Tuesday, October 27, 2026

Your Morally Corrupt Government and You

The worst of the worst:

Qatar and Turkey are two of the world’s only countries tomaintain diplomatic relations with the terrorist group Hamas.

The Qatari capital of Doha has been home to Hamas’s official political office since 2012. Turkey’s foreign minister hosted a Hamas delegation just two weeks ago, and President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has praised Hamas as a “group of liberators.”

Both Qatar and Turkey are autocracies. Qataris have been subject to the executive rule of a hereditary monarch ever since independence in 1971. Turkey is a relative newcomer to autocratic rule, thanks to an all-out crackdown on political opposition by Erdogan.

Both countries have problems with modern slavery. According to the keepers of the Global Slavery Index, Turkey has as many as 1.3 million individuals “living in modern slavery.” When Qatar hosted the World Cup in 2022, several rights organizations published reports alleging that venues had been constructed by migrant forced labour.

And the newest thing Qatar and Turkey now share in common is that in 2026 they both received their first bilateral visit from a sitting Canadian prime minister.

Mark Carney dropped in on Qatar in January and just wrapped up a three-day visit to Turkey over the weekend. In both instances, the Prime Minister’s Office cited the “historic” significance of Carney being the first of 24 Canadian prime ministers to make a dedicated visit. …

The rhetoric is similar in two other instances of Carney paying a rare visit to a notorious human rights abuser.

In July, Carney’s arrival in Saudi Arabia was trumpeted by his office “as the first visit to the country by a Canadian Prime Minister in 26 years.”

The earlier prime ministerial visit to Saudi Arabia, by Jean Chrétien in 2000, was part of a 12-day tour of the Middle East that included stops in Egypt, Syria and Israel.

And at the time of Carney’s visit, a Global Affairs travel warning for the country urged Canadians to “avoid non-essential travel,” and warned that their social media history could land them in a Saudi jail.

“Saudi nationals and foreigners have been sentenced to lengthy jail sentences for social media activities, including posts or simple ‘likes’. This included social media activity that took place outside Saudi Arabia and sometimes many years in the past,” it reads.

Nevertheless, in a joint statement with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, Carney didn’t just speak of increasing trade, but of a “partnership … based on trust, friendship and a shared vision of confronting global challenges with pragmatic, swift and tangible cooperation.”

On the same foreign trip that included Qatar, Carney also paid a visit to Beijing, where he praised the People’s Republic of China as a partner in a “new world order.”

Trips to Beijing are more common for Canadian heads of government, but this was the first in nearly 10 years following a deep chill in Sino-Canadian relations brought about by allegations of Chinese interference in Canadian elections and Beijing’s arbitrary 1,000-day detention of Canadians Michael Spavor and Michael Kovrig.

In a meeting with Chinese Premier Li Qiang, Carney said “the world has changed much since that last visit and I believe the progress that we have made, and the partnership, sets us up well for the new world order.”

(Sidebar: a new world order, eh?) 

A joint statement, meanwhile, would pledge closer “law enforcement cooperation” between Beijing and Canada.

 

The Liberals have never met a dictatorship they didn't like. 

 

Also - Canadians don't really care about communism.

Caring interferes with more trivial matters:

I was at an embassy function recently and listened to speeches on what we must do with North Korea. There was talk of goodwill and engagement and warm, empty gestures. It upset me.

Canadians share a kind of naïvety about this world. We shrink from frank discussion of human rights for fear of hurting people’s feelings, and prefer sanitized talk about trade rather than prison camps.

For me, this is a bitter pill. I know how communists work. My family fled Vietnam in 1975 and has never returned.

We lived in Saigon. My father worked for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. I followed in his footsteps and worked in the department. I was young then, fresh from school after graduating from the Sorbonne in Paris. My parents did not belong to any political party.

When my country fell in ‘75 I was working as a press attaché at the Vietnamese embassy in Bangkok. To return home would have brought instant arrest. Communists hated diplomats second only to South Vietnamese army officers. I was stateless but managed to find my way to Canada.

I knew friends and colleagues who could not escape. They were not tortured right away. First they were instructed to report to a certain office, then they were sent to “re-education” camps to “retool” their thinking. Then they were imprisoned in chains.

Some survived. A few escaped. One colleague was tortured so badly he can barely walk to this day. Others hid in the villages and tried to erase their past. I lost contact with many of my friends after 1975.

Vietnam, China, North Korea, all have labour camps. All abuse human rights and rule of law. Perhaps these realities are too raw for Canadians. Instead we presume common interests and points of goodwill that do not really exist. These are not normal societies as you and I know them; normal gestures are pointless.

Governments promote trade with communist countries but there is no evidence this diminishes the power of police states or has ever closed a single prison camp. They fill their pockets with dollars and we fill our marketplace with goods made by cheap labour – 50¢ an hour compared $20 in Canada.

Trade is important but my interest is freedom. If we are going to do business with these countries, we have the opportunity to protest the conditions of their people. I know it’s delicate – I am a former diplomat – but it can be done effectively.

When I was in the company of diplomats at that embassy function in Ottawa I told them what I’ve now told you. We cannot be bullied by North Korea. We cannot be cajoled into giving them aid that will be confiscated by the Party or hectored into treating them as a functioning society.

Human rights must be a cornerstone of diplomacy, and Canada should never remain silent when others lose their freedoms.

 

Oh, but it is! 

Canada has sunk into a swampy, enervating apathy that bars it from caring about the oppressed, the sick and disenfranchised. 

Canadians mimic the very things authors in their dystopian tomes warned us about. 

They won't go back. 

 

And:

Cabinet’s decision to grant Chinese electric vehicle makers a 278,989-car import quota over five years marked “a new path,” says an internal Department of Foreign Affairs memo. The censored eight-page document made no mention of slave-made parts: “If we concede that electric vehicles required forced labour in their supply chain, will you put them on the list of products banned in Canada?” 

 

 

 

The government is still expecting its friends on the Supreme Court to sanction its tyranny:

The Supreme Court yesterday served formal notice it will hear a last appeal from cabinet over the legality of emergency measures it used against peaceful Freedom Convoy protestors in 2022. Two lower courts determined cabinet’s actions including the freezing of demonstrators’ bank accounts were unlawful: “It captured people who simply wanted to join in the protest by standing on Parliament Hill carrying a placard.” 

 

 

Grifter demands to use an iron fist, too:

Labour Minister Patty Hajdu would gain “ambiguous and dangerous” powers to quash legal strikes under cabinet’s bill C-39, union executives said yesterday. The bill would codify strike bans by executive order, a measure used by cabinet 10 times in two years: “This concept is ambiguous and dangerous.”

 

 

 

It's about censorship and not safety:

Federal Identity Minister Marc Miller says he would consider broadening the scope of the digital safety bill to include gaming platforms, in order to help protect children from predators who use them to target kids.

The bill will make social-media companies block users below the age of 16 from having accounts. The companies would be able to seek exemptions from the under-16 ban if they can convince a new digital safety regulator that they have sufficient safeguards to protect children.

Child protection advocates have raised concerns that platforms used by gamers, such as Roblox and Discord, where children and adults can communicate, are not covered by the digital safety bill and are being used for child exploitation.

In an interview Friday, Mr. Miller said he would “absolutely consider” making changes to the bill through regulations to make gaming platforms safer for children, and would listen to suggestions in committee.

The proposed under-16 ban follows a similar move in Australia, where experts say many children have found ways to get around it by migrating to smaller platforms, including Roblox, not covered by their law.

 

 

 

Abolish the Indian Act?

I doubt it:

 

 

It's Just a Failed Economy

It's over and even the fraud knows it:

The federal government may be on track to take in almost$20-billion more in taxes and other revenue this year than had been expected less than six months ago, National Post has learned, potentially handing Prime Minister Mark Carney much more room in his second budget to cut taxes, trim Canada’s massive deficit or spend.

In its Spring Economic Update in late April, the government said it expected to rake in $529.6-billion this fiscal year, which would have been an increase of 3.5 per cent over the previous year.

But instead, according to government figures up to the most recent month, Ottawa has so far this year taken in 7.4 per cent more than the previous year, more than double the pace of growth that had been expected. If the growth continues throughout the year, that translates to $549.4-billion, or $19.8-billion more than what had been expected in April.

Economists say the federal government, like the provinces and territories, is sitting on extra cash this year due to higher-than expected income tax payments, a small jump in inflation, and strong markets for many natural resources, particularly oil. That means increases in both corporate income tax and sales tax.

Trevor Tombe, professor of economics at the University of Calgary and director of fiscal and economic policy at the School of Public Policy, said he’s surprised at the federal government’s revenue spike, although he emphasized that Ottawa shouldn’t assume that those increases will continue.

Canada’s trade relationship with the U.S. remains uncertain while growth has been sluggish and the government’s fiscal situation is dire, leading to questions about how long the revenue spike will continue, economists say.

 

(Sidebar: this US.) 

 

He squeezed blood out of a stone.

Good for him.

** 

Although crude exports have meaningfully recovered, supply is still below demand, shipping costs have skyrocketed and refined product exports from the Middle East have risen much more slowly. On top of that, Ukraine has been relentlessly and successfully attacking Russian refineries. While Russia normally exports as much as half of its fuel oil output, production constraints have led it to go so far as to ban diesel exports. Diesel prices around the world have hit record highs and shortages are likely persist into 2027.

Why do these conflicts affect Canadian fuel prices? Canada is not only a large exporter of crude oil, it is a net exporter of finished petroleum products such as diesel and gasoline. However, the fuel market is global. Diesel prices in Canada are determined by the value of diesel in the North American and global markets, not Canada’s domestic balance of production and consumption. Canadian and American refiners respond to international shortages by moving more diesel into markets where it is more scarce, and thus can fetch higher prices.

This normal market response has provoked accusations from the B.C. and federal NDP that refiners are exploiting overseas conflicts and war profiteering. There have even been calls for capping diesel prices and windfall profit taxes. This is not a phenomenon exclusive to the left. U.S. President Donald Trump, being particularly sensitive to the impact of high diesel prices on the upcoming midterm elections, has also floated the idea of an export ban on diesel.

Yet such ideas would exacerbate the current crisis, as they would restrict markets rather than increasing supply, and discourage more North American refining. At a time when the world needs more diesel, the priority should be maximizing Canadian refinery throughput and keeping trade flowing, not restricting access to the supplies that remain.

Canada can do little in the short term to alleviate the global energy crisis, but provincial and federal governments have other tools to lower prices at the pump, as up to 40 per cent of the cost of a litre of gas comes from taxes.

The low hanging fruit has been addressed by the federal government: in addition to removing the consumer carbon tax in 2025, Prime Minister Mark Carney suspended the federal fuel excise tax in April, saving Canadians 10 cents/litre on gasoline and four cents/litre on diesel. Alberta and Prince Edward Island have also suspended provincial fuel taxes.

But there is another lever to pull: the clean fuel regulations. Enacted in 2023, the clean fuel regulations (CFR) are designed to progressively reduce the greenhouse gas emissions associated with gasoline and diesel sold in Canada.

Rather than imposing a fixed charge per litre, they require suppliers to reduce the life-cycle carbon intensity of the fuels they sell through a complicated combination of tradable credit markets, life-cycle emissions accounting and different compliance pathways. Blending in lower-carbon fuels such as ethanol and biodiesel is one of the principal pathways.

Although the CFR is not as transparent as an excise tax, we know how much it costs consumers because Atlantic-Canadian fuel prices are regulated, and most provincial regulators explicitly allow suppliers to recover compliance costs in gasoline and diesel prices.

In July, the Nova Scotia regulator assessed the CFR compliance costs at 13.57 cents a litre for diesel and 12.24 cents a litre for gasoline. To add insult to injury, HST is charged on top of these costs. The Parliamentary Budget Officer estimated in 2023 that the cost of the CFR would rise to 17 cents per litre of gasoline and 16 cents per litre of diesel by 2030, and lower Canada’s GDP by 0.3 per cent.

There is an even more insidious aspect to the CFR. To meet their carbon intensity targets, many Canadian refiners blend biofuels into their petroleum products. But Canada is not self-sufficient in their production. More than half of Canada’s biofuels are imported, predominantly from the United States.

Somehow, in the middle of a trade war and an energy crisis, it has gone unnoticed that Canada — the aspiring energy superpower — has artificially made itself dependent on the United States for fuel. The vulnerability was brutally exposed with U.S. President Donald Trump’s diesel export ban threat, when refiners were scrambling to find out if renewable diesel bound for Canada would be caught in the net.

It is a favourite line of the Carney government that, amidst geopolitical rupture and trade disruption, “Canada is focused on what we can control.” The CFR is at the top of the list of self-harming, expensive and distortive policies that Canada controls, and has every interest in rolling back.

** 

The next time you pull up to the gas pump and grumble about the soaring cost of filling up the tank, take solace you don’t live in Norway or Mexico.

Those two countries are among a number of energy-producing democratic nations whose gas prices are far higher than what Canadians pay, according to an analysis by Benchmark Canada, a Macdonald-Laurier Institute project that compares Canada with its peers.

Which doesn’t make it cheap. Canadians paid an average of about $1.85 a litre for gas by mid-October, the Benchmark Canada data shows, but that’s less than Norway, the United Kingdom, Australia and Mexico. Only Americans, who pay the cheapest at roughly $1.57 a litre in equivalent Canadian dollars, and Brazilians pay less for gas.

In almost all the countries surveyed, government taxes and policy are driving higher prices.

“The underlying cost of the commodity is roughly the same,” said Patrick De Haan, head of petroleum analysis at GasBuddy. “It may vary slightly, but it’s all in taxes and potential rules and regulations.”

Taxes make up about 21 per cent of the Canadian pump price at normal rates (17 per cent if you take account of the federal excise tax, which is suspended until next January). In Norway, which has more oil per person than any other of the seven democracies highlighted by Benchmark Canada, they make up 51 per cent, the data showed. Again, American drivers enjoy the lowest gas tax at about 12 per cent.

 

 That's not all we over-spend for:

Canada spends the second-highest share of its economy on health care among 32 countries with universal or systems, yet ranks near the bottom for the availability of doctors, hospital beds, and much of its medical technology, according to a recent study.

The study, conducted by the Fraser Institute, examines how Canada compares with other high-income countries in health-care spending, resource availability, and access to medical services.

After adjusting for differences in the age of each country’s population, Canada ranked second-highest in health-care spending as a percentage of GDP in 2024, the most recent year for which comparable data were available. Canada spent 11.9 percent of GDP on health care, behind Chile at 12.6 percent.

Despite the high spending, the study found that Canada generally has fewer medical resources per capita than many comparable countries.

The report is a 2026 update to a long-standing series that began in 2002. Its main data sources include OECD databases, the Canadian Institute for Health Information, and the Commonwealth Fund, a U.S.-based private foundation focused on health-care policy.

The 32 countries included in the study are OECD members, have universal or near-universal coverage for core medical services, and are classified as high-income countries by the World Bank.

 

At this time, some Canadian parrot would repeat the often-heard line that at least we are not the US, a tired refrain that serves to distract rather than address why we spend more for rationed care than for medical professionals and necessary medicines.  

 

The EU can save us, right?:

 

Oh.

 

Also:

 

 But ... engineers who drive Ubers ...