Weekly Wrap: Carney conquers NATO's 2% target. What now?

Hi, I'm Darina, co-founder of Quo.

If you run a business, you know the team that responds first

wins the customer.

You've probably opened your phone to a bunch of missed calls

and no voicemails.

Those are missed opportunities, and exactly why we built Quo.

Quo is the business phone system that helps your team

handle every call and text right away.

Join over 90,000 businesses that win more customers with Quo.

Try Quo for free at Quo.com slash tech.

This is a CBC podcast.

Hey, I'm JP Tasker in for David on another Saturday of the weekly rep.

This week Canada finally meets NATO's 2% defense spending target.

We moved our tech school to that plant, and we achieved it as we predicted

as we wanted to by March 31st.

The April 1st deadline for an agreement that could lead to a new pipeline

is fast approaching.

We're making good progress with Alberta's more to be done,

but we're making very good progress.

And the auditor general says Ottawa's international student program

is failing to crack down on fraud, prompting calls from the opposition

to fire the immigration minister and her predecessors.

Will the current liberal prime minister take responsibility?

Fire that minister, the justice minister, and the immigration minister.

There's a lot to get to, so let's do it.

Joining me now, Zayn Belgy is a former strategist for the Alberta NDP.

Rachel Siegel is a former director of policy in the Harper government,

and here with me, Laura DiAngelo, was an advisor to former prime minister, Justin Trudeau.

Hi guys, nice to see you all on this Friday.

As always, I see your bright and shining faces.

Let's start with the big news at the end of the week.

Canada finally hit NATO's 2% GDP spending target.

I spoke to defense minister David McGinty about the milestone yesterday.

Here's what he had to say about that and what comes next.

We moved our texture on that plan and we achieved it as we predicted

as we wanted to by March 31st.

So now we're laying track for the second phase of the plan,

which is to increase that spending and to build on the investments

we're making right across the country, not just the pay raise,

but rebuilding, re-arming, rebooting, really, the Canadian Armed Forces.

Laura, we have been talking about this for a long time, right?

2014 was when they first made this commitment and this week they headed.

Is it a big milestone?

It's a huge milestone and it's, you know, particularly for minister McGinty,

but the prime minister, this is a, like, promise made, promise kept moment.

And it's a really big deal for them.

I think, especially with, you know, the budget getting royal ascent this week,

a whole pile of big things happen.

This is really important and it is important from a global foreign policy perspective

as well at this moment in time with the way the world is going.

There is illiteral war happening that we're hearing about every day.

There's a trade war happening.

It is important that Canada is aligned with our allies,

particularly our NATO allies and contributing in ways that those allies,

like the NATO Secretary General,

seize as meaningful and important as we move forward.

Zane?

I mean, only in politics and public policy do we call it a spending accomplishment.

That's very funny, right?

Because, like, I don't think we call it a spending accomplishment

on our own personal budgets at home.

But to be clear, yes, it's an accomplishment because of how difficult it was

to spend that money, find the right things to spend that money.

We still need to see, frankly, where that money is going.

And if it's being spent on things that functionally make Canadians feel safer

at the end of the day,

but we're not in that era right now.

This is in the get the money out the door.

We're doing something on defense.

At least it's not the true no era of being millymouthed on this file.

Cardying was resolute on it.

So we're actually giving this government a pass.

But there is something to be said about the fact that at the end of the day

on this particular file, Canadians have two things to consider.

Number one, does this spending and its trade-offs make them feel safer?

And number two, does it make them feel safer in a world where our greatest

threat might be the United States?

And I say that with a bit of hyperbole, because I do not believe there are

greatest threat, but there are most immediate threat with their imperialist

expansionist rhetoric, especially as it relates to my province,

which I'm selfish about talking with Alberta separatism as a core topic of

discussion.

So yes, this is a massive accomplishment, but there is this added

weirdness in the air about, but does this actually accomplish what might be

the safety, security, integrity, cyber impact threat in front of us?

Which is the United States?

Rachel, what do you make?

I mean, a lot of this new spending, how we got there was pay raises for the

troops, which is perfectly fine, not taking anything away from that.

And it was rolling in the Canadian Coast Guard.

Like a lot of things that don't necessarily boost the military's

capabilities.

And that was certainly the criticism we heard from the conservatives this

week.

Oh, absolutely.

And you know, the real goal here in what we look at NATO targets is

ensuring that our troops have the capabilities that they need in order

to perform their work.

And so yes, great that we're paying our military more.

Absolutely.

We still need submarines.

We still need tanks.

We still need guns.

There's times of equipment that are so outdated and so needed 10 years

ago that now we're still talking about it as we're hitting a 2% target

and sitting next to Albania in terms of the amount of spending that we

are making towards our military.

And so I think it's an accomplishment for the current government.

And I absolutely will give them that, but I think that we as Canadians

also need to think about that defense question.

And if we're in an era where we are looking to invest and protect the

country, what point do we need to get to in terms of spending NATO

spending in order to accomplish that?

Because 2% and still being one of the lowest spenders in the world on

NATO is not really the ultimate goal here.

The ultimate goal would to be making meaningful investments.

Yeah, and it was that 2.0% figure.

It was nothing higher, nothing less.

Right on the money, 2.0, no 2.1 for Canada.

Okay, that's how it's going to go.

Okay, let's move on to our next topic.

One deadline met another deadline approaching Ottawa and Alberta's

April for his deadline on a series of agreements that could unlock approval

for a new oil pipeline to the West Coast.

The two governments did reach an agreement in principle on methane emissions

this week, but that's just one of the many steps.

Here's what the Prime Minister had to say about it today.

Our strategy with Alberta has been to go right to the heart of the issue,

which is the pipeline.

But what else comes with the pipeline pathways and actual carbon market

that works?

We're making good progress with Alberta.

There's more to be done, but we're making very good progress.

Zane, the Prime Minister seems pretty optimistic.

And he needs to be, frankly, I'd say the political dynamics of this situation

have fundamentally changed.

This seemed to be at the start of it, I agree with the Prime Minister,

attack the subject matter, but also if we were going to fail on this

as a collective federal provincial strategy, let's just fail fast, right?

If Alberta wasn't going to meet on the climate front,

like let's just get that over with.

If they weren't going to find a proponent for a pipeline,

let's just get that over with so we can move on.

It really seemed to have the drum beat of everything else

Karni was doing in that era, like a couple months ago.

What's changed is separatism is at an all-time high in terms of popularity

and its movement towards being more viable,

although it's still polling in that 20 to 30 percent range,

but creating those massive fractures within Alberta

might be irreparable regardless of the electoral outcome of a referendum,

which means that the Prime Minister's main sort of antidote against separatism

and giving Canada and by extension, Alberta,

what it wants and needs from an economic and energy security perspective,

is making sure these now succeed.

So the maths has changed for rather than I'm going to put a flyer out there,

see if it flies, get celebrated for the announcement,

but if it doesn't go ahead, we'll let the Premier wear it to now.

We actually both need this to succeed because the future of the country may be at stake

with a basket of energy projects that might be originating in Alberta.

Laura, we could have two pipelines because now there's this talk of

reviving Keystone XL.

Minister Hodgson spoke to his American counterpart this week in Texas,

making the case for the Americans to prove the permits

for what is required to get that through the United States.

Now we have this pipeline to the Pacific potentially coming as a result of this MOU.

We're in a very different place than we were a year ago on this file.

A very different place, and I want to, yes, and sayings,

really, really important point about Alberta separatism.

You also have to layer a couple of other things onto that.

You now also layer on the Iran War, and gas prices,

and instability worldwide for oil and gas, right?

You layer on Kusma negotiations,

and frankly, the leverage that we have when you start talking about Keystone XL,

and you start talking about other pipelines,

and other things we can offer the US,

particularly given the war in Iran.

And then on top of that, you move to the political side,

which is Karni has largely staked his political future

on getting things built, changing the economy,

diversifying it, building major projects.

And so now we're talking about two,

and it is no longer just about to Zane's various two-point,

putting the pressure on Premier Smith and Alberta,

they are now tied together,

and he really needs this to succeed,

at least a few more steps along the way.

Yeah, Rachel, we're hearing the Trans Mountain pipeline,

too, is expected to actually be operating at full capacity

as a result of what's going on in the Middle East.

There is a big demand for Canadian oil.

It could actually get even more so based on what we're seeing

in the region.

A lot of oil supplies potentially offline,

the Strait Hormuz still clogged up,

and then LNG, I mean, it's a huge issue

with Qatar taking its supplies offline.

Canada could potentially cash in as a result of this war.

I know it's not really a great look to cheerlead a war.

Obviously, that's not what we're doing,

but the economic potential that could come about for this country

if this war does really disrupt some of those supplies,

potentially very big.

Yeah, absolutely, but this is an argument

that we could have made years ago

about the economic potential of this country.

Now, as a British Colombian,

paying $2.15 a liter for gas,

I would agree with you even more.

But there's only one person in the entire country

that can build a pipeline, and that's Mark Kerney.

I mean, C5, the bill made that even more

of the case, as we saw him have now powers

to put forward this project and make it happen

and really create that economic impact in the country.

In terms of Keystone, I mean, that would be wonderful.

Conservatives have loved the idea of Keystone for a long time.

The question is, at this moment in time,

are we going to focus our efforts on Donald Trump

and the United States and getting oil flowing to the south?

I mean, that's great, but we also need to look

within our own borders and really push pumps to shove

ensure that the Prime Minister is also working to ensure

that we are taking oil out of the ground

and moving it across our own country

in terms of that economic benefit.

Zane, what do you make of Cory Hogan,

the parliamentary secretary to the Minister of Natural Resources,

telling me that Keystone XL could be a card to play

in the negotiations with the United States?

He says, yeah, maybe we want this pipeline,

but maybe we want it more because Trump wants it

even more than we do.

Yeah, the viability there of Keystone XL kind of makes sense,

although there's elements on it, unlike the climate map,

the indigenous rights issues that we've never

really changed fundamentally.

But yeah, the pre-approval status down south

and also the fact that this was greenlit even from our side

in some notional sense is actually quite important.

Card to be played versus actual viable infrastructure

is our two very different things.

So if Keystone XL is being traded

in Kuzma negotiations for something that benefits,

let's say Southern Ontario,

oh, that's a very different ballgame.

Then if Keystone XL is going to actually have a pathway

to viability and be built,

because those regional politics, you know,

despite the fact that we're one Canada one team,

you know, putting aside everything I said

about Alberta separatism for a second,

those still matter.

And so card to be played potentially,

but also, like, let's be clear,

it needs to be card to be played in order for it to get built.

That new thing?

Yeah, we've got it.

The Drop by G and C,

bringing you all the newness that matters,

handpicked by the pros who actually know what's up

and what's proven to work.

We keep you on top of the trends

and dialed into what's next,

whether you're crushing it at the gym,

leveling up your game or thriving every day.

The Drop by G and C is where the latest solutions

in health and wellness lay in first.

Non-stop innovation and fresh finds daily.

Explore what's new and what's next

on The Drop by G and C.

Hi, I'm Jamie Poisson, host of the Daily News podcast,

Frontburner.

I got this really cool note from a listener the other day.

They wrote,

I find myself torn between the desire

to understand the world around me

and the anxiety associated with the easily access

barrage of terrible news.

And yet, amidst the torrent,

there lies a sweet spot called Frontburner.

This is exactly why we make the show.

So you don't get swept away

in a tide of overwhelming news.

So follow Frontburner wherever you get your podcasts.

All right, let's move on to our next topic.

The author General said this week

that Canada's Immigration Department is dropping the ball

and dealing with rampant fraud

in the International Student Program.

It led to calls from the opposition

for the Prime Minister to take charge

and fire the ministers responsible.

Only 3% of the 150,000 cases of suspected fraud

were investigated at all.

Will the current Liberal Prime Minister take responsibility?

Fire that minister, the Justice Minister

and the Immigration Minister.

Rachel, I know you want to weigh on this one.

What do you make of what we learned from the author, General?

And why is Polly Ev calling for three ministers

to get fired over it?

Well, I think Polly Ev is asking

who holds the blame here.

I mean, this is years of the degradation

of our immigration system.

And now the AG's report just highlights

how much fraud was within that system

and how the system that's in place

has not been able to tackle that.

And so I think, like I've said before,

a lot of Canadians are asking who's to blame

for these issues that are clearly highlighted in the report.

And when you look for the people to blame,

they're sitting on the front bench

of Mark Carney's government.

And a lot, so Pierre Paulier came out this week

and rightfully said,

there's no point in letting these ministers

fall upwards, fail upwards.

There should be held accountable

for the fraud and the mismanagement

of a major system within the country

that has impacted many aspects

of Canadian society over the last 10 years.

And so I think Polly Ev, rightfully,

asked those tough questions this week.

Zane?

Yeah, so from the minister's perspective,

listen, this is an embattled minister.

This is not the first time that her name has made headlines

in terms of accountability on her file.

It also opens up into a question about a government.

If it is serious, both on an enforcement level

but also immigration level to follow through

on some of its actions,

which is helpful to Polly Ev from a pure politics perspective

because you could sense that he's sniffing out immigration

as his next big file to try to make hay out of

and consistently march to that drumbeat.

But I will say there is another added component here

as our politicians debate this,

which is the international students.

Those young people from foreign lands

who mortgage so much of their future,

paid high fees, followed the rules

and now look like they're a problem to be managed

rather than people trying to build upon a dream

that many of the folks that from their communities

and from their places that they've come from

have built in Canada.

And that has that strain of hitting on people

over and over and over again.

Despite how resilient they are, matters.

And it matters both from a cultural perspective

around who we are as a country

and what we do in terms of the minority folks

who want to come here and imagine a better future

and a better life.

But also in an era of increased Islamophobia,

anti-Semitism, South Asian hate,

this only further perpetuates by pointing

fingers at very specific groups of people.

And my warning sign is only to any politician

that wants to go down this path

is to be careful about what you do in the people

and the human cost that comes with going down

some of the very attractive rhetoric on this particular file.

Laura, quick thought to you

before we move on to our look ahead.

I'm glad Zayn covered all of that

because that was something that was on my mind.

Was we have to be so careful about demonizing these students

because it's actually not fair to them, right?

And they are not the problem.

Also, we do have to ground ourselves in fact, too.

The numbers, particularly of international students,

have dropped significantly.

Those were policies started exactly,

started by Minister Miller actually

back under Justin Trudeau and have continued.

They're down 60% from the 2024-25 numbers.

And that's really significant.

And so while today for Pierre Paulier

from a political perspective was, you know,

he got lots of fodder for Tazane's point.

What I think is probably the next thing he wants to tap on.

It also isn't fully attached to what's currently happening

with them. It's from before.

It's from a couple of years past.

It's an audit of what happened.

Right, for sure. Good point.

Let's do look ahead.

Rachel, what are you watching for?

I'm watching for this weekend.

The time is finally here.

The NDP race is finally over.

It's been going on for what feels like 10 years.

We will know who the next federal leader of the NDP is soon enough.

And I'm very excited to see whether or not

this race comes down to Avi Lewis or a Heather McPherson.

Both in my mind are still in this race.

It's not over.

And what that means for the party,

whether or not it's Heather sitting in the house or Avi

who doesn't have his seat and where the party will go

with their policies going forward under that new leader.

So I think it's a really exciting time,

not only for the NDP, but for the country to kind of see

where everybody's placed on the political spectrum after the weekend.

Zane, what are you watching for a year?

The guy who's dialed in with these folks?

What do you think is going to happen?

So if it is a Lewis victory,

which seems to suggest is the probabilistic outcome of Sunday,

then what I'm looking ahead to is the next 48 hours following.

And in more particularly what the provincial leaders of

BC Manitoba, who by the way, new Democrats,

governing new Democrats,

Alberta and Saskatchewan and Nenshi in back in addition

to EB and canoe, who I just mentioned.

What did they say?

Because I'm not sure they're loving an Avi Lewis leadership

at the federal NDP.

There's already bad blood in British Columbia.

Nenshi's already said to the NDP to stay out of his business

and not ruin his chances.

What does it say for the future of the NDP?

But more specifically, what are the comments and the directionality

that these four either in government or very viable

to form government leaders in the provincial apparatus of the NDP?

What do they say?

What do they do immediately following a potential Lewis victory?

Zane, is there a reason?

Nahad Nenshi is not in Winnipeg this weekend?

Oh, I wonder why.

No, I think it is very clear in terms of the association

of Avi Lewis, the federal NDP,

and the viable pathway for the Alberta NDP and Alberta

that oil and water seems to be an analogy that may work there.

Yeah, what do you make of this like dynamic zane?

Because we've heard this criticism all show for the last two hours

is that there is tension between the federal NDP

led by Avi Lewis potentially and the provinces.

Like, it's just not necessarily a great dynamic

because he has been critical of the Alberta NDP government

because he had the past one.

He's been critical of the current BC NDP government

especially on issues like LNG.

There's tension there.

It's not necessarily all harmonious.

No, and you know, in the past, it used to be

where like, if you would tell Jeremy saying,

don't come here, you know, you get the political reality.

We get the political reality.

I can't be seen in a photo with you.

You know, you can't be circulating around the room

because of what you believe.

And, you know, they generally be like, yeah, we get it.

But I'm not sure that's the case with Avi Lewis.

I feel like this is a guy who wants to impose his world view

in every corner of this country.

And the tension is not just one way, it's both ways.

Like, I think as to your point,

he's been critical of the provincial brethren

and the cousins and the provincial sort of apparatus.

It's not just a one-way stay away from here.

You believe stuff.

It's no, I disagree with what you believe

and how you've been successful in these places.

Alberta, BC, Manitoba, Saskatchewan.

And that is inherently a very different type of tension

that the party may have to navigate come Sunday.

Laura, very quickly, what are you looking for?

Mine is totally different than the NDP leadership race.

There's been a lot of chatter in Ottawa over the past month

about what's going to happen with the online harm's legislation

and where the Prime Minister is headed with this.

And this week there were landmark cases in California

and New Mexico proving that there was intentional harm

created into these platforms for kids.

I think you had the BCA-G on this week as well, talking.

What's the ban?

Yeah, she wants a ban.

So I'm actually watching to see where that goes this week.

I don't think it will be a quiet week

on the online harm's front.

That is a great one to put on our radar.

Okay, let's see what they're there.

Thank you so much for the weekly rap panel.

Zane Vellgi, Rachel Siegel, Laura D'Angelo.

That's it for today.

If you like this episode, please follow the pod

and catch our next live show on CBC News Network.

We're on weekdays at 5 p.m. Eastern.

I'm J.P. Tasker.

Thanks for listening.

For more CBC podcasts, go to cbc.ca slash podcasts.