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
WEF-linked Linda Yaccarino to step down as CEO of X

From LifeSiteNews
Yaccarino had raised concerns among conservatives and free speech advocates for previously serving as chairwoman of a World Economic Forum taskforce and promoting DEI and the COVID shots.
X CEO, Linda Yaccarino, announced today that she is departing from her position at the social media giant.
“After two incredible years, I’ve decided to step down as CEO of 𝕏,” wrote Yaccarino on X.
“When Elon Musk and I first spoke of his vision for X, I knew it would be the opportunity of a lifetime to carry out the extraordinary mission of this company,” she continued. “I’m immensely grateful to him for entrusting me with the responsibility of protecting free speech, turning the company around, and transforming X into the Everything App.”
“I’m incredibly proud of the X team – the historic business turn around we have accomplished together has been nothing short of remarkable,” she said.
After two incredible years, I’ve decided to step down as CEO of 𝕏.
When @elonmusk and I first spoke of his vision for X, I knew it would be the opportunity of a lifetime to carry out the extraordinary mission of this company. I’m immensely grateful to him for entrusting me…
— Linda Yaccarino (@lindayaX) July 9, 2025
Musk hired Yaccarino in May 2023, seven months after his $44 billion purchase of the tech company, then known as “Twitter.”
At the time, Musk’s choice to take the helm at his newly acquired company raised eyebrows among conservative observers who had earlier rejoiced at the tech mogul’s intent to rescue free speech on the internet but now were troubled about the credentials of the digital platform’s new head.
Their concerns were not without good reason.
Yaccarino had previously served as chairwoman of the World Economic Forum’s “future of work” taskforce and sat on the globalist group’s “steering committee” for “media, entertainment, and culture industry.”
She had also boasted about her role as an early cheerleader for the untested COVID-19 jab.
As 2021–2022 Ad Council Chair, she “partnered with the business community, the White House, and government agencies to create a COVID-19 vaccination campaign, featuring Pope Francis and reaching over 200 million Americans,” according to her biography page at NBCUniversal, where she had been president before being lured to Twitter by Musk.
While at NBCUniversal, she also pushed discriminatory, equity-based hiring practices, based on “diversity” characteristics such as gender and race.
“At NBCU, she uses the power of media to advance equity and helps to launch DEI [Diversity, Equity, Inclusion]-focused initiatives,” recounted her online biography.
For the most part, over the last two years, Yaccarino’s performance at X allayed suspicions free speech activists at first harbored.
“Honestly, I was worried when she was hired but she didn’t burn down the house,” quipped popular conservative X account, @amuse.
Mike Benz, who serves as executive director of the Foundation For Freedom Online, a free speech watchdog organization dedicated to restoring the promise of a free and open internet, was far more effusive in his praise of Yaccarino.
“Linda stood up and fought for free speech during arguably its most acute crisis moment in world history when we were almost on the brink of losing it,” said Benz in an X post. “She stepped up for all of us in the face of what seemed like insurmountable pressure from governments, advertisers, boycotters, banking institutions, and astroturfed lynch mobs.”
Automotive
Federal government should swiftly axe foolish EV mandate

From the Fraser Institute
Two recent events exemplify the fundamental irrationality that is Canada’s electric vehicle (EV) policy.
First, the Carney government re-committed to Justin Trudeau’s EV transition mandate that by 2035 all (that’s 100 per cent) of new car sales in Canada consist of “zero emission vehicles” including battery EVs, plug-in hybrid EVs and fuel-cell powered vehicles (which are virtually non-existent in today’s market). This policy has been a foolish idea since inception. The mass of car-buyers in Canada showed little desire to buy them in 2022, when the government announced the plan, and they still don’t want them.
Second, President Trump’s “Big Beautiful” budget bill has slashed taxpayer subsidies for buying new and used EVs, ended federal support for EV charging stations, and limited the ability of states to use fuel standards to force EVs onto the sales lot. Of course, Canada should not craft policy to simply match U.S. policy, but in light of policy changes south of the border Canadian policymakers would be wise to give their own EV policies a rethink.
And in this case, a rethink—that is, scrapping Ottawa’s mandate—would only benefit most Canadians. Indeed, most Canadians disapprove of the mandate; most do not want to buy EVs; most can’t afford to buy EVs (which are more expensive than traditional internal combustion vehicles and more expensive to insure and repair); and if they do manage to swing the cost of an EV, most will likely find it difficult to find public charging stations.
Also, consider this. Globally, the mining sector likely lacks the ability to keep up with the supply of metals needed to produce EVs and satisfy government mandates like we have in Canada, potentially further driving up production costs and ultimately sticker prices.
Finally, if you’re worried about losing the climate and environmental benefits of an EV transition, you should, well, not worry that much. The benefits of vehicle electrification for climate/environmental risk reduction have been oversold. In some circumstances EVs can help reduce GHG emissions—in others, they can make them worse. It depends on the fuel used to generate electricity used to charge them. And EVs have environmental negatives of their own—their fancy tires cause a lot of fine particulate pollution, one of the more harmful types of air pollution that can affect our health. And when they burst into flames (which they do with disturbing regularity) they spew toxic metals and plastics into the air with abandon.
So, to sum up in point form. Prime Minister Carney’s government has re-upped its commitment to the Trudeau-era 2035 EV mandate even while Canadians have shown for years that most don’t want to buy them. EVs don’t provide meaningful environmental benefits. They represent the worst of public policy (picking winning or losing technologies in mass markets). They are unjust (tax-robbing people who can’t afford them to subsidize those who can). And taxpayer-funded “investments” in EVs and EV-battery technology will likely be wasted in light of the diminishing U.S. market for Canadian EV tech.
If ever there was a policy so justifiably axed on its failed merits, it’s Ottawa’s EV mandate. Hopefully, the pragmatists we’ve heard much about since Carney’s election victory will acknowledge EV reality.
-
MAiD2 days ago
Canada’s euthanasia regime is already killing the disabled. It’s about to get worse
-
Daily Caller16 hours ago
USAID Quietly Sent Thousands Of Viruses To Chinese Military-Linked Biolab
-
Alberta13 hours ago
‘Far too serious for such uninformed, careless journalism’: Complaint filed against Globe and Mail article challenging Alberta’s gender surgery law
-
Censorship Industrial Complex24 hours ago
Canadian pro-freedom group sounds alarm over Liberal plans to revive internet censorship bill
-
Fraser Institute1 day ago
Before Trudeau average annual immigration was 617,800. Under Trudeau number skyrocketted to 1.4 million from 2016 to 2024
-
International2 days ago
Chicago suburb purchases childhood home of Pope Leo XIV
-
Daily Caller2 days ago
‘I Know How These People Operate’: Fmr CIA Officer Calls BS On FBI’s New Epstein Intel
-
Economy1 day ago
The stars are aligning for a new pipeline to the West Coast