From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy

By David Leis

Canada is at a breaking point. Weak border security, unchecked organized crime, and rampant foreign interference have left the country dangerously exposed to threats that jeopardize its safety, economy, and sovereignty. Under Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s leadership, these challenges have escalated to unprecedented levels, and no meaningful action has been taken to address them.

In British Columbia, a mother of two recently shared how the fentanyl crisis has ravaged her community. She spoke of losing friends and neighbours to overdoses, while her own family lives in fear of growing gang activity. Her story illustrates the human cost of systemic inaction and highlights the devastating consequences of a government unable to protect its people. It is a tragic reality mirrored in communities across the country, from urban centres to small towns, where drugs and crime are taking a growing toll.

Canada’s border management, a critical first line of defence, is failing to stem the tide of illicit goods and activities. The Canada Border Services Agency inspects less than two per cent of shipping containers entering the country, leaving ports like Vancouver vulnerable to transnational crime. According to the Cullen Commission, billions of dollars are laundered annually in British Columbia, often through casinos and real estate linked to organized crime. Transparency International’s 2022 report ranked Canada among the worst in the G7 for anti-money laundering enforcement, underlining systemic failures.

Weak border controls are exacerbating the fentanyl crisis. Precursor chemicals flow into Canada largely unchecked, often disguised as legitimate imports. Provincial officials in British Columbia have acknowledged the need for tighter regulations on pill presses, but federal laws remain inconsistent. The consequences are staggering: over 34,000 Canadians have died of opioid overdoses since 2016, according to Health Canada. These are not just numbers; they represent families shattered and communities in mourning. Yet, the federal government continues to respond with piecemeal measures instead of a comprehensive national strategy.

Concerns over foreign interference add another dimension to Canada’s vulnerability. Weak borders and lax enforcement also provide fertile ground for foreign actors to exploit. The recent inquiry into election interference revealed disturbing levels of meddling, with CSIS identifying instances of Chinese state funding for federal candidates. Hybrid warfare tactics – including cyberattacks, economic manipulation, and political interference – are well-documented. These activities undermine Canada’s sovereignty and erode trust in its democratic institutions.

International partners, particularly the United States, are taking notice. Canada’s largest trading partner has grown increasingly frustrated with these vulnerabilities. Under a potential Trump administration, Canada could face severe economic repercussions, including tariffs, if it does not address its security deficiencies. A report from the Global Initiative Against Transnational Organized Crime labelled Canada a “safe zone” for transnational crime, citing weak enforcement and limited co-ordination among intelligence agencies. Such critiques directly challenge Canada’s reputation and its role as a trusted ally.

Canada’s aging infrastructure compounds these security failures. A 2023 report from Statistics Canada revealed that nearly 40 per cent of the country’s infrastructure is nearing the end of its useful life. Ports, highways, and public utilities – critical for trade and national security – are underfunded and rapidly deteriorating. This hampers economic competitiveness and leaves Canada ill prepared to secure its supply chains. These failings highlight a broader issue: the government’s reluctance to prioritize foundational investments that ensure long-term stability.

Meanwhile, Canada’s regulatory framework struggles to keep pace with modern threats. The country lacks effective oversight to combat money laundering, cyberattacks, and supply chain exploitation. Organized crime and illicit trade drain billions from the economy every year. Weak border controls have made Canada a transit point for everything from drugs to counterfeit goods. Provincial attempts at regulation, like in British Columbia, have helped somewhat, but federal legislation has yet to catch up.

Canada’s challenges didn’t emerge overnight. They are the result of decades of underinvestment in security, weak enforcement, and a lack of political will. While the Trudeau government has failed to address these issues, previous administrations are responsible for creating the conditions that allowed them to fester.

However, the current government bears responsibility for the lack of urgency in the face of escalating crises. Performative policies, like token GST rebates, do little to address systemic issues. The Trudeau government has failed to modernize Canada’s security apparatus, prioritizing political optics over substantive reform.

Canada cannot afford to remain passive in the face of these mounting threats. The government must decisively modernize border security, combat organized crime, and confront foreign interference with meaningful legislation and enforcement. Countries like Australia have successfully implemented advanced port screening and stricter anti-money laundering laws to address similar issues. Canada must follow suit to regain control of its borders and restore trust in its institutions.

The stakes couldn’t be higher. Every uninspected container ship, every fentanyl overdose, and every election left vulnerable to interference represents a failure of leadership. The mother in B.C., fearing for her children’s future, is not alone – she represents countless Canadians who feel abandoned by a government unwilling to act. Her voice, and others like hers, demand attention.

This is no longer about politics or optics; it’s about safeguarding the nation’s future. The time for complacency has passed. Canada’s security, prosperity, and sovereignty depend on immediate, decisive leadership.

Anything less is unacceptable.

David Leis is President and CEO of the Frontier Centre for Public Policy and host of the Leaders on the Frontier podcast.

From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy

By Ian Madsen

What if the scariest climate predictions are more fiction than fact?

The International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) aims to highlight the urgent threats climate change poses. It projects severe consequences, including longer and more intense urban heat waves, as the World Resources Institute noted, along with increased storms, floods, and crop failures. IPCC claims that our current path leads to a temperature increase of at least three degrees Celsius above pre-industrial (circa 1750-1850) levels if the world does not drastically reduce carbon dioxide or just carbon emissions. However, this assessment and the attendant predictions are dubious.

The first uncertainty is the pre-industrial global temperatures. There were no precise thermometers at random sites or in major towns until late in the 19^th century. Therefore, researchers use ice cores and lake and sea sediments as proxies. The U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Administration admits that pre-1880 data are limited. It provides many examples showing how even modern temperatures can be incomparable from region to region and from past to present and consequently are adjusted to approximate comparability.

What cannot be explained away is the Medieval Warm Period, which lasted from about 800 AD to around 1300 AD, and the subsequent cooling period that ‘bottomed’ about 1700 AD called the Little Ice Age. Human activity did not cause either one, and they were not merely regional phenomena confined to the North Atlantic and Western Europe. In the Middle Ages, Vikings settled in Greenland and were able to grow crops. The weather cooled dramatically, and they abandoned their colonies in the 15^th century. During the Little Ice Age, there were many crop failures and famines in Europe, and the river Thames reliably froze over, with ice thick enough to hold winter fairs on.

Temperatures did not rise significantly until well into the 19^th century. Suppose the recent temperature increase between one and one and one-half degrees Celsius is correct. This is only a third of the way toward a more tolerable  (i.e., more livable, with less disease and fewer cold-related deaths) climate and cannot be termed “global boiling,” as the Secretary-General of the United Nations called it in 2023.

At three or more degrees of warming, IPCC researchers (“Climate Change 2023 Synthesis Report:  Summary for Policymakers Sixth Assessment Report,” “AR6” pp. 15-16) have “high confidence” in more severe hurricanes, typhoons and cyclones; large floods; deadlier heatwaves and droughts; lower glacier-fed river flow; and lower crop yields.

Yet, their predictions are vague and generalized. So far, there are few signs that these calamities are increasing in frequency or intensity – hurricanes, cyclones, and typhoons are not. Indeed, humanity is coping well: The UN’s Food and Agriculture Organization observed that 2024 grain production was the second-highest on record.

Here are a few erroneous predictions the New American found: the United Nations Environmental Program (UNEP)’s 2005 warning of 50 million climate refugees by 2010; the University of East Anglia’s 2000 prediction that the United Kingdom would rarely have snow in winter; and several early-2000s prognostications of the Arctic Ocean being ice-free in summer by 2016 – none has happened. A critique from May of 2020 of the thirty-eight models used to predict futures observed that the predictions of the amalgamated model used by the IPCC consistently and substantially overestimated actual warming.

Longer and hotter heat waves in cities are not the end of the world. They are unpleasant but manageable. Practical methods of urban cooling are spreading globally. Heat-related deaths are still far fewer than those from cold (by a ten-to-one ratio). If it gets hotter occasionally, humanity can and will survive.

Ian Madsen is the Senior Policy Analyst at the Frontier Centre for Public Policy.