2025 Federal Election
Conservative Party urges investigation into Carney plan to spend $1 billion on heat pumps
From Conservative Party Communications
Mark Carney Must Be Investigated For His Conflicts of Interest
Michael Barrett, Conservative Candidate for Leeds–Grenville–Thousand Islands–Rideau Lakes, wrote the following letter to Canada’s Lobbying Commissioner:
Dear Commissioner,
I am writing to draw attention to remarks made by Prime Minister Mark Carney yesterday, which raise serious concerns about conflicts of interest.
On Tuesday, April 8, 2025, Mr. Carney announced his intention to spend $1 billion on heat pumps, a decision which would clearly benefit companies in the heat pump business.
Brookfield Infrastructure “is the flagship listed infrastructure company of Brookfield Asset Management (BAM).” Brookfield Infrastructure in turn owns Ontario-based Enercare, which specifically advertises heat pump retrofits as one of its offered services – including taking advantage of government rebate programs.
As you are well aware, Mr. Carney was previously Chair of the board at BAM. While Mr. Carney has repeatedly declined to publicly disclose his assets and conflicts of interest, he has also refused to rule out some sort of continued financial interest in Brookfield.
As such, it is conceivable that Mr. Carney might well benefit financially from the Liberals’ announced $1 billion heat pump program.
This is not the first time that Mr. Carney has been caught using his political influence to advance Brookfield’s heat pump interests.
In October 2024, London’s Telegraph newspaper broke news that Mr. Carney used his political connections to personally lobby the British Cabinet for heat pump programs. At the time, the Chairman of BAM subsidiary HomeServe bluntly stated, “Mark is working on our behalf in Government.”
Also, last October, at the Prime Quadrant Conference in Toronto on October 10, 2024, Mr. Carney discussed how he provides advice to governments around the world while simultaneously benefiting Brookfield’s business interests.
Here is what Mr. Carney had to say to a business audience:
Well, I do spend some time advising on what… you know, again, pro-bono…but advising on the types of policies that are going to have maximum impacts for investors. So I’ll give you an example. Which is one of the issues… it’s not the biggest issue, it’s like 2% of global emissions, you wouldn’t know it from the headlines, but 2% of global emissions is for air travel…emissions from air travel.
Now, so the question is, are we going to have green sustainable aviation fuel? What’s happened in the UK, the EU, is they’ve said to major airlines, ‘look if you’re flying in and out of Heathrow or wherever, you have to have 10% of your load has to be sustainable aviation fuel by…’, I think it’s 2030.
A consequence of that policy has been to convert some entrepreneurs in Texas, in this case a company called Infinian, to become economic. Because all of a sudden American Airlines, British Airways need to buy that fuel. They’ll pay a green premium. You’ve got an off-take, you know, that’s high credit quality. And in that case, we put, we Brookfield, put a billion dollars to work there and it’s a fantastic opportunity.
The point being, without the policy … the policy has to drive it and drive things down.
Mr. Carney appears to admit to using his political influence to advocate for commercial policies for the benefit of himself and Brookfield. It is also notable that these comments were made after Mr. Carney was appointed to head then-Prime Minister Trudeau’s ‘Task Force on Economic Growth’ in September 2024, leading one to wonder whether Mr. Carney lobbied for similar policies within the Government of Canada.
While Mr. Carney has said that he moved his assets into a ‘blind trust,’ Mr. Carney certainly knows what assets he moved into that trust, be it shares, stock options, or ‘carried interest’ bonus payments from Brookfield funds Mr. Carney personally set up.
Mr. Carney should come clean with Canadians and immediately disclose his assets so Canadians can render judgment on Mr. Carney’s conflicts of interest before voting in the election.
I am asking you to immediately begin an investigation into the matter.
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.
Anti-Trump protests planned across the country on Saturday as LA violence continues
Telegram founder Pavel Durov exposes crackdown on digital privacy in Tucker Carlson interview
Audit report reveals Canada’s controversial COVID travel app violated multiple rules
