2025 Federal Election
Bureau Exclusive: Chinese Election Interference Network Tied to Senate Breach Investigation

As Canada’s election unfolds, fresh questions emerge over whether foreign interference has reached Parliament’s inner chambers.
A Canadian Parliamentarian assessed by national security officials to be part of a Toronto-based Chinese consulate election interference network was the subject of a high-profile foreign interference investigation into an alleged breach of Canada’s Senate, The Bureau has confirmed through multiple intelligence sources.
Sources said the investigation examined allegations that the Parliamentarian enabled a close associate—described as a female Chinese national—to bypass Senate security protocols.
A source familiar with the Senate breach allegation said the probe was triggered by a complaint from a sitting Canadian senator, who believed they had observed a troubling pattern of behavior involving the Parliamentarian and their Chinese companion. The concern, the source said, centered on the alleged bypassing of Senate security screening, unauthorized entry into the parliamentary precinct, and access to secure Government of Canada computer systems.
While The Bureau could not independently confirm whether the allegations were ultimately substantiated, the details align closely with broader risks outlined in NSICOP’s 2024 findings on foreign interference, which stated that CSIS’s investigations were valid, and that China—and other states, including India—had established deeply concerning relationships with Canadian lawmakers.
NSICOP warned that Parliamentarians across all parties are potential targets for interference by foreign states. The committee found that such operations may be overt or covert, and that members of both the House of Commons and the Senate are considered “high-value” targets. Foreign states, the report stated, “use traditional tradecraft to build relationships that can be used to influence, coerce or exploit.”
NSICOP concluded that during the period under review, Beijing “developed clandestine networks surrounding candidates and elected officials to gain undisclosed influence and leverage over nomination processes, elections, parliamentary business and government decision-making.”
Records indicate that the Parliamentarian in question has maintained longstanding ties to several diaspora organizations affiliated with the Chinese Communist Party—including the Jiangsu Commerce Council of Canada, a business group based in Markham linked to Beijing’s United Front Work Department, and now tied to a controversial meeting with Prime Minister Mark Carney during his leadership campaign in January.
Specifically on Chinese interference, NSICOP’s explosive report stated: “The United Front Work Department… has established community organizations to facilitate influence operations against specific members of Parliament and infiltrated existing community associations to reorient them toward supporting CCP policies and narratives.”
In an interview with The Bureau, a sitting senator—who asked not to be named due to the sensitivity of the matter—was asked whether they believed NSICOP’s findings were valid and whether Chinese state actors had influenced the Senate.
“Without a doubt. Without a doubt,” the senator said. “I’ve seen it with my own eyes. Some speeches in the Senate of Canada—one would not be surprised if they had been written directly in the offices of the United Front in Beijing. Many of the senators, if you see the positions they articulate, the way they articulate and the way they vote, speaks volumes about who they stand with. But the one thing about being a public office holder—at some point in time, you’ve got to stand on your feet.”
Those observations are echoed by findings in the NSICOP report, which states: “Foreign states developed clandestine networks surrounding candidates and elected officials to gain undisclosed influence.”
The report also found that “some Parliamentarians are either semi-witting or witting participants in the efforts of foreign states to interfere in Canadian politics… including providing privileged information to foreign intelligence officers.”
However, Justice Marie-Josée Hogue, in a contrary conclusion issued through her federal inquiry, assessed that “no evidence” had been presented of intentional wrongdoing by Parliamentarians implicated in CSIS foreign interference investigations. Instead, she concluded that some officials may have made “bad decisions.”
Still, specifics of the investigation into the Parliamentarian strongly resemble the broader findings of NSICOP—particularly if the allegation of providing inappropriate access to Canada’s Senate facilities to a Chinese national is substantiated.
In interviews conducted between 2022 and 2025, The Bureau’s sources—who requested anonymity due to fears of professional retribution—said they believe Canada’s national security agencies were inhibited from pursuing broader investigations into Parliamentarians and politicians across all levels of government. They described how CSIS agents’ efforts to advance foreign interference cases were at times delayed or obstructed by senior managers reluctant to scrutinize powerful political figures.
More broadly, the sources asserted that CSIS remains structurally constrained from effectively investigating senior officials and Parliamentarians. As a result, they warned, investigations into those broadly referenced in the 2024 NSICOP Special Report on Foreign Interference have not—and likely could not—produce meaningful deterrence against ongoing threats from China and other hostile foreign states.
The Bureau’s review of open-source records shows that the Parliamentarian at the center of the Senate allegations has, from the 2019 CSIS investigation to the present, maintained significant ties to multiple Canadian organizations linked to the Chinese Communist Party’s United Front Work Department.
These include the Confederation of Toronto Chinese Canadian Organizations, the Jiangsu Commerce Council of Canada, and a third British Columbia–based entity, which has documented connections to both the United Front and the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference—an entity the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency has identified as Beijing’s central united front body.
The matter has gained urgency in the context of Canada’s ongoing federal election, in which Mark Carney’s party has come under scrutiny following The Globe and Mail’s revelation of his campaign’s January 2025 meeting with JCCC leadership—a meeting Carney’s team later denied. Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre has also faced criticism over his 2022 leadership race, which, according to documents and interviews reviewed by The Bureau, was allegedly targeted by both Chinese foreign interference networks and individuals aligned with the Indian government.
As previously reported by The Bureau, during the pandemic, several Liberal Party officials were involved in a PPE shipment initiative coordinated with the JCCC and authorities tied to the Chinese Communist Party. Official CCP correspondence praised the JCCC’s donations to China, and the group’s response acknowledged its operations were “organized under the guidance” of the United Front Work Department and other Party-aligned bodies. One co-signer of that letter was a senior Liberal organizer who had also served as JCCC president.
2025 Federal Election
NDP’s collapse rightly cost them official party status

This article supplied by Troy Media.
By Michael Taube
Official party status requires 12 seats. The NDP got seven. End of story
Rules are rules.
That, in a nutshell, is why the NDP wasn’t granted official party status in the House of Commons on Monday. Prime Minister Mark Carney and the
Liberals, to their credit, made the right decision.
Let’s examine why.
The 1963 Senate and House of Commons Act passed an amendment that gave an annual allowance to party leaders other than the prime minister and
leader of the Opposition. In doing so, the Canadian government had to establish what constitutes a “political party.” The definition they came up with was a sensible one: it had to have a “recognized membership of 12 or more persons in the House of Commons.”
This important amendment is still used today.
The NDP fell from 24 to a paltry seven seats in last month’s federal election. (There are a total of 343 seats in the House of Commons.) They finished with 1,234,673 votes, or 6.29 per cent, which was behind the Liberals, Conservatives and Bloc Québécois. Party leader Jagmeet Singh, who had represented the former Burnaby South riding since 2019, finished a distant third in the newly created Burnaby Central riding and resigned.
The NDP’s seven seats is well below the 12-seat requirement needed for official party status. This means Canada’s socialist alternative won’t be able to ask questions in the House of Commons and will lose out on money for research purposes.
Or, to put it another way, they’re plumb out of luck.
Hold on, some people said. They pointed out that the NDP’s seat count and popular vote only plummeted because many progressive voters backed Carney and the Liberals as the best option to counter U.S. President Donald Trump and his tariffs. They felt that the NDP’s long history as a champion for unions and the working class should count for something. They suggested there should be an exception to the rule.
Guess what? They’re wrong.
This is the worst election result in the party’s history. Even its predecessor, the Co-operative Commonwealth Federation (CCF), did marginally better in its first campaign. The CCF won seven out of 245 seats—and earned 410,125 votes, or 9.31 per cent—in the 1935 election. Party leader J.S. Woodsworth, who had represented the riding of Winnipeg North Centre as an Independent Labour MP since 1925, comfortably held his seat.
Meanwhile, this won’t be the first time they’ve ever lost official party status.
The NDP dropped from 43 to nine seats in the 1993 election. It was a dismal showing, to say the least. There was a suggestion at the time that then-party leader Audrey McLaughlin, the first woman to lead a party with political representation in Canada’s House of Commons, deserved a better fate. While the NDP certainly came closer to achieving the 12-seat requirement in this particular election, Prime Minister Jean Chrétien and the Liberals decided against granting them official party status.
Why? As I mentioned earlier, rules are rules.
Then again, British pilot Harry Day notably told his fellow flying ace Douglas Bader in 1931, “You know my views about some regulations—they’re written for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men.”
Does this mean that individuals and organizations who follow rules are, in fact, fools? Not at all. While certain rules in a liberal democratic society can range from slightly questionable to utterly ridiculous, they’re usually put in place for a specific purpose.
In the case of the House of Commons, it’s to ensure that a bar has been set with respect to political representation. Is 12 seats the right number? That’s difficult to say. It certainly prevents small protest parties and one-issue parties that unexpectedly win a tiny number of seats in an election from acquiring power and status right off the bat. They need to win more seats and grow in size and stature to reach a point of respectability. Most of them never reach this point and disappear while others float in a constant state of mediocrity like the Green Party of Canada. ’Tis the nature of the political beast.
One final point. If Singh and the NDP had reached double digits in total number of seats in 2025, a solid case could have been made in favour of official party status. If they had finished with 11 seats, it would have almost been a lock. Neither scenario ultimately materialized, which is why Carney and the Liberals did exactly what they did.
Michael Taube is a political commentator, Troy Media syndicated columnist and former speechwriter for Prime Minister Stephen Harper. He holds a master’s degree in comparative politics from the London School of Economics, lending academic rigour to his political insights.
Troy Media empowers Canadian community news outlets by providing independent, insightful analysis and commentary. Our mission is to support local media in helping Canadians stay informed and engaged by delivering reliable content that strengthens community connections and deepens understanding across the country.
2025 Federal Election
Judicial recounts give Conservatives 2 more seats, keeping Liberals short of majority

From LifeSiteNews
After a judicial recount, Conservative candidate Kathy Borrelli has officially won over Liberal incumbent Irek Kusmierczyk, in the Ontario riding of Windsor-Tecumseh-Lakeshore.
Judicial recounts from the 2025 federal election have given the Conservative Party two new seats, with one candidate winning by just four votes.
After a judicial recount, Conservative candidate Kathy Borrelli has officially won over Liberal incumbent Irek Kusmierczyk, in the Ontario riding of Windsor-Tecumseh-Lakeshore.
Borrelli got 32,090 votes, with Kusmierczyk getting 32,086 votes, and NDP candidate Alex Ilijoski getting 4,240 votes.
In the Newfoundland riding of Terra Nova-The Peninsulas, Conservative candidate Jonathan Rowe beat out Liberal Anthony Germain by just 12 votes after a recount with the initial result showing a Liberal victory.
The new election results mean the Conservatives now have 144 seats with the Liberals at 169, three short of a majority.
Judicial recounts are automatically triggered when the margin of victory for a candidate is less than 0.1 percent of valid votes.
While these recounts have favored the Conservatives, others have gone in the Liberal Party’s favor.
A May 16 judicial recount switched the southern Ontario riding of Milton East-Halton Hills South to the Liberals with a 21-vote victory over the Conservatives.
Overall, the election results have been a big blow to the Conservative Party, which on top of losing the election also saw its leader, Pierre Poilievre, fail to win his long-held seat. However, Poilievre is expected to run in a yet-to-be-announced by-election in Alberta to reclaim a seat in Parliament.
-
conflict2 days ago
Iran nuclear talks were ‘coordinated deception’ between US and Israel: report
-
Alberta2 days ago
Punishing Alberta Oil Production: The Divisive Effect of Policies For Carney’s “Decarbonized Oil”
-
International2 days ago
Israel’s Decapitation Strike on Iran Reverberates Across Global Flashpoints
-
Energy2 days ago
Canada is no energy superpower
-
Alberta2 days ago
Alberta Premier Danielle Smith Discusses Moving Energy Forward at the Global Energy Show in Calgary
-
Health2 days ago
Just 3 Days Left to Win the Dream Home of a Lifetime!
-
Fraser Institute2 days ago
Long waits for health care hit Canadians in their pocketbooks
-
conflict1 day ago
One dead, over 60 injured after Iranian missiles pierce Iron Dome