Former CBC host Travis Dhanraj did not walk into Parliament on Tuesday as a random disgruntled ex-employee. He showed up as an insider who had been promoted by the public broadcaster, trusted with a national program, then pushed to the margins after he says he raised concerns about editorial balance, internal culture, and political gatekeeping. His charge was simple and devastating: “CBC is gaslighting Canadians.” If even half of what he told MPs is true, the conclusion is no longer hard to reach. The CBC cannot be fixed. It should be defunded.Dhanraj’s testimony matters because it fits a pattern already visible to millions of Canadians who have watched the CBC cover politics, culture, and national debates with a thumb on the scale. In his earlier public statements after leaving the network, Dhanraj said he had “no real choice but to walk away” and accused the broadcaster of sidelining voices, avoiding hard truths, and hiding what was happening inside the institution. CBC has categorically rejected his accusations. That denial is noted. Still, the broader problem is that Dhanraj’s claims sound familiar because so many viewers have already come to the same conclusion.His allegations were not minor. He told MPs that conservatives were blocked from appearing on programs, that he was not allowed to freely pursue interviews with conservative figures, and that internal newsroom attitudes treated certain Canadians with open contempt. .That is not a small newsroom spat over guest booking. That is an allegation that a taxpayer-funded broadcaster is filtering democratic debate through an ideological lens. Dhanraj said he even raised concerns about whether CBC was living up to the spirit of the Broadcasting Act, which includes provisions on equitable treatment in political broadcasting. A public broadcaster that acts like a partisan club is not serving the public. It is using public money to lecture the public.That is why the usual defence of the CBC no longer works. Canadians are always told that the broadcaster only needs better management, a refreshed mandate, or one more round of reforms. Ottawa is already heading that way. The federal government’s own 2025 policy paper, The Future of CBC/Radio-Canada, proposes a new funding structure, new accountability language, and even stronger insulation from annual political fights. The same document says CBC currently receives about $1.38 billion in federal funding, or about $33.66 per person, and floats a more stable statutory funding model going forward. In plain English, the answer from Ottawa to public distrust is not less CBC. It is a more protected CBC.That should alarm anyone who still believes accountability matters. .The more money the CBC gets, the less reason it has to listen. The more secure its subsidy, the less pressure it faces to correct bias, bad judgment, or rotten culture. Dhanraj’s testimony suggests the problem is not one rogue producer or one bad editorial call. It is structural. A newsroom culture that treats conservatives as suspect, freedom convoy supporters as beneath respect, and internal dissent as something to suppress will not be cured by another consultant’s report and another committee hearing. It will defend itself, rebrand itself, and carry on. Public institutions do that all the time.There is another point defenders of the CBC do not like to admit. Trust is already weak. Reuters Institute’s 2025 Canada profile says overall trust in news in this country is just 40%. That is the environment in which the CBC wants Canadians to keep handing over more money while accepting assurances that it is impartial, indispensable, and misunderstood. .A broadcaster that claims to be the national referee cannot afford even the appearance of ideological capture. Yet that is exactly the appearance it has spent years cultivating. Trust, once lost, is hard to win back.Defunding the CBC does not mean Canadians lose journalism. It means they stop being forced to bankroll a giant institution that competes with private outlets while enjoying state support and political protection. Local and independent media across the country have had to survive in the real world. The CBC has had the luxury of subsidy and still managed to alienate a large share of the country. That is not a market failure. That is an institutional failure.Dhanraj did not create the case against the CBC. He sharpened it. He gave it names, examples, and an insider’s credibility. His testimony should end the old fantasy that this broadcaster can be nudged back to neutrality with better slogans and another cash infusion. Canadians do not owe the CBC endless patience. They do not owe it endless money, either.The time for warnings has passed. Defund it, now.
