LP_468x60
on-the-record-468x60-white

Source: National Post (Politics)

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and U.S. President Donald Trump hold a joint news conference in the State Dining Room at the White House on September 29, 2025 in Washington, DC.

Whether or not Hamas accepts a new proposal to end the war in Gaza, the Jewish diaspora should brace for antisemitism “for at least some time,” says a top American rabbi.

Antisemitism is a “behemoth backed by all sorts of nefarious types,” said Rabbi Abraham Cooper, an associate dean and director of global social action at Jewish human rights activist organization, Simon Wiesenthal Center.

“Right now, there’s a worldwide effort to delegitimize and demonize the Jewish state, and that, in many ways, is a self-sustaining machine,” he told National Post on Tuesday. “That is a kind of nuclear waste. You can’t just do an on/off switch and get rid of it.”

His comments come a day after U.S. President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu appeared as a united front to

announce a proposal

that could end the conflict in Gaza. The war, which nears its two-year mark, was triggered by the events of Oct. 7, 2023, when Hamas terrorists murdered 1,200 people and took 251 hostages. (There are 48 left, of which 20 are believed to be alive, Netanyahu said,

The Times of Israel reported

.) Another part of the proposal, which Trump highlighted, was to return the hostages.

People walk past a billboard bearing the portraits of Israeli hostages, some still being held in the Gaza Strip since the October 7, 2023 attacks by Hamas terrorists, in Jerusalem on February 17, 2025.

The deal, which has yet to be accepted by Hamas, offered some clarity in a murky situation, Cooper said. He called it a “very serious plan” with a “stark” message to Hamas. Either they accept it, lay down their weapons, and return the hostages (and follow through on a total of 20 points listed in the proposal) — or “Israel will finish the job by itself,” Netanyahu said.

Cooper also said he believes that the proposal makes moot the recognition of a Palestinian state by several countries, including Canada, at the UN General Assembly last week. Ahead of that decision, it was

condemned by many Canadian Jewish advocacy groups

, including Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs (CIJA) and Allies for a Strong Canada.

“Think about Palestinians, who were running around trying to get out of harm’s way, from Hamas and from bombs coming down, and they have lost their homes, and they hear that Ottawa is going to recognize the Palestinian state,” he said. “You think that’s what’s on the minds right now of Palestinians?”

Canada and other countries can play a “constructive role,” he added, for example, by helping with the education of Palestinian children. Educators and experts should take a look at their curriculum, get an independent review of it and provide funding for a new one. “In Morocco, in Saudi Arabia, in Bahrain, in the UAE, there are plenty of Arab educators, scholars and curriculum writers to help,” he said. He noted that he was not looking for an endorsement of Israel or the funding of Zionism, but that the curriculum should undergo “a complete and total change.”

In March, a

study by researchers at the Institute for Monitoring Peace and Cultural Tolerance in School Education

observed an online school curriculum produced by the Palestinian Authority for school children in Gaza from grades one through 12. It found that the textbooks contain “antisemitic content that encourages students to acts of violence.”

“Antisemitism itself used to be a bipartisan issue, and like everything else in politics these days, in our democracies, it’s all weaponized,” said Cooper. “I believe it will continue for at least some time to have a direct impact on us in the diaspora.”

Speaking to reporters on Tuesday,

Trump said

he would give Hamas “three or four days” to respond to the proposal.

Hamas fighters during hostage release on February 1, 2025.

It’s hard to tell if Hamas will accept the proposal being considered right now, said Jon Allen, a senior fellow at the Bill Graham Centre for Contemporary International History, located in Toronto. He was also the ambassador of Canada to Israel from 2006 to 2010.

“Certainly, I, and most sane people, would hope they would say yes, because, of course, we want the war to end. We want the hostages released, we want humanitarian aid to flow, and we want the death and destruction in Gaza to end. So that’s the upside,” he told National Post. “The downside for Hamas is that there is no defined time in which the (Israel Defense Forces) is going to leave.”

Allen said if Hamas rejects the proposal, he believes Netanyahu would resume the war.

“He would claim that it’s all Hamas fault, as he has before. And to some extent, he’s right, but that’s probably what will happen. More Israeli soldiers will die. The hostages will probably die. More Palestinians will certainly die, and it’ll be a disaster for Israel going forward, and it’ll be a disaster for the Palestinians living in Gaza going forward as well, and it’ll be a disaster for the diaspora Jewish community,” he said.

The Jewish community in Canada, like most Canadians, is looking forward to ending the “painful conflict” and to building a better future for Israelis and Palestinians, CIJA CEO Noah Shack said in a statement to National Post.

“There is unanimity that this must begin with the release of all Israeli hostages and the disarming of Hamas,” he said.

“At this pivotal moment, our community is closely following developments with concern, not only for the region, but for Canadian society. In our streets, universities, and public spaces, we’ve seen pro-Hamas extremists exploiting the conflict to spread hate and violence.

“As important as it is for our leaders to support peace in the Middle East, all Canadians have a vested interest in combatting growing extremism in Canada.”

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.

Click here for more Canada

Hundreds gathered for an Orange Shirt Day event at The Confluence in Calgary on Sept. 30, 2025.

As Canada marks Truth and Reconciliation Day, pollsters have found that while Indigenous reconciliation is becoming increasingly important to Canadians, more than half think there are more important social issues that the country should be focusing on.

The new poll from

Leger found

that while 69 per cent say they have more understanding of why reconciliation with Indigenous Peoples is important, 54 per cent say they “think there are bigger societal challenges in Canada, and too much attention is being paid to reconciliation matters specifically.” Forty-six per cent of Canadians say they are frustrated by how slowly reconciliation is moving in this country and that they don’t think progress has been made.

“Big picture here is that reconciliation is a long road. Canadians are walking it, but unevenly,” said Jennifer McLeod Macey, senior vice-president with Leger.

Truth and Reconciliation Day, held annually on Sept. 30, is a memorial to those who died — and survived — Canada’s long-running Indian residential school system. Over the past decade, Canada has embarked upon an at-times dramatic reckoning with the legacy of colonialism and the fallout from residential schools, including the final report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, released in December 2015, and a controversy over potential unmarked graves discovered at residential schools.

Just 19 per cent of Canadians say that the day is very important, and matters to them personally, while 43 per cent say that while it’s good that Canada marks a dark chapter in its history, it’s not important to them. Almost one-third of poll respondents say they treat Sept. 30 like any other day — a view that’s most popular in Quebec (39 per cent) and least popular in Ontario (25 per cent).

While 44 per cent of Canadians say that governments should be doing more to address reconciliation, it’s nevertheless a low-down-the-list priority when compared to issues such as health care, which 88 per cent of Canadians believe the government needs to do more to address, and the economy, which 86 per cent of Canadians flag as important.

Sixty per cent of those in the 18 to 34 age bracket say more needs to be done on reconciliation, compared to just 36 per cent of those aged 55 and older.

There are also wide regional and demographic differences among those who consider reconciliation to be key priority. Forty-nine per cent of Ontarians say that governments need to do more on reconciliation, compared to just 27 per cent of those in Manitoba and Saskatchewan, for example.

With the polling done this month, and wildfire season in the Prairies drawing to a close, focus on other concerns and priorities could be one factor in why those in Manitoba and Saskatchewan weren’t as concerned about governments making reconciliation a priority.

“That might be more top of mind,” McLeod Macey said.

Yet, many Canadians say that over the past five years, they are more aware of Indigenous history and why reconciliation is important. Sixty-four per cent of poll respondents say they now know more about Indigenous history than they did a half-decade ago and 69 per cent say they are more aware of why reconciliation is important. Twenty-seven per cent say they are much more aware — an 11-point jump since Leger asked the question in 2024.

“Just to bring it back to that bigger picture, while awareness is moving in the right direction, we now need to move beyond awareness and into reconciliation, because awareness alone is not reconciliation,” McLeod Macey said.

Those in Ontario are the most likely (72 per cent) to say they are more understanding of why reconciliation is important, and just 49 per cent of them believe there are other social issues in Canada that need addressing, compared to the 67 per cent of poll respondents from Manitoba and Saskatchewan who believe too much attention is paid to Indigenous reconciliation. Men are far more likely (61 per cent) than women (47 per cent) to say other societal issues require more attention, the polling finds.

A slight majority of Canadians — 53 per cent — said they would do something special to mark Truth and Reconciliation Day on Tuesday. Twenty-three per cent said they would wear orange to show support and 17 per cent said they would actively listen to Indigenous people talk about their issues. Twelve per cent planned to do research about the residential school system and 15 per cent said they would talk to their friends and family about the issue.

“The real test is, can the small acts add up to something bigger?” said McLeod Macey

Quebecers, at 59 per cent, are the most likely to say they won’t do anything special to mark the day, followed by 55 per cent of those in Manitoba and Saskatchewan.

The online poll of 1,528 Canadians was conducted between Sept. 26 and Sept. 29. Results were weighted according to age, gender, mother tongue, region, education and presence of children in the household to form a representative sample of the Canadian population. For comparison purposes, a probability sample of this size would yield a margin of error no greater than plus or minus 2.51 per cent, 19 times out of 20.

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.

Click here for more Canada

U.S. President Donald Trump addresses senior military officers gathered Virginia on Tuesday. During his speech, Trump said Canada can join a U.S. missile defence program

After months without rhetoric and outright trolling about Canada becoming the 51st state, U.S. Donald Trump brought it up again on Tuesday.

Approaching the halfway mark of a 72-minute address to hundreds of U.S. military officials summoned to Virginia, Trump claimed work on the “Golden Dome Missile Defence Shield” was proceeding and that Canada had recently contacted him to say “they want to be a part of it.”

“To which I said, ‘Well, why don’t you just join our country? You become the 51st state and you get it for free,” he suggested.

“I don’t know if that made a big impact, but it does make a lot of sense, because they’re having a hard time up there in Canada now because, as you know, with tariffs, everyone’s coming into our country.”

National Post has contacted the Prime Minister’s Office for more comment and more information. A spokesperson for Global Affairs Canada, meanwhile, promised a response by the end of the week.

Senior military leaders look on at Marine Corps Base Quantico on September 30, 2025 in Quantico, Virginia.

The White House bills the Golden Dome as a multilayered missile defence program to counter threats to America, even those coming from foreign-controlled satellites. Its cost is estimated at

US$175 billion.

A

Congressional Budget Office

report released in May exploring the cost of maintaining only space-based interceptors for 20 years estimated it at between $161 billion for the “lowest-cost alternative” and $542 billion for the top tier.

Trump’s suggestions that Canada join the U.S. began in December, before he was sworn in as President.

It was first reported in December 2024 following a meeting between former prime minister Justin Trudeau and top ministers and incoming Trump officials at his Mar-A-Lago resort in Florida, where the president-elect

reportedly joked about it.

The meeting came after Trump’s earlier remarks about the alleged trade deficit between the two countries, which he pegged at $100 billion, and the suggestion that 25 per cent tariffs would be deployed in response.

In a

Truth Social post

in the days after the meeting, Trump referred to Trudeau as the governor of Canada, something he would do repeatedly in the weeks that followed.

He did so again in the days after the resignation of Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland, whose behaviour in negotiations he described as

“totally toxic, and not at all conducive to making deals.”

U.S. Secretary of War Pete Hegseth addresses senior military officers at Marine Corps Base Quantico in Quantico, Virginia, on September 30, 2025.

“No one can answer why we subsidize Canada to the tune of over $100,000,000 a year,” he wrote in

another post two days later

. “Makes no sense! Many Canadians want Canada to become the 51st State. They would save massively on taxes and military protection. I think it is a great idea. 51st State!!!”

Before Christmas, his son, Eric Trump, shared a doctored image of a

fake Amazon shopping cart showing Canada

, along with Greenland and the Panama Canal, as contents. Trump claimed at the time that the U.S. should be able to claim the latter two for strategic purposes.

After Trudeau announced his resignation in early January, Trump — again stating that Canadians support the 51st state idea — said the former Liberal Leader did so because of the

“massive Trade Deficits and Subsidies that Canada needs to stay afloat.”

In an early February interview on FOX, Trump inflated the deficit to $200 billion and said he wouldn’t mind as much if

Canada became the 51st state.

Mark Carney, not long after claiming the Liberal Leadership in March, said Trump brought it up again during a congratulatory call, despite earlier telling reporters that the subject wasn’t broached.

“We talked about lots of things, okay,”

Carney responded when asked about the remarks in April

. “And what’s important is the conclusions of the call, the results of the call, and those are exactly the same on the American side and the Canadian side… And those were that it was very constructive.”

Days before the federal election that would see Carney become prime minister, Trump said Canada “would cease to exist as a country” if the U.S. stopped buying its goods and that it would exist better as a state, according to the

Associated Press.

Around the same time, he told TIME magazine’s senior political correspondent Eric Cortellessa and editor-in-chief Sam Jacobs that he was

“really not trolling”

when it comes to the 51st state talk.

On election day, he took to Truth Social and asked Canadian voters to

“elect the man”

who will let Canada join the U.S., prompting Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre to tell the president to “stay out of our election.”

In early May, when Carney and Trump met in person for the first time, when reporters asked the president about Canada becoming the 51st state, he

said “never say never.”

Carney, to his left, can be seen mouthing the word “never.”

In late May, Carney and a Canadian contingent went to Washington for a sit-down with Trump and his administration, where the president reportedly said Canada could gain protection under the Golden Dome for US$61 billion (CAD$83 billion) or earn it for

free by becoming the 51st state.

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.

Click here for more Canada

Toronto Blue Jays outfielder George Springer rounds the bases after hitting a home run against the Tampa Bay Rays in Toronto, Sunday, Sept. 28, 2025.

The New York Yankees face the Boston Red Sox this week in a three-game wild card series to determine who will face the Toronto Blue Jays in the American League Division Series (ALDS) playoff. But if the Yankees get that honour, Canadian fans won’t be able to attend any of the games in New York. That team is

restricting ticket purchases

to residents of New York and several nearby states.

On Sunday, the Jays clinched the American League East division title with a win against the Tampa Bay Rays, meaning they move to the five-game ALDS, which will begin Saturday at Rogers Centre in Toronto.

Two home games will be followed by at least one matchup in either New York or Boston, plus another if necessary, and then a potential fifth game back at Rogers Centre.

Tickets to all post-season games are expensive and hard to get. But Yankees tickets are out of reach for Canadians. The team has restricted ticket sales to residents of New York and the neighbouring states of New Jersey, Connecticut and Pennsylvania.

Notably left off that list are residents of Vermont and Massachusetts, which also border New York State — and Canada, where the vast majority of Blue Jays fans reside.

“Yankee Stadium is located in Bronx, New York,” the team’s website notes, somewhat obviously, in an “important event information” box that pops up if buyers try to choose a potential ALDS game.

“Sales to this event will be restricted to residents of New York, New Jersey, Connecticut and Pennsylvania. Residency will be based on credit card billing address. Orders by residents outside New York, New Jersey, Connecticut and Pennsylvania will be canceled without notice and refunds given.”

It’s a fiscal shame for Canadians who might want to travel south to cheer on their team. That’s because, as of Tuesday, tickets for game three of the ALDS start at just US$107 (about $149 Canadian) for an upper-deck seat overlooking Yankee Stadium’s right field.

Rogers Centre games, on the other hand, start at $289 for resale tickets in a similar position in the ballpark for Saturday’s ALDS kickoff game. Lowest prices for Sunday’s game are $318, and for a potential game five they start at $358.

Canada’s Ticketmaster site doesn’t even show the not-for-Canadians games. Searching for a Yankees-Jays matchup on that site will bring up only the Toronto post-season games, followed by a four-game series between the two teams in

May of 2026

, part of next year’s regular season.

Everything changes if the Boston Red Sox beat the Yankees in this week’s best-of-three, however. Fans from Canada (and anywhere else) will be eligible to buy tickets to watch a potential Jay-Sox ALDS game at Fenway Park, with a representative for that team telling National Post: “The Red Sox and Boston will not be turning away fans from other states or out of the country to purchase tickets.”

The Major League Baseball playoff brackets for the 2025 post-season.

Prices are steeper in Boston, however, with tickets as of Tuesday starting at US$238 (about $331 Canadian, comparable to a Jays game) for the first of two potential home games there in the ALDS.

National Post has also reached out to the Seattle Mariners, the Detroit Tigers and the Cleveland Guardians, one of whom the Jays might face if they make it to the

next round

of playoffs, to ask about their ticket sale policies.

A spokesperson for the Tigers said tickets for those games are not yet for sale, but: “

Ontario is usually included in the group that can buy tickets.”

There are six National League teams vying for a berth in the World Series, which begins on Oct. 24 and could finish as late as Nov. 1.

If the Yankees ticket travails sounds familiar, that’s because a similar situation bedevilled Toronto Maple Leafs fans two years ago. In 2023, when the Leafs moved to the second round of the NHL playoffs to face the Florida Panthers, that

team barred non-U.S. residents

(i.e., Canadians) from buying tickets to its home games.

The issue doesn’t seem to have cropped up this year, with tour operators

organizing trips

south for Canadians to watch the same two teams battle it out. However, travel to the U.S. from Canada was also down due to the trade war and other issues between the two countries.

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.

Click here for more Canada

The youngest (aged 18 to 24) and oldest (65 years and older) poll respondents were the most supportive of welcoming new immigrants, at 46 per cent.

A majority of Canadians feel that the country does not need new immigrants and people are divided over whether newcomers should have to give up their customs, according to a new national poll.

The survey, conducted by Leger for the Association for Canadian Studies found that 60 per cent of respondents disagreed that “Canada needs new immigrants,” with the highest levels of opposition found in Alberta (65 per cent), Ontario (63 per cent) and Quebec (61 per cent), followed by Manitoba and Saskatchewan (60 per cent), the Atlantic provinces (56 per cent) and British Columbia (48 per cent).

The poll found Canadian immigrants were slightly more supportive than non-immigrants of opening the country to future waves of newcomers. Just over half (52 per cent) of immigrants agreed that “Canada needs new immigrants,” while 37 per cent of non-immigrants felt the same. Still, 48 per cent of Canadian immigrants disagreed that the country needs more immigration.

Jack Jedwab, the chief executive Association for Canadian Studies, told National Post in an email that he was “surprised” by the findings, which came “in the midst of one of the biggest debates over immigration in Canada in the past 25 years.” Jedwab pointed to a

Statistics Canada report

released last week that shows the country’s population growth has virtually plateaued and that new arrivals are needed, despite the public’s growing weariness.

“Canada needs immigration despite many feeling otherwise,” he wrote. Jedwab placed some of the blame for anti-immigration sentiment on the government for failing to communicate effectively with the public on this issue. “Our politicians need to offer a reminder about the importance of immigration and redirect the debate to how many are needed in line with the country’s capacity.”

The youngest (aged 18 to 24) and oldest (65 years and older) respondents were the most supportive of welcoming new immigrants, at 46 per cent. Anti-immigration sentiment was highest among “working age” cohorts, Jedwab said, which “may be attributable to the perception of competition in the workplace, something that requires more validation than is the case currently.” He also explained that besides economic factors, “concern around security issues … can’t be neglected” when seeking to understand the growing skepticism toward immigration.

Respondents were also closely split on the question of whether Canadian newcomers should culturally assimilate, with 51 per cent agreeing immigrants “should give up their customs and traditions and adopt those of the majority.”

Respondents in Quebec were most likely (60 per cent) to support the statement, followed by Alberta (55 per cent), the Atlantic provinces (49 per cent), Ontario (48 per cent), British Columbia (47 per cent), and Manitoba and Saskatchewan (46 per cent).

Jedwab pointed out that, on the other hand, the overwhelming majority of Canadians (85 per cent) believe “it is important to pass on customs and traditions to future generations.”

“There is a lot of confusion around this issue as half of Canadians are saying on the one hand that immigrants should give up their customs and traditions and become more like the majority, while the vast majority of Canadians are saying that it is important to transmit our customs and traditions to future generations,” Jedwab wrote.

“In other words, it’s okay for ‘us’ to preserve customs and traditions but not for newcomers to do so. The conversation around newcomer integration needs to be better defined than is currently the case,” he wrote. “Clearly, the discourse around integration and assimilation in Canada appears to reflect less the pride in our mosaic that we used to hear more frequently.”

Despite Canada’s reputation as a multicultural mosaic, the poll found that Americans — historically known more for their reputation as a cultural melting pot — were actually less supportive of cultural assimilation than Canadians. Nearly three-quarters (71 per cent) of Americans disagreed that immigrants “should give up their customs and traditions” compared with just under half of Canadians (49 per cent).

“The vision of Canada as a mosaic is being displaced or realigned based on binary or ‘dualistic’ ways of describing the country,” Jedwab concluded.

The online poll of 1,627 Canadians was conducted between Aug. 29 and 31. A margin of error cannot be associated with a non-probability sample in a panel survey for comparison purposes. A probability sample would have a margin of error of plus or minus 2.52 per cent, 19 times out of 20.

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.

Click here for more Alberta

Rebecca Alty, federal Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations.

OTTAWA — Liberals say they’re not sure what to make of a letter from Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre calling on them to “argue to overturn” a recent British Columbia Indigenous land-claims ruling they’ve already filed an appeal against.

“Mr. Poilievre’s a little late to the game, because the government appealed this decision three weeks ago,” said Jeremy Bellefeuille, a spokesperson for federal Justice Minister Sean Fraser.

Poilievre wrote an open letter to Fraser on Sunday, stating that the federal government “must argue in court” against the B.C. Supreme Court’s recent Cowichan Tribes v. Canada ruling, which he said threatened property rights across the country.

“(The ruling) is already causing investment to flee, with businesses and homeowners facing difficulties as funders have major concerns about the uncertainty this situation has created,” wrote Poilievre.

Crown-Indigenous Relations Minister Rebecca Alty was quick to note that the federal government

appealed the landmark decision

on Sept. 8.

“Canada disagrees with this court decision … Further legal clarity is required to address its potentially significant nationwide implications, particularly relating to private property rights,” said Alty in a statement.

The decision is also being appealed by the B.C. government, City of Richmond and Vancouver Port Authority, as well as two coastal First Nations’ groups.

The court ruled on Aug. 7 that the Vancouver Island-based Cowichan Tribes hold Aboriginal title and fishing rights

over nearly 2,000 acres

of ancestral lands in B.C.’s Lower Mainland, including private property.

Poilievre told reporters on Monday that the court got “property rights wrong” in the contentious ruling. He called on the federal government to “make legal arguments at the appeal level to overturn it.”

Dwight Newman, a law professor at the University of Saskatchewan, observed that some

in the legal community

have criticized government lawyers for not mounting a more aggressive defence in court.

“(Poilievre’s) letter doesn’t state specifically what arguments should be put forward, but there’s been some critique that the federal and provincial governments ended up not pursuing all of the arguments that they conceivably could have put forward,” said Newman.

Defence lawyers notably declined to

press the critical issue

of whether Aboriginal title was “extinguished” when private ownership was established over the lands by the government in the 1800s.

Newman added it would be “unusual” for a sitting federal justice minister to publicly lay out the specific arguments that government lawyers should make.

He noted that the federal government’s public legal posturing doesn’t always match the arguments they pursue in court, pointing to

the ongoing court case

surrounding Quebec’s use of the notwithstanding clause to insulate its 2019 secularism law.

“They were saying some things around what they were going to argue, although what they’ve ended up arguing has been a bit different than what they were talking about,” said Newman.

A long-awaited factum

submitted by Fraser earlier this month sidesteps the law’s content entirely and focuses on constitutional issues raised by Quebec’s use of the notwithstanding clause, despite years

of Liberal concern

 about the law’s adverse effects on religious minorities.

The B.C. Court of Appeal has not yet set a hearing date for the Cowichan Tribes case.

National Post

rmohamed@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 daily newsletter, Posted, here.

Click here for more Canada

Ontario Premier Doug Ford at Chapman's Ice Cream in Markdale, Ont., on Friday, Sept. 19, 2025.

Ontario Premier Doug Ford, who has made it clear this month that he wants to rid the province of automated speed enforcement cameras, mused on Monday about whether they could be turned to other crime-fighting purposes.

Ford was in Hamilton, Ont., for a

press conference

when a reporter asked if he foresaw the province giving money to the city to make up for lost revenue from speed cameras and to put into infrastructure.

“Well, what we’re going to do is make sure that we give places like Hamilton the money to build the infrastructure, to actually slow down the traffic,” said Ford. “And we look forward to working with the mayor and her team to tell us where … they want the infrastructure put together.”

Ford then added: “I was asking the mayor about crime as well, because I want to start introducing cameras on crime, if approved by residents.”

He said he has been talking to Andrea Horvath, Hamilton’s mayor, about home invasions and car theft, noting that the city was one of several regions in Ontario that was “getting hammered” by crime.

“So we’re going to be working on that,” he said. “And I’m wondering if we can use those

cameras to identify stolen cars as well.”

Ford added that, while speed cameras were on his radar, he did not see red when it came to red-light cameras.

“I have no problem with red light cameras,” he said. “I think they’re essential because they cause serious accidents. Someone’s racing through a red light. But our goal is to continue working with the municipalities, to help them build the infrastructure that is needed.”

Ford did not add whether it would be practical or even possible to repurpose speed cameras for other purposes.

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.

Click here for more Canada

Burlington lawyer Crystal Diane Masterson was suspended by the Law Society of Ontario while it probes allegations that she participated in a Ponzi scheme that saw $25 million deposited into her trust account.

The Law Society of Ontario has suspended the licence of a Burlington lawyer while it probes allegations that she participated in a Ponzi scheme that saw $25 million deposited into her trust account.

Crystal Diane Masterson, 40, informed the society this past March that she had been charged with fraud over $5,000.

“The charge stems from the lawyer’s involvement in an apparent Ponzi scheme, which allegedly resulted in millions of dollars of losses,” said the recent decision suspending Masterson’s licence to practice, which notes two co-accused were also charged.

Masterson’s interlocutory suspension was ordered in a decision from the Law Society Tribunal, dated Sept. 10.

“The evidence before us shows that there are serious concerns about the lawyer’s integrity and trustworthiness,” said the panel.

Masterson was called to the bar in 2013, said the decision, which notes she primarily works in real estate law.

She “first learned of the purported investments underlying the Ponzi scheme from a friend of hers, now a co-accused, who she understood was a mortgage broker,” said the decision. “She was told the investments involved unsecured loans for private bridge financing for real estate transactions, and equipment financing for companies. The loans were secured by a ‘wealthy businessman’ — now also a co-accused — who had purportedly vetted all the borrowers and could cover any loans which defaulted.”

Ontario Provincial Police charged Halton Regional Police Sgt. Jon Williams this past spring in relation to the fraud. The 18-year veteran of the force was suspended with pay this past March. That’s still the case, a spokesman for the force confirmed Monday.

Douglas Grozelle, reportedly a former member of the punk band Trunk, is also charged with fraud in the Ponzi scheme.

“Grozelle allegedly induced investors to contribute capital by promising extraordinary returns,” according to Insolvency Insider Canada. “However, none of the investments, save for one, resulted in any legitimate returns or income.”

Some of the scheme’s “top net winners (numbers 1, 2, 6 and 7 respectively) include Halton Regional Police officers,” said the publication. “Over a dozen other officers (some net losers) invested in the scheme, including a former fraud detective who was the top net loser.”

Masterson “did no due diligence with respect to the purported investments and relied on her friend’s assurances that he had personally vetted the investments,” said the decision from the Law Society Tribunal.

In April 2022, Masterson “tested the purported investment by investing $175,000 of her own money, together with her then-husband. The initial loan was paid out in full with $17,500 in interest in 21 days,” said the decision.

“After this test, the lawyer approached friends and family members, most of whom were also clients, to invest money in the alleged Ponzi scheme.”

According to the decision, “it appears the investment funds flowed through” Masterson’s trust account.

“This was unrelated to the provision of legal services. When the lawyer received funds from investors to her trust account, she would immediately disburse them to her co-accused’s company. It appears there were approximately 15 individuals, most of whom were clients in addition to being friends and family members, whose funds flowed through her trust account.”

Masterson “claims she relied on information from her co-accused that the loans were urgent in nature and the funds had to be transferred the same day, thereby necessitating the use of her trust account,” said the decision, which notes she has paid back some, but not all of those who invested through her trust account.

“She indicated she paid back those who were closest to her. It appears nine individuals or groups of individuals are still owed a total of approximately $9 million. Between April and December 2022, approximately $25 million was deposited into the lawyer’s trust account in relation to the investment scheme.”

Masterson said she “began having concerns about the investment scheme in September or October 2022, when payments from her co-accused started coming in late,” said the decision, which notes she didn’t “suspect the investment scheme was fraudulent until January 2023 when one of her co-accused retained counsel who then sent her a letter promising a payment of $5.9 million by December 30, 2022, which did not materialize.”

After the loans defaulted in November 2022, Masterson “was approached by one of the investors who wanted to raise capital to buy out all purported investments,” said the decision.

“This investor indicated he had a friend who could potentially invest to ‘buy out the loan portfolio.’”

Masterson “made a brochure to be used in a presentation to try to convince the investor’s friend to buy out the loans,” said the decision.

According to the brochure Masterson made, “in over three years of operation, the pooled fund has experienced zero defaults on its loans,” said the decision, which notes it included a statement about being “verified with sworn attestation by lawyer in good standing with the Law Society of Ontario.”

By the time she had created the brochure, “the loans had gone into default, which is inconsistent with the information (Masterson) included in the brochure,” said the decision.

Records provided by Masterson “with respect to her trust account suggest that, in November 2022, (she) used new funds obtained from investors to pay off earlier investors in the alleged Ponzi scheme,” said the decision.

Masterson is named in “at least three ongoing civil matters which name (her) as a defendant, and which claim damages for losses suffered because of investments made to the alleged Ponzi scheme,” it said.

They allege Masterson “solicited funds from clients for short-term loans while she was acting as their lawyer and trusted advisor; assured clients that the various private loans were vetted by her or individuals she trusted; deposited client investment funds in her trust account; allowed others to misrepresent the investments in the brochure such as by claiming” that she’d verified them.

The brochure she made indicated the lenders had been through a “thorough investigation,” said the decision, noting that “allowed her co-accused to hold themselves out as reliable, law-abiding lenders by using her status as licensed and in good standing with the Law Society.”

One person suing Masterson “swore an affidavit containing text messages exchanged with (her) in October 2022” where Masterson “appeared to indicate” that “the scheme had had ‘zero defaults’ in four years and hundreds of millions of dollars invested,” said the decision.

The texts confirm Masterson was “paid a ‘finder’s fee’ which does not come out of the potential return for the investor,” said the decision, which notes Masterson “has not disclosed to the Law Society that she was paid a finder’s fee for recruiting investors into the Ponzi scheme, including in her two interviews.”

The decision notes the investigation into Masterson’s actions is at an early stage.

“While the lawyer seems to be co-operating, she has failed to provide many key documents,” it said, noting that some documents Masterson provided “have contained inaccurate information, hampering” the Law Society’s ability to investigate allegations against her.

The tribunal found it had “reasonable grounds to believe that there is a significant risk of harm to members of the public, or to the public interest in the administration of justice” if it didn’t suspend Masterson.

“In our view, there is risk of harm under both branches, given the evidence tending to demonstrate a lack of integrity and trustworthiness on” Masterson’s part, said the decision.

“Specifically, the evidence provides reasonable grounds to believe that (she) may have may have engaged in criminal conduct; may have knowingly participated in, facilitated or otherwise failed to prevent dishonesty, fraud, crime or illegal conduct; and may have used trust accounts for purposes not related to the provision of legal services.”

If the allegations against Masterson “are established, she would face a substantial penalty — either a lengthy suspension or possibly revocation of her licence,” said the decision.

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.

Click here for more Canada

Russian President Vladimir Putin, Chinese President Xi Jinping and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un on Sept. 3, 2025.

OTTAWA — A top government cybersecurity official says the threat landscape has “never been worse”, with attacks happening at unprecedented numbers and levels of sophistication namely from “axis of cyber evil” states.
 

“It’s bad out there. It’s ugly out there when it comes to cyber,” Sami Khoury, a senior official for cyber security at the Communications Security Establishment (CSE) told attendees of an orientation session for MPs by the Parliamentary Centre on Friday.
 

Leaning on his 33-year career at Canada’s cyber spy agency split between working on the intelligence side and then heading the Canadian Center for Cyber Security, Khoury painted a bleak picture of the current cyber threat landscape.
 

Cyber criminals are coming at private and public organizations harder, better, faster and stronger than ever before, he said.
 

On top of that, there are “daily” breaches by cybercriminals backed by what he called the four “axis of cyber evil” states: China, Russia, Iran and North Korea.
 

“I can say it hasn’t been it’s never been worse, in the sense that it’s really bad these days,” Khoury said of the cyber threat landscape.
 

“I would say every indicator is pointing up in terms of the volume of incidents we’re seeing, the variety of incidents… the velocity of these incidents at which they’re coming at us and also the sophistication of these incidents.”
 

In its latest annual report

, CSE

said it responded to 2,561 cyber security incidents affecting either the government of Canada or critical infrastructure providers

in the 2024-2025 fiscal year.

That’s a 16 per cent increase compared to the previous year as hostile actors increasingly target Canada’s critical infrastructure sectors such as energy, finance, food, water and manufacturing. 

Members of Parliament are particularly attractive targets for cybercriminals because of their access to House of Commons networks and government documents.
 

On Friday, Khoury cautioned MPs to avoid sending themselves files between their professional and personal networks (such as email) and to generally keep their personal and professional lives separate.
 

“Please, protect the link between your life and your personal life. Passing documents back and forth might seem like an easy way or a simple thing to do, but that becomes a factor for infecting one or two devices that way,” Khoury said.
 

Khoury said ransomware is the “predominant blight” in the cyber world now, with criminals and state-sponsored groups increasingly deploying sophisticated and cheap tools to lock victims’ systems and demand money to have them unlocked.
 

Part of the issue, he noted, is that there is no “magical solution” to unlock systems crippled by ransomware. Thus, investing in cyber security to prevent such attacks is more important than ever, he added.
 

“From a government perspective, we don’t have a magic key on all these systems. The solution is to build resilience, to invest in raising the cyber resilience of organizations,” he warned attendees of the Parliamentary Centre event.
 

But state-sponsored criminal activity, namely from China, is the second “extreme” on the cyber threat landscape, Khoury said.
 

“China keeps us on our toes and keeps us busy. It tends to be predominantly for espionage, to get a sense of what is the government up to and then we’ll use any way to get into that nugget of information,” he detailed.
 

Despite the concerning trends in cyber, Khoury ended the event with a note of optimism: Cybersecurity is one of Canada’s “strongest assets” and the government’s cyber defence systems are the
envy of many other countries
.
 

National Post

cnardi@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 politics newsletter, First Reading, here.

Click here for more Canada

A WestJet cabin interior. The airline notes this is an artist rendering, and may not be exactly as shown.

WestJet has announced a “major cabin reconfiguration” on its fleet of Boeing 737 aircraft that it says will offer “a refreshed range of seating options.” Among the changes, however, is something the airline is calling “fixed recline design” seats in its economy section. “Fixed” in this case means “don’t” — the seats no longer have an option to recline.

In a

press release

announcing the changes, WestJet says it is also instituting a new class,

Extended Comfort

, which “features 36 seats with extra legroom and will be separated from the Economy cabin by a cabin divider.”

It adds: “The standard seating in the Economy cabin offers choices ranging from less space at the back to more space near the front of the cabin, and upgraded seats featuring seatback contouring to maximize legroom, ergonomically designed, contoured bottom and back cushions.”

On its

website,

WestJet goes into further detail, noting that back of cabin seats from rows 20 to 31 offer less space, while middle seats (rows 15 to 19) offer a bit more, and those toward the front of the cabin even more.

Extended Comfort section seats will recline, as will those in the premium seating section, which is in front of economy. Both Extended Comfort and premium seats will cost more than the regular economy seats.

According to WestJet, the new non-reclining seats will also allow enough space on-board to add one seating row compared to the airline’s prior standard layout, which it says will help reduce prices.

The airline is putting a positive spin on the change in another way, noting that “the modern cabin experience will offer a bright, airy atmosphere with an upgraded design that features new seats, adjustable headrests and enhanced cushion and back support.”

It says the fixed recline design “helps preserve personal space,” adding: “The interior will also include in-seat power sources, personal phone/tablet holders and reworked lavatories and galleys.”

The airline says that select WestJet Rewards members as well as employees helped select the new seats in January 2023, by testing and sharing their experiences on which options were the most comfortable.

“A complete cabin prototype was tested in late Summer 2025, and feedback was incorporated to help shape rollout, training and preparation for the launch,” the airline added.

Whether regular passengers will agree remains to be seen. Seat-recline politics have long been an issue, with numerous etiquette guides offerings

dos and don’ts

on the practice.

Things came to a head about 10 years ago with a product called the

Knee Defender

— plastic clips that prevented the seat in front from reclining. Fights broke out, and airlines banned the use of such devices, on pain of ejection from the aircraft.

Samantha Taylor, WestJet Executive Vice-President and Chief Experience Officer, said: “The cabin has been thoughtfully designed to offer WestJet’s welcoming service at every budget. It reflects our commitment to elevating every aspect of the travel experience and meeting guest demand for a broader range of product offerings.”

National Post has reached out to WestJet for further information.

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.

Click here for more Canada