Conservative pundit and independent journalist Aaron Gunn has been barred by the BC Liberals’ Leadership Election Organizing Committee (LEOC) from running in its upcoming leadership race.
Gunn, who ran an explicitly conservative platform, responded to the news on Twitter Friday saying that those who believe in common sense and free speech are no longer welcome in the party.
“Today, it became clear that conservatives, and all British Columbians who believe in common sense and freedom of speech, are no longer welcome in today’s BC Liberal party,” tweeted Gunn.
‘I will be releasing a full statement later today, but rest assured, if you think this fight is over, you couldn’t be more wrong. The fight is only just beginning.”
BREAKING: The BC Liberals have red-lit conservative pundit Aaron Gunn from running in their upcoming leadership race.
Without approval from the Leadership Election Organizing Committee, Gunn will not be a candidate in the 2022 party election. https://t.co/pvuadkXFnr
In a statement released by the party, comments made by Gunn on social media were cited in the decision to bar him.
“After a thorough review of Mr. Gunn’s statements on social media, both public and private, and after having provided Mr. Gunn with the opportunity to respond to concerns raised by certain of those statements, LEOC concluded that to approve Mr. Gunn’s candidacy would be inconsistent with the BC Liberal Party’s commitment to reconciliation, diversity and acceptance of all British Columbians,” said LEOC Co-Chair Roxanne Helme.
Without Gunn in the race, party members will have to choose between the following candidates: Ellis Ross, Gavin Dew, Kevin Falcon, Michael Lee, Val Litwin and Renee Merrifield.
The move comes after Gunn was attacked by both the ruling BC NDPs and by potential opponent MLA Michael Lee who accused Gunn of holding allegedly “intolerant views.”
“Michael is exemplifying the worst aspects of politics. He is the classic politician who says one thing and does another, and people are sick of this behaviour,” Gunn told True North.
“I represent tens of thousands of ordinary British Columbians who want to see change in politics. Meanwhile, Michael Lee is committed to regurgitating talking points from our NDP opposition.”
Gunn announced his leadership bid on October 9, 2021 in his hometown of Victoria, BC.
As Justin Trudeau’s government seeks to “decarbonize” Canadian industry, the Liberals are advancing what they call a “just transition” devoted to “helping workers and communities thrive in a net-zero carbon economy.” While it sounds noble, it’s an initiative based on the idea of phasing out jobs in Canada’s oil and gas sector. Moreover, it neglects to recognize the work being done by the energy industry, such as investing in carbon capture and storage, which reduce emissions without punitive carbon taxes.
In this edition of True North’s The Andrew Lawton Show, we do a deep dive into the so-called just transition, and shine a light on what the sector is doing outside the government.
This panel features Alberta Enterprise Group president Danielle Smith, Modern Miracle Network founder Michael Binnion, Carbon Upcycling CEO Apoorv Sinha, and Avatar Innovations co-founder and CEO Kevin Krausert.
Two concurrent decisions from Manitoba Chief Justice Glenn Joyal from the Manitoba Court of Queen’s Bench upheld the province’s lockdown policies, according to a press release issued by the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF) on Thursday.
The first decision held that the authority given to Manitoba Chief Provincial Public Health Officer Dr. Brent Roussin was constitutional. The second decision said that Manitoba’s lockdown restrictions were justified in violating the Charter rights of freedoms of conscience, religion, expression and peaceful assembly.
Joyal found there had been no constitutional violations of the right to life, liberty, and security of the person and equality rights with the province’s lockdown measures, which included restricting stores from selling goods the government deemed “non-essential” and closing churches for worship.
Joyal said in his decision that these lockdown measures are appropriate.
“In the context of this deadly and unprecedented pandemic, I have determined that this is most certainly a case where a margin of appreciation can be afforded to those making decisions quickly and in real-time for the benefit of the public good and safety,” said Joyal.
“Determination of whether any limits on rights are constitutionally defensible is a determination that should be guided not only by the rigours of the existing legal tests, but as well, by a requisite judicial humility that comes from acknowledging that courts do not have the specialized expertise to casually second guess the decisions of public health officials.”
The hearings on these cases occurred in early spring.
JCCF constitutional lawyer Allison Pejovic said in the press release that she disapproves of the decision.
“We are disappointed in these decisions and in the unwavering deference accorded to public health officials,” said Pejovic. “We are carefully reviewing the decisions and are considering an appeal.”
The JCCF alleged the Manitoba legislature has been sidelined in favour of Roussin’s authority throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. The orders Roussin enacted were not considered, debated, amended or studied by the Manitoba legislature.
The JCCF said the onus was on the Manitoba government to justify these restrictions under the Charter as reasonable, necessary and beneficial.
This court action contended that the Manitoba government, Roussin and Manitoba Acting Deputy Chief Provincial Public Health Officer Dr. Jazz Atwal failed to consider the social and health costs of lockdown measures.
Expert reports filed by the JCCF demonstrated the lockdown measures were not justified. Submissions included Stanford University epidemiology professor Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, former Manitoba chief provincial public health officer Dr. Joel Kettner and Oakville Trafalgar Memorial Hospital infectious specialist Dr. Thomas Warren.
Similar lawsuits have been initiated by the JCCF throughout the pandemic.
The JCCF filed a lawsuit against the Alberta government for Bill 10 last year. Bill 10 allowed cabinet ministers to make new laws and offences related to public health without consultation from the Alberta legislature.
Another lawsuit was initiated against the Ontario government on behalf of two elderly residents of long-term care homes and their daughters who are caregivers. The JCCF will be asking the court to review the government’s decision to keep caregivers locked out of long-term care homes.
Calgary’s new mayor-elect Jyoti Gondek says her first order of business is to declare a “climate emergency” and work to “move past” oil and gas. True North’s Andrew Lawton says Gondek’s comments amount to a declaration of war on the energy sector, and a huge flip flop from her previous comments about the importance of that industry to Calgary.
Plus, Tk’emlups Chief Rosanne Casimir dresses down Trudeau for his Tofino vacation, plus a look at the House of Commons’ undemocratic vaccine mandate.
The federal government has spent millions of taxpayer dollars on its gun buyback scheme without actually buying any guns.
As of May 2021, the estimated cost of the scheme has risen to over $1.5 million due to several contracts.
Originally the Department of Public Safety gave a contract to IBM Canada to create a framework for the program costing taxpayers $1.1 million. Several months later, that contract increased by $395,6000 after signing onto optional services.
The Canadian Taxpayers Federation (CTF) has since called the wasteful spending a “boondoggle” for the government.
“We’re already seeing costs go higher and the government hasn’t bought back a single gun,” said Federal Director with the CTF Franco Terrazzano in a press release.
“The gun buyback won’t make Canadians safer, but it has all the makings of another big taxpayer boondoggle.”
Not only has the program been wasteful, the head of the RCMP’s National Police Federation (NPF) has stated that the initiative fails to address the issue of gun crime altogether.
“The narrative is that we need to restrict gun ownership because that will curtail crime, when really the evidence is that illegal gun trafficking leads to criminals owning guns, which leads to crimes with firearms,” said NPF president Brian Sauvé.
In total, the Firearms Buyback Secretariat spent upwards to $2.2 million on salaries and operations without actually producing any results.
On top of that, the government wants to give the Secretariat an additional $4 million.
According to estimates by the Parliamentary Budget Officer when the buyback scheme is completed, it could cost taxpayers up to $756 million to buy all the guns back from legal firearm owners which Prime Minister Justin Trudeau banned last year.
“The gun buyback is an expensive program that won’t keep Canadians safe,” said Terrazzano.
“The feds need to scrap the gun ban and buyback, because we don’t need another ineffective policy and taxpayers can’t afford to waste more money.”
On Truth and Reconciliation Day, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau rejected an invitation by the Tk’emlúps First Nation to visit and instead opted to hit the beaches of Tofino, BC. Nearly 3 weeks later, Trudeau finally visited the Tk’emlúps First Nation – and things got pretty awkward.
Plus, the legacy media and activists continue to falsely claim that Canada committed genocide. In fact, the claim of 215 unmarked graves found near a residential school has still not been confirmed.
Candice Malcolm discusses these stories and more on The Candice Malcolm Show.
The SickKids Hospital has joined other medical institutions across the country in forcing staff to take unpaid leave for not being fully vaccinated.
Recently the hospital revealed that 147 employees are currently on unpaid leave after not being able to prove they are fully vaccinated.
“It is our hope that every staff member who is currently not fully vaccinated will become fully vaccinated at their earliest opportunity and return from leave,” said SickKids.
Numerous doctors, nurses and hospital staff throughout Canada have already been taken off of their jobs despite increasing pressure on the hospital system.
In British Columbia, a nursing union that represents 48,000 employees came out against the province’s mandatory vaccine order saying that removing any staff during a time of crisis could be disastrous for the healthcare system.
According to Ontario government mandates, hospital staff have a choice to either be fully vaccinated or subject themselves to regular testing.
Ontario Premier Doug Ford has indicated that while he encourages everyone to be vaccinated, making it mandatory would worsen healthcare staff shortages.
Although the Ford government has not mandated vaccination, hospitals and companies in the province have taken it upon themselves to institute their own mandatory vaccination policies.
Earlier this month, 15,000 healthcare workers faced suspension without pay in Quebec after the province instituted a similar mandatory COVID-19 vaccine.
“Most of them are not going to go back to health care if it stays. Some love their jobs and are dedicated; they work so many hours and shifts,” said lawyer Natalia Manole who is representing them in court.
“(The order) is not reasonable. A decree is supposed to be made in the public interest; our position is that this is not in the public interest.”
A much anticipated public inquiry into anti-Alberta energy campaigns released its findings today confirming that “well-funded foreign interests” have waged a “decade-long campaign of misinformation” to landlock the province’s oil and gas industry.
The report reveals that there are enormous amounts of foreign funding flowing into Canada with the purpose of influencing public opinion against Alberta energy developments.
According to the report, registered Canadian charities at large have received nearly $15 billion in foreign funding since 2010.
“Total foreign funding of ‘Canadian-based’ environmental initiatives was $1.28 billion between 2003 and 2019. The commissioner states that these figures are likely significantly understated,” the report summary describes.
Included in that figure was $925 million in foreign funding for “environmental initiatives,” while more specifically $54.1 million was specifically earmarked for “anti-Alberta resource development activity.”
The inquiry is based on findings by Canadian environmental charity researcher Vivian Krause and further forensic accounting work done by the firm Deloitte Forensic Inc. To achieve their findings Deloitte pored over 200,000 documents and investigated 200 organizations.
“Of substantive and significant importance for Albertans and Canadians to note, is the large quantum of foreign funding flowing into Canada for whatever purpose, and which has the potential to influence matters of public interest to Albertans and Canadians,” wrote Commissioner of the Public Inquiry into Anti-Alberta Energy Campaign J. Stephens Allan.
With regard to how much this funding impacted oil and gas developments, Allan remarked that while the anti-Alberta energy campaigns “have played a role” it was impossible to determine the exact economic damage due to the numerous factors at play including natural market forces.
However, Allan noted that many environmental NGOs have taken credit for the cancellation of projects like Keystone XL and the Northern Gateway Pipeline.
According to the report, there were “several attempts to influence decision makers – including those in federal and provincial governments – in a way that could constitute an attempt to directly or indirectly delay or frustrate the development of Alberta’s oil and gas resources.”
Among the campaigns include Lead Now’s 2015 Vote Together campaign intended to beat former prime minister Stephen Harper.
Some of the major funders identified by the report include Pembina, Greenpeace Canada, LeadNow, the Dogwood Initiative and re-granters like the Tides US Foundation. Of the dozens of entities identified as funders, all but one had headquarters in the US.
Allan made several recommendations in the report including further regulatory and governance measures for Canadian non-profits, more meaningful dialogue with First Nations, rebranding Canadian energy projects, leading a national resource development strategy and further collaboration on research into energy science.
The single-minded officials in charge of combatting black racism at the city of Toronto have used the pandemic as an excuse to put together a special food plan for the city’s black families.
The Toronto Black Food Sovereignty plan, recently adopted unanimously by council despite having no budget attached to it, seeks to increase access to “healthy, affordable and culturally appropriate food” for Toronto’s black communities.
The plan was developed by the city’s anti-black racism unit — staffed largely with black activists — which is operating this year with a $1.5-million-plus budget.
It includes a pile of actions to ensure black residents have access to safe and nutritious food they allegedly don’t have now. This plan includes giving public money to black groups to create an annual black food sovereignty conference, funding urban agriculture for black communities, black food businesses, black entrepreneurs and black food markets and providing free city space for black-serving farmers markets.
This whole plan makes me wonder whether the city of Toronto’s motto is still “diversity our strength.”
If so much time and money are being directed to black-only food and farmers’ markets, is that not discrimination against white and other minority residents?
A city spokesman says the money will flow in 2022 when various city divisions start implementing the plan. Like so many other similar projects approved by council in the past few years under the watch of Mayor John Tory, money seems to be no object when it comes to appearing “woke.”
The rationale for the plan, according to an 18-page report replete with wokespeak, is that more than 30% of black children live in “food insecure households” which has put them at greater risk of contracting COVID-19.
The city’s own statistics, however. Which were compiled to May of this year show that south Asian, southeast Asian and Latin American communities have had a higher rate of COVID cases than members of Toronto’s black community.
The report claims that neighbourhoods with higher black populations in Toronto have “inadequate access” to grocery stores and blacks in Toronto lack the ability to secure “culturally appropriate” food.
The report also alleges there is “excessive policing” in grocery stores in low-income neighbourhoods with a greater concentration of black residents.
Asked in what neighbourhoods police hang out in grocery stores, the city spokesman named Weston, Mount Dennis, Black Creek, Rexdale, Jane and Finch, Regent Park, Riverdale, St. James Town and in east Scarborough.
The spokesman noted these neighbourhoods are also where food stores stock poor quality produce.
I have no way of knowing whether grocery stores stock substandard produce in these areas as I don’t shop there. But given the limited police resources throughout the city to handle the most basic of crimes, I highly doubt that officers have been assigned to watch black residents at supermarkets.
I suspect if police frequent certain areas like St. James Town, Rexdale or Jane and Finch, it’s because there are frequent shootings in these areas, not because they’re worried about what black residents do in their local grocery stores.
The report’s authors — there were four in total (one lists herself as an ancient wisdom teacher and spiritual liberation activist in addition to being a director at the city) — also maintain that “legacies of colonialism and vestiges of institutional anti-black racism” have prevented black community members from having access to parks, community gardens and the city’s trees.
If the report’s assumptions and proposals aren’t suspect enough, officials with the city’s anti-black racism unit began their recent presentation by trying to out-woke their Indigenous colleagues.
They did so by giving land acknowledgements not just to native tribes but to “ancestors of African origin and descent.
“(The anti-black racism unit) acknowledges we are all Treaty peoples including those who came here as settlers,” the presenters said.”(We acknowledge those) brought to these lands as a result of the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade and Slavery.”
It should come as no surprise that there was unquestioning buy-in from Mayor Tory and council, who in their desperation to pander to the vocal minority and prove they’re not racist, have themselves created divisiveness in this city and a culture of haves and have-nots.
It is also terrifying to think that none of these proposals were even costed out, suggesting councillors and the mayor are so intent on appearing “woke” they don’t care the least bit about demanding accountability.
As the country awaits the final results of Alberta’s equalization referendum, a new poll indicates that a wide majority of Canadians think the federal economic redistribution program is unfair for the Western province.
According to a survey by Maru Public Opinion, 66% of Canadians stated that certain aspects of the equalization program is unfair to Alberta, which contributes an outsized share of money sent to the rest of the country.
Most Canadians from across the country agreed that some elements were unfair, including 53% of people in Atlantic Canada, 55% of those polled in Quebec and British Columbia and 57% of Ontarians.
The highest rate of those who believed equalization was unfair was predictably found in Alberta, which reported 84%, and Manitoba and Saskatchewan where 69% stated it was unfair.
“The concept of equalization is well understood and embraced in this country. It’s the formula that isn’t understood. It’s the formula that causes political differences,” said Maru Executive Vice President John Wright.
Additionally, 69% of Canadians agreed that if provinces blocked and objected to pipeline construction, they shouldn’t be benefiting from Alberta’s contributions to equalization.
“There are people in this country that believe if Alberta can’t get its resources to marketplace then it should be given some special exception to whatever equalization means,” said Wright.
The survey polled 1,515 Canadian adults from Maru Voice Canada online panellists and was conducted between October 15, 2021 and October 18, 2021. A similar probability sample size has a margin of error of +/- 2.5% or 19 times out of 20.
On Monday, Albertans headed to the polls for municipal elections and also a number of referenda, one of which addressed removing equalization from the constitution.
According to early results from Calgary, nearly 58% of voters voted “yes” on the equalization referendum.
