The “sad episode” of the prosecution – and persecution – of VAdm. Norman is indeed "well behind us". But it should not be. The case should instead shock and infuriate Canadians still.
This conscientious officer challenged the shibboleth of the National Shipbuilding Strategy - a cesspool of politicized procurement, regional horse-trading, expensive bureaucratic inertia, and of course defence-policy fecklessness.
For doing that he was charged with a crime, and his career was aborted. But there was, it turned out, no real evidence presented. Further, it appears that the details he was prepared to raise in court would have embarrassed the Liberal government.
So the expensive criminal case was dropped without explanation, and VAdm. Norman got an undisclosed cash settlement. Of course he was required to sign a non-disclosure agreement. I wonder why.
And so taxpayers’ money was used to paper over this administrative and ethical shambles.
Why SHOULD that be behind us?
I don’t blame Norman for taking care of his family by accepting the settlement. But on the government side there is still more than enough blame enough to go around - and yet the whole scandal is “behind us”.
Is anyone else losing their mind having this time of crisis while there is no functioning federal government? And an election where the two main contenders are still speaking about actions not a tenth as radical as they need to be, and the second-place contenders are still literally proposing new social programme spending like it’s the Long Summer of zero interest rates and Pax Americana?
How bad to things have to get before a politician contemplates something like, say, cutting OAS for well-off retirees to pay for a military expansion? Or if that angers you, how about a truly deep look at public sector productivity — with real time studies that show what people do all day? (A sane version of DOGE, basically)
Or on energy — Great that PP is talking about an East-West pipeline to Atlantic tidewater to ship fossil fuels to Europe. Tell me what you’ll actually do with C-69, First Nations consent, and Quebec consent?
If these suggestions make you angry, good, it means they’re actually meaningful. We need two dozen more suggestions that each make half of Canada furious, or we’re not thinking big enough. Here’s one for me: cut the carbon tax in half, and redirect the remaining tax into military expansion and Canada-to-Europe fossil fuel export infrastructure. As someone who thinks climate change is ultimately the biggest threat we face, this would make me very sad. Good!
It feels like we’re standing here watching the house burn down because, you know, we’re in the middle of a yard party and it would be so not groovy to put down the beer and call the fire department or grab a hose or something. What are we DOING?
I do think Trump/Vance/Musk will be a governance challenge for any Canadian government, but especially for the guy who gets half his votes from people who think those three are *great.*
Paul thanks for the reply. I agree this will be a challenge, but if we’re heading for a Poilievre Conservative Government I think it’s important to have really sharp knowledge of the true motivations of the CPC voters — both the base and the “tired of Trudeau” disaffected Liberals who Carney may win back.
My read is that most of this people think Canada has gone in a really wrong direction and want to take a wrecking ball to the post-2015 policies. Eg most voters are against equity quotas when put to a clear question, and most want to see major projects get permitted again (very few people truly support degrowth). They’re seeing Trump et al take action on these things and that’s driving a level respect and sympathy. But they’re also strongly patriotic and most will be the first to defend the country against US provocations, whether they’re economic or worse.
I think there’s a real window here for Carney or Poilievre to push the envelope on what’s being proposed. Make the other guy look like Chamberlain or Halifax.
United States. I love the book because it gives you an insight into what is going on in this US administration. Also This book was a work in progress over a number of years. It is expensive and only available on Amazon.
An pipeline to the Atlantic is pointless unless we build a refinery in Canada to actually make money for us from our oilsands. We just built, at huge public expense, a pipeline to the Pacific. Contrary to popular belief, it doesn't carry oil. It carries diluted bitumen which is then shipped to foreign refineries and then we naive Canadians buy it back in the form of more expensive fuels. Ad guess what - most of those refineries are in the USA, so this expensive pipeline has barely diversified our exports as more than half of the tankers using it are going to the USA.
I continue to be amazed that Newfoundland oil production never seems to factor into the conversation about export markets or for eastern Canada. Unlike Alberta’s heavy crude oil, Newfoundland has light crude which demands a higher price. There is no necessity to build extensive pipelines, there are already deep sea ports. More refinery capacity would be needed, and movement in developing existing projects like Bay du Nord.
Listened to this in full - here is my takeaway: the current “tiddlywinks” approach by 🇨🇦 is effectively a policy of appeasement. And implicit in Admiral Norman’s comments is that annexation can occur without military action. Isn’t this frightening enough to shake us all into action?
Let’s not forget the childish, post - 2015 election vengeance on Adm. Norman for putting the Forces and Canada before politics. Brison, Butts and Wernick bailed when it looked like they would have to testify in court on the Norman charges. Still, the MV Asterix is the only replenishment ship, rented and serving well beyond the original lease. Canada’s RCN supply ship replacements are years behind. Bravo Zulu Asterix
Canada's never been in it to win it. That's been the problem with our political culture for decades. No one's been willing to pay the price, whether it's in dollars or lives or seats in the House of Commons. No one's had the emotional maturity or long-term perspective to invest social or political capital in expensive and unpopular yet existential investments in our physical and economic security. Will that change now? Will the federal leaders we have be the ones to do it, and put Canada's interests ahead of their own biases? Consider me skeptical.
I agree that we've been lazy of late, but we have built an incredibly safe and prosperous country out of the harshest real estate on the planet where even the small amount of agricultural land is frozen for most of the year. We built the transcontinental railroad, the Trans-Canada and Yellowhead Highways, the St. Lawrence Seaway, the first civilian communications satellite, the Confederation Bridge, the first smartphones... We CAN do these things. As you say, it's a matter of political, and private sector, will.
I really enjoyed this podcast, and found what Admiral Norman had to say genuinely refreshing. I’m a millenial, born in the late ‘80s and grew up in the ‘90s when there was far more anti-Americanism around in the culture than there has been in the last ten years.
It’s honestly shocking how at least in English Canada the sense of Canadian distinctiveness vis-a-vis the US has faded over the last decade (or more), and how it suddenly has reasserted itself in this moment. I think Admiral Norman is right to be provocative — unless the annexationists (somewhere around 20% of our population, according to some polling I’ve seen floating around on Twitter) have their way, this is an opportunity for our political class to once again re-articulate a vision of Canadian independence that is purposefully resistant to continental integration.
I wish that we had a class of leaders who could do that. But I’m surprised that the few compelling statements I’ve seen come out on this question have largely been from either the Premier of Quebec or people outside of directly elected politics, like Admiral Norman.
I have to think that the current players in federal politics came up at a time when they didn’t have to think in these terms about the future of the country. I wonder if anyone of them has what it takes to keep us free and independent.
The basic problem in Canada has been the installation and infiltration of anti-Canadianism into our institutions...government and or public. Trudeau, Butts and Telford just deepened the infiltration. But we need real leaders...my god in BC Eby just gave total title to an Indian band for the Charlottes (now called Haida Gwaii). We knew it was coming but prior to it 'coming' there was no discussion about it all, the ramifications going forward. I don't think the government either provincial or federal has a clue. I gather we are still on the hook for funding the whole thing. So what did Canada get from this arrangement. Nothing. Weak wankers...please try not to vomit if you happen upon the media screens pics of Trudeau crying.
No discussion? Discussion has been going on since at least the 1980s. Unlike most of Canada, most First Nations in BC never signed treaties ceding the land they use. This means things work a little differently here. But individual private property is still intact. Economic progress is still happening (just look at LNG Canada!) with the involeement of First nations from the beginning instead of as an afterthought.
Fair enough. I disagree that there was a lot of discussion. We knew and were afraid of what the NDP/EBY had in mind and it came to pass. So now the Haida have the land that they historically lived on...what's next? You say that individual private property is still intact, but sorry I mistrust that. Not sure that alure of kicking out the whites yet still taking the cash will ever end. Prove me wrong. Advocate for an end to the Indian Act...and the people who belong to the tribe can really become part of the wider society. Support yourself or at least act like a municipality and make your own way with out the loan guarantees etc etc etc that the tribes currently rely on.
A necessary, excellent, conversation that our political leaders need to start speaking about openly, more often, now. Thanks for bringing it to us. I agree with Admiral Norman about the need to stop being reactive and defensive to serious threats to our country and to go far beyond tit-for-tat tariffs. There shall be pain in that approach. Nation-defining, collective pain, and worth it. Hello, fellow citizens. Hello, Danielle Smith.
Agreed, but I have to wonder if some part of our problem getting support from others has to do with our abject failure to arrive at free trade deals with Europe and the UK (and others) due to the other sacred provincial cow of dairy supply management. So hello also to Francois Legault.
VAdmin. Norman is due great respect, and I found the interview quite informative. Thank you Paul. However, the issue that repeatedly arises is that it was a mistake to take cutting-off Cdn oil supply to the US off the table. I disagree and am disheartened to hear it described in such unsophisticated terms by Paul - that the idea is seen as fighting words by the redneck, mouth breathers in Alberta - OK, I exaggerate Paul's statement but that was the context.
Oil for both Ontario and Quebec comes into Cda from the US, even Cdn oil. It is a fantasy to believe that we can cut off oil to the US, and they won't do the same in retaliation. Ontario and maybe Quebec will be without gasoline for cars and diesel for trucks within a few weeks. Western Cda will be able to manage.
Overall, Cda's hand is weak. The US has options for diversity of supply. Cda purposefully has no options for diversity of export in the regions that export and no options, or highly limited options, for diversity of supply in the major regions that import.
Yet I hear Central Cdn 'sophisticates' wagging their fingers at the unwashed in Alberta as though those cowboys are the ones that haven't thought this through. So, let's go ahead and do it. I'll still be driving my car but you won't, nor will you have groceries delivered to your grocery store once you walk through the snow to get there.
When I interviewed the premier of Alberta at length a couple of weeks ago, did you hear me call her a redneck mouth breather? Don't you dare put words in my mouth.
You are correct. My apologies. I will leave my words and your admonishment as they presently stand. In my weak defence, I was finally, after saying nothing in other areas, finally reacting to numerous comments and should not have personalized them.
Is the only lever Canada has Alberta and Newfoundlands oil and gas?
Why is the first item that - I will say primarily non Albertians but maybe some Albertains are included - is identified and the statements made; we should turn of the oil and gas taps?
I agree with the initiation of tariffs now. We are already seeing the effects of trumps words. Cancelled orders and contracts.. We must encourage our politicians to act as leaders.. not puppets of a psychopath.
I'm glad you said it in the text accompanying this interview: Norman really doesn't have a plan here. I can heartily agree that Canadians need a change in attitude, but Norman is, quite frankly, all rhetorical bluster with no specifics.
I guess it reads as a criticism of the former general, but that was not my intention - it rather was an observation. I think he himself noted in the discussion with Paul that he does not have all the answers, he just wanted to give Canadians a kick in the pants. I appreciate the fact that he did so.
Nuts! I just listened to this on Apple podcasts. I was going to cancel my paid subscription but you have forced me to continue! Go back to crazy emotionalism so I can save 5 bucks a month ! Please!
Just came here to say thank you, this was excellent, I’ll be sharing it widely! Haven’t listened to the last few audio offerings but this had me CLICK right away
The “sad episode” of the prosecution – and persecution – of VAdm. Norman is indeed "well behind us". But it should not be. The case should instead shock and infuriate Canadians still.
This conscientious officer challenged the shibboleth of the National Shipbuilding Strategy - a cesspool of politicized procurement, regional horse-trading, expensive bureaucratic inertia, and of course defence-policy fecklessness.
For doing that he was charged with a crime, and his career was aborted. But there was, it turned out, no real evidence presented. Further, it appears that the details he was prepared to raise in court would have embarrassed the Liberal government.
So the expensive criminal case was dropped without explanation, and VAdm. Norman got an undisclosed cash settlement. Of course he was required to sign a non-disclosure agreement. I wonder why.
And so taxpayers’ money was used to paper over this administrative and ethical shambles.
Why SHOULD that be behind us?
I don’t blame Norman for taking care of his family by accepting the settlement. But on the government side there is still more than enough blame enough to go around - and yet the whole scandal is “behind us”.
Is anyone else losing their mind having this time of crisis while there is no functioning federal government? And an election where the two main contenders are still speaking about actions not a tenth as radical as they need to be, and the second-place contenders are still literally proposing new social programme spending like it’s the Long Summer of zero interest rates and Pax Americana?
How bad to things have to get before a politician contemplates something like, say, cutting OAS for well-off retirees to pay for a military expansion? Or if that angers you, how about a truly deep look at public sector productivity — with real time studies that show what people do all day? (A sane version of DOGE, basically)
Or on energy — Great that PP is talking about an East-West pipeline to Atlantic tidewater to ship fossil fuels to Europe. Tell me what you’ll actually do with C-69, First Nations consent, and Quebec consent?
If these suggestions make you angry, good, it means they’re actually meaningful. We need two dozen more suggestions that each make half of Canada furious, or we’re not thinking big enough. Here’s one for me: cut the carbon tax in half, and redirect the remaining tax into military expansion and Canada-to-Europe fossil fuel export infrastructure. As someone who thinks climate change is ultimately the biggest threat we face, this would make me very sad. Good!
It feels like we’re standing here watching the house burn down because, you know, we’re in the middle of a yard party and it would be so not groovy to put down the beer and call the fire department or grab a hose or something. What are we DOING?
I do think Trump/Vance/Musk will be a governance challenge for any Canadian government, but especially for the guy who gets half his votes from people who think those three are *great.*
Paul thanks for the reply. I agree this will be a challenge, but if we’re heading for a Poilievre Conservative Government I think it’s important to have really sharp knowledge of the true motivations of the CPC voters — both the base and the “tired of Trudeau” disaffected Liberals who Carney may win back.
My read is that most of this people think Canada has gone in a really wrong direction and want to take a wrecking ball to the post-2015 policies. Eg most voters are against equity quotas when put to a clear question, and most want to see major projects get permitted again (very few people truly support degrowth). They’re seeing Trump et al take action on these things and that’s driving a level respect and sympathy. But they’re also strongly patriotic and most will be the first to defend the country against US provocations, whether they’re economic or worse.
I think there’s a real window here for Carney or Poilievre to push the envelope on what’s being proposed. Make the other guy look like Chamberlain or Halifax.
Im an currently reading a book by fellow Substacker Christopher Messina
The books title is,
Messina's Federal Budget
Some might think that the current administration may have used this book as a template for the measures being taken by the current administration.
When you write 'current administration', do you mean Canada or the US?
United States. I love the book because it gives you an insight into what is going on in this US administration. Also This book was a work in progress over a number of years. It is expensive and only available on Amazon.
An pipeline to the Atlantic is pointless unless we build a refinery in Canada to actually make money for us from our oilsands. We just built, at huge public expense, a pipeline to the Pacific. Contrary to popular belief, it doesn't carry oil. It carries diluted bitumen which is then shipped to foreign refineries and then we naive Canadians buy it back in the form of more expensive fuels. Ad guess what - most of those refineries are in the USA, so this expensive pipeline has barely diversified our exports as more than half of the tankers using it are going to the USA.
I continue to be amazed that Newfoundland oil production never seems to factor into the conversation about export markets or for eastern Canada. Unlike Alberta’s heavy crude oil, Newfoundland has light crude which demands a higher price. There is no necessity to build extensive pipelines, there are already deep sea ports. More refinery capacity would be needed, and movement in developing existing projects like Bay du Nord.
Listened to this in full - here is my takeaway: the current “tiddlywinks” approach by 🇨🇦 is effectively a policy of appeasement. And implicit in Admiral Norman’s comments is that annexation can occur without military action. Isn’t this frightening enough to shake us all into action?
Admiral Norman, but yes❤️
fixed
Let’s not forget the childish, post - 2015 election vengeance on Adm. Norman for putting the Forces and Canada before politics. Brison, Butts and Wernick bailed when it looked like they would have to testify in court on the Norman charges. Still, the MV Asterix is the only replenishment ship, rented and serving well beyond the original lease. Canada’s RCN supply ship replacements are years behind. Bravo Zulu Asterix
Canada's never been in it to win it. That's been the problem with our political culture for decades. No one's been willing to pay the price, whether it's in dollars or lives or seats in the House of Commons. No one's had the emotional maturity or long-term perspective to invest social or political capital in expensive and unpopular yet existential investments in our physical and economic security. Will that change now? Will the federal leaders we have be the ones to do it, and put Canada's interests ahead of their own biases? Consider me skeptical.
Have you spoken to the families of the fallen CAF soldiers from the war on Afghanistan.
I agree that we've been lazy of late, but we have built an incredibly safe and prosperous country out of the harshest real estate on the planet where even the small amount of agricultural land is frozen for most of the year. We built the transcontinental railroad, the Trans-Canada and Yellowhead Highways, the St. Lawrence Seaway, the first civilian communications satellite, the Confederation Bridge, the first smartphones... We CAN do these things. As you say, it's a matter of political, and private sector, will.
Just a comment on the 80 or so year old TC and Yellowhead highways.
Much of the TC especially in BC is still two lanes - that's the major across the nation Canadian highway.
The Yellowhead is two lanes in part of Alberta and much of BC, with no bypass of numerous small towns.
The annual increase in transportation costs of these two inadequate major routes is significant.
Long time reader, first time commenter.
I really enjoyed this podcast, and found what Admiral Norman had to say genuinely refreshing. I’m a millenial, born in the late ‘80s and grew up in the ‘90s when there was far more anti-Americanism around in the culture than there has been in the last ten years.
It’s honestly shocking how at least in English Canada the sense of Canadian distinctiveness vis-a-vis the US has faded over the last decade (or more), and how it suddenly has reasserted itself in this moment. I think Admiral Norman is right to be provocative — unless the annexationists (somewhere around 20% of our population, according to some polling I’ve seen floating around on Twitter) have their way, this is an opportunity for our political class to once again re-articulate a vision of Canadian independence that is purposefully resistant to continental integration.
I wish that we had a class of leaders who could do that. But I’m surprised that the few compelling statements I’ve seen come out on this question have largely been from either the Premier of Quebec or people outside of directly elected politics, like Admiral Norman.
I have to think that the current players in federal politics came up at a time when they didn’t have to think in these terms about the future of the country. I wonder if anyone of them has what it takes to keep us free and independent.
The basic problem in Canada has been the installation and infiltration of anti-Canadianism into our institutions...government and or public. Trudeau, Butts and Telford just deepened the infiltration. But we need real leaders...my god in BC Eby just gave total title to an Indian band for the Charlottes (now called Haida Gwaii). We knew it was coming but prior to it 'coming' there was no discussion about it all, the ramifications going forward. I don't think the government either provincial or federal has a clue. I gather we are still on the hook for funding the whole thing. So what did Canada get from this arrangement. Nothing. Weak wankers...please try not to vomit if you happen upon the media screens pics of Trudeau crying.
No discussion? Discussion has been going on since at least the 1980s. Unlike most of Canada, most First Nations in BC never signed treaties ceding the land they use. This means things work a little differently here. But individual private property is still intact. Economic progress is still happening (just look at LNG Canada!) with the involeement of First nations from the beginning instead of as an afterthought.
Fair enough. I disagree that there was a lot of discussion. We knew and were afraid of what the NDP/EBY had in mind and it came to pass. So now the Haida have the land that they historically lived on...what's next? You say that individual private property is still intact, but sorry I mistrust that. Not sure that alure of kicking out the whites yet still taking the cash will ever end. Prove me wrong. Advocate for an end to the Indian Act...and the people who belong to the tribe can really become part of the wider society. Support yourself or at least act like a municipality and make your own way with out the loan guarantees etc etc etc that the tribes currently rely on.
Crying again?
A necessary, excellent, conversation that our political leaders need to start speaking about openly, more often, now. Thanks for bringing it to us. I agree with Admiral Norman about the need to stop being reactive and defensive to serious threats to our country and to go far beyond tit-for-tat tariffs. There shall be pain in that approach. Nation-defining, collective pain, and worth it. Hello, fellow citizens. Hello, Danielle Smith.
Agreed, but I have to wonder if some part of our problem getting support from others has to do with our abject failure to arrive at free trade deals with Europe and the UK (and others) due to the other sacred provincial cow of dairy supply management. So hello also to Francois Legault.
Total agreement, now that I have read this. Yes, the Article 4 thing is just being intentionally provocative, good.
VAdmin. Norman is due great respect, and I found the interview quite informative. Thank you Paul. However, the issue that repeatedly arises is that it was a mistake to take cutting-off Cdn oil supply to the US off the table. I disagree and am disheartened to hear it described in such unsophisticated terms by Paul - that the idea is seen as fighting words by the redneck, mouth breathers in Alberta - OK, I exaggerate Paul's statement but that was the context.
Oil for both Ontario and Quebec comes into Cda from the US, even Cdn oil. It is a fantasy to believe that we can cut off oil to the US, and they won't do the same in retaliation. Ontario and maybe Quebec will be without gasoline for cars and diesel for trucks within a few weeks. Western Cda will be able to manage.
Overall, Cda's hand is weak. The US has options for diversity of supply. Cda purposefully has no options for diversity of export in the regions that export and no options, or highly limited options, for diversity of supply in the major regions that import.
Yet I hear Central Cdn 'sophisticates' wagging their fingers at the unwashed in Alberta as though those cowboys are the ones that haven't thought this through. So, let's go ahead and do it. I'll still be driving my car but you won't, nor will you have groceries delivered to your grocery store once you walk through the snow to get there.
When I interviewed the premier of Alberta at length a couple of weeks ago, did you hear me call her a redneck mouth breather? Don't you dare put words in my mouth.
You are correct. My apologies. I will leave my words and your admonishment as they presently stand. In my weak defence, I was finally, after saying nothing in other areas, finally reacting to numerous comments and should not have personalized them.
Is the only lever Canada has Alberta and Newfoundlands oil and gas?
Why is the first item that - I will say primarily non Albertians but maybe some Albertains are included - is identified and the statements made; we should turn of the oil and gas taps?
How could ROC expect Alberta to bear this burden?
Yea Yea the old Alberta Slogan ,
" let them freeze in the dark" same rhetoric different generation.
I agree with the initiation of tariffs now. We are already seeing the effects of trumps words. Cancelled orders and contracts.. We must encourage our politicians to act as leaders.. not puppets of a psychopath.
I'm glad you said it in the text accompanying this interview: Norman really doesn't have a plan here. I can heartily agree that Canadians need a change in attitude, but Norman is, quite frankly, all rhetorical bluster with no specifics.
We need specifics.
Would you prefer a four hour Paul Wells Podcast so the former general can go down a checklist point by point.
I guess it reads as a criticism of the former general, but that was not my intention - it rather was an observation. I think he himself noted in the discussion with Paul that he does not have all the answers, he just wanted to give Canadians a kick in the pants. I appreciate the fact that he did so.
Here’s Stephen Harper confusing me again with a lot of concord on our views https://substack.com/@davidherle/note/c-94957310
P.S. I wonder why Substack doesn’t provide comment sorting options on these podcast posts?
We better not let ‘Voldemort’ into this country!!
Nuts! I just listened to this on Apple podcasts. I was going to cancel my paid subscription but you have forced me to continue! Go back to crazy emotionalism so I can save 5 bucks a month ! Please!
Just came here to say thank you, this was excellent, I’ll be sharing it widely! Haven’t listened to the last few audio offerings but this had me CLICK right away