From LifeSiteNews

By Anthony Murdoch

The explosive growth of Canadians shifting to alternative non-legacy media to obtain their news is not due to Russian “bots,” as some in the government and left-wing media claim, but reflects people’s distrust of entrenched media outlets, at least one government agency admitted.

A memo titled Foreign Interference And Right Wing Politics: The Canadian Context from Canada’s Department of Foreign Affairs said that the growth of so-called “alternative and far right ‘news sources’” is not due to Russian bots but is likely due to Canadians’ suspicion of “traditional outlets.”

Analysts put to rest claims made by some far-left media outlets that bots are somehow to blame for the rise of independent news media sites in Canada popular today, which include the Post Millennial, Rebel News, True North, LifeSiteNews, as well as a host of others.

According to foreign interference monitors at the Rapid Response Mechanism office, or RRM Canada, run by the department, “they tried and failed to corroborate allegations that conservative media in Canada were stoked by offshore agents,” according to Blacklock’s Reporter.

“RRM Canada observed no indication of false amplification and assesses the increased popularity of these sources is very likely both organic and domestic in nature,” read the memo.

The memo stated that the while the nature of the content is “domestic, the move away from traditional news sources may indicate a decrease in trust among traditional outlets among right leaning Canadians.”

“No such increased popularity has been observed among alternative or far left media outlets,” noted the memo.

The memo noted that sites such as the Rebel News Network had a larger social media footprint than established outlets such as the National Post or the Globe & Mail.

When looking to find claims that foreign agents were behind the rise of alternative media, the RRM analysts found no evidence that this is the case.

“Articles in The National Observer and Press Progress have made claims that conservative political discussions on social media are driven by inauthentic automated accounts, i.e. bots,” read the memo.

“While these stories are not necessarily inaccurate, Rapid Response Mechanism Canada notes foreign interference and covert influence campaigns exploit narratives from across the political spectrum.”

The memo of note was filed with counsel for Canada’s ongoing Commission on Foreign Interference.

Overall, the memo contradicted claims made by the cabinet of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau that Russian agents were the ones increasing messaging critical of the government.

In 2020, Canada’s then-Public Safety Minister and now-Finance Minister Dominic LeBlanc quipped to reporters that “Trolls and bots are dispatched to stoke anxiety and in some cases inflame debate around sensitive issues,” saying, “Their main goal is chaos.”

“We have seen how hostile state and non-state actors use information technologies to manufacture reality,” he claimed, adding, “Fake news not only masquerades as the truth, it masquerades as legitimate political debate.”

Canadian figures who are critical of the Trudeau government have been accused of being bankrolled by Russia. As reported by LifeSiteNews, Dr. Jordan Peterson recently demanded an apology from Trudeau after the Canadian prime minister accused him of being funded by Russian state media.

As reported by LifeSiteNews, Trudeau claimed U.S. media personality Tucker Carlson and Peterson are being funded by the state media outlet Russia Today. He also blamed Russia for “amplifying the chaos” surrounding the 2022 Freedom Convoy protests.

Trudeau made the claim last Wednesday under oath during testimony at the Foreign Interference Commission after he was asked about Russia’s alleged role in the Freedom Convoy.

The Foreign Interference Commission was convened to “examine and assess the interference by China, Russia, and other foreign states or non-state actors, including any potential impacts, to confirm the integrity of, and any impacts on, the 43rd and 44th general elections (2019 and 2021 elections) at the national and electoral district levels.”

By Tegan Hill

Each Albertan would save up to $2,850 in 2027—the first year of the hypothetical Alberta plan—while retaining the same benefits as the CPP. Meanwhile, the basic CPP contribution rate for the rest of Canada would increase to 10.36 per cent.

Despite a new report from Canada’s chief actuary about Alberta’s potential plan to leave the Canada Pension Plan (CPP) and start its own separate provincial pension plan, Albertans still don’t have an official estimate from Ottawa about Alberta’s share of CPP assets.

The actuary analyzed how the division of assets might be calculated, but did not provide specific numbers.

Yet according to a report commissioned by the Smith government and released last year, Alberta’s share of CPP assets totalled an estimated $334 billion—more than half the value of total CPP assets. Based on that number, if Alberta left the CPP, Albertans would pay a contribution rate of 5.91 per cent for a new CPP-like provincial program (a significant reduction from the current 9.9 per cent CPP rate deducted from their paycheques). As a result, each Albertan would save up to $2,850 in 2027—the first year of the hypothetical Alberta plan—while retaining the same benefits as the CPP. Meanwhile, the basic CPP contribution rate for the rest of Canada would increase to 10.36 per cent.

Why would Albertans pay less under a provincial plan?

Because Alberta has a comparatively younger population (i.e. more workers vs. retirees), higher average incomes and higher levels of employment (i.e. higher level of premiums paid into the fund). As such, Albertans collectively pay significantly more into the CPP than retirees in Alberta receive in benefits. Simply put, under a provincial plan, Albertans would pay less and receive the same benefits.

Some critics, however, dispute the estimated share of Alberta’s CPP assets (again, $334 billion—more than half the value of total CPP assets) in the Smith government’s report, and claim the estimate understates the report’s contribution rate for a new Alberta pension plan and overestimates the new CPP rate without Alberta.

Which takes us back to the new report from Canada’s chief actuary, which was supposed to provide its own estimate of Alberta’s share of the assets. Unfortunately, it did not.

But there are other rate estimates out there, based on various assumptions. According to a 2019 analysis published by the Fraser Institute, the contribution rate for a new separate CPP-like program in Alberta could be as low as 5.85 per cent, while AIMCo’s 2019 estimate was 7.21 per cent (and possibly as low as 6.85 per cent). And University of Calgary economist Trevor Tombe has pegged Alberta’s hypothetical rate at 8.2 per cent.

While the actuary in Ottawa failed to provide any numbers, one thing’s for certain—according to the available estimates, Albertans would pay a lower contribution rate in a separate provincial pension plan while CPP contributions for the rest of Canada (excluding Quebec) would likely increase.

Tegan Hill

Director, Alberta Policy, Fraser Institute