Freeing up trade and keeping workers safe
Over the last few months, we have heard a lot about the need to remove so-called interprovincial trade barriers, driven by political responses to the impacts of Donald Trump's trade threats and tariffs on the Canadian economy. Prime Minister Mark Carney has said he wants interprovincial trade barriers taken down by Canada Day.
Here in Manitoba, the NDP government recently passed Bill 47, legislation that the government claims will free up interprovincial trade.
While interprovincial trade barriers are clearly something that politicians of all political stripes are currently focused on, the actual evidence of barriers that exist is a bit murkier. When I talk with my business counterparts, I find they are often hard pressed to name many examples of specific interprovincial trade barriers that are interfering with trade between provinces.
About a month ago, I had the opportunity to discuss the topic of interprovincial trade barriers with Loren Remillard, president and CEO of the Winnipeg Chamber of Commerce, on a local radio station. The only example of an interprovincial trade barrier that he offered was that each province has individual rules for fall protection.
We have all heard the lofty claims that removing interprovincial trade barriers will unleash billions in economic activity. But I fail to see how taking away a province's ability to set strong protections to keep workers from falling from roofs will unleash billions of dollars in economic activity.
Removing interprovincial trade barriers should not be used as code for things that are not barriers at all, but important protections that keep workers safe — like setting high workplace health and safety standards. A healthy workforce is a more productive workforce, and governments should be doing all they can to keep workers safe and healthy on the job. Here in Manitoba, workers continue to suffer over 25,000 workplace-related injuries a year, demonstrating that there is a lot more work to do on workplace health and safety.
When it comes to having common standards across the country, we should be striving to have the best standards, not the lowest.
For example, look at Red Seal certification, something that unions have been major supporters of through training and apprenticeship programs. When someone is Red Seal certified, you know they are well trained, and you can trust the work they do.
For trades workers, that Red Seal is a ticket to a good paying, family-supporting job, and it is recognized throughout our country, meaning you can work anywhere in Canada. Having Red Seal certification demonstrates that a worker has completed the highest standards of training. And the highest standards are something that we should all aspire to when it comes to our economy and our workforce.
Our province's interprovincial trade legislation will enable Manitoba to identify jurisdictions in Canada as reciprocating jurisdictions, in effect treating that jurisdiction's standards as equal to Manitoba's when it comes to the sale of goods and services. It closely copies legislation that Ontario and Nova Scotia have introduced on the subject, and Premier Wab Kinew also signed an interprovincial trade MOU with Ontario a few weeks ago.
But other recent action by Ontario Premier Doug Ford's government should give us pause on going full steam ahead with treating it as a reciprocating jurisdiction, no questions asked. Premier Ford is currently fast-tracking a controversial law to allow cabinet to identify 'special economic zones,' which could exempt any company or project in the zone from having to comply with whichever provincial laws, provincial regulations or municipal bylaws the government chooses.
This would open the door for the Ontario government to declare that such things as Ontario's minimum wage rules or its environmental protections no longer apply within the designated zone, an extreme measure that exists nowhere else in Canada.
As is often the case with vague notions like interprovincial trade barriers, the devil will be in the details of the Manitoba NDP government's interprovincial trade plans. And these details will only be addressed when the government makes untold numbers of regulatory changes now that Bill 47 has become law.
But Manitoba's unions will do all that we can to ensure that Manitoba strikes the right balance regarding common sense trade reforms and the best interests of Manitoba workers.
Kevin Rebeck is the president of the Manitoba Federation of Labour.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Canada News.Net
39 minutes ago
- Canada News.Net
Cocoa tariffs crush US firms, boost Canadian chocolate exports
LONDON/NEW YORK: U.S. President Donald Trump's tariffs are designed to strengthen domestic manufacturing. But in the chocolate industry, they're having the opposite effect, raising cocoa import costs and making U.S. production less competitive than factories in Canada and Mexico, industry executives and experts say. Thanks to the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), chocolate exported to the U.S. from Canada and Mexico is tariff-free, regardless of where the cocoa is sourced. Meanwhile, U.S. manufacturers must now pay between 10 percent and 25 percent in tariffs on cocoa imports. Those rates could rise to 35 percent starting August 1. Canada has no tariffs on imported cocoa products like butter and powder, and Mexico grows its own beans, giving both countries a cost advantage over U.S.-based factories. Top U.S. chocolate producer Hershey, which has facilities in Canada and Mexico, estimated earlier that tariffs could cost it US$100 million in the second half of this year if they remain in place. The company recently introduced double-digit price hikes on products like Reese's cups, but said the increases were not related to tariffs. Smaller producers are also feeling the pressure. Taza Chocolate, based in Somerville, Massachusetts, had to pay over $24,000 in duties for a single container of cocoa from Haiti. Its next shipment from the Dominican Republic will cost more than $30,000 in tariffs. "For a company our size, that's our profit margin gone," said CEO Alex Whitmore. While he considered moving part of the production to Canada to benefit from USMCA, the investment was too risky in today's uncertain environment. "We're just hunkering down and hoping this will pass," he said. Customs data from Trade Data Monitor shows Canada's chocolate exports to the U.S. rose 10 percent in the first five months of this year. Industry insiders say Canadian and Mexican contract manufacturers are gaining market share, including multinationals like Barry Callebaut, which operates multiple facilities across North America. Barry Callebaut declined to comment, but CEO Peter Feld noted the company's presence in the U.S., Canada, and Mexico "allows us to navigate this environment." Contract chocolate makers supply raw chocolate to U.S. brands, which then add ingredients and market it as American-made. The timing is especially tough for U.S. chocolate makers. Cocoa prices have surged due to poor weather and disease in major producing countries like Ghana and the Ivory Coast. Cocoa accounts for 30 to 50 percent of a chocolate bar's total cost. Hershey said in May that it is lobbying the U.S. government for an exemption on cocoa imports. In Mexico, the chocolate association Aschoco Confimex said American companies have shown growing interest in outsourcing production south of the border. "The sentiment… and requests… to manufacture in Mexico is real and has been increasing," said director general Paolo Quadrini. The U.S. chocolate market is worth $25 to 30 billion. Imports from Canada and Mexico now make up roughly 12.5 percent of that total.
CTV News
an hour ago
- CTV News
Watchdog agency investigating ex-Trump prosecutor Jack Smith for alleged illegal political activity
Special counsel Jack Smith speaks to the media about an indictment of former President Donald Trump, Aug. 1, 2023, at an office of the Department of Justice in Washington. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite, File) BRIDGEWATER, N.J. — An independent watchdog agency responsible for enforcing a law against partisan political activity by federal employees has opened an investigation into Jack Smith, the Justice Department special counsel who brought two criminal cases against then-candidate Donald Trump before his election to the White House last year. The Office of Special Counsel confirmed Saturday that it was investigating Smith on allegations he engaged in political activity through his inquiries into Trump. Smith was named special counsel by then-Attorney General Merrick Garland in November 2022 and his special counsel title is entirely distinct from the agency now investigating him. The office has no criminal enforcement power but does have the authority to impose fines and other sanctions for violations. It was not clear what basis exists to contend that Smith's investigations were political in nature or that he violated the Hatch Act, a federal law that bans certain public officials from engaging in political activity. Sen. Tom Cotton, an Arkansas Republican, had earlier this week encouraged the office to scrutinize Smith's activities and had alleged that his conduct was designed to help then-President Joe Biden and his vice president Kamala Harris, both Democrats. Smith brought two cases against Trump, one accusing him of conspiring to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election and the other of hoarding classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida. Both were brought in 2023, well over a year before the 2024 presidential election, and indictments in the two cases cited what Smith and his team described as clear violations of well-established federal law. Garland has repeatedly said politics played no part in the handling of the cases. Both cases were abandoned by Smith after Trump's November win, with the prosecutor citing longstanding Justice Department policy prohibiting the indictment of a sitting president. There was no immediate indication that the same office investigating Smith had opened investigations into the Justice Department special counsels who were appointed by Garland to investigate Biden and his son Hunter. The White House had no immediate comment on the investigation into Smith, which was first reported by The New York Post. The office has been riven by leadership tumult over the last year. An earlier chief, Hampton Dellinger, was abruptly fired by the Trump administration and initially sued to get his job back before abandoning the court fight. Trump's trade representative, Jamieson Greer, is also serving as acting special counsel. Trump selected as his replacement Paul Ingrassia, a former right-wing podcast host who has praised criminally charged influencer Andrew Tate as a 'extraordinary human being' and promoted the false claim that the 2020 election was rigged. A Senate panel was set to consider his nomination at a hearing last month, but it was pulled from the agenda. By Darlene Superville And Eric Tucker, The Associated Press
Winnipeg Free Press
2 hours ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
India indicates it will keep buying Russian oil despite Trump's threats
NEW DELHI (AP) — India has indicated that it would continue buying oil from Russia despite threats by U.S. President Donald Trump. The Indian foreign ministry said its relationship with Russia was 'steady and time-tested,' and should not be seen through the prism of a third country. Addressing a weekly presser on Friday, spokesman Randhir Jaiswal said India's broader stance on securing its energy needs was guided by the availability of oil in the markets and prevailing global circumstances. The comments follow an announcement by President Donald Trump that he intends to impose a 25% tariff on goods from India plus an additional import tax because of New Delhi's purchases of Russian oil. The threat came as the U.S. president has increasingly soured on Russia for failing to agree to a ceasefire in Ukraine and has threatened new economic sanctions if progress is not made. India bought 68,000 barrels per day of crude oil from Russia in January 2022, but by June of same year oil imports rose to 1.12 million barrels per day. The daily imports peaked at 2.15 million in May 2023 and have varied since. Supplies rose as high as nearly 40% of India's imports at one point, making Moscow the largest supplier of crude to New Delhi, the Press Trust of India reported, citing data from Kpler, a data analytics company. India's daily oil consumption is pegged around 5.5 million barrels, of which nearly 88% is met through imports. The country has historically bought most of its crude from the Middle East, but this has changed since Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. India, the world's third-largest crude importer after China and the U.S., began buying Russian oil available at discounted rates after the West shunned it to punish Moscow.
