Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

National

Trudeau’s environment minister proclaims himself ‘proud socialist’ before House of Commons

Published

2 years ago

7 minute read

From LifeSiteNews

By Anthony Murdoch

Steven Guilbeault made the declaration during a debate about the impact of carbon tax policies on soaring energy bills

Minister of Environment Steven Guilbeault proudly proclaimed before the House of Commons on Tuesday that he is a “proud socialist” during a debate over a carbon tax the federal government has imposed on Canadians that has contributed to sky-high energy bills.

“I’m a Liberal and a proud socialist,” Guilbeault said after being asked a question by Conservative Party of Canada (CPC) MP Ted Falk concerning the carbon tax.

Guilbeault then blamed former conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper for not “believing” in “climate change” as a reason the current conservatives do not support a carbon tax.

“This reminds me of a certain quote from Prime Minister Harper who talked about the fight against climate change as a socialist plot,” he said.

“Here it is, you have it again, Mr. Speaker. They do not believe that climate change is an issue. They do not believe we should do anything about it.”

Falk had said to Guilbeault before his “socialist” response that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has created a “carbon tax” coalition with other socialist and separatist entities in Canada to cause financial pain for Canadians.

“After eight years, we now have the socialists, the separatists, and this prime minister who’s just not worth the cost,” Falk said.

“They’re all part of this costly carbon tax coalition that is leaving Canadians out in the cold.”

Trudeau has many times before blamed Harper for his government’s ills, it should be noted.

Reaction to Guilbeault’s comments came swiftly from many Canadian political pundits and others.

“Steven Guilbeault isn’t just a ‘proud socialist,’ he’s a total nutbar, climate extremist and incompetent minister,” wrote Paul Mitchell, a former People’s Party of Canada candidate and political commentator on X (formerly Twitter).

“Every provincial premier should demand that Guilbeault be sacked. Dealing with him is intolerable.”

Jim Murphy, a retired Toronto police officer, wrote on X, “I’m a bit confused, shouldn’t @s_guilbeaultbe a member of the NDP and not the @liberal_party? Serious question.”

The carbon tax has been a hot topic in the House of Commons, notably after Trudeau announced about two weeks ago he was pausing the collection of the carbon tax on home heating oil for three years but only for Atlantic Canadian provinces. The current cost of the carbon tax on home heating fuel is 17 cents per liter. Most Canadians, however, heat their homes with clean-burning natural gas, which will not be exempted from the carbon tax.

Trudeau’s carbon tax pause for Atlantic Canada announcement came amid dismal polling numbers showing his government is likely to be defeated in a landslide by the Conservative Party in the next election.

As a result, the CPC under leader Pierre Poilievre introduced a motion calling for the carbon tax to be paused for all Canadians. This motion was voted down on Monday by the Liberals with support from the Bloc Quebecois.

The New Democratic Party (NDP) voted in support of the CPC motion, despite the fact they have an informal coalition with the party that began last year, agreeing to support and keep the Liberals in power until the next election is mandated by law in 2025.

As for Guilbeault, he is perhaps Trudeau’s most radical minister in terms of his extreme environmental views. He recently said the Liberal government was going to push ahead with net-zero emission regulations despite the fact Canada’s Supreme Court recently ruled against the federal government’s “no more pipelines” legislation.

Earlier this year, the CPC slammed Trudeau for having Guilbeault accept an invite from China for climate talks.

Alberta Premier Danielle Smith has been a staunch opponent of Trudeau’s net-zero regulations and praised the court decision as returning power to the provinces.

Guilbeault has a history of environmental activism. In 2001, he was arrested after scaling the CN Tower in Toronto as part of a stunt for Greenpeace.

The CPC has previously called out extreme views emanating from the Liberal Party.

In September, Poilievre called Trudeau and his father Pierre Elliot Trudeau “Marxists” when asked by an Ontario resident what could be done to help prevent Canada from going “down” due to Liberal policies.

LifeSiteNews reported last month how Trudeau’s carbon tax is costing Canadians hundreds of dollars annually, as the rebates given out by the federal government are not enough to compensate for the increased fuel costs.

The Trudeau government’s current environmental goals – in lockstep with the United Nations’ “2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development” – include phasing out coal-fired power plants, reducing fertilizer usage, and curbing natural gas use over the coming decades.

The reduction and eventual elimination of the use of so-called “fossil fuels” and a transition to unreliable “green” energy has also been pushed by the World Economic Forum (WEF) – the globalist group behind the socialist “Great Reset” agenda – an organization in which Trudeau and some of his cabinet are involved.

Related Topics:

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

More from this author
Business / 7 hours ago

RFK Jr. says Hep B vaccine is linked to 1,135% higher autism rate

International / 7 hours ago

RFK Jr. tells Tucker how Big Pharma uses ‘perverse incentives’ to get vaccines approved

Censorship Industrial Complex / 7 hours ago

Global media alliance colluded with foreign nations to crush free speech in America: House report

Business

Massive government child-care plan wreaking havoc across Ontario

Published on June 30, 2025

By

From the Fraser Institute

By Matthew Lau

It’s now more than four years since the federal Liberal government pledged $30 billion in spending over five years for $10-per-day national child care, and more than three years since Ontario’s Progressive Conservative government signed a $13.2 billion deal with the federal government to deliver this child-care plan.

Not surprisingly, with massive government funding came massive government control. While demand for child care has increased due to the government subsidies and lower out-of-pocket costs for parents, the plan significantly restricts how child-care centres operate (including what items participating centres may purchase), and crucially, caps the proportion of government funds available to private for-profit providers.

What have families and taxpayers got for this enormous government effort? Widespread child-care shortages across Ontario.

For example, according to the City of Ottawa, the number of children (aged 0 to 5 years) on child-care waitlists has ballooned by more than 300 per cent since 2019, there are significant disparities in affordable child-care access “with nearly half of neighbourhoods underserved, and limited access in suburban and rural areas,” and families face “significantly higher” costs for before-and-after-school care for school-age children.

In addition, Ottawa families find the system “complex and difficult to navigate” and “fewer child care options exist for children with special needs.” And while 42 per cent of surveyed parents need flexible child care (weekends, evenings, part-time care), only one per cent of child-care centres offer these flexible options. These are clearly not encouraging statistics, and show that a government-knows-best approach does not properly anticipate the diverse needs of diverse families.

Moreover, according to the Peel Region’s 2025 pre-budget submission to the federal government (essentially, a list of asks and recommendations), it “has maximized its for-profit allocation, leaving 1,460 for-profit spaces on a waitlist.” In other words, families can’t access $10-per-day child care—the central promise of the plan—because the government has capped the number of for-profit centres.

Similarly, according to Halton Region’s pre-budget submission to the provincial government, “no additional families can be supported with affordable child care” because, under current provincial rules, government funding can only be used to reduce child-care fees for families already in the program.

And according to a March 2025 Oxford County report, the municipality is experiencing a shortage of child-care staff and access challenges for low-income families and children with special needs. The report includes a grim bureaucratic predication that “provincial expansion targets do not reflect anticipated child care demand.”

Child-care access is also a problem provincewide. In Stratford, which has a population of roughly 33,000, the municipal government reports that more than 1,000 children are on a child-care waitlist. Similarly in Port Colborne (population 20,000), the city’s chief administrative officer told city council in April 2025 there were almost 500 children on daycare waitlists at the beginning of the school term. As of the end of last year, Guelph and Wellington County reportedly had a total of 2,569 full-day child-care spaces for children up to age four, versus a waitlist of 4,559 children—in other words, nearly two times as many children on a waitlist compared to the number of child-care spaces.

More examples. In Prince Edward County, population around 26,000, there are more than 400 children waitlisted for licensed daycare. In Kawartha Lakes and Haliburton County, the child-care waitlist is about 1,500 children long and the average wait time is four years. And in St. Mary’s, there are more than 600 children waitlisted for child care, but in recent years town staff have only been able to move 25 to 30 children off the wait list annually.

The numbers speak for themselves. Massive government spending and control over child care has created havoc for Ontario families and made child-care access worse. This cannot be a surprise. Quebec’s child-care system has been largely government controlled for decades, with poor results. Why would Ontario be any different? And how long will Premier Ford allow this debacle to continue before he asks the new prime minister to rethink the child-care policy of his predecessor?

Matthew Lau

Adjunct Scholar, Fraser Institute
Continue Reading

Business

Canada Caves: Carney ditches digital services tax after criticism from Trump

Published on June 30, 2025

By

From The Center Square

By

Canada caved to President Donald Trump demands by pulling its digital services tax hours before it was to go into effect on Monday.

Trump said Friday that he was ending all trade talks with Canada over the digital services tax, which he called a direct attack on the U.S. and American tech firms. The DST required foreign and domestic businesses to pay taxes on some revenue earned from engaging with online users in Canada.

“Based on this egregious Tax, we are hereby terminating ALL discussions on Trade with Canada, effective immediately,” the president said. “We will let Canada know the Tariff that they will be paying to do business with the United States of America within the next seven day period.”

By Sunday, Canada relented in an effort to resume trade talks with the U.S., it’s largest trading partner.

“To support those negotiations, the Minister of Finance and National Revenue, the Honourable François-Philippe Champagne, announced today that Canada would rescind the Digital Services Tax (DST) in anticipation of a mutually beneficial comprehensive trade arrangement with the United States,” according to a statement from Canada’s Department of Finance.

Canada’s Department of Finance said that Prime Minister Mark Carney and Trump agreed to resume negotiations, aiming to reach a deal by July 21.

U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said Monday that the digital services tax would hurt the U.S.

“Thank you Canada for removing your Digital Services Tax which was intended to stifle American innovation and would have been a deal breaker for any trade deal with America,” he wrote on X.

Earlier this month, the two nations seemed close to striking a deal.

Trump said he and Carney had different concepts for trade between the two neighboring countries during a meeting at the G7 Summit in Kananaskis, in the Canadian Rockies.

Asked what was holding up a trade deal between the two nations at that time, Trump said they had different concepts for what that would look like.

“It’s not so much holding up, I think we have different concepts, I have a tariff concept, Mark has a different concept, which is something that some people like, but we’re going to see if we can get to the bottom of it today.”

Shortly after taking office in January, Trump hit Canada and Mexico with 25% tariffs for allowing fentanyl and migrants to cross their borders into the U.S. Trump later applied those 25% tariffs only to goods that fall outside the free-trade agreement between the three nations, called the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement.

Trump put a 10% tariff on non-USMCA compliant potash and energy products. A 50% tariff on aluminum and steel imports from all countries into the U.S. has been in effect since June 4. Trump also put a 25% tariff on all cars and trucks not built in the U.S.

Economists, businesses and some publicly traded companies have warned that tariffs could raise prices on a wide range of consumer products.

Trump has said he wants to use tariffs to restore manufacturing jobs lost to lower-wage countries in decades past, shift the tax burden away from U.S. families, and pay down the national debt.

A tariff is a tax on imported goods paid by the person or company that imports them. The importer can absorb the cost of the tariffs or try to pass the cost on to consumers through higher prices.

Trump’s tariffs give U.S.-produced goods a price advantage over imported goods, generating revenue for the federal government.

Continue Reading

Trending

X