New Statistics Canada data shows that the price of some basic grocery items across Canada is surging in the double digits.
The latest monthly update by the department indicates that items like chicken, tomatoes and fruit have all been impacted by inflation, according to Blacklock’s Reporter.
In British Columbia, the price of chicken thighs grew by 21% over the year, from $6.58 to $7.97 per kilogram.
As for Ontario, consumers had to pay 13% more for chicken breast and 24% more for bacon.
Meanwhile, Quebecers observed that the price of potatoes grew by an average of 24%, while pork loin was up 17% since last year.
In Alberta, consumers faced a price hike for tomatoes by 13% and an 18% spike in the price of peppers.
The Bank of Canada has denied that Canada has been undergoing inflation in the past. Only half a year ago, former governor of the Bank of Canada Stephen Poloz said that price hikes did not indicate inflation.
“This is not inflation. This is normalization of prices,” Poloz told the House of Commons finance committee on May 18, 2021.
“I agree with what I’ve heard from various central banks, including our own, that the inflation we’re observing right now is very likely to be transitory. I can say flippantly not to worry about inflation.”
To date, the Bank of Canada has revised its inflation targets up to 4.75%.
Critics like the Canadian Taxpayers Federation (CTF) have blasted the federal government’s vast spending and the Bank of Canada over inflation concerns.
“Since the pandemic began (beginning of March 2020), the Bank of Canada has printed more than $380 billion,” CTF Federal Director Franco Terrazzano told True North in October.
“The stats are showing what everyone is feeling: pain from sky-high cost of living. It’s time for the feds to take the printing press out of overdrive, rein in the overspending and provide tax relief.”
The CBC, with their new commitment to hard-hitting climate journalism, publishes an op-ed by a man who orders too much takeout and is therefore experiencing eco-anxiety because of all the plastic containers he has accumulated. While this particular CBC op-ed may be useless fluff, the concept of “climate anxiety” is worth delving into. True North fellow Lindsay Shepherd discusses what “climate anxiety” is and how the leftist-socialist-environmentalist class uses these types of concepts as cop-outs and excuses for their bad habits.
That’s the only way to describe how most of our campaign staff and volunteers felt on Friday, October 22nd, upon hearing the news that my candidacy had been rejected less than two weeks after entering the BC Liberal leadership race.
For those from outside BC, the BC Liberals are the main centre-right, free-market alternative to the NDP in the province – comprised of both federal Conservative and federal Liberals (not unlike the Sask Party in Saskatchewan).
After being resoundingly defeated by the NDP one year ago, and following the resignation of then-leader Andrew Wilkinson, the BC Liberals launched a leadership race and embarked on a quest of “renewal.” I entered the race, with the support of my 100,000+ social media followers, just over two weeks ago.
And within those first two weeks, there was little doubt that momentum was on our side.
Over 2,000 British Columbians registered to vote for our campaign while our first two events, in Victoria and Comox, saw higher turnouts than events hosted by the other candidates. We were also the first to roll out a detailed platform and take strong positions, including opposing B.C.’s carbon tax and strongly defending freedom of speech. These are issues that the other leadership candidates have yet to touch.
It was all going according to plan – until it wasn’t.
It was at this point we received the shocking news that an unelected, seven-person committee within the BC Liberal Party (known as the Leadership Election Organizing Committee or LEOC) had rejected my candidacy and, in effect, ended our campaign. LEOC defended the decision, in a public statement, by arguing approval of my candidacy “would be inconsistent with the BC Liberal Party’s commitment to reconciliation, diversity and acceptance of all British Columbians.”
Setting aside the fundamental point that subjective decisions on the worthiness of leadership candidates should be left to party members, this decision begged the question on which evidence did they base their judgment?
The party pointed to three tweets I had made over the past two years that argued the Government of Canada had not committed “genocide” against Indigenous people, and a fourth tweet that stated a historical fact about the origins of residential schools.
At worst, it could be argued that one of the tweets was more terse than necessary. But it is difficult to see how any of these tweets expressed extreme or factually dubious opinions that fall outside mainstream Canadian political thought. Especially considering “genocide” is most commonly defined as “the deliberate killing of a large number of people from a particular nation or ethnic group with the aim of destroying that nation or group” – a rather serious accusation which, I believe, should only be used in those rare, extreme circumstances (such as the Holocaust, for example).
It also raises the important sociological questions of whether the new litmus test for running for office in Canada includes some sort of compelled acknowledgement that Canada is a genocidal state, and if a pre-requisite for reconciliation, which I wholeheartedly support, rests on such an acknowledgement as well?
Another question that might be asked is if First Nations, who are finally beginning to share in the economic and societal benefits of Canada, are being served by such decisions? Ironically, of the unelected, seven-person committee that denied my candidacy none, to my knowledge, are actually Indigenous. Meanwhile, the one Indigenous candidate in the leadership race, Ellis Ross, enthusiastically supported my entry.
At 31-years-old, I fully recognized the magnitude of my undertaking when I entered the leadership race, and while I believed we could win, that was not my primary motivation for running.
I believe, as a society and culture, we have become, to an unhealthy degree, terrified of open and honest debate. We are scared of discussing ideas and issues, our history and traditions, and being OK with agreeing to disagree (rather than trying to cancel anyone who holds a contrarian opinion).
While the party has, to this point, been tight-lipped about the social media posts they used as justification (sincerely or not) to block my candidacy, I felt it was important to have them out in the open. This way we can, hopefully, discuss and debate not only their merits but the appropriateness of their use by the BC Liberal Party to justify exchanging the democratic rights of their members with the judgement of an unelected seven-person committee in the middle of a leadership race.
The College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (CPSO) has filed claims against four doctors who are publicly opposed to COVID-19 vaccines with the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, according to a statement emailed to True North on Wednesday.
The CPSO said in the statement that they are seeking to compel Dr. Celeste Jean Thirlwell, Dr. Mary Elizabeth O’Connor, Dr. Mark Raymond Trozzi and Dr. Rochagne Kilian to comply with ongoing investigations into their practices, including their issuance of medical exemptions for COVID-19 vaccines and testing.
“In all four cases, the court filings indicate that their respective investigations were commenced following receipt of information, which includes copies of inappropriately issued exemptions,” said the CPSO.
Dr. Thirlwell, a psychiatrist at the Centre for Sleep and Chronobiology, is alleged to have stated through her lawyer that if CPSO investigators attempt to obtain records from her office, “it will be resisted physically, by private security.” Dr.Thirlwell has taken the position that the college lacks “jurisdiction to police” medical exemptions.
Dr. O’Connor, a family doctor from Ottawa, allegedly obstructed an investigation by refusing to provide medical records and patient information requested by the CPSO. Dr. O’Connor says she “will not be able to move forward without [the College’s] precise definition of COVID-19.”
Dr. Trozzi, a family doctor from Harrow, Ont., believes the college does not have a “legal basis” to request patient lists and charts. Dr. Trozzi said “an Ontario doctor is free to provide medical exemptions relating to COVID-19 vaccinations as he or she sees fit.”
Dr. Kilian, a former emergency room doctor from Owen Sound, Ont., was sent a notice because the college has received confirmation that she provides vaccine exemptions through Enable Air, a website facilitating the purchase of them. Dr. Kilian has taken the position that the college does not have jurisdiction to request patient lists and charts.
Dr. Trozzi and Dr. Kilian were restricted from issuing medical exemptions for COVID-19 vaccines, testing and masks on Oct. 15.
These two doctors could no longer issue exemptions related to these matters, and they were ordered to maintain a detailed log of patients that would be submitted for inspections by the CPSO.
It remains unclear whether the college considers any exemptions the doctors issued prior to these restrictions as legitimate.
The CPSO barred Kilian from practicing medicine on Oct. 29, alleging her activities put patients’ health at risk.
She has spoken out multiple times against mask mandates, the safety of vaccines and lockdown measures.
Thirlwell, O’Connor, Trozzi and Kilian could not be reached for further comment in time for publication.
The Canadian government sent more delegates than any other G7 nation to the ongoing COP26 conference, including the summit’s host state, the UK.
True North relied on a provisional list of registered participants published by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) to achieve the count.
According to the UNFCCC document, Canada sent 276 delegates to COP26 including Prime Minister Justin Trudeau himself, numerous federal ministers, several provincial premiers and dozens of federal staff and media.
The number of delegates sent by Canada outnumbered even the amount of people sent to attend by the conference’s host state, the UK.
In total, the UK sent the second-highest number of delegates numbering in at 227 attendees.
The UK was followed by Japan who sent 225 delegates, while France sent 195 officials to attend. The US came in fifth place with 133 delegates sent.
Meanwhile, Germany came second last with 120 delegates sent, followed by 66 attendees sent to COP26 by Italy.
As first reported by Blacklock’s Reporter, the Department of Environment has refused to reveal the cost of the diplomatic trip.
Among those listed as being part of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s entourage was his own personal videographer, photographer, speechwriter and a media team of 17 made up of press secretaries and communications directors.
A number of reporters from CBC News, CTV, Global News and other outlets also attended.
Additionally, it is unclear whether taxpayers footed the bill of former environment minister Catherine McKenna, who was spotted at the conference but whose name does not make it into the official COP26 roll call.
An estimated 30,000 delegates have been sent by nations and organizations around the world to the two week event. According to local outlet Sunday Mail, delegates boarded over 400 private jets to attend, contributing an estimated 13,000 tonnes of CO2 pollution into the environment.
Are people finally getting fed up with cancel culture?
More celebrities are speaking out about it and more people are realizing just how ridiculous it is to cancel someone just because you don’t agree with them.
After admitting that the province’s healthcare system couldn’t handle losing thousands of healthcare workers, Quebec Health Minister Christian Dubé revised the provincial mandatory vaccine policy so that it only applies to new hires.
Dubé made the announcement during a press conference on Wednesday.
“To deprive ourselves of 8,000 people [in healthcare] will have devastating consequences for our network,” Dubé said.
“For many Quebecers, myself included, this remains incomprehensible that health workers won’t get vaccinated. “I think some people will be disappointed by the decision. I want to remind all Quebecers that they’ve gotten vaccinated in very big numbers… that meant we could make this decision today.”
Instead of forcing vaccinations on those who are unwilling, Quebec will now allow the unvaccinated to be regularly tested for COVID-19 three times a week.
Currently, Quebec is reporting that 97% of all healthcare workers are vaccinated against COVID-19. According to Dubé, some healthcare workers dealing with high-risk patients in areas such as nursing homes will be reassigned to a different job.
In a statement released Wednesday afternoon, the Ontario government announced that the province will not implement mandatory vaccination policy for healthcare workers. The province pointed to the negative impacts of the policy on healthcare systems in Quebec and British Columbia.
Recently, BC Health Minister Adrian Dix revealed that the province had to cancel and delay some surgeries after 3,325 unvaccinated healthcare workers were put on unpaid leave by the provincial government.
A True North estimate from October based on media reports found that approximately over 26,000 healthcare workers faced discipline or firing at the time for being unvaccinated across Canada.
The government is changing what it means to be “fully-vaccinated.” Two shots may not be enough as Canada’s top public health “expert” Dr. Theresa Tam says the general population will need another vaccine shot. Tam’s latest ruling comes just three days after she said boosters would not be required for Canadians.
Nobody is surprised by the government’s moving goal-posts anymore. Whether it’s vaccine passports or Canada’s early response to the virus, Canadians have been accustomed to non-sensical and contradictory rules.
True North’s Candice Malcolm says it’s no wonder Canadians are hesitant when the lockdown authoritarians constantly tell us to “trust the science.”
The Liberal government won’t reveal how much taxpayers spent on sending 276 delegates and members of the media to Glasgow, Scotland.
According to Blacklock’s Reporter, among those who attended include former environment minister Catherine McKenna who travelled to the event as a VIP. The Department of Environment refused to say if McKenna’s expenses were covered by taxpayers.
“Canada has taken steps to ensure diverse perspectives are reflected in international forums,” department spokesperson Samantha Bayard told Blocklock’s Reporter.
McKenna is not listed on the official delegate list according to the outlet, however, she was spotted attending meetings at COP26.
Among those attending alongside Prime Minister Justin Trudeau include Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault, Deputy Environment Minister Thelma Hogan, Assistant Deputy Minister Catherine Stewart, Climate Change Ambassador Patricia Fuller and Climate Change Director Joanna Dafoe. They are also accompanied by 25 advisors and negotiators.
Trudeau’s personal photographer, videographer and speechwriter also travelled to Glasgow with the prime minister. His entourage was also accompanied by 17 press secretaries and communications directors and four CBC reporters.
Two elected Green Party MPs also got to attend.
While at the conference, Prime Minister Trudeau pledged on Monday that he would cap emissions for Canada’s oil and gas sector.
“We will limit oil and gas sector emissions today and ensure they decrease tomorrow at the speed and scale needed to reach net zero by 2050,” Trudeau told global leaders in a short speech.
In response to the announcement, Alberta Premier Jason Kenney told reporters on Tuesday that the idea was “totally unrealistic” and that his province was never consulted on the matter.
“I don’t know why they would make such an announcement without consulting the province with the most oil and gas reserves in Canada,” Kenney said.
“Their approach seems to be, well it’s totally unrealistic, and their approach, if they were to actually achieve their targets without using these transition technologies, would be devastating to the entire global economy.”
In 2018, 16% of all homeless people in Canada’s largest city identified as Indigenous. In the city of Toronto’s most recent homeless census, 15% said they had Indigenous ancestry.
In 2018, 31% of the homeless surveyed in Toronto were black. That percentage remained unchanged at 31% in this year’s street census.
White homeless people actually jumped to 41% this year from 36.6% in 2018, according to the street count.
The street census was completed on April 21 and cost $150,000, the highest amount to date of counts conducted every three years since 2006.
Despite the relatively static numbers – except for white homeless people – Toronto City Hall has dictated in its latest Homelessness Solutions Service plan to give preferential treatment to black and Indigenous homeless people, instead of helping every individual regardless of race.
In fact, the first two priorities of the service plan – approved at an Oct. 21 committee meeting – are to “meaningfully address Indigenous homelessness” and “anti-black racism.”
Does that mean that it wasn’t meaningfully addressed in the past?
“Indigenous people are overrepresented in homelessness due to the ongoing effects of colonialism, intergenerational trauma and racism,” the service plan states, noting that the city’s shelter bureaucrats are committed to “honouring and working” within the context of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada.
That includes “Indigenous cultural learning and development for staff” and increased financial investments in Indigenous housing and homeless services.
For as long as I’ve been covering the homeless cause – some 20 years – the Indigenous have been evident on the streets of Toronto. Yet never before have city staff claimed the Indigenous population are homeless due to “colonialism.”
Actually, they’ve been in large part ignored.
In 2016, I wrote about councillor Joe Cressy holding court on Bloor St. W. while an Indigenous man lay sprawled out on the sidewalk behind him, completely ignored.
The same goes for “confronting anti-black racism.”
Even though the 2018 homeless census showed the impact of a huge influx of refugee claimants into city shelters – many from Nigeria and largely due to the illegal border crossings at Roxham Rd. – “anti-black racism” didn’t seem to be a problem then.
Nevertheless, shelter officials feel that a “distinct approach” to serve black people experiencing homelessness is now required.
It is so needed, according to the city’s bureaucrats, that an internal “anti-black racism” unit has been established within the shelter division – one that will provide “training, guidance and resources” so that there is an ongoing dialogue about “anti-black racism.”
If the city spent as much time monitoring the activities of service providers in shelters and ensuring there are consequences for shelter residents who commit crimes – as they do wringing their hands on make-work projects trying to be “woke” – the city would be far safer and the homeless industry would be pushed to deliver results.
The fact that the term “solutions” is attached to the name of the plan is extremely disingenuous.
City officials – as they have for years – claim their goal is to end chronic homelessness; yet the numbers of those who continue to find themselves without a permanent roof over their heads after six months are staggering, despite the hundreds of millions of dollars poured into homeless services each year.
In 2018, 48% of those surveyed said they were homeless for six months or more; 36% for more than a year.
In this year’s census, more than half report being without a home for upwards of six months, 65% for up to five years and a scandalous 13% for 10 years or more.
Unfortunately, the Toronto shelter system seems to be proof positive of the idiom, “if you build it they will come.”
In this case, the famous line from the Field of Dreams movie is not a good thing.
Shelters were supposed to be an emergency band-aid but this year’s census shows that the number of homeless being served in emergency shelters has jumped 57% – from 3,649 15 years ago to 5,720 this year.
This street census, like the ones that have been done before, is supposed to frame future policies and targets to improve the system.
