the party paying for his children to go to a private education facility?
I think that hurt him too, and as smeared his image.
Yeah, I think that did as well.
And we don't exactly know what the outcome of those deliberations were that were happening on Wednesday with the party national council.
They're kind of sorting through papers, trying to figure out how on earth could Andrew Scheer have spent more than, well, he spent $900,000.
That's $700,000 more than the typical leader over the year would spend.
Ron Ambrose, Stephen Harper, all them, they're spending about $200,000 a year to operate.
And that's, you know, makeup, wardrobe, flights, speechwriters, media training, that kind of thing.
Actually, speechwriters are probably separate.
Media training is definitely in there.
And somehow, Andrew Scheer spent 4.5 times, 450% more than the average leader.
And that's not, I mean, if you, how you campaign is how you govern.
That's one of Morton Blackwell's rules for public policy.
How you campaign is how you govern.
And if you are spending more than you can even afford before you're even campaigning, keep in mind, this was money spent before the election.
This wasn't even written money.
This was before the election, and he was spending this much money.
What was he going to do in government?
It's staggering and contrary to the image he was trying to convey.
Spending Before the Election00:03:29
And I have to ask you, Kian, this is a completely hypothetical question, but I think it needs to be asked.
When Mr. Scheer, of course, won the nomination to become leader of the Conservative Party, it was on the 13th ballot.
It was by less than 2%.
It was often said that he was nobody's first choice, but he was everybody's second and third choice.
He edged out Mr. Bernier by the thinnest of margins.
Had Mr. Bernier prevailed, do you think things would have turned out differently on October 21st?
I, without a doubt, know that they would have turned out differently.
How much better that would have been, I don't know.
I think that if Maxine Bernier stayed with the CPC, he wouldn't have been seen as so much more radical.
He certainly wouldn't have had the same gotcha moments that Andrew Scheer had that took him down in the mainstream media.
I don't think Maxine Bernier was ever running around talking about how gay people are dogs and that kind of thing, which keep in mind is something that Andrew Scheer said, for better or for worse.
That's something that the mainstream media didn't find acceptable.
And that's something that they were able to translate into his intellectability with the masses.
So I think Maxine Bernier would have been better on that, but they probably would have grilled him in the same way with his support for reducing immigration unashamedly.
I mean, that's one of the no-go points for the mainstream media as well.
So who knows?
And Kian, excellent question.
Assuming Mr. Scheer is indeed going to step down as leader and not have a walk in the snow moment and come back, is there anybody on your radar that you would personally like to see as the leader of the Conservative Party?
I like Pierre Polyev.
I think that he, I mean, what he said really resonated with me.
You got to lead a conservative party as a conservative.
He's treated me well in the past, which is more than I can say for most political leaders.
Especially when they're conservatives, they try and sort of duck and cover when rebel comes along.
You know, people are saying Rona Ambrose would be great, but I have to say, people think Rona Ambrose is good because she was interim leader and she didn't do anything.
Therefore, she didn't do anything wrong.
So she has this warm glow of nostalgia around her.
She's a bit of a red Tory.
She's a woman, so she would do better optically maybe.
But that's not what conservatives should be concerned about.
They shouldn't be concerned about how the mainstream media is going to receive them.
Rona Ambrose, she didn't have the opportunity to do anything wrong because she did her job as interim leader well, and that is to not really make a fuss.
That's not really to do anything substantial.
But people think that that would translate into a successful permanent leadership.
I don't know.
Maybe she would be a good leader, but I don't think that her being a good interim leader is what qualifies someone as a good long-term leader.
Well, we shall see.
Time will tell as the cliché goes.
And one thing is for certain, the convention in Toronto in April should be an exciting affair indeed.
The Detained Christ Scene00:02:43
Kian, thank you so much, and I wish you and yours a very Merry Christmas and all the best in 2020, my friend.
Merry Christmas, David.
Thank you.
And that was Kian Bexty in Calgary.
Keep it here, folks.
more of Rebel Roundup to come right after this.
David Menzies for the Rebel News here outside the Eastminster United Church in Toronto.
Well, folks, sometimes the question arises, is nothing sacred?
And I think the answer to that query is that, yeah, nothing is sacred.
Indeed, check out the nativity scene here at the Eastminster Church.
Instead of the traditional baby Jesus in the manger, this scene depicts Jesus as a refugee claimant at a detention center.
As you can see, the baby is behind bars and it is wrapped in a solar blanket, which is supposedly how the refugees are detained in U.S. migration centers.
Now, I did reach out to the people behind the display at the church.
They weren't here and there was no one else available to come on camera.
But apparently, the whole idea of this makeshift nativity display is to raise awareness.
Indeed, the name of the display is The Detained Christ.
And there is some copy that accompanies the display.
It says, in recent years, there has been growing awareness of the ways in which migrants and refugees face detainment, deportation, and separation from their families.
The actions from North American governments has led to increased policing and incarceration of migrants and refugees, especially those who are racialized.
At the U.S.-Mexico border, it has become commonplace to see children separated from parents and for refugee claimants to be held in detention centers in inhumane conditions.
As a signatory to the Safe Third Party Agreement, Canada is complicit in the actions of the United States.
Yeah, nothing quite conveys the meaning of Christmas more so than the reimagining of the Nativity scene to look more like something lifted from a concentration camp.
In any event, here's what some of you had to say about this bizarre and downright disrespectful display, courtesy of the United Church.
Ironically, Vague writes, Jesus would have obeyed the law.
Wow, what a concept.
Imagine that, folks, being a law-abiding citizen.
Jesus Would Obey Laws00:01:16
And yes, I agree.
I think Jesus would have obeyed the law, but many of the irregulars waltzing into Canada via Wroxham Road simply can't be bothered to fill out all that boring paperwork when it comes to immigrating to Canada, it would seem.
Benny Kraut writes, Don't you love it when your church is forced into a political statement by a bunch of heathens who disguise themselves as a legitimate church?
S-M-F-H.
Yeah, but Benny, the really sad part of this story is that nobody is actually forcing them.
This is a self-inflicted wound.
And Me, Myself, and I writes, Real Edgy, now draw a cartoon of Muhammad, you cowards.
Oh, hold on just a second there, me, myself, and I. Remember how I speculated that nothing is sacred?
When it comes to depictions of the Prophet Muhammad, that is still sacred because even drawing Muhammad in a respectful fashion is, how shall I put this?
Well, it's potentially harmful to one's well-being.
Well, that wraps up another edition of Rebel Roundup.
In fact, the last Rebel Roundup of the decade, no less.
Thanks so much for joining us.
See you next year.
And hey, folks, never forget, without risk, there can be no glory.