Ezra Levant exposes Canada’s military crisis: a March 2024 CBC report reveals 58% of equipment unserviceable, with only half the CAF ready for emergencies, despite Trudeau’s promises—800 drones, $400M air defense, four Leopard 2 tanks (one sent to Poland). His gender-focused demining demands and carbon tax push on Ukraine highlight ideological overreach, while unpaid bills for CAF personnel in Poland question feasibility. Legal updates show Tamara Leach’s conspiracy case against Chris Barber may hinge on weak evidence, reinforcing systemic distrust under Trudeau’s leadership. [Automatically generated summary]
Only about half of Canada's military equipment even works.
Only about half of Canada's soldiers could respond to any demand on them.
And it's from the CBC telling you this, so you know it's got to be even worse.
I'll show you the facts and I'll contrast it with Trudeau's big promises of sending military assets to Ukraine, almost none of which he's actually done.
I'd like to show you a photo of a tank, and I really want you to see it because it tells the story.
To do that, you need the video version of this podcast.
Just go to RebelNewsPlus.com, click subscribe.
It's eight bucks a month, which gives you the video version every day.
And just as important, it helps keep Rebel News strong because we get no money from Trudeau or the government, and it shows.
That's RebelNewsPlus.com.
All right, here's today's podcast.
Tonight, a new report says that half of Canada's military equipment doesn't even work.
It's March 7th, and this is the Ezra Levant show.
I showed you the other day the headline in the Toronto Star where the Trudeau government was floating the idea of sending Canadian troops into Ukraine itself.
I think it's the worst possible idea from a government with a lot of bad ideas.
I mean, if we had a bad idea laboratory, the only thing I think that it could engineer to be worse would be if Trudeau wanted to send Canadian troops into Gaza.
He'd probably want them to defend Hamas.
He'll probably suggest that pretty soon considering the path he's on.
But as I said the other day, I really don't know what Canada would do other than being a PR backdrop for Trudeau or Christia Freeland's next photo op in Kiev.
I mean, Trudeau makes so many promises to Ukraine about sending weapons, but I'm really not certain if any of them have actually physically been sent over and used.
Trudeau made a big show about sending over an air defense system.
Costs almost half a billion dollars.
Let me read the CBC story on that, though.
So you know the reality must be a lot worse if this is what the CBC says.
Ukraine's president says getting air defense systems onto the battlefield is the top priority in the new year, but the system Canada promised a year ago still hasn't been delivered and it's not clear when it will be.
By the way, Canada doesn't even have that air defense missile system.
Basically, Trudeau promised to buy one to be made and then to be sent directly to Ukraine from the factory, I guess.
But one of the companies that makes them says they don't even have a contract yet.
Here's another promise from Trudeau, and the CBC reports this one credulously.
Let me read this one to you.
Canada donating hundreds of drones to help war effort in Ukraine.
I'll read a little bit.
The federal government is donating more than 800 drones to help the war effort in Ukraine, Defense Minister Bill Blair announced Monday.
Now, you can probably guess the punchline here.
Do you think that Canada even has 800 military drones to donate?
No, we do not.
I don't know if we have eight.
Again, Trudeau is promising that he'll find a company to make them, sign a contract with that company, pay the company.
The company will do the contract and they'll send the drones to Ukraine and be used.
Do you see a pattern here?
Do you think that's actually going to happen?
You know, Trudeau promised to send four of our Leopard 2 battle tanks to Ukraine, right?
Leopard 2 is the name of the tanks that are made in Germany.
I think that only a single one has been sent.
Here's a picture of it.
I love that caption of the photo.
The first Canadian Leopard 2 main battle tank donated to Ukraine arrives by air transport in Poland.
So it's a single tank.
And I don't know if it's even made it into Ukraine from Poland.
And that's it.
Again, just photo ops.
The Global Mail got the photo.
They were really excited.
I don't know if Canada has four working Leopard 2 battle tanks that are in suitable condition to send.
I really don't.
I'm not sure if they're up to standard.
Other countries have been sending in Leopard 2 battle tanks, and they've had some limited success.
Here's some images of Russians attacking the Leopard 2 tanks.
So they're not a magic solution to stopping the Russians.
Now, those tanks are from the 80s, so it's sort of 50-year-old, 40-year-old technology that actually makes them a lot younger than other Canadian military equipment.
I honestly don't know if Canada's Leopard 2 tanks have up-to-date computer systems, battle communication systems, aiming systems.
Do you think they do?
Do you think the Canadian Armed Forces has updated those tanks made in the 1980s to be high-tech to work with other NATO allies in the 2020s?
What's your theory about what appears to be just a single tank sent to Ukraine despite all the press conferences?
What do you think is going on?
Well, here's another CBC story, and I'm sorry for using such an unreliable source, but it's sort of like how I like to use abacus polls to bring the news about how unpopular Justin Trudeau is, because Abacus was created by one of Trudeau's close political allies in the Liberal Party.
So if they say things are bad for Trudeau, you can probably take it to the bank as opposed to a conservative pollster saying the same thing.
By the way, I can't name a conservative pollster off the top of my head, but I think you get the point.
So here's the CBC today.
Here's their story.
State of Canadian Armed Forces combat readiness growing worse, government report warns.
Department of National Defense report also says almost half of military's equipment is unserviceable.
Oh, you don't say.
Let me read a few paragraphs.
Only 58% of the Canadian Armed Forces would be able to respond if called upon in a crisis by NATO allies right now, and almost half the military's equipment is considered unavailable and unserviceable, says a recent internal Department of National Defense presentation obtained by CBC News.
The presentation, which touches on everything from readiness and equipment to recruiting and ammunition supplies, is dated December 31st, 2023.
It's the latest comprehensive snapshot of the state of the military.
The overview paints an alarming picture of the forces' decline in readiness, one that's even worse than the figures presented in last year's federal budget documents.
Quote, in an increasingly dangerous world where demand for the CAF is increasing, our readiness is decreasing, said the document.
The issue of military readiness has preoccupied the House of Commons Defense Committee.
The committee held a series of closed-door meetings last year where MPs could discuss sensitive information with top military commanders.
Now, I'm not sure if you can see these pie charts the CBC showed, but 55% of our Air Force is not working.
No wonder we don't hold that NATO exercise in Cold Lake, Alberta anymore.
We used to hold it every year.
It was called Maple Flag.
That sounds a great name for it.
It's sort of like the top gun for NATO in Alberta.
All the NATO Air Forces would come together to practice with each other, practice working together in Alberta.
It's pretty cool.
Then Trudeau said, I am not kidding.
They said they're shutting it down to make it better.
Here's a press release from about five years ago.
The Royal Canadian Air Force has decided to not conduct Exercise Maple Flag in 2019.
The RCAF will use the opportunity to refocus its resources to update the exercise's mandate and to modernize the infrastructure used during the exercise.
The RCF will thereby ensure that Maple Flag remains focused and relevant to fighter operations in the dynamic and fluid battle space now and into the future.
In past years, Exercise Maple Flag took place at Fourth Wing Cold Lake, Alberta, in the June time period.
I think that was the last of it.
I don't think they've ever come back.
NATO's Missing 2%00:03:22
You know, there's a weird talking point out there among the left and the media and the left media that Donald Trump wants to end NATO.
It's so weird.
And of course, it's part of the conspiracy theory: Donald Trump is a Russian asset, which was completely debunked by a huge Democrat investigation by special counsel Robert Mueller.
I don't know if you remember that, but the CBC and other regime media in both countries still claim that Trump is for Russia, which is odd because Putin didn't dare invade Ukraine when Trump was president, but he did both before when Obama was president and after, now that Biden is president.
So it sort of tells me who Putin likes to have as president.
But do you remember this when Donald Trump went to Europe as president to scold NATO countries for not spending enough on their defense?
Remember this?
I have been very, very direct with Secretary Stoltenberg and members of the alliance in saying that NATO members must finally contribute their fair share and meet their financial obligations.
But 23 of the 28 member nations are still not paying what they should be paying and what they are supposed to be paying for their defense.
This is not fair to the people and taxpayers of the United States.
And many of these nations owe massive amounts of money from past years and not paying in those past years.
Over the last eight years, the United States spent more on defense than all other NATO countries combined.
If all NATO members had spent just 2% of their GDP on defense last year, we would have had another $119 billion for our collective defense and for the financing of additional NATO reserves.
And do you remember this when Trump met with Trudeau and scolded Trudeau on not spending enough?
And Trudeau tried to lie about it, but Trump knew the facts and corrected him.
That was incredible.
Canada does not meet the 2% standard.
Should it have a plan to meet the 2% standard?
Well, we'll put them on a payment plan, you know?
We'll put Canada on a payment plan, right?
I'm sure the Prime Minister would love that.
What are you at?
What is your number?
The number we talk about is 70% increase over these past years, including and for the coming years, including significant investments in our fighter jets, significant investments in our naval fleets.
We are increasing significantly our defense spending from previous governments that cut it.
Okay.
Where are you now in terms of your number?
We're at 135?
1.3. 1. 14. 14th.
And continuing to move.
They're getting there.
They know it's important to do.
And their economy is doing well.
They'll get there quickly, I think.
And do you remember when Trump scolded Europe for the folly of buying their energy from Vladimir Putin?
Germany is totally controlled by Russia because they were getting from 60 to 70% of their energy from Russia at a new pipeline.
Germany's Russian Energy Dependency00:06:33
And you tell me if that's appropriate because I think it's not.
And I think it's a very bad thing for NATO.
And I don't think it should have happened.
And I think we have to talk to Germany about it.
We have to talk about the billions and billions of dollars that's being paid to the country that we're supposed to be protecting you against.
You know, everybody's talking about it all over the world.
They'll say, well, wait a minute, we're supposed to be protecting you from Russia, but why are you paying billions of dollars to Russia for energy?
Why are countries in NATO, namely Germany, having a large percentage of the energy needs paid to Russia and taken care of by Russia?
Now, if you look at it, Germany is a captive of Russia because they supply.
They get rid of their coal plants, they get rid of their nuclear.
They're getting so much of the oil and gas from Russia.
Yeah, I know who's the better ally, and his name is Donald Trump.
So Trudeau talks about supporting the Ukrainian military, but he can't really because we have nothing to send them other than press releases.
Trudeau doesn't support our own military because, like his father, Pierre Trudeau, he hates our military.
I think the only armed force that Trudeau supports and funds lavishly is Hamas.
Stay with us for more.
There are some things that could use a gender analysis, I'm sure.
I can't really think of them offhand.
I mean, a lot of the go-girl projects have been achieved.
If you look at universities, for example, more than 50% of law schools, more than 50% of med schools are women.
In fact, in many different departments, women make up 70% of the academy.
Boys are just not going to universities anymore, maybe because they're too woke or maybe because they want to get a real job in a trade.
There's no level of this government that hasn't had women in it, from leading the Senate to being a prime minister to being premiers.
It's no longer remarkable.
I think that in many cases, the battle has been won.
But of course, a lot of these battles are self-perpetuating.
Instead of declaring victory, they have to continue to build an empire.
I thought of that when Justin Trudeau announced gender analysis for pipeline projects, for oil sands.
And I thought, what on earth is a gender analysis in oil and gas?
What's that got to do with it?
And of course, would they apply that gender analysis for oil imports from, say, Saudi Arabia, where women simply aren't allowed to work in oil and gas?
Of course not.
But I think the craziest deployment of the gender lens that Justin Trudeau applies to pretty much anything and everything he wants to politicize is an announcement that Ukraine will receive money from Justin Trudeau to clear landmines, which is a good idea, but only if it is done in a gender-sensitive manner.
If you think I'm kidding, well, listen to our next guest, our friend Lauren Gunter, has written a column about this crazy idea called Trudeau's Virtue Signaling Aid Pledge, not helpful to Ukraine.
And Lauren joined us now by a Skype from Edmonton.
Lauren, when I first saw that, I swear I had to click through to the original document because I thought it was a spoof.
I thought it was like the Babylon Bee or the Onion just making fun of Trudeau.
But he really did say he's going to give millions of dollars to Ukraine, but only if they clear landmines in a gender-sensitive way.
Yeah, exactly.
It said that you must make sure that the mine clearing battalions are gender inclusive.
Now, they didn't have any specific goals.
It doesn't say 50-50, whatever.
But like, who at global affairs or national defense is sitting around thinking this stuff up?
Like, do they, do they look at the Bahrainian mine clearing unit and say, oh, there are no obvious women on this list.
So therefore, we can't include them in any future treaties because they don't have gender inclusive mind sweeping.
What difference does it make?
They're in the middle of a war.
They're not in the middle of downtown Toronto where you can cancel and woke people to death on social media.
They're in the middle of a real war.
Give them money to clear minds.
I mean, one of the things that keeps people who've been displaced in Ukraine from coming back to their communities is the fact that the Russians very often, when they are forced to withdraw, plant all sorts of mines all over the town and the farm fields around it to render them useless to people.
So demining is a very big part of Ukraine's recovery.
And what we've decided is we're going to impose our values, peace, during peace, in an ultra-liberal country, very whoa.
We're going to try and impose our values on a war zone.
I mean, this is not the only thing.
They want the Ukrainian economy to be decarbonized.
They want them to have a carbon tax.
You might remember that when Pierre Polyev initially objected to giving this aid package to Ukraine, of course, everybody on the liberal side in the media, the CBC and the star and the globe, oh, Polyev thinks that he doesn't support the Ukrainians.
He must be a Putin fan.
Oh my goodness.
But it was because they were reading this document and they were saying, you have to appoint internet censors.
If you want our aid for communications, you have to do what they're trying to do in Canada, which is people in charge of looking at the internet to make sure there's no disinformation.
But the worst one for me was this $4 million for demining that was incumbent on there being women encouraged to join the hurt locker, as it were.
You know, you quote the exact phrase from the announcement.
I just want people to know that you're not making this up.
The aid is contingent on, quote, promoting gender transformative mine action.
Like it's like they were just throwing darts at a bulletin board that had, you know, transformative gender action.
Like they probably used gender transformative climate action.
Like that doesn't mean anything.
Oh, undoubtedly.
And I'm sure there's some climate change parts of this.
In fact, you mentioned it, the carbon tax.
You know, I love watching some of Jordan Peterson's debates on gender stuff because he, you know, I remember that very famous interview you did with Kathy Newman on Channel 4, where talking about inequality of men and women in the world.
And he says, yes, there are more men in positions of economic power.
There's also more men in the worst jobs in the world, like, you know, very dangerous jobs from people who go to fish at sea for a month at a time or people who, you know, let me give you an example.
I mean, construction, it's a more dangerous job.
Mining, it's a more dangerous job.
I recently saw a video of people doing welding in deep sea drilling rigs.
They're very dangerous jobs.
You know, stringing the high-tension, high-voltage power lines.
Those are very dangerous jobs.
And if you could show me that the companies responsible for that, or the government's responsible for that, were deliberately barring women.
I would say, let's have a case for that.
Let's take them to court.
But the point is, I think the difference between small L liberalism and Marxism is that in small L liberalism, you say there's opportunity for all, and you then punish people who don't give the proper opportunity to everyone, regardless of gender, race, whatever.
Marxism is we cannot know that there isn't discrimination unless there are equal numbers of all groups in the final product.
And that gets away from merit.
I don't care if every woman who's digging out, every person who's digging out mines in Ukraine is a woman.
I don't want us then to have a rule that, well, you have to get more men involved.
I don't care.
It's so insane.
But you know what?
I don't think there's a single woman.
Like, I would be, I mean, clearing mine just got to be one of the worst jobs in the world.
And thank God there are men who are willing to do it to keep us safe and free.
And I imagine, I don't know a lot about it, but you're wearing heavy protective clothing in case, God forbid, a mine explodes.
So you have to be strong enough to probably wear 100 pounds worth of protection.
Like that is a dangerous job.
I would be surprised if there is if there are 10 women in the entire world who want to.
I saw an interview.
I googled up an interview or YouTubed up an interview, looked to see whether there were any women D-miners.
And I found an interview with one from the U.S. Army.
Lost Faith in Ukraine War00:08:50
But it would be very rare.
But the point is not whether it's rare or not.
It's whether it's allowed or not.
And if it's not allowed, then you have a problem.
But if it's allowed and it's rare, that's nobody's business.
It's just madness that this is like, I think it makes a mockery of Trudeau's supposed support for Ukraine.
I just did a monologue, Lauren, where I pointed out that we promised them 800 drones.
We don't have 800 drones.
So we have to order them and maybe they'll be delivered.
We promised them a bunch of Leopard 2 tanks.
I think only one has been delivered.
And I don't know if it's being deployed.
We promised them a $400 million air defense system.
It hasn't even been built yet.
It's not like we had it.
So I think that Justin Trudeau is using Ukrainians as basically a cinema backdrop for him to virtue signal pandering to Ukrainian Canadian voters.
I don't think most of his promises have actually been kept.
And what a bizarre promise.
This is some strange feminist thing.
It's not helping Ukraine, Lauren.
No, and I, and, you know, he thinks he's pandering to Ukrainian voters in Canada.
But if they find out about the strings that have been attached to this aid project, they're not going to go for that because what they need to see is real Canadian aid going to Ukraine fast enough to actually push Putin back.
And, you know, I know a lot of people in the West have lost faith or lost interest in the Ukraine war because it hasn't gone as quickly or as well as we had thought it might.
I think it has gone very much better than it could have.
I mean, the last good estimates I saw were up to 400,000 Russian soldiers had died.
The better estimates were somewhere between 66,000 and 85,000.
That's about four or five times as many as they lost in Afghanistan in the 80s.
So this has been a real blow to the Russians.
It's going to be slow, but we know from past history that what Russians do is they throw, they have no value for their own citizens' lives and said they will throw as many people as they can at any war situation.
And so the West more than ever has to stand up with Ukraine.
And if he's not getting drones to Ukraine because we don't have the drones to send them, and we have, I think we only had four tanks that were movable.
And we sent them one, but I don't think we sent the repair kit for how to actually fix the thing and make it work.
So you're right.
All of his aid promises to Ukraine have been very hollow.
You know what?
I'm less bullish on this war than you are.
In fact, twice I've visited the Ukrainian pavilion at the World Economic Forum, and twice I've spent quite a bit of time there because I want to make sure I hear the Ukrainian story very clearly.
And I don't doubt what I've heard there.
The emphasis that they have had at this pavilion is the civilian losses and what they call atrocities.
And I'm sure both are true.
And after going through the whole Ukrainian messaging experience, which some would call propaganda, but I went through it and I spoke to the curator there and I spent a lot of time there and I talked to their international law lawyers.
I leave there not enthusiastic for the warlorn, but desperate for peace because the meat grinder of both sides, I heard that the average age of the Ukrainian army now is 43.
They have either lost the men who were refugees or they've been killed in battle.
And I just wish that there was a diplomatic solution because I mean, even if what you're saying is correct, that this has been a devastating loss for Russia, how's that a win for the world?
Because it's Ukrainian men who are fighting.
And I hate to say there actually are Ukrainian women who are being sent into the meat grinder too.
Absolutely.
But let's sort of draw a parallel here with Gaza.
You know, I am really sorry that Ukraine has had as many losses as it has.
I am sorry that the Palestinian innocents are being killed.
But I understand that both of those wars have got to be fought to the conclusion because the West, as much as those two combatant countries need wins, the West needs wins in both of those battles.
And maybe a diplomatic solution could be a win.
You stop Russia where it's at now and it has to go back home and lick its wounds for a decade.
That might be the best that comes out of this.
But I don't see us.
What I think Trudeau is really doing is trying hard not to give aid to Ukraine without looking like he's not giving aid to Ukraine.
Well, I find the whole thing deeply sad.
And I think I follow Professor John Mearsheimer of Chicago, who, by the way, 30 years ago, he was warning Ukraine not to give up its nukes.
It said, once you give up your nukes, you're just in the hands of the big powers.
I don't know if you recall, but after the Berlin Wall fell and the Soviet Union disintegrated, Ukraine, because it was a large Soviet socialist republic, it actually had a lot of the Soviet Union's nuclear weapons.
And there was an agreement signed by America and the Brits and Russia that, hey, if you give up your nukes, Ukraine, we'll protect you.
I think it was called the Budapest Memorandum.
Well, Ukraine gave up its nukes, and that was the worst decision they've never made.
It would be like giving up, you know, a homeowner, giving up your guns.
You're never going to get them back.
Yeah.
And it was, you know, it was unique because, I mean, there were lots of the Soviet republics in Central Asia that had huge numbers of Russian missiles, but they were all operated and protected by Russians.
They'd moved Russians into those things.
In Ukraine, the Russians had let the Ukrainians mostly, for the most part, actually take care of those missiles.
So yeah, it was unfortunate that they gave them up.
And Mearsheimer, so the reason I mention that is that Mearsheimer was for Ukraine 30 years ago.
He's not some Putin shill.
And he laments that we're getting off topic.
We wanted to talk about the bizarre feminization of foreign aid.
But I don't even know what the path forward is because a big chunk of Ukraine has already been devoured by Russia, and I don't know if it'll ever be extracted from it.
And, you know, I'm terrified when, I don't know if you saw the news about a week ago, Bill Blair was brooding the idea of sending Canadian troops into Ukraine proper for non-combat roles nonetheless.
But still, I am worried about an escalation.
Do you think I'm too much of a nervous nelly?
Do you think it's too much of a Putinist response to say, I am worried about sending Western troops into Ukraine?
Well, I absolutely should be worried about that.
But we should make that decision based on what our needs are for this conflict.
And if we need to protect Ukraine to preserve democracy in Central and Eastern Europe from being devoured by the Russians, then maybe there is a non-combat role for our people there.
But we couldn't even send peacekeepers to Haiti when the Americans asked us to do that about 18 months.
I think it's all BS.
I think Trudeau is just all talk.
He's gutted the military.
And I think, frankly, in his own way, he's abusing Ukrainian Canadians by giving them false promises.
And he's trying to score points off the general hatred of Putin.
He wants to be on the front line of denouncing Putin, but he actually hasn't lifted a finger in reality.
We have 100 Canadians in Poland training Ukrainians in this war.
And these are the guys who, when they got sent over there, were not sent a cook.
You might remember this story.
They were not sent a cook with them.
And they were told, just charge your meals at local restaurants and we will reimburse you.
And six months later, they drained all their savings.
They were getting their friends and family back home to send them money because DND had not paid them back.
They were buying their own meal in Poland.
So what would Blair think he was going to do with people sending them directly to Ukraine?
It's just ludicrous, this government.
Yeah, well, I mean, I think the fact that he's calling for gender-neutral mind clearing shows you it's not actually about mind clearing.
And we're laughing.
Carter Application Ruling00:06:36
You're right.
I mean, mines are one of the saddest things in the world because not only are civilians prone to stepping on them, but it casts a shadow decades after the war is done.
The mines are still active.
I mean, believe it or not, mines are still being found, unexploded ordnance still being found from World War II, and even the occasional World War II chill 100 years after.
So it really is, you know, mind clearing is of interest to everyone, women and men, civilian and military alike.
But this bizarre requirement that the mind clears be women is just crazy.
Lauren, it's great to catch up with you.
And I really appreciate you making your points about the war in Ukraine.
I have a, I would even call it a more pacifist point of view, which I don't normally do, but I appreciate you sparring with me on the subject.
You bet.
All right.
There you have it.
Lauren Gunter.
His new column is called Trudeau's Virtue Signaling Aid Pledge Not Helpful to Ukraine, and you can read it in post-media.
Stay with us.
more ahead.
Hey, I almost forgot to tell you today, Tamara Leach was back in court.
I think it was just a virtual court hearing, but the trial and the prosecution, the endless political prosecution of Tamara Leach was back on.
And our friend Robert Krachik filed this report.
So I'll play it for you instead of letters today until tomorrow.
On behalf of all of us here at Rebel World Headquarters, to you at home, good night.
Keep fighting for freedom and take a look at Robert.
Robert Krejik here in Ottawa, Ontario, reporting for Rebel News.
Want to share a quick update with you folks out there in the Dear Rebel News audience.
Very short proceedings today.
The judge ruling on one motion submitted by the defense.
The defense requested an outright preemptive dismissal of a Carter application that's expected to be submitted by the Crown at the end of the trial.
Now, I need to explain to you folks out there, what is a Carter application and what does the Crown seek to accomplish via its forthcoming submission.
A Carter application, if accepted, would allow the application of statements from one defendant to the other.
In this specific case, it would allow for statements made by Chris Barber to be attributed to Tamara Leach as evidence.
So a Carter application implies a conspiracy between co-defendants.
So if the prosecution successfully argues at the end of this trial that both Tamara Leach and Chris Barber conspire towards an unlawful end, then again, evidence that can be used against one defendant can be used against the other.
Again, specifically in this case, it means statements made by Barber can be attributed to Tamara Leach as evidence.
Now, the defense knows that this application is coming and they preemptively submitted a motion to dismiss the Carter application out of hand to prevent the judge from even considering it.
The judge today decided that she wants to see the Carter application upon its submission.
So again, like I said, that will be happening at the end of the trial.
This was expected.
This is not some sort of catastrophic bad news for the defense team, despite their own motion being denied.
At the end of the trial, when the prosecution explains and submits its card application with all the details and arguments in its favor, the defense will have an opportunity to respond to those arguments.
And at that time, the judge can decide whether or not to accept the claims or reject them.
So at the end of the day, we can still see a rejection from Justice Perkins McVeigh to deny the Crown's attempt to link the two defendants as co-conspirators in this conspiracy via the Carter applications, allegations.
So as the judge told us and reminded us again this morning, it's a bit of an unusual application that the Crown is relying on, where there's more than one person charged and the Crown is trying to use what one person said against somebody else.
So in this case, they're trying to use things that Chris Barber said against Tamara Leach and things that Tamara Leach said against Chris Barber.
So there's a particular somewhat convoluted series of steps that the Crown has to go through in order to try and use that evidence against one against the other.
So that's essentially what we're dealing with here.
So it's basically a three-step process that the judge has to look at.
And now as far as today's proceedings, the brief moments that were there, the judge denied a motion from the defense to preemptively dismiss the Carter application prior to its hearing.
Is that correct?
And if that is right, what's the outcome of that in terms of future proceedings?
That's correct.
And you put that very well in terms of our application to preemptively dismiss this application, because as the judge emphasized in her decision a number of times, this is not a decision on that application.
This is not a decision on whether any of that evidence will be admitted.
And even further down the line, this is not evidence that any of the evidence will be used or useful to her in terms of reaching her decision, even if it is ruled admissible.
The Crown must prove its claims of this conspiracy existing between the two defendants beyond a reasonable doubt.
Isn't that the highest standard of proof or the highest burden required?
And does that now apply to the Crown at the end of the trial, given this consideration of the forthcoming Carter application?
Exactly.
So, what it means is now that we will be hearing about this Carter application again at the end of the case, and at that point, the Crown will need to persuade the judge, which she again reminded everybody this morning, is at that point going to be a very high burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt that there in fact was a conspiracy or common unlawful design.
And they'll have to establish, at least on balance of probabilities, that both Ms. Leach and Mr. Barber were part of whatever specific common unlawful design the judge finds, if any.
Basically, at this stage, we're forced to argue that it could not succeed, that there's no basis in law as to why the the evidence that's presented could succeed on a Carter application.
At the end of the case, we get to argue that it should not succeed, and we say it does not succeed because there's simply a lack of evidence of a common unlawful design,