National
Liberals, NDP admit closed-door meetings took place in attempt to delay Canada’s next election

From LifeSiteNews
Pushing back the date would preserve the pensions of some of the MPs who could be voted out of office in October 2025.
Aides to the cabinet of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau confirmed that MPs from the Liberal and New Democratic Party (NDP) did indeed hold closed-door “briefings” to rewrite Canada’s elections laws so that they could push back the date of the next election.
The closed-door talks between the NDP and Liberals confirmed the aides included a revision that would guarantee some of its 28 MPs, including three of Trudeau’s cabinet members, would get a pension.
Allen Sutherland, who serves as the assistant cabinet secretary, testified before the House of Commons affairs committee that the changes to the Elections Act were discussed in the meetings.
“We attended a meeting where the substance of that proposal was discussed,” he said, adding that his “understanding is the briefing was primarily oral.”
According to Sutherland, as reported by Blacklock’s Reporter, it was only NDP and Liberal MPs who attended the secret meetings regarding changes to Canada’s Elections Act via Bill C-65, An Act to Amend the Canada Elections Act before the bill was introduced in March.
As reported by LifeSiteNews before, the Liberals were hoping to delay the 2025 federal election by a few days in what many see as a stunt to secure pensions for MPs who are projected to lose their seats. Approximately 80 MPs would qualify for pensions should they sit as MPs until at least October 27, 2025, which is the newly proposed election date. The election date is currently set for October 20, 2025.
Sutherland noted when asked by Conservative MP Luc Berthold that he recalled little from the meetings, but he did confirm he attended “two meetings of that kind.”
“Didn’t you find it unusual that a discussion about amending the Elections Act included only two political parties and excluded the others?” Berthold asked.
Sutherland responded, “It’s important to understand what my role was in those meetings which was simply to provide background information.”
Berthold then asked, “You nevertheless suggested amendments to the legislation including a change of dates?”
“My role was to provide information,” replied Sutherland, who added he could not provide the exact dates of the meetings.
MPs must serve at least six years to qualify for a pension that pays $77,900 a year. Should an election be called today, many MPs would fall short of reaching the six years, hence Bill C-65 was introduced by the Liberals and NDP.
The Liberals have claimed that pushing back the next election date is not over pensions but due to “trying to observe religious holidays,” as noted by Liberal MP Mark Gerretsen.
“Conservatives voted against this bill,” Berthold said, as they are “confident of winning re-election. We don’t need this change.”
Trudeau’s popularity is at a all-time low, but he has refused to step down as PM, call an early election, or even step aside as Liberal Party leader.
As for the amendments to elections laws, they come after months of polling in favour of the Conservative Party under the leadership of Pierre Poilievre.
A recent poll found that 70 percent of Canadians believe the country is “broken” as Trudeau focuses on less critical issues. Similarly, in January, most Canadians reported that they are worse off financially since Trudeau took office.
Additionally, a January poll showed that 46 percent of Canadians expressed a desire for the federal election to take place sooner rather than the latest mandated date in the fall of 2025.
Business
A new federal bureaucracy will not deliver the affordable housing Canadians need

Governments are not real estate developers, and Canada should take note of the failure of New Zealand’s cancelled program, highlights a new MEI publication.
“The prospect of new homes is great, but execution is what matters,” says Renaud Brossard, vice president of Communications at the MEI and contributor to the report. “New Zealand’s government also thought more government intervention was the solution, but after seven years, its project had little to show for it.”
During the federal election, Prime Minister Mark Carney promised to establish a new Crown corporation, Build Canada Homes, to act as a developer of affordable housing. His plan includes $25 billion to finance prefabricated homes and an additional $10 billion in low-cost financing for developers building affordable homes.
This idea is not novel. In 2018, the New Zealand government launched the KiwiBuild program to address a lack of affordable housing. Starting with a budget of $1.7 billion, the project aimed to build 100,000 affordable homes by 2028.
In its first year, KiwiBuild successfully completed 49 units, a far cry from the 1,000-home target for that year. Experts estimated that at its initial rate, it would take the government 436 years to reach the 100,000-home target.
By the end of 2024, just 2,389 homes had been built. The program, which was abandoned in October 2024, has achieved barely 3 per cent of its goal, when including units still under construction.
One obstacle for KiwiBuild was how its target was set. The 100,000-home objective was developed with no rigorous process and no consideration for the availability of construction labour, leading to an overestimation of the program’s capabilities.
“What New Zealand’s government-backed home-building program shows is that building homes simply isn’t the government’s expertise,” said Mr. Brossard. “Once again, the source of the problem isn’t too little government intervention; it’s too much.”
According to the Canadian Mortgage and Housing Corporation, Canada needs an additional 4.8 million homes to restore affordability levels. This would entail building between 430,000 to 480,000 new units annually. Figures on Canada’s housing starts show that we are currently not on track to meet this goal.
The MEI points to high development charges and long permitting delays as key impediments to accelerating the pace of construction.
Between 2020 and 2022 alone, development charges rose by 33 per cent across Canada. In Toronto, these charges now account for more than 25 per cent of the total cost of a home.
Canada also ranks well behind most OECD countries on the time it takes to obtain a construction permit.
“KiwiBuild shows us the limitations of a government-led approach,” said Mr. Brossard. “Instead of creating a whole new bureaucracy, the government should focus on creating a regulatory environment that allows developers to build the housing Canadians need.”
The MEI viewpoint is available here.
* * *
The MEI is an independent public policy think tank with offices in Montreal, Ottawa, and Calgary. Through its publications, media appearances, and advisory services to policymakers, the MEI stimulates public policy debate and reforms based on sound economics and entrepreneurship.
Business
Ottawa Funded the China Ferry Deal—Then Pretended to Oppose It

While Beijing-backed hackers infiltrated Canadian telecoms, federal and B.C. leaders quietly financed a billion-dollar shipbuilding deal with a Chinese state firm—then tried to pass the buck.
So just to recap—because this one’s almost too absurd to believe: BC Ferries cuts a billion-dollar deal with a Chinese state-owned shipyard to build four new ferries. Canada’s Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland—always quick to perform outrage when the cameras are on—writes a stern letter saying how “dismayed” she is. She scolds British Columbia for daring to do business with a hostile foreign regime that’s literally attacking our critical infrastructure in real time.
And then—wait for it—it turns out her own federal government quietly financed the whole thing.
Yes, really.
According to an explosive report from The Globe and Mail, the Canada Infrastructure Bank—a federal Crown corporation—provided $1 billion in low-interest financing for the very same China shipbuilding deal Freeland claimed to oppose. The contract was signed in March 2025. The outrage? That only came later, when the public found out about it in June.

Freeland’s letter to BC’s Transportation Minister was loaded with warnings. She talked about China’s “unjustified tariffs” and “cybersecurity threats.” She demanded assurances that “no federal funding” would support the purchase. But what she didn’t mention—what she conveniently left out—was that Ottawa had already cut the cheque. The financing was already in place. The loan had been approved. Freeland just didn’t say a word.
And when reporters asked for clarification, what did her office say? Nothing. They passed the buck to another minister. The new Infrastructure Minister, Gregor Robertson, now claims the government had “no influence” in the procurement decision. No influence? You loan a billion dollars to a company and have no opinion on where it goes?
Let’s be clear: This wasn’t some harmless miscommunication. If it wasn’t a cover-up, then it was sheer incompetence—the same brand of incompetence that’s driven our shipyards into obsolescence, our economy into dependence, and our country into managed decline. An entire federal cabinet stood by, watched this unfold, signed the cheque—and then pretended they had nothing to do with it.
And British Columbia’s government? Just as bad. Premier David Eby, the man who pretends to champion “BC First,” claims he was “not happy” with the China deal but says it’s “too late” to change course. Too late? This isn’t an asteroid heading for Earth. It’s a contract. And contracts can be rewritten, canceled, renegotiated—if anyone in charge had the political will to stand up and say, “No, we don’t hand billion-dollar infrastructure projects to hostile regimes.”
But instead, we get excuse after excuse. They say BC Ferries is independent. They say there was no capacity in Canada. They say we had no choice. All the while, Canadian shipyards sit idle, unionized workers are frozen out, and the Canadian taxpayer is stuck subsidizing Chinese shipbuilding—and Chinese espionage.
Because while all of this was happening, we now know that a Chinese state-sponsored hacking group called Salt Typhoon was actively breaching Canadian telecommunications networks. That’s not speculation—it’s confirmed in a federal cyber security bulletin dated June 19, 2025.
Chinese actors exploited a vulnerability in Cisco equipment and infiltrated the networks of at least one major Canadian telecom provider. They pulled config files, rerouted traffic through GRE tunnels, and monitored call metadata and SMS communications. Translation: They were spying. On us. On officials. On infrastructure.
So let’s break this down. In February, China hacked Canadian telecoms. In March, Canada quietly finances a massive shipbuilding contract with China. In June, Freeland pretends to be outraged—while hiding the fact that her own government bankrolled it.
And now we’re told, “There’s nothing to see here. No jurisdiction.”
Really?
Freeland has jurisdiction when it comes to issuing carbon taxes, banning handguns, and lecturing citizens about disinformation—but somehow has no jurisdiction when her own Infrastructure Bank gives a billion dollars to build ships in a country that’s attacking our networks and undermining our democracy?
And it gets worse. The interest rate on the loan? Just 1.8%. That’s below market. That’s a subsidy, plain and simple. The financial gap will be recorded as government funding. So even if the Liberals want to play word games about “no direct funding,” that distinction is meaningless. The money came from taxpayers. It went to BC Ferries. It ended up in the hands of the Chinese Communist Party.
So what do we call this? It’s not economic strategy. It’s not climate policy. It’s not forward-looking infrastructure planning.
It’s decline. Managed decline.
It’s a government that tells Canadians we’re too broke, too slow, too divided to build our own ships. So we’ll just outsource it. To the same regime our intelligence services say is spying on us and interfering in our elections.
This was a test. A big one. And the people who told you they were going to put “Canada First”—people like David Eby and Mark Carney—failed that test spectacularly. When it came time to make a real choice—stand with Canadian workers, Canadian industry, and Canadian sovereignty—or cave to foreign pressure and cheap outsourcing, they chose China.
And then they lied about it.
But Canadians aren’t stupid. We know what leadership looks like—and this isn’t it. We don’t need more slogans. We need action. We need courage. We need people in government who actually believe in this country and the people who built it.
Because Canada can build ships. Canada can defend its infrastructure. And Canada should never hand over critical national projects to a regime that’s actively working against our interests.
If this is what “Canada First” looks like under the Liberals and the BC NDP, then we need something better. It’s time to stop managing decline and start building again.
Call the election. Let Canadians choose a path forward—one rooted in strength, in sovereignty, and in pride. Let us choose leaders who put Canada first—for real.
Subscribe to The Opposition with Dan Knight
-
COVID-192 days ago
Ontario man launches new challenge against province’s latest attempt to ban free expression on roadside billboards
-
COVID-1919 hours ago
New Peer-Reviewed Study Affirms COVID Vaccines Reduce Fertility
-
Alberta2 days ago
Alberta Next Takes A Look At Alberta Provincial Police Force
-
Business15 hours ago
Ottawa Funded the China Ferry Deal—Then Pretended to Oppose It
-
Alberta2 days ago
Canadian Oil Sands Production Expected to Reach All-time Highs this Year Despite Lower Oil Prices
-
Alberta18 hours ago
The permanent CO2 storage site at the end of the Alberta Carbon Trunk Line is just getting started
-
MAiD17 hours ago
Canada’s euthanasia regime is not health care, but a death machine for the unwanted
-
International2 days ago
President Xi Skips Key Summit, Adding Fuel to Ebbing Power Theories