Connect with us
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]

National

Trudeau Must Resign From Board Overseeing Leadership Race and Call for Investigation Into Foreign Interference

Published

11 months ago

8 minute read

The Bureau

Calls for Trudeau’s Recusal From LPC Board, Citing Bias Toward Mark Carney

By Elbert K. Paul, CPA – CA

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.

Related Topics:

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

More from this author
COVID-19 / 5 hours ago

Crown seeks to punish peaceful protestor Chris Barber by confiscating his family work truck “Big Red”

Alberta / 5 hours ago

New pipeline from Alberta would benefit all Canadians—despite claims from B.C. premier

Indigenous / 6 hours ago

Canadian mayor promises to ‘vigorously defend’ property owners against aboriginal land grab

Alberta

New pipeline from Alberta would benefit all Canadians—despite claims from B.C. premier

Published on November 25, 2025

By

From the Fraser Institute

By Kenneth P. Green

The pending Memorandum of Understanding between the Carney government and the Alberta governments will reportedly support a new oil pipeline from Alberta’s oilsands to British Columbia’s tidewater. But B.C. Premier David Eby continues his increasingly strident—and factually challenged—opposition to the whole idea.

Eby’s arguments against a new pipeline are simply illogical and technically incorrect.

First, he argues that any pipeline would pose unmitigated risks to B.C.’s coastal environment, but this is wrong for several reasons. The history of oil transport off of Canada’s coasts is one of incredible safety, whether of Canadian or foreign origin, long predating federal Bill C-48’s tanker ban. New pipelines and additional transport of oil from (and along) B.C. coastal waters is likely very low environmental risk. In the meantime, a regular stream of oil tankers and large fuel-capacity ships have been cruising up and down the B.C. coast between Alaska and U.S. west coast ports for decades with great safety records.

Next, Eby argues that B.C.’s First Nations people oppose any such pipeline and will torpedo energy projects in B.C. But in reality, based on the history of the recently completed Trans Mountain Expansion (TMX) pipeline, First Nations opposition is quite contingent. The TMX project had signed 43 mutual benefit/participation agreements with Indigenous groups along its route by 2018, 33 of which were in B.C. As of March 2023, the project had signed agreements with 81 out of 129 Indigenous community groups along the route worth $657 million, and the project had resulted in more than $4.8 billion in contracts with Indigenous businesses.

Back in 2019, another proposed energy project garnered serious interest among First Nations groups. The First Nations-proposed Eagle Spirit Energy Corridor, aimed to connect Alberta’s oilpatch to a port in Kitimat, B.C. (and ultimately overseas markets) had the buy-in of 35 First Nations groups along the proposed corridor, with equity-sharing agreements floated with 400 others. Energy Spirit, unfortunately, died in regulatory strangulation in the Trudeau government’s revised environmental assessment process, and with the passage of the B.C. tanker ban.

Premier Eby is perfectly free to opine and oppose the very thought of oil pipelines crossing B.C. But the Supreme Court of Canada has already ruled in a case about the TMX pipeline that B.C. does not have the authority to block infrastructure of national importance such as pipelines.

And it’s unreasonable and corrosive to public policy in Canada for leading government figures to adopt positions on important elements of public policy that are simply false, in blatant contradiction to recorded history and fact. Fact—if the energy industry is allowed to move oil reserves to markets other than the United States, this would be in the economic interest of all Canadians including those in B.C.

It must be repeated. Premier Eby’s objections to another Alberta pipeline are rooted in fallacy, not fact, and should be discounted by the federal government as it plans an agreement that would enable a project of national importance.

Continue Reading

Indigenous

Canadian mayor promises to ‘vigorously defend’ property owners against aboriginal land grab

Published on November 25, 2025

By

From LifeSiteNews

By Anthony Murdoch

Port Coquitlam, British Columbia, is fighting a Kwikwetlem First Nation’s claim that, if successful, would see aboriginals in essence be given large swaths of land owned by the city.

A Canadian mayor said he will “vigorously defend” the property rights of residents in light of a recent court ruling that gave a portion of a municipality to aboriginals via a title claim they won in court.

Mayor Brad West of Port Coquitlam, British Columbia, vowed to residents, “We have, and will continue to, vigorously defend public ownership of these lands, along with private property rights in our jurisdiction.”

“We will ensure the public is kept informed,” he promised in a post on X. 

Port Coquitlam is fighting a Kwikwetlem First Nation’s claim made in 2016 that, if successful, would see the aboriginals in essence be given large swaths of land owned by the city.

The city said that at this time that there are “no civil claims initiated by any First Nations involving private property within the City of Port Coquitlam.”

The city promised in a statement that if the changes are made, it will notify residents immediately.

“While the City recognizes public concern resulting from recent media coverage of the Cowichan/Richmond case, it is important to note that no private lands within Port Coquitlam are currently the subject of litigation,” the statement read.

West’s comments come in light of a recent court ruling in British Columbia affecting property rights, Cowichan Tribes v. Canada (Attorney General), which saw the provincial Supreme Court rule that decades-long land grants by the government were not valid and violated a land title held by the tribes.

The ruling included large parts of Richmond, British Columbia, which is in the Vancouver area, essentially given to local tribes.

As reported by LifeSiteNews, John Carpay, founder and president of the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF), noted the court “told the people (of various ethnicities) who live in some parts of Richmond, B.C., that the money they paid for their own properties does not guarantee them the right to own and enjoy their own homes.”

Carpay noted that “the fact that aboriginal ethnic groups arrived in Canada earlier than other ethnic groups should be completely irrelevant when it comes to the application of the law.”

“Nobody disputes that different aboriginal tribes lived in this land before the arrival of Europeans, Africans, and Asians. The question is: Why should this fact matter?” he noted.

Carpay observed that when officials and courts apply the “law” differently to come after “Canadians because of their race, ancestry, ethnicity, or descent,” the predictable and inevitable outcome “is strife, resentment, and fear.”

Continue Reading

Trending

X