Business
Dropping the elbows: Canada caves to Trump’s trade pressure by rolling back retaliatory tariffs

Quick Hit:
Canada is rolling back billions in tariffs on U.S. goods, a sharp reversal by Prime Minister Mark Carney aimed at easing tensions with President Donald Trump as trade talks heat up.
Key Details:
- Canada will eliminate 25% tariffs on U.S. consumer goods worth roughly $21.7 billion, including orange juice, wine, clothing, and motorcycles.
- Prime Minister Carney’s move follows a direct phone call with President Trump and marks a sharp break from his campaign promise to retaliate against U.S. trade measures.
- Canada will maintain tariffs on U.S. steel, aluminum, and automobiles — sectors where Trump has imposed his toughest levies.
Diving Deeper:
Prime Minister Mark Carney is abandoning one of his central campaign promises — to hit the United States with “maximum pain” through sweeping tariffs — and is instead extending what amounts to a trade olive branch to President Donald Trump. The decision to remove 25% tariffs on a broad range of U.S. consumer goods, valued at $21.7 billion, represents a remarkable about-face for a Canadian government that had previously positioned itself as one of Trump’s fiercest international trade adversaries.
The shift follows a phone call between Carney and Trump on Thursday, their first publicly acknowledged conversation in weeks. While Canada will continue to levy tariffs on steel, aluminum, and automobiles, the rollback is a clear sign that Carney is recalibrating his approach in response to U.S. pressure and the looming review of the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement. The White House welcomed the move as “long overdue,” according to a senior official, signaling that Washington sees Ottawa’s retreat as validation of Trump’s hardline negotiating style.
Carney’s pivot is particularly striking given the fiery rhetoric that propelled him into office. During his campaign, he blasted Trump’s tariffs and vowed to retaliate aggressively. That posture may have served him politically against former Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre, but as prime minister, Carney appears more pragmatic. His finance ministry has already carved out exemptions for automakers and other industries since April, suggesting a growing awareness that trade wars can backfire economically.
The decision is also shaped by economic realities. Despite Canada’s earlier tariff blitz, economists note that the effective U.S. tariff rate on Canadian goods remains below 7% thanks to USMCA exemptions. Meanwhile, Canada’s retaliatory tariffs did not produce the inflation surge some feared, with consumer prices rising only 1.7% in July. Still, Carney faced the prospect of prolonged strain with Washington at a time when the U.S. economy is expanding under Trump’s leadership, and Canadian businesses were lobbying hard for relief.
For President Trump, this is another reminder that his “America First” approach is producing results. Canada, once defiant, is now backing down — a stark contrast to the confrontational posture of Justin Trudeau’s government and even Carney’s own campaign pledges. The message is clear: protectionist threats from Washington carry weight, and Canada’s leaders are recognizing that cooperation is more beneficial than confrontation.
The long-term question is whether Carney will maintain this more conciliatory posture or revert to his combative instincts when political pressures mount. For now, though, the rollback underscores Trump’s continued leverage on the global stage and his ability to secure favorable outcomes for American workers and industries.
Alberta
Your money isn’t as safe as you think

This article supplied by Troy Media.
The Emergencies Act proved how quickly bank accounts can be weaponized. Alberta must act now to protect its citizens.
When Eva Chipiuk (the Alberta lawyer who famously confronted former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s assertions at the Emergencies Act inquiry) found out her Royal Bank account was being shut down, it confirmed a chilling truth: those who challenge Ottawa are not safe from retribution.
Chipiuk committed no crime and was not charged with any offence. However, the Montreal-based Royal Bank refused to provide her services, citing an unspecified risk. The message is clear: if you challenge Ottawa, you may risk being treated as an economic non-person. This comes just months before Tamara Lich, an Alberta resident, is expected to be sentenced for standing up against COVID overreach.
The Alberta government cannot ignore these threats against its citizens. There is plenty Ottawa doesn’t like about Alberta and Albertans today. Given that, in a February 2022 Globe and Mail oped—written before he became prime minister—Mark Carney described civil protesters as “seditionists,” one doesn’t need much imagination to see how his government could treat Albertans who push for greater control over their future. The province must prepare now to shield its citizens from financial retaliation.
Albertans who think their money is safe if it’s parked at a credit union or ATB, instead of a chartered bank, are mistaken. It isn’t. Under the Criminal Code, the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act, and the Emergencies Act, Ottawa can force any “financial service provider”—including provincially regulated credit unions—to freeze accounts. For example, when Tamara Lich tried to open an account with ATB—Alberta’s Crown-owned financial institution—she was denied even an appointment.
Events such as these show that it doesn’t take a judge to determine you have run afoul of those laws—only a government that disagrees with you.
Alberta has the tools to defend its citizens, and it should use them. It should start by making ATB and its provincially regulated credit unions fortresses against politically motivated financial punishment. ATB, created in 1938 to shield farmers from the aggressive lending practices of Laurentian bankers, has a distinct status as an arm of the Alberta government.
That status can be leveraged today to keep Ottawa at bay by:
- Refocusing ATB on serving Albertans, not advancing trendy corporate agendas.
- Amending the ATB Financial Act to require judicial orders for any account freezes or closures, mandate public reporting of such actions, and enshrine political neutrality to ensure no Albertan is denied service for lawful political activity.
- Preparing to invoke the Sovereignty Act if Ottawa attempts another Emergencies Act-style move, instructing ATB and its credit unions to disregard unconstitutional federal orders unless validated by Alberta courts.
- Creating a Québec-style integrated financial regulator to oversee ATB and Alberta’s provincially regulated credit unions, insulating them from Ottawa’s reach.
- Exploring alternative payment systems to reduce reliance on Ottawa-controlled clearing mechanisms. Payments Canada—which Ottawa controls—could be used as a choke point against Alberta institutions. A provincial or private settlement system would blunt that weapon before it can be deployed.
Finally, Alberta should enact an Alberta Financial Rights Act guaranteeing that no one will be denied financial services and that no account can be frozen or closed without due process in open court.
Ottawa will not take this lying down. It can seek court injunctions, threaten ATB’s and our credit unions’ access to national payment systems, or pass legislation directly targeting provincial Crown corporations. Alberta must anticipate these moves now by drafting constitutional challenges, forging alliances with like-minded provinces, and building backup clearing systems.
When the federal government can freeze your account for giving $50 to the “wrong” cause, you are not a free citizen. You are a subject. The treatment of Tamara Lich and Eva Chipiuk’s debanking is a warning.
Alberta can either wait for the next wave of financial punishments to hit its citizens, or it can act decisively to make ATB and its provincially regulated credit unions fortresses that protect them. Premier Danielle Smith has a unique opportunity to put Alberta first again—and she should take it.
Marco Navarro-Genie is vice-president of research at the Frontier Centre for Public Policy and co-author, with Barry Cooper, of Canada’s COVID: The Story of a Pandemic Moral Panic (2023).
Troy Media empowers Canadian community news outlets by providing independent, insightful analysis and commentary. Our mission is to support local media in helping Canadians stay informed and engaged by delivering reliable content that strengthens community connections and deepens understanding across the country.
Business
Flight attendants’ win proves the right to strike matters

This article supplied by Troy Media.
By Peggy Nash
Ottawa’s interference in the Air Canada strike delayed a resolution. When it stepped aside, a deal quickly followed
When governments get out of the way, collective bargaining works—and the Air Canada flight attendants proved it by reaching a deal the moment
they were left to negotiate freely.
The strike by 10,000 flight attendants ended on Aug. 19 with a tentative agreement between their union, the Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE), and the airline.
That only happened after the Canadian Industrial Relations Board, acting under the federal government, tried to force an end to the strike by ordering the employees back to work. The CIRB can suspend or limit strikes if it believes a labour dispute threatens public safety or the economy. In this case, it attempted to use that power to override the strike—a move workers strongly opposed.
Because Air Canada is federally regulated, labour disputes fall under federal labour law, not provincial. That gives Ottawa broader powers to intervene in disputes, including through back-to-work legislation or binding arbitration.
That legal context helps explain what happened next. The government’s attempted intervention failed. But when it stepped back and let both parties negotiate freely, a deal was reached within hours.
It was a swift and fair outcome—one that likely could have happened earlier if not for the looming threat of government interference.
Employers already hold most of the power. They decide when to invest, where to expand and who to hire or fire. They often benefit from institutional credibility and public sympathy. The only meaningful power workers have is the ability to bargain collectively, and, if necessary, to strike.
The Air Canada flight attendants—more than 70 per cent of whom are women— hadn’t been able to negotiate a proper contract in over a decade. Wages had fallen behind inflation, even as they were expected to live in some of the country’s most expensive cities. Many had less than five years’ seniority and were paid near-poverty wages. They also performed unpaid ground work before and after flights.
Their frustration translated into action. They were fighting for better pay and to be compensated for all the hours they worked. And they were united. Over 90 per cent of union members voted. Of those, 99.7 per cent backed the strike. The public supported them too.
Air Canada, however, appeared to be counting on the government to intervene—expecting Ottawa to force arbitration and deny workers a vote on their own contract.
That undermines the constitutional right to free collective bargaining and feeds growing frustration among workers as corporate profits soar while wages stagnate. Last year, Air Canada’s CEO earned $12 million while some staff struggled to make ends meet.
This kind of imbalance shows why collective bargaining rights matter. The system is meant to balance power—ensuring workers can negotiate fairly while employers continue to operate between contracts. That structure has mostly preserved labour peace in Canada.
But when government overrides that process, it invites disorder. In this case, it led to hundreds of thousands of delays for passengers, lost revenue and reputational damage, only for both sides to agree on terms they might have reached much earlier if the threat of interference hadn’t been on the table.
The outcome sets an important precedent. If major employers expect Ottawa to intervene every time a union takes job action, the right to strike becomes meaningless. And that weakens the bargaining power of workers across the country—not just in aviation.
CUPE flight attendants—and their union—deserve credit for standing up for their rights. In doing so, they rallied support across the labour movement.
The lesson is simple: when governments and corporations overreach, they risk losing control. But when workers stand together and fight for fairness, they can win.
Peggy Nash is the executive director of the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives.
Troy Media empowers Canadian community news outlets by providing independent, insightful analysis and commentary. Our mission is to support local media in helping Canadians stay informed and engaged by delivering reliable content that strengthens community connections and deepens understanding across the country.
-
espionage2 days ago
Tulsi Gabbard guts nearly half of her agency
-
Business2 days ago
Trump Brings Hard Times For The Climate Alarm Movement
-
Canadian Energy Centre2 days ago
Indigenous communities shut out by B.C. tanker ban want another chance
-
Energy2 days ago
Developing Alberta’s Oil & Gas for Export Should Not Require a “Grand Bargain” or “National Interest” Status from Mark Carney
-
Alberta1 day ago
Most Alberta municipalities spending more—but some far more than others
-
Alberta1 day ago
Change at the top: Rob Morgan is the new CEO of the Alberta Energy Regulator
-
Energy1 day ago
Will Coastal GasLink Do for Natural Gas What TMX Did For Oil?
-
Artificial Intelligence2 days ago
Artificial intelligence is faking it