Randy Boissonnault and the Liberal Scandal That Won’t Go Away

Todayville

Published

6 days ago

9 minute read

Dan Knight

Standing Committee on Indigenous and Northern Affairs: How Fraud, False Identity Claims, and Liberal Entitlement Expose a System Rigged Against Canadians

Ladies and gentlemen, today, we take a closer look at what happens when the carefully constructed facade of Justin Trudeau’s Liberal Party crumbles. This isn’t just a scandal about one man’s lies—it’s about a government-wide culture of entitlement, deception, and corruption that prioritizes Liberal insiders over the hardworking Canadians they claim to represent.

Why are we here? Because a man named Randy Boissonnault—a former Liberal cabinet minister and trusted Trudeau ally—has been caught at the center of a scandal involving fraudulent business dealings, false claims of Indigenous identity, and federal contracts stolen from real Indigenous businesses. The setting? The Standing Committee on Indigenous and Northern Affairs, where Boissonnault faced over two hours of questioning from MPs determined to get to the truth.

But did we get the truth? Absolutely not. What we got was a masterclass in Liberal arrogance, evasion, and deflection.

At the heart of this controversy is Boissonnault’s involvement in a company called Global Health Imports (GHI), which falsely claimed to be Indigenous-owned in order to win lucrative federal contracts. For years, Boissonnault portrayed himself as a “non-status adopted Cree” based on vague family anecdotes. This label, of course, conveniently blurred the lines, allowing him to gain credibility in Indigenous spaces while avoiding legal scrutiny. Not only did GHI fraudulently secure taxpayer money meant for Indigenous businesses, but Boissonnault’s name and supposed Indigenous heritage were plastered all over Liberal Party campaign materials. For years, the Liberals actively promoted him as Indigenous, exploiting the very communities they claim to champion.

When the media and whistleblowers finally exposed the truth, Boissonnault resigned from his cabinet position. And now, he’s here, at INAN, supposedly to set the record straight. Spoiler alert: he didn’t.

Boissonnault’s opening statement was a lesson in political deflection. He apologized—not for the harm done to Indigenous communities or Canadian taxpayers, but for the “confusion” around his identity. He insisted he never claimed Indigenous status, despite evidence to the contrary, and described his use of the term “non-status adopted Cree” as an effort to honor his adoptive family’s supposed heritage—a claim Indigenous researchers have outright denied.

When pressed on his involvement with GHI, Boissonnault claimed ignorance. He told the committee he left the company in 2021 and had no idea his name was being used to secure fraudulent contracts. Really? We’re supposed to believe that a man who co-owned 50% of the company and whose name was actively used in business dealings was completely unaware of its activities? Either he’s lying, or he’s astonishingly incompetent.

It gets worse. When asked why he hasn’t sued his former business partner, Mr. Anderson, for allegedly using his name without consent, Boissonnault offered the weakest excuse imaginable: he’s “consulting legal counsel.” Months have passed since this scandal broke, and he still hasn’t taken a single step to clear his name. If someone stole your identity to commit fraud, wouldn’t you act immediately?

Thankfully, not everyone in the room was willing to let Boissonnault off the hook. Conservative MPs Michael Barrett and Martin Shields led the charge, relentlessly exposing Boissonnault’s contradictions and demanding accountability. Barrett zeroed in on Boissonnault’s failure to take legal action against GHI, calling it a clear sign of either complicity or cowardice. Shields turned his focus to the systemic failures that allowed this fraud to happen in the first place, pointing out the Liberal government’s negligence in safeguarding programs designed to support Indigenous communities.

Meanwhile, Bloc MP Nathalie Sinclair-Déguin and NDP MP Lori Idlout focused on the harm done to Indigenous communities. They highlighted how fraudulent activities like GHI’s undermine trust, reconciliation, and real opportunities for Indigenous businesses. They also demanded systemic reforms, like stricter oversight and verification processes, to prevent future abuses.

Of course, no Liberal scandal would be complete without the party’s MPs running interference. Enter Ben Carr and Anna Gainey. Carr used his time to praise Boissonnault’s “allyship” and steer the conversation away from fraud and deception. Gainey, who didn’t even bother to show up in person, framed the controversy as a “learning opportunity” for Boissonnault and the government. Neither of them asked a single hard question. They weren’t there to seek answers—they were there to protect their colleague and the Liberal Party brand.

Final Thoughts

Let’s be blunt. What we witnessed at the INAN hearing wasn’t just a scandal about Randy Boissonnault—it was a damning indictment of Justin Trudeau’s Liberal regime and its entire culture of corruption, entitlement, and betrayal of the Canadian people.

Think about what’s at stake here. We’re not talking about a minor oversight or a simple mistake. We’re talking about a Liberal insider who exploited a sacred cause—reconciliation with Indigenous peoples—for personal and political gain. A man who co-founded a company that defrauded taxpayers, deprived Indigenous businesses of opportunities, and damaged trust between the government and the communities it claims to support. And yet, instead of taking responsibility, he shows up to a committee hearing and feeds us a steady diet of deflection and excuses.

But let’s not just focus on Boissonnault. What about the rest of the Liberal Party? A party that promoted him as Indigenous in their campaigns, used his fabricated narrative to boost their image, and now refuses to hold him accountable. What we saw at the hearing was a carefully orchestrated performance. Liberal MPs didn’t ask hard questions because they didn’t want answers. Their job was to protect Boissonnault, protect the party, and protect their grip on power.

And here’s the tragic part: the real victims of this scandal aren’t sitting in Ottawa’s plush committee rooms. They’re the Indigenous entrepreneurs who lost out on contracts, the taxpayers who unknowingly funded this fraud, and the millions of Canadians who believed in a government that promised to do better.

This isn’t just a Randy Boissonnault problem. This is a Liberal problem. A systemic problem. A Trudeau problem. It’s about a government that’s so addicted to power, so comfortable with corruption, that they don’t even bother hiding it anymore.

But here’s the good news: Canadians are waking up. They’re seeing through the Liberal lies and realizing that the system isn’t broken—it’s rigged. Rigged for the insiders, the cronies, and the friends of Justin Trudeau.

So what happens next? That’s up to you, Canada. You have a choice. You can let this scandal fade into the background like so many others before it. Or you can demand better. Demand accountability. Demand a government that works for you, not for itself.

Please consider subscribing to The Opposition with Dan Knight .

Support our journalism and enjoy the full experience, upgrade your subscription.

Up Next

Government Subsidies and the Oil and Gas Industry

Don't Miss

Trump Reportedly Has Ace Up His Sleeve For Countries That Refuse To Take Back Their Illegal Migrants

Todayville

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

Economics professor offers grossly misleading analysis of inequality in Canada

Business / 5 hours ago

Ottawa once again defends egregious mismanagement during COVID

Business / 7 hours ago

Base Policies on Reality – Not Myths, Models, Misinformation and Fearmongering

Business

Economics professor offers grossly misleading analysis of inequality in Canada

Published on December 11, 2024

Todayville

From the Fraser Institute

By: Philip Cross

Dalhousie economics professor Lars Osberg’s The Scandalous Rise of Inequality in Canada was published just in time to be eligible for the always hotly-contested title of worst Canadian economics book of the year.

Osberg’s central theme is that inequality in Canada has been steadily increasing and this poses a threat to economic growth, financial stability, social mobility, limiting climate change and even democracy—at times, it seems every imaginable problem is blamed on inequality. This makes it even more important to get the facts about inequality right.

The most misleading chapter in the book concerns top-income earners. Osberg claims that “the income share of the top 1 per cent… is the aspect of inequality that has changed the most in recent years.” However, the chapter on inequality at the top of the income distribution exclusively features data for its increase in the United States, driven by the outrageous success of technology firms such as Facebook, Apple, Alphabet, Microsoft and Nvidia. Nowhere is the data for Canada cited, but in fact the 1 per cent’s share of income in Canada has fallen since 2007, which probably explains why Osberg avoided it.

The real problem with Canada’s high-income earners over the last two decades is not that they’re gobbling up more income at the expense of everyone else, but that we do not have enough of them. Nor do the top 1 per cent in Canada earn nearly as much as in the U.S. Pretending that incomes in Canada are as skewed as in the U.S. is another example of importing narratives without examining whether they are applicable here. This might be forgivable for the average person, but it’s scandalous and disingenuous for a professor specializing in income distribution.

Raising taxes on the richest 1 per cent has a “populist” appeal. However, former finance minister Bill Morneau wrote in his memoire Where To From Here: A Path to Canadian Prosperity that he came to “regret supporting the idea of a tax increase on the 1 percent” because “it began a narrative that made it difficult to have a constructive dialogue with the people prepared to invest in research and development to benefit the country… our proposal’s biggest impact was to reduce business confidence in us.” Before becoming the Trudeau government’s current finance minister, Chrystia Freeland acknowledged that “many of the ultra-high net-worth individuals flourishing in today’s global economy are admirable entrepreneurs, and we would all be poorer without them.”

Another practical consideration for Morneau was that “Canada’s personal income tax rates are not competitive with the U.S. where highly skilled labour is concerned.” Finally, Morneau acknowledged that taxing the rich in Canada will not raise much money, because “the number of taxpayers affected will be quite small… the math just doesn’t work.” I calculate that confiscating all of the income the 1 per cent earn above $200,000 would fund total government spending in Canada for a paltry 44.2 days.

Besides misrepresenting the importance of Canada’s 1 per cent, Osberg twice makes the patently false claim in his book that “income from capital… is roughly half of GDP in Canada.” Just last week, Statistics Canada’s estimated labour income’s share of GDP was 51.3 per cent while corporate profits garnered 26.0 per cent (including profits reaped by government-owned businesses through their monopolies on utilities, gambling and alcohol sales). Another 12.6 per cent of GDP was mixed income earned by farmers and small businesses, which StatsCan cannot disentangle between labour and capital. The final 10.2 per cent of GDP went to government taxes on production and imports, which clearly is not a return on capital. I would expect undergraduate economic students to have a better grasp of the distribution of GDP than Osberg demonstrates.

Among the many evils generated by inequality, Osberg cites democracy as “threatened by the increasing concentration of wealth and economic power in Canada.” Osberg must believe Justin Trudeau’s decade-long tenure as prime minister reflects the choice of our economic elites. If so, they have much to answer for; besides steadily-degrading Canada’s economic performance and international standing, Trudeau attacked these same elites by raising income taxes on upper incomes, increasing the capital gains tax, and undercutting the fortunes of the oil and gas industry on which much wealth relies. If our economic elite really controls government, it seems they made an incredibly bad choice for prime minister.

Philip Cross

Senior Fellow, Fraser Institute

Business

Ottawa once again defends egregious mismanagement during COVID

Published on December 11, 2024

Todayville

From the Fraser Institute

By: Jake Fuss and Tegan Hill

Two federal cabinet ministers criticized the report because it “fails to properly acknowledge that CEBA was designed and delivered during a global pandemic.” Translation—taxpayer money can be mismanaged so long as it’s delivered quickly, and we can use an emergency as an excuse for wasteful spending

According to a new report by Canada’s auditor general, in another of example of mismanagement and waste during the COVID pandemic, nearly 10 per cent—or $3.5 billion—of the federal government’s Canada Emergency Business Account (CEBA) loans went to ineligible businesses.

The report said “the program was not managed with due regard for value for money” and the government “did not effectively oversee the CEBA program.”

In response, two federal cabinet ministers criticized the report because it “fails to properly acknowledge that CEBA was designed and delivered during a global pandemic.”

Translation—taxpayer money can be mismanaged so long as it’s delivered quickly, and we can use an emergency as an excuse for wasteful spending. Accountability to the public is evidently an afterthought.

Of course, this is only the latest revelation of Trudeau government mismanagement during COVID. The government spent huge sums of taxpayer money on expensive programs such as the Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy (CEWS) and Canada Emergency Response Benefit (CERB). But a substantial share of this spending was simply wasted.

For example, an earlier report in 2022 by the auditor general found that ineligible individuals received $4.6 billion in CERB payments and other benefits. Ineligible recipients included 1,522 prisoners, 391 dead people and 434 children too young to be eligible. And 51,049 employers incorrectly received $9.9 billion in wage subsidies even though they did not have a sufficient drop in revenue to be eligible for the subsidies.

The federal government also spent billions on Canadians who probably didn’t need the money. An analysis published in 2020 by the Fraser Institute estimated that $11.8 billion in CERB payments went to eligible young people (ages 15 to 24) living with their parents in households with at least $100,000 in income. And an estimated $7.0 billion in CERB payments went to spouses in families with at least $100,000 in household income.

COVID-related programs were not only poorly targeted, but many payments surpassed the level required to restore the regular income of many recipients. According to the auditor general, the lowest-income Canada Recovery Benefit (CRB) recipients could take in more money from government benefits than from working, and the program “represented a disincentive to work, which impacted some labour markets at a crucial time when the need for employees was trending upwards.”

The total costs of fiscal waste during COVID are difficult to nail down. But our 2023 study estimated that one in four dollars of federal pandemic spending was wasted. That amounts to at least $89.9 billion in total fiscal waste. For context, that’s roughly what the British Columbia government spends annually in its entire budget for health care, education, social services, infrastructure, etc.

Finally, because the Trudeau government borrowed money to finance its excessive and wasteful COVID spending, Canadians will pay an estimated $21.1 billion in debt interest costs (over a 10-year period) that are directly attributable to this fiscal waste.

The new report by the auditor general is the latest proof of mismanagement by Ottawa during COVID, to the tune of billions of dollars in waste. Unfortunately, the government continues to scoff at the bill it’s handed to taxpayers for the waste it produced.