voice-over: this is bbc news. we'll have the headlines for you at the top of the hour, which is straight after this programme. welcome to hardtalk. i'm stephen sackur. russia's invasion of ukraine served as a wake—up call to those members of nato who have long ignored american demands that they spend more on defence. ordid it? canada, for one, may still be snoozing, still well short of nato�*s defence bending target. —— spending target. of course, canada is a long way from kyiv. but there are concerns about russian and chinese intentions much closer to home, and in arctic north, for example. my guest is canada's defence minister, bill blair. is canada ready to get serious about defending itself?

bill blair in ottawa, welcome to hardtalk. thank you very much, stephen. it's a pleasure to have you on the show. as minister of defence in canada, how embarrassed are you that your country is still significantly failing to meet the collective commitment of nato member states to spend at least 2% of your gdp on defence? stephen, i'm not embarrassed at all because canada, under our government, has been investing very significantly in defence and there's been a very strong upper projectory of defence spending.

we've just introduced our latest defence policy, which injects a significant amount of new investment into defence spending. it builds up greater capabilities, it moves us much closer to the target of 2%, and with some of the other things that we've articulated in this defence policy, i think we are on a strong and inevitable path to achieving that 2% goal. canada is well aware of its responsibilities to our nato allies, to our continental allies, through norad in the united states, and even around the world, and, as well, we are very strongly focused, as you've just mentioned, on our responsibilities to defend our own country and our own sovereignty, and we're making very significant new investments, we'll be at 1.76 as a result of this year's budget, announcements, and we have also made — sent a very clear signal to our allies — we know we have to do more, we're going to do more, we are investing in additional capabilities that will put us on a very clear and strong path to 2%. minister, you dress it up as best you can, but you're basically breaking a very clear promise. your prime minister,

justin trudeau, was one of the nato leaders who last year fully committed to meet that 2% target. you've just told me you're going to get to 1.76% of gdp on defence, but that won't be until the financial year 29—30 — some five years away. so not only are you breaking your promise, you're not even going to get close to meeting your promise after the next five years. and, stephen, if i may be clear, i think we can demonstrate to our allies that we're working hard to actually keep that promise and, in fact, my defence spending budget is going to increase by 27% next year over this year. since 2017, our government began investing significantly in defence. we have more than doubled our defence spending in that ensuing seven years. but as a result of the new investments we're making, we're in fact tripling our defence spending and we still have more to do... if i may say so, minister, that simply shows how little you've spent on defence

over many, many years. the opposition conservatives say that canada's military is simply disfigured by dwindling personnel numbers, rusting warships, deteriorating fighterjets, and one of your experts in the country on defence studies, paul mitchell, says that your government's approach remains lackadaisical and feckless. nobody is convinced by what you've told me. those are remarkable statements coming from, for example, the conservatives who, when they were in government, actually reached a historic low in defence spending of less than 1% of gdp. their abysmal record of support for national defence and defence capability i think speaks for itself — and deeds speak. and, in fact, as i'vejust said, we've already undertaken initiatives to double our defence spending, we're now working towards tripling our defence spending, and in every single case, the conservatives have voted against those initiatives.

so, quite honestly, stephen, their words don't match their deeds, and the criticism that the critics level — there's always old generals who talk about what we have not done, but, quite frankly, i look at their awful record in making sure that the canadian armed forces were ready, the lack of preparation that we inherited from the previous government, the investments that we are making and the work that we are doing now to — for example, we're replacing our halifax class frigates. they have been on the water for 45 years, they actually cost more to maintain than to replace. we're also investing in new fighter aircraft, we're investing in new capabilities for our army, we have more work to do in acquiring underwater surveillance and integrated air missile defence. all of those expenditures are going to take us well past 2%. frankly, it would be very nice if some of those — those feckless critics could be a little bit clearer in showing support for those investments. they talk a good game but they never deliver. polls suggest that many canadians are increasingly concerned about the lack of military capacity

in your country given the geopolitical situation that we see, rising tensions around the world. i just wonder how you, as minister of defence, can be satisfied with such vague commitments to future military capabilities. for example, this phrase in your most recent defence review that you've just been talking about with me, that canada is "exploring options for renewing and expanding "its submarine fleet." now, this is a key strategic asset and you can't be more vague than simply saying "we're looking at options." stephen, one of the things i will not put in our defence policy is unfunded commitments, and so the money that our government committed to defence spending in this latest budget, which we now have before the house, but which only introduced in april by ourfinance minister, the money that we've committed to that is going to significantly advance it, but i would point out, stephen, we've been very clear —

we know we have to invest in underwater surveillance, we have to replace — we have an ageing victoria class fleet that, frankly, we bought them second—hand from the uk in the �*90s. those ships are no longer fit for purpose, we need to replace them. i'm doing the work now to identify exactly what our requirements are and to go into the marketplace and send a clear signal to those that we require this capability, and when that work is done — and it will not take that long — i'll be able to go back to my government and secure the funding that will be necessary to do it. but, stephen, you mention the canadians' growing concern. that, quite frankly, has been very purposeful for me. i was named the defence minister about nine months ago. when i found at the time that there was not a great deal of support among canadians for significant new investments in defence — there are natural and understandable concerns about affordability and housing issues, healthcare and dental care, support for seniors, lifting kids out of poverty,

all of those things are important obligations for our government — but i began very purposely having conversations with canadians about the need to invest more in defence, and what we have seen over the last eight months is a near—doubling in support among canadians for the investments that we know we have to make in defence, and i think one of the things that was most compelling for canadians with a refocusing of our defence policy on our responsibilities to defend canada, to defend our north, to defend the arctic approaches because a the changing geopolitical situation and the actions of russia and china in — around the world, but particularly in our arctic, climate change is making the area more accessible... i want to go to specifics like your arctic strategy in just a second, butjust to stick with the big picture. the achilles heel of canada for a very long time has been your reliance on the united states and the assumption that you'll always be protected by your big neighbour and partner to the south. 100 years ago, i'm mindful that a famous canadian liberal politician said "canada is a fireproof house far "removed from all flammable materials."

you can't be so complacent anymore, can you, and the americans, your long—time allies and partners, are putting real pressure on you now. we had a senior american general saying that he's going to have tough conversations with canada, and we heard donald trump, when he was president, mocking justin trudeau for the failure of your government to spend enough on defence. the americans will force you to get real, won't they? well, stephen, i think you're kind of ignoring canada's long history of being there for our allies. canada was the first answer to britain's call in the second and in the first world war, most of the investments of the canadian armed forces have not been domestic, as you say, because we have the benefit of geography — we are surrounded by three oceans, one of which is mostly — has mostly been frozen, at least in the past, and we are — have a benign neighbour, and the support of superpower in the united states. but canada's military has been

active and engaged in europe and in the indo pacific and in the middle east and around the world, but we also recognise... but with respect, let's take one specific — let's take ukraine — canada's given less military and financial assistance to ukraine than small european countries, relatively small countries like denmark and norway. how do you justify that? i would just simply point out i think you might want to go back and check the math simply because canada's investment in ukraine since the onset of the war — first of all, we didn't begin in 2022, when russia invaded ukraine at the latest time, but in 2015, we began training the ukrainian armed forces in ukraine, and we did that in partnership, by the way, with the uk. in 2022, after that invasion, we had to move some of that training out of ukraine into poland and the uk, but we've continued to make those investments. but canada's actually contributed nearly $14 billion in both military and other financial aides to ukraine

since the onset of hostilities, we work very close with president zelensky, i work very closely in partnership, i spoke to him a couple of times this week, with minister umerov and their defence industry minister as well. there are really strong ties between our two countries. we have — from the very outset of hostilities, and even well before hostilities — been there for ukraine and will continue to be there for ukraine. well, you know, you say you've been there for ukraine, i know that you've spoken to the ukrainians many times as, indeed, hasjustin trudeau, but i look at the message you send and compare it with that coming, for example, in recent weeks from president macron in france who has said that "it is time to stop talking of red lines," he won't even rule out the possibility of sending french and western troops into ukraine, into the theatre of war. you, on the other hand, have always very explicitly said — and i'm quoting something you said in the past — "i do not want to put canadian armed forces "anywhere near that combat theatre." listen, i was at that meeting with president macron,

i think it was an important conversation for all the european and nato leaders who were at that table, and i was present as well. we're all looking for ways in which we can step up and assist ukraine more. but at the same time, i think you will note that my position is very closely aligned with your government's position with respect to the supports that we are providing to ukraine, and at the same time, we also understand the caution that many of our european and nato allies have with respect to the deployment of troops in the country, we're very respectful of those concerns, and as well, we work very closely with ukraine. what i have also said is that i am quite open to deploying troops in ukraine at the right time, but in consultation with our nato allies, this is not the time and there are other ways in which we can continue to support ukraine. you talked about the arctic a moment ago. let's talk specifically about the far north. do you see russia and, indeed, china is hostile actors now in the arctic north, and what are you doing, if that is the case,

to combat the threat you see? for canada, arctic sovereignty and arctic security isn't merely having a plane fly by periodically, or even a boat sail by or even a ship sail by when the ice is out. it really is about investing in a persistent presence for our military, but also, strengthening infrastructure for the people that live in our north. that's how we maintain our sovereignty. what we have seen is far more aggressive action of our adversaries in the north. we certainly have seen this and witnessed it for some period of time, but increasingly, from russia as well, and also, we're starting to see far more interventions from the people's republic of china in the arctic as well. and i think part of it is the arctic is also, i think, an opportunity, but an important source of security on our supply chains for the free world, and so, we see that those could potentially be challenged by our adversaries and we have a responsibility to our allies and to our own country to be there more persistently, to be stronger, and to put

the infrastructure in place, the capability and the people that are going to enable us to maintain our security. and, by the way, stephen, you spoke a little bit about the work that we do with the americans. canada recently committed nearly $40 billion to nato modernisation, and that's going to include installations in canada by canadians spending canadian dollars on arctic over—the—horizon and polar over—the—horizon, installations on arctic satellite receiving stations, new northern support hubs new northern support hubs where we will be able to deploy our new fighterjets, our transport planes, our awacs surveillance fleet and even our tactical helicopters. just to be clear about one thing... we are investing significantly in being there for our allies in the north. right. sorry to interrupt, minister, butjust to be clear about one thing — we've talked about the showdown between nato, western powers and russia in ukraine with all of the western assistance going to ukraine. in the past, there's always been an attempt to keep the arctic separate from other geopolitical tensions,

indeed, there is this arctic council, which russia plays a full part in, where the effort is to get all the arctic countries to talk to each other, to get a dialogue going, which is insulated from wider geopolitical tensions. is that era over? is the arctic council effectively dead now? stephen, it's an excellent question, and i think with the advent of finland and sweden into nato, there is a responsibility. i've been meeting this week with the nordic ambassadors to canada, but also, with my colleagues, who are defence ministers from those countries, and so for finland, sweden, norway, iceland, denmark, the united states, and us as well, and i think the united kingdom has a role here as well, we recognise that we have a responsibility in the protection of nato.

the north atlantic treaty organisation has a northern frontier, and that is the arctic, and i agree we do not want to see that becoming a theatre of conflict, and there are a number of important diplomatic efforts, including the arctic council, but, quite frankly, that relationship has been badly shaken i think by russia's aggressive actions, the illegal invasion of ukraine, and has cause for deep concern among the allies. we understand that in order to actually keep the peace in the arctic, we have to be strong in the arctic. it's one of the reasons i've turned our national defence policy strongly towards that responsibility, and we're going to work very closely in collaboration obviously with the continental defence of the united states, but with the arctic council, with all of our nato allies, and i think it is a shared responsibility. when we are collaborative and we work together, i think we can be strong and we can deter that ever becoming a theatre of conflict. briefly, if you can — does canada want to join the so—called aukus group? that is australia, the uk, alongside the united states, in a special security arrangement. now, its short—term goal is to achieve cooperation

on submarine technology, the idea to give australia access to that submarine technology, but in a more wide sense, it is information sharing on technology, ai, new weapons systems. does canada want to join, and how quickly? very clear, the first pillar of aukus was really about the sharing of nuclear technology for nuclear submarines, and canada, quite frankly, is in the market for conventionally powered submarines, that is what our navy requires to do the work we do, and at the same time, our five eyes partners — australia, united kingdom and the united states — are our closest allies and we work very closely together. we've had discussions with them, i have every expectation that we will have an opportunity to work on the second pillar of aukus, and, as you mention, that includes, i think, canada has very significant contributions to make that would be very significant to the original aukus partners. there are a number of other

countries that can make a real contribution to the second pillar of aukus. canada, certainly, is quite anxious and willing to be part of that. your ambition is clear. have you considered the fact that if donald trump wins the white house in november, donald trump may well not want canada in aukus? he has described justin trudeau variously as "dishonest", "wea k", "a far—left lu natic". it's pretty unlikely trump is going to want to cosy up to canada underjustin trudeau. with respect, i've worked with the united states for decades on a number of different fronts, on the public safety side and now in the defence side. there's more to america than the white house, and our relationship with the us military, our relationship with their congress, and with americans, i think, is the strength and the basis of our continental security. we're going to continue to work hard on that, and we are making the investments in modernisation, and in our own military to be good partners to the united states, and i'm very confident that we have a lot to contribute. 0ur allies in the five eyes

know that canada has much to contribute, and i'm very confident. let's talk about the middle east, let's talk about israel and what it may be about to do in gaza, in particular, mounting an all—out assault on rafah, where roughly 1.3 million displaced palestinians are currently living. joe biden has said in the last 2a hours, "if the israelis go in to rafah, "i am not supplying the weapons that they have used "to deal with the cities. "we are not going to supply the weapons and the artillery "shells that have been used by the israelis." is canada saying the same thing? i'm a little confused about your defence relationship with israel. have you already halted all arms supplies or not? yes, we have not been supplying arms to israel throughout any portion of this conflict. we do have a trade relationship with them, but it does not include the provision of armaments to israel.

we have a very rigorous export regime, but no permits have been issued since this conflict began. let me also say that canada shares president biden�*s concern about a conflict in rafah, because of the vulnerability of a significant civilian population, and we have called for a ceasefire, we called for the return of those hostages, and greater access of humanitarian aid into the region, and we are deeply concerned about the impact on innocent civilians, and we share that with our allies in the united kingdom and in the united states, and we will continue to work towards a peaceful resolution of that conflict. to be clear, though, your relationship with israel clearly has been damaged by what the israelis have done in gaza in recent weeks and months. you're saying that right now canada is no longer prepared to supply arms to israel, right? what i have said is, frankly, we strongly support israel's right to exist and defend itself, and we strongly condemn the hamas attack that occurred... that's not what i asked you.

i know, but i think it is important context. we strongly condemn the hamas attack, but at the same time, we have every expectation that israel will uphold international law and do everything possible to protect innocent civilians. we have expressed to them our strong concern and condemnation of the humanitarian crisis that has been created in gaza, and particularly we are very worried about continued expansion of hostilities in rafah, because there is a very vulnerable population there. before we end, i do want to get to one other arena, and that is your relationship with china. ajudge, who launched a commission of enquiry into foreign interference in canadian affairs, particularly politics, concluded that china has been the most persistent and sophisticated foreign interference threat to canada, and the government must re—establish trust by informing the public of what has been going on and taking real, concrete steps to deter and counter it. can you convince the canadian public that you are capable

of counteracting chinese cyber threats? yeah, first of all, i agree completely with the judge, that we have a responsibility to make sure canadians are aware of the threat the people's republic of china represents. two, very important critical infrastructure in canada, they have made a concerted effort to interfere with our society and with our elections. i was public safety minister prior to being the defence minister. i issued a very public document to canadians in 2020, alerting them to the threat of chinese political interference. it's work that our government has been undertaking... one of the allegations was that you and the prime minister were not really across the nature of the threat, you didn't even read some of the papers that your own intelligence service provided about what the chinese were doing. and, unfortunately, you are misinformed on that one, stephen, because in fact the testimony before

the enquiry was that our intelligence services did not supply that information, and it did not share that with the government at the time, including i, as the minister. but we have taken very concerted efforts to respond to that, we havejust introduced a foreign agent legislation in canada. there are other countries that are also hostile to our country and to our interests, and who have been acting concertedly. one of the things i'm responsible for is the communications of the security establishment. we have just invested heavily in the creation of a cyber force. we are doing what is necessary to protect ourselves against those types of attacks. just to end on a thought that i aired earlier — canadians in the past might have thought they were pretty flameproof. i guess the message today is canada is not as fireproof as you and other canadians might have hoped? you know, for 150 years, canada has stepped up to fight alongside our allies, to defend world peace and the international rules order that has kept us all safe. we recognise that our country is now, because of the changing

climate, the changing technologies and the activities of some of our potential adversaries, we are also now closer to the front line. canada shares the largest maritime border with russia of any country in the world. i recognise we have responsibilities to defend our country, our continent, and to be there, strong for our allies. but i think if you're going to be strong around the world, you have to be strong at home. bill blair, thank you forjoining me on hardtalk. my pleasure, stephen. thank you for having me. hello. the weather looks decidedly mixed over the next few days, just as it was on monday. for some of us, there was a little bit of sunshine and some warmth — 2a celsius, or at least very close to it, in parts of northern scotland. compare that with 1a celsius

in southwest england, with cloud, with outbreaks of rain — all in association with this area of low pressure and this slow—moving frontal system. now, this weather front is now slowly on the move, northwards and eastwards. you can follow that weather front here for tuesday morning. that's where we'll see outbreaks of rain across parts of eastern england, for a time across the midlands, certainly some rain across northern england, southern and central scotland. rain tending to pull away from northern ireland, and for wales in the southwest, it's a mix of sunny spells and heavy showers. northern scotland should see some dry and bright weather. we could well see the highest of the temperatures here, around 21 celsius, more generally, 16—20. and then, through tuesday night, here's our weather front continuing its very slow journey northwards and eastwards. much of the rain, though, i think fizzling out. it'll be a bit misty and murky in places as we start wednesday morning, temperatures generally between 9—12 celsius. 0ur weather front still in play, still a band of clouds, some splashes of rain —

we may see some heavier rain pushing back in across some eastern and northern parts of england. elsewhere, some spells of sunshine, a scattering of showers — we could possibly see the odd heavy thundery shower breaking out in the northwest of scotland. temperatures in northern scotland likely to touch 22—23 celsius, but in sunny spots elsewhere, we will be in the high teens or the low 20s. for thursday, still the remnants of that weather front providing cloud and a focus for some showers. but we will see some showers breaking out quite widely on thursday, some heavy, thundery ones in places. but again, in the sunshine, temperatures getting into the low 20s celsius — not bad at all for the time of year. now, as we head into the end of the week and the weekend, this area of low pressure tending to weaken, the centre of the low tending to be to the south of the uk. so spots further north actually may escape most of the showers and see a decent amount of dry weather. temperatures could still get into the 20s celsius for some. more showers further south, some of those heavy

and thundery, but still with some spells of warm sunshine in between.

live from london, this is bbc news

israeli protesters block aid trucks destined for gaza — smashing open food packages — in the occupied west bank. protesters return to georgia's capital, demanding the government scrap a law that they worry will silence dissent. and some of the biggest names in international cinema are gathering on the french riviera for the cannes film festival, which kicks off later today. hello. i'm sally bundock. israeli protesters have blocked aid trucks destined for gaza, throwing food packages onto the road and ripping bags of grain open in the occupied west bank. the lorries, which were set upon at the tarqumiya

checkpoint west of hebron, came from jordan and were headed