The Dystopian Future of Canada Part I

Tim Lasiuta

Published

5 years ago

8 minute read

According to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, the “Great Reset,” is underway, and that should scare you.

In a video interview released November 16, 2020, of his speech in front of the United Nations delivered in late September, Trudeau has now emerged as North Americas poster child for the United Nation Agenda 21 and 2030.

While Canadians were spending our summer at our homes with limited travel and our economy sputtered along, the Liberals and their global partners were rolling out their plan to reimagine the worlds economic systems with a focus on Net-Zero Emissions and social equity.

“This pandemic has provided an opportunity for a reset,” Trudeau said in the following video. “This is our chance to accelerate our pre-pandemic efforts to reimagine economic systems that actually address global challenges like extreme poverty, inequality and climate change.”

The video can be viewed at:

He and his fellow Liberals also absconded the phrase, “Building Back Better,” a slogan that Presidential hopeful Joe Biden used during his campaign. “Building back better means getting support to the most vulnerable while maintaining our momentum on reaching the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development,” said Trudeau.

What will the life of an ordinary Canadian look like under 2030?

According to the original 1992 version of this non-binding legislation it included 95% depopulation of the world with all property rights being stripped from citizens with all workers living in zones close to employment.

(https://csglobe.com/agenda-21-depopulation-95-world-2030/)

Our modern version may be slightly different with no private property ownership, guaranteed incomes, forced vaccinations, the death of the family unit (perhaps our lockdowns and cohort associations are the beginning), and the death of churches and athletics (again, look at the last 6 months).

A particularly telling video explains 8 concepts the Global Rest will make commonplace, remember “I don’t own anything and I am happy.”

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/WEF-Future.mp4?_=1

According to one website, (https://prepareforchange.net/2019/04/08/agenda-21-reinvented-as-agenda-2030-and-agenda-2050-is-a-plan-to-depopulate-95-of-the-world-population-by-2030/)

“It will remove and destroy all constitutions, restrict free speech and disarm the people. When Agenda 21 is fully realized, the United Nations will be in possession of all guns and subsequently, there will be no opposition to their control.”

Paul McGuire, an internationally recognized futurist, speaker, minister, and author writes in his book The Babylon Code that:

“The true agenda of Agenda 21[/2030] is to establish a global government, global economic system, and global religion. When U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon spoke of ‘a dream of a world of peace and dignity for all’ this is no different than when the Communists promised the people a ‘worker’s paradise.’”

The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development is not new, it is a program that has been part of the UN for several years and includes climate change as a tool to reinvent world economies and societies. In fact, the Davos meetings have focused on the ‘Reset’ as well over the last couple of years as well and this stage has been where United States President Trump has pushed his America First policy, an act which earned him international scorn.

According to the UN 2030 website, the rationale behind the movement also known as Agenda 21 is:

When you see a chance, take it

We have a once-in-a-generation opportunity to set things straight. To write a new social contract, together, that is fair and just for everybody. A bold, ambitious plan to achieve the 2030 Agenda and the Sustainable Development Goals.

From the website, there are 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) which were adopted in 2015 and designed for a 15-year implementation time frame.

These can be found here: https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/development-agenda/

They are: No poverty, zero hunger, good health and well-being, quality education, gender equality, clean water, affordable clean energy, decent work, industry and innovation, reduced inequalities, sustainable cities, responsible consumption, climate action, life below water and on land, human rights and partnerships.

How far along the murky waters of Agenda 21 are we exactly in Canada?

UN troops in Canada? You bet, that will be another discussion.

Guaranteed incomes? Does CERB fit the bill?

A brief description of the tenets of the Global Reset can be found at the website below:

New World Order: UN Agenda 21/2030 Mission Goals

In fact, a recent Canadian Government grant (https://www.startupcan.ca/social-impact/sdg-pitch-competition/) for SDG Pitch Competitions has been announced for the month of November focusing on:

 SDG 1: Poverty Reduction

 SDG 5: Gender Equality

 SDG 8: Decent Work & Economic Growth

 SDG 13: Climate Action

The prize of $500 plus a gift in kind rewards pitches that embrace sustainability and fulfills one of the 4 SDG’s including: Poverty Reduction, Gender Equality, Decent Work & Economic Growth, and Climate Action.

Again, quoted from the UN website:

We believe fossil fuel subsidies can be removed without causing social harm. In five countries we are analyzing the best way to reform energy prices and we will offer a guide for policymakers on carbon pricing and subsidy reform.

As a matter of fact, one of the elements of 2030 is the decarbonization of countries while encouraging renewable resources. To see evidence of this policy in Canada all citizens have to do is to look at federal support for oil and gas resource development in western Canada and Carbon tax levels coupled with the proposed Clean Fuel Initiative from the last ‘budget.’

The simple fact remains. When Prime Minister Justin Trudeau campaigned for a seat in the UN, Canada was rejected however, since then it has become apparent that the ‘consolation’ prize of just being a member country has morphed into an outright granting of Canada’s sovereignty to the highest bidder, in this case the UN in exchange for a seemingly spokesperson role for the organization. Instead of being OUR Prime Minister, he has become the liaison and has sold his country out for a paper crown.

This short discussion merely scratches the surface, and further links between Trudeau and his UN cohorts come to the surface daily.

NEXT INSTALLMENT: Trudeau and the Chinese Connection: Or Wu (han) is your Daddy!

Tim Lasiuta

Tim Lasiuta is a Red Deer writer, entrepreneur and communicator. He has interests in history and the future for our country.

Follow Author

Penhold Flight Instructor Releases Updated Instruction Manual For the 21st Century

#RedDeerStrong / 5 years ago

Hope, Faith and Love: the Music Ministry of Gerard Renaud

COVID-19 / 5 years ago

Part IV: Clerical Errors Affect Real People!

Frontier Centre for Public Policy

Ottawa Should Think Twice Before Taxing Churches

Published on October 20, 2025

Todayville

From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy

By Pierre Gilbert

Ottawa has churches in its crosshairs. A federal fiscal squeeze could strip religious organizations of tax breaks, crippling Canada’s community backbone

Proposals to revoke charitable status for faith-based groups would devastate the community services thousands rely on

Canada’s churches, synagogues, temples, mosques and charities like the Salvation Army are at the heart of our communities, offering hope, support and services to thousands. But a storm is brewing in Ottawa that could strip these vital institutions of their charitable status, threatening their very survival—and much of our country’s social fabric.

The 2025 House of Commons Standing Committee on Finance, which makes recommendations to shape the federal budget, dropped a bombshell in its prebudget report, an influential document often used to set priorities for the year ahead. It included two recommendations that could hit religious organizations hard.

The first is that the government revoke the charitable status of pro-life groups. These agencies are being singled out because of the support they provide to pregnant women who do not wish to abort their children.

The second is that the “advancement of religion,” one of the four long-standing categories under which Canadian charities qualify for registration, be eliminated. The recommendation was based on a single proposal by the B.C. Humanist Association, a provincial nonprofit organization in British Columbia that represents atheists, humanists, agnostics and non-religious people.

If included in the next federal budget, these ideas would strip religious organizations across Canada of tax exemptions, the ability to issue donation receipts and, if provinces follow suit, property tax breaks.

Why target these groups?

Ottawa desperately needs the cash. The federal government is on a spending binge of gargantuan proportions with no end in sight. Canada’s balance sheet is drenched in red ink, with no credible plan to address the structural budget deficit, which the C.D. Howe Institute, a Toronto-based policy think tank, estimates will reach a record $92 billion this year. While the tax exemptions amount to only between $1.7 and $3.2 billion annually, the temptation to grab what it can from churches may prove irresistible.

But it’s not just about the dollars. Religious institutions have increasingly faced criticism from secular voices in Ottawa and academia. The Catholic Church, for example, is still facing harsh criticism over its role in Canada’s residential school system and over recent allegations of unmarked graves of Indigenous children at some schools.

As for Protestant and Evangelical churches, public perception casts these institutions as clashing with modern societal norms. Critics claim that churches opposing abortion or prevailing views on human sexuality should be compelled to align with government policies on these issues.

The message seems to be: shape up or ship out. This isn’t just a policy debate; it’s a cultural attack on institutions that have shaped Canada for generations.

Despite the criticism, there are compelling reasons to preserve the charitable status of religious organizations.

First, a recent study by Cardus, a Canadian faith-based think tank, shows that for every dollar of tax exemption, religious groups deliver $10 in community services.

Second, religious congregations offer substantial intangible benefits of immeasurable value. They foster vibrant communities where individuals find friendship, emotional support and spaces to explore questions of meaning and purpose. They also provide opportunities for people to experience a sense of transcendence and spiritual connection.

When the current focus on materialism comes to an end, as it must, many Canadians will turn to the church for guidance in addressing the most profound questions about human existence.

Ottawa needs to get its fiscal house in order, not raid ours. It’s time for Canadians to speak up. Write to your MP, attend community forums and demand that the charitable status for religious organizations be preserved. Doing so will ensure that churches and other places of worship continue to serve Canadians for generations.

Pierre Gilbert, PhD, is an emeritus associate professor at Canadian Mennonite University and a senior fellow at the Frontier Centre for Public Policy. He is the author of Revoking the Charitable Status for the Advancement of Religion: A Critical Assessment and God Never Meant for Us to Die (2020).

National

Democracy Watch Renews Push for Independent Prosecutor in SNC-Lavalin Case

Published on October 19, 2025

Todayville

Dan Knight's avatar Dan Knight

Group says Ontario Crown used “clearly incorrect” legal test to shield Trudeau from private prosecution, calls for independent process free of political ties

Democracy Watch has launched a fresh bid to reopen the door to prosecuting former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau over his alleged role in the 2018 SNC-Lavalin affair, accusing Ontario Crown Counsel of using a legally flawed standard to shut down its private prosecution and continuing what it calls “a smelly cover-up” that began under the Trudeau government.

Read the full press release here

In a new letter sent Wednesday to Ontario Attorney General Doug Downey and Randy Schwartz, the province’s Assistant Deputy Attorney General for Criminal Law, the non-partisan watchdog group is again calling for an independent special prosecutor to review evidence that Trudeau obstructed justice and breached public trust by pressuring then–Attorney General Jody Wilson-Raybould to intervene in the SNC-Lavalin prosecution seven years ago.

This latest appeal comes after Ontario’s Director of the Complex Prosecutions Bureau, John Corelli, used his authority in September to halt Democracy Watch’s private prosecution before it reached a preliminary “pre-enquête” hearing. In that letter, Corelli said there was “no reasonable prospect the Crown could prove that Mr. Trudeau acted with the requisite criminal intent.”

Democracy Watch disputes that reasoning, arguing it misstates the law.

“Crown prosecutors stopping this prosecution for a legally incorrect reason, just like the RCMP did in addition to suppressing key evidence, amounts to a smelly cover-up,” said Duff Conacher, the group’s co-founder and legal expert. “It shows clearly that Canada does not have independent, effective anti-corruption law enforcement and, as a result, corruption in the highest public offices across the country is effectively legal.”

The group’s new letter marks the second time it has asked Ontario’s Attorney General to intervene. In its first request in March, Democracy Watch urged Downey to establish a non-partisan selection committee to appoint a special prosecutor. Downey’s office declined that request in May.

Now, the group is reiterating the demand, saying the independent prosecutor should be chosen by a committee composed of people with no party ties, working alongside opposition leaders, to ensure public confidence in the process.

Conacher’s team argues that Corelli’s reasoning — that the Crown cannot prove Trudeau acted with “criminal intent” — applies the wrong legal test. In its filings, Democracy Watch cites the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in R. v. Beaudry (2007), which clarified that obstruction of justice requires only that an act be done “willfully” to frustrate the course of justice — not that it be done with corrupt or deceitful intent.

“The Supreme Court has already set the threshold,” Conacher said. “Proof of ‘criminal’ intent isn’t required. It’s enough that someone acted willfully to obstruct the process. That’s what the Crown ignored.”

The group also says that the case against Trudeau is unprecedented and cannot be dismissed out of hand without judicial review. It accuses the RCMP of conducting a “negligently weak and incomplete investigation” that left key questions unanswered and accepted the government’s refusal to release Cabinet records from the time.

Democracy Watch’s original filing included testimony and documents obtained from the RCMP after a two-year access battle. It alleges that the Mounties failed to interview key witnesses, including Wilson-Raybould’s chief of staff Jessica Prince and former Liberal minister Jane Philpott, and withheld portions of their answers in documents finally disclosed. The proposed pre-enquête hearing — which Corelli stopped — would have allowed those witnesses to testify under oath and allowed a judge to decide if the evidence was sufficient to proceed.

The group’s case was supported by Wayne Crookes, founder of Integrity B.C., and represented by Jen Danch of Swadron Associates law firm.

Conacher is now urging Ontario’s Attorney General to “do the right thing” and reverse course.

“Canadians can only hope Ontario’s Attorney General will work with opposition party leaders to establish a fully independent committee that will choose a fully independent special prosecutor to review the evidence,” Conacher said.

He also renewed his call for structural reform of Canada’s anti-corruption enforcement, noting that Quebec’s independent anti-corruption police and prosecution units (UPAC) have operated since 2011, while the RCMP remains under the direct control of Cabinet appointees.

“The RCMP lacks independence from the Prime Minister and Cabinet ministers who handpick its leadership,” Conacher said. “They serve at the pleasure of the government, so they are vulnerable to political interference. To ensure integrity, Canada needs a fully independent anti-corruption police force and independent prosecutors.”

Democracy Watch’s campaign underscores a broader concern that the Trudeau-era SNC-Lavalin controversy, which saw Wilson-Raybould’s resignation, Philpott’s exit, and an Ethics Commissioner finding of improper political pressure, has never been subjected to a full criminal review.

For Conacher, the issue is bigger than one case. It’s about restoring the principle that no one, not even a Prime Minister, stands above the law.

Subscribe to The Opposition with Dan Knight .

For the full experience, upgrade your subscription.