Transcript: The Internet's Future; Should Billionaires Exist? | Dec 13, 2019

Steve stands in the studio. He's slim, clean-shaven, in his fifties, with short curly brown hair. He's wearing a dark blue suit, white shirt, and spotted blue tie.
A wall screen behind him reads "The week in review."

Steve says THE AGENDA THIS WEEK
HEARD THE CASE AGAINST
BILLIONAIRES FROM WRITER
ANAND GIRIDHARADAS, AND SPOKE TO
FORMER SENATOR HUGH SEGAL ABOUT
HIS BATTLE TO COMBAT POVERTY IN
CANADA.
THE AGENDA'S WEEK IN REVIEW
BEGINS ASKING WHETHER THE
INTERNET'S EARLY PROMISE IS
PAYING OFF.

Music plays as an animated slate reads "The week in review."

In a clip, Steve sits with guests in the studio.

A caption on screen reads "The Internet's midlife crisis?"

Steve says WE WERE TALKING
ABOUT HOW YOUNG THE INTERNET WAS
BACK IN JANUARY OF 1996 IN THIS
VERY STUDIO, AND SHELDON, SHALL
WE ROLL A CLIP AND SEE IF
ANYBODY RECOGNIZES ANYBODY IN
THIS CLIP?
FIRE AWAY.

A clip plays on screen with the caption "January 11, 1996. Bill Washburn."
In the clip, Bill speaks. He's in his thirties, clean-shaven, with short blond hair and glasses.

He says I THINK THE WEB REPRESENTS AN
EXPLOSION TRULY FROM THE GRASS
ROOTS, THAT NONE OF US QUITE
ANTICIPATED HAPPENING SO
QUICKLY.
THAT JUST EXPLODED FROM
EVERYWHERE.

A very young Steve Paikin appears on screen and says THIS IS THE THING YOU HEAR
ABOUT IT, IS THAT THIS THING IS,
YOU KNOW, ANARCHIC, UNREGULATED,
TOTALLY...

The caption changes to "Cory Doctorow."

Cory, in his early twenties, with short brown hair and rounded glasses says Unregulatable.
IT'S TECHNOLOGICALLY
INFEASIBLE AS DOING SOMETHING AS
BASIC AS DETERMINING HOW MANY
COMPUTERS ARE CONNECTED TO THE
INTERNET.
IN A SITUATION LIKE THAT, IT
BECOMES DIFFICULT TO BLOCK
ACCESS FROM OR TO.

Steve says THE GOVERNMENT'S NIGHTMARE, RIGHT?
YOU CAN'T CONTROL IT.

Cory says YEAH, IF YOU WANT TO TAKE
THAT SORT OF... IF THIS WERE A
MOVIE STARRING SYLVESTER
STALLONE, IT WOULD BE HOW THE
INTERNET THREW OFF THE
OPPRESSORS.
IT IS IN SOME SENSES AN ANARCHIC
ENVIRONMENT, IT'S DIFFICULT TO
KEEP TRACK OF WHO DOES WHAT WHEN
AND HOW.

The clip ends.

Steve says THE FIRST PERSON WE HEARD WAS
BILL WASHBURN.
THE OTHER WAS CORY DOCTOROW WHEN
HE WAS ABOUT 12 YEARS OLD.
CORY, HOW MUCH DO YOU AGREE WITH
YOUR FORMER SELF?

The caption changes to "Cory Doctorow. Boing boing."
Then, it changes again to "The promise."

Cory is in his forties, clean-shaven, with short, receding brown hair. He's wearing glasses, a blue sweater and a blue tee.

He says YOU KNOW, I WOULD... I WOULD,
IN THE SPIRIT OF THE CREATIVE
ARTS HERE, I WOULD GIVE MY
FORMER SELF A "YES AND."
AND THAT "AND" WOULD BE IN
ADDITION TO BEING THE MEANS BY
WHICH PEOPLE ORGANIZE MOVEMENTS
FOR LIBERATION, IT'S ALSO A
MEANS BY WHICH THEY ORGANIZE
AGAINST CREATE A
COUNTER-REVOLUTION.
AND I'D LIKE TO THINK THAT BACK
THEN I WAS COGNIZANT OF THAT
TOO.
I MEAN, PEOPLE DON'T GET WORKED
UP ABOUT THE FUTURE OF THE
INTERNET IF THEY THINK IT'S
GOING TO AUTOMATICALLY BE GREAT.
THERE WERE MANY OF US BOTH
EXCITED ABOUT THE POSSIBLE
FUTURE BUT ALSO TERRIFIED ABOUT
HOW IT COULD GO WRONG.

Steve says PRESCIENT FOR 24
YEARS AGO.
RAMONA, HOW ABOUT SOME OF THE
ADJECTIVES WE HEARD, ANARCHIC
AND UNREGULATABLE?

The caption changes to "Ramona Pringle. Ryerson University."

Ramona is in her thirties, with chin-length wavy auburn hair. She's wearing a pale pink blazer.

She says CERTAINLY WATCHING IT FEELS
LIKE, MY, HOW TIMES CHANGE AND
HOW WE LEARN AND HINDSIGHT IS
20-20.
YOU THINK ABOUT THOSE EARLY DAYS
AND EVERYONE SORT OF SCRAMBLING
TO GET THEIR DOMAINS AS IF IT
WAS... AS IF IT WAS ACTUAL REAL
ESTATE AND THEY WERE THE ONES
WHO WERE HOPING TO GET RICH AND
NOT ALL OF THEM DID GET RICH IN
THE END.
BUT JUST SORT OF LOOKING BACK AT
THIS NOW, THERE'S THIS IDEA OF,
YOU KNOW, YOU TALK ABOUT THE
"YES AND" AND THE CREATIVE MIND,
THE CREATIVE MOVE INTO THE NEW
NEIGHBOURHOOD, THE DERELICT
NEIGHBOURHOOD, AND THEN EVERYONE
FOLLOWS WHO WANTS TO MAKE A
BUCK.
I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE'VE SEEN
WITH THE INTERNET, IS THERE WAS
THAT SORT OF HOPEFUL... THAT
HOPEFUL UTOPIAN VISION OF WHAT
IT COULD BE, AND OF COURSE ONCE
SOMETHING BECOMES HOT, ONCE IT'S
BEEN MADE A SPACE THAT EVERYONE
ELSE WANTS TO CLAMOUR TO, THOSE
WHO WANT TO CASH IN ON IT WILL,
AND THE REST FOLLOW, AS WE'VE
SEEN.

The caption changes to "The Week in Review. @theagenda. Tvo.org."

Steve says JACOB, IN WHICH
CASE, HOW NAIVE DO YOU THINK THE
CREATORS OF THE INTERNET WERE
BACK IN THE DAY?

The caption changes to "Jacob Malthouse. Savedotorg.org"

Jacob is in his forties, with shirt gray hair and a trimmed beard. He's wearing a blue shirt and a white undershirt.

He says WELL, IT'S A GREAT QUESTION.
FOR ME I THINK A LOT OF THIS HAS
SORT OF ALMOST RELIGIOUS
UNDERTONES.
WHEN YOU HEAR PEOPLE TALKING THE
PASSION WITH WHICH THEY'RE
TALKING, THAT IT'S A NEW
MOVEMENT, THAT THERE'S ANARCHY,
THAT THERE'S OPPORTUNITY, THAT
THERE'S FREEDOM FOR EVERYBODY,
AND NOW, I THINK WHAT YOU'RE
SEEING IS THAT THERE'S BEEN SO
MUCH MONEY JUST DUMPED INTO THE
SYSTEM, IT'S BECOME LIKE AN
ACCELERANT AND, YOU KNOW, THE
THING THAT COMES TO MIND FOR ME
IS LIKE THE CATHOLIC CHURCH AND
WHEN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH JUST
BECAME KIND OF LIKE FAT ELVIS
AND THE WHOLE THING STARTED TO
LOSE TOUCH WITH ITS ROOTS AND
NOW WE HAVE ESSENTIALLY A
PROTESTANT MOVEMENT SAYING, WE
NEED TO RETURN BACK TO THESE
PRINCIPLES ON WHICH THE INTERNET
WAS FOUNDED AND WHAT IT WAS KIND
OF MEANT TO BE BECAUSE WHAT WE
SEE RIGHT NOW BEARS NO REAL
RELATION TO THOSE FOUNDING
PRINCIPLES, AND THAT'S A DANGER
FOR THE INTERNET GOING FORWARD,
BECAUSE IT NEEDS THOSE
PRINCIPLES TO WORK WELL.

The caption changes to "For more on this story visit: tvo.org/theagenda."

Cory says WE'RE AT A CROSSROADS NOW
WHERE THE INTERNET HAS BECOME
KIND OF THE NERVOUS SYSTEM OF
THE 21ST CENTURY, AND OUR
PROBLEM WITH REGULATING IT IS,
YOU KNOW, THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO
COME AT IT AND SAY, WELL, HOW DO
WE MAKE SURE IT'S SAFE AS AN
ENTERTAINMENT MEDIUM AND OTHERS
SAY HOW DO WE MAKE SURE IT'S
SAFE AS A PUBLIC SQUARE?
WE HAVE TO MAKE IT SAFE FOR ALL
THE THINGS WE'RE DOING WITH IT.
IT'S WHERE WE FIND ROMANCE AND
EDUCATION AND EMPLOYMENT AND ALL
THE OTHER ELEMENTS OF OUR LIVES.
THAT DOESN'T MEAN WE SHOULDN'T
REGULATE IT.
BUT WE SHOULD REGULATE WITH
GRAVITAS AND CARE AND NOT SAY SO
LONG AS PEOPLE ARE WATCHING TV
WRONG ON THE INTERNET, OUR JOB
IS DONE EVEN IF IT MAKES IT HARD
TO DO CIVIC ENGAGEMENT.
WE HAVE TO DO ALL OF THE THINGS.

Now music plays as an animated slate reads "The week in review."

Steve sits with different guests

A caption on screen reads "Should billionaires exist? Hashtag NotAllBillionaires.

Steve says ON NOVEMBER 5TH,
J.P. J.P. CHASE CEO JAMIE DIMON
SAYS, SOME WOULD SAY VILIFY
SUCCESSFUL PEOPLE.
I DON'T LIKE VILIFYING PEOPLE.
I THINK WE SHOULD APPLAUD
SUCCESSFUL PEOPLE.

A quote appears on screen, under the title "Billionaires versus Warren." The quote reads "Jamie Dimon. November 5. She uses some pretty harsh words, you know, some would say vilifies successful people. I think we should applaud successful people."

Steve says THE TAX.
WHAT DO YOU THINK FOR STARTERS?

The caption changes to "Anand Giridharadas. Author, 'Winners take all.' @AnandWrites."

Anand is in his thirties, with spiky gray hair and a stubble. He's wearing a black leather jacket and a black tee.

He says A COUPLE OF THINGS.
WHEN JAMIE DIMON CONTACTED ME TO
CHALLENGE SOME OF MY PUBLIC
COMMENTS ON THESE KINDS OF
ISSUES AND HE HAD NO PROBLEM
VILIFYING HARD-WORKING PEOPLE
WHEN I SUGGESTED TO HIM THAT A
LOT OF WORKERS ARE EXPLOITED IN
AMERICA BY THE CEOs HE ADMIRES
AND PALS AROUND WITH AND HE
SAID, NO, SOME PEOPLE JUST DON'T
LIKE TO WORK.
HE HAS NO PROBLEM VILIFYING
DOWN.
HE HAS A PROBLEM WITH PEOPLE
VILIFYING BILLIONAIRES.
IF YOU THINK THAT A 3 percent TAX, ONLY
ON THOSE ASSETS YOU HAVE ABOVE
A BILLION, IS VILIFICATION, YOU
NEED TO GET OUT MORE.
YOU MAY BE LIVING IN SUCH A
COSSETED COTTON BALL BUBBLE THAT
YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT IT MEANS FOR
ANYBODY TO TELL YOU THE TRUTH.
3 percent IS A LOWER PERCENT THAN ALL
THESE PEOPLE MAKE IN THEIR
ANNUAL RETURNS ON CAPITAL, OKAY?
SHE IS LITERALLY NOT EVEN... I
ACTUALLY DISAGREE WITH HER PLAN
IN THAT SENSE.

The caption changes to "The Week in Review. @theagenda. Tvo.org."

Steve says YOU WANT IT HIGHER.

Anand says I DON'T THINK ANYBODY'S
FORTUNE WOULD GET SMALLER
BECAUSE NOW SHE HAS RAISED IT TO
SIX BECAUSE OF HER MEDICARE FOR
ALL PLAN.
EVEN 6.
MOST OF THESE PEOPLE HAVE A RATE
OF RETURN ON CAPITAL THAT IS IN
EXCESS, IT'S IN THE TENS OR
TEENS IN MANY CASES.
AND SO THE IDEA THAT A PERSON
WHO IS PROPOSING TO MERELY
REDUCE THE RATE AT WHICH YOU
CONTINUE TO GET RICHER THAN
OTHER PEOPLE IS VILIFYING YOU?
YOU'VE GOT TO GET OUT MORE.
YOU KNOW, WHAT'S REALLY
INTERESTING... THERE'S A COUPLE
OF TALKING POINTS THAT WE'RE
SEEING EMERGING UNDER WHAT I
CALL KIND OF THE GREAT PLUT
FREAKOUT OF 2018.
ALL THESE PEOPLE.
YOU CITED SOME OF THEM.
I WOULD CITE MICHAEL BLOOMBERG
IS NOW EXPLORING RUNNING FOR
PRESIDENT OUT OF THE SAME
MOTIVATION.
LEON COOPERMAN WENT ON TV AND
CRIED.
BLOOMBERG IS THE FIRST PERSON IN
HISTORY TO RUN FOR PRESIDENT AS
A FORM OF TAX EVASION, TO
LITERALLY AVOID THIS NOMINEE WHO
MIGHT TAX YOU 3 percent.
AND WHAT IS SO INTERESTING IS
YOU'VE SEEN THE TALKING POINTS.
TALKING POINT NUMBER ONE IS THE
ONE YOU CITED.
YOU'RE VILIFYING, DEMONIZING,
CLASS WAR, RIGHT?
WHEN IN FACT, YOU KNOW, WARREN
ACTUALLY GETS ATTACKED ON THE
LEFT FOR NOT GOING AFTER THESE
PEOPLE HARD ENOUGH, FOR SAYING
SHE IS A CAPITALIST, FOR SAYING
SHE BELIEVES IN CAPITALISM.
SECOND, THE TALKING POINT IS:
HEY, THIS IS NOT BAD FOR US.
WE'RE NOT ABOUT US.
THIS IS BAD FOR YOU.
IF YOU TAX US BILLIONAIRES MORE,
YOU GUYS ARE GOING TO GET HURT.
HERE'S WHY.
ZUCKERBERG SAID, THERE'S GOING
TO BE NO DIVERSITY IN MEDICAL
RESEARCH BECAUSE ALL THESE
DIFFERENT PEOPLE ARE FUNDING
MEDICAL RESEARCH.
APPARENTLY THE KIND OF DIVERSITY
ZUCKERBERG BELIEVES IS IN
MEDICAL RESEARCH.
THERE WILL BE NONE OF THAT.
COOPERMAN SAYS ALL THIS GOOD
MONEY I SPEND ON CHARITY, WON'T
BE ABLE TO DO THAT.

Steve says THEY GIVE TO THE
ARTS, ET CETERA.

Anand says RIGHT.
THIS IS WHAT I CALL ECONOMIC
CONCERN TROLLING.
INSTEAD OF JUST SAYING THE
TRUTH, WHICH IS, HEY, I WANT TO
KEEP MY MONEY, THEY MAKE UP THIS
WHOLE ELABORATE THING OF, IF YOU
TAX US MORE, IT'S GOING TO BE
BAD FOR YOU, EVEN THOUGH WE NOW
KNOW, THIS IS REMARKABLE, YOU
LOOK AT THE WARREN PLAN OR
BERNIE SANDERS' PLAN, BY TAXING
100,000 PEOPLE, WHICH IS A SMALL
NUMBER OF PEOPLE IN A COUNTRY OF
350 MILLION PEOPLE, YOU COULD
FUND PROGRAMS THAT WOULD
TRANSFORM THE LIVES OF EVERY
AMERICAN CITIZEN, WIPE OUT
STUDENT DEBT, FUND UNIVERSAL
FREE COLLEGE, UNIVERSAL DAY
CARE... THERE'S NO PERSON IN
AMERICA WHO WOULDN'T HAVE THEIR
LIFE ALTERED, INCLUDING AFFLUENT
PEOPLE AND VERY POOR PEOPLE AND
EVERYBODY IN BETWEEN BY THESE
PLANS.
THE IDEA THAT YOU CAN DO THAT
ENTIRELY, MULTIPLE THINGS LIKE
THAT, AND NOT ADD TO MEDICARE
FOR ALL UNDER WARREN'S PLAN JUST
BY TAXING 100,000 PEOPLE, TELLS
YOU HOW MUCH MONEY THOSE 100,000
PEOPLE HAVE UNDER THEIR
MATTRESSES, RIGHT?
MY GUESS WOULD BE IN THIS
COUNTRY, YOU COULDN'T DO THAT
MUCH SOCIAL SPENDING JUST FROM
TAXING THE TOP 100,000 PEOPLE.
MAYBE YOU COULD.
MY GUESS IS YOU DON'T HAVE THAT
LEVEL OF CONCENTRATION.
THE FACT THAT YOU COULD DO IT IS
EVIDENCE OF THE PROBLEM.

The caption changes to "For more on this story visit: tvo.org/theagenda."

Steve says WELL, THE PANAMA
PAPERS WAS A BIG DEAL A FEW
YEARS AGO, AT LEAST IT WAS A BIG
DEAL IN THE PLACEMENT IT GOT IN
THE MEDIA FOR A FEW DAYS, AND IT
CERTAINLY REFLECTED ON ALL OF
THE WEALTH THAT IS BEING
SHELTERED IN TAX HAVENS
OFFSHORE.
IT WAS A BIG MOMENT IN
INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALISM.
AND IT LOOKED LIKE IT WAS GOING
TO LEAD TO SOMETHING AND IT
ENDED UP LEADING TO NOTHING.
AND I'M WONDERING WHY.

The caption changes to "Connect with us: Twitter: @theagenda; Facebook, agendaconnect@tvo.org, Instagram."

Anand says YOU KNOW, I THINK IT GOES
BACK TO YOUR OCCUPY THING.
I DON'T THINK ANY OF THESE
THINGS ON THEIR OWN LEADS TO
SOMETHING.
I THINK THIS IS A CUMULATIVE
EFFECT.
I THINK THE PANAMA PAPERS ARE
BAKED IN TO WHY YOU AND I ARE
HAVING THIS CONVERSATION, THE
WAY OCCUPY IS PART OF WHY YOU
AND I ARE HAVING THIS
CONVERSATION, AND WHY THE 2008
FINANCIAL CRISIS IS PART OF WHY
YOU AND I ARE HAVING THIS
CONVERSATION.
TO ME WHAT HAS SLOWLY HAPPENED
IN AN ACCRETIVE WAY IS THAT
VARIOUS STORIES HAVE, LIKE,
NEEDLES, STARTED TO KIND OF
PRICK THE BALLOONS OF A BELIEF
SYSTEM THAT SAID, ENTREPRENEURS
ARE HEROS, GOVERNMENT IS BAD,
GOVERNMENT IS BAD.
THIS MAY NOT RESONATE IN CANADA
AS MUCH.
IN THE UNITED STATES, WE REALLY
HAVE BEEN ON THE RECEIVING END
OF THIS 40-YEAR IDEOLOGICAL WAR.

Now music plays as an animated slate reads "The week in review."

A male guest speaks in the studio.
A caption reads "Hugh Segal. Author, 'Boot straps need boots.'"
Hugh in his seventies, clean-shaven and balding. He's wearing a black suit, blue shirt and striped blue tie.

The caption changes to "A lifelong crusade against poverty. Joining the big blue machine."

Hugh says 35 PERCENT OF OUR SENIORS
WERE LIVING IN POVERTY, AND I
REMEMBER WHEN THAT REPORT CAME
TO CABINET, AND I FIGURED FOR
SURE THERE WOULD BE THE NORMAL
RIGHT-LEFT SPLIT AND NOTHING
WOULD HAPPEN AND TO DARCY'S
EVER-LASTING CREDIT, THE
POSITION HE TOOK WAS THAT THESE
ARE THE WOMEN WHO STOOD BY WHEN
OUR MEN AND WOMEN WENT TO WAR,
THESE ARE THE WOMEN WHO WENT
THROUGH THE... WENT THROUGH THE
DEPRESSION AND THEY'RE NOT GOING
TO LIVE IN POVERTY IN MY
ONTARIO.
AND THAT PRODUCED THE GUARANTEED
ANNUAL INCOME SUPPLEMENT PROGRAM
SUPPORTED BY ALL THREE PARTIES,
WHICH BASICALLY SAID, YOU DON'T
HAVE TO FILL OUT ANY FORMS, YOU
DON'T HAVE TO GO SEE THE WELFARE
DEPARTMENT.
IF YOUR INCOME FALLS BENEATH A
CERTAIN LEVEL, YOU WILL BE
TOPPED UP AUTOMATICALLY.

The caption changes to "Watch us anytime: tvo.org, Twitter: @theagenda, Facebook Live, YouTube."

Steve says IT'S A GUARANTEED
ANNUAL INCOME.

Hugh says YEAH.
IT WAS CALLED THE GUARANTEED
ANNUAL INCOME SYSTEM, GAIN, AND
IT SHOWS WE KNOW HOW TO DO THIS
WHEN WE WANT TO.
AND THAT WAS A VERY INSTRUCTIVE
MOMENT CERTAINLY FOR ME ON THIS
ISSUE.

Steve says MR. McCUE IS STILL
AROUND AND WILL BE 87 NEXT MONTH.

Hugh says INDEED.

The caption changes to "National tory politics."

Steve says YOU MOVED BACK TO
FEDERAL POLITICS.
YOU EVENTUALLY BECAME CHIEF OF
STAFF TO PRIME MINISTER BRIAN
MULRONEY, BUT IN THE COURSE OF
THAT HE LET YOU CHAIR A TASK
FORCE LOOKING INTO THE
GUARANTEED ANNUAL INCOME IDEA.
WHAT EMERGED FROM THAT?

The caption changes to "The Week in Review. @theagenda. Tvo.org."

Hugh says THE REASON THAT IT HAPPENED
WAS BECAUSE WE DID AWAY WITH THE
UNIVERSAL FAMILY ALLOWANCE, AND
I WAS ONE OF THOSE WHO THOUGHT
THAT WE'D NEVER GET AWAY WITH
THAT, BUT WE REPLACED IT WITH A
MUCH MORE ENRICHED CHILD TAX
CREDIT SO LOW INCOME FAMILIES
DID BETTER THAN WAS THE CASE
BECAUSE THE MONEY WAS BEING
SPENT IN A MORE EFFECTIVE WAY.
THE TASK FORCE WAS MYSELF, IAN
GREEN, WHO WAS THE DEPUTY
MINISTER OF HEALTH, AND A BUNCH
OF OTHER PUBLIC SERVANTS, AND WE
RODE IN PERFECT CIRCLES FOR
ABOUT FOUR MONTHS BECAUSE THE
PEOPLE FROM TREASURY BOARD AND
FINANCE DID EVERYTHING THEY
COULD TO KEEP ANY PROGRESS FROM
EMERGING, WHICH IS ONE OF THE
PROBLEMS WITH THE WHOLE IDEA OF
A BASIC INCOME.
EVERY FINANCE DEPARTMENT IN THE
WORLD IS MADE UP OF PEOPLE WHO
ARE AGAINST PROGRAMS THAT
AUTOMATICALLY DISCHARGE CASH TO
HELP PEOPLE IN A CIRCUMSTANCE...

Steve says WHY?

Hugh says BECAUSE THEY GIVE UP THEIR
DISCRETION, THEIR DISCRETION TO
ADVISE ON HOW MUCH YOU SPEND
EXAMINE HOW MUCH YOU DON'T SPEND
IS LIMITED EVERY TIME THERE IS
AN AUTOMATIC PROGRAM LIKE OHIP,
LIKE THE GUARANTEED ANNUAL
INCOME SUPPLEMENT FOR SENIORS,
NOW CALLED THE GIS, IT'S A
FEDERAL PROGRAM NOW.
SO THEY ARE OPPOSED TO ANY OF
THOSE KINDS OF MEASURES AND
THAT... THAT PRODUCES ONE OF THE
POINTS OF RESISTANCE IN TERMS OF
MAKING THE CHANGE.

Steve says I WANT TO TAKE YOU
TO THE 1990s NOW, AND I WANT
TO ASK YOU SOMETHING... FIRST OF
ALL, LET'S TAKE THIS... SHELDON,
DO YOU WANT TO PUT THIS PICTURE
UP?

In a black and white picture, a middle-aged Hugh wears rounded glasses and gives a speech with his arms spread out.

Steve continues THIS IS 1998 AND HERE IS HUGH
SEGAL RUNNING FOR THE LEADERSHIP
OF THE NOW DEFUNCT PROGRESSIVE
CONSERVATIVE PARTY OF CANADA.
THAT IS A CONTEST YOU MIGHT HAVE
WON HAD JOE CLARK NOT DECIDED TO
JUMP IN LATE IN THE RACE AND TRY
TO RECLAIM HIS OLD JOB, WHICH HE
DID.
LET ME SAY THIS: YOU'VE HAD A
TREMENDOUS IMPACT ON CANADA, BUT
YOU'VE NEVER MANAGED TO GET
ELECTED, AND HERE'S MY SMART ASS
QUESTION.

Hugh says RIGHT.

Steve says HOW MUCH OF A SORE
POINT IS IT FOR YOU THAT, IN
SPITE OF ALL THE CONTRIBUTIONS
YOU HAVE MADE, YOU'VE NEVER WON
AN ELECTION?

The caption changes to "Running for PC Leadership."

Hugh says SO I DON'T VIEW IT THAT WAY,
AND MAYBE JUST TO SUSTAIN MY OWN
SANITY.
I VIEW IT THIS WAY: I'VE HAD THE
CHANCE TO BE INVOLVED AT THE
ELECTORAL LEVEL AND TO RUN FOR
OFFICE, TWICE FOR PARLIAMENT AND
ONCE FOR THE LEADERSHIP OF MY
PARTY.
I DON'T THINK I WAS TREATED
UNFAIRLY IN THE PROCESS.
I THINK THE COMPETITIVE PROCESS
IS WHAT IT IS.
I WAS BEATEN BY PEOPLE WHO HAD
MORE STANDING OR MORE BACKGROUND
OR MORE REPUTATION, AND THAT'S
HOW POLITICS WORKS.
SO I'M NOT BITTER ABOUT THAT,
ALTHOUGH I MUST SAY, I REMEMBER
WHEN ERIN O'TOOLE WAS ELECTED AS
A FEDERAL MP AND HE WAS ONE OF
THE YOUNG PEOPLE WHO HAD WORKED
ON MY LEADERSHIP CAMPAIGN ALONG
WITH OTHERS, INCLUDING PATRICK
BROWN AND ET CETERA, AND WHEN HE
WAS BEING SWORN IN, HE WAS KIND
ENOUGH TO ASK... I WAS THEN IN
THE SENATE... SENATOR SEGAL TO
PIN THE PARLIAMENTARY HOUSE OF
COMMONS PIN ON HIS LAPEL, WHICH
I WAS GLAD TO DO AND I SAID AT
THE TIME, WHY IS IT BETTER IN
TERMS OF GETTING ELECTED TO KNOW
HUGH SEGAL THAN TO BE HUGH
SEGAL?

The caption changes to "For more on this story visit: tvo.org/theagenda."

Hugh continues AND ALL THE PEOPLE FROM MY
CAMPAIGN WHO WERE MINISTERS OF
THE CROWN AND MPs AND WHATEVER
ENJOYED THAT AND SO DID I.
BUT I'M NOT BITTER ABOUT THAT AT
ALL.
I'M DELIGHTED TO HAVE HAD THE
CHANCE AND I'M GLAD TO SERVE IN
OTHER WAYS.

The clips end and Steve stands in the studio alone.

He says THAT'S JUST SOME OF
WHAT WE COVERED THIS WEEK ON
THE AGENDA.
FOR MORE, INCLUDING THE FULL
CONVERSATIONS, YOU CAN VISIT OUR
WEBSITE, THAT'S tvo.org, OUR
YouTube CHANNEL AT
youtube.com/theagenda OR OUR
TWITTER FEED: THAT'S
twitter.com/TheAgenda.

Watch: The Internet's Future; Should Billionaires Exist?