Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

Opinion

Trudeau’s home heating oil exemption shows politics trumps real affordability

Published

5 minute read

From the Canadian Taxpayers Federation

Author: Jay Goldberg

It turns out desperate pigs really do fly.

In a colossal policy reversal, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced a suspension of the carbon tax on home heating oil for the next three years. But that one concession favours one region over others and is far from enough to protect Canadians from the brutal realities of the carbon tax’s impact on family budgets.

Trudeau’s carbon tax concession was specifically targeted at Atlantic Canada because it deals with home heating oil. Forty per cent of Atlantic Canadian households use heating oil to heat their homes. Compare that to just two per cent of Ontario households.

Atlantic Canada had a special deal with Trudeau until this summer. The federal government gave Atlantic provinces permission to exempt home heating oil from their carbon taxes.

But the region’s special deal ran out in July, with full federal carbon tax pricing kicking in on Canada Day, including on heating oil.

With winter fast approaching, taxpayers in Atlantic Canada recognized the massive tax hike they were about to face just to stay warm.

Last winter, Atlantic Canadian households paid no carbon tax on their home heating oil bill. This winter, the average household was poised to spend $272.

Public opinion polls of late show Atlantic Canadians are preparing to vote with their chequebooks. The anti-carbon tax Conservatives are gaining steam.

The Conservatives forced a vote in the House of Commons on repealing the carbon tax earlier this month. One Liberal MP from Newfoundland and Labrador had the courage to stand up for his constituents and vote to repeal the tax.

Avalon MP Ken McDonald was crystal clear in articulating why he voted the way he did.

“I’ve had people tell me they can’t afford groceries,” McDonald said. “They can’t afford to heat their homes. You can’t make it more expensive on people than what they can handle. And that’s exactly what’s happening right now.”

McDonald spoke a truth Trudeau has consistently refused to hear, or at least acknowledge. The federal carbon tax is making life less affordable for Canadians.

A report from the non-partisan Parliamentary Budget Officer shows this plain as day. This year, the average Canadian family will lose between $347 and $710 due to the carbon tax, even after the rebates.

After McDonald voted to repeal the carbon tax, other Liberal MPs from Atlantic Canada voiced their concerns in public.

In the wake of all of this, Trudeau caved. He announced a three year suspension of the carbon tax on home heating oil. Conveniently, that suspension ends just after the next federal election.

Most Ontario households use natural gas to heat their homes. It’s cleaner than home heating oil, but Trudeau is keeping the carbon tax on natural gas in place.

That’s proof that this is all about politics.

The average Ontario household using natural gas will be paying a $326 carbon tax bill this winter. Those folks won’t get an exemption under Trudeau’s new plan.

If Liberal MPs in Ontario take a courageous stand like McDonald did in Newfoundland, families here wouldn’t get punished with a carbon tax for heating their homes.

What shouldn’t be lost in any of this is that carbon tax misery will still be felt coast to coast, even though many in Atlantic Canada are getting special treatment.

Families in every province will still pay carbon taxes at the pumps when filling up to drive the kids to school. And food will still be more expensive because truckers who ship the food and farmers who produce the food will still be paying carbon taxes on fuel.

It’s time for Trudeau to stop driving up the cost of living and dividing Canadians based on political calculations. The feds need to axe the carbon tax on everything everywhere, no matter the postal code.

2025 Federal Election

Post election…the chips fell where they fell

Published on

William Lacey's avatar William Lacey

I put a lot of personal energy into this election, trying to understand why it was that Canadians so wholeheartedly endorsed Mark Carney as their new leader, despite the fact that it was the same party who caused irreparable economic harm to the economy, and he has a similar philosophical outlook to the core outlook of the party. I truly believe that we have moved to a phase in our electoral process where, until something breaks, left leaning ideology will trump the day (pun intended).

Coming out of this election I have three questions.

1. What of Pierre Poilievre? The question for Conservatives is whether the wolves feed on the carcass of Poilievre (in my opinion the worst enemy of a Conservative is a Conservative) and initiate the hunt for a new leader (if they do, I believe the future should be led by a woman – Melissa Lantsman or possibly Caroline Mulroney), or does Poilievre move to Alberta and run for a “safe” seat to get back into the House of Commons, change his tone, and show people he too can be Prime Ministerial? His concession speech gives clues to this.

2. What of Mark Carney? Maybe (hopefully) Carney will see the light and try to bring the nation together, as there is an obvious east-west split in the country in terms of politics. Time will tell, and minority governments need to be cautious. Will we have a Supply and Confidence 2.0 or will we see olive branches extended?

3. What of the House of Commons? As I have mentioned previously, there has been discussion that the House of Commons may not sit until after the summer break, meaning that the House of Commons really will not have conducted any business in almost a year by the time it reconveens. If indeed “we are in the worst crisis of our lives” as Prime Minister Carney campaigned on, then should we not have the House of Commons sit through the summer? After all, the summer break usually is for politicians to go back to their ridings and connect with their constituents, but if an election campaign doesn’t constitute connecting, what does?

Regardless, as the election is behind us, we now need to see what comes. I will try to be hopeful, but remain cautious. May Canada have better days ahead.

Thanks for reading William’s Substack!

Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.

Continue Reading

Banks

TD Bank Account Closures Expose Chinese Hybrid Warfare Threat

Published on

From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy

By Scott McGregor

Scott McGregor warns that Chinese hybrid warfare is no longer hypothetical—it’s unfolding in Canada now. TD Bank’s closure of CCP-linked accounts highlights the rising infiltration of financial interests. From cyberattacks to guanxi-driven influence, Canada’s institutions face a systemic threat. As banks sound the alarm, Ottawa dithers. McGregor calls for urgent, whole-of-society action before foreign interference further erodes our sovereignty.

Chinese hybrid warfare isn’t coming. It’s here. And Canada’s response has been dangerously complacent

The recent revelation by The Globe and Mail that TD Bank has closed accounts linked to pro-China groups—including those associated with former Liberal MP Han Dong—should not be dismissed as routine risk management. Rather, it is a visible sign of a much deeper and more insidious campaign: a hybrid war being waged by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) across Canada’s political, economic and digital spheres.

TD Bank’s move—reportedly driven by “reputational risk” and concerns over foreign interference—marks a rare, public signal from the private sector. Politically exposed persons (PEPs), a term used in banking and intelligence circles to denote individuals vulnerable to corruption or manipulation, were reportedly among those flagged. When a leading Canadian bank takes action while the government remains hesitant, it suggests the threat is no longer theoretical. It is here.

Hybrid warfare refers to the use of non-military tools—such as cyberattacks, financial manipulation, political influence and disinformation—to erode a nation’s sovereignty and resilience from within. In The Mosaic Effect: How the Chinese Communist Party Started a Hybrid War in America’s Backyard, co-authored with Ina Mitchell, we detailed how the CCP has developed a complex and opaque architecture of influence within Canadian institutions. What we’re seeing now is the slow unravelling of that system, one bank record at a time.

Financial manipulation is a key component of this strategy. CCP-linked actors often use opaque payment systems—such as WeChat Pay, UnionPay or cryptocurrency—to move money outside traditional compliance structures. These platforms facilitate the unchecked flow of funds into Canadian sectors like real estate, academia and infrastructure, many of which are tied to national security and economic competitiveness.

Layered into this is China’s corporate-social credit system. While framed as a financial scoring tool, it also functions as a mechanism of political control, compelling Chinese firms and individuals—even abroad—to align with party objectives. In this context, there is no such thing as a genuinely independent Chinese company.

Complementing these structural tools is guanxi—a Chinese system of interpersonal networks and mutual obligations. Though rooted in trust, guanxi can be repurposed to quietly influence decision-makers, bypass oversight and secure insider deals. In the wrong hands, it becomes an informal channel of foreign control.

Meanwhile, Canada continues to face escalating cyberattacks linked to the Chinese state. These operations have targeted government agencies and private firms, stealing sensitive data, compromising infrastructure and undermining public confidence. These are not isolated intrusions—they are part of a broader effort to weaken Canada’s digital, economic and democratic institutions.

The TD Bank decision should be seen as a bellwether. Financial institutions are increasingly on the front lines of this undeclared conflict. Their actions raise an urgent question: if private-sector actors recognize the risk, why hasn’t the federal government acted more decisively?

The issue of Chinese interference has made headlines in recent years, from allegations of election meddling to intimidation of diaspora communities. TD’s decision adds a new financial layer to this growing concern.

Canada cannot afford to respond with fragmented, reactive policies. What’s needed is a whole-of-society response: new legislation to address foreign interference, strengthened compliance frameworks in finance and technology, and a clear-eyed recognition that hybrid warfare is already being waged on Canadian soil.

The CCP’s strategy is long-term, multidimensional and calculated. It blends political leverage, economic subversion, transnational organized crime and cyber operations. Canada must respond with equal sophistication, coordination and resolve.

The mosaic of influence isn’t forming. It’s already here. Recognizing the full picture is no longer optional. Canadians must demand transparency, accountability and action before more of our institutions fall under foreign control.

Scott McGregor is a defence and intelligence veteran, co-author of The Mosaic Effect: How the Chinese Communist Party Started a Hybrid War in America’s Backyard, and the managing partner of Close Hold Intelligence Consulting Ltd. He is a senior security adviser to the Council on Countering Hybrid Warfare and a former intelligence adviser to the RCMP and the B.C. Attorney General. He writes for the Frontier Centre for Public Policy.

Continue Reading

Trending

X