Connect with us

National

Conservative report accuses Trudeau gov’t of ignoring Chinese interference because it helped Liberals

Published

5 minute read

Chinese President Xi Jinping (right) shakes hands with Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to the G20 Summit on September 4, 2016 in Hangzhou, China.

From LifeSiteNews

By Clare Marie Merkowsky

‘Conservatives note that the Liberal government knew the Communist Party of China was interfering in Canada’s democracy for years and had they not been the beneficiary of this foreign interference the Liberals may have taken action…’ the report stated

Conservatives have accused Trudeau’s Liberal government of having ignored foreign interference because it was to their political benefit.  

On October 24, Conservative Member of Parliament (MP) John Brassard published a report from Conservatives accusing the Liberal government under Prime Minister Justin Trudeau of ignoring Chinese interference in Canadian elections through China’s donations to the prime minister’s family foundation, the Pierre Elliot Trudeau Foundation.   

“Conservatives note that the Liberal government knew the Communist Party of China was interfering in Canada’s democracy for years and had they not been the beneficiary of this foreign interference the Liberals may have taken action, rather than reacting to sustained public and political pressure,” the report stated.   

“It is clear, through testimony heard by the committee from current and former members of the Trudeau Foundation, that the Foundation had no bylaws for foreign interference, no oversight of donations, and no due diligence done of donations,” it continued.  

The report referenced a $140,000 donation by a Chinese billionaire, Zhang Bin, who has direct ties to Beijing. Bin was also photographed at a 2016 fundraiser with Trudeau. Furthermore, Trudeau’s brother, Sacha, was pictured accepting the donation from Bin on behalf of the Trudeau Foundation.  

“Seemingly, it was the perfect conduit for a foreign dictatorship to influence Prime Minister Justin Trudeau,” the report stated. “The interference operation was proven successful as the two cutouts had direct access to the Prime Minister within five months of the donation.”  

Following public outcry over the donation, Pascale Fournier, Former President and Executive Officer at the Trudeau Foundation, testified that “because of the allegations in the media, it would be best for the Foundation to repay the donation.”  

According to Edward Johnson, chair of the board and founding member of the Foundation, the money was returned, and the deposit was confirmed in writing.  

 “In light of the evidence, the committee cannot take a definitive position on this case,” the committee ruled after the testimonies.  

However, Conservatives pointed out that, “The irony is not lost on Conservatives that the beneficiary of a foreign interference campaign of disinformation perpetrated by the Communist Party of China would partake in a committee study pertaining to the very foreign interference campaign that helped him get elected.” 

“This reinforces the fact that this Liberal government has an utter disregard for ethics and conflicts of interest,” the Conservative report continued.  

As a result, the report recommended that, “the Government of Canada undertake a forensic audit of the Trudeau Foundation.” 

The Foundation labels itself as “an independent and non-partisan charity established in 2001 as a living memorial to the former prime minister.”  

Pierre Trudeau is the late father of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and was prime minister from 1968 until 1984 except for a brief lapse from 1979 to 1980. He was known for his praise of the major totalitarian political systems of his day. 

The Trudeau Foundation has undergone increased scrutiny regarding its connection with China, and the examination will continue. In late September, MPs from the House of Commons unanimously voted to have the country’s Auditor General investigate the $125 million taxpayer endowment given to help found the Trudeau Foundation in 2001. 

This investigation comes just months after Canadian MPs from the House of Commons Public Accounts voted to begin an examination after a report surfaced detailing how the non-profit group received a $200,000 donation alleged to be connected to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Following the release of this report, the entire board of directors, including the president and CEO, of the Trudeau Foundation resigned.   

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

Business

Carney’s European pivot could quietly reshape Canada’s sovereignty

Published on

This article supplied by Troy Media.

Troy Media By Isidoros Karderinis

Canadians must consider how closer EU ties could erode national control and economic sovereignty

As Prime Minister Mark Carney attempts to deepen Canada’s relationship with the European Union and other supranational institutions, Canadians should be asking a hard question: how much of our national independence are we prepared to give away? If you want a glimpse of what happens when a country loses control over its currency, trade and democratic accountability, you need only look to Bulgaria.

On June 8, 2025, thousands of Bulgarians took to the streets in front of the country’s National Bank. Their message was clear: they want to keep the lev and stop the forced adoption of the euro, scheduled for Jan. 1, 2026.

Bulgaria, a southeastern European country and EU member since 2007, is preparing to join the eurozone—a bloc of 20 countries that share the euro as a common currency. The move would bind Bulgaria to the economic decisions of the European Central Bank, replacing its national currency with one managed from Brussels and Frankfurt.

The protest movement is a vivid example of the tensions that arise when national identity collides with centralized policy-making. It was organized by Vazrazdane, a nationalist, eurosceptic political party that has gained support by opposing what it sees as the erosion of Bulgarian sovereignty through European integration. Similar demonstrations took place in cities across the country.

At the heart of the unrest is a call for democratic accountability. Vazrazdane leader Konstantin Kostadinov appealed directly to EU leaders, arguing that Bulgarians should not be forced into the eurozone without a public vote. He noted that in Italy, referendums on the euro were allowed with support from less than one per cent of citizens, while in Bulgaria, more than 10 per cent calling for a referendum have been ignored.

Protesters warned that abandoning the lev without a public vote would amount to a betrayal of democracy. “If there is no lev, there is no Bulgaria,” some chanted. For them, the lev is not just a currency: it is a symbol of national independence.

Their fears are not unfounded. Across the eurozone, several countries have experienced higher prices and reduced purchasing power after adopting the euro. The loss of domestic control over monetary policy has led to economic decisions being dictated from afar. Inflation, declining living standards and external dependency are real concerns.

Canada is not Bulgaria. But it is not immune to the same dynamics. Through trade agreements, regulatory convergence and global commitments, Canada has already surrendered meaningful control over its economy and borders. Canadians rarely debate these trade-offs publicly, and almost never vote on them directly.

Carney, a former central banker with deep ties to global finance, has made clear his intention to align more closely with the European Union on economic and security matters. While partnership is not inherently wrong, it must come with strong democratic oversight. Canadians should not allow fundamental shifts in sovereignty to be handed off quietly to international bodies or technocratic elites.

What’s happening in Bulgaria is not just about the euro—it’s about a people demanding the right to chart their own course. Canadians should take note. Sovereignty is not lost in one dramatic act. It erodes incrementally: through treaties we don’t read, agreements we don’t question, and decisions made without our consent.

If democracy and national control still matter to Canadians, they would do well to pay attention.

Isidoros Karderinis was born in Athens, Greece. He is a journalist, foreign press correspondent, economist, novelist and poet. He is accredited by the Greek Ministry of Foreign Affairs as a foreign press correspondent and has built a distinguished career in journalism and literature.

Troy Media empowers Canadian community news outlets by providing independent, insightful analysis and commentary. Our mission is to support local media in helping Canadians stay informed and engaged by delivering reliable content that strengthens community connections and deepens understanding across the country.

 

Continue Reading

Alberta

Albertans need clarity on prime minister’s incoherent energy policy

Published on

From the Fraser Institute

By Tegan Hill

The new government under Prime Minister Mark Carney recently delivered its throne speech, which set out the government’s priorities for the coming term. Unfortunately, on energy policy, Albertans are still waiting for clarity.

Prime Minister Carney’s position on energy policy has been confusing, to say the least. On the campaign trail, he promised to keep Trudeau’s arbitrary emissions cap for the oil and gas sector, and Bill C-69 (which opponents call the “no more pipelines act”). Then, two weeks ago, he said his government will “change things at the federal level that need to be changed in order for projects to move forward,” adding he may eventually scrap both the emissions cap and Bill C-69.

His recent cabinet appointments further muddied his government’s position. On one hand, he appointed Tim Hodgson as the new minister of Energy and Natural Resources. Hodgson has called energy “Canada’s superpower” and promised to support oil and pipelines, and fix the mistrust that’s been built up over the past decade between Alberta and Ottawa. His appointment gave hope to some that Carney may have a new approach to revitalize Canada’s oil and gas sector.

On the other hand, he appointed Julie Dabrusin as the new minister of Environment and Climate Change. Dabrusin was the parliamentary secretary to the two previous environment ministers (Jonathan Wilkinson and Steven Guilbeault) who opposed several pipeline developments and were instrumental in introducing the oil and gas emissions cap, among other measures designed to restrict traditional energy development.

To confuse matters further, Guilbeault, who remains in Carney’s cabinet albeit in a diminished role, dismissed the need for additional pipeline infrastructure less than 48 hours after Carney expressed conditional support for new pipelines.

The throne speech was an opportunity to finally provide clarity to Canadians—and specifically Albertans—about the future of Canada’s energy industry. During her first meeting with Prime Minister Carney, Premier Danielle Smith outlined Alberta’s demands, which include scrapping the emissions cap, Bill C-69 and Bill C-48, which bans most oil tankers loading or unloading anywhere on British Columbia’s north coast (Smith also wants Ottawa to support an oil pipeline to B.C.’s coast). But again, the throne speech provided no clarity on any of these items. Instead, it contained vague platitudes including promises to “identify and catalyse projects of national significance” and “enable Canada to become the world’s leading energy superpower in both clean and conventional energy.”

Until the Carney government provides a clear plan to address the roadblocks facing Canada’s energy industry, private investment will remain on the sidelines, or worse, flow to other countries. Put simply, time is up. Albertans—and Canadians—need clarity. No more flip flopping and no more platitudes.

Tegan Hill

Tegan Hill

Director, Alberta Policy, Fraser Institute
Continue Reading

Trending

X