26:41
To use a very bad analogy, we're putting our foot off the gas when it comes to fighting climate change, and I think Canadians are going to pay the price. Prime Minister Mark Carney's climate concessions cost him an MP this week. Former Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault announced Wednesday his time as a Liberal MP is coming to an end. The Prime Minister's MOU, an industrial carbon pricing deal with Alberta Premier Danielle Smith, proved too much for the long-time staunch environmentalist. But despite losing one of his own caucus, Mark Carney says that MOU was worth it.
Uh absolutely. So, will this hurt or help the Prime Minister politically? And what are the risks longer term? Our Sunday strategy session is here to talk about that. Lisa Raitt is a former Conservative cabinet minister and former Conservative deputy leader. Scott Reid is the CTV News political analyst and former communications director to Prime Minister Paul Martin. And Nathan Cullen is a former NDP MP and former provincial, rather, NDP minister. Hi, everybody. Good to see you. Uh Scott, I'll start with you. Is this a big deal politically for the Prime Minister? I don't think it's going to end up being a big deal politically. But let's not understate the significance of Guilbeault's departure. And I'm
thinking less about the pipeline, the MOU, and the climate file than I am about Quebec. Guilbeault was a household name in Quebec and has been for 20 years. He was also the Quebec lieutenant. That means he was into the machinery, the gears and wheels of the Liberal Party machine in the province of Quebec. So, if Guilbeault had wanted to, he could have done, I think, real damage to the Prime Minister. If he'd wanted to give one interview after another, if he wanted to throw haymakers, he could have done some damage to the Prime Minister in the province of Quebec. But I think he's chosen a less confrontational path. And as a consequence, I think that, you know, the issue that will preside, the issue that will eclipse, is the
overwhelming desire on the part of Canadians to back the Prime Minister's agenda to build things, give ourselves options economically and trade wise to allow us to untether from the United States or at least exclusively from the Donald Trump White House. I think that issue provides so much cover for the Prime Minister that Guilbeault's departure will not cost him seats or votes in the next election, whenever that might be. He was definitely not Nathan confrontational in his exit, but he also didn't didn't mince words. Like in the interview we did, he said that the government has abandoned the fight against climate change. Is that potentially consequential? Maybe not in
the immediate or near term, but down the road? Yeah, as Scott was saying, the Quebec question is huge, but I also think it might be too soon to tell whether the environmental or lack of environmental strength from the government eventually causes consequence come the next election. And the environment, climate change are not top issues right now in the minds of Canadians. They're being eclipsed by Trump and recessionary worries that we see on the books. That is now, that might not be the future. And then we know the environment rises and falls depending on how people are feeling about other so or more basic needs. If those change, if the economy strengthens, if Mr. Trump is not so much a threat on the horizon in the next
campaign, people start to ask questions about the two Marc Carneys, the one that wrote values and the one that is presenting the economic agenda that he is today. And that's what caused Steven to leave. I also think his voice on the international stage is something that we shouldn't ignore. He's very, very well connected. If he decides to go out and not campaign, but be a voice on the international stage calling for more effort from Canada, Mr. Carney is very much concerned about our reputation internationally and that could have effect, but I don't know if that's Mr. Guilbeault's plan.
What's the net political impact from where you sit, Lisa? So, it's it's a slow burn for me. Um, I think Mr. Guilbeault's exit, it certainly wasn't the Chrystia Freeland exit, was it? I mean, it definitely wasn't. Far from it, yeah. It was lighting the fire and then throwing it behind your uh your back as you walked out the door, which took out a prime minister and the leader of the party. So, it was much more measured, and perhaps it's because what he's recognized, and he did talk about it, right? Doing I think Mélanie Joly said something or Catherine McKenna did about how maybe they've concluded he can do more from outside the cabinet, outside the caucus, outside the government than
he can do within. And the way I look at it is you know, the potential he
