National
Mark Carney’s new chief of staff was caught lying about Emergencies Act use

From LifeSiteNews
Newly elected Liberal leader Mark Carney selected former Trudeau cabinet minister Mark Mendicino as chief of staff despite his deceitful record as Public Safety minister.
Newly elected Liberal leader Mark Carney selected MP Marco Mendicino as chief of staff despite his record of lying to Canadians.
Many Canadians are sounding the alarm over Carney’s upcoming appointment of Justin Trudeau’s former cabinet minister as chief of staff, reminding Canadians of Mendicino’s tyrannical record while serving as public safety minister.
“Mark Carney’s Chief of Staff is none other than Trudeau’s ex-Public Safety/Immigration Minister, Marco Mendicino,” Conservative Party leader Pierre Poilievre posted on X.
“He’s the guy forced to resign after he: Moved mass murderer & serial rapist Paul Bernardo out of a maximum security prison. Allowed gun crimes to surge 116%. Did nothing to stop Beijing’s foreign interference in Canada’s democracy. Helped Trudeau break our immigration system,” he continued.
“Nothing has changed,” Poilievre warned. “Do these guys really deserve a fourth term?”
According to Liberal sources, Carney chose Mendicino earlier this week and both will be sworn into office on Friday.
However, while Carney claims he is taking the Liberal Party in a different direction than Trudeau, his selection of Mendicino appears to show otherwise.
Thanks to his time serving under Trudeau, Mendicino is already well-known to Canadians for infringing on their freedoms while lying about it.
In 2022, Mendicino falsely stated that some of the Freedom Convoy protesters demanding an end to COVID mandates in Ottawa made rape threats. He used this allegation to justify the Trudeau government’s use of the Emergencies Act to disperse the peaceful protest and freeze bank accounts.
Mendicino was also caught lying when he claimed that law enforcement agencies asked for the Emergencies Act to be used on the Freedom Convoy.
Furthermore, Mendicino played key role in controversial gun control legislation framed to the public as a ban on handguns, but he later secretly amended to include prohibitions on a number of hunting rifles and shotguns.
Mendicino is also known to be weak on standing against foreign interference, especially from China. In 2023, at a time of increased international tensions considering the Chinese surveillance of North America via a balloon, he argued that any laws dealing with targeting foreign spies must be “inclusive” and done in a “culturally sensitive” manner.
In fact, Mendicino proved so unpopular with Canadians that Trudeau dropped the minister from his cabinet in 2023 along with other COVID-era ministers.
National
Democracy Watch Renews Push for Independent Prosecutor in SNC-Lavalin Case

Group says Ontario Crown used “clearly incorrect” legal test to shield Trudeau from private prosecution, calls for independent process free of political ties
Democracy Watch has launched a fresh bid to reopen the door to prosecuting former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau over his alleged role in the 2018 SNC-Lavalin affair, accusing Ontario Crown Counsel of using a legally flawed standard to shut down its private prosecution and continuing what it calls “a smelly cover-up” that began under the Trudeau government.
Read the full press release here
In a new letter sent Wednesday to Ontario Attorney General Doug Downey and Randy Schwartz, the province’s Assistant Deputy Attorney General for Criminal Law, the non-partisan watchdog group is again calling for an independent special prosecutor to review evidence that Trudeau obstructed justice and breached public trust by pressuring then–Attorney General Jody Wilson-Raybould to intervene in the SNC-Lavalin prosecution seven years ago.
This latest appeal comes after Ontario’s Director of the Complex Prosecutions Bureau, John Corelli, used his authority in September to halt Democracy Watch’s private prosecution before it reached a preliminary “pre-enquête” hearing. In that letter, Corelli said there was “no reasonable prospect the Crown could prove that Mr. Trudeau acted with the requisite criminal intent.”
Democracy Watch disputes that reasoning, arguing it misstates the law.
“Crown prosecutors stopping this prosecution for a legally incorrect reason, just like the RCMP did in addition to suppressing key evidence, amounts to a smelly cover-up,” said Duff Conacher, the group’s co-founder and legal expert. “It shows clearly that Canada does not have independent, effective anti-corruption law enforcement and, as a result, corruption in the highest public offices across the country is effectively legal.”
The group’s new letter marks the second time it has asked Ontario’s Attorney General to intervene. In its first request in March, Democracy Watch urged Downey to establish a non-partisan selection committee to appoint a special prosecutor. Downey’s office declined that request in May.
Now, the group is reiterating the demand, saying the independent prosecutor should be chosen by a committee composed of people with no party ties, working alongside opposition leaders, to ensure public confidence in the process.
Conacher’s team argues that Corelli’s reasoning — that the Crown cannot prove Trudeau acted with “criminal intent” — applies the wrong legal test. In its filings, Democracy Watch cites the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in R. v. Beaudry (2007), which clarified that obstruction of justice requires only that an act be done “willfully” to frustrate the course of justice — not that it be done with corrupt or deceitful intent.
“The Supreme Court has already set the threshold,” Conacher said. “Proof of ‘criminal’ intent isn’t required. It’s enough that someone acted willfully to obstruct the process. That’s what the Crown ignored.”
The group also says that the case against Trudeau is unprecedented and cannot be dismissed out of hand without judicial review. It accuses the RCMP of conducting a “negligently weak and incomplete investigation” that left key questions unanswered and accepted the government’s refusal to release Cabinet records from the time.
Democracy Watch’s original filing included testimony and documents obtained from the RCMP after a two-year access battle. It alleges that the Mounties failed to interview key witnesses, including Wilson-Raybould’s chief of staff Jessica Prince and former Liberal minister Jane Philpott, and withheld portions of their answers in documents finally disclosed. The proposed pre-enquête hearing — which Corelli stopped — would have allowed those witnesses to testify under oath and allowed a judge to decide if the evidence was sufficient to proceed.
The group’s case was supported by Wayne Crookes, founder of Integrity B.C., and represented by Jen Danch of Swadron Associates law firm.
Conacher is now urging Ontario’s Attorney General to “do the right thing” and reverse course.
“Canadians can only hope Ontario’s Attorney General will work with opposition party leaders to establish a fully independent committee that will choose a fully independent special prosecutor to review the evidence,” Conacher said.
He also renewed his call for structural reform of Canada’s anti-corruption enforcement, noting that Quebec’s independent anti-corruption police and prosecution units (UPAC) have operated since 2011, while the RCMP remains under the direct control of Cabinet appointees.
“The RCMP lacks independence from the Prime Minister and Cabinet ministers who handpick its leadership,” Conacher said. “They serve at the pleasure of the government, so they are vulnerable to political interference. To ensure integrity, Canada needs a fully independent anti-corruption police force and independent prosecutors.”
Democracy Watch’s campaign underscores a broader concern that the Trudeau-era SNC-Lavalin controversy, which saw Wilson-Raybould’s resignation, Philpott’s exit, and an Ethics Commissioner finding of improper political pressure, has never been subjected to a full criminal review.
For Conacher, the issue is bigger than one case. It’s about restoring the principle that no one, not even a Prime Minister, stands above the law.
Subscribe to The Opposition with Dan Knight .
For the full experience, upgrade your subscription.
Business
Over two thirds of Canadians say Ottawa should reduce size of federal bureaucracy

From the Fraser Institute
By Matthew Lau
From 2015 to 2024, headcount at Natural Resources Canada increased 39 per cent even though employment in Canada’s natural resources sector actually fell one per cent. Similarly, there was 382 per cent headcount growth at the federal department for Women and Gender Equality—obviously far higher than the actual growth in Canada’s female population.
According to a recent poll, there’s widespread support among Canadians for reducing the size of the federal bureaucracy. The support extends across the political spectrum. Among the political right, 82.8 per cent agree to reduce the federal bureaucracy compared to only 5.8 per cent who disagree (with the balance neither agreeing nor disagreeing); among political moderates 68.4 per cent agree and only 10.0 per cent disagree; and among the political left 44.8 per cent agree and 26.3 per cent disagree.
Taken together, “67 per cent agreed the federal bureaucracy should be significantly reduced. Only 12 per cent disagreed.” These results shouldn’t be surprising. The federal bureaucracy is ripe for cuts. From 2015 to 2024, the federal government added more than 110,000 new bureaucrats, a 43 per cent increase, which was nearly triple the rate of population growth.
This bureaucratic expansion was totally unjustified. From 2015 to 2024, headcount at Natural Resources Canada increased 39 per cent even though employment in Canada’s natural resources sector actually fell one per cent. Similarly, there was 382 per cent headcount growth at the federal department for Women and Gender Equality—obviously far higher than the actual growth in Canada’s female population. And there are many similar examples.
While in 2025 the number of federal public service jobs fell by three per cent, the cost of the federal bureaucracy actually increased as the number of fulltime equivalents, which accounts for whether those jobs were fulltime or part-time, went up. With the tax burden created by the federal bureaucracy rising so significantly in the past decade, it’s no wonder Canadians overwhelmingly support its reduction.
Another interesting poll result: “While 42 per cent of those surveyed supported the government using artificial intelligence tools to resolve bottlenecks in service delivery, 32 per cent opposed it, with 25 per cent on the fence.” The authors of the poll say the “plurality in favour is surprising, given the novelty of the technology.”
Yet if 67 per cent of Canadians agree with significantly shrinking the federal bureaucracy, then solid support for using AI to increasing efficiency should not be too surprising, even if the technology is relatively new. Separate research finds 58 per cent of Canadian workers say they use AI tools provided by their workplace, and although many of them do not necessarily use AI regularly, of those who report using AI the majority say it improves their productivity.
In fact, there’s massive potential for the government to leverage AI to increase efficiency and control labour expenses. According to a recent study by a think-tank at Toronto Metropolitan University (formerly known as Ryerson), while the federal public service and the overall Canadian workforce are similar in terms of the percentage of roles that could be made more productive by AI, federal employees were twice as likely (58 per cent versus 29 per cent) to have jobs “comprised of tasks that are more likely to be substituted or replaced” by AI.
The opportunity to improve public service efficiency and deliver massive savings to taxpayers is clearly there. However, whether the Carney government will take advantage of this opportunity is questionable. Unlike private businesses, which must continuously innovate and improve operational efficiency to compete in a free market, federal bureaucracies face no competition. As a result, there’s little pressure or incentive to reduce costs and increase efficiency, whether through AI or other process or organizational improvements.
In its upcoming budget and beyond, it would be a shame if the federal government does not, through AI or other changes, restrain the cost of its workforce. Taxpayers deserve, and clearly demand, a break from this ever-increasing burden.
-
Censorship Industrial Complex24 hours ago
Canada’s privacy commissioner says he was not consulted on bill to ban dissidents from internet
-
Business1 day ago
Finance Committee Recommendation To Revoke Charitable Status For Religion Short Sighted And Destructive
-
Alberta1 day ago
Oil Sands are the Costco of world energy – dependable and you know exactly where to find it
-
Alberta23 hours ago
Enbridge CEO says ‘there’s a good reason’ for Alberta to champion new oil pipeline
-
Business23 hours ago
Former Trump Advisor Says US Must Stop UN ‘Net Zero’ Climate Tax On American Ships
-
Energy1 day ago
Indigenous Communities Support Pipelines, Why No One Talks About That
-
Health1 day ago
Colorado gave over 500 people assisted suicide drugs solely for eating disorders in 2024
-
Business2 days ago
Finance Titans May Have Found Trojan Horse For ‘Climate Mandates’