Economy
After 140-Odd Years, Can’t We Figure Rail Out Yet?

From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy
A typical train these days has over 100 cars. Each rail car, depending on the load, is at least one, and often several truckloads. A train needs two crew to operate it. Are you going to come up with 100 to 200 truck drivers to replace that one, individual train, as well as the trucks, trailers, and space on the highways in a moment’s notice, and then do that for the entire economy?
In all the fuss about the Canadian rail disruption, one thing jumped out at me. Here’s how the National Post reported it:
“Despite the economic impacts, the Canadian Industrial Relations Board ruled earlier this month that the railway workers are not an essential service.”
Every member of this board should be sacked. Immediately. Because if rail is not essential, nothing is.
Did none of them pay attention in grade school? Canada was built on the railway. British Columbia joined confederation as a result, and all the gaps in between were filled in in large part because there was rail.
Yet every few years, Canadians and the Canadian economy is held hostage by some sort of disruption involving rail, usually a labour one, but occasionally a protest movement or even the weather, as if this is our first year living in the great white north.
The playbook is worn out already. After several days of pain and homage being paid to the rights of the workers to strike (yet no one talks about the rights of companies to lock out workers), the federal government eventually takes action and things get back to normal.
In this case, the feds let the entire rail network of CN and CPKC shut down on Thursday, Aug. 22, before ordering binding arbitration. But as I write this the morning of Friday, Aug. 23, the Teamsters have served strike notice on CN about an hour ago. I’m not going to try to keep up with all the developments. Maybe by the time this is published, it will all be resolved. But it seemed like that resolution was yesterday, and it fell apart today, so who knows?
And frankly, I don’t care, and I don’t think you should, either. Perhaps the union members have a point in their issues. Maybe the rail companies do, too. Fundamentally, it doesn’t matter. Sort it out. Put on you big boy/girl shorts/panties. Make it work.
At no point, ever, in the history of this nation, has rail service not been essential. From farmers needing to ship their grain at harvest to cities needing chlorine for water treatment to pavers needing asphalt from the Lloydminster refinery before the fall paving season ends, rail is utterly critical to our existence as a nation.
And anyone who says we can just backfill with trucks is a fool. A typical train these days has over 100 cars. Each rail car, depending on the load, is at least one, and often several truckloads. A train needs two crew to operate it. Are you going to come up with 100 to 200 truck drivers to replace that one, individual train, as well as the trucks, trailers, and space on the highways in a moment’s notice, and then do that for the entire economy?
Let’s look back at the rail blockades of 2020 in support of the Wet’suwet’en opposition to the Coastal GasLink pipeline. Because the blockades were related to First Nations politics, the federal Liberal government was loathe to step in. In a nod to George Orwell’s Animal Farm, it proved that in the 21st century, “some animals are more equal than others.” In this case, some First Nations were more equal than others, and could block rail lines at will, dramatically impacting parts of the economy. Never mind that the pipeline that was so ardently opposed is now the salvation for other First Nations bands to go ahead with their own Cedar LNG facility, dramatically improving their economic prospects.
Did the government perhaps learn something from the 2020 blockades – that rail disruption can’t allow these things to go on forever, especially because it would now impact the entire economy? Maybe. But if so, maybe the federal minister should have acted before an actual stoppage took place.
And that’s the key thing. Rail is nothing new to Canada. It’s almost as old as the nation itself. And yet there’s always something causing grief. Sometimes rail performance is blamed on snow in the mountains, or cold, as if this is the first time there’s ever been cold, or snow, or both, in Canada. Except they made it work for over 140-odd years, why are we now unable to make things work? Why, after the same 140-odd years of operation, we still have labour strife over rest periods and operations? Hasn’t that been enough time to figure it out, both from the company and labour sides?
How many more decades, nay, centuries do we need to figure out how to run a railroad?
Brian Zinchuk is editor and owner of Pipeline Online, and occasional contributor to the Frontier Centre for Public Policy. He can be reached at [email protected].
Business
Most Canadians say retaliatory tariffs on American goods contribute to raising the price of essential goods at home

- 77 per cent say Canada’s tariffs on U.S. products increase the price of consumer goods
- 72 per cent say that their current tax bill hurts their standard of living
A new MEI-Ipsos poll published this morning reveals a clear disconnect between Ottawa’s high-tax, high-spending approach and Canadians’ level of satisfaction.
“Canadians are not on board with Ottawa’s fiscal path,” says Samantha Dagres, communications manager at the MEI. “From housing to trade policy, Canadians feel they’re being squeezed by a government that is increasingly an impediment to their standard of living.”
More than half of Canadians (54 per cent) say Ottawa is spending too much, while only six per cent think it is spending too little.
A majority (54 per cent) also do not believe federal dollars are being effectively allocated to address Canada’s most important issues, and a similar proportion (55 per cent) are dissatisfied with the transparency and accountability in the government’s spending practices.
As for their own tax bills, Canadians are equally skeptical. Two-thirds (67 per cent) say they pay too much income tax, and about half say they do not receive good value in return.
Provincial governments fared even worse. A majority of Canadians say they receive poor value for the taxes they pay provincially. In Quebec, nearly two-thirds (64 per cent) of respondents say they are not getting their money’s worth from the provincial government.
Not coincidentally, Quebecers face the highest marginal tax rates in North America.
On the question of Canada’s response to the U.S. trade dispute, nearly eight in 10 Canadians (77 per cent) agree that Ottawa’s retaliatory tariffs on American products are driving up the cost of everyday goods.
“Canadians understand that tariffs are just another form of taxation, and that they are the ones footing the bill for any political posturing,” adds Ms. Dagres. “Ottawa should favour unilateral tariff reduction and increased trade with other nations, as opposed to retaliatory tariffs that heap more costs onto Canadian consumers and businesses.”
On the issue of housing, 74 per cent of respondents believe that taxes on new construction contribute directly to unaffordability.
All of this dissatisfaction culminates in 72 per cent of Canadians saying their overall tax burden is reducing their standard of living.
“Taxpayers are not just ATMs for government – and if they are going to pay such exorbitant taxes, you’d think the least they could expect is good service in return,” says Ms. Dagres. “Canadians are increasingly distrustful of a government that believes every problem can be solved with higher taxes.”
A sample of 1,020 Canadians 18 years of age and older was polled between June 17 and 23, 2025. The results are accurate to within ± 3.8 percentage points, 19 times out of 20.
The results of the MEI-Ipsos poll are available here.
* * *
The MEI is an independent public policy think tank with offices in Montreal, Ottawa, and Calgary. Through its publications, media appearances, and advisory services to policymakers, the MEI stimulates public policy debate and reforms based on sound economics and entrepreneurship.
Business
Trump confirms 35% tariff on Canada, warns more could come

Quick Hit:
President Trump on Thursday confirmed a sweeping new 35% tariff on Canadian imports starting August 1, citing Canada’s failure to curb fentanyl trafficking and retaliatory trade actions.
Key Details:
- In a letter to Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, Trump said the new 35% levy is in response to Canada’s “financial retaliation” and its inability to stop fentanyl from reaching the U.S.
- Trump emphasized that Canadian businesses that relocate manufacturing to the U.S. will be exempt and promised expedited approvals for such moves.
- The administration has already notified 23 countries of impending tariffs following the expiration of a 90-day negotiation window under Trump’s “Liberation Day” trade policy.
Diving Deeper:
President Trump escalated his tariff strategy on Thursday, formally announcing a 35% duty on all Canadian imports effective August 1. The move follows what Trump described as a breakdown in trade cooperation and a failure by Canada to address its role in the U.S. fentanyl crisis.
“It is a Great Honor for me to send you this letter in that it demonstrates the strength and commitment of our Trading Relationship,” Trump wrote to Prime Minister Mark Carney. He added that the tariff response comes after Canada “financially retaliated” against the U.S. rather than working to resolve the flow of fentanyl across the northern border.
Trump’s letter made clear the tariff will apply broadly, separate from any existing sector-specific levies, and included a warning that “goods transshipped to evade this higher Tariff will be subject to that higher Tariff.” The president also hinted that further retaliation from Canada could push rates even higher.
However, Trump left the door open for possible revisions. “If Canada works with me to stop the flow of Fentanyl, we will, perhaps, consider an adjustment to this letter,” he said, adding that tariffs “may be modified, upward or downward, depending on our relationship.”
Canadian companies that move operations to the U.S. would be exempt, Trump said, noting his administration “will do everything possible to get approvals quickly, professionally, and routinely — In other words, in a matter of weeks.”
The U.S. traded over $762 billion in goods with Canada in 2024, with a trade deficit of $63.3 billion, a figure Trump called a “major threat” to both the economy and national security.
Speaking with NBC News on Thursday, Trump suggested even broader tariff hikes are coming, floating the idea of a 15% or 20% blanket rate on all imports. “We’re just going to say all of the remaining countries are going to pay,” he told Meet the Press moderator Kristen Welker, adding that “the tariffs have been very well-received” and noting that the stock market had hit new highs that day.
The Canadian announcement is part of a broader global tariff rollout. In recent days, Trump has notified at least 23 countries of new levies and revealed a separate 50% tariff on copper imports.
“Not everybody has to get a letter,” Trump said when asked if other leaders would be formally notified. “You know that. We’re just setting our tariffs.”
-
Fraser Institute2 hours ago
Before Trudeau average annual immigration was 617,800. Under Trudeau number skyrocketted to 1.4 million annually
-
COVID-191 day ago
FDA requires new warning on mRNA COVID shots due to heart damage in young men
-
Business1 day ago
Carney’s new agenda faces old Canadian problems
-
Daily Caller23 hours ago
Blackouts Coming If America Continues With Biden-Era Green Frenzy, Trump Admin Warns
-
Indigenous1 day ago
Internal emails show Canadian gov’t doubted ‘mass graves’ narrative but went along with it
-
MAiD4 hours ago
Canada’s euthanasia regime is already killing the disabled. It’s about to get worse
-
Bruce Dowbiggin1 day ago
Eau Canada! Join Us In An Inclusive New National Anthem
-
Frontier Centre for Public Policy54 mins ago
New Book Warns The Decline In Marriage Comes At A High Cost