Business
Trudeau’s labor minister pushes ‘equity’ mandate to favor LGBT job applicants
From LifeSiteNews
The report presented by Liberal Labour Minister Seamus O’Regan suggests giving special privileges to ‘LGBT-identifying and Black Canadians’ in the hiring process in the name of ‘equity,’ and dismisses concerns that such a move is tantamount to discrimination.
The Trudeau government is celebrating a newly proposed equity mandate which would reward LGBT-identifying job applicants over those with natural sexual proclivities.
On December 11, Liberal Labour Minister Seamus O’Regan announced the Employment Equity Act Review Task Force report, which seeks to add “LGBT-identifying and Black Canadians” to the list of those with special hiring privileges.
“It’s pretty historical,” O’Regan said outside the House of Commons foyer on Monday. “We are naming Black people and 2SLGBTQI+ individuals as designated groups under the Employment Equity Act.”
According to information obtained by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC), the Liberal government, under the leadership of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, “broadly supports” the recommendation.
The report, led by McGill University law professor Adelle Blackett, assured Canadians that it would not lead to “reverse discrimination” or abolish a merit-based hiring system, despite seemingly being formulated to do exactly that.
“Let us be clear: the Employment Equity Act framework does not impose quotas, and the notion of ‘reverse discrimination’ is not part of Canadian equality law and is likewise not part of the Canadian Employment Equity Act framework,” reads the introduction.
While the job candidates would still have to meet certain requirements to be considered for the position, they would not be competing against all candidates for the position but just those within their so-called minority group. As a result, they would have a higher chance of being hired for the position compared to someone who did not fit into the group.
The report dismissed this concern, however, labeling it as an American, not Canadian, argument. “The U.S. idea of ‘reverse discrimination’ has in particular gained a lot of attention. It is used so often in common parlance that many people do not recognize that it is not a part of Canadian substantive equality law,” reads the report.
The report also attempted to address the problem that because being an LGBT-identifying person is not an objective category, it is conceivable that people could just say they are members of the LGBT so-called community as a way to gain an advantage in the hiring process.
“Declarations of this nature… would constitute dishonesty in the employment relationship and although the threshold for dismissal on that basis is high, contextual factors to assessing the appropriate sanction would rationally include any preferential treatment received on the basis of the false statement,” the report said.
In recent years, there has been a push for in Canada, the United States and much of the West to go along with so-called “diversity, equity, & inclusion” (DEI) hiring and promotion practices.
The controversy surrounding DEI is that it usually goes hand-in-hand with a slew of identity-based social causes and grievances that undermine merit-based hiring, meaning that the most qualified person for a job may be overlooked in favor of someone of a particular skin color, ethnicity or sexual proclivity.
In 2019, the Canadian military was exposed for periodically closing all applications to the armed forces except to women if their so-called employment equity targets had not been met.
Similarly, in June 2023, Ontario announced free training for truck drivers; however, the offer was only extended to “women, newcomers and others from underrepresented groups,” effectively barring anyone except white, heterosexual men.
Additionally, this October, British Columbia construction companies were offered an extra cash incentive if they hire first-year apprentices who “self-identify” as LGBT, disabled, or anything other than a white heterosexual male.
Business
Capital Flight Signals No Confidence In Carney’s Agenda
From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy
By Jay Goldberg
Between bad trade calls and looming deficits, Canada is driving money out just when it needs it most
Canadians voted for relative continuity in April, but investors voted with their wallets, moving $124 billion out of the country.
According to the National Bank, Canadian investors purchased approximately $124 billion in American securities between February and July of this year. At the same time, foreign investment in Canada dropped sharply, leaving the country with a serious hole in its capital base.
As Warren Lovely of National Bank put it, “with non-resident investors aloof and Canadians adding foreign assets, the country has suffered a major capital drain”—one he called “unprecedented.”
Why is this happening?
One reason is trade. Canada adopted one of the most aggressive responses to U.S. President Donald Trump’s tariff agenda. Former prime minister Justin Trudeau imposed retaliatory tariffs on the United States and escalated tensions further by targeting goods covered under the Canada–United States–Mexico Agreement (CUSMA), something even the Trump administration avoided.
The result was punishing. Washington slapped a 35 per cent tariff on non-CUSMA Canadian goods, far higher than the 25 per cent rate applied to Mexico. That made Canadian exports less competitive and unattractive to U.S. consumers. The effects rippled through industries like autos, agriculture and steel, sectors that rely heavily on access to U.S. markets. Canadian producers suddenly found themselves priced out, and investors took note.
Recognizing the damage, Prime Minister Mark Carney rolled back all retaliatory tariffs on CUSMA-covered goods this summer in hopes of cooling tensions. Yet the 35 per cent tariff on non-CUSMA Canadian exports remains, among the highest the U.S. applies to any trading partner.
Investors saw the writing on the wall. They understood Trudeau’s strategy had soured relations with Trump and that, given Canada’s reliance on U.S. trade, the United States would inevitably come out on top. Parking capital in U.S. securities looked far safer than betting on Canada’s economy under a government playing a weak hand.
The trade story alone explains much of the exodus, but fiscal policy is another concern. Interim Parliamentary Budget Officer Jason Jacques recently called Ottawa’s approach “stupefying” and warned that Canada risks a 1990s-style fiscal crisis if spending isn’t brought under control. During the 1990s, ballooning deficits forced deep program cuts and painful tax hikes. Interest rates soared, Canada’s debt was downgraded and Ottawa nearly lost control of its finances. Investors are seeing warning signs that history could repeat itself.
After months of delay, Canadians finally saw a federal budget on Nov. 4. Jacques had already projected a deficit of $68.5 billion when he warned the outlook was “unsustainable.” National Bank now suggests the shortfall could exceed $100 billion. And that doesn’t include Carney’s campaign promises, such as higher defence spending, which could add tens of billions more.
Deficits of that scale matter. They can drive up borrowing costs, leave less room for social spending and undermine confidence in the country’s long-term fiscal stability. For investors managing pensions, RRSPs or business portfolios, Canada’s balance sheet now looks shaky compared to a U.S. economy offering both scale and relative stability.
Add in high taxes, heavy regulation and interprovincial trade barriers, and the picture grows bleaker. Despite decades of promises, barriers between provinces still make it difficult for Canadian businesses to trade freely within their own country. From differing trucking regulations to restrictions on alcohol distribution, these long-standing inefficiencies eat away at productivity. When combined with federal tax and regulatory burdens, the environment for growth becomes even more hostile.
The Carney government needs to take this unprecedented capital drain seriously. Investors are not acting on a whim. They are responding to structural problems—ill-advised trade actions, runaway federal spending and persistent barriers to growth—that Ottawa has yet to fix.
In the short term, that means striking a deal with Washington to lower tariffs and restore confidence that Canada can maintain stable access to U.S. markets. It also means resisting the urge to spend Canada into deeper deficits when warning lights are already flashing red. Over the long term, Ottawa must finally tackle high taxes, cut red tape and eliminate the bureaucratic obstacles that stand in the way of economic growth.
Capital has choices. Right now, it is voting with its feet, and with its dollars, and heading south. If Canada wants that capital to come home, the government will have to earn it back.
Jay Goldberg is a fellow with the Frontier Centre for Public Policy.
Business
Budget 2025 continues to balloon spending and debt
The Canadian Taxpayers Federation is criticizing Prime Minister Mark Carney for ballooning spending and debt in Budget 2025.
“Budget 2025 shows the debt continues to spiral out of control because spending continues to spiral out of control,” said Franco Terrazzano, CTF Federal Director. “Carney needs to reverse course to get debt and spending under control because every dollar Canadians pay in federal sales tax is already going to pay interest charges on the debt.
“Carney isn’t close to balancing anything when he’s borrowing tens of billions of dollars every year.”
The federal deficit will increase significantly this year to $78.3 billion. There is no plan to balance the budget and stop borrowing money. The federal debt will reach $1.35 trillion by the end of this year.
Debt interest charges will cost taxpayers $55.6 billion this year, which is more than the federal government will send to the provinces in health transfers ($54.7 billion) or collect through the GST ($54.4 billion).
Budget 2025 increases spending by $38 billion this year to $581 billion. Despite promises to control spending in future years, Budget 2025 projects that overall spending will continue to rise by billions every year.
“Canadians don’t need another plan to create a plan to meet about cutting spending, Canadians need real spending cuts now,” Terrazzano said. “The government always tells Canadians that it will go on a diet Monday, but Monday never comes.
“And the government isn’t really finding savings if it’s planning to keep increasing spending every year.”
Budget 2025 commits to “strengthening” the industrial carbon tax and “setting a multi-decade industrial carbon price trajectory that targets net zero by 2050.”
“Carney’s hidden carbon tax will make it harder for Canadian businesses to compete and will push Canadian entrepreneurs to set up shop south of the border,” Terrazzano said. “Carney should scrap all carbon taxes, cut spending and stop taking so much money from taxpayers.”
-
Agriculture17 hours agoDanish Cows Collapsing Under Mandatory Methane-Reducing Additive
-
Bruce Dowbiggin2 days agoA Story So Good Not Even The Elbows Up Crew Could Ruin It
-
Alberta2 days agoCanada’s heavy oil finds new fans as global demand rises
-
Daily Caller1 day agoTrump Reportedly Planning Ground Troops, Drone Strikes On Cartels In Mexico
-
Health2 days agoRFK Jr’s argument for studying efficacy of various vaccines
-
Business1 day agoTrump’s Tariffs Have Not Caused Economy To Collapse
-
Addictions2 days agoThe War on Commonsense Nicotine Regulation
-
Business2 days agoCarney government should retire misleading ‘G7’ talking point on economic growth

