When Finance Minister François-Philippe Champagne announced that Ottawa plans to create a national financial crimes agency to fight online scams and modern fraud, most Canadians understandably welcomed the idea. After all, the Feds’ announcement of a new agency targeting online scams and financial fraud comes at a time when Canadians lost an estimated $643 million to fraud in 2024 — a figure that’s nearly tripled since 2020, according to the Canadian Anti-Fraud Centre.
But behind the friendly headlines lies a deeper debate about who really benefits when the federal government starts rewriting financial law — particularly when the Bank Act and Canada’s private banking structure are in their sights.
The “Good Intentions” Problem
The federal Liberals say this initiative will modernize the fight against cybercrime. The new financial crimes agency, expected to be outlined in the November 4 budget, will reportedly focus on complex online scams — phishing links, ghost texts, and fraudulent bank emails.
Minister Champagne described the initiative as “a big bold step” to make Canada “best in class.” Yet as many private-sector professionals point out, the cost of this new agency hasn’t even been calculated — and when government budgets swell without clear structure or measurable outcomes, taxpayers often foot the bill without seeing results.
For many Canadians, the problem isn’t the desire to stop scams. It’s the growing centralization of authority under the banner of “protection.”
Mark Carney’s ESG Framework — or Corporate Social Engineering?
Prime Minister Mark Carney’s ideological footprint looms large here. His book Values outlines a worldview based on ESG — Environmental, Social and Governance principles. While ESG may sound progressive, critics argue it’s less about protecting the environment and more about controlling the private sector.
By tying access to capital and banking services to a shifting set of “approved” environmental and social goals, ESG turns subjective political standards into corporate compliance mandates. When combined with policies like “net zero,” this framework risks penalizing dissenters and reshaping financial access through what amounts to soft censorship.
For Christians and other liberty-minded Canadians, this raises moral and ethical questions. If “settled science” or “approved values” become prerequisites for financial participation, freedom of conscience and speech could quickly become casualties of bureaucratic progress.
The Bank Act: What’s Really Changing?
Among the measures being discussed is an amendment to the Bank Act, compelling financial institutions to implement fraud-prevention and response policies. On paper, that sounds harmless. But history shows that vague policy language often enables overreach.
Consider 2022, when the Liberal government froze bank accounts of Canadians involved in lawful protests. That moment revealed how easily financial control can be weaponized against political opponents. Now, under the pretext of “protecting consumers,” the state may again expand its reach into private financial systems.
When governments attempt to legislate personal accountability, it rarely ends well. Most financial scams — whether romance scams, fake CRA calls, or online phishing — stem from consumer negligence, not systemic banking failure. Private insurance products and fraud-protection services already exist to mitigate those risks. There’s no need to amend federal banking law to manage individual decision-making.
The Slippery Slope of Centralized Science and “Settled Truth”
Modern “settled science” once claimed the earth was flat, and Socrates was executed for questioning democratic orthodoxy. Yet today’s ESG movement insists that environmental and social policy are beyond debate — a dangerous mindset for any free society.
Centralizing authority under the guise of “science” or “equity” doesn’t lead to justice; it leads to bureaucratic absolutism. Globalism, when divorced from moral truth, becomes a substitute religion — one where data replaces discernment and compliance replaces conviction.
Accountability or Infantilization?
Canada’s cultural shift toward blaming institutions rather than individuals is troubling. We now live in a society where every personal mistake becomes a call for reimbursement. If an individual falls for a romance scam, sends money to a stranger overseas, and then demands repayment from their bank — the logical result is tighter bank scrutiny, higher fees, and more closed accounts.
This cycle punishes everyone, while doing little to educate the public about personal financial responsibility. Instead of promoting insurance-based safeguards or better consumer awareness, we see yet another layer of federal oversight and unfunded bureaucracy.
Political Context: A Budget in Turbulence
The financial-crimes announcement arrives just as Mark Carney prepares his first federal budget — one likely to include another large deficit. Conservatives, led by Pierre Poilievre, warn that the Liberals have turned Canada into “a country of empty bank accounts, empty fridges, and empty stomachs.”
Poilievre argues that the government could shrink its deficit by “cutting wasteful spending on bureaucracy, consultants, corporate welfare, and foreign aid,” while boosting resource development. The Bloc Québécois and NDP are each pressing for their own pre-budget demands — from expanded housing and healthcare funding to Old Age Security increases.
Amid all these negotiations, the proposed financial crimes agency may appear small. But in principle, it represents the same top-down mindset that defines ESG: centralize, control, and compel compliance in the name of the public good.
A Better Way Forward
The private sector — not Ottawa — is best equipped to develop fraud-prevention tools. Insurance-based risk management, better digital-security education, and trusted intermediaries could all reduce fraud without rewriting national banking law.
By contrast, expanding government control over private finance risks empowering future administrations to regulate ideology, not crime. Canada’s financial system is already highly compliant. The answer to online scams isn’t more bureaucracy; it’s more personal accountability and moral grounding.
Final Reflection
Mark Carney’s Net Zero/ESG banking vision is more than a policy debate — it’s a worldview. It replaces faith with technocracy, independence with regulation, and free enterprise with managed compliance. Whether you agree or disagree with his ideology, the truth remains: freedom cannot coexist with enforced conformity.
As Christians, we’re reminded that truth is not dictated by committees or “settled science.” True justice begins when individuals take responsibility for their actions and align their values with something higher than government approval.
Consider making Jesus Christ your Lord and Savior today — the only foundation strong enough to withstand any system built on shifting human values.