The News Rundown

Poilievre pledges Arctic military base, naval icebreakers if party forms government

Pierre Poilievre, leader of Canada's Conservative opposition, is pledging, if his party forms government, to build a military base in Canada’s Arctic, buy two polar icebreakers for the Royal Canadian Navy and double the size of the Canadian Rangers patrol group responsible for upper reaches of the North. Poilievre unveiled this pledge Monday morning in the northern city of Iqaluit. When was the last time a Liberal leader held a press conference or even visited the North?
Poilievre cites the need to counter “growing threats from China and Russia” for these measures – as well as maintaining good relations with the United States: “Our safety, territory and trade with the U.S. requires we take back control of Canada’s North.”
He also added that Beijing is trying to gain a foothold in the Arctic despite no territory fronting the region: “Hostile powers want our resources and shipping routes, and to be within striking distance of our continent. China has now declared itself a ‘near-Arctic state,’ even though its borders are approximately 1,500 kilometres from the Arctic Circle.”
Canada currently does not have a military base in the Arctic – the definition of what constitutes a base is variable – but the Forces do have a number of stations or installations across the North.
U.S. President Donald Trump has repeatedly criticized Canada’s defence spending. In January, before taking office, he said Canada, which this fiscal year is spending more than $40-billion on its military, should pay the United States for defending it: “They have a very small military. They rely on our military. It’s all fine, but they’ve got to pay for that.”
Not only would a base in Iqaluit be much closer to the Arctic Circle, it would provide a much closer base than the ones in Alberta and Quebec to the territories, the Northwest Passage, and also provide jobs to locals in a region that could certainly use them.
The Conservatives say the Iqaluit military base they envision would be able to host a full Royal Canadian Air Force wing, or unit of command, to launch and land new F-35 fighter jets to deter, intercept and destroy threats as well as to land Poseidon P-8 surveillance aircraft that carry out search and rescue, conduct anti-submarine warfare, as well as intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance work.
The two Navy icebreakers the Conservatives are promising would be on top of the two polar icebreakers the Seaspan and Davie shipyards are now building for the Canadian Coast Guard, with pledges that these existing icebreakers will be delivered by 2029.
Poilievre is pledging to fund his promises by making significant cuts to foreign aid – a means of finding more dollars for defence that he first mentioned in 2024. A Conservative government, the press statement says, would “dramatically cut foreign aid, much of which goes to dictators, terrorists and global bureaucracies.” Examples his office provided last year would include assistance to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees and Canada’s stake in the controversial Chinese-led Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank.
In 2022, Canada’s then-top soldier General Wayne Eyre warned that Canada’s “tenuous hold” on its Arctic territories will come under increasing challenge in the decades ahead as China and Russia expand their presence in the region.
Russia has been reopening Arctic military bases and outposts for years. China is also securing a significant presence in the Arctic as Russia, facing a severe budget crunch from its military assault on Ukraine, increasingly relies on Beijing and unprecedented levels of Chinese corporate and state investment to develop the northern region.
Canada's Arctic is an important region that the Trudeau government has been underfunding for years, along with the military. It's something that needs to change going forward. We need to be able to protect our own country as we clearly can't rely on the US doing it for us anymore.
Supplementals:

While the Conservative party has branded Mark Carney as carbon tax Carney we need to have a deeper look into one of, if not the singular policy, that Mark Carney has announced.
The conservatives are often criticized for being nothing but slogans but we must dispel the notion that the Liberals and Conservatives are now on the same page regarding carbon pricing as the media has said this week.
Carney has announced that he will scrap the consumer carbon tax.
He has also announced that a re-elected Liberal government will “improve and tighten the output based pricing system for large industrial emitters” which translates to raising the cost of carbon emissions for large businesses that are emitters.
Carney and the Liberals will also have polluters pay consumers to lower their carbon footprint.
This is being framed as a way of making Canada more competitive but the laws of economics say that the costs will get passed on to the consumers.
Carney’s carbon plan also aims to “promote fair competition and improve environmental outcomes by developing a Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism.” This effectively amounts to a carbon tariff on imports from countries with lower environmental standards. Again, businesses are being asked to eat the cost but they will as economics say, be passed onto the consumers.
The economic realities of what Carney is proposing has been discussed in the Globe and Mail as expecting a free lunch for carbon costs meaning someone will just absorb them and potentially exacerbating a trade war with the US over carbon emissions.
If these ideas to replace the carbon tax are applied in Canada it would most likely mean import levies on our largest trading partners, otherwise known as tariffs.
Tariffs by-in-large have been shunned as the bogey man in recent months and Donald Trump has been categorized as an economic buffoon who will hurt his own people with his tariffs.
Higher carbon levies on big business and carbon tariffs against US importers is exactly the economic malpractice enacted by the US that people in Canada have been running around with their hair on fire about.
Yet this same economic theory has garnered almost zero media coverage here when purveyed by the governing Liberals.
Worse, the Conservatives have been painted as now being on the same page as the Liberals.
Policies of Carney, Freeland, or Gould are not nearly as clear as simply removing the consumer carbon tax with no replacement.
It all culminates in a simple truth, the Carney plan as being proposed is the same as Justin Trudeau’s just re-packaged with who bears the brunt of the costs initially.
Carney admits this freely. In a speech in Kelowna while saying he would use emergency powers to build the projects we need he also said, “The issue wasn’t — to coin a phrase — whether to ‘axe the tax.’ The issue was how to change it.”
He’s also said while on the east coast that he would speed up approvals of clean energy projects.
1+2 = 3
What has been exposed is a horrible media malpractice that amounts to the media carrying water for Carney as the chosen candidate while watering down actual plans proposed by the Conservative party.
At the end of the day, given the staff and the endorsements, we need to ask and the media needs to ask, if Mark Carney wins the Liberal leadership, will he offer up more of the same?
Supplementals:

BC NDP blames Trump while axing promise that should never have been made

A self described "core piece" of David Eby's re-election campaign last October has become a promise broken, as the BC NDP's grocery rebate has now been cancelled, leading many to question if it was ever going to happen, or if it was just a desperate attempt to buy votes to remain in power.
It's a pretty compelling argument for the Opposition BC Conservatives to make after Finance Minister Brenda Bailey pulled the plug on a $1,000 “grocery rebate”, citing US tariffs as the reason: “We intended to do this, but the world has changed on us. It’s become much more uncertain.”
The world was pretty uncertain back on Sept. 29, 2024, too, when the NDP first made the promise of an up to $500 rebate for individuals and $1,000 for families. In fact, a rebate during uncertain times was the whole point of the proposal.
Eby at the time said: “It’s really tough out there for many families – inflation and interest rates have driven up the cost of daily essentials. People need help now so they can get ahead.”
“Now” was the operative word. Eby spent weeks hammering home how his plan would put cash in the wallets of British Columbians within months. From the moment the promise first left the premier’s lips, there were rumbles it might never actually happen.
“You and your family need support right now, not five years from now maybe if you qualify and are able to gather all your documents together — but right away, $1,000 for the average household, immediately in a rebate in the first year of our government,” he said.
Instead, now it's not happening at all. The $1.8-billion cost for the rebate was extraordinarily high, at a time of a record $9.4-billion deficit. How could B.C. possibly afford it, while the premier was also promising to show “a path” to balanced budgets without cutting spending or raising taxes? In short, it wasn't feasible at the time, and it still isn't now, but the NDP now have a new boogeyman to blame their fiscal failures on.
So important was the promise, the premier professed during his platform launch that his campaign couldn’t exist without it. Eby said Oct. 3: “A core piece of this platform has to be responding to the affordability challenges facing this audience. The work we've done around the costing and preparation of this has been significant. I would not bring forward a platform for British Columbians that did not include a very specific and understandable piece that supports people with the cost of daily life.” he said.
Bailey tries to insist that “It is something that we wanted to do and something that we were working on, but that was a moment in time before an unpredictable person was in the White House and threatened our jobs, our businesses and the revenue that we need to power the programs and services that British Columbians rely on. It’s no longer the right time to make a new big expenditure.”
Conservative Leader John Rustad didn't mince words in calling Eby an opportunist: “I think that’s code for saying David Eby lied and BS’d during the election because he needed the votes. He knew there was fiscal problems.”
Peter Milobar, finance critic for the Opposition B.C. Conservatives, said the NDP government is looking for a scapegoat for its fiscal mismanagement.
"You only have to go back to the election where David Eby was routinely mocking what the B.C. Conservatives were saying in terms of bringing in slowly tax cuts and tax relief for British Columbians as we could afford it. Instead, he tried to make it sound like they had a plan to put money immediately in your pocket. The second the election was over, he was looking for ways to renege on those types of promises."
The Conservatives have a right to be angry with the flip-flop. During the election, they tabled their own affordability measure that would have let British Columbians write-off their rent or mortgage costs, earning a tax rebate of up to $1,700 annually.
Rustad proposed to phase it in over four years so he could mitigate costs and also reduce the budget deficit over time. Eby and the New Democrats mocked him mercilessly for what they called “the long wait” versus their immediate (and it turns out totally impractical) rebate cheques.
Eby even said: "the Conservatives appear to be saying, what's the longest date out we can reasonably promise people that they will see relief? In 2029 you can take your flying car to pick up the rebate from John Rustad after your long wait."
As it turns out, the saying better late than never applies here. The second bit of news was what the New Democrats are characterizing as a “bold” expansion of the “hiring freeze” that Eby and Bailey announced last December. The NDP’s preferred terminology is a “pause,” not a “freeze.” Either way, there’s not a lot of significance in terms of measurable outcomes. Bailey announced neither jobs numbers nor cost savings.
The latest exercise applies only to central government and its ministries. It does not extend to health care, schools, universities and the like.
Bailey hedged when asked how the pause/freeze would be monitored and enforced. Was the government imposing a cap on the size of its own public service for example? No, of course not. This latest freeze — or pause, if you're NDP — could actually allow further increases in the size of the public service because the exemptions to the policy are broad and undefined.
In short, it looks to be business as usual for a party that expanded the public service by more than a third in its first seven years in office.
One thing the finance minister won’t do is delay the budget any longer than the New Democrats have already done. The date is still March 4, two weeks later than usual and, as Bailey acknowledged, smack dab in the middle of Trump’s next deadline for the 25 per cent tariffs.
The timing makes it “impossible” to gauge the impact of whatever Trump will or will not do. The Finance Ministry is making up a budget on the basis of “hoping for the best and preparing for the worst.”
As it stands, in BC we have a re-elected government with the barest of majorites, who haven't reconvened the legislature in over 4 months, haven't passed a budget, have already broken campaign promises, and are projecting an awful 2025 for finances even before we factor in any tariffs. Elections have consequences.
Supplementals:

Firing Line

CBC host afraid Canadian flag associates him with Freedom Convoy

Today, recording day, February 15th, marks the 60th anniversary of the Canadian Flag. 60 years ago was the first time our flag flew on Parliament Hill.
The flag though has been a sore point for many over the recent years.
The flag atop Parliament Hill was flown at half staff for months following the residential school controversy.
The flag caused some to question whether Canada Day celebrations should’ve been cancelled due to being too colonialist.
Fast forward to today though there has been an uptick in Canadian pride due to threats from south of the border.
Today we bring two cases to highlight just how absurd some of the questions around our flag have become.
In a post highlighted by the Western Standard, CBC host Stephen Quinn asked in a Bluesky post: Have we decided that we’re taking back the Canadian flag from the convoy types? Is it okay to fly a Canadian flag without being mistaken for you know, those guys?
The post has since been deleted but it speaks volumes.
Quinn is host of The Early Edition on CBC.
This and in particular discussion around 2022 convoy protests seem to still be front of mind for many who write for and read the CBC.
CBC published another piece this week about “reclaiming the Canadian flag.”
The post highlights barber shop owner Robin Seguin who said, "I was devastated. It really made a separation between me as a Canadian and my flag, which always flew so strong and proud and free."
Following the recent realization of Canadian nationalism for many, Seguin said, "I can look at the flag with pride again, which I couldn't do for the longest time.”
The general sentiment is that the flag has been “hijacked” according to those that CBC spoke to and their commentariat.
Carmen Celestini who studies disinformation, extremists, and conspiracy theorists at the University of Waterloo said, “It was intended to emphasize their nationalism. They hold that flag as [if] they are the heroes of our nation, saving us from something, saving God, country and family.”
Classically the CBC doesn’t show the alternate side of the story, that is, since 2015 inch by inch the federal Liberal government has eroded the definition of Canada to the point many who follow the government and mainstream media forgot what Canadian nationalism is.
The convoy protests put that on display. The people who travelled to Ottawa were showing their Canadian pride and Canadian nationalism. That scared people, people in the government, people in the media, and those who see those two as the tastemakers of society.
The recent tensions with the US have also re-ignited a Canada First mantra in this country to the point it’s been suggested that Canada First is a copy of the America First slogan that Donald Trump has used.
But let’s go back in history and discuss who the actual first Canadian was to sell Canada First. That person was one of our longest serving Prime Ministers, Sir Wilfrid Laurier.
Wilfrid Laurier has been branded by the Macdonald Laurier institute on his 175th birthday as the founder of modern Canada.
While many chastise the Conservatives for relying on slogans, Wilfrid Laurier had his own: Canada First, Canada Last, Canada Always.
This was a slogan that emphasized placing Canada’s interests first, Canada first. It highlighted a commitment to Canada throughout all challenges and changes, Canada last. And most importantly it underscored Laurier’s vision of a united and enduring Canada, Canada always.
This slogan came from the speech now known as Canada’s Century from 1904 hence the old style english.
In that speech Laurier outlined Canada’s future as a leading nation, the need for economic growth, national unity and identity, and what Canada’s role in the world should be in the 20th century.
In many ways Laurier’s moment is similar to today’s. A need for Canada to stand up, rise up, and re-orient itself for the new century.
Unfortunately Canadian patriotism has been a dirty subject for many due to the division placed on Canada and Canadians over the last 9+ years.
Let there be no mistake that Canada First is needed today and tomorrow and it’s not racist or a signal of right wing politics and the Canadian flag should belong to everyone.
Anyone or any media questioning that is further dividing Canada and that has no place today.
Supplementals:

Quote of the Week

“We intended to do this, but the world has changed on us. It’s become much more uncertain.” - BC Finance Brenda Bailey on cancelling the campaign promised $1000 grocery rebate

Word of the Week

Hijacked - take over (something) and use it for a different purpose

How to Find Us
Westerncontext.ca

westerncontext.ca/subscribe

westerncontext.ca/support

twitter.com/westerncontext

facebook.com/westerncontext

Show Data

Episode Title: Media Malpractice
Teaser: Poilievre pledges to increase our Arctic footprint, Carney wants to rebrand the carbon tax, and the BC NDP cancels the planned grocery rebate. Also, the anniversary of the flag brings a renewal of Canada first.
Production Code: WC-407-2025-02-15
Recorded Date: February 15, 2025
Release Date: February 16, 2025
Duration: 57:41
Edit Notes: Wilfrid Laurier timespan

Podcast Summary Notes

Duration: XX:XX