Stop blaming others and take control of your job search success

Troy Media
-
0
Stop blaming others and take control of your job search success

Nick Kossovan

Troy Media

Five hundred applicants (a conservative estimate), one hire:

• 500:1 ratio

            •           2 per cent chance of getting hired

Regardless of your education, skills, experience, or connections, job searching today is akin to betting against the house.

The 499 who didn’t get hired will likely say:

            •           “I’m over 45, so it must be ageism.”

            •           “I’m green, so it must be racism.”

            •           “I identify as [whatever], so it must be [whatever].”

            •           “I don’t fall into a DEI category, so it must be reverse racism.”

Rare is the job seeker who’ll admit, “I could have done a better job applying or interviewing.”

In most cases, job seekers reach for the “I’m a victim” card (read: excuse) as the reason they weren’t selected for an interview or hired. With rejection so prevalent, self-professed career coaches—who never provide empirical data and only offer selective anecdotes (details are never given)—exploit the vulnerability of job seekers by telling them what they want to hear. They claim it’s not their fault and that employers are bad people looking for unicorns and rockstars, all as a ploy to sell their “service.”

Actions and inactions have consequences, especially in job hunting. Based on my observations and conversations, people rarely consider the consequences of their actions or inactions, instead blaming circumstances—or everyone but themselves—for their lack of success. What you eat today will affect you tomorrow. Not returning a phone call immediately could mean a lost opportunity.

Today’s sense of entitlement among job seekers is so prevalent that it’s fueling visible anger: “I’m not getting what I deserve!” or “I’m not getting what I want!” Anger frequently results in false pride and an overinflated belief in worth. It’s the job market—not your opinion of yourself—that determines your worth. Overcoming this mentality is one of the most difficult challenges for job seekers.

We are all born into this world to make our own way. Nothing is promised—not health, safety, food, shelter, happiness, love, or a job.

Social media amplifies voices, opinions, and narratives—too well. The result is a toxic echo chamber that makes it seem like everyone is a victim of something: ageism, sexism, racism, and more. While many “isms” are undeniably real, you have little to no influence in changing them. Dwelling on systemic issues distracts you from finding a job. As a job seeker, you’re in the job-finding business, not the advocacy-for-hiring-policy-changes business.

Since your mindset directly influences your attitude and behaviour, having a victim mentality is counterproductive. Blaming external factors—often unquantifiable—for your frustrations won’t bring you closer to finding a job. Job seekers who play the victim card become passive observers of the job market rather than taking actionable steps to change their strategy.

A victim mentality or sense of entitlement turns employers off and is often evident during interviews. Experienced recruiters or hiring managers can immediately spot entitlement or a negative attitude. Employers prefer proactive, resourceful candidates who take responsibility for their actions.

Let go of any sense of entitlement you may have. Employers—and the world—owe you nothing. Network relentlessly by reaching out to contacts, attending events, and engaging on LinkedIn. Embrace rejection as a learning tool. Analyze what went wrong and adjust your job search strategy. Resilience is key; setbacks are part of achieving goals. Focus on what you can contribute to employers, not what you want them to give you.

Your actions and inactions are the ultimate contributors to your job search success. Control what you can influence: Are you applying to the right jobs and companies? (My advice: Don’t just look for a job; look for your tribe. Seek employers who will welcome you.) Does your resumé and LinkedIn profile showcase tangible results you’ve achieved for employers, backed by numbers rather than opinions? Are you actively seeking out opportunities and networking?

Focus on articulating how you can solve problems for an employer. By envisioning yourself as a solutions provider—“How can I help this employer?”—you cultivate a proactive approach to your job search.

When job hunting, your greatest asset is your mindset. Yes, systemic issues exist and may affect your job search. However, allowing these “isms”—which you can’t change—to dominate your focus is counterproductive. Don’t let those with an entitlement mentality convince you that a host of systemic barriers are preventing you from finding a job. Instead, focus your energy and attention on what you can do to secure employment.

Nick Kossovan, a well-seasoned veteran of the corporate landscape, offers advice on searching for a job.

2025 will be another tough year for Canada’s economy

Troy Media
-
0
2025 will be another tough year for Canada’s economy

Roslyn Kunin

Troy Media

The start of a new year always invites us to dust off the old crystal ball and try to peer into it to see what the year has in store. Predicting how an economy will perform, however, is always tricky because so many external, uncontrollable factors can throw off even the best forecasts. Weather events and politics are two big ones that can quickly change the game.

Still, the basic pillars that support an economy are well-known and can provide some clues about what’s to come. Consumption, investment, government spending, and foreign trade are the four key components. Understanding their likely trends or directions gives us a good sense of how the year might unfold.

Consumption is the spending we all do on goods and services, from cups of coffee to haircuts. It’s the largest part of an economy like Canada’s and reflects the standard of living it provides. But this year, consumer spending is unlikely to drive growth. Canadians are too concerned about their finances to indulge in “shop ‘til you drop” behaviour. For years, our standard of living has been slowly eroding when adjusted for population growth.

Even though inflation is no longer as alarming as it was a few years ago, it still lingers in our minds. Prices continue to rise in grocery stores and elsewhere, leaving many feeling the financial pinch. Canadians are budgeting carefully and cutting back wherever they can. Media outlets are packed with advice on how to save, a clear sign that spending restraint will be the norm this year.

Investment, or capital spending by businesses, is also unlikely to revive the economy in 2025. Businesses can find ways to invest in good times and bad, but one thing that always stops them in their tracks is uncertainty. And right now, uncertainty is everywhere. Entrepreneurs are full of questions without answers. Will consumers spend enough to buy their products? Will governments adjust taxes, tariffs, or policies that affect businesses? Can inflation remain under control? Will there be enough skilled workers at affordable wages? What will happen to interest rates?

Even though borrowing costs are falling, which often encourages investment, businesses are hesitant. No one wants to take on more risk until at least some of these uncertainties are resolved.

Government spending could stimulate the economy, but only if it sparks more consumption and private-sector investment. Unfortunately, ongoing deficits and growing debt leave little room for big spending initiatives. Rising debt is already hurting Canada’s credit rating and pushing up the interest we pay on government borrowing. As more tax dollars go toward interest payments, there’s less left for essential services like health care or meaningful economic stimulus. The brief tax holiday over the holiday period had little impact and isn’t expected to move the needle much this year.

Canada’s trade future is another significant unknown, particularly given global uncertainties. In the United States, the incoming president has threatened a barrage of tariffs that, if enacted, could throw the global economy into chaos. While it’s unlikely all these threats will materialize, even a partial rollout could dampen international trade and hurt economies everywhere, including Canada. Historically, tariffs have been as damaging to the imposing country as to its trading partners, but the possibility of trade restrictions is already fuelling anxiety.

One silver lining in this otherwise cloudy forecast is the weakening of the Canadian dollar. A lower dollar makes Canadian exports cheaper and more attractive on the global market, which could boost foreign trade. However, this comes with its own set of challenges. Importing goods becomes more expensive, and travelling abroad feels like a bigger financial stretch. Whether the benefits of increased exports will outweigh these drawbacks depends on how trade barriers and global demand play out.

Don’t expect 2025 to be a standout year for Canada’s economy. Consumer caution, business hesitation, government constraints, and trade uncertainties combine to paint a challenging picture. Still, with a bit of luck, co-operative weather, and sound decisions from governments and policymakers (always a stretch), we might avoid a major downturn. And, as always, there’s hope that 2026 will bring better days.

Dr. Roslyn Kunin is a respected Canadian economist known for her extensive work in economic forecasting, public policy, and labour market analysis. She has held various prominent roles, including serving as the regional director for the federal government’s Department of Employment and Immigration in British Columbia and Yukon and as an adjunct professor at the University of British Columbia. Dr. Kunin is also recognized for her contributions to economic development, particularly in Western Canada.

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

Troy Media
-
0
Canada’s agri-food sector dodges a bullet as Parliament hits pause

Farmers score big as Ottawa’s misguided policies fall by the wayside

Sylvain Charlebois, Troy Media

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 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 Mar. 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 per cent 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 per cent 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 per cent 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.

Dr. 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. He is frequently cited in the media for his insights on food prices, agricultural trends, and the global food supply chain.

Canada’s top food stories of 2024

Troy Media
-
0
Canada’s top food stories of 2024

Sylvain Charlebois

Troy Media

Every year, I 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.

This year was no exception, offering a mix of triumphs and setbacks that defined the year for farmers, consumers, and businesses alike. 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 where we’re headed.

  • The Loblaw boycott that wasn’t

I was 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 extended indefinitely. However, the boycott’s impact was negligible, as reflected in Loblaw’s shares soaring to $195 – a remarkable 27 per cent increase since the campaign’s launch.

While the financial outcome left Loblaw unscathed, the campaign sparked meaningful 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.

  • 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 per cent tax hike on average, according to the Grain Growers of Canada. With Canada already losing 700 to 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.

  • 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. The code is expected to enhance transparency and stabilize the food supply chain by fostering fairer negotiations and reducing price volatility. However, questions remain about enforcement, and grocers must demonstrate their commitment to rebuilding consumer trust through fair practices.

  • The 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, potentially impacting 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 healthcare systems and evolving societal attitudes toward weight loss and wellness.

  • 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 benefit more, with families saving $60 to $90. However, the logistical burden on retailers, 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.

  • 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.

  • Railway, grain, and port labour disruptions

Labour disputes in Canada’s logistics sector disrupted its 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.

  • 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 per cent of its agri-food exports and $40 billion worth south of the border. Proposed tariffs of up to 25 per cent would have devastated 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.

  • 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.

  • 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 per cent. 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 prioritizing affordability and inclusivity.

Dr. Sylvain Charlebois, a Canadian professor and researcher specializing in food distribution and policy, is a 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. 

What will 2025 mean for social media’s toxic tug of war?

Troy Media
-
0
What will 2025 mean for social media’s toxic tug of war?

Nick Kossovan

Troy Media

2024 … that’s a wrap!

It was fun watching social media continue to evolve rapidly, especially in shaping how businesses and consumers interact online. Last Black Friday, shoppers ditched the mall in favour of shopping online. U.S. retail stores reported a modest 0.7 per cent rise in sales this year versus a 14.6 per cent rise for e-commerce.

2024 showed us that social media isn’t social. It’s a digital collection of bubbles, where like-minded individuals gather in their respective bubbles and talk “us versus them.” Thus, achieving social media success at a minimal level is becoming increasingly challenging since curating an audience – the key to social media success – requires attaching bubbles of like-minded people rather than freethinking individuals.

The popularity of videos under 45 seconds on social media will continue to grow in 2025, with platforms like Instagram Reels, YouTube Shorts, and LinkedIn driving this trend. Short-form videos, all types of snackable content that capture attention within seconds, will continue to be one of the most effective ways to pique someone’s interest enough to stop scrolling momentarily.

One of the most significant shifts in 2025, because it allows users to own their data and have a say in how content is moderated, will be the growing popularity of decentralized social media platforms, often abbreviated as DeSo. These platforms operate on independently run servers rather than being controlled by a single company, such as Meta (Facebook, Instagram). Mastodon, Lens Protocol, Steemit, and Gab Social, which I recommend you check out, to name a few, are decentralized platforms built on blockchain technology – equivalent to a digital notebook where everyone can see and trust the entries; hence why Bitcoin uses blockchain technology – giving users greater control over how their data is used and monetized.

Despite the growing concern over personal data, social commerce is set to thrive in 2025. Platforms like Instagram, Facebook, TikTok, and Pinterest have significantly invested in their shopping features, allowing users to discover products organically and make purchases without leaving their apps. This shift is transforming social media platforms from merely a place to create and foster brand awareness to a cradle-to-grave sales channel.

After years of cultural sanitization and emotional suppression, I anticipate, thanks to Donald Trump’s re-election, social media will become more unruly, as Trump supporters will feel justified in speaking their minds. Sadly, social media is likely to regress to the toxic environment it was during Trump’s first presidency, particularly on his preferred platform, X/Twitter, especially now that he has Elon Musk by his side.

People feeling comfortable saying their quiet parts out loud will intensify rage-baiting as left-leaning Americans and right-leaning Americans entrench themselves deeper in the “you must submit to our political beliefs” war that millions never seem to get tired of. Meanwhile, with an election imminent here in Canada, Canadians can expect to witness a Justin Trudeau (left) vs. Pierre Poilievre (right) battle royale on social media platforms. I see a perfect storm brewing for 2025.

All this uncivilized discourse will be a boon for social media companies. The human tendency to be drawn to car wrecks but indifferent to roadmaps keeps us glued to our feeds. Scandals and drama ignite curiosity, while constructive solutions barely flicker on the radar.

The elephant in the room is TikTok’s future in the U.S. On Apr. 24, President Joe Biden signed a bill, often referred to as the “TikTok’s TikTok,” that would ban TikTok unless its parent company, ByteDance, sells the platform to an American buyer by Jan. 19, the day before Trump’s inauguration. U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland said in a statement on Dec. 6, after a federal appeals court upheld a law that could lead to a ban on TikTok as soon as late January, “Today’s decision is an important step in blocking the Chinese government from weaponizing TikTok.”

If the law is upheld, as is likely, TikTok, with its massive American user base of over 170 million, will cease to operate in the U.S. on Jan. 19, 2025. Thus, the biggest foreign competitor to American-based social media platforms will be eliminated. Ironically, given how banning TikTok would benefit X/Twitter, Trump, who in 2020 proposed banning TikTok to punish China for COVID-19, now opposes it.

You don’t need me to tell you we’re heading toward a serious power struggle between traditional and alternative media in the coming year. Everything we’re already seeing – the ongoing decline in trust in legacy media paired with the rise of alternative media via social media, podcasts, Substack, and private newsletters – will come to a head in 2025.

Admittedly, I spend more time than I should in the “digital world.” I’m now questioning, as do many people in my circle, how much time I spend reading and viewing other people’s lives and thoughts rather than living my own. There’s just so much you can take in before your life goes by in a blur that you miss, and you realize life offline is a luxury.

One thing we won’t see changing in 2025 is the reason we use social media: other people use it.

Nick Kossovan is a Toronto-based writer and commentator known for his insights into human psychology and career development. His work often emphasizes the importance of personal responsibility and making informed choices to achieve a fulfilling life.

Canada’s leadership vacuum fueling a national crisis

Troy Media
-
0
Canada’s leadership vacuum fueling a national crisis

David Leis

Troy Media

Canada is at a breaking point. Weak border security, unchecked organized crime, and rampant foreign interference have left the country dangerously exposed to threats that jeopardize its safety, economy, and sovereignty. Under Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s leadership, these challenges have escalated to unprecedented levels, and no meaningful action has been taken to address them.

In British Columbia, a mother of two recently shared how the fentanyl crisis has ravaged her community. She spoke of losing friends and neighbours to overdoses, while her own family lives in fear of growing gang activity. Her story illustrates the human cost of systemic inaction and highlights the devastating consequences of a government unable to protect its people. It is a tragic reality mirrored in communities across the country, from urban centres to small towns, where drugs and crime are taking a growing toll.

Canada’s border management, a critical first line of defence, is failing to stem the tide of illicit goods and activities. The Canada Border Services Agency inspects less than two per cent of shipping containers entering the country, leaving ports like Vancouver vulnerable to transnational crime. According to the Cullen Commission, billions of dollars are laundered annually in British Columbia, often through casinos and real estate linked to organized crime. Transparency International’s 2022 report ranked Canada among the worst in the G7 for anti-money laundering enforcement, underlining systemic failures.

Weak border controls are exacerbating the fentanyl crisis. Precursor chemicals flow into Canada largely unchecked, often disguised as legitimate imports. Provincial officials in British Columbia have acknowledged the need for tighter regulations on pill presses, but federal laws remain inconsistent. The consequences are staggering: over 34,000 Canadians have died of opioid overdoses since 2016, according to Health Canada. These are not just numbers; they represent families shattered and communities in mourning. Yet, the federal government continues to respond with piecemeal measures instead of a comprehensive national strategy.

Concerns over foreign interference add another dimension to Canada’s vulnerability. Weak borders and lax enforcement also provide fertile ground for foreign actors to exploit. The recent inquiry into election interference revealed disturbing levels of meddling, with CSIS identifying instances of Chinese state funding for federal candidates. Hybrid warfare tactics – including cyberattacks, economic manipulation, and political interference – are well-documented. These activities not only undermine Canada’s sovereignty but also erode trust in its democratic institutions.

International partners, particularly the United States, are taking notice. Canada’s largest trading partner has grown increasingly frustrated with these vulnerabilities. Under a potential Trump administration, Canada could face severe economic repercussions, including tariffs, if it does not address its security deficiencies. A report from the Global Initiative Against Transnational Organized Crime labelled Canada a “safe zone” for transnational crime, citing weak enforcement and limited co-ordination among intelligence agencies. Such critiques directly challenge Canada’s reputation and its role as a trusted ally.

These security failures are compounded by Canada’s aging infrastructure. A 2023 report from Statistics Canada revealed that nearly 40 per cent of the country’s infrastructure is nearing the end of its useful life. Ports, highways, and public utilities – critical for trade and national security – are underfunded and rapidly deteriorating. This not only hampers economic competitiveness but also leaves Canada ill-prepared to secure its supply chains. These failings highlight a broader issue: the government’s reluctance to prioritize foundational investments that ensure long-term stability.

Meanwhile, Canada’s regulatory framework struggles to keep pace with modern threats. The country lacks effective oversight to combat money laundering, cyberattacks, and supply chain exploitation. Organized crime and illicit trade drain billions from the economy every year. Weak border controls have made Canada a transit point for everything from drugs to counterfeit goods. Provincial attempts at regulation, like in British Columbia, have helped somewhat, but federal legislation has yet to catch up.

Canada’s challenges didn’t emerge overnight. They are the result of decades of underinvestment in security, weak enforcement, and a lack of political will. While the Trudeau government has failed to address these issues, previous administrations also bear responsibility for creating the conditions that allowed them to fester.

However, the current government bears responsibility for the lack of urgency in the face of escalating crises. Performative policies, like token GST rebates, do little to address systemic issues. The Trudeau government has failed to modernize Canada’s security apparatus, prioritizing political optics over substantive reform.

Canada cannot afford to remain passive in the face of these mounting threats. The government must act decisively to modernize border security, combat organized crime, and confront foreign interference with meaningful legislation and enforcement. Countries like Australia have successfully implemented advanced port screening and stricter anti-money laundering laws to address similar issues. Canada must follow suit to regain control of its borders and restore trust in its institutions.

The stakes couldn’t be higher. Every uninspected container ship, every fentanyl overdose, and every election left vulnerable to interference represents a failure of leadership. The mother in B.C., fearing for her children’s future, is not alone – she represents countless Canadians who feel abandoned by a government unwilling to act. Her voice, and others like hers, demand attention.

This is no longer about politics or optics; it’s about safeguarding the nation’s future. The time for complacency has passed. Canada’s security, prosperity, and sovereignty depend on immediate, decisive leadership.

Anything less is unacceptable.

David Leis is President and CEO of the Frontier Centre for Public Policy and host of the Leaders on the Frontier podcast.

Trudeau’s leadership questioned as trade tensions escalate

Troy Media
-
0
Trudeau’s leadership questioned as trade tensions escalate

Rashid Husain Syed

Troy Media

Canada’s trade relationship with the United States – one of the largest bilateral partnerships in the world, worth nearly US$1 trillion annually – is under serious threat. U.S. President-elect Donald Trump has pledged to impose a 25 per cent tariff on all Canadian imports, a move that could devastate industries on both sides of the border.

The situation took a bizarre turn following a dinner at Mar-a-Lago late last month, where Prime Minister Justin Trudeau met with Trump to discuss the looming trade crisis. What was intended as a diplomatic effort to cool tensions instead sparked controversy when Trump reportedly joked about Canada becoming the 51st U.S. state. Days later, he posted an AI-generated image of himself atop a mountain, waving a Canadian flag, with the caption “Oh Canada.”

The move, widely viewed as condescending, was quickly followed by more dismissive remarks. During an interview last week, Trump referred to Trudeau as “the Governor of the Great State of Canada,” a jab that seemed designed to belittle both the prime minister and Canada’s sovereignty.

The fallout has been swift and politically costly for Trudeau. Opposition leaders have called for his resignation, citing his failure to protect Canada’s economic interests in the face of escalating trade threats. Adding to the turmoil, Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland resigned earlier this week amid reports of deep disagreements with Trudeau over economic policy and the government’s response to the tariff threat. Freeland’s departure is a significant blow, leaving a leadership vacuum at a time when strong economic direction is desperately needed. Within the Liberal Party, dissent is growing, with some MPs openly questioning Trudeau’s ability to lead Canada through this crisis.

Trudeau has responded defiantly. Speaking at a recent Equal Voice Foundation event, he reframed the discussion by criticizing Trump’s leadership and emphasizing his feminist values: “Just a few weeks ago, the United States voted for a second time not to elect its first woman president. Everywhere, women’s rights and women’s progress are under attack – overtly and subtly.” While the comments were aimed at bolstering Trudeau’s image domestically, they did little to repair his strained relationship with Trump’s incoming administration.

Meanwhile, Ottawa is reportedly weighing retaliatory measures, including export taxes on critical resources such as oil, electricity, uranium, and potash – exports vital to the U.S. economy. However, the proposal has exposed deep fractures among Canada’s provincial leaders.

Ontario Premier Doug Ford, in a rare show of brinkmanship, suggested the province could suspend electricity exports to states like Michigan and New York. “It would turn off the lights to a million-and-a-half Americans,” Ford said, emphasizing that Ontario’s exports supply millions of homes across the border.

Other premiers are less inclined to escalate the situation. Alberta Premier Danielle Smith flatly rejected the idea of export taxes, arguing that such measures would harm Canadian industries more than they would pressure the U.S. “We don’t support tariffs – on Canadian goods or U.S. goods – because all it does is make life more expensive for everyday Canadians and Americans,” Smith stated. Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe echoed Smith’s concerns, warning that cutting off key exports like potash and uranium would be a “self-destructive” move for his province.

Quebec Premier François Legault offered a different solution after a recent meeting with Trump in Paris. Legault claimed Trump’s primary concern is border security, not trade, and suggested Ottawa focus on addressing illegal immigration. “He told me very clearly we can avoid those tariffs if we do what needs to be done with the borders,” Legault said, urging Trudeau to put forward a plan to tighten border controls.

The stakes for Canadians could not be higher. A 25 per cent tariff on Canadian goods would drive up the cost of everything from groceries to vehicles, placing yet another burden on households already struggling with inflation. While politically attractive, retaliatory measures could disrupt key industries and trigger job losses across energy, agriculture, and manufacturing – sectors vital to Canada’s economic stability.

For Trudeau, the challenge is immense. He must navigate sharp divisions among provincial leaders, manage escalating tensions with Trump, and reassure Canadians that the government has a plan to protect the economy. The growing calls for his resignation and the loss of key allies like Freeland only add to the pressure.

What happens next will determine whether Canada can protect its economic interests without deepening the rift with its largest trading partner. As tensions rise, Canadians are left to wonder how a once-stable trade relationship has become so uncertain – and whether Trudeau is the leader who can withstand the storm.

Toronto-based Rashid Husain Syed is a highly regarded analyst specializing in energy and politics, particularly on 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.

How to make yourself the obvious choice for getting hired

Troy Media
-
0
How to make yourself the obvious choice for getting hired

Nick Kossovan

Troy Media

Speaking from personal experience, a bad hire isn’t a good look. The last thing you want is to hear, “Who the hell hired Bob?” and have your hiring judgment questioned.

The job seeker who’s empathetic to the employer’s side of the hiring desk, which controls the hiring process, is rare.

One of the best things you can do to enhance your job search is to practice perspective-taking, which involves seeing things from a different perspective.

It’s natural for employers to find candidates who are empathic and understand their challenges and pain points more attractive. Candidates like these are seen as potential allies rather than individuals only looking out for themselves. Since most job seekers approach employers with a ‘what’s in it for me’ mindset, practicing perspective-taking sets you apart.

Perspective-taking makes you realize that from an employer’s point of view, hiring is fraught with risks that employers want to avoid; thus, you consider what most job seekers don’t: How can I present myself as the least risky hiring option?

Here’s an exercise that’ll help you visualize the employer’s side of the hiring process.

Candidate A or B?

Imagine you’re the Director of Customer Service for a regional bank with 85 branches. You’re hiring a call centre manager who’ll work onsite at the bank’s head office, overseeing the bank’s 50-seat call centre. In addition to working with the call centre agents, the successful candidate will also interact with other departments, your boss, and members of the C-suite leadership team; in other words, they’ll be visible throughout the bank.

The job posting resulted in over 400 applications. The bank’s Applicant Tracking System (ATS) and human resources (phone interview vetting, skill assessment testing) selected five candidates, plus an employee referral, for you to interview. You aim to shortlist the six candidates to three, whom you’ll interview a second time, and then make a hiring decision. Before scheduling the interviews, which will take place between all your other ongoing responsibilities, you spend five to 10 minutes with each candidate’s resume and review their respective digital footprint and LinkedIn activity.

In your opinion, which candidate deserves a second interview?

Candidate A: Their resume provides quantitative numbers – evidence – of the results they’ve achieved. (Through enhanced agent training, reduced average handle time from 4:32 to 2:43 minutes, which decreased the abandon rate from 4.6 per cent to 2.2 per cent.)
Candidate B: Their resume offers only opinions. (“I’m detail-oriented,” “I learn fast.”)

Candidate A: Looks you in the eye, has a firm handshake, smiles, and exudes confidence.
Candidate B: Doesn’t look you in the eye and has a weak handshake.

Candidate A: Referred by Ariya, who’s been with the bank for over 15 years and has a stellar record, having moved up from teller to credit analyst and is tracking to become a Managing Director.
Candidate B: Applied online. Based on your knowledge, they did nothing else to make their application more visible. (for example, reaching out to you or other bank employees)

Candidate A: Well educated, grew up as a digital native, eager and energetic. Currently manages a 35-seat call centre for a mid-size credit union. They mention they called the bank’s call centre several times and suggest ways to improve the caller experience.
Candidate B: Has been working in banking for over 25 years, managing the call centre at their last bank for 17 years before being laid off eight months ago. They definitely have the experience to run a call centre. However, you have a nagging gut feeling that they’re just looking for a place to park themselves until they can afford to retire.

Candidate A: Has a fully completed LinkedIn profile (picture, eye-catching banner) packed with quantifying numbers. It’s evident how they were of value to their employers. Recently, they engaged constructively with posts and comments and published a LinkedIn article on managing Generations Y and Z call centre agents. Their Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter/X accounts aren’t controversial, sharing between ‘Happy Birthday’ and ‘Congratulations’ messages, their love of fine dining, baseball, and gardening.
Candidate B: Their LinkedIn profile is incomplete. The last time they posted on LinkedIn was seven months ago, ranting about how the government’s latest interest rate hike will plunge the country into a deep recession. Conspiracy theories abound on their Facebook page.

Candidate A: Notices the golf calendar on your desk, the putter and golf balls in the corner, and a photograph of Phil Mickelson putting on the green jacket at the 2010 Masters hanging on your wall. While nodding towards the picture, they say, “Evidently, you golf. Not being a golfer myself, what made you take up golf, which I understand is a frustrating sport?”
Candidate B: Doesn’t proactively engage in small talk. Waits for you to start the interview.

Which of the above candidates presents the least hiring risk? Will likely succeed (read: achieve the results the employer needs)? Will show your boss, upper management, and employees you know how to hire for competence and fit?

Nick Kossovan, a well-seasoned veteran of the corporate landscape, offers advice on searching for a job.

How Trudeau’s GST/HST tax break turned into a holiday turkey

Troy Media
-
0
How Trudeau’s GST/HST tax break turned into a holiday turkey

Sylvain Charlebois

Troy Media

T’was the week before Christmas, and all through the malls, many creatures were stirring …

Consumers and retailers are scrambling to understand the GST/HST holiday chaos. With Bill C-78 granting Canadians a temporary tax reprieve receiving royal assent mere days before its implementation on Dec. 14, businesses were faced with an almost impossible task: recoding systems during the busiest shopping season of the year. While some major food retailers had anticipated the bill’s passage and prepared in advance, others were caught off guard or distanced themselves entirely from the initiative.

What was supposed to bring holiday cheer has instead become a tax policy nightmare.

The confusion started early. On Dec. 10, PepsiCo announced it would not participate, informing its partners – Loblaw, Sobeys, and Metro – that it would continue charging taxes due to the complexity of its systems. PepsiCo wasn’t alone; other manufacturers reportedly followed suit. By the eve of Dec. 14, Ottawa confirmed that participation in the GST/HST holiday would be voluntary, with no enforcement mechanism or penalties for non-compliance. What could have been a straightforward consumer benefit instead created an uneven playing field, leaving businesses and shoppers frustrated.

For retailers opting out, the stakes are high. In provinces where the GST/HST rate is as high as 15 per cent, not participating could mean a significant competitive disadvantage. Larger chains with the resources to adapt quickly are likely to benefit, while smaller, independent grocers – already struggling with tight margins – may lose customers.

The experience is no less chaotic for consumers. Many shoppers don’t know which stores are participating and often discover the answer only at the checkout counter. Stories of long lines and disappointed customers spread quickly, and some vow to avoid non-participating retailers altogether, whether for economic or even political reasons.

Adding another layer of complexity are retailers pledging to donate collected taxes to charity. While noble in intent, these efforts only underscore the holiday’s haphazard rollout, making the GST/HST holiday feel less like a gift and more like an awkward misstep. One shopper quipped, “I just want to know if I’m saving money – not solve a puzzle every time I go to the store.”

Ottawa billed the tax holiday as a festive measure to provide relief to Canadians, but anyone familiar with fiscal policy knows better. The rushed, temporary, and optional initiative has introduced unnecessary complexity into Canada’s food retail system at a time when simplicity and certainty are desperately needed. In the weeks ahead, consumers will likely question receipts, demand refunds, and flood government hotlines for answers.

Meanwhile, retailers face rising operational costs, eroded confidence, and the risk of losing already scarce customers. For businesses weighing their options, this fiasco only reinforces Canada’s reputation as a challenging place to do business.

Restaurants, fortunately, have been spared much of this confusion, as their operations remain relatively straightforward under the new policy. But for grocers and food retailers, the holiday adds pressure to an already stressful time of year.

A hidden consequence of this policy could be opportunity pricing. With retail taxes temporarily removed, some businesses may quietly raise prices to account for operational disruptions. Items like coffee, cocoa, and baked goods could see noticeable price increases, hidden until the holiday ends in February. Consumers may be left facing higher costs long after the festive season fades, adding insult to injury.

What began as a political gimmick has instead revealed the pitfalls of poor policymaking. Rather than launching a temporary and voluntary tax break during the busiest retail period, Ottawa could have focused on meaningful, permanent reforms to stabilize retail prices and protect Canadians from market volatility. By introducing such a disruptive initiative in the middle of the holiday season, the government has highlighted its mismanagement rather than its generosity.

Ultimately, this tax holiday is shaping up to be a lump of coal in Canada’s economic stocking. Consumers are confused, retailers are frustrated, and the policy’s temporary nature ensures its benefits will be short-lived at best. As Canadians muddle through the holiday season, one thing is certain: the GST/HST holiday is a case study of how not to deliver fiscal relief.

Dr. Sylvain Charlebois is a Canadian professor and researcher who specializes 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. The media frequently cites him for his insights on food prices, agricultural trends, and the global food supply chain.

Four authors to cozy up with this Christmas season

Troy Media
-
0
Four authors to cozy up with this Christmas season

Pat Murphy

Troy Media

The period between Christmas and the return of New Year normalcy can be an excellent time to cozily settle in and read a good book. And I don’t mean a book of the uplifting or educational variety, but rather something that lends itself to escape. A good story that’s intelligently plotted and skilfully rendered can be just what the doctor ordered.

If that proposition fits for you, or someone you know, here are a few suggested authors to add to your Christmas reading list.

Robert Harris

Robert Harris is the English journalist who launched a lucrative second career as a writer of best-selling novels, many of which incorporate real historical figures and events. I did a column about his latest offering, Precipice, last month.

Beginning in the summer of 1914, the story revolves around the extraordinarily indiscreet affair between UK Prime Minister Herbert Asquith and Venetia Stanley, a woman less than half his age. It’s a good read and well worth a recommendation.

But it’s by no means the only one.

Conclave, an imagining of an intrigue-laden papal election, is also an excellent read. For icing on the cake, you can follow it up by streaming the movie. I’m told that both production values and acting are excellent.

Then there are the two Nazi novels. Munich is set in the days immediately surrounding the infamous 1938 “peace in our time” agreement, and provides an unexpectedly sympathetic perspective on Neville Chamberlain, the hapless British prime minister who negotiated the agreement with Hitler. Fatherland is an alternative history based on a scenario where Nazi Germany wins the Second World War.

Ken Follett

Welsh by birth, Ken Follett is an extraordinarily prolific and commercially successful writer. His breakthrough came with the 1978 spy thriller Eye of the Needle, and since then he’s published at least 23 more novels. Combined sales are north of 160 million.

Follett followed Eye of the Needle with several other best-sellers in the same genre before expanding to historical fiction with 1989’s Pillars of the Earth, the first in what has come to be called the Kingsbridge series. There are now five of them and there’s another on the way for next year.

The series has been described as “an account of the building of a civilization,” in this case, England, ranging from the turn of the first millennium through to the late 18th/early 19th century. And along with Follett’s first-rate storytelling, the series has the advantage that each novel is susceptible to being read on a standalone basis.

My wife is currently finishing The Evening and the Morning, which takes place in the decade between 997 and 1007. It’s a hefty read (913 pages). But once she got into it, she found it difficult to put down.

Although Follett freely acknowledges that his centre-left politics can influence his novels, that’s not a reason to avoid them. After all, he’s writing historical fiction, not history!

Kate Morton

Kate Morton is an Australian who has published seven novels over the last 18 years. And having read all of them, I can recommend the lot.

Morton’s books tend to be long, descriptive of physical surroundings, multi-generational and complicated. Her latest, Homecoming, runs to 560 pages and covers events spanning the period 1959-2018.

Personally, I could do with a bit less on the physical surroundings side, but some people like that sort of thing. However, the complication isn’t a problem. In fact, it’s the selling point.

Morton’s plots are intricate, requiring the reader to stay awake and pay attention. Secrets are gradually revealed and ultimate endings are invariably plausible.

If you’ve never read her, I’d start with her first novel. House at Riverton was published in 2006, takes place in two timeframes (1914 to 1924 and 1999), and unravels a secret concerning a shooting.

Liane Moriarty

Another Australian, Liane Moriarty, debuted in 2004 and now has 10 novels under her belt. I’ve read several of them, but not the latest. Obviously, though, her audience is still very much there. In a bookstore the other day, Here One Moment was unmissable.

Moriarty’s popularity was undoubtedly boosted by the television adaptation of her 2014 book, Big Little Lies. Starring Nicole Kidman and Reese Witherspoon, the adaptation switched the story’s locale from Australia to California, which I wish it hadn’t done. But I suppose that’s show business!

And worthy as Big Little Lies is, if I was picking just one Moriarty book I’d plump for its immediate predecessor, The Husband’s Secret. A letter that’s only supposed to be opened in the event of death gets opened anyway, and the consequences are devastating. To discover more, you’ll have to read the book.

Troy Media columnist Pat Murphy casts a history buff’s eye at the goings-on in our world. Never cynical – well, perhaps a little bit.

1234...28Page 3 of 28