Category: Canada

Posted on

Chambers Of Commerce: Collecting Subsidies While Calling For Open Borders

According to the CEWS Registry, the Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy has been handed out to some 235 institutions that have “Chamber of Commerce” as part of their name. That should alarm people, that hundreds of organizations that claim to promote business are getting handouts from Ottawa — or rather, taxpayers.

The Chambers of Commerce are just part of a long list of institutions that are getting funded to shill the “pandemic” narrative. These include: restaurants and hotels, political parties, law firms, more law firms, churches, and trucking associations, to name a few.

While it would be unrealistic to do a profile on all 235 organizations, let’s take a look at one: The Canadian Chamber of Commerce.

Description of the organization’s activities
Founded in 1925, the Canadian Chamber of Commerce is the nation’s largest business association, representing small and large firms from every sector and region in Canada. The Canadian Chamber is a network of 420 community chambers and boards of trade across Canada, in addition to individual corporate members and over 80 trade and professional organizations. The total membership exceeds 192,000. It is dedicated to the promotion and development of a strong economy. The chamber monitors federal and international issues, solicits the views of the Canadian business community and communicates them to policymakers in Ottawa and internationally. Headquartered in Ottawa, it also has staff in Toronto, Montreal and Calgary.

This is how the group describes its activities.

Instead of calling for people to be able to run their businesses freely, and with minimal interference, the Chamber of Commerce parrots the line that vaccines and rapid tests are the quickest way back to normal. On the surface, it looks like they are playing along because of the financial incentives provided. More on that coming up.

The “wins” they brag about include getting CEWS and CERS extended. CERS is the Canada Emergency Rental Subsidy which is available for businesses. This “business” group also brags about getting the hiring subsidy created, so that taxpayers help fund new employees.

While this organization does receive private donations, it undeniably is getting Government handouts as well. In fact, this has been happening for many years.

GOVERNMENT BRANCH SOURCE YEAR AMOUNT
Bank of Canada 2019 $1,375.00
Business Development Bank of Canada (BDC) 2015 $5,000.00
Canada Foundation for Innovation 2020 $2,300.00
Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) 2021 $5,000.00
Canada Post Corporation (CPC) 2014 $10,000.00
Canada Post Corporation (CPC) 2015 $6,000.00
Canada Post Corporation (CPC) 2017 $6,000.00
Canada Post Corporation (CPC) 2018 $1,900.00
Canada Post Corporation (CPC) 2020 $10,000.00
Canada Post Corporation (CPC) 2021 $30,000.00
Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) 2020 $850,623.60
Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) 2021 $118,464.75
Competition Bureau Canada (COBU) 2016 $1,800.00
Employment and Social Development Canada (ESDC) 2018 $3,400.00
Employment and Social Development Canada (ESDC) 2019 $74,496.00
Employment and Social Development Canada (ESDC) 2020 $22,451.00
Employment and Social Development Canada (ESDC) 2021 $12,180
Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC) 2017 $56,548.68
Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC) 2018 $29,600.00
Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC) 2019 $2,500.00
Export Development Canada (EDC) 2014 $37,500.00
Export Development Canada (EDC) 2015 $29,000.00
Export Development Canada (EDC) 2016 $42,000.00
Export Development Canada (EDC) 2017 $63,000.00
Export Development Canada (EDC) 2018 $65,000.00
Export Development Canada (EDC) 2019 $65,000.00
Export Development Canada (EDC) 2020 $51,000.00
Export Development Canada (EDC) 2021 $79,100.00
Farm Credit Canada (FCC) 2018 $2,500.00
FedDev Agency for Southern Ontario 2018 $2,300.00
FedDev Agency for Southern Ontario 2020 $2,300.00
Global Affairs Canada (GAC) 2017 $1,900.00
Global Affairs Canada (GAC) 2018 $1,900.00
Global Affairs Canada (GAC) 2019 $2,300.00
Health Canada (HC) 2021 $4,947,978.19
Industry Canada 2014 $1,500.00
Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada 2015 $1,800.00
Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada 2016 $2,300.00
Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada 2018 $2,300.00
Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada 2019 $2,300.00
Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada 2020 $530,300.00
Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada 2021 $2,300.00
Montreal Port Authority 2020 $5,000.00
Montreal Port Authority 2021 $5,000.00
Natural Resources Canada (NRCan) 2015 $132,300.00
Natural Resources Canada (NRCan) 2017 $22,122.12
Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada (OPC) 2014 $1,500.00
Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada (OPC) 2015 $1,800.00
Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada (OPC) 2016 $1,800.00
Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada (OPC) 2017 $1,900.00
Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada (OPC) 2019 $2,000.00
Office of the Procurement Ombudsman (OPO) 2020 $2,300.00
Office of the Taxpayers’ Ombudsman 2018 $2,300.00
Ontario Federation of Agriculture 2020 $5,000.00
Port Alberni Port Authority 2016 $10,000.00
Prince Rupert Port Authority 2016 $4,500.00
Public Works and Government Services Canada 2014 $1,500.00
Royal Canadian Mint 2014 $2,500.00
Vancouver Fraser Port Authority (Port Metro Vancouver) 2014 $32,500.00
Vancouver Fraser Port Authority (Port Metro Vancouver) 2015 $10,000.00
Vancouver Fraser Port Authority (Port Metro Vancouver) 2016 $43,000.00
Vancouver Fraser Port Authority (Port Metro Vancouver) 2017 $65,000.00
Vancouver Fraser Port Authority (Port Metro Vancouver) 2018 $50,000.00
Vancouver Fraser Port Authority (Port Metro Vancouver) 2019 $40,000.00
Vancouver Fraser Port Authority (Port Metro Vancouver) 2020 $40,000.00
Vancouver Fraser Port Authority (Port Metro Vancouver) 2021 $57,500.00
VIA Rail Canada 2016 $7,500.00
VIA Rail Canada 2017 $18,500.00
VIA Rail Canada 2019 $10,000.00
VIA Rail Canada 2020 $10,000.00
VIA Rail Canada 2021 $15,000.00

You’d be forgiven for thinking that these were really Communists. Now, what is the Chamber of Commerce getting for itself? The listings should scare you. Keep in mind, that other Chambers of Commerce are likely also receiving money at the local level.

The Canadian Chamber of Commerce has been getting handouts going back many years. The CEWS is really just the least of it. It would also be interesting to know what the conditions were for that nearly $5 million they received from Health Canada.

The Chamber doesn’t appear to call for the end to martial law restrictions. Instead, they lobby for more handouts in order to cope with lockdowns. For a business orientated group, they seem completely okay with Government interference and restrictions.

There also appears to be no issue with policies like vaccine passports. After all, if Canadians don’t want to play along, they can just be replaced by TFWs who took the shots as a condition of employment.

This group also calls for drastically increased immigration, and more ways to remain in Canada. They also support free trade which will see industries outsourced based on cost. Think about how this plays out in the long term.

[1] Flood Canada with more people, driving up demand for work
[2] Support trade deals which reduce the supply of available work

Never mind the social impacts of importing large numbers from very different backgrounds, or the culture clash that will result. It appears these business groups don’t care about such things.

If you think it’s bad now, the agenda from a few years back is even worse. Or perhaps it’s just more open about what they really wanted then.

BORDER CROSSINGS – Beyond the Borders Initiative, with respect to implementation of the action plan items.
BORDER CROSSINGS – with respect to the development of a new International Crossing between Windsor and Detroit.
FREE TRADE AGREEMENTS – Promote balanced free trade agreements for Canada with Europe, India Japan and Korea. Promote Canada’s participation in the Trans-Pacific partnership and in the Trade in Services Agreement
IMMIGRATION – Expedited application process with regard to giving priority to applicants who possess skills in short supply in Canada and processing their applications within 6-12 months.
IMMIGRATION – Foreign Credentials Recognition Program with regard to working with the provinces/territories and business community to develop national accreditation standards to evaluate foreign credentials, professional and trade qualifications, and certification in regulated and non-regulated occupations that reflect employers’ needs
IMMIGRATION: Changes intended to attract and retain international students with respect to work permits, applications for permanent residency, and processing times for applications.
IMMIGRATION: Changes to increase the number of economic immigrants to this country to double the current rate. Renegotiation and signing of new memoranda of understanding with each of the provinces and territories to increase provincial caps for Provincial Nominee Programs. Adequate staffing of local Citizenship and Immigration Canada offices to meet demand and alleviate the labour market shortages.
IMMIGRATION: Regional strategy for settlement needs and at levels of service to ensure access to skilled workers in all regions of the country.
International Trade: Expanding trade and investment links with developing countries.
Labour: Ensuring that any changes to the Canada Labour Code are implemented only if they address a real problem or result in improvement for these employers, their employee and/or the Canadians they serve.
Labour: Asking the federal government, specifically the Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development, to work with the Canadian private sector to identify ways to increase long-term formal employment opportunities for the poor in developing countries, and facilitate the availability of financial institutional products and services, including microfinance, to stimulate job creation for the poor

The above section includes items from 2014 (#36 on their profile with the Lobbying Registry). The Canadian Chamber of Commerce (and presumably all chapters) support virtually open borders as it ensures ready access to an endless supply of cheaper labour.

Put bluntly, Canadian taxpayers are helping to finance groups calling for outsourcing of industries, and the importing of a new work force for what’s left. It not only causes havoc with jobs, but drives down wages for the ones that remain.

Now, about those 235 groups receiving the CEWS:

  • 1000 ISLANDS GANANOQUE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • ABBOTSFORD CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • Aboriginal Chamber Of Commerce – Grand Rapids
  • AIRDRIE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • ALBERNI VALLEY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • ALBERTA CHAMBERS OF COMMERCE
  • ANNAPOLIS VALLEY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • AURORA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • BAFFIN REGIONAL CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • BANCROFT & DISTRICT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • BATHURST CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • BATTLEFORDS CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • BEAUMONT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE ASSOCIATION
  • BONNYVILLE & DISTRICT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE SOCIETY
  • BOW VALLEY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE ASSOCIATION
  • BRACEBRIDGE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • BRANDON CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • BRAZIL-CANADA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • BRIGHTON AND DISTRICT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • BROCKVILLE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • BURLINGTON CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • BURNS LAKE & DISTRICT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • CAMBRIDGE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • CAMERA DI COMMERCIO ITALIANA DELL’ ONTARIO/ITALIAN CHAMBER OF COMMERCE OF ONTARIO
  • CAMPBELL RIVER AND DISTRICT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • CAMROSE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • CANADIAN GERMAN CHAMBER OF INDUSTRY AND COMMERCE INC
  • Canadian Women’s Chamber of Commerce
  • CASTLEGAR & DISTRICT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • CENTRE WELLINGTON CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • CHAMBER OF COMMERCE BRANTFORD-BRANT
  • CHAMBER OF COMMERCE SERVING COQUITLAM, PORT COQUITLAM PORT MOODY
  • Chamber of Marine Commerce CHAMBRE DE COMMERCE MARITIME
  • Chambre de commerce Canada-Floride/ Chamber of commerce Canada-florida
  • Chambre de commerce de l’Est de Montréal Eastern Montreal Chamber of Commerce
  • CHAMBRE DE COMMERCE ET D’INDUSTRIE DE BÉCANCOUR NICOLET-YAMASKA / BECANCOUR NICOLET-YAMASKA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • CHARLOTTETOWN CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • CHATHAM-KENT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • CHETWYND CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • CHILLIWACK CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • CLOVERDALE DISTRICT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • Coboconk, Norland & Area Chamber of Commerce
  • COLD LAKE REGIONAL CHAMBER OF COMMERCE ASSOCIATION
  • COLUMBIA VALLEY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • CORNWALL CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • COWICHAN LAKE DISTRICT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • CRANBROOK CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • DAWSON CITY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE ASSOCIATION
  • DAWSON CREEK & DISTRICT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • DELTA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • DRUMHELLER AND DISTRICT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • DRYDEN DISTRICT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • DUNCAN-COWICHAN CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • EAST GWILLIMBURY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • EAST HANTS AND DISTRICTS CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • Eastern Prince Edward Island Chamber of Commerce Inc.
  • EDMONTON CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • EDMUNDSTON CHAMBER OF COMMERCE/LA CHAMBRE DE COMMERCE DE LA REGION D’EDMUNDSTON INC
  • ESTEVAN CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • FENELON FALLS CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • FERNIE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • FORT FRANCES CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • FORT MACLEOD AND DISTRICT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • FORT MCMURRAY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • FORT NELSON CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • FORT SASKATCHEWAN CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • FORT ST JOHN AND DISTRICT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • FREDERICTON CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • GANDER & AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE INC
  • GEORGINA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • GIBSONS AND DISTRICT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • GRANDE PRAIRIE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • GRAVENHURST CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • GREATER BARRIE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • GREATER KINGSTON CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • GREATER LANGLEY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • GREATER NANAIMO CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • GREATER NIAGARA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • GREATER OSHAWA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • GREATER PETERBOROUGH CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • Greater Saskatoon Chamber of Commerce
  • GREATER SUDBURY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • GREATER VERNON CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • GREATER VICTORIA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • GRIMSBY & DISTRICT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • GUANGDONG CHAMBER OF COMMERCE (CANADA)
  • GUELPH CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • HALIBURTON HIGHLANDS CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • HALIFAX CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • HALTON HILLS CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • HUMBOLDT AND DISTRICT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE CORP.
  • HUNTSVILLE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • INDO-CANADA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • INNISFAIL AND DISTRICT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE SOCIETY
  • ITALIAN CHAMBER OF COMMERCE IN CANADA – WEST/CAMERA DI COMMERCIO ITALIANA IN CANADA – OVEST
  • JASPER PARK CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • KAMLOOPS CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • KAWARTHA LAKES CHAMBER OF COMMERCE-EASTERN REGION
  • KELOWNA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • KENORA AND DISTRICT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • KENSINGTON AND AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • KIMBERLEY BAVARIAN SOCIETY
  • KINDERSLEY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • KITIMAT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • LA CHAMBRE DE COMMERCE DE GASPE – /GASPÉ CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • LA CHAMBRE DE COMMERCE DE MANIWAKI-THE MANIWAKI CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • LA CHAMBRE DE COMMERCE ITALIENNE AU CANADA. ITALIAN CHAMBER OF COMMERCE IN CANADA CAMERA DI COMMERCIO ITALIANA IN CANADA
  • LA CRETE AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • LAB WEST CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • LABRADOR NORTH CHAMBER OF COMMERCE INC.
  • LAC LA BICHE & DISTRICT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • Lacombe and District Chamber of Commerce
  • LADYSMITH CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • LAKE COUNTRY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • LEAMINGTON DISTRICT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • LEDUC REGIONAL CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • LETHBRIDGE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • LINCOLN CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • LINDSAY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • LLOYDMINSTER CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • LONDON CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • MEDICINE HAT AND DISTRICT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • MILTON CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • MOOSE JAW CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • MORDEN AND DISTRICT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • MOUNT PEARL PARADISE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • MUSKOKA LAKES CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • NELSON AND DISTRICT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • NEW WESTMINSTER CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • NEWMARKET CHAMBER OF COMMERCE INC.
  • NIAGARA-ON-THE-LAKE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • NORTH BAY AND DISTRICT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • Northumberland Central Chamber of Commerce
  • NWT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • OAKVILLE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • ORILLIA AND DISTRICT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • ORO-MEDONTE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • OWEN SOUND & DISTRICT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • PARKSVILLE & DISTRICT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • PEACE RIVER BOARD OF TRADE AND CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • PEACHLAND CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • PEMBERTON AND DISTRICT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • PENTICTON AND WINE COUNTRY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • PLACENTIA AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • PONOKA & DISTRICT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE SOCIETY
  • PORT HARDY & DISTRICT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • PORT HOPE AND DISTRICT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • PORTAGE LA PRAIRIE AND DISTRICT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • POWELL RIVER CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • PRAIRIE SKY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE INC.
  • PRINCE GEORGE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • QUESNEL AND DISTRICT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • QUINTE WEST CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • RADIUM HOT SPRINGS CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • RED DEER CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • REGINA & DISTRICT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • RENFREW CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • REVELSTOKE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • RICHMOND CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • RUSSELL AND DISTRICT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • SALT SPRING ISLAND CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • SARNIA LAMBTON CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • SASKATCHEWAN CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • SAUGEEN SHORES CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • SAULT STE MARIE AND DISTRICT OF CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • SELKIRK & DISTRICT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE INC
  • SHERWOOD PARK & DISTRICT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • SICAMOUS AND DISTRICT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • SIMCOE AND DISTRICT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • SMITHERS DISTRICT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • SMITHS FALLS CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • SOCIETY OF THE MORINVILLE AND DISTRICT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • SOUTH SURREY AND WHITE ROCK CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • SOUTHERN GEORGIAN BAY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • Springfield Chamber of Commerce Inc.
  • SQUAMISH CHAMBER OF COMMERCE.
  • ST. ALBERT AND DISTRICT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE SOCIETY
  • ST PAUL & DISTRICT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE ASSOCIATION
  • ST THOMAS CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • STONY PLAIN & DISTRICT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • STRATHROY AND DISTRICT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • SUMMERLAND CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • SUSSEX AND DISTRICT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE INC.
  • SWIFT CURRENT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • SYLVAN LAKE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • THE ARMSTRONG-SPALLUMCHEEN CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • THE BRITISH COLUMBIA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • THE CALGARY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • THE CANADIAN CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE NIAGARA FALLS, CANADA
  • THE EDSON AND DISTRICT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • The Greater Kitchener Waterloo Chamber of Commerce
  • THE GREATER MONCTON CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • THE GREATER SUMMERSIDE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • THE HAMILTON CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • THE MACKENZIE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • THE MANITOBA CHAMBERS OF COMMERCE
  • THE MOUNT FOREST DISTRICT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • THE PARRY SOUND AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • THE PAS AND DISTRICT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • THE PERTH CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • THE PRINCE EDWARD COUNTY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • THE SAANICH PENINSULA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • THE TABER CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • The Winkler and District Chamber of Commerce
  • THE WINNIPEG CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • THUNDER BAY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • TILLSONBURG DISTRICT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • TIMMINS CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • TOBERMORY & DISTRICT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • TOFINO-LONG BEACH CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • Trail Chamber of Commerce
  • TRENT HILLS AND DISTRICT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • TRURO AND DISTRICT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • UCLUELET CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • VAUGHAN CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • VEGREVILLE & DISTRICT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • VERMILION CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • WASKESIU CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • WELLAND/PELHAM CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • WEST PRINCE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • WEST SHORE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • WEST VANCOUVER CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • WEYBURN CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • WHITBY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • WHITCHURCH STOUFFVILLE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • WHITECOURT AND DISTRICT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • WHITEHORSE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • WIARTON AND DISTRICT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • WILLIAMS LAKE & DISTRICT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • Windsor-Essex Regional Chamber of Commerce
  • WOODSTOCK CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • YARMOUTH AND AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • YELLOWKNIFE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • YORKTON CHAMBER OF COMMERCE

Do you get it now? Your tax dollars are being used to support these “Chambers of Commerce”. These groups lobby Federal and Provincial Governments to spend even more money propping up businesses which impose mask and vaccine rules. They also support the open border agenda to mass import people who will work for less, and who are more receptive to taking experimental shots.

In many ways, this comes across as a protection racket. These groups push for certain “safety” grants and measures for their members, but always ones that profit them as well.

(1) https://chamber.ca/
(2) https://chamber.ca/campaign/business-led-recovery/
(3) https://chamber.ca/advocacy/wins-for-canadian-business/
(4) https://apps.cra-arc.gc.ca/ebci/hacc/cews/srch/pub/bscSrch
(5) https://apps.cra-arc.gc.ca/ebci/habs/cews/srch/pub/dsplyBscSrch?request_locale=en
(6) https://lobbycanada.gc.ca/app/secure/ocl/lrs/do/vwRg?regId=812012&cno=15787#regStart

(A) https://canucklaw.ca/media-subsidies-and-govt-financing/
(B) https://canucklaw.ca/media-controlled-opposition/
(C) https://canucklaw.ca/groups-calling-for-vaccine-passports-heavily-subsidized-by-government/
(D) https://canucklaw.ca/trudeau-using-taxpayer-money-to-subsidize-opposition-parties-liberals-too/
(E) https://canucklaw.ca/law-firms-bar-associations-receiving-canada-emergency-wage-subsidy-cews/
(F) https://canucklaw.ca/conflicting-out-its-not-just-cews-that-the-lawyers-are-receiving/
(G) https://canucklaw.ca/following-the-money-why-are-churches-really-pushing-the-vaxx-agenda
(H) https://canucklaw.ca/canadian-trucking-alliance-raising-lots-of-questions-lately/

Posted on

Kelvin Zero: Developing Digital Biometric ID With Public Money

Publication number: 20210083872
Abstract: Provided herein is a system, device, method, and subnetwork for performing a secure blockchain transaction of a digital asset. The system includes a terminal for generating the blockchain transaction, the terminal configured to operate in a first mode and a second mode, and a switch connector for preventing the terminal from operating in the first mode and the second mode simultaneously. When the terminal is in the first mode, the terminal is connected via a network to a system provider server, the system provider server in communication with a plurality of blockchain devices. When the terminal is in the second mode, the terminal is in communication with a cold storage device. The cold storage device is configured to store a private key for signing the blockchain transaction. The terminal is configured to sign the blockchain transaction on the cold storage device using the private key.
Type: Application
Filed: March 27, 2019
Publication date: March 18, 2021
Inventors: Philippe Desmarais, Thierry St-Jacques Gagnon

The above is a description of a patent to make electronic transfers more secure, and less vulnerable to outside attacks. It outlines a number of security features for identity verification, and to ensure the money gets to its intended targets.

Philippe Desmarais, Thierry St-Jacques Gagnon are the co-Founders of Kelvin Zero. In 2019, they filed a patent application for a blockchain application for digital asset transfers. While this is interesting, this hasn’t really been all their efforts, as the company has been subsidized by taxpayer money. The National Research Council has been handing out grants to fund this kind of technology.

Desmarais is also a Board Member at IX Investing. The name is also a curious one, as many readers will be familiar with the Desmarais Family, who owns Power Corporation and most Canadian politicians.

The Federal Lobbying Registry provides some information on the money that had been given out during the period of the lobbying and solicitation. Other databases have overlapping results.

GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT YEAR MONEY
Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) 2020 $41,359
Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) 2020 $23,375
Information and Communications Technology Council of Canada 2020 $20,000
Information Technology Association of Canada 2020 $32,500
Investissement Québec 2020 $63,364
National Research Council (NRC) 2020 $178,720

Kelvin Zero has been lobbying for the last while in order to secure taxpayer funding for its various initiatives. This is hardly surprising. The grants handed out in 2021 should be publicly available soon.

Bruce Hartley is also an interesting choice to use as the lobbyist. He spent a decade working for Jean Chretien. He was also one of the lobbyist (along with William Pristanski) which got SNC Lavalin their deferred prosecution.

DATE AGREEMENT AMOUNT OF MONEY
Apr. 1, 2020 Innovation Assistance Program $81,312
Jun. 25, 2020 Innovation Assistance Program $97,408
Oct. 12, 2020 European GVC/MNE access support $30,000
Dec. 20, 2020 Innovation Assistance Program $70,449
Apr. 12, 2021 Digital Biometric ID Card $180,000

Kelvin Zero received several grants from the Federal Government in the last few years. This is information available from Open Search Canada. Perhaps the most interesting of which was the Biometric ID Program.

This project will help Kelvin Zero develop the technology behind its biometric access card system, MULTI-PASSTM. MULTI-PASS is a global, unique digital wallet that organizations and their users can use to process secure data, identity, and access validations over near-field communication (NFC) technology.

Kelvin also describes their project as a way to “validate identity without ever accessing it”. The stated rationale is that if the identity isn’t accessed, then it’s not at risk for being compromised. The company is also working on developing a “universal digital wallet”.

Kelvin is also part of the Thales Accelerate Partner Network. According to records from the Canada Revenue Agency, Thales Digital Solutions has been receiving the Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy.

(1) https://kzero.com/en/team
(2) https://patents.justia.com/inventor/philippe-desmarais
(3) https://www.ix-investments.com/our-board/philippe-desmarais/
(4) https://lobbycanada.gc.ca/app/secure/ocl/lrs/do/vwRg?cno=367360&regId=905576#regStart
(5) https://www.linkedin.com/in/philippe-desmarais-b695a3126/
(6) https://search.open.canada.ca/en/gc/
(7) https://kzero.com/en/news/kelvin-zero-selected-for-a-biometric-card-r-d-project
(8) https://kzero.com/en/what-we-do
(9) https://apps.cra-arc.gc.ca/ebci/hacc/cews/srch/pub/bscSrch

Posted on

Illegal Crossings Into Canada On The Rise Again, Unsurprisingly

Trudeau wasn’t kidding when he said that Roxham Road would be reopened to fake refugees entering from the United States. Then again, it had never really closed, but had declined.

In September and October 2021, there were 169 and 113 interceptions respectively by the RCMP. This increased to 845 in November, and 2,811 in December. It’s pretty messed up that actual Canadians are having their movements restricted, but illegal aliens can just come in almost at will. Included below is the official data for the last several years.

Of course, this doesn’t take into account the people who slip in unnoticed across the thousands of miles of unprotected borders between Canada and the U.S.

Nor does it factor in the hordes of people who enter legally, but who then never leave.

PROVINCE/TERRITORY 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Newfoundland 0 0 0 0 0 0
Prince Edward Island 0 0 0 0 0 0
Nova Scotia 0 0 0 0 0 0
New Brunswick 10 5 5 ? ? 25
Quebec 1,335 1,295 785 875 1,035 2,595
Ontario 2,660 2,340 1,995 2,630 2,790 3,7935
Manitoba 20 15 25 10 225 505
Saskatchewan ? ? ? ? ? 30
Alberta 35 40 35 65 70 120
British Columbia 125 85 110 130 170 220
Yukon 0 0 0 0 0 5
Northwest Territories 0 0 0 0 0 0
Nunavut 0 0 0 0 0 0
TOTALS 4,185 3,770 2,955 3,715 4,290 7,365

Illegals were still coming into Canada via land border crossings during the Harper years. However, it’s only considered an issue when Trudeau is in power.

YEAR: 2017
MONTH QUEBEC MANITOBA B.C. OTHERS TOTAL
January 245 19 46 5 315
February 452 142 84 0 678
March 654 170 71 2 897
April 672 146 32 9 859
May 576 106 60 0 742
June 781 63 39 1 884
July 2,996 87 51 0 3,314
August 5,530 80 102 0 5,712
September 1,720 78 79 4 1,881
October 1,755 67 68 8 1,890
November 1,539 38 46 0 1,623
December 1,916 22 40 0 1,978
TOTAL 18,836 1,018 718 22 20,593
YEAR: 2018
MONTH QUEBEC MANITOBA B.C. OTHERS TOTAL
January 1,458 18 41 0 1,517
February 1,486 31 48 0 1,565
March 1,884 53 33 0 1,970
April 2,479 50 31 0 2,560
May 1,775 36 53 0 1,869
June 1,179 31 53 0 1,263
July 1,552 51 31 0 1,634
August 1,666 39 39 3 1,747
September 1,485 44 68 4 1,601
October 1,334 23 37 0 1,394
November 978 23 18 0 1,019
December 1,242 11 27 0 1,280
TOTAL 18,518 410 479 7 19,419
YEAR: 2019
MONTH QUEBEC MANITOBA B.C. OTHERS TOTAL
January 871 1 16 1 888
February 800 1 6 2 808
March 967 13 22 0 1,002
April 1,206 15 25 0 1,246
May 1,149 27 20 0 1,196
June 1,536 26 5 0 1,567
July 1,835 23 15 1 1,874
August 1,712 26 22 2 1,762
September 1,706 19 17 0 1,737
October 1,595 18 8 1 1,622
November 1,118 9 21 0 1,148
December 1,646 2 5 2 1,653
TOTAL 16,136 180 182 9 16,503
YEAR: 2020
MONTH QUEBEC MANITOBA B.C. OTHERS TOTAL
January 1,086 7 7 0 1,100
February 976 2 2 0 980
March 930 7 18 0 955
April 1 0 5 0 6
May 17 0 4 0 21
June 28 1 3 1 33
July 29 2 17 0 48
August 15 3 0 0 18
September 30 4 7 0 41
October 27 0 4 0 31
November 24 0 8 0 32
December 26 2 8 0 36
TOTAL 3,189 28 84 1 3,302
YEAR: 2021
MONTH QUEBEC MANITOBA B.C. OTHERS TOTAL
January 28 1 10 0 39
February 39 0 1 0 40
March 29 5 2 0 36
April 29 2 2 0 33
May 12 3 13 0 28
June 11 0 6 0 17
July 28 5 6 0 39
August 63 2 11 0 76
September 150 0 19 0 169
October 96 0 17 0 113
November 832 1 12 0 845
December 2,778 0 33 0 2,811
TOTAL 4,095 19 132 0 4,246

One can only imagine how bad 2022 will end up being with this issue. Of course, the vast scale of LEGAL immigration is a much, MUCH bigger problem than the illegal entries. That said, it’s not an issue that can be ignored.

(1) https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/roxham-road-reopen-1.6257868
(2) https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/services/refugees/asylum-claims/processed-claims.html
(3) https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/services/refugees/asylum-claims/asylum-claims-2017.html
(4) https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/services/refugees/asylum-claims/asylum-claims-2018.html
(5) https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/services/refugees/asylum-claims/asylum-claims-2019.html
(6) https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/services/refugees/asylum-claims/asylum-claims-2020.html
(7) https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/services/refugees/asylum-claims/asylum-claims-2021.html

Posted on

Delay Prevents Action4Canada Case From Being Immediately Thrown Out

Action4Canada and other Plaintiffs were supposed to be in Court on February 3rd, in order to address 2 Applications (here and here) filed back in January. But due to an extremely convenient medical illness, this has been pushed back until April 5th. It’s unclear why Lawrence Wong didn’t simply step up, as he’s been a B.C. lawyer since 1987.

Private matters generally aren’t worth covering. However, their August 2021 lawsuit is a very public case, and has involved soliciting public donations since 2020. It’s fair that people know its true status: that it’s on the verge of being struck.

For all the money that was sunk into getting this lawsuit off the ground, it never stood a chance.

It feels odd to have a previous piece age so well. Back in August 2021, this site critiqued the 391 page lawsuit filed by Action4Canada in Vancouver. The basic premise was that the Notice of Civil Claim was drafted so poorly, it didn’t stand a chance in hell of making it to trial.

To be more specific, the Notice of Claim didn’t follow (at all) Rules 3-1, and 3-7 of BC Civil Procedure. These outline how pleadings are to be drafted. The logical remedy — from the Defendants’ position — would be to file a Motion or Application to strike based on Rule 9-5. This rule allows cases to be struck for a number of reasons, including for being “frivolous, vexatious, or an abuse of process”. Pleadings can also be struck if they don’t disclose a reasonable cause of action.

To make a distinction here: dismissing and striking are not the same thing. Dismissing a case usually means a Judge has made a determination about the merits of the case. By contrast, striking means attacking the pleadings themselves.

For those wondering what “struck without leave to amend” means, here’s an explanation. Sometimes, the Court will “give leave” or permission, to make changes to the pleadings (allowing content to be added or deleted). This is typically meant for very minor issues. For serious problems, such as with this lawsuit, the defects are so extensive that the Court won’t allow it.

Anyone with a rudimentary understanding of civil procedure would have looked at Action4Canada’s case and saw where this was going.

Now the other shoe has dropped, and at least 2 Applications have been filed. The first is from the various Provincial Defendants, and the other from Vancouver Island Health Authority and Providence Health Care. They are trying to strike the case for essentially the same reasons outlined on this site back in August, 2021.

To state the obvious: this doesn’t mean supporting or advocating for the medical martial law measures that have gone on in the last 2 years.

Nonetheless, it’s pretty difficult to argue with the premise of the Application. Specifically, Defendants are trying to get the case struck as being “frivolous, scandalous, vexatious, prolix, and an abuse of process”. This isn’t just written in a shoddy manner, but it’s over-the-top ridiculous.

The Claim contains many pages of completely irrelevant material, seeks remedies outside the Court’s jurisdiction, and makes allegations against people who aren’t parties (and presumably haven’t been subpoenaed). It’s also extremely disjointed and difficult to follow along with.

It’s hard to believe that 2 very senior, very experienced lawyers could draft this garbage. Combined, they have nearly 70 years of legal work completed. While the Claim does contain a fair amount of truthful information, it’s written so badly that no Judge will ever consider it.

By contrast, the Notices of Application were extremely well written, to the point, and raised many fatal defects in the Notice of Civil Claim. Again, this isn’t to defend the Horgan/Henry regime, but their lawyers make a compelling case as to why this should be thrown out. Although there are 2 Applications, the content is very similar.

3. The Claim is a prolix and convoluted document that is replete with groundless accusations against public officials, inflammatory language, and conspiracy theories.

6. The Plaintiffs’ Claim is deficient in form and substance. It is a scandalous, frivolous, and vexatious pleading that fails to meet the basic requirements for pleadings and is an abuse of the Court’s process. The Claim should be struck in accordance with Rule 9-5(1) of the Supreme Court Civil Rules, without leave to amend.

Pleadings Generally
7. Supreme Court Civil Rule (the “Rules”) 3-1 provides, in part:
Contents of notice of civil claim
(2) A notice of civil claim must do the following:
(a) set out a concise statement of the material facts giving rise to the claim;
(b) set out the relief sought by the Plaintiff against each named defendant;
(c) set out a concise summary of the legal basis for the relief sought;
…
(g) otherwise comply with Rule 3-7. [emphasis added]

8. Rule 3-7 provides, in part:
Pleading must not contain evidence
(1) A pleading must not contain the evidence by which the facts alleged in it are to be proved.
…
Pleading conclusions of law
(9) Conclusions of law must not be pleaded unless the material facts supporting them are pleaded.
…
General damages must not be pleaded
(14) If general damages are claimed, the amount of the general damages claimed must not be stated in any pleading. …

9. The function of pleadings is to clearly define the issues of fact and law to be determined by the court. The plaintiff must state, for each cause of action, the material facts. Material facts are those facts necessary for the purpose of formulating the cause of action. The defendant then sees the case to be met and may respond to the plaintiff’s allegations in such a way that the court will understand from the pleadings what issues of fact and law it will be called upon to decide.
.
Homalco Indian Band v. British Columbia, [1998] B.C.J. No. 2703 (S.C.), para. 5

10. As the Court of Appeal recently held in Mercantile Office Systems Private Ltd. v. Worldwide Warranty Life Services Inc., 2021 BCCA 362, para 44:
None of a notice of claim, a response to civil claim, and a counterclaim is a story. Each pleading contemplates and requires a reasonably disciplined exercise that is governed, in many instances in mandatory terms, by the Rules and the relevant authorities. Each requires the drafting party to “concisely” set out the “material facts” that give rise to the claim or that relate to the matters raised by the claim.
None of these pleadings are permitted to contain evidence or argument.

Application to Strike
11. Rule 9-5(1) provides:
Scandalous, frivolous or vexatious matters
(1) At any stage of a proceeding, the court may order to be struck out or amended the whole or any part of a pleading, petition or other document on the ground that
(a) it discloses no reasonable claim or defence, as the case may be,
(b) it is unnecessary, scandalous, frivolous or vexatious,
…
(d) it is otherwise an abuse of the process of the court …

12. A pleading may be struck under Rule 9-5(1) if it is plain and obvious that the pleading contravenes any of Rule 9-5(l)(a) through (d).
.
Knight V. Imperial Tobacco Canada Ltd, 2011 SCC 42 at para. 17

Rule – 9-5(l)(a)-The Notice of Civil Claim Discloses No Reasonable Claim
14. The Claim is premised upon non-justiciable questions and relies heavily upon international treaties, Criminal Code provisions, and unknown causes of action that are incapable of disclosing a reasonable cause of action for the purposes of Rule 9-5(1)(a).

16. The Plaintiffs allege numerous violations (and non-violations) of the Criminal Code that are not properly raised in a civil action (Simon v. Canada, 2015 BCSC 924, para. 45); including:

17. The Plaintiffs allege numerous violations of international legal instruments, unwritten constitutional principles, and causes of action unknown to law that are not actionable in Canadian courts (Li v. British Columbia, 2021 BCCA 256, paras. 107-109; Toronto v. Ontario, 2021 SCC 34, para. 5), including the following:

19. The general rule that facts pleaded should be accepted as true for the purposes of a strike application does not apply in a “case like this where the notice of civil claim is replete with assumptions, speculation, and in some instances, outrageous allegations. The law is clear that allegations based on assumption and speculation need not be taken as true.”
.
Willow v. Chong, 2013 BCSC 1083, para. 19
See, also, Simon v. Canada, 2015 BCSC 924 [“Simon”], para. 54

20. The Plaintiffs have failed to plead the concise statement of material facts that is necessary to support any complete cause of action. The Charter claims are inextricably bound up in a prolix, argumentative, and wildly speculative narrative of grand conspiracy that is incapable of supporting a viable cause of action. It is impossible to separate the material from the immaterial, the fabric of one potential cause of action or claim from another, or conjecture and conspiracy from asserted facts.
.
Fowler v. Canada (Attorney General), 2012 BCSC 367, para. 54
Simon, supra, paras 54-59

9-5(l)(b) The Notice of Civil Claim is Scandalous, Frivolous and Vexatious
Scandalous and Embarrassing
22. A pleading is scandalous if it does not state the real issue in an intelligible form and would require the parties to undertake useless expense to litigate matters irrelevant to the claim.
.
Gill v. Canada, 2013 BCSC 1703 [“Gill”], para. 9

23. A claim is also scandalous or embarrassing if it is prolix, includes irrelevant facts, argument or evidence, such that it is nearly impossible for the defendant to reply to the pleading and know the case to meet. Pleadings that are so prolix and confusing that it is difficult, if not impossible, to understand the case to be met, should be struck.
.
Gill, supra para. 9
Strata Plan LMS3259 v. Sze Hang Holding Inc., 2009 BCSC 473, at para. 36
Kuhn v. American Credit Indemnity Co., [1992] B.C.J. No. 953 (S.C.)

24. The Claim is a scandalous pleading because it is prolix, confusing, and nearly impossible to respond to:
a. The 391 page Claim attempts to plead dozens of causes of action and Charter breaches and seeks over 200 declarations. It is, as a result, nearly impossible to know the case to be met.
b. The Claim contains extensive passages of completely irrelevant information, including:

Rule 9-5(l)(a) and (d) – The Claim is Vexatious and an Abuse of Process
28. Little distinction exists between a vexatious action and one that is an abuse of process as the two concepts have strikingly similar features.
.
Dixon v. Stork Craft Mamifacturing Inc., 2013 BCSC 1117

29. Abuse of process is not limited to cases where a claim or an issue has already been decided in other litigation, but is a flexible doctrine applied by the court to values fundamental to the court system. In Toronto (City) v. Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 79 (CUPE), [2003] 3 S.C.R. 77, the court stated at para. 37:
.
Canadian courts have applied the doctrine of abuse of process to preclude relitigation in circumstances where the strict requirements of issue estoppel (typically the privity/mutuality requirements) are not met, but where allowing the litigation to proceed would nonetheless violate such principles as judicial economy, consistency, finality and the integrity of the administration of justice.

30. Vexatious actions include those brought for an improper purpose, including the harassment and oppression of other parties by multifarious proceedings brought for purposes other than the assertion of legitimate rights. Where it is obvious that an action cannot succeed, or if the action would lead to no possible good, or if no reasonable person can reasonably expect to obtain relief, the action is vexatious.
.
Lang Michener Lash Johnston v. Fabian, [1987] O.J. No. 355 [“Lang Michener”], at para. 19

33. The Applicants submit the Claim has been brought for an improper purpose. The Plaintiffs and their counsel must know, or ought to know, that a 391 page Claim seeking over 200 declarations concerning alleged criminal conduct and the efficacy of public health measures “cannot succeed … [and] would lead to no possible good”: Lang Michener, supra.

34. The Claim is intended, at least in part, to intimidate and harass health authorities, public officials and politicians, including the Provincial Health Officer, by advancing spurious, public allegations of criminal conduct, conflicts of interest, and ulterior motives. This intention is further corroborated by the Plaintiff Action4Canada’s simultaneous campaign to encourage individuals to serve government officials and politicians with “Notices of Liability” for their actions in responding to the COVID-19 pandemic (Affidavit #1 of Rebecca Hill, Ex. G, I).

35. The Claim is also intended, at least in part, to consolidate, publicize, and amplify COVID-19 conspiracy theories and misinformation. The Claim is a book-length tirade against the entirety of British Columbia’s response to the pandemic, with dozens of quotes from, and hundreds of footnotes to, anti-mask, anti-lockdown, and anti-vaccine resources. Both Action4Canada and its counsel have promoted the Claim online and on social media
.
(Affidavit #1 of Rebecca Hill, Ex. D, K).

36. These are improper purposes to file and prosecute a civil action. There can be no question that the Claim is an abuse of process. Permitting this litigation to proceed would violate the principles of judicial economy and the integrity of the administration of justice.

The above quotes came from the January 17 Notice of Application. Re-read the original Notice of Civil Claim and ask: what are they wrong about?

The Applications get into allegations that Action4Canada is causing harassment of Government Officials as a result of their behaviour. This is where things get more interesting:

This Application also contains an Affidavit from Rebecca Hill. She apparently works for Mark Witten, the lawyer for the B.C Defendants. She’s alleging that the “Notices of Liability” that Action4Canada provides have led to the bombardment of Government Officials. From the information provided, it’s strongly implied that this is done in order to drive up the donations.

By extension, it wouldn’t take much to argue that the entire Notice of Claim was a stunt to get more people handing out money.

Remember those notices you downloaded, filled out, and submitted? Guess what? Many of them, and the emails, are now saved as evidence by the B.C. Government.

Author’s note: since the Vancouver Court has apparently not scanned the entire Affidavit, the attachments are not available. That may be for the best, as there is contact information.

It’s also worth pointing out: the Defendants are asking for costs as well. This is pretty much inevitable, once the case is thrown out. It seems unlikely that any Plaintiff has given this serious thought. For a reference point, Adam Skelly was hit with a $15,000 cost award, just for trying to open his restaurant. Given the size and vexatious nature of the Action4Canada case, it’s quite possible for everyone to be on the hook for several thousand dollars each. Keep in mind, court costs aren’t dischargeable in bankruptcy.

Once more, this isn’t an attempt to defend the B.C. Government. That said, the Claim was written in such a convoluted way, it never stood a chance. One has to ask why it really happened.

Back in October, Action4Canada posted a reply to the response they received from the B.C. Government. It’s amusing that they act indignant that Rule 9-5 was quoted verbatim. Spoiler: if you want a Court to toss a case, you have to cite the law that allows it.

Whether this case is decided on April 5, or is set back again, the ultimate result is the same. Once a Judge sits down with the lawsuit, it’s getting struck without leave to amend.

It’s not just the B.C. case that will be struck. The Ontario ones will be soon as well. Many will remember this filing from July 6, 2020. More than a year and a half later, there are still no defenses filed, no motions, no applications, no scheduled appearances.

In fact, under Rules 14 and 24 of civil procedure in Ontario, all of these idling cases could probably be dismissed at any time for unnecessary delay.

One other thing to consider is the Statute of Limitations. For most things in Ontario and B.C., a person has 2 years to commence legal action. Now, if a case is filed, but sits for years and is simply dismissed, it may be too late to start another. This doesn’t stop the clock. Something to think about.

Prediction: once the B.C. case is struck (for the reasons listed above), the Ford regime will then make similar Applications for the Ontario cases.

Other than wasting a lot of time and money, what has this actually accomplished?

COURT DOCUMENTS
(1) A4C Notice of Civil Claim
(2) A4C Response October 14
(3) A4C Legal Action Update, October 14th 2021 Action4Canada
(4) A4C Notice of Application January 12
(5) A4C Notice of Application January 17
(6) A4C Affidavit
(7) A4C Response VIH-Providence January 17
(8) A4C Response to Application BC Ferries January 19

Posted on

Health Canada Initially Created For Population Control Measures

Health Canada has had several names since its inception in 1919. Despite how innocuous its name and mandate sounds, this organization had an initial purpose: population control. It’s been previously covered how PHAC was an artificial creation from the World Health Organization to serve a global order.

Few people know this, but the Department of Health was formed with the same goal in mind.

In January 2004, the WHO put out an edict that all Member States were to create an “outpost” for public health. Consequently, the Government of Paul Martin created PHAC, the Public Health Agency of Canada, out of nothing in that year. In late 2004 and into 2005, hearings went on for Bill C-12, the Quarantine Act. This was really just domestic implementation of the 3rd Edition of the International Health Regulations. The Provinces have their own laws which are based on this. The PHAC Act was introduced in 2006 by Stephen Harper shortly after taking power.

(a) International Health Regulations are legally binding on Member States.
(b) 2005 Quarantine Act was, in reality, written by WHO
(c) Public Health Agency Of Canada is a branch of WHO, and not Canadian

Again, this should be a review for most readers, but it’s still worth bringing up. The bigger picture is quite scary when it’s all laid out.

PHAC’s purpose is to use the pretense of public health as a means to control the local populations. Thing is: Health Canada (in its previous iterations) was formed for the same purpose.

1. Timeline Of Major Events In Public Health

  • 1837: William White publishes book — Evils Of Quarantine Laws
  • 1851: First International Sanitary Conference, Paris
  • 1859: Second International Sanitary Conference, Paris
  • 1866: Third International Sanitary Conference, Constantinople
  • 1874: Fourth International Sanitary Conference, Vienna
  • 1881: Fifth International Sanitary Conference, Washington
  • 1885: Sixth International Sanitary Conference, Rome
  • 1892: Seventh International Sanitary Conference, Venice
  • 1983: Eighth International Sanitary Conference, Dresden
  • 1894: Ninth International Sanitary Conference, Paris
  • 1897: Tenth International Sanitary Conference, Venice
  • 1903: Eleventh International Sanitary Conference : Paris, 1903
  • 1906: Revised Statutes Of Canada In 1906 Publication
  • 1907: Founding of the Office international d’Hygiene publique
  • 1911-1912: Twelfth International Sanitary Conference, Paris
  • 1912: Canadian Public Health Association Incorporated
  • 1919: Bill 37, Canada forms the Department of Health
  • 1926: Thirteenth International Sanitary Conference, Paris
  • 1928: Bill 205, Canada’s DOH becomes Department of Pensions and National Health
  • 1938: Fourteenth International Sanitary Conference, Paris
  • 1944: Bill C-149, Canada’s DPNH becomes Department of National Health and Welfare
  • 1946: Canada joins World Health Organization, agrees to Constitution
  • 1951: International Sanitation Regulations take effect from WHO
  • 1959: “Privileges And Immunities” granted to all WHO Officials
  • 1969: International Health Regulations (1st Ed.) replace Sanitation Regulations
  • 1984: Bill C-3, Health Canada Act passed
  • 1993: Department of National Health and Welfare becomes Health Canada
  • 1995: 2nd Edition of WHO International Health Regulations
  • 2001: DARK WINTER pandemic simulation plays out
  • 2004: WHO issues edict all Members to have “public health outpost”
  • 2004: PHAC, Public Health Agency of Canada, created by Order In Council
  • 2004: Bill C-12, hearings on Quarantine Act in Parliament
  • 2005: 3rd Edition of WHO International Health Regulations
  • 2005: ATLANTIC STORM pandemic simulation plays out
  • 2006: PHAC Act introduced by Harper Government
  • 2010: Rockefeller paper released, includes infamous LOCKSTEP SCENARIO
  • 2010: Theresa Tam stars in movie about fictional outbreak
  • 2017: SPARS Pandemic Scenario plays out
  • 2018: CLADE X pandemic simulation plays out
  • 2019: EVENT 201 pandemic simulation plays out

A book by William White titled “The Evils of Quarantine Laws” is still available today. In fact, it can be purchased on Amazon. In that book, White pushed his case that contagions did not actually exist, and that these quarantine laws were pushed for other purposes.

The pdf version is nearly 200 pages, but it’s well worth a read. It goes into considerable depth about how a pseudo-science is pushed on the public under the guises of protection.

2. International Sanitary Conferences: 1851 to 1938

Going back to 1851, there were over a dozen International Sanitary Conferences held in the West. Canada (then a British Colony) would have been subjected to whatever measures the U.K. wanted. The measures sounded innocuous enough, and claimed the purpose of trying to prevent international spread of disease. The archive is also available.

The stated reasons including establishing global standards of health in order to prevent the transmission and spreading of cholera, among other diseases. Sounds pretty familiar with what’s going on now, doesn’t it?

3. Revised Statutes Of Canada In 1906

Even back in 1906, Canada had a Quarantine Act on the books. Although heavily promoted as a way to manage international trade and immigration, those same principles can be used to restrict people domestically.

What’s going on today globally isn’t anything new, at least conceptually. Instead, it’s the scale of which that is novel.

The Medical Officer of Health isn’t a new concept either. Ages ago, there were still “experts” who had almost dictatorial powers to implement laws and regulations. After all, if Kings didn’t know what was going on, they would have to trust the thinking to other people.

4. Founding of the Office International d’Hygiene Publique In 1907

The Welcome Collection in the U.K. published the document for the creation of an International Office of Public Health. As a Colony at the time, Canada would presumably have been subjected to the same laws and regulations.

That said, the information is still available on the Canadian Government’s site. Over a century ago, our “leaders” signed us up to be regulated and controlled by public health experts.

5. Canadian Public Health Association Created In 1910

Ongoing programs:
.
Providing an effective liaison and network both nationally and internationally in collaboration with various disciplines, agencies and organizations; Encouraging and facilitating measures for disease prevention, health promotion and protection and healthy public policy; Initiating, encouraging and participating in research directed at the fields of disease prevention, health promotion and healthy public policy; Providing an effective liaison and partnership with CPHA’s Provincial and Territorial Public Health Associations; Acting in partnership with a range of disciplines including health, environment, agriculture, transportation, other health-oriented groups and individuals in developing and expressing a public health viewpoint on personal and community health issues; Designing, developing and implementing public health policies, programs and activities; Facilitating the development of public health goals for Canada; Identifying public health issues and advocating for policy change; Identifying literacy as a major factor in achieving equitable access to health services.

The Canadian Public Health Association was created in 1910, and incorporated in 1912. It became a charity in 1975. In its most recent C.R.A. filings, approximately 60% of the CPHA’s financing came from the Government.

Although the page has since been altered, the main financial support of the CPHA comes from drug companies like Pfizer, Moderna and AstraZeneca. That shouldn’t be the least bit surprising to anyone at this point.

CPHA is involved in advocating for national and international health policies, including the restriction of people’s movements. It presumably is quite influential regarding Health Canada. At the time of writing this, there are several Provincial counterparts, all advocating for much the same thing. More on that in later pieces.

6. Department Of Health Created In 1919, Bill 37

[Section 4a]
Cooperation with the provincial, territorial and other health authorities with a view towards to coordination of the efforts proposed or being made for preserving and improving public health

Section 4f referred to enforcement of rules made by the International Joint Committee.

Bill 37 came into effect in 1919, after the First World War. Supposedly, the driving force behind this was the Spanish influenza, and the need to protect global public health.

Interestingly, it references the Revised Statutes of Canada, 1906, Volume 2. Even back then, there were Quarantine Acts on the books in order to restrict the movement of people. Of course, these were “supposed” to only apply to sick people.

Worth noting is that the League of Nations, the predecessor to the United Nations, also placed a heavy focus on public health. Many associate it with attempts to prevent wars between countries. In reality, there was a lot more to it.

7. Department of Pensions and National Health, 1928, Bill 205

In 1928, there was a change in name to the Department of Pensions and National Health. This came with the introduction of Bill 205. However, the purposes regarding public health remained much the same.

8. Department of National Health and Welfare Created In 1944, Bill 149

There was another change of name in 1994, courtesy of Bill 149. This time it became the Department of National Health and Welfare. Keep in mind, this was in the latter stages of the Second World War, and the beginnings of the new world order forming. The groundwork for the United Nations and World Health Organization had already been laid out.

9. WHO Membership Means Submitting To THEIR Constitution

After the defeat of the Axis powers, the World was supposed to embrace freedom and human rights, but then this happened.

Article 21
The Health Assembly shall have authority to adopt regulations concerning:
(a) sanitary and quarantine requirements and other procedures designed to prevent the international spread of disease;
(b) nomenclatures with respect to diseases, causes of death and public health practices;
(c) standards with respect to diagnostic procedures for international use;
(d) standards with respect to the safety, purity and potency of biological, pharmaceutical and similar products moving in international commerce;
(e) advertising and labelling of biological, pharmaceutical and similar products moving in international commerce.

Article 22
Regulations adopted pursuant to Article 21 shall come into force for all Members after due notice has been given of their adoption by the Health Assembly except for such Members as may notify the Director-General of rejection or reservations within the period stated in the notice.

In 1946, Canada signed a Treaty endorsing the Constitution of the World Health Organization, and agreeing to be bound by it.

Article 21(a) of the WHO’s Constitution explicitly gives it authority over Member States over issues such as quarantine, or medical martial law. WHO also (largely) gets to decide what diagnostic standards and equipment are considered suitable.

Since Canada never opted out, Article 22 means that we must live with this.

In 1951, the International Sanitation Regulations came into effect, which was really the first agreement which gave the World Health Organization power to dictate Member actions under the guise of “public health”. But at least people would be held responsible if something happened, right?

10. World Health Organization Gives Itself/Officials Immunity

WHA12.41 Convention on the Privileges and immunities of the Specialized Agencies: Specification of Categories of Officials under Section 18 of Article VI of the Convention
The Twelfth World Health Assembly,
.
Considering Section 18 of Article VI of the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the Specialized Agencies which requires that each specialized agency will specify the categories of officials to which the provisions of that Article and Article VIII shall apply; and Considering the practice hitherto followed by the World Health Organization under which, in implementing the terms of Section 18 of the Convention, due account has been taken of the provisions of resolution 76 (I) of the General Assembly of the United Nations,
.
1. CONFIRMS this practice; and
2. APPROVES the granting of the privileges and immunities referred to in Articles VI and VIII of the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the Specialized Agencies to all officials of the World Health Organization, with the exception of those who are recruited locally and are assigned to hourly rates.
Eleventh plenary meeting, 28 May 1959 (section 3 of the fourth report of the Committee)

https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/88834
ihr.convention.on.immunities.privileges

Even back in 1959, the World Health Organization saw that its members should enjoy full legal immunity for itself, and its agents. Of course, member states seemed happy to go along with it. Looking through the records though, it seems unclear if Canada has specifically signed on.

The International Sanitation Regulations were replaced by the International Health Regulations (first edition) in 1969. Canada signed on and it became binding in 1971. The second version of WHO-IHR came out in 1995, and the third was released in 2005.

The information from this point on has been extensively covered on this site.

Most people are aware that the scope of Health Canada has grown considerably in recent decades. It has encompassed more and more things, resulting in less of a focus on public health measures. PHAC would soon pick up the slack.

11. Public Health Groups Are Registered “Charities” In Canada

Think the problem of drug money is limited to Health Canada, or the Public Health Agency of Canada? It’s not, and we will get more into the finances later. The list of “charities” includes groups that have the power to impose medical tyranny.

  • Alberta Health Services (AB)
  • Central Regional Integrated Health Authority (NL)
  • Eastern Regional Integrated Health Authority (NL)
  • Fraser Health Authority (BC)
  • Hay River Health & Social Services Authority (NT)
  • Interlake-Eastern Regional Health Authority (MB)
  • Interior Health Authority (BC)
  • Labrador-Grenfell Regional Integrated Health Authority (NL)
  • Nisga’a Valley Health Authority (BC)
  • Northern Regional Health Authority (MB)
  • Northern Regional Health Authority (BC)
  • Nova Scotia Health Authority (NS)
  • Provincial Health Services Authority (BC)
  • Regional Health Authority A (NB)
  • Regional Health Authority B (NB)
  • Saskatchewan Health Authority (SK)
  • Souris Health Auxiliary of Assinibione Regional Health Authority Inc. (MB)
  • Vancouver Coastal Health Authority (BC)
  • Vancouver Island Health Authority (BC)
  • Weeneebayko Area Health Authority (ON)
  • Winnipeg Regional Health Authority (MB)

However, there are also a number of other suspicious groups that need to be looked at. Although they may not have the power to mandate martial law, they do influence policies. Now, who would donate to such groups, unless it’s done for the purposes of writing the laws? Or to ensure that solutions involve pharmaceuticals?

  • Alberta Public Health Association
  • BCCDC Foundation For Population And Public Health
  • Canadian Foundation For Pharmacy
  • Canadian Pharmaceutical Sciences Foundation
  • Canadian Public Health Association
  • Ontario Public Health Association
  • Pharmacists Without Borders Canada
  • Public Health Association of British Columbia
  • Seenso Institute for Public Health
  • Shoppers Drug Mart Life Foundation

This is just some of the groups that are registered as charities. Why be structured this way? Probably since it means that private donations are subsidized by the public via tax refunds.

A serious question: given all of the “health organizations” (and this is just a partial list), accepting private donations, does this likely impact how Health Canada does business?

12. Binding Global “Pandemic Management” Treaty Proposed

This was addressed in March 2021. Countries across the world are world are apparently open to the idea of a legally binding globally authority to manage alleged crises. Essentially, national sovereignty would be secondary to the International Health Regulations.

13. Final Thoughts On This Subject

The Department of Health (1919) was founded under the guise of managing the Spanish flu through restrictive measures. It’s original creation isn’t at all what many believe. But over time, the organization came to encompass many more functions.

The reality is that countries don’t have sovereignty over their own affairs. Using the cloak of “infection control”, people have their rights and freedoms stripped away all the time. Many so-called Health Authorities are actually structured as charities and receive private donations.

What companies would donate to health authorities which are implementing mandatory vaccination policies? Wild idea, but perhaps businesses that would profit from these dicatates are contributing.

The Public Health Agency of Canada has essentially taken over that role since it came into existence in 2004. However, Health Canada does still advocate for much the same policies. The International Health Regulations (and prior Sanitation Regulations) are legally binding on Member States.

Now, the influence and money from the pharmaceutical industry cannot be ignored. The cash is rampant, and will be the subject of a Part II, coming later.

(1) https://www.pc.gc.ca/en/culture/clmhc-hsmbc/res/information-backgrounder/espagnole-spanish
(2) Evils Of Quarantine Laws
(3) https://www.amazon.com/-/es/William-White/dp/1231197994
(4) https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-6/20021231/P1TT3xt3.html
(5) https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/health-canada
(6) https://www.treaty-accord.gc.ca/index.aspx
(7) https://www.treaty-accord.gc.ca/details.aspx?lang=eng&id=103984&t=637793587893732877
(8) https://www.treaty-accord.gc.ca/details.aspx?lang=eng&id=103990&t=637793587893576566
(9) https://www.treaty-accord.gc.ca/details.aspx?lang=eng&id=103997&t=637793622744842730
(10) https://www.treaty-accord.gc.ca/details.aspx?lang=eng&id=105025&t=637793622744842730
(11) https://www.jstor.org/stable/41975722
(12) https://parl.canadiana.ca/browse/eng/c/bills/13-2
(13) https://parl.canadiana.ca/view/oop.bills_HOC_1302_1/554?r=0&s=1
(14) https://parl.canadiana.ca/browse/eng/c/bills/16-2
(15) https://parl.canadiana.ca/view/oop.bills_HOC_1602_1/778?r=0&s=1
(16) https://parl.canadiana.ca/view/oop.bills_HOC_1905_1/7?r=0&s=1
(17) https://parl.canadiana.ca/view/oop.bills_HOC_1905_1/542?r=0&s=1
(18) https://parl.canadiana.ca/view/oop.HOC_32_2_C2_C9/427?r=0&s=1
(19) https://parl.canadiana.ca/view/oop.bills_HOC_1602_1/778?r=0&s=1
(20) https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/62873/14549_eng.pdf
(21) The scientific background Of International Sanitary Conferences
(22) https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/128165/EB9_35_eng.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
(23) 1951 International Sanitation Regulations
(24) https://iiif.wellcomecollection.org/pdf/b22419743
(25) 1907 Creation Of International Public Health
(26) https://www.who.int/governance/eb/who_constitution_en.pdf
(27) https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/88834
(28) ihr.convention.on.immunities.privileges
(29) https://apps.cra-arc.gc.ca/ebci/hacc/srch/pub/bscSrch
(30) https://www.who.int/news-room/commentaries/detail/op-ed—covid-19-shows-why-united-action-is-needed-for-more-robust-international-health-architecture

Posted on

Reminder: Immigration Is Largely A Provincial Matter

The open borders into Canada is an issue that doesn’t get addressed nearly enough. A specific detail within that subject is who’s actually responsible for it. Yes, there are plenty of NGOs and special interest groups, but that’s a discussion for another time.

Trudeau (rightly) gets a lot of flack for promoting the replacement agenda. Harper and Mulroney, although more polished, were doing much the same thing. While they definitely deserve condemnation, this doesn’t tell the complete story.

What’s very rarely mentioned is the fact that Ottawa has Treaties with all 13 Provinces and Territories over immigration rates and categories. The terms differ somewhat. However, the basic principle is that they are agreements based on estimates of how many people they wish to import.

There are also efforts underway to enact Municipal Nominee Programs to let individual cities determine how many people come into the country.

As an analogy: consider a worker who grabs takeout food for 10 of his colleagues on a lunch break. While the cashier may have dealt only with him, the overall order was placed on behalf of everyone. The food that he brings back to the office will (largely) be what his co-workers asked for.

According to Section 95 of the Constitution, the Provinces have the authority to make their own laws with respect to immigration. By contrast, it says that Ottawa may “from time to time” make their own laws. This suggests that the true power over mass entry into Canada really lies with the Provinces.

Agriculture and Immigration
Marginal note: Concurrent Powers of Legislation respecting Agriculture, etc.
.
95 In each Province the Legislature may make Laws in relation to Agriculture in the Province, and to Immigration into the Province; and it is hereby declared that the Parliament of Canada may from Time to Time make Laws in relation to Agriculture in all or any of the Provinces, and to Immigration into all or any of the Provinces; and any Law of the Legislature of a Province relative to Agriculture or to Immigration shall have effect in and for the Province as long and as far only as it is not repugnant to any Act of the Parliament of Canada.

It’s not facetious to look at the Federal immigration policy as merely a compilation of the 13 Treaties that have been signed with the Provinces and Territories. They inform Ottawa what they want, and Ottawa puts together a policy. Yes, this Ministry is managed Federally, and legal challenges go to the Federal Court, but the policy details are hammered out with the lower levels of Government.

Even if the Federal Government (in theory) were to challenge a Provincial immigration rule, the broad scope of Section 92 (Provincial jurisdiction) would make it difficult. A Judge could very well throw out any challenge as being ultra vires, or outside Ottawa’s scope.

Much of the political class, and many of the pundits don’t seem to have any understanding about how this works. That includes writers who do this professionally.

The Provinces have their own Nominee Programs, and others, such as Agricultural or Regional. They hold tremendous influence in determining the number of people who enter Canada on visas.

Keep in mind, the additional strain on social services like schools and hospitals must also be taken into account when these Treaties are made and renewed. These services are, of course, run by the Provinces.

While it would be nice to blame the Trudeau Liberals (and successive “Conservative” administrations), it’s misplaced to dump it all on them. Who’s demanding to bring in more people lately? Well, it’s Ontario, Saskatchewan, Alberta, and New Brunswick. All of those Premiers claim to be conservatives. Yes, the Feds do compile the Annual Reports to Parliament, but the contents are drafted in collaboration with the Provinces and Territories.

Have you ever heard Jason Kenney, Scott Moe, or Doug Ford asking to put the brakes on immigration?

(1) https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/corporate/mandate/policies-operational-instructions-agreements/agreements/federal-provincial-territorial.html
(2) https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/corporate/transparency/consultations/2020-consultations-immigration-levels-and-municipal-nominee-program/discussion-guide.html
(3) https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/const/page-3.html#h-24
(4) https://spencerfernando.com/2021/01/21/why-the-conservatives-should-make-decentralization-their-core-idea/
(5) https://canucklaw.ca/immigration-annual-reports-to-parliament/

*Disclaimers, Ethics* Proudly powered by WordPress