Trudeau gov’t dept. suggests giving LGBT, minority journalists $45k annually to promote ‘diversity’

From LifeSiteNews

‘Organizations mentioned the need for government funds dedicated to creators and journalists from Indigenous, racialized and religious minority communities in the media’

The Canadian Department of Heritage is advising that Indigenous, Muslim, Black or LGBT identifying journalists be federally funded up to $45,000 per year to promote “diversity.”

According to a report titled Changing Narratives Fund Report On Consultations, published November 28 by Blacklock’s Reporter, the Department of Canadian Heritage has recommended that the Cabinet directly give individual reporters a salary of $45,000 annually.

“Organizations mentioned the need for government funds dedicated to creators and journalists from Indigenous, racialized and religious minority communities in the media,” said the report. “Funding should be stable and targeted.”

The proposed scheme, submitted by departmental advisors, professors Christopher Dornan and Adrian Harewood of Carleton University and Patrick White of the University of Québec, suggests “a salary of $45,000 per annum” for reporters who are Indigenous, Muslim, Black or LGBT.

“Hiring journalists and creators from diverse communities especially new talent alone cannot guarantee diverse perspectives will be presented in media coverage,” the report asserted. “If these new talents are not trained or allocated budgets or resources to share their stories they may well remain invisible.”

“For these stories to be seen a paradigm shift is needed in the way traditional news media share the stories of Indigenous, racialized and religious minority communities,” it continued.

“A number of organizations argued media coverage of the reality of their communities has not only been historically deficient but has often been detrimental,” the report alleged.

“Consequently the lack of regular and daily contact between majority and minority communities leads to misunderstanding of the other and worsens stereotypes and negative attitudes,” it added.

The report failed to explain how “diversity” of reporting could be maintained if the Liberal government under the leadership of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is funding the journalists’ salaries.

“Communism much??” one wrote on X, formerly known as Twitter.

Communism much??

— Slick Greg (@mrgregparsons) November 28, 2023

“Not even trying to hide the bribery anymore!” another posted.

Not even trying to hide the bribery anymore!

— Stephen M Lloyd 🇨🇦 🌻 (@StephenMLloyd2) November 28, 2023

“Government Approved Newsrooms are Pravda,” one wrote, referring to the official newspaper of the former Communist Party of the Soviet. “Government has no place in promoting narrative.”

Government Approved Newsrooms are Pravda … FULL STOP! Government has no place in promoting narrative.

— Sanitary Napping (@NilPointerFound) November 28, 2023

Notably, the call for increased federal funding for journalists closely follows Trudeau’s fall economic statement which includes massive payouts for mainstream media outlets ahead of and after the 2025 election.

Beginning in 2019, Parliament changed the Income Tax Act to give yearly rebates of 25 percent for each news employee in cabinet-approved media outlets earning up to $55,000 a year, to a maximum of $13,750.  

However, the Canadian Heritage Department since admitted that the payouts are not sufficient to keep legacy media outlets running. The department recommended that rebates be doubled next year to a maximum $29,750 annually. 

This suggestion was adopted by the Trudeau government in its Fall Economic Statement, which increased the rebates to 35 percent on newsroom salaries up to $85,000, totaling a maximum rebate of $29,750. The temporary tax credit is set to apply for the next four years.   

While media subsidies were to set to expire March 31, 2024, they have now been expanded to 2029 past the next general election. The increased payouts are expected to cost taxpayer $129 million in the next five years and an additional $10 million for every subsequent year.   

The renewed media bailouts come as trust in mainstream media is polling at an all-time low with Canadians.

According to a recent study by Canada’s Public Health Agency, less than a third of Canadians displayed “high trust” of the federal government, with “large media organizations” as well as celebrities getting even lower scores. 

Large mainstream media outlets and “journalists” working for them scored a “high trust” rating of only 18 percent. This was followed by only 12 percent of people saying they trusted “ordinary people,” with celebrities garnering only an eight percent “trust” rating. 

Up Next

How the Deep State is using the ‘Censorship Industrial Complex’ to crush free speech

Don't Miss

Government surrenders to Google: Peter Menzies

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

Former COVID coordinator Deborah Birx now admits jabs could have injured ‘thousands’

Energy / 5 hours ago

Buckle Up for Summer Blackouts: Wind Is Already Failing Texas in Spring

Bruce Dowbiggin / 7 hours ago

Why Do The Same Few Always Get The Best Sports Scoops?

Automotive

New Analysis Shows Just How Bad Electric Trucks Are For Business

Published on May 12, 2024

Todayville

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By WILL KESSLER

Converting America’s medium- and heavy-duty trucks to electric vehicles (EV) in accordance with goals from the Biden administration would add massive costs to commercial trucking, according to a new analysis released Wednesday.

The cost to switch over to light-duty EVs like a transit van would equate to a 5% increase in costs per year while switching over medium- and heavy-duty trucks would add up to 114% in costs per year to already struggling businesses, according to a report from transportation and logistics company Ryder Systems. The Biden administration, in an effort to facilitate a transition to EVs, finalized new emission standards in March that would require a huge number of heavy-duty vehicles to be electric or zero-emission by 2032 and has created a plan to roll out charging infrastructure across the country.

“There are specific applications where EV adoption makes sense today, but the use cases are still limited,” Karen Jones, executive vice president at Ryder, said in an accompanying press release. “Yet we’re facing regulations aimed at accelerating broader EV adoption when the technology and infrastructure are still developing. Until the gap in TCT for heavier-duty vehicles is narrowed or closed, we cannot expect many companies to make the transition, and, if required to convert in today’s market, we face more supply chain disruptions, transportation cost increases, and additional inflationary pressure.”

Due to the increase in costs for businesses, the potential inflationary impact on the entire economy per year is between 0.5% and 1%, according to the report. Inflation is already elevated, measuring 3.5% year-over-year in March, far from the Federal Reserve’s 2% target.

Increased expense projections differ by state, with class 8 heavy-duty trucks costing 94% more per year in California compared to traditional trucks, due largely to a 501% increase in equipment costs, while cost savings on fuel only amounted to 52%. In Georgia, costs would be 114% higher due to higher equipment costs, labor costs, a smaller payload capacity and more.

The EPA also recently finalized rules mandating that 67% of all light-duty vehicles sold after 2032 be electric or hybrid. Around $1 billion from the Inflation Reduction Act has already been designated to be used by subnational governments in the U.S. to replace some heavy-duty vehicles with EVs, like delivery trucks or school buses.

The Biden administration has also had trouble expanding EV charging infrastructure across the country, despite allotting $7.5 billion for chargers in 2021. Current charging infrastructure frequently has issues operating properly, adding to fears of “range anxiety,” where EV owners worry they will become stranded without a charger.

Business

Economic progress stalling for Canada and other G7 countries

Published on May 10, 2024

Todayville

From the Fraser Institute

By Jake Fuss

For decades, Canada and other countries in the G7 have been known as the economic powerhouses of the world. They generally have had the biggest economies and the most prosperous countries. But in recent years, poor government policy across the G7 has contributed to slowing economic growth and near-stagnant living standards.

Simply put, the Group of Seven countries—Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States—have become complacent. Rather than build off past economic success by employing small governments that are limited and efficient, these countries have largely pursued policies that increase or maintain high taxes on families and businesses, increase regulation and grow government spending.

Canada is a prime example. As multiple levels of government have turned on the spending taps to expand programs or implement new ones, the size of total government has surged ever higher. Unsurprisingly, Canada’s general government spending as a share of GDP has risen from 39.3 per cent in 2007 to 42.2 per cent in 2022.

At the same time, federal and provincial governments have increased taxes on professionals, businessowners and entrepreneurs to the point where the country’s top combined marginal tax rate is now the fifth-highest among OECD countries. New regulations such as Bill C-69, which instituted a complex and burdensome assessment process for major infrastructure projects and Bill C-48, which prohibits producers from shipping oil or natural gas from British Columbia’s northern coast, have also made it difficult to conduct business.

The results of poor government policy in Canada and other G7 countries have not been pretty.

Productivity, which is typically defined as economic output per hour of work, is a crucial determinant of overall economic growth and living standards in a country. Over the most recent 10-year period of available data (2013 to 2022), productivity growth has been meagre at best. Annual productivity growth equaled 0.9 per cent for the G7 on average over this period, which means the average rate of growth during the two previous decades (1.6 per cent) has essentially been chopped in half. For some countries such as Canada, productivity has grown even slower than the paltry G7 average.

Since productivity has grown at a snail’s pace, citizens are now experiencing stalled improvement in living standards. Gross domestic product (GDP) per person, a common indicator of living standards, grew annually (inflation-adjusted) by an anemic 0.7 per cent in Canada from 2013 to 2022 and only slightly better across the G7 at 1.3 per cent. This should raise alarm bells for policymakers.

A skeptic might suggest this is merely a global phenomenon. But other countries have fared much better. Two European countries, Ireland and Estonia, have seen a far more significant improvement than G7 countries in both productivity and per-person GDP.

From 2013 to 2022, Estonia’s annual productivity has grown more than twice as fast (1.9 per cent) as the G7 countries (0.9 per cent). Productivity in Ireland has grown at a rapid annual pace of 5.9 per cent, more than six times faster than the G7.

A similar story occurs when examining improvements in living standards. Estonians enjoyed average per-person GDP growth of 2.8 per cent from 2013 to 2022—more than double the G7. Meanwhile, Ireland’s per-person GDP has surged by 7.9 per cent annually over the 10-year period. To put this in perspective, living standards for the Irish grew 10 times faster than for Canadians.

But this should come as no surprise. Governments in Ireland and Estonia are smaller than the G7 average and impose lower taxes on individuals and businesses. In 2019, general government spending as a percentage of GDP averaged 44.0 per cent for G7 countries. Spending for governments in both Estonia and Ireland were well below this benchmark.

Moreover, the business tax rate averaged 27.2 per cent for G7 countries in 2023 compared to lower rates in Ireland (12.5 per cent) and Estonia (20.0 per cent). For personal income taxes, Estonia’s top marginal tax rate (20.0 per cent) is significantly below the G7 average of 49.7 per cent. Ireland’s top marginal tax rate is below the G7 average as well.

Economic progress has largely stalled for Canada and other G7 countries. The status quo of government policy is simply untenable.