LATEST ARTICLES

Big Oil cashed in on the war with Iran. Now Trump is facing the fallout

Troy Media
-
0
Big Oil cashed in on the war with Iran. Now Trump is facing the fallout

Rashid Husain Syed, Troy Media

No clear winner may have emerged on the battleground in the U.S.-Israeli war with Iran, but away from the battlefield, Big Oil has emerged as one of the conflict’s biggest beneficiaries. And that is creating a political headache for U.S. President Donald Trump.

“They made too much money, too much money,” Trump said last week, referring to U.S. oil majors ExxonMobil and Chevron. “They ought to give some of that back to the public, and they better cut the retail price.”

Major oil companies reported exceptionally strong second-quarter profits for 2026 as the war with Iran disrupted energy supplies and sent oil prices soaring.

Eight of the global oil majors amassed profits of US$93 billion in just three months, according to the Guardian. Their combined profits were almost double the nearly US$50 billion recorded during the same period last year.

The eight companies—Saudi Aramco, BP, Shell, Equinor, TotalEnergies, Eni, Chevron and ExxonMobil—made more than US$700,000 in profit every minute during the quarter, the Guardian estimated.

ExxonMobil doubled its profit to US$14.5 billion. Chevron reported US$12.2 billion. Shell reported adjusted earnings of US$9.8 billion, while BP’s adjusted profit surged to US$5.7 billion.

Saudi Aramco also emerged as a major beneficiary despite the disruption in the Strait of Hormuz, its preferred export waterway. The strait is one of the world’s most important oil routes, normally carrying oil volumes equivalent to about one-fifth of global petroleum consumption.

The blockage forced Saudi Aramco to reroute shipments away from Hormuz. Yet the Saudi state oil company still registered a 44 per cent jump in net profit to US$32.69 billion.

Gasoline prices remain an important political issue in the United States, particularly with the midterm elections only a few months away. The national average for regular gasoline reached US$4.07 a gallon on Aug. 13, compared with US$3.16 a year earlier. If prices at the pump remain high, Trump and the Republicans could pay a political price.

The impact is not limited to the U.S. Canada is a major oil producer, but crude is traded in a global market. Higher international oil prices are also driving up gasoline prices for Canadian consumers.

In late June, Trump ordered the U.S. Justice Department to investigate oil companies, including ExxonMobil and Chevron, over gasoline prices. “Gasoline Retailers must get their Prices down, IMMEDIATELY,” Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform. “If Retailers don’t do this, big problems lie ahead!”

But getting prices down while oil companies are enjoying extraordinary profits is easier said than done.

Democratic Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse and Democratic Rep. Ro Khanna reintroduced the Big Oil Windfall Profits Tax Act in March, and similar calls have been heard in Europe. Such a tax is designed to capture excess profits generated by extraordinary external circumstances, with the proceeds redirected to consumers facing higher energy costs.

There is precedent. The European Union imposed a windfall tax on oil profits after energy prices surged following Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022.

Not surprisingly, industry leaders strongly oppose the idea. ExxonMobil CEO Darren Woods told analysts that windfall taxes are a “misguided policy” that penalizes businesses that attempt to stay successful despite the oil industry’s volatile booms and busts.

“We cancelled investments that we had planned for Europe based on the last time they passed a windfall profits tax,” Woods said. “And in fact, we’re suing because we don’t think that’s a legal taking for the industry.”

Politically speaking, it may not be easy for Trump to tax the oil majors. Big Oil remains one of the most powerful lobbying interests in Washington. The oil industry has traditionally strongly supported Republicans, with fossil-fuel interests contributing heavily to Trump and Republican-aligned campaigns.

Trump has said the oil majors are making “too much money.” But taking them on could have political fallout.

The Iran war has given Big Oil an extraordinary financial windfall. For Trump, the question now is whether criticizing those profits will be enough if gasoline prices remain high as the midterm elections approach.

Toronto-based Rashid Husain Syed is a highly regarded analyst specializing in energy and politics, particularly in the Middle East. In addition to his contributions to local and international newspapers, Rashid frequently lends his expertise as a speaker at global conferences. Organizations such as the Department of Energy in Washington and the International Energy Agency in Paris have sought his insights on global energy matters.

Lloyd Robertson was a Canadian original

Troy Media
-
0
Lloyd Robertson was a Canadian original

Michael Taube, Troy Media

A fixture of Canadian living rooms for over four decades, he set a standard for broadcasting longevity, dignity, and grace

The list of Canadian national news anchors is relatively short and exclusive. Early examples in the 1950s and 1960s included Stanley Burke, Earl Cameron, Warren Davis, Larry Henderson and Peter Jennings (who achieved greater success in the U.S.).

When I was growing up in the 1970s and 1980s, some familiar names included Peter Kent, Harvey Kirck, Peter Mansbridge, Wendy Mesley, Keith Morrison, Knowlton Nash and Sandie Rinaldo. They’ve been followed by Dawna Friesen, Ian Hanomansing, Heather Hiscox, Lisa LaFlamme, Kevin Newman, Evan Solomon, Nancy Wilson and others.

Then, there was Lloyd Robertson. The face of CTV National News (1984-2011) and co-host of CTV’s W5 (2011-2016) was the longest-tenured national news anchor in North America. He was also, in many ways, one of the last true gentlemen in the news industry of his generation—and one of its finest representatives.

Robertson died on Aug. 4 at age 92. Tributes came pouring in from the two worlds of politics and the media. Many Canadians signed a book of condolences posted by CTV. They wanted to pay their final respects to the legendary newsman who had appeared on their televisions each night, told them about Canada and the world and, in a sense, became part of their families.

Robertson was born on Jan. 19, 1934, in Stratford, Ont. His father was a machinist’s helper for the Canadian National Railway, and his mother was a homemaker. The family’s home life was far from ideal. His father, whom he described as a “philosopher-king,” died from cancer when Robertson was only 21. Even worse, his mother suffered from mental illness and underwent a lobotomy in 1948. According to Robertson, it stabilized her mood swings and obsessive-compulsive behaviour but “flat-lined her emotionally … She has haunted me all of my life. When you’re the child of a mentally ill patient, you’re always looking for something in yourself.”

Broadcasting turned out to be Robertson’s one true salvation.

He was enamoured with a radio broadcast on his local station, CJCS-FM, related to soldiers of the Perth Regiment returning home from the Second World War. He felt that he was a witness to “something much bigger than myself” and wanted to be part of it. Robertson convinced them to let him work at the station after school. He started spinning 78-rpm records and later became a news reader at the stroke of midnight.

He finished high school and stayed at CJCS until 1954. He moved on to CJOY in Guelph, Ont., auditioned for the CBC and got hired. He started in Windsor, Ont., and joined CBWT-TV in Winnipeg in 1956, which was his first television role. (Robertson also got married to Nancy Barrett, his high school sweetheart, that year.) He shifted to CBOT-TV in Ottawa in 1960, and moved to Toronto to host CBC Weekend in the late 1960s. He was also an anchor for CBC’s The National from 1970 to 1976.

Robertson left CBC after 22 years due to, as the public broadcaster itself fully admitted in an Aug. 4 obituary, “increasingly outdated union strictures involving studio and field work.” He felt quite limited in terms of what he could and couldn’t do in broadcasting. He apparently “once shared his workplace frustrations with Walter Cronkite on a trip to the U.S.,” CBC News’s Chris Iorfida also wrote, and “recounted that the CBS news titan was incredulous that CBC anchors couldn’t write their own copy, and were limited in reporting outside of the studio.”

The decision to shift to CTV was the best choice he could have ever made. His career trajectory in the Canadian news industry went through the stratosphere.

Robertson started off as the co-anchor of CTV National News with Kircik in 1976. He became the senior anchor eight years later and never looked back. With his distinctive voice and calm demeanour, he quickly became one of the most trusted voices in Canadian news. He covered federal elections, political personalities, royal weddings, foreign policy matters, wars and military skirmishes, natural disasters—and more.

“For a kid from Stratford, Ont., who didn’t have a lot of formal education, never went beyond high school,” he said in a 2011 interview, “here I am in this job which puts me right here on the cusp of history and I’m able to experience all of this … there is not a better job in the world.”

When Robertson retired in 2011, it ended an incredible 41-year run as a national news anchor at CBC and CTV. He lasted longer than his North American colleagues, including news legends like Cronkite, Chet Huntley, David Brinkley and Edward R. Murrow. Based on the volatility and rapid turnover of modern news anchors, it’s a record that no one will likely ever come close to breaking.

The number of people that Robertson knew, mentored or befriended in his long, illustrious career is far too numerous to mention. I’m fortunate to be among them.

Robertson and I met during my tenure at CTV News Channel as a political commentator from 2012 to 2015. He was a host on W5, and we would occasionally speak in the green room. Our conversations were always pleasant and upbeat. A little dash of politics here, some current news events there—and a cornucopia of other topics of mutual interest. It was always a pleasure and honour to speak with him, and I’m glad that I had many opportunities to do just that.

Robertson ended his broadcasts on CTV National News with the same memorable line, “And that’s the kind of day it’s been.” The glorious days we had with this warm, friendly, serious, humorous, intelligent and fun-loving giant of Canadian broadcasting won’t soon be forgotten. Rest in peace, Lloyd.

Michael Taube is a political commentator, Troy Media syndicated columnist and former speechwriter for Prime Minister Stephen Harper. He holds a master’s degree in comparative politics from the London School of Economics, lending academic rigour to his political insights.

Ottawa’s bonus culture makes failure pay

Troy Media
-
0
Ottawa’s bonus culture makes failure pay

Franco Terrazzano, Troy Media

In the real world, bonuses happen when you do a good job or your organization has a great year. In Ottawa, bonuses reward D- performances, bailouts and billion-dollar losses with taxpayers’ money.

Let’s start with Canada Post. The federal Crown corporation showered its managers and executives with $30.8 million in bonuses in 2025. That same year it lost nearly $1.6 billion and took a $1 billion bailout from taxpayers.

This wasn’t a one-off rough patch. Canada Post has lost money for eight years running, totalling $5.4 billion.

VIA Rail is another Crown corporation rewarding failure with taxpayers’ money.

The government dumped $376 million into VIA Rail last year to cover the train company’s operating losses. Despite hemorrhaging money, VIA Rail rubber-stamped $10.3 million in bonuses. Every executive took a bonus and their average bonus payout was $115,293.

Then there’s Alto, the Crown corporation dreaming up Canada’s high-speed rail boondoggle. It hasn’t put a single shovel in the ground. It hasn’t laid a single metre of track. It doesn’t even know the exact route for its train. Despite having completed almost nothing, it handed out $2.8 million in bonuses. Every Alto staffer took a bonus.

The Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation is also familiar with the taxpayer cookie jar. It’s the government’s housing agency and it has repeatedly claimed its goal is “housing affordability for all.”

Spoiler alert: The CMHC is failing its own goal.

The CMHC handed out $31.7 million in bonuses last year even as its own CEO admitted housing supply and affordability “remained one of Canada’s greatest challenges.”

If only bureaucrat bonuses actually made homes affordable, then every Canadian would own a home with an in-ground pool and a cottage at the lake.

This isn’t a few bad apples. It’s the whole orchard. About 90 per cent of government executives take a bonus every year. Those executive bonuses cost taxpayers about $200 million last year.

Meanwhile, federal departments consistently miss their own performance targets. In two of the last five years, departments failed to meet even half of them, according to the government’s data. Their best year was 2024-25, when they hit 54 per cent of their own targets.

Picture a report card full of D’s and F’s that still comes with a gold star. That’s what happens in the federal government’s executive suites.

Former parliamentary budget officer Yves Giroux explained what’s going on:

Bureaucrats set their own targets and they’re careful to set the bar “not too high” but not “too low” and yet “by their own assessment they fail to deliver on many of these.”

Translation: Bureaucrats discovered they can fail and still get rewarded for a passing grade because they’re the ones grading their own homework.

How does the government justify these bonuses? A Canada Post spokesperson said it needs to “retain the talented and experienced people” leading the corporation.

Retain them for what talent? Losing $5.4 billion over the last eight years? These bonuses aren’t rewarding talent or excellent performance. They’re a perverse incentive that tells government executives failure is safe and success is optional because the bonus cheque comes either way.

Taxpayers continue to foot the bill for failure even as the government sinks further into debt. Paying interest on the federal government’s debt costs taxpayers more than $1 billion every week.

Prime Minister Mark Carney told departments and Crown corporations to find up to 15 per cent in savings. Carney doesn’t need to look far to find the fat. Bonuses for failure should be the first thing on the chopping block.

Franco Terrazzano is the Federal Director of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation and a public policy analyst specializing in government accountability, taxation, and fiscal waste. He holds a Master of Public Policy and a Bachelor of Arts in Economics from the University of Calgary.

Saskatchewan is right to keep its coal plants running

Troy Media
-
0
Saskatchewan is right to keep its coal plants running

Lee Harding, Troy Media

Much controversy has ensued over the Government of Saskatchewan’s decision to refurbish coal-fired power plants. Although the details deserve scrutiny, the premise is sound. Electricity generation is expensive no matter how it is done, and extending coal-fired power capacity makes fiscal and practical sense.

Saskatchewan is a sensible provincial outlier in its refurbishment plans. Alberta, Ontario and Manitoba have stopped burning coal, and Nova Scotia and New Brunswick will end the practice in 2030. By contrast, Saskatchewan will spend $2.6 billion to overhaul seven coal-fired generating units at Boundary Dam, Poplar River and Shand to extend their use until 2050.

Of course, the 2030 and 2050 dates are not coincidental. They align with international carbon emission reduction targets, supposedly ending up at net zero by 2050. Much could be said against the wisdom or necessity of these targets. They will curtail the power production that fuels industry, productivity and agriculture, jeopardizing world prosperity and food security.

However, Saskatchewan is not entirely pushing back against these carbon reduction goals. It is still pursuing more power production from natural gas and small modular nuclear reactors. Even if the experimental technology behind the reactors proves viable, the province will be well into the next decade before the reactors come online.

Maintaining coal production is still a practical necessity. And if there’s anything we would like a government to be, it is practical.

The province also has more reason than others to lean on coal more heavily. Whereas Manitoba, Quebec and British Columbia have 90 per cent or higher reliance on hydro for their power needs, Saskatchewan only has 14 per cent. Unlike Ontario and New Brunswick, there is no existing nuclear station. Meanwhile, the province expects growing electricity demand from mining, industrial development and electrification.

Manitoba has refused new AI data centres, but Saskatchewan said yes to one by Bell Canada. The data centre campus, currently being built south of Regina, will become partly operational next year. The centre will draw 300 megawatts, equivalent to five per cent of the province’s entire grid capacity.

The province is meeting this need through a new 370-megawatt natural gas plant near Lanigan, alongside new wind and solar projects. Still, it’s one indication of the fresh thirst for electricity that is just getting started.

Not surprisingly, the Opposition NDP has criticized the government for the plan. In May, the party released small portions of a leaked internal SaskPower document that projected that the average cost of electricity would be 20 per cent higher in 2030 and 95 per cent higher in 2040 if the coal plants were extended. And that price is apart from industrial carbon taxes.

The document also revealed that “SaskPower is terminating previous corporate commitments related to renewable capacity and emissions reductions.” The province was also counting on Ottawa to allow the plan to “proceed without regulatory violation.”

The document called that gamble an “extreme risk,” but it is one worth taking. The Clean Electricity Regulations and ever-increasing industrial carbon taxes will be corrosive for the Canadian economy. As it was with the consumer carbon tax, once the pain is felt from these initiatives, it will be politically difficult to keep ratcheting them up.

Besides, the federal government is too smart not to recognize Western discontent and its threat to Canadian unity. Who knows, Ottawa may even kick in some money to add carbon capture units to the coal plants. Saskatchewan pioneered the technology for a coal-fired unit at the Boundary Dam Power Station in 2014 and could always install it elsewhere.

As for the cost, the province claims coal is still the cheaper option. Building similar capacity through new natural gas plants would cost $10 billion. SaskPower also estimates that extending the coal fleet would avoid more than $21 billion in capital expenditures compared with a pathway fully compliant with Clean Electricity Regulations. That’s almost $20,000 per capita given Saskatchewan’s population.

The province can rightfully claim it is relying less on coal than before. The latest national electricity mix published by Environment and Climate Change Canada claimed 36 per cent of the province’s power was generated by coal. However, SaskPower’s more recent operating data shows coal only provided 24 per cent, with natural gas picking up half of the slack. The province is pursuing a power production path that is economical, viable and reliable.

Lee Harding is a research fellow at the Frontier Centre for Public Policy. He holds a Master of Public Policy (U of C) and a BA in Journalism, with a career spanning major networks like CBC and Global TV, as well as landmark published research on Canadian economic and social policy.

Canada still trades like 13 separate countries

Troy Media
-
0
Canada still trades like 13 separate countries

Sylvain Charlebois, Troy Media

Canada’s premiers raised a glass to internal trade last week. Nine provinces signed an agreement allowing licensed Canadian wineries, breweries and distilleries to sell directly to consumers across participating jurisdictions. Quebec and Yukon, which helped develop the framework, have not yet joined but say they are working toward implementation. British Columbia, meanwhile, will not have its full system operating until Feb. 2027.

Politically, the announcement sounds consequential. Economically, it is much more modest. Canadians were already ordering alcohol from producers in other provinces, often through a patchwork of exemptions, informal practices and rules that were rarely enforced consistently. The new agreement brings a measure of legitimacy to activity that was already occurring under the radar. What was once ambiguous is now more openly tolerated.

But this is not a duty-free Canadian alcohol market in any meaningful sense. The agreement explicitly preserves each province’s authority to require registrations and licences, impose minimum prices, and collect fees, markups and taxes. Destination provinces can require an out-of-province producer to collect and remit those charges. The agreement itself also states that it creates no legally enforceable obligations. Canada has opened a new pipe between producers and consumers, but every province still controls the valve and can still charge a toll.

That matters because market access is about more than legal permission. Provinces must also make out-of-province Canadian products commercially attractive. Shipping costs, registration requirements, provincial markups and the enormous purchasing power of liquor monopolies can still make domestic expansion uneconomic.

An Ontario winery owner told CBC last week that, even with a looming 50-per-cent U.S. tariff on certain Canadian alcohol products scheduled for Aug. 19, doing business in the United States remained more attractive than selling into other Canadian provinces. That is an extraordinary indictment of our internal market. When exporting through an international border facing a punitive tariff can still appear preferable to selling within Canada, the problem is much deeper than direct-to-consumer rules.

The premiers’ announcement may be a step forward but hardly the liberation of the Canadian alcohol market. It expands choice at the margins, especially for small producers with loyal customers, yet it leaves the basic provincial distribution architecture intact. It is progress wrapped in considerably more political theatre than economic transformation.

If governments truly want a single Canadian market, they should now turn to food. Fruits, vegetables, meat, dairy products, eggs and processed foods still encounter different inspection regimes, licensing systems, marketing rules and technical standards. A processor can meet federal export requirements and sell abroad, yet still face obstacles serving customers in another province. For a country urgently trying to strengthen domestic supply chains, this is economically incoherent.

Supply management is the most politically sensitive part of that conversation, but it cannot remain outside it. This does not require abolishing production quotas. Dairy, poultry and egg production can remain supply managed while becoming genuinely national. Today, national production requirements are ultimately divided and implemented through provincial allocations and marketing boards. The result is a system designed around historical provincial shares even though processors, retailers and consumers increasingly operate in a national market.

A pragmatic reform would preserve existing quota rights while harmonizing allocation nationally. All future quota growth could be assigned according to consumer demand, production efficiency, processing capacity, logistics and regional food security needs—not simply historical provincial entitlement. A national quota exchange or leasing platform could gradually improve mobility without confiscating existing assets. Regional production reserves could protect remote markets and supply resilience. Most importantly, milk, poultry and eggs should be able to move freely across provincial boundaries without duplicative requirements or artificial restrictions imposed to protect local incumbents.

The potential consumer benefit is meaningful, though it should not be exaggerated. Our preliminary modelling suggests that conventional reforms to internal food and alcohol trade could eventually save approximately $120 per Canadian annually. National quota allocation and freer movement of supply-managed commodities could add another $25 to $60. The combined central estimate is roughly $155 per Canadian or about $370 for an average household and $6.4 billion nationally.

These are long-run estimates, not promises of an immediate reduction at the grocery checkout. Savings would emerge gradually as production, processing and distribution adjusted. They would also depend on competition. If lower production costs merely inflate quota values or increase margins elsewhere in the chain, consumers would see little benefit. Any national quota reform should therefore include a transparent efficiency dividend, ensuring that measurable reductions in production and regulatory costs are reflected in regulated farm-gate prices.

There would be resistance. Provincial boards would surrender influence, some regions would attract more incremental production than others, and governments would need to protect legitimate existing investments during the transition. Those concerns deserve serious treatment. They do not justify preserving a fragmented system indefinitely. Beginning with future quota growth would allow Canada to modernize gradually without upending farm balance sheets overnight.

The alcohol agreement offers a useful lesson. Removing a prohibition is not the same as creating a competitive market. Canada cannot credibly celebrate the free movement of a few cases of wine while fruits, vegetables, meat, milk, poultry and eggs remain caught in provincial silos. If the objective is one Canadian economy, governments must be prepared to build one Canadian food market. Anything less is another toast to reform without actually serving the main course.

Dr. Sylvain Charlebois is senior director of the Agri-Food Analytics Lab at Dalhousie University, co-host of The Food Professor Podcast and visiting scholar at McGill University.

China’s changing energy habits are reshaping global oil markets

Troy Media
-
0
China’s changing energy habits are reshaping global oil markets

Rashid Husain Syed, Troy Media

The turmoil in the Middle East was expected to unleash another global oil shock. It didn’t.

Despite fears that crude could soar above US$200 a barrel, prices remained relatively subdued. Strategic petroleum reserve releases and increased production helped, but one country played a larger role than many observers realized: China.

China’s changing pattern of energy consumption—driven by rapid electric vehicle adoption, reduced crude imports and careful management of strategic reserves—is becoming an increasingly important force in how global oil markets respond to geopolitical crises.

Unlike previous oil shocks, China did not rush to secure additional crude supplies as tensions mounted. Instead, imports fell sharply as China relied more heavily on strategic petroleum reserves, while slower demand growth and rapid electric vehicle adoption reduced the need for additional crude imports. According to China’s General Administration of Customs, crude imports averaged 8.1 million barrels a day during the second quarter of 2026, down 32 per cent from the previous quarter. Imports in May and June fell below eight million barrels a day for the first time since 2016.

As Tsvetana Paraskova wrote for Oilprice.com, China’s buying behaviour became one of the biggest cushions against the extreme price swings many analysts had anticipated. Instead of adding pressure to an already nervous market, the world’s largest oil importer unexpectedly reduced demand.

That response reflects more than short-term caution. It points to a structural change in China’s energy economy.

Rapid growth in electric vehicles is steadily reducing the country’s dependence on crude oil. According to investment bank Jefferies, electric vehicles displaced an estimated 1.4 million barrels of oil a day in China during the first half of 2026, equivalent to 33.7 million tonnes of oil equivalent. Three years earlier, the figure was about 500,000 barrels a day.

The transition has been remarkably swift. New energy vehicles accounted for a record 63 per cent of passenger vehicle sales in China in June 2026. Nearly two out of every three new passenger vehicles sold were battery-electric or plug-in hybrid models.

The International Energy Agency estimates electric vehicles displaced about one million barrels of oil a day in China during 2025 and projects that figure will rise to 2.7 million barrels a day by 2030.

The effects are spreading well beyond China. According to the International Energy Agency, the latest oil crisis helped drive record electric and plug-in hybrid vehicle sales across about 50 countries during the second quarter of 2026. More than nine million electric and plug-in hybrid vehicles were sold worldwide during the first half of the year despite weaker overall vehicle sales, suggesting higher oil prices are accelerating the shift toward lower oil consumption.

Ironically, one consequence of higher oil prices has been to accelerate the transition away from oil itself.

None of this means supply has become unimportant. Major producers, particularly Saudi Arabia and other OPEC members, remain central to the stability of world oil markets, and geopolitical conflicts will continue to influence prices.

What has changed is that demand is becoming a more important part of the equation than many analysts anticipated. The latest Middle East crisis demonstrated that the behaviour of the world’s largest oil importer can help moderate price movements during periods of geopolitical stress.

For decades, oil markets were viewed primarily through the actions of producers. Today, they are increasingly being influenced by the changing behaviour of the world’s largest consumer.

What is already clear is that China’s changing energy mix is no longer simply a domestic story. It has become an increasingly important factor in how global oil markets respond to periods of international uncertainty.

Toronto-based Rashid Husain Syed is a highly regarded analyst specializing in energy and politics, particularly in the Middle East. In addition to his contributions to local and international newspapers, Rashid frequently lends his expertise as a speaker at global conferences. Organizations such as the Department of Energy in Washington and the International Energy Agency in Paris have sought his insights on global energy matters.

Paying doctors more won’t solve Canada’s primary care crisis

Troy Media
-
0
Paying doctors more won’t solve Canada’s primary care crisis

It’s time to stop paying for failure and start funding real, team-based primary care

Andrew Longhurst, Troy Media

Access to primary care in Canada is in decline and has been for the past decade. This should alarm Canadians. In 2024, one in five Canadians lacked access to a regular family doctor or nurse practitioner. Even more concerning, the share of adults with a regular family doctor declined in seven of 10 provinces between 2015 and 2024.

This matters because access to primary care is the front door to the health-care system. Without a regular provider, Canadians face greater difficulty accessing timely care and managing their health needs. Yet the problem is also not affecting everyone equally. In 2024, lower-income Canadians were less likely to have a regular health provider than higher-income Canadians, and that gap showed no improvement over the previous decade.

The declines have been particularly severe in Atlantic Canada. In Prince Edward Island, the share of adults with a regular family doctor fell from 88 per cent to 53 per cent between 2015 and 2024. Newfoundland and Labrador saw a decline from 86 per cent to 67 per cent, Nova Scotia from 86 per cent to 72 per cent, and New Brunswick from 88 per cent to 76 per cent. Other provinces also experienced declines, including British Columbia, Ontario and Saskatchewan.

One bright spot is the growing role of nurse practitioners. Although they still provide care to a relatively small share of Canadians, access to a regular nurse practitioner increased between 2015 and 2024, demonstrating their growing importance in strengthening primary care.

But the overall problem persists. One explanation is that governments have focused on the wrong solutions. Across Canada, many primary care reforms have centred on changing or increasing physician compensation. Yet these efforts have not translated into improved access to care.

A deeper problem is the continued reliance on the independent contractor model, in which doctors and nurse practitioners are expected to own and operate a business. And because it’s tough to run a business and care for patients at the same time, one result is the growth of investor-owned corporate chains. That trend raises new concerns—about care delivery, quality and the commercialization of patient data.

Canada’s provinces, therefore, need to move away from a system that relies primarily on individual practitioners operating as small-business owners. Instead, governments should invest in not-for-profit primary care infrastructure and expand team-based primary care.

In fact, Canada should implement lessons from the Scottish public health system, which in 2018 began to assume responsibility for clinic premises, reducing the financial risks and administrative burdens for doctors’ practices. It also began to employ multidisciplinary teams with the goal of improving work-life balance for medical professionals and access to care for patients. And the early results suggest that more publicly supported, team-based primary care appeals to the preferences of newer generations of family physicians.

Canada’s community health centre model, Community Health Centres (CHCs), also lets physicians work in multidisciplinary teams without running a business. Ontario’s more than 300 CHCs have been instrumental in expanding access to primary care in that province. However, while their flexible core funding model supports innovation, provincial policy still favours independent physician contractors, and this makes it difficult for the CHC model to become more widespread.

So, there is more work to be done, especially by the federal government, which needs to show more leadership in this space. Federal funding should be tied to progress in closing the primary care access gap, and governments should be held accountable for ensuring that all Canadians have timely access to a primary care provider or team.

The path forward is clear: the primary care crisis will not be solved simply by paying doctors more. It requires structural reform, investment in community-based clinics and a renewed commitment from governments to ensure that access to primary care is available to everyone.

Andrew Longhurst is a senior researcher at the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives and author of the new research study Failure, By Design: Ontario’s deepening hospital funding crisis.

Ottawa is starving an industry bigger than the oil sands

Troy Media
-
0
Ottawa is starving an industry bigger than the oil sands

Ryan Romard, Troy Media

After decades of chronic underfunding, the post-secondary education system is in crisis but, confoundingly, the federal and provincial governments are doing shockingly little about it. Most post-secondary education institutions are struggling after the loss of international students, who, for years, have paid significantly higher tuition fees to help compensate for provincial government funding shortfalls.

With continued underfunding, layoffs are becoming more common in the sector—and jobs that were once among the most secure in the country are becoming more precarious.

Young people are actively encouraged to go to university or college in order to compete in a challenging job market, but the government itself doesn’t treat the sector as though it has value. Nothing could be further from the truth.

The post-secondary education system is actually more powerful at driving economic growth than many key sectors, even mining or the oil sands.

But here’s the difference: Whenever either of those sectors are in economic trouble, governments come rushing to their rescue. Why not do the same for universities and colleges—especially since government policy decisions are responsible for the sector’s struggles.

Last year, universities’ and colleges’ economic output was worth $61 billion—considerably more than all oil sands extraction ($49 billion), and almost twice as much as mining or transportation manufacturing ($33 billion each).

The ongoing threats to the stability of post-secondary education directly endanger the livelihoods of hundreds of thousands of people employed in the sector and, ultimately, those enrolled in university or college programs. And this can hurt entire communities.

Ask any university or college town: The post-secondary education system is an important job creator. Universities and colleges employ more than twice as many people as the transport manufacturing industry, nearly four times more than the oil and gas extraction industry, and almost six times more than the mining industry.

University and college workers are a large workforce and, as such, create significant economic demand. In 2024, university and college workers’ compensation contributed 2.3 per cent of Canada’s total pay pie. That’s an even bigger contribution to the economy than the oil and gas industry’s workers’ pay (1.7 per cent). These wages have a direct impact on economic growth—especially in university and college towns, where workers spend their money locally, supporting small businesses, and the local arts and culture. This should give institutions pause when looking at layoffs.

It is, further, another argument for why increased reliance by institutions on precariously employed and lower-paid contract workers as a cost-saving strategy not only exacerbates inequality across the sector — it makes bad local business sense because those workers have less money to spend in their community.

University and college procurement—the stuff needed to keep those institutions running—creates demand in other industries.

In 2022, the most recent year of available data, universities and colleges spent $16.5 billion on purchases from other industries, including $1.4 billion on gasoline, $1 billion on repair construction services, $895 million on building services like landscaping, $560 million on electricity, $481 million on IT services, and $388 million on prepared meals.

In addition to educating generations of workers and citizens, universities and colleges themselves produce vital knowledge. In 2023, over $18 billion was spent on research and development activities in Canada’s post-secondary education sector. Despite only making up about two per cent of Canada’s economy, the post-secondary education sector represents over 34 per cent of all research and development—much higher than Canada’s peer countries and, any way you look at it, returning to us an outsized bang for the buck.

Universities and colleges are also solid taxpayers. Post-secondary institutions paid $1.1 billion in taxes on products in 2022, which was mostly federal and provincial sales taxes, but also includes items like fuel taxes and import duties.

Additionally, they paid $683 million in taxes on production, such as capital, payroll, land or property taxes. That’s not even counting the income taxes paid by employees of post-secondary institutions. The post-secondary education industry is an economic powerhouse. Particularly during this time of global instability, governments can’t let this vital industry atrophy.

Ryan Romard is a researcher at the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives (CCPA).

Job Seekers: Look to Those Who Are Getting Hired

Troy Media
-
0

Nick Kossovan, Troy Media

This past August, I participated in a LinkedIn Live session with career coach Ruth Sternberg, titled Job Search Myths Shattered. In my closing remarks, I mentioned that even in today’s challenging job market, people are getting hired every day.

High inflation, recession fears, and geopolitical posturing, such as tariffs, have many companies and industries operating in a state of fear, prompting them to question whether it’s wise to be hiring. Even if you doubled Canada’s national unemployment rate of 7.1% (August 2025) in order to satisfy those who claim unemployment is higher than reported, it would still show that over 85% of Canadians are employed, a positive data point. Another positive, though not to the extent job seekers would like, is that employers are still hiring.

Regardless of the state of the economy, the job market is constantly churning, creating job openings through promotions, terminations, resignations, retirements, and unexpected events such as deaths. The job market is neither inherently good nor bad. It’s neutral. It’s indifferent. It simply reflects the economics of business, showing where capital is flowing and why.

It’s easy to find “the bad” when you’re always looking for “the bad.”

For quite some time, companies have capitalized on the cost benefits of offshoring their jobs. As automation and artificial intelligence rapidly enhance their capabilities, companies are focusing on investing in technology that will reduce their biggest expense: labour costs. I believe we’re witnessing the beginning of a future with a smaller workforce, where working for a business in the traditional sense will become less common, but let’s wait and see what unfolds. For now, amid efforts to leverage technology to lower the number of employees, hence boosting profits—the core reason a business exists—hiring continues.

When you describe the job market as “bad” because your job search is taking longer than expected and you keep pointing to other job seekers facing the same challenges, you’re signalling that you don’t understand the economics behind business decisions. If you can’t demonstrate that you understand the economic factors influencing business decisions, especially when it comes to hiring, why would a company trust you to help them make or save money?

I get it; pessimistic and inflammatory posts about the job market and employers, which, by the way, discourage employers from contacting you, drive engagement. However, if your ‘likes’ and ‘commenting for reach’ aren’t resulting in employers contacting you—which is probably the case—consider a different approach. Pay attention to what those who are getting hired are doing that you might not be doing or not doing to the same extent.

From what I’ve observed, those who are getting hired focus on a few key areas:

Following instructions

Quality applications stand out.

I’m not a fan of applying to online job postings alongside hundreds or even thousands of other candidates, making your application akin to a lottery ticket. Networking offers better odds; however, applying to jobs where you meet at least 90% of the requirements should still be part of your job search, as you never know when you might hit the jackpot. Therefore, to increase your lottery odds, follow the instructions!

Meticulously following instructions showcases your professionalism and willingness to adhere to directives. Carefully review the job posting. Identify submission requirements, such as document format (e.g., PDF), specific questions to address in a cover letter, or ‘Reference Job ID #H587’ in your email subject line. Your applications will get noticed more if you do what most job seekers don’t: submit a quality application that dots all the ‘I’s and crosses all the ‘T’s.

Submitting 2 – 3 quality applications daily and following up two days later, if necessary, is a much more effective job search strategy than the ‘spraying and praying’ method many job seekers use. Quality over quantity!

Connecting

Deny all you want; you won’t change the fact that networking gives you a significant advantage by uncovering job opportunities that aren’t advertised publicly. Job searching is a people-oriented activity, not something you do by hiding behind your keyboard and naively believing that engaging with people’s posts and comments on LinkedIn will lead to forming meaningful professional relationships. Even in 2025, face-to-face interactions have much more stickiness than digital outreach efforts.

Those who are getting hired are circulating in the real world, grabbing every chance to connect with others; making eye contact, focusing on the person in front of them, and setting aside their ego, asking themselves, “How can I help this person?”

Connecting with others happens when you:

  • Show genuine interest in the other person
  • Are honest and authentic
  • Ask thoughtful, meaningful questions
  • Ensure the other person feels heard

Refusing to be a victim

People with a victim mentality tend to have a longer job search than those who do not. Social media, especially LinkedIn, has become flooded with job seekers feeling sorry for themselves. Those getting hired refuse to see themselves as a victim or feel sorry for themselves.

Achieving success in your job search requires focusing on what you can control, such as networking and how you present yourself to employers, rather than dwelling on factors outside your influence, like the economy and others’ behaviour. Although many job seekers didn’t choose to be job searching, everyone can choose where to direct their focus and energy.

Nick Kossovan, a well-seasoned corporate veteran, offers “unsweetened” job search advice.

Lab-made food won’t win over Canadian shoppers

Troy Media
-
0
Lab-made food won’t win over Canadian shoppers

Would you eat ice cream made from recycled plastic?

Sylvain Charlebois, Troy Media

Producing butter without cows, pastures or crops—using only carbon and hydrogen synthesized in a laboratory—sounds like science fiction. Yet in an era of climate urgency and resource constraints, it is being framed as the next frontier in food innovation. A new wave of philanthropists and investors is betting on disruptive technologies to reimagine how we eat.

One such player is Savor, a Chicago-based company partly backed by Bill Gates, who has become a prominent supporter of climate-focused food startups. The firm says it has created a product indistinguishable from traditional butter.

Unlike margarine, made from plant oils such as soybean or canola, this butter contains no animals or crops. Its fat molecules are built in a lab from carbon dioxide captured from the air and hydrogen drawn from water, processed through heating and oxidation. The result mimics the molecular structure of fats found in beef, cheese or vegetable oils, without a single acre of farmland.

Savor claims its butter would have a far smaller environmental footprint than traditional dairy. Commercially, the company is targeting a market launch within 12 to 18 months, likely at a premium comparable to organic butter. On nutrition, however, the company has said little. That leaves a larger question for consumers: will lab-made foods ease the strain of record grocery bills or simply add another pricey product?

Molecular agriculture, sometimes called synthetic or cellular food production, means building foods molecule by molecule in a lab instead of growing them on farms. It has gained traction across categories from meat to seafood to coffee. These products are marketed as climate saviours, but what really drives consumer choices, labelling, price, taste and nutrition, often comes second.

Sometimes the race for novelty veers into the absurd. In 2023, a UK company claimed it could make ice cream from recycled plastic. One has to wonder how far we are prepared to go in the name of saving the planet. And novelty isn’t the only risk: history shows that even once-celebrated food science can backfire.

Trans fats, for example, were once hailed for improving texture and shelf life, only to be banned after their damage to public health became undeniable.

This points to a deeper cultural and economic tension. Food is not simply about producing calories with minimal resources. It is also an expression of culture, heritage and pride, rooted in centuries-old traditions. According to the Food Sentiment Index published by the Agri-Food Analytics Lab at Dalhousie University earlier this year, just nine per cent of consumers cite the environment as their main purchase driver.

Cellular and molecular agriculture has its place, but it must be guided by the right motivations. Efforts that play God or lean on eco-authoritarian narratives risk alienating the very consumers they hope to attract. Credible pathways must integrate the cultural, economic and sensory dimensions of eating. In Canada, this connection is especially strong in dairy and agriculture, which remain both economic pillars and cultural touchstones.

The future of food will not be defined by lab breakthroughs alone. Success will hinge on taste, transparency, affordability and respect for tradition.

In the end, not all of us aspire to eat like Greta Thunberg.

Dr. Sylvain Charlebois is a Canadian professor and researcher in food distribution and policy. He is senior director of the Agri-Food Analytics Lab at Dalhousie University and co-host of The Food Professor Podcast. He is frequently cited in the media for his insights on food prices, agricultural trends, and the global food supply chain.

123...29Page 1 of 29