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
Business
Canada is failing dismally at our climate goals. We’re also ruining our economy.
From the Fraser Institute
By Annika Segelhorst and Elmira Aliakbari
Short-term climate pledges simply chase deadlines, not results
The annual meeting of the United Nations Conference of the Parties, or COP, which is dedicated to implementing international action on climate change, is now underway in Brazil. Like other signatories to the Paris Agreement, Canada is required to provide a progress update on our pledge to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 40 to 45 per cent below 2005 levels by 2030. After decades of massive government spending and heavy-handed regulations aimed at decarbonizing our economy, we’re far from achieving that goal. It’s time for Canada to move past arbitrary short-term goals and deadlines, and instead focus on more effective ways to support climate objectives.
Since signing the Paris Agreement in 2015, the federal government has introduced dozens of measures intended to reduce Canada’s carbon emissions, including more than $150 billion in “green economy” spending, the national carbon tax, the arbitrary cap on emissions imposed exclusively on the oil and gas sector, stronger energy efficiency requirements for buildings and automobiles, electric vehicle mandates, and stricter methane regulations for the oil and gas industry.
Recent estimates show that achieving the federal government’s target will impose significant costs on Canadians, including 164,000 job losses and a reduction in economic output of 6.2 per cent by 2030 (compared to a scenario where we don’t have these measures in place). For Canadian workers, this means losing $6,700 (each, on average) annually by 2030.
Yet even with all these costly measures, Canada will only achieve 57 per cent of its goal for emissions reductions. Several studies have already confirmed that Canada, despite massive green spending and heavy-handed regulations to decarbonize the economy over the past decade, remains off track to meet its 2030 emission reduction target.
And even if Canada somehow met its costly and stringent emission reduction target, the impact on the Earth’s climate would be minimal. Canada accounts for less than 2 per cent of global emissions, and that share is projected to fall as developing countries consume increasing quantities of energy to support rising living standards. In 2025, according to the International Energy Agency (IEA), emerging and developing economies are driving 80 per cent of the growth in global energy demand. Further, IEA projects that fossil fuels will remain foundational to the global energy mix for decades, especially in developing economies. This means that even if Canada were to aggressively pursue short-term emission reductions and all the economic costs it would imposes on Canadians, the overall climate results would be negligible.
Rather than focusing on arbitrary deadline-contingent pledges to reduce Canadian emissions, we should shift our focus to think about how we can lower global GHG emissions. A recent study showed that doubling Canada’s production of liquefied natural gas and exporting to Asia to displace an equivalent amount of coal could lower global GHG emissions by about 1.7 per cent or about 630 million tonnes of GHG emissions. For reference, that’s the equivalent to nearly 90 per cent of Canada’s annual GHG emissions. This type of approach reflects Canada’s existing strength as an energy producer and would address the fastest-growing sources of emissions, namely developing countries.
As the 2030 deadline grows closer, even top climate advocates are starting to emphasize a more pragmatic approach to climate action. In a recent memo, Bill Gates warned that unfounded climate pessimism “is causing much of the climate community to focus too much on near-term emissions goals, and it’s diverting resources from the most effective things we should be doing to improve life in a warming world.” Even within the federal ministry of Environment and Climate Change, the tone is shifting. Despite the 2030 emissions goal having been a hallmark of Canadian climate policy in recent years, in a recent interview, Minister Julie Dabrusin declined to affirm that the 2030 targets remain feasible.
Instead of scrambling to satisfy short-term national emissions limits, governments in Canada should prioritize strategies that will reduce global emissions where they’re growing the fastest.
![]()
Elmira Aliakbari
Artificial Intelligence
Lawsuit Claims Google Secretly Used Gemini AI to Scan Private Gmail and Chat Data
Whether the claims are true or not, privacy in Google’s universe has long been less a right than a nostalgic illusion.
|
When Google flipped a digital switch in October 2025, few users noticed anything unusual.
Gmail loaded as usual, Chat messages zipped across screens, and Meet calls continued without interruption.
Yet, according to a new class action lawsuit, something significant had changed beneath the surface.
We obtained a copy of the lawsuit for you here.
Plaintiffs claim that Google silently activated its artificial intelligence system, Gemini, across its communication platforms, turning private conversations into raw material for machine analysis.
The lawsuit, filed by Thomas Thele and Melo Porter, describes a scenario that reads like a breach of trust.
It accuses Google of enabling Gemini to “access and exploit the entire recorded history of its users’ private communications, including literally every email and attachment sent and received.”
The filing argues that the company’s conduct “violates its users’ reasonable expectations of privacy.”
Until early October, Gemini’s data processing was supposedly available only to those who opted in.
Then, the plaintiffs claim, Google “turned it on for everyone by default,” allowing the system to mine the contents of emails, attachments, and conversations across Gmail, Chat, and Meet.
The complaint points to a particular line in Google’s settings, “When you turn this setting on, you agree,” as misleading, since the feature “had already been switched on.”
This, according to the filing, represents a deliberate misdirection designed to create the illusion of consent where none existed.
There is a certain irony woven through the outrage. For all the noise about privacy, most users long ago accepted the quiet trade that powers Google’s empire.
They search, share, and store their digital lives inside Google’s ecosystem, knowing the company thrives on data.
The lawsuit may sound shocking, but for many, it simply exposes what has been implicit all along: if you live in Google’s world, privacy has already been priced into the convenience.
Thele warns that Gemini’s access could expose “financial information and records, employment information and records, religious affiliations and activities, political affiliations and activities, medical care and records, the identities of his family, friends, and other contacts, social habits and activities, eating habits, shopping habits, exercise habits, [and] the extent to which he is involved in the activities of his children.”
In other words, the system’s reach, if the allegations prove true, could extend into nearly every aspect of a user’s personal life.
The plaintiffs argue that Gemini’s analytical capabilities allow Google to “cross-reference and conduct unlimited analysis toward unmerited, improper, and monetizable insights” about users’ private relationships and behaviors.
The complaint brands the company’s actions as “deceptive and unethical,” claiming Google “surreptitiously turned on this AI tracking ‘feature’ without informing or obtaining the consent of Plaintiffs and Class Members.” Such conduct, it says, is “highly offensive” and “defies social norms.”
The case invokes a formidable set of statutes, including the California Invasion of Privacy Act, the California Computer Data Access and Fraud Act, the Stored Communications Act, and California’s constitutional right to privacy.
Google is yet to comment on the filing.
|
|
|
|
Reclaim The Net is reader-supported. Consider becoming a paid subscriber.
|
|
|
|
-
Alberta2 days agoNational Crisis Approaching Due To The Carney Government’s Centrally Planned Green Economy
-
Carbon Tax1 day agoCarney fails to undo Trudeau’s devastating energy policies
-
Agriculture2 days agoFederal cabinet calls for Canadian bank used primarily by white farmers to be more diverse
-
Business1 day agoThe UN Pushing Carbon Taxes, Punishing Prosperity, And Promoting Poverty
-
Health1 day agoNEW STUDY: Infant Vaccine “Intensity” Strongly Predicts Autism Rates Worldwide
-
Business1 day agoClimate Climbdown: Sacrificing the Canadian Economy for Net-Zero Goals Others Are Abandoning
-
Great Reset2 days agoCanadian government forcing doctors to promote euthanasia to patients: report
-
Artificial Intelligence1 day agoLawsuit Claims Google Secretly Used Gemini AI to Scan Private Gmail and Chat Data





