LaPointe: Christy Clark's Liberal leadership bid faceplants on a fact check

Tory past trips up Clark

Photo: THE CANADIAN PRESS/Ben Nelms

Former B.C. premier Christy Clark, told the CBC she was never a member of the federal Conservative party. But the party has revealed she was a card-carrying member for a year in 2022-23.

Of the things about which I am confident, I can safely state that my weekend and yours was a lot better than Christy Clark’s.

Now, as she awoke Friday, the former B.C. premier’s world had every opportunity to be her oyster. She had convened a national call of 135 believers earlier in the week and was making the late-stage, toe-in-the-water ritual interviews to hum and haw a bit and say, well, I’m thinking about running for the national Liberal party leadership that would, shucks, make me prime minister – if only for a cup of coffee, then as opposition leader.

She would be situated logically as the longest serving female first minister in the top tier of candidates to succeed Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, alongside the former deputy prime minister and finance minister, Chrystia Freeland, who had been for ages his elected right-hand until she used the left hand to knife him, and Mark Carney, former governor of the Bank of Canada and Bank of England – and supposed outsider who nonetheless has seemingly all of Trudeau’s unelected right hands as his aides.

But Friday did not go according to script for Clark, and no one – not the 135 on the call, certainly not me waiting to watch her campaign – expected inarguably the largest mistake in a career of generally shrewd navigation of political trouble.

It was an own goal, as they say in soccer, and an entirely, completely, emphatically, absolutely, utterly, certainly, positively, definitively, undoubtedly, unquestionably, indubitably preventable error.

Catherine Cullen, a strong but hardly menacing host of the venerable CBC Radio show, The House, had a question many of us were interested in but was more of a curiosity than a matter of accountability. It turned out that Clark, who called herself a “lifelong Liberal” when she saluted Trudeau upon announcing his slow-boat departure as prime minister, actually took a detour into the Conservative Party of Canada to support Jean Charest in his unsuccessful 2022 leadership campaign ultimately won by the guy we expect soon to call prime minister, Pierre Poilievre.

Lots of people change parties, no biggie. Hey, Cullen asked, how long were you actually a Conservative?

“Never,” Clark said, beaming with some seeming joy. “I never voted and I never got a membership.”

That wasn’t the answer Cullen, or pretty well any of us, expected. Clark said back then she had bought a membership, supported Charest, and wanted to stop Poilievre. This did not square.

Maybe it was a nervous answer, maybe she was about to say, “Well, I bought a membership but didn’t want to be in the party, I just thought Poilievre was a menace and I wanted to do everything I could to defeat him, and I had a friend running against him and, and, and …”

But no, she went from there into an abyss of historic, perhaps catastrophic consequence for her return to the ring.

She denied what was on the public record with countless conversations. Denied what was recorded on (if you’re a supporter, an excruciating) video with (egads!) the Conservative Journal of Canada podcast. Didn’t mention she publicly said Charest would be a great prime minister. Even went so far – and this was just head-shaking gaslighting and playing into the enemy’s hands – that she even had a membership in the party.

“I wouldn't put it past them to manufacture one of them,” she told Cullen. Oy vey.

You see, political parties are businesses, and the Conservatives had her credit card record, and produced her membership transaction in an instant. She was a member for a year in 2022 and 2023. Foes, one of them former Liberal environment minister Catherine McKenna, quickly noted on social media that Clark was a Conservative at that point. It was the slip other leadership campaigns were awaiting.

Her response hours later hardly put down the hard-digging shovel: a coarser version of how “it” happens, and an “I misspoke.” It is true that you can claim to misspeak to cover up a lie, but if you knew the statement was false, it isn’t misspeaking.

How her confidants could not have anticipated an obvious question like this, and prepared a plausible answer for her, defies reason. With no experience in crisis management except as a spectator, even a journalist can see an easy way out:

Say, yes, I think Poilievre is the evil incarnate, and I was going to take every opportunity to stop him.

Say, yes, it required me to swallow hard and join the party, but only briefly. I was only going to stay through the leadership to get his enemy elected. (Note: Leave aside what might be in it for you eventually.)

Say, now I have set my sights on crushing this guy, and believe me, I can do it.

Say, next question.

It was unclear Monday if Clark will continue on her intended campaign path. She would be the best retail politician in the race, she would offer the most distinct departure from the Trudeau cult, she is a scrappy campaigner, and she would bring a more authentic western sentiment to the contest than either Albertan natives-turned-Central-Canadians Freeland or Carney. I think Clark and Poilievre in Question Period every day would be a rock show, great daytime TV – as a dinner friend said to me: Thunderdome.

But I fear she has false-started before the race occurs, and in the Olympics these days, and in the merciless and mercenary mess of social media, that doesn’t give you a second chance. Let’s see.

Kirk LaPointe is a Glacier Media columnist with an extensive background in journalism.

This column first appeared on Business In Vancouver.

This article is written by or on behalf of an outsourced columnist and does not necessarily reflect the views of Castanet.

Canada’s agri-food sector dodges a bullet as Parliament hits pause

Proposed bills in doubt

Photo: ANDREW HARNIK/AP

Parliamentarians gather in the House of Commons during a visit to Ottawa by U.S. President Joe Biden.

For farmers and stakeholders across the agri-food supply chain, 2025 has started on a high note.

Jan. 6 was a particularly good day for the sector. While Prime Minister Justin Trudeau remains at the helm, Parliament has been prorogued, and with it, the future of some contentious legislative proposals is in serious doubt. When MPs return on March 24, the government will likely face a confidence vote, potentially leaving several flawed bills and proposals to die on the order paper.

Among the most notable casualties are Bills C-282 and C-293, as well as proposed changes to the taxable portion of capital gains. For those of us concerned about the economics of food and farming, this marks a rare victory for pragmatism over politics.

The proposed capital gains tax reform

One of the most controversial proposals that failed to survive was a plan to increase the taxable portion of capital gains from 50% to 66.7% for individuals and companies earning over $250,000 in capital gains. This change would have represented a significant financial burden for farmers, who often rely on the sale of land, equipment, or quotas as part of succession planning.

While the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) may still be considering modifications to capital gains taxation, the rejection of this proposal underscores the importance of sound political leadership. Farmers and agri-food businesses need policies that foster growth and sustainability – not measures that create additional economic barriers. The failed proposal highlights how chaotic and disconnected Ottawa’s approach to economic policy has been in recent years.

Bill C-282: A misguided trade policy

Bill C-282, championed by a Bloc Québécois MP, aimed to grant permanent immunity to supply-managed sectors – poultry, eggs, and dairy – during future trade negotiations. This would have barred Canada from making further concessions on these industries, such as granting tariff-free access to foreign cheese, butter, chicken, or eggs. While supply management plays a critical role in stabilizing certain agricultural markets, the approach proposed in this bill would have significantly narrowed Canada’s trade flexibility.

Currently, tariffs on supply-managed goods can exceed 300% for imports, a level of protectionism that has drawn ire from trading partners, particularly the United States. With Donald Trump set to return to the White House, his administration already threatens tariffs on nearly all goods, including the $42 billion in agri-food exports Canada sends south annually. Bill C-282 would have made supply management a lightning rod in bilateral trade discussions, exposing the sector to targeted retaliation.

Protecting less than two per cent of the Canadian economy at the expense of the other 98% is simply bad trade policy. Supply management has functioned effectively for decades without the need for such drastic legislative measures. This bill’s demise is a relief for those who value balanced trade agreements that benefit the broader economy.

Bill C-293: The overreach of “Canada’s Vegan Act”

Bill C-293, dubbed “Canada’s Vegan Act,” was another private member’s bill that sparked significant debate. Ostensibly designed to improve pandemic preparedness, it included provisions to “de-risk” animal protein production and promote alternative protein consumption. While innovation in food production is important, this bill crossed a line by appearing to push a particular dietary agenda – namely, vegetarianism and veganism – under the guise of public health.

Such proposals alienate farming communities and undermine consumer choice. Canada’s food system thrives on its diversity, and any attempt to dictate what Canadians should eat contradicts the principles of food democracy. Consumers must remain free to make their own decisions about their diets without undue interference from Ottawa.

The fact that Bills C-282 and C-293 advanced through the House of Commons reflects a deeper dysfunction in Parliament. Private member’s bills rarely make it this far, yet these proposals sailed through the lower chamber and left the Senate scrambling to decide their fate. Parliament’s prorogation provides a much-needed pause, allowing Canada’s lawmakers to reassess their priorities.

While both bills could technically be reintroduced, their chances of survival are slim. With Senate committees requiring reconstitution, the likelihood of either bill becoming law is infinitesimal—much to the relief of Canada’s farming communities and trade partners.

The rejection of increased capital gains taxes and the demise of Bills C-282 and C-293 are wins for the agri-food sector and Canadian consumers alike. Farmers and food producers can now move forward more confidently, knowing that ill-conceived policies are less likely to hinder their operations.

Supply management has proven its resilience without the need for overly restrictive legislation, and food democracy remains intact. Canada thrives on choice, innovation, and the freedom to compete on the global stage. Let this moment remind us that political leadership matters, especially in preserving the economic pillars that feed our nation and sustain our communities.

Sylvain Charlebois is a Canadian professor and researcher specializing in food distribution and policy. He is the senior director of the Agri-Food Analytics Lab at Dalhousie University and co-host of The Food Professor Podcast.

This article is written by or on behalf of an outsourced columnist and does not necessarily reflect the views of Castanet.

Climate and health effects, marketing strategy and future potential of renewable natural gas

New name, same gas

Photo: Contributed

Kristy Dyer, whose column Sustainability Spotlight usually appears in this spot every second week, is on an extended leave. Her column is expected to return in the spring.

This is the second of a two-part series about renewable natural gas by our new climate action columnists Janet Parkins and Eli Pivnick. The first part appeared Dec. 24

In the first part of this column about renewable natural gas, I discussed what RNG is, where it comes from and its availability. In this part, I discuss climate and health effects, FortisBC’s marketing strategy and the future of RNG.

Methane, also known as natural gas, can be RNG or conventional (or fracked) natural gas. Methane has a big carbon footprint. Escaped methane accounts for nearly a quarter of the global warming from all greenhouse gas emissions.

While carbon dioxide gets the most press, methane is a much more potent greenhouse gas—more than 80 times more powerful than CO2 in its first two decades, when the fuel packs its biggest climate punch.

RNG contributes directly to climate change as it leaks from the same leaky distribution pipelines as conventional natural gas. When RNG is burned in our appliances, it produces the same amount of CO2 conventional natural gas does.

Burning methane indoors is a known health risk. Nitrogen dioxide and other air contaminants released when cooking with gas increase a child’s risk of developing asthma between 24% and 42% and are known to aggravate Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disorder, a lung condition. Significant amounts of natural gas leak from gas appliances even when they are turned off.

RNG is up to five times more expensive than fossil gas because of the complexities of capturing and processing the methane. Many of the lowest-cost RNG projects (using waste streams that are large, centrally contained and conveniently located near existing pipelines) have already been developed. What remains are the costlier projects—smaller facilities farther away from pipelines and biomass that is dispersed. Replacing fossil gas with RNG would be prohibitively expensive.

FortisBC applied to the B.C. Utilities Commission, the government agency responsible for regulating energy utilities in B.C., to provide 100% RNG to new customers while spreading the cost across all existing customers. The BCUC rejected the proposal, saying, “The BCUC recognizes that there is a need for an orderly transition of B.C.’s energy system towards a net-zero carbon emissions future and measures will need to be taken to address the role of gas and protect FortisBC gas customers.”

As of July 1, 2024, to support B.C.’s “clean energy transformation”, FortisBC delivers 1% RNG to all customers and customers can opt for a higher percentage (at least on paper) for an additional average cost of between $2.10 per month for 5% and $51.98 for 100%.

As of Jan. 1, the BCUC approved a 17.5% rate increase. According to FortisBC, the average residential customer will see their bill increase by about $14.25 per month. Rates may change again in the first half of 2025 as the BCUC reviews Fortis’ rate-setting framework.

The gas industry is using RNG to greenwash its image while obscuring its real objective—selling more natural gas, even at the climate’s expense. The industry aims to create the illusion that our gas system can be decarbonized by introducing a new renewable fuel, RNG, that can offset today’s gas demand. In reality, it would offset only a small portion of that demand.

If the public can be convinced, it will enable gas companies to invest millions more dollars into new infrastructure that would lock in decades of profits from natural gas sales. The result would be consumers paying higher prices for a façade of GHG reductions.

FortisBC is promoting the use of RNG in buildings as an alternative to conventional or fracked natural gas. However, this is false because:

• There will never be enough RNG.

• RNG is expensive to produce.

• RNG has the same negative indoor health effects as other sources of natural gas.

• RNG is prone to leakage from pipelines and other infrastructure: a major source of GHGs.

The best use of RNG is as an alternative fuel for backup generators or in situations that are hard to decarbonize, such as long-haul trucking, concrete-production and other industrial processes.

Electrification is by far the better alternative to natural gas for heating buildings. As well as having no carbon emissions or noxious gases, electric heat pumps are more efficient and come with the added benefit of being able to provide cooling as well as heating.

An honest conversation about our energy future must include scaling up proven non-emitting technologies, such as wind, solar and geothermal production rather than locking in our dependency on natural gas. It doesn’t make sense to use RNG where natural gas could simply be replaced with net-carbon zero electricity. In conclusion, there is no need to use RNG in homes. Safe, clean and less expensive alternatives to natural gas already exist.

Janet Parkins is a member of Frack-Free BC and Climate Action Now! North Okanagan.

This article is written by or on behalf of an outsourced columnist and does not necessarily reflect the views of Castanet.

Charlebois: Canada’s top food stories of 2024, a mix of triumphs and setbacks

Food in the headlines 2024

Photo: Pixabay

Every year, we compile a list of the most impactful food stories to highlight the trends, challenges, and opportunities shaping Canada’s agri-food sector.

From policy changes and economic pressures to technological advancements and consumer-driven shifts, these stories reflect the complexities of our food system and its broader societal implications. 2024 was no exception, offering a mix of triumphs and setbacks that defined the year for farmers, consumers, and businesses.

As always, this list aims to provide a balanced perspective on the events that mattered most in the agri-food world, helping us understand where we’ve been and are headed. Enjoy!

10. The Loblaw boycott that wasn’t

We were uncertain about including this story on the list since it never truly materialized. Despite significant online momentum, particularly on Reddit, the boycott, which initially targeted Canadian grocers like Loblaw, Sobeys, and Metro — while excluding American giants such as Walmart and Costco — failed to gain traction.

Initially declared as a one-month protest starting May 1, it was later announced as indefinite. However, the boycott’s impact was negligible, as reflected in Loblaw’s shares soaring to $195—a remarkable 27% increase since the campaign’s launch.

While the financial outcome left Loblaw unscathed, the campaign sparked important discussions around “greedflation,” corporate ethics, and the public image of Canada’s major grocers. The controversy exposed a critical gap in consumer confidence and intensified calls for greater transparency in pricing and competition practices.

Addressing these issues will be essential for rebuilding trust and fostering a more equitable and competitive grocery landscape in the future.

9. Capital gains tax changes impacting farmers

The June 25 increase in the capital gains inclusion rate for profits exceeding $250,000 has alarmed the agricultural sector. Farmers, often asset-rich but cash-poor, face a 30% tax hike on average, according to the Grain Growers of Canada.

With Canada already losing 700–1,000 farms annually, these changes exacerbate generational succession challenges and accelerate industry consolidation. Although the lifetime capital gains exemption has increased to $1.25 million, the higher tax rate disproportionately affects family-owned farms, posing a threat to the future of Canadian agriculture.

8. Endorsement of Grocer Code of Conduct by the “Big Five”

The endorsement of the Grocer Code of Conduct by Canada’s largest grocers marked a milestone in addressing power imbalances between retailers and suppliers. By fostering fairer negotiations and reducing price volatility, the code is expected to enhance transparency and stabilize the food supply chain.

However, questions remain about enforcement, and grocers must demonstrate their commitment to rebuilding consumer trust through fair practices.

7. Rise of GLP-1 drugs Like Ozempic

The rise of GLP-1 drugs, such as Ozempic, marks a transformative moment in the pharmaceutical and health sectors, with the potential to impact millions worldwide.

Initially developed for managing Type 2 diabetes, these drugs have gained widespread recognition for their effectiveness in promoting weight loss by suppressing appetite and slowing digestion. With global obesity rates continuing to rise, medications like Ozempic are being touted as game-changers, with experts predicting widespread adoption in the coming years.

A pivotal moment in this shift occurred in February when Oprah Winfrey stepped down from the board of Weight Watchers, signalling a potential decline in traditional weight-loss programs as pharmaceutical solutions gain traction. While these drugs offer significant benefits, including improved metabolic health and reduced risks of obesity-related diseases, they also raise critical concerns.

Affordability, long-term safety, and equitable access remain pressing issues. Additionally, the growing demand prompts questions about their impact on health-care systems and evolving societal attitudes toward weight loss and wellness.

6. The GST holiday and taxes on food debate

Ottawa’s temporary GST/HST holiday on food and restaurant items sparked significant debate. While consumers will see minimal savings — roughly $5 at grocery stores — restaurants will benefit more, with families saving $60–$90. However, the logistical burden on retailers and regional disparities in tax rates and the possibility of opportunity pricing drew criticism.

A permanent removal of GST on food would have been a more effective solution, fostering affordability without the instability of short-term policies.

5. Record food recalls and safety alerts

Food recalls reached their fourth-highest level in 2024, driven by high-profile incidents involving cucumbers, bakery products, and plant-based beverages like Silk and Great Value brands. Tragically, these recalls were linked to three fatalities, emphasizing the importance of robust safety measures.

This story sheds light on the ongoing challenges of managing food safety in complex supply chains, calling for stronger oversight and transparency in the agri-food industry.

4. Railway, grain, and port disruptions

Labour disputes in Canada’s logistics sector disrupted the nation’s food supply chain in 2024, damaging its international reputation.

With railways, ports, and other infrastructure under constant strain, these disruptions highlighted the critical importance of safeguarding the backbone of the Canadian economy. While protecting workers’ rights is vital, striking a balance to ensure uninterrupted supply chains is equally necessary.

The year underscored the need for proactive labour policies to avoid holding the economy — and the food system — hostage.

3. Potential Tariffs with the Return of Donald Trump

The return of Donald Trump to the U.S. presidency reignited fears of economic disruption, particularly in Canada’s agri-food sector, which sends 60% of its agri-food exports — $40 billion worth — south of the border.

Proposed tariffs of up to 25% would devastate Canadian producers, already grappling with slim margins and the carbon tax. Ottawa faced mounting pressure to develop a long-term strategy to mitigate these risks and strengthen the agri-food sector’s competitiveness in an increasingly protectionist global landscape.

2. Carbon tax debate on food prices

Carbon pricing remains a divisive issue in 2024, with peer-reviewed studies confirming that the policy increases production and transport costs, ultimately eroding the competitiveness of Canadian food systems.

While grocers often mitigate impacts by importing cheaper goods, this approach masks the structural weaknesses created by rising operational costs. As such, studies looking at the impact of carbon pricing on food prices are generally flawed.

Critics argue that many studies dismissing the tax’s effect on food prices are influenced by funding from Environment and Climate Change Canada, raising questions of bias. Policymakers must look beyond retail price fluctuations to understand the long-term implications of carbon pricing on Canada’s agri-food sector and food security.

1. Record number of visits to food banks

In 2024, the HungerCount report revealed a record-breaking number of visits to food banks, alongside Canada’s food insecurity rate reaching an unprecedented 22.9%.

These figures highlight a growing affordability crisis, driven by soaring food prices, stagnant wages, and broader inflationary pressures. While some have pointed fingers at immigration, such narratives overlook the complex economic dynamics at play and the humanity at the heart of this issue.

Food banks, stretched beyond capacity, are emblematic of a broader social crisis. This story underscores the urgent need for robust social safety nets and policies that prioritize affordability and inclusivity.

Honourable mentions

Upcoming approval of cloned meat in Canada: Health Canada’s consideration of cloned meat approval has sparked heated debate. While advocates point to potential benefits like enhanced livestock genetics and improved food security, critics highlight concerns about transparency, ethical implications, and biodiversity. Without mandatory labelling, consumers are left in the dark about what’s on their plates, intensifying the call for stricter regulations and open communication.

Approval of methane-reducing feed for cattle and dairy: Bovaer, a feed additive approved in February, has the potential to significantly reduce methane emissions from cattle, offering an innovative solution for sustainable farming. However, its adoption remains limited, with no clear government communication or labelling guidelines. The lack of transparency echoes past controversies like Buttergate, leaving consumers uninformed about its broader implications.

Bill C-282 to protect supply management during trade deals: The advancement of Bill C-282, aimed at protecting supply management in future trade agreements, stands as one of the year’s most significant food policy developments. The bill seeks to safeguard Canada’s dairy, poultry, and egg sectors from trade concessions, ensuring industry stability and maintaining predictable prices for consumers. However, its progress has stalled in the Senate, casting doubt on whether it will pass before a new U.S. administration, potentially less favourable to Canada’s supply management system, takes office in January. Critics argue that the legislation could restrict Canada’s flexibility in broader trade negotiations. Nevertheless, supporters view it as essential for preserving food sovereignty and protecting Canadian farmers from an increasingly unpredictable global market.

Bill C-293: Canada’s “Vegan Act:” Originally focused on pandemic preparedness, Bill C-293 has sparked controversy for promoting alternative proteins and de-risking animal protein production. Proponents argue the bill aligns with sustainability goals and food innovation, while critics fear it marginalizes traditional farming. The ongoing debate highlights the tension between progressive food policies and the preservation of Canada’s agricultural heritage.

Ottawa’s tightening of the Temporary Foreign Worker Program: While changes to the Temporary Foreign Worker Program aimed to prioritize domestic hiring, they have exacerbated labour shortages in agriculture and food processing. While the policy seeks to address labour exploitation, it risks destabilizing sectors heavily reliant on foreign workers, calling for a more balanced approach to ensure workforce stability.

Sylvain Charlebois is the director of the Agri-Food Analytics Lab at Dalhousie University and co-host of The Food Professor Podcast.

This article is written by or on behalf of an outsourced columnist and does not necessarily reflect the views of Castanet.