Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

Business

Trudeau’s Delusion Meets Trump’s Tariffs: 25% Hit on Canada and Mexico Could Cripple Economies Overnight!

Published

17 minute read

The Opposition with Dan Knight

In a fiery Truth Social post on November 25th, Donald Trump made his position crystal clear: the days of open borders, unchecked drug smuggling, and illegal immigration are over. The president-elect, set to take office in January, declared that one of his first actions as commander-in-chief will be to slap a 25% tariff on all goods from Mexico and Canada until both nations “use their absolute right and power” to stop the flow of drugs and illegal immigrants into the United States.

The Trump Doctrine Returns

This announcement serves as a bold reminder of Trump’s “America First” strategy, which dominated his first presidency. According to Trump, the current state of the U.S.-Mexico border is a “national emergency,” with caravans from Mexico allegedly bringing record levels of drugs like fentanyl and waves of illegal migrants. Canada isn’t off the hook either, as Trump accuses Justin Trudeau’s government of maintaining what he calls “ridiculous open borders” that have contributed to the crisis.

“Both Mexico and Canada have the absolute right and power to easily solve this long-simmering problem,” Trump stated. “Until such time that they do, it is time for them to pay a very big price!”

Economic Weapons Locked and Loaded

The proposed tariffs are no small matter. A 25% import tax on goods from Canada and Mexico could cripple their export-driven economies, both of which are heavily reliant on U.S. trade:

  • Mexico: Over 80% of its exports head to the U.S. A 25% tariff would devastate industries like auto manufacturing, agriculture, and electronics.
  • Canada: With 75% of exports destined for the U.S., Canadian businesses are bracing for significant disruptions to key sectors, including energy and auto parts.

Experts warn that these tariffs would also raise prices for American consumers. But Trump’s post signals he’s unfazed by potential backlash. “It’s time for these countries to pay a very big price,” he declared, echoing his tough-on-trade rhetoric from the 2016 campaign trail.

The Bureau – Canada’s Role in the Fentanyl Epidemic

 

According to The Bureau, U.S. investigators have uncovered a direct connection between Canadian cities—particularly Toronto and Vancouver—and transnational fentanyl money-laundering networks. These networks, allegedly run by Triads with ties to Beijing, are laundering cash for Mexican cartels smuggling fentanyl precursors from China.

David Asher, a former Trump administration official and DEA consultant, didn’t mince words in his interview with The Bureau. He stated that U.S. intelligence points to Canada as the “command and control” hub for these networks, which have fueled the devastating fentanyl crisis.

“When we seized their phones, we’d see Canada light up like a Christmas tree,” Asher said, highlighting how Toronto and British Columbia play central roles in these operations.

Canada’s Tariff Crisis: The Numbers Don’t Lie

 

Let’s dig into the cold, hard facts, courtesy of the Canadian Chamber of Commerce, and they’re downright devastating. Trump’s proposed tariffs aren’t just a political statement—they’re an economic wrecking ball aimed squarely at Canada’s most vulnerable industries. For Justin Trudeau’s government and hapless premiers like David Eby, these numbers are a brutal wake-up call.

The Trade Dependency Trap

Canada’s economic lifeblood is deeply tied to the United States, with 41% of Ontario’s GDP and a staggering two-thirds of New Brunswick’s GDP linked to cross-border trade. And it’s not just Canada feeling the squeeze—states like Michigan (14% GDP dependency) and Illinois (10.2%) rely heavily on Canadian trade.

The kicker? Nearly 63% of Canadian exports to the U.S. are intermediate inputs, meaning they’re critical components for American manufacturing. Canada isn’t just exporting products; it’s exporting the gears that keep U.S. industries turning.

Energy and Autos: The Collateral Damage

Consider this: in the first half of 2024 alone, Canada exported $85 billion in energy and $40 billion in auto parts to the U.S. A 25% tariff would obliterate these sectors, dragging down both economies in the process. And while Trudeau and his team posture about “standing united,” it’s clear their lack of preparation will only deepen the pain for Canadians.

Tariff Fallout: A National Recession Looms

The numbers paint a grim picture: a 25% tariff would deliver a 2.6% GDP decline annually for Canada, costing the average Canadian $2,000 CAD per year in lost income. Add in retaliatory tariffs, and this spirals into a full-blown recession, with cascading impacts on productivity, supply chains, and jobs.

  • Auto/Transport Exports: Down 10 percentage points.
  • Basic Metals Exports: Down 9 percentage points.
  • Chemicals and Paper Products: Exports drop by 8% and 7%, respectively.
  • Overall Sector Decline: A staggering 22 percentage points for critical industries.

Meanwhile, cross-border investment—once a pillar of Canada-U.S. relations—is under threat. Canadian investments in the U.S. total $1.1 trillion, but a tariff war risks destabilizing these flows and gutting the broader economic relationship.

Last Weeks Spin Piece from the Canadian Press

As we look at the fallout from Trump’s 25% tariff announcement, let’s take a moment to laugh at this spin piece from the Canadian Press that came out just last week. The article tried to paint a picture of Canada’s Foreign Affairs Minister Mélanie Joly claiming that Donald Trump’s return to the White House has somehow boosted Canada’s influence on the world stage. Yes, you heard that right—Canada, the same country with open borders, an overreliance on U.S. trade, and a prime minister whose leadership is about as effective as a broken clock, is supposedly advising the world on how to handle Trump.

Joly boldly declared from the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in Lima, “No country understands the United States better than Canada.” According to her, nations are lining up to learn from Canada’s experience with Trump, as though Trudeau and his team have some masterclass on navigating Trump’s policies. Fast forward to today, with Trump poised to slam Canada with tariffs that could destroy their economy, and the absurdity of this claim is glaring.

This narrative that Canada is a calm, steady hand amid Trump’s return is nothing more than a fantasy. While Joly and Trudeau were hobnobbing at summits, Trump was gearing up to deliver real consequences. His 25% tariff on Canadian imports isn’t hypothetical—it’s a financial wrecking ball aimed at an economy that relies on U.S. trade for survival. Energy exports, autos, and agriculture—the pillars of Canada’s economy—will take a direct hit. But instead of preparing for this, Joly was busy spinning a tale of Canada’s supposed “influence.”

And let’s not forget what Joly was selling in that article. “Canada’s influence is actually increasing because of the impacts that the world is now facing with the new administration.” Increasing? On what planet? Trump’s tariffs make it clear that Canada isn’t leading anything; it’s scrambling to react.

The article also floated the idea that Trudeau was in a “privileged position” because of his past dealings with Trump. Let’s recall how that went, shall we? Trudeau was caught mocking Trump on a hot mic during a G7 summit, embarrassing himself and the country in front of world leaders. His government barely held onto a renegotiated NAFTA—now the USMCA—that Trump rewrote to suit America’s interests. If this is the kind of experience Trudeau brings to the table, it’s no wonder Canada is in trouble.

Meanwhile, the Canadian Press tries to prop up Trudeau as some staunch defender of “rules-based trade,” as though those rules mean anything when Trump has the leverage to rewrite them. Joly spoke about sending “clear messages” to Beijing, yet Trump’s tariff threats expose just how little Canada has done to address the very issues Trump is targeting. Let’s not forget The Bureau’s report on Canada’s role in fentanyl money laundering, with Toronto and Vancouver lighting up as command centers for Triads laundering cash from Mexican cartels. Canada’s failures are part of the problem Trump is confronting.

And here’s the kicker: as of today, neither Trudeau nor Joly has made a peep about Trump’s tariff announcement. No tweets, no press statements, no leadership—just silence. So much for being the world’s go-to expert on Trump. Canada’s leaders are AWOL while Trump tightens the economic screws.

While our beloved PM is silent, Jagmeet Singh, ever the opportunist, couldn’t resist wading into the chaos with his usual brand of hollow theatrics. “Stand up and fight like hell,” he bellowed at Justin Trudeau on Twitter, as though anyone has ever mistaken Singh for a warrior of any kind. Let’s be honest—Singh’s idea of “fighting like hell” probably involves drafting another toothless motion in Parliament or throwing shade on social media while offering zero solutions. This is the same guy who props up Trudeau’s government with his NDP-Liberal supply-and-confidence deal, enabling the very weakness he’s now trying to criticize. Spare us the tough talk, Jagmeet. Bootlicking Trudeau one day and grandstanding the next doesn’t exactly scream credibility.

And as for Trudeau and Mélanie Joly? Their performance over the last week has been nothing short of delusional. While Trump was setting the stage to unleash a 25% tariff that could dismantle Canada’s economy, Trudeau was busy posturing at international summits and snapping photos with global elites. Joly, for her part, claimed that Trump’s return to power somehow boosted Canada’s global influence—because apparently being a punching bag now counts as diplomacy.

This isn’t global influence; it’s global irrelevance. The Trudeau government spent the last week basking in delusion while Trump was preparing to drop the hammer. And now the clock has run out. Stay tuned—because while Trudeau dithers and Singh flails, the reckoning is here.

Final Thoughts

Trump campaigned on a clear and powerful message: tariffs are a weapon to protect American workers and restore national sovereignty. And, folks, he wasn’t wrong. Sure, input costs might rise. Sure, a few elites will clutch their pearls as their profits shrink. But this isn’t about them. This is about something bigger. It’s about standing up for the forgotten workers in Michigan, Ohio, and Wisconsin who’ve watched their livelihoods vanish thanks to decades of globalist betrayal. Trump’s message is loud and clear: no more one-sided trade deals, no more globalist bull. America comes first.

And what about Canada? What has Justin Trudeau done? He’s alienated an entire nation while dividing our own country with his disastrous, virtue-signaling policies. Trudeau doesn’t just dislike the West—he actively works against it. The West pays the bills in this country, folks. Alberta’s oil sands, Saskatchewan’s agriculture, and British Columbia’s resources prop up this nation’s economy. And how does Trudeau repay them? By demonizing their industries, their workers, and their very way of life to appease his climate cult.

While Trudeau struts on the world stage preaching green fantasies, the West bears the cost. It’s their jobs, their industries, and their communities that are hollowed out to fund his carbon tax schemes. Now, with Trump’s tariffs about to slam Canada’s economy, the true cost of Trudeau’s failures is finally coming home to roost.

How can Canada face this crisis when our so-called leader is more concerned with photo ops, platitudes, and meaningless “climate leadership” than standing up for our country? Trudeau has alienated our most important trading partner, antagonized the West, and is now leaving us unprepared for a showdown with Trump’s America.

Let’s look at the facts. Canada is at odds with China, embroiled in a cold war with India, and now staring down Trump’s tariffs. Every move Trudeau makes puts us further into isolation, weaker and more vulnerable. So here’s the question: can we really afford another year of this man at the helm?

The Trudeau government has run out of excuses, out of allies, and now, out of time. This isn’t just about whether Canada can survive Trump’s tariffs. It’s about whether we can survive another year of Justin Trudeau’s leadership. The reckoning is here, and Canada deserves better.

Subscribe to The Opposition with Dan Knight .

For the full experience, upgrade your subscription.

Business

StatsCan Report Confirms Canada’s Middle Class Is Disappearing Under Liberal Mismanagement

Published on

The Opposition with Dan Knight

A new Statistics Canada report reveals widening income inequality and a shrinking middle class, all while Trudeau’s Liberals push policies that benefit the wealthy and punish working Canadians.

A newly released report from Statistics Canada on household economic accounts for the third quarter of 2024 confirms what many Canadians have long suspected—while the wealthiest continue to rake in profits, middle- and lower-income families are left struggling under the weight of economic policies that seem designed to work against them. The report, released today, paints a stark picture of a country where financial inequality is not just persisting, but growing.

The numbers don’t lie. Income inequality has increased, with the top 40% of earners pulling even further ahead of the bottom 40%. The gap in disposable income between these two groups expanded to 46.9 percentage points, up from 46.3 just a year ago. The highest-income households saw their disposable income rise by 6.8%, largely driven by soaring investment gains, while the poorest Canadians saw only a 3.7% increase, barely enough to keep up with the cost of living. Meanwhile, middle-income earners experienced sluggish wage growth of just 2.7%, well below the national average.

Despite declining interest rates, lower-income households found themselves paying more on mortgages and consumer credit, while the wealthy reaped the benefits of higher investment yields. The data shows that middle-income households, who are already feeling the squeeze from inflation and stagnating wages, saw their share of national income shrink.

The most revealing statistic is in net worth distribution. The top 20% of wealthiest Canadians control nearly two-thirds (64.7%) of the country’s net worth, averaging an eye-watering $3.3 million per household. Meanwhile, the bottom 40% hold just 3.3%, barely scraping by with an average of $83,189 in assets.

However, the real estate market has provided a rare silver lining for some lower-wealth households, as they were able to take advantage of slightly more favorable conditions to buy homes, increasing their net worth at the fastest pace. But even that gain is tempered by the reality that housing costs remain unaffordable for many, and young Canadians under 35 continue to pull back from homeownership altogether.

Let’s be clear—this isn’t happening by accident. This is what happens when you let a government of self-serving narcissists run the country into the ground. Justin Trudeau and his Liberal Party have spent nearly a decade dismantling the Canadian economy, pushing a radical, ideologically driven agenda that benefits their elite donor class while leaving working Canadians behind. And now, as the country crumbles under the weight of their incompetence, Trudeau is running for the exits, leaving the mess to whoever’s foolish enough to take the job.

And what do they do on the way out? Do they work to secure our economy? To make life more affordable? To protect Canadian workers? No. Instead, they decide to pick a fight with the United States. Donald Trump, who actually puts his country first—imagine that—announces a 25% tariff on Canadian imports, a move meant to address drug trafficking and illegal immigration, and what’s the Liberals’ response? Do they try to work out a deal? Do they negotiate in good faith to protect Canadian jobs? No. Instead, Chrystia Freeland comes out swinging, proposing retaliatory tariffs that will hurt Canadian businesses just as much, if not more, than they’ll hurt the U.S.

This isn’t about protecting Canada. This isn’t about securing the border or fighting for our economy. This is about pure, partisan politics. The Liberal base wants conflict with the U.S. Not because it’s good for the country, but because their fragile, self-righteous worldview depends on it. They hate Trump, and they hate that his America-First policies are actually working for American workers. So instead of finding a solution, they escalate. They antagonize. Because their base loves it. Not because Canada benefits, but because Liberals benefit.

Subscribe to The Opposition with Dan Knight .

For the full experience, upgrade your subscription.

And meanwhile, what’s Jagmeet Singh doing? The man who loves to talk about standing up for the working class? He could pull the plug on this corrupt government today with a non-confidence motion. But he won’t. Because, like every other member of the political elite in this country, he’s more interested in protecting his own position than actually doing his job. He makes noise about fighting for Canadian workers, but when the moment comes to act, he folds—again.

So here we are. The economy is in shambles. The wealth gap is growing. The middle class is getting squeezed to death. And the people in charge are too busy playing partisan games to do anything about it. Trudeau is leaving, but his legacy of economic destruction, division, and incompetence will live on through the same out-of-touch Liberal elites who put us in this mess.

But here’s the thing—Canada is better than this. We are a nation built on hard work, freedom, and opportunity, not on government control, reckless spending, and endless excuses. We are a country that thrives when its people—not bureaucrats in Ottawa—decide their own future.

It’s time for Canadians to take their country back. It’s time to put an end to this cycle of economic ruin and government failure. We don’t need more empty promises, more excuses, or more Liberal arrogance. We need an election. We need leaders who believe in the strength of Canadians, not the power of government.

Enough is enough. If we want a future where hard work is rewarded, where families can afford to buy a home, and where our economy is built to benefit all Canadians—not just the elite—then we must act. This country belongs to you, not the Liberal Party, not the special interests, and certainly not the self-serving political class in Ottawa.

Canada deserves better. And the time to demand it is now.

Subscribe to The Opposition with Dan Knight .

For the full experience, upgrade your subscription.

Continue Reading

Business

Long Ignored Criminal Infiltration of Canadian Ports Lead Straight to Trump Tariffs

Published on

Sam Cooper

Briefings to Liberal Government on Chinese Infiltration of Vancouver Port and Canada’s Opioid Scourge Ignored

Trump Tariffs Loom as Critics Decry Ottawa’s “Fox in the Hen House” Approach to Border Security

As President Donald Trump readies sweeping tariffs against Canada on Saturday—citing Ottawa’s failure to secure its shared North American borders from fentanyl originating in China—The Bureau has obtained a remarkable December 1999 document from a senior law enforcement official, revealing Ottawa’s longstanding negligence in securing Vancouver’s port against drug trafficking linked to Chinese shipping entities.

The Bureau is a reader-supported publication.

To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

The letter, drafted by former Crown prosecutor Scott Newark and addressed to Ottawa’s Security Intelligence Review Committee (SIRC), urged the body to reconsider explosive findings from a leaked RCMP and CSIS report detailing the infiltration of Canada’s “porous” borders by Chinese criminal networks.

Titled “Re: S.I.R.C. Review in relation to Project Sidewinder,” Newark’s letter alleges systemic failures that enabled Chinese State Council owned shipping giant COSCO and Triads with suspected Chinese military ties to penetrate Vancouver’s port system. He further asserts that federal authorities ignored repeated briefings and warnings from Canadian law enforcement—warnings based on intelligence gathered by Canadian officials in Hong Kong, who initiated the Sidewinder review.

Newark also warned that Liberal Prime Minister Jean Chrétien’s decision to dismantle Canada’s specialized Ports Police and privatize national port control had left the country dangerously exposed to foreign criminal networks, noting he had personally briefed the Canadian government on these concerns as early as 1996.

Addressing his letter to SIRC’s chair, Quebec lawyer Paule Gauthier, Newark wrote:

“As the former (1994-98) Executive Officer of the Canadian Police Association, I was assigned responsibility for dealing with the issue of the federal government’s changes to control of the national ports and policing therein.”

“This involved close examination of matters such as drug, weapon, and people smuggling through the national ports and, in particular, both the growing presence of organized criminal groups at ports and the ominous hazard control of those ports by such groups represented.”

Newark’s letter goes on to allege widespread failures in Ottawa that facilitated Chinese Triad infiltration of Vancouver’s port, revealing federal authorities’ reluctance to act on warnings from RCMP officer Garry Clement and immigration control officer Brian McAdam—former Canadian officials based in Hong Kong who had sounded the alarm, prompting the Sidewinder review.

Newark explained to SIRC’s chair that, during his tenure as Executive Officer of the Canadian Police Association, he prepared approximately fifty detailed policy briefs for the government and regularly appeared before parliamentary committees and in private ministerial briefings.

“I can assure you that in all of that time, no clearer warning was ever given by Canada’s rank and file police officers to the national government than what was done in our unsuccessful attempt to prevent the disbandment of the specialized Canada Ports Police in combination with the privatization of the ports themselves,” Newark’s letter to SIRC states.

The letter continues, noting that in October 1996, Newark met with Chrétien’s Transport Minister David Anderson—later addressing the Transport Committee—to highlight the imminent threat posed by Asian organized crime’s infiltration of port operations. Newark’s written briefing to the Minister underscored the gravity of the situation with a blunt question:

“Who exactly are the commercial port operators?”

Citing the Anderson briefing document, Newark’s letter to SIRC states that Anderson had been warned:

“We are, for example, aware of serious concerns amongst the international law enforcement community surrounding the ownership of ports and container industries in Asia and, in particular, Hong Kong, Taiwan, and the People’s Republic of China. There is simply no longer any doubt that drugs like heroin are coming from these destinations through the Port of Vancouver, moved by organized criminal gangs whose assets include ‘legitimate’ properties.”

The Anderson briefing also referenced a British Columbia anti-gang unit report, titled “Organized Crime on Vancouver Waterfront,” which made clear that the Longshoreman’s Union had been infiltrated by the Hells Angels.

“The movement of goods through Canada’s ports requires an independence in policing that is impossible without public control,” the report warned.

It concluded:

“This report should be taken as a specific warning to this Government that, prior to downloading operational control over the ports themselves to private interests, Government be absolutely certain as to who owns what—and that it can continue that certainty with power to refuse acquisition of port assets in the future.”

Scott Newark’s letter to SIRC then turns to new intelligence—gathered from Canadian and U.S. officials—that further underscored the vulnerability created by Chrétien’s border policies.

“To now learn that law enforcement and public officials in Canada and the United States have linked a company (COSCO), granted docking and other facilities in Vancouver, to Asian organized crime, arms and drug smuggling is, to say the least, disturbing,” Newark’s December 1999 letter states.

“That this company, its principals, subsidiaries, and partners have been associated with various military agencies of a foreign government—agencies themselves identified by Canadian and American officials as having unhealthy connections to Triad groups—makes a bad situation even worse.”

Newark next addressed the broader implications of Canada’s failure to enforce border security, particularly in relation to the deportation of foreign criminals—a process he had sought to reform while serving with the Canadian Police Association.

Drawing on his experience, he described a deeply flawed immigration enforcement system, one that allowed individuals with serious criminal records to remain in Canada indefinitely. The problem, he wrote, was twofold: not only were foreign criminals able to enter Canada with ease, but authorities also failed to deport those with outstanding arrest warrants.

Newark recounted how, in 1996, a Cabinet Minister requested that he meet with Brian McAdam, a former senior foreign service officer in Hong Kong who had spent years uncovering organized crime’s grip on Canada’s immigration system. McAdam’s detailed revelations, he wrote, had directly led to the launch of Project Sidewinder.

Newark told SIRC that even after leaving the Canadian Police Association in 1998, he remained in contact with McAdam and other officials working to expose this vast and complex national security risk posed by foreign criminal networks.

It was this ongoing communication that led to an even more alarming discovery. Newark wrote that he was stunned to learn that Canada’s government had not only terminated Project Sidewinder but had gone so far as to destroy some related files.

The Bureau is a reader-supported publication.

To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Newark suggests SIRC’s chair, in her review of Sidewinder, should determine whether “Sidewinder should not have been cancelled … why such inappropriate action was taken and at whose direction this was done.”

He concludes that SIRC should also freshly examine why intelligence reporting from the Canadian officials in Hong Kong, Brian McAdam and Garry Clement had been ignored in Ottawa.

Newark’s letter to SIRC says these failures to act on intelligence included the “Inappropriate granting of visas to Triad members or associates” and “Granting of docking facilities with attendant consequences to COSCO”—and “Failure of CIC and Foreign Affairs to respond appropriately to the various information supplied by McAdam and Clement in relation to material pertaining to Sidewinder.”

In an exclusive interview with The Bureau, Garry Clement, who contributed to investigations referenced in Newark’s letter, corroborated many of its claims and provided further insight. Clement recalled his role in Project Sunset, a 1990s investigation into Chinese Triads’ efforts to gain control over Vancouver’s ports.

“I can remember having a discussion with Scott when he wrote that to SIRC because Scott and I go back a long time,” Clement said. “I knew about him writing on it, but I knew it was also buried.”

He described his own intelligence work during the same period:

“I wrote in the nineties when I was the liaison officer in Hong Kong, a very long intelligence brief on the Chinese wanting to basically acquire or build out a port at the Surrey Fraser Docks area. And it was going to be completely controlled by that time, with Triad influence, but it was going to be controlled by China.”

Clement expressed frustration that decades of warnings had gone unheeded:

“The bottom line is that here we are almost 40 years later, talking about an issue that was identified in the ‘90s about our ports and allowing China to have free access—and nothing has been done over that period of time.”

Newark’s urgent recommendation for SIRC to reconsider Sidewinder’s warnings on Vancouver’s ports was never acted upon.

“We still don’t have Port Police. We got nobody overseeing them,” Clement added. “The ports themselves, it’s sort of like putting a fox in the hen house and saying, ‘Behave yourself.’”

Finally, when asked about the Trudeau government’s claim this week that Canada is responsible for only one percent of the fentanyl entering the United States—a figure reported widely in Canadian media—Clement’s response was unequivocal.

“The fact that we’ve become a haven for transnational organized crime, it’s internationally known,” he said. “So when I read that, with the fentanyl—Trump is wrong in that there’s less than 1% of our fentanyl going to the United States. That’s a crock of shit. If you look at the two super labs that were taken down in British Columbia—I think there’s three now—the amount they were capable of producing was more than the whole Vancouver population could have used in 10 years. So we know that Vancouver has become a transshipment point to North America for opiates and cocaine and other drugs because it’s a weak link, and enforcement is not capable of keeping up with transnational organized crime.”

The Bureau is a reader-supported publication.

To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

That opinion is evidently acknowledged by British Columbia Premier David Eby, according to documents from Canada’s Foreign Interference Commission that say Eby sought meetings with Justin Trudeau’s National Security Advisor.

A record from the Hogue Commission, sanitized for public release, outlines the “context and drivers” behind Eby’s concerns, including “foreign interference; election security; countering fentanyl, organized crime, money laundering, corruption.”

The documents state Ottawa’s Privy Council Office—which provides advice to Justin Trudeau’s cabinet—had recommended that British Columbia continue to work with the federal government on initiatives like the establishment of a new Canada Financial Crimes Agency to bolster the nation’s ability to respond swiftly to complex financial crimes.

Additionally, the PCO highlighted that Canada, the United States, and Mexico were supposedly collaborating on strategies to reduce the supply of fentanyl, including addressing precursor chemicals and preventing the exploitation of commercial shipping channels—a critical area where British Columbia, and specifically the Port of Vancouver, plays a significant role.

Eby acknowledged the concerns again this week in an interview with Macleans.

“I understood Trump’s concerns about drugs coming in. We’ve got a serious fentanyl problem in B.C.; we see the precursor chemicals coming into B.C. from China and Mexico. We see ties to Asian and Mexican organized crime groups. We’d been discussing all of that with the American ambassador and fellow governors. That’s why it was such a strange turnaround, from ‘Hey, we’re working together on this!’ to suddenly finding ourselves in the crosshairs.”

Yet, despite Eby’s claims of intergovernmental efforts, critics—including Garry Clement—argue that nothing has changed. Vancouver’s port remains alarmingly vulnerable, a decades-old concern that continues to resurface as fentanyl and other illicit drugs flood North American markets.

The Bureau is a reader-supported publication.

To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Continue Reading

Trending

X