I am a registered Liberal and former director and chair of the audit committee of the Federal Liberal Agency of Canada “(FLAC)” and have served seven leaders of the Liberal Party of Canada “(LPC)”, including four Prime Ministers. I am a former partner of a major national accounting firm.
With the resignation of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, the LPC has the urgent challenge to respond creatively. That should involve an invigorated and new vision of the profound needs of Canadians and the world. We are reminded of the ancient saying:
“Where there is no vision, the people perish…”
The purpose of this Op Ed is twofold – to demonstrate that:
Firstly, although the Prime Minister has resigned, Registered Liberals should demand that, effective immediately, he recuse himself from the LPC board overseeing the leadership process.
Secondly, Registered Liberals should demand an investigation into foreign interference in the LPC leadership process.
As reported in The Bureau on January 7, 2025, “Trudeau Clinging Like A ‘Low-Key Autocrat,’” Jeremy Nuttall correctly asserts:
“This isn’t normal. Not even close. Even the most eccentric of Prime Ministers in any other commonwealth country would likely be licking their wounds in Ibiza by now, watching the chaos unfold from a safe distance. Not this Prime Minister… the only bar lower at this point would be if Trudeau goes back on his promise to resign. I’ll really believe he’s gone when he’s gone.”
And Bloomberg‘s December 20, 2024 report raises legitimate concerns over a conflict of interest and apprehension of bias that exists with the Prime Minister and Mark Carney. Specifically, it reported that Trudeau informed Chrystia Freeland on December 13, 2024, that she would soon be out as finance minister. She was deeply upset and felt betrayed. Mark Carney was taking over, Trudeau
told her.
This action toward Chrystia Freeland suggests that the Prime Minister may favour Mark Carney. The Prime Minister is not only the LPC leader, he is also on the board of the LPC. The LPC board will be making key decisions regarding the process for selection of a new leader. To date, the leading candidates are Mark Carney and Chrystia Freeland. As a result of his conduct, the Prime Minister is in a conflict of interest and there is an apprehension of bias in favour of Mark Carney.
It is compellingly rational to demand that, effective immediately, the Prime Minister recuse himself from the Liberal Party of Canada board overseeing the Liberal Party of Canada leadership process.
I recommend in my second objective that Registered Liberals should demand an investigation into possible foreign interference in the LPC leadership process.
On the current LPC website it states that the party looks forward to running a secure, fair, and national race that will elect the next Leader of the party.
As reported by the CBC on January 10, 2025, in response to concerns about foreign interference, the Liberal leadership contest now requires voters to be Canadian citizens or permanent residents. Liberal Party national campaign co-chair Terry Duguid tells Power & Politics that the party will verify the status of registered voters.
However, my Op Ed dated March 11, 2024, based on The Bureau’s reporting, demonstrates that the Liberal government, led by the dishonorable leadership of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, has failed to address the following vital and relevant issues:
a. Expedite Revisions to Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist
Financing Act S.C. 2000, c. 17 r.
b. Immediately respond to the B.C. Cullen Commission Report,
c. Improve the capacity of The Office of the Superintendent of Financial
Institutions
d. Implement immediately a foreign registry like that of the U.S. and Great
Britain.
Also, as reported in my March 2024, Op Ed in The Bureau, an investigation should be initiated to address contributions totaling $65,000 to the Prime Minister’s Papineau Federal Liberal Association. These contributions involve possible contravention of Section 363(1) of the Election Act, being ineligible
contributions from a foreign person or entity. This reporting is detailed in Wilful Blindness Third Edition by Sam Cooper—essential reading for insights into malign foreign powers infiltrating Canada’s political systems, eroding democracy, and threatening prosperity.
To address the profound concern of Registered Liberals and the Canadian public on the issue of foreign interference I make the following recommendation to be implemented immediately:
Federal Liberal Agency of Canada, as chief agent of the Liberal Party of Canada “(LPC)” and independent from the LPC Board, should engage Price Waterhouse Coopers “(PWC)”, being the LPC external auditors, to investigate foreign interference in the current LPC leadership election process. The purpose of this
investigation is to demonstrate the efficacy and legitimacy of the LPC leadership process in addressing potential foreign interference to Registered Liberals and the Canadian public.
There is a precedent for this proposed action. I, in my capacity of chair of the FLAC audit committee, along with others, on March 25, 2013, engaged PWC to perform certain procedures to ensure the efficacy and effectiveness of the voting system. PWC reported the results of their investigation to the LPC National Meeting.
Conclusion
The Canadian liberal democracy is a safeguard against autocracy and includes many benefits, including individual rights, universal suffrage and participation, separation of powers, peaceful conflict resolution, economic opportunity and equality, government transparency and accountability, rule of law and judicial
independence, and self-critique.
We are profoundly blessed in Canada with abundant natural resources and a gifted ethnic mosaic from around the world. However, there are malign foreign powers infiltrating our political systems and eroding the extraordinary benefits of Canadian liberal democracy. We are reminded of our call to vigilance in our National Anthem:
O Canada!
Our home and native land!
True patriot love in all of us command.
With glowing hearts we see thee rise,
The True North strong and free!
From far and wide,
O Canada, we stand on guard for thee.
God keep our land glorious and free!
O Canada, we stand on guard for thee
The Bureau is a reader-supported publication.
To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
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.
A new Ontario-wide survey conducted by Nanos Research on behalf of Canada Action finds strong public consensus that Canadian oil and gas revenues are critical to jobs, economic growth, and trade – and that Canada should lean into its energy advantage at home and abroad.
“Our polling feedback shows that a majority of Ontarians recognize the vital, irreplaceable role oil and gas has to play in our national economy. Canadians are telling us they want to see more support for the oil and gas sector, which is foundational to our standard of living and economy at large,” said Canada Action spokesperson, Cody Battershill.
The online survey of 1,000 Ontarians shows that more than four in five (84 per cent) respondents believe oil and gas revenues are important for creating jobs for Canadians and building a stronger economy. Additionally, four-in-five (80 per cent) support Canada developing a strategy to become a preferred oil supplier to countries, while Ontarians are more than eight times as likely to support as to oppose Canada supplying oil and gas, provided it remains a major source of energy worldwide.
“Building new trade infrastructure, including pipelines to the coasts that would get our oil and gas resources to international markets, can help Canadians diversify our trading partners, maximize the value of our resources, and secure a strong and prosperous future for our families,” Battershill said.
Also, nearly four-in-five (79 per cent) of Ontarians say oil and gas revenues are important for keeping energy costs manageable for Canadians.
“Our poll is just one of many in Canada since the start of 2025 that show a majority of Canadians are supportive of oil and gas development. It’s time we get moving forward on these projects without delay and learn from the lessons of our past, where we saw multiple pipelines cancelled to the detriment of Canada’s long-term economic success.”
Additional findings include:
Four-in-five (80 per cent) of Ontarians support Canada supplying oil and gas, provided it remains a major source of energy worldwide.
Four-in five (80 per cent) of Ontarians believe oil and gas revenues are important when it comes to building stronger trading partnerships.
Nearly four-in-five (79 per cent) of Ontarians say oil and gas revenues are important for keeping energy costs manageable for Canadians.
Nearly four-in-five (78 per cent) of Ontarians support Canada stepping up to provide our key NATO allies with secure energy sources.
Nearly four-in-five (78 per cent) of Ontarians support Canada increasing oil and gas exports around the world, about six and a half times more likely than to oppose.
Nearly four-in-five (77 per cent) of Ontarians support Canada providing Asia and Europe with oil and gas so that they are less reliant on authoritarian suppliers.
Nearly three-in-four (74 per cent) of Ontarians support Canada increasing oil and gas exports around the world, five times more likely than to oppose.
Nearly three-in-four (74 per cent) of Ontarians say oil and gas revenues are important to reducing taxes for Canadians.
More than seven-in-ten (71 per cent) of Ontarians support building new energy infrastructure projects without reducing environmental protections and safety.
More than six-in-ten (63 per cent) of Canadians say they are important for paying for social programs, including health care, education, and other public services.
Respondents were nine times more likely to say the government approval process for energy infrastructure projects is too slow (46 per cent) rather than too fast (5 per cent).
About the survey
The survey was conducted by Nanos Research for Canada Action using a representative non-probability online panel of 1,000 Ontarians aged 18 and older between December 10 and 12, 2025.
While a margin of error cannot be calculated for non-probability samples, a probability sample of 1,000 respondents would have a margin of error of ±3.1 percentage points, 19 times out of 20.
Pathways Alliance CEO Kendall Dilling is interviewed at the World Petroleum Congress in Calgary, Monday, Sept. 18, 2023.THE CANADIAN PRESS/Jeff McIntosh
Carbon capture gives biggest bang for carbon tax buck CCS much cheaper than fuel switching: report
Canada’s climate change strategy is now joined at the hip to a pipeline. Two pipelines, actually — one for oil, one for carbon dioxide.
The MOU signed between Ottawa and Alberta two weeks ago ties a new oil pipeline to the Pathways Alliance, which includes what has been billed as the largest carbon capture proposal in the world.
One cannot proceed without the other. It’s quite possible neither will proceed.
The timing for multi-billion dollar carbon capture projects in general may be off, given the retreat we are now seeing from industry and government on decarbonization, especially in the U.S., our biggest energy customer and competitor.
But if the public, industry and our governments still think getting Canada’s GHG emissions down is a priority, decarbonizing Alberta oil, gas and heavy industry through CCS promises to be the most cost-effective technology approach.
New modelling by Clean Prosperity, a climate policy organization, finds large-scale carbon capture gets the biggest bang for the carbon tax buck.
Which makes sense. If oil and gas production in Alberta is Canada’s single largest emitter of CO2 and methane, it stands to reason that methane abatement and sequestering CO2 from oil and gas production is where the biggest gains are to be had.
A number of CCS projects are already in operation in Alberta, including Shell’s Quest project, which captures about 1 million tonnes of CO2 annually from the Scotford upgrader.
What is CO2 worth?
Clean Prosperity estimates industrial carbon pricing of $130 to $150 per tonne in Alberta and CCS could result in $90 billion in investment and 70 megatons (MT) annually of GHG abatement or sequestration. The lion’s share of that would come from CCS.
To put that in perspective, 70 MT is 10% of Canada’s total GHG emissions (694 MT).
The report cautions that these estimates are “hypothetical” and gives no timelines.
All of the main policy tools recommended by Clean Prosperity to achieve these GHG reductions are contained in the Ottawa-Alberta MOU.
One important policy in the MOU includes enhanced oil recovery (EOR), in which CO2 is injected into older conventional oil wells to increase output. While this increases oil production, it also sequesters large amounts of CO2.
Under Trudeau era policies, EOR was excluded from federal CCS tax credits. The MOU extends credits and other incentives to EOR, which improves the value proposition for carbon capture.
Under the MOU, Alberta agrees to raise its industrial carbon pricing from the current $95 per tonne to a minimum of $130 per tonne under its TIER system (Technology Innovation and Emission Reduction).
The biggest bang for the buck
Using a price of $130 to $150 per tonne, Clean Prosperity looked at two main pathways to GHG reductions: fuel switching in the power sector and CCS.
Fuel switching would involve replacing natural gas power generation with renewables, nuclear power, renewable natural gas or hydrogen.
“We calculated that fuel switching is more expensive,” Brendan Frank, director of policy and strategy for Clean Prosperity, told me.
Achieving the same GHG reductions through fuel switching would require industrial carbon prices of $300 to $1,000 per tonne, Frank said.
Clean Prosperity looked at five big sectoral emitters: oil and gas extraction, chemical manufacturing, pipeline transportation, petroleum refining, and cement manufacturing.
“We find that CCUS represents the largest opportunity for meaningful, cost-effective emissions reductions across five sectors,” the report states.
Fuel switching requires higher carbon prices than CCUS.
Measures like energy efficiency and methane abatement are included in Clean Prosperity’s calculations, but again CCS takes the biggest bite out of Alberta’s GHGs.
“Efficiency and (methane) abatement are a portion of it, but it’s a fairly small slice,” Frank said. “The overwhelming majority of it is in carbon capture.”
From left, Alberta Minister of Energy Marg McCuaig-Boyd, Shell Canada President Lorraine Mitchelmore, CEO of Royal Dutch Shell Ben van Beurden, Marathon Oil Executive Brian Maynard, Shell ER Manager, Stephen Velthuizen, and British High Commissioner to Canada Howard Drake open the valve to the Quest carbon capture and storage facility in Fort Saskatchewan Alta, on Friday November 6, 2015. Quest is designed to capture and safely store more than one million tonnes of CO2 each year an equivalent to the emissions from about 250,000 cars. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Jason Franson
Credit where credit is due
Setting an industrial carbon price is one thing. Putting it into effect through a workable carbon credit market is another.
“A high headline price is meaningless without higher credit prices,” the report states.
“TIER credit prices have declined steadily since 2023 and traded below $20 per tonne as of November 2025. With credit prices this low, the $95 per tonne headline price has a negligible effect on investment decisions and carbon markets will not drive CCUS deployment or fuel switching.”
Clean Prosperity recommends a kind of government-backstopped insurance mechanism guaranteeing carbon credit prices, which could otherwise be vulnerable to political and market vagaries.
Specifically, it recommends carbon contracts for difference (CCfD).
“A straight-forward way to think about it is insurance,” Frank explains.
Carbon credit prices are vulnerable to risks, including “stroke-of-pen risks,” in which governments change or cancel price schedules. There are also market risks.
CCfDs are contractual agreements between the private sector and government that guarantees a specific credit value over a specified time period.
“The private actor basically has insurance that the credits they’ll generate, as a result of making whatever low-carbon investment they’re after, will get a certain amount of revenue,” Frank said. “That certainty is enough to, in our view, unlock a lot of these projects.”
From the perspective of Canadian CCS equipment manufacturers like Vancouver’s Svante, there is one policy piece still missing from the MOU: eligibility for the Clean Technology Manufacturing (CTM) Investment tax credit.
“Carbon capture was left out of that,” said Svante co-founder Brett Henkel said.
Svante recently built a major manufacturing plant in Burnaby for its carbon capture filters and machines, with many of its prospective customers expected to be in the U.S.
The $20 billion Pathways project could be a huge boon for Canadian companies like Svante and Calgary’s Entropy. But there is fear Canadian CCS equipment manufacturers could be shut out of the project.
“If the oil sands companies put out for a bid all this equipment that’s needed, it is highly likely that a lot of that equipment is sourced outside of Canada, because the support for Canadian manufacturing is not there,” Henkel said.
Henkel hopes to see CCS manufacturing added to the eligibility for the CTM investment tax credit.
“To really build this eco-system in Canada and to support the Pathways Alliance project, we need that amendment to happen.”
