0:00

This is a special bonus episode

0:02

of The Knowledge Project featuring Pierre

0:04

Polyev, the leader of the Conservative

0:06

Party of Canada, and leader of

0:08

the official opposition. I've always avoided

0:10

politics on the platform, but lately

0:12

I've been frustrated, not as a

0:14

partisan, but as a citizen. Political

0:17

conversations around the world have become

0:19

nothing but angry sound bites and

0:21

gotcha moments. We've lost the ability

0:24

to explore complex issues with nuance

0:26

and good faith. This isn't just a

0:28

Canadian problem, it's happening everywhere. So I

0:31

decided to do something about it, even

0:33

if it's just a small step. With

0:35

that in mind, I've invited both of

0:37

the leading candidates to the Canadian election

0:39

on the show. They both said yes,

0:41

but only one is yet to record.

0:44

Whether you follow North American politics

0:46

closely or just catch the headlines,

0:48

our conversation explores issues that affect

0:50

your daily life. We dig into

0:53

why prices keep rising, how tariffs

0:55

impact your wallet, the real effects

0:57

of immigration on policy, what's happening

1:00

with health care, and even how

1:02

AI is reshaping society. These aren't

1:04

just political talking points, they're

1:06

the forces shaping our future.

1:08

I want to point out

1:10

that these questions were not

1:12

provided in advance, and no

1:15

editorial control was given to

1:17

the candidates' team. I also want

1:19

to point out that our editing

1:21

for the episode is incredibly minimal

1:23

and nothing of substance.

1:25

We're back to our

1:27

regular programming Tuesday with

1:29

an incredible episode on AI

1:31

with Open AI Chairman and Sierra

1:34

founder Brett Taylor. It's time to

1:36

listen and learn. Pierre,

1:41

welcome to the show. Great to be here. Thanks

1:43

for having me. Many Canadians know

1:45

you from the headlines that often compare

1:47

you to Trump to focus on conflicts.

1:49

But your friends and family describe you

1:51

as caring husband and father and someone

1:54

deeply committed to serving Canada. What do

1:56

you want voters to know about you

1:58

that doesn't make the headline? lines. You

2:00

know, being opposition leader by definition

2:02

requires that you fight a lot.

2:05

I mean, it's two sword lengths

2:07

apart in the House of Commons

2:10

and the system is deliberately adversarial

2:12

so that you can hold

2:14

government to account, but

2:16

I think it's important for people

2:18

to know what I'm fighting for and

2:20

what I really want is to

2:22

give everyone the same chance I had.

2:25

You know, I was, I started

2:27

from very humble beginnings beginnings.

2:29

It was adopted by a couple

2:32

school teachers in Calgary and yet

2:34

I've been able to make it here. And

2:36

the story is the same for my

2:38

wife. She came here as a

2:40

refugee from Venezuela and she's been able

2:43

to have a great life as has

2:45

her family. And we believe in

2:47

that. We believe that this is a

2:49

country where you can start anywhere and

2:51

get anywhere. So that's what

2:54

really motivates me. That's my

2:56

purpose in politics. That's my why.

2:58

And if there was one thing that I

3:00

want people to know about me as they

3:02

consider their decision, it's why I'm doing this,

3:05

why I do what I do. Then you

3:07

can get into all the specific policies

3:09

about how you get there, but

3:11

that's really what pushes me forward

3:14

and gets me out of bed

3:16

in the morning to do this job. Do

3:18

you think the comparison to Trump

3:20

is fair? No, I don't think so.

3:22

I mean, we don't really sure anything

3:24

in common. I mean, he comes from

3:26

an extremely... privileged background. He,

3:29

you know, he was born into

3:31

a very wealthy millionaire family and

3:33

I was born in very humble

3:36

beginnings. There's a lot of policies

3:38

that he has that I disagree

3:40

with and I think I'm distinctively

3:43

Canadian in my outlook and in

3:45

my goals. So I don't really see the

3:47

comparison and I'm a Canadian. I'm

3:49

Pierre Polyev. I'm no one else. I'm

3:52

just me. You mentioned being the

3:54

head of the opposition and

3:56

the adversarial role that that

3:58

necessarily entails. As the leader

4:00

of the country, you have to

4:03

unite everybody. How do you envision

4:05

doing that? Well, that's a big

4:07

job. I mean, I think right

4:09

now people are more divided than

4:12

ever in Canada. And I think it's

4:14

a bit by design. The government of

4:16

the day is sought to divide

4:18

people in order to stay in

4:21

power. And I think that's the

4:23

wrong approach. We need to unite

4:25

people around what I call the

4:27

Canadian promise. make everyone

4:30

feel like they can achieve something in

4:32

this country by being part of

4:34

the community and by working hard.

4:36

That's what's missing right now. I also

4:38

think we have to get away from identity

4:41

politics, which divides people based

4:43

on their group origins and

4:45

separates them into categories. The

4:47

reason why we haven't had

4:49

big sectarian divisions in Canada

4:51

is because we judge them

4:53

as people as individuals on

4:55

their personal character and conduct.

4:57

rather than their gender, their

5:00

race, their religion, which has

5:02

increasingly become a vogue approach

5:04

by the modern and progressive

5:07

left, I think the opposite

5:09

approach is better. I think

5:11

it's better to treat everyone

5:13

like an individual and to give

5:16

them a chance. We should stop the

5:18

divisions that we see between

5:20

different groups. And basically, so

5:22

look, you're Canadian first. If

5:24

you come to Canada, sure,

5:26

bring your culture, bring your

5:28

language, your food, your traditions,

5:31

but the problems from abroad

5:33

have to stay at home. We bring

5:35

here a place where we leave all

5:37

that behind and unite for our flag.

5:39

We always thought of that as

5:41

assimilation when I was growing up,

5:44

right? So welcome people, but also

5:46

assimilating into our culture. Have we

5:48

forgotten that? I think the

5:51

government has tried to

5:53

encourage people to divide

5:56

into different camps,

5:58

and that has... metastasized

15:04

Ryan Reynolds here for Mint

15:06

Mobile. The message for everyone

15:08

paying big wireless way too

15:11

much. Please for the love

15:13

of everything good in this

15:15

world. Stop. With Mint you

15:17

can get premium wireless for

15:19

just $15 a month. Of course

15:21

if you enjoy overpaying, no

15:24

judgments, but that's joy

15:26

overpaying. No judgments, but

15:28

that's weird. Okay, one

15:30

judgment. Anyway, give it

15:32

a try at mintmobile.com,

44:01

this is an enormous amount of

44:03

investment we could be bringing.

44:05

But the Squamish people, they

44:07

took 14 years to get an approval

44:09

for their project. It's an

44:12

indigenous-led project and the government

44:14

made them jerk around for

44:16

14 years. We should be approving

44:18

these things in months. And then

44:20

the coastal first nations in B.C. would

44:23

become literally the richest people in the

44:25

world, exporting our gas overseas to Asia.

44:27

And then in the East Coast, we

44:30

can do it out of Saguenay, out

44:32

of Newfoundland, potentially out of the maritime

44:34

provinces, and go around the Americans. And

44:36

say to them, you know, you don't

44:39

want our gas, fine. We'll sell it

44:41

to the Europeans and then the Asians.

44:43

We'll make a heck of a lot more money

44:45

doing it. How does the lack of free trade

44:48

between provinces? Things cost more

44:50

because there are a bunch of hoops

44:52

to jump through and then lower wages

44:54

because we can't generate as much

44:56

wealth. You look at the trucking

44:59

sector, for example. We don't have

45:01

harmonized trucking regulations across the

45:03

country, so you're going over

45:05

the border between Nova Scotia

45:07

and New Brunswick. There's a

45:09

weight regulation difference. So, you

45:11

know, you can't move products

45:14

seamlessly between those two provinces. How

45:16

can you have free trade in

45:18

this country? Obviously, the lack

45:20

of pipelines is a form of a

45:22

trade barrier, and we need to knock

45:24

down these barriers. I'm committed to sit

45:26

down with the provinces and say, look,

45:28

I'll make you a deal. We can

45:31

calculate how much GDP boost we

45:33

get every time you knocked out a

45:35

trade barrier. And that means more federal

45:37

revenues. I will give you

45:40

those revenues. So if, say,

45:42

Saskatchewan arbitrarily gets rid of all

45:44

of its protections and let's free

45:46

trade into its province from other...

45:48

Canadians. Well, my officials will sit

45:51

down and say, well, this is the GDP

45:53

boost in the federal revenue hall from that.

45:55

Let's give that to the Saskatchewan

45:57

government. And that will create a

45:59

powerful incentive. different provincial

46:01

governments to knock down those

46:03

barriers. I like that. You like that

46:06

one? It's a carrot. That's a good

46:08

one. Thank you. I want to go

46:10

back to the Trump and tariffs just

46:12

for a second. It seems from

46:14

the outside, looking in a lot of

46:16

what he's trying to do is slow

46:19

the rise of China. Yeah. Or to

46:21

level the playing field between the

46:23

US and China. And out of the things

46:25

that you mentioned that you would do,

46:27

you never use the word China. Look,

46:32

I think we do need

46:34

to stand up against Chinese

46:36

interference in our country, whether

46:39

it's foreign political interference, whether

46:41

it's unfair trade practices

46:43

that de-industrialize Canada and

46:45

make us overly dependent

46:47

on them. There's a lot of risks

46:49

to that. We also need to keep

46:52

China out of our Arctic waters,

46:54

skies and soil, by having a

46:56

stronger national defense. I look,

46:58

I think if we have to choose

47:00

between Beijing and... and the US obviously

47:02

the US is our closest neighbor. They're

47:05

the biggest economic and military superpower

47:07

in the history of the world

47:09

and up until recently they were

47:11

very friendly to us. The president's

47:14

wrong-headed tariffs notwithstanding we

47:16

still need a strong relationship

47:18

with the United States and one of

47:20

the things I would say to the Americans

47:23

is if you want to strengthen yourself

47:25

vis-a-vis China You don't do it

47:27

by picking fights with Canada, for

47:29

God's sakes. Like, what is Canada?

47:32

How does ostracizing and aliening Canada

47:34

achieve that? You should give us more

47:36

access to your market, and we

47:38

should trade and grow our economies in

47:40

synchronicity rather than fighting

47:43

with each other, because Trump

47:45

tariffs against Canada, actually only

47:47

strengthen China, because they weaken

47:49

both Canada and the US. So the

47:51

argument I will make is how do

47:54

we strengthen... ourselves as North

47:56

Americans against the Chinese threat,

47:58

we need to knock down

48:00

the crazy tariffs, the Americans

48:02

need to respect our sovereignty,

48:04

and we need to separately

48:07

but cooperatively strengthen our militaries.

48:09

I want to talk about media for

48:11

a second. I know this is a thing

48:13

for you. It's a thing. Many people don't

48:15

understand. So I want

48:17

to get into it a

48:19

little bit here. Many Canadian

48:22

media outlets are partially government

48:24

funded, not only via the

48:26

Canadian periodical fund, but they

48:28

get subsidies from for journalists'

48:30

salaries, the government is a

48:32

large advertiser, not to mention

48:34

regulatory barriers that are put

48:37

in place to prevent competition,

48:39

which when I think about this,

48:41

it sort of raises concerns for

48:43

me about bias and editorial freedom.

48:45

How would you ensure that

48:48

journalists can hold all politicians,

48:50

including you, accountable while preserving

48:53

a diverse and independent press?

48:55

Well, first and foremost free

48:58

speech. I would repeal C11.

49:00

That's the censorship law, which

49:02

gives extraordinary powers to the

49:05

CRTC to control what content

49:07

is seen to boost certain

49:09

types of content that they

49:12

deem to be Canadian in

49:14

nature, although there's no real

49:17

definition of that, and then

49:19

discourage other content. And I

49:21

think that will, over time, be

49:23

a surreptitious way of... trying

49:26

to manage the debate in favor

49:28

of what the government wants people

49:30

to see, I would repeal that

49:32

entirely. We need to look at the

49:34

internet and the rise of

49:36

social media differently than this government.

49:39

They think it's, they think that

49:41

having too many voices is a

49:43

threat. I think it's an opportunity. I

49:46

mean, you wouldn't be able to do

49:48

this 30 years ago, unless you wanted

49:50

to. You know, wanted to invest tens of

49:52

millions of dollars in a production studio

49:54

and a distribution plan and you'd have

49:56

to sign deals with a broadcaster to

49:58

get yourself on air. Membership

51:14

means more with American Express

51:17

Business Gold. Earn four times membership

51:19

rewards points in your top two

51:21

eligible spending categories every month, including

51:24

eligible U.S. advertising purchases in select

51:26

media, and U.S. purchases at restaurants,

51:28

including takeout and delivery. What are

51:31

you waiting for? Get the card

51:33

that flexes with your spending every

51:36

month. Terms and points cap apply.

51:38

Learn more at American express.com/business-business gold

51:40

card built for business by American

51:43

Express. I

1:10:01

think we need to celebrate our

1:10:04

successes for one. I mean, my

1:10:06

kids, you remember we used to

1:10:08

have those Canadian heritage commercials on

1:10:10

TV? Yes. Like when I talk

1:10:12

to my kids, they don't learn

1:10:14

about famous Canadians. They don't learn

1:10:17

about Timothy Eaton. They don't learn

1:10:19

about people who started businesses who

1:10:21

were successful, who drive the economy.

1:10:23

They sort of learned some quasi

1:10:25

version of socialism in school. They

1:10:27

don't learn about Richard Feynman when

1:10:30

they're taught math and I'm like,

1:10:32

why don't, like that pulls people

1:10:34

in these characters. We've got to

1:10:36

change that. I think we have

1:10:38

to tell our stories and we

1:10:40

have to be more proud of

1:10:43

our history because it brings us

1:10:45

together and that shared sense of

1:10:47

accomplishment is what binds the country

1:10:49

together and that's going to be

1:10:51

part of my goal is to,

1:10:53

you know, we're going to put

1:10:56

all our heroes back in the

1:10:58

passport for example. no more tearing

1:11:00

down. I think we should build

1:11:02

new statues. I was meeting with

1:11:04

some First Nations people and I

1:11:06

said we should build statues in

1:11:09

honor of your greatest heroes. Let's

1:11:11

expand the celebration of history rather

1:11:13

than tearing it down. I think

1:11:15

that's how we unite the country.

1:11:17

I totally agree that. you know

1:11:19

we definitely need to to look

1:11:22

back and you know it's not

1:11:24

always pleasant what we've done in

1:11:26

the past but also shaming people

1:11:28

for something that happened so long

1:11:30

ago is not super effective at

1:11:33

changing the future absolutely I think

1:11:35

we can we can do this

1:11:37

and and as you say I

1:11:39

think we need to tell our

1:11:41

young people that entrepreneurs are heroes

1:11:43

that's the guy who mortgages his

1:11:46

house and doesn't have a good

1:11:48

night's sleep for four years because

1:11:50

he's trying to build something from

1:11:52

scratch that has a 10% chance

1:11:54

of success and then it breaks

1:11:56

through that guy should be given

1:11:59

a pat on the back and

1:12:01

not treated as some kind of

1:12:03

a you know a bandit because

1:12:05

of the success. As AI and

1:12:07

other emerging technologies reshape the job

1:12:09

market and the privacy landscape, how

1:12:12

do you balance innovation with sort

1:12:14

of protecting workers' livelihoods and Canadians'

1:12:16

personal data? That's a very good

1:12:18

question. First of all, I think

1:12:20

we do need to ban and

1:12:22

criminalize the unapproved use of other

1:12:25

people's images in intimate acts. There's

1:12:27

really appalling... these AI images that

1:12:29

take someone's person and have them

1:12:31

performing different acts. That is an

1:12:33

intimate acts. I think that's really

1:12:35

appalling. We need to protect people

1:12:38

against that. I think we need

1:12:40

to have stronger protections for our

1:12:42

kids against online luring and At

1:12:44

the same time, we need to

1:12:46

make sure that the government doesn't

1:12:48

abuse these new powers. And some

1:12:51

people say, well, all the powers

1:12:53

of AI need to be concentrated

1:12:55

in the government to protect us

1:12:57

all. OK. But we have to

1:12:59

make sure the government then doesn't

1:13:02

abuse those powers either. Because if

1:13:04

there can be abuse in the

1:13:06

private sector, there can be abuse

1:13:08

in the government. So we have

1:13:10

to hold the state accountable and

1:13:12

make sure that the regulations that

1:13:15

the government puts in are. truly

1:13:17

designed to protect the public interest,

1:13:19

not to protect the interest of

1:13:21

just the people who are in

1:13:23

power. How do we do that

1:13:25

though? Like, what does that look

1:13:28

like? When you say that, when

1:13:30

you mean like what kind of

1:13:32

regulations would you blame bringing in

1:13:34

or what are you asking? Like

1:13:36

if you have power, how do

1:13:38

we prevent people from abusing that

1:13:41

power? I mean, you can put,

1:13:43

you can legislate things, but I

1:13:45

mean, as a question is oldest

1:13:47

man. For the past 10 years,

1:13:49

I mean, we've seen scandal after

1:13:51

scandal and sort of no consequences

1:13:54

to those. So how does that

1:13:56

work? You're talking more just generally

1:13:58

about accountability or particularly on the

1:14:00

the AI front well both like

1:14:02

how do we hold the government

1:14:04

accountable? specifically with, let's tackle specifically

1:14:07

with, like, how do we ensure

1:14:09

that the government can be held

1:14:11

accountable in a world where they

1:14:13

might control information flow? I think

1:14:15

transparency. People need to know what

1:14:17

rules are government imposing on the

1:14:20

AI companies and what instructions are

1:14:22

they giving the companies? All of

1:14:24

that should be publicly known. We

1:14:26

don't want sort of backroom manipulations

1:14:28

to be allowed. It should be

1:14:31

the truth should be public. And

1:14:33

that way the people can say,

1:14:35

well, listen, in this case, I

1:14:37

can see that the government is

1:14:39

genuinely protecting public interest. They're protecting

1:14:41

my daughter against an online threat.

1:14:44

But in that case, a different

1:14:46

case, the government is using its

1:14:48

regulation to advance a political agenda.

1:14:50

And we then the voter can

1:14:52

punish that at the ballot box.

1:14:54

So I think the answer is

1:14:57

that transparency, sunlight is the best

1:14:59

disinfected. I have no data on

1:15:01

this other than anecdotal and friends,

1:15:03

but trust in government seems to

1:15:05

be at a near all-time low.

1:15:07

Okay. Post-covid. Is that, why do

1:15:10

you think that is? Like, what

1:15:12

would explain that? If you just

1:15:14

entertain the hypotheses that that might

1:15:16

be true. Well,

1:15:18

you know, I think part of

1:15:21

it is the government keeps telling

1:15:23

us of all the wonderful things

1:15:25

they're going to do for us,

1:15:27

and then it results in misery

1:15:29

for the people who claim they're

1:15:32

helping. Like, you know, so they

1:15:34

bring in the monstrous housing program

1:15:36

ten years ago and say, well,

1:15:38

the government's going to get back

1:15:40

into housing, and that's going to

1:15:43

make it affordable. Well, then the

1:15:45

housing costs double. An entire generation

1:15:47

can't afford a home. Or the

1:15:49

government says, we're going to massively

1:15:51

increase spending. Well, what happens? Well,

1:15:54

only a small number of largely

1:15:56

affluent people actually get the help,

1:15:58

and everyone else gets the bill,

1:16:00

and you've got two million people

1:16:02

lined up at a food bank.

1:16:05

So people say... You know, every

1:16:07

time they tell me they're going

1:16:09

to do something wonderful for me,

1:16:11

it turns out I get stuck

1:16:13

with a terrible bill and my

1:16:16

life gets turned upside down. And

1:16:18

I think naturally people are very

1:16:20

frustrated with that. And I've tried

1:16:22

to channel that frustration towards a

1:16:24

positive outcome, which is let's change

1:16:27

it. Let's stop making these ridiculous

1:16:29

promises that government is going to

1:16:31

do everything for us, because the

1:16:33

government can't give you anything without

1:16:35

first taking it away. The government

1:16:38

doesn't have any of its own

1:16:40

money. So every time they promise

1:16:42

these things, they're really talking about

1:16:44

taking from you. What we need

1:16:46

to do is have a government

1:16:49

that is back to the basics,

1:16:51

does a few things right rather

1:16:53

than a lot of things poorly,

1:16:55

and then lets people prosper and

1:16:57

grow and build their lives in

1:17:00

the whole country. I want to

1:17:02

hit on climate change because we

1:17:04

haven't talked about that at all

1:17:06

yet. Many Canadians... believe in government

1:17:09

action on climate change. And I

1:17:11

want to ask a nuanced question

1:17:13

on this. So in a world

1:17:15

where one country opts into taking

1:17:17

action on climate change and others

1:17:20

can easily opt out, that risks

1:17:22

making us uncompetitive, particularly given the

1:17:24

role of natural resources and how

1:17:26

they play. such a vital part

1:17:28

in our economy, how will you

1:17:31

ensure that Canada does its part

1:17:33

in tackling climate change while also

1:17:35

continuing to grow the economy and

1:17:37

ensuring Canada and Canadians remain globally

1:17:39

competitive? That's a good question. I

1:17:42

think we have to remember the

1:17:44

problem of carbon leakage, which is

1:17:46

when you... You increase taxes and

1:17:48

burdens on Canadian industry to a

1:17:50

point where production offshores in more

1:17:53

polluting jurisdictions, and then you end

1:17:55

up with even more global pollution

1:17:57

while you have even less Canadian

1:17:59

output and industry. And that's what

1:18:01

I think we've seen over the

1:18:04

last decade. The government has increased

1:18:06

taxes on investment. on energy, on

1:18:08

payroll, so businesses say, well, you

1:18:10

know, it's cheaper to go produce

1:18:12

in some other place where they

1:18:15

have no regulations. I'll give you

1:18:17

the most obvious example to me

1:18:19

is the Sun Tech tomatoes in

1:18:21

Manatek. They're paying a carbon tax

1:18:23

on the CO2. They release into

1:18:26

the greenhouse, even though it's absorbed

1:18:28

by the plant life. That's, you

1:18:30

know, that's, you know, it's grade

1:18:32

school science. So the Mexican tomato.

1:18:34

is more affordable in Manatek than

1:18:37

the Manatetit tomato. So the government

1:18:39

sends a price signal to the

1:18:41

consumer to buy a tomato that

1:18:43

had to be transported burning fossil

1:18:45

fuels from Mexico by truck and

1:18:48

train all the way to Canada,

1:18:50

rather than incentivizing the local purchase.

1:18:52

And that's an example of when

1:18:54

you punish your own production, you

1:18:56

don't necessarily get lower emissions, you

1:18:59

just get less opportunity here. I

1:19:01

want to bring a tax break

1:19:03

for companies that produce goods below

1:19:05

emission levels like a tax break

1:19:07

for investment over at the aluminum,

1:19:10

the Rio Tinto plant in Sagni,

1:19:12

they produce one ton of aluminum

1:19:14

with two tons of carbon. China,

1:19:16

it's 14 tons of carbon for

1:19:18

every ton of aluminum. So by

1:19:21

repatriating production of aluminum to Canada

1:19:23

from China, you're not only enriching

1:19:25

our economy, you're actually reducing global

1:19:27

emissions. But we want to... cut

1:19:29

taxes on low-emitting Canadian and industries

1:19:32

to bring the production home and

1:19:34

bring emissions down at the same

1:19:36

time. That's my overall approach. I

1:19:38

just have two questions for wrap-ups.

1:19:40

One is, what do you think

1:19:43

other people's biggest misconception about you

1:19:45

as... I think that, you know,

1:19:47

because I... I spend a lot

1:19:49

of time with the people in

1:19:51

Canada that are suffering the most.

1:19:54

the people who can't afford a

1:19:56

home whose businesses are going under.

1:19:58

who can't feed their kids. And

1:20:00

sometimes I find that very upsetting

1:20:02

and it comes off as aggressive.

1:20:05

But it comes from, I don't

1:20:07

think people, maybe perhaps they might

1:20:09

not know that it comes from

1:20:11

a place of caring for the

1:20:13

people that I'm fighting for. And

1:20:16

my challenge is to convert that

1:20:18

care into showing people the positive

1:20:20

vision I have for the country.

1:20:22

the brighter future that we have

1:20:24

with change and that's what I

1:20:27

have to convey in these closing

1:20:29

weeks. So that people have hope,

1:20:31

I want people to go to

1:20:33

the polls not because they're angry

1:20:35

but because they're hopeful. Usually the

1:20:38

final question I ask for any

1:20:40

guest is what does success look

1:20:42

like for you? But I think

1:20:44

in your case I'm going to

1:20:46

change that slightly. What does success

1:20:49

look like for Canada four years

1:20:51

from now if you're elected? I

1:20:55

think it's a place where every kid

1:20:57

grows up knowing that they can achieve

1:20:59

anything they want. Parents sit down and

1:21:02

say, look, what do you want to

1:21:04

do? You want to be an astronaut?

1:21:06

You want to start a business? You

1:21:08

want to cure cancer? You just want

1:21:10

to have a nice house with a

1:21:12

dog and have a couple of kids

1:21:14

that play street hockey in the front

1:21:16

driveway? You can do any of that.

1:21:18

All you have to do is work

1:21:21

hard. And that's what I want the

1:21:23

country to have in this country, and

1:21:25

that would be a success. Is there

1:21:27

anything we haven't covered that you want

1:21:29

to get on the record? No, I

1:21:31

think that's good. I think that's all.

1:21:33

This was great. Thank you for taking

1:21:35

the time today. Thank you for having

1:21:37

me. I really enjoy your show and

1:21:39

look forward to seeing you next time.

1:21:42

Appreciate it. So,