Frontier Centre for Public Policy
Trudeau ‘finished what his father started’ driving Canada into failing freefall
From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy
In 2015 Prime Minister Justin Trudeau scorned Canada — a country that afforded him so much, yet to which he had contributed nothing of notable significance. His disdain for those on whose backs Canada was built was clear. History and European national origins had to be blotted out.
Canada was a “post-national” nation with “no core identity,” he arrogantly told the New York Times. The reckless socialist ideology he spat out was an omen of the division, fear and attack on so-called privileged (white) Canadians that hit like a storm. It hovers over us like a choking toxic cloud.
If Trudeau’s vision was a Canada “completely splintered,” with Quebec a nation unto itself “separate and distinct,” English-speaking provinces “fractured into oblivion” and breaking up our “common culture” — then mission accomplished.
“He’s finished what his father started,” said Lt. Col. Dave Redman (ret’d), who served 27 years with the Canadian Armed Forces and headed Alberta’s Emergency Management Agency.
The Trudeau concept of a post-national state is “dangerous and misleading.”
“It implies that democratically elected national governments are no longer relevant.”
Redman explained Canada’s “shifting socio-political landscape” with powerful clarity in Canada 2024: A Confident Resilient Nation or a Fearful Fracture Country? in the Frontier Centre for Public Policy.
Canadians know something has gone terribly wrong beyond mounting financial struggles and trampled rights. Our nation’s rife with “apologies and internal divisions,” said Redman.
“Confidence has been turned into fear and shame. Canada has become irrelevant on the world stage.”
Canada’s in a “failing” freefall.
“Why will no one invest economically in Canada? Why are people leaving Canada? Why are people not believing that Canada has a future? Why are our allies ignoring us and holding us in disdain? Because we are a threat to their national security because China can get to them through us.”
Canada’s at a “critical juncture.” Until politicians and Canadians unite with common values and defended borders —necessary for a successful nation — Canada will be “stumbling from one crisis to another.”
Until Canadians hold them to account, politicians will fixate on minor “wedge” issues — such as diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) — to divert attention from critical national concerns they want us to ignore.
Convincing people to feel bad about themselves makes it easier to manipulate guilt and usher in destructive, ideological programs with obscene price tags.
Canada must foster national pride, prioritize national interests and protect national security to secure its future, said Redman.
“A nation is successful when a group of people live in one country with defended borders and share common values, even if they vary in cultures and languages.”
Redman’s six-point framework for national interests includes unity, national security, good governance, protection of rights and freedoms, economic prosperity and growth and personal and community well-being. He offers strategies on how to achieve these critical objectives.
“I believe the current sitting government truly does believe that the World Economic Forum’s concepts and ideals of post-national states is what Canada should be and they have started it.”
“I believe the current government of Canada is intentionally walking each of those six national interests away from Canada in a way that will allow Canada to become part of a broken world.”
It’s up to Canadians to decide what direction we head in.
“The reason I wrote this paper was to make people think about our country in a 20-to-25-year vision. And not let the current government which loves to use divisive, tactical issues to destroy the larger picture conversation. And in doing so, destroy our economy, destroy our unity, destroy our national security by focussing on tactical issues,” said Redman.
A vision for Canada involves citizens who are optimistic about the future, have self-respect to follow through on their ideas, and courage to stand up for their culture and ideals, he said.
Trudeau and his band of self-serving renegades unleashed an ideological curse on Canada.
But we let them.
Then COVID-19 demonstrated how quickly rights and freedoms “can be trampled on, eviscerated and dismissed.”
For a glorious moment in time Freedom Convoy truckers rejuvenated Canadian pride, united Canadians and emboldened us to fight for freedom. Peaceful protesters who waved the Canadian flag were punished.
Yet the silence is deafening as people who despise Canada’s core identity — yes, Trudeau, we have one — hijack our nation and our children’s future.
Redman points to “diaspora marching routinely in the streets of our cities supporting illegal terrorist organizations demanding the death of both citizens here and abroad.”
They wave flags but never the Maple Leaf. They support other countries “but do not march for Canada.”
“Unity is the core value for a country. A cultural unity is based on common shared ethics, values and beliefs. People wishing to become citizens of a country must understand these principles of belief and join the country because they wish for the same to be the foundation of their daily lives.”
“Many who come to a country, not wishing to join the cultural unity of that country, are enemies, intentional or otherwise, who work to erode or destroy this unity.”
Immigration is part of national security.
“You’re pouring people into our country who do not share our ethics and values. And you’re doing it intentionally. That will destroy unity and while it’s destroying unity it will destroy economic prosperity and growth.”
“Our police and courts take no action or in fact support these illegal acts.”
“Our current federal government, many of our provincial territorial governments and our municipal governments stand silently by, or in some cases support the destruction of our values, laws and national interests.”
Redman said the question is, what do Canadians want Canada to be? Will we stand up and root out infectious ideology? Is it too late?
“My paper is about how to overcome what’s happened. It’s happened, we can’t change that. But it’s how to get politicians and Canadians to change how they think about our country. And to have a process to put in place, a vision for our country and have elected officials explain what they see the vision to be. Canadians can make a choice between visions.”
Citizens, academia, public and private sector organizations, unions, religious and non-religious groups need to get involved to break down national interests into “clear and attainable objectives.”
Politicians must explain what unity and democracy means to them. That’s not happening.
Many Canadians are pinning hopes on Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre forming the next federal government.
“My line to Poilievre is I understand his tactical four bullet plan you know that inflation’s up, the cost of living’s up, that housing’s bad and people need more money in their pocket.”
“I get it. He’s beating that drum over and over. But we’ve got a year before the election, he needs to start talking about his vision for Canada.”
Canada was once internationally respected, trusted and consulted. Now we are pitied by shocked outsiders witnessing woke ideology and crushed free speech forced upon us.
“We’ve been taught to be ashamed of our history instead of proud of it, or even to learn from it.”
“We have completely shattered democratic institutions. Our election system is in question. Our legislatures are in turmoil, our courts, our schools, our medical system. The mainstream media is completely partisan. Our economy is broken. People can’t meet bills at the end of the month and we’re ignored and shunned by our allies.”
Redman addressed good governance, offering guidelines on how to “strengthen and preserve the democratic way of life in Canada.”
“Good governance to me means defence of democracy, where in other countries it can mean absolute control of a totalitarian government.”
Redman’s suggestions to stop Canada from being completely “shattered” include a 100% immigration policy review; halting funding to universities that are “domestic threats” and removing Marxists professors; establishing a monitored election process; and ending government-funded media.
Agencies that counter external threats must be “equipped to work individually and cooperatively, with each other and our allies.”
Stop foreign aid that counters our interests and national security.
“While Canadians are challenged to put food on the table and to have a house, they watch as the federal government sends hundreds of millions of dollars to international organizations and specific countries that do not share our democratic aims or our national interests.”
There must be “a wall of people hitting” politicians telling them to listen or face defeat.
“In 25 years will Canada be a democracy? Or will it become a country led by an authoritarian government that uses fear and threats to remove imaginary risks from the daily lives of Canadians who have lost their self-respect and courage?”
Look at what eight years did.
First published here.
Linda Slobodian is the Senior Manitoba Columnist for the Western Standard based out of Winnipeg. She has been an investigative columnist for the Calgary Herald, Calgary Sun, Edmonton Sun, and Alberta Report.
From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy
By Lee Harding
Alberta moves to remove books after disturbing content, too graphic for media to view, was found in schools
Should elementary school children be given books to read with harsh insults against minorities, depictions of oral sex, and other disturbingly graphic and explicit content?
Such books have been in some Alberta elementary schools for a while, and in many school libraries across Canada.
In late May, the Alberta government announced it would establish new guidelines regarding age-appropriate materials in its schools. A government press release included quotes with disturbing content, but at a press conference, Education Minister Demetrios Nicolaides said some book illustrations could not be shown.
“I would show these images to all of you here and to the media, but they are too graphic for a live-stream media event. These examples … illustrate the kind of content that raises concerns amongst parents,” Nicolaides said.
You don’t say? This seems like the sort of stuff no one, except a pervert in a park, would dream of showing to a child. Ironically, the inability to publicize such graphic materials is part of the reason they have been shown to children with little public awareness.
Citizens’ group Action4Canada (A4C) has claimed its activism played a pivotal role in the Alberta decision. The organization has compiled a 36-page document online with examples of objectionable content in Canadian schools. Among the worst is Identical by Ellen Hopkins, which includes graphic descriptions of a little girl being molested by her father.
A4C founder Tanya Gaw has repeatedly tried to raise concerns about objectionable books with school boards, often without success. In some cases, she isn’t even allowed on the agenda if she states her topic upfront. When she is permitted to speak, she’s frequently cut off as soon as she begins quoting from the books, preventing the content from entering the public record.
In January 2023, Gaw made an online presentation to a school board in Mission, B.C. regarding materials in their schools. As she began to screenshare what was there, some board members objected, saying such permission had not been given in advance.
One month later, the board banned Action4Canada from making any further presentations. In later media interviews, the board chair justified the decision by saying Gaw’s PowerPoint contained some graphic and “inappropriate images.”
Exactly, and that is the problem. A recent check showed Mission’s school division only removed four of 15 books A4C objected to. Gaw is just glad “Identical” is one of them.
Pierre Barns, a father from Abbotsford, B.C., made it his mission to notify school boards across Canada what was on their school shelves. An online search was all it took to confirm. A “reply all” from a board member at the Halton School District in Ontario was most ironic.
“I am concerned. This individual has included links to publications and videos which may contain illegal content,” she wrote.
“I’m not sure how to investigate the content of the email safely. Would you please advise us whether or not this person ought to be reported to police? Is there some action we should take?”
There probably was action they should have taken, such as removing the books, but that never happened. Later, they defended a biologically male teacher in their school division who made international headlines by wearing large prosthetic breasts to school.
The Alberta government has committed to conducting public consultations before implementing new policies. It’s a good time for parents and citizens there and in other provinces to speak up. A young mind is a terrible thing to corrupt, but unfortunately, some schools are part of this corrosive effort.
Lee Harding is a research fellow with the Frontier Centre for Public Policy.
From the Frontier Institute for Public Policy
Research VP Marco Navarro-Genie warns that Canada’s future hinges on building energy infrastructure, not just expanding pipelines but forging a true North American energy alliance. With global demand rising and authoritarian regimes weaponizing energy, Ottawa’s dithering costs Canada $70 million daily. Sovereignty isn’t secured by speeches but by infrastructure. Until Canada sheds its regulatory paralysis, it will remain a discount supplier in a high stakes geopolitical game. Time to build.
Canada has energy the world is begging for, but ideology and red tape are holding us back
As Prime Minister Mark Carney met with U.S. President Donald Trump recently, energy should have been the issue behind every headline, whether mentioned or not. Canada’s future as a sovereign, economically resilient country will depend in no small part on whether the country seizes this moment or stalls out again in a fog of regulatory inertia and political ambivalence. Canada holds an underleveraged strategic card: the potential to be the world’s most reliable democratic energy supplier. Recent trade figures show Chinese imports of Canadian crude hit a record 7.3 million barrels in March, a direct result of newly expanded access to the Pacific via the Trans Mountain Expansion (TMX), a federally owned pipeline project that now connects Alberta crude to global markets through British Columbia’s coast. But one pipeline does not make a national strategy. Demand in Asia is growing fast. India is among the hungriest, but Canada’s infrastructure is nowhere near meeting that demand.
This matters not just for Canada, but for the United States as well. In a world where energy markets are weaponized and strategic reserves manipulated by authoritarian regimes, the case for a coordinated North American energy alliance is stronger than ever. Such an alliance should not erode national sovereignty. It should reinforce it, allowing Canada, the U.S. and Mexico to insulate themselves collectively from supply shocks and geopolitical blackmail while projecting democratic strength abroad.
But for that alliance to work, Canada must be a credible partner, not merely a junior supplier shackled by Ottawa-induced internal bottlenecks. While the U.S. has leveraged its shale revolution, LNG capacity and permitting reforms to pursue energy dominance, Canada dithers. Projects languish. Investment flees. And meanwhile, Canadian oil continues to flow south at a steep discount, only to be refined and resold, often back to us or our trading partners, at full global prices.
Yes, you read that right. Canada’s oil and gas is sold at a discount to U.S. customers, and that discount costs Canada more than $70 million every single day. The Frontier Centre for Public Policy has developed a real-time tracker to monitor these losses. This pricing gap exists because Canada lacks sufficient pipeline infrastructure to access overseas buyers directly, forcing producers to sell to the U.S., often at below-market rates.
Such massive losses should be unacceptable to any government serious about economic growth, geopolitical influence or environmental integrity. Yet Ottawa continues to speak the language of ambition while legislating the mechanics of paralysis. Stephen Guilbault’s statement that Canada already has enough pipelines speaks to more paralysis..
Canada’s energy infrastructure challenges are not just economic; they are matters of national defence. No country can claim to be secure while relying on another’s pipelines to transport its energy across its own territory. No country can afford to leave its wealth-producing regions boxed in by regulatory choke points or political resistance dressed as environmental virtue.
Our energy economy is fragmented. Western hydrocarbons are stuck inland and must pass through the U.S. to reach Eastern Canada or global markets eastward. This weakens national unity and leaves us exposed to foreign leverage. It also creates strategic vulnerabilities for our allies. American industries depend on Canadian crude. So do U.S. Gulf Coast refineries. And while American officials continue to treat energy as a tool of diplomacy and economic leverage, using energy exports to build alliances and reduce reliance on unstable regimes, Canada treats it as a domestic liability.
We need to shift the frame. Infrastructure isn’t just about steel in the ground; it’s the backbone of strategic autonomy. Pipelines, export terminals and utility corridors would allow Canada to claim its place in the emerging geopolitical order. They would also signal to global investors that Canada is open for business and capable of delivering returns without political obstruction.
The U.S. wants a stable, competent partner to help meet global energy needs. Increasingly, so does the rest of the world. But until we address our internal dysfunction and build, we’re stuck. Stuck watching global opportunities pass us by. Stuck selling low while others sell high. Stuck in a conversation about sovereignty we’re not structurally equipped to address, let alone win.
When Carney meets with Trump again, he would do well to remember that economic independence, not rhetorical unity, is the bedrock of sovereignty. Without infrastructure, Canada brings only words to a hard-power conversation.
Paraphrasing Thomas Hobbes, energy covenants without infrastructure are but words. It’s time to stop posturing and start building.
Marco Navarro-Genie is the vice-president of research at the Frontier Centre for Public Policy. He is co-author, with Barry Cooper, of Canada’s COVID: The Story of a Pandemic Moral Panic (2023).
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
Carney’s Promise of Expediting Resource Projects Feels Like a Modern Version of the Wicked Stepmother from Disney’s Cinderella
