Connect with us
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]

Opinion

Trudeau and Singh Scheme to Delay Election, Secure Payouts on the Taxpayer’s Dime

Published

10 minute read

Let’s get real about what’s going on in Canada right now. In the Meeting No. 130 PROC – Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs on Bill C-65, Justin Trudeau and his Liberal minions, backed by their trusty NDP sidekicks, are pushing forward a so-called “reform” to delay Canada’s next election. Their excuse? They’re “making voting more inclusive.” But the real reason? To buy themselves a cushy retirement at your expense.

Here’s the scheme: Trudeau and his Liberal-NDP alliance want to push the election back by a week. Not to secure democracy, not to make voting accessible, but to guarantee that MPs who were elected in 2019 get their golden parachute—hitting that magic six-year mark to cash in on their pensions. They’re wrapping it all up in talk about “accessibility” and “inclusivity,” but the facts laid out in committee make it clear—this is nothing more than a taxpayer-funded jackpot for Trudeau’s coalition. It’s like watching a heist in slow motion, and the people pulling it off are your elected officials.

Let’s break down the facts: Bill C-65 is presented as a way to make voting “inclusive” by moving the election from October 20 to October 27 to avoid overlapping with Diwali. Really? Suddenly the Trudeau government is all about Diwali? When did Justin Trudeau become the defender of every cultural holiday? If that were true, they’d be calling a snap election to get back to Canadians sooner, not later. But this isn’t about inclusivity; it’s about squeezing the system dry for every penny they can get.

Conservative MP Eric Duncan and Bloc MP Marie-Hélène Gaudreau saw right through it. They grilled Trudeau’s Privy Council Office (PCO) witnesses, who came armed with vague talking points but no real answers. The obvious question: Why push the election back when we already have advance polling? The answer? Crickets. The PCO’s representatives mumbled about “scheduling challenges” and “inclusivity,” but never explained why delaying the election is somehow the only solution.

And who’s standing right next to Trudeau in this scheme? The NDP. Trudeau’s favorite backup team, once again signing onto a shady deal to keep their coalition afloat. The NDP’s MP Daniel Blaikie was all in, rubber-stamping the date change. The reason? This move locks in the pensions not just for Liberals, but for their NDP buddies too. The whole thing reeks of backroom deals and mutual back-scratching. It’s a classic case of “you scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours”—and Canadian taxpayers are left footing the bill.

In committee, Liberal MP Mark Gerretsen tried to play damage control, dismissing the pension concern as “Conservative scandal-mongering.” That’s right, folks: If you’re upset that your tax dollars are funding a Liberal-NDP pension scheme, Gerretsen says you’re the problem. He and his Liberal colleagues want you to believe that this bill is about “democracy.” But tell me, how democratic is it to change election dates so politicians can milk the system?

The Damning Parts of Bill C-65

So what are the most damning parts of Bill C-65? It’s a textbook case of self-serving political maneuvering. First, there’s the election date change itself—a convenient one-week delay that coincides perfectly with the deadline for MPs elected in 2019 to secure their pensions. This timing isn’t just suspicious; it’s blatant. With no other compelling reason, Trudeau’s Liberals are trying to sell the public on a delay that just happens to benefit their own pocketbooks. What’s even more shocking is that they’re hiding behind Diwali, as if Canadians can’t see right through it.

And the privacy implications? Almost completely glossed over. Bill C-65 falls flat on providing robust privacy protections. Instead, it opens the door for political parties to access voters’ sensitive data under a weak framework that offers minimal oversight. This is more than a missed opportunity; it’s an intentional sidestep to ensure politicians retain easy access to personal information for campaigning purposes.

Then there’s the lack of genuine accountability for foreign interference. Sure, they included some anti-interference provisions, but glaring loopholes remain. Leadership races and nomination contests are still fair game for foreign influence. The Liberals tout this bill as election protection, but when it comes to securing the integrity of the entire process, they’ve left the doors wide open.

Trudeau’s Swamp: When “Inclusivity” Is Just a Cover for Corruption

Let’s be clear about what’s happening here. Justin Trudeau’s government isn’t interested in protecting democracy; they’re interested in protecting their own pockets and political power. Bill C-65 is the latest swamp maneuver by a Liberal-NDP alliance that wants you to believe their motives are pure, cloaking a blatant cash grab under the guise of “inclusivity” and “accessibility.” But real inclusivity doesn’t need backroom deals or sudden election delays. Real inclusivity doesn’t make a mockery of Canadians’ intelligence by pretending a pension-padding scheme is about respecting religious holidays.

This is Trudeau’s swamp at its finest—sneaking in self-serving perks under the cover of high-minded ideals. By claiming they’re moving the election for “cultural sensitivity,” they’re hoping Canadians will overlook what’s really going on: a calculated effort to stretch their time in office just long enough to qualify for generous pensions. And Jagmeet Singh? He’s right there beside Trudeau in this scheme, securing his own taxpayer-funded future, while selling out the values he claims to stand for. This is a backroom deal that pays off for everyone except Canadian taxpayers, who get nothing but excuses and empty rhetoric.

And when opposition MPs raised these glaring issues—why Canadians are seeing no real electoral reforms or accountability—Trudeau’s team sidestepped, evaded, and downplayed. Even the so-called “anti-interference” measures fall flat, with loopholes so wide you could drive a truck through them. Foreign interference protections that ignore internal nomination contests? Privacy policies that allow political parties to dip into Canadians’ data with next to no oversight? It’s government overreach at best, outright negligence at worst, and yet they insist this is all about “democracy.”

If Trudeau’s government truly cared about protecting democracy, they wouldn’t be delaying elections to suit their pension schedules. They’d be calling an election to let Canadians decide who deserves to lead, right now. But they won’t do that because they know they’re losing the trust of Canadians, who are waking up to these games. They’d rather delay, manipulate, and cash in, hoping that enough time will make people forget this little “adjustment” to the election date.

This isn’t just political maneuvering; it’s a power grab. Trudeau and Singh are the faces of a swamp that puts self-interest before public service, personal gain before genuine leadership. They’re bending the rules to keep themselves and their allies comfortable, all while counting on Canadians to stay distracted. But Canadians are smarter than that, and they’re watching as this government dips into their wallets, lines their own pockets, and calls it “inclusivity.”

This is government corruption disguised as progressivism. This is your leadership in Canada today—when the very people elected to serve Canadians are the ones robbing them blind, hiding behind “woke” language to pull off their heist. Trudeau’s swamp doesn’t just run deep; it’s becoming the whole system. And every day they stay in power, they’re counting on Canadians to look the other way.

Subscribe to The Opposition with Dan Knight . For the full experience, upgrade your subscription.

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

Bruce Dowbiggin

Burying Poilievre Is Job One In Carney’s Ottawa

Published on

The Liberals’ first budget under Mark Carney— about nine months overdue— snuck through Parliament with Green Party leader-of-one Elizabeth “Margarita” May as the deciding vote. (All it took was a commitment to her insane climate targets.) A quick review of the Book of Revelations does not reveal this as a sign of the Apocalypse. But to Canadians who voted for a change in the spring it’s a rude reminder that no one is minding the store in Ottawa.

The Parliament Hill media has largely shelved discussion of Carney’s budget ‘guzintas (the PBO said there is a “less than 10 percent chance the government will keep its deficit-to-GDP ratio on a downward track through 2029-30… and Finance Canada has “changed its reporting of deficit financing, separating capital from operational spending.”) Translation:  If Carney keeps on this track till 2030 the total GST collected from Canadians will not be enough to service the federal debt.

The chattering class is, however, full speed ahead on their Pierre Poilievre deathwatch. The leader of the CPC is one of their more anodyne figures to lead a party since Mackenzie King. His earnest kitchen-table schtick is about as dynamic as a cheese sandwich. Even when he famously defenestrated a blundering BC journalist in an apple orchard he never raised his voice. (What page am I taking from Trump’s book?”)

In the House of Commons, he has performed a monotone strafing of Liberal policy since becoming leader in 2023. He hasn’t elbowed aside a female NDP member. In the fine tradition of the House he does mock the Liberals front bench, throws water on their fevered policies and acts like a vice-principal of a small high school disciplining a student.

But in the judgment of today’s febered media— okay, the Liberals— he’s “rage-farming” or “rage-baiting” when pointing out that Canada’s debt is out of control, its real estate is a bubble waiting to burst and the relationship with the U.S. is flat lining. In fact he’s all rage, all the time, for their purposes. According to Carney’s bots, Poilievre stoops “to stirring and riling up ‘white-trash’ elements in society into hateful rhetoric against the prime minister. “

Team Carney has gloried in his travails since Donald Trump upended the spring election by cozying up to Carney. (Poilievre didn’t help himself taking pot shots at Trump who then dismissed Poilievre). CBC/ CTV/ Global savants who spit every time they mention Trump bizarrely were suddenly in enthusiastic approval of Orange Man Bad spanking PP for them.

The tone about his performance as opposition leader is vitriolic. “Pierre Poilievre’s rage-baiting and empty slogans aren’t what Canada needs”. His slogans (stolen by Carney during the election campaign), his by-election win in Alberta, his insistence on core issues— it drives the panelists on talk shows to fits for pique.

Which is funny when you think about it. Those with longer memories can recall the hijinx of the Liberals’ Rat Pack in the 1980s and 90s. Led by Sheila Copps (dubbed Tequila Sheila by Tory justice minister John Crosbie), Don Boudria and John Nunziata they were an early version of Polievere and Melissa Lantsman and the CPC front bench. Just more obnoxious.

Except the wind therapists were amused by them. Instead of rage monkeys they were the subjects of puckish CBC features. Copps could speak Italian with her (Hamilton) constituents and also had “perfect French,” said reporter Jason Moscovitz.” But she needles Mulroney in plain English,” he added, as Copps introduced a question for Brian Mulroney by comparing him to to Johnny Carson.

The irreverent Rats even produced their own T-shirts to wear in the House. “Other MPs say he’s sleazy, slimy, and a snake,” said Moscovitz, of Nunziata as he donned one of the T-shirts. So Nunziata used the same words in the House of Commons.”Sleazy, slimy Tory patronage!” he proclaimed on the floor of the House.

Laugh? We could have died. It was entertaining in the collegial debating club of the time. The sparring of the feisty Copps and her target John Crosbie was mint.

But now that the Liberals are entering a second decade of mismanaging the nation, their appetite for impertinence has disappeared. So the clever ripostes of Copps are now Poilievre “rage” farming and “rage baiting”. Some people have noticed the contrast: “Caucus unrest treated as a calamity when it involves the Conservatives, while Liberals get a pass” But the bubble-bound Canadian public only hears one slant.

In the U.S. there are hopeful signs of a bubble breakthrough. Hip TV host Bill Maher was forced to tell Woke comedian Patton Oswalt that his BlueSky world was strangling him. He enlightens an oblivious Oswalt on the UK grooming gangs. He also brought him up to reality when Oswalt said the Left never orders gender off of passports.

It’s not much, but it’s hopeful, at least in America. Here in Canada the information corridor is so thoroughly policed by the culture Stasi (using their dreaded Trump guns) that nothing can get through. Singing O Canada and not abusing the lyrics is considered a sacrilege on the Left. Daniel Smith is a Trumpist etc. Carney is intent on importing British hate speech convictions, not AI chips and nuclear energy.

If that isn’t enough of a bummer remember that Carney is just a stop-gap, a guy to rag the puck for a few years till the Liberals have groomed Justin’s eldest for the PMO. Where he can complete the Woking of traditional Canada that Grandpapa Pierre started in 1968.

Bruce Dowbiggin @dowbboy is the editor of Not The Public Broadcaster  A two-time winner of the Gemini Award as Canada’s top television sports broadcaster, his new book Deal With It: The Trades That Stunned The NHL And Changed hockey is now available on Amazon. Inexact Science: The Six Most Compelling Draft Years In NHL History, his previous book with his son Evan, was voted the seventh-best professional hockey book of all time by bookauthority.org . His 2004 book Money Players was voted sixth best on the same list, and is available via brucedowbigginbooks.ca.

Continue Reading

Energy

Here’s what they don’t tell you about BC’s tanker ban

Published on

From Resource Works

By Tom Fletcher

Crude oil tankers have sailed and docked on the British Columbia coast for more than 70 years, with no spills

BC Premier David Eby staged a big media event on Nov. 6 to once again restate his opposition to an oil pipeline from Alberta to the Prince Rupert area.

The elaborate ceremony to sign a poster-sized document called the “North Coast Protection Declaration” was dutifully covered by provincial and national media, despite having no actual news content. It is not a response to Alberta’s plan to finance preliminary work on a new oil pipeline, Eby insisted. It’s to confirm the direction of growing the BC economy without, you know, any more oil pipelines.

The event at the opulent Vancouver Convention Centre West was timed to coincide with the annual BC Cabinet and First Nations Leaders Gathering, a diplomatic effort set up 10 years ago by former premier Christy Clark. This year’s event featured more than 1,300 delegates from 200 First Nations and every BC government ministry.

A high-profile event with little real news

The two-day gathering features 1,300 meetings, “plus plenary and discussion sessions on a variety of topics, including major projects, responding to racism, implementation of the Declaration Act, and more,” the premier’s office announced.

Everyone’s taxpayer-funded hotels and expense accounts alone are an impressive boost to the economy. Aside from an opening news conference and the declaration event at the end, the whole thing is closed to the public.

The protection declaration is a partnership between the BC government and the Coastal First Nations, Eby said. As I mentioned in my Oct. 15 commentary, Coastal First Nations sounds like a tribal council, but it isn’t. It’s an environmental group started in the late 1990s by the David Suzuki Foundation, with international eco-foundation funding over the years that led to the current name, Coastal First Nations Great Bear Initiative.

The evolution of the Coastal First Nations initiative

Their current project is the Great Bear Sea, funded by $200 million from the federal government, $60 million from BC, and $75 million from “philanthropic investors.” This is similar to the Great Bear Rainforest conservation project, backed by mostly US billionaire charity funds, that persuaded Justin Trudeau to turn the voluntary tanker exclusion zone into Canadian law.

Leadoff speaker in Vancouver was the current Coastal First Nations president, Heiltsuk Chief Marilyn Slett. She repeated a well-worn story about her remote Central Coast community of Bella Bella still struggling with the effects of an “oil spill” in 2016.

In fact, the 2016 event was the sinking of a tugboat that ran aground while pushing an empty fuel barge back down from Alaska to a refinery in Washington to be refilled. The “oil spill” was the diesel fuel powering the tugboat, which basic chemistry suggests would have evaporated long ago.

Fuel dependence on the remote BC coast

Remote coastal settlements are entirely dependent on fuel shipments, and Bella Bella is no different. It has no road or power grid connections, and the little seaside village is dominated by large fuel tanks that have to be refilled regularly by barge to keep the lights on.

Bella Bella on BC’s remote Central Coast is dominated by large fuel tanks that allow Heiltsuk reserve residents to keep the lights on. Remote off-grid communities up the BC coast to Alaska depend on fuel barge shipments. Image courtesy of Tom Fletcher

Alaska North Slope crude has been shipped by tanker to Washington and beyond for more than 60 years. Yes, there’s a North Coast “exclusion zone” where US-bound tankers go west around Haida Gwaii rather than down the Inside Passage, but once the ships reach Vancouver Island, they sail inside right past Victoria to refineries at Cherry Point, March Point, and other US stops.

Through the tall windows of the Vancouver convention centre, you can watch Aframax crude tankers sail past under the Second Narrows and Lions Gate bridges, after loading diluted bitumen crude from the expanded Westridge Terminal in Burnaby. That is, of course, the west end of the Trans Mountain Pipeline, which has operated since 1954 with no spills, including the branch line down to the Cherry Point complex.

There are many more crude tankers exiting Vancouver now that the TMX expansion is complete, but they aren’t filled all the way because the Second Narrows is too shallow to allow that. A dredging project is in the works to allow Aframax-sized tankers to fill up.

A global market for Alberta crude emerges

They enter and exit Burrard Inlet surrounded by tethered tugboats to prevent grounding, even if the tanker loses power in this brief stretch of a long voyage that now takes Alberta crude around the world. Since the TMX expansion, shipments that used to go mostly to California now are reaching Korea, Japan, China, Hong Kong, and Singapore as well.

The US captive discount has shrunk, the tripled pipeline capacity is rapidly filling up, and pumping stations are being added. This is the very definition of Mark Carney’s nation-building projects to get Canada out of the red.

The idea that the North Coast can host fuel barges, LNG tankers, bunker-fired cruise ships, and freighters but can’t tolerate Canadian crude along with the US tankers is a silly urban myth.

 

Tom Fletcher has covered BC politics and business as a journalist since 1984. [email protected]. X: @tomfletcherbc

Continue Reading

Trending

X