Connect with us

National

Trudeau clinging like a ‘low-key autocrat’: Jeremy Nuttall

Published

7 minute read

By Jeremy Nuttall

Is Canada looking like a developing nation with a corruption problem and a soft authoritarian regime?

This isn’t normal. Not even close. Even the most eccentric of Prime Ministers in any other commonwealth country would likely be licking their wounds in Ibiza by now, watching the chaos unfold from a safe distance.

Not this Prime Minister. True to form as the head of a micromanaging Prime Minister’s Office, he couldn’t bring himself to step aside. In fact, he still hasn’t.

Trudeau’s stubbornness edges dangerously close to the behavior of a low-key autocrat. He was nowhere to be seen for days as he shrugged off demands to “get lost in the snow.”

Imagine a country with a leader so deeply unpopular within his own party that members, mostly speaking anonymously out of fear, pressured him for months to step down—only for him to deflect with vague promises of “reflection” whenever the pressure mounted.

Imagine that happening against the background of the leader refusing to release documents as ordered by Parliament, at the same time the political landscape is embroiled in a foreign interference scandal. Meanwhile, food bank usage has surged, and concerns over soaring housing costs continue to grow.

Then, after a top minister leaves and drives a stake through his government, that leader circles his most loyal comrades in a bid to fend off the resignation even more before finally admitting defeat.

But even then, after the admission, said leader is still in charge and only promising to resign fully once his successor is chosen, then stopping the work of government at one of the most crucial times in recent history to give himself and his party time to get their affairs in order.

If you had that explained to you without knowing it was Canada, would you think it was a western parliamentary democracy being described, or a developing nation with a corruption problem and a soft authoritarian regime?

Democracies aren’t meant to prioritize the personal interests of government members over the country’s welfare. Yet that’s exactly what Trudeau did by requesting the prorogation of Parliament, giving his Liberals time to strategize for their own political survival.

Meanwhile, for the first few months of a new U.S. administration threatening major tariffs, Canada will be limited in its ability to address whatever happens in the House. With so much at stake, this move seems almost vindictive to a Canadian public who are now rejecting Liberal leadership.

Governor General Mary Simon’s decision to allow this—and the time she took to consider it—deserves scrutiny. The public is owed an explanation.

The Liberal Party’s troubles are not the Canadian public’s troubles, but in proroguing Parliament to deal with them, the Liberals have made them such.

Trudeau’s plan for the country is incoherent, his ministers suddenly have a lot of family obligations, and even columnists who curiously supported him for years too long are now calling for his exit.

Additionally, with him waiting until the Liberals are at their most unpopular ever, the Conservatives—set to win in a landslide no matter what—can control the narrative of the election and claim to have won on any mandate they see fit. The public could be left out of the conversation.

When tallied up, it’s all so awful.

In reality, however abnormal this is, it’s the natural course of where Canadians have allowed their country to end up.

Years of not really getting that upset about anything or realizing that the government and what it does matters are starting to show the real harms a country can be haunted by when it shrugs off the chipping away of its democratic norms by shallow and venal political operatives.

As pressure mounted on Trudeau to resign, his own MPs sheepishly asked for him to step down, an illustration that the PMO holds far too much power over caucus. One was left wondering if a breaking point would happen and MPs would make a grand gesture on behalf of Canadians.

Such a climax never arrived. My incredibly small kingdom for a handful of Liberal MPs with cojones.

The really sad part is, so far, it seems Liberal MPs missed a chance to turn the tide and more forcefully oust Trudeau from the leadership role by any means necessary, even if it meant voting against their own party.

They could have sent a message that democracy is a cumulative effort, not the whims of one person, then followed it up with reasonable changes to party policy to allow for the removal of a leader should such circumstances occur again.

What this has done is set a new low bar. The next power-crazed PMO will have this one as a blueprint to disregard the public and its welfare before pushing the limit even further.

The only bar lower at this point would be if Trudeau goes back on his promise to resign. Yes, it’s a long shot, but considering this guy’s track record of keeping promises—right up there with an absentee father in a daytime drama—I’ll really believe he’s gone when he’s gone.

This is a moment Canadians really need to examine and question if the way their government has been operating is working for them. If it isn’t, a movement for change must spring up.

Dignity, tradition, integrity, the common good—all of these principles risk becoming meaningless unless Canadians begin to take them seriously.

The Bureau is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Subscribe to The Bureau

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

Business

Carney’s Digital Tax Debacle: How Ottawa Triggered a Trade Fallout with Washington

Published on

The Opposition with Dan Knight

Trump walked away from trade talks over Canada’s retroactive digital services tax—enacted by Mark Carney’s Liberal government despite clear warnings from experts, businesses, and industry leaders.

Donald Trump has officially walked away from the negotiating table. The trigger? Canada’s ill-conceived Digital Services Tax (DST)—a reckless, retroactive grab for revenue targeting U.S. tech firms. Trump isn’t mincing words: he’s calling it a “blatant, discriminatory attack” on American innovation, and now he’s moving to punish Canada economically for it.

So what exactly is this tax?

The Digital Services Tax, passed by the Liberal government and implemented under Mark Carney’s leadership, applies a 3% levy on revenue—not profits—earned by large digital firms operating in Canada. And it’s retroactive. That means it’s being applied to earnings from as far back as January 1, 2022, with companies forced to make lump-sum payments by June 30, 2025.

This tax specifically targets companies with global revenue of at least €750 million and Canadian digital revenue of at least CAD 20 million. Translation: It’s a direct hit on American giants like Google, Amazon, Meta, Airbnb, and Uber, and it spares Canadian firms and EU-based entities from equivalent exposure. It’s not tax fairness—it’s protectionism with a smiley-face sticker.

Trump has responded in kind. As of June 27, all trade negotiations with Canada are suspended. Retaliatory tariffs—already mounting since February—are set to escalate. Trump is drawing a red line, and he’s daring Canada to cross it.

What’s at stake?

Everything. Canada sends over 75% of its exports to the United States. We’re talking about nearly a trillion dollars in annual trade. With Trump now actively leveraging tariffs and ending negotiations, entire sectors—from automotive to agriculture, energy to manufacturing—are in the crosshairs.

Already this year, Trump has slapped 25% tariffs on Canadian imports, with specific hits to steel, aluminum, vehicles, and auto parts, and 10% tariffs on Canadian oil, gas, and potash. These moves have already disrupted markets. Ending trade negotiations is a body blow to an already wobbly Canadian economy—still reeling from Trudeau-era mismanagement and Carney’s corporate globalist agenda.

So who could have seen this coming?

Almost everyone.

In testimony before the House of Commons Standing Committee on International Trade on June 11, 2024, Dr. Meredith Lilly, Associate Professor and Simon Reisman Chair in International Economic Policy at Carleton University, issued a precise and deeply informed warning about Canada’s Digital Services Tax (DST).

Dr. Lilly, a leading authority on North American trade, emphasized that unilateral implementation of a DST would “discriminate against large U.S. firms” and could trigger U.S. retaliation under the Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement (CUSMA). Her words were clear:

“Unilateral action by Canada to introduce a digital services tax would discriminate against large U.S. firms. We should be prepared for U.S. retaliation if these measures are enacted, and Canadian lawmakers should be aware of the damaging consequences for the broader CUSMA review process.”

She explained that such policy moves could provoke formal dispute resolution under CUSMA Chapter 31 and complicate the 2026 review of the trade agreement. Dr. Lilly stated unequivocally:

“Both of these things [the Online Streaming Act and the DST] will complicate the process and result in a full review if they aren’t addressed before then.”

This wasn’t a political shot—it was an expert diagnosis. Dr. Lilly’s analysis made it crystal clear: if Canada chose to proceed with a retroactive, discriminatory tax on U.S. digital firms, the blowback from Washington wouldn’t wait until 2026. It would come sooner. And it did—on June 27, 2025, President Trump pulled the plug on all trade talks with Canada, citing the DST as a direct affront to American companies and fair trade principles.

In a June 2024 committee hearing, MP Kyle Seeback pressed experts on the fallout of Trudeau-era policies like the Digital Services Tax, asking bluntly:

“If these all go through and are implemented, as it looks like the current government wants to do, will it make the CUSMA review easier or more complicated?”

Dr. Meredith Lilly didn’t mince words:

“If the online streaming act and the digital services tax move forward, I fully expect action to happen before the 2026 review. I think the Americans will respond.”

So Kyle Seeback saw it. Meredith Lilly warned about it. But this wasn’t just a red flag waved by a few policy experts or MPs in a backroom committee. No—Canada’s entire business community was screaming from the rooftops about the catastrophic implications of the Digital Services Tax.

Let’s be clear: this wasn’t some quiet objection buried in legalese. It was a full-blown economic revolt.

The Canadian Chamber of Commerce called it out as early as September 2023, warning that the tax would raise prices on digital services, hammer consumers, and almost certainly provoke retaliatory tariffs from the United States—a country that, I might remind you, accounted for $960.9 billion in bilateral trade in 2022 alone.

The Retail Council of Canada joined the fight in June 2025, warning that retailers and everyday Canadians would be caught in the crossfire of U.S. retaliation. The Business Council of Canada didn’t mince words either, saying the tax carried “serious economic consequences” and “a high risk of sparking a trade dispute”—exactly what happened when Donald Trump walked away from trade negotiations.

And it didn’t stop there.

The Canadian Bankers Association, Canadian Life and Health Insurance Association, Canadian Venture Capital Association, and Future Borders Coalition all signed a joint letter in June 2025 pleading with Mark Carney’s government to hit pause. They warned of massive financial disruptions, threats to investment stability, and damage to border operations.

This wasn’t lobbying. It was a desperate attempt to prevent economic self-harm.

Even the groups who typically tread lightly around Ottawa saw the writing on the wall. They were begging for sanity. And what did the Liberal government do? They shoved the tax through anyway—retroactive to 2022—and waited for the backlash.

Well, it came. Trump walked. Tariffs hit. Negotiations died. And Canada’s business leaders, from Bay Street to the border crossings, are now left to deal with the fallout they predicted—and Trudeau’s team ignored.

You were told the Liberals were the “adults in the room.” That they could navigate Trump. That they understood diplomacy, trade, and economics. But let’s be honest—an eight-year-old could have seen this coming. You slap a retroactive tax on American companies, and you expect no consequences? That’s not strategy. That’s stupidity.

This entire debacle is proof that the Liberal Party is utterly incapable of negotiating with strength. They don’t understand leverage, they don’t understand power, and they clearly don’t understand how to protect Canada’s economic interests. Mark Carney, Trudeau’s handpicked heir, isn’t some master tactician—he’s a globalist relic from 2008, still clinging to failed ideas and the fantasy of technocratic rule.

Unfortunately for him—and for us—this isn’t 2008 anymore. The world has changed. Trump is back, the rules are different, and while other countries pivot, adapt, and push back, Canada’s Liberal government is stuck in the past. Rigid, arrogant, and dangerously out of touch.

What we’re witnessing isn’t just a policy failure. It’s the collapse of a worldview—the end of the Liberal fantasy that globalist tax schemes, virtue signaling, and bureaucratic arrogance can substitute for real leadership. And it’s playing out in real time: with lost jobs, broken trade relationships, and Canada’s economic credibility circling the drain.

But here’s the good news: Canadians are waking up.

The Liberal government, now clinging to a minority held together by duct tape and desperation, won’t be around for long. The legacy media can’t protect them forever. The echo chamber of downtown Toronto can’t drown out the truth spilling out from small towns, border communities, and every corner of the real Canada.

This is a patriotic call to action. The sooner an election is called, the better. Because Canada cannot afford more of this. We cannot afford a government that punishes productivity, antagonizes our closest ally, and drives our economy into a wall—all while patting itself on the back for “moral leadership.”

It’s time to turn the page. Time to elect leaders who understand strength, who prioritize prosperity, and who don’t bend the knee to unelected bureaucrats in Brussels or Davos. Canada needs a government that fights for our interests—not the interests of Silicon Valley tax envy or UN think tanks.

The collapse has begun. Now it’s up to Canadians to finish the job—and rebuild this country with pride, purpose, and power.

Subscribe to The Opposition with Dan Knight .

For the full experience, upgrade your subscription.

Continue Reading

National

Quebec bans gender-confused inmates from requesting prison of their choice

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

Public Security Minister François Bonnardel announced that prisoners will be placed in facilities according to their sex.

In a press release issued this week, Quebec’s Public Security Minister François Bonnardel announced that gender-confused inmates will be sent to incarceration facilities based on their sex, not the gender they identify with.

“The Quebec government is ensuring equity in the treatment of all inmates,” Bonnardel said. “Safety must always come first, for the benefit of correctional officers, our fellow citizens and incarcerated people.”

According to The Montreal Gazette, offenders who are confused about whether they are a man or woman previously were allowed to request to be placed in a male or female facility of their preference.

The outlet noted that the change means that such requests will no longer be allowed, though criminals who are confused about their sex will still be able to identify as the gender they wish and that accommodations will be made “to respect their rights and circumstances.”

READ: Female prisoner describes horror of being incarcerated with gender-confused men

As reported by LifeSite in April of this year, Correctional Services Canada announced that Mohamad Al Ballouz, who brutally killed his wife and two children in 2022, would be sent to a men’s prison, despite claiming to be a woman.

Ballouz, a 38-year-old man from Quebec, was found guilty of second-degree murder. Defending its decision to send Ballouz to a male facility, CSC said “when there are overriding health and safety concerns, the request is denied and alternatives are put in place to meet the offender’s gender‑related needs at the institution where they are incarcerated.”

During his trial, Ballouz claimed to be a woman and demanded that he be referred to as “Levana,” a change which was made after he was charged for his crimes. Notably, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation’s (CBC’s) report of the case referred to Ballouz as a “she” and used his fake name.

Pierre Poilievre’s Conservative Party platform had sought to ensure male criminals who claim to be gender-confused and identify as women would not be sent to female prisons.

Continue Reading

Trending

X