The News Rundown

Conservatives say the justice system favours non-citizens. Experts disagree

Recent cases in the media of non-citizens receiving lighter sentences has made its way to Conservative Immigration critic Michelle Rempel Garner.
In a statement this week on Wednesday Rempel Garner said, "When it comes to sentencing non-citizens, Canada has essentially adopted a form of two-tier justice. This offends all principles of fairness that should be foundational to our justice system. Removing non-citizens convicted of serious crimes is a no-brainer. Becoming a Canadian is a privilege, not a right.”
She is of course talking about the various stories that were but blips in the mainstream media but formed two of our most recent Firing Lines on episode 430 and 427.
In the first two newcomers received no jail time for sex offences in the Toronto area, one was working as a Bell employee who asked a woman inappropriate questions about the victim’s physical attractiveness, including telling her she was “beautiful” and asking if she had a boyfriend while also exposing himself.
The second case discussed on 427 detailed another where the perpetrator was convicted of trying to hire a 15-year-old as a prostitute during a sting operation where Peel police posed as a minor online, they were eventually sentenced to 12 months probation.
Both these cases were given lighter sentences as the judge was concerned that it would limit the offender’s viability of staying in Canada.
On episode 430 we discussed the pure two tier justice system where in Quebec a pre-sentencing report known as an Impact of Race and Culture Assessment (IRCA) to help determine the sentence for a Black offender.
The offender got less time sentenced due to being a “intergenerational survivor of slavery.”
In a story published this week at the CBC, “immigration experts” warn that the Conservatives characterization of the system as being biased is “simply false”.
Audrey Macklin, a law professor at the University of Toronto, says that the justice system always takes into account numerous factors: "Sentencing always takes into account factors unique or specific to that individual. It's a misrepresentation to suggest that this is two-tier justice."
Macklin says that the 2013 ruling that Michelle Rempel cites can consider immigration status but it can not reduce the sentence below the standard minimum.
The issue is that if we go back to the case of the perp who tried to solicit minors in Ontario, Ontario’s courts struck down the mandatory minimums for underage solicitation.
The case for the Bell worker who exposed himself though saw the judge completely ignore minimums and instead go for a custodial sentence.
The issue isn’t that the sentences are being reduced beyond minimum as Macklin says, the issue is that the laws we have aren’t being enforced by judges after law enforcement says a crime was committed.
This story shows how the CBC is unable to the basic research to put together a story and shows that their whole push with this story was to create a narrative, which they even fail at doing.
The CBC’s ability to back up the claim from the University of Toronto professor is literally this one quote, quoted previously here in this segment.
What the CBC did here was search out an ‘expert’ who would back up their world view even if it is only one person from a university.
One good thing the CBC did in their story was point out that if someone is convicted of a crime they can’t appeal a deportation order.
The CBC then cites Toronto immigration lawyer Pantea Jafari who says that because the deportation order is automatic when a non-citizen meets the conditions of ineligibility for an Immigration Appeal Division appeal, there is no error in law and the judicial review will "100 per cent" support the person's removal from Canada.
The Conservatives will be introducing a Private Members’ Bill this fall to “restore the value of Canadian Citizenship”
The bill "will expressly outline that any potential impact of a sentence on the immigration status of a convicted non-citizen offender, or that of their family members, should not be taken into consideration.
This story underlines how our media has abandoned the job they are supposed to do. With a little bit of research they could have had a full exposé on the subject matter but instead they sought out the two people from downtown Toronto who could help them push a narrative.

This past week Canada has been dealt a further increase in tariffs, this time not from the United States, but from China. China decided to increase the tariff on canola imports from Canada to 75.8%, a devastatingly high number for the industry that employs more than 200k across the country.
Saskatchewan’s premier Scott Moe is calling on Ottawa to take “immediate action” to protect the canola industry in the face of massive Chinese tariffs which Moe said could have a “devastating impact on the price points for Saskatchewan’s canola industry.”
Moe noted that canola is a $43 billion industry in Canada, which he says is 'significantly larger than the steel industry, the aluminum industry and the car manufacturing industry combined'. But while the steel, aluminum and automotive sectors have received quite a bit of help from the federal government after taking hits due to tariffs from the United States, Moe said the canola industry has essentially been left out of the conversation despite dealing with daunting tariffs from China.
While China’s commerce ministry said the “dumping” of Canadian canola into the Chinese market is hurting its domestic canola oil market, Moe said he believes this most recent round of tariffs is largely a continued response to Canada’s 100 per cent tariffs on Chinese-made electric vehicles.
The premier said he’s reached out to Prime Minister Mark Carney to discuss the tariffs from China, and expects to speak with him later on Tuesday. While he credited Ottawa for already beginning talks with China, Moe said Carney should speak about the tariffs on canola with Chinese President Xi Jinping at his earliest opportunity.
Moe noted that as the country works to diversify its trade interests in the wake of hard-hitting tariffs from the United States, it’s important to maintain a good trade relationship with China, which imports about $5 billion in canola each year.
Carney spoke out Thursday about China’s new tariffs on Canadian canola seed that kicked in this week, warning on social media that “these unjustified duties” will significantly affect many Canadian farmers. Carney also said he’s talked with Saskatchewan’s premier about a series of measures to support canola growers.
But it doesn’t give Alberta Agriculture Minister RJ Sigurdson much confidence that Ottawa is taking swift action to help an industry side-swiped by factors beyond its control. Sigurdson said: “A lot of rhetoric has been spread around about Alberta being on Team Canada. This is a prime example of where Canada needs to be on Team Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba, and we’re not seeing the response from our federal government that shows the support for our Western Canadian agricultural producers . . . I just don’t think that we’re seeing the clear action that is necessary.”
In March, China placed a 100 per cent tariff on Canadian canola meal, canola oil and on peas, along with 25 per cent levies on seafood and pork imports.
These came after Canada established a 100 per cent tariff last year on Chinese-made electric vehicles, following a similar step by the previous Joe Biden administration in the U.S. Canada also placed a 25 per cent levy on aluminum and steel imports from China.
Sigurdson said: “What we see is an EV tariff that is meant to protect Central Canada businesses, affecting western Canadian agricultural producers. And we’re calling on the federal government for immediate action to resolve this before harvest.”
In response, the provincial and federal Conservatives are renewing their calls to cancel a federal loan for BC Ferries’ procurement deal with a Chinese shipyard, as Beijing announced new tariffs this week on Canadian canola imports. Federal Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre says Ottawa is failing to stand up for the Canadian industry, and it needs to cancel the loan immediately.
“Given the Chinese Communist Party’s newest round of tariffs, we renew our call for Minister Robertson to cancel the Canadian Infrastructure Bank loan and put Canadian shipbuilders, steel workers, and industry first.”
Poilievre says the loan would contribute to the Chinese shipyard industry during a time when Canada is embroiled in a trade war with that country. About a week after BC Ferries announced the deal with the Chinese state-owned shipyard in June this year, the Canada Infrastructure Bank confirmed that it had granted the company a $1 billion loan for the project.
BC Ferries has insisted this is the best way to get ferries in the water fast and without breaking the bank. CEO Nicholas Jimenez has hailed it as “the best deal for British Columbians and getting the best deal for BC Ferries.”
Regardless, China increasing tariffs is going to hurt Western Canadian industry, at the expense of protecting Ontario industry. This is a tricky situation that will require some work in the days to come.
Supplementals:

Tensions high at town hall as Alberta Next Panel faces polarized crowd in Edmonton

The Alberta Next panel made its way to Edmonton and the panels drew controversy as the mainstream media puts it.
As Global News puts it, “division and outrage in the room quickly spilled over into anger, F-bombs, and challenges to Smith’s United Conservative Party government that weren’t on the agenda, from health care to accountability and transparency.”
The Alberta Next panels are set up to gauge Albertan’s openness to policies like an Alberta Police Force and Alberta Pension Plan. Plus things like controlling our own immigration numbers.
The media reporting on the matter paints the controversy as the big thing to come out of these Edmonton panels to paint a picture of the population being against these ideas but the reality is different.
Many people in the room were actually in support of these policies. The reporting even says so. It was only a few malcontents creating the issues.
Secondly, when watching back the footage, it’s clear that a portion of the people being critical at the panel in the microphone were reading from a script.
Nothing has been confirmed but on X there was discussion about the talking points being provided by the Alberta Federation of Labour.
The Alberta Federation of Labour is one of the biggest unions in the province and has strong ties to the NDP.
Now while this has not been confirmed, it would make a lot of the discussion at the Edmonton panel make sense.
The unfortunate aspect out of all of this is that while the media has decided to focus on the blow up and controversy, legitimate alternate points of view with respect to these panels are missed.
A lot of Albertans and those in the media are operating on the same wavelength as they were during the Trudeau administration. The question Alberta and Albertans should be asking is to the federal government: what does the new Carney government think of the grievances at play and what can they do now that they’re in power to offer an olive branch?
There has been excellent economic research done on the vessel of Alberta independence but that coverage really has not been distilled down for the mainstream media.
The media often lacks the credibility to convey an economic message thoughtfully.
The same economic discussions should also be had without bias from the mainstream media on the idea of an Alberta Pension Plan, police force, and tax agency.
Quebec does all three, why is there media opposition in Alberta?
And finally, are there any comparisons on the international stage for such a list of grievances.
At this point, this single Western Context story has created about a week and a half to two weeks of segments for a provincial reporter with the legacy media.
The point at the end of it all is that this one narrow narrative that ran on Thursday and Friday this week, doesn’t cover the true depth of the Alberta Next panels and is really only being used as click bait.
Supplementals:

https://globalnews.ca/news/11336237/premier-smith-alberta-next-panel-face-hecklers-supporters-at-fiery-edmonton-event/

Firing Line

Indigenous group wins land claim over riverbank in metro Vancouver

An Indigenous group won claim to hundreds of acres of metropolitan Vancouver after a years-long trial and landmark judgment at British Columbia’s supreme court.
The Cowichan have aboriginal title to a section of riverbank in the city of Richmond, according to the 863-page ruling published Friday. Interests of the government of Canada and the city in the area alongside the Fraser River outlined in black on a map attached to the ruling “are defective and invalid,” the judge said.
Grants later made by the British to others “unjustifiably infringe” on the Cowichan land title, according to the ruling, which also recognizes the Cowichan descendants’ right to fish part of the Fraser River. The plaintiffs called it a “historic victory.”
Many Indigenous groups in what became Canada signed treaties with the British Crown, predominantly during the 18th and 19th centuries. That isn’t the case in British Columbia, where the lower mainland has some of Canada’s most expensive land. Many areas of the province are subject to legal and political disputes.
David Rosenberg, senior litigation counsel for the plaintiffs, who represented the Tsilhqot’in Nation in a 2014 Supreme Court case which reinforced Aboriginal rights, said he expects the case will be appealed and may not be resolved for years. Owners’ rights for some 120 properties in the affected area will not change “except if they come to do something with the property that requires Crown authorization,” Rosenberg said by phone. Property sales by owners who have used the Crown land title system may end up requiring Cowichan consent, he said.
The Cowichan descendants’ claim was opposed in court by Canada, British Columbia, Richmond, the Vancouver Fraser Port Authority and two other Indigenous groups — the Tsawwassen First Nation and the Musqueam Indian Band.
Richmond said the decision is under legal review. The Musqueam said they are “devastated” in a statement, while the Tsawwassen First Nation said they are reviewing the decision with legal counsel. A Port Authority spokesman said the agency is reviewing the decision.
Attorney General Niki Sharma said the B.C. government strongly disagrees with the decision.
“British Columbia will be filing an appeal and seeking a stay to pause implementation until the appeal is resolved,” she said in a statement.
“We respect the court’s role in our justice system, but given the significant legal issues raised in the recent decision in Cowichan Tribes v. AG Canada et al., we believe it must be reconsidered on appeal. This ruling could have significant unintended consequences for fee simple private property rights in B.C. that must be reconsidered by a higher court.”
Supplementals:

Quote of the Week

“We respect the court’s role in our justice system, but given the significant legal issues raised in the recent decision in Cowichan Tribes v. AG Canada et al., we believe it must be reconsidered on appeal. This ruling could have significant unintended consequences for fee simple private property rights in B.C. that must be reconsidered by a higher court.” - Attorney General Niki Sharma on the recent court decision granting Aboriginal Title part of Vancouver to a Vancouver Island based First Nation.

Word of the Week

Claim - a demand or request for something considered one's due, typically one that is disputed or in doubt.

How to Find Us

Take our Western Context 2025 Summer Survey
Westerncontext.ca

westerncontext.ca/subscribe

westerncontext.ca/support

twitter.com/westerncontext

facebook.com/westerncontext

Show Data

Episode Title: Claiming Status
Teaser: Conservatives say the justice system favours non citizens, China increases tariffs on canola, and the Alberta Next panels see increased media bias. Also, a court decision gives Aboriginal title to a large section of Richmond BC to a Vancouver Island band.
Production Code: WC-431-2025-08-16
Recorded Date: August 16, 2025
Release Date: August 17, 2025
Duration: 1:11:58
Edit Notes: Intro splice, survey links, china tariffs

Podcast Summary Notes

Duration: XX:XX