Here are the first ten questions from the provided transcript, followed by answers extracted directly from the transcript, maintaining the original wording and tone as much as possible:
1. Question: "Is that the sense you get that nations are lining up to cut a deal with us right now?"
Answer: "I don't know."
2. Question: "Prime Minister where does this podcast find you?"
Answer: "I'm in Montreal right now, professor."
3. Question: "Can you give us sort of your backstory, your origin story?"
Answer: "Sure. Um so I was born in the Arctic, uh the north of Canada, place called Fort Smith, Northwest Territories. I grew up in Edmonton and uh those who might follow hockey was the days of Wayne Gretzky when he was playing for the Oilers. That was when I was a kid. Uh I went away to university in the US Uh and then um and then I worked on Wall Street or versions of Wall Street. I worked for Goldman Sachs in London and Tokyo and New York and ultimately Canada. And then I went in about 20 years ago to become the deputy governor of the Bank of Canada which is the equivalent of the Federal Reserve in the US. Uh and ended up being the governor during the financial crisis of 2008. Um so worked with you know through that process of the financial crisis. We had a quote good financial crisis if you can have a good financial crisis in Canada. We got through it better than anyone else emerged stronger. Our bank stayed together uh and then ultimately I kind of slightly bizarrely um I was asked to uh become governor of the bank of England. So I became the first foreigners governor of the bank of England and I did that through the period of the Brexit referendum as it turned out and in the aftermath of that and then came back Canada 2020 right in the middle of uh co..."
4. Question: "In your view what role does Canada play on the global stage?"
Answer: "So we play, I mean we play several roles. Um we're a member of the G7. In fact we are chair of the G7 uh this year. So I'm chair of the G7 uh we're a member of the Commonwealth which is the old uh UK grouping. Um we're member of the franophhone which is the obviously the franophhone grouping of about uh 60 countries. So we we have our role in several uh different let's call it organizations, self-appointed organizations or groupings. I think one of the roles we play potentially in the new or the emerging uh global order is partly based on you know our assets. Uh we are uh an energy an emerging energy superpower in all forms of energy. Uh we're one of the largest critical mineral suppliers in the world. We're we're pretty good in AI. A lot of people claim that. We're you know but we're I think legitimately claiming that. And so we can play a role as a country that believes in open open markets, open systems, believes in trade, open ideas, diversity. We can play a role with like-minded countries uh to kind of reconstruct that bit of that bit of the international order which has been uh I'm in Montreal they would say bulver like it's been upended uh in the course of uh more intensively in the last few months but uh a process that really began with the financial crisis 15 years ago..."
5. Question: "What would you identify as the two or three biggest issues facing Canada and what's your agenda if you could pick two or three things you're really going to go hard at your first year as prime minister what are those things?"
Answer: "I'll set tariffs aside and uh and focus in on on on three things. Uh first is having free trade actually within Canada. We have you know basically 13 economies here. Uh 10 different provinces and territories all with their own rules. It's hard to move credentials and sometimes goods and services across the country. Far harder than it should be. So uh a process a very quick process of free trade. And by the way just to put orders of magnitude on this you know a reasonable estimate of the economic benefit of that is bigger than the economic hit from the worst version of the Trump tariffs. So we can kind of give ourselves more than others can. Second thing is uh we have a huge housing problem here. Uh and particularly obviously for younger Canadians first and foremost we need to double the rate of housing. Um and we need to I won't go into all the details I'm happy to but uh we need some major reforms in order to do that. We can do it in a way that actually leverages you know the Canadian supply chain technology and all the lumber we potentially won't be able to send southbound to the US. And then the third thing um look the world's fluid. I'm afraid this kind of comes towards tariffs but uh I think the trading system is going to get reordered fairly quickly. And so in the course of the first year the question is well who are we going to deepen our relationships with other than the United States and those relationships last point are both economic and security. Uh the world's a much more dangerous and divided place. Security concerns are are top of the list. Uh so who in Europe or European Union as a whole UK who in Asia where are we going to partnership um if I can say one last thing Scott is you know the just being shaken so hard by what's happening in the United States Canadians are very open to all of those priorities like people are up for big things. Uh they're coming together and they're willing to do big things because they know they have to do big things because the world's changed so much."
6. Question: "So give us the state of play...describe the state of play between what is happening between the US and Canada Where does it sit at this moment?"
Answer: "So I'll I'll start with the the bad news or the um as we would call the unjustified news um which is what tariffs are in place. Uh we have still in place today tariffs that were originally justified because of fentanyl uh fentanyl coming across the border uh from Canada. Uh just for the listeners who haven't tracked this um less than 1% of the fentanyl imported into United States comes from Canada. In fact you've got a sophisticated audience. So I can say things like 19 basis points uh of the fentanyl comes across the border from Canada. We've taken major steps to reinforce the border drones helicopters other things and it's fallen by a further 990% over the course of the last 3 months. Um but those tariffs um hit a wide range of goods in Canada hit a wide range of goods and there's a few carveouts for that but you know it's hitting hundreds of billions of good and those are 25% tariffs from the United States. Then we are also caught Secondly we're also caught in the steel and aluminum tariffs which are uh this quote uh uh national security tariffs so-called 232 tariffs. Uh we are the largest supplier of aluminum in the United States. We're one of the most important suppliers of steel to the United States and you can roll those up into hundreds of thousands of jobs in the US depending on Canadian steel and aluminum. Um and then the third thing is we are caught in the auto tariffs. As people probably know but I'll just personalize it. Well they wouldn't know this fact. There was something called the auto pack which was signed the year I was born you know 60 years ago. And we have had an increasingly integrated auto system with the United States for 60 years. It got tighter with the Canada US free trade agreement 40 years ago and then with NAFTA and the successor. So literally you know these companies and the supply chains the main part suppliers uh they they're virtually fully integrated um and now into the middle of this is coming 25% uh US tariffs uh which are you know in an industry as as as you know that has you know 5 7% margins. I mean this is this is absolutely damaging so we have three sets of tariffs. We are not subject yet to the recipro so-called reciprocal tariffs of the US so the state of the relationship ship is um strained to say the least because all of these tariffs are in violation of what you call USMCA we call KSMA the same trade agreement. The good news or the better news is that 3 weeks ago or so uh President Trump and I spoke and we agreed that following the Canadian election there would be the beginning of a negotiation of a of a comprehensive a new comprehensive relationship economic security. So uh we are we are in the the queue so to speak uh for those discussions."
7. Question: "Is Canada aggressively and actively trying to reroute around America right now?"
Answer: "I would say you know trade is a world of and um so um you know it's a it's a positive sum game as you know both s you do it right both sides win. It's not a zero- sum game so I might not choose the phrase around America but obviously you know Look if we're uh if we've got excess capacity or we have things we're going to develop for I'll use the example of critical minerals where we're a big player. Um who are with whom are we going to trade who can we rely on you know we we're we're sitting here we supply 70% of the pod ash to the United States you know one of the most important components of fertilizer 70%. And there is a 25% tariff being put on pod ash. So when you think about it well geez maybe I might want to take another I'll call it a commodity even though critical metals and minerals are are more than that. Um if we're going to develop those maybe we want to develop them with a supply chain to someone who's not going to slap a tariff like that on. So that invalidating your thesis we uh we yeah we have begun to intensify discussions with other other countries other trading blocks. We have a pretty good set of trading trade deals in place. We have a free trade deal with Europe. We have free trade. We're part of the trans what was called the trans-pacific partnership in Asia. So we have a number of those but we we're looking to reinforce them. Um and look we're we are hopeful maybe hopeful isn't the right word but we're open to open is a better way to put it to um a restart of the US trading relationship. Um provided there's willingness on the other side and we can come to one of those positive positive sum deals."
8. Question: "What's the general consensus around American leadership right now...?"
Answer: "Well I think the first thing is to recognize as as I have said and uh a number of those other leaders have said including G7 leaders is that the system as we knew it is over right when the anchor of the system is fundamental has done a series of measures uh that the US has done but also set out a series of objectives and I'll come back to that but set out a series of objectives that are just inconsistent with the way the system has been operating for decades right basically since the fall of the Berlin all intensified since then. So you recognize that that system anchored on the US is over. That then leads to how do you react to it there's partly the negotiation with the US and which you've been focused on. But then it's also how do we deal with each other which we've also touched on in terms of what the US is trying to accomplish. I think it's uh you know I take go back to uh Peter Teal of 10 years ago saying take Donald Trump literally uh and seriously but take him literally and seriously and you know they're looking to um to balance uh where to the extent possible to balance trade which is not the way we think about things but is the way the US thinks about things and you know you do get into odd situations like Canada where we actually run a the America has a trade surplus with Canada in goods. The only reason there's an overall deficit with Canada is because of basically oil imports. Well if you don't want our oil imports that will be a bit of a problem for a period of time cuz you know the only other option for the refineries that take Canadian oil is Venezuela and that's you know they've just ban those uh those imports as well. So there it's not the logic isn't entirely consistent let's put it that way. But I think at the core recognizing this desire for more balanced trade and so from the US administration question I think in our mind is there are some industries autos particularly aerospace would have another element of this um and then a number of commodity in there a couple industries that are so integrated that it's hard to see why for US competitiveness let alone North American competitiveness it makes sense to pull them apart. That would be our argument. And then there's other industries forest products steel aluminum as three big examples where we're agriculture pot ash I gave that example nickel I could go on where we're such huge suppliers and such a safe secure supplier. Again it doesn't really to us make sense that that would be displaced or tariffed. So you know we've seen that this the trade policy is evolving as some of these choke points become more evident and uh you know I suspect I suspect we will see more. Maybe I'll say one other thing if I could which is it strikes me a bit what the in the consistencies of uh US policy is a desire to have some minimum tariff if possible um which has a revenue raising element to it and I think you know tied into uh US tax policy that is uh that is also a possibility here."
9. Question: "Respond to that...that the US has been taken advantage of by its trading partners including Canada..."
Answer: "Well I I mean we don't obviously we don't see it um we don't see it in the following respects because really again the way the the Trump administration has defined being quote taken advantage of is do you run a trade deficit um and we can argue about that definition. I wouldn't if I lead on my economic training and uh my experience I would say well that isn't being taken advantage of. It's it's mutual exchange. But the US runs the surplus with us the US sells more to if anyone's being taken advantage of we're being taken advantage of right because I mean by that definition and the only place where they run a deficit is yes we do ship oil to the United States now we happen to ship oil to the United States at a big discount to global prices so we're being taken advantage of again on that definition um on the on the goods trade side and we're getting taken advantage because we're selling oil at below good prices so we you know we we want our money back. No we don't. Where we still see the broader benefits uh of the relationship and uh you know I don't think that I'll go back to the auto sector. Um it's not going to feel taken advantage of Um as if if these tariffs stay in place and you know as you say you got to check your your your phone every once in a while just to see where things stand. Uh there's a possible exemption on the auto part side uh that's coming in in the United States um which we would have said right what we did say right from the start would have to happen because the whole system will grind to a halt uh without it. So some of the mutual advantages will become more are becoming more apparent and hopefully uh the US administration can continue to be nimble."
10. Question: "How do you see this playing out...?"
Answer: "Well short answer I I I I don't know. This I I don't know is on that second question. There there's a few things that happened here. One is that um there's a risk premium in US assets that wasn't there before. Uh and the question is how big is that risk premium going to set where is it going to settle um and uh and that in part is going to depend on how coherent the new system is. You know and and is there does the US credibly commit to a new system or a series of deals remember we're you know we have a we have a trading deal with the US that was signed by the current president um and uh and which which isn't being you know observed. So so I think that's one thing is there's a risk premium on US assets and if there's a risk premium on US assets then the cost of all other assets around the world is greater right like since we're still priced off of uh priced off of US treasuries for example so that's one thing. I think second is um I do believe that there are a series of like-minded countries we very much like the US to be part of that group but like-minded countries who will develop deeper trading and security relationships as a consequence of this uh it's the world of second best. It's not what we would all want but it's the logical thing to do. Third thing that's going to happen is that um there is going to be much greater focus and I know this for a fact Well this will be a fact if if if my party is successful in the elections. Uh a much greater focus on uh domestic drivers of demand. So building at home building big infrastructure building millions of houses building you know building out our own economies um more more pro uh domestic procurement right in a world where we've got excess steel and aluminum capacity which we will uh if the US doesn't change on trade well guess whose steel and aluminum we're going to buy um for a variety of things. Uh guess what defense procurement we're going to do uh you know right now we spend about 75% of our defense dollars go to the United States that you know doesn't make a lot of sense uh if we settle out in a in a more um armslength relationship with the US and that's true if it's true for us it's true for Europe it's true for the UK um and so we'll all move more domestic and more with each other and the degree to which that happens so this is a world just to be clear and you I think you intuitively what you get this from the start we got a world where we have higher risk premia right it's cost of capital is more expensive and we've got a world where people are doing second best things countries are doing second best things so it's a world that's more expensive and it's more it's not artic fancy word like it's not totally in and of yourself but it's you're putting much greater emphasis on uh taking care of yourself um we'll do that and we'll with like-minded countries and uh and move forward."
Please note that some answers are truncated because the original question was interrupted or the answer continued into a discussion of a new topic. I have tried to maintain the integrity of the responses as they appear within the transcript.
