Carney questioned over hot mic moment calling Premier Smith 'stupid'

Ajouté : 2026-06-01

[00:00:00]What do you think of referendums in general, Stock?

[00:00:02]>> Well, there should be a place for them.

[00:00:04]It's um things can be accomplished through a referendum that maybe can't be accomplished in other ways. One of the main things it does, it's it's it's like a a pressure valve and it allows people to at least ask a question. Anytime you say to I'm talking whether you're talking about raising your kids and you say you can't ask that question or if you get to university and the prop says you can't ask that question, which actually happens quite a bit today.

[00:00:29]Anytime you tell somebody who's really burning up to ask a question to shut up and you can't ask the question, you're just going to create huge problems.

[00:00:39]There has to be a way for questions to be put. Referenda are a valid way of doing that. Structured along certain guidelines and they should be permitted.

[00:00:48]>> You know, I think um sometimes politicians throw prickly questions to the courts precisely so they can avoid having to make a decision. Now the courts always tilt one way. So it's something liberals love to do. But in a way a referendum is the same get off the hook for a politician. They could say I'm gonna this is a tough one. This is a big momentous thing. I'm not going to arrogate unto myself the decision. I'm going to let ordinary people do it. And uh I I think the reason why so many in the elite commentary in Canada like I just think of Andrew Coin and shut up he explained like that. That's what you're talking about. stock just telling people to shut up and and calling names. It's it's not going to persuade people. I think if anything, it's a safety valve for prickly issues. I mean, remember, it's not just uh independence that's on the ballot. Danielle Smith is putting immigration questions on the ballot, and that's something that every single pollster for 10 years or more has said people want lower numbers, but no politician in office has seemed to done it. What a great way to air out that question. And so politicians don't have to be the bad guy. Uh I I don't know.

[00:02:00]Are there any other Does anyone know?

[00:02:01]Are there other provinces that have referendum or citizen initiative laws on the books? I think BC might, but I could be wrong on that. Do you guys know?

[00:02:12]>> Well, I know >> BC. Yeah. Go ahead, sir. Go ahead.

[00:02:14]>> No, I was just going to say I know for sure Saskatchewan does. However, unlike Alberta, theirs is non-binding. So, and the bar to get your referendum question on the ballot is very high, almost insurmountable. The last one they had, Lisa, correct me if I'm wrong, I think it was on debt.

[00:02:32]>> Yes. Yes. On debt and debt spending. And of course, naturally, uh, that did pass, but then they continued debt spending because it's non-binding. So if the people of Saskatchewan want a voice in their future, our friend Scott Mo in Saskatchewan should consider making a referendum non-binding and also lowering the bar so that putting a ballot question to the people is not so ownorous the way it is there now. Sorry.

[00:03:01]>> No. And there's really there's there's no good argument for it. Sheila Gunreed.

[00:03:04]There's no good Sorry, Stockwell Day.

[00:03:06]You go ahead. I'm going to defer to you.

[00:03:08]>> No, no, you've got better insights on this more recent than I. I I just want to reflect something Ezra said also it's really important here on the judiciary.

[00:03:18]The original intent in uh constitutional u democracies like Canada's like the US is to have a balance of powers. So you've got uh an executive branch which is basically your cabinet. You've got the elected group which is basically your legislators or house of commons and you've got the judiciary. And that's that's actually done on the premise that people will not always make the right thing. People will not always do the right thing. You cannot trust one level of government. That is a very good healthy perspective to have. And that's why there's a balance of powers. But it gets imbalanced when you have the judiciary that completely abandons the original intent of the uh balance of powers is when all at the end of the line the question whatever it might be would go to judges who would make a decision based on what was the original intent. Now I realize a lot of people and uh uh Ezra quite rightly mentioned uh these pontificators who roll their eyes you know when we the uh the mere masses discuss these things like original intent but that was the purpose of it. A judge or judges would then decide well based on the whether they like it or not based on the original intent this law can stand or it can't.

[00:04:33]And when you have judges defying that, as the recent judicial decision in in Alberta, or as the one just recently in Ontario, which says the it's it's actually a constitutional right for you to have an encampment in a downtown city and not be moved. When we get insane rulings that have nothing to do with original intent, you get a lot of unrest and it brings even more into light the need for referenda.

[00:04:58]>> You know, you're so right. I mean, this one lone judge in Alberta, and it is relevant that that judge was appointed by Justin Trudeau, and it is relevant that that judge is originally from New Brunswick. I've got nothing against New Brunswick, and I think there's a place for liberals in society, believe it or not, but but just simply to have 700,000 petition signers. Remember, 300,000 who signed the independence petition led by Mitch Sylvester and 400,000 who signed a pro Albert, I mean, there's pro- Canada one. So these 700,000 people want a referendum. At least at least that many more who didn't sign it for sure. And one judge says, "No, I've invented I've discovered a new indigenous veto on I mean these people hadn't even done anything other than say, hey, I'd like a discussion." No, shut up. She explained you're not allowed. And and by the way, this goes this feeds the underlying grievance of Alberta, which suggests that there's a two tier system in Canada because Quebec has had two uh independence referendums and none of this was was thrown at them. Um to his credit, the Parti Kebqua, that's the provincial separatist party in Quebec, uh had a comment about this and I think it's a good time to play that clip, Olivia. Uh uh and by the way, our Alexa Lavois had a 1-hour sitdown with the Parti Kebbequa leader. So I appreciate him giving us the time of talking to us.

[00:06:22]I think it was an excellent interview.

[00:06:23]Without further ado, here's the clip of Mr. Pleon.

[00:06:28]>> I don't I don't think we heard uh your reaction since Daniel Smith announced that she'll start the process for a future and potential referendum. How do you react about this?

[00:06:39]>> Uh what's happening in Alberta? I'm surprised at what Carney said. Mark Carney seemed to be willing to give many things to Alberta in exchange for some peace.

[00:06:53]And I think the premier of Alberta, Daniel Smith, is just doing her job as a premier saying that uh of course they are free to consult their population and of course they're a parliament free of making any laws that they deem fit fit that the deem fit to uh for their objectives. So for Mark Carney to all of a sudden uh start saying that uh it's a bluff, it's dangerous, I think it's really out of out of line and I'm I'm not sure where that is heading. But make me let me make clear that in the case of Quebec uh our laws are clear. The historic uh the history of the two referendums are very clear. We are free to consult our population at any time and there's no blackmail or any comment that will change that principle and I'm pretty sure that it's the same reasoning in Alberta right now.

[00:07:47]>> I mean again he's just saying I can talk to my people, they can petition me and no judge is going to stop it. And I think that's that would be called normal democracy. He was referring to a few comments by Mark Carney and let me just play a couple more vids and then we'll go back to our super duper panel.

[00:08:02]Olivia, can you play the first one there where Carney says the referendum about a referendum is not binding? And I am frustrated that Danielle Smith watered it down to two referendums in a row. I don't think that makes any sense. I don't I don't think it was justified, but she did it. Here's Mark Carney saying the whole thing's a joke. Take a listen.

[00:08:23]>> I gave I gave a very I gave a Sorry, just to be clear. Um the because it is a question about a question. I mean it's uh it it it doesn't it's not a b it's explicit in the question that it's not a binding referendum. This is what I expected. But I uh you know as I said uh in French that um as prime minister on issues particularly issues of a constitutional nature I like to make sure I have the uh official advice before which is why yesterday I was careful in terms of my no it is not uh it is not for under a clarity act it is absolutely not and I would just recommend that you read the clarity act. very clear. Not surprisingly, the Clarity Act is very clear and a termination uh and there's a series of conditions which I responded in the House uh for the record. Thank you.

[00:09:11]>> So, a big win from Mark Carney. Um I don't know what Danielle Smith got in return. And just one more. Um Mark Carney had a hot mic incident where it sounds like he was calling Danielle Smith >> stupid or at least her ideas stupid. And I mean we listen we know he sneers at the West. Uh we know he sneers at democracy. I mean, it's quite something to take lectures on democracy from someone who did not get a majority government. Voters deemed he should only have a minority government, but he undermined that election by bribing and giving gifts and promises to MPs to make them cross the floor. Uh, so it I don't really think that we should take lessons from Carney on democracy, but here he is referring to a a moment captured by I think it was CTV where he was saying Danielle Smith is stupid for not letting the judge kill this thing. Take a listen.

[00:10:02]>> Yeah, Prime Minister, I'm hoping you can clarify some remarks that you made after the scrum on Monday. When you were leaving the press conference, you spoke with Minister Robertson, and I want to read what you set out. What are you doing? This is stupid. You've got an offramp. Take it. That to me sounds like you're talking about Daniel Smith and the Alberta referendum question.

[00:10:20]>> I'm talking to Minister Robertson.

[00:10:21]>> But can you can you clarify what you you were discussing in that point in time because the the scrum was about what the Smith had done.

[00:10:27]>> No, it was about Minister Robertson. I have um uh I think uh if if I'm going to I'm going to take your question uh about uh the relationship with Canada and Alberta, Canada and the federal government and uh and the provinces and we're we practice cooperative federalism. Uh we work together. What we're f focused on is making the federation work. Uh we're doing that with Alberta uh with respect to a variety of aspects of energy. It's much more than a pipeline. It's nuclear. Uh it's interconnects with British Columbia. It's a new industry of carbon capture. It's restarting the renewable market. Uh it's getting a carbon market that actually works that other provinces can be able to join so we can broaden out a national carbon market. That's what we're doing there. We're here uh talking about defense industrial strategy, the benefits of the announcement we just made uh around the negotiations uh led by Secretary of State.

[00:11:23]>> Okay, we don't need any more of this baffle gab. His real answer was laughing for about 30 seconds straight and then he just pivoted to talking about >> uh the new carbon capture industry and a carbon market that really works. Those are not real things by the way. That's exactly what Enron got in trouble for.

[00:11:43]It's just trading BS, trading hot air.

[00:11:46]Um there is no such thing as a market for carbon. I'm exhaling it right now.

[00:11:50]Plants inhale it. It's naturally occurring. there's there's there makes no economic sense to pipe to spend $10 billion pumping CO2 into the ground.

[00:11:58]It's just it's a madeup thing. Um so it's sort of weird that he pivots from let me laugh at Danielle Smith for a solid 30 seconds and then tell you the ways I'm undermining Alberta. It just just tremendously disrespectful stock day. I'm wondering is Mark Carney's tone um the right one to convince Albertans.

[00:12:20]I mean, listen, right now the polls say Albertans would would not vote for independence, but there's a big chunk between 30 and 40% right now who say they would. Um Mark Carney, I think, is an elitist who hasn't really spent any time in Canada for 20 years. And um he naturally scoffs at questions he doesn't like, people he doesn't like, especially doesn't do well with women he doesn't like. What do you make of his tone towards Daniel Smith? Yeah, he was clearly caught off guard and it was he was his parliamentary pants were down there. He was clearly exposed as thinking that Daniel Smith and the approach he's taking is a joke. He couldn't stop his nervous laughter as you said for 30 seconds and then just a stream of totally extraneous items that had nothing to do with the question. The fact is 1995 we know there was a vote in Quebec and it was 50.6% decided of Quebecers decided to stay. By the way, that clip you just played from the Quebec Quebec minister is brilliant.

[00:13:19]That's 100% the position. Provinces has the right to decide these. After the 95, then a reference was sent to the Supreme Court in 98. That was called the Quebec reference. And the Quebec reference didn't say uh whether a province could ask a question. They they said if a province is going to ask a question, here's some things they should take into consideration. That made resulted in the Clarity Act in 2000. The Clarity Act lays out some things that says here's what Parliament will have to consider after a vote has been taken. There is no suggestion a vote cannot be taken.

[00:13:55]There's no suggestion that whether it's First Nations or any other nation can stop a vote. Provinces have the right to ask questions. Parliament may decide on those questions if they like them or not, but provinces have the right to put those questions in a referendum.

[00:14:12]Alberta is at a crossroads. For years, I've heard the frustration. I've felt it, too. But frustration doesn't build a country. Preparation does.

[00:14:26]In my new book, Independence Blueprint: What Alberta Can Learn from Quebec, I break down the hard mechanics of sovereignty, what we can learn from Quebec's 1995 referendum, the research that's already been done, and what would actually come next for a free Alberta.

[00:14:44]There's the constitutional process, currency, pensions, continuity of services, trade, resource control, indigenous partnership, and international recognition. These aren't slogans. This isn't fantasy. These are just hard facts and serious preparation.

[00:15:00]Whether Alberta stays or goes, we need to understand the stakes. Head over to buy your copy today at independencebloopprint.ca.

[00:15:08]Let's be prepared because our time is now.