Uncategorized
UK to ramp up ‘no-deal’ Brexit preparations amid impasse
LONDON — Britain’s government ramped up preparations Tuesday for the possibility the U.K. could leave the European Union in 101 days without a deal, urging thousands of businesses and millions of households to make sure they are ready for the worst.
With the country’s departure set for March 29, it remains unclear whether British lawmakers will approve the divorce deal the government negotiated with the EU. The alternative, a “no-deal” Brexit, risks plunging the economy into recession and touching off chaos at the borders.
“The government’s priority remains to secure a deal, but we need to recognize with 14 weeks to go, that a responsible government is preparing for the eventuality that we leave without a deal,” Brexit Secretary Steve Barclay said.
Members of May’s Cabinet agreed to activate all of the government’s no-deal plans and advised the public to prepare for disruptions. Ministers insisted the steps were sensible precautions.
“Just because you put a seatbelt on doesn’t mean that you should crash the car,” Work and Pensions Secretary Amber Rudd said.
Some 3,500 troops will be on standby to help deal with any disruptions in the event of a “no-deal,”
Businesses will be sent a 100-plus page online pack to help them get ready. Emails to 80,000 of those most likely to be affected will be sent over the next few days.
Opposition politicians said no amount of preparation could sugar-coat the impact of a chaotic Brexit.
“This is the reality of a no-deal Brexit: soldiers on the streets, medicines being stockpiled in the NHS (health service), and airports and ferry terminals grinding to a halt,” Labour Party lawmaker Ian Murray said.
Some manufacturers have begun stockpiling parts and goods in anticipation of post-Brexit hiccups to trade. But many businesses — especially smaller firms — have done little to mitigate the economic shock of leaving without a deal.
And big firms and business organizations have warned that uncertainty is already sapping investment and causing needless expense.
The British Chambers of Commerce said Tuesday that economic growth and business investment in 2019 were likely to be lower than previously forecast because of the continuing uncertainty.
Director-General Adam Marshall said “the lack of certainty over the U.K.’s future relationship with the EU has led to many firms hitting the pause button on their growth plans.”
He said that “businesses are having to take action, delaying or pulling hiring and investment plans and, in some cases, moving operations elsewhere in order to maintain hard-won supply chains.”
The British government and the EU sealed a Brexit deal last month, but May postponed a parliamentary vote on it last week when it became clear legislators would overwhelmingly reject it.
She tried to win changes from the EU to sweeten the deal for reluctant lawmakers, but was rebuffed by the bloc at a summit in Brussels last week. May’s authority has also been shaken after a no-confidence vote from her own party that saw more than a third of Conservative lawmakers vote against her.
May insisted Monday she could win “clarification” from the EU to reassure skeptical lawmakers before Parliament votes on the deal during the week of Jan. 14.
Opposition legislators — and many members of May’s Conservative Party — remain opposed to the deal. But with Parliament divided on the way forward, the Brexit process is at an impasse.
Jeremy Corbyn, leader of the main opposition Labour Party, on Monday submitted a motion of no-confidence in the prime minister, accusing May of deliberately wasting time by delaying the vote, forcing Parliament to choose between her deal and no deal.
Corbyn’s move was symbolic: Losing the vote on such a motion would increase the pressure on May, but unlike a no-confidence vote in the government as a whole it wouldn’t trigger a process that could lead to an election.
The government said it would not grant Parliament time to debate the motion, calling it a “stunt.” Other opposition parties accused Corbyn of making a futile gesture, and called on him to push instead for a vote of no-confidence in the government — which would have to be put to debate and a vote under parliamentary rules.
Labour lawmaker John Healey said the party would call a full motion of no-confidence “when it’s clear to the country the government has failed decisively.”
He said it was “a question of when, not if” the government would be challenged.
___
Follow AP’s full coverage of Brexit at: https://www.apnews.com/Brexit
Jill Lawless And Danica Kirka, The Associated Press
Uncategorized
Poilievre on 2025 Election Interference – Carney sill hasn’t fired Liberal MP in Chinese election interference scandal

From Conservative Party Communications
“Yes. He must be disqualified. I find it incredible that Mark Carney would allow someone to run for his party that called for a Canadian citizen to be handed over to a foreign government on a bounty, a foreign government that would almost certainly execute that Canadian citizen.
“Think about that for a second. We have a Liberal MP saying that a Canadian citizen should be handed over to a foreign dictatorship to get a bounty so that that citizen could be murdered. And Mark Carney says he should stay on as a candidate. What does that say about whether Mark Carney would protect Canadians?
“Mark Carney is deeply conflicted. Just in November, he went to Beijing and secured a quarter-billion-dollar loan for his company from a state-owned Chinese bank. He’s deeply compromised, and he will never stand up for Canada against any foreign regime. It is another reason why Mr. Carney must show us all his assets, all the money he owes, all the money that his companies owe to foreign hostile regimes. And this story might not be entirely the story of the bounty, and a Liberal MP calling for a Canadian to be handed over for execution to a foreign government might not be something that the everyday Canadian can relate to because it’s so outrageous. But I ask you this, if Mark Carney would allow his Liberal MP to make a comment like this, when would he ever protect Canada or Canadians against foreign hostility?
“He has never put Canada first, and that’s why we cannot have a fourth Liberal term. After the Lost Liberal Decade, our country is a playground for foreign interference. Our economy is weaker than ever before. Our people more divided. We need a change to put Canada first with a new government that will stand up for the security and economy of our citizens and take back control of our destiny. Let’s bring it home.”
Uncategorized
Canada Needs A Real Plan To Compete Globally

From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy
Ottawa’s ideological policies have left Canada vulnerable. Strategic action is needed now
As Canada navigates an increasingly complex geopolitical landscape, the next federal government must move beyond reflexive anti—Americanism regardless of its political leanings. Instead, Canada should prioritize national interests while avoiding unnecessary conflict and subservience.
The notion that Canada can stand alone is as misguided as the idea that it is only an economic appendage of the United States. Both perspectives have influenced policy in Ottawa at different times, leading to mistakes.
Rather than engaging in futile name-calling or trade disputes, Canada must take strategic steps to reinforce its autonomy. This approach requires a pragmatic view rooted in Realpolitik—recognizing global realities, mitigating risks, governing for the whole country, and seizing opportunities while abandoning failed ideologies.
However, if Washington continues to pursue protectionist measures, Canada must find effective ways to counteract the weakened position Ottawa has placed the country in over the past decade.
One key strategy is diversifying trade relationships, notably by expanding economic ties with emerging markets such as India and Southeast Asia. This will require repairing Canada’s strained relationship with India and regaining political respect in China.
Unlike past Liberal trade missions, which often prioritized ideological talking points over substance, Canada must negotiate deals that protect domestic industries rather than turning summits into platforms for moral posturing.
A more effective approach would be strengthening partnerships with countries that value Canadian resources instead of vilifying them under misguided environmental policies. Expand LNG exports to Europe and Asia and leverage Canada’s critical minerals sector to establish reciprocal supply chains with non-Western economies, reducing economic reliance on the U.S.
Decades of complacency have left Canada vulnerable to American influence over its resource sector. Foreign-funded environmental groups have weakened domestic energy production, handing U.S. industries a strategic advantage. Ottawa must counter this by ensuring Canadian energy is developed at home rather than allowing suppressed domestic production to benefit foreign competitors.
Likewise, a robust industrial policy—prioritizing mining, manufacturing, and agricultural resilience—could reduce dependence on U.S. and Chinese imports. This does not mean adopting European-style subsidies but rather eliminating excessive regulations that make Canadian businesses uncompetitive, including costly domestic carbon tariffs.
Another key vulnerability is Canada’s growing military dependence on the U.S. through NORAD and NATO. While alliances are essential, decades of underfunding and neglect have turned the Canadian Armed Forces into little more than a symbolic force. Canada must learn self-reliance and commit to serious investment in defence.
Increasing defence spending—not to meet NATO targets but to build deterrence—is essential. Ottawa must reform its outdated procurement processes and develop a domestic defence manufacturing base, reducing reliance on foreign arms deals.
Canada’s vast Arctic is also at risk. Without continued investment in northern sovereignty, Ottawa may find itself locked out of its own backyard by more assertive global powers.
For too long, Canada has relied on an economic model that prioritizes federal redistribution over wealth creation and productivity. A competitive tax regime—one that attracts investment instead of punishing success—is essential.
A capital gains tax hike might satisfy activists in Toronto, but it does little to attract investments and encourage economic growth. Likewise, Ottawa must abandon ideological green policies that threaten agri-food production, whether by overregulating farmers or ranchers. At the same time, it must address inefficiencies in supply management once and for all. Canada must be able to feed a growing world without unnecessary bureaucratic obstacles.
Ottawa must also create an environment where businesses can innovate and grow without excessive regulatory burdens. This includes eliminating interprovincial trade barriers that stifle commerce.
Similarly, Canada’s tech sector, long hindered by predatory regulations, should be freed from excessive government interference. Instead of suffocating innovation with compliance mandates, Ottawa should focus on deregulation while implementing stronger security measures for foreign tech firms operating in Canada.
Perhaps Ottawa’s greatest mistake is its knee-jerk reactions to American policies, made without a coherent long-term strategy. Performative trade disputes with Washington and symbolic grandstanding in multilateral organizations do little to advance Canada’s interests.
Instead of reacting emotionally, Canada must take proactive steps to secure its economic, resource, and defence future. That is the role of a responsible government.
History’s best strategists understood that one should never fight an opponent’s war but instead dictate the terms of engagement. Canada’s future does not depend on reacting to Washington’s policies—these are calculated strategies, not whims. Instead, Canada’s success will be determined by its ability to act in the interests of citizens in all regions of the country, and seeing the world as it is rather than how ideological narratives wish it to be.
Marco Navarro-Génie is the vice president of research at the Frontier Centre for Public Policy. With Barry Cooper, he is co-author of Canada’s COVID: The Story of a Pandemic Moral Panic (2023).
-
2025 Federal Election2 days ago
WEF video shows Mark Carney pushing financial ‘revolution’ based on ‘net zero’ goals
-
Break The Needle2 days ago
Why psychedelic therapy is stuck in the waiting room
-
2025 Federal Election2 days ago
Three cheers for Poilievre’s alcohol tax cut
-
2025 Federal Election2 days ago
MORE OF THE SAME: Mark Carney Admits He Will Not Repeal the Liberal’s Bill C-69 – The ‘No Pipelines’ Bill
-
2025 Federal Election2 days ago
‘Coordinated and Alarming’: Allegations of Chinese Voter Suppression in 2021 Race That Flipped Toronto Riding to Liberals and Paul Chiang
-
2025 Federal Election2 days ago
Liberal MP resigns after promoting Chinese government bounty on Conservative rival
-
2025 Federal Election2 days ago
‘I’m Cautiously Optimistic’: Doug Ford Strongly Recommends Canada ‘Not To Retaliate’ Against Trump’s Tariffs
-
Automotive2 days ago
Trump Must Act to Halt the Tesla Terror Campaign