Winnipeggers weigh in on banning encampments near places like playgrounds
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CTV News
31 minutes ago
- CTV News
Canada in ‘no man's land' as new U.S. tariffs take effect, former foreign minister warns
Prime Minister Mark Carney listens as U.S. President Donald Trump speaks during a group photo at the G7 Summit, Monday, June 16, 2025, in Kananaskis, Canada. (AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein) Canada is bracing for further tension in its trade relationship with the United States, after President Donald Trump imposed sweeping new tariffs. 'This is bad news,' said former foreign affairs minister Peter MacKay in an interview with CTV News Channel Sunday. 'It's bad news for the markets. It's bad news for many sectors on both sides of the border. … There is a lot of impetus now to try to bring this to an end.' Trump hit Canadian goods with a 35-per-cent tariff on Friday—targeting products not compliant with the Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement. The White House said the decision was made in response to Canada's 'failure to co-operate' on stemming fentanyl imports and Ottawa's retaliatory duties. Trump also introduced 50-per-cent tariffs on semi-finished copper products and maintained existing duties on Canadian steel, aluminum and automobiles. Dominic LeBlanc, Canada's trade minister, said Sunday he expects Prime Minister Mark Carney and Trump to speak 'over the next number of days' in a renewed effort to de-escalate the dispute. MacKay, meanwhile, says high-level talks are essential, especially given Trump's direct involvement. 'Having personal discussions with our prime minister … is probably the only way we are going to see this trade agreement finally get done,' he said. MacKay warned that while some 75 per cent of goods crossing the border remain tariff-free, critical sectors like steel, aluminum, copper and autos are facing sharp new costs. He also cautioned that the trade war risks turning personal. 'We've seen what happens, as recently as with the former Prime Minister Trudeau, when it does get personal,' he said. 'The Canadian economy ultimately and quickly pays a price.' Trump signed the executive order late Thursday. The Aug. 1 target date floated for a potential deal passed without progress, and there is still no clear timeline for resolution. MacKay described this current phase as 'no man's land.' 'We are not even where we used to be,' he said. 'Let's just hope that (Trump) doesn't go wildly off in all directions on the eve of getting to some sort of a finish line.' With files from the Canadian Press
CBC
33 minutes ago
- CBC
Opponents of new gas plant accuse N.B. Power of trying to evade regulatory scrutiny
Social Sharing Advocates are raising concerns that N.B. Power is looking to shortcut the regulatory process and avoid public scrutiny of its proposed 400-megawatt gas plant. "It's an attempt to evade the regulatory process and that's unacceptable," said Green Leader David Coon. N.B. Power is required to get approval from the Energy and Utilities Board for capital projects costing more than $50 million, but are arguing that a $70-million transmission facility required for a new natural gas generating facility in the province's southeast should be excepted from that scrutiny. Normally, that would trigger a review of the entire project. Coon said it's clear the utility doesn't believe the independent EUB would see the economic argument for it. "It says to me they don't have much faith in the Energy and Utilities Board deciding that these expenditures would be in the economic interests of New Brunswickers given the alternatives," he said. "The alternatives are there. I mean, places from the city of Saint John to the state of Vermont are using large battery storage systems on the scale of hundreds of megawatts in the case of Vermont to provide peak power." N.B. Power's application makes the case that the structure of the deal to build and operate the plant and necessary infrastructure doesn't count as a traditional capital investment. The new plant will be owned and operated by ProEnergy, which will sell the power generated back to N.B. Power. Because the plant is being built by and will be wholly owned by ProEnergy, the project doesn't require hearings and board approval. WATCH | 'They have a right to see what's going on,' says critic calling for review: Opponents of new gas plant say N.B. Power is trying to evade public scrutiny 7 minutes ago However, the project also includes a $70-million switchyard that ProEnergy has agreed to build. By law, only N.B. Power can own transmission assets in the province, so once completed, it will be sold to the utility for a dollar. N.B. Power argues that since they aren't building it, the transfer shouldn't count as a capital project and should therefore be shielded from board review and the public hearings that come with it — even though it will show up as a $70-million asset in its capital structure, with the depreciation and liabilities that come with it. A spokesperson for N.B. Power said in a statement that the application is intended to get the EUB's opinion on how to treat these types of agreements. "This structure differs from N.B. Power building and operating a long-term asset, where we would assume all operational risks, ultimately borne by the ratepayer. This is a new type of agreement for NB Power, and we felt it was important to seek the NBEUB's opinion," Elizabeth Fraser said in an email. Fraser added that while a full EUB review would take longer, they believe the plant could still be ready by 2028. N.B. Power said previously that the plant is necessary to address the growing population and demand for energy in the province and to provide a backup to intermittent renewable power. The utility is also looking to add hundreds of megawatts of wind energy to its generation mix in coming years and says the plant will be a crucial part of ensuring it has the energy it needs when demand dictates. According to environmental assessment filings, work to prepare the site is intended to start as early as next year, with the plant coming online in 2028. ProEnergy's lead for the project previously told CBC that it's expected the project could result in a 250,000-tonne reduction in N.B. Power's greenhouse gas emissions as the plant would displace more polluting sources of power. Reduction claims need to be tested Moe Qureshi, the director of climate change research and policy at the Conservation Council of New Brunswick, said those claims need to be tested in the EUB's public hearing process to determine if the plant, or the deal, is in the best interest of New Brunswickers. "The EUB is the way to review that information to check if this is really the best choice for New Brunswick and, without that oversight, I think we're going to get into more problems rather than less," he said. "What if this costs us more down the road than what we think now? And I think if the ratepayers have to pay for this, they have a right to see what's going on." The EUB filing also provides more details about how ProEnergy will be paid for the facility. N.B. Power will pay for the fuel used to power the plant and purchase the power generated. But they will also make monthly "capacity payments" based on how much power the utility purchased versus what the facility could produce. Fraser said payments will be based on a "'pay for performance' model, meaning we are only subject to payments when the facility meets a high level of availability." N.B. Power's EUB filing states they expect the capacity payments will eclipse $50 million over the 25-year lifespan of the agreement. A pre-hearing conference is scheduled for Aug. 12, with hearing dates set for the beginning of September.
Globe and Mail
34 minutes ago
- Globe and Mail
Why it is a mistake to recognize a Palestinian state
Canada's decision to recognize Palestinian statehood is a grave mistake, for several reasons. First, it rewards terrorism. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is wrong about many things, but he is right about that. Palestinian advocates have argued for years that the major Western powers should grant recognition to a sovereign Palestine, as many other countries already have. The Western powers have always balked, arguing that formal recognition should come only after a final peace settlement. Now France, Britain and Canada have agreed. They are the first members of the G7 club of rich, democratic nations to take this momentous step. Hamas can now argue that its Oct. 7 attack on Israel won Palestinians the prize that has eluded them for so long. It drew the Israelis into a devastating counterattack that blackened their reputation. Gaza may be in ruins, its people in misery, but some of Israel's most powerful friends have turned against the Jewish state. Murder works. Yahya Sinwar, the Oct. 7 mastermind later killed in Gaza, would be pleased. Second, it chokes off the opportunity for a negotiated agreement. The template for that has always been land for peace. Israel ends its occupation, the Palestinians acknowledge Israel's right to live in peace, the world gives its blessing to the new state of Palestine. Though the prospect of such a deal seems remote now, it is still the best route to a lasting solution. Analysis: Movement to recognize Palestinian statehood reflects Israel's growing isolation This pre-empts it. What leverage do Canada and its partners possess now, having granted the Palestinians their long-sought reward in advance? Third, it recognizes something that does not exist, at least not yet. Recognition usually comes when a new country has a functioning government that exercises effective control over a coherent territory. The state that Canada is about to recognize is divided into separate pieces: the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, one torn by war, the other in turmoil. Two mutually hostile groups are vying to rule that notional state. One, Hamas, is a violent Islamist movement whose leadership has been decimated; the other, the Palestinian Authority, is stagnant, unpopular and corrupt. Neither has faced the voters in years. Both lack all democratic legitimacy. Mahmoud Abbas, the weak and discredited PA leader, has held power since 2005. He will soon turn 90. Prime Minister Mark Carney says he has the personal assurance of Mr. Abbas that the leader will hold proper elections next year. Canada's decision to recognize a Palestinian state at the United Nations General Assembly in September is 'predicated' on that pledge. Predicated on, but not conditional on. Canada won't wait to see whether Mr. Abbas actually holds a free vote, as he has often promised to do in the past. Mr. Carney will just take his word. Explainer: What does Canada's recognition of a Palestinian state mean in practice? So, Canada's decision rewards terrorism, reduces the chances of a negotiated settlement and recognizes a state that does not exist. Apart from all that, it will almost certainly fail to achieve its immediate goal. The three allies seem to think that recognizing Palestinian statehood will jolt Israel into seeing just how disgusted and furious the international community is with its conduct of the war in Gaza. The hope is that Israel's leaders will come to their senses, declare an immediate ceasefire and stop blocking the road to the creation of a free Palestine. More likely, the gesture will push Israel's right-wing government into a corner, making it even less willing to listen. It is determined to thwart the emergence of a Palestinian state, which it is convinced would become another Gaza: an extremist-run terror state on Israel's doorstep. All the finger wagging from Paris, London and Ottawa is not going to change its mind. Nor will the move have much effect on Hamas, which continues to insist on keeping its arms, its hostages and its political control of Gaza despite all the suffering the recent conflict has brought – suffering it caused by attacking Israel and prolongs to this day by refusing to give ground at the bargaining table. If anything, this will embolden its hard-liners. Canada, like most of the world, would like to end Gaza's agony and bring the war to a quick conclusion. Unfortunately, Ottawa's empty gesture might have exactly the opposite effect.
