Conservative MP Leslyn Lewis has sponsored a petition calling on Canada to withdraw from the United Nations and the World Health Organization, saying Canada’s membership in these bodies has undermined the “health rights and freedom of Canadians.” Liberal and NDP MPs have accused Lewis and the Conservatives of being dangerous conspiracy theorists as a result. What do you think? True North’s Andrew Lawton weighs in.
Also, the British Columbia Supreme Court has ruled that it would violate drug users’ constitutional rights to keep them away from playgrounds. This comes as a new report from the Macdonald-Laurier institute exposes how so-called safe supply policies have failed. The report’s author, National Post columnist Adam Zivo, joins the show to discuss.
Plus, is civility dead? Author Alexandra Hudson calls for a return of civility to bridge the widening political divide in her new book “The Soul of Civility” and comes on to share her thoughts.
Once a vocal opponent of the Freedom Convoy, Ottawa NDP MPP Joel Harden is now complaining about noise bylaw tickets being handed out by police at a pro-Palestine protest.
Plus, an unvaccinated veteran firefighter is suing his former employer, alleging he was misled about keeping his severance pay and pension upon resignation amid Covid-19 vaccine mandates.
And the BC Supreme Court has issued an injunction to a government amendment meant to prevent open drug use at playgrounds, claiming it caused “irreparable harm” to drug users’ human rights.
Tune into The Daily Brief with Cosmin Dzsurdzsa and Lindsay Shepherd!
Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland has been billing thousands of dollars for her use of limousines and taxis to commute around the GTA.
While Freeland has been a staunch advocate for climate change and told Canadians that she didn’t own a car earlier this summer, she has billed $3,040 for limo and taxi transportation, according to access to information documents obtained by Blacklock’s Reporter.
That figure does not include separate trips billed to her official chauffeur, which have accumulated a tab of $6,736.
Freeland billed the expenses for private transportation despite claiming that when it comes to climate change, she is leading by example by not owning a car.
“I think all of us who are in these positions of responsibility need to take a deep breath and ask ourselves what we did today to fight climate change,” testified Freeland at the Senate national finance committee in June.
“What did I do today to be sure that we’re doing the right things for Canada?”
The latest Access to Information report also didn’t include the $3,000 Freeland billed to taxpayers for private transportation while traveling in Scotland from Edinburgh to Glasgow during last year’s COP26 Climate Summit.
Travel between the two cities is accessible by a daily train, which costs $50 for a ticket.
Blacklock’s asked for the numbers following comments made by Freeland in July that she did not own a car and used only carbon-friendly methods while commuting around the Toronto area.
“I right now am an MP from downtown Toronto,” Freeland told reporters last summer. “A fact that still shocks my dad is I don’t actually own a car because I live in downtown Toronto. I am like 300 metres from the nearest subway. I walk, I take the subway. I make my kids walk and ride their bikes and take the subway. It’s actually healthier for our family. I can live that way.”
She later said criticisms to the contrary were “blatant disinformation.”
However, Freeland made no mention of her government-issued car or her frequent use of private chauffeur services in the GTA.
Shortly after those comments Freeland was pulled over while speeding in Alberta and fined for driving 42 km over the legal limit.
Canada’s national auto dealer association is warning that without addressing issues with charging infrastructure and financial incentives aren’t fixed, the federal plan to mandate EV sales could backfire.
Last month, Liberal Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault unveiled Ottawa’s ambitious plan to completely phase out the sale of new gas and diesel cars by the year 2035 within Canada.
Canadian Automobile Dealers Association lead economist Charles Bernard told True North that the industry is excited about electrification but disagreement remains about the role government should play in the matter.
“This is where we are in disagreement with the government, they tend to believe that because EVs will be eventually be the sole purchase option, well (manufacturers) will produce the amount needed and consumers will go the dealerships and buy them,” said Bernard.
According to Bernard, the government’s imagined outcome likely won’t pan out if a sustainable vision for demand and supply aren’t taken into account. Consumers still have many worries about EVs, including their high costs, lack of range and sparse charging infrastructure.
“To remove or reduce these worries – which I like to call behavioral and financial barriers – governments need to create the proper environment for consumers to think that is essentially logical, and financially sustainable, to go along with the policy and purchase an EV,” explained Bernard.
If these aspects are not taken into account, every party involved – including policy makers, auto dealers and manufacturers – would face failure.
“All in all, dealers see this as a new business opportunity and can see the potential, but it has to be done right,” he said.
“It is evident that there are structural elements that need to be fixed (investments in charging and financial incentives) for this policy to work and create the ‘’buzz” within consumers re: the EV transition. If not, this policy could quickly become inflationary and generates frustration among consumers.”
In its plan, the federal government claims it has provisions to require manufacturers to supply more EVs while also offering incentives to bring the price of EVs closer to those of traditional gasoline or diesel vehicles. Additionally, Ottawa has pledged to build 85,000 public EV chargers across the country by 2027.
However, the reality of the market might not necessarily comply with the federal government’s vision for how the transition will play out.
“There might be environments where manufacturers believe there is a better chance for vehicle (X) to be sold: consumer adaptation, charging infrastructure, incentives, regional dynamics, energy access, etc,” said Bernard.
“If (manufacturers) do not prioritize Canada within their own global supply and production chain, they might have to reduce their total of vehicles sold in Canada to meet the threshold.”
Depending on the scenario, a potential outcome could be a drastic reduction in inventory provided to Canada as more countries compete to achieve electrification all at once, which could lead to even higher prices.
The Canadian Automobile Dealers Association is not the only industry group expressing concerns about the direction Ottawa has taken with its EV plan. In a press conference last month, they were joined by the Canadian Vehicle Manufacturers’ Association and the Global Automakers of Canada in demanding that the government address the pervasive underlying barriers preventing more consumers from adopting EVs as their preferred method of transportation.
According to Bernard, EV adoption could be easier, but with current inflation and interest levels, it is harder to sell for consumers.
“If we were in an environment with low interest rates, I think consumers wouldn’t be as worried about the purchase of an EV with the current prices (there are savings to be made in the long run),” Bernard told True North.
“But with high interest rates and economic uncertainty, we could very well see loans getting longer with higher average interest rate. That underlines one of our main requests: federal and provincial incentive programs must be a) sustained and b) improved.”
Additionally, an EV mandate could have consequences for the used car market with prices remaining high for the near future.
“In provinces where the EV transition takes more time (colder and more rural parts of Canada), I suspect that the turnover of new EVs might take more time as well resulting in less residual inventory on the used side,” said Bernard.
Ultimately, the 2035 target year for 100% new EV sales is unlikely, remarked Bernard, pointing to other countries and US states adjusting their targets further into the future.
“I am an optimist, so I think changes in the approach could lead to significant progress – but so far, the federal government seems to be stuck on promoting the potential end result without actually explaining the crucial step-by-step on how to get there.”
Senators and members of Parliament will no longer need to swear an oath of allegiance to King Charles III may no longer be a requirement for MPs and senators if a Liberal MP’s private member’s bill passes.
New Brunswick Liberal MP René Arsenault introduced Bill C-347 which, if passed, would end the tradition of swearing allegiance to the reigning monarch and instead would offer the option to swear an “oath to office.”
While Canadian monarchists disagree with the bill, it’s being welcomed by Canada’s republicans, who feel the procedure is outdated.
Under Section 128 of the Constitution, every newly elected or appointed parliamentarian must swear that they will be faithful and bear true allegiance” to the reigning monarch, which includes a line that the actual name will change from “time to time.”
A member cannot legally take his or her seat in Parliament until after they have taken the oath to the sovereign, under Canada’s constitution.
The oath under the new bill would have members state that they will carry out their duties “in the best interest of Canada while upholding its Constitution.”
However, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has stated repeatedly that the monarchy’s role in Canada is important and that now is not the time to debate this, saying that King Charles III is “deeply aligned” with the values of Canada.
Former federal public servant and member of Citizens for a Canadian Republic, Pierre Vincent, is in support of Arseneault’s bill however. He is Acadian and refused to pledge allegiance to the monarch because of the Crown’s role in the 18th century expulsion of his francophone ancestors from Atlantic Canada.
“They gave me an ultimatum,” Vincent told CBC News, referring to his superiors in public service. “They told me to take the oath or you’re fired and I told them, ‘Nope!'”
Eventually, Vincent won his fight and the oath was quietly removed for bureaucrats. Now he is looking to help parliamentarians do the same.
“Why are we still doing this colonial, medieval stuff that does not coincide with our modern views of diversity and inclusion? I mean, it’s ridiculous. It makes no sense,” said Vincent.
“You know, sacrificing virgins used to be a tradition in Mexico. They’ve dumped that. A tradition itself is not a good reason to be doing things like this, to be violating free speech.”
Critics of the legislation like John Fraser say that republicans are “foolishly” attempting to undo Canada’s Westminster system of government. Fraser is a monarchist and president of the Institute for the Study of the Crown in Canada.
“We live in a constitutional Crown system and trying to break it up piecemeal is not a good way to run a country,” said Fraser.
“If the government of the day feels that it’s time for us to seriously consider becoming a republic, they should draft a referendum and present it to the people. But they also need a backup plan to replace it.”
Fraser said that republicans have not come up with a viable alternative to Canada’s current system.
“Doing away with the oath — it’s all based on emotionalism,” said Fraser. “I don’t think we should marginalize something that is an integral part of our system of government. Look at how republics are faring right now. Look to the south, the U.S. Do we want that here?”
A new poll has found that almost half of Canadians want a federal election called before the scheduled date of October 2025.
The survey numbers come from a Nanos Research survey, commissioned by CTV News, indicating that a significant portion of the population is eager to head to the ballot.
According to the poll, nearly one in two Canadians (46%) want to see a federal election held before the scheduled date, broken down further more people want to see it happen as soon as possible (29%) than those who want an election sometime in 2024 (17%). One in three (33%) of respondents would prefer 2025, while a minority (17%) have no preference.
The desire for an early election was particularly pronounced among certain demographics.
Men are more likely to want an election as soon as possible (36%) than women (23%).
Additionally, the survey showcased a generational split in election preferences.
Canadians aged 55 and older are more likely to prefer having the next election in 2025 (41%) than younger Canadians, like those aged 18-34 (26%), and among those aged 35-54 (28%).
Regionally, the desire for an early election also varies, with the highest number of Canadians in the Prairies preferring to return to the polls as soon as possible (41.3%), the highest of any demographic. Quebec had the lowest percentage of people (20.3%) wanting to have the next federal election as soon as possible.
Conversely, the demographic with the highest percentage of people who want to have the next federal election (39.9%) in 2025 was found in the Atlantic provinces. The prairies had the lowest percentage (21.4%) of people wishing to wait until 2025.
The survey’s findings have potential implications for the Liberal-NDP supply-and-confidence agreement, which is set to keep Prime Minister Justin Trudeau in power until June 2025. However, the Canada Elections Act does not prevent an election from being called earlier as long as it is no later than five years after the previous election.
As previously reported by True North, in late November 2023, Melissa Outwater launched an e-petition sponsored by Conservative MP Michelle Ferreri. Petition e-4701 called on the House of Commons to call for a vote of no confidence and a federal election 45 days following the vote. The petition closed with 386,698 signatures, making it the most-signed e-petition since the House of Commons began accepting electronic petitions in 2015.
While the government is not obligated to act on any petition, it must provide an official response to MPs within 45 days if it garners more than 500 signatures.
True North recently reported that 69% of Canadians think Trudeau should resign before the next federal election, based on a survey by Ipsos.
Despite the growing calls for an early election, Prime Minister Trudeau has remained steadfast in his leadership role.
“I couldn’t be the person I am and walk away from this fight right now,” said Trudeau in his year-end interview with CityNews.
The Nanos survey was conducted between November 30 and December 2, 2023, involving 1,069 Canadians aged 18 and older. The study employed a random digit dialling dual frame (land and cell lines) hybrid telephone and online survey methodology. The margin of error for this survey is ±3.0 percentage points, 19 times out of 20.
On Monday, Saskatchewan’s natural gas utility dropped the carbon tax from home heating bills in response to the federal government’s carbon tax carve-out for Atlantic Canadians. Canadian Taxpayers Federation Alberta director Kris Sims joined True North’s Andrew Lawton to discuss the broader impact this move could have on energy policies across the country.
Keeping drug users away from playgrounds would cause “irreparable harm,” British Columbia’s Supreme Court has ruled.
The B.C. Supreme Court issued an injunction striking down an amendment to the NDP government’s pilot project which tried to keep drug users away from areas where children congregate.
The province was nine months into a pilot project to decriminalize personal possession of illegal drugs, under the weight of 2.5 grams.
By federal exemption, fentanyl, heroin, cocaine, meth, MDMA all became legal to possess and use anywhere throughout the province.
The “playground” amendment was enacted Sept. 18 to walk back leniency on where people could use their drugs, restricting users to be at least 15 metres from a playground, skate park or “outdoor spray pool or wading pool.”
Police were instructed to direct users to leave those areas if they were found using drugs there but were discouraged from making any arrests, based on the Restricting Public Consumption of Illegal Substances Act.
The original decriminalization order already included the exception of schools and “child care facility premises” as restricted areas.
However, following an injunction issued in December, B.C.’s Supreme Court ruled that preventing users from areas included under the “playground” amendment was a violation of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
B.C. Supreme Court Chief Justice Christopher Hinkson ruled that restricting those areas would impose “irreparable harm” to drug users if they were directed away from them.
While Hinkson acknowledged that this would mean public parks would face the reality of bio-hazardous drug paraphernalia being littered around and that other members of the park being subjected to “social harms” like “unpredictable behaviour,” but said these concerns would have to take a back seat given the province’s ongoing overdose crisis.
“I … accept that the attendant public safety risks are particularly concerning given that many of the restricted areas and places in the Act are frequented by seniors, people with disabilities, and families with young children,” wrote Hinkson.
Hinkson ruled that B.C.’s playground amendment was a violation of “the right to life, liberty and security of the person” guaranteed by section 7 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.“I am satisfied that the suspension of the Act … can be properly characterized as a substantial public benefit,” he wrote.
The injunction is temporary and remains in place until Mar. 31.
The plaintiff in the case was the Harm Reduction Nurses Association, who argued that any restriction on drug use in public areas would likely result in “lone drug use” which would increase the number of fatal overdoses.
“It is apparent that public consumption and consuming drugs in the company of others is oftentimes the safest, healthiest, and/or only available option for an individual,” wrote Hinkson.
Lawyers representing the B.C. government argued that the Harm Reduction Nurses Association was using “anecdotal evidence, unsubstantiated conclusory statements” and “layers of unattributed hearsay.”
While Hinkson did accept the counter argument as valid, he instead based his decision on data from a 2022 Death Review Panel by the B.C. Coroner Service, a long time advocate of B.C.’s safe supply initiative.
Hinkson agreed with the Coroner Sevice’s assertion that “criminalizing drug use behaviour ensures an ongoing public perception that it is deviant and shameful, creating a barrier to people seeking the support they need as well as requiring people to hide their needs for fear of criminal sanctions.”
“Given the evidence before me, I find that there is a high degree of probability that at least some of the harm set out by the plaintiff will in fact occur,” wrote Hinkson in his conclusion.
Initially, the “playground” amendment was endorsed by some of B.C.’s most prominent advocates of harm reduction like Victoria Mayor Marianne Alto.
“As the longer-term effects of decriminalization are assessed … it’s important to consider and take steps that specifically protect children,” said Alto in a statement at the time.
B.C. Premier David Eby was also in agreement, telling the provincial Legislative Assembly in May, “Nobody wants this activity affecting our kids, and we will do something.”
Ebay was responding to a number of municipalities in the B.C.’s Lower Mainland who wanted to see their parks and playgrounds remain protected under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act.
However the amendment was encoded under a B.C. government bill passed in November, which advised police who thought someone was “consuming an illegal substance” in a playground or other prohibited area to “direct the person” to either “cease consuming” the drug, or to “leave the area or place.”
If the user ignored the direction of the police, only then could an officer make an arrest or confiscate their drugs, however they are still not permitted to press criminal charges.
B.C. Conservative Leader John Rustad pledged to end open air drug use if elected, saying, “I will use the notwithstanding clause to end open air drug dens and bring back safe streets for families.”
The notwithstanding clause allows governments to protect legislation against certain constitutional challenges.
Canada is giving Khalistani separatism “space” that’s allowing it to balloon, an Indian official warns.
India’s External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar said in a recent interview that Canadian politics abets the growth of Kahlistani activism by allowing separatists to propagate their radical ideology.
Jaishankar’s comments, made to the Asian news outlet ANI, are the latest in an escalating row between Canada and India over the killing of Sikh separatist Hardeep Singh Nijjar in Surrey, B.C..
“The issue at heart is the fact that in Canadian politics, these Khalistani forces have been given a lot of space and allowed to indulge in activities which, I think, are damaging the relationship, and are clearly not in India’s interest, and not in Canada’s interest either. But unfortunately, that is the state of their politics,” Jaishankar said.
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has accused the Indian government of overseeing a plot to assassinate Nijjar and other prominent Sikh activists, an accusation which India has denied.
He also clarified that the recent G20 summit in New Delhi had no relation to the Khalistan issue in Canada. Trudeau made the explosive assassination allegations shortly after returning the trip and subsequent reports indicate that his delegation raised the issue with India privately.
“Getting everybody around on a G20 has nothing to do with the Khalistan issue in Canada. The Khalistan issue is not new,” said Jaishankar.
“I can explain my government, my prime minister. It’s not for me to speculate on other prime ministers.”
Jaishankar’s comments came amid heightened tension between India and Canada.
A recent video message from a Sikh separatist leader warned against flying with Air India on Nov. 19.
The video, posted by Gurpatwant Singh Pannun, a prominent advocate of the Khalistan movement, claimed that Air India flights could face “dire consequences” on that day. However, no attacks were reported on any flights at the time.
The Indian government condemned the video as a “terrorist threat” and said it would raise the matter with the Canadian authorities.
“We shall take up the threat against Air India flights originating from and terminating in Canada, with the concerned Canadian authorities,” said Sanjay Kumar Verma, India’s high commissioner to Canada.
