Canadian delegation in Rome for Pope Francis's funeral
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
National Observer
32 minutes ago
- National Observer
Danielle Smith and Doug Ford will sign agreements in Calgary today
The premiers of Alberta and Ontario will meet in Calgary today to sign two new memorandums of understanding. Danielle Smith 's office says she and Doug Ford will sign agreements on energy priorities, trade and interprovincial co-operation. The pair were together at a roundtable in Calgary on Sunday, with Ford tweeting that they discussed how to build new pipelines, as well as rail lines to export Canadian critical minerals and energy. Smith bumped into Prime Minister Mark Carney at the Calgary Stampede on Saturday. When she told Carney about the documents she and Ford would be signing, she told him it would be "so great if we didn't have net-zero (carbon) rules." Ford signed a memorandum in May with Manitoba Premier Wab Kinew to boost the movement of goods and labour between the two provinces. "The best way to protect Canadian workers from tariffs and economic uncertainty is to build the infrastructure that will get our resources to new markets," Ford said Sunday in a post on social media, along with photos from his roundtable with Smith. Smith is also scheduled to be at the Premier's Stampede Breakfast early Monday, which will be outside McDougall Centre, where her meeting with Ford will take place later in the day. The rush to break down internal barriers to trade comes in response to US President Donald Trump's tariff war with Canada. One study estimates existing internal trade hurdles cost the economy some $200 billion a year. Throughout the spring federal election campaign, Carney repeatedly vowed to "eliminate" interprovincial trade barriers and create "free trade by Canada Day." In recent months, Smith has called for Carney to abolish several federal policies and programs, including a proposed greenhouse gas emissions cap, net-zero electricity grid regulations and the West Coast tanker ban.
National Observer
33 minutes ago
- National Observer
Politicians overstate the benefits of scrapping internal trade barriers: think tank
A new report by the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives is dismissing moves by the federal government and Canada's premiers to break down internal trade barriers as little more than "political theatre." It lands just ahead of the country's internal trade ministers meeting in Quebec City this week, where they are expected to talk about their next steps as they rush to remove rules hampering cross-provincial trade. Prime Minister Mark Carney vowed throughout the spring election to forge "one Canadian economy" with the premiers by eliminating internal barriers to trade and labour mobility in response to US President Donald Trump 's tariffs. Internal Trade Minister Chrystia Freeland has pointed to studies that say internal trade barriers amount to a seven per cent tariff that Canada imposes on itself, and that removing them could boost the economy by up to $200 billion. But the left-leaning think tank's report released this morning reviews the steps taken by Ottawa and the provinces to remove red tape and argues they will do little to mitigate the tariff threat or significantly boost the economy. The study authors say federal and provincial politicians have only been able to point to a handful of examples where getting rid of overlapping regulations could have an impact.
Vancouver Sun
an hour ago
- Vancouver Sun
Opinion: B.C.'s Crown land strategy demands public scrutiny, transparency and accountability
The B.C. government's approach to managing public lands is collapsing under its own contradictions. In the past year alone, First Nations, public interest groups, and industry proponents have all taken the province to court over closed-door decision-making on Crown land. The message from all sides is consistent: The NDP government is failing to uphold transparency, accountability, equal access and fairness. After shelving the proposed Land Act amendments last year due to a public backlash against joint Indigenous-Crown decision making, Premier David Eby promised not to proceed without rebuilding public trust. Yet his government has doubled down on requiring First Nations consent in areas where asserted territory overlaps public lands, citing the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. A daily roundup of Opinion pieces from the Sun and beyond. By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc. A welcome email is on its way. If you don't see it, please check your junk folder. The next issue of Informed Opinion will soon be in your inbox. Please try again Interested in more newsletters? Browse here. For British Columbians who expect their public lands to be managed transparently and in accordance with the law, the NDP's UNDRIP-based process delivers none of the stability or predictability promised by the premier. Nothing in Canadian law requires Indigenous consent over any lands to which Aboriginal title has not been declared by the courts under Canadian law. Yet the government's actions suggest it is operating from a very different premise by assuming Indigenous legal authority and jurisdiction over entire claimed territories, without proof of either in law. The Public Land Use Society was formed in response to growing public concerns over closed-door Crown land decisions. PLUS is non-profit society representing concerned citizens, business owners and local groups who believe that Crown land decisions should be transparent, inclusive, and accountable to all British Columbians. Aboriginal rights and title, as carefully delineated by the Canadian courts, deserve full recognition and affirmation. But what's unfolding under the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act is the imposition of an ideological framework for reconciliation drawn from UNDRIP, a non-legally binding international convention. This approach is secretive, exclusionary, undemocratic and fundamentally inappropriate for B.C. A clear pattern is emerging: the government is negotiating sweeping land-use planning agreements behind closed doors, including arrangements like the Land Use Planning Agreement with the Sḵwx̱wú7mesh Úxwumixw (Squamish Nation), announced on June 26. This 106-page agreement covers a region of major importance to British Columbians. It includes designated recreational sites and, according to the government's own release, places that land 'under direct control' of the First Nation. There is no legal authority for Indigenous 'control' of the territory, and yet the public are said to be bound by it. In some cases, these changes will require modified park management plans that could impact recreational uses. The public has had no say in these changes, which shift long-term control to a system of decision-making and management 'authority' that is in no way accountable to the broader public. To understand why this is a radical departure, consider two key elements of UNDRIP that DRIPA advances: first, the concept of Indigenous 'owned' self-defined traditional territories; and second, the requirement for Indigenous 'consent' for any government action that might affect those self-defined 'owned' territories. UNDRIP's definition of 'owned territory and resources' is very different both geographically and materially from Aboriginal title under Canadian law. Aboriginal title in Canada must be proven in court to take full legal effect and applies only to defined areas. So far, court declarations have recognized Aboriginal title over only small portions of the broader claimed traditional territories. All of this is entirely contrary to Canadian law that has been set out by the Supreme Court of Canada . It is also the exact 'veto' authority Eby has been so consistent in telling the public his government has not promised to First Nations. While PLUS supports thoughtful collaboration with Indigenous governments and the need for long-term planning, these land-use planning announcements and consent-based agreements prioritize political theatre over real-world democratic and transparent governance and seriously undermine the public interest. Planning frameworks must be grounded in clear legislation, defensible timelines, and meaningful public engagement. Public land belongs to all British Columbians, who must now decide whether to remain silent or demand a return to lawful, inclusive, and transparent land-use governance. Warren Mirko is executive director of the Public Land Use Society. Geoffrey S. Moyse, KC, is a senior lawyer with 31 years' experience in Indigenous and public law, including with the B.C. Attorney General's office.
