Category: Globalism

Posted on

Getting Started With Researching Registered Canadian Charities

In both Canada and the United States, registered charities are open to at least some degree of scrutiny by members of the public. This is of importance since a surprising number of NGOs who try to influence your life are actually charities. In addition to meddling, these groups are being subsidized with your tax money. The upside is that it makes it much easier to look into them.

Also in this series, we covered: (a) research, investigative journalism for beginners; (b) FOI/ATIP filings; (c) court record searches; and (d) lobbyist registrations. This is meant as introductory lessons, and not to include everything.

While the focus on this is Canadian charities, you should be aware that it’s possible to search the finances of American ones in much the same way. The information is made public by the Canada Revenue Agency, and Internal Revenue Service, respectively.

A disclaimer: it’s probably best to go into this with an open mind. Surely, the bulk of these groups operate in a completely transparent manner. That said, groups that few have heard of have a disproportionate impact on our lives. Be curious, but willing to have beliefs changed. Also, a great many of these organizations have revenue of just a few thousand or tens of thousands per year. They aren’t pulling too many strings.

Referring to the Canadian site: checking out if a company is registered as a charity is about as complicated as running a Google search. Simply type in the name, or part of a name. It is actually quite surprising the amount of places that are charities. This includes colleges, universities and many public health “authorities”.

Now, let’s try an example:

Searching with the term “public health“, we get 6 hits. The Public Health Association of British Columbia is one of those on that list, so let’s take a look at that.

Basic information about the PHABC (and other groups) are instantly available. Typically, the last 5 years of financial data will be available, although one can ask the CRA for filings from further back. They will also list the number of employees, and typically the salary ranges of the top 10 highest paid. Usually, these are executives. While this certainly does not include everything, it’s a great starting point when investigating charities.

(Anecdotally) it seems very common that a large part of the revenue is from “other” sources. It would be nice to know specifically what that involved. Perhaps some assets were sold off to make it happen?!

While non-profits are subject to many of the same laws, the financial information isn’t so readily available. Just a clarification here.

The CRA Charity Page works well in conjunction with Corporations Canada. From here, one can look up which groups are registered, and obtain many of their filings. These are free. If a corporation is set up provincially, the filings can be obtained that way, although some charge for copies.

When you know who the Directors are — either from the CRA or a corporate search — do a little digging. Have they sat in Government before? Have they held any public office? Do they have relatives, close friends, or business associates who are in a position to influence policies? While this approach may make some uncomfortable, realize that this is how things work in the real world. It’s not Bills or Motions, but secret handshakes that often determine how things go.

As for formal meetings, check the piece on getting started with lobbyist registries. It’s amazing how much information is out there.

Now, why would a corporation structure itself as a charity? The most obvious explanation is for the tax benefits. Since donations are tax deductible — almost 50% in most cases — it provides an incentive for donors, as the public will actually help finance it. Also, charities are taxes by the CRA in a more generous way than other businesses, or even non-profits. But, there is a trade off: more forced transparency.

Can a person call up a charity to ask for information? Yes, absolutely. In fact, depending on how easy going you are, you may learn about things that never crossed your mind.

This isn’t to suggest that all charities are run with some nefarious purpose. Far from it. However, it’s important to know what you are helping to fund, and if and how they are trying to influence public policy.

Then of course, we have “charities” like the Century Initiative who promote genocidal policies of population replacement with open borders initiatives. Ones like this are definitely worth a deep dive.

Now, if the entity being researched is not a registered charity, then this article will have no impact. That said, a stunning number of them are, so it’s at least worth a look.

One other thing to point out: programs run through the CRA — like the Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy and various sickness programs — post a lot of their data online. If nothing else, there’s a significant amount of information available.

Is this a lot of work? It can be, but with practice, it gets much easier. And this is what this series is trying to underscore: self reliance. Instead of depending on some blogger, or YouTuber, or podcast, “you” are your own most reliable source of information. Figure out what’s true and what’s not.

IMPORTANT LINKS
(1) https://apps.cra-arc.gc.ca/ebci/hacc/srch/pub/dsplyBscSrch
(2) https://apps.irs.gov/app/eos/
(3) https://ic.gc.ca/app/scr/cc/CorporationsCanada/fdrlCrpSrch.html

PROGRAMS RUN BY THE CANADA REVENUE AGENCY
(A) https://apps.cra-arc.gc.ca/ebci/hacc/cews/srch/pub/bscSrch
(B) https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/subsidy/emergency-wage-subsidy.html
(C) https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/subsidy/emergency-wage-subsidy/cews-statistics.html
(D) https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/subsidy/emergency-wage-subsidy/cews-statistics/stats-detailed.html
(E) https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/benefits/recovery-benefit.html
(F) https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/benefits/recovery-caregiving-benefit.html
(G) https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/benefits/recovery-sickness-benefit.html

SURPRISING INSTITUTIONS THAT ARE “CHARITIES”
(1) https://canucklaw.ca/bc-provincial-health-services-authority-is-a-private-corporation-charity/
(2) https://canucklaw.ca/bc-centre-for-disease-control-foundation-is-registered-charity-with-pharma-funding/
(3) https://canucklaw.ca/alberta-health-services-mostly-autonomous-corporation-charity/
(4) https://canucklaw.ca/public-health-ontario-a-semi-autonomous-corporation-whose-leaders-sit-with-on-science-table/
(5) https://canucklaw.ca/executives-of-public-health-charities-drawing-huge-salaries-to-lock-you-down/
(6) https://canucklaw.ca/canadian-public-health-association-is-a-charity-funded-by-drug-companies/
(7) https://canucklaw.ca/charity-university-of-toronto-institute-for-pandemics-funded-by-millers-merck-run-by-ontario-science-table/
(8) https://canucklaw.ca/charity-mcmaster-university-bill-gates-future-of-canada-project-nexus-for-infectious-diseases/
(9) https://canucklaw.ca/media-5-the-origins-of-true-north-canada-which-its-founder-hides/

Posted on

Canadian Public Health Association Is A Charity, Funded By Drug Companies

The Canadian Public Health Association, or CPHA, is an organization that tries to influence health policy within Canada and abroad. Also, check out the British Fertility Society, the U.S. Council on Patient Safety, the American College Health Foundation (ACHF), the Canadian Immunization Research Network (CIRN), or the Canadian Pharmaceutical Sciences Foundation (CPSF). All have similar ties.

But that seems harmless enough, right? Surely, these are all well meaning people. However, when one looks up who their major sponsors are, certain names stand out. This certainly is cause for concern, given how much money is known to influence the law and politics.

It’s a shame that this group doesn’t specify the amount that these “platinum” sponsors (or donors) contribute. Although the page has since been edited, the archive is still available, as is a pdf version. That being said, this prominent list includes:

  • AstraZeneca
  • Medicago
  • Merck
  • Moderna
  • Sanofi Pasteur
  • Seqirus

Yes, this organization’s biggest private donors are drug companies, including AstraZeneca, Merck and Moderna, who have a significant financial interest in ensuring the Canadian Government keeps purchasing their vaccines. Things get even more interesting, since the CPHA is actually a charity, registered with the Canada Revenue Agency. Not only is big pharma financing the CPHA, but those grants are subsidized by the public in terms of tax rebates.

CPHA was incorporated in 1912, and it became a charity in 1975. Its CRA registration is 106865744 RR 0001. How the CPHA describes its activities is also very interesting. Corporate documents can also be ordered on the Federal site.

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 Canada Revenue Agency also provides a snapshot of the finances of all charities over the last 5 years. Looking through some of the data, we get this information:

2016 Financials Summary
Receipted donations $17,952.00 (0.61%)
Non-receipted donations $693,500.00 (23.43%)
Gifts from other registered charities $45,561.00 (1.54%)
Government funding $759,823.00 (25.67%)
All other revenue $1,443,165.00 (48.76%)
Total revenue: $2,960,001.00

Charitable programs $2,217,691.00 (75.52%)
Management and administration $478,049.00 (16.28%)
Fundraising $17,565.00 (0.60%)
Political activities $96,389.00 (3.28%)
Gifts to other registered charities and qualified donees $0.00 (0.00%)
Other $126,791.00 (4.32%)
Total expenses: $2,936,485.00

2017 Financials Summary
Receipted donations $6,562.00 (0.23%)
Non-receipted donations $334,000.00 (11.74%)
Gifts from other registered charities $65,979.00 (2.32%)
Government funding $1,485,693.00 (52.21%)
All other revenue $953,575.00 (33.51%)
Total revenue: $2,845,809.00

Charitable programs $2,275,825.00 (75.97%)
Management and administration $489,917.00 (16.35%)
Fundraising $9,128.00 (0.30%)
Political activities $98,965.00 (3.30%)
Gifts to other registered charities and qualified donees $0.00 (0.00%)
Other $121,957.00 (4.07%)
Total expenses: $2,995,792.00

2018 Financials Summary
Receipted donations $100.00 (0.00%)
Non-receipted donations $565,702.00 (13.15%)
Gifts from other registered charities $77,135.00 (1.79%)
Government funding $1,933,773.00 (44.94%)
All other revenue $1,726,656.00 (40.12%)
Total revenue: $4,303,366.00

Charitable programs $3,404,797.00 (82.24%)
Management and administration $498,188.00 (12.03%)
Fundraising $9,405.00 (0.23%)
Political activities $101,965.00 (2.46%)
Gifts to other registered charities and qualified donees $0.00 (0.00%)
Other $125,710.00 (3.04%)
Total expenses: $4,140,065.00

2019 Financials Summary
Receipted donations $100.00 (0.00%)
Non-receipted donations $565,702.00 (13.15%)
Gifts from other registered charities $77,135.00 (1.79%)
Government funding $1,933,773.00 (44.94%)
All other revenue $1,726,656.00 (40.12%)
Total revenue: $4,303,366.00

Charitable programs $2,609,623.00 (80.85%)
Management and administration $487,201.00 (15.09%)
Fundraising $9,554.00 (0.30%)
Gifts to other registered charities and qualified donees $0.00 (0.00%)
Other $121,370.00 (3.76%)
Total expenses: $3,227,748.00

2020 Financials Summary
Receipted donations $2,736.00 (0.07%)
Non-receipted donations $397,000.00 (9.57%)
Gifts from other registered charities $8,734.00 (0.21%)
Government funding $2,500,250.00 (60.29%)
All other revenue $1,238,324.00 (29.86%)
Total revenue: $4,147,044.00

Charitable programs $2,877,407.00 (82.79%)
Management and administration $552,487.00 (15.90%)
Fundraising $9,548.00 (0.27%)
Political activities $0.00 (0.00%)
Gifts to other registered charities and qualified donees $0.00 (0.00%)
Total expenses: $3,475,665.00

It would be nice to know what “other revenue” means, considering it represents between a third and half of the money that this organization takes in.

Because of its status as a charity, donations to the CPHA only cost about half the amount given. Approximately 40% to 50% comes back in the form of tax rebates. That’s not the only subsidy this group gets. Oh, there are others indeed.

The CPHA is also receiving CEWS, the Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy. This means that taxpayers are subsidizing this organization for “pandemic relief”. That could be part of why this group never seems to oppose any measures that are brought in.

Considering that CEWS is intended for private businesses to cover their employees’ salaries, this would seem to imply that CPHA isn’t part of the Government.

CPHA is (surprisingly) not currently registered with the Lobbying Commissioner’s Office. It hasn’t been for a while, and the last time they received money (according to their postings) is 2015.

CPHA has a number of projects on the go, and the climate change ones stand out. Of course, it’s not surprising that it would be intertwined with everything these days. Given this group’s connection to the pharmaceutical industry, it’s quite expected that they also promote the mass vaccination agenda. This from 2017:

Immunization is one of the most successful and cost effective public health interventions, saving countless number of lives through the reduction of morbidity and mortality caused by disease. Despite this, vaccine preventable diseases still persist in Canada, requiring high levels of immunization coverage for continued protection. To better understand the underlying causes and strategies to achieving optimal vaccine coverage and acceptance, a significant body of multifaceted and interdisciplinary research is being developed within the Canadian and international research community. The growing interest in identifying and addressing the challenges faced in improving vaccine acceptance and uptake has resulted in the development of relevant research data, tools, practices, procedures and strategies. However, not all evidence is made easily available and accessible to support health care professionals growing needs.

Following a report commissioned by the Communicable and Infectious Disease Steering Committee of the Pan-Canadian Public Health Network Opens in a new window from the Vaccine Acceptance and Uptake Task Group, a number of recommendations to improving vaccine coverage were made. One of which included the establishment of an up-to-date inventory of relevant peer reviewed research and studies underlying the causes and potential solutions to vaccine acceptance and uptake in Canada.

In July 2017, CPHA—funded by the Public Health Agency of Canada Opens in a new window through the Immunization Partnership Fund—launched the Creation of a Canadian Immunization Resource Centre project. The project aims to offer access to the latest evidence-based products, resources and tools via the Canadian Vaccination Evidence Resource and Exchange Centre (CANVax) Opens in a new window. CANVax is an online database of curated resources to support immunization program planning and promotional activities to improve vaccine acceptance and uptake in Canada.

PHAC, the Public Health Agency of Canada, has been helping fund the Canadian Immunization Resource Centre project. It stands to reason that companies like AstraZeneca and Moderna are as well. This is essentially market research, not much different than the Vaccine Confidence Project. Keep in mind, PHAC is actually a branch of the WHO, and not really Canadian.

DATE AMOUNT
Dec. 5, 2016 $136,782
Jul. 1, 2017 $15,795
Jul. 1, 2017 $180,418
Jul. 1, 2017 $3,582,970
Oct. 19, 2018 $896,893
Jan. 2, 2020 $3,122,867
May 25, 2020 $508,792

Through Open Search, we can see the donations PHAC has made to CPHA in recent years. That is quite a lot of money, considering that pushing drugs is one of its primary functions.

This is a group that advocates on behalf of certain health policies, including on widespread vaccination. It also receives taxpayer money (along with pharma money) to run its operations. But whose interests does it really serve?

(1) https://www.cpha.ca/
(2) https://www.cpha.ca/corporate-partners
(3) https://www.cpha.ca/projects
(4) https://www.cpha.ca/creation-canadian-immunization-resource-centre
(5) https://opengovca.com/corporation/959421
(6) Corporations Canada Search
(7) https://apps.cra-arc.gc.ca/ebci/hacc/srch/pub/bscSrch
(8) https://apps.cra-arc.gc.ca/ebci/hacc/cews/srch/pub/bscSrch
(9) https://www.lobbycanada.gc.ca/app/secure/ocl/lrs/do/vwRg?cno=16210&regId=826615#regStart
(10) https://search.open.canada.ca/en/gc/
(11) CPHA 01 Continuance
(12) CPHA 02 Directors
(13) CPHA 03 Bylaws

Posted on

B.C. Health Care (Consent) And Care Facility (Admissions) Act Of 1996

With the looming vaccine passports in B.C. (and elsewhere), a good piece of legislation to know is the B.C. Health Care (Consent) And Care Facility (Admissions) Act Of 1996. It doesn’t really require much commentary, as the quoted passages are pretty self explanatory.

Part 2 — Consent to Health Care
.
Consent rights
4 Every adult who is capable of giving or refusing consent to health care has
(a) the right to give consent or to refuse consent on any grounds, including moral or religious grounds, even if the refusal will result in death,
(b) the right to select a particular form of available health care on any grounds, including moral or religious grounds,
(c) the right to revoke consent,
(d) the right to expect that a decision to give, refuse or revoke consent will be respected, and
(e) the right to be involved to the greatest degree possible in all case planning and decision making.

General rule — consent needed
5 (1) A health care provider must not provide any health care to an adult without the adult’s consent except under sections 11 to 15.
.
(2) A health care provider must not seek a decision about whether to give or refuse substitute consent to health care under section 11, 14 or 15 unless he or she has made every reasonable effort to obtain a decision from the adult.

Elements of consent
.
6 An adult consents to health care if
(a) the consent relates to the proposed health care,
(b) the consent is given voluntarily,
(c) the consent is not obtained by fraud or misrepresentation,
(d) the adult is capable of making a decision about whether to give or refuse consent to the proposed health care,
(e) the health care provider gives the adult the information a reasonable person would require to understand the proposed health care and to make a decision, including information about
(i) the condition for which the health care is proposed,
(ii) the nature of the proposed health care,
(iii) the risks and benefits of the proposed health care that a reasonable person would expect to be told about, and
(iv) alternative courses of health care, and
(f) the adult has an opportunity to ask questions and receive answers about the proposed health care.

How incapability is determined
7 When deciding whether an adult is incapable of giving, refusing or revoking consent to health care, a health care provider must base the decision on whether or not the adult demonstrates that he or she understands
(a) the information given by the health care provider under section 6 (e), and
(b) that the information applies to the situation of the adult for whom the health care is proposed.

No emergency health care contrary to wishes
12.1 A health care provider must not provide health care under section 12 if the health care provider has reasonable grounds to believe that the person, while capable and after attaining 19 years of age, expressed an instruction or wish applicable to the circumstances to refuse consent to the health care.

However, depending on how malicious the higher ups may be, there are sections that could be twisted and perverted to force certain types of health care. That being said, the whole issue of consent seems pretty clear cut.

Threatening someone’s livelihood, finances, or general freedoms in order to obtain consent amounts to coercion. And that is exactly what forced “vaccines” and tests do. And yes, this has been brought up many times, but these aren’t even approved by Health Canada. They have interim authorization. Considering the emergency declaration was cancelled in Ontario and B.C., this should actually be illegal.

Also check out the Ontario Health Care Consent Act of 1996. So-called medical professionals aren’t allowed to do anything to you if you don’t give voluntary and informed consent.

(1) https://www.bclaws.gov.bc.ca/civix/document/id/complete/statreg/96181_01#part2
(2) https://canucklaw.ca/ontario-health-care-consent-act-of-1996-fyi-for-vaccines-or-tests/
(3) https://covid-vaccine.canada.ca/info/pdf/astrazeneca-covid-19-vaccine-pm-en.pdf
(4) https://covid-vaccine.canada.ca/info/pdf/janssen-covid-19-vaccine-pm-en.pdf
(5) https://covid-vaccine.canada.ca/info/pdf/covid-19-vaccine-moderna-pm-en.pdf
(6) https://covid-vaccine.canada.ca/info/pdf/pfizer-biontech-covid-19-vaccine-pm1-en.pdf
(7) https://www.laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/F-27/page-9.html#docCont
(8) https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/drugs-health-products/covid19-industry/drugs-vaccines-treatments/interim-order-import-sale-advertising-drugs.html#a2.3

Posted on

Groups Calling For Vaccine Passports Heavily Subsidized By Government

Jeff Guignard of the Alliance of Beverage Licensees B.C. claims that vaccine passports are widely supported, and that these companies “will have her [Bonnie Henry’s] back the way we have throughout the entire pandemic”. This was a July 27, 2021 showing on CTV News, and the video is posted above for full context.

This sounds lovely (or revolting) depending on your view. However, why does the Alliance of Beverage Licensees have Bonnie’s back? Why are they so supportive? Is this solidarity ideological, or financial in nature? We will get into that, and more.

At 1:07, Bonnie talks about people being more comfortable. That was basically the rationale behind masks on public transit last August. Talk about passive aggressive.

Bit of a side note: it would have been nice if in the video (see above), Guignard had disclosed the fact that he spent years as a staffer for the Liberal Party of Canada. He worked in the small business critic’s office. Of course, that same Party is now ruling Canada, and likewise supports vaccine passports. Of course, CTV didn’t take it upon themselves to mention it either, assuming they even knew about it.

Keep in mind, the British Columbia Restaurant and Foodservices Association and B.C. Hotel Association are also getting the CEWS. So are many, many organizations. Perhaps they think it unwise to bite the hand that feeds them.

As the topic of vaccine passports becomes a reality, a surprising number of retailers — across different sectors — appear to be clamouring for them. Why is that? What do they stand to gain from forcing vaccination by employees and/or customers? Won’t customers stay away, and won’t people quit? See this prior article for these passports coming to B.C.

Yes, they will quit or avoid the premises. However, given the myriad of Government programs available, it seems this is a financial decision for many. Sure, some will be driven by other things, but others see getting handouts as a worthwhile way of doing business. Free money, isn’t it?

Now, being “funded by the Government” really means being funded by the taxpayers. This happens either through direct spending, or deficit spending. Most know this of course, but it’s worth mentioning.

To be clear, this issue of taxpayers propping up businesses unnecessarily is not limited to B.C., or even to Canada. This looks like a coordinated effort to collapse economies everywhere.

A bit of a disclaimer: this is not an exhaustive list of all the grants that businesses are getting. It is, however, intended to be a guide to show just how widespread this is, and where the public’s money is really going. Also, this piece is not an authoritative source, but a good faith research effort.

To check out individual grants at the Federal level, OPEN SEARCH is a pretty good resource. The Provinces have their own listings for how they spend money.

Now, there are several programs to look at, starting with CEWS, the Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy Program. In fact, typing that into OPEN SEARCH results in thousands of hits. But in fairness, many of those were programs in place years ago, and hence irrelevant.

  • Alberta Hotel & Lodging Association
  • Association Des Hoteliers Du Quebec/Hotel Association of Quebec
  • Association Des Hotels Du Grand Montreal
  • Association Hotelier De La Region De Quebec
  • British Columbia Hotel Association
  • Hotel Association of Canada Inc.
  • Manitoba Hotel Association Inc.
  • Ottawa Gatineau Hotel Association
  • Regina Hotel Association Inc.
  • Saskatchewan Hotel & Hospitality Association
  • The Fairways At Bear Mountain Resort Owners’ Association
  • The Toronto Hotel Association
  • Vancouver Hotel Destination Association

Hotel associations, as the name implies, are set up to advocate — as a bloc — for the interests of hotel owners. They subscribe to the notion of strength in numbers.

Just by typing “hotel association“, there are 13 organizations that are flagged in the CEWS program. It was set up to cover the salaries of workers, up to 75%, if they had seen a drop in income due to lockdowns and business closures.

There is currently a proposal to extend the program to October 2021. Remember, it was originally only supposed to last a few months in the Spring of 2020, to get businesses going again. Strange, that these “temporary” programs never seem to be that.

1. What is the Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy? Updated: July 2, 2021
The Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy (wage subsidy) is a subsidy that was initially available for a period of 12 weeks (made up of three four-week periods), from March 15, 2020 to June 6, 2020, that provides a subsidy of up to 75% of eligible remuneration, paid by an eligible entity (eligible employer) that qualifies, to each eligible employee – up to a maximum of $847 per week.
.
The government subsequently extended the wage subsidy until June 5, 2021, for a total of 64 weeks consisting of 16 four-week periods.
.
In the April 19, 2021 budget announcement, the government has further extended the wage subsidy for an additional 16 weeks (i.e., four more four-week periods) from June 6, 2021 to September 25, 2021, with the ability to extend the wage subsidy further to November 30, 2021

The above quote comes from the FAQ (frequently asked questions) section of the CEWS program. Talk about shifting the goalposts. Of course, this means that many businesses will be able to have wages (mostly) covered, even if they aren’t selling anything.

In fairness, the CEWS Registry doesn’t disclose how much has been paid. However, salaries are typically the single biggest expense of any company, so getting funding for that can go a long way.

By typing in “hotel” into the CEWS search, we will see that 1030 businesses were flagged as receiving grant money. “Motel” results in another 576 hits. This does include multiples in a chain. For example, Best Western has 83 of its buildings funded with this program. Typing in “restaurant” leads to another 6065 results.

Granted, there will be a bit of overlap, but this is a good reference point.

As for all those banks, credit unions, and other financial institutions who want to vaxx their employees, start searching their names in the Registry. One can play with the CEWS search indefinitely, but we do need to move on.

This will stand out a bit. Currently, there is the CRHP, the Canada Recovery Hiring Program. This is in some ways a substitute to the CEWS, and will subsidize the expenses of new hires. There is also the Work Sharing Program, where employees agree to work less, in order for everyone to stay employed. Think about this. Ottawa will subsidize new hires, and also pay people to work less. Or rather, the public will subsidize it.

Also, various loan and financing programs are set up to cover the gap that others will not. Guess the issue with this (one of many), is that is the loans are defaulted on, the Government could theoretically take the business. This being the same Government who caused the crash in the first place.

There are also programs to subsidize the costs of having TFW (Temporary Foreign Workers) isolated for their quarantine period. Even as we pay people to reduce their hours, or not work at all, we pay more to bring people into the country to work. Can’t make this stuff up.

CERS, the Canada Emergency Rent Subsidy, is another major program that has become a money pit for taxpayers. Keep in mind, without the shutdowns from this fake pandemic, none of this would be needed.

The statistics page is updated regularly. As of August 8, 2021, these were 1,404,830 subsidies approved overall. Breaking it down by amounts, we get the following numbers:

AMOUNT PAID NUMBER OF CLAIMS
Under $500 176,940
$500 to $1K 223,030
$1K to $1.5K 186,140
$1.5K to $2K 146,300
$2K to $4K 333,070
$4K to $10K 230,540
Over $10K 108,800

That’s interesting that the numbers all seem to end in zero, but apparently that is due to rounding. There have been 1,447,690 applications received, with 203,120 unique applicants approved. This suggests that the bulk of companies are getting multiple subsidies.

As of the time of writing this, there has been $5.69 billion spent on the program, with Canada Emergency Rent Subsidy making up $4.83 billion, or the bulk, and Lockdown Support being another $859.3 million.

According to the details of the program, or each claim period, businesses can claim eligible expenses up to a maximum of:

$75,000 per business location (base and top-up)
$300,000 in total for all locations (including any amounts claimed by affiliated entities)

Keep in mind, that’s money that public is debt financing. Also, remember that many of these are in the hospitality and “non essential” sectors. This means that they have been getting paid to close, or operate on a partial capacity. These places will also be the first to implement vaccine passports.

The site also gives details on how to calculate the rent subsidy. Interestingly, the rental subsidies seem to be shrinking, while “lockdown supports” are growing.

Most people know about CERB/CRB/EI and other programs of “emergency funding”. However, it’s rather disingenuous, considering Governments are causing the crises they now claim to be preventing. The hegelian dialectic is clear for all to see.

In reality, the Governments are subsidizing companies to downsize, and people to not work. Does anyone seriously think this is about a virus?

Anyone catching on here?

The CFIB, Canadian Federation of Independent Businesses, contains a pretty thorough list of what benefits are available, both Federally and Provincially. To their credit, the coverage is quite detailed and helpful.

That said, their President, Dan Kelly, seems a bit too enthusiastic about all of this. See here and here. Some might think this whole thing is just for show. One would hope that there would be a greater emphasis on getting people back to work. There doesn’t appear to be any urgency on his part to get his members fully operational again, which is very strange.

While the CFIB may not directly be receiving money, their members pay them dues. Since this group pushes for more grants, this effectively makes the other companies middlemen.

One of the things the CFIB has been pushing for is a moratorium on evictions from commercial properties. Now, they don’t seem all that concerned with fully opening businesses up, but want them to be able to remain where they are. In essence, property rights for landlords disappears. They fight for loans, grants, and tax deferrals, but not for economic freedom.

The Toronto Region Board of Trade has also loudly called for restrictions and vaccine passports. Of course, they are heavily funded by Government, and are too close with China. One would think that a group advancing “trade” would support as much freedom as possible, but it seems not. Pretty screwy when these organizations come across as more authoritarian and Communist than actual Communists.

More and more colleges and universities are demanding vaccinations. Some apply this to everyone entering the campus, while others limit it to those living in dormitories. Oddly, they never mention that these injections are still only authorized on an interim basis, and not formally approved. Most are actually registered charities, whose finances are propped up under this classification.

Chapters-Indigo became notorious for not allowing people in without masks, even those with legitimate medical exemptions. Of course, Canadians propped this company up with over $20 million in handouts in the year 2020. Sure, we can boycott them, but it’s pretty meaningless when they just get bailed out. While they haven’t announced a vaccine passport requirement (yet), this company seems pretty likely to.

Of course, the media in Canada cheers loudly for more restrictions, more lockdowns, and more erosion of basic rights. Even “alternative” media and journalists offer only the most tepid opposition. Of course, looking at some of the grants they get (see bottom of article), things start to make sense. Additionally, this doesn’t include all of the ad space that gets bought up by Federal and Provincial Governments. Heck, the whole series is worth checking out.

GROUP YEAR AMOUNT
Agence Science-Presse 2019-2020 $129,345
Apathy is Boring 2018-2019 $100,000
Apathy is Boring 2019-2020 $340,000
Boys and Girls Clubs of Canada 2019-2020 $460,000
Canadian News Media Association 2019-2020 $484,300
CIVIX 2018-2019 $275,000
CIVIX 2019-2020 $400,000
Encounters with Canada 2018-2019 $100,000
Quebec Professional Journalists 2019-2020 $202,570
Global Vision 2019-2020 $260,000
Historica Canada 2019-2020 $250,000
Institute for Canadian Citizenship 2019-2020 $250,000
Journalists for Human Rights 2019-2020 $250,691
Magazines Canada 2019-2020 $63,000
McGill University 2019-2020 $1,196,205
MediaSmarts 2019-2020 $650,000
New Canadian Media 2019-2020 $66,517
Ryerson University 2019-2020 $290,250
Samara Centre for Democracy 2019-2020 $59,200
Sask Weekly Newspapers Ass’n 2019-2020 $70,055
Simon Fraser University 2019-2020 $175,000
Vubble Inc. Unboxed project 2019-2020 $299,000

As just a very small sample, these are some of the “anti-misinformation” grants that had been handed out. Note: this is prior to the so-called pandemic, and mostly center around elections and democracy. It speaks volumes when not only is the media Government funded, but the fact checkers are as well.

And this doesn’t even cover the social media collusions, and censorship. They don’t even bother to hide that anymore.

Have you also noticed how more and more sports teams are demanding vaccinations from both players and fans? Take a look through the CEWS index. A surprising number of them are getting the wage subsidy. Imagine this: your taxes pay for this (now even more so), and in order to attend a game, you need to have a vaccine and a mask, and shell out outrageous amounts to millionaire athletes.

One such example is the Toronto Blue Jays, which is owned by Rogers Communications. They just made the announcement that everyone — including fans — would either need a vaccine passport, or a negative test. This is, of course, just one of many who are being funded by the public, to exclude the public.

Do you get it now, Canadians? Can you see why there are so many people that would be happy to keep the scam-demic going? There’s a lot of money to be made in all of this, including by crashing the economy. Experts like Abdu Sharkawy do quite well on the speaking circuit, spreading doomsday warnings.

This only ends in one of two ways: either society collapses, or there is sufficient pushback to stop it. At this point, option #1 seems more likely.

IMPORTANT LINKS
(1) https://bc.ctvnews.ca/not-vaccinated-against-covid-19-b-c-s-health-officials-say-there-will-be-consequences-1.5525139
(2) https://www.linkedin.com/in/jeff-guignard-62020a32/
(3) https://lobbycanada.gc.ca/app/secure/ocl/lrs/do/cmmLgPblcVw?comlogId=245488
(4) https://search.open.canada.ca/en/gc/
(5) https://canucklaw.ca/b-c-mandates-vaccine-passports-no-emergency-order-no-approval-no-exemptions-audio/
(6) https://apps.cra-arc.gc.ca/ebci/hacc/cews/srch/pub/bscSrch
(7) https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/subsidy/emergency-wage-subsidy.html
(8) https://archive.is/7imOj
(9) https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/subsidy/emergency-wage-subsidy/cews-frequently-asked-questions.html
(10) https://archive.is/51VAH
(11) https://www.canada.ca/en/department-finance/economic-response-plan.html
(12) https://archive.is/osD91
(13) https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/subsidy/emergency-rent-subsidy.html
(14) https://archive.is/Lz8LI
(15) https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/subsidy/emergency-rent-subsidy/cers-statistics.html
(16) https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/subsidy/emergency-rent-subsidy/cers-calculate-subsidy-amount.html
(17) https://twitter.com/CFIB/status/1402405151483248645
(18) https://twitter.com/CFIB/status/1395133016423505923
(19) https://lobbycanada.gc.ca/app/secure/ocl/lrs/do/vwRg?cno=15291&regId=911677
(20) https://lobbycanada.gc.ca/app/secure/ocl/lrs/do/vwRg?cno=369554&regId=913010
(21) https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/london/her-daughter-has-a-mask-exemption-but-chapters-indigo-wouldn-t-let-her-in-1.5942044
(22) https://www.cp24.com/news/toronto-blue-jays-to-mandate-covid-19-vaccines-or-negative-tests-for-everyone-12-and-up-starting-sept-13-1.5557603
(23) https://www.nsb.com/speakers/abdu-sharkawy/

MEDIA SUBSIDIZED BY TAXPAYERS
(A) https://canucklaw.ca/postmedia-subsidies-connections-may-explain-lack-of-interest-in-real-journalism/
(B) https://canucklaw.ca/postmedia-gets-next-round-of-pandemic-bucks-from-taxpayers-in-2021/
(C) https://canucklaw.ca/nordstar-capital-torstar-corp-metroland-media-group-more-subsidies-pandemic-bucks/
(D) https://canucklaw.ca/aberdeen-publishing-sells-out-takes-those-pandemic-bucks-to-push-narrative/
(E) https://canucklaw.ca/many-other-periodicals-receiving-the-pandemic-bucks-in-order-to-push-the-narrative/
(F) https://canucklaw.ca/media-subsidies-to-counter-online-misinformation-groups-led-by-political-operatives/
(G) https://canucklaw.ca/taxpayer-grants-to-fight-misinformation-in-media-including-more-pandemic-bucks/
(H) https://canucklaw.ca/counter-intelligence-firms-to-influence-elections-canada-and-abroad-registered-as-charities/
(I) https://canucklaw.ca/more-pandemic-bucks-for-disinformation-prevention-locally-and-abroad-civix/
(J) https://canucklaw.ca/phac-supporting-science-up-first-online-counter-misinformation-group/
(K) https://canucklaw.ca/even-more-subsidies-pandemic-bucks-for-propping-up-canadian-media/
(L) https://canucklaw.ca/sister-of-pro-lockdown-mayor-john-tory-a-board-member-at-bell-which-received-cews-tax-breaks/
(M) https://canucklaw.ca/disinfowatch-ties-to-atlas-network-connected-to-lpc-political-operatives/

Posted on

B.C. Mandates “Vaccine Passports”, No Emergency Order, No Approval, No Exemptions (AUDIO)

In a move that surprised no one, B.C. has announced its own vaccine passport, coming into effect on September 13, 2021. People who want to have some fun in their lives are about to have far fewer options.

There is the line near the end: “The measures will be time limited through to Jan. 31, 2022, subject to possible extension.” of course, subject to possible extension is a built-in loophole that will allow this to

A call to the Government, specifically, Patient & Client Relations, confirmed that this is exactly what they intended to do. There is no mistake or misunderstanding. The lack of qualifiers or exemptions in the directive were not the result or carelessness on someone’s part.

A few takeaways from this call:

  • No state of emergency needed to do it
  • No exemptions in order currently
  • No plans to put exemptions in later
  • No need to have approved vaccines (interim authorization is fine)
  • No guarantee this ends on January 31, 2022 (spoiler: it won’t)

The person on the other end of the call was pleasant enough, but clearly working from a script. It appeared that such inquiries were anticipated in advance. And where will this take effect?


(UPDATE) On Wednesday, August 25, I tried again. Someone different answered the phone, and she was much more hostile and testy than the previous one. It’s unclear whether she knew nothing about the vaccines themselves, or was coached on how to deceive and mislead. But it doesn’t really matter, as the result is the same.

A few takeaways from this 2nd call:

  • She doesn’t know (or lies) about vaccines not being approved
  • She doesn’t know (or lies) about risks to pregnant women
  • She doesn’t know (or lies) about risks to nursing mothers
  • She doesn’t know (or lies) about BCHRC having exemptions put in
  • She refused to specify where exactly in the law this was legal

Also, it was impossible to get through on the regular phone line, after that first call. Perhaps they are blocking numbers of people who ask difficult questions. Considering what they are trying to do, that isn’t too farfetched of an idea.

Another difference from the last call: this woman was very eager to get off the phone once it became clear that hard questions would be asked. She is little more than a mouthpiece and a gatekeeper.

As to where these “vaccine passports” will apply

-indoor ticketed sporting events
-indoor concerts
-indoor theatre/dance/symphony events
-restaurants (indoor and patio dining)
-night clubs
-casinos
-movie theatres
-fitness centres/gyms (excluding youth recreational sport)
-businesses offering indoor high-intensity group exercise activities
-organized indoor events (eg. weddings, parties, conferences, meetings, workshops)
-discretionary organized indoor group recreational classes and activities

And all of this comes despite M275, which cancelled the State of Emergency on June 30, 2021. Also, M273 cancelled the other measures. To reiterate, this isn’t being done under any emergency order, but is simply dictated by Bonnie Henry and her handlers.

To any university or college students, consider your options. This also applies to living in residence, and could very well be extended beyond that. In fact, more announcements are expected soon.

Other Provinces, like Quebec and Manitoba, are already implementing their own version.

Such moves will likely kill most of the rest of these industries. And that appears to be calculated. However, this seems even more insidious than at first glance.

As a few examples: BCRFA, the British Columbia Restaurant and Foodservices Association; BCHA, the B.C. Hotel Association; and ABLE BC, the Association for Beverage Licensees, openly promote the myriad of Government handouts that are available to their members. They do this at the same time they support vaccine passports and mask mandates, driving away both employees and customers. But, it doesn’t really matter to them, since the Government — or taxpayers — will just bail them out.

Not only are businesses in hospitality subsidized by CEWS, but so are the trade groups that represent them. These are just a few of the many examples.

BCRFA goes even further, actively trying to import a replacement workforce under “Express Entry”. This is no doubt because we don’t have enough people unemployed here already.

Collapsing the economies of B.C. other Provinces, and elsewhere, can only be explained as being deliberate. However, until that happens, taxpayers will be subsidizing organizations that are complicit in perpetuating this fraud and medical tyranny.

Where’s Action4Canada in all of this? They have been fundraising for a year, and “claim” to have retained Rocco Galati to sue the B.C. Government? Not holding out much hope for that. Even if a Statement of Claim is eventually filed, no guarantee it will ever go beyond that.

(1) https://news.gov.bc.ca/releases/2021HLTH0053-001659
(2) https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/health/about-bc-s-health-care-system/office-of-the-provincial-health-officer/current-health-topics/pandemic-influenza/contacts
(3) https://www.bclaws.gov.bc.ca/civix/document/id/mo/mo/m0275_2021?fbclid=IwAR309l-HdQCrEdBaF6q2dUMwr5CbevxjJ94CweOLK-VUSBx7bE-weX725KE
(4) https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/public-safety-and-emergency-services/emergency-preparedness-response-recovery/embc/reports/speaker/621140-letter_to_the_speaker-protective_measures-m273.pdf
(5) https://www.quebec.ca/en/health/health-issues/a-z/2019-coronavirus/progress-of-the-covid-19-vaccination/covid-19-vaccination-passport
(6) https://manitoba.ca/covid19/vaccine/immunizationrecord/index.html
(7) British Columbia Restaurant and Foodservices Association
(8) https://www.bcrfa.com/covid-19-enews
(9) https://archive.is/Vnjmg
(10) https://www.bcrfa.com/federal-support
(11) https://archive.is/uMgNE
(12) https://www.bcrfa.com/expressentry
(13) https://archive.is/1IehR
(14) https://www.bcha.com/covid-19-advocacy-efforts.html
(15) https://archive.is/mxG2D
(16) ABLE BC – AdvocacyReport v4
(17) https://apps.cra-arc.gc.ca/ebci/hacc/cews/srch/pub/bscSrch

Posted on

Getting Started With Your Own Freedom Of Information/Access To Information Requests

This article is going to be different. Instead of dropping a bunch of research, today we will get into conducting your own research. Specifically, how to go about filing freedom of information (or access to information) requests. FOI/ATI are essentially the same thing, a request for documents.

You don’t have to be a journalist, reporter, or researcher to file these requests. Anyone who is curious or concerned with what’s going on, or if they have a personal issue, can file one.

Now, this is just general information of filing such requests, and how it works. Take this article as a starting place, rather than as some gospel.

Depending on the jurisdiction and/or information sought, there may or may not be a fee. Also, the fee can go up if the the search is overly broad. As a general guideline: Government bodies will typically give a person their own information for free, but may charge for general information. Also, they typically won’t hand over SOMEONE ELSE’S private information without a signed waiver or agreement.

Depending on many factors, an FOI can take anywhere from a few days, to several months for a response. There’s no one answer for how long you will wait. Now, what will the agency you file with do?

In short, a few different outcomes can happen:
(a) Government body discloses records being sought
(b) Government body ignores or delays the request
(c) Government body admits that it has no such records
(d) Government body admits having records, but refuses to release them, for some reason. More on that later.

All 4 outcomes have happened to FOI requests from here. The success rate at getting meaningful data has (anecdotally) been about 50%. That being said, these are still a valuable tool for truth seekers. If nothing else, these are quite easy to file.

A tip for making FOI requests: write it up in such a way that it’s clear you are asking for records. You likely won’t get a helpful response if this involves open ended questions. As an example:

Instead of: “Has anyone studied the physical or psychological consequences of forcing young children to wear masks?”

Try this: “I request records of any studies involving the physical or psychological effects of forcing young children to wear masks”

This may sound nitpicky and silly, but the wording does make a difference. If records are sought on a controversial topic, this could be used as an excuse to deny it, or at least delay it.

What kinds of documents can be requested?

  • Records of meetings, minutes
  • Names of people involved in a committee, study, or research
  • Conflict of interest disclosures
  • Studies or research conducted
  • Amounts of money paid to people or groups
  • Sources of funding
  • Reports filed publicly

Now, this should be commonsense, but if you wish to post your findings, consider scrubbing — removing — your personal details beforehand. At a minimum, don’t have your address splashed all over the internet, but even your name is important.

It’s worth pointing out that filing a formal FOI request may not always be necessary. Sometimes, if the information is already posted (or easy to find), just calling or emailing the Ministry or group in question may be enough to get it sent to you.

Also, if you don’t want to pay fees, or just don’t want to wait for a formal reply, see if someone has already made a similar request. In some jurisdictions, FOI results get posted online, in order to avoid duplication. If you do find what you want (from someone else), use that data. If you’re going to publish it, go ahead. Now, their personal info shouldn’t be disclosed, however, if it is, removing it would be appreciated. Their earlier work did you a favour after all.

  • Section 12: Cabinet confidences
  • Section 13: Advice or recommendations
  • Section 14: Legal advice
  • Section 15: Harm to law enforcement
  • Section 16: Harm to intergovernmental relations or negotiations
  • Section 17: Harm to financial or economic interests of a public body
  • Section 18: Harm to conservation of heritage sites
  • Section 19: Harm to individual or public safety
  • Section 20: Information to be published or released within 60 days
  • Section 21: Harm to business interests of a third party
  • Section 22: Harm to personal privacy
  • Section 22.1: Information relating to abortion services

It’s worth mentioning that Governments can (and often do) either refuse to release records, or redact parts of it. Using the BC FOIPP Act as an example, many items have exclusions (at least partially). Now, just because it’s a reason stated, doesn’t mean it’s legitimate.

When you get the results of the FOI request back, this might not be the end. There will almost always be some wording at the bottom saying that you can appeal, or request a review. Take this opportunity — especially if you’ve paid money or waited a long time — and ask for clarification on anything not understood.

As a closing thought, any readers who get something worthwhile are always welcome to submit their findings to Canuck Law. Results will be posted, with personal info removed.

P.S. Go check out Fluoride Free Peel for an extreme case on how to use FOIs to disprove a scam sprung onto the public.

ALBERTA
(a) Contact FOIP TO See If Records Already Available
(b) Service Alberta: Making A FOIP Request
(c) Alberts eServices: Make FOIP Request
(d) Freedom Of Information & Privacy Protection Act

BRITISH COLUMBIA
(a) Previously Released FOI Responses
(b) Getting Started With FOI Requests
(c) Submit General FOI Request
(d) Freedom Of Information & Protection Of Privacy Act

MANITOBA
(a) Listings Of Previously Received FOI Requests
(b) Freedom Of Information Main Portal
(c) Freedom Of Information & Privacy Protection Act

NEW BRUNSWICK
(a) Getting Started Searching For Information
(b) List Of Bodies Subject To FOI Requests
(c) Right To Information & Protection Of Privacy Act

NEWFOUNDLAND
(a) Previously Released ATIPP Results
(b) Filing Your Own Access To Information Requests
(c) ATIPP Coordinators
(d) Access To Information & Protection Of Privacy Act

NORTHWEST TERRITORIES
(a) ATIPP Reviews Posted
(b) ATIPP Main Page
(c) Access To Information request Forms
(d) Access To Information And Protection Act

NOVA SCOTIA
(a) Searching Previously Disclosed Access To Information Results
(b) Getting Started With Access To Information
(c) Guidelines For FOI And Privacy Requests
(d) Freedom Of Information & Protection Of Privacy Act

NUNAVIT
(a) How To Place ATIPP Request

ONTARIO
(a) Directory Of Records
(b) Access To Information Forms
(c) Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, Provincial
(d) Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, Municial

PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND
(a) Making A Request Under FOIPP
(b) List Of Public Bodies Covered Under Act
(c) Freedom Of Information & Protection Of Privacy Act

QUEBEC
(a) Previous ATIPP Disclosures — French Only
(b) How To Make An Access Request
(c) General Information On ATIPP
(d) Act Respecting Access to Documents Held By Public Bodies

SASKATCHEWAN
(a) Access To Information — Provincial And Municipal Acts

YUKON
(a) Searching Archives Of ATIPP Requests
(b) Access to Information Registry
(c) ATIPP Request For Access To Information
(d) ATIPP Coordinators

FEDERAL
(a) Search Existing Access To Information Requests
(b) Access to Information and Privacy (ATIP) Online Request
(c) Complete List Of Institutions
(d) List Of ATIP Coordinators