Connect with us

Business

U.S. ‘Losing Faith’ in Canada’s Ability to Combat Industrial-Scale Fentanyl

Published

11 minute read

Sam Cooper

BC Mayor Warns of Asian Organized Crime’s Surprising Access to Canada’s Political Class, Echoing US Agency Concerns

In a high-level meeting in 2023—one participant representing the head of state of the world’s most powerful nation, the other a popular small-town mayor in British Columbia—candid warnings emerged about Canada’s capacity to confront the industrial-scale production of fentanyl. Mayor Brad West, a longstanding critic of transnational drug networks in his province, recalls Secretary of State Antony Blinken stressing that Washington believes Beijing is effectively weaponizing fentanyl against North Americans—and that Canada stands out as a worrisome weak link in the global supply chain.

On Tuesday, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s government moved to address growing U.S. alarm by appointing former RCMP deputy commissioner Kevin Brosseau as Canada’s new “fentanyl czar.” Announced as part of an agreement to forestall potential American tariffs in a tense trade dispute, the position mandates “accelerating Canada’s ongoing work to detect, disrupt, and dismantle the fentanyl trade,” according to the Prime Minister’s Office. Brosseau, who most recently served as deputy national security and intelligence adviser to Trudeau, will work closely with U.S. agencies to tackle a crisis that has claimed tens of thousands of lives across North America. Still, questions remain about whether he has the standing in Washington—and the authority in Ottawa—to enact meaningful reforms.

West, reflecting on his encounter with Blinken, doubts that incremental measures will suffice. He argues that only bold legislative change, coupled with a willingness to challenge entrenched legal barriers, can dispel the U.S. government’s unease over Canada’s approach. “Secretary Blinken specifically noted the lack of a RICO-style law in Canada,” West said. “He talked about how, in the United States, that law had been used to take down large portions of the mafia. Then he looked at us—one of America’s closest allies—and saw a very concerning weak link.”

According to West, Blinken pointed to China’s role in funneling precursor chemicals into fentanyl labs. He warned that China’s government, if inclined, could stem the flow but has little interest in doing so. “He was incredibly candid and very serious about the threat fentanyl poses to North America,” West recalled. “He confirmed the connection between the Chinese Communist Party, the triads, and the Mexican cartels, telling me these groups are working together—and it’s Canada where they’re finding a safe operating base.”

West says American frustration revolves around high-profile law enforcement stumbles in Canada, notably the E-Pirate investigation into Silver International, an alleged underground bank in Richmond, B.C., believed to have laundered more than a billion dollars a year for global syndicates. Touted as a signal that Canadian authorities could clamp down on transnational money laundering, the case nevertheless collapsed with no convictions. “He expressed genuine dismay that we haven’t secured meaningful convictions,” West said, paraphrasing Blinken. “When our most prominent laundering case ends with zero prison time, you can see why the Americans are alarmed.”

Blinken also conveyed to West that U.S. agencies have grown hesitant to share certain intelligence with their Canadian counterparts.
“He told me that U.S. intelligence and law enforcement are withholding some evidence because they don’t believe we’ll act on it,” West explained. “They’ve lost confidence.”

West added that in ongoing communications, he has learned American officials are shocked that major figures in Asian organized crime “seem to have so much access to our political class. They’re basically saying, ‘What’s going on in Canada?’”

A major concern, according to West, is how known criminals manage to appear at political events or fundraisers with little oversight.
“It’s not necessarily that politicians are complicit, but our political structures have weak guardrails,” West said. “The Americans see pictures of transnational criminals mingling at official gatherings and find it baffling.”

West insists that Canada must enact a legal framework akin to the U.S. Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act to truly “detect, disrupt, and dismantle” the fentanyl trade. “We don’t have anything like it, and until we do, I worry the new czar’s hands could be tied by the legal status quo,” West said. “Ottawa might resist, but we need it. We should have enacted it yesterday.”

He also decries what he calls “egregious rulings” that free major traffickers or launderers on technicalities. West cites a prominent British Columbia case in which a suspect found with more than 27,000 fentanyl pills was released because a police dog had not fully performed its required sitting motion before searching a vehicle. “When a decision like that happens, we’re letting criminals exploit minutiae while countless people die,” he said. “We need a government that has the courage to challenge those judicial outcomes.”

In pursuit of that goal, West is willing to suggest the targeted use of the notwithstanding clause, a rare constitutional tool allowing governments to override parts of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms for up to five years. Typically employed in language or education disputes, it has scarcely been used in criminal proceedings. “When the Charter is being weaponized by sophisticated organizations, the government should consider all tools,” he insisted. “The right of Canadians not to be killed by a drug of this scale ought to supersede a procedural glitch.”

The severity of the fentanyl crisis in British Columbia, which has seen the majority of Canada’s overdose deaths, offers a striking backdrop for West’s urgings. He emphasizes that the torrent of precursor chemicals from China has supercharged local labs, embedding crime syndicates in global narcotics pipelines. Profits from these vast operations, in his words, flow through real estate, casinos, and underground banks with little interference.

Whether Ottawa has the political will to implement measures as sweeping as a RICO-style statute or invoke the notwithstanding clause remains uncertain. Both actions would require confronting powerful interests and explaining why existing laws have failed to secure convictions against top offenders. But West argues that mounting American impatience has changed the equation. “This is no longer just a Canadian domestic issue,” he said. “Secretary Blinken made it clear that the Biden administration sees fentanyl as an existential threat. They’re building a global coalition and need Canada fully on board. If we don’t show real progress, the U.S. will protect itself by any means—tariffs or otherwise.”

“People have been calling for something like RICO in Canada for years,” West added. “Silver International was the textbook illustration of why we need it. We had it all—massive money laundering, triads with direct links to Mexican cartels tied to fentanyl labs—and it collapsed because our system couldn’t handle a case of that complexity. That can’t keep happening, or else we’ll remain the hub of a deadly trade.”

West also revealed he would have accepted the fentanyl czar position himself if asked. “I love being mayor, but this is one of the biggest challenges facing our country,” he said. “I’d pour my heart into it. It demands relentless follow-through: legislation, expanded police powers, educating the public, and yes, taking on the courts if necessary.”

Whether Brosseau wields enough clout remains to be seen. West hopes the appointment signals a turning point from what he calls “a fragmented, complacent approach” to one that confronts the crisis on all fronts. “I’ve seen too many half-measures,” he said. “But maybe this time it’ll be different. The Americans have made their position crystal clear, and we need to demonstrate that we can protect ourselves. Otherwise, we fail both our citizens and our closest ally.”

West still recalls Blinken’s direct plea: “He basically said, ‘We need a partner we can trust, one that can disrupt these networks and secure convictions,’” West noted. “If Canada doesn’t step up, I believe the Americans will respond in ways that damage our relationship—and meanwhile, we’ll continue losing people to a drug that’s tearing families apart. We just can’t let that happen.”

The Bureau is a reader-supported publication.

To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

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

Automotive

Politicians should be honest about environmental pros and cons of electric vehicles

Published on

From the Fraser Institute

By Annika Segelhorst and Elmira Aliakbari

According to Steven Guilbeault, former environment minister under Justin Trudeau and former member of Prime Minister Carney’s cabinet, “Switching to an electric vehicle is one of the most impactful things Canadians can do to help fight climate change.”

And the Carney government has only paused Trudeau’s electric vehicle (EV) sales mandate to conduct a “review” of the policy, despite industry pressure to scrap the policy altogether.

So clearly, according to policymakers in Ottawa, EVs are essentially “zero emission” and thus good for environment.

But is that true?

Clearly, EVs have some environmental advantages over traditional gasoline-powered vehicles. Unlike cars with engines that directly burn fossil fuels, EVs do not produce tailpipe emissions of pollutants such as nitrogen dioxide and carbon monoxide, and do not release greenhouse gases (GHGs) such as carbon dioxide. These benefits are real. But when you consider the entire lifecycle of an EV, the picture becomes much more complicated.

Unlike traditional gasoline-powered vehicles, battery-powered EVs and plug-in hybrids generate most of their GHG emissions before the vehicles roll off the assembly line. Compared with conventional gas-powered cars, EVs typically require more fossil fuel energy to manufacture, largely because to produce EVs batteries, producers require a variety of mined materials including cobalt, graphite, lithium, manganese and nickel, which all take lots of energy to extract and process. Once these raw materials are mined, processed and transported across often vast distances to manufacturing sites, they must be assembled into battery packs. Consequently, the manufacturing process of an EV—from the initial mining of materials to final assembly—produces twice the quantity of GHGs (on average) as the manufacturing process for a comparable gas-powered car.

Once an EV is on the road, its carbon footprint depends on how the electricity used to charge its battery is generated. According to a report from the Canada Energy Regulator (the federal agency responsible for overseeing oil, gas and electric utilities), in British Columbia, Manitoba, Quebec and Ontario, electricity is largely produced from low- or even zero-carbon sources such as hydro, so EVs in these provinces have a low level of “indirect” emissions.

However, in other provinces—particularly Alberta, Saskatchewan and Nova Scotia—electricity generation is more heavily reliant on fossil fuels such as coal and natural gas, so EVs produce much higher indirect emissions. And according to research from the University of Toronto, in coal-dependent U.S. states such as West Virginia, an EV can emit about 6 per cent more GHG emissions over its entire lifetime—from initial mining, manufacturing and charging to eventual disposal—than a gas-powered vehicle of the same size. This means that in regions with especially coal-dependent energy grids, EVs could impose more climate costs than benefits. Put simply, for an EV to help meaningfully reduce emissions while on the road, its electricity must come from low-carbon electricity sources—something that does not happen in certain areas of Canada and the United States.

Finally, even after an EV is off the road, it continues to produce emissions, mainly because of the battery. EV batteries contain components that are energy-intensive to extract but also notoriously challenging to recycle. While EV battery recycling technologies are still emerging, approximately 5 per cent of lithium-ion batteries, which are commonly used in EVs, are actually recycled worldwide. This means that most new EVs feature batteries with no recycled components—further weakening the environmental benefit of EVs.

So what’s the final analysis? The technology continues to evolve and therefore the calculations will continue to change. But right now, while electric vehicles clearly help reduce tailpipe emissions, they’re not necessarily “zero emission” vehicles. And after you consider the full lifecycle—manufacturing, charging, scrapping—a more accurate picture of their environmental impact comes into view.

 

Annika Segelhorst

Junior Economist

Elmira Aliakbari

Director, Natural Resource Studies, Fraser Institute

 

Continue Reading

Business

Fuelled by federalism—America’s economically freest states come out on top

Published on

From the Fraser Institute

By Matthew D. Mitchell

Do economic rivalries between Texas and California or New York and Florida feel like yet another sign that America has become hopelessly divided? There’s a bright side to their disagreements, and a new ranking of economic freedom across the states helps explain why.

As a popular bumper sticker among economists proclaims: “I heart federalism (for the natural experiments).” In a federal system, states have wide latitude to set priorities and to choose their own strategies to achieve them. It’s messy, but informative.

New York and California, along with other states like New Mexico, have long pursued a government-centric approach to economic policy. They tax a lot. They spend a lot. Their governments employ a large fraction of the workforce and set a high minimum wage.

They aren’t socialist by any means; most property is still in private hands. Consumers, workers and businesses still make most of their own decisions. But these states control more resources than other states do through taxes and regulation, so their governments play a larger role in economic life.

At the other end of the spectrum, New Hampshire, Tennessee, Florida and South Dakota allow citizens to make more of their own economic choices, keep more of their own money, and set more of their own terms of trade and work.

They aren’t free-market utopias; they impose plenty of regulatory burdens. But they are economically freer than other states.

These two groups have, in other words, been experimenting with different approaches to economic policy. Does one approach lead to higher incomes or faster growth? Greater economic equality or more upward mobility? What about other aspects of a good society like tolerance, generosity, or life satisfaction?

For two decades now, we’ve had a handy tool to assess these questions: The Fraser Institute’s annual “Economic Freedom of North America” index uses 10 variables in three broad areas—government spending, taxation, and labor regulation—to assess the degree of economic freedom in each of the 50 states and the territory of Puerto Rico, as well as in Canadian provinces and Mexican states.

It’s an objective measurement that allows economists to take stock of federalism’s natural experiments. Independent scholars have done just that, having now conducted over 250 studies using the index. With careful statistical analyses that control for the important differences among states—possibly confounding factors such as geography, climate, and historical development—the vast majority of these studies associate greater economic freedom with greater prosperity.

In fact, freedom’s payoffs are astounding.

States with high and increasing levels of economic freedom tend to see higher incomesmore entrepreneurial activity and more net in-migration. Their people tend to experience greater income mobility, and more income growth at both the top and bottom of the income distribution. They have less poverty, less homelessness and lower levels of food insecurity. People there even seem to be more philanthropic, more tolerant and more satisfied with their lives.

New Hampshire, Tennessee, and South Dakota topped the latest edition of the report while Puerto Rico, New Mexico, and New York rounded out the bottom. New Mexico displaced New York as the least economically free state in the union for the first time in 20 years, but it had always been near the bottom.

The bigger stories are the major movers. The last 10 years’ worth of available data show South Carolina, Ohio, Wisconsin, Idaho, Iowa and Utah moving up at least 10 places. Arizona, Virginia, Nebraska, and Maryland have all slid down 10 spots.

Over that same decade, those states that were among the freest 25 per cent on average saw their populations grow nearly 18 times faster than those in the bottom 25 per cent. Statewide personal income grew nine times as fast.

Economic freedom isn’t a panacea. Nor is it the only thing that matters. Geography, culture, and even luck can influence a state’s prosperity. But while policymakers can’t move mountains or rewrite cultures, they can look at the data, heed the lessons of our federalist experiment, and permit their citizens more economic freedom.

Continue Reading

Trending

X