Opinion
Trudeau and Singh Scheme to Delay Election, Secure Payouts on the Taxpayer’s Dime
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.
Opinion
Blind to the Left: Canada’s Counter-Extremism Failure Leaves Neo-Marxist and Islamist Threats Unchecked
By Ian Bradbury
Incidents like the 2022 Coastal GasLink attack, the December 2023 Ottawa plot against Jewish events and the January 2024 Edmonton City Hall attack underscore the stakes, yet they fade from public discourse without rigorous analysis. This is not mere oversight—it is a systemic failure of Canada’s counter-radicalization and extremism frameworks and media, exposing the nation to risks from under-assessed threats.
In June 2025, a former British Columbia civil liberties leader—forced to resign in 2021 for rhetoric deemed too extreme even by the province’s NDP government—re-emerged to lead a protest outside the Canada Border Services Agency offices in Vancouver. Her earlier praise of Hamas attackers’ hang-glider tactics as “beautiful” and her call to “burn it all down” amid the 2021 church arsons across Canada raise a critical question: Is this the sign of a deeper ideological current gaining momentum beneath the surface?
Canada faces a mounting crisis of radicalization and extremism, yet its citizens remain largely uninformed or, worse, misinformed.
Despite tens of millions invested in counter-radicalization over the past decade, threats from extremist elements within the Pro-Palestinian movement, the “Hands Off Iran” protests, and left-wing extremism receive insufficient scrutiny.
The “Hands Off Iran” demonstrations on June 22, 2025, which rallied hundreds in support of the Iranian regime—planned before U.S. strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities and organized by many of the same protest groups active since October 7, 2023—highlight this neglect.
The absence of detailed reporting obscures their scope and significance. Incidents like the January 2024 Edmonton City Hall attack and the December 2023 Ottawa plot against Jewish events underscore the stakes, yet they fade from public discourse without rigorous analysis.
This is not mere oversight—it is a systemic failure of Canada’s counter-radicalization and extremism frameworks and media, exposing the nation to risks from under-assessed threats.
Under-assessed Threats in Plain Sight
Pro-Palestinian rallies in Vancouver, Toronto, Ottawa, and Montreal reveal this gap. Flags of Hamas and Hezbollah—designated terrorist groups in Canada—have been displayed openly, and chants of “Death to Canada”, “Death to America”, and “Death to Israel, Death to Jews” have been reported, yet government-funded organizations offer no in-depth analysis of the radical networks or rhetoric tied to these events.
The “Hands Off Iran” protests face the same silence. Where are the detailed reports dissecting these movements? Where are the network maps or guides to their flags, symbols, and rhetoric, as seen for far-right groups?
Similarly, Left-wing accelerationism, an neo-marxist ideology advocating violent societal collapse, has fueled incidents like the 2022 Coastal GasLink attack, the 2021 church arsons, and anti-colonial criminal acts, yet it is overshadowed and downplayed by coverage of far-right threats, such as militant “right-wing accelerationism”. Two cases illustrate the broad urgency: the Edmonton attack, involving gunfire and a Molotov cocktail, included a video supporting Palestine and condemning Israel’s actions in Gaza, but was downplayed as “salad-bar extremism.”
The Ottawa plot, inspired by Islamic extremism and the Israel-Palestine conflict, vanished from headlines with alarming speed. These incidents demand thorough investigation, not dismissal.
A Counter-Radicalization Industry Misaligned
Canada’s counter-radicalization efforts fail to address the full spectrum of threats. Organizations such as the Canadian Centre for the Prevention of Radicalization Leading to Violence and the Canadian Anti-Hate Network (an organization linked to the extremist decentralized Antifa movement) focus heavily on far-right extremism and limited Islamic threats (e.g., ISIS and Al-Qaeda), while sidelining left-wing extremism, accelerationism, anarchist extremism, and broader Islamic extremism.
Despite Canada’s 2024 designations of the IRGC and Samidoun as terrorist entities, these threats receive minimal attention compared to the detailed profiling of far-right networks in Canada. Detailed radicalization or extremist assessment reports on Edmonton or Ottawa? Virtually nonexistent. Further compounding the challenge, Canada’s reliance on foreign groups like the UK’s ICSR, ISD, Moonshot, or Meta’s GIFCT—partly funded by Canadian taxpayers—skews focus away from nuanced, Canada centered, counter-radicalization and extremism priorities.
Certain initiatives, such as Moonshot’s redirect program, which was found to have directed individuals vulnerable to right-wing radicalization to curated content from an anarchist and convicted human trafficker with ties to Russian organized crime, likely exacerbated rather than mitigated the risks it intended to reduce. This prompts a critical question: Why does Canada entrust so much of its counter-radicalization and extremism initiatives to external entities that are unaccountable to its citizens?
Media coverage only compounds the problem.
The Edmonton attack’s Palestine-linked video was buried under vague labeling, and the Ottawa plot faded without follow-up. Extremist symbols at rallies are treated as backdrop, unlike the 2022 convoy protests, which prompted detailed government-funded analyses of symbols, rhetoric, and networks, that were amplified by media.
Exacerbating the challenges, Public Safety Canada’s Listed Terrorist Entities page lists groups but lacks guides to their symbols, terms, or networks, leaving Canadians ill-equipped to identify threats. This is not journalism or governance—it is a failure to connect evident and observable dots.
CSIS and the RCMP have raised alarms about Iranian- and Palestinian-linked threats, in addition to Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Sharren Haskel’s claim of hundreds of IRGC operatives active in Canada. The 2024 designations of the IRGC, linked to Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis, and Samidoun, tied to Palestinian extremism, confirm these risks. CSIS has flagged Iranian-backed influence networks, and the RCMP thwarted plots like the Ottawa conspiracy.
Yet, these warnings rarely translate into robust public understanding, leaving Canadians vulnerable to acknowledged and observable threats.
A Path Forward: Immediate Accountability
The U.S. bombardment of Iranian nuclear sites has heightened these risks, with reports of Iranian sleeper cells in North America adding urgency. Canada must act swiftly to address all threats—left-wing, Islamic, and far-right—with equal rigor.
Detailed, unclassified reports on incidents like Edmonton and Ottawa, alongside network analyses of domestic protest and disruption movements, must become standard. Furthermore, Public Safety Canada should enhance its Listed Terrorist Entities page with guides to symbols, flags, rhetoric, and networks, drawing on allied nations’ open-source models for rapid implementation. Federal funding for counter-radicalization groups must mandate balanced, actionable reporting across all threats, verified through regular audits.
Canada’s skewed approach to extremism is a profound national security vulnerability. Left-wing extremism and accelerationism, pervasive Islamic extremism, and attacks on Jewish institutions fester unaddressed, while rallies including support for listed terrorist groups evade scrutiny.
The counter-radicalization sector, media, and government share responsibility for this dangerous oversight. As global tensions rise and domestic risks evolve, the cost of inaction grows steeper, leaving Canada vulnerable to the next strike. What message does Canada send by prioritizing some threats while overlooking others that are active and evident?
And what will the reckoning be when a skilled attacker, emboldened by this neglect, slips through the cracks?
The Bureau is a reader-supported publication.
To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
Invite your friends and earn rewards
Quick Hit:
UPenn will strip Lia Thomas of women’s swimming titles and apologize to impacted athletes in a Title IX settlement with the Department of Education, following a Trump-led investigation and funding freeze.
Key Details:
- The Department of Education announced Tuesday that UPenn will restore all Division I swimming records, titles, and recognitions to the biological women who earned them prior to Lia Thomas’s participation.
- The university will also issue personal apology letters to each affected female swimmer and release a public statement affirming that biological males will no longer be allowed to compete in women’s sports.
- The agreement follows a Trump administration order in March that froze $175 million in federal funding to UPenn pending a Title IX investigation. UPenn’s total federal funding exceeds $1 billion annually.
Diving Deeper:
On Tuesday, the Department of Education announced that the University of Pennsylvania had entered into a formal resolution agreement to address violations of Title IX, the federal law barring sex-based discrimination in education. The action stems from UPenn’s decision to allow Lia Thomas, a male athlete who identifies as transgender, to compete in women’s collegiate swimming events—an action the Trump administration deemed unlawful under Title IX protections.
According to the Department’s statement, UPenn will be required to restore “all individual UPenn Division I swimming records, titles, or similar recognitions” to the female athletes who were displaced by Thomas’s participation. The university must also send “a personalized letter of apology to each impacted female swimmer” and issue a broader public acknowledgment of its policy change: biological males will no longer be permitted to compete in women’s athletic programs.
The move marks the latest step in a months-long standoff between the Ivy League institution and the Trump administration. In March, the administration placed a hold on $175 million in federal funding allocated to UPenn, pending the outcome of an investigation into the school’s compliance with Title IX. That funding freeze was part of a broader executive order signed by President Donald Trump in February, which mandated that federal funds be withheld from schools allowing transgender athletes to compete against women.
Former UPenn swimmer Paula Scanlan, who was part of the team during Thomas’s controversial tenure, praised the outcome. “As a former UPenn swimmer who had to compete against and share a locker room with a male athlete, I am deeply grateful to the Trump Administration for refusing to back down on protecting women and girls and restoring our rightful accolades,” she said. “I am also pleased that my alma mater has finally agreed to take not only the lawful path, but the honorable one.”
Riley Gaines, a prominent women’s sports advocate and former NCAA swimmer, also applauded the agreement. “From day one, President Trump and Secretary McMahon vowed to protect women and girls, and today’s agreement with UPenn is a historic display of that promise being fulfilled,” Gaines said. “This Administration does not just pay lip service to women’s equality: it vigorously insists on that equality being upheld.”
The totality of UPenn’s federal funding—around $1 billion annually—could have been at risk had the university refused to comply. Instead, the school has agreed to the terms laid out by the Department of Education and will now be expected to implement new compliance policies to ensure continued eligibility for federal funds.
This resolution is one of the first high-profile enforcement actions under Trump’s revised Title IX policy, and it sends a clear signal: schools that violate protections for women’s sports face real consequences.
The Quiet Invasion: How Transnational Crime and Chinese State Actors Infiltrated Vancouver and Eroded Canada’s Sovereignty
RFK Jr. says Hep B vaccine is linked to 1,135% higher autism rate
Alberta Independence Seekers Take First Step: Citizen Initiative Application Approved, Notice of Initiative Petition Issued
National Health Care Fraud Takedown Results in 324 Defendants Charged in Connection with Over $14.6 Billion in Alleged Fraud
-
Business1 day ago
RFK Jr. says Hep B vaccine is linked to 1,135% higher autism rate
-
Crime2 days ago
National Health Care Fraud Takedown Results in 324 Defendants Charged in Connection with Over $14.6 Billion in Alleged Fraud
-
Business13 hours agoWhy it’s time to repeal the oil tanker ban on B.C.’s north coast
-
Censorship Industrial Complex1 day agoGlobal media alliance colluded with foreign nations to crush free speech in America: House report
-
Alberta8 hours agoAlberta Provincial Police – New chief of Independent Agency Police Service
-
Health2 days agoRFK Jr. Unloads Disturbing Vaccine Secrets on Tucker—And Surprises Everyone on Trump
-
Alberta13 hours agoPierre Poilievre – Per Capita, Hardisty, Alberta Is the Most Important Little Town In Canada
-
Business1 day agoElon Musk slams Trump’s ‘Big Beautiful Bill,’ calls for new political party