Pierre Poilievre's smart move on the pipeline vote, what is happening in the U.K., and banning the Bible at Christmas...

Plus putting questions to Coastal First Nations and more.

It’s a pretty smart move, Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre is going to lean on the cracks in the Liberal Party over pipelines and the MOU. A motion to be debated in the House of Commons on Tuesday, takes language directly from the Memorandum of Understanding between Alberta and the Federal government and puts it to a vote.

We’ve seen the PM try to play both sides against the middle on the idea of a pipeline, we’ve seen Liberal MPs, either from BC or their environmental caucus, attempt to downplay the pipeline idea. So the Conservatives pulled parts of the MOU and put them into their motion and Liberals will need to vote yes or no.

From the Notice Paper.

Opposition Motions

December 5, 2025 — The Honourable Pierre Poilievre (Battle River—Crowfoot) — That the House:

(a) take note of the Memorandum of Understanding between Canada and Alberta of November 27, 2025; and

(b) support the construction of one or more pipelines enabling the export of at least one million barrels a day of low-emission Alberta bitumen from a strategic deep­water port on the British Columbia coast to reach Asian markets, including through an appropriate adjustment to the Oil Tanker Moratorium Act, while respecting the duty to consult Indigenous peoples.

On Monday, Poilievre was having fun asking the Liberals about this, and to be honest, they were having trouble answering.

Will they ask real questions or carry water for them…

On Tuesday, the CEO of Coastal First Nations will be in Ottawa to protest the pipeline proposal and the MOU.

I’ve challenged members of the Parliamentary Press Gallery to ask real and relevant questions as I posted on X.

I’m some will try, but if they do the pack-like, mean girls element of the gallery will try and shut some of it down. It’s a bizarre place the Press Gallery.

Anyway, for this week’s episode of the Full Comment Podcast, I spoke to Ellis Ross. He’s currently the Conservative MP for Skeena-Bulkley Valley in B.C. and was previously the MLA for the area.

Before that, he was the local Chief for the Haisla First Nation. He’s also pro-pipeline and not a fan of Coastal First Nations, again, they aren’t a band they are a Vancouver based not-for-profit that was started with American money to oppose Canadian resource development.

Listen here or look up Full Comment wherever you get your podcasts.

What the heck is happening in the U.K. right now…

Britain, that reliably left-wing country appears to be at a breaking point when it comes to immigration, specifically illegal immigration. That’s a big part of what is driving the move to Reform U.K. and their leader Nigel Farage.

People are fed up it seems with the mainstream parties.

To try and get a sense of this I spoke with Simon Kent, a former colleague at the Toronto Sun who has worked for media outlets all over the world and for the last decade has been based in London working as a writer and editor with Breitbart.

If you enjoy the conversation, please share it.

Banning the Bible at Christmas is a vote getter…

Yes, let’s pass a law that will ban parts of the Bible just before Christmas, that will get huge amounts of public support! If you haven’t heard the Carney Liberals are in hot water over their attempts to pass a new hate crime law, Bill C-9, that would also either ban or criminalize certain religious texts.

I lay this all out in my column in the Toronto Sun today.

Bill C-9 has some good parts, protecting places of worship from the kinds of aggressive protests synagogues in Toronto and elsewhere have seen since October 7, 2023. There are problematic parts to it as well that have generated criticism around how far it goes in curtailing free speech.

The law, which really should be split up, wasn’t finding any partners that would help the Liberals pass it. That was until the Bloc Quebecois said they would support it if the Liberals amended it to strip away current provisions in the criminal code that offer a “good faith” defence based on religious belief or religious texts.

The animosity towards religion in official Quebec is quite something to behold. Yes, I get the whole quiet revolution thing, but they’ve become obnoxiously loud in their opposition to religion anywhere in public life.

The problem, as I pointed out in my column is that this proposal has raised the ire of several religious groups. The Bloc wants to portray any opposition to their stance as backwards bigoted folks from the religious right, except the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops has written to Prime Minister Mark Carney - a church going Catholic - to express their concern.

What could be banned…

Over at National Post, Tristin Hopper is having fun going over what Bible verses might be banned or criminalized if this does go through.

Deuteronomy 22:22

Present in both Jewish texts and the Christian Old Testament, the book of Deuteronomy is effectively a series of speeches by Moses in which he tells Israelites how God wants them to worship and live. And one of those rules is that adulterers should die. “If a man be found lying with a woman married to a husband, then they shall both of them die,” reads the King James translation of Deuteronomy 22:22.

Miller specifically referenced this passage in a social media post where he also cited his Christian bona fides. “I say this, in particular because I am a Christian: there should be no defence to the crime of publicly inciting hatred because, for example, someone relied on Leviticus 20:13 or Deuteronomy 22:22,” he wrote.

Killing adulterers is notably absent from modern Judaism or Christianity. The Catholic Church, for one, prescribes spiritual (rather than violent) atonement for adultery. And the Anglican Church of Canada has noted adulterer King Charles III as its head.