Connect with us
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]

National

JD Vance sounds alarm over slew of Canadian church burnings: ‘Anti-Christian bigotry’

Published

3 minute read

From LifeSiteNews

By Anthony Murdoch

The US Vice President-elect re-posted Conservative MP Jamil Jivani’s recent message regarding Christian persecution in Canada, saying ‘Jamil is speaking the truth’ and ‘shame on journalists who refuse to see what’s obvious.’

The recent rash of arson and vandalism attacks on mostly Catholic churches in Canada has drawn the attention of U.S. Vice President-elect JD Vance, who called the burnings a display of “anti-Christian bigotry.”

“Canada has seen a number of church burnings in recent years thanks to anti-Christian bigotry,” Vance wrote on X last Friday.

“All over the world, Christians are the most persecuted religious group.”

Vance’s X posting included a re-post of a posting from Conservative MP Jamil Jivani’s recent message regarding Christian persecution in Canada that LifeSiteNews reported last week.

Vance said that “Jamil is speaking the truth.”

“Shame on journalists who refuse to see what’s obvious,” he added.

Last week, Jivani, citing continued persecution of Christians in Canada, launched an initiative calling on “all levels of government” to put an end to “anti-Christian bigotry.”

The “Protect Christians in Canada” initiative seeks to raise awareness and end “anti-Christian bigotry in Canadian institutions.”

Jivani was recently elected as a Conservative MP in a by-election and since that time has been outspoken in his defense of Christians.

The church burnings started in 2021 after the mainstream media and the federal government of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau ran with inflammatory and dubious claims that hundreds of children were buried and disregarded by Catholic priests and nuns who ran some of the now-closed residential schools.

As a result of the claims, since the spring of 2021, 112 churches, most of them Catholic, many of them on indigenous lands that serve the local population, have been burned to the ground, vandalized, or defiled in Canada.

The latest of these attacks occurred last month.

The legacy media and the Trudeau government have implied that the Catholic Church is complicit in the deaths of thousands of indigenous Canadians who attended government-mandated residential schools.

However, these claims have never been proved. In October, retired Manitoba judge Brian Giesbrecht said Canadians are being “deliberately deceived by their own government” after blasting the Trudeau government for “actively pursuing” a policy that blames the Catholic Church for the unfounded “deaths and secret burials” of Indigenous children.

Giesbrecht observed that the reality is historical records “clearly show” “the children who died of disease or accident while attending residential school were all given Christian burials, with their deaths properly recorded.”

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Business

An era of Indigenous economic leadership in Canada has begun

Published on

Energy for a Secure Future (ESF), the Institute of Energy Economics, Japan (IEEJ), and the First Nations LNG Alliance have signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to increase energy trade between Canada and Japan. The MOU was signed at the Canadian Embassy in Tokyo and recognizes the growing importance of Indigenous-led LNG projects in Canada’s energy security, reducing global emissions, and driving economic growth for First Nations and the country as a whole.

With Canada’s trade relationship with the U.S. uncertain—especially with U.S. President Donald Trump threatening a 25 per cent tariff on Canadian exports, including 10 per cent on energy—the need to diversify markets has never been more pressing. Canada ships 97 per cent of its oil and gas to the U.S., leaving the country exposed to the political whims of Washington. Expanding trade partnerships with key allies like Japan provides an opportunity to mitigate these risks and build a more resilient economy.

At the heart of Canada’s modern energy industry are First Nations-led LNG projects, which are proving to be a model for economic reconciliation and environmental responsibility. The Haisla Nation’s Cedar LNG, the Squamish Nation’s involvement with Woodfibre LNG, and the Nisga’a Nation’s Ksi Lisims LNG project exemplify Indigenous leadership in Canada’s energy future. These projects bring economic prosperity to Indigenous communities and position Canada as a key player in low-emission energy for the world.

Few people embody this leadership more than Chief Crystal Smith of the Haisla Nation, who received the 2025 Testimonial Dinner Award on February 7. Her vision and determination have brought Cedar LNG—the world’s first Indigenous-majority-owned LNG facility—to life. Under her leadership, this $4-billion project will start up in 2028 and will be one of the most sustainable LNG facilities in the world, powered entirely by BC Hydro’s renewable electricity. Her work is not just about resource development—it represents a country-changing shift in Indigenous economic leadership. By owning the majority of the Cedar LNG project, the Haisla Nation has set a precedent for economic self-determination, long-term job creation, revenue generation, and skills training for Indigenous youth.

She is echoed by Karen Ogen, CEO of the First Nations LNG Alliance, who has been a long-time advocate for Indigenous participation in LNG. As she says, “Our involvement in LNG not only represents an opportunity for economic growth for our communities and for Canada but will help the world with energy security and emissions reduction.”

The MOU signed in Tokyo signals Japan’s growing interest in Canadian LNG as part of its energy security strategy. Japan is phasing out coal and needs reliable, low-emission energy sources—Canadian LNG is the answer. Shannon Joseph, Chair of Energy for a Secure Future, said, “Japan wants diverse energy partners, and on this mission, we’ve heard clearly that they want Canada to be one of those partners.”

This partnership also highlights Canada’s missed opportunities over the last decade. As industry leaders like Eric Nuttall of Ninepoint Partners have pointed out, Canada could have avoided its current dependence on U.S. markets had it built more pipelines to the east and west coasts. The cancellation of the Northern Gateway and Energy East pipelines left Canada without the infrastructure to reach Asian and European markets.

Now, with the expansion of Trans Mountain (TMX) and the rise of Indigenous-led LNG projects, Canada has a second chance to shape its energy future.

As B.C. Minister of Economic Development Diana Gibson has said, expanding trade relationships beyond the U.S. is key to Canada’s future.

The First Nations-led LNG sector is demonstrating that Indigenous leadership is driving economic reconciliation and strengthening Canada’s geopolitical influence in global energy markets. For too long, Indigenous communities were merely stakeholders in resource projects—now they are owners and partners. First Nations are proving that responsible development and environmental stewardship can coexist.

With the MOU between Canada and Japan, the growth of LNG projects, and the recognition of Chief Crystal Smith, a new era of Indigenous economic power is emerging. These developments make one thing clear: First Nations are not just leading their communities—they are leading Canada.

In times of trade uncertainty, their vision, resilience, and business acumen are building the foundation for Canada’s energy future, ensuring prosperity is shared between Indigenous peoples and all Canadians.

Continue Reading

Business

Carbon tariff proposal carries risks and consequences for Canada

Published on

A carbon tariff—a policy that would impose fees on imported goods based on their carbon emissions—is built on the idea that Canada should penalize foreign producers for not adhering to stringent climate policies. While this may sound like a strong stance on climate action, the reality is that such a policy carries major risks for Canada’s economy. As a resource-rich nation that exports carbon-intensive products like oil, natural gas, and minerals, Canada stands to lose more than it gains from this approach.

Mark Carney, who is competing for the federal Liberal leadership, has made the introduction of a carbon tariff the number two promise in his 16-point industrial competitiveness strategy.

Key problems with a carbon tariff in Canada

1. Retaliation from other countries

A carbon tariff (also known as a Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism, or CBAM) would not go unchallenged by Canada’s trading partners. Major exporters to Canada, such as the United States and China, are unlikely to accept this policy without a response. They could retaliate by imposing tariffs on Canadian goods, making it significantly harder for Canadian businesses to compete in international markets. This could be particularly damaging for key industries like oil and gas, mining, and manufacturing, which rely heavily on exports. A trade war over carbon tariffs could weaken the Canadian economy and lead to job losses across multiple sectors.

2. Canada is an exporting nation

Canada exports far more carbon-intensive goods than it imports. By introducing a carbon tariff on foreign products, Canada is effectively inviting other countries to do the same, targeting Canadian exports with similar carbon-based tariffs. This would make Canadian goods more expensive on the global market, reducing demand for them and harming the very industries that drive Canada’s economy. The result? A weaker economy, job losses, and higher costs for businesses that depend on trade.

3. Big business paying for consumers’ emissions

The Carney plan also proposes to make large businesses bear the cost of helping individual households lower their carbon emissions. While this may sound like a fair approach, in practice, these costs will be passed down to consumers. Businesses will need to offset these additional expenses, leading to higher prices on everyday goods and services. In the end, it is Canadian families who will bear the financial burden, facing increased living costs, higher taxes, and fewer job opportunities as businesses struggle to absorb the additional costs.

CBAM in context: implications for Canada

Has this been tried elsewhere?

The European Union’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) is currently in effect. It entered its transitional phase on October 1, 2023, during which importers of certain carbon-intensive goods are required to report the embedded emissions of their imports without incurring financial liabilities. This phase is set to last until the end of 2025. The definitive regime, where importers will need to purchase CBAM certificates corresponding to the carbon emissions of their imported goods, is scheduled to begin in 2026.

However, Europe is not Canada’s largest trading partner—that is the United States. With Donald Trump back in the presidency, there is no chance that the U.S. will implement a CBAM of its own. If Canada were to move forward with a unilateral carbon tariff, if anyone prepared to argue that it would not face significant economic punishment from the Trump White House?

Moreover, with 91 percent of the world having no carbon tariff, other countries would impose countermeasures, leaving Canadian businesses struggling to remain competitive.

This raises the question: is the push for a carbon tariff in Canada more about political positioning than economic pragmatism? Given the unlikelihood of U.S. participation, a Canadian CBAM would amount to a unilateral economic sacrifice. While this may appeal to certain voter bases, the reality is that such a policy would carry immense risks without global coordination. Policymakers should carefully consider whether pursuing this path makes sense in a world where Canada’s largest trading partner is unlikely to follow suit.

Where do others stand?

Chrystia Freeland, the former finance minister and current Liberal leadership candidate, has not explicitly detailed her stance on carbon tariffs. However, she has emphasized the importance of defending Canadian interests against U.S. economic nationalism, particularly in response to potential tariffs from the U.S.

Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre is a vocal critic of carbon pricing mechanisms, including carbon taxes, and has pledged to repeal such measures if elected.

Elizabeth May, leader of the Green Party, has consistently advocated for strong environmental policies, including carbon pricing, but has not specifically addressed carbon tariffs in recent statements.

What it means to consumers

Here are some relatable examples of carbon-intensive exports and imports for the average Canadian:

Carbon-Intensive Exports from Canada

Oil & Gas – Canada is a major exporter of crude oil, natural gas, and refined petroleum products, particularly to the U.S. If a carbon tariff were applied to these products, it could make them more expensive and less competitive in global markets, affecting jobs in Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Newfoundland.

Lumber & Pulp – Canada is a leading exporter of forestry products, including lumber, paper, and pulp, which require significant energy and emissions to produce. If tariffs are imposed on Canadian wood products, the forestry sector could suffer.

Agricultural Products – Fertilizers, beef, and grain production all have significant carbon footprints. If trading partners retaliate with tariffs, Canadian farmers may struggle to compete in global markets.

Carbon-Intensive Imports into Canada

Steel & Aluminum – Canada imports a large amount of steel, primarily from China and the U.S., which is essential for industries like construction, manufacturing, and automotive production. A carbon tariff would drive up costs for these industries.

Consumer Goods from China – Many everyday products (electronics, clothing, appliances) are imported from countries with high-carbon electricity grids. A carbon tariff could increase the price of these goods for Canadian consumers.

Food Products – Imported produce, meats, and packaged foods from countries like the U.S. and Mexico often have high transportation-related emissions. A carbon tariff could increase grocery bills.

Continue Reading

Trending

X