SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
mark carney
Canadian Youth, Groups Sue Over Carney 'Failure' on Climate Crisis
"Everyone in Canada deserves to be safe and healthy," said one organization leader. "Instead, our government is putting people at risk by dismantling key climate policies without a credible plan to reduce emissions."
Jun 16, 2026
"You cannot abandon the map and still expect to reach your destination. Yet that's exactly what the federal government has done with its 2030 climate plan."
That's according to Charlie Hatt, climate director at Ecojustice, Canada's largest environmental law charity and one of the groups that partnered with a trio of young citizens this week to challenge Prime Minister Mark Carney's "failure" to bring the country's 2030 emissions reduction plan into compliance with a key federal law.
"Right now, its only climate plan is a plan to fail—and that's not just irresponsible, it's unlawful under the Canadian Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act," said Hatt. "Neither the climate nor the law can tolerate rollbacks today in exchange for promises of action many years from now."
The act requires the federal government to set science-based climate goals, create a plan to achieve them, and report on its progress. However, Carney has recently pursued various rollbacks and boosted fossil fuel development, putting his nation's 2030 emissions reduction target out of reach—which the groups and young people argued violates the law.
"Everyone in Canada deserves to be safe and healthy," said Dr. Samantha Green, president of the Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment. "Instead, our government is putting people at risk by dismantling key climate policies without a credible plan to reduce emissions. Climate change is not an abstract future threat: It is a public health emergency that is already harming patients and communities across Canada. That's why CAPE is joining this lawsuit."
The fossil fuel-driven climate emergency isn't just a danger to public health. As Environmental Defence's Julia Levin noted, Canadians "are paying the price through wildfires, heat domes, rising food insecurity, and high costs of living."
"PM Carney is betraying Canadians by taking a wrecking ball to our hard-fought climate progress," Levin declared, accusing the Liberal Party leader of following in the footsteps of Big Oil-backed Republican US President Donald Trump.
"The rest of the world is rapidly adopting clean energy systems that are already more reliable, affordable, and secure than fossil fuels," she said. "Meanwhile, our prime minister is copying President Trump's playbook, ensuring that Canada will be left behind."
Carney's climate policies as prime minister—especially compared with how he talked about the crisis before rising to his current position last year—have frustrated many citizens and left "climate-anxious voters... feeling a major case of buyer's remorse, disoriented by the dissonance between who they thought they were supporting and a climate plan that is now a complete shambles," as Canadian climate writer and activist Seth Klein wrote for The Guardian last month.
Youth applicants in the new legal fight made that frustration clear on Tuesday. Montréal, Quebec-based climate organizer Shirley Barnea said that "the Carney government's gutting of climate policy is a massive insult. After presenting himself as a climate leader, our prime minister is now abdicating responsibility—to Canadians, to future generations, to the law. As long as governments continue ignoring climate science and rolling back protections for our futures, young people will continue taking them to court."
Marie Maltais, who is from Sainte-Catherine-de-la-Jacques-Cartier, Québec, and has advocated for the climate since her early teens, said that "my generation has grown up surrounded by climate disasters and broken political promises to address them. We're told to trust the government's climate commitments—but commitments mean nothing without a real plan behind them."
Sudbury, Ontario-based Sophia Mathur, an early participant in Greta Thunberg's Fridays for Future movement who recently met with Carney and urged him to keep his climate promises, added that "young people are being handed the consequences of decisions we didn't make. We are going to live with the impacts of unchecked climate change for the rest of our lives—so we're standing up for our futures, now."
The young citizens and advocacy groups are seeking a court order that would compel Carney to comply with the Canadian Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act, stressing that "climate change is an existential threat to all Canadians."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Progressive Champion Avi Lewis Wins Leadership Race for Canada’s NDP, Vowing Left Party Will Come ‘Roaring Back’
"The NDP will start winning again because we will become that beacon to the 99%," Lewis said.
Mar 30, 2026
Progressive activist Avi Lewis is pledging to bring Canada's New Democratic Party "out of the wilderness" after being decisively elected as its new leader on Sunday on the back of an ambitious, affordability-focused agenda aimed at winning back working-class voters.
Lewis, the grandson of one of the NDP's cofounders, cruised to a resounding victory, earning 56% of the vote to take over leadership of the long-ailing left-wing party, which has bled members in recent years to both Prime Minister Mark Carney's Liberals and Pierre Poilievre's Conservatives.
He was introduced at Sunday's Winnipeg convention by his wife, the acclaimed author and activist Naomi Klein, who said her husband's victory was an invitation for Canadians to “dream big once again" and renew the fight against corporate greed at a time when more than half of the population says they struggle to afford basic necessities.
Lewis has proposed a sweeping agenda of “public options” aimed at combating Canada’s affordability crisis, including publicly owned grocery stores and banks to compete with price-gouging corporate monopolies.
A scion of the party that helped to build Canada’s universal healthcare system—which covers hospital and physician care—he’s called for it to be expanded into a “head-to-toe” care system that guarantees dental, drugs, vision, hearing, and mental health services for all Canadians.
In order to pay for these programs and others—including public housing, green energy investment, and subsidized phone and internet plans—Lewis has campaigned to pass a wealth tax on the richest 1% of Canadians, who own nearly $1.25 trillion, almost as much as the bottom 80% of Canadians, according to a recent report by Oxfam Canada.
"This country is awash in wealth. We can have nice things," Lewis asserted to a raucous crowd during his acceptance speech. "Banks made $70 billion in profits last year alone. Oil companies are expecting a new windfall in the tens of billions. Grocery baron Galen Weston alone is worth $20 billion."
During his campaign, Lewis railed against tax cuts for wealthy Canadians passed by the Liberal government, which are projected to cost the government nearly $76 billion over five years and slash an estimated 57,000 public-sector jobs by 2028.
"It is time, far past time, to properly tax the billionaires and corporations that have been riding a tidal wave of profit," Lewis said.
While he acknowledged that Carney is still largely popular in Canada, in large part due to his fiery denunciations of US President Donald Trump's tariff war and threats to annex Canada, Lewis argued that the prime minister's revulsion toward Trumpism is only skin-deep.
"I think when you connect the dots, his moves do not add up to the vision that Canadians truly want and deserve in this perilous moment," he said. "Half a trillion dollars in a decade for weapons to make Canada a major arms exporter in a war-torn world. Slashing our cherished public services, sweeping aside indigenous rights... No regulations on AI and pipelines."
"In the last federal election, Canadians voted to say no to Trump and Trumpism," Lewis said. "What they're getting instead is our government following the US into a future of wars, fossil fuels, austerity, and job-killing generative AI."
Lewis will face a difficult task ahead in rebuilding the NDP from a disastrous loss of support under its previous leader, Jagmeet Singh, who stepped down from his post after the party suffered the worst defeat in its history during last April’s elections, dropping to just seven seats in Parliament—not even enough to be considered a “recognized” party.
The role of NDP leader is the highest office Lewis has held in his life, having run two failed campaigns for parliament in his native Vancouver in 2021 and 2025.
Though NDP currently sits at a distant third, with only about 7% support according to an Abacus poll from March, other polls show that their positions, including a wealth tax and expanding federal health coverage, are popular with the vast majority of voters across party lines.
Other polls show that Canadians, especially those with low incomes, increasingly view affordability and inequality as pressing issues, especially as Trump's war against Iran has caused global energy shortages and price hikes.
"The NDP is coming back because we know that a thriving world is possible, and we know who is standing in our way, and there are way more of us than there are of them," Lewis said. "The NDP will start winning again because we will become that beacon to the 99%."
Keep ReadingShow Less
From Gaza to Cuba, Canada Remains the World’s Most Tactful Bystander
Ottawa has expressed concern, called for deescalation, and urged all parties to respect international law, but it has avoided naming responsibility and evaded confronting its closest ally.
Feb 16, 2026
The world is witnessing yet another manufactured humanitarian catastrophe unfolding in plain sight in Cuba. This crisis is not the result of any internal collapse or mismanagement. It is the deliberate outcome of United States policy, a policy of collective punishment designed to impose economic suffocation on an entire population to extract political change. President Donald Trump has openly declared his intention to overthrow the Cuban government by year’s end, meaning Washington is transforming its decades-old blockade into a full-scale siege. The Trump administration has absurdly designated the small, peaceful Caribbean nation as “an unusual and extraordinary threat” to the United States, weaponizing tariffs and economic coercion against any country that dares to sell oil to Cuba.
The consequences are immediate and impossible to ignore. Cuban authorities have announced that jet fuel will be unavailable at airports across the country starting this week, disrupting airport operations and grounding both domestic and international carriers. Canadian airlines have already announced contingency plans for flights to and from Cuba, assessing reroutes, suspensions, and assistance for stranded travelers. But aviation is only the most visible edge of a far deeper collapse. If Cuba’s energy infrastructure fails, people will die. This is not a metaphor. It is inevitable. Without electricity, food cannot be grown, preserved, or transported. Medicines cannot be produced, refrigerated, or administered. Hospitals cannot operate. Ambulances, incubators, and ventilators will stop.
This deprivation is not at all incidental. It is intentional. Administration officials and the extreme right Cuban American political establishment have been explicit: The goal is to inflict suffering, to manufacture hunger, medicine shortages, and nationwide blackouts as instruments of regime change. Washington’s intentions could not be clearer. The United States is attempting to strangle an entire nation into submission.
While the US pursues this deliberate campaign of suffering, Ottawa has once again chosen the path of procedural dithering, offering words instead of action. Canada’s response, to no one’s surprise, has been another Kafkaesque exercise in bureaucratic evasion. When Senator Yuen Pau Woo asked officials from the Senate Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade what Canada is doing to prevent this potentially catastrophic humanitarian disaster in Cuba, the exchange exposed more absence than action. Pressed for specifics, the response was: “There are no specifics.” The officials further conceded that “there is no humanitarian response plan for Cuba that I’m aware of,” explaining that Canada’s engagement has been framed as “more looking at the development context and not the humanitarian context.”
Canada is not responsible for US actions. But it is responsible for its response to them.
In practice, this distinction functions as a delay mechanism. The government is “looking into the matter,” as it so often does, deferring urgency behind the process while conditions deteriorate. The latency appears less accidental than structural. And, as usual, no timeline has been offered, no indication of when this period of observation will end, or when statements will give way to action.
This pattern is not all new, nor is it confined to Cuba. It is, in fact, a continuation of a long record of calibrated restraint and strategic silence. Canada’s response over the past few years has been consistent, predictable, and deeply inadequate. By now, Canada has perfected the art of tactful bystanding, present in language, absent in consequence. Ottawa has expressed concern, called for deescalation, and urged all parties to respect international law, but it has avoided naming responsibility and evaded confronting its closest ally. Canada criticizes outcomes while refusing to challenge the very system that produces them. This is simply appeasement dressed up as diplomacy. While statements are issued, the systems that produce these horrors remain untouched, leaving ordinary people, Palestinians, Venezuelans, Iranians, and now Cubans, to bear the consequences.
For the past two years, the United States has funded and enabled genocide in Gaza, where tens of thousands of civilians have been killed with US weapons, under US protection, with full knowledge that no meaningful consequences will follow. A recent Al Jazeera investigation revealed that US-supplied thermal and thermobaric munitions, burning at 3,500°CC, effectively evaporated nearly 3,000 Palestinians, leaving no trace of their bodies, a stark illustration of unchecked barbarism. And as we speak, Israeli authorities are reportedly preparing to execute Palestinian prisoners under mandatory death penalties in military courts for vaguely defined “terrorism” offenses, laws applied only to Palestinians. And yet Canada, despite claiming to have imposed an arms embargo, continues to supply ammunition and weapons parts that fuel this violence. Canadian factories produce fighter jet components, explosives, and munitions that flow through US channels directly into the assault, sustaining the machinery of death while Ottawa issues carefully worded statements of concern.
This silence is not confined to Gaza. After the United States launched strikes on Iranian nuclear sites, Ottawa responded with bland calls for calm and diplomacy. Still, it deliberately refrained from directly condemning Washington’s military action, instead echoing cautious G7 language about negotiation without even naming the US role in the escalation.
And when the US carried out large‑scale strikes in Venezuela and captured its president, Canada’s official statement did not even bother to mention the United States. And, instead offered abstract calls for all parties to “uphold international law” while leaving Washington’s unilateral intervention unchallenged.
In each case, Ottawa paid lip service to restraint while leaving raw power untouched, exposing how Ottawa’s posture has consistently privileged diplomatic caution over moral accountability.
Although recently, it did seem that Canada’s posture might be shifting, tellingly, not because of mass civilian deaths abroad. The change came only when US military adventurism edged closer to home. Prime Minister Mark Carney’s warnings about a collapsing rules-based international order only came after the US threatened Greenland, a territory tied to NATO allies and Arctic stability. Only then did Canada speak clearly about sovereignty, coercion, and the dangers of unchecked power. The timing is telling. It suggests Canada perceives the risks of impunity only when they threaten Western interests or its own proximity, while the devastation inflicted on others remains effectively invisible.
Even then, the response has remained largely rhetorical.
When Canada’s response to ICE’s documented brutalities of its own citizens is so plainly inadequate, it comes as no surprise that its response to US aggression abroad is equally hollow and insufficient.
And now, as the humanitarian catastrophe looms in Cuba, Canada appears to be relying on verbal gymnastics to maintain political correctness while avoiding meaningful action. Even though, on paper, Ottawa opposes US sanctions and the blockade, in practice, it offers no condemnation, no advocacy, and no protection for ordinary Cubans facing hunger, blackouts, and collapsing hospitals. Suffice it to say, Canada has by now perfected the role of silent bystander to nearly an art form.
Today, the mechanisms that enable atrocity, impunity, exceptionalism, and allied silence are on full display and fully operational, and Cuba is simply the latest victim. To call the United States’ behavior “outside the spirit of international law” would be a grotesque understatement. Washington treats international law as optional, shielding mass civilian slaughter through diplomatic vetoes, launching unilateral strikes with impunity, and sustaining devastation through overwhelming military support.
Canada is not responsible for US actions. But it is responsible for its response to them. Ottawa has deliberately hidden behind bureaucratic loopholes while allowing Canadian-made weapons components and ammunition to move through US supply chains and into Israel, insulating itself from accountability while profiting from the machinery of war. Carney’s government has offered no clear or urgent plan on Bill C-233, legislation intended to curb Canadian arms exports where there is a risk of war crimes. The bill continues to hang in limbo, while Canada remains embedded in US military supply chains. Canadian-made F-35 components and ammunition continue to flow to the United States, where end-use accountability effectively disappears. Simultaneously, Canada continues to export armoured vehicles and security equipment to US agencies, including Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), an institution that has detained Canadian citizens without explanation, due process, or urgency.
When Canada’s response to ICE’s documented brutalities of its own citizens is so plainly inadequate, it comes as no surprise that its response to US aggression abroad is equally hollow and insufficient. None of the people affected by the US aggression—Palestinians, Iranians, Venezuelans, Cubans, or others subjected to unilateral force—believe that Canada is in their corner in any meaningful way. None. Canada’s response serves no protective function at all. It is a calculated performance of concern, engineered to evade moral obligation without disrupting US power.
If Canada genuinely wants to make a difference, it can start with something simple and immediate: Sell essential goods to Cuba, food, fuel, and medicine. Not statements. Not carefully worded press releases. Tangible relief that keeps lights on, shelves stocked, and patients alive. Yet, as so often before, Ottawa may retreat behind another polished, empty statement while taking no meaningful action.
Ottawa’s approach is built on a reckless assumption that Trump’s chaos is governed by strategy, that US volatility is calculable, and that Canada will somehow remain exempt. That illusion has already collapsed. The same contempt for international law has now extended to Greenland, with explicit annexation threats aimed at allies. If Canada continues to hedge, appease, and delay rather than act on principle, it should not expect any support when its own sovereignty is challenged. Silence does not buy safety. It only invites escalation. If Canada does not adjust its course, it may find that when threats strike closer to home, there will be no one left willing to stand alongside it.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Canada Has Concluded That Binding Itself to the US Isn't Safe; Here's Why That Matters
For those in Washington who assume the old alliances will endure regardless of how allies are treated, Canada's actions show the old order really is not coming back.
Feb 03, 2026
Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney’s speech at the World Economic Forum on January 20 was not an exercise in pique. It was the clearest articulation yet of a strategic shift that has profound implications—not just for US-Canada relations, but for the entire structure of American alliances worldwide.
Carney told the Davos audience that “the old order is not coming back” and that the rules-based international system was always “partially false.” The strongest exempted themselves when convenient, trade rules were enforced asymmetrically, and Canada “placed the sign in the window” while avoiding the gaps between rhetoric and reality. That bargain, he declared, no longer works. Canada is now building what Carney called “strategic autonomy”—the capacity to feed itself, fuel itself, and defend itself without depending on the United States.
The speech codified what six months of frenetic diplomacy had already demonstrated. Since taking office, Carney has signed 12 trade and security agreements across four continents. Canada has joined the European Union’s €150 billion Security Action for Europe (SAFE) defense procurement program; the first non-European nation admitted. Recently, Carney announced a strategic partnership with Xi Jinping and opened Canadian markets to Chinese electric vehicles. Ottawa has committed to the largest military spending increase since World War II, deliberately structured to reduce reliance on American defense contractors.
This matters beyond North America because Canada was, until recently, the test case for deep integration with the United States. More than 75% of Canadian exports went south. Supply chains, especially in automotive and energy, were seamlessly continental. Defense was jointly managed through NORAD. If any country had conclusively answered the question of whether binding one’s self to American hegemony was safe, it was Canada.
When allies begin describing authoritarian rivals as more reliable than the United States, something fundamental has broken.
The answer, Ottawa has now concluded, is no. And that conclusion is being watched carefully in Brussels, Tokyo, Canberra, and Seoul.
The proximate cause is the Trump administration’s tariffs, threats to abandon the US-Mexico-Canada Agreement, and repeated suggestions that Canada should become the 51st US state. But Carney’s Davos speech made clear that the problem runs deeper than one administration. The issue is structural: American policy now swings so dramatically between presidencies that commitments made by one administration cannot be trusted to survive the next. For allies making decade-long investments in defense procurement, energy infrastructure, or trade relationships, this volatility is intolerable.
Carney borrowed a framework from Finnish President Alexander Stubb: “values-based realism.” Canada will remain committed to sovereignty, human rights, and international law in principle. However, Canada will be pragmatic about working with partners who do not share those values. This explains the China pivot. Beijing is not a trustworthy partner, and Canadians know this better than most after the arbitrary detention of the two Michaels—Michael Spavor and Michael Kovrig—in 2018 (and released in 2021). But China is predictable in ways that Washington no longer is. As Carney noted in Beijing, the relationship with China is now “more predictable” than the one with the United States.
That statement should alarm policymakers in Washington far more than any tariff retaliation. When allies begin describing authoritarian rivals as more reliable than the United States, something fundamental has broken.
The Canadian pivot also reveals the limits of geographical determinism. American analysts have long assumed that Canada has no real alternatives; that proximity and integration lock Ottawa into the US orbit regardless of policy. Carney is testing that assumption. The Trans Mountain pipeline now ships Canadian oil to Asia. Liquefied natural gas terminals are under construction for Pacific exports. The EU defense partnership opens European procurement to Canadian manufacturers.
Canada cannot replace American trade overnight, but it can build sufficient alternatives to survive without it. That is precisely what Carney has pledged: doubling non-US exports within 10 years.
For other US allies, the lesson is clear. If Canada, the most integrated, most proximate, most culturally similar American ally, has concluded that dependence on Washington is too risky, then no alliance is safe from reassessment. The Europeans are already drawing similar conclusions. The EU’s Mercosur deal and accelerated talks with Japan and South Korea reflect the same diversification logic. Even Australia, historically the most reliable US partner in the Indo-Pacific, is quietly exploring options.
None of this necessarily serves those allies’ long-term interests. China is not a benign alternative to American hegemony. The middle-power coalitions Carney envisions may lack the capacity to provide genuine security. And the economic costs of unwinding continental integration will be substantial. Canada’s gamble may yet prove to be a mistake.
But that is not the point. America’s closest ally has made a rational decision, based on observed evidence, that the United States can no longer be trusted, and is acting accordingly. Other allies are making similar calculations. The network of relationships that has amplified American power since 1945 is fraying, and American policy is what’s fraying it.
Carney closed his Davos speech with a line that deserves attention beyond Ottawa: “Nostalgia is not a strategy.” For those in Washington who assume the old alliances will endure regardless of how allies are treated, the warning applies with equal force. The old order really is not coming back. The question is what replaces it, and whether the United States will have any role in building it.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump to Hike US Prices Because 'Canada Hurt His Feelings' With Reagan Tariffs Ad
"He's increasing taxes on Americans by executive fiat because he didn't like an advertisement that quoted Reagan's (accurate) views on tariffs," said one US journalist. "You (and I) are paying these taxes—not Canada."
Oct 26, 2025
Critics across North America are blasting President Donald Trump's additional 10% import tax on Canadian goods over Ontario's television advertisement featuring former President Ronald Reagan's condemnation of tariffs—an announcement that came Saturday, in the lead-up to the US Supreme Court hearing arguments on his trade war.
"The president announces an arbitrary price hike on Americans because his feelings are hurt by an ad accurately quoting Ronald Reagan's criticism of tariffs," US journalist Aaron Rupar wrote on X in response to Trump's Saturday afternoon Truth Social post.
Billy Binion, a reporter for the American libertarian magazine Reason, similarly said: "I don't get how anyone can support the president having power over tariffs after watching this exchange. He is unilaterally raising taxes on Americans—not because of a ~negotiating~ tactic or to create jobs, but because… Canada hurt his feelings. Congress needs to do its job."
Throughout Trump's trade war, experts have emphasized that Americans ultimately pay more because of his tariffs, despite the president's claims to the contrary. Research published earlier his month by the investment bank Goldman Sachs shows that US consumers are shouldering up to 55% of the costs stemming from his taxes on imports.
"Let's be clear about what this is. Canada isn't paying a goddamned thing," Independent White House correspondent Andrew Feinberg stressed Saturday. "He's increasing taxes on Americans by executive fiat because he didn't like an advertisement that quoted Reagan's (accurate) views on tariffs. You (and I) are paying these taxes—not Canada."
Melanie D'Arrigo, executive director of the Campaign for New York Health, said on X: "1. Reagan's speech is real. 2. It's public domain. 3. Americans pay the cost of the added 10% tariffs, not Canadians. 4. Trump keeps lying because he thinks you're all too stupid to fact-check. 5. The average family will pay an extra $4,900 this year because [of] his tariffs."
The tariff announcement came after Trump suspended trade talks with Canada on Thursday night over the one-minute ad, even though the Canadian federal government did not pay for it. Ontario's provincial government was behind the ad, which uses audio from Reagan's April 25, 1987 radio address on free and fair trade.
Trump on Saturday quoted from the Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation & Institute's Thursday statement, which said that the ad "misrepresents" the address, the Ontario government "did not seek nor receive permission to use and edit the remarks," and the organization "is reviewing its legal options in this matter."
Several journalists and other observers have concluded that "the ad faithfully reproduced Mr. Reagan's words, just in a different order," as the New York Times' Matina Stevis-Gridneff put it.
"When someone says, 'Let's impose tariffs on foreign imports,' it looks like they're doing the patriotic thing by protecting American products and jobs. And sometimes for a short while it works—but only for a short time," the ad begins. "Over the long run such trade barriers hurt every American worker and consumer."
"High tariffs inevitably lead to retaliation by foreign countries and the triggering of fierce trade wars," the clip of Reagan's voice continues. "Then the worst happens: Markets shrink and collapse; businesses and industries shut down; and millions of people lose their jobs."
Ontario's premier, Doug Ford, said Friday that "our intention was always to initiate a conversation about the kind of economy that Americans want to build and the impact of tariffs on workers and businesses. We've achieved our goal, having reached US audiences at the highest levels. I've directed my team to keep putting our message in front of Americans over the weekend so that we can air our commercial during the first two World Series games."
After speaking with Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, Ford said, "Ontario will pause its US advertising campaign effective Monday so that trade talks can resume. The people elected our government to protect Ontario—our workers, businesses, families, and communities. That's exactly what I'm doing. Like I said earlier today: Canada and the US are neighbors, friends, and allies. We're so much stronger when we work together. Let's work together to build Fortress Am-Can and make our two countries stronger, more prosperous, and more secure."
Ford's pledge to pull the ad next week clearly did not appease the US president. Hours after Trump announced the new tariffs on Saturday, Dominic Leblanc, the Canadian minister of US-Canada trade, urged engagement at the federal level.
"As the prime minister said yesterday, we stand ready to build on the progress made in constructive discussions with American counterparts over the course of recent weeks," Leblanc wrote on social media. "We will remain focused on achieving results that benefit workers and families in both the United States and Canada, and that progress is best achieved through direct engagement with the US administration—which is the responsibility of the federal government."
Meanwhile, Carney seemed to take swipes at Trump at the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) summit in Malaysia on Sunday. As CBC reported, he said that "we have all been reminded of the importance of reliable partners—who honor their commitments, who are there in tough times, and who engage collaboratively to fix something that isn't working."
"Canada is such a partner, a dependable partner, and I have come to Kuala Lumpur to say clearly that we want to play a bigger role in this region," Carney continued, as Trump also headed to Malaysia. "Like ASEAN, Canada values the rules-based system. We respect trade agreements and the rule of law. We believe in the value of the free exchange of goods, capital, and ideas."
The escalation between the US and its second-largest trading partner comes as the Supreme Court prepares to hear arguments over the president's authority to impose sweeping tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. Trump's Saturday remarks were widely regarded as highly relevant to the case.
"Trump is raising US tariffs on Canada by 10% because he's unhappy that Ontario ran an ad quoting Ronald Reagan on why tariffs are bad. This is, of course, insane, and Trump has no legal authority to raise tariffs for that reason," said American finance journalist James Surowiecki. "If the Supreme Court can see this and still accept Trump's national security/national emergency argument for why he should be able to impose whatever tariffs he wants on whomever he wants, they are not serious people."
"We're living in a country where the president just randomly raises taxes on a whim because he's in a snit—and no one stops him, even though the Constitution gives him zero power over tariffs," he added. "This is not a constitutional republic at the moment."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Economists Pan 'Insane' New Trump Tariffs as US Consumers Struggle With Rising Prices
"Trump's definition of 'winning' is hitting the American people with ever-higher taxes," said economist Dean Baker.
Aug 01, 2025
U.S. President Donald Trump on Thursday used emergency authority to impose high tariff rates on imports from dozens of American trading partners, including Canada—a move that economists criticized as a senseless approach to global trade that will further increase costs for consumers who are already struggling to get by.
Trump outlined the new tariff rates in executive orders signed just ahead of his arbitrary August 1 deadline for U.S. trading partners to negotiate a deal with the White House, whose erratic, aggressive, and legally dubious approach has alarmed world leaders.
Under the president's new orders, Canadian goods that are not covered by the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) will face 35% import duties, while steel and aluminum imports will face a 50% tariff rate.
Trump claimed Canada "has failed to cooperate in curbing the ongoing flood of fentanyl and other illicit drugs." But Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney hit back in a statement early Friday, noting that Canada "accounts for only 1% of U.S. fentanyl imports and has been working intensively to further reduce these volumes."
"While we will continue to negotiate with the United States on our trading relationship, the Canadian government is laser-focused on what we can control: building Canada strong," Carney added. "Canadians will be our own best customer, creating more well-paying careers at home, as we strengthen and diversify our trading partnerships throughout the world."
Economist Brad Setser said that while the impact of the higher tariff on Canadian imports could be muted because of the exemption of USMCA-covered products such as oil, the 35% rate is still "insane" and "dumb."
"Same with the high tariff on Switzerland. Crazy," Setser wrote, pointing to the 39% rate for Switzerland imports. "This isn't just protectionism, it is bad protectionism—and will have all sorts of unintended consequences."
The new tariff rates for Canadian goods will take effect Friday while the higher rates for other nations such as Brazil (50%), India (25%), and Vietnam (20%) won't kick in until next week "to give Customs and Border Protection officials time to prepare," The Washington Post reported. Customs and Border Protection collects tariffs, which are effectively taxes paid by importers—who often pass those costs onto consumers in the form of higher prices.
"Trump's definition of 'winning' is hitting the American people with ever-higher taxes," Dean Baker, senior economist at the Center for Economic and Policy Research, wrote late Thursday.
Recent U.S. economic data indicates that Trump's tariffs are already putting upward pressure on prices—and companies are using the president's trade chaos as an excuse to drive up prices further and pad their bottom lines.
The Tax Foundation noted earlier this week that "a variety of food imports" will be impacted by Trump's tariffs, likely leading to "higher food prices for consumers." More than 80% of Americans are already concerned about the price of groceries and many are struggling to stay afloat, according to survey data released Thursday by The Century Foundation.
Baker warned Thursday that even nations that have agreed to trade frameworks with the U.S. are not out of the woods.
"Deals are meaningless to Trump. He'll break them in a second any time he feels like it," Baker wrote. "I trust everyone negotiating with Trump understands that fact."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Canadians Fume at Trump 'Tariff Bullying' as Carney Says Ottawa to Recognize Palestine
"It is time to align with human rights and international law. It is not a time to bend the knee," said the National Council of Canadian Muslims.
Jul 31, 2025
President Donald Trump said Wednesday that Canada's decision to conditionally recognize Palestinian statehood "will make it very hard" to complete a trade deal with the United States' northern neighbor, prompting widespread condemnation of the president's not-so-thinly-veiled threat.
On Wednesday, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney announced that Ottawa will grant formal recognition to Palestine at September's United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) in New York if the Palestinian Authority agrees to hold an election in 2026 and implement other democratic reforms.
Asked if he had consulted the U.S. about recognizing Palestine, Carney told reporters that "we make our own independent foreign policy positions."
Carney's announcement came as Israel—which is facing an ongoing genocide case at the International Court of Justice—is under increasing pressure to end its 663-day, U.S.-backed war and siege on Gaza, which has killed or maimed more than 220,000 Palestinians and fueled famine.
The far-right government of Israeli Prime Minster Benjamin Netanyahu, who is wanted by the International Criminal Court for alleged crimes against humanity and war crimes, is also openly pursuing plans to ethnically cleanse Gaza of Palestinians so it can be transformed into what Trump has described as "the Riviera of the Middle East."
Critically, Carney's announcement also came amid trade deal negotiations between U.S. and Canadian officials ahead of Trump's August 1 deadline for 35% tariffs on all imported Canadian goods not covered by the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement.
"More evidence there's no limit to Trump's goal to use tariff bullying to chip away at the sovereignty of other countries... on any issue at all," Canadian economist Jim Stanford said Thursday on the social media site X.
"See also his harsh tariffs on Brazil for prosecuting Trump's close friend and coup schemer Bolsonaro," he added, referring to disgraced former far-right Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro, who is also known as the "Trump of the Tropics."
What do we even think we are negotiating here? A "deal" that will be subject to constant threats to tear it up based on the arbitrary moment-to-moment mood swings of our trading partner's president? Trump's word is meaningless, why delude ourselves to believe he'd honour any "deal" we'd negotiate?
[image or embed]
— Luke LeBrun (@lukelebrun.ca) July 31, 2025 at 6:27 AM
Dean Baker, a U.S. economist who co-founded the Center for Economic and Policy Research, said on X: "Looks like Trump wants us all to pay higher taxes in support of Israel's mass murder in Gaza. Can someone explain to me how this is 'America First?'"
The National Council of Canadian Muslims (NCCM) said on social media that "Donald Trump has openly endorsed plans to ethnically cleanse and annex Gaza, along with his own outrageous ideas of making Canada the 51st state."
"As Canada strikes out an independent foreign policy by planning to recognize Palestinian statehood, Trump's attempt to suggest that the trade deal is in peril because Canada took a step in the right direction is just another transparent attempt at bullying from a man who changes the goal posts in every trade 'negotiation' in any case," the group continued.
"This is the time to stand strongly in support of Canadian values," NCCM added. "It is time to align with human rights and international law. It is not a time to bend the knee. Canada must push forward by imposing further sanctions on Netanyahu's government, reviewing the Canada-Israel Free Trade Agreement, applying a full two-way arms embargo on the [Israel Defense Forces], and helping those escaping Gaza arrive in Canada."
Although Canada's government insists that it has prohibited arms transfers to Israel since January 2024, research by four groups—World Beyond War, the Palestinian Youth Movement, Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East, and Independent Jewish Voices—revealed this week that there have been at least 47 shipments from Canadian weapons manufacturers to Israeli armaments companies between October 2023 and July 2025.
Trump and members of his administration sought to assuage anxiety over U.S. tariff whiplash by promising bigger, better deals. In April, Peter Navarro, the top White House trade adviser, vowed that Trump would hammer out "90 deals in 90 days." However, 90 days later, the U.S. has finalized deals with around half a dozen nations, with the suspension of Trump's so-called reciprocal tariffs set to expire on August 1. After that, Trump is set to impose tariffs as high as 50% on many countries.
Trump's attacks on longstanding allies have prompted calls for solidarity among Western democracies as they move to recognize Palestine.
"By trying to bully nations out of recognizing Palestine, Trump is making himself the biggest hurdle to a two-state solution and a lasting peace," British Member of Parliament Ed Davey, who leads the center-left Liberal Democrats, said on the social media site Bluesky Thursday. "The U.K. must stand strong with Canada and our allies, we should recognize the Palestinian state right now. No more delays."
Earlier this week, U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer said Britain stands poised to formally recognize Palestine at September's UNGA if Israel does not take "substantive" steps to end its war on Gaza, allow aid into the strip, and renounce annexation of the illegally occupied West Bank. Trump signaled that he would not object to U.K. recognition of Palestine.
Around 150 of 193 U.N. member states already recognize Palestine, and this week France and Malta also said they would do so at the UNGA. On Thursday, Portuguese Prime Minister Luís Montenegro said that his government "is considering recognition of the Palestinian state."
There have been increased calls for Canada to find ways to lessen its dependence on the U.S.
"Clearly, August 1 is barely the beginning of this struggle for Canada's heart and soul, never mind a 'deadline,'" Stanford asserted. "Regardless of what happens this week, Canada must charge ahead on this epic mission to rebuild an economy that can survive independently of the U.S."
In a bid to gain some independence from their increasingly unreliable neighbor, Canada and Mexico are working to establish a new land and sea trade corridor that would completely bypass the United States, an initiative projected to cost the U.S. economy at least tens of billions of lost dollars, according to PPR Mundial. In addition to utilizing diverse modes of transport, including rail and maritime connections, the bilateral proposal is expected to incorporate advanced digital technologies including blockchain to manage customs and other formalities.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Caving to Trump, Canada Drops Tax on US Tech Firms
One journalist accused Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney of chickening out.
Jun 30, 2025
Acquiescing to pressure from the Trump administration, the Canadian government announced on Sunday that the country will rescind the digital services tax, a levy that would have seen large American tech firms pay billions of dollars to Canada over the next few years.
The Sunday announcement from the Canadian government cited "anticipation of a mutually beneficial comprehensive trade arrangement" as the reason for the rescission.
"Today's announcement will support a resumption of negotiations toward the July 21, 2025, timeline set out at this month's G7 Leaders' Summit in Kananaskis," said Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney in the statement.
The digital services tax impacts companies that make over $20 million in revenue from Canadian users and customers through digital services like online advertising and shopping. Companies like Uber and Google would have paid a 3% levy on the money they made from Canadian sources, according to CBC News.
The reversal comes after U.S. President Donald Trump on Friday blasted the digital services tax, calling it a "direct and blatant attack on our country" on Truth Social.
Trump said he was suspending trade talks between the two countries because of the tax. "Based on this egregious Tax, we are hereby terminating ALL discussions on Trade with Canada, effective immediately. We will let Canada know the Tariff that they will be paying to do business with the United States of America within the next seven day period," Trump wrote. The United States is Canada's largest trading partner.
Payments from tech firms subject to the digital services tax were due starting on Monday, though the tax has been in effect since last year.
"The June 30, 2025 collection will be halted," and Canada's Minister of Finance "will soon bring forward legislation to rescind the Digital Services Tax Act," according to the Sunday statement.
"If Mark Carney folds in response to this pressure from Trump on the digital services tax, he proves he can be pushed around," said Canadian journalist Paris Marx on Bluesky, speaking prior to the announcement of the rescission. "The tax must be enforced," he added.
"Carney chickens out too," wrote the author Doug Henwood on Twitter on Monday.
In an opinion piece originally published in Canadian Dimension before the announcement on Sunday, Jared Walker, executive director of the progressive advocacy group Canadians for Tax Fairness, wrote that all the money generated for the tax could mean "more federal money for housing, transit, and healthcare transfers—all from some of the largest and most under-taxed companies in the world."
Walker also wrote that the digital service tax could serve as a counterweight to the so-called "revenge tax" provision in Trump's sprawling domestic tax and spending bill.
Section 899, called "Enforcement of Remedies Against Unfair Foreign Taxes," would "increase withholding taxes for non-resident individuals and companies from countries that the U.S. believes have imposed discriminatory or unfair taxes," according to CBC. The digital services tax is one of the taxes the Trump administration believes is discriminatory.
"If 'elbows up' is going to be more than just a slogan, Canada can't cave to pressure when Donald Trump throws his weight around," wrote Walker, invoking the Canadian rallying cry in the face of American antagonism when it comes to trade.
"But this slogan also means the Carney government has to make sure it is working on behalf of everyday Canadians—not just the ultra-rich and big corporations that are only 'Canadian' when it's convenient," Walker wrote.
Keep ReadingShow Less
G7 Leaders Blasted for 'Morally Indefensible' Failure on Crises of War, Poverty, and Climate
Amid interlocking catastrophes, the world's wealthiest and most powerful nations were told they "cannot retreat and hide."
Jun 18, 2025
The Group of Seven Leaders' Summit concluded in Canada on Tuesday with joint statements on artificial intelligence, critical minerals supply chains, foreign interference, quantum innovation, transnational crime, and wildfires, but campaigners called out attendees for failing to "take collective action to end conflicts, address climate change, and reduce poverty and inequality."
Although U.S. President Donald Trump bailed early, representatives from the other G7 member countries—Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, and the United Kingdom—and the European Union gathered in Kananaskis, Alberta from Sunday to Tuesday, with appearances by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte.
"The summit fell short of delivering the leadership the world needs," the global advocacy group Oxfam said in a lengthy statement after the meeting ended. "Nowhere was this more apparent than in how this G7 totally missed its chance to exert any meaningful pressure toward peace in the Middle East."
"Even its call for a de-escalation between Israel and Iran, which is desperately needed, was corrupted by geo-political partiality and bias," the group continued, calling for "an immediate end to hostilities in the region," including "Israel's relentless assault on Gaza."
"With a planned 28% reduction by 2026 compared to 2024, these cuts are not just a policy failure but put the lives of millions of people at risk, especially those already facing hunger, poverty, and ever-worsening effects of climate change."
Unlike the 2002 G8 Summit in Kananaskis, "where leaders committed to an Africa Action Plan and development cooperation," G7 leaders are now "pursuing the largest aid cuts in its history," Oxfam also noted. "With a planned 28% reduction by 2026 compared to 2024, these cuts are not just a policy failure but put the lives of millions of people at risk, especially those already facing hunger, poverty, and ever-worsening effects of climate change."
"In a world grappling with war, rising inequality, food insecurity, and climate breakdown," Oxfam declared, "the G7's retreat from responsibility is not only morally indefensible but also strategically short-sighted."
Climate campaigners also took aim at summit attendees, with Greenpeace International's Tracy Carty saying Tuesday that "as G7 leaders grapple with how to de-escalate multiple conflicts they can ill afford to ignore another threat to global stability—the worsening climate emergency."
"But even before the latest intensification in the Middle East, the climate had already been sidelined, as the G7—under Canada's leadership—tiptoed around Trump's climate denialism," Carty continued. "The leaders of these nations—among the most responsible for global emissions—cannot retreat and hide."
"The G7 must urgently work towards bold action to cut emissions, hold the fossil fuel industry accountable, and ensure big polluters pay their fair share for the climate damage already unfolding across the globe," she asserted.
Her colleague at Greenpeace Canada, Keith Stewart, pointed out that "Canada is literally a country on fire, but despite wanting to discuss an improved joint response to wildfires, it allowed the summit to end with a statement on the issue that included no mention of tackling the climate crisis fueling the latest disaster."
📣This year's #G7Summit ended with clean energy & fossil fuel subsidy reform missing from final statements. Climate received only a passing reference in the Chair’s statement.IISD's @patriciafuller.bsky.social stresses previous climate commitments remain on the books. 👇 www.iisd.org/articles/sta...
[image or embed]
— IISD Energy (@energy.iisd.org) June 17, 2025 at 9:49 PM
Amara Possian, 350.org's Canada team lead, targeted Liberal Prime Minister Mark Carney, arguing that "as one of the world's richest, most polluting countries, Canada has a responsibility to lead on climate justice" and he "should use the G7 presidency to raise the bar."
Specifically, "to do our fair share, Canada must triple climate finance through grants, cancel Global South debt, make polluters and billionaires pay, and end trade rules that block climate action," Possian said. "This is a defining test of Canada's commitment to long-term security and prosperity."
350.org leaders from Japan, the United States, Europe, and Latin America and the Caribbean also took aim at G7 leaders who "missed a crucial opportunity to lead on climate and to stand up against fossil fuel interests and the Trump administration."
U.S. senior policy analyst JL Andrepont said that "Trump's early exit from the G7 summit in Canada is part of a continued effort to remove our leadership and commitments from the world stage. We cannot move forward quickly enough on the needed clean, just energy transition with a U.S. government hostile to the very concept of the climate crisis and the readily available tools necessary to fight it—justly sourced and implemented, low-cost wind and solar."
"The rest of the planet must step forward in our absence to keep the fight to end the fossil fuel era going," Andrepont added. "Unfortunately, G7 leaders followed in Trump's footsteps and ended the meeting pretending climate change doesn't exist. Our people and our planet deserve better."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Climate Policy on Thin Ice: A Lesson from Canada
Canada’s experience with its carbon price-and-dividend system for fossil fuels has important implications for the rest of the world, including the United States.
May 12, 2025
The recent news coverage of Canada’s elections was all about the spectacular backfiring of President Trump’s strong-arm tactics—tariffs and the pipe dream of Canada becoming the “51st state” sparked the Liberal Party’s stunning come-from-behind victory under its new leader, Mark Carney. But behind the headlines, the Canadian elections also carry a profound cautionary tale about the political mishaps that can befall even the best-designed climate policy.
Until Trump barged onto the scene, climate change was the single most visible issue in the election campaign. Carney, the former UN Special Envoy for Climate Action and Finance, called it an “existential threat.” His Conservative Party opponent, Pierre Poilievre, instead pledged to roll back regulations on fossil fuel emissions and scrap Canada’s most ingenious climate policy: its carbon price-and-dividend system.
Under former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau in 2019, the Canadian government had introduced a price on carbon pollution and recycled the revenue straight back to households—the first enactment anywhere of the “carbon dividend” policy widely advocated in the U.S. by economists from across the political spectrum.
Dividends make it possible to use this tool while protecting the living standards of working families.
The policy succeeded in reducing emissions while at the same time raising the incomes of most Canadian households more than enough to offset the impact of the carbon price—a win-win for the environment and the people. Yet Poilievre’s vow to “ax the tax” became so popular among voters that Carney himself scuttled the policy upon replacing Trudeau as Liberal Party leader in March.
Why did a successful climate policy go down to defeat in the court of public opinion?
The policy’s aim was to give consumers and businesses an incentive to reduce emissions while letting them choose what worked best for them. Returning the revenue directly to the public safeguarded the purchasing power of ordinary households, a prerequisite for ensuring equity and political durability. Most Canadian families came out ahead—an analysis by the Canadian government found that about 80% of households experienced net income gains, their dividends being boosted by the outsized carbon consumption of the most affluent consumers.
Predictably, Trudeau’s conservative opponents denounced the policy. Poilievre incorrectly labeled it a “tax” and blamed the policy for any and all fuel price increases, including those triggered by the worldwide spike in oil prices after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, while remaining notably silent on the return flow of the carbon revenue back to households.
The Trudeau administration meanwhile did little to publicize the benefits of the policy to consumers, evidently assuming Canadians would figure out themselves that they were receiving dividends and that they more than compensated for the carbon price. This lack of visibility was compounded by how the payments were delivered. Initially they were buried in income tax returns. When this changed to electronic bank deposits, they were inscrutably labeled, appearing on statements simply as “Canada Fed” or a random string of numbers and letters. The neglect of messaging proved to be the policy’s Achilles heel.
Canada’s experience has important implications for the rest of the world, including the United States. Although it may seem hard to imagine in our present political moment, sooner or later climate policy is all but certain to return to the nation’s political agenda. When it does, carbon pricing will re-emerge as a key tool for curbing emissions.
Dividends make it possible to use this tool while protecting the living standards of working families. The Healthy Climate and Family Security Act introduced in December by Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) is a good example of legislation that would do precisely this. But to win and maintain public support for the policy, transparency is crucial: the dividend that households receive must be just as visible as the gasoline prices they pay at the pump.
In Canada, Carney has promised to continue the carbon price for heavy industrial emitters, while offering incentives for consumers to reward “green choices” such as purchases of electric vehicles. But carrots alone will not bring about a clean energy transition. Climate catastrophes have already begun. If we want to keep them from worsening, the take-home lesson from Canada is that any serious climate policy will require an equally serious commitment to making its benefits clear and present.
Keep ReadingShow Less
See More Stories
Most Popular
To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.
News & Opinion
Trending
Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit
Privacy Policy