Great Reset
The WHO Pandemic Treaty could strip Canada of its ability to make its own health decisions

This article supplied by Troy Media.
By Cosmos Voutsinos
Don’t let Ottawa sign away our sovereignty to the WHO, placing power in the hands of unelected global officials
U.S. President Donald Trump’s recent call for Canada to become the 51st state rightly triggered national outrage. Yet while many were offended by his
provocative remarks, a more real and insidious assault on our sovereignty is unfolding in Geneva, where the World Health Organization (WHO)
Pandemic Treaty threatens to shift power from democratic nations to unelected global bureaucrats.
The Treaty, under negotiation, is aimed at strengthening global health responses to future pandemics. While proponents argue it will improve global preparedness, critics warn it will undermine national sovereignty, giving the WHO the power to impose sweeping health measures—lockdowns, vaccine mandates, and travel restrictions—without consultation or approval from elected governments. The treaty empowers the WHO director-general to declare a global health emergency, effectively bypassing national decision-making and subjecting countries to externally imposed mandates.
The Intergovernmental Negotiating Body (INB), established by the WHO to draft a new international pandemic agreement, concluded its 13th meeting on April 16. The final proposed treaty will be presented for consideration and adoption at the 78th World Health Assembly, scheduled to begin on May 19.
While global cooperation on public health is essential, Canada’s health decisions should remain in Canadian hands. The treaty gives the WHO significant authority to mandate health responses, potentially overriding local decisions made by Canadian experts and governments. This could mean that Canada’s ability to make pandemic decisions based on local context and need could be compromised by a centralized, unelected body, which Canadians never voted to give power to.
This is not just a health care issue—it is a fundamental challenge to democratic governance. The treaty lays the groundwork for digital health passes and surveillance systems that could weaponize personal health data, as we saw during the trucker protests in Ottawa. Do Canadians want a future where personal freedoms are tied to health status and tracked globally?
There are also serious financial implications. The treaty introduces a “Pathogen Access and Benet Sharing System” with undefined costs, potentially saddling Canada with an ongoing financial burden to fund global health initiatives. Earlier drafts proposed that countries contribute five per cent of their health budgets, a clause that has been removed but replaced with new, opaque financial obligations that could lead to billions in taxpayer dollars being diverted to the UN.
The United States has already initiated its withdrawal from the WHO, raising important questions about how Canada will coordinate cross-border policies and maintain its trading relationship with our largest neighbour during future health crises.
The WHO is not accountable to Canadian voters. It has no direct responsibility to our Parliament or provincial health authorities. It has a poor track record, failing to declare COVID-19 a pandemic in time, hesitating to challenge China’s handling of the virus, and offering shifting guidance that undermined public trust. Why should Canadians accept its authority without direct oversight?
Worse, Parliament will not be sitting during the critical window when the treaty will be presented and potentially signed. According to the House of Commons Sitting Calendar, Canadian Parliament is not scheduled to sit until May 26, 2025, which is after the World Health Assembly concludes. This means decisions could be made behind closed doors with little public debate or political consequence.
The treaty’s implications go far beyond health and set a dangerous precedent that in the next crisis, Canadians may not have a say in how their government responds.
International cooperation should not come at the expense of our freedom and sovereignty. The WHO can offer advice, coordination, and resources but it should not dictate our national response. Canada’s government must reject this treaty, ensuring that any related commitments are brought before Parliament for full debate and approval.
Anything less would betray the trust Canadians place in their leaders. This is not just about public health—it’s about protecting our democratic rights, our sovereignty, and our freedom.
Cosmos Voutsinos is a retired engineer who has published multiple scientific papers that have garnered a total of 96 citations. He earned his Bachelor of Applied Science (BASc) at the University of Waterloo and his Master of Engineering (M.Eng) degree from McMaster University.
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.
Banks
Top Canadian bank studies possible use of digital dollar for ‘basic’ online payments

From LifeSiteNews
A new report released by the Bank of Canada proposed a ‘promising architecture well-suited for basic payments’ through the use of a digital dollar, though most Canadians are wary of such an idea.
Canada’s central bank has been studying ways to introduce a central bank digital currency (CBDC) for use for online retailers, according to a new report, despite the fact that recent research suggests Canadians are wary of any type of digital dollar.
In a new 47-page report titled, “A Retail CBDC Design For Basic Payments Feasibility Study,” which was released on June 13, 2025, the Bank of Canada (BOC) identified a “promising architecture well-suited for basic payments” through the use of a digital dollar.
The report reads that CBDCs “can be fast and cheap for basic payments, with high privacy, although some areas such as integration with retail payments systems, performance of auditing and resilience of the core system state require further investigation.”
While the report authors stopped short of fully recommending a CBDC, they noted it is a decision that could happen “outside the scope of this analysis.”
“Our framing highlights other promising architectures for an online retail CBDC, whose analysis we leave as an area for further exploration,” reads the report.
When it comes to a digital Canadian dollar, the Bank of Canada last year found that Canadians are very wary of a government-backed digital currency, concluding that a “significant number” of citizens would resist the implementation of such a system.
Indeed, a 2023 study found that most Canadians, about 85 percent, do not want a digital dollar, as previously reported by LifeSiteNews.
The study found that a “significant number” of Canadians are suspicious of government overreach and would resist any measures by the government or central bank to create digital forms of official money.
The BOC has said that it would continue to look at other countries’ use and development of CBDCs and will work with other “central banks” to improve so-called cross border payments.
Last year, as reported by LifeSiteNews, the BOC has already said that plans to create a digital “dollar,” also known as a central bank digital currency (CBDC), have been shelved.
Digital currencies have been touted as the future by some government officials, but, as LifeSiteNews has reported before, many experts warn that such technology would restrict freedom and could be used as a “control tool” against citizens, similar to China’s pervasive social credit system.
The BOC last August admitted that the creation of a CBDC is not even necessary, as many people rely on cash to pay for things. The bank concluded that the introduction of a digital currency would only be feasible if consumers demanded its release.
Conservative Party leader Pierre Poilievre has promised, should he ever form the government, he would oppose the creation of a digital dollar.
Contrast this to Canada’s current Liberal Prime Minister Mark Carney. He has a history of supporting central bank digital currencies and in 2022 supported “choking off the money” donated to the Freedom Convoy protests against COVID mandates.
Energy
Who put the energy illiterate in charge?

This article supplied by Troy Media.
Canada’s energy policy is being shaped by politicians who don’t actually understand how energy works. That’s not just embarrassing. It’s dangerous
Canada’s energy future is being held back by a critical obstacle: our elected officials don’t understand energy.
At all three levels of government, most politicians lack even a basic grasp of how our energy systems function. That ignorance isn’t just a knowledge gap—it’s a leadership crisis. Energy systems are evolving rapidly, and our leaders are ill-equipped to manage the complexity, tradeoffs and consequences involved. With few exceptions, their understanding is superficial, shaped more by talking points than substance.
By “energy systems,” I mean the complex web of technologies, infrastructure, markets and regulations that generate, distribute and manage power—from oil and gas to hydro, nuclear, wind and solar. These systems are deeply interconnected, constantly changing and central to every aspect of modern life. Yet the people making decisions about them often have little idea how they actually work.
This shows up frequently in public life: dodged questions, scripted answers, vague platitudes. Many politicians skate across the surface of issues with the thinnest understanding. The old adage “a little knowledge is a dangerous thing” perfectly describes Canadian energy politics today.
Decisions about energy directly affect household utility bills, climate goals, industrial competitiveness and grid reliability. Yet politicians tend to be tethered to the dominant energy source in their own region—oil and gas in Alberta, hydro in Quebec, nuclear in Ontario—without grasping how those systems connect or conflict. Canada’s energy landscape is fragmented, with each province operating under its own regulatory framework, infrastructure constraints and political pressures. That makes coordination difficult and systems-level thinking essential.
This isn’t a left-versus-right issue. It’s not oil and gas versus renewables. It’s a national failure to understand the integrated systems that power our lives and economy. Canada is, functionally, energy illiterate, and our elected officials reflect that reality. We flip a switch, pump gas, turn up the thermostat and rarely ask how or why it works, or what it costs in environmental or economic terms.
Take the Clean Electricity Regulations as one example. Introduced by the federal government to drive Canada’s electricity grid to net-zero emissions by 2035, the CERs require provinces to sharply reduce or eliminate fossil fuel-based power. But in Alberta and Saskatchewan, where coal and natural gas still dominate, those regulations landed with a thud. The federal government failed to account for regional infrastructure limitations, market structure
differences and technology readiness. The result? Immediate backlash, legal threats and political gridlock—not because climate action is unwelcome, but because the policy was crafted in a vacuum of systems-level understanding.
Adding to the problem is the dominance of bureaucrats and political handlers in shaping what passes for energy messaging. Speeches are often a patchwork of statistics and sanitized clichés, stripped of nuance or depth. Many politicians simply deliver what they’re handed, guided more by risk management than insight. The result is policy that’s disconnected from the realities it aims to change.
A handful of elected officials do have real-world energy experience, but even that is often narrow, based on one role or one sector. It rarely translates into the kind of broad, integrated knowledge needed to lead across multiple interdependent systems. The risks of this fragmented thinking are immense.
What’s needed is mandatory education—an energy information and insights toolkit for anyone seeking public office. This shared curriculum would cover how electricity and fuel systems work, the economics of energy markets, climate dynamics, environmental trade-offs and public policy principles. It should be grounded in both natural and social sciences and structured to develop systems thinking, so that decisions are informed by how energy technologies, markets and governance truly interact.
Imagine if thousands of politicians—urban and rural, left and right, federal and local—learned from the same textbook. Politics wouldn’t vanish. Disagreements wouldn’t disappear. But the debate would shift from tribal talking points to informed discussion.
And for once, Canada might start moving forward on energy, not with noise or paralysis, but with purpose.
Bill Whitelaw is a director and advisor to many industry boards, including the Canadian Society for Evolving Energy, which he chairs. He speaks and comments frequently on the subjects of social licence, innovation and technology, and energy supply networks.
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.
-
illegal immigration2 days ago
Heightened alert: Iranians in U.S. previously charged with support for terrorism
-
Business1 day ago
The Passage of Bill C-5 Leaves the Conventional Energy Sector With as Many Questions as Answers
-
Business1 day ago
The U.S. Strike in Iran-Insecurity About Global Oil Supply Suddenly Makes Canadian Oil Attractive
-
Business12 hours ago
While China Hacks Canada, B.C. Sends Them a Billion-Dollar Ship Building Contract
-
conflict2 days ago
Americans abroad told to stay alert as Iran threatens retaliation
-
Business1 day ago
Federal fiscal anchor gives appearance of prudence, fails to back it up
-
conflict2 days ago
How Iran Could Shake Up Global Economy In Response To US Strikes
-
Business1 day ago
Trump reins in oil markets with one Truth Social post