Connect with us

National

Disgruntled Liberal MPs reportedly give Trudeau until October 28 to step down

Published

6 minute read

From LifeSiteNews

By Clare Marie Merkowsky

Liberal MPs reportedly gave Trudeau a letter this week demanding he step down as party leader or face undisclosed consequences from within his own caucus.

Discontented Liberals have reportedly given Prime Minister Justin Trudeau until October 28 to step down as Liberal Party leader before they take action to force the issue.   

During a widely anticipated October 23 Liberal caucus meeting, Liberal MPs gave Trudeau a letter demanding his resignation by next week, according to information shared by Liberal MPs with the National Post  

“The letter—which two MPs confirmed did not include the signatures of those who signed— recognized Trudeau’s accomplishments in office, but said MPs felt compelled to share feedback from constituents and asked that he respond positively to the call for him to step down,” the report stated.  

During the three-and-a-half-hour caucus meeting, around 60 MPs addressed their fellow Liberals, about half of whom are said to have called for Trudeau to step down.   

According to the National Post, the Liberal letter gives Trudeau until October 28 to resign but does not specific what the consequences will be if the prime minister declines to do so.

The October deadline comes after 20 Liberals had signed a letter to call on Trudeau to be removed as leader of the Liberal Party following two disastrous by-election results in “safe” ridings in Toronto and Montreal.   

While none of the Liberals would publicly disclose what was said at the meeting, New Brunswick MP Wayne Long, who recently called for Trudeau’s resignation, hinted that the discussion included the possibility of Trudeau stepping down.   

“In my nine years, I have not seen a more open, honest, frank and direct meeting between members of Parliament and the prime minister. I’ve not seen anything like that,” he said.  

“My hope is that the prime minister has cause for reflection on what MPs said,” Long continued. “What he does with that message and how he processes that message and how he moves forward with that message is really up to him.”  

In addition to the October deadline, others have begun to publicly decry Trudeau’s leadership and call for his resignation. Earlier this week, Liberal MP Sean Casey of Charlottetown, Prince Edward Island, told CBC News that Trudeau’s time as leader has ended, making him the second MP in a week to make such a declaration.  

“My job has always been to project the voice of the people I represent in Ottawa, to be Charlottetown’s representative in Ottawa, and not the reverse,” he said. “And the message that I’ve been getting loud and clear and more and more strongly as time goes by is that it’s time for him to go. And I agree.”   

Casey’s statement echoes Montreal Liberal MP Anthony Housefather who told CTV News that it is time for the Liberal Party to discuss who will lead them into the 2025 election.    

“I support whoever is leader in my party at all times,” he said. “But that doesn’t mean there shouldn’t be a robust caucus discussion about who the best person to lead us in the next election is, and that discussion should happen in caucus. It shouldn’t happen in the media.”   

Calls for Trudeau’s resignation come on top of the numerous Liberal MPs, including former cabinet ministers, who have vacated their seats or who have announced that they will not be running for re-election.   

In addition to calls from the political class for Trudeau’s resignation, or at the very least their distancing themselves from his leadership, Canadian citizens have also had enough of the prime minister’s rule over the country.

Polls continue to uncover the upset of Canadians toward the current government, whether it be the 70 percent who believe the country is “broke,” or the majority of citizens who report being worse off financially since Trudeau took office.        

Additional polls show that the scandal-plagued government has sent the Liberals into a nosedive with no end in sight, with a September poll showing that the Conservatives under Pierre Poilievre would win a landslide majority government were an election held today.  

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

Energy

Global fossil fuel use rising despite UN proclamations

Published on

From the Fraser Institute

By Julio Mejía and Elmira Aliakbari

Major energy transitions are slow and take centuries, not decades… the first global energy transition—from traditional biomass fuels (including wood and charcoal) to fossil fuels—started more than two centuries ago and remains incomplete. Nearly three billion people in the developing world still depend on charcoal, straw and dried dung for cooking and heating, accounting for about 7 per cent of the world’s energy supply (as of 2020).

At the Conference of the Parties (COP29) in Azerbaijan, António Guterres, the United Nations Secretary-General, last week called for a global net-zero carbon footprint by 2050, which requires a “fossil fuel phase-out” and “deep decarbonization across the entire value chain.”

Yet despite the trillions of dollars already spent globally pursuing this target—and the additional trillions projected as necessary to “end the era of fossil fuels”—the world’s dependence on fossil fuels has remained largely unchanged.

So, how realistic is a “net-zero” emissions world—which means either eliminating fossil fuel generation or offsetting carbon emissions with activities such as planting trees—by 2050?

The journey began in 1995 when the UN hosted the first COP conference in Berlin, launching a global effort to drive energy transition and decarbonization. That year, global investment in renewable energy reached US$7 billion, according to some estimates. Since then, an extraordinary amount of money and resources have been allocated to the transition away from fossil fuels.

According to the International Energy Agency, between 2015 and 2023 alone, governments and industry worldwide spent US$12.3 trillion (inflation-adjusted) on clean energy. For context, that’s over six times the value of the entire Canadian economy in 2023.

Despite this spending, between 1995 and 2023, global fossil fuel consumption increased by 62 per cent, with oil consumption rising by 38 per cent, coal by 66 per cent and natural gas by 90 per cent.

And during that same 28-year period, despite the trillions spent on energy alternatives, the share of global energy provided by fossil fuels declined by only four percentage points, from 85.6 per cent to 81.5 per cent.

This should come as no surprise. Major energy transitions are slow and take centuries, not decades. According to a recent study by renowned scholar Vaclav Smil, the first global energy transition—from traditional biomass fuels (including wood and charcoal) to fossil fuels—started more than two centuries ago and remains incomplete. Nearly three billion people in the developing world still depend on charcoal, straw and dried dung for cooking and heating, accounting for about 7 per cent of the world’s energy supply (as of 2020).

Moreover, coal only surpassed wood as the main energy source worldwide around 1900. It took more than 150 years from oil’s first commercial extraction for oil to reach 25 per cent of all fossil fuels consumed worldwide. Natural gas didn’t reach this threshold until the end of the 20th century, after 130 years of industry development.

Now, consider the current push by governments to force an energy transition via regulation and spending. In Canada, the Trudeau government has set a target to fully decarbonize electricity generation by 2035 so all electricity is derived from renewable power sources such as wind and solar. But merely replacing Canada’s existing fossil fuel-based electricity with clean energy sources within the next decade would require building the equivalent of 23 major hydro projects (like British Columbia’s Site C) or 2.3 large-scale nuclear power plants (like Ontario’s Bruce Power). The planning and construction of significant electricity generation infrastructure in Canada is a complex and time-consuming process, often plagued by delays, regulatory hurdles and substantial cost overruns.

The Site C project took around 43 years from initial feasibility studies in 1971 to securing environmental certification in 2014. Construction began on the Peace River in northern B.C. in 2015, with completion expected in 2025 at a cost of at least $16 billion. Similarly, Ontario’s Bruce Power plant took nearly two decades to complete, with billions in cost overruns. Given these immense practical, financial and regulatory challenges, achieving the government’s 2035 target is highly improbable.

As politicians gather at high-profile conferences and set ambitious targets for a swift energy transition, global reliance on fossil fuels has continued to increase. As things stand, achieving net-zero by 2050 appears neither realistic nor feasible.

Continue Reading

Business

Taxpayer watchdog calls Trudeau ‘out of touch’ for prioritizing ‘climate change’ while families struggle

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Anthony Murdoch

The prime minister told a G20 panel this week that fighting so-called ‘climate change’ should be more important to families than putting food on the table or paying rent.

Canada’s leading taxpayer watchdog blasted Prime Minister Justin Trudeau for being completely “out of touch” with everyday Canadians after the PM earlier this week suggested his climate “change” policies, including a punitive carbon tax, are more important for families than trying to stay financially afloat.

In speaking to LifeSiteNews, Canadian Taxpayers Federation (CTF) federal director Franco Terrazzano said Trudeau’s recent comments show his government “continues to prove it’s out of touch with its carbon tax.”

“Canadians don’t support the carbon tax because we know it makes life more expensive and it doesn’t help the environment,” Terrazzano told LifeSiteNews.

Terrazzano’s comments come after Trudeau told a G20 panel earlier this week that fighting so-called “climate change” should be more important to families than putting food on the table or paying rent.

Speaking to the panel, Trudeau commented that it is “really, really easy” to “put climate change as a slightly lower priority” when one has “to be able to pay the rent this month” or “buy groceries” for their “kids,” but insisted that “we can’t do that around climate change.”

Terrazzano said that the Trudeau government’s carbon tax in reality “impacts nearly all aspects of life in Canada by making it more expensive to fuel up our cars, heat our homes and buy food.”

“The carbon tax also puts a huge hole in our economy that we can’t afford,” he said to LifeSiteNews, adding that if Trudeau really wanted to help Canadians and “prove it understands the struggles facing Canadians,” then it should “scrap the carbon tax to make life more affordable.”

On Thursday, Trudeau, who is facing abysmal polling numbers, announced he would introduce a temporary pause on the federal Goods and Services Tax (GST) for some goods.

Conservative Party of Canada leader Pierre Poilievre this afternoon said about Trudeau’s temporary tax holiday that if he is serious about helping Canadians, he would cut the carbon tax completely.

“What a ridiculous gimmick. Bribing Canadians temporarily with borrowed money,” Bernier wrote.

“When the real solution is to stop growing the bureaucracy, cut wasteful spending, stop sending billions to Ukraine, eliminate subsidies to businesses and activist groups, stop creating new unsustainable and unconstitutional social programs, eliminate the deficit, and THEN, cut taxes for real. None of which he will do of course.”

As reported by LifeSiteNews, a survey found that nearly half of Canadians are just $200 away from financial ruin as the costs of housing, food and other necessities has gone up massively since Trudeau took power in 2015.

In addition to the increasing domestic carbon tax, LifeSiteNews reported last week that Minister of Environment Steven Guilbeault wants to create a new “global’ carbon tax applied to all goods shipped internationally that could further drive-up prices for families already struggling with inflated costs.

Not only is the carbon tax costing Canadian families hundreds of dollars annually, but Liberals also have admitted that the tax has only reduced greenhouse gas emissions by 1 percent.

Continue Reading

Trending

X