I then sat with the Prime Minister in the Queen Elizabeth hotel in Montreal last Thursday afternoon.
It was the meeting of the first ministers, a meeting that was a lot of tension, but not a lot of consequences for all those conversations.
It is not one of journals interviews; It's an interview that I'm trying to get some time now. He is busy, that's understandable.
But if we are now less than one year away from an election, sitting with the current Prime Minister and his rivals for that job seems important. The purpose of the interview was not to get to Trudeau on news of day, but rather to respond a little to decisions he made and defended and explained.
You can guess how well a job he does in answering those questions.
We will make other calls with other leaders in the weeks to get the Canadians understand what these leaders and their parties are and when the time comes when you want to decide who will be? your best values and priorities are best
RB: Good to see.
PMJT: Good to be Rosie here.
RB: How Do You Do?
PMJT: Very good.
RB: Good. I will start with what you have been in the last week around the G20 and the signing of the new NAFTA, that's what I never call. I know you can say that tariffs and actions are not the same thing, they are two separate things, but it seems to me that you have something to do with the United States, and you will not return it again. So why do you even draw it with these rates still?
PMJT: Now, I think, especially, that we get access to access to our major trading partner for businesses, for workers, our Canadian economy was essential, and the alternative for signing would have been what we considered in real terms Trade with the US in a time of great protectionism and uncertainty. I mean investments and businesses are very pleased that we have resolved NAFTA's question.
PMJT: The demand for leverage is one to reflect. I mean we want to be willing to be of this type of steel and aluminum, we must, we will continue to work for our employees, but we also see the point of ratification as a place where there are continuous conversations by members of Congress, of companies or associations in the United States, governors who have seen these targets, and then we are going to work.
RB: Why is it then to try to drink people around him or people in Washington?
PMJT: All steps of # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #
See Trudeau about rates:
RB: If you have this press conference with the president and say one at a time: Donald, the more reason to get these rates & # 39; did you give him a note that you would do that simply you need him to publish him.
PMJT: No, I talked to him just before I talked to him for a couple of days talking to him about how important it was for us to get rid of these tarts between our two countries. It does not make sense to move freely and still have a profit, especially those in a national security sense that does not mean sense if it comes to Canada.
RB: Ok, but that we are something, we move freely and read the rates in place. So what's the way to remove her?
PMJT: To continue with the broad range of partners in the United States, members of congressional, business leaders, working groups who know that these rates, such as all rates, consumers and workers both sides of & # 39; the boundary line.
RB: It was like a point where it was done, when it was done, where the US ambassador had said we could probably handle one with a bag after a signature. Why do you feel necessary to play that is so difficult, especially in times of time, why do you want to give the chairman the moment to act?
PMJT: Oh, Canadians do not want me to make it personal, Canadians want me to just make sure I do something for Canada and it's right for Canada to go with a secure NAFTA – that's what I have heard of Canadians right the land. These are people who work all political backgrounds and all industries. Our unified approach to NAFTA makes a great difference in the bargain table and we get a better deal when we have different.
See the full interview with Justin Trudeau:
RB: Yes, but you did not have to stand beside him to draw it. It will happen if you're stone or not, so …
PMJT: Really no, we had to be a signature feast and we're happy to say, we worked very hard, still doing more work on tariffs, of course we should stand for our steel and aluminum workers, but We have free trade with the United States and that's a big thing, not a little thing. & # 39;
RB: You said the president is unpredictable, you said he can not play the rules, can you give me an example how your work has been influenced as a minister's president, one not so in advance
PMJT: Well, I think that as Canadians have seen, we continue to be constructive in our relationship with the United States. It means we respond without comment or react if we get a surprise in a tweet or a statement. We will continue to say, the relationship is bigger than between two people on the grounds of the country, and we continue to focus on focusing, and that's between Canada and Americans. This approach was in good position.
RB: But it has got more security for you.
PMJT: As Canada's premier is a challenging job at any time, there are personalities, and challenges on a global scale, one should deal with. I just used to adapt to surprises in world peace, not just from & # 39; the United States. That comes with the territory.
RB: Is it easier with the president?
PMJT: I think we just have a level of comprehensibility of each other that has grown by working together to get a resolution on this great case of modernizing NAFTA. So yes, it's a bit more understanding of what our people are and how we can work together.
RB: But you will not hang with him?
PMJT: Canadians expect me to be called and I will continue.
RB: I want to go to another thing, which happened at the G20, when you've got some time to meet the Saudi prince. The Saudi Crown Prince, MBS. You lost the problem of Raif Badawi, his sister, Jamal Khashoggi, and the war in Yemen. How does a leader respond to another leader who gets up and says: "Listen, we have some problems, I need you to do," which you asked him. How is he responding to that?
PMJT: Well, I think it's a lot of stuff that will be things, and my framework, in any case at & # 39; The World Poat, Canada is a useful help to remove from us to a better place than planet and our interest in & Humanitarian crisis in Yemen affects an offering: "Can Canada be useful," as it is by UN, with our allies. There are people who learn and die, we want to be useful.
So we see, we have to look at a rigidity, we will be with you in working with the international community to work wisely and to fight humanitarian aid. It is never a situation of you, we can imagine that we can stand there and another country say what to do or how to do it. It says, it's great to be doing this and we can be useful to move on a constructive way. I think that's what the Canadians are trying to do on the world stage at all levels.
RB: I can see how this conversation would be Yemen, less obviously how it will take on Jamal Khashoggi.
RB: How can you say to the Crown Prince & # 39; We are certainly sure you are involved in the murder of an innocent journalist. & # 39;
PMJT: We say we have better answers. We need better responsibility. The journalist's camp is something that is serious for Canada, for me. But I get a lot of questions from Canadians, who have been right, like citizens around the world, really tried to wound on what happened. We must, as a global community, have better answers to citizens.
RB: His answer to you, saying that with you fully know what you know about the intelligence behind him?
PMJT: His answer is: & # 39; see, we are happy to continue work and get more information and more evidence, and if you need information or information, you will be offered it. That's exactly what we are doing. & # 39;
RB: Roll your eyes on that point?
PMJT: As a member of the World Poetry, it is to be able to enjoy all kinds of people without experiencing personal feelings about involuntary movements.
RB: Have you heard the band, or have you indicated what this band is?
PMJT: I've been informed about what the clip is.
RB: And what was that?
PMJT: Of course it's what intelligence communities take and listening and working with and is part of our reflection to get real answers.
RB: Can you characterize it for me?
PMJT: I do not want to characterize it, no.
PMJT: I will not characterize it.
RB: You have made it clear to the crown prince that human rights is Canada. How can you tell him to tell us that we still have to sell the lightly wounded car? Is there no opposition in that?
PMJT: This is a question that comes not only to Saudi Arabia, but to consider a wider range of countries that have different levels of defensive human rights than Canada and Canada expect. Whether it's China, or it's Russia, whether Saudi Arabia is, whether the other countries around the world are not so strong in # 39; defense of LGBT defenders, or others.
We are trying to look for constructive ways to get relationships that lead us to be strangely aware of # 39; man, there we do not even know there we feel that we can often be useful for improving things while at the same time finding a way that you do not shake your fox together and say: You must change, & # 39; in an expectation that only they need to change.
RB: No, not only, but Germany has done it. Germany said: "We do not want to do anything more."
PMJ: We have a lot of problems behind the scenes, see export permits and look for ways forward.
RB: Is the contract not broken down?
PMJT: There are convictions about that.
RB: What does that mean?
PMJT: That means we are in conversations about what to do with our continual economic relations with Saudi Arabia.
RB: Just as I'm clear, the contract can be broken. It is possible.
PMJ: If I mark, the contract has special provisions, both for confidentiality and supplementary punishment. It was a contract signed by the former government and we see it naturally.
RB: OK. Let's decide what week the first meeting of a minister. You are trying to attend this meeting with a forest of people you probably do not know well, that I do not particularly like associations of you. You have four provinces that do not match the brokerage, now you will be able to log in them.
It seems more coordinated, actively against you on 't cooperation policy. How much worse it is to sell you that the Canadians know that these other people are out there that it is the wrong thing to do.
PMJT: One of the questions that people have had, I was asked: With the context, and yes, the real misconceptions about # The table of Ministers likely to come up, I want to run a page from Stephen Harper's book and decided to complete the meetings of the first minister. And the answer is of course not. I think it's really important to sit down and show people in their eyes and talk about a constructive way of how we serve the citizens we all serve here.
There are things to do, we go over, there are things that we do not agree with, and have these conversations, although some are heavier than others, and a few years are getting harder than others, remains something that I think the Canadians expect due to their ministerial presidency. I'm happy this will be our fourth year, and I will sit there every year and try with the Prime Ministers, it's really important with us, our federation.
RB: I say that, that was not the question. The question was: Is it harder to sell the carbon copy if you say that it's the wrong thing?
PMJ: I think the fact is that there is a forest of conservatives that have decided that the pollution should be free, not that hard to check. I think Canada understands that we fight the climate, make our economies for the future and make sure we support the Canadians through this transition. That's exactly what we are doing, that's exactly what our plan is.
We put a price on pollution, so we want less pollution and the fact that conservatives in this country do not want to go on, when the climate change is fighting or helping people get the good jobs in the future can be a chat I have always responded. The political instruments for the conservative of Andrew Scheer, to Doug Ford, to another, are really off-the-ground where the conversations I had with Canadians.
RB: I think the Canadians have devoted themselves to climate change. I'm not sure, but they regret the comfort of their life for climate change. What is the sort of what you say, is not it?
PMJ: No, but that's exactly why we're doing in moving forward with a price on pollution to make ordinary ordinary families in # 39; the provinces where the federal government has brought a price to pollution, has won the conservative victory It makes these families safer, better supported. What we do with climate-stimulating stimulation ensures that a family in Ontario, which needs additional cost to reduce pollution, will be more than compensated for.
RB: What's your hope in how these people change their behavior and you have a sense of how quickly it happened?
PMJT: I think we know that if you want to put a price on what you do not want to …
RB: A tax burden.
PMJT: such as pollution.
RB: A tax burden.
PMJT: We put a price on pollution, right.
RB: It's a tax but OK.
PMJT: And we make sure we will accept, actually the money back to the jurisdiction. This is not a federal suit. This is not what we are going to do about something else. We give money money back to citizens in the county where it's rising, so we know that if you make pollution for free people more.
That's just fruitful what the conservatives want to do. They want to free the pollution, use a convenient expression. We say no, if you want to reject it, there would be a cost that has been associated with it.
RB: And yet we see a politics, I think he's a political ally of yours, Emmanuel Macron, with this whole question about the past few weeks. He was convinced of fuel, plans on the street, and he had to go back. What experience did you learn from that?
PMJT: He does not have a second part of that, you put a price on pollution, because we want less pollution, but you ensure that ordinary Canadians can make this transition to a lower co-operating economy.
RB: It's the rebate that makes the difference?
PMJT: Representation, family support, people seeking their future, they are concerned about climate change, they also worry about their jobs and their own retirement. That ensures that we support families by this transition period is a full responsibility for each government. That's in the core of our approach, that's not what we can see from & # 39; the approach of conservatives, and that's not what other countries have done.
RB: As conservative, and other people, especially if they talk about roads, people who live in Toronto have to travel many, have to bring their children, all those Types of species, they are the people that will be the most tax. Do you think that the rebate means that it will be completely different, that they do not worry, or do you expect people to feel a squeeze when it starts to run when it starts to ramp?
PMJ: No, the average family will be better off by what we are doing. But that's not all we do, of course. We have invested massively in public transit, we invest in cleaner energy sources, sustainable energy, clean technology, and make historical investments to make the jobs in innovation, like us in lowering economy, are and center.
RB: And, however, the United Nations says most of the major emissions countries, including Canada, are not on the role to comply with the target targets, no G20 land is actually. So you do this, and it does not have the influence that the United Nations would like to see. They call for more urgency. So how do you respond in the face of this? Are you fast doing what you are doing Do you change what you are doing
PMJ: Countries around the world, with a great deal of interest in Canada, is about to make a prize on pollution and the support of ordinary citizens through this transition. This is a model that many people are very interested, because it is a model that puts us on a path to reaching our Paris goals.
RB: Yes, the UN said that. The UN said it does not go.
PMJT: We will be able to reach these obligations.
PMJT: Having a price on pollution. People will seek ways to innovate, less vulnerable, and the positive tug boats that come about as people make a better inventory and innovation, we are developing a path to a safe way that emigrates to us climate change effectively reduces and improves.
RB: So will you reach the target targets?
PMJT: We are pursuing our goals for goals, yes.
RB: You have called the conservatives in the provinces. There seems to be a kind of growing movement in the provinces, which happens to be much as you know, and as a liberal in power is federal. The movement seems to form, at least, partly by Doug Ford. So I ask you & # 39; you think he's asked about voters, and if they're the same people you're interested in.
PMJT: I think it is, there is no question that Ontarians, like all Canadians, have been concerned about growth in economy, have tried about their jobs, worried about the changes that they see in & # 39; The economists around them, around globalization and want to ensure that they are in the right place. That's what I'm part of my decision as the Prime Minister, including Ford Prime. We want to work together in the effort to find ways to grow the economy, helping citizens navigate in positive ways.
RB: Yes, but you can not say that you share the same values.
PMJ: No, but we make clear cuts on how to help the Ontarians, so I ask that I sit with him to talk about how to go in front of the way We're together.
RB: On Sunday, the Prime Minister of Alberta announced a reduction in oil production to deal with these historic small prizes [for oil] in Alberta. It is also buying spoof carts to try and find more ways. You said it was a crisis. How can you not offer help if it is a crisis?
PMJT: Oh, we've got a lot of help and we have …
PMJT: We think first, that Alberta and Albert are now a whole moment. This price-performance goes faster than just something that has been over the past years, and they need help. the first and foremost they need to get our oil earrings to new brands as the United States. The fact that Canada, Canadian oil is most financially in the US market, means we take a massive discount.
If we go after a transition to a lower co-ordinated economy, we will need to pay for this transition, and every million dollars of money annually does not take into account. Therefore, we are so embedded in order to get our resources in order to recognize the right way, noting the United States, such as the transfer rates of Trans Mountain. But we follow the directions of the court on how to do that.
The problem is, for ten years, we have a government that fails to meet the guidelines, ignoring communities, ignore scientific science, and not listen to the Canadians concerned and that we build ten years of these projects .
See if Trudeau discussed the oil industry:
RB: That is your long term solution. But the Prime Minister is working on the short term and therefore they have done this. What did you offer? What can you do for the, you know, dozens of thousands of people in this sector? Is there anything you can do?
PMJT: We see absolute on the tool that we have around EI. We look at the tool that we have to support in return. We have a number of things around you, dealing with situations in the past and we are going to do more. I also get to sit with premier Notley and hear about how the federal government can be a partner in solving this in a real way.
RB: But they told you they wanted to buy your spoiler, for example.
PMJT: You know, that's what we are happy to see. If that is a proposal that they think is a significant difference, then we are happy to see how it works. I mean we are here to help a partner.
RB: Is the answer, though not really, we already bought a pipeline, what more do you want?
PMJT: We still have a lot of work to get the Line Three. Well, the line Three expansion will come in the third quarter, or fourth quarter next year. This brings a certain amount of relief and the further benefits to a good way on the & # 39; The Trans Mountain will also prevent penalties. But you know, we are working in front of what is the key problem, which we have only one market for Alberta and our prairie oil.
RB: For TMX, of course, you are back, like the federal court, you need to do exactly now, Recording First Nations, with a better dialogue. What do you want to do to build it? Changing the route, better accommodates those first national communities? Are you ready to deal with these things?
PMJT: Absolutely, that is in the heart of what the board of the federal government was. We are a land of respect for the law of law, respect for the constitution, and the court gives us a blueprint and said: you have to do a better job to consult with indigenous communities and you need to have a better Doing business Some of the environmental awareness issues about the safety of # 39; the navy and that's just what we are doing.
We have a land that has many natural resources, but also citizens who are focused on the influence of our development for development in their area, in the future of the future. the children. Right in a straightforward way is just what the court puts a diaspora and what we want to follow.
RB: But because you have already bought, with my tax deduction and each tax deduction, go ahead. It must go in some shapes and by some route, does not it?
PMJT: We could have an existing pipeline and the option to put it forward and we have to follow which court has the way to do this and make the right decision whether it is in the Canadian National government and this is what we are doing.
RB: But you believe it is?
PMJT: I have consistently said we should get our resources to new brands, but we have to make it a good way. The problem that we have had before the previous government for a decade, are not busy with things in the right way. They just wanted to try and do things, and what they did was not done entirely.
Right now, trans transition of Trans Mountain, for example, has had to put a price on pollution and get our own goals. We know that when we get our oil change to new markets, we bring more wealth to afford the transition and innovation, and at the same time, Alberta has chosen to put an absolute cap on oil discharges. Please allow us to reach that goal.
RB: As G GM announced its future closure of the Oshawa auto-plant, you have said that you will be able to get these workers to get their feet. But it comes to me, you know, for that decision, to put people in Alberta, there is so much you can do really. What would you say to those people who have worried that their jobs are a kind of development that the jobs are not often the jobs of future.
RB: What can you do for them?
PMJT: First, especially for those families and people through a terrible cruelty, a terrible time. Oshawa has an extraordinarily long hundred years history with this plant and it's a destructive piece of news that GM has proposed and we continue to work with GM and people to try and see if there is no way forward. But surely, support for these families is above the spirit. We also understand that there are changes in staff, there are changes in & # 39; Consumers' reviews, there are changes in world economy that come with more automation, various delivery options for & # 39; the world, AI.
I know there will always be a role in production in Canada, for high-quality production in Canada, whether the new technology is coming, or improvements to old technology. That focus is what we invest in and therefore our investments in skills, university, stem research, bringing women into employees, these are the things that we are trying to help the Canadians in that transition.
RB: I say that, and you are trying to think about jobs for the future, but GM does not want to stay here, what is that you tell?
PMJT: During the past, GM has deployed significant payments, for example, in an engineering research in Markham, where they work on jobs from the future, they see more electrical car and auto-auto & # 39; ; s. And Canada is part of how they think about the future.
RB: So then why not only say that they have to plant their whole lives and make cars of the future. Why not consider them …
PMJT: This is part of the conversation that goes by. Of course, the president Trump and I sell this in the UE four or five plants. We lose one plant and the Oshawa plant is actually one of them, always, one of the & # 39; the top plant in the world for GM.
So there are real questions about what we are trying to do and ensure that we provide all possible support to these workers.
RB: Why do you sleep on deficit when the economy is doing well? It does not make much sense for people.
PMJT: Until the ten years of the previous government we have in # Over the past few years, growth of low-income and low-employment jobs and we have made a great decision in 2015. We are the only party to invest in Canadians, invest in infrastructure, invest in our communities, spend more money in a pocket of & # 39; the middle class, and that work harder, such as the children of Canada, is the way to grow the economy.
There were many people who were skeptical. Mar wat wy dat eins sjoen hawwe, is dat jild foar de Kanada-berneboek, om de ferheging fan it garandearre ynkommende oanfolling foar ús meast kwetsbere senioaren, ynvestearjen yn ynfrastruktuer dy't in ferskil yn mienskippen makket, dat tekenet yn ynvestearring, strategysk ynvestearrings yn bedriuwen , lowering the barriers to small businesses success, our approach has actually delivered the lowest unemployment rate in 40 years…
PMJT: Has delivered five or six hundred thousand new jobs created over the past three years, and we had the fastest growth in the G7 last year. Our approach to invest, in order to grow the economy, is working and we're going to continue to do that in responsible ways. Every year, our debt as a proportion of our GDP continues to decline. We're the lowest ratio in the G7. We're doing very well.
RB: So you're OK with that broken promise though?
PMJT: We are on a trajectory that demonstrates decreasing deficits and growing economies.
RB: But is that because politicians thinking on issues evolves, that you had a different thought about what the economy could be versus what you wanted to do with it when you got in office, or is that just because you said, this actually isn't that important the deficit?
PMJT: No, we've always said that fiscal responsibility is extraordinarily important and that's something that we've demonstrated with the declining share of our debt as a piece of our GDP.
RB: I know, I guess I'm just trying to understand how you went from saying we're going to have this, we're going to return to balance, then to no longer talking about that. Like what was the thinking for you, where you said to yourself that shouldn't be my focus anymore, we shouldn't be preoccupied with that.
PMJT: The fact that our approach is working, that people are getting, you know, new and better jobs, that our economy is growing, that unemployment is low that Canadians are more confident, not just in their futures, but their kids' futures, means that our approach continues to work, and maintaining that fiscal responsibility, and that fiscal discipline is part and parcel of what we always do.
RB: OK so that's a reasonable answer, but how should Canadians interpret that then? That it's OK to break a promise if you can show that what you've chosen is a better option?
PMJT: Well I think people understand that circumstances change and, for example, all the cuts that the Conservatives made in that last year of their government, cuts to veteran services, cuts to border security, cuts to a significant range of programs, that weakened Canadians, and showed a phony balance and, just in time for the election, that immediately snapped back into a huge deficit, regardless of what we were going to do, people understand that they want a government that is going to adjust to what the needs of the time are. We are very much realizing that our plan of investing in Canadians, of investing in infrastructure, and in their communities, is working to grow our economy and we're going to keep doing it.
RB: Did that trip to India do more harm than good?
PMJT: There was a number of things that came out that were very positive about that trip.
RB: Like what?
PMJT: In terms of investments, in terms of jobs, we're talking about a billion dollars in two-way investment, we're talking about thousands and thousands of jobs across this country created. We saw positive connections between our diaspora communities, but yeah, if I had to redo that trip I would do it very differently.
RB: Would you wear the outfits?
PMJT: No, I probably would not. I think that was a clear. I mean I had more suits on that trip than I had outfits, but the pictures of the outfits dominated and certainly it was a lesson learned.
RB: And the whole attempted murderer showing up at a dinner, I know the report has come out and you're not willing to say much about what was redacted, but it seems to me you at least have a lesson here about how you do these things.
PMJT: Absolutely. On every trip there are lessons to learn, ways to improve how we do things. I mean one of the lessons on this is just how important it is that we have a national security committee of parliamentarians that actually come together, all parties together, and weigh in on these issues.
And the professionalism with which they dug into some very complex issues, and the solutions they put forward are significant aide to our government and to all governments moving forward.
RB: You've said that Canadians should expect the next election to be the nastiest yet. What are you going to do to prevent that?
PMJT: I'm going to continue to demonstrate that positive politics that bring people together, that not engaging in personal attacks, not trying to dumb down and simplify politics so it fits on a bumper sticker or an easy slogan, instead treat Canadians as intelligent, rational citizens who want to be part of the difficult reflections on how we move forward. The challenge with populism, as we've seen it rise over the past three years particularly, is that it sort of takes citizens for fools.
It says, while we can scare them by you know, going into our darkest fears and making political hay out of it, I'm always going to look for ways to bring people together, to involve them in the solutions, and demonstrate that Canadians deserve better than politicians who play the fear and division card every time they can.
RB: Do you practice what you preach?
PMJT: I certainly try to, yeah.
RB: You try to?
PMJT: Yeah absolutely.
RB: Would you admit that there are times when you don't?
PMJT: I will admit that I have occasioned to be critical in ways. I always look for ways to be very fierce about distinctions in policy and calling out the politics of division and fear whenever I see it. I won't make apologies for that, cause I'm going to fight for the democratic principles that we have, and the values of an informed populous.
RB: I'm thinking back to a moment at the beginning of October when we were talking about the Terri-Lynne McClintic issue with the healing lodge, and inside the House of Commons you called the Conservatives ambulance chasing politicians — and it wasn't just in the heat of the moment.
RB: Cause then you came right back out and you said it again. How do you feel about that comment now? Does it reflect who you are as a politician?
PMJT: I think it does because I won't make any apologies for calling out people who use the basest kinds of politics and fears to torque a situation. I mean they…
RB: But how did they do that?
PMJT: Know, knowing…
RB: You've changed the policy.
PMJT: Knowing what we know now.
RB: You've changed the policy subsequent to that.
PMJT: Oh yes we did.
PMJT: But they didn't recognize that they had done exactly the same thing 14 times while they were in office. And the fact that Terri-Lynne McClintic was transferred to a medium security institution under the Conservative government, and she remained in a medium security institution throughout the time that they were criticizing me, showed that they were willing to exploit a horrific tragedy to a family, to a little girl, to try and score cheap political points.
RB: Or they were trying to call attention to an issue that needed to be changed that you subsequently changed…
PMJT: That they consistently ignored, and we didn't change it by suddenly giving the politicians power to classify a criminal. We asked…
RB: No, I understand that.
PMJT: We asked the institution to review its policies to make sure they were right. That was a change that they very much could have made when, if they were so outraged about it, while they were busy doing it.
But they chose to play a level of politics, when they themselves had engaged in exactly that behaviour, in a way that is cynical that I will not apologize for calling out the politics of cynicism, of fear, of division, of anger, of hatred.
RB: Yeah but that's not what you did, you called them a name back, ambulance chasing politicians. I just wonder whether you think you should have said something different now.
PMJT: I think it's extremely important to point out when people are playing the basest kinds of politics. And the fact that I am calling out Conservatives on the way they play politics with horrific tragedies to do fundraising, and to try and score cheap points. I'm willing to do it.
RB: After you made the decision to change the healing lodge.
PMJT: Listen, their decision to move forward and to make this an issue on the back of a terrible tragedy was something that would require to call them out.
RB: But you changed the policy, like, it worked.
PMJT: What worked was we actually asked Corrections Canada to review their entire policy. We didn't change that one case. We didn't weigh in the way politics…
RB: No, I understand but it forced you to look at the policy and in that way the opposition was doing its job. Whether you like the language they used is beside the point.
PMJT: I think there's two things.
First of all, yes, it is an opposition's job and responsibility to challenge, to call out, to say you should do things differently, you can do things differently.
PMJT: That's really important. But if they do it by exacerbating the polarization, the anger, the fear within electorate, we start to walk down a very, very dangerous path. And I am always going to be very firm and unequivocal about calling out nastiness and negativity to that level in politics.
And if you take…
PMJT: The comment I made and put it up against the kind of ugly rhetoric that they put forward, you'll see that my comment was actually very mild. But you know, as we often see, there is a habit amongst those particular practitioners of negative politics to have very thin skins when things are turned around on them.
RB: Have you learned anything about your temperament in this job?
I have some observations, but I'll let you go first.
PMJT: Yeah. I'm extremely passionate about standing for what I believe to be the truth and believe in my values. And I get offended when people rely on falsehoods, and I get irritated when people try and play fast and loose with facts, or ignore facts entirely. I think that is weakening not just to our governance, but to our institutions and to our democracy.
RB: You're scrappy.
PMJT: I can be.
RB: Would you say?
PMJT: I'm not going to, you know, sit by meekly as people weaken our institutions and our democracy.
RB: And what is the difference between being scrappy and being full of sunny ways? Because that's not something you say very much anymore and maybe it's just a reality of governing. I don't particularly love the expression anyway, but is there a difference between that, or can you be scrappy and still positive?
PMJT: I think, absolutely.
PMJT: I think I can and I think I do. I mean, I always look for ways to bring people together. I look for ways to solve solutions. I look for ways [to] solve problems, I look for ways to listen to people and make sure we are consulting and engaging in thoughtful ways. Now it usually requires me to give a longer answer to a complex question than someone who's just looking for an easy populist answer, but I'm always going to be ready to argue a given point.
RB: Do you think though that you're a better politician than the Conservatives? I mean it seems that to me that you're sort of putting yourself on a different level than them and I wonder if that's not a little dismissive of the people who believe the things they're saying, because there's a lot of them.
PMJT: I'm always willing to have a debate on the facts, to look at counter-proposals. But what we're not seeing from the opposition, whether it's on climate or even on economic policy is much of a plan, or an explanation of how they would do things differently. So we're not actually debating on the substance of what we're doing, they tend to go to name calling and a challenge around, you know, personal attacks rather than actually debating the substance of what we're putting forward.
RB: Do you think are a patient person?
PMJT: It depends on the context. If I'm spending time with a Canadian who has questions about what we're doing, I have a tremendous amount of patience. If I'm in a situation where I'm engaging with someone who should know better and chooses to believe that the earth is flat, or that climate change is not man made, then I will be a little more impatient because I feel that is a choice that they're making that is impacting negatively on our ability to come together and actually solve the big problems we're facing.
RB: So you probably don't have good chats with the president then?
PMJT: No, I've had excellent conversations with…
RB: You must be impatient with him though.
PMJT: I've had good conversations with the president.
RB: Do you think that sometimes you are perceived as trivial or superficial? I'll give you examples. The outfits in India certainly gave that perception. The tweet on the weekend to Trevor Noah about the $50 million dollars.
PMJT: Yeah but see, but that's an interesting one, because of course when you make a spending decision like that, there's weeks of reflection on whether or not this is the right thing to do. Because our political opponents don't particularly like the way we announced it, they find themselves opposed to investing money in some of the most vulnerable kids around the world.
RB: No, I don't know that they're opposed to that. I think they're opposed to the trivial nature in which it was announced. Like why do you have to…
PMJT: Would they prefer I have a big novelty cheque like the Conservatives used to do?
RB: No, but tagging a celebrity, what's the benefit of that as prime minister?
PMJT: Well one of the challenges is if we were to put out a press conference in the Ottawa press theatre that says 'we're sending $50 million dollars to education cannot wait to invest in the most impoverished and vulnerable kids in the world,' that might not have actually reached as much of an audience as for example than [a] celebrity engaged down in South Africa.
RB: Yeah, I would argue you stepped on your own message though by doing that.
PMJT: Well, I think a lot more people know that Canada is actually stepping up and helping vulnerable people around the world. And there are always lessons to be learned about this, but I'm not going to make apologies for actually doing it and for making sure that we're looking for different ways of communicating that message.
RB: OK, so I'll leave this part on this. Do you ever worry that brand Trudeau… I was in New York last week and I wandered into a store and there was cups with your name on it, and socks, and all sorts of things. It was very strange to be in New York and all that stuff is there.
I'm sure it's stranger for you. Do you ever worry that brand Trudeau sort of overtakes what you're trying to say and do, which I think to you is more important?
PMJT: I think what we're seeing around interest in Canada on the world stage doesn't have as much to do with me as it does to do with what Canadians have been doing on the world stage for years and for generations. Yes, there's a moment where for all sorts of different reasons, including, you know, social media skills, that Canada is being noticed a little bit more, but the fact that is a positive aspirational impact on so many people around the world…
RB: But it's your face attached to it.
PMJT: Is due to our values.
RB: It's not the, the flag, or it's not, you know, anybody else.
PMJT: You know, there's a mix of things associated with it and if we can do a better job of highlighting what Canada is doing on the world stage, and how what we're doing at home with things like the, the Canada Child Benefit that's making such a big difference. then people will look and say, 'OK, they've got a solution to some of the really sticky problems that we're facing all around the world.'
RB: Thank you, thank you for your time.
PMJT: Thank you very much Rosie.