Connect with us

National

Trudeau’s agenda is failing Canadians as 2 million visit food banks each month

Published

4 minute read

From LifeSiteNews

By Clare Marie Merkowsky

According to an October report from Food Banks Canada, Canadians made 2,059,636 visits to a food bank in March alone, as overall visits have increased 6% from last year’s record-breaking numbers. But what, if anything, is being done to fix this?

More Canadians than ever are relying on food banks to feed their families, as usage has increased 90% from 2019. 

According to an October report from Food Banks Canada, Canadians made 2,059,636 visits to a food bank in March alone, as overall visits have increased 6% from last year’s record-breaking numbers.  

“Compared to before the pandemic, there has been a significant increase in two-parent households with children under 18 accessing food banks — from 18.8% in 2019 to nearly 23% in 2024,” reads the report.  

“Two-parent families who access food banks are more likely to live in larger urban areas of 100,000 or more, which contributes to the higher usage rates in those areas,” it continued. “This trend is consistent with other research findings that show households with children have been especially hard hit by rapidly rising costs of living.”  

Conservative Party Leader Pierre Poilievre commented on the situation, saying, ” Food Banks Canada reports more than 2 MILLION food bank visits in ONE MONTH—after the carbon tax sent food prices up 36% faster than in the U.S. This is Canada after 9 years of NDP-Liberals.” 

 

According to the report, families are increasingly forced to rely on food banks, as one-third of the recipients were children, making 700,000 monthly visits this year. 

Food Banks Canada attributed the rising reliance on food banks to “rapid inflation, housing costs and insufficient social supports.” According to the report, 18% of food bank recipients are gainfully employed while 70% are in the rental market.  

Finding a solution 

The report recommended “a groceries and essentials benefit,” by modifying the existing GST quarterly credit given to low-income Canadians.   

However, it should be clear that giving struggling Canadians a tax benefit merely treats the symptom, not the problem itself. The disease is not rising food prices, it is Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s radical policies that have created a failing economy fueled by inflationary government spending and a punitive carbon tax regime.

Taxing the “carbon” emitted in the production and transportation of Canadians’ food and then returning a fraction of the money not only drives Canadians into poverty, but makes them reliant on handouts.

The Trudeau government needs to reign in its reckless spending and reverse its radical tax policies, returning the economic power to citizens and away from bureaucrats.

Despite the clear need for this, Trudeau’s government appears bent on doing the opposite. As LifeSiteNews previously reported, a 2023 October Parliamentary Budget Officer report found that Trudeau’s carbon tax is costing Canadians hundreds of dollars annually as government rebates remain insufficient to compensate for the increased fuel prices, yet he remains committed to further increasing the tax.

Reports have revealed that a carbon tax of more than $350 per tonne is needed to reach Trudeau’s net-zero goals by 2050. Currently, Canadians living in provinces under the federal carbon pricing scheme pay $80 per tonne, a rate that will be raised to $170 per tonne by 2030.

Directly following a report that Canada’s poverty rate increased for the first time in years due to high inflation spurred by government spending, polls showed that nearly half of Canadians are only $200 from complete financial ruin, and yet the Trudeau government continues down its same path.   

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

National

Women and girls beauty pageant urges dismissal of transgender human rights complaint

Published on

Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms

There has not been a human rights case in Canada that has dealt with whether children’s emotional, mental, and physical safety should take precedence over a transwoman’s desire to access a female changeroom.

The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms announces that Canada Galaxy Pageants (CGP), a beauty competition based in Mississauga, Ontario, continues to face a drawn-out human rights complaint filed in 2019 by Ms. Jessica Yaniv (also known as Ms. Jessica Simpson). Despite repeated delays, missed deadlines, and inadequate filings by Ms. Simpson, the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (Tribunal) has allowed the case to continue—imposing years of uncertainty, stress, and reputational harm on pageant activities and its organizers.

On July 8, 2025, lawyers provided by the Justice Centre wrote to the Tribunal requesting that the complaint against the pageant be dismissed.

The conflict began in 2019, when Ms. Jessica Simpson (identifying at the time as Ms. Jessica Yaniv) was asked whether she had fully transitioned to female prior to competing in a CGP beauty pageant. Ms. Simpson refused to answer and filed a complaint with the Tribunal, seeking $10,000 in damages for “injury to dignity and feelings” and a ruling against the pageant that it must allow biological males to participate alongside biological females and young girls.

CPG pageants are private events that include female competitors as young as six years old, and require participants to change together backstage.

The pageant has a policy of accommodating fully transitioned transgender women, but has expressed safety and privacy concerns about allowing individuals with intact male genitals to access these female-only spaces.

There has not been a human rights case in Canada that has dealt with whether children’s emotional, mental, and physical safety should take precedence over a transwoman’s desire to access a female changeroom.

In January 2025, the Tribunal directed both parties to file hearing materials. While the pageant complied, submitting nine witness statements, including from concerned parents, Ms. Simpson repeatedly failed to meet deadlines and produced inadequate submissions. Ms. Simpson was nevertheless granted multiple extensions, but still failed to submit a proper case summary or witness list beyond naming her own mother.

The Tribunal has not yet indicated whether it will proceed to a hearing or will finally dismiss the claim.

Constitutional lawyer Allison Pejovic stated, “This beauty pageant has already made reasonable accommodations for fully transitioned transgender females without male genitals.”

“It is imperative that biological women and girls have safe, secure, female-only places where they won’t have to worry about seeing male genitals, or about having individuals with male genitals looking at them,” Ms. Pejovic continued. “Little girls should not be exposed to male genitals. Period.”

Canada Galaxy Pageants continues to express gratitude for the legal support it has received from the Justice Centre.

The Tribunal is expected to decide in the coming weeks whether it will finally dismiss the complaint or extend further leniency to Ms. Simpson.

Continue Reading

National

How Long Will Mark Carney’s Post-Election Honeymoon Last? – Michelle Rempel Garner

Published on

From Energy Now

By Michelle Rempel Garner

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney seems to be enjoying a bit of a post-election honeymoon period with voters. This is a normal phenomenon in Canadian politics – our electorate tends to give new leaders the benefit of the doubt for a time after their election.


Get the Latest Canadian Focused Energy News Delivered to You! It’s FREE: Quick Sign-Up Here


So the obvious question that arises in this circumstance is, how long will it last?

I’ve had a few people ask me to speculate about that over the last few weeks. It’s not an entirely straightforward question to answer, because external factors often need to be considered. However, leaders have a lot of control too, and on that front, questions linger about Mark Carney’s long-term political acumen. So let’s start there.

Having now watched the man in action for a hot minute, there seems to be some legs to the lingering perception that, as a political neophyte, Mr. Carney struggles to identify and address political challenges. In the over 100 days that he’s now been in office, he’s laid down some proof points on this front.

For starters, Mr. Carney seems to not fully grasp that his post-election honeymoon is unfolding in a starkly different political landscape than that of his predecessor in 2015. When former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau secured a majority government, he inherited a balanced federal budget, a thriving economy, and a stable social fabric from the prior Conservative government. These favorable conditions gave Trudeau the time and flexibility to advance his political agenda. By contrast, Canadians today are grappling with crises in affordability, employment, and crime – issues that were virtually non-existent in 2015. As a result, public patience with a new political leader may wear thin much more quickly now than it did a decade ago.

So in that, Carney doesn’t have much time to make material progress on longstanding irritants like crime and affordability, but to date, he really hasn’t. In fact, he hasn’t even dedicated much space in any of his daily communications to empathizing with the plight of the everyday Canadian, eschewing concern for bread and butter issues for colder corporate speak. So if predictions about a further economic downturn in the fall ring true, he may not have the longer term political runway Justin Trudeau once had with the voting public, which doesn’t bode well for his long term favourables.

Carney’s apparent unease with retail politics won’t help him on that front, either. For example, at the Calgary Stampede, while on the same circuit, I noticed him spending the bulk of his limited time at events – even swish cocktail receptions – visibly eyeing the exit, surrounded by an entourage of fartcatchers whose numbers would have made even Trudeau blush. Unlike Trudeau, whose personal charisma secured three election victories despite scandals, Carney struggles to connect with a crowd. This political weakness may prove fatal to his prospects for an extended honeymoon, even with the Liberal brand providing cover.

It’s also too early to tell if Carney has anyone in his inner circle capable of grasping these concepts. That said, leaders typically don’t cocoon themselves away from people who will give blunt political assessments until the very end of their tenures when their political ends are clear to everyone but them. Nonetheless, Carney seems to have done exactly that, and compounded the problem of his lack of political acumen, by choosing close advisors who have little retail political experience themselves. While some have lauded this lack of political experience as a good thing, not having people around the daily table or group chat who can interject salient points about how policy decisions will impact the lives of day to day Canadians probably won’t help Carney slow the loss of his post-election shine.

Further proof to this point are the post-election grumblings that have emerged from the Liberal caucus. Unlike Trudeau, who started his premiership with an overwhelming majority of his caucus having been freshly elected, Carney has a significant number of old hands in his caucus who carry a decade of internal drama, inflated sense of worth, and personal grievances amongst them. As a political neophyte, Carney not only has to prove to the Canadian public that he has the capacity to understand their plight, he also has to do the same for his caucus, whose support he will uniformly need to pass legislation in a minority Parliament.

To date, Carney has not been entirely successful on that front. In crafting his cabinet, he promoted weak caucus members into key portfolios like immigration, kept loose cannons in places where they can cause a lot of political damage (i.e. Steven Guilbeaut in Heritage), unceremoniously dumped mavericks who possess big social media reach without giving them a task to keep them occupied, and passed over senior members of the caucus who felt they should either keep their jobs or have earned a promotion after carrying water for a decade. Underestimating the ability of a discontented caucus to derail a leader’s political agenda – either by throwing a wrench into the gears of Parliamentleaking internal drama to media, or underperformance – is something that Carney doesn’t seem to fully grasp. Said differently, Carney’s (in)ability to manage his caucus will have an impact on how long the shine stays on him.

Mark Carney’s honeymoon as a public figure also hinges upon his (arguably hilarious) assumption that the federal public service operates in the same way that private sector businesses do. Take for example, a recent (and hamfistedly) leaked headline, proactively warning senior public servants that he might fire them. In the corporate world, where bonuses and promotions are tied to results, such conditions are standard (and in most cases, entirely reasonable). Yet, after a decade of Liberal government expansion and lax enforcement of performance standards, some bureaucrats have grown accustomed to and protective of Liberal slipshod operating standards. Carney may not yet understand that many of these folks will happily leak sensitive information or sabotage policy reforms to preserve their status quo, and that both elegance and political will is required to enact change within the Liberal’s bloated government.

On that front, Mr. Carney has already gained a reputation for being dismissive and irritable with various players in the political arena. While this quick-tempered demeanor may have remained understated during his relatively brief ascent to the Prime Minister’s office, continued impatience could soon become a prominent issue for both him and his party. Whether dismissing reporters or publicly slighting senior cabinet members, if Carney sustains this type of arrogance and irritability he won’t be long for the political world. Without humility, good humor, patience, and resilience he won’t be able to convince voters, the media, the bureaucracy, and industry to support his governing agenda.

But perhaps the most important factor in judging how long Mr. Carney’s honeymoon will last is that to date he has shown a striking indifference to nuclear-grade social policy files like justice, immigration, and public safety. His appointment of underperforming ministers to these critical portfolios and the absence of a single government justice bill in Parliament’s spring session – despite crime being a major voter concern – is a big problem. Carney himself rarely addresses these issues – likely due to a lack of knowledge and care – leaving them to the weakest members of his team. None of this points to long term political success for Carney.

So Mr. Carney needs to understand that Canadians are not sterile, esoteric units to be traded in a Bay Street transaction. They are real people living real lives, with real concerns that he signed up to address. He also needs to understand that politics (read, the ability to connect with one’s constituents and deliver for them) isn’t an avocation – it’s a learned skill of which he is very much still a novice practitioner.

Honeymoon or not, these laws of political gravity that Mr. Carney can’t avoid for long, particularly with an effective opposition litigating his government’s failures.

In that, I think the better question is not if Mark Carney can escape that political gravity well, but whether he’ll stick around once his ship inevitably gets sucked into it.

Only time – and the country’s fortunes under his premiership – will tell.

Continue Reading

Trending

X