From LifeSiteNews

By Anthony Murdoch

A significant number’ of Canadians are suspicious of government overreach and would resist any measures by the government or central bank to create digital forms of official money.

A Bank of Canada study has found that Canadians are very wary of a government-backed digital currency, concluding that “significant number” of citizens would resist the implementation of such a system.

The study, conducted by the Bank of Canada, found that a “significant number” of Canadians are suspicious of government overreach, and would resist any measures by the government or central bank to create digital forms of official money.  

According to results from the BOC’s report titled The Consumer Value Proposition For A Hypothetical Digital Canadian Dollar, “cash remains an important method of payment” for Canadians and “[c]ertain groups may strongly resist a digital dollar if they conflate its launch with the end of cash issuance.” 

The BOC noted that not only would a “significant number” of Canadians “reject” digital money, but that for some “mindset segments, their lack of interest in a hypothetical digital Canadian dollar was heavily influenced by perceptions of government overreach.” 

As reported by LifeSiteNews in September, the BOC has already said that plans to create a digital “dollar,” also known as a central bank digital currency (CBDC), have been shelved. 

The shelving came after the BOC had already forged ahead and filed a trademark for a digital currency, as LifeSiteNews previously reported.  

Officials from Canada’s central bank said that a digital currency, or electronic “loonie,” will no longer be considered after years of investigating bringing one to market.  

However, that does not mean the BOC is still not researching or exploring other options when it comes to digital money. As noted by researchers, despite there being some “interest” in a “hypothetical digital Canadian dollar,” that “interest does not necessarily translate to adoption.” 

“Most participants felt well served by current means of payment,” noted the study, adding, “Individuals who support the issuance of a hypothetical digital Canadian dollar did not imagine themselves using it regularly.” 

Those most enthusiastic about a government-backed version of Bitcoin were teenagers and young adults. Those older remained especially skeptical.

“They were skeptical of the need for this new form of money and of its reliability,” read the report, which also noted, “They did not trust that concepts were secure or that their personal information would be kept private.” 

Given the results from the report, the bank concluded that “[b]road early adoption” of a digital dollar “is unlikely given that available payment methods meet the needs of most users.” 

“Financially vulnerable segments often have the most to gain from this payment method but are most resistant to adoption. Important considerations for appeal and adoption potential include universal merchant acceptance, low costs, easy access, simplified online payments, shared payment features, budgeting tools and customizable security and privacy settings,” it noted.  

Digital currencies have been touted as the future by some government officials, but, as LifeSiteNews has reported before, many experts warn that such technology would restrict freedom and could be used as a “control tool” against citizens, similar to China’s pervasive social credit system.  

Most Canadians do not want a digital dollar, as previously reported by LifeSiteNews. A public survey launched by the BOC to gauge Canadians’ taste for a digital dollar revealed that an overwhelming majority of citizens want to “leave cash alone” and not proceed with a digital iteration of the national currency.  

The BOC last August admitted that the creation of a CBDC is not even necessary, as many people rely on cash to pay for things. The bank concluded that the introduction of a digital currency would only be feasible if consumers demanded its release.  

In August, LifeSiteNews also reported that the Conservative Party is looking to gather support for a bill that would outright ban the federal government from ever creating a digital currency and make it so that cash is kept as the preferred means of settling debts.    

Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre promised that if he is elected prime minister, he would stop any  implementation of a “digital currency” or a compulsory “digital ID” system.  

Prominent opponents of CBDCs have been strongly advocating that citizens use cash whenever possible and boycott businesses that do not accept cash payments as a means of slowing down the imposition of CBDCs.  

From Project Confederation

By Josh Andrus

Five years ago, I announced the launch of Project Confederation on Danielle Smith’s CHQR 770 radio show.

That interview changed my life forever.

The project launch was driven by a belief that federal policies – including, but not limited to, the carbon tax – were unfairly targeting Alberta and our economy.

Five years later, we find ourselves opening the next chapter of a long-running saga.

Slowly but surely, Canadians – not just Albertans – have worked out that carbon tax doesn’t make sense, doesn’t work, and isn’t constitutional.

And as the public backlash to the carbon tax grew, the federal government compromised the policy even further, making it even more unpopular and even less constitutional.

On Tuesday, Danielle Smith, now Alberta Premier, announced that her government is going to court to challenge the constitutionality of Ottawa’s selective carbon tax exemption on home heating oils.

The carbon tax, of course, is the levy charged for fuel and combustible waste as outlined in the Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act and its regulations.

The carbon tax is a tax on everything.

Every product you consume relies on energy-intensive steps in the production cycle – whether it’s the combines harvesting crops, commercial trucks transporting goods, or the electricity powering lights and refrigeration at the grocery store, just to name a few.

This drives costs up throughout the production process in virtually every industry.

The carbon tax also serves as the flagship policy of the Liberal-NDP coalition government, which took office following the 2019 election – just two days before my first appearance on Danielle Smith’s show.

In the eyes of the federal government, the carbon tax represents a beacon to the world, signalling Canada’s new global position as a green, socialist utopia.

In the eyes of the voters, it represents a symbol of the Trudeau government’s unpopularity, a major contributor to ongoing affordability problems and a sluggish economy.

In the eyes of the provinces, it is a clear violation of provincial jurisdiction.

The Act requires provinces to establish these punitive carbon taxes, and if they don’t, the Act allows for Ottawa to impose carbon pricing.

When it was introduced, it faced immediate legal challenges from Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Ontario.

They were joined in opposition to the law by Quebec, Manitoba and New Brunswick – meaning that six provinces, making up over 80% of the Canadian population, believed the carbon tax was a violation of provincial jurisdiction.

The provinces contended that natural resources fall under provincial authority, and that the carbon tax essentially imposes a levy on resource development.

Ottawa, however, argued that climate change constitutes a national crisis and thus falls under federal responsibility.

In 2021, the Supreme Court ruled in favour of the federal government – on the premise that it could be applied as a “minimum national standard.”

“This is in fact the very premise of a federal scheme that imposes minimum national standards: Canada and the provinces are both free to legislate in relation to the same fact situation but the federal law is paramount.”

Just two years later, the Liberal-NDP coalition completely abandoned the minimum national standard by granting a carbon tax carve-out to home heating oils.

Here’s the catch.

In Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba, less than one percent of households use home heating oils to keep their homes warm during cold weather.

That number rises to seven percent in New Brunswick, eighteen percent in Newfoundland and Labrador, thirty-two percent in Nova Scotia and forty percent in Prince Edward Island.

The carbon tax had become such an unpopular policy in Atlantic Canada that the Liberals, trying to stop their collapsing poll numbers, decided to try and regain some votes in the region.

If that weren’t enough, the Liberal government blatantly admitted that the decision was political.

On CTV’s Question Period, Rural Economic Development Minister Gudie Hutchings said  “I can tell you, the (Liberal) Atlantic caucus was vocal with what they’ve heard from their constituents, and perhaps they need to elect more Liberals in the Prairies so that we can have that conversation, as well.”

So much for the “minimum national standard.”

Immediately, the constitutionality of the carbon tax was called into question.

Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe said the move was “not about fairness or about families, it’s only about votes.”

Moe moved swiftly, announcing that SaskEnergy – the Crown corporation that supplies natural gas to residents – would no longer collect or remit the carbon tax on home heating bills in Saskatchewan.

In a misguided effort to curry political favour in the Atlantic provinces, the Liberals have completely compromised the legal standing of the carbon tax and opened the door for provinces to explore new legal avenues against their signature policy.

Now, the Alberta government is seizing that opportunity by filing an application for judicial review of the exemption with the Federal Court, requesting a declaration that the exemption is “both unconstitutional and unlawful.”

“Albertans simply cannot stand by for another winter while the federal government picks and chooses who their carbon tax applies to,” Smith said in a statement. “Since they won’t play fair, we’re going to take the federal government back to court.”

Minister of Justice Mickey Amery added that:

“This exemption is not only unfair to the vast majority of Canadians, but it is also unlawful as the federal government does not have the authority to make special exemptions for certain parts of the country under the Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act.”

“The federal government isn’t even following its own laws now. Someone needs to hold them accountable, and Alberta is stepping up to do just that.”

The carbon tax has always been unfair to western Canadians, where households use more energy per capita, thanks to our geography and climate.

In a press conference, Danielle Smith went further, saying:

“We’re calling on (the federal government) to repeal the carbon tax. We’ve been calling for that for years. The retail carbon tax is just punitive to taxpayers. It’s punitive to consumers.”

We agree.

It adds an additional expense at every level of the economy, affecting everything from home heating to transportation, and it creates an environment of higher prices on the goods and services we all rely on.

It’s time to take the action that should have been taken long ago.

It’s time to repeal the carbon tax.

Please sign this petition and join our effort to hold the federal government accountable:

Once you’ve signed, please share with your friends, family, and every Canadian.

Regards,

Josh Andrus
Executive Director
Project Confederation