2025 Federal Election
Euthanasia is out of control in Canada, but nobody is talking about it on the campaign trail
From LifeSiteNews
While refraining from campaigning on the issue, Poilievre, to his credit, has said previously that he will ‘scrap’ the Liberal’s plan of expanding euthanasia to the mentally ill ‘entirely.’
Canada’s euthanasia regime should be one of the key election issues on the campaign trail, but thus far, there seems to be little interest in discussing the issue.
This despite the fact that last month, the United Nations Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities took the stunning step of publishing a report calling on Canada to halt “Track 2 MAID,” stop the planned 2027 expansion of euthanasia to those suffering solely from mental illness, and reject “advance directives” for euthanasia.
Track 2 MAID was legalized in Canada in 2021, when a lower Quebec court ruled that restricting euthanasia to those with “reasonably foreseeable death” was unconstitutional and expanding eligibility to a wide range of Canadians suffering from various conditions. The floodgates opened; over 60,000 Canadians have died by euthanasia since legalization.
In fact, the vice-chair of the UN committee, at a hearing in Geneva, went so far as to ask a Canadian government representative how it was possible not to view Canada’s euthanasia regime as a “step back into state-sponsored eugenics.”
When Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre was asked on the campaign trail if his government would make any changes to Canada’s laws, he responded: “People will continue to have the right to make that choice, the choice for themselves. We are not proposing to expand medical assistance in dying beyond the existing parameters. That said, we also believe that we need better healthcare so that people have all sorts of options.”
Poilievre then pivoted to discussing his policies to fix Canada’s broken healthcare system, making it quite clear that this is an issue that he is not eager to discuss—likely because of high support for euthanasia in Quebec. Indeed, Dying with Dignity—Canada’s relentless and well-funded euthanasia lobby—has been releasing polling data designed to discourage politicians from addressing the issue, emphasizing public support for their agenda.
Rebecca Vachon of Cardus has a good breakdown of DWD’s data that highlights the truth of the old political adage that polls are often commissioned to shape public opinion rather than measure it:
Poilievre, to his credit, has previously made his position on euthanasia for mental illness crystal clear, voting for a Conservative bill to ban the practice and stating in February that, if elected, “We will revoke an expansion entirely.” Mark Carney, on the other hand, has made no statement on euthanasia whatsoever, which indicates that he is likely to carry on the Trudeau government’s policies, which are still in effect—including the planned 2027 expansion of euthanasia to those suffering solely from mental illness.
Indeed, in response to a request for comment on the United Nations Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities report and recommendations from Canadian Affairs, Health Canada ignored the condemnation of Canada’s regime and instead simply reiterated the current framework—including the planned 2027 eligibility expansion. In summary, if the Liberals are re-elected at the end of this month, it is full steam ahead—and Canadians with disabilities will simply have to live (or die) with it.
Despite the Conservative Party’s clear disinterest in campaigning on the issue, the choice before Canadians is still clear. Make no mistake: Expanding euthanasia to those with mental illness would be one of the greatest national tragedies since the 1988 R v. Morgentaler decision. If you have found the stories of the past several years horrifying, remember: They are nothing compared to the stories that we will all be forced to read, and perhaps even experience, once a Liberal government begins to facilitate suicide for those suffering solely from suicidal ideation.
This article supplied by Troy Media.
By Michael Taube
Official party status requires 12 seats. The NDP got seven. End of story
Rules are rules.
That, in a nutshell, is why the NDP wasn’t granted official party status in the House of Commons on Monday. Prime Minister Mark Carney and the
Liberals, to their credit, made the right decision.
Let’s examine why.
The 1963 Senate and House of Commons Act passed an amendment that gave an annual allowance to party leaders other than the prime minister and
leader of the Opposition. In doing so, the Canadian government had to establish what constitutes a “political party.” The definition they came up with was a sensible one: it had to have a “recognized membership of 12 or more persons in the House of Commons.”
This important amendment is still used today.
The NDP fell from 24 to a paltry seven seats in last month’s federal election. (There are a total of 343 seats in the House of Commons.) They finished with 1,234,673 votes, or 6.29 per cent, which was behind the Liberals, Conservatives and Bloc Québécois. Party leader Jagmeet Singh, who had represented the former Burnaby South riding since 2019, finished a distant third in the newly created Burnaby Central riding and resigned.
The NDP’s seven seats is well below the 12-seat requirement needed for official party status. This means Canada’s socialist alternative won’t be able to ask questions in the House of Commons and will lose out on money for research purposes.
Or, to put it another way, they’re plumb out of luck.
Hold on, some people said. They pointed out that the NDP’s seat count and popular vote only plummeted because many progressive voters backed Carney and the Liberals as the best option to counter U.S. President Donald Trump and his tariffs. They felt that the NDP’s long history as a champion for unions and the working class should count for something. They suggested there should be an exception to the rule.
Guess what? They’re wrong.
This is the worst election result in the party’s history. Even its predecessor, the Co-operative Commonwealth Federation (CCF), did marginally better in its first campaign. The CCF won seven out of 245 seats—and earned 410,125 votes, or 9.31 per cent—in the 1935 election. Party leader J.S. Woodsworth, who had represented the riding of Winnipeg North Centre as an Independent Labour MP since 1925, comfortably held his seat.
Meanwhile, this won’t be the first time they’ve ever lost official party status.
The NDP dropped from 43 to nine seats in the 1993 election. It was a dismal showing, to say the least. There was a suggestion at the time that then-party leader Audrey McLaughlin, the first woman to lead a party with political representation in Canada’s House of Commons, deserved a better fate. While the NDP certainly came closer to achieving the 12-seat requirement in this particular election, Prime Minister Jean Chrétien and the Liberals decided against granting them official party status.
Why? As I mentioned earlier, rules are rules.
Then again, British pilot Harry Day notably told his fellow flying ace Douglas Bader in 1931, “You know my views about some regulations—they’re written for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men.”
Does this mean that individuals and organizations who follow rules are, in fact, fools? Not at all. While certain rules in a liberal democratic society can range from slightly questionable to utterly ridiculous, they’re usually put in place for a specific purpose.
In the case of the House of Commons, it’s to ensure that a bar has been set with respect to political representation. Is 12 seats the right number? That’s difficult to say. It certainly prevents small protest parties and one-issue parties that unexpectedly win a tiny number of seats in an election from acquiring power and status right off the bat. They need to win more seats and grow in size and stature to reach a point of respectability. Most of them never reach this point and disappear while others float in a constant state of mediocrity like the Green Party of Canada. ’Tis the nature of the political beast.
One final point. If Singh and the NDP had reached double digits in total number of seats in 2025, a solid case could have been made in favour of official party status. If they had finished with 11 seats, it would have almost been a lock. Neither scenario ultimately materialized, which is why Carney and the Liberals did exactly what they did.
Michael Taube is a political commentator, Troy Media syndicated columnist and former speechwriter for Prime Minister Stephen Harper. He holds a master’s degree in comparative politics from the London School of Economics, lending academic rigour to his political insights.
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.
2025 Federal Election
Judicial recounts give Conservatives 2 more seats, keeping Liberals short of majority
From LifeSiteNews
After a judicial recount, Conservative candidate Kathy Borrelli has officially won over Liberal incumbent Irek Kusmierczyk, in the Ontario riding of Windsor-Tecumseh-Lakeshore.
Judicial recounts from the 2025 federal election have given the Conservative Party two new seats, with one candidate winning by just four votes.
After a judicial recount, Conservative candidate Kathy Borrelli has officially won over Liberal incumbent Irek Kusmierczyk, in the Ontario riding of Windsor-Tecumseh-Lakeshore.
Borrelli got 32,090 votes, with Kusmierczyk getting 32,086 votes, and NDP candidate Alex Ilijoski getting 4,240 votes.
In the Newfoundland riding of Terra Nova-The Peninsulas, Conservative candidate Jonathan Rowe beat out Liberal Anthony Germain by just 12 votes after a recount with the initial result showing a Liberal victory.
The new election results mean the Conservatives now have 144 seats with the Liberals at 169, three short of a majority.
Judicial recounts are automatically triggered when the margin of victory for a candidate is less than 0.1 percent of valid votes.
While these recounts have favored the Conservatives, others have gone in the Liberal Party’s favor.
A May 16 judicial recount switched the southern Ontario riding of Milton East-Halton Hills South to the Liberals with a 21-vote victory over the Conservatives.
Overall, the election results have been a big blow to the Conservative Party, which on top of losing the election also saw its leader, Pierre Poilievre, fail to win his long-held seat. However, Poilievre is expected to run in a yet-to-be-announced by-election in Alberta to reclaim a seat in Parliament.
Too Graphic For A Press Conference But Fine For Kids In School?
New RCMP program steering opioid addicted towards treatment and recovery
How Chinese State-Linked Networks Replaced the Medellín Model with Global Logistics and Political Protection
LA Mayor Karen Bass Makes New Demands Of Trump At Monday Night Press Conference
Natural gas pipeline ownership spreads across 36 First Nations in B.C.
Trump says Ukraine war may need to play out before peace is possible
Trump deploys National Guard to Los Angeles after violent attacks on ICE agents
-
International2 days agoIsrael’s Decapitation Strike on Iran Reverberates Across Global Flashpoints
-
Alberta2 days agoPunishing Alberta Oil Production: The Divisive Effect of Policies For Carney’s “Decarbonized Oil”
-
Alberta2 days agoAlberta Premier Danielle Smith Discusses Moving Energy Forward at the Global Energy Show in Calgary
-
conflict2 days agoIran nuclear talks were ‘coordinated deception’ between US and Israel: report
-
Energy2 days agoCanada is no energy superpower
-
Fraser Institute2 days agoLong waits for health care hit Canadians in their pocketbooks
-
conflict22 hours agoOne dead, over 60 injured after Iranian missiles pierce Iron Dome
-
Health2 days agoJust 3 Days Left to Win the Dream Home of a Lifetime!