Is Canada’s Auditor General complicit in the ignoring of Trudeau Government’s lack of Emergency Risk Management in COVID19 matters? We think so! CIN decided to investigate the Auditor General of Canada who reports to parliamentarians directly by conducting independent financial audits of federal government operations. These audits provide members of parliament with objective evidence to help them examine the government’s activities and hold it to account. But who holds the Auditor General accountable?
Karen Hogan: Canada’s Auditor General or NWO Puppet?
Who is the Auditor General? Karen Hogan holds both a Bachelor’s and a graduate diploma in accounting from Concordia University in Montreal.
Hogan has served in various corporate roles including with the Montreal office of Ernst & Young and as a Senior Accounting manager for Canada Post in Ottawa. Hogan is a member of the Chartered Professional Accountants of Ontario as well as the Ordre des comptables professionnels agréés du Québec.
Corruption doesn’t fall far from the tree in this Liberal government. Much to the disappointment of many Canadians across the country, “Justin’s Puppet Show Hour” holds performances daily, seven days a week! Yes, Master “Sock Boy” definitely likes his “Sock-Puppets”!
‘Auditor General Karen Hogan yesterday defended her ties to a Liberal lobbyist. Hogan awarded sole-sourced contracts to a lobbying firm and fed them confidential copies of her audits months before they were available to MPs and senators.’
“I have taken a look at the contracts,” said Hogan. “We followed the contracting rules set out by the government.” Hogan’s office in 2020 awarded a $24,800 sole-sourced contract to lobbyist Susan Smith of Bluesky Strategy Group Inc. of Ottawa. Smith is also a former Liberal press aide & co-founder of a Party-affiliated think tank, Canada 2020.’
‘Records showed auditors also fed confidential copies of their reports to Smith months before they were tabled in Parliament. Secret copies of audits were emailed to smith January 8, 2020 but were not publicly released to parliamentarians until July 8.’
Auditor Hogan yesterday declined comment when asked if any corrective measures were taken following the disclosures. Hogan’s office had attempted to conceal the records under the Access To Information Act and only released them after Blacklock’s reporter filed a formal complaint.
The AG declined to comment! The Auditor-General who is tasked with checking all government spending every year by carrying out annual audits in order to assist parliament to hold to account and call to account, all persons entrusted with management of public funds and resources… “declined to comment”! But why stop at $25,000 when you’re responsible for billions (maybe even trillions by the time the Pandemic is over). This according to the Chartered Professional Accountants of Canada: https://www.cpacanada.ca/en/news/pivot-magazine/2020-10-26-karen-hogan-auditor-general
“Hogan’s office is tasked with a crucial role: to audit every single dollar spent by the federal government on COVID-19 support”
It does not stop…
The thing is, Karen’s office hasn’t stopped there. Here are contracts awarded to Steve Broad, Karen’s husband at Kinemedics, for services charged to the Auditor Generals Office itself! Anons were kind enough to dump thousands of confidential links on the web which we recovered! We are not certain if he is the registered owner of Kinemedics as that data has been scrubbed from the internet? Regardless, there is a definite conflict of interest here that equals if not surpasses Trudeau’s Aga Khan Island scandal!
Here are the contracts awarded to Kinemedics from the Auditor Generals Office. The contracts total $198,550. So much ergonomics assessment? They better have the best posture in Ottawa!
Here’s one for Bill Morneau’s company, Morneau Shepell Ltd. for $49,720. Apparently the Auditor General needed some private auditing?
Bill Morneau was the one to personally contact Karen Hogan when Trudeau appointed her AG:
“We suspected she might be getting a call, but it kept getting delayed,” says her husband, Steve Broad. “Then when it finally came, her cell reception was so weak that the call dropped.” Hours later, the same day, the lines connected. It was Bill Morneau officially offering Hogan the job. “She came out of the room with a big smile. She was extremely happy.”
And here is another contract made, again, to BlueSky Strategy Group for $13,899 for “Media Training for the Deputy Auditor General”.
So, why is Hogan rewarding “sole-sourced” contracts and leaking confidential reports to lobbyists? How are BlueSky Strategies and Canada 2020 involved in all this? Canada’s highest checks-and-balances office seems to be caught in a corruption scandal! So, who audits the Auditor General? Morneau? Not the Canadian taxpayer!
Canada’s highest checks-and-balances office seems to be caught in a corruption scandal! Recently, CIN aired the dirty linens within Canada’s Auditor Generals Office led by Trudeau appointee Karen Hogan. Hogan rewarded “sole-sourced” contracts and leaked confidential reports to lobbyists? The woman at the heart of this scandal was Susan Smith, founder of Canada 2020; a think-tank founded in 2006, whose goal is to build a community of progressive ideas and people that will move and shape governments. What role does Canada 2020 play in the theater that has become our government? If Canadian politics is theatre, Canada 2020 is the central casting agency! Welcome to the home of the New World Order!
Here are Canada 2020 Corporate Partners: Google, Mastercard and the Desmarais family Canada Power Corporation, just to mention a few!
Justin Trudeau on Advisory Council for Canada 2020!
Canada 2020 was founded in 2006 by Tim Barber, Gene Lang, Susan Smith and Tom Pitfield. Susan Smith was the lobbyist who received funding and confidential reports directly from the Auditor Generals Office.
Why is this significant? Justin Trudeau himself sits on the Advisory Board of Canada 2020 as does Gerald Butts. Was Canada’s Auditor General doing her Master’s bidding by awarding “sole-sourced” contracts and leaking confidential reports to lobbyists? We believe so! How is this NOT a conflict of interest?
Susan Smith: Co-founder of Canada 2020, lobbyist who Hogan gave “sole sourced” contract to and confidential reports. Odd that the MSM only listed her as a founder of SkyBlue Strategy Group and omitted her role in the larger umbrella network, Canada 2020? Surely that must have been an oversite?
2. Tim Barber: Tim worked with both the Privy Council and the Canada China Business Council! Don’t you just love how they portray themselves as “loving families”? Of course they are, but they will put their family’s well being ahead of a “useless eater” any day! Remember, Justin Trudeau was advisor to Canada 2020 and his father Pierre helped to establish the depopulation “Club of Rome.” These NWO elites care only for themselves and mass genocide in order to sustain their longevity and planetary health is their primary goal!
3.Eugene (Gene) Lang: If there ever was a Soros/Desmarais puppet Eugene would be it! Eugene graduated from Soros’s home turf at The London School of Economics and was involved with the Desmarais’s Canada China Business Council. Lang’s career has spanned the public, private and academic sectors. He served in the Canadian government as Chief of staff to John McCallum (known as Mai Jialian who offered the Chinese 30 million visa’s and citizenship… yes seriously!) including as Chief of Staff to two Ministers of National Defense; Economic Policy Advisor to the Deputy Prime Minister; Policy Advisor to the Solicitor General; and Senior Economist, Finance Canada. He has also worked as Director of Government Affairs for Bell Canada Enterprises during 2007-2009! Yes, he helped to deregulate the CRTC so Canadians can now enjoy overpriced cell phone bills with none other than… The Minister from Bell himself… Maxime Bernier! Also known as… Mad Max and The Albertan from Quebec, Maxime wants corporations to control your internet!
4.Tom Pitfield: Prior to his appointment, Tom served as the Chief Digital Strategist for Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s federal election campaign, as well as his campaign for leadership of the Liberal Party of Canada. Previously, Tom served as Senior Policy Advisor to the Leader of the Government in the Senate, the Honourable Jack Austin. He also worked in China for the Desmarais family run Canada Chinese Business Council! The Canada China Business Council is a collaboration between Canadian Corporations and the People’s Republic of China; basically it’s primary function is to sell Canadian Corporations and Natural Resources to the Chinese Communist State! And it wasn’t just Liberal Governments that bartered these deals, Conservative Governments did as well! The who’s who of the NWO elite sold out Canada one piece at a time in a well-coordinated operation! FYI: Just a friendly reminder to all Harperites and Albertans out there: China now owns most of your oil wells!
Many don’t know this, but Tom’s father, Michael Pitfield was clerk of the Privy Council and served Pierre Trudeau! He was also the founder of the Canadian Security Intelligence Services (CSIS), Canada’s spy agency! The agency has been criticized to have a broad scope of powers allowing it to engage in “any other act or thing that is reasonably necessary”, effectively greenlighting it to operate outside of the law. While CSIS’s powers had been reined in through committee hearings, its mandate was still quite extensive .https://ccla.org/the-canadian-security-intelligence-service-csis-past-and-present/
Where am I going with this information? The children of the elite are still, to this very day, running our country. Nothing has changed and everything they do has been achieved through an incremental approach. Canada does not have a government but rather a perception of one whereby deals are made in secrecy and mafia families rule!
Will the Conservatives come to the rescue? Canada was invaded a long time ago and what you see now is all an elaborate production implemented to appease those that still believe we are a sovereign country; all drama! There are no “white hats” in government anymore! And even the “Albertan from Quebec” is also a NWO puppet for the “Controlled Opposition”!
Here we have former Prime Minister Brian Mulroney addressing the Canada 2020 think tank where he talks about “continuity” between political parties as they took power… it was always about taking an incremental approach to usher in the NWO they wanted!
“The essential continuity of governments from Mulroney through Chretien and Martin to Harper explains a great deal of what is right about Canada today. No one should underestimate the value of this continuity. Serious public policy can only be conceived and practiced over decades – not four-year terms. “
All politicians and all parties have sold out Canada to the highest bidder for their own self-benefit and all working collectively with predetermined scripts written by the Master Puppeteer himself! Did someone say… Rothschild? In Canada, any politician associated with the powerful Desmarais family is, by association, also tied to the Rothschild family itself. https://www.mediacoop.ca/story/meet-canada%E2%80%99s-ruling-oligarchy-parasites-plenty/10917
Rothschild’s Global Commission on Internet Governance!
Canada2020 has partnered with the Government of Canada and CIGI, Center for International Governance and Innovations, the home of Canada’s CIA. Together, they are setting up the Global Commission on Internet Governance! However, the web page showing the event taking place on November 2014 has since been deleted from the Canada 2020 website. Truly, they have rewritten history here; the event apparently never happened!
“Canada 2020, in partnership with CIGI and the Government of Canada, hosted the Global Commission on Internet Governance in Ottawa on November 25, 2014. Featuring presentations from Minister of Foreign Affairs John Baird, the Commission Chair Carl Bildt, and a panel discussion hosted by the CBC’s Evan Solomon.”
CIGI now states that they are in partnership with another global think tank called Chatham House; Chatham House, also known as the Royal Institute of International Affairs, a NWO policy institute headquartered in London whose mission is to provide authoritative commentary on world events and offer solutions to global challenges. Simply put…. this is Rothschild Central HQ itself! It is the originator of the Chatham House Rule. Why was this done? Our guess is that Rothschild himself demands complete secrecy! What we do know is that Internet censorship will become a reality; we are moving closer to becoming a communist state where freedom of speech, protests, online censorship is all being labelled as sedition!
clip from Eustace Mullins in Randy Atkins’ ‘The Neo Zionist Order: Who Rules Your Rulers’, 2005.
And look at who partnered with Canada 2020: Google, Facebook, Huawei! You see? Everything you see and hear on the MSM is pure drama. Rothschild-China’s Huawei is here to stay!
Jeffrey David Sachs is an American economist, academic, public policy analyst and former director of The Earth Institute at Columbia University. He is known as one of the world’s leading experts on sustainable development, economic development,Sachs is Director of the Center for Sustainable Development at Columbia University and President of the UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network and an SDG Advocate for United Nations (UN) Secretary-General António Guterres on the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), a set of 17 global goals adopted at a UN summit meeting in September 2015. From 2001 to 2018, Sachs served as Special Advisor to the UN Secretary General, and held the same position under the previous UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon. Sachs is also former senior advisor to WHO, IMF, the World Bank, the OECD and the Pope!
In December 2018, Huawei Chief Financial Officer Meng Wanzhou was arrested in Canada at the request of the U.S., which was seeking her extradition to face charges of violating sanctions against Iran. Soon after Meng’s arrest, Sachs wrote an article in which he said her arrest was part of efforts to contain China and accused the U.S. of hypocrisy for seeking her extradition. Isaac Stone Fish, a senior fellow at Asia Society, noted that Sachs had written a foreword to a Huawei position paper, and questioned whether Sachs had been paid by Huawei.
Sachs has also shared a close relationship with Huawei, including an endorsement of the company’s “vision of our shared digital future”. And it is alleged that Sachs has ties to a number of Chinese state bodies and the private energy corporation CEFC China Energy.
During a January 2021 interview, Sachs also evaded questions about China’s repression of the Uyghurs by alluding to “huge human rights abuses committed by the U.S.” Subsequently, advocacy and rights groups jointly wrote a letter to Columbia University stating that Sachs “betrayed his institution’s mission” by trivializing the perspective of those who were oppressed by the Chinese government. Stephan Richter, editor-in-chief at The Globalist, and J.D. Bindenagel, a writer, wrote that Sachs was actively promoting “a classic Communist propaganda ploy”. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Sachs
It is not surprising to see Jeffrey Sachs portrayed as a hero by Rothschild-Chabad organizations all over North America. It is the NWO they want; an order that can only be led by the Moshiach (the Jewish Messiah)?!
According to Pensions & Investments, Sachs also said investments should be made in developing countries to create cleaner fuel alternatives. Lady Lynn Forester de Rothschild added at a conference that “When we talk with companies, we have to be very clear with them that we care about issues like their carbon footprint, ” https://jewishbusinessnews.com/2015/02/05/uns-jeffrey-sachs-says-divest-from-fossil-fuels/
Sachs and Rothschild telling corporations how it goes.
Reshaping the world by COVID-19. All fucken premeditated!
Canada’s highest checks-and-balances is corrupt! The Auditor-General checks all government spending every year. This checking process is called audit. By carrying out annual audits, the Auditor-General assists parliament to hold to account and call to account, all persons entrusted with management of public funds and resources.
The thing is, none of these offices exist autonomously. Welcome to the Hybrid Universe. What you have here is the COVID-19 response team colluding over a decade prior! Canada2020 was an advance team, ready to steer the ship through the Great Reset, with Rothschild at the helm.
Canada 2020: Covid-19 Event Partners… need I say more?
MPs have three main duties: legislating in Parliament, representing their riding and political party, and serving their constituents’ needs. BUT….
Whether or not an MP or other representative has an obligation to reply to their constituents’ messages…a good question!!
In fact, a court case back in 2009 saw a constituent claiming that his MP hadn’t done enough to help him — she’d eventually stopped responding to his letters. The judge returned a ruling that MPs have ‘no duty to their constituents’.!! (Thank goodness this was a British case…. but……does it not have effect here in Canada? One has to wonder!! It appears that it does…please read on!)
Is my request (supported with VALIDATION) to correct a critical operational management deficiency by the Federal Government in power (defective risk management causing financial/economic and social damages to the citizens of Canada,) exempt the Official Opposition Party from considering corrective active (received from a Canadian citizen,) at its discretion and in particular ignoring such request?
Another question…. Should citizens have to resort to “litigation” to have proper representation by both the Federal Government and more importantly by the official opposition party whose role IS to keep the government accountable? (There is professional/legal argument that the “Official Opposition Party” members (or any MP) are acting in a fiduciary position with respect to representing a constituent (and/or a citizen) but why should the financial cost and inconvenience fall on the shoulder of the innocent citizen who needs protection from these “institutions”?
While the position of the Auditor General concentrates on the stewardship or financial “accountability” by the Government in power there is absolutely no recourse whatsoever for defective or complete lack of representation by the ‘Official Opposition” in discharging any matter that appears that fiduciary relationship may be present to citizens at large. The election (or re-election process is completely inadequate in correcting the noted situation.)
Furthermore, it is quite evident that the political party system (opposition parties) form what are known as “Shadow Cabinets,” which mirror Cabinet.
Shadow ministers (generally referred to as opposition critics) supposedly hold the government to account, offering alternative policy, and expressing their party’s position and message. This has absolutely nothing to do with continuing (current) valid citizen complaints, validated observations left unattended by these self-serving “opposition parties” …hence the “gap” to be filled by an ombudsman to satisfy valid citizens’ complaints and observations.
The volume of validated information and observations submitted to the Prime Minister by myself and supported with extensive evidence has been totally ignored by first, the Prime Minister, secondly by a responsible PC “shadow cabinet minister” and lastly by the Leader of the Official Opposition; none of whom had the courtesy (and more probable, lacked the necessary technical knowledge) of even responding with exception of acknowledging receipt of the representations.
The corrective action requested from the official opposition Party was to request the involvement of the Auditor General in the process of reviewing my submission; the position would undoubtedly have the technical expertise to evaluate the submission and respond with direction to the government for corrective action indicated in my submission.
The lack of proactive risk management by the Trudeau governmenthas been ignored by the PC “Official Opposition” even though it has been totally informed by myself of the issues and supported with validation (some 25 “Exhibits” as you will note from the submission to PM Trudeau).
The attempts to have the Official Opposition involved in this matter are graphically demonstrated below:
(To be noted the Federal Government has not structured an “ombudsman” concept but some individual Federal Government departments have. The CRA is one of those departments).
No cost-benefit calculations for any of the measures have ever been presented by both the Trudeau government (and provincial governments for that matter) — not even now, nearly a year and a half later from the appearance of COVID-19, at a time when the Federal and Provincial governments are again utilizing more rounds of lockdowns and home quarantines.
Governments seem to forget that the process of “lock-down” IS NOT synonymous with the term “separation-the latter more “palatable” to Canadian citizens; also validated and expressed by numerous health professionals not only universally but in Canada also.
While the” cost” of lock-downs expressed in dollars and cents should not NOW be restricted as the propulsive remedy for mitigation of Covid-19,it would have been easily a rectifiable factor if the Federal government had applied pro-active risk mitigation in the first place.
PM Trudeau “excuses” should not be acceptable- not if he had sincerely paid attention to the extensively validatedsubmission that you are about to read –and that he had in his possession since September 2020 and did nothing about it! At least there is absolutely NO evidence that he did.
The Federal government’s reactive “propaganda” expressed March 25, 2021 while focused on a specific issue does not address the real over-all issues of inadequate government proactiverisk management lacking throughout the COVID-19 crisis.
Please note the ISSUES are an INTERNAL operational matter or STEWARDSHIP that was not adequately addressed in the AUDITOR GENERAL REPORT of March 25th 2021.
The subject validated submission to Prime Minister Trudeau unveils the real impotentrisk management exercised by the government during the COVID-19 crisis.
As an example, in support of the lack of preparedness of COVID-19 by the government, the Auditor General did at least state that the Public Health Agency was unprepared, led to lacking early pandemic response, but there is much more of other issues in my submission to PM Trudeau to which you will have access as referenced in the attached submission to PM Trudeau and attachments -being conveyed to you.
Unfortunately as a taxpayer and citizen I am not allowed to access the Auditor Generalin government policy matters ; hence the need for your help in informing Canadians, the only avenue left to inform them.
1
Had the Federal Government precisely adopted the universal standard ISO 31000 Enterprise Risk Management (ERM domain and reviewed it in conjunction with the history of past epidemics including the “SARS” epidemic, it would have acted in a PROACTIVE manner to mitigate COVID-19 labor, financial, economic and health risks rather than the damaging REACTIVE response(s) it followed. Required review of previous “epidemics” omitted by the Federal Govt also observed in Auditor General’s report of March 25, 2021.
2
A “panel” of some 11 Federal departments/” agencies” (including several “Health” departments did a “review” of “risk management” in the Federal Government just several years ago-only to “rename” it in a confusing process in which only 1 department abided by this “reinvention of the wheel”. (CRA) applied the “invention” but NONE of the other Departments represented on the “panel” did!! (An independent, “arms- length” audit firm “discredited” the CRA application of this “new TBS invention”!!!
3
The Enterprise Risk Management “paradigm” (ERM) is not new to government operations in Canada; The B.C. Government has had an effective ERM program established since the mid nineties! The program is administered by a special “risk agency” (department) NOT totally accountable to “Treasury” but the “stewardship” is done by the AuditorGeneralwho reports directly to the BC General Assembly. The evidence shows that the Federal Treasury Board Secretariat (TBS) is ultimately responsible for “risk management” at the Federal level and its record of management can by described as “dysfunctional”. Premier Trudeau has been accorded volumes of evidence to this observation but has yet to respond to my VALIDATED observations submitted in September and again in November 2020. (It appears that Prime Minister Trudeau acknowledgements of “receipt” constitutes a response to the issues!!)
4
Questionable lack of Federal Government reporting of health “pre-conditions” falsely attributed to COVID-19, while advised by the WHO to report such matters in March, 2020. England is at least one country that has abided. Why hasn’t Canada?
5
Lastly, but not least- Why has not the Trudeau Government not supported its mammoth $spending under the chant, “COVID-19” made me do it” and the Official Opposition watch in glee the spending as the threat of PM Trudeau calling an early election appears to have scared the “daylight” out of them? The” magic formula” Debt to GrossProfit Ratio” utilized by the Trudeau finance minister is extremely shallow as Canada’s “slide rule” for funding COVID-19 financial and economic collateral damages. Hasn’t PM Trudeau’s government heard about the measurement of the universal Cost-Benefit Ratio to determine the viability of “cash flows”? Australia has and is using it successfully for determining its COVID-19 financial and economic damage. Isn’t time for the Trudeau Government to cease the chant, “COVID made me do it” with its outrageous spending that could also have been avoided and planned properly by practicing ERM– Enterprise Risk Management?
Following is a copy of the subject issues (with attachments) referred to PM Trudeau in September 2020 and again in November 2020 to which he has never responded. The submission to PM Trudeau concludes with 11 substantive recommendations, and is validated (supported) with 25 “Exhibits” of evidence.
I cannot overemphasize the importance of the universally accepted “Enterprise Risk Management” (ERM) paradigm in proactively managing “risk” . As additional evidence I respectfully refer you to an important reference source described below:
One last (critically important) “validation” for the acceptance of the universally recognized Enterprise Risk Management (ERM)
Chartered Professional Accountants of Canada (CPA Canada) is one of the largest national accounting organizations in the world and is a respected voice in the business, government, education and non-profit sectors.
In 2019 CPA Canada (the professional organization) received the prestigious “Canada Awards for Excellence.”
CPA Canada‘s acceptance of “Enterprise Risk Management” (ERM) adds a high degree of credibility to this world renown methodology for managing risks in any organization, especially that of Government operations.
CPA Canada recently presented an education seminar on the subject of ERM for its members and executives of other organizations. The seminar included specific exercises that focused on COVID-19through a risk lens!
I believe that my submission to Prime Minister Trudeau focuses extensively on this aspect and I respectfully suggest that the information contained in this memorandum forms part of any representations made regarding the matter of the Prime Minister’s government abrogating what should be a mandatory responsibility in administering a critical program addressing proactive risk management.
**********************
Copy of the submission to PM Trudeau submitted September 21st 2020
From: “Wilfred J Pelletier CPA CMA; FMA” To: “Justin Trudeau Prime Minister” <pm@pm.gc.ca> Cc: “Deputy Prime Minister Canada Chrystia Freeland” <chrystia.freeland@parl.gc.ca> Sent: Monday, September 21, 2020 4:18:24 PM Subject: A better way to manage risks associated with COVID-19
Mr. Trudeau, Prime minister of Canada
A better way to manage the “wide spectrum” of risks associated with COVID-19
Introduction
Mr. Trudeau I am one of many in expressing gratitude for the dedication shown by health workers at all levels during the COVID-19 epidemic; dedications from doctors, nurses, support staff, maintenance, housekeeping staff, and first responders.
However, there is a critical level of achievement in ordinance missing; from government leaders at ALL levels, and in particular at the cabinet levels.
This issue is summarized as follows: ……….
Further to the highlighted “text” above is the fact that in Canada, many hospitals were struggling with overcrowding before the COVID-19 outbreak hit in earnest in March..and in any forthcoming epidemic that could have been addressed immediately following the previous noted “epidemics”. -WJP
Mental health aspectscould have been predicted from previous experience. The Ebola Virusshould have taught governments valuable lessons in this this aspect of risk management, but apparently was ignored before the COVID-19 occurrence. (Also relate this to the” isolation” controversies now rampant. – WJP)
The COVID-19 pandemic is a realized issue with the emphasis now on solving the immediate problems.
However, the present government’s objectives and strategies will also be influenced in the medium-to-long-term. That means looking ahead anddealing with theanticipated “second-wave” of the epidemic, that could easily occur, as reported by health officers.
If the COVID-19 pandemic has taught us anything, it is the need to be prepared for a wide range of scenarios. The pandemic has illustrated how corporate and government leaders and their risk management teams need to constantly review and enhance the fundamentals of the risk function and increase its connectivity and collaboration across the organization. (ERM does accomplish exactly that-WJP)
(In the case of governments, risk management teams are virtually non-existent in Canada. The exception is British Columbia– please refer to discussion in “Exhibit 9)
Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) provides that opportunity to do so now. (The present “risk” program crafted by the Treasury Board Secretariat(TBS) commenced before 2010,
continued into 2016is still inefficient and unsuccessful. Pleaserefer to “Exhibit 1-ERM History”)
The ERM processes should include recurring opportunities to survey current conditions and future assumptions and adjust objectives and strategies as appropriate. The COVID-19 pandemic is certainly one of those opportunities.
Issuing government assistance money is one mitigation measure that has served the present. Regrettably future generations of Canadians may have to shoulder the debt burden.
Once an ERM system is put into place, a government department should examine known uncertainties and their treatment plans. It can also explore new uncertainties that could impact the revised objectives and strategies. Risk appetite statements and thresholds should also be reviewed; what was once considered to be important may not be as important now. Government departments should examine existing uncertainties in the light of new understanding. Impact assessments may change and may no longer meet the adjusted appetite thresholds.
New uncertainties that emerge from the altered future landscape must be examined against the updated risk appetite.
I am not about to jump on the “band-wagon” of those criticizing your government for spending too much money at this time. I do believe that you are correct in considering “people first” when such an epidemic occurs.
However, your government would be better served in avoiding opposition criticism from political parties, the media, and citizens if the extraneous disbursements were supported with “cost-benefit analyses” as discussed in Exhibit 35.
If there is an “under performance” it points to the Treasury Board Secretariat (TBS) which has been at the process of formulating an appropriate “risk program” for more than two decades without positive results. (Please refer to “Exhibit 1 ERM History”).
There are solutions for future risk management by looking at what is going on in the “health care” field, and in other jurisdictions right at the moment! (Mr. Trudeau I am providing you with extensive reference material in this submission that should inform your government as to what needs to be done about “risk” in health care …. if it has the willingness and desire to improve its risk management.
I have likened my task of representation of priorities to you, Mr. Trudeau, as a project comparable to the construction of a large office complex building tower.
An imaginary consideration might be to determine what “expertise” is required for its construction.
Some may say “the architect” as the design is paramount not in terms of cost to build but rather the utilization advantages of the building and its ultimate purpose. Others may list the service of mechanical and electrical engineers for structural capacity and utilization. Still speculating, others would consider the carpentry, finishing interior decorators, etc. And the list goes on!
With this “fictional” example I have to ask a question: In the final designation what usually gets built first? The answer would be “the basement” and “foundation”.
In respect to this “scenario” it is very clear that the “foundation” and its elements would be an excellent starting point to replicate the task(s) of dealing with COVID-19 risk in going forward.
My representations to you Mr. Trudeau will be of the “foundational” type illustration of explaining the value of “Enterprise Risk Management” (ERM) in going forward in financial and economic terms,
I have provided, a large number of “exhibits” to not only facilitate more understanding of topic subjects, but also to eliminate misunderstanding in general explanations that often arise in “introductions” such as this.
(Please note that there are “gaps” in the numbering of “exhibits” – I have simply eliminated some exhibits no longer required!)
Is the World Health Organization (WHO) in a state of “conflict of interest?
To begin with Canada is a member country of theOrganisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, OECD.
It’s reasonable to believe that Canada is a co-operative country that follows the guidelines of the OECD. Accordingly, it should not only be aware of the “guidelines” of membership but also should abide by its pronouncements.
The “Conflict of Interest Act, S.C. 2006, c. 9, s.2 Assented to 2006- 12-12- of the OECD constitution dictates the elements of apparentconflict of interest of an official. (By implication the principle applies to organizations connected/acting in the same manner)
Serving the public interest is the fundamental mission of governments and public institutions. Citizens expect individual public officials to perform their duties with integrity, in a fair and unbiased way.
According to the OECD Guidelines, inappropriately managed or resolved conflicts of interest have the potential to undermine the proper functioning of democratic governments by:
Weakening adherence by public officials to the ideals of legitimacy, impartiality, and fairness in public decision-making, and
Distorting the rule of law, the development and application of policy, the functioning of markets, and the allocation of public resource
(Please scroll to bottom to Exhibit #14 for conflict of interest details- WHO and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation)
Having illustrated the possible “conflict of interest” between the World Health Organization and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, WHO’s weak attempt in advising about ERM (Exhibit 11), the USA ceasing its funding to WHO, a 200,000 member petition signed by Italian citizens to OECD countries to cease funding to the WHO for lack of performance, and Canada already not abiding by its direction in reporting health “pre-conditions” of COVID-19 deaths isn’t it time for Canada to totally ignore WHO directives and access the OECD for reference purposes instead, particularly in vaccination matters?
There are also other benefits accruing to Canada from membership in the OECD:
Through its country surveys and comparable statistical and economic data, the OECD provides its member countries tools with which to analyse and monitor their economic, social and environmental policies. Countries can draw on the OECD‘s reservoir of expertise, including peer reviews, and they can access all of the research and analysis conducted by the Secretariat.
Covering the full economic and social spectrum, this work could not be carried out by any one country alone.
In addition to its economic intelligence functions, the OECD is above all a forum within which countries discuss and share national experience, identify best practices and find solutions to common problems. The OECD having working relationships with over 100 non-member economies, members benefit from dialogue and consultations with all players on the world scene, in a context of increased interdependence that demands global rules of the game.
Last but certainly not the least, OECD has recently issued a directive with much more credibility than any from the WHO (and its an apparent conflict of interest situation just described) “Treatments and a vaccine for COVID-19: The need for coordinating policies on R & D, manufacturing and access” dated May 29, 2020at this link.
There is more: OECD Policy Responses to Coronavirus (Covid-19):
“Supporting businesses in financial distress to avoid insolvency during the COVID-19 crisis” May 27, 2020
Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) is the coordinated, ongoing application of risk management across all parts of an organization, at all levels, from strategic planning to service delivery.
This includes how risk is assessed, the roles and responsibilities of senior leaders and all employees in managing risk, and the effective reporting and communication of riskinformationthroughout the organization.
It prevents costly “silo” management of risks by individual departments noted for unnecessary “procedural inventions” or duplication of effort.
CSA ISO 31000:18 Risk Management – Guidelines Standard (accepted and pronounced by ISO Canada etc. is the applicable direction.)
Organizations using it can compare their risk management practices with an internationally recognized benchmark, providing sound principles for effective management and corporate governance.
ERM is applied in numerous countries (including China!!)
It is a very definitive risk management standard, rather than descriptive terminology fumbled by the Federal Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat (TBS) under PM Trudeau!
Regrettably, due to the restrictive administrative process that the Auditor General follows with respect to “input” from the general public and/or citizens, the information that is being conveyed in this email was regrettably not available to the AG for reference purposes.
While the position of the “Auditor General” is the ultimate “stewardship” of Federal Government management its March 25, 2021 report failed to capture the essence of the Federal Government ignoring proactive risk management of COVID-19 financial, economic and business issues;
It also failed to comment on the universally accepted proactive risk management standard “Enterprise Risk Management” (ERM) that has been applied successfully not only world wide in virtually all enterprises including health care, but also in Canada.
The Province of British Columbia has practiced successful “ERM” since the mid to late 1990’s and the stewardship of the program is conducted by the independent Auditor General and NOT by the internal (non-arms-length) BC legislative Assembly.
By comparison the Federal Government assigns this task to a “non-arms length” demonstrated dysfunctional Treasury Board Secretariat (TBS).
One of the World’s largest accounting bodies, CPA Canada endorses without exception the proactive risk management paradigm of ERM.
A major catastrophic decision of utilizing “lock-downs” could have been avoided or significantly reduced to allow normalcy in business, health and educational matters if the proactive risk concept of ERM had been applied by the Federal Government- Totally absent from the Auditor General Report of March 25, 2021.
All of the above information (and much more) was presented to the Official Opposition at various levels and responsibilities resulting in no action to date- signifying the need for an ombudsman position to be created to respond to such issues in the future.
“…The government cannot ignore long-standing issues—they do not go away.,”
“.. we found that the government was not ready for a pandemic of this magnitude …”
“…What if the government decided not to wait for catastrophic unfrozen events to drive positive change in its service to Canadians?
“…I believe that these questions are worth exploring.”
This “graphic” summaries the concerns of the Auditor General’s reference to the lack of proactiverisk management by the Trudeau Government (who chose instead to follow a costly “reactive risk management” process:
There is much more about this subject:
FORWARD
The Federal Government’s latest Federal budget is being labeled in essence as “Kick-starting the economy – for recovery “- this is akin to attempting to bet on a race horse after the starting gate opens! The process and rules make it abundantly clear that the “betting” takes place before the start of the race!!-
On a comparable principle, the COVID-19 “risk mitigation” as defined by the Trudeau government should have started before the “COVID ” pandemic and soon after the previouspandemics (SARS, etc.).
This is a FUNDAMENTAL initial step in “risk mitigation” asserted albeit sparingly in the Auditor’s General report of March 25th 2021.
As necessary as lockdownsmay have appeared to beto governments, they highlighted the government’s unpreparedness for such a pandemic. As citizens try to limp back to normalcy, it is imperative for governments to learn important lessons from the Covid-19 era – the primary one being how to manage Risks.
Trudeau’s government had a “golden opportunity” to do just that- merely by having a “mirror” approach focusing on former epidemicsand applying the universally accepted “Enterprise Risk management” standard in preparedness to future epidemics such as Covid-19.
For greater certainty and emphasis:
Employing the concept of the forward looking universally acceptedERM by the Federal Government government would have achieved the necessary timely “proactiverisk mitigation” and at much less cost to Canadians in terms of financial, economic, and health costs.
It would have lessened if not eliminated other collateral damages caused by the Federal Government’s costlyreactiverisk management and dysfunctional stewardship of COVID-19 risks.
Importantly, ERM would enlighten the Federal government on the fact that the term “closure” (negative) IS NOT synonymous with the term “separation” – the latter, a more acceptable and valid term under the COVID -19risk circumstances.
On-going “closure” judicial challenges in Canada and elsewhere should certainly result in certainty in this narrow circumstance. The broad aspect of proactive risk management and its lack of application by the Federal Government is covered in the (validated) submission to PM Trudeau.
In conclusion of the “forward” it is regretful that the Auditor General did not have access to my submission to PM Trudeau at the time of her recent audit of COVID-19 matters, March 25th, 2021.
*************
SUMMARY OF THE ISSUES SUBMITTED TO PM TRUDEAU \
This is about how leveraging “Enterprise Risk Management ” (ERM) principles by the Trudeau Government would have resulted in a much better response to COVID-19 related risks ; particularly
in avoiding the resultant horrendous financial and economic losses now burdening Canadians under the guise of being risk mitigation .
(Please note that by definition if an event has already occurred there is no risk! Only “collateral damage!”!! (and there is plenty that could have been avoided had the Trudeau government instituted and practiced ERM! )
Unfortunately, while the Auditor General report of March 21, 2021 did acknowledge /mention somewhat the need for a proactive risk management approach , it was merely a “miniscule” acknowledgement of the need.
My subject submission to PM Trudeau in September 2020 and repeated in November 2020 (because of his lack of response to the issues ) reveals and provides unquestionable validation for the requirement need of proactive risk management in dealing with COVID -19 .
And behold on April 1st (and before the Trudeau budget was expected ??) and shortly after the “”Auditor General’s ” report ” of March 25th 2021 I received the following “emails” from both the Prime Minister and the Finance Minister in answer to a submission that I made to PM Trudeau. back in September 2020!!??)
(Please refer to “copies” of the content below in the order of “receipt:
And shortly following the above reply I received the following from the finance minister:
Setting
On September 20, 2020, (and repeated in November 2020 due to lack of a substantive response,) I presented a submission (supported with some 25 Exhibits of evidence/validation) to Prime Minister Trudeau requesting a response to email correspondence to him titled-
“A better way to manage the “wide spectrum” of risks associated with COVID-19″
(Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland was copied with the email submissions.)
(A copy of the subject submission (and “Exhibits” to PM Trudeau will be forwarded in a separate email following this introduction due to the volume of validating information. WJP)
Apart from acknowledging “receipt” of the submission PM Trudeau has never responded to this submission and in particular to the 11 “recommendations” for corrective action critically needed from his government. (This request was supported with some 25 exhibits of validations ignored by the Prime Minister.)
Below is a “graphic” of the resultant recommendations made to PM Trudeau (September 2020 and reorganized in priority for purposes of this reporting):
(The AG observation of “government not being ready” is extracted from my submission to PM Trudeau in September 2020 and BEFORE the Auditor Generalreported)
A comprehensive submission (supported with 25 “Exhibits” of validation) to Prime Minister Trudeau submitted in September 2020 and again in November 2020 due to lack of response covering the above matters and much more can be accessed:
Bill C-36 has been introduced into the House of Commons. It would be fair to describe portions of this as a “red flag” law. People can be subjected to Court restrictions simply based on the suspicion that they may engage in hate speech or hate propaganda.
Welcome to the Pre-Crime Unit, and the Minority Report
Fear of hate propaganda offence or hate crime 810.012 (1) A person may, with the Attorney General’s consent, lay an information before a provincial court judge if the person fears on reasonable grounds that another person will commit (a) an offence under section 318 or subsection 319(1) or (2); (b) an offence under subsection 430(4.1); or (c) an offence motivated by bias, prejudice or hate based on race, national or ethnic origin, language, colour, religion, sex, age, mental or physical disability, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, or any other similar factor. Appearances
(2) The provincial court judge who receives an information under subsection (1) may cause the parties to appear before a provincial court judge.
Adjudication (3) If the provincial court judge before whom the parties appear is satisfied by the evidence adduced that the informant has reasonable grounds for the fear, the judge may order that the defendant enter into a recognizance to keep the peace and be of good behaviour for a period of not more than 12 months.
Duration extended (4) However, if the provincial court judge is also satisfied that the defendant was convicted previously of any offence referred to in subsection (1), the judge may order that the defendant enter into the recognizance for a period of not more than two years.
Refusal to enter into recognizance (5) The provincial court judge may commit the defendant to prison for a term of not more than 12 months if the defendant fails or refuses to enter into the recognizance.
Conditions in recognizance (6) The provincial court judge may add any reasonable conditions to the recognizance that the judge considers desirable to secure the good conduct of the defendant, including conditions that (a) require the defendant to wear an electronic monitoring device, if the Attorney General makes that request; (b) require the defendant to return to and remain at their place of residence at specified times; (c) require the defendant to abstain from the consumption of drugs, except in accordance with a medical prescription, of alcohol or of any other intoxicating substance; (d) require the defendant to provide, for the purpose of analysis, a sample of a bodily substance prescribed by regulation on the demand of a peace officer, a probation officer or someone designated under paragraph 810.3(2)(a) to make a demand, at the place and time and on the day specified by the person making the demand, if that person has reasonable grounds to believe that the defendant has breached a condition of the recognizance that requires them to abstain from the consumption of drugs, alcohol or any other intoxicating substance; (e) require the defendant to provide, for the purpose of analysis, a sample of a bodily substance prescribed by regulation at regular intervals that are specified, in a notice in Form 51 served on the defendant, by a probation officer or a person designated under paragraph 810.3(2)(b) to specify them, if a condition of the recognizance requires the defendant to abstain from the consumption of drugs, alcohol or any other intoxicating substance; or (f) prohibit the defendant from communicating, directly or indirectly, with any person identified in the recognizance, or refrain from going to any place specified in the recognizance, except in accordance with the conditions specified in the recognizance that the judge considers necessary.
Conditions — firearms (7) The provincial court judge shall consider whether it is desirable, in the interests of the defendant’s safety or that of any other person, to prohibit the defendant from possessing any firearm, cross-bow, prohibited weapon, restricted weapon, prohibited device, ammunition, prohibited ammunition or explosive substance, or all of those things. If the judge decides that it is desirable to do so, the judge shall add that condition to the recognizance and specify the period during which it applies.
Surrender, etc. (8) If the provincial court judge adds a condition described in subsection (7) to a recognizance, the judge shall specify in the recognizance how the things referred to in that subsection that are in the defendant’s possession shall be surrendered, disposed of, detained, stored or dealt with and how the authorizations, licences and registration certificates that are held by the defendant shall be surrendered.
Reasons (9) If the provincial court judge does not add a condition described in subsection (7) to a recognizance, the judge shall include in the record a statement of the reasons for not adding it.
Variance of conditions (10) A provincial court judge may, on application of the informant, the Attorney General or the defendant, vary the conditions fixed in the recognizance.
Other provisions to apply (11) Subsections 810(4) and (5) apply, with any modifications that the circumstances require, to recognizances made under this section.
-A person can be ordered to appear before a Provincial Court -A Judge can order a person to enter into a Recognizance for 12 months -That Recognizance can last for 24 months if there is a prior conviction -A person can be jailed for 12 months for refusing a Recognizance -A person can be ordered to wear an electronic monitoring device -A person can be subjected to a curfew -A person can be ordered to abstain from alcohol -A person can be subjected to drug/alcohol testing -That drug/testing can be ordered at regular intervals -A person can be subjected to a no contact order (of 3rd parties) -A person can be prohibited from going to certain places -A person may be subjected to other conditions
Keep in mind, all of these conditions can be imposed, simply because of the SUSPICION that a hate crime will be committed, or hate propaganda will be distributed.
Not only is the Canadian Criminal Code to be amended, but the Canadian Human Rights Code will be as well, to implement fines and cessation orders. There doesn’t seem to be real standard for what counts as hate speech.
Canadian Human Rights Act Amendments to the Act 2013, c. 37, s. 1 12 Section 4 of the Canadian Human Rights Act is replaced by the following: Orders regarding discriminatory practices 4 A discriminatory practice, as described in sections 5 to 14.1, may be the subject of a complaint under Part III and anyone found to be engaging or to have engaged in a discriminatory practice may be made subject to an order as provided for in section 53 or 53.1. . 13 The Act is amended by adding the following after section 12: Communication of hate speech . 13 (1) It is a discriminatory practice to communicate or cause to be communicated hate speech by means of the Internet or other means of telecommunication in a context in which the hate speech is likely to foment detestation or vilification of an individual or group of individuals on the basis of a prohibited ground of discrimination. Continuous communication . (2) For the purposes of subsection (1), a person who communicates or causes to be communicated hate speech continues to do so for as long as the hate speech remains public and the person can remove or block access to it.
Complaint substantiated — section 13 53.1 If at the conclusion of an inquiry the member or panel conducting the inquiry finds that a complaint relating to a discriminatory practice described in section 13 is substantiated, the member or panel may make one or more of only the following orders against the person found to be engaging or to have engaged in the discriminatory practice: (a) an order to cease the discriminatory practice and take measures, in consultation with the Commission on the general purposes of the measures, to redress the practice or to prevent the same or a similar practice from recurring; (b) an order to pay compensation of not more than $20,000 to any victim personally identified in the communication that constituted the discriminatory practice, for any pain and suffering that the victim experienced as a result of that discriminatory practice, so long as that person created or developed, in whole or in part, the hate speech indicated in the complaint; (c) an order to pay a penalty of not more than $50,000 to the Receiver General if the member or panel considers it appropriate having regard to the nature, circumstances, extent and gravity of the discriminatory practice, the wilfulness or intent of the person who is engaging or has engaged in the discriminatory practice, any prior discriminatory practices that the person has engaged in and the person’s ability to pay the penalty. Award of costs 53.2 A member or panel conducting an inquiry into a complaint filed on the basis of section 13 may award costs for abuse of process in relation to the inquiry.
According to the revisions in the Act, “hate speech” will be ongoing as long as the material is available publicly, and could be removed. A person can also be ordered to be $20,000 to each victim, and $50,000 to the panel itself.
Problem with all of this, “hate speech” is disturbingly vague. It could be applied subjectively, depending on the politics of the parties involved.
There are few things more nefarious than when politicians pass laws to strip your rights away, or undermine democracy. It’s even worse when this isn’t openly debated, but instead slipped into a larger Bill, and it goes almost unnoticed.
This was done in the Spring of 2019, and pushed through right before an election. Have to wonder why.
In the interest of fairness, Diverge Media broke this story yesterday. A great piece of research, showing that a major regulatory check had been scrapped without any public discussion.
Looking at the timing, it’s hard to plausibly believe that the politicians weren’t aware that something was going to happen. And if they didn’t know, why not speak up now?
The NDP did make a passing objection, but it seemed to be more in the context of having an omnibus Bill pushed. She listed: “Seventh, subdivision K of division 9 of part 4 repeals provisions of the Quarantine Act. Eighth, subdivision L of division 9 of part 4 repeals provisions of the Human Pathogens and Toxins Act.” There were no specific details given as to why these were bad.
This was the public “discussion” on May 6, 2019. A 90 second speech.
Mr. Chair, I’ll speak to subdivision K, as well as subdivision L, given their similarities. . The proposed legislative amendment to the Quarantine Act and to the Human Pathogens and Toxins Act would streamline the regulatory process under both acts by repealing the requirement for the Minister of Health to table proposed regulations before both Houses of Parliament prior to making new or updated regulations. This will allow the minister to proceed through the standard Governor in Council process, including prepublication and public consultation in the Canada Gazette. New or updated regulations under both of these acts would continue to comply with the cabinet directive on regulations. . The proposed amendments would put the Public Health Agency of Canada on level footing with other Canadian regulators and we will be more responsive to stakeholder needs for nimble, agile regulations that are kept up to date by facilitating the removal of outdated or ineffective regulations that may not be adequately protecting the public health and safety or may hinder innovation and economic growth. . Our ability to have up-to-date regulations will be a benefit for the Canadian public, for the travel and transportation sectors, and for the biotech and medical resource sectors.
On March 19, 2019, Cindy Evans told a Parliamentary Committee that a provision of Bill C-97 would remove the requirement for legislative checks and balances before issuing orders under the Quarantine Act. Keep in mind, this was a BUDGET Bill, and this was buried in an obscure section.
Proposed regulations to be laid before Parliament . 66.1 (1) Before a regulation is made under section 66, the Minister shall lay the proposed regulation before each House of Parliament. . Marginal note: Report by committee . (2) A proposed regulation that is laid before Parliament shall be referred to the appropriate committee of each House, as determined by the rules of that House, and the committee may review the proposed regulation and report its findings to that House. . Marginal note: Standing Committee on Health . (2.1) The committee of the House of Commons referred to in subsection (2) shall be the Standing Committee on Health or, in the event that there is not a Standing Committee on Health, the appropriate committee of the House. . Marginal note: Making of regulations . (3) A regulation may not be made before the earliest of (a) 30 sitting days after the proposed regulation is laid before Parliament, (b) 160 calendar days after the proposed regulation is laid before Parliament, and (c) the day after each appropriate committee has reported its findings with respect to the proposed regulation. . Marginal note: Explanation . (4) The Minister shall take into account any report of the committee of either House. If a regulation does not incorporate a recommendation of the committee of either House, the Minister shall lay before that House a statement of the reasons for not incorporating it. . Marginal note: Alteration . (5) A proposed regulation that has been laid before Parliament need not again be so laid prior to the making of the regulation, whether it has been altered or not.
Exceptions . 66.2 (1) A regulation may be made without being laid before either House of Parliament if the Minister is of the opinion that . (a) the changes made by the regulation to an existing regulation are so immaterial or insubstantial that section 66.1 should not apply in the circumstances; or . (b) the regulation must be made immediately in order to protect the health or safety of any person. . Marginal note: Notice of opinion . (2) If a regulation is made without being laid before Parliament, the Minister shall lay before each House of Parliament a statement of the Minister’s reasons.
Although the “exceptions” clause did provide some wiggle room, forcing Cabinet Ministers to bring proposed changes through the legislative process is actually a good check. It ensures that at least there is open discussion. However, given how quickly these changes passed in Parliament, their effectiveness is questionable.
Proposed regulations to be laid before both Houses of Parliament . 62.1 (1) The Governor in Council may not make a regulation under section 62 unless the Minister has first caused the proposed regulation to be laid before both Houses of Parliament. . Marginal note: Report by committee . (2) A proposed regulation that is laid before a House of Parliament is deemed to be automatically referred to the appropriate committee of that House, as determined by the rules of that House, and the committee may conduct inquiries or public hearings with respect to the proposed regulation and report its findings to that House. . Marginal note: Making of regulations . (3) The Governor in Council may make a regulation under section 62 only if . (a) neither House has concurred in any report from its committee respecting the proposed regulation before the end of 30 sitting days or 160 calendar days, whichever is earlier, after the day on which the proposed regulation was laid before that House, in which case the regulation may be made only in the form laid; or . (b) both Houses have concurred in reports from their committees approving the proposed regulation or a version of it amended to the same effect, in which case the regulation may be made only in the form concurred in. . Marginal note: Meaning of “sitting day” . (4) For the purpose of this section, “sitting day” means a day on which the House in question sits.
Exceptions . 62.2 (1) A regulation may be made without being laid before each House of Parliament if the Minister is of the opinion that . (a) the changes made by the regulation to an existing regulation are so immaterial or insubstantial that section 62.1 should not apply in the circumstances; or . (b) the regulation must be made immediately in order to protect the health or safeguard the safety of the public. . Marginal note: Explanation . (2) If a regulation is made without being laid before each House of Parliament, the Minister shall cause to be laid before each House a statement of the reasons why it was not.
The Quarantine Act also had legitimate safety mechanism stripped out, buried as a seeming afterthought in an omnibus budget Bill.
The “Budget Bill” did pass along Party lines. At the time, the Liberals held a majority, so they needed no support in ramming this through. While the NDP and Conservatives voted against it, these provisions were very unlikely to have contributed, since their was no real debate. Even now, they don’t speak up.
Anthropology is a very young social science, and calling it a science at all is rather generous. True, derivations of the word from Greek roots may be traced to German and Romance language experimentation of the 1600s. Think Merovingians. Yet constructing exotic new words from Latin and Greek or appropriating the cross of Lorraine were the warlike fashion of the period and certainly not of this one. It was the Renaissance after all.
Merovingian Script
Adorning one’s thoughts with richly evocative, or garlanded, made-up Greek words, like Ephesian stone marquetry, is reminiscent of current efforts, however weak, of the latest diversity inclusion and equity (D.I.E.) ideology. The former stands the test of longevity, with respect to the ancient cultures that formed our times, while the latter falls far too short, in its own brief, bastardo attempt to gild an overtly self-destructive tendency.
Canadian English Is A Bastard Language.
Namely, the aims of the current rash of new words seems far from rebirth; there is the unpalatable stuff of cultural nihilism, oppression and Marxist critical theory, yet again in the reiteration of ever failed attempts at rewriting the English language an already well-tailored, evolved, trained, and formed bastard. This iconoclastic and brute reordering of the language does not seek to suit the needs of the many, but the petty complaints of an increasingly antidemocratic and thoughtless few. A whole new set of idle thinkers who might call themselves scholars, yet in reality rudimentary grifters, are all busy making up new words, such as “settler colonialism” to slake a bored and cruel nature.
Yet these new terms are deliberately harder to fathom than ancient languages, without any roots in particular to Canadian or even English cultural identity or speech. They crave irrelevance. Worse, legally-enforced pronouns which have no grammatical basis in reality, or history of the language are an insult to human thought, physiology, anatomy, and genetics, let alone the maturity and free spirit of the language. An entire social sciences academy is seen readily throwing itself over the cliff, like ideological lemmings, for fast foreign cash they have not earned and without just cause. This is anti-Canadian thought, a thievery of useful communications; this indicates a lack of robust thought, or respect, for the roots of the study of social sciences itself. That’s an insult to the educated mind. Spare us the bullshit.
And it’s an insult to Canadians.
The deliberate misappropriation of the grammar and diction of a culture and language, that is already finely and well-categorized, already finely and well-defined, is akin to destroying the art of communication. It’s akin to attempting to destroy our Byzantine proxemics. Such maligning of science and logic, provokes a literal thirst for common sense from readers or thinkers, upon a bastard language as it is, such as English. So poorly attempting to colonize a bastard language, and act as its overweened, pompous Québécois settler, this really does not help in the interests of civil communication, either here in Canada or anywhere else.
We are not peoplekind. We are a northern people.
This Canadian language, this English, which often lacks a logical categorization in grammar or lexis alone, has charmed and vexed foreigners for centuries in acquiring its truly unique devices. Forcing any kind of common usage is neither the natural nor historical way of the English language, as Baugh and Cable can attest. Or the way of Canada. Anyone who has deeply studied the evolution of either would already know that. It’s a rules and non-rules language, with often illogical rules, which often perplex the learner. This can be clearly revealed in any edition of Quirk and Greenbaum to any Québecor.
These grammarians have long ago proven, English is the last language that ought to be suitably tested or so treated, to such ridiculous terms as for the ludicrous concept of legally-enforced speech. That is preposterous. And only pompous, underread followers of Marxist ideology, the undertrained, the mentally compressed, the barely literate or the most inchoate minds, dressed up as Trudeauian or Juche or Maoist Thought, would even ever dare to attempt it. Such attempts are a perpetual downward road to a monstrous hell of civil disorder. Stop going there.
Dynamic overconfidence is not uncommon among those elevated beyond their ability.
So let us rescue Canadian discourse, for those who can barely iterate it, and treasure Canadian discourse, as it is, and where it is found, for its functionality and vitality, rather as the world’s leading business language. That is the point of communication. Brevity. And anthropology has been but a brief issue, it is a recent, junior usurper of a rich artistic and creative intangibility. Same for Trudeau Foundation. An audit is overdue for its activities to circumvent the very constitution of the nation.
Canadian Discourse
Destroying Anthropology: The Trudeau Legacy
The term anthropology itself began to gain favour in reference to ethnology in the 1800s. Yet it was not until the late 1800s in Europe, and until 1902 in the US, that research cliques of any great relevance, such as the American Anthropology Association, gained any real traction at all, and means to form some immature stubble of scrubby yet ill-kept establishment.
So too, not until the later in the 20th and 21st centuries, with researchers such as Franz Boas, Clyde Klukhohn, Geert Hofstede or Fons Trompenars, were a greater semblance of the truly scientific, or social scientifically useful, relevant theories of comparability, not relativism, extracted from the anthropological discipline. These yet still yield well and perhaps the finest flowering of the sociological realm upon the nature and benefit of comparative cultural research. Wise consensus remains abiding those comparative waves of culture, that wisdom clearly takes centuries, not a few short years. That wisdom does not fade, and remains richly the credit to the discipline despite the ponderous nature of its current, self-destructive demise.
Birds of a Feather
Boas was among the first to have provoked theoretical frameworks useful and practical to most, to attempt to define cultural identity itself. Not an easy or complete task. This might explain why non-productive anthropological theories have also proliferated throughout the history of anthropology’s brief science, much as a fig-like branch of an equally dubious root in certain corners of the genocide discipline. There are many dead-ends to anthropology without a tentative or considerate nature; such sociology loses its countenance without provoking wonder, and joy in new learning.
This appears the case in Canada today, where the social sciences have become shrew-like, and enforced to be a branch of a poisoned and stolen Lorraine tree used to demean, devalue, and discredit that unifying concept of national cultural identity itself. Rather too few Canadian academics seek to elucidate or edify Canadian culture as Canada’s most valuable product. To fail to do so is lunacy. Canadian thought remains a unique contribution to the old world, and to improve for the nation its quality of life. That is the original intent of university research, to edify the old in the new.
With Trudeau, that careful craftsmanship is lost.
The authoritarian political license to do so grievously with such bounty, appears to trace to an unaccountable set of foreign foundations, imposed and squeezed upon Canadian society without grace, without its consent, and epitomized by a cruel, utilitarian form of Benthanism. This devaluation of the culture and identity of this nation is financed with tax dollars by a guttural, inarticulate leader such as Chrétien, again without consent of the crudely-governed. It is a paradox; organizations such as Trudeau Foundation would so claw and exemplify the worst kind of colonialism, upon what is widely seen as the most tolerant of national cultures in the world.
To claim Canada to be anything other than that is a falsehood against the nation.
Sadly, it seems the joy of anthropology has been so subsumed by a bitter, caustic, nonproductive ideology as settler colonialism, and not only at that foundation. Countless others of similar wicked-bent, and similar fruitless, foreign socialist fig tree planting have proliferated where they really don’t belong as settlers upon a culture and society that has its one value and contributions to the world. Make no mistake, Trudeau Foundation and its dubiously-termed scholars have exacted a kind of torture upon an otherwise gifted, eloquent, competent culture and society such as Canada. Such foundations perpetuate a kind of religious (yet anti-religious ) fervour totally unsuited to social sciences research. And totally unsuited to Canada.
Take the word “settler” as a harrowing example.
This term has taken off since 2006 in measurable usage, there must be some reason, that particular year, saw an increase in the use of the term, the rate of increasing frequency measurable and according to Collin Cobuild dictionary. Yet such measuring of its rise is good and just, given the greatest lexical resource and analytical database of English usage likely compiled. Collins Cobuild reveals its increased frequency, as forced and financed by poor quality research aims. Any ideas what externalities would have provoked that ever increasing usage, and reach of the term “settler” in English from 2006?
Surely it is more than coincidence, and the record of scholarship on that topic and the measurable timeline is known. The root of the poisoned tree, is quickly revealed as this fellow Patrick Wolfe from Australia, who pops up like a marmot, and multiplied like a weasel, among the tiresome appropriated, Merovingian (as if) cross of Lorraine scholars. They evoke a dead index logos, this dead scholar Wolfe is easily identified as being the global social theory grifter, by his own lockstep followers, who appropriated the minds of his Marxist adherents. Among these are a collectivist desire for him to be their dear leader, who stirred up the settler colonialist mantra, to perpetuate an endless identitarian social conflict, in a nation such as Canada and elsewhere, where there was largely none.
Frederick Lowy: Trudeau’s Torture Expert Advisor
If there is a signpost by which Trudeau Foundation found its anti-Canadian ideology then it is certainly by route of this completely degrading Patrick Wolfe. This “thinker” sought to transform anthropology, with social theory, akin to destroying it through the means of Saul Alinsky, and the regressive tolerance of Herbert Marcuse. The inept and unwise direction of SSHRC (Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council) under Frederick Lowy, assistant to a mid-century modern-day Mengele, Dr Ewan Cameron, of the Allan Memorial Institute, helped author the CIA kubark torture manuals. This crooked standard became direction of far too many at SSHRC. Social research has become social engineering, using tax-funded grants to attack the very culture financing it. Abominable.
There is nearly two decades or more of social science in Canada thus most worthy of the scrap heap for its lack of objectivity, ethics, and practice. Having politically moved the goal posts, Trudeau Foundation and others have largely destroyed the practicality or benefit of social sciences research in Canada, for an entire generation. It’s a sad, misled legacy that requires full shutdown of tax-payer resources, as it has produced little other than cultural disunity, and threatens the national unity of Canada itself.
Settler Colonialism Grifters Abroad
“Canadian PM Justin Trudeau is giving $25Million for ‘social and sexual health’ in Africa. But African women are not asking for some Canadian dude to give us condoms, contraceptives, or abortion. We want education, jobs and businesses to raise our communities!”
Obianuju Ekeocha, Founder of COLAfrica
Indeed, Trudeau “scholars” (grifters) call white Canadians settlers tax cheats and land thieves at home, while the same hypocrite “scholars” (grifters) approve perpetuating a kind of neocolonialism abroad. Canadian NGOs finance projects without audit or input from locals, who often neither asked for nor control project goals. This is a sick hypocrisy. This is the worst kind of grifterism. It’s embarrassing to Canadians.
Settler Colonialism as discipline seems rarefied, a research consortia that is oppressively narrow, grasping and craven, with little research beyond the past 25 years or so and yet again, in lay mans terms, the entire thing has no balls. It’s surprising that First Nations in Canada would focus so heavily on this aspect of anthropology given depth and breadth of coexistence. There are so many other more productive, and profitable theories to pursue, that actually do contribute to peaceable business, of mutual profit from one culture to another. There have been many who profited from this settler colonialism grift, but many more, as seen across the west, who are impoverished by it. A unified Canada cannot long endure a privileged few who lead so poorly.
Settler Colonialism Is Racist As Hell.
Blending Marxist ideology of critical theory to infect social sciences is not a solution. This usage of “settler” is incorrect according to the dictionaries. Appropriating the language of English seems like a Trudeau Foundation style of initiative and without surprise, unimaginative. Indeed such grifting is quite similar to appropriation of the cross of Lorraine. This reminds me of peoplekind, a fantasy world where politicians play games with other people’s marbles, rather than multiply the number of marbles for all.
Patrick Wolfe’s obituary reveals his clear advocacy for the Palestinian cause. Whether his cause is just or not, that is beside the point. Such an absence or paucity of objectivity, has become the “go to standard” for far too much of SSHRC research since 2006. To his credit, Wolfe has had an influence, yet at the cost of rational social science. Canadian academia requires a reset in these fields, there’s too much throwing of oneself from the onset into political activism, when the goal ought to simply be good research. The Canadian academy requires a restoration rather than torture, as much of it is far gone from the practical or traditional role of the academy, namely to be of some future or practical use to Canadian society.
Wolfe Went Native
Wolfe’s position on Palestine negates his thesis entirely. He and others like him have perverted the cause of social sciences and not respected its centuries-old method. Being a Palestinian advocate, that is not a “pure” position for an anthropologist at all. Really. That is an example of an anthropological cardinal sin: “going native.” Loss of objectivity is of no use to the discipline. Elevating such horrendously poor scholarship poisoned those who cite his works, his ideological reach now impacts even Canada’s state broadcaster, CBC, where claims that white people are inherently racist are being made. That is a false premise which Wolfe inculcated, and is nothing more than the worst kind of ideological taint upon all that the Renaissance of societal constitutions attempted to achieve. The aspirations of our Canadians ancestors were made through painful bloody victories over tyranny and the goals and aims of emancipation, from Harriet Beecher Stowe and beyond.
The words “settler grifter” come to mind in reference to Wolfe, and his hateful doctrine against the people of Canada or Israel. And for the benefit of the Canadian mind, the anthropology and social sciences discipline has had enough of this destruction of objectivity, as seen most clearly by scholars associated with Trudeau’s foundation, or others such as associated with Tides Canada or LeadNow.
Drive Out Grifters, Restore The Academy
If all Trudeau’s foundation was aiming to do was to destroy the reputation of Canada’s pragmatic approach to national unity, by rubbishing its robust export economy, the very bedrock of its national identity, a natural bounty unseen in most nations, that task seems nearly completed. Yet again, poor scholarship among Trudeau scholar grifters, provokes attacks upon a populace which has never been so culturally integrated, with the least racist society its ever been, according to all credible reports. No thanks to Trudeau or his grifter scholars.
I admit, I began hearing claims that white people were racist or imperialist by birth among supporters of Hugo Chavez in the early 2000s. Now CBC, state broadcaster, tries to tell me the same. Rubbish. Twenty years of social sciences rubbish. Such stat organs require legal redress and closure, as likely Trudeau foundation.
The ponderously poor scholarship, forming the settler colonialism ideology is an ever ready yet brittle example. It can stand no critical analysis of itself. In lay man’s terms, it has no balls. Thus it defeats a test of necessary rigour. Obligating white Christian Canadians in particular to raise the sword of Saint Michael to refute and strike that beast down seems well overdue. The pointed end of thrust of this argument pierces and defeats the aims of the Trudeau Foundation itself. Let’s get to it.
Sancte Michael Archangele, defende nos in proelio; contra nequitiam et insidias diaboli esto praesidium. Imperet illi Deus, supplices deprecamur: tuque, Princeps militiae caelestis, Satanam aliosque spiritus malignos, qui ad perditionem animarum pervagantur in mundo, divina virtute, in infernum detrude.
Amen.
Saint Michael
Conclusion
The settler colonialism cake even The Washington Post keeps trying to serve Canadians is a wash; it has no essential ingredients. The meta analysis tracks back to 2006. Try harder, the settler colonialist genocide narrative has no mothers and no fathers prior to 2006. Get rid of it. Defund it.
(2019) The History of Collins Cobuild: A new generation of dictionaries for learners of English, Collins. https://www.collinsdictionary.com/cobuild [Accessed: March 5, 2020]
Wolfe, P. (2006) Settler Colonialism & the Elimination of the Native, Journal of Genocide Research, 8(4), December, 387-409 https://t.co/2vZWsmIapu?amp=1
Trudeau, and those destroying Alberta Oil & promoting Iranian Colonialism have their origins in Quebec. At the Quebec Summit 1987 under the Brian Mulroney government, Gilles Bernier organized the Francophonie Business Forum in order to merge Quebec businesses owned by Desmarais (Power Corporation Canada), Laurent Beaudoin (Bombardier) and Peladeau (Quebecor) with the International Organization of La Francophonie; an international organization with 88 member states and governments where French is the dominant language and where a significant proportion of the population are Francophones. (1) And yes…Stephen Harper was also involved!
BACKGROUND: Listen to this first so you understand what is going on. (2)
These Quebec Oligarchs of the Francophone Business Forum were given consultative status with UNIDO (United Nations Industrial Development Organization) (5) whose primary mission is to implement Agenda 2030 in order to stuff the coffers of the corporate elite while impoverishing the rest of us! Corporate Canada became partners with the UN! This was all done quietly and without consultation, because in Canada “we” means Quebec propped up by their serfdom.
How are these Quebec corporations connected to Iran? Paul Desmarais of Power Corporation sits on the board of directors for LaFarge, a giant concrete company in France. (7)
LaFarge was charged for financing ISIS fighters in Syria and for crimes against Humanity!(8)
Besides being a regular donor to the Clinton Foundation, LaFarge also employed Hillary Clinton. And as US Secretary of State, Hillary was also funding ISIS and Al-Qaeda fighters!(12)
It is quite elementary you see? Quebec Corporations = International Organization for La Francophonie = ISIS = Iran. We are embedding the original article confirming Hillary’s connection to LaFarge as the Internet Nazi are forever removing valuable news clips!(14)
The International Organization for La Francophnie has gone all UN/Sustainable Development; it was during the Quebec Summit of 1987 that the Institute for Sustainable Development of La Francophonie was formed!(15)
BOOM! For those of you in Alberta who still think Stephen Harper will deliver you from this economic disaster… think again! It was Stephen Harper that sent Gilles Bernier to the La Francophonie Summit in 2006. Yes, papa Bernier was the chairman of the Quebec oligarchs Francophone Business Forum! To quote Justin Trudeau, “Quebecors are better than the rest of Canada,” and apparently Stephen Harper believes this as well! Vive le Quebec libre! Right?
Alberta Oil: Pierre Trudeau made the oil sands a Crown Corporation (21), Mulroney privatized them (22), and Harper then sold them to the Chinese all-the-while the Quebec Oligarchs made billions!
In 2012, Harper approved the CNOOC (China National Offshore Oil Corporation) owned by the People’s Republic of China buyout of Nexen, an Albertan Oil company.(23)(24) In the process Harper locked Canada into a 31 year trade deal with China (FIPA) that promotes Chinese interests in Canada while threatening our sovereignty. China can now sue Canada or Provincial governments in secret tribunals if our laws don’t suit their corporate interests. This one-sided deal was made without debate or provincial consultation! (25)(26)(27)(28)
How? CNOOC is a member of the Canada-China Business Council(CCBC) that helped to barter this deal.(29) In 1978 under the Pierre Trudeau leadership, Paul Desmarais, Maurice Strong of Petro-Canada and Paul T.K. Lin of McGill University along with their connections to China’s Communist Party founded the Canada China Business Council.https://ipolitics.ca/2016/05/25/eastern-promise/ Paul Desmarais and his corporate minions (Power Corporation, Bombardier, SNC Lavalin) used the government of Canada as an intermediary to set up the Canada-China Business Council,(30) an association that would act to facilitate and promotes business, trade and investments between Canada and the People’s Republic of China. Representing the People’s Republic of China on the Canada-China Business Council was CITIC Group a main founding partner(31). But what was not disclosed until the “Panama Papers” data leaks of 2016, was that Andre Desmarais was also a board member of CITIC from 1997-2014 at the time the CNOOC buyout was made. So whose interests were the Canada-China Business Council representing? Furthermore, during Desmarais 16 year tenure CITIC had incorporated over 90 offshore shell companies in the British Virgin Islands using the services of Mossack Fonseca, the Panama-based law firm at the center of the data leak scandal.(32)
Now why would a Chinese Company with the Chinese government as a majority shareholder feel it necessary to form these shell companies to hide taxes? What was the purpose of creating these shell companies if the parent company (CITIC) was generating profits for China? Could it be that the Quebec Oligarchs have a strong hold on China? And how will this relationship impact Canadian sovereignty? No one really knows. What we do know is that the Quebec Corporate Mafia manipulate governments in order to implement their self-serving agenda. In 2006, CNOOC made a $16 Billion natural gas development deal with Iran.(33) And while the Iran-China relations are doing quite well, no pipelines are being built in Alberta and their economy is in free-fall? Who exactly is running the country?
China needs oil to fuel it’s industrial growth and Harper’s FIPA treaty, in place till 2045, also ensured that China would get a pipeline built from Alberta to BC. In 2016, Justin Trudeau bought a 4.5 billion dollar pipeline that was fraught with controversy. There is no requirement in the FIPA agreement for the federal government to make public any lawsuits it may be facing from Chinese investors which means the government could settle the lawsuit by paying out taxpayers money without us knowing! Did Trudeau buy the Kinder Morgan pipeline to appease China?(35) This story will not end well for Canadians. Corporate China now wants total access to Canada and seeks to import it’s own work force!
This Desmarais axis of evil wasn’t created overnight; it was carefully crafted and implemented incrementally by our ruling parties. Canada has NO political heroes; they all serve their globalist overlords! And unless we all stop dancing around these self-serving politicians and their demonic offspring that spew their venomous crap of bull shit they call civil society, pluralism, diversity, open markets, deregulation, climate change aka… “The sky is falling Chicken Little!” etc… Canada is done!
People want us to back track and give details on the past. While we agree, that would be fun, we will instead suggest the work of Peter C. Newman who detailed the Canadian Establishment until 1998. After that, Peter seemed to believe the establishment died. Well, it did not, instead the Canadian establishment amalgamated with the wider establishment of the New World Order, with the likes of Soros, Koch, Clinton/Giustra and the Aga Khan. This is where our work is filling the gap. We begin reporting from the mid 1990s when these deals were being established. In the meantime, we require you find and read the following. Then when you read our material, everything will make more sense.
They are the 1,000 men who really run Canada – invisible, in-bred, secretive, puritanical and tough-minded – the harsh and iron-willed businessmen dedicated to preserving the status quo – their status quo. The author calls them “this country’s non-elected government”, and if there is anyone who knows government in Canada, it is Peter C. Newman. The most compelling, accomplished and clear-sighted political-analytical, journalist in the country, he knows who has power, how they achieved it, how they hold on to it, how they use and abuse it. Newman applies his special skill and scalpel in a fascinating, factual and authoritative account that takes readers into the very marrow of the Canadian Establishment. Naming the men and institutions where the real authority resides, he traces the elaborate personal interconnections between members of the power elite, illustrates the ways in which authority moves, the methods used for its self-perpetuation and the jealous guard kept to ensure that power remains with the select. Trenchant, exciting and in many ways frightening, The Canadian Establishment is one the the most explosive books of the decade.
Bronfman Dynasty: The Rothschilds of the New World (1978)
Only one book – only one family – could possibly succeed The Canadian Establishment… and three years after the publication of that sensational and controversial volume, Peter C. Newman returns with Bronfman Dynasty, the intimate story of the greatest, most powerful empire of them all.
Even though its various branches control assets worth an estimated $7billion, the Bronfman clan is constantly in flux and flight – a feuding clutch of hot-headed dreamers with wounded eyes and hyper egos.
We meet Sam Bronfman, who, along with his brothers, laid the Seagram empire’s financial foundations by supplying booze to bootleggers who crossed the Canadian-USA border during some of the Prohibition era’s most violent encounters. Later he sought respectability by attempting to buy a seat in the Canadian senate.
Today’s generation is less rambunctious but no less interesting. There’s Charles, the current power behind the throne, who owns a baseball ream and lives in a $2million house that has a swimming pool and a retracting roof. Edgar, the New York jet setter, who runs the empire from a Park Avenue office that has a Rodin nude state of Balzac in it. Peter, the shyest billionaire in the country, who owns Montreal’s huge Place Ville Marie and much of downtown Calgary. Mitch, who lives a James Bond existence, hiding in his desk a special flashlight that shoots a stream of mace at unwanted visitors. Then there is Pyllis, who lives in a restored factory on Montreal’s waterfront, and Minda, the baroness, who continues to set sophisticated standards for Parisian society.
Here is the Canadian book that cried out to be written: the compelling saga of Canada’s wealthiest, most powerful, and secretive dynasty.
Acquisitors: Volume 2 of The Canadian Establishment (1981)
Power means control over other people’s lives.
The men in this book exercise that kind of authority, and in gaining their new-found status in an astonishingly brief period of time they have quickened the pulse of Canada.
They’re the fearless new entrepreneurs who have hustled their way into contention, shaking Canada’s Establishment down to the tendrils of its elegant roots. Wealth and influence and passing into new hands-from the de-industrialized East to the petrol-rich West, from the patrician aristocrats of Montreal and Toronto to the cowboy capitalists of Calgary and Vancouver, from the Old Rich, who hide their fortunes, to the New Rich who flaunt their megabucks, their biceps, and their women.
This book explains how part of the Canadian Establishment has reconstructed itself to fit the times, reformulating its very chemistry to accommodate the surging bloodlines of these impatient newcomers. They are the millionaires, software smoothies, hamburger kings, guitar twangers and real-estate-flippers who form a new breed Newman calls THE AQUISITORS.
Within an exciting half-decade, these remarkable newcomers have garnered fortunes that allow them to spend $10,000 a day for their pleasure.
This book is a group profile of hot-headed young guys with jet boats and balloons, big cars, bigger yachts, and egos to match, whose condos in Maui or Miami, stretch Learjets and colour-co-ordinated French Impressionists have become essential to their psychic survival. Their Bonzo lifestyles, strange histories, and stranger marital arrangements allow them to inhabit a climate different from that of ordinary men.
In this volume, which continues his classic study of Canada’s power wielders, Peter C. Newman has isolated the score of men constituting the leading ranks of the fascinating new posse of daring Aquisitors. He details who they are, what they do, and how they get away with it.
Titans (The Canadian Establishment, Vol. 3) (1998)
In this final volume of Peter C. Newman’s momentous trilogy on the Canadian Establishment, he pulls out all the stops. Readers accompany him on a tour of one Candian Titan’s four-acre house; trace in minute detail how Canada’s business Establishment has captured Ottawa’s political agenda; discover the differences between the Old and New Establishments. (“New Money regards waiters as buddies; Old Money treats them as self-propelled furniture.”)
Newman tackles the effects of globalization on our society, documenting how “the Titans have reduced the idea of Canada to a flag of convenience – or occasionally inconvenience – to be used or discarded, like a moth-eaten T-shirt.” He quotes one international trader’s definition of the kind of clout that counts in the global village: “The men who really wield, retain and covet power in New York are the kind of men who answer bedside telephones while making love.”
This is a lively, anecdote-filled survey of how the Canadian Establishment was transformed from staid aristocracy to rampaging meritocracy, where anything goes – as long as you mint a fortune doing it. The intimate details of how these action-oriented gunslingers – fast on the draw and slow on loyalty – have grabbed command of Canada’s future makes for a revealing and explosive book.
These Lords of the New Millennium influence our lives and careers in many astonishing ways. The Old Establishment was a Club; the New Establishment is a Network. Who is plugged it, how they operate, and how they get away with it is the subject of Titans, bound to be the most cussed and discussed book of the year.
While Mr. Newman gave us a complete analysis of the establishment in Canada until 1998, in 2013 he put out a piece in Macleans stating the establishment had lost its hold. Here is Newman in 2013 claiming the establishment is gone…
The Canadian Establishment, Volume 4: Rise of the New World Order (2021) Our goal, to publish a book. A hardcover book.
In the meantime, Dan Matthews released a fantastic film about the establishment in Canada, especially in relationship to central banking.
This is a serious journalism piece that asks the tough questions directly to such politicians as Former Prime Minister of Canada Paul Martin, Canadian Finance Minister Jim Flaherty, Green Party Leader Elizabeth May, Ontario Gas Man Dan McTeague, NDP Leader Jack Layton, Mayor of Oshawa John Gray, Former Prime Minister of Canada John Turner and many more!
Yellow Vests of Canada 