National
Liberal MPs stop police commissioner from testifying about SNC-Lavalin scandal

From LifeSiteNews
RCMP commissioner Michael Duheme was set to testify about whether Justin Trudeau blocked police from obtaining cabinet documents in the SNC-Lavalin affair when MPs on the ethics committee voted 7-3 to adopt a Liberal motion to abruptly adjourn the meeting
Canadian Liberal MPs on the ethics committee voted to stop the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) commissioner from testifying about a bribery scandal involving the large Canadian engineering firm SNC-Lavalin and the federal Liberal government of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.
RCMP commissioner Michael Duheme was set to testify about the bribery scandal to speak about whether Trudeau blocked the police from obtaining certain cabinet documents, which might have implicated him regarding his obstruction of justice charges that stemmed from the SNC-Lavalin affair.
Liberal, New Democrat (NDP), and Bloc Québécois MPs on the ethics committee voted 7-3 to adopt a Liberal motion to abruptly adjourn the meeting with Duheme only minutes after it began.
Conservative MP Michael Barrett called the abrupt meeting cancellation “unacceptable.”
“Witnesses were to give testimony and now we have government members looking to shut down a hearing on a very serious matter with respect to a criminal investigation into the Prime Minister and we have the Commissioner of the RCMP at this table,” Barrett said.
Liberal MP Mona Fortier, who serves as the ethics committee vice chair, claimed the SNC-Lavalin scandal had not been “discussed whatsoever by the committee.”
“I think the committee should at least have had the opportunity to debate the motion presented in due form. I don’t think this is necessarily the best way to go forward, having committees unable to make their decisions. So based on this reasoning, I would like to adjourn the meeting,” she said.
In June, LifeSiteNews reported on how the RCMP denied it was looking into whether Trudeau and his cabinet committed obstruction of justice concerning the SNC-Lavalin bribery scandal.
SNC-Lavalin was faced with charges of corruption and fraud concerning about $48 million in payments made to officials with the Libyan government between 2001 and 2011. The company had hoped to be spared both a trial and prosecution deferred prosecution agreement.
However, then-Attorney General Jody Wilson-Raybould did not go along with Trudeau’s plan, which would have allegedly appeared to help SNC-Lavalin. Back in 2019, she contended that both Trudeau and his top Liberal officials had inappropriately applied pressure to her for four months to directly intervene in the criminal prosecution relating to corruption and bribery charges connected to SNC’s government contracts in Libya.
Wilson-Raybould testified in early 2019 to Canada’s justice committee that she believed she was moved from her then-justice cabinet posting to veterans’ affairs due to the fact she did not grant a request from SNC-Lavalin for a deferred prosecution agreement rather than a criminal trial.
Of note is that a criminal conviction would have banned the company from getting any government contracts for 10 years.
Trudeau flat-out denied it was being investigated by the RCMP.
A little less than four years ago, Trudeau was found to have broken the federal ethics laws, or Section 9 of the Conflict of Interest Act, for his role in pressuring Wilson-Raybould.
MPs were hoping Duheme’s testimony would clear up many questions
Conservative MPs were hoping that Duheme’s testimony would have cleared up more questions about the SNC-Lavalin scandal after the group Democracy Watch on October 16 revealed a host of records regarding it.
These records show that the RCMP was stopped by Trudeau’s top cabinet members via a restricted disclosure order. This order stated that authorization to waive solicitor-client privilege would not be allowed in regard to information concerning communications between Wilson-Raybould and the director of public prosecutions regarding SNC-Lavalin.
The records released by Democracy Watch involve about 1,815 pages of records from 19 documents that the RCMP recently disclosed after an Access to Information Act (ATIA) request.
In July 2022, the group filed an Access to Information Act (ATIA) request with the RCMP about the SNC-Lavalin affair and Trudeau.
As for SNC-Lavalin, which now goes by the name “AtkinsRéalis,” in 2019 it pleaded guilty to committing fraud in a Québec Provincial Court and was hit with a $280 million fine. Company executives also admitted that they had paid some $47.7 million in bribes to get contracts in Libya.
After Duheme was blocked from testifying, Conservative MPs Barrett and Larry Brock said in a press release that Trudeau had “refused to hand over documents or let individuals who were involved in the affair testify” after it was discovered he broke Canada’s ethics laws.
Business
Ottawa has spent nearly $18 billion settling Indigenous ‘specific claims’ since 2015

From the Fraser Institute
By Tom Flanagan
Since 2015, the federal government has paid nearly $18 billion settling an increasing number of ‘specific claims’ by First Nations, including more than $7 billion last year alone, finds a new study released today by the Fraser Institute, an independent, non-partisan Canadian public policy think tank.
“Specific claims are for past treaty breaches, and as such, their number should be finite. But instead of declining over time, the number of claims keeps growing as lucrative settlements are reached, which in turn prompts even more claims,” said Tom Flanagan, Fraser Institute senior fellow, professor emeritus of political science at the University of Calgary and author of Specific Claims—an Out-of-Control Program.
The study reveals details about “specific claims,” which began in 1974 and are filed by First Nations who claim that Canadian governments—past or present—violated the Indian Act or historic treaty agreements, such as when governments purchased reserve land for railway lines or hydro projects. Most “specific claims” date back 100 years or more. Specific claims are contrasted with comprehensive claims, which arise from the absence of a treaty.
Crucially, the number of specific claims and the value of the settlement paid out have increased dramatically since 2015.
In 2015/16, 11 ‘specific claims’ were filed with the federal government, and the total value of the settlements was $27 million (in 2024 dollars, to adjust for inflation). The number of claims increased virtually every year since so that by 2024/25, 69 ‘specific claims’ were filed, and the value of the settlements in 2024/25 was $7.061 billion. All told, from 2015/16 to 2024/25, the value of all ‘specific claims’ settlements was $17.9 billion (inflation adjusted).
“First Nations have had 50 years to study their history, looking for violations of treaty and legislation. That is more than enough time for the discovery of legitimate grievances,” Flanagan said.
“Ottawa should set a deadline for filing specific claims so that the government and First Nations leaders can focus instead on programs that would do more to improve the living standards and prosperity for both current and future Indigenous peoples.”
Specific Claims: An Out-of-Control Program
- Specific claims are based on the government’s alleged failure to abide by provisions of the Indian Act or a treaty.
- The federal government began to entertain such claims in 1974. The number and value of claims increased gradually until 2017, when both started to rise at an extraordinary rate.
- In fiscal year 2024/25, the government settled 69 claims for an astonishing total of $7.1 billion dollars.
- The evidence suggests at least two causes for this sudden acceleration. One was the new approach of Justin Trudeau’s Liberal government toward settling Indigenous claims, an approach adopted in 2015 and formalized by Minister of Justice Jodi Wilson-Raybould’s 2019 practice directive. Under the new policy, the Department of Justice was instructed to negotiate rather than litigate claims.
- Another factor was the recognition, beginning around 2017, of “cows and plows” claims based on the allegation that agricultural assistance promised in early treaties—seed grain, cattle, agricultural implements—never arrived or was of poor quality.
- The specific-claims process should be terminated. Fifty years is long enough to discover legitimate grievances.
- The government should announce a short but reasonable period, say three years, for new claims to be submitted. Claims that have already been submitted should be processed, but with more rigorous instructions to the Department of Justice for legal scrutiny.
- The government should also require more transparency about what happens to these settlements. At present, much of the revenue paid out disappears into First Nations’ “settlement trusts”, for which there is no public disclosure.
Business
Senator wants to torpedo Canada’s oil and gas industry

From the Fraser Institute
Recently, without much fanfare, Senator Rosa Galvez re-pitched a piece of legislation that died on the vine when former prime minister Justin Trudeau prorogued Parliament in January. Her “Climate-Aligned Finance Act” (CAFA), which would basically bring a form of BDS (Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions) to Canada’s oil and gas sector, would much better be left in its current legislative oblivion.
CAFA would essentially treat Canada’s oil and gas sector like an enemy of the state—a state, in Senator Galvez’ view, where all values are subordinate to greenhouse gas emission control. Think I’m kidding? Per CAFA, alignment with national climate commitments means that everyone engaged in federal investment in “emission intensive activities [read, the entire oil and gas sector] must give precedence to that duty over all other duties and obligations of office, and, for that purpose, ensuring the entity is in alignment with climate commitments is deemed to be a superseding matter of public interest.”
In plain English, CAFA would require anyone involved in federal financing (or federally-regulated financing) of the oil and gas sector to divest their Canadian federal investments in the oil and gas sector. And the government would sanction those who argue against it.
There’s another disturbing component to CAFA—in short, it stacks investment decision-making boards. CAFA requires at least one board member of every federally-regulated financial institution to have “climate expertise.” How is “climate expertise” defined? CAFA says it includes people with experience in climate science, social science, Indgineuous “ways of knowing,” and people who have “acute lived experience related to the physical or economic damages of climate change.” (Stacking advisory boards like this, by the way, is a great way to build public distrust in governmental advisory boards, which, in our post-COVID world, is probably not all that high. Might want to rethink this, senator.)
Clearly, Senator Galvez’ CAFA is draconian public policy dressed up in drab finance-speak camouflage. But here’s what it would do. By making federal investment off-limits to oil and gas companies, it would quickly put negative pressure on investment from both national and international investors, effectively starving the sector for capital. After all, if a company’s activities are anathema to its own federal regulators or investment organs, and are statutorily prohibited from even verbally defending such investments, who in their right minds would want to invest?
And that is the BDS of CAFA. In so many words, it calls on the Canadian federal government to boycott, divest from, and sanction Canada’s oil and gas sector—which powers our country, produces a huge share of our exports, and employs people from coast to coast. Senator Galvez would like to see her Climate-Aligned Finance Act (CAFA) resurrected by the Carney government, whose energy policy to-date has been less than crystal clear. But for the sake of Canadians, it should stay dead.
-
Agriculture1 day ago
Unstung Heroes: Canada’s Honey Bees are not Disappearing – They’re Thriving
-
espionage1 day ago
From Sidewinder to P.E.I.: Are Canada’s Political Elites Benefiting from Beijing’s Real Estate Reach?
-
Daily Caller1 day ago
Unanimous Supreme Court Ruling Inspires Hope For Future Energy Project Permitting
-
Alberta1 day ago
Alberta’s carbon diet – how to lose megatonnes in just three short decades
-
Energy1 day ago
Who put the energy illiterate in charge?
-
Business24 hours ago
Senator wants to torpedo Canada’s oil and gas industry
-
Business2 days ago
RFK Jr. planning new restrictions on drug advertising: report
-
espionage1 day ago
FBI Buried ‘Warning’ Intel on CCP Plot to Elect Biden Using TikTok, Fake IDs, CCP Sympathizers and PRC Students—Grassley Probes Withdrawal