Tag Archives: Trade

Section 338 tariffs?

Posted on by

With the World Cup out of the way, Trump decided it was time to beat up on Canada again, so he announced the intention to hit us with new 50 percent tariffs, and no, not because of the wildfire smoke crossing the border (which prime minister Mark Carney said he talked to Trump about at the World Cup final). No, these are under Section 338 in their trade law, which has to do with “discrimination.” Because retaliation for their illegal and unjustified tariffs apparently counts as “discrimination” in their eyes, and no, there won’t be any NAFTA exemptions under these tariffs, apparently.

https://bsky.app/profile/emmettmacfarlane.com/post/3mr4ivv6mlk2l

But they’re also weird. Some of them are calculated for symbolic effect (like hockey sticks, or Canadian wine), but some of them make no sense (Canadian tequila?). And maybe this is more “art for the deal” nonsense,

https://bsky.app/profile/jrobson.bsky.social/post/3mr4hk7wqcs2w

https://bsky.app/profile/jrobson.bsky.social/post/3mr4hk7wz422w

https://bsky.app/profile/jrobson.bsky.social/post/3mr4hk7x23c2w

Raking the Forests

Some Canadians got in on the whole “Rake the Forests!” MAGA meme, and it’s very embarrassing. Others decided that after years of insisting that these fires were set by climate arsonists, that now wildfires are natural, so there’s no climate change involved. (Erm, guys…) I can’t even.

https://twitter.com/andrew_leach/status/2078166450540519719

https://twitter.com/andrew_leach/status/2078912872625868932

https://twitter.com/andrew_leach/status/2079276027340362039

New right wing talking points dropped! The forest fires have nothing to do with climate change. Nothing to see here.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-07-18T19:42:56.807Z

My Latest:

My weekend column looks at how Carney capitulated to industry on the Pathways project, making it essentially costly and useless, likely in a bid to simply kill it.

Continue reading →

A grab-bag of Carney answers

Posted on by

Prime minister Mark Carney held a press conference yesterday to pat himself on the back for his government’s accomplishments over the spring sitting, but as with most of these exercises, the real interest was in his responses to questions, which he doesn’t do very often. So, what did we learn?

  • That big call with Trump this week with the extremely vague readout was mostly about Iran and NATO, and not about trade.
  • We’re still a long way away from any kind of trade deal with Trump.
  • The six upcoming by-elections will likely be spaced out.
  • We finally got more details on that condo purchase in Vancouver, which is 90 percent provincial funding/10 percent federal, and is intended as rent-to-own.
  • He will be going to Stampede, and plans to defend national unity, and is using Brexit as a cautionary tale (as well he should be).
  • We are sending aid to Venezuela after the earthquakes, and while it might be useful to have some kind of consular services there or in Iran, we’ll go through partners.

Shortly afterward, Pierre Poilievre gave his own press conference to decry the state of the Canadian economy and blame Carney for it, as though Trump wasn’t a factor, or that climate change isn’t affecting things like food prices. In fact, he pretty much admitted he’d accept a bad deal with Trump for the sake of getting a deal. So there’s that.

"It's all an illusion."

— Scott Robertson (@sarobertson.bsky.social) 2026-06-25T19:54:15.597Z

My Latest:

For National Magazine, I delve into the Supreme Court of Canada’s increasing caseload, and why the Chief Justice’s explanation of cleared backlogs doesn’t hold.

Continue reading →

QP: Ministers not proving their ability to know their files

Posted on by

The PM was still at the G7 in France, while Pierre Poilievre was also absent, and for some reason, Branden Leslie led off with a shouted recitation of the “recession” script, and François-Philippe Champagne suggested that the Conservatives were not happy but he bought good news about the highest level of foreign direct investment and the second-fastest growth in the G7. Leslie cited people turning to GoFundMe pages to afford to live, and Champagne assured him that Canadians don’t want another clip, they want action, and he listed measures the government has taken. Gabriel Hardy took forward in French, read a weeks-ago talking point about the prime minister talking about the level of affordability before reading today’s clip-bait about GoFundMe pages. Champagne accused the Conservatives of hypocrisy for their voting against programmes to help people. Hardy suggested that people want the government to stop what’s not working, and that government spending was driving the country into recession. Lightbound suggested the number of people in Hardy’s riding getting that GST credit would disagree. Shannon Stubbs picked up the metaphorical baton to angrily read the day’s script, including the GoFundMe mention, and this time Tim Hodgson listed programmes that are getting underway. Stubbs railed about the prime minister’s in-flight catering and meandered into the “inflationary spending” talking point. Steven MacKinnon got up to wonder what the Conservatives are for if they vote against all measures to help people.

Yves Perron led for the Bloc, and complained about the programming motion on Bill C-22 and time allocation on Bill C-30. MacKinnon took a swipe at the Bloc for opposing the high-speed rail project and all of good things it would bring. Perron kept up his complaints about these “gag orders” that prevent MPs from doing their jobs, and to keep civil society from realising the abuse in those laws. MacKinnon said they would not apologise for working on the priorities of Canadians, like high-speed rail. (Erm, lawful access is not this, guys). Claude DeBellefeuille took her own crack at complaining about the motion on Bill C-22, and Lightbound said he wouldn’t apologise for taking action on things like transit…which again, is not lawful access.

Continue reading →

QP: More grousing about in-flight catering

Posted on by

As the final sitting week of the spring sitting began, the PM was yet again absent, this time off in Evian, France, for the G7 meeting. Pierre Poilievre was also absent, leaving it up to Rhonda Kirkland to lead off, bafflingly, and she read the tired script about the country supposedly being in recession (we’re not), and the prime minister’s in-flight catering. Steven MacKinnon rose to point out that the Conservatives merely vote against any assistance for Canadians while Mark Carney brings back trade deals. Kirkland recited the scripted line that these were just “illusions,” and MacKinnon says that success looks like Canada creating twice as many jobs per capital than the U.S., high-speed rail, and the MOU with Alberta. John Brassard took over to sanctimoniously to cite the CFIB’s press release this morning on small businesses feeling uncertain, before moving onto the “recession”talking points. Tim Hodgson dismissed this, and listed project that are being built. Brassard tied again, demanding the government scrap their policies over the past six years, and Hodgson said the Conservatives are trying to fight the election from six years ago, and cited Danielle Smith’s optimism (not that it’s worth anything). Luc Berthold took over in French to cite the same reports and talking points, to which Joël Lightbound pointed out that the Conservatives voted against any measure to help Canadians. Berthold tried again, citing more newspaper stories, and Lightbound pointed to the tens of thousands of people in Berthold’s riding benefitting from government programmes.

Christine Normandin led for the Bloc, and she listed the ways in which Carney capitulated to the Americans and abandoned Europe to do it. MacKinnon said that there is another European phenomenon which they should sign onto, being high-speed rail. Normandin listed more sins of Carney’s in betraying Europe, and MacKinnon continued to praise high-speed rail. Martin Champoux took over to give the same condemnation of “abandoning” the EU, particularly around streaming levies and the digital services tax. Lightbound got back up to point out that the Bloc hasn’t spoken about culture with the budget.

Continue reading →

QP: Changing up tactics in service of a stunt

Posted on by

The PM was absent, in Toronto for an announcement before jetting off to Paris, while Pierre Poilievre was also absent. Melissa Lantsman led off, and she raised the death of a Toronto police officer earlier in the day, and asked for a government response. Gary Anandasangaree gave some words of condolence for his death. Lantsman asked which security agencies were engaged on this, as the officer was investigating the shooting of the US consulate in Toronto, and Anandasangaree listed some of the agencies, including the RCMP, involved and that this was a collaborative process. Jasraj Hallan took over, and he once again accused the prime minister of “stuffing his face” on in-flight catering and the costs associated with it, and Steven MacKinnon called for Hallan to up his game. Hallan accused the prime minister of not caring that Canadians are losing sleep because of food insecurity, and MacKinnon reminded him that we are in the midst of a trade war. Pierre Paul-Hus took over in French to again complain about the costs of the prime minister’s in-flight catering. MacKinnon dismissed this given how much trade and investment the prime minister brings home when he travels. Paul-Hus kept railing about the costs, and François-Philippe Champagne rose to add his voice go the condolences for the fallen officer, before repeating the assurances of the prime minister’s trade prowess.

Christine Normandin led for the Bloc, and she said that with Trump looking to give up the New NAFTA altogether, so they sacrificed Quebec culture for nothing. MacKinnon got up to take a swipe at the Bloc, ignoring the question. Normandin suggested that the strategy of weakness was not working, and this time Marc Miller rose, and touted how much the government is investing in culture, including their cultural export programme. Martin Champoux took over to ask the same again, and Miller pointed out that the filmmaker Champoux mentioned is funded by the National Film Board.

Continue reading →

Reversing themselves on age verification

Posted on by

The government’s online harms bill dropped yesterday, and while there are some good parts to it, there are some very, very bad parts that I am absolutely outraged about. Because this government has developed a real penchant for major omnibus bills, this contains parts of the previous online harms bill, such as the duty to act responsibly for platforms around safe design for sites and apps, which is the good part. It dropped the hate crime provisions that included restoring some of the functions of the Human Rights Tribunal around hate, which were controversial to begin with, but was also about trying to respond to the increasing amounts of hate being seen online. It seeks to create a Digital Safety Commission as the regulator in charge of the online harms scheme, who will oversee enforcement and implementation. It has a partial social media ban for youth under sixteen, but is also incorporating the age verification scheme of that Senate Public Bill, S-209, which has failed time and again, and which the Trudeau government opposed for all of the right reasons, including the fact that age verification cannot work without becoming mass surveillance (and yes, this is the part that I am absolutely livid about). (More from CBC here and here).

https://bsky.app/profile/emmettmacfarlane.com/post/3mnxuplffys2b

Part of what is so infuriating is that they are putting the age-gating into this legislation, but there are no details on how that is going to work, other than mention of “age estimation,” which is poor technology when it can have trouble distinguishing between a fifteen and a sixteen year-old, and doesn’t work well for anyone who is racialised or trans (and certain age estimation technologies have been easily thwarted with fake moustaches). And remember, this is technology that everyone on the internet is going to be subjected to, which is inevitably going to involve mass surveillance, and the loss of internet privacy writ-large. The Liberals have reversed themselves yet again, shamelessly. (For more, here is Michael Geist’s first impressions of the legislation).

My Latest:

My column highlights remarks that Louise Arbour made about diversity during her installation speech, given we are at a time of increasing ethnic/white nationalism.

Continue reading →

QP: Cherry-picking the Bank of Canada governor

Posted on by

The PM was in town, but conveniently occupied on a Zoom meeting with the other premiers, while Pierre Poilievre was present, and in French, he led off by mentioning that his MP Bernard Généroux had a cardiac incident in the morning and is in hospital in stable condition, and offered the government a chance to offer their best wishes, to which Steven MacKinnon took the opportunity to do. Poilievre then got back to news, and he launched immediately into the “recession” talking points, cherry-picked statements that the Governor of the Bank of Canada and outright ignored that he said we weren’t in a recession, while also citing a United Way report. François-Philippe Champagne read the OECD growth projections, and that Canada was the second-highest. Poilievre asked his same question in English, and Champagne repeated his same response in English. Poilievre pointed out again that the Governor of the Bank said the economy was “weak” nine times, and demanded the government overturn their policies. Tim Hodgson pointed out Macklem’s statement about our economic resilience, and pointed to projects that got approved. Poilievre read about anxiety Canadians were having per the United Way report, while complaining that the PM was not answering, while Mélanie Joly insisted that the PM is a “serious person” who is working with the premiers, before mentioning the latest job numbers and our growing trade surplus. Poilievre kept insisting that we were in a recession, and demanded the government eliminate the industrial carbon price, the fuel standard, and capital gains taxes that are reinvested in Canada. David McGuinty said that Poilievre has no plan, he cherry-picks data, and then he cherry-picked his own data.

Poilievre says that MP Bernard Généroux had a cardiac event at caucus this morning and is now in stable condition in hospital. #QP

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-06-10T18:35:37.500Z

Christine Normandin led for the Bloc, and panned the government backing off on streaming levies, and worried about what else was being demanded. MacKinnon got up to gloat that the Bloc had a bad day when the mayors of Quebec’s biggest cities denounced their opposition to the high-speed rail project. Normandin led capitulations that are benefiting American companies, to which MacKinnon went on a paean about building things. Martin Champoux lamented that the biggest victim of these capitulations is Quebec culture, and accused the PM of being the “gravedigger” of their culture. Marc Miller shrugged this off as the Bloc in their fourth decade of doing nothing in Parliament, and that they are spitting on the support the government is giving to the sector.

Continue reading →

QP: Poilievre makes common cause with the PQ leader

Posted on by

The PM was present today, fresh from the Pride flag raising on the Hill, and Pierre Poilievre was present as well. He led off in French, worrying that in the midst of the “worst recession in the G7,” he lamented that the government planned to spent $90 billion on the high-speed rail that would “destroy farms in Quebec.” Mark Carney listed the jobs that this was expected to create. Poilievre dismissed these as “jobs for Liberal friends,” and again lamented the projected cost of the project. Carney praised that this would be the biggest infrastructure project in the country’s history, and we need to build. Poilievre switched to English to worry about the rise in bankruptcies and worried the government’s spreading was making it worse. Carney praised the number for jobs created in the past month. Poilievre countered with even more cherry-picked dismal numbers, and Carney dismissed this as Poilievre not believing in Canada. Poilievre insisted it was his patriotic duty to fight for the people who are suffering, and that he would make no lessons on patriotism from a guy who stashes his funds in a tax haven. The Speaker noted that there wasn’t a question, and so they moved onto the next one, and Poilievre cited delinquency rates, and blamed the PM for driving the country into recession, to which Carney insisted they are growing a stronger and more independent economy.

Christine Normandin led for the Bloc, and she accused the government of abandoning Quebec culture in the face of tech giants and Donald Trump, in exchange for absolute nothing. Carney responded that the question is why the Bloc keeps voting against investments in Quebec culture. Normandin listed the cancellation of policies and the abandonment of the flight against climate change, and that he is deregulating things like pesticides, all for the benefit of American corporations. Carney shrugged this off by listing things the Bloc voted against. Martin Champoux also accused Carney of abandoning Quebec culture for bargaining chips, and Carney said it was sad that the Bloc didn’t read the previous budget and the investments for culture therein.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Capitulating to the streaming giants

Posted on by

Just days after the CRTC outlined the obligations under the Online Streaming Act that web giant streaming services would need to abide by when it comes to a portion of their Canadian revenues to be sent to Canadian content funds (which, to be clear, they could then draw from in order to develop shows and put on their platforms), and a day after Dominic LeBlanc was in Washington for more trade talks, the government decided to try and walk back these CRTC obligations. Minister Marc Miller ordered the CRTC to review the decision (as he can’t outright ignore it, as the CRTC is a quasi-judicial body) but with a “focus on affordability” as the claim is that these streaming services will simply raise their prices and Canadian households are already hit hard. Oh, but they’ll devote $600 million to Canadian media in lieu of these funds.

They insist it’s not a capitulation, but that’s exactly what it feels like, particularly since Trump mouthpieces were grousing that this levy was “discriminatory” (it’s not—it levelled the playing field with Canadian broadcasters and streaming services), and that it was yet another “trade irritant” as though they are allowed to throw up whatever tariffs they want (this week: New ten percent tariffs because of forced labour, but don’t look at their own deals with China, or the forced labour that comes from American prisons). Miller also insists that because the funds collected to date were frozen due to court challenges also seems to be beside the point. The point was that these web giants are taking Canadian money and giving nothing back (and no, treating our production studios as a resource colony is not exactly giving back), so having them contribute the same way a Canadian broadcaster contributes was both fair, and, I stress again, gave them the option to use these same funds that they contributed in order to create their own Canadian content that they could put up on their platforms.

I’m not going to engage in any kind of elbow discourse, but when you consider just how much these web giants and the tech bros that own them are integrated into Trump’s fascist regime, capitulating to them yet again is not exactly giving the impression that we’re protecting Canada’s cultural sovereignty, or that all the talk about Heated Rivalry and how much of a success it’s been is hollow if we keep letting the web giants dictate our own cultural policy. Where is the self-respect that should be a bare minimum in this conversation?

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2026-06-03T13:08:04.315Z

My Latest:

My column on legacy columnists opining about the “condescension” of central Canadians when it comes to Alberta separatists and their crybaby tendencies.

Continue reading →

QP: A recession or a technical recession?

Posted on by

The PM was finally present today for the first time since the GDP numbers were released, as was Pierre Poilievre, itching for a confrontation. Poilievre led off in English for a change, and he worried that nineteen of the G20 nations Arena not in recession, and asked for only leader of a G20 nation in recession to stand up. the Speaker said this was not a question but a request, and moved onto the next question. Poilievre then worried about all of the people in food insecurity and asked if we are in a recession or technical recession. Mark Carney first wished Poilievre a happy birthday before launching into a script about how much we are building as a country. Poilievre thanked him for the wishes, and noted that he is 47 but that’s 50 with inflation, before he listed more things going wrong in the country, and again asked if it was a recession or technical recession. Carney suggested he asked the CD Howe Institute and noted the OECD growth projections. Poilievre switched to French to repeat his G20 framing before asking again if it was a recession or technical recession. Carney corrected what the promise he made in the election was, and repeated his talking points about building. Poilievre returned to English to complain about the PM’s in-flight catering and again demanded to know if it was a recession or a technical recession. Carney decided to instead praise the international investment he has been able to attract to the country. Poilievre dismissed this as being about private corporations getting rich regardless while people suffered, and again asked if it was a recession or a technical recession. Carney said that we are in an economy in the midst of transformation and praised the increase in investment and exports to non-U.S. markets. 

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, and lambasted the government for attempting to back track on the streaming levies charged to web giants. Carney said that this was about affordability and patted himself on the back for spending $600 million more on culture. Blanchet tried to again, and this time Carney said that everyday people would pay for that levy through increased costs, so they have decided to focus on affordability while ensuring the cultural sector is supported. Blanchet said this was worse than capitulating, but validating the American notion that the French language and culture are a barrier, and it also capitulated to the Conservatives. Carney insisted that they were investing, and that they have “more than made whole” the cultural sector (which I am less convinced about).

Continue reading →