At Issue | What Carney’s G7 invite list says about his priorities

...At Issue this week: Minister Mark Carney invites Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman to the G7 summit. Canada gets a defence spending boost. And how close are we to a trade deal with the U.S.? At Issue is Canada's most-watched political panel, hosted by CBC Chief Political Correspondent Rosemary Barton and featuring leading political journalists Chantal Hebert, Andrew Coyne and Althia Raj.

....

TRANSCRIPT 

at issue tonight the G7 summit world

0:03

leaders coming to Alberta to discuss big

0:05

global issues canada is hosting global

0:08

leaders for a global conversation about

0:12

numerous issues energy security peace

0:14

and stability but there are concerns

0:17

even within the Liberal caucus about

0:19

some of the invitations to nonG7 leaders

0:22

india has to be accountable they have to

0:24

give assurance that they are going to

0:26

cooperate

0:29

so what's been made of some of the

0:30

expanded list of invites to this meeting

0:32

what can we expect to come out of the G7

0:35

this week i'm Rosemary Barton here to

0:36

break it down tonight Shantelli Bear

0:38

Andrew Coin Elia Raj um let's start with

0:41

the the the invite list and then we'll

0:43

get to whether we should expect anything

0:45

substantive and remarkable uh it it has

0:48

been expanded not only to I think most

0:50

controversially invite Narendra Modi uh

0:52

but there was an invite to Saudi Arabia

0:54

and and the list of people is longer

0:57

than you might expect for a G7 not for

0:59

the G7 but for the second day where

1:01

other nations will take to the table

1:02

what what did you make of uh what's

1:04

behind this Andrew and and why why the

1:07

prime minister has taken this approach

1:08

yeah I mean it's almost like a G20 minus

1:11

Russia and China you know I think

1:13

they're sort of designing the PL plane

1:15

while they're flying it they're they're

1:16

having to I I you know I think they're

1:19

wrestling with a lot of issues that have

1:20

been set in train by the calamity in

1:23

Washington if I can call it that of

1:24

Donald Trump uh while Donald Trump is

1:27

actually at the conference it's going to

1:28

be fascinating to see them try to square

1:30

that circle uh I think it accounts for

1:32

the fact that they don't they're not

1:33

going to be issuing a communique at the

1:35

end uh but they're trying to deal with

1:37

for example Ukraine and the very changed

1:39

security situation well the situation

1:42

has changed because the United States is

1:44

basically taking Russia's side uh so I

1:46

think perhaps part of the calculation

1:48

was there was safety in numbers if you

1:49

if you bring in more players you can

1:51

make it more of a kind of a a glo global

1:54

if you will of the democracies rather

1:56

than just the the the G7 um but they're

1:59

taking on a lot of things at the same

2:00

time but because a lot of things are

2:02

happening at the same time yeah but but

2:03

but a lot but I mean those invites

2:05

didn't have to go out Althia this is

2:07

obviously that the prime minister has

2:09

made this decision in terms of what he

2:10

sees is happening in the world and what

2:12

his goals are what so tell me your

2:14

thoughts

2:15

i think one it's uh how Mark Carney

2:18

wants to present himself to Canadians

2:19

and to the world two it's a focus on

2:23

trading relationships um three it's a a

2:27

recognition that the global geopolitical

2:30

situation has changed that our so-called

2:33

enemies um have bandied together and

2:36

that we need to do a better job of

2:38

integrating our friendlies in a way of

2:41

not just being a kind of elitist club so

2:44

I think that there's a lot of numerous

2:47

there there's probably more

2:48

considerations than that um but that

2:51

have influenced some of the invite list

2:54

i'm told the Saudi Arabia invite which I

2:57

thought was deeply shocking uh that NBS

3:00

had been invited but apparently he's not

3:02

coming um has more to do with Palestine

3:05

um and the situation in Gaza and

3:08

recognition of Palestine territory um

3:10

than it has anything to do with business

3:12

trade i I put that out there um that's

3:15

what I've been told um I think the fact

3:18

that we're bringing the Mexico president

3:20

here is a good sign to reset the

3:23

relationship which seems to be frosty um

3:26

especially since Doug Ford the premier

3:28

of Ventura has suggested we should

3:29

phrase out Mexico from a renewed Kisma

3:32

deal or negotiator side agreement so I

3:34

think there's a whole bunch of different

3:36

different agendas at play uh at this

3:39

Sunday Monday Tuesday meeting the the

3:41

prime minister did tell Petrusa uh

3:43

yesterday that the UAE and Saudi Arabia

3:45

that that was also about um artificial

3:47

intelligence and tapping into capital

3:49

there you know for for what it's worth

3:51

um Shantel what what what do you make of

3:53

the invite list

3:56

uh it's not the first time uh and not

3:59

just the Canadian thing that the G7 list

4:01

is extended we always knew President

4:04

Zilinski for instance was going to show

4:06

up he was invited uh uh from the first

4:10

and once Donald Trump said he would be

4:13

there he's a major drawer it's easy to

4:15

invite people they're basically coming

4:17

not to sign off on communities but to

4:20

talk to uh Donald Trump one-on-one if

4:23

they grab his long enough

4:26

if you go back to the beginning the

4:28

notion of the G7 in this current

4:31

environment the elements of that meeting

4:35

add Zalinski to that was maybe the

4:38

elements of a six versus one uh dynamic

4:43

i.e all the others versus Donald Trump

4:46

plus Zinski mhm and up to a point you

4:49

kind of take away from that possibility

4:52

by drowning the place with issues and

4:55

meetings it is also I believe uh useful

5:00

for people who run countries uh to talk

5:04

to each other one-on-one things that you

5:06

will not see in the community do get

5:08

accomplished over that but I think by

5:11

doing that Mark Carney has saved

5:13

themsself the scenario of everyone

5:16

ganging up on Donald Trump with the

5:18

expected results as for trade well we'll

5:22

see i'm I I'm not so sure that we're

5:25

going to get a lot of practical uh

5:27

results from the these meetings we'll

5:30

talk later about whether anything could

5:31

happen there between Canada and the US

5:33

but you mentioned it too Andrew there's

5:35

no final communicate that was told by a

5:37

senior Canadian official today there are

5:40

going to be short statements of

5:41

agreement potentially does that does

5:43

that kind of thing matter or is it does

5:45

it just matter that they're all there

5:46

talking about things i think it reflects

5:48

reality you know there there isn't a G7

5:51

as such anymore when one when the

5:54

biggest player as big as all the rest of

5:56

them is basically on the other side of a

5:58

number of fundamental issues um then

6:01

you're kind of going through the motions

6:02

in a way by continuing to meet as a G7

6:04

so I think the only answer to that was

6:06

to enlarge it to uh to give more free

6:10

play for some of these negotiations and

6:11

discussions on the sidelines uh to not

6:14

try to pretend there's a unity when

6:16

there isn't unity uh but to to try at

6:19

the same time to get some of these the

6:21

other non US actors to give them a

6:23

chance to to work together and to

6:25

pretend the US is sort of both there and

6:27

not there at the same time i cannot

6:29

imagine how weird it is uh for anybody

6:31

in these negotiations to to to be having

6:35

to pretend that the United States is

6:37

still on board when it manifestly isn't

6:39

and yet that's what they're going to do

6:41

yeah it'll be even stranger than like

6:44

the Trump 1.0 I would think Althia in

6:46

terms of how much further he's he's gone

6:48

in some of his positions

6:50

the thing is all the negotiations for

6:52

what would be in a communique have

6:54

basically already happened so they know

6:56

what the points of tensions are and in a

6:58

way this is lowering expectations

7:01

so that we don't expect that there is

7:03

unanimity on a final statement and if by

7:05

a miracle uh there is no drama and

7:08

actually they get agreement everybody

7:11

will say what a great success this was

7:13

so that's part of it the other thing is

7:15

they probably didn't think that they

7:17

could get agreement um but I I think I

7:20

just I want to mention on the earlier

7:21

point because I think it reflects the

7:23

way this government is running things

7:25

you know this Modi backlash that is

7:27

happening within the Liberal caucus if

7:29

they had discussed this issue ahead of

7:31

time with the caucus they would have

7:34

been able to mitigate so much of the

7:36

backlash that has happened the same

7:37

thing with C5 the natural resources bill

7:40

if they had talked to caucus about it

7:41

before and not briefed them an hour

7:43

before they tabled it some of the

7:45

backlash would not have happened or the

7:46

stakeholders on the the border bill they

7:49

they don't seem to value caucus as a

7:51

sounding board and I think this is going

7:53

to cause more and more problems if they

7:54

don't realize it soon well yeah well

7:56

we've seen that certainly with past

7:57

prime ministers shantel last word to you

7:59

on this well uh on the Modi invite uh

8:03

you can understand why uh Liberal caucus

8:06

members would be jarred it's not even a

8:08

year since Justin Trudeau stood up in

8:11

the House of Commons to say there was

8:14

evidence that the Modi government had uh

8:17

partaken in the assassination of a

8:20

Canadian citizen on Canadian soil so

8:24

it seems for many caucus members that

8:27

this I mean this is a prime minister who

8:30

is getting rid of red lines from his

8:33

predecessors but this was one that

8:36

really stuck because it was totally

8:39

unexpected and he is right and um not

8:43

seeing it coming kind of makes it worse

8:46

because you do need the explanation

8:50

at issue increased defense spending the

8:52

prime Minister says Canada will hit its

8:54

NATO targets ahead of schedule canada

8:56

will achieve NATO's 2% of GDP target

9:01

this year half a decade ahead of

9:04

schedule and will stand strong with

9:07

European allies parallel we are actively

9:09

seeking to strengthen transatlantic

9:12

security particularly be by becoming a

9:16

participant in Rearm Europe so here to

9:19

break down what this new commitment

9:20

means for our international partners and

9:23

for the military Shantel Bear Andrew

9:25

Coin Althia Raj Shantel let's start with

9:26

you this is a big amount of money $9

9:28

billion just over $9 billion in a very

9:30

tight timeline and something that the

9:32

world had been asking of us for some

9:34

time just as potential new targets are

9:37

on the horizon um what what does that

9:39

tell you about uh the government's

9:41

approach to to the world I guess Mark

9:43

Carney's foreign policy approach too

9:45

it's kind of the same conversation

9:46

almost

9:48

okay so I'm going to bring it down to a

9:52

bargaining chip uh looking ahead to the

9:55

G7 and the meeting with Donald Trump one

9:58

two a move that was not forecast in the

10:02

election campaign and not part of the

10:04

election platform that was put forward

10:06

by the Liberals and three a move that

10:09

kind of makes a the production of a

10:12

budget a more compelling exercise than

10:16

maybe it even was a week ago because I'm

10:19

sure many people including the

10:21

opposition parties would really like to

10:23

know what the tradeoffs for Canadians

10:25

are going to be to pay for this and

10:27

finally

10:29

it's one thing to say that you're doing

10:31

this and some of this is the easy part

10:33

you raise wages etc But uh we have not

10:38

been good at spending money and

10:40

executing uh spending on the defide i'm

10:43

being polite here

10:45

so

10:47

where or how do we assume that we will

10:49

be better at it by March 31st of 2026

10:54

yeah some new agency I think would be

10:56

the government's answer but how it works

10:58

yeah i don't know either i don't know

10:59

either and and I would also say Andrew

11:01

part of what the prime minister said

11:02

about what Shantel said about how where

11:04

this money comes from he talked about

11:05

Canadians making sacrifices without

11:08

saying anything more about what that

11:10

means either so anyway your your your

11:11

thought except that he ruled out

11:13

increased taxes so it's going to be

11:15

either cutting spending in some area or

11:17

more likely larger deficits uh which he

11:20

doesn't seem to show much aversion to um

11:23

look it's it's progress that we're

11:25

meeting the two 2% target that we first

11:28

agreed to informally in 2006 and

11:30

formally in 2014 um it's a good thing he

11:33

did it before the NATO meeting later

11:34

this month because I'm not sure they'd

11:36

let him in the door if he hadn't uh and

11:38

the target now it looks like it's going

11:40

to shift to 3.5% or 5% depending

11:43

depending how you define it so we've got

11:44

a lot of tough sledding ahead of time i

11:46

I think he was right to focus in the

11:48

short term on operational things like as

11:51

Shantel said more recruitment higher pay

11:53

things you can do just by basically

11:54

writing checks you can do that quickly

11:56

and it's also really necessary the part

11:58

part of our problem is not just lack of

12:00

capacity it's that the capacity we have

12:01

now um is not functional you know that

12:04

we've got machinery that's broken down

12:05

and we can't afford to fix it etc so

12:08

good in the short term to focus on

12:09

upgrading our existing capacity longer

12:12

term we do have to figure out uh our

12:14

broken procurement process if we're

12:16

going to make capital acquisitions and

12:17

so it's a little distressing to see him

12:19

emphasizing a made in Canada strategy

12:22

where they're even going to have to use

12:23

Canadian steel and Canadian alum

12:24

aluminum if we're going to meet our

12:26

targets in a functional way and not just

12:29

in terms of quickness but also uh

12:33

performance and and and adding the the

12:35

most bang for the buck we should be

12:37

buying the cheapest equipment wherever

12:39

we can find it that can produce the the

12:41

machinery and the the firepower that we

12:43

need uh and if that means buying it off

12:45

the shelf from some other country so be

12:47

it we part of the reason we're in the

12:49

fix we're in in defense is we've used it

12:51

over the decades as a regional

12:53

development or a pork barrel or an

12:55

industrial strategy or a handout to the

12:57

defense industry whatever you want to

12:58

call it but we've had everything except

13:01

military readiness as our first priority

13:04

yeah except it's clear from what he said

13:06

that he also is looking for ways to not

13:08

spend most of the money in the United

13:10

States in the United States trying to do

13:12

those two things at once I guess yeah

13:14

yeah i understand not not being

13:15

dependent on the United States but we

13:17

could be buying it from Italy France

13:19

Sweden you know fair enough yeah okay

13:20

althia so I agree with everything Andrew

13:23

and Shantad have just said i think the

13:25

reason plain and simple that it wasn't

13:27

in the election platform is because

13:29

there's no way the math could have at

13:31

all worked uh 5% of military spending

13:35

and this is 5% of GDP so it's not a

13:37

number you can grow the economy and make

13:39

this uh less a significant spend is

13:43

almost a third of all government

13:46

spending and there's some of that

13:47

spending you can't touch it's transfers

13:49

to healthcare it's transfers to people

13:51

it's old age security you you can't

13:53

touch this stuff so the idea that they

13:56

could cut this much out of the federal

13:58

government is quite surprising and will

14:01

be felt if that's the way they're going

14:03

or they're just going to add more to the

14:05

deficit and the debt and this will be

14:08

structural deficits that I'm sure Andrew

14:09

will write lots about um one thing I

14:12

want to say on the procurement side yes

14:15

there is trouble uh spending that money

14:18

but part of the vision and I sat down

14:20

with David McGinty the new national

14:21

defense minister this week is it's about

14:24

a new economic plan they want to grow

14:28

the Canadian defense industry that's why

14:30

they're joining Rearm they want to help

14:32

Canadian firms negotiate for deals in

14:34

Europe they view the economy the way

14:37

that we're going to get the strongest

14:38

economy in the G7 as natural resources

14:41

as critical minerals and as the defense

14:44

industry and so it's as much about that

14:46

than it is about responding to the

14:48

threats of China and Russia in the high

14:50

Arctic which is exactly my complaint

14:52

yeah yeah

14:54

go ahead Andrew but I'm imagining that

14:57

he's not smiling

15:00

no he's not i can confirm

15:02

now he is but go ahead Shantel

15:05

no

15:07

it's not the first government that wants

15:09

to use defense as Andrew pointed out as

15:11

a way to grow the economy sure but at

15:14

some point I mean all these goals seem

15:17

to be on a collision course and I'm

15:20

curious to see how it's going to play

15:22

out this is just the first uh act it's

15:25

the easy first act uh we'll see what

15:29

happens down the road because once you

15:31

get to the end of the fiscal year and a

15:33

budget in between um there will be

15:36

things that will need to be done to keep

15:39

up that 2% three three and a half% i

15:42

don't think we're I think Mark Carney

15:44

was playing defense uh with the

15:46

announcement up to a point when he said

15:48

I'm not going to be told by NATO

15:50

accountants how much I'm going to spend

15:53

i don't think we'll ever sign off on 5%

15:56

well it's one it's not totally 5% it's

15:59

3.5% of pure defense spending and then

16:01

1.5% of security related so that could

16:04

be infrastructure for example like

16:05

that's not going to be a problem to get

16:08

to it's the 3.5% of ongoing defense

16:11

spending and making sure that that money

16:12

gets out the door because it's to

16:14

Shantel's point we have had a lot of

16:16

troubles making sure that happens yeah i

16:18

I And by the way unless you assume that

16:22

Justin Trudeau was a pacifist there is a

16:24

reason why they had set a much more

16:27

distant uh target for this uh spending

16:31

except he again the prime minister seems

16:34

to be suggesting Andrew that Canadians

16:36

are prepared to do this and public

16:37

opinion polling shows that there is an

16:39

openness to it i got like 20 seconds

16:41

yeah there well the public opinion has

16:43

wrapped itself around the idea of 2% of

16:45

GDP yeah when the rubber hits the road

16:47

of what you going to give up to spend

16:49

for that that's going to be interesting

16:50

to see where the public opinion holds

16:53

at issue talk of a deal cbc News has

16:56

learned Canadian and US officials are

16:58

working towards a deal with hope of

16:59

progress coming out of those G7 meetings

17:02

but despite new defense commitments and

17:04

an openness to the Golden Dome the

17:06

president continues to threaten

17:08

additional auto tariffs i might go up

17:10

with that tariff in the not too distant

17:12

future the higher you go the more likely

17:13

it is to build up land yeah so here to

17:16

break down what progress could happen

17:18

out of the G7 meeting Shantel Andrew and

17:20

Althia i I think we would all agree that

17:23

no one has any idea if there can be a

17:25

deal uh coming out of the G7 because

17:28

Donald Trump is so unpredictable but I

17:31

wonder maybe I'll start with you Andrew

17:32

whether you think there is pressure on

17:35

the prime minister to get a deal soon in

17:37

spite of the fact that he keeps saying

17:38

"We have time we can wait we've got

17:40

time." Um I I don't know whether that he

17:43

has pressure personally and politically

17:45

to get this done i'm not sure because

17:47

what is the upside of getting a deal

17:50

frankly we have no assurance of anything

17:52

uh we don't know with Donald Trump

17:55

whether a promise even if he were to

17:57

make a promise to reduce the tariffs

17:58

which to my knowledge he hasn't yet n uh

18:02

how whether that stays in place or

18:03

whether he simply comes back and asks

18:05

for more again yeah so I think there's

18:07

so much skepticism around the the

18:09

usefulness of any deal that I'm not sure

18:11

that there's a huge amount of pressure

18:12

on them other than the fact that he said

18:14

he's going to try and get one um but but

18:17

you know the Trump has been in the habit

18:19

of announcing deals that aren't really

18:21

deals they're just agreements to keep

18:23

talking etc so it shouldn't be beyond

18:25

the ingenuity of either party to come up

18:27

with some similarly vaporous agreement

18:30

that can allow them to keep talking and

18:32

allow them to save face i I don't know

18:34

if a vaporist agreement would be

18:35

acceptable to Canadians though Shantel

18:37

like and and and they are going to have

18:39

a bilateral at this G7 they are going to

18:41

have some sort of conversation i would

18:43

imagine tariffs will be part of it

18:46

well if you take the prime minister at

18:49

his word in an interview that he gave

18:52

yesterday uh to to Canada he drew a line

18:56

in the sand he said the first Can

18:58

Canadian condition is tariffs disappear

19:02

they go off not tariffs are reduced so

19:05

that's his own uh line in the sand i

19:08

don't know if he can get a deal based on

19:11

that line in the sand he wants a return

19:14

to Kushma rules which uh is in theory

19:18

where we should be but um it will be

19:21

very hard to paper over differences and

19:24

have a vaporous deal and jive that with

19:27

what Mark Carney said yesterday in that

19:29

interview yeah althia

19:31

the president has said that he wants a

19:33

bunch of deals done by July 4th so we

19:36

are incentivized to just drag the puck

19:39

as long as we want to get what we want

19:42

uh because he seems to be the one that

19:44

has the time crunch um I agree with

19:47

Andrew and I think Shalt on the like I

19:50

don't know what the value of a deal is

19:52

if the president continues to break his

19:55

word even on the deal that he has signed

19:57

mhm so I'm more concerned about the

20:00

things that we seem willing to be

20:03

willing to trade or give to the

20:05

Americans uh there was reporting in the

20:07

Economist for example that Canada is

20:09

willing to give the Americans right of

20:10

first refusal on critical minerals there

20:13

are questions to be raised about you

20:15

know that big beautiful bill as the

20:17

president calls it in the United States

20:19

that gives that says it's a budget bill

20:22

but has language around AI saying that

20:24

you can't regulate AI for 10 years i

20:27

hope we don't have anything that

20:28

resembles that that in a trade deal so I

20:31

think that there will be a lot of people

20:33

interested to know what we are willing

20:36

to align ourselves with especially if we

20:38

we just had an election campaign

20:40

suggesting that we wanted to be quite

20:42

different than our American friends i

20:44

I'm told that critical minerals thing is

20:46

is not on that that is not on the table

20:48

that that is not real but for for what

20:50

it's worth but we don't know to your

20:52

point we we don't know we we don't know

20:53

what's really on the table shantel last

20:55

words to either well just to paraphrase

20:58

a bit what Althia was saying uh I don't

21:01

think Canadians want to buy a deal that

21:03

actually make us a an economic satellite

21:06

or a sat military satellite of the

21:08

United States exactly and I I from

21:12

everything I hear I do believe that Mark

21:14

Carney understands that quick last word

21:16

to you Andrew uh I was just going to say

21:19

that the the he he he he's got all the

21:21

the leeway in the world because Trump is

21:23

now down to 38% in the polls and he's

21:26

plummeting uh so I think there's

21:28

percentages is in stalling for time

21:30

playing along i don't think you have to

21:33

sign a deal for all the reasons we've

21:34

been saying i don't think Canadians are

21:36

you know busting a gut that we have to

21:37

sign a deal right now with the Americans

21:39

because why would we okay well we'll see

21:41

what happens next week thank you all i

21:43

appreciate all those conversations and

21:45

smart thoughts that is at issue for this

21:47

week i'm Rosemary Barton thank you so

21:50

much for watching

21:51

[Music]