Liberal ‘Project Fear’ A Longer Con

From the National Citizens Coalition

NATIONAL CITIZENS COALITION SLAMS LIBERAL PARTY’S “PROJECT FEAR,” AMID NEW REVELATIONS ON CREATION OF “ELBOWS UP” CAMPAIGN STRATEGY

The National Citizens Coalition (NCC) and its President, Peter Coleman, are calling out the Liberal Party’s disgraceful ‘Project Fear’ tactics, following new revelations obtained by Blacklock’s Reporter, a trusted Canadian independent news source and accredited member of the Parliamentary Press Gallery.

New documents expose that the Liberal Party conducted government-funded focus groups to test their fearmongering, ‘elbows up’ strategy months before the United States announced tariffs, using pollsters hired by the Privy Council.

Readers should also note this government focus-group effort took place around the time of Trudeau’s ‘hot mic’ with business leaders and the press, when he released what would become the foundations for the Liberal campaign.

This premeditated ‘Project Fear’ strategy, designed to stoke anxiety and division, is a betrayal of the trust Canadians place in their government.

“Young Canadians, working Canadians, common-sense Canadians, they desperately needed change, and they can see through the Liberal Party’s manipulative tactics,” says Peter Coleman, President of the National Citizens Coalition.

“The Liberal governments has been caught red-handed abusing taxpayer dollars to test-drive a fear-mongering campaign long before any tariffs were even announced. This was not leadership, it’s political opportunism at its worst. Canadians deserve a government that tackles real challenges with honesty, not one that takes a serious situation like negotiations and tariff threats from south of the border, and then manufactures a greater crisis for votes.”

The NCC condemns the Liberal Party’s exploitation of confidential focus groups to shape a narrative that abuses economic uncertainties for partisan gain. This revelation underscores a pattern of prioritizing political survival over the public’s interest, a hallmark of the Liberals’ recent tenure.

The ‘elbows up’ campaign, far from being a spontaneous response to U.S. tariffs, appears to have been a calculated move to manipulate public perception, funded by taxpayers and orchestrated through the Privy Council.

“We know better than to take the Carney Liberals at their word,” Coleman continues. “The Liberals have long-shown they’ll say anything to cling to power. That they pulled this cynical stunt during a vital change election, with a worst-in-the-G7 housing crisis, out-of-control immigration, record healthcare wait-times, and rising crime and chaos… I’m ashamed for the millions of Canadians who have been denied their moment of recovery because of this ‘Project Fear.’ Especially knowing those ‘elbows’ are now down.”

The NCC demands transparency on how these focus groups were funded, who authorized them and when, what connection they potentially share with the PMO, and why taxpayer money was used to fund a partisan re-election strategy.

Canada’s pioneering conservative advocacy group demands the Carney Liberals release all documents related to these focus groups, and commit to governing with integrity, not deception. The NCC stands with Canadians who value truth, fiscal responsibility, and leadership that puts the nation’s interests above political gamesmanship.

“The trust and goodwill the Carney Liberals have been receiving from subsidized media and short-sighted supporters, it should be earned. These cynical political animals, largely from the same Trudeau team who got our country into this mess in the first place, should be afforded no benefit of the doubt. The honeymoon is over,” the NCC president concludes.

Don't Miss

The stars are aligning for a new pipeline to the West Coast

Todayville

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

Liberal ‘Project Fear’ A Longer Con

Economy / 11 mins ago

The stars are aligning for a new pipeline to the West Coast

Frontier Centre for Public Policy / 22 mins ago

New Book Warns The Decline In Marriage Comes At A High Cost

Economy

The stars are aligning for a new pipeline to the West Coast

Published on July 8, 2025

Todayville

From Resource Works

By Geoff Russ

Mark Carney says another pipeline is “highly likely”, and that welcome news.

While attending this year’s Calgary Stampede, Prime Minister Mark Carney made it official that a new pipeline to Canada’s West Coast is “highly likely.”

While far from a guarantee, it is still great news for Canada and our energy industry. After years of projects being put on hold or cancelled, things are coming together at the perfect time for truly nation-building enterprises.

Carney’s comments at Stampede have been preceded by a number of other promising signs.

At a June meeting between Carney and the premiers in Saskatoon, Alberta Premier Danielle Smith proposed a “grand bargain” that would include a privately funded pipeline capable of moving a million barrels of oil a day, along with significant green investments.

Carney agreed with Smith’s plan, saying that Canada needed to balance economic growth with environmental responsibility.

Business and political leaders have been mostly united in calling for the federal government to speed up the building of pipelines, for economic and strategic reasons. As we know, it is very difficult to find consensus in Canada, with British Columbia Premier David Eby still reluctant to commit to another pipeline on the coast of the province.

Alberta has been actively encouraging support from the private sector to fund a new pipeline that would fulfil the goals of the Northern Gateway project, a pipeline proposed in 2008 but snuffed out by a hail of regulations under former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.

We are in a new era, however, and we at Resource Works remarked that last month’s G7 meeting in Kananaskis could prove to be a pivotal moment in the history of Canadian energy. An Ipsos poll found that Canada was the most favoured nation for supplying oil in the G7, and our potential as an energy superpower has never been more important for the democratic world, given the instability caused by Russia and other autocratic energy powers.

Because of this shifting, uncertain global climate, Canadian oil and gas are more attractive than ever, and diversifying our exports beyond the United States has become a necessity in the wake of Donald Trump’s regime of tariffs on Canada and other friendly countries.

It has jolted Canadian political leaders into action, and the premiers are all on board with strengthening our economic independence and trade diversification, even if not all agree on what that should look like.

Two premiers who have found common ground are Danielle Smith and Ontario Premier Doug Ford. After meeting at Stampede, the pair signed two memorandums of understanding to collaborate on studying an energy corridor and other infrastructure to boost interprovincial trade. This included the possibility of an eastward-bound pipeline to Ontario ports for shipping abroad.

Ford explicitly said that “the days of relying on the United States 100 percent, those days are over.” That’s in line with Alberta’s push for new pipeline routes, especially to northwestern B.C., which are supported by Smith’s government.

On June 10, Resource Works founder and CEO Stewart Muir wrote that Canadian energy projects are a daunting endeavour, akin to a complicated jigsaw puzzle, but that getting discouraged by the complexity causes us to lose sight of the picture itself. He asserted that Canadians have to accept that messiness, not avoid it.

Prime Minister Carney has suggested he will make adjustments to existing regulations and controversial legislation like Bill C-69 and the emissions cap, all of which have slowed the development of new energy infrastructure.

This moment of alignment between Ottawa, the provinces, and other stakeholders cannot be wasted. The stars are aligning, and it will be a tragedy if we cannot take a great step into the future of our country.

Frontier Centre for Public Policy

New Book Warns The Decline In Marriage Comes At A High Cost

Published on July 8, 2025

Todayville

From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy

By Travis D. Smith

Travis Smith reviews I… Do? by Andrea Mrozek and Peter Jon Mitchell, showing that marriage is a public good, not just private choice, arguing culture, not politics, must lead any revival of this vital institution.

Andrea Mrozek and Peter Jon Mitchell, in I… Do?, write that the fading value of marriage is a threat to social stability

I… Do? by Andrea Mrozek and Peter Jon Mitchell manages to say something both obvious and radical: marriage matters. And not just for sentimental reasons. Marriage is a public good, the authors attest.

The book is a modestly sized but extensively researched work that compiles decades of social science data to make one central point: stable marriages improve individual and societal well-being. Married people are generally healthier, wealthier and more resilient. Children from married-parent homes do better across almost every major indicator: academic success, mental health, future earnings and reduced contact with the justice system.

The authors refer to this consistent pattern as the “marriage advantage.” It’s not simply about income. Even in low-income households, children raised by married parents tend to outperform their peers from single-parent families. Mrozek and Mitchell make the case that marriage functions as a stabilizing institution, producing better outcomes not just for couples and kids but for communities and, by extension, the country.

While the book compiles an impressive array of empirical findings, it is clear the authors know that data alone can’t fix what’s broken. There’s a quiet but important concession in these pages: if statistics alone could persuade people to value marriage, we would already be seeing a turnaround.

Marriage in Canada is in sharp decline. Fewer people are getting married, the average age of first marriage continues to climb, and fertility rates are hitting historic lows. The cultural narrative has shifted. Marriage is seen less as a cornerstone of adult life and more as a personal lifestyle choice, often put off indefinitely while people wait to feel ready, build their careers or find emotional stability.

The real value of I… Do? lies in its recognition that the solutions are not primarily political. Policy changes might help stop making things worse, but politicians are not going to rescue marriage. In fact, asking them to may be counterproductive. Looking to politicians to save marriage would involve misunderstanding both marriage and politics. Mrozek and Mitchell suggest the best the state can do is remove disincentives, such as tax policies and benefit structures that inadvertently penalize marriage, and otherwise get out of the way.

The liberal tradition once understood that family should be considered prior to politics for good reason. Love is higher than justice, and the relationships based in it should be kept safely outside the grasp of bureaucrats, ideologues, and power-seekers. The more marriage has been politicized over recent decades, the more it has been reshaped in ways that promote dependency on the impersonal and depersonalizing benefactions of the state.

The book takes a brief detour into the politics of same-sex marriage. Mrozek laments that the topic has become politically untouchable. I would argue that revisiting that battle is neither advisable nor desirable. By now, most Canadians likely know same-sex couples whose marriages demonstrate the same qualities and advantages the authors otherwise praise.

Where I… Do? really shines is in its final section. After pages of statistics, the authors turn to something far more powerful: culture. They explore how civil society—including faith communities, neighbourhoods, voluntary associations and the arts can help revive a vision of marriage that is compelling, accessible and rooted in human experience. They point to storytelling, mentorship and personal witness as ways to rebuild a marriage culture from the ground up.

It’s here that the book moves from description to inspiration. Mrozek and Mitchell acknowledge the limits of top-down efforts and instead offer the beginnings of a grassroots roadmap. Their suggestions are tentative but important: showcase healthy marriages, celebrate commitment and encourage institutions to support rather than undermine families.

This is not a utopian manifesto. It’s a realistic, often sobering look at how far marriage has fallen off the public radar and what it might take to put it back. In a political climate where even mentioning marriage as a public good can raise eyebrows, I… Do? attempts to reframe the conversation.

To be clear, this is not a book for policy wonks or ideologues. It’s for parents, educators, community leaders and anyone concerned about social cohesion. It’s for Gen Xers wondering if their children will ever give them grandchildren. It’s for Gen Zers wondering if marriage is still worth it. And it’s for those in between, hoping to build something lasting in a culture that too often encourages the opposite.

If your experiences already tell you that strong, healthy marriages are among the greatest of human goods, I… Do? will affirm what you know. If you’re skeptical, it won’t convert you overnight, but it might spark a much-needed conversation.

Travis D. Smith is an associate professor of political science at Concordia University in Montreal. This book review was submitted by the Frontier Centre for Public Policy.