Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

Opinion

Trudeau’s Winnipeg Whitewash – A Masterclass in Diversion and Disconnection

Published

2 years ago

12 minute read

From The Opposition with Dan Knight

As Canada grapples with soaring housing costs and a quality of life crisis, the Prime Minister’s narrative on immigration & multicultural success stories clashes with the lived realities of Canadians

As some of you enjoyed the comfort of Family Day, perhaps some of you noticed Justin Trudeau making the rounds in Winnipeg – (Justin Trudeau Fireside Chat at Winnipeg Chamber of Commerce – February 16, 2024), where he found quite the fan in Loren Remillard of the Winnipeg Chamber of Commerce. It seems Remillard was all too eager to extend a metaphorical hand, fishing for tax dollars to prop up their projects.

Oh, let’s dissect the masterful art of political deflection and diversion, shall we? Justin Trudeau, spun a narrative so disconnected from the reality Canadians live in, it’s almost an art form. He lauds Toronto and Vancouver as paragons of multicultural success, cities thriving under the weight of their diversity. But here’s the catch folks—the reality on the ground, as reported by Stats Canada, tells a story that’s anything but rosy for the residents of these supposed utopias.

When we turn our gaze to the real impact of his government’s immigration policies on the ground, the picture is starkly different. Toronto and Vancouver, the benchmarks of Trudeau’s immigration success story, are in fact cities where residents report a lower quality of life than their provincial counterparts. Why? Because amidst the fanfare of diversity and inclusion, the basic needs of the citizens—like feeling a sense of belonging, life satisfaction, and mental health—are being sidelined.

Let’s not forget the elephant in the room Trudeau casually mentioned—2 million temporary residents flooding into Canada. This isn’t just a number; it’s a tsunami of demand in addition to the Liberal 500k target per year of permanent resident hitting a housing market already gasping for air, driving rents and shelter costs to astronomical heights. And Trudeau’s response? A shrug of the shoulders and a diversion to talk about measures with Mexico or the plight of international students. While these issues merit attention, they dance around the core issue: a government more obsessed with its global image than the welfare of its citizens.

The audacity to claim that Toronto and Vancouver are thriving under his policies, while Stats Canada directly contradicts this with evidence of declining quality of life, is nothing short of political theater. It’s a sleight of hand designed to distract from the harsh reality—that his government’s approach to immigration and temporary residents is contributing to a crisis of affordability and well-being in our major cities.

But amidst the spectacle, Trudeau touched on a subject that should raise eyebrows across the nation: On how his government is using immigration as a tool to “grow the economy.” Now, let’s pause for a moment to digest that, shall we?

Diving deeper, a fascinating exchange caught my ear during a Finance Committee meeting FINA-124 -February 1, 2024, where Tiff Macklem of the Bank of Canada offered some candid insights. When prodded by Mr. Jasraj Singh Hallan, Macklem conceded that the government’s spending spree and the Bank’s efforts to stabilize our economy were essentially at loggerheads. Here we have the Trudeau administration, pushing fiscal policies that seem to sprint in the opposite direction of monetary sanity.

Macklem went on, outlining that yes, government spending is contributing to growth, but let’s be clear about the kind of growth we’re talking about here. It’s one that barely keeps pace with population increases, teetering on the edge of potential. And with government spending poised to climb even higher, we’re flirting dangerously close to exacerbating inflation, rather than reining it in.

Senior Deputy Governor Carolyn Rogers chimed in with a stark reminder of the housing market’s woes. Despite interest rate hikes, which traditionally cool down housing prices, Canada’s chronic housing shortage keeps prices stubbornly high. The result? A housing affordability crisis that’s squeezing Canadians tighter than ever, exacerbated by an immigration policy that is throwing fuel on the fire of demand without addressing the urgent need for supply.

This is the picture Trudeau’s policies paint for Canada: a nation where the cost of living climbs ever higher, where the dream of homeownership slips further away for the average citizen, and where economic growth strategies seem disconnected from the realities on the ground. It’s high time for a reality check, a moment to ask ourselves whether these policies truly serve the best interest of Canadians or merely the political agenda of those in power.

Indeed, the root of the issue is staring us right in the face—supply problems are driving costs through the roof. Yet, it seems as though there’s a conspiracy of silence in the House of Commons; no one dares to utter the truth that unchecked immigration is exacerbating these supply woes, sending shelter costs soaring. Let’s dive into the latest from Stats Canada to unravel the narrative everyone is thriving under Justin Trudeau.

First off, let’s talk about renters. According to this report, if you’re renting, your quality of life isn’t just on the lower rung; it’s plummeting. Renters are staggering under the weight of financial pressures unheard of for homeowners, feeling the pinch of record-low vacancy rates and rent hikes that would make your head spin. Over 15 percentage points more likely to struggle financially and over 11 points less likely to experience life satisfaction.

But the plot thickens when we look at the younger Canadians, those aged 15 to 54. They’re caught in a vise, with life satisfaction and mental health scores that trail behind their older counterparts. The dream of home ownership? A mirage for many, as they navigate a landscape where the very idea of paying off a mortgage seems like a relic of a bygone era. And let’s not even get started on the economic tightrope walked by residents of Toronto and Vancouver, cities where the cost of living soars as high as the skyscrapers dotting their skylines.

Now, Trudeau’s government might have you believe that policies are in place to bridge these divides, to bolster the quality of life for all Canadians. But let’s be real—the evidence suggests otherwise. With renters and younger generations buckling under financial strains and cities like Toronto and Vancouver becoming enclaves of the unaffordable, the narrative being spun by the current administration seems more fiction than fact.

Consider the financial strain laid bare by these statistics: a significant portion of Canadians are finding it increasingly difficult to meet their financial needs, with shelter costs consuming a lion’s share of their income.

In a landscape marked by disparities in quality of life we’re left with a pressing question: where does the path forward lie?

 

Let’s cut to the chase, folks. The latest 338 polling data isn’t just a blip on the political radar; it’s a resounding bell tolling for the end of the Liberals’ reign, inching closer to losing their official party status. Why, you might ask? It’s simple: Justin Trudeau’s legacy is one of profound ineptitude, a legacy that has systematically failed Canadians at every turn. When Trudeau touts his housing policies, claiming to increase rentals, remember the cold, hard facts from Stats Canada—he’s not building homes; he’s crafting a nation with a diminished quality of life. That’s the Trudeau vision for Canada.

And let’s not overlook the audacity of his actions—jetting off to Jamaica with a hefty $162,000 bill footed by you, the taxpayer. It seems Trudeau’s concern for your quality of life evaporates faster than a Liberal MP can devour lobster in Malaysia. Meanwhile, ordinary Canadians are left to scrounge at food banks. But hey, as long as the political elite get their fill, right?

SNC-Lavalin was just the beginning, the canary in the coal mine signaling the avalanche of corruption set to spill out from Trudeau’s government. WE Charity, the Trudeau Foundation, Chinese interference, ArriveScam… the list of scandals under Trudeau’s watch is as long as it is disgraceful. These aren’t mere footnotes in history; they’re the defining features of his tenure.

Remember the uproar over a $16 orange juice under Harper? That was considered the height of scandal, a benchmark of accountability. Fast forward to today, and this government can’t even spell ‘ethics,’ let alone practice it.

So, my fellow Canadians, as we look ahead to the next election, we’re presented with a golden opportunity—a chance to reset the narrative and send a clear message to the liberal elites that we’ve had enough of their disdain for the average citizen. I, for one, will be cheering on the red wedding of Canadian politics because the liberal standard is not just detrimental to your well-being; it’s an affront to all of Canada. It’s time to say enough is enough and reclaim the Canada we know and love—a Canada of integrity, accountability, and true north strong and free.

Before Post

Related Topics:

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

More from this author
Fraser Institute / 1 hour ago

Courts and governments caused B.C.’s property crisis—they’re not about to fix it

Censorship Industrial Complex / 14 hours ago

EU’s “Democracy Shield” Centralizes Control Over Online Speech

International / 15 hours ago

US announces Operation Southern Spear, targeting narco-terrorists

Fraser Institute

Courts and governments caused B.C.’s property crisis—they’re not about to fix it

Published on November 14, 2025

By

From the Fraser Institute

By Bruce Pardy

In British Columbia, property rights are in turmoil. The B.C. Supreme Court recently declared that Aboriginal title exists on 800 acres of land in Richmond, a suburb of Vancouver. Aboriginal title, said the court, is “senior and prior” to fee simple interests. In the shadow of the decision, given the implications, Aboriginal title claims are receiving more attention. Kamloops and Sun Peaks ski resort are targets in one such claim. Meanwhile, the B.C. government has been conferring Aboriginal title across the province too. It continues to make agreements, such as on Haida Gwaii, to transfer control over land use in the province.

Courts and governments have caused this problem. The framers of Canada’s new constitution, adopted in 1982, excluded rights to private property. But at the last hour, they guaranteed existing Aboriginal rights and title. Over decades, the Supreme Court of Canada has expanded the scope of those rights. The recent decision about Richmond is a culmination of its work. That decision is under appeal, first to the B.C. Court of Appeal. After that, we may find out if the Supreme Court approves. But that could take years.

It’s not just the courts. In 2015, the Trudeau government agreed to implement the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP). UNDRIP says that Aboriginal groups have the right to own, use, develop and control any lands that they traditionally occupied or used. In 2019, the B.C. legislature incorporated UNDRIP into BC law. Known as DRIPA, the statute requires B.C. law to be consistent with UNDRIP. The NDP government has been granting Aboriginal title and control across the province accordingly.

What can be done? The Canadian constitution has an onerous amending formula. Repealing the section on Aboriginal rights would be next to impossible. So would adding private property guarantees to the Charter. But last week, Dwight Newman, professor of law at the University of Saskatchewan, suggested an alternative in the Post. Rather than attempt wholesale change, he proposed an amendment specific to B.C.

Section 43 is one of the ways to amend the Canadian constitution. It allows changes “in relation to any provision that applies to one or more, but not all, provinces.” The requirements are simple. The legislature in one province and the federal Parliament must both pass a resolution declaring the amendment. That’s it. Such a resolution, Newman suggests, could guarantee that private property in B.C. has priority over Aboriginal title.

He might be right. Section 43 has been used, for example, to alter constitutional denominational school rights in Quebec and Newfoundland. In 1993, New Brunswick used Section 43 to add a provision to the Charter about linguistic rights in the province.

But Section 43 might be narrower than hoped. The New Brunswick amendment was not challenged in court at the time of its enactment. So, yes, Section 43 was used to change the Charter, but not with judicial benediction. Moreover, the Supreme Court has not considered the ways in which Section 43 can be used. Section 43 amendments so far have been minor, mere “tweaks” to the constitutional order. We do not know what meaning the Court might give to “any provision that applies to one province.” It could mean any new provision, but more likely it means any existing provision that applies only to the province. Which would rule out using Section 43 to protect property rights from Aboriginal title in B.C. If the Court allowed Section 43 to be used for that purpose, then Section 43 could theoretically be used for anything, including amending the Charter wholesale until each province had its own version.

Even if Section 43 could be used to fix the property mess, it requires both the province and Ottawa to act. In addition, B.C. legislation requires that such changes be first approved by referendum. The B.C. and federal governments have helped to cause the crisis and continue to do so. They seem intent on undermining the system of land tenure in their own society. They are not likely to disrupt the constitution to frustrate their own work.

Moreover, there are other, simpler places to begin. The federal government could reverse its support for UNDRIP. The B.C. legislature could repeal DRIPA. Neither sitting government will do that. Few political actors will step out of line on Aboriginal questions, even to defend the country’s land, economy, and people. Will we discover whether there is anything more Canadian, after all, than acquiescence? In Canada, truth and reconciliation has morphed into fiction and capitulation.

Canada’s property crisis runs deep, and not just in B.C. Aboriginal rights are widely regarded as the natural and proper order of things. Special status for Aboriginal people is deeply ingrained in Canadian culture as well as the constitution. But it is dead wrong. Legal rights should not depend on lineage or group affiliation. Everyone born in Canada is native to the place. In a free country, laws apply not to distinctive peoples, but to individual people and their private property.

Bruce Pardy

Professor of Law, Queen’s University
Continue Reading

Bruce Dowbiggin

DEI Or Die: Out With Remembrance, In With Replacement

Published on November 14, 2025

By

“Thank you to those so often forgotten by the politics of our city who made this movement their own. I speak of Yemeni Bodega owners and Mexican abuelas, Senegalese taxi drivers and Uzbek nurses, Trinidadian line cooks and Ethiopian aunties”.- new NYC mayor Zohran Mamdami

The new mayor’s effusive tribute to immigrants is very on-brand for the Woke Left. Coming as it did on the week where Canadians’ remembered the sacrifice of the over one hundred thousand who “died to make the world free” in WWI, WWII and Korea— even as their homes are squeezed between hereditary land rights and Justin Trudeau’s holiday camp.

For Boomers that battle sacrifice has underpinned their lifestyle for most of the past 75 years or so. No matter how cynical or hipster the Boomer, the phrase “They died to make the world free” was the Gorilla Glue holding Western civilizations together. Whether you agreed or not, you acknowledged its pre-eminence in society.

Those who annually recall family members who’d made the ultimate sacrifice underscore that “they died to make the world free” is foundational in their national myth making. For example, our younger son placed roses on my uncle’s grave in the Commonwealth war cemetery near Hanover, Germany. He then delivered the petals to his grandmother to acknowledge the loss of her brother.

These rituals of sacrifice were everywhere till the early decades of the twenty-first century when the demographics of declining birth rates in the West combined with aggressive immigration— both sanctioned and illegal— to create the Beirut  described by mayor Mandami upon election. He was talking about NYC, but it could have been Toronto, Montreal or Vancouver. But you are free to ask what freedom means in this context.

North America in particular has long encouraged immigration. It was typically combined with assimilation in the doctrines used by governments of the day. People from around the globe arrived in the West and aspired to the cultural and financial modes they discovered. For one young Ukrainian boy we knew the figure of Frank Mahovlich, son of Croatian immigrants, on the Toronto Maple Leafs was proof that he could belong in his new society.

But somewhere along the way the suicidal empathy of progressives— combined with a need for low-income workers for corporations— loosened the expectations for those arriving in the West. In Canada, prime minster Justin Trudeau adopted Yan Martel’s diversity model of Canada as a travellers’ hotel. No longer would newcomers need to assimilate.

They could live side-by-side with ancestors of original inhabitants while still recreating their former homelands. In time the bureaucracy— and revenge of the cradle— would replace the cranky white people with a more malleable electorate. It was Replacement Theory.

The Canadian boys going over the top at Vimy or taking off in their Lancaster bombers would never have foreseen this as they risked their lives. They couldn’t countenance the people they’d fought for throwing away their sacrifice on a pandering scheme like DEI (diversity, equality, inclusion) which replaced merit with settler guilt in hiring decisions.

When government admonitions to accept their societal revolution failed to produce enough newcomer guilt, social media filled the gap. Remember the drowned Syrian boy on the beach in 2015? The uproar about Canada’s immigration policies helped unseat Steven Harper and install a trust-fund puppet in the PMO. And it opened the floodgates that sent Canada from 35 million to 42.5 population in a decade.

As Mark Steyn observes, “Winston Churchill said we shall fight them on the beaches; his grandson Rupert Soames set up the highly lucrative business model whereby we welcome them on the beaches …and then usher them to taxpayer-funded four-star hotels with three meals a day and complimentary cellphone. That’s the story of the post-war west in three generations of one family.”

Recent reports show that many top American corporations are moving away from DEI back to merit-based hiring. But Canada’s government, led by its Woke academic and culture sectors, remains stubbornly fixed on the DEI model. That obsession keeps the corporate side from emulating their American counterparts.

The tell that DEI is far from dead can be seen in how the advertising world has doubled down on the orthodoxy of majority male whites bad/ everyone else good. In what is clearly a political, not profitable approach, minorities, mixed-race couples and women are featured in commercials in numbers far disproportionate to their percentage of the population.

A blend of LGBTQ and Rousseau’s The Noble Savage has produced The Church Lady come to the 2020s. Upper-class blacks are portrayed as authority figures while white males are hillbilly figures of ridicule. This is not to placate those communities but to assuage the guilt felt by educated white liberals.

Mixed-race commercials now mandate that virtually no same-race figures be allowed to be paired on-camera. (Having the ironic effect of white liberals telling the minorities they worship that they are not worthwhile unless in combination with the evil settler demographic.)

It’s the same in movies and TV which used to complain about cultural appropriation but now suddenly place racial and gender-inappropriate actors in period roles that are clearly specific to whites and males. For example, Netflix’s new series Death by Lightning is set in Chicago, 1880 – and this foreground establishing scene pops up.:

•an Asian woman,

•two Black men,

•and a one-legged man

  • all walking together. @StutteringCraig estimates the odds of this DEI dream at roughly 1 in 640,000. No matter. Authenticity is so yesterday.

The DEI obsession has pilled over into traditional Remembrance Day ceremonies that were marred by land acknowledgements and slavery references (slavery was banned in Canada 45 years before it became a nation.) Which led to CBC running a story on the Palestinian flag being raised at Toronto city hall on Remembrance Day.

In B.C. premier David Eby has declared that Canada now needs a power-sharing with the Cowichan and their confederates. American politics is also loath to give up their DEI dogma. In one real-life example leftist radio host Stephanie Miller kissed the feet of unhinged Democrat Rep. Jasmine Crockett. “Why, yes I DID kiss the sneakers of @JasmineForUS and I DO worship the ground she walks on! And she was LOVELY about it!” The laces fetishists think this performative theatre will always be thus. It won’t.

“The Venetian Republic lasted 1,100 years – and ninety-nine per cent of North Americans have never heard of it. But, on present demographic and fiscal trends, that’s four times longer than the United States is likely to make it,” Steyn observes.

“Walk around New York: The Yemeni-Mexican-Senegalese-Uzbek-Trinidadian-Ethiopians are the future. And you’re not.”

Bruce Dowbiggin @dowbboy is the editor of Not The Public Broadcaster  A two-time winner of the Gemini Award as Canada’s top television sports broadcaster, his new book Deal With It: The Trades That Stunned The NHL And Changed hockey is now available on Amazon. Inexact Science: The Six Most Compelling Draft Years In NHL History, his previous book with his son Evan, was voted the seventh-best professional hockey book of all time by bookauthority.org . His 2004 book Money Players was voted sixth best on the same list, and is available via brucedowbigginbooks.ca.

Continue Reading

Trending

X