OTTAWA — In July 2025, a senior federal official delivered a stark warning in a court affidavit. Every day that Chinese surveillance camera giant Hikvision continues to operate in Canada is another day China could spy further on Canadians.

“The continued operation of Hikvision Canada leads to an increase of the capabilities of the PRC (People’s Republic of China) to conduct surveillance of Canadians and others in Canada,” swore Robert McCarty, a senior investment officer in the Innovation, Science and Economic Development (ISED) branch responsible for reviewing foreign investments.

The potential espionage uses of the thousands upon thousands pieces of Hikvision surveillance equipment in Canada were numerous and unnerving, he warned.

The PRC could use it to monitor specific people, collect “pattern of life” information or use the company’s artificial-intelligence powered tools for facial recognition, license place monitoring or even record audio and video of people meeting in public or private spaces, McCarty wrote.

At the time McCarty swore his affidavit, Hikvision had operated “illegally” in Canada for nearly one decade. During that time, the Chinese giant catapulted from a relative newcomer to a “leader” in the Canadian security and surveillance gear market.

By 2024, over a dozen federal government departments and agencies offices had Hikvision equipment deployed on their properties. Today, there are over 28,700 of the company’s devices connected to public-facing Internet connections in Canada (and likely far more on private connections), according to device search engine Shodan.

Hikvision is the most valuable manufacturer of “Internet of Things” surveillance equipment in the world, but also one of the most controversial. It is partly state-owned by the Chinese government and benefits from PRC subsidies that allow it to sell its equipment cheaper than most competitors.

But over the last decade, the company has been linked to multiple major cybersecurity vulnerabilities , is allegedly used by the Chinese government for mass surveillance of Uyghurs and other minority groups , and has been blacklisted by governments around the world over concerns about espionage and cybersecurity.

And yet, it was only in 2025 that the Liberal government took what appeared to be decisive action against the company that Canada’s security apparatus had viewed as a potential threat to national security for years. In June 2025, Industry Minister Mélanie Joly issued a rare order demanding the company pack its bags and leave Canada.

In the confidential order obtained by National Post, the government laid out five broad reasons for the ban. Those include Chinese laws compelling companies to spy for the government, Hikvision’s proximity to the PRC and its ability to access end user data is some cases.

All issues security analysts, other Western governments and even Canada’s intelligence apparatus had been warning about for years.

The Hikvision case raises serious questions about how the federal bureaucracy guards itself against technology it considers harmful, and if it heeds the advice of its own security agencies.

Hikvision is one of only a handful of companies that the federal government has moved to outright ban from Canada due to national security concern. Details — including confidential and classified information — revealing the process behind-the-scenes are laid out in thousands of pages of Federal Court documents as part of Hikvision’s legal battle to remain in Canada.

In both the court documents and a statement, Hikvision denied all the government’s concerns regarding the safety of its equipment and said it could not use its gear to spy on Canadians on behalf of China.

“The existing court submissions accurately reflect the company’s stance that there is no evidence that our products or operations pose a national security risk in Canada. We continue to expect a fair and transparent environment for all businesses and investors in the country,” Hikvision told National Post.

Until Hikvision’s lawsuit, much of the government’s grave concerns about the Chinese company were locked away from the eyes of the public. Even the government’s 2025 order in council justifying the Hikvision ban is still marked as “privileged information and cannot be published” online .

The information reviewed by National Post invites scrutiny into how the federal government reviews foreign investments in Canada that could be injurious to national security.

That’s because, despite repeated warnings from its security and intelligence apparatus about Hikvision gear, copious public reporting detailing security vulnerabilities in Hikvision cameras and the risk of espionage posed by the Chinese tech giant, ISED only launched a review of the company’s Canadian presence in 2024.

That’s when the department discovered the company had been operating “illegally” in Canada for nearly one decade, according to government court filings.

Hikvision had never notified ISED when it incorporated in 2014 and began operating in Canada in 2015, a mandatory step that allows Ottawa to review the investment for national security concerns. In court, the company said it wasn’t aware of the obligation at the time, which a judge dismissed in September 2025 as “no excuse” while declaring Hikvision to have “unclean hands.”

CSIS and other Canadian security agencies have long warned about the espionage risk of some Chinese tech. But those concerns spiked when the Chinese government adopted a National Intelligence Law in 2017 that requires local companies to “support, cooperate with and collaborate” with the China’s intelligence efforts if required.

Another key government concern was Hikvision’s participation as a “Tier One Technical Support Unit” in China’s cybersecurity vulnerability reporting program run by the government’s Ministry of State Security.

Not only did the company fail to disclose its voluntary participation in the program early in ISED’s review, the government charged, but the PRC is suspected of passing on reported cyber vulnerabilities to its “hacking teams” before disclosing them publicly.

In its lawsuit, Hikvision Canada said it complies with all Canadian privacy laws and regulations and is “not subject to PRC law”. It argued that it “cannot” be compelled by the PRC to provide end user data or any other information, nor had it ever received any such request from the Chinese government.

The company also fiercely opposed the government’s position that it could access users’ data, arguing that it had essentially no way to access such information. Furthermore, it said its participation in China’s cyber reporting program was aligned with industry norms.

Ottawa’s national security concerns about Hikvisions are simply “speculation,” the company charged.

Despite that, in early 2025, Hikvision offered a series of concessions to ISED in order to avoid a ban. Court records show the company proposed six undertakings, including adhering to Canadian privacy laws, appointing Canadian citizens to its board and issuing “transparency reports.”

But the offer did not sway Ottawa. China’s national security laws are a key reason why Canada declared Hikvision persona non grata in the federal government’s confidential 2025 order.

“Despite Hikvision Canada’s representations that it would attenuate the national security risks… it is likely that, even if those undertakings were given, Hikvision would act contrary to Canadian interests under the direction of the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) or the government of the PRC (and) would not adhere to any such undertakings,” reads the confidential document.

Samy Khoury, a former top Canadian cybersecurity official, told National Post that China’s National Intelligence Law applies to Chinese companies regardless of the intent of foreign staff. That’s particularly the case for state-owned companies like Hikvision.

“The National Intelligence Law compels companies to sometimes … act against the customers’ interests, regardless of the good faith of the local staff,” said Khoury, who headed the Canadian Centre for Cyber Security and worked over three decades for the federal signals intelligence agency before retiring in July.

“The fact that the country has a law that compels a technology company, or presumably any company, to fork over data, that is something I would think twice about.”

Intelligence and security agencies also quietly shared their concerns about Hikvision technology specifically to the federal government years before ISED began the 2024 review of Hikvision Canada’s presence in Canada.

Notably, in November 2022, Canada’s spy agency sent out a rare and stark advisory to its partners.

Hikvision poses a threat to Canada’s national security because its products can potentially be used as an intelligence collection platform for China in Canada and abroad, reads the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) security alert obtained by National Post.

On top of that, Hikvision directly designs, implements and operates China’s Xinjiang-based surveillance project of the Uyghur minority, CSIS warned.

Hikvision video surveillance gear should be given national security consideration and due diligence, particularly on Government of Canada facilities, CSIS warned in the 2022 document.

In other words: don’t use it.

Yet two years after the 2022 CSIS alert, a dozen government departments and agencies still used Hikvision surveillance equipment on their property in 2024. Thursday, National Post reported that over one year after the government’s ban, at least two federal agencies still used Hikvision gear on their properties.

“We shouldn’t allow Hikvision equipment to be used in Canada, particularly in government offices,” Michael Kovrig, CEO of Kovrig Group and a former diplomat imprisoned by China from 2018 to 2021, told National Post.

“Canadians should be wary of surveillance systems made by PRC companies, because the problems with their products aren’t just technical, they stem from China’s increasingly totalitarian political system.”

CSIS declined to comment, citing ongoing litigation between the government and Hikvision.

It’s not just the government’s concerns about Hikvision that were shrouded in secrecy for years, but also a key watchdog’s.

In 2024, the privacy commissioner quietly launched a privacy and security review of the potential risk posed by Hikvision equipment such as security cameras, network video recorders and companion applications.

The review was launched at the request of then Bloc Québécois MP René Villemure, and a briefing note for the commissioner said he would report his findings.

It was completed and never made public. His office declined to share a copy of the report or summarize any of its findings.

“Once the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada completed the analysis, it was shared with the appropriate government institution. The analysis was not made public given the sensitivity of the information,” office spokesperson Vito Pilieci said.

Why, if Hikvision’s products pose such a grave threat, did it take years after CSIS’s warning for ISED to launch its review of Hikvision’s presence in Canada?

Both ISED and Joly refused to answer those questions and more, citing ongoing litigation.

But even before the spy agency’s alert, Canada’s allies had been warning for years that Hikvision equipment could pose a threat.

In 2019, the U.S. government banned its federal agencies from purchasing or using Hikvision equipment, citing security concerns and the company’s surveillance of Uyghurs in the Chinese province of Xinjiang.

In the following years, parts or all of the Indian, South Korean, European, U.K., New Zealand and Australian governments implemented bans or restrictions on Hikvision equipment for similar reasons.

Then in late 2023, the Quebec government announced it was barring public institutions from purchasing any new Hikvision equipment and implementing stringent firewalls on existing gear.

Now, Hikvision’s lawsuit against the federal government in a last-ditch attempt to quash the 2025 order requiring it to leave Canada may be reaping fruits.

In a September hearing, lawyers for both parties told the court that they were negotiating a settlement and hoped to find a “mutually acceptable outcome” by December. Presumably, the negotiations are about finding a way to allow Hikvision to continue operating in Canada, though both parties declined to comment.

In its submissions, Hikvision noted that being forced to cease its operations in Canada would effectively shut out its products and destroy its Canadian business.

Dennis Molinaro, a researcher on national security and former federal intelligence analyst, said that the government needs to explain any reversal on its ban of Hikvision Canada.

“There is no safe way for them to operate. Otherwise, there wouldn’t have been a (federal) order in the first place,” said Molinaro, the author of Under Assault: Interference and Espionage in China’s Secret War Against Canada.

But in the meantime, a Federal Court judge rejected Hikvision’s attempt to pause the government’s ban pending the end of the lawsuit, citing the “serious public interest harms” linked to the national security risks posed by the company.

The ban also irked the Chinese government at a time when Prime Minister Mark Carney is trying to rebuild diplomatic bridges between both countries.

A statement in the PRC-operated Global Times shortly after the Hikvision ban stated that “China is strongly dissatisfied with and firmly opposed to this” and urged canada to “change its course”.

Federal briefing documents also suggest the Chinese government raised Hikvision with Canadian government officials directly during bilateral meetings in fall 2025 when discussing “challenges” for Chinese businesses.

“The federal government’s 2025 order does not explicitly ban Hikvision products from being sold and installed by a third party. “However, I strongly encourage all Canadians to take note of this decision and make their own decisions accordingly,” Joly declared at the time .

Genetec, a leading security software firm based in Montreal, made that decision all the way back in 2016 after one too many incidents involving Hikvision cameras connected to their products, according to vice-president Andrew Elvish.

“These cameras are worse than asbestos. They are super duper dangerous time bombs waiting to explode, and especially now in a very unstable geopolitical climate,” said Elvish.

“You don’t want to know when they’re going to start activating these backdoors they’ve put in place.

Asked if he would ever install Hikvision equipment in his home, Khoury, the former top Canadian cybersecurity official, was succinct.

“I wouldn’t.”

National Post

cnardi@postmedia.com

• Chinese surveillance cameras are still around, despite ban in government buildings
• Ottawa has new powers to ban Chinese telecom companies. It says it’s not planning to use them

Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our politics newsletter, First Reading, here.

On the morning of the Toronto airport gold heist, an Air Canada employee working at the cargo depot where the loot was about to be stolen received a text message from his supervisor’s personal phone: “Gooooood morning it is.”

Minutes later the employee replied saying he was “soo tired.. no sleep.”

“We looking good anyways for today,” came the manager’s replied.

Both men stand accused of being part of the insider conspiracy that pulled off one of the world’s largest gold heists, and their friendly chats prior to the theft — and a sharp falling out afterwards — is revealed in a trove of data extracted from a seized phone.

The Air Canada manager was named in court as Simran Preet Panesar, 34, who is considered a wanted fugitive in the heist case and believed to be in India. The employee was Parmpal Sidhu, a 56-year-old former Air Canada cargo warehouse employee who is on trial for the heist in a Brampton, Ont., court.

Sidhu has pleaded not guilty to theft and conspiracy.

Sidhu’s phone was seized by Peel Regional Police when he was arrested on April 5, 2024, almost a year after the high-profile heist. His home was searched as well.

Det.-Const. Edil Aden told court on Thursday that investigators extracted the phone’s contents using Cellebrite, a digital-forensics software tool.

“So it has text messages, phone calls, logs, images, videos. Their phone is put onto a screen for us,” Aden said. The printed data report was about two inches thick.

Aden said messages found on Sidhu’s phone had been sent and received through various tools, including text, encrypted apps and social media direct messaging.

One chat on Sidhu’s phone from a few months before the heist in April 2023 was with a jeweller about how to accurately test for nearly pure gold that had been melted without contamination.

Most of the messages that court heard about, however, were linked to Panesar, who might have been a co-accused at this same trial if he had returned to Canada. Panesar was the manager with Air Canada at the cargo warehouse at Pearson airport to whom Sidhu reported.

Sidhu and Panesar were friends outside of work. Their messages refer to going to the gym, having haircuts, getting coffee, sharing rides to work and laser hair removal recommendations.

Sidhu had five different means of contacting Panesar saved on his phone, including on encrypted communication apps Signal and WhatsApp.

The profile photos of Panesar saved on Sidhu’s phone look different from the widely circulated photo of Panesar in his police mug shot because he sometimes wears a hairpiece, court was told.

On the day of the heist, the two exchanges dozens of short messages, some highlighted to Judge Gordon Cudjoe as suspicious, or, in the words of Crown prosecutor Tyler Powell, “potentially relevant to this investigation.”

They included Panesar’s enthusiastic greetings for the day and a message from him a few hours after the heist.

“I think I’ll be going to India for days off just to get away few days,” the message from Panesar’s phone says. He said it was his wedding anniversary.

“Happy Anniversary,” Sidhu replies.

A few hours later, a message to Panesar’s number from Sidhu’s phone said: “Hey….gotta a call from my cuz who’s in peel. said he heard about a brings heist at cargo last night… lol. Hear anything?”

“No nothing like that happened,” was the reply.

Court heard little or no context to the messages. Presumably the reference to “brings heist” is a misspelling of Brink’s, the security transit company that was moving the gold from Switzerland to Toronto on an Air Canada flight for their client, TD Bank. It wasn’t until Brink’s guards arrived to collect the crate hours later that anyone realized it was gone.

Aden also testified about a screen recording found on Sidhu’s phone that appears to capture a thoroughly modern falling out between the two men: There is a screen shot of a message reading “Last chance” and then a sequence showing Sidhu’s phone blocking Panesar on Instagram.

Adel said police can’t say the screen recording was made by Sidhu, only that it was on Sidhu’s phone. It is not clear when the recording was made.

In a series of direct messages on Instagram dated Jan. 30, 2023, there is more evidence of acrimony.

“14” a message from Sidhu’s account says.

“Yes I know” is the reply from Panesar’s.

“Bullshit,” says Sidhu’s.

“And I have news for you. We speak tomorrow. Cool?” says Panesar’s account.

“Talk to your lawyer. I urge you guys to do the right thing. U listen to me when u took the us cash… your full of shit.” In another message in the same string from Sidhu’s account, he mentions someone who was once a suspect in the heist and a misspelled version of Arsalan Chaudhary’s name.

In April, Chaudhary, 43, admitted to being the ringleader of the heist and was sentenced to four years in prison.

Aden was asked by Sidhu’s lawyer, Shale Wagman, if Sidhu’s fingerprints were found on the air waybill that was used to collect and steal the crate of gold and cash, worth more than $22 million. Court heard the waybill was printed from inside the Air Canada warehouse by someone logging in with Sidhu’s credentials.

She said she doesn’t think they were. She also agreed that no gold bars were found in the police search of Sidhu’s home.

Wagman asked her if the text massage saying “We looking good anyways for today” could mean almost anything. “It can mean anything, but the pertinence of it was that that’s the date of the heist,” Aden said. “It could be something work related,” Wagman asked. “It could be. It could be not,” she replied.

The trial continues Tuesday.

• Email: ahumphreys@postmedia.com | X: AD_Humphreys

• ‘Curious’ Air Canada IT worker tried to think like a crook to trace how airport gold heist was pulled off
• Trial hears of two mysterious phone calls the day $22M in gold and cash stolen from Toronto Pearson airport

Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our newsletters here.

The federal government has withdrawn its sponsorship for a European disinformation conference that includes panel discussions about the U.S. government as a risk for foreign interference.

The conference is an annual event focused on countering disinformation. Organized by EU DisinfoLab, a non-profit based in Brussels, it attracts researchers, people who work in counter-disinformation, journalists, think tanks, academics and government officials. The 2026 edition is taking place in Vilnius, Lithuania this week.

More than one panel slated for Disinfo2026 , discusses the U.S. as a source of foreign-information manipulation and interference (FIMI), which refers to state-backed actors engaging in coordinated efforts to sway public debate aiming to undermining elections and institutions.

Global Affairs Canada says Ottawa isn’t comfortable with how those discussions were framed, so while Canadian officials will still be participating in the conference, they will not be chairing any discussions.

“Following changes to the framing of several panel discussions, Global Affairs decided to revise its participation in those sessions at the EU DisinfoLab 2026 conference,” says Samatha Lafleur, spokesperson for Global Affairs.

The department “carefully assesses participation in, and sponsorship of, external events on a case-by-case basis,” she said in an email to National Post on Thursday. “We respect the right of the organizers to frame discussions as they see fit and recognize the independence of civil society actors and speakers at the conference.”

Despite the sponsorship cancellation, Lafleur added that “Canada remains firmly committed to addressing the challenge of disinformation and misinformation. Global Affairs Canada officials continue to participate in the … conference and look forward to engaging with partners and stakeholders on efforts to counter disinformation.”

The Guardian is reporting that the Trump administration “pressured multiple countries to withdraw their sponsorship” and that Canada, as well as Lithuania and the EU’s diplomatic service agreed. Lafleur did not respond to this allegation.

Just days before the conference was to begin, the logos of the main supporters, including the Lithuanian ministry of foreign affairs, the European External Action Service and Global Affairs Canada, were removed from the conference website, states the Guardian. Both the Guardian and CBC are reporting that photos of the event show white stickers placed over the logos of these organizations on official conference materials.

On Wednesday, a panel that Lithuania took exception to, according to the Guardian, explored how Europe’s disinformation community could rebuild resilience without Washington, the first time the conference appears to have entertained the idea that the U.S. could be a disinformation actor in Europe. It’s called “USA as a FIMI threat: adapt, acknowledge, push back.”

Another session will discuss “growing evidence” that the United States has in some Arctic contexts, operated as a FIMI actor.

The U.S. State Department is neither confirming, nor denying the application of pressure to withdraw conference sponsorship.

In an emailed statement to National Post on Thursday, State Department spokesperson Jennifer Viau said: “While we are unable to comment on the details of diplomatic conversations, it should not be a surprise that countries would disaffiliate from this conference upon learning that it labeled the U.S. a ‘FIMI threat.’ Labeling the United States a FIMI threat – a term normally reserved for describing influence operations of adversaries – undermines shared goals and should alarm those involved.”

An EU spokesperson confirmed to the Guardian that the European External Action Service decided to withdraw its support from the conference because “the organizers chose to frame some of the discussions in a way which does not align with the official positions held by the EU.” Despite withdrawing its sponsorship, the EU continues to fund the conference.

Canada’s move comes at a time when the country is caught in the ongoing tensions of a bitter trade dispute with U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration.

• Feds to restructure fund for combating disinformation, end program for hiring diverse journalists
• Paul Deegan: Real journalists matter in an AI worldPaul Deegan: Real journalists matter in an AI world

Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here.

OTTAWA – Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre told reporters Thursday that his party intends to bring amendments to the Liberal government’s latest major projects bill, to ensure workers benefit from the government’s build agenda.

“We will be putting forward amendments, to protect workers, their jobs, their rights and the working-class people who build this country,” said Poilievre, during a scrum on Parliament Hill.

Bill C-39, titled Building Canada Strong Act, which makes several changes to Canada’s regulatory and environmental laws, promises a one-year timeline and one review for the approval of major projects.

The bill also makes changes to the Canada Labour Code, including changes to collective bargaining and giving the labour minister “guardrails” on when they can intervene to end a lockout or strike. Those “guardrails” include a special mediator and a national interest test.

The government has argued this gives more transparency to the labour minister’s use of Section 107 of the labour code, although labour unions argue it gives too much discretionary power to a member of cabinet and threatens workers’ fundamental right to strike.

The Liberal government has used Section 107 to end several strikes and lockouts at ports, railways and airlines.

The omnibus bill passed second reading on Thursday, with help from the Conservative Party, and will now go to a special committee for members of Parliament to study. Members of the Bloc Québécois, NDP and Green parties voted against the legislation.

Poilievre did not provide details on what sort of amendments his party will bring forward but has been in contact with labour unions about the bill.

“I think it’s appalling that after the Carney Liberals have destroyed the paycheques of the working class through high taxes and inflation, they are now blaming those same workers for our economic weakness that he caused,” said Poilievre.

Green Party Leader Elizabeth May warned Thursday, that like its predecessor Bill C-5, which was passed last year, the latest major projects bill gives immense discretionary power to ministers.

“Once Cabinet decides a project or undefined region of national interest has been decreed by Cabinet (then) every future decision will be taken for the furtherance of the project,” said May. “It’s quite extraordinary.”

May said this allows government to bulldoze through existing laws to get things built faster, which does not necessarily mean better outcomes.

“When you move fast, you often end up with projects being 300 to 400 per cent over budget,” said May, citing empirical evidence from a book titled “How Big Things Get Done.”

Liberal MP Patrick Weiler appeared to criticize the bill on Tuesday evening, while debating the bill in the House of Commons, to voice similar concerns outlined by May.

“Given that the powers in this bill would be permanent, it is important that where new flexibility or discretion is created, Parliament instils clear and transparent processes,” said Weiler.

Weiler said he ultimately supports the aim of the bill and voted in support of Bill C-39 with his caucus on Thursday.

Meanwhile, labour unions continued to voice their concerns about the bill on Thursday, urging the Liberal government to remove the provisions related to Section 107, or face the risk of more labour unrest.

“I can tell you that our national executive board has just made a decision that said if locals who are out on strike want to defy, our union will stand with them,” said Candace Rennick, national secretary-treasury at the Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE), during a press conference in Ottawa.

“Because it’s CUPE members and CUPE members only that should decide when their picket lines end,” she added.

National Post

• New bill should help prevent strikes in the ‘centre of the economy,’ think tank report says
• Poilievre rips Carney’s omnibus bill as Conservatives agonize over how to vote on it

Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our newsletters here.

PLESSISVILLE, QC — “Plessisville is Conservative. He’s wasting his time here.”

Samuel Côté, a country music DJ, and his girlfriend Mélanie Lévesque, a social worker, were eating lunch on their porch, just steps away from where Parti Québécois Leader Paul St-Pierre Plamondon was trying to shore up support before the election.

Clearly, the PQ did not have their vote. Their lawn sign showed they instead supported their Conservative candidate, Tarek Henoud, who would end up winning the riding of Arthabaska—L’Érable, located between Montreal and Quebec City, on Monday.

This is also one of the handful of seats that would end up costing the PQ its coveted majority, having underestimated the voter turnout for their Conservative opponents.

“To begin with, I’m not a huge separatist,” said Côté, who also goes by the alias DJ Sammy. “I used to vote for Québec Solidaire when I was much younger — like a lot of young people in the 18-to-25 age range. But I really lost interest in them during COVID.”

Côté said he was skeptical of the “medical conspiracies” during the pandemic and refused to get vaccinated. It was during that time that he subscribed to follow Conservative Leader Éric Duhaime who was not shy to address those questions.

“That’s what made me move from the far left to a less extreme right, I’d say.”

With the pandemic behind them, Côté and Lévesque said they continued to subscribe to Duhaime’s propositions to lower taxes so families could have more in their pockets and to cut in Quebec’s bloated bureaucracy to reinvest in better services for people.

One example that spoke to them was the promise to abolish the provincial tax on used goods. Lévesque said it makes no sense to pay taxes on a used car, for instance, when those same taxes were already paid for when that same car was brand-new.

Côté also said Duhaime’s promise to abolish Quebec’s “carbon tax” appealed to him. The province remains the only jurisdiction in Canada to have maintained its carbon pricing system, which is adding to the already bloated price at the pump.

The PQ government has promised to abolish the provincial tax on used goods. It also intends to cut the provincial tax on gas by half for one year and reimburse it completely for individual Quebecers earning less than $40,000 per year with a cheque of $125.

Côté said he was happy to see the ideas promoted by the Quebec Conservatives be adopted by other parties — and in this case, make their way to government.

“The important thing is for the ideas to get through — not for the Conservative government to get elected. No. The goal is for the ideas to get through,” he said.

While lots of ink has been spilled on the referendum issue, many Quebecers have expressed they just want to get by. And Duhaime was able to pound that message.

As a result, the Quebec Conservatives are making a noticeable comeback in the National Assembly with over 20 per cent of the votes and a whopping 19 seats. They won 15 out of the 18 seats in Quebec City, spilling into central Quebec and the Eastern Townships. Their navy blue seats now form a large blot on a map of Quebec.

“It exceeded our expectations,” said director of communications Cédric Lapointe.

Duhaime has said he built on the lessons of the past campaign, where his party won no seats despite finishing with 13 per cent of the popular vote. So, he focused his efforts on the Quebec City area, campaigning in surrounding regions as his support grew.

Lapointe said the idea was to develop their brand as the “party of taxpayers” by focusing on people’s purchasing power. He said it was a clear contrast with the PQ and the Quebec Liberals, which were more focused on constitutional debates.

“We were considered by many people as an alternative to the old parties,” he said.

The Quebec Conservatives were not immune to criticism, however. Some of their candidates made headlines for recent comments on vaccines, abortion or Canada becoming the 51st state. Duhaime dismissed those comments as “distractions.”

His campaign was also overshadowed by revelations that 62 per cent of his most recent book, “Destination Autonomy: Expanding Quebec’s Powers within the Canadian Confederation,” was written with artificial intelligence.

Duhaime argued that AI is a tool like any other and those were still his ideas.

In the last stretch of the campaign, Duhaime called on voters who were disappointed by the incumbent Coalition Avenir Québec government to instead opt to vote for the Conservatives to block a PQ majority and a possible third referendum.

Duhaime made that ultimate appeal in front of a garage with two buses — one with a “Yes” sign and the other with a “No” sign.

“There is only one party that can stop them from leaving the garage,” he said.

The Quebec Conservatives were aiming for at least 12 seats and form a recognized party at the National Assembly. Poll aggregators were showing there would be close races with the PQ in many ridings which could reduce it to a minority government.

The race in Arthabaska—L’Érable was especially personal for both parties.

The PQ had won a byelection in the riding in 2025 with former journalist Alex Boissonneault against Duhaime, who had asked Henoud, who was also their candidate in 2022, to step aside in an attempt to finally win a seat at the National Assembly.

St-Pierre Plamondon had even promised, days before the vote, to name Boissonneault as one of his ministers in a PQ government. In the end, it wasn’t even close.

Henoud won 41 per cent of the vote against Boissonneault’s 33 per cent.

Duhaime mentioned this accomplishment in his speech the night of the election.

“Tonight, we made history. For the first time in (nearly) 100 years, Quebecers have decided to send a large caucus of Conservative members to the National Assembly.”

“And just think about this: we defeated six incumbent ministers, and we even defeated a Parti Québécois minister, believe it or not,” he added.

That comment prompted loud boos from the PQ supporters on their election night.

Duhaime said the rise of his party on Monday night is certainly no accident.

“It is about a political family — about values ​​deeply rooted in our identity, our history, and our regions,” he said.

“Individual freedom, entrepreneurship, the importance of family, regional autonomy, Quebec’s autonomy within the Confederation — in short, the pride of being Québécois,” he continued.

During an unrelated announcement in Sherbrooke on Thursday, Prime Minister Mark Carney would not comment on the rise of the Quebec Conservatives at the provincial level.

“For us, at the federal level, we take messages from byelections and federal elections,” he said.

In that sense, he said he was “very encouraged” that his own party won over 50 per cent of the votes in a Quebec byelection back in August.

National Post
calevesque@postmedia.com

Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our newsletters here.

The British Consulate in Jerusalem, which Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar last month said would be shuttered, will be renamed the UK Mission, Jerusalem, and operate from the same building with a smaller staff, according to statements published on Thursday by Jerusalem and London.

Twenty diplomats, including the consul general, will end their assignments and leave Israel, Sa’ar said. The consulate’s sign has been removed. Britain retains ownership of the building and may operate a small task force there, Sa’ar said.

“We have allowed the British Government to operate a task force of only seven diplomats from the building, which ceased to function as a consulate today. Their scope of activity will be very limited,” he wrote.

Sa’ar announced the closure on Sept. 8, immediately after the U.K. introduced an import ban on products from Israeli communities in the West Bank.

“A boycott of goods from Judea and Samaria is a despicable practice that harms hard-working, law-abiding citizens,” Sa’ar said last month. “The Labour Government has decided to employ this practice of boycotts and BDS only against the Jewish state.”

Sa’ar added that the Israeli public overwhelmingly supports the Jewish communities in the West Bank and just as overwhelmingly opposes the creation of a Palestinian state in its heartland. “This is something that the Labour government is attempting, through measures that are doomed to fail, to force upon Israel. It will not work,” he said.

We established a clear principle: It is not possible to act against Israel without Israel taking appropriate measures in response.

In this spirit, the measures I announced on 8 September have been implemented:

1.The removal of the British representatives from the International…

— Gideon Sa’ar | גדעון סער (@gidonsaar) October 8, 2026

The U.K. and Israel had conducted weeks of talks to prevent a deterioration in bilateral relations, Sa’ar said on Thursday. Understandings were reached on Wednesday night and the two governments agreed to continue dialogue. Under the current understandings, “no measures will be taken against Israel as a result of the implementation of the decisions,” he wrote.

Ed Miliband, Sa’ar’s British counterpart, wrote in a statement on Thursday: “Following discussions with the Government of Israel, our Consulate General building will not be closing, and will be known as the UK Mission, Jerusalem from today. The UK Mission, Jerusalem is independent, operational, and will continue to deliver vital services and our work with the Palestinian people.”

The arrangement would preserve Britain’s longstanding presence and its role in supporting a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Miliband said.

“Without an understanding, we would not have the necessary assurances for the security and protections of our staff and premises. Accordingly, the UK has temporarily withdrawn a number of staff and families to ensure their safety and security,” he wrote.

Miliband said the U.K. “will work in the coming months to build back up our presence, and we will not take reciprocal action while such discussions are underway and credible.”

Britain remains “committed” to the measures it adopted on Sept. 8, Miliband said, describing them as coordinated with the international community and intended to support a two-state solution delivering peace and security for Israelis and Palestinians.

Sa’ar said Israel had implemented all of the retaliatory measures he announced on Sept. 8, which included banning British representatives from the International Gaza Support Center (previously known as the Civil-Military Coordination Center) in Kiryat Gat.

Other Israeli sanctions included terminating British training for Palestinian Authority forces in the West Bank, and barring 12 British officials and other citizens from entering Israel over what Sa’ar called their involvement in antisemitic and anti-Israel activity.

“We established a clear principle: It is not possible to act against Israel without Israel taking appropriate measures in response,” he wrote.

Miliband, in his statement, wrote, ”We have been clear that we do not accept that the Government of Israel has the legal right to close the British Consulate General in Jerusalem, which has been there for nearly 200 years. The UK government reiterates its long-standing view that East Jerusalem is occupied territory.”

Sa’ar assigned responsibility for the crisis to Britain’s Labour government.

“We did not want to reach this point, but the actions of the UK Labour Government brought us here. Their latest decision in this series was to initiate a range of far-reaching sanctions against the communities in Judea and Samaria, as well as additional sanctions on defence exports to Israel,” he wrote.

“All this was accompanied by hostile rhetoric, including false accusations against Israel, such as accusations of ‘ethnic cleansing.’”

Sa’ar described the measures as part of an escalating series of unilateral actions against Israel since Labour took office in July 2024.

These included Britain’s unilateral recognition of what he called a “virtual Palestinian state” in September 2025; renewed funding for UNRWA; the suspension of defense export licenses; sanctions on Israeli ministers and other individuals and entities, and the suspension of talks on a free trade agreement.

He also listed restrictions on Israel’s participation in an international defense exhibition in Britain, the exclusion of IDF officers from training at the Royal College of Defence Studies, and repeated “biased attacks” against Israel internationally.

Israel continues to believe in dialogue, Sa’ar said, although no genuine dialogue had taken place with the Labour government in recent years. “This is despite good relations with Britain, reflected, among other things, in security and intelligence cooperation,” he said.

Bilateral relations and security and intelligence cooperation have repeatedly helped protect British lives and interests, Sa’ar also said. Israel had recently provided Britain with “vital information” concerning the RAF Fairford incident, he added. British security forces last month arrested several people who are suspected of planning a terrorist attack at the base.

Sa’ar thanked those on both sides who contributed to the understandings, which he said served Israel’s interests.

“I cannot promise that there will not be further crises in the future. If there are, we will face them on the basis of our core principles,” he wrote, adding, “Israel will no longer turn its cheek to diplomatic attacks against it.”

• ‘There will be surprises’: Netanyahu departs for U.S. ahead of UN General Assembly speech
• Netanyahu tells New York mayor Mamdani that he will ‘expose the truth’ about him at UN