Feb. 1, 2019 - Rubin Report - Dave Rubin
01:00:37
| 
| Speaker | Time | Text |
|---|---|---|
| Joining me today is a Canadian businessman, lawyer, member of parliament, and the founder and head of the People's Party of Canada, Maxime Bernier. | ||
| Welcome to The Rubin Report. | ||
| Thanks for the invitation, Dave. | ||
| I'm very happy to be with you. | ||
| I am glad you're here. | ||
| I am pretty sure, how many people are there in Canada, roughly? | ||
| 37 million people. | ||
| 37 million, so I've gotten about 36 million emails to have you on the show or on Twitter. | ||
| I mean, everybody in Canada seems to want us to do this sit down. | ||
|
unidentified
|
So I'll do my best. | |
| So we shall see what happens. | ||
| Okay, there's many reasons that I'm looking forward to this chat and originally we were gonna do this on Skype and then you were gracious enough to say let's do this in person. | ||
| The fact that somebody in Canada is spreading the ideas of liberty and of the individual and limited government and all of those things is incredibly inspiring to me and it's more of what we need down here too. | ||
| But let's just start first with a little bit of your biography for people that don't know anything about you. | ||
| Yes, I'm a lawyer. | ||
| I did also a course in businesses before, and I work in a private sector in Montreal, Quebec, in the financial sector. | ||
| I was VP of financial institutions. | ||
| And after that, I worked with the Montreal Economic Institute. | ||
| That's a free market think tank, like maybe the Mises Institute and like that. | ||
| I was VP over there. | ||
| And in 2005, I had a meeting with Stephen Harper. | ||
| At that time, he was the leader of the opposition. | ||
| Before the election in 2006. | ||
| And so, he was looking for some ideas to be able to have some seats in Quebec. | ||
| As you know, Quebec is the francophone part of the country. | ||
| And so, we had a good chat together and I told him, you know, there's two important things that you must say to Quebeckers if you want to win. | ||
| First, you must respect the Constitution. | ||
| Because in Quebec, if you remember, we had two referendums, and we still have a separatist political party at the provincial level. | ||
| So I told him, you know, respect the Canadian constitution, don't interfere in provincial jurisdiction, and everything will be OK. | ||
| And also, lower taxes, income tax, to Quebecers and all Canadians. | ||
| And at the end, that was, I think, a good proposal for Quebec, but also for all across the country. | ||
| And he decided to put that in his platform and he asked me to run with him in 2006. | ||
| So I decided to run. | ||
| And my riding, my district, it is in Beauce, near Quebec City. | ||
| It's half rural, half urban riding. | ||
| And I went there because my dad was an MP under Brian Maroney for 13 years. | ||
| And so when I came in Beauce in 2006 to run, The director of my campaign told me, Maxime, we have a problem with you. | ||
| Because I was working in Montreal, I was not in the writing. | ||
| He said, you have a name. | ||
| My dad was very well known, but you don't have a first name. | ||
| So our goal at the end of the campaign, people must know you. | ||
| So I did a good campaign and at the end, I won, and also Stephen Harper. | ||
| We formed a government in 2006, a minority government, 2008, a minority government, and I was industry minister at that time. | ||
| I did a big deregulation in telecom, and that's why people at that time, they called me the Albertan from Quebec, because in Alberta, there are very free markets, and in Quebec, at the financial level, we have a big fat and socialist government. | ||
| So, and I deregulate the telecom industry. | ||
| It was a big success. | ||
| And after that, Prime Minister Harper asked me to be the Foreign Affair, and I was the Foreign Affair for a year. | ||
| And I resigned, and I came back in the Cabinet in 2010, and I was Minister for Small Business, and after that, Minister for state for agriculture. | ||
| And so, we had a majority government in 2011. | ||
| And so, we did some reform. | ||
| And after that, in 2015, Trudeau went in power. | ||
| And I'm still a member of Parliament. | ||
| And I'll probably resign as the leader of the party. | ||
| And the fun is coming right now, because I decided to run for the leadership. | ||
| And I create -- after that, I didn't win, with 49 percent of the votes. | ||
| And I was the most libertarian candidate. | ||
| And I had a very strong platform about individual freedom, personal responsibility. | ||
| Actually, the four themes of our platform was individual freedom, personal responsibility, respect and fairness. | ||
| And all our policies were based on these principles. | ||
| That was very successful. | ||
| At 49%. | ||
| And I was the only one to say we must abolish corporate welfare 100%. | ||
| We must also cut foreign aid and do a lot of changes like that on the economy and also on the immigration. | ||
| I had a strong platform. | ||
| So I didn't win. | ||
| I tried to work with the new leader, Andrew Scheer. | ||
| I wanted the leadership of the Conservative Party of Canada to adopt some of our reforms, because that was very popular. | ||
| And a year later, he told me that they didn't want me anymore, they won't take any of the ideas that I put forward. | ||
| And also, I did a couple of tweets that they didn't like. | ||
| We'll get to your Twitter in a little bit. | ||
| And so I resigned from the party and in September I decided to create the People's Party of Canada. | ||
| Yeah, alright, so we've got your basic political pedigree there. | ||
| Is there an inherent sort of oddity of a libertarian trying to go into government, where most people that go into government want to grow government. | ||
| They believe that if only their policies were instituted, they could have a better government that could do more and so on, versus a libertarian comes in, you cut regulation, you wanted to cut some programs, et cetera, et cetera. | ||
| It's almost like you're trying to shrink the thing that's also your job. | ||
| Now, you've had real jobs also, so I suspect you could look at it perhaps a little bit differently. | ||
| Yeah, because, you know, I was in the private sector before, and I know that too much government, it is not bringing prosperity. | ||
| And I'm kind of an Austrian economist also. | ||
| I like Mises and all, you know, my preferred website is Mises.org. | ||
| So, I'm on the economy. | ||
| You can call me a libertarian. | ||
| But I'm not a real libertarian because a real libertarian will ask for open borders or no more regulations or legislation on drugs and so I don't believe in that. | ||
| I think we must have a state that will have some regulation, basic regulations. | ||
| So how do you figure out where that line is? | ||
| That's been one of the themes that I talk about with a lot of different guests, and that sort of seems to be a little bit of the difference between people who consider themselves classical liberals and libertarians, where there's a little more, say, hand of the state on the classical liberal side. | ||
| Libertarians, it's hard to know where the end is. | ||
| we are we just in Mad Max? | ||
|
unidentified
|
(laughing) | |
| Mad Max, sometimes they call you Mad Max. | ||
| So there you go. | ||
| Yes. | ||
| So for me, it's all about the economy. | ||
| That's the most important. | ||
| And yes, you know, our social policies must be for more freedom and personal responsibility. | ||
| And I try to make a big difference with the state and the economy like we did in the past with the states and religious, you know. | ||
| So that's always important to have this difference. | ||
| And on the economy, it's easier to be a libertarian and a politician because, you know, it's all special interest groups that are coming to you and they want a privilege or more subsidies or things like that. | ||
| So, I'm making the line when I'm saying, you know, what I want, I want to work for all Canadians and not for a special interest group. | ||
| I don't know. | ||
| A special interest group is coming to us and they just want to promote their privilege or to keep their privilege. | ||
| That would be easy for me to say no, I won't do that. | ||
| The best example was the cartel that we have in Canada in supply management. | ||
| That's a socialist system that Pierre-Eliot Trudeau put forward 45 years ago, where milk, | ||
| poultry and eggs, the producers are fixing the price and fixing the production for the | ||
| Canadian market. | ||
| They cannot export. | ||
| So Canadians are paying twice the price for milk, poultry and eggs, if you compare that | ||
| with the price that you're paying here in the U.S. | ||
| So this cartel is very powerful. | ||
| And when they came to me and they wanted to keep their privilege, I said, "No, you know, | ||
| We'll abolish that. | ||
| We'll have a transition period. | ||
| You'll be able to export. | ||
| I believe in a real free market. | ||
| If a free market is good for every industry, it must be good also for these people. | ||
| So, what's the counter-argument on that, though? | ||
| If Trudeau now, not the old Trudeau, but if our current Trudeau, or your current Trudeau, was giving the counter-argument on why you wouldn't free that up? | ||
| Is that just because he doesn't believe in free market economics? | ||
| It's because it is a powerful lobby and also they want to keep seats also and they are very powerful in rural areas in the country and so far they're powerful. | ||
| Second, he is buying in their arguments that, you know, if we have milk from the U.S. | ||
| or eggs from the U.S. | ||
| that won't be the same quality and we need to stop that for being sure that we can control the quality of our products. | ||
| And so, that's another argument. | ||
| But for me, you know, when you have a legislation, everybody must respect that. | ||
| So if you want to export to Canada your eggs or your poultry or your milk, you must follow | ||
| the Canadian legislation and regulation. | ||
| That's a no-deal. | ||
| But it's the powerful. | ||
| They are very powerful. | ||
| So the thinking is they want to keep not only Trudeau, but also my former party, the Conservative | ||
| Party of Canada, the NDP also. | ||
| They're too afraid to... | ||
| To just listen to Canadians. | ||
| They think that we have a good system, and they think that Canadians don't understand that system. | ||
| They think that Canadians don't understand that they're paying twice the price. | ||
| So the more I speak about that, the more popular it is. | ||
| And that was very important in my campaign for the leadership, and it is also part of our platform right now. | ||
| So answering your questions, why Trudeau wants to keep that cartel, I think it's only for political reasons. | ||
| So is the idea of liberty and personal responsibility and some of the other things that you're running on, are these oddly new in Canada? | ||
| And I say that because when you started coming on my radar about a year ago and I saw people started tweeting about you, there were a lot of people saying something to the effect of, wow, if a libertarian is needed in Canada, then something really must be wrong there. | ||
| As if there was no need for it for a long time, but maybe something unique is happening now. | ||
| Yeah, people are ready for the new ideas and I think people are fed up with traditional politicians that are saying something a day and the opposite the other day. | ||
| Politicians that try to please the special interests group. | ||
| So what I'm doing, you know, I'm doing politics differently. | ||
| And, you know, there's no political correctness for our party. | ||
| I'm saying what must be said for better policies in this country, in Canada, sorry. | ||
| I think people are ready. | ||
| And what's happening actually right now, you know, it's good to have the right ideas, but it's better to have the right ideas at the right time. | ||
| And I think the timing is very good for us, for me. | ||
| Because we have a government in Ottawa right now, the Trudeau government, that are spending a lot of money. | ||
| Huge deficit. | ||
| People, they don't see, and we don't know when they will balance the budget. | ||
| It must be around 2024. | ||
| And everybody knows that the deficit of today are the taxes of tomorrow. | ||
| So, a huge deficit, huge taxes in Ottawa. | ||
| And the economy is so-so right now in Canada. | ||
| So, people are looking for a kind of alternative. | ||
| And I think the timing is good for me because in a poll, 57% of Canadians said, maybe a month ago, that they're ready to vote for a new party. | ||
| So, we are a very new party, four months old, and they're ready to vote for a new party and not voting for the traditional parties. | ||
| Something is happening. | ||
| The big government in Ottawa, every time putting a lot of regulations and a lot of subsidies to businesses, you know, the government bailed out the GM a couple of years ago, more than $2.5 billion, and GM said two months ago that they will leave Canada. | ||
| So, it's a waste of money. | ||
| We're giving a lot of money to big businesses and all the other politicians are saying, it's okay, we must help business. | ||
| What I'm saying, yes, we must help businesses, but every businesses having a fair policy, that is to lower taxes to every businesses and not giving subsidies and picking winner and loser. | ||
| So I think people are ready for a change. | ||
| They're seeing what's happening in our country and they know that we're not going in the right direction right now. | ||
| So let's talk a little bit about regulation because I think a lot of people think Especially if they're on the left right now. | ||
| They think if you say I'm cutting regulation, well first they go to environmental regulation. | ||
| I think that's what they think first, so I do wanna ask you about that. | ||
| But also they think if you're just talking about it purely at a business level, that that means that capitalism will then run amok. | ||
| That all of these businesses will then start dumping in the rivers and doing shady deals with each other and competition will be crushed and all of those things. | ||
| So do you wanna do business or environment first on the regulation front? | ||
| Yeah, I think. | ||
| Let's do business first. | ||
| Yeah, let's do business first. | ||
| You know, business must answer the needs of their consumers. | ||
| So, consumers are asking for better products and for products that will respect the environment. | ||
| That's why they are asking for electric cars. | ||
| And so, you don't always need regulation to force that. | ||
| The free markets, The wish of the people will force businesses to adopt their practice in the right way. | ||
| And so, when you have a real free market and when you have competition, it's always good at the end for the consumers. | ||
| You'll have better products and you'll have lower prices. | ||
| But at the same time, the way that they are producing their products will change. | ||
| Right now, you know, people, the best And some people are telling me, you know, we must have, you know, corporate social, corporate, how do you call that, corporate social... Corporate welfare? | ||
| No, no, corporate social identity. | ||
| A corporation must be socially well... Oh, they have to have like a social awareness. | ||
| Social awareness. | ||
| And I said, you know, not really, because a corporation first must make profits. | ||
| If they don't, They won't make any profit. | ||
| They won't be able to do anything. | ||
| So if they're profitable, it's because consumers want their goods and products. | ||
| So that's the first goal of our corporation, to make products. | ||
| And I think that you need regulation, but what we're doing right now, every time that something happens, we put a new regulation. | ||
| But they must be responsible of their actions, corporations and individuals. | ||
| So that's important for me and I think Canadians understand that. | ||
| What about on the environmental side? | ||
| I think this is the big one. | ||
| I think even for people who can understand free market economics a little bit more. | ||
| People think you just can't leave this. | ||
| Environmental issues up to private companies. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| You know, you can sue a corporation if they don't respect the regulations. | ||
| Actually, you know, clean water, it's very important. | ||
| But, you know, when you have facilities that are owned by the government or by the municipalities, everything must be public if they are doing tests and things like that, if the water is clean or not. | ||
| When it's not public, you cannot You cannot sue them if they don't respect the regulation. | ||
| So I remember that Margaret Thatcher in Europe, the way to clean water over there was to have a regulation saying every test that you're doing, and that was done by municipalities, a public entity, must be public. | ||
| And you will be responsible to be sure that you respect the regulation. | ||
| She just put a regulation on that. | ||
| Every test was public. | ||
| And five years later, The water was cleaner than it was before because they didn't want to be sued. | ||
| They didn't want to be... So they were responsible. | ||
| So when you have a real free market, when everything is on the table and you know the information, that brings usually a better quality of water or land. | ||
| And so you have property rights for that. | ||
| And property rights, it's the basics of all that. | ||
| But speaking about environment, now the debate in Canada, it's climate change. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| So, everybody wants to do something about climate change, and I'm the only party who said, you know, we won't do anything. | ||
| Environment in Canada, it's a shared jurisdiction with provinces and the federal government. | ||
| And I don't believe in the Paris Accord. | ||
| I don't believe that Canada will be able to achieve The goals that they put in the Paris Accord, and actually the U.N. | ||
| and the Radical Environmental in Canada said the same thing, that Trudeau wants to impose a carbon tax of $20 a ton, and he must impose a carbon tax of at least $200 a ton if he wants to achieve his target. | ||
| So at $20 a ton, it will be only a distortion for the economy. | ||
| And hardworking families will pay higher prices. | ||
| So that's why, you know, I don't believe in Paris Accord, and I think that we must not | ||
| impose new regulation on that. | ||
| We must let provinces and other provincial governments, if they want to have a cap and | ||
| trade like they have here in the U.S., and other kind of process for that. | ||
| For us, I want to have a program that will maybe be very strong on clear water, clear | ||
| air, something that people understand, and having the property rights that will work | ||
| and more information. | ||
| You need more information at the same time to be sure that people will understand if this lake is clear or not. | ||
| Yeah, so I'm glad you mentioned that because it seems to me that it's about information and being able to get your messaging across. | ||
| So, for example, the Paris Accords, which obviously the United States pulled out of, it seems very easy. | ||
| If you listen to the media, it was very easy. | ||
| We have to be part of the Paris Accords. | ||
| And then if you ask anyone what the Paris Accords are, they have no idea. | ||
| If you ask them, well, is it a binding? | ||
| Is there any, you know? | ||
| Is there anyone watching to make sure any of this happens? | ||
| They have no idea, and the answer is no. | ||
| I just read last month that despite the U.S. | ||
| pulling out of the Accords, that right now the U.S. | ||
| is meeting most, if not, or exceeding all of the standards of the Accords. | ||
| So how much of this is just about getting your messaging across? | ||
| Because this will shift us a little bit to talking about the media, which you've had an interesting relationship with, to say the least. | ||
| Yeah, you're right about that. | ||
| It's all about virtue signaling for a politician. | ||
| But I think Canadians understand that. | ||
| They understand what I'm saying. | ||
| The Trudeau government, actually, right now, they are hypocrite. | ||
| They are saying something to the population knowing that they won't be able to achieve that. | ||
| So I prefer to tell the truth, saying, you know, we won't think that and we won't do anything to achieve that. | ||
| And we won't spend $2.3 billion to send that to African countries to help them to fight climate change. | ||
| I think we must help Canadians first. | ||
| So that's part of our platform. | ||
| But the other party, like the Conservative Party also, they don't want to have a carbon tax, but they want to impose more regulations on Canadian businesses. | ||
| And that's not the solution, but they try to please maybe the media. | ||
| But also a portion of the population. | ||
| And I think that, you know, when you explain, and that's what I like in politics, you know, I like to explain our policies and why we are having the right policies based on freedom and responsibility. | ||
| And when you explain that, the more you explain, I think the better people understand it, and | ||
| the more people will want to vote for our party. | ||
| So for me, when I'm the only one to speak against the Paris Accord, there are a huge | ||
| clientele there, and it won't hurt me. | ||
| It will help me at the end. | ||
| And I'm, you know, my deal with Canadians is, be true, tell what you believe in, and | ||
| And have some debates, real debates. | ||
| And that's important for me. | ||
| So, yes, the media are playing an important role, but we need to use also the social media. | ||
| And that's why, you know, I'm very pleased to be here to speak to the American audience and Canadian audience and just try to have a conversation with them and you. | ||
| Yeah, what's the state of the media in Canada right now? | ||
| You guys have a whole different set of problems than we do. | ||
| What is going on with the CBC and just everything else in Canada? | ||
| Yeah, you know, we have the CBC. | ||
| I like how your whole body language changes immediately. | ||
| Here we go. | ||
| Yeah, we have the CBC and the federal government is giving about 1.3 billion dollars a year to the state broadcaster, the CBC, and in French it's Radio-Canada. | ||
| And I'm the only politician and it's a very popular policy that we must cut that because it is unfair. | ||
| The CBC are competing with other private broadcasters for the advertising and also they receive money from the government. | ||
| So it is not fair. | ||
| We must cut the CBC. | ||
| And what I want, I want the CBC to be a little bit like PBS in the state. | ||
| If they're so good, they will be able to have money from their viewers. | ||
| But also the CBC, their editorial board are a little bit I would be very, very kind. | ||
| A little bit leftist. | ||
| You're being very kind. | ||
| Yeah, yeah. | ||
| It's worse in French, though. | ||
| The Radio-Canada in French are more leftist than CBC sometimes. | ||
| Is there a reason for that? | ||
| You know, it's like your media here a little bit, but the worst thing is it is funded by the government. | ||
| So if you're, I don't know, a CNN and you don't receive any fund by the government and you want to be on the left, it's your corporate decision, but the CBC must be more neutral and they're not. | ||
| So that's the big problem that we have in Canada. | ||
| The way to fix that is, first of all, CBC must be must receive money from their viewers first. | ||
| And second, the government must—if the government is giving money to the CBC, we must know what's | ||
| happening, and maybe the executive of the CBC must be before the Parliament once a year | ||
| to explain their editorial policy. | ||
| But that being said, the media—we have the CBC, we have the traditional media, but when | ||
| you're a real conservative or a right-wing politician, you don't have the same coverage | ||
| than the liberal media. | ||
| the liberals or the left they're having in these traditional media. | ||
| Do you think in a weird way that that's working to your favor now? | ||
| I don't think so. | ||
| Because at least in the circles that I can see, you seem to be the hottest Canadian politician. | ||
| Despite the fact, and maybe it's fueled by, maybe it's not despite, maybe because of the fact | ||
| that you're the outsider from the media and people are so fed up with the media | ||
| that it's like, oh, here's this guy doing it, you know, circumventing it. | ||
| And also, you know, when the traditional media are writing something about us or my party that is not true, I will call that. | ||
| And I'm very factual on social media and Twitter about it. | ||
| I don't try to please everybody. | ||
| I don't try to please the media. | ||
| They have to do a job. | ||
| If they're fair, it's OK. | ||
| If they're not fair, I will be out there and I will argue my case. | ||
| And that's not all the politicians. | ||
| The politicians are not doing that. | ||
| They want to be fine with the media, they don't want to have a fight with | ||
| the media. | ||
| And for me, I will have a fight with a journalist if he is not doing his job. | ||
| And I think people appreciate that. | ||
| So yes, when they are doing something not objective on our policies, on my party, that | ||
| can help me at the end. | ||
| Because, you know, the credibility of journalists, it is not the same. | ||
| With people like you on social media, people have another way to find their news, and they're a little bit more critics toward the traditional journalists. | ||
| And yes, I agree with you, that can help me as a politician. | ||
| Are you able to debate some of your political opponents these days? | ||
| I mean, does anyone in Canada put these kind of talks on television, where you can actually get into the ideas with some of the people that you disagree with? | ||
| No, usually when I'm on the traditional TV in Canada, it's all about, you know, five minutes, six minutes. | ||
| Yeah, and they want to get you. | ||
| Yeah, they want to have you and they don't give you enough time to answer the questions and to go deeper in the subject. | ||
| But that's why I use social media. | ||
| That's why I'm present in social media. | ||
| So, but, you know, I need to deal with that. | ||
| And I think it's going very well right now. | ||
| So how does this all link to just sort of the state of free speech in Canada? | ||
| Because there does seem to be something particularly unique in Canada, which is why I've had so many Canadian guests and why Canada is usually our second or third most viewed country. | ||
| Obviously, there was the Jordan Peterson incident with C-16. | ||
| There's what happened with Lindsey Shepard at Wilfrid Laurier. | ||
| You've got Gad Saad up there who's always fighting the battle of free speech. | ||
| Is there something, is this new what's happening? | ||
| Related to political correctness in Canada? | ||
| Yeah, I think, first of all, that started 40 years ago in the university in Canada, like in the US. | ||
| But now what's happening, there are some politicians who believe in that. | ||
| And with that motion, M103, the Bill C-16 now, these people that were on the At school a couple of years ago, 40 years ago, now some of them are politicians. | ||
| And you have this debate right now. | ||
| And it's good for us that we have Jordan Peterson and people like that. | ||
| We must fight. | ||
| I think we must not take for granted in Canada our freedom of expression. | ||
| Free speech, and we must fight, and I'm doing that as a politician. | ||
| And, you know, with that bill, C-16, that was crazy bill, you know? | ||
| Jordan, they want to force Jordan to speak with a transgender, not he or she, but what was the word? | ||
| Well, it was whatever they wanted. | ||
| Whatever they want, yeah. | ||
| But there's no obligation, you know? | ||
| There's no obligation to please everybody. | ||
| Yeah, is that what this all comes down to though? | ||
| That people just don't understand the fundamental... | ||
| Responsibility of government in a free society. | ||
| I mean, if we were boiling all this into one thing, that seems to me to be it. | ||
| Yeah, you don't want the government to tell you what to do. | ||
| You don't want the government to tell you what to say. | ||
| You know, it's the basics of our democracy. | ||
| And actually, you know, one of our candidates, Laura Lynn, because we have three by-elections in Canada at the end of February, the 25th of February, And I will have candidates, the People's Party of Canada will have candidates. | ||
| And one of our candidates, Laura Lynn, in BC, Burnaby, BC, in that riding, she, at the provincial level, fight for gender, against gender fluidity. | ||
| In BC, in the school, it's a provincial jurisdiction. | ||
| They wanted to teach at school to young kids that if you're a boy, you may not be a boy, and if you're a girl, you may not be a girl, and you can choose your sex. | ||
| The state wants to impose that and to teach that to young people. | ||
| And Laura Lynch said, no, I don't want that. | ||
| I don't want the state to tell us what to do. | ||
| That must be the responsibility of the parents. | ||
| You don't have to put that in the mind of a young boy, six or seven or five years old. | ||
| But when she decided to be our candidate, all the mainstream media said, oh, Bernie. | ||
| And I said, you know, she has the right to her own opinion. | ||
| And that's a great debate that they had at the provincial level. | ||
| Now she's doing politics at the federal level. | ||
| But, you know, they were trying to look at her like, you know, she may be a crazy candidate because she has some opinions, and strong opinions. | ||
| But, you know, because I believe in freedom of speech, our candidates can have opinions like that. | ||
| We have candidates that are pro-choice, we have candidates that are pro-life, but Justin Trudeau and the Liberals, They don't want any pro-life candidates. | ||
| So for me, my party must be like our Canadian society. | ||
| So yes, I will tolerate different point of view, but people must be all behind our programs, a program that's very important. | ||
| But yes, we have these debates right now in Canada about the state imposing some values that I think that's not the role of the government. | ||
| Yeah, is it actually part of the policy of the Trudeau government that if you're pro-life that you actually can't be in the party platform? | ||
| It's a party platform. | ||
| If you're a pro-life person, you cannot be a candidate for the Liberal Party of Canada. | ||
| And Justin Trudeau said that. | ||
| But you know, that government is all obsessed by sex and gender. | ||
| Yeah, it's endless with it. | ||
| Oh yeah, the last budget, you know, that was a gender budget. | ||
| What does that even mean? | ||
| What does that mean? | ||
| They didn't have a lot of economic data in the budget. | ||
| You're supposed to be a budget, supposed to have economic data. | ||
| They didn't have a lot of economic data. | ||
| But I think the word gender was in the budget 300 times. | ||
| And I will give you an example. | ||
| If you want to build a pipeline in Canada, With the new Bill C-69, you need to do an intersectorial sex and gender analysis. | ||
| Don't ask me what that means. | ||
| Intersectional sex and gender analysis. | ||
| That's in the legislation. | ||
| To build a pipeline. | ||
| A lot of people were talking about this when we were in Alberta. | ||
| The sex and gender expert will look at the impact of building a pipeline in a rural community with men and women and the sex, and so it's crazy. | ||
| It's a nonsense, it's crazy. | ||
| And this government is obsessed about that. | ||
| And I think that's why people are looking for an alternative. | ||
| So a guy like Trudeau, it's hard to judge what's really going on in someone's mind, but do you think he really, believes in the things that he's saying when it comes to all of this gender stuff, or is it just that it always leads to bigger government? | ||
| And what he wants fundamentally is bigger government because he wants more power. | ||
| He believes in state power. | ||
| So that it's almost like it's an ends, the ends justify the means. | ||
| It's like, you'll just say anything about gender and all these things. | ||
| I think he probably kind of believes them, but at the end they just give him more power. | ||
| I think, first of all, he believes it, and I think also it's because he believes in a big government that will fix every problem in our society. | ||
| That's his philosophy. | ||
| And, you know, when he said that, you know, Canada has no core identity, or Canada is the first post-national state, People, they understand in Canada that we are a nation. | ||
| We are not a post-nation state. | ||
| We have Canadian values and we share the Western civilization values. | ||
| So for him, he's a little bit like his father, you know. | ||
| The UN and the world is important and mass immigration and open borders and everybody can come to Canada. | ||
| That's what people, they don't like that in Canada. | ||
| They want us to respect our immigration system and having a sustainable immigration system. | ||
| So Trudeau, I think, wants to build a big government and at the end he believes in a Supra National Government, you know, he just signed in 2010 with the UN, there's the UN, UNPA, UN Parliamentary Assembly. | ||
| It's a group that want to promote a world government like the EU Parliament that will be able to So, it's all about the UN, it's all about the big government, and it's all about him trying to find the right policies that will solve every problem. | ||
| But that's not the case. | ||
| in 2010 promote that and believe in that. | ||
| So it's all about the UN, it's all about the big government, and it's all about him trying | ||
| to find the right policies that will solve every problem. | ||
| But that's not the case. | ||
| Just less regulation, more freedom, you'll have more prosperity. | ||
| I think people are tired of that in Canada. | ||
| It almost strikes me as it's like a psychological condition more than anything else. | ||
| It's just like sort of what, like it's obvious to me that you believe in just that the individual can, to the best of their ability, solve their problems. | ||
| Not all of them, but to the best of their ability. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Absolutely. | |
| And I think that this other set of people believe that, I don't know, I would view it as almost a very dim way of viewing humans. | ||
| That if we all weren't controlled, that endless evil would spread everywhere or something to | ||
|
unidentified
|
that effect? | |
| I think they believe that Canadians are children and they must follow regulation. | ||
| But I trust, I have faith in people. I have faith that they have the ability, | ||
| the dignity and the right to make their own decision and determine their own destiny. | ||
| That's important for us. That's important for me. And yes, you can make a mistake, | ||
| but you'll be responsible of your success and your mistake. | ||
| That's how you learn in a society. | ||
| That's why, you know, speaking about that, people... | ||
| like me a little bit and they're looking at Jordan Peterson and they're saying, well, Bernie, personal responsibility | ||
| and Jordan also is book, it's all about that, you know? | ||
| Clean your room before cleaning the world. | ||
| So be responsible of your action and that's what we want to do | ||
| and that's what as a politician I want to do. | ||
| Well, I mentioned it before we sat down, but I may as well say it on camera | ||
| that when I go to these events with Jordan and especially the 12 or 15 we did in Canada, | ||
| I say something about Trudeau and the whole audience boos. | ||
| I say something about you and the whole audience goes crazy. | ||
| So something good is happening. | ||
| You've mentioned borders a couple of times. | ||
| This does seem to now be the hot one, at least in the United States, where we seem to be caught between either a wall or open borders. | ||
| And it's not a real choice, I don't think. | ||
| It's not a sensible choice. | ||
| And in one hand, if you're for the wall, they say you're racist. | ||
| If you say you're for open borders, then you're an anarchist or whatever it is. | ||
| So what would be the right way to look at borders if you wanna maintain your national sovereignty? | ||
| Yeah, and that's a debate that we're having right now in Canada, because as you know, we have people who are crossing the border from the state of New York to Quebec, and they are asking to, they said that they're refugees, and actually they're not real refugees. | ||
| You know, your life is not in danger in the state of New York. | ||
| But that being said- They think it is. | ||
| It's perceived. | ||
| But the last two years, I think more than 40,000 people crossed the border illegally. | ||
| So the Trudeau government doesn't want to fix that. | ||
| And that's a big issue in Canada. | ||
| So what I'm asking as a politician, we have an immigration system and that is It was going very well at Point Systems, so it's a privilege to be Canadians. | ||
| And we want people who come here to share our Canadian values, our basic Western civilization values, and it's a privilege. | ||
| So, we have three kinds of immigrants in Canada. | ||
| The reunification of family, the refugees, and the economic immigrant, the person that will come because they have a job. | ||
| Because the business wasn't able to find Canadians for that job, so they are coming, they have a job, and usually it's easier to integrate a society if you have a job. | ||
| But we don't need to build a wall between Canada and US, we just need to be sure to respect our immigration system. | ||
| And the way to do that is to have a discussion with President Trump about the Third Safe | ||
| Country Agreement. | ||
| We have an agreement with the U.S. about that. | ||
| And to fix that loophole, so people who are crossing at a real point of entry, it's OK. | ||
| But people who are crossing and not a real point of entry, they must go back to the U.S. | ||
| And we must have an agreement with the U.S. | ||
| about that. | ||
| And I think we can have that kind of agreement if we sit with the Trump administration. | ||
| But at the same time, we must be clear that people who are coming to Canada must come from the right reason. | ||
| And these people who are crossing our border right now, 40 percent of them We'll have to be deported because they're not real refugees. | ||
| So it's a big cost for Canadian taxpayers because these people will be deported maybe in three years from now. | ||
| So we must fix that and we have a strong position in our platform. | ||
| Yes, we'll fix that at the border, but we don't need to impose a wall. | ||
| We don't need to create a wall. | ||
| But the most important, we need to focus on more economic immigrants. | ||
| That's what we need in Canada. | ||
| And a little bit less of refugees and a little bit less of reunification of family. | ||
| So that's a strong position. | ||
| But seeing that, yes, it's a risk in Canada when you see that as a politician. | ||
| But I'm taking that risk. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| What do you make of the libertarian argument that is pro-open border? | ||
| Because I've had many guests that are libertarian that take that position. | ||
| I've never been convinced of it. | ||
| I actually, I just, I don't understand the fundamental premise because as you said earlier, it's if you're a nation, a nation has borders. | ||
| That's just, otherwise everything is just an amorphous blob. | ||
| But what, I'm sure you hear this when you're in libertarian circles. | ||
| So what do you make of that argument? | ||
| That's not coming from the left. | ||
| Yeah, absolutely. | ||
| So our party is, we're not anti-immigration and we're not open borders and for mass immigration. | ||
| So what we want is a little bit less immigrants, 250,000 a year, like we had under Stephen Harper, not 350,000 a year. | ||
| To do a government increase that by 40%. | ||
| So what I'm saying when people say, oh, you know, open border is good. | ||
| It's not everybody that can be part of a nation. | ||
| If you don't support our values, if you are, I don't know, pro-sharia law, that's against our values. | ||
| That's against freedom between men and women, equality between men and women, The respect of the rule of law. | ||
| If you want to impose a new rule of law, a sharia law, the integration won't be very well in our society. | ||
| So these people, they must share our values, our Western civilization values. | ||
| So that's why if you have an open border and you want everybody from everywhere to come to Canada, that will create tension and dislike in the population. | ||
| And that's happening actually in Europe actually right now. | ||
| Are you able to point to that? | ||
| That's the one thing that I've never understood that Europe is having all of these integration problems. | ||
| Merkel has basically said she screwed up, you know, after letting a million people in. | ||
| Are you able to point to that and say, you see, they might've, that's the warning. | ||
| You know, journalists are telling me, Maxime, nothing happened in Canada. | ||
| It's a great country. | ||
| I said, yes, it is a great country. | ||
| But I want this country to be like that in 20 years from now. | ||
| So that's why we must have the discussion right now. | ||
| And people who are coming to Canada must share our values. | ||
| If not, you know, they're not welcome. | ||
| Because the integration will be very difficult. | ||
| And that's the Trudeau government policy on extreme multiculturalism. | ||
| So, you know, for Trudeau, diversity is our strength. | ||
| And for me, it's unity who is our strength as a country. | ||
| But Trudeau is always pushing for more diversity, more diversity, more diversity. | ||
| And I said that and I tweeted about that. | ||
| More diversity won't help our country. | ||
| At the end, it will destroy our country. | ||
| I know that Canada is a diverse country with people coming from different countries and with different cultures, but at the end, They integrated our society because they believe in our freedom, in our values, and they want to share our traditions and our heritage, celebrate our heritage. | ||
| So that's what we want. | ||
| And we need to have that discussion in Canada. | ||
| And I'm having that discussion, actually. | ||
| So that's why I don't believe in open borders. | ||
| I think it will create Too much diversity, and I want people who come in our country to share our values, and it's a privilege to be Canadians, and like it's a privilege to be an American. | ||
| So we must choose our immigrants, and we did that for the last 35 years, and that was very successful for our country. | ||
| And people- And it's interesting, you're only trying to roll it back to what it was, 40% less. | ||
| I mean, it's not like you're doing something, it's not like you're saying, we're not letting anyone in. | ||
| No, no. | ||
| Just going back to a couple years ago, yeah. | ||
| And it is Justin Trudeau who is radical because the last poll in Canada, 49% of Canadians said that they want fewer immigrants and only 6%, 6% of Canadians said that they want more immigrants. | ||
| So who is the radical, Maxime Bernier or Justin Trudeau? | ||
| Justin Trudeau increased that by 40%. | ||
| So that's a fact. | ||
| What Canadians are fed up with is extreme multiculturalism, the cult of diversity. | ||
| Too much is too much. | ||
| And I think Canadians can see that in the future, if you go on that road, we'll have more problems and the integration will be more difficult. | ||
| But I'm not anti-immigrants and people came in our country and they built this country, but they came for the right reason and they're proud to be Canadians. | ||
| But the Liberals and the Conservatives are doing identity politics and they try to please every special interest group, but every special ethnic group also. | ||
| So you know, they call that outreach. | ||
| But for me, the policies must be the same for every Canadian, and we don't do any difference | ||
| with your race, your gender or what. | ||
| So for us, it is not important. | ||
| But the Canadian government is playing that, they are doing these policies, and I think | ||
| that won't be good at the end for our country. | ||
| Yeah, so speaking of these policies, I've also seen you on Twitter. | ||
| You're not a big fan of what's going on at the UN these days. | ||
| No, I'm not. | ||
| To say the least. | ||
| Can you lay out why the UN, why you're so down on the UN? | ||
| First of all, it's a dysfunctional organization. | ||
| Just as example, I think the last two years they voted 21 resolutions against Israel on human rights and only one or two resolutions against China or Cuba or Venezuela. | ||
| So, you know, and the countries that are It's all the bad guys. | ||
| Yeah, it's all the bad guys. | ||
| Iraq, China, all the bad guys, all the dictatorships. | ||
| So, it's a joke. | ||
| But the UN wants to impose their vision of the world on other countries. | ||
| And, you know, I was against recently, against the compact on migration. | ||
| And they want migrants to be normal. | ||
| It is not normal. | ||
| People must be able to live in their country. | ||
| We must try to bring peace and prosperity, and that's the most important. | ||
| But no, they want that to be normal. | ||
| There's 250 million people that are migrants on the globe, and they want to facilitate that. | ||
| And the Trudeau government signed that agreement, but they were saying, "Oh, it's not binding. | ||
| It's not binding." | ||
| But at the end, why signing an agreement? | ||
| And if you said that you will follow all that, but yeah, it's not binding, but you will put | ||
| legislation in place to be in line with the agreement that you signed, so that will have | ||
| an effect on our country at the end. | ||
| It won't be imposed by the UN, it will be imposed by a legitimate elected Canadian government. | ||
| Which is ironic because the Paris Accord was non-binding too, and he was all about the Paris Accord. | ||
| Absolutely, yeah, you're right. | ||
| So I think people, And I think I was very clear about it. | ||
| And I had a lot of support about that, that migrant compact. | ||
| And people understand that, you know, we have our sovereignty as a country, and we must be able to select our immigrants. | ||
| And so that's coming from the UN. | ||
| So, yes, you're right. | ||
| I don't like the UN. | ||
| I think that they're not so efficient. | ||
| And I'm clear about that. | ||
| Yeah, do you guys have a strain, you know, we're seeing in Europe now where there's nationalist parties that there does seem to be a strain of sort of ethno-nationalism or something that has a different racial connotation to it. | ||
| Do you guys have a strain of that in Canada? | ||
| Because it seems to me that I think what's happening, and we're starting to see it here, is that if the good liberals and the good libertarians and the people who just wanna live and let live, if they don't start making some advances against this radical leftism that's moving, There's going to be a lot of people that break in a bad way. | ||
| And in a weird way, I wouldn't be able to blame them. | ||
| And I say that as someone that has no racism in my heart. | ||
| But they would be left with no alternative as they watch their country crumble. | ||
| Do you have any of that in Canada? | ||
| No, we don't. | ||
| And it's good news. | ||
| But at the end, that's why we must have this discussion. | ||
| I don't fear to have the discussion. | ||
| For me, there's no political correctness, there's no taboo subject, and we need to have the discussion, and I'm having that discussion with Canadians. | ||
| And I think it is time to have the discussion. | ||
| If we wait too long, that can happen in our country. | ||
| Yeah, so right now, I would imagine there's probably some people on the right that are saying, well, Bernier, if he gains too much strength, it'll sort of split the right, and then that gives us true, I mean, this is always the argument against libertarians, right? | ||
| And I say this as someone that, I voted for Gary Johnson, and I get it. | ||
| At some micro level, the third party is usually the Libertarian Party, that's usually gonna take from the conservatives more than the lefties, and then there is an argument, then you're always gonna end up with a lefty government. | ||
| I suspect, as the guy leading this thing, you don't buy that argument, at least in the long term. | ||
| I don't buy that, but actually, it is the only argument that my opponent, the Conservative Party of Canada, has. | ||
| So that's their whole thing is, this guy, you vote for this guy, you're gonna fracture us. | ||
| They have a weak leader. | ||
| There's no conviction there. | ||
| The Conservatives are doing a lot of polling and focus group and survey. | ||
| But they're not doing politics by conviction. | ||
| And I'm doing politics by conviction. | ||
| And we must speak about what we believe openly, with passion and conviction. | ||
| And that's what I'm doing. | ||
| That's a big difference with me and Andrew Scheer. | ||
| And Andrew Scheer tried to please everybody. | ||
| And he said, actually... | ||
| He was with the Toronto Sun and he said, my party, he is a centrist, centrist, pragmatic, political party, open for a lot of ideas, for a lot of people. | ||
| So what he's saying is, he doesn't have any principle, doesn't have any conviction, doesn't have any vision for the country. | ||
| He wants to please everybody, but at the end, when you please everybody, you end up pleasing nobody. | ||
| So that's the Conservatives. | ||
| I think I'm not happy with him, but they're telling me, Maxime, we want to win. | ||
| And yes, you are splitting the vote, but I'm saying in a democracy. | ||
| And the vote, it's always split. | ||
| If you don't want anyone to split the vote, it would be a dictatorship. | ||
| So what I'm telling them is Andrew Scheer, when I was with him, when I was a conservative, he wasn't winning against Justin Trudeau. | ||
| He was always six to eight points behind Justin Trudeau. | ||
| And Maxime Bernier is not with Andrew Scheer right now. | ||
| And Andrew Scheer is not winning. | ||
| He's behind Justin Trudeau by four to six points now. | ||
| So he's not able to win. | ||
| So what I'm saying to people, vote for your values. | ||
| Vote for what you believe in. | ||
| Be part of the change. | ||
| Be with us. | ||
| We have the momentum right now. | ||
| We have the real conservative policies and ideas and come with us and we'll see what will happen. | ||
| Maybe we can have the balance of power in a parliamentary system. | ||
| We can be in power, so I don't know. | ||
| I don't know what will happen, but I know that we have the momentum. | ||
| So you think it's a risk worth taking regardless, even if at the end of the day the party splits, or not the party because it's two separate parties, but the votes are split enough that you end up with Trudeau again. | ||
| You think it's just long term, it's what you have to do basically. | ||
| You have to vote for what you believe, you know, and I'm giving them another alternative. | ||
| And, you know, while you will vote for a politician that is telling you something and at the end he won't do any reform, he won't do anything because he will look at the poll and he won't be able to do that, I'm speaking about real conservative reform before After and during an election time, every time. | ||
| So yes, there's a risk over there that Justin Trudeau be elected. | ||
| But maybe he will be elected only as a minority government. | ||
| And if it's a minority government and we are there with a lot of seats, we can be the difference. | ||
| And we can impose our reform to the government or reverse the government. | ||
| We don't know what we can do. | ||
| But I don't know what can happen. | ||
| But I'm telling them that's a risk. | ||
| Vote for what you think will be good for this country in the long term. | ||
| That's what we're doing right now. | ||
| They like the poll. | ||
| That's why I'm telling you that's the only argument that they have. | ||
| But the goal, and I think I can defeat Justin Trudeau, the most important for me, actually, It's to be able to have candidates all across the country in every riding, and we'll be able to have that. | ||
| So we're not a regional party. | ||
| We are a national party in Quebec and outside Quebec and all across the country. | ||
| And also, I will be present at the national debate on the national TV during the election campaign in September, October. | ||
| And that would be important for me, as the leader of a new party, to be there. | ||
| And I think I'll be able to question the other leaders, to challenge them, and that will help our party at the end. | ||
| So we can be a big surprise, and I'm telling people, come with us, vote for what you believe, be part of the change, and we'll be able to do something. | ||
| I don't know what will be the end result of all that, but I can tell you that we are able to change the country for the better. | ||
| Yeah, that should be the ending, but I'm not quite done yet. | ||
| But that was the ending portion here, in a way. | ||
| That was your closing stump speech there. | ||
| What do you make of the state? | ||
| We haven't talked at all about religion. | ||
| It's one of the themes that we've talked a lot about here, and I know you're obviously familiar with Jordan Peterson's work. | ||
| That it seems that the way that Western countries have, say, moved off of Judeo-Christian values, that they've replaced everything with a big state. | ||
|
unidentified
|
I actually don't know what you're... Oh yeah, actually that's... | |
| I believe in that, and that happened in Quebec, in my own province in Quebec at the provincial level. | ||
| You know, we had the relationship with the state and the church in Quebec in the 1950s, 1960s, and after that, you know, we did at the provincial level a quiet revolution, and so we replaced That's why, you know, Quebec is a poor province in Canada. | ||
| We have a kind of a formula in Canada in the Constitution. | ||
| fat government at the provincial level in Quebec. | ||
| That's why Quebec is a poor province in Canada. | ||
| We have a kind of a formula in Canada in the constitution. | ||
| We call that the equalization formula. | ||
| The rich provinces are giving money to poor provinces, and Quebec received equalization | ||
| money for the last 50 years. | ||
| So, because bad economic policies at the provincial level and because of a big state at the provincial level... Does it ever work? | ||
| Does shifting the money ever work? | ||
| Why did they have to do it for 50 years if this was so the good policy? | ||
| But politicians like to give money. | ||
| So what you're saying about when I think we did that in Quebec and at the federal level, with the Trudeau government. They want a bigger state, | ||
| absolutely. So I agree with Jordan when he said that. That was the case at the provincial | ||
| level in Quebec, a little bit more evident, but also at the federal level. So people want, | ||
| politicians want a bigger government. | ||
| And the more bigger the government is, the more power they have, the more regulation | ||
| they're doing, the more influence they will have. And so for me, I don't buy that. | ||
| So as a libertarian in government, which as I started this, is an odd thing, because it's the only type of people that want to scale back the very thing they're becoming part of, Are you worried at all that everything has become political? | ||
| That it seems politics has sort of replaced sports, at least here in the United States. | ||
| The way we talk about politicians is the way you used to talk about athletes. | ||
| We worship these people who've never accomplished anything, but they're good on sound bites, or Trudeau has nice hair and wears nice socks, although you're clearly, you're doing all right in the sock game. | ||
| But that we worship these people who should have, if we were doing this right, would have almost no control over us, and yet we've elevated them to some magical state. | ||
| That's got to be just weird for you personally, as someone that you want to scale this thing back, and yet you have to be part I have to be part of that. | ||
| I have to be part of that to do that. | ||
| You're absolutely right. | ||
| But yes, and I think that the population, sometimes they're putting too much faith in a politician to change things, you know. | ||
| And that's what I'm telling to people, you know. | ||
| I will put forward the policies that we believe in, but after that, you know, when we'll have more competition, no more corporate welfare, a government that respects the Constitution, and with all these extreme multiculturalism policies, you know, that is there to buy votes, ethnic voting with different communities. | ||
| We'll abolish these policies. | ||
| So I'm telling them, I'll do that. | ||
| But at the same time, I'm doing that because I believe in you, because I don't want to save you for every individual problem that you can have in your life. | ||
| I want you to be responsible. | ||
| That's a little bit, but you know, I'm the only politician who speaks like that. | ||
| And for me, you know, I believe in free markets. | ||
| I believe in competition. | ||
| But when you don't have competition, it is fun. | ||
| In politics, you know, other politicians are too afraid to say that. | ||
| And for me, that's great because I don't have political competition on what I'm saying. | ||
| But you're right, you know, people must be responsible and we must have a smaller government. | ||
| And I want to have that job to be sure to Do what I want to do and help people in the right way by giving them back their responsibility and giving them back their own money and increasing their purchasing power. | ||
| So all the things that if they have more money in their pockets, they'll be able to do more things and so for them or for their family. | ||
| So that's what I want to do in politics and I like that. | ||
| Actually, it's my best time in politics right now. | ||
| All right, I normally don't end an interview asking for a favor, but my favor is this. | ||
| If you can make this thing work in Canada, can you then send somebody down to fix the libertarians in the United States? | ||
| Because our libertarians need some help. | ||
| I mean, but your voice and someone that's speaking clarity on libertarian issues, because we have a lot of talkers that are doing it. | ||
| We have a lot of YouTubers and think tanks that do it really well, but for whatever reason, and again, I voted for Gary Johnson. | ||
| I think he's a really nice man, but he wasn't a great candidate. | ||
| We need that, what you're presenting. | ||
| So if you've got anybody, can you send them our way when you're done with this thing? | ||
| Don't deal. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Sounds good. | |
| All right, well, it was a pleasure. | ||
| Thank you so much for coming in. |
Export Selection