Mid-Week Post

 

Your middle-of-the-week agent provocateuse …

 

What does he care? He has his pension:

Former environment minister Steven Guilbeault will resign as a Liberal MP. He will make the announcement to his colleagues Wednesday morning in caucus and will give a speech at the House of Commons later in the afternoon to explain his reasons.

A source close to Guilbeault confirmed the information to the National Post after news of his impending resignation was reported by different media outlets.

The source confirmed Guilbeault is leaving politics because of the recent deal Prime Minister Mark Carney struck with Alberta to advance a new oil pipeline to the West Coast, but also because of the government’s environmental policy setbacks in general.

 

 

We could be sweeping up right now:

It’s now officially been a year that the Carney government has been musing about maybe, possibly building an oil export pipeline from Alberta to the B.C. coast. 

“Will I support building a pipeline? Yes,” was what Prime Minister Mark Carney told CTV on May 13, 2025. He also said that he’d expressed such thoughts “repeatedly.”

Although Carney retains extraordinary powers to greenlight such a project at any time, this month he announced only that he intends to approve construction by September 2027. According to a subsequent report by CIBC World Markets, the “best case scenario” is that the project might be moving oil by 2034.

And a West Coast pipeline has already been on the drawing board for more than 20 years. As early as 2006, Enbridge first started inking contracts for the proposed Northern Gateway pipeline, only for the project to be cancelled by then prime minister Justin Trudeau in 2016.

So, if everything goes to plan, the current state of affairs is that Canada might be able to begin operations on a West Coast oil export pipeline more than 28 years after such a thing was first proposed.

This is a glacial pace unknown to any other major oil producer. While Canada doesn’t have a monopoly on cancelled oil infrastructure or red tape, its inability to move its own oil across internal borders is unlike few other jurisdictions on earth. 

The Strait of Hormuz bypass pipeline

If the United Arab Emirates’ official timelines are to be believed, they’ve recently delivered a masterclass on how to fast-track an oil export pipeline.

In March, the UAE first saw its oil exports thrown into disarray by intermittent Iranian blockades of the Strait of Hormuz, the sole waterway connecting UAE oil ports to the Indian Ocean.

Just this month, Abu Dhabi National Oil Co. announced that it was already half-done on a new pipeline that would bypass the blockaded strait, with oil set to start flowing in 2027.

The UAE is able to fast-track this pipeline largely because it’s following an existing right-of-way. The project merely expands the existing Habshan-Fujairah pipeline, which first opened in 2012.

However, that situation also neatly describes the Trans Mountain Expansion Project, which remains Canada’s only non-U.S. export pipeline built in the last 50 years. That project, completed in 2024, followed the route of the 1950s-era Trans Mountain Pipeline.

Even then, it took 11 years for TMX to go from application to completion. And it wouldn’t have been completed at all if the federal government hadn’t bought out the project in 2018.

Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline

Canada’s chief vulnerability in getting pipelines approved is jurisdictional conflict. Any attempt to construct a pipeline across provincial borders will often spur litigation and obstruction from neighbouring provinces, not to mention an avalanche of litigation from any one of dozens of First Nations along the pipeline route.

So it’s perhaps notable that in the early 2000s, a major pipeline was laid across three sovereign countries without nearly as much handwringing and red tape.

That would be an 1,800-kilometre pipeline running through Georgia, Turkey and Azerbaijan, all to connect the Baku oil fields to the Mediterranean Sea. The intergovernmental agreement authorizing its construction was inked in 1999, and it was pumping oil by 2005.

Sino-Myanmar Crude Oil Pipeline

The political case for a Canadian oil export pipeline to the Pacific is that it’s effectively the fastest way for Canada to diversify trade away from the United States. If Northern Gateway had been completed in the 2010s as intended, it would currently be exporting 190,000 barrels of oil per day. Right now, that would be at least $20 million in oil exports per day, much of it going to non-U.S. customers.

A similar kind of sovereign pressure underlay the development of the Sino-Myanmar pipeline project, which saw twin natural gas and oil pipelines driven from Western China to ports in Myanmar.

Although it’s an import pipeline, the whole idea was to reduce sovereign vulnerability to outside pressures. Specifically, the pipeline is intended to bypass the Malacca Strait, a choke point between Indonesia and Malaysia through which most of China’s imported oil is shipped.

Both Beijing and Myanmar are authoritarian countries, which generally expedites infrastructure approvals. Nevertheless, the pipeline was being driven through a region with active armed conflict. And rebel militias in the area have indeed targeted pipeline infrastructure on occasion.

Nevertheless, the oil pipeline portion of the project was officially inaugurated by 2015, less than six years after it was first announced in 2009.

Dakota Access Pipeline

The Dakota Access Pipeline — much like any number of Canadian oil and gas pipelines — was the target of a well-funded, all-out activist attempt to shut it down. The most memorable component of which was a months-long anti-pipeline encampment established on the Standing Rock Indian Reservation in North Dakota.

And yet, those protests ultimately proved to be a mild speed bump towards the project’s ultimate completion.

The Dakota Access Pipeline is several hundred kilometres longer than any proposed pipeline from Alberta to the B.C. coast. And it took just three years to go from its initial regulatory application in 2014 to its completion in 2017.

 

 

Has no one asked why a government wants to spy on its own citizens:

The federal government never consulted widely on one of the most contentious parts of its lawful access reform to how police and intelligence services can obtain or intercept private data.

That’s according to Murray Rankin, the former NDP politician and intelligence watchdog head who was tasked by the Liberal government to consult and make recommendations to the government leading up to Bill C-22.

In an interview, Rankin said Canada desperately needs lawful access reform to avoid becoming an “oasis” for criminals because law enforcement doesn’t have the tools to protect Canadians like our European or Five Eyes alliance allies.

But he also noted that he was never asked to make recommendations about a clause in the bill that would force yet undefined “core providers” of electronic services to retain certain categories of metadata — including transmission and location data — for up to one year so that police and Canadian spies can obtain them via warrant if a judge allows it.

Bill C-22, which is currently at committee, is the Mark Carney Liberals’ second attempt at lawful access reform and comes after the government returned to the drawing board and tasked Rankin last summer to quietly consult on the bill and issue recommendations to the government.

Lawful access, or the ability to obtain Canadians’ private information and intercept communications, is one of the most intrusive powers afforded to police and intelligence agencies. Creating such a regime for the digital age in Canada has been the subject of fierce debate for decades.

But some of the most fierce criticism has targeted the bill’s one-year metadata retention clause, which privacy and security specialists argue is far too long and a violation of Canadians’ right to privacy.

“Imposing a blanket obligation on a whole class of service providers to preserve everyone’s metadata for law enforcement purposes would amount to a significant interference with the privacy interests of millions of Canadians,” wrote Thompson River University law professor Robert Diab.

On the other hand, some police services have told MPs they’d prefer the retention period extended to two or even three years.

In an interview, Rankin told National Post that the government never brought up the one-year retention period of metadata during his roundtables, suggesting he was surprised to see the clause appear in the bill.

“You know this business about the metadata, it never came up in our conversations,” Rankin said. “In my work, it never came up.”

**

Google and Apple, whose software runs in nearly every phone and tablet in Canada, warned that the Liberals’ lawful access bill poses a “threat” to encryption and their users’ data and could facilitate crimes such as foreign interference.

Speaking to the House public safety committee Tuesday, representatives from both tech giants said they respect the government’s desire to adopt lawful access reform. They argued that their goal is to balance users’ privacy with the need for law enforcement to have the tools they need.

But they warned that the Liberals’ controversial Bill C-22 goes too far and needs to be reworked significantly, lest it force them to create a “backdoor” into their encrypted services to users.

Google and Apple’s software powers over 99 per cent of all cellphones and tablets sold in Canada, as well as a significant portion of portable computers. They also operate a significant portion of the cloud storage business.

“Our users trust Apple with their most sensitive information. They expect and deserve the strongest protections, that’s why we’re so concerned about the threat to encryption posed by C-22,” said Apple senior director Erik Neuenchwander.

Google’s Jeanette Patell went a step further, telling MPs that the bill as it stands could force the company to undo many of its security features and open the door to criminals.

“Without stronger definitions, the law could be used to force the dismantling of critical privacy and architecture, such as breaking encryption, overriding users’ data deletion controls, or building remote access capability, all of which could facilitate foreign interference and weaken global user privacy,” Patell argued.

The federal Privacy Commissioner Philippe Dufresne also told the committee the Liberals’ lawful access bill is overly broad and should be narrowed to protect Canadians’ rights.

The government has repeatedly sworn that the new obligations to telecommunications and electronic services providers would not compel them to decrypt encrypted information. They argue the bill would allow them to ask companies to decrypt information if that is already possible, but would not force them to develop ways to unlock encrypted information.

But, many of the bills’ clauses “don’t compromise encryption directly but try to get at it indirectly by circumventing it or bypassing it. It still have the same impact in terms of the vulnerabilities that they ultimately create,” the Canadian Civil Liberties Association’s Tamir Israel to MPs Tuesday.

Lawful access, or the ability to obtain Canadians’ private information and intercept communications, is one of the most intrusive powers afforded to police and intelligence agencies. Creating such a regime for the digital age in Canada has been the subject of fierce debate for decades.

 

Also – what about anti-Catholic groups?:

Attorney General Sean Fraser yesterday said he feared some future justice minister will use federal hate crimes legislation to settle scores with environmental groups or political opponents. Fraser did not identify any person by name: “Those are dangerous conversations.”

 

 

Never forget who and what they are:

A majority of the House of Commons voted against a non-binding motion on Monday that called on the federal government to protect private property from First Nations land claims — a political issue the Crown-Indigenous Relations minister has said is rife with partisan rhetoric.

B.C. and the Cowichan Tribes have both said they do not want to invalidate any privately held fee simple titles on the lands covered by the court decision.

The federal and provincial governments opposed the Cowichan Tribes' claim. There are now appeals on both sides of the issue — including an appeal by the federal government.

Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre and his party have seized upon the uncertainty created by the decision and have for weeks been calling on the federal government to take action. Poilievre held a press conference and town hall events in B.C. about the issue last week.

On Friday, the First Nations Summit released a statement accusing the Conservatives of fearmongering and claiming Poilievre is desperately trying to stay relevant.

"The Cowichan decision is not and never was about taking away people's homes or private fee-simple property. The court simply reaffirmed principles that have existed in Canadian law for decades — namely that First Nations title was never automatically extinguished by the Crown," said Laxele'wuts'aat, Chief Shana Thomas of the First Nations Summit political executive.

Last month, Poilievre appointed B.C. MP Tako van Popta to lead a Conservative task force on property rights. He was tasked with, among other things, convening a parliamentary committee to study the issue.

"The ruling has shaken the foundations of British Columbia's economy and sparked fear among landowners provincewide," Poilievre said in a statement on April 23.

The Conservative motion called for a number of actions, including the creation of a special committee to study the legal, constitutional and political steps that could be taken to protect private property rights.

It also called for the government to put private property first and argue that it has priority over all other forms of title, and to ensure it does not make future agreements with First Nations that do not include explicit protection of fee simple property rights.

The Conservatives voted in favour of the motion, while the Liberals, NDP and Bloc Québécois all voted against it.

 

There is no right to property in the Charter.

 

 

None could be happier than Carney:

Canadians are resigned to failure in eliminating U.S. tariffs, says in-house Privy Council research. Federal focus groups were unable to reach any consensus on whether Prime Minister Mark Carney was “on the right track” after promising to negotiate a win for Canada: “Few thought that it was likely that an agreement could be achieved where all tariffs would be removed.”

 

 

The proles have no right to ask questions:

The Department of Employment says its Canada Summer Jobs program does help student hiring through 50 percent wage subsidies but cannot say how many jobs it creates. A first-ever analysis called it “a good policy tool” at more than a quarter billion a year: “How do you know if the program is achieving its objectives without measuring exactly that?”

**

An unidentified automaker is drafting a secret plan to export Canadian-made passenger cars to Asia and the Middle East, Industry Minister Mélanie Joly said yesterday. MPs on the Commons industry committee expressed skepticism: “No company has come to any committee on Parliament Hill or gone to the media to suggest that this is a viable business plan.”

 

 

What was once cruelty has descended into farce:

A London, Ont., doctor who assessed a patient with inflammatory bowel disease and a history of mental health issues for MAID outside a Tim Hortons location and later personally drove the man to the place his life was ended has agreed to a minimum six months’ supervision.

In another case, Dr. James MacLean failed to administer one of three drugs used in assisted deaths — one that paralyzes the body’s muscles, including the muscles involved in breathing. The patient resumed spontaneously breathing again after initially being pronounced dead, and after MacLean had already left the home.

As first reported Monday by the The Globe and Mail, the doctor’s case is raising new concerns about MAID’s oversight and accountability.

“What is striking is not only the seriousness of the concerns identified in these cases, but the limited regulatory response,” said Dr. Ramona Coelho, a family physician and former member of the Office of the Chief Coroner of Ontario’s MAID death review committee.

As part of an investigation by the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (CPSO) into two public complaints made against MacLean, an independent assessor appointed to review a number of MacLean’s charts concluded that he “did not meet the standard of practice of the profession, displayed a lack of judgment and that his conduct exposes or is likely to expose patients to harm or injury in five out of twenty charts reviewed,” according to a summary decision of the college’s inquiries, complaints and reports committee.

MacLean was called before the committee to be verbally “cautioned” with respect to the MAID complaints.

In addition to agreeing to mandatory clinical supervision for at least six months as part of an “undertaking” with the college, MacLean will undergo ongoing review of his MAID patient charts and mandatory professional education related to MAID, consent, documentation, professional boundaries and professional behaviour.

After six months, he’ll undergo an assessment of his practice, the results of which “may form the basis of further action by the College,” Laura Zilke, a CPSO spokesperson said in an email to National Post.

“The undertaking imposes extensive oversight and monitoring requirements on Dr. MacLean’s practice,” Zilke said.

“The college takes any complaints brought to our attention extremely seriously as part of our mandate to serve the public interest and ensure safe, ethical and competent medical care for all Ontarians.”

MacLean declined comment when contacted by National Post.

“Due to the rules regarding privacy and my professional responsibilities to the CPSO regarding confidentiality of complaint investigations, I am unable to respond to your questions,” he said in an email.

According to The Globe and Mail, one of the complaints concerns Thomas Dillon who suffered from Crohn’s disease and died, age 45, in January 2024.

The anonymized death of the St. Thomas man was also flagged by the Ontario coroner’s MAID death review committee.

In a report involving 2024 MAID deaths, the coroner’s panel highlighted the case of “Mr. A,” a male in his 40s with inflammatory bowel disease who, because of his illness, didn’t have an active social network, had difficulty maintaining a job, found personal relationships difficult and was dependent on family for housing and financial support.

He had a history of mental illness, previous bouts of suicidal thinking and on-going alcohol and opioid misuse that cost him his driver’s licence.

During a psychiatric assessment, Dillon was asked if he was aware of MAID and given information on the option.

There was no documented input from the family who were known to have had concerns about the MAID request.

MacLean and another assessor found Dillon eligible for MAID under Track 2, designed for people whose death is not reasonably foreseeable but who suffer intolerably from a grievous and irremediable medical condition.

MacLean conducted his assessment outside the coffee shop. The CPSO panel found it concerning that MacLean discussed “sensitive MAID-related matters in an informal public setting,” according to the summary of the inquiries and complaints committee’s decision.

“In the Committee’s view, this reflected a lack of the level of formality and care expected when assessing requests for MAID.”

The panel was also troubled by the “quantity and nature” of MacLean’s text exchanges with Dillon, which included comments about the family’s views.

MacLean’s decision to drive Dillon to the MAID provision location — which the Globe identified as an industrial-like facility where bodies are prepared for funerals — “raised concerns about professional boundaries.”

“Taken together, these actions created a risk that (MacLean’s) involvement could be perceived as influencing the patient,” the committee’s summary reads, especially given the patient-doctor power imbalance and Dillon’s history of mental health and substance use issues.

According to a more detailed decision from the inquiries and complaints committee provided to the family and obtained by The Globe and Mail, Dillon refused to ride to the MAID procedure site with his sister when she arrived at the Tim Hortons, where he and MacLean had again arranged to meet. MacLean ultimately drove Dillon himself “to ensure that patient’s final moments were dignified.” Dillon didn’t want to die at home, where he lived with his mother, because he knew his family didn’t approve and he agreed to the chosen site after other options were considered, the decision said.

“In this case, the assessment occurred during a single encounter at a Tim Hortons coffee shop,” Coelho said in an email.

“The family was not engaged in the assessment process, despite being the patient’s primary support and despite the MAID provider being aware they were trying to raise concerns,” she said.

“Collateral information from those closest to the patient is essential to understanding the factors contributing to the desire to die.”

 

The world sees Canada as willing to embrace cruelty.

Now it’s making this cruelty into a joke.

 

Also – look – actual human concern yields positive results:

For years, Akiko Hashiguchi was told she was failing as a mother.

Teachers criticized her parenting. Other parents distanced themselves. Relatives and strangers alike blamed her for her son’s behavior, which was only later understood to be linked to ADHD (attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder).

She found herself constantly apologizing.

By her account, the criticism did not create a single rupture but steadily accumulated as small judgments that, over time, fostered a sense of total isolation in a society where asking for help is often difficult. By 2001, the pressure had become unbearable.

Hashiguchi, then 29, drove into the mountains of Shizuoka Prefecture with her 6-year-old son, intending to end both of their lives. In Japanese reporting, such incidents are often described as muri shinjū, a term used for situations involving people in close relationships in which one person kills another before taking their own lives.

“I placed my hands around my son’s neck,” Hashiguchi said, having resolved to kill him and then drive the car off a cliff. “But when he said, ‘I’m sorry for making you suffer, Mom,’ I suddenly came to my senses and let go.”

Hashiguchi and her son in 1995. She felt small judgments about her parenting from teachers, other parents and relatives steadily accumulated and fostered a sense of total isolation over time.

Domestic murder-suicides are a recurring headline in Japan.

Muri shinjū is not a legal term, but a journalistic shorthand used in early reporting when circumstances are still unclear. It has become embedded in crime coverage, often involving families, couples and caregiver-dependent relationships.

The phrase combines shinjū (心中), originally used for love suicides (when partners choose to die by suicide together), and muri (無理), meaning forced — referring to deaths within intimate relationships in which the intent is not shared.

Japan’s Children and Families Agency classifies parent-child muri shinjū — including cases in which the parent survives — as deaths linked to child abuse, framing them as an extreme form of maltreatment.

Beyond official classification, they are often discussed in terms of how family distress is handled within the home in Japan. Financial hardship, caregiving exhaustion and mental health problems are frequently dealt with privately, with limited outside intervention until situations become severe.

In parent-child incidents, social expectations around resiliency, responsibility and self-restraint can intensify feelings of shame among those already under strain, particularly for mothers, with signs of withdrawal or exhaustion often only recognized in hindsight.

Keiko Ishii, a professor of cultural psychology at the University of Tokyo who studies help-seeking behavior, said studies suggest people in Japan may be more likely to worry about disrupting relationships, being criticized by others, or making situations worse by speaking openly about personal or family problems.

She added that social ties are shaped by expectations of reciprocity and harmony, along with anxiety about being excluded or damaging existing relationships.

“These concerns can make it harder for people to seek comfort or advice when they are struggling,” she said.

Ishii said her research suggests that people in Japan tend to interpret hardship as a deviation from social expectations or responsibilities — a view that can deepen shame, reduce empathy, and make both seeking and offering help less likely. …

In response, new support efforts are beginning to emerge in Japan. One Tokyo-based program, “Ikuji 119,” offers 24-hour assistance for parents in distress, dispatching trained childcare professionals to their homes within an hour of a phone call for a fee. ….

One of the few people in Japan to publicly share her personal experience with muri shinjū under her own name, Hashiguchi has since been involved in parents’ support work and advocacy around developmental disorders.

She says her planned murder-suicide was an impulsive act that was shaped by social isolation and a lack of support outside her family, as well as a culture quick to judge mothers while reducing deeply personal struggles to textbook solutions.

“There was no village to raise a child in,” she said. “I just needed one person outside my family who would be there for me. If I had that, things might have been different. I think we can all be that for someone else.”

Akiko Hashiguchi and her son in September 2001 taken a month after his ADHD diagnosis. Her son now supports her decision to share her story, hoping it may help prevent another tragedy.

Akiko Hashiguchi and her son in September 2001 taken a month after his ADHD diagnosis. Her son now supports her decision to share her story, hoping it may help prevent another tragedy. 

Ishii said that preventing people from reaching a breaking point begins with addressing severe isolation. In Japan, she said, social ties have traditionally carried strong expectations of mutual obligation, sometimes enabling quiet, informal support such as checking in or simply being present. But she noted that rapid social change has made that kind of support harder, while formal systems do not always reach those most in need.

“Preventing severe isolation requires creating spaces where people can seek help without feeling they are imposing on others,” the professor said, adding that this can include environments where people from different backgrounds can mix and share everyday experiences.

Nearly a decade after the incident, Hashiguchi recalls breaking down as she spoke to her son about what happened — trying to leave him in the mountains, him chasing after the car and her attempt to strangle him — before she begged for forgiveness. He now supports her decision to share her story, hoping it may help prevent another tragedy.

“I know I will carry the guilt with me for the rest of my life,” Hashiguchi said. “But if my experience can stop even one parent from feeling completely alone, then I believe it has meaning.”

 

 

I was assured that these diverse doctors and engineers were far more tolerant than native-born Canadians:

A recent survey has revealed that fewer Canadians support people being able to express their gender however they choose compared to eight years ago.

The findings, published in Statistics Canada’s Juristat, were based on self-reported data from the 2018 and 2025 Survey of Safety in Public and Private Spaces (SSPPS). The survey examined how attitudes toward gender-related issues have changed over time.

When it came to gender expression, women were more likely than men to agree with statements supporting people’s rights to gender expression.

In 2025, 77 per cent of women and 70 per cent of men agreed that people should be able to express their gender however they choose. Women were also more likely to say they would support a family member if they came out as transgender (77 per cent compared to 65 per cent).

However, support for people’s right to express their gender however they choose has declined among both women and men since 2018.

The percentage of women who agreed that people should have this right decreased from 85 per cent to 77 per cent, while support among men dropped from 78 per cent to 70 per cent.

The StatCan survey doesn’t examine the potential causes behind the decline, but notes that the changes in attitude coincide with “a period of animated public discourse” surrounding the rights of transgender and non-binary people. …

The survey found that 80 per cent of women and 71 per cent of men born in Canada agreed that individuals should be able to express their gender however they choose, compared to 70 per cent of women and 67 per cent of men born elsewhere.

 

Imagine entire voters blocks that don’t care about liberal feelings.

 

Also – a known liar will not allow people to correctly conclude that a troubled sociopath plugged with artificial hormones and given access to rifles is not the usual tact of “misinformation” but actual truth:

Days after a shooter opened fire on a school in rural British Columbia, a memo addressed to Prime Minister Mark Carney warned that “false claims” and “misinformation” was circulating online regarding violence and those who identify as transgender.

Officials also flagged that the incident risked giving rise to criticisms around firearm regulations.

The document, released partially redacted to National Post under federal access-to-information legislation, was dated three days after the shooting of nine mostly school-aged children that injured dozens more at a secondary school in Tumbler Ridge, B.C., located in the province’s interior.

Prepared for the prime minister by the Privy Council Office, the document includes an appendix of analysis of the “sentiment” that was being expressed by the public and online in the immediate aftermath, which noted the spread of “grief, shock, and national mourning” as well as calls to support victims.

“Early signs of polarization are emerging,” the note read, “particularly on social media, where identity-related narratives, policy debates, and misinformation are beginning to fragment public discourse.”

It specified that polarization was being observed on social media when it came to the shooter’s identity, from “identity-based political commentary” and “disputes over police handling of gender identity” as well as “hostile exchanges between ideological groups.”

“False claims and misinformation involving transgender violence have circulated online,” it added. “Media reporting confirms social media narratives fuelling anti-trans rhetoric.”

The shooter, identified by police as 18-year-old Jesse Van Rootselaar whom officers said was found dead from a self-inflicted wound, was born a biological male and later transitioned to female.

The memo prepared for Carney pinpoints that among federal departments that stood available to offer supports was Women and Gender Equality Canada, which funds LGBTQ organizations, noting “the tragedy’s impact on the “broader trans” and LGBTQ community.

It also pointed to an anti-stigma campaign which the department had launched, meant to address the discrimination faced by those who identify as gender diverse. “This may be useful for community leaders, educators and parents to discuss these issues with children and others impacted by the tragedy,” the memo says.

When it comes to firearms, the memo to Carney outlines how the sentiment on social media was shifting from grief to more accountability driven questions, such as mental health interventions “firearms access, and whether warning signs were missed.”

 

Why, that sounds like a cover-up for an agenda-driven and unaccountable plutocracy to me.

 

And:

Canada spent more than $722 million providing extensive health care to tens of thousands of asylum seekers in the last fiscal year, including a considerable portion on “failed refugee claimants” who are either languishing in the system or avoiding removal orders, according to a new report from the Parliamentary Budget Office.

The review of the Interim Federal Health Program (IFHP) also found that its costs continue to climb because of “backlogs” in Canada’s asylum system that keep claimants waiting, in some cases for up to three years.

The IFHP was created to provide limited and temporary health-care coverage to foreign nationals deemed vulnerable and disadvantaged.

 

 

Some people are special:

Parliament should criminalize Indian Residential School denialism just as it outlawed wilful downplaying of the Holocaust, First Nations leaders yesterday told the Senate human rights committee. Indigenous witnesses condemned skeptics who state “no children actually died or are buried at these sites.”

 

Not even close.

Outlawing thought and inquiry, especially into a largely exploded and fabricated moral outrage, is not the same as Holocaust denial.

Comparing an actual genocide to claims based on shaky statements (and lucrative agendas) is a base and transparent attempt at legitimacy for these beliefs and deflection from genuine inquiry.

 

 

We don’t have to trade with China:

The Canada Pension Plan Investment Board holds shares in a Chinese social media company used by Communist Party agents to intimidate Conservatives in the last election, records show. The Board had no comment on millions invested in operators of WeChat, a platform used to distribute wanted posters of one candidate who was forced to suspend his campaign: ‘The RCMP intercepted a credible threat to harm me during the election.’

 

No Country For Anyone

As one can clearly see:

Toronto Police have released an additional image of Esther in hopes it will help find the 14-year-old Jewish girl who has been missing since Friday, May 15. The latest release also adds that she was last seen on May 16 at 12:01 a.m., in the Bathurst Street and Hotspur Road area.

On the weekend, Michael Levitt, President-CEO of the Simon Wiesenthal Center Canada, shared an image of a torn poster on X and told whoever had done it to stop.

 

The lack of human decency at its worst.

 

 

From the Most "Transparent" Government in the Country's History

Proles have no right to know how their money is spent:

Cabinet will not disclose the budget for the June 8 swearing-in of the new Governor General. The ceremony is the first of its kind since Prime Minister Mark Carney promised to cut spending and “make tough choices.”

 

 

It's the Tumbler Ridge Effect

Did that go down the memory-hole already?:

 A recent survey has revealed that fewer Canadians support people being able to express their gender however they choose compared to eight years ago.

The findings, published in Statistics Canada’s Juristat , were based on self-reported data from the 2018 and 2025 Survey of Safety in Public and Private Spaces (SSPPS). The survey examined how attitudes toward gender-related issues have changed over time.

When it came to gender expression, women were more likely than men to agree with statements supporting people’s rights to gender expression.

In 2025, 77 per cent of women and 70 per cent of men agreed that people should be able to express their gender however they choose. Women were also more likely to say they would support a family member if they came out as transgender (77 per cent compared to 65 per cent).

However, support for people’s right to express their gender however they choose has declined among both women and men since 2018.

The percentage of women who agreed that people should have this right decreased from 85 per cent to 77 per cent, while support among men dropped from 78 per cent to 70 per cent.

The StatCan survey doesn’t examine the potential causes behind the decline, but notes that the changes in attitude coincide with “a period of animated public discourse” surrounding the rights of transgender and non-binary people.

 

Rather, people got tired of clearly mentally affected people screaming biological untruths at them and their supporters in high places who go short of threatening gulag treatments to people who correctly point out that GENDER is a grammatical construct and not a scientific one, that wearing a dress doesn't make one a woman, that NATURE determines half of your fate, and that forcing people to embrace the ridiculous will eventually backfire, even in a country that will accept almost any monstrosity.

 

"I Have A Lot of Friends Named Albert!" ... Or Something

Not one of us.

Not anymore: 

Mark Carney misidentified the first Alberta prime minister in a videotaped tribute to “great Albertans,” records show. Carney’s office could not name the first Alberta prime minister when asked: “I think when I come to Parliament of the great Albertans.”

 

Also - that sounds like blackmail to me: 

Prime Minister Mark Carney warned that Alberta Premier Danielle Smith’s referendum question on potential separatism is a “very dangerous bluff” and argued that it is “not helpful” to ask such questions.

Speaking to reporters from a residential construction site in Ottawa, Carney had a stark warning for Albertans ahead of Smith’s referendum question on provincial sovereignty in the fall: be wary of what you’re voting for.

“It is often advanced that ‘vote for this, and it’s a free option’, ‘vote for this, and we will strengthen your hand in future negotiation.’ That is a very dangerous bluff,” Carney said.

 

What is dangerous is keeping oil in the ground when we could be sweeping up.

But, you know, Brookfield.