Poilievre says B.C. Ferries loan to buy Chinese ships should be cancelled
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Globe and Mail
28 minutes ago
- Globe and Mail
Letters to the editor, Aug. 17: ‘If Canada was a business … it would be bankrupt'
Re 'Nuclear threats, Ukraine's fate cast long shadow as Putin, Trump prepare to meet' (Aug. 8): The Russian and Chinese navies carried out 'a joint drill in which they practised hunting and destroying an enemy submarine.' As a former surface ship sonarman in the Royal Canadian Navy, I can say with some authority that Western allies have been regularly doing this very thing for decades. If asked during the 1960s, the Navy would have admitted that antisubmarine warfare was our raison d'être. Indeed when, a few years into my career, I served in Canada's submarine service, a major part of our job was to act as a target for allied forces trying to hone their skills. It should be noted that in those war games, the submarines usually won. Gord Hunter Regina Re 'Ontario universities must be released from their financial chokehold' (Aug. 11): I believe educating our youth is of paramount importance, and entrance fees must be affordable for all. Allowing our institutions to increase fees as needed would produce a U.S. model of unaffordable postsecondary education. Ontario and Canada are prioritizing government dollars for health care for older citizens over accessible education for the young. This makes no sense to me when about nearly three-quarters of all health care dollars are spent on patients over 60, while a similar amount of all personal wealth is in the hands of the same 60-plus crowd, including myself. It is time to start asking us old folks to open our wallets and free up public funds for better university access. Those who are not affluent can be dealt with under the tax system to support their needs. If Canada was a business, with inadequate focus on rebuilding its workforce, it would be bankrupt. David Parkes Ottawa Re 'Ontario labour group urges more worker protections amid rising air quality concerns' (Online, Aug. 6): Good for the Ontario Federation of Labour for taking the threat of wildfire smoke seriously and pushing for stronger worker protections. We find ourselves in a time of rapid change, and our policies and procedures should adapt accordingly. I think it's also worth taking a moment to reflect on how summer air quality is now a mainstream concern in Southern Ontario. As recently as three years ago, many would have found the OFL's advocacy radical. 'Smoke days' have only been a regular occurrence here since the summer of 2023. We can sit and ponder the reasons why wildfire season has gotten so much worse, but the science points pretty convincingly toward climate change. Let's remember that smoky skies in Toronto aren't some freak occurrence. If we want to stop this situation from getting much, much worse, we need to fight climate change, and that means reducing our greenhouse gas emissions. Mary Blake Rose London, Ont. Re 'It's not a bird! It's a Super Scooper plane, Canada's most powerful waterbombing tool to fight against wildfires' (Opinion, Aug. 9) and 'You can't fly sovereignty on foreign fuel' (Aug. 14): Thanks for publishing creative proposals to shake us out of the plodding complacency that won't cut it any longer in this time of multiple crises. We could use canola oil produced by tariff-battered Prairie farmers to ramp up production of low-emission aviation fuel. At the same time, we desperately need more water bombers to fight forest fires that threaten to become a permanent feature of summer; Canada produces one of the world's best in the 'Super Scooper.' Foreseeing an increase in global demand for water bombers and low-emission fuels, let's invest in our farmers and aerospace sector, strengthening our economy while combatting both the main cause and worst effects of that other existential crisis: climate change. Norm Beach Toronto Re 'Toronto the Grind: Making your way around has never been such a slog' (Opinion, Aug. 9): I think most everybody can agree that, at base, the issue comes down to having either condo construction at a breakneck pace, or the ability to travel around Toronto more seamlessly. We can't have both. Many voices have urged solutions to the traffic problem for years while still being able to build condos, but I find that all these ideas just nibble around the edges. Ultimately, it appears that the 'leadership,' developers and majority of the city's politicians have made one choice in favour of erecting condos – and I believe the vast majority of citizens have made the opposite choice. Ross Hollingshead Toronto I'm always struck by how those who once lived in Toronto, when returning after a long period away, invariably talk traffic chaos. Why is it that those of us who live here simply put up with it and don't demand change and progress? It feels like millions of us are simply the frog in the pot on the stove. We've been in the hot water so long, we've simply accepted it. We shouldn't. Traffic chaos should be an absolute priority at city hall. Stephen Kouri Toronto Blaming Toronto traffic and transit woes on a lack of leadership feels rather a cop-out. Whose leadership? When Toronto consults with residents and produces plans to deal with transportation or housing issues, they most often get shot down by the province. These decisions are then almost always upheld by the courts because, after all, the city 'is a creature of the province.' The province ordering the city to rip out bike lanes? More than 14 years (and counting) for the Eglinton Crosstown LRT? Historic underfunding of public transit? Road and construction deadlock? In whose mind is that acceptable transportation planning for a big city? Unless Toronto has real power under the Constitution to make its own decisions and real authority to raise needed funds, the power and politics and blame games between the city, the province and the feds will continue. And so will Toronto's transportation and transit woes. Monica Franklin Toronto Poor planning, political meddling and financial profligacy has steadily degraded nearly all methods of mobility in and around Toronto. Rather than focusing on transit improvements by studying global best practices and optimizing modal integration, it seems our provincial government has a better answer: Make space for more cars and spend tons of taxpayer money in the process – for what? This populist, tail-chasing process ensures that mobility woes remain entrenched. Exacerbating the problem is that new public transportation infrastructure costs in Toronto are among the highest in the world on a per-kilometre basis, and involved provincial departments seem to be doing little to correct this. Who is accountable for the fact that the three-stop Scarborough subway extension cost has now doubled from $5.5-billion to $10.2-billion? Making Toronto into a world-class city would mean replacing populism with foresight and pragmatism, by investing rather than spending. We continue to suffer the consequences. Kenneth Westcar Woodstock, Ont. Letters to the Editor should be exclusive to The Globe and Mail. Include your name, address and daytime phone number. Keep letters to 150 words or fewer. Letters may be edited for length and clarity. To submit a letter by e-mail, click here: letters@
CBC
29 minutes ago
- CBC
Who controls the food supply? Proposed changes to seed reuse reopens debate
It's a small change that risks cultivating a big debate. On one side is the principle of farmer's privilege — the traditional right of Canadian farmers to save seeds at the end of a growing season and reuse them the next year. On the other is the principle of plant breeders' rights — the right of those who develop new seeds and plants to protect and profit from their discoveries. The issue has been dormant for a decade. Now, proposed changes to government rules regarding plant breeders' rights are reviving that debate. It also raises questions about how Canada gets its food and who controls what is grown. "Ultimately, it's about food security," said Keith Currie, president of the Canadian Federation of Agriculture. The group supports the changes, which include narrowing the scope of farmer's privilege. "Not only keeping us competitive to keep food costs down, but also to make sure that we maintain new varieties coming forward for that food availability." In a notice dated Aug. 9, the government announced proposed changes to Canada's Plant Breeders' Rights Regulations — a form of intellectual property protection for plants, similar to a patent. The regulations give plant breeders a monopoly over the distribution of their product for a set period, as a way to to encourage investment and innovations such as varieties with higher yields or more resistant to drought or pests. It's a big business. Estimates of the economic impact of the seed industry in Canada range from $4 billion to $6 billion a year. The right to reuse The changes would remove the right of farmers to save and reuse seeds and cuttings from protected "fruits, vegetables, ornamental varieties, other plants reproduced through vegetative propagation and hybrids." For most plants recognized under the law, the protections last for 20 years. Personal gardens and many other kinds of crops such as wheat, cereals and pulses, where seed saving is more widespread, would not be affected. Among the other proposed changes is to extend the protection for new varieties of mushrooms, asparagus and woody plants like raspberries and blueberries to 25 years from the current 20 years. A public consultation on the changes runs until Oct. 18. NDP agriculture critic Gord Johns says the changes raise an important issue for Canadians. He questions why the government is holding the consultation in summer when most farmers are focused on growing and harvesting crops — not drafting submissions for public consultations. "They keep doing this over and over again," said Johns of the federal government. "They announce regulatory changes that impact farmers and their livelihoods [and] they schedule the consultation period during the busiest time of the year for farmers." Johns said companies producing new kinds of seed should be adequately compensated for their innovation and intellectual property. But he said farmers who grow and harvest the food Canadians eat shouldn't "be starved by big corporations choking off their seed supply." He wants the House of Commons agriculture committee to hold hearings and take a closer look at the changes being proposed. A spokesperson for Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food Heath MacDonald said the government is "committed to encouraging innovation, investment, research and competitiveness in Canadian agriculture, horticulture and ornamental industries." The spokesperson said the government "will review all feedback before determining next steps." Access vs. innovation Former prime minister Stephen Harper's government triggered a debate in 2015 when it adopted measures to bring Canada's rules more in line with guidelines adopted by the International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants, known as UPOV 91. The rules are separate from patent law or technology use agreements which some seed companies use to prevent farmers from saving and reusing seeds. Changes to plant breeders' rules are now again on the table. Last year, a government consultation resulted in 109 submissions, the majority supportive of change. Meanwhile, lobbyists have been busy behind the scenes. According to the federal lobbying registry, 13 people from several different groups or companies are currently registered to lobby on plant breeders' rights including the Canadian Federation of Agriculture, the Canadian Canola Growers Association, the Fruit and Vegetable Growers Association and Swiss-based Syngenta, owned by Sinochem, a Chinese state-owned enterprise. Cathy Holtslander, director of research and policy for the National Farmers Union, says the proposed changes risk hurting farmers while increasing profits and the power of seed-producing companies — often multinationals with foreign ownership. While the changes are focused on an area of agriculture where seed saving is less common, Holtslander warns the changes are a "slippery slope" that could lead to an erosion of the rights of farmers. "If they were to go after wheat with the amendment, there would be a huge uproar and people would really be angry and push back," Holtslander said. She said what's being proposed "paves the way" for other crops to be included later. "The seed industry does not want farmers' privilege to exist for any seed. They want to be able to require people to buy new seed every year," she said. Holtslander's group plans to fight the proposed changes. She said the issue goes beyond the question of individual farmers reusing seed. "If the big multinational companies control the seed, they control our food supply," she said. Lauren Comin, director of policy for Seeds Canada, acknowledges the issue can be controversial but argues Canada needs strong intellectual property protection if it wants access to the newest innovations to compete on the world stage. "It's incredibly important to have these frameworks to encourage investment companies, businesses, public entities, to know that they are going to somehow be compensated and protected," Comin said. She said that while the changes "provide that certainty and that incentive for investment," she wants them to go further. While acknowledging there isn't enough certified seed for all of Canada's cereals and small grains crop, Comin would also like to see farmers compensate plant breeders when they reuse seeds, as they do in Europe. "The farmer's privilege does not say that that use is free," she said. "[Farmers] can choose to buy the latest and greatest product of innovation, which means that there is a tremendous amount of investment and effort that went toward developing this improved variety. Or they can decide that they don't value innovation, and they can go back to a variety that's unprotected and grow that." Currie, an Ontario grains and oil seed farmer who saves and reuses seeds, says Canada needs to balance the two principles. He says farmer's privilege is key to Canada's competitiveness, but so is access to new varieties of seeds and plants. "While I do understand where some of the multinationals want to have better control, I believe in order for the industry to be viable, farmers have to have some control as well," he said.
Globe and Mail
2 hours ago
- Globe and Mail
INTEGRA REPORTS SECOND QUARTER 2025 RESULTS; CONSISTENT PERFORMANCE AND SIGNIFICANT CAPITAL INVESTMENT AT FLORIDA CANYON GOLD MINE
VANCOUVER, BC, Aug. 13, 2025 /CNW/ - Integra Resources Corp. ("Integra" or the "Company") (TSX: ITR) (NYSE American: ITRG) is pleased to announce financial and operating results for the three months ended June 30, 2025 (the "second quarter" or "Q2 2025"). The Company will host a conference call to discuss second quarter 2025 results on Thursday, August 14, 2025 at 11:00 AM Eastern Time / 8:00 AM Pacific Time.
