Doug Ford teases new details of Ontario's $5B tariff response plan
On Wednesday morning, Finance Minister Peter Bethlenfalvy is scheduled to hold a news conference alongside Vic Fedeli, the trade minister.
At an unrelated event the day before, Ford appeared to tease details of what the pair would unveil.
'We're releasing another $5 billion. I think we're going to start a billion tomorrow and then just keep adding,' the premier said in Windsor, Ont.
'We're going to focus on helping small businesses, we're going to really focus on the auto sector and the steel sector, they're the ones that are really getting hit the hardest. So we're rolling out the money — and I won't hesitate to keep rolling it out.'
Story continues below advertisement
Ford appeared to be referencing the $5 billion Protecting Ontario Account, which was announced as part of his government's 2025 election platform and the budget that followed.
Get daily National news
Get the day's top news, political, economic, and current affairs headlines, delivered to your inbox once a day. Sign up for daily National newsletter Sign Up
By providing your email address, you have read and agree to Global News' Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy
When it was announced, the government's financial blueprint explained that the Protecting Ontario Account was designed to work together with tariff measures introduced by the federal government.
It would include 'up to $1 billion in immediate liquidity relief aimed at protecting Ontario businesses and workers facing significant tariff-related business disruptions,' the budget said.
Officials described it as 'an emergency backstop for Ontario businesses that have exhausted available funding.'
Despite announcing the fund as part of its budget in May, the government has provided few details of how it will work and whether it has been used, even as tariffs bite.
United States President Donald Trump has had levies in place for some time on Canadian steel and aluminum, also adding 35 per cent tariffs on all goods not covered by a trade deal between the two countries at the beginning of August.
Opposition politicians said the Ford government was taking too long to stimulate the economy.
'Our economy is already taking a big hit with Trump's most recent tariff hike on all Canadian goods to 35 per cent,' NDP MPP Catherine Fife said in a statement.
Story continues below advertisement
'Despite growing economic uncertainty and ongoing job losses, we still don't have a plan from the Premier to protect workers and create good jobs. In order to weather this 'Trump Storm,' we must strategically invest in our auto sector and fight to keep these good, stable jobs in Ontario.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
a minute ago
Flight attendant union asks jobs minister not to intervene in Air Canada negotiations
The Canadian Union of Public Employees released a statement on Friday afternoon urging Federal Jobs Minister Patty Hajdu not to intervene in negotiations by invoking Section 107 of the Canada Labour Code, thereby permitting collective bargaining to continue and allowing the parties to negotiate a resolution. Air Canada had previously asked CUPE to consider binding interest arbitration, which would bring an arbitrator into the negotiations to make decisions on key agenda items that the two sides haven't been able to agree on. After CUPE declined that request earlier this week, Air Canada then asked Hajdu to make a referral under Section 107 that the negotiation be sent to arbitration. Hajdu gave CUPE until noon on Friday to respond. We thank the union for their response. We strongly urge the parties to work with federal mediators and get a deal done. Time's precious and Canadians are counting on you, Hajdu's press secretary said in a statement to CBC News. Air Canada warned Friday it is cancelling around 500 flights previously scheduled to take off today in anticipation of the work stoppage, with a full stoppage looming Saturday. The airline said on X that as of noon on Friday, 294 flights had been cancelled and more than 55,000 passengers had been impacted. It said it would notify customers of cancellations through email and text message, adding it recommends against going to the airport unless they have a confirmed booking and their flight still shows as operating. An Angus Reid Institute poll released on Friday suggested that four in five Canadians — about 84 per cent — believe it's unfair that Air Canada flight attendants are only paid for work when the plane is in the air. This is a key sticking point in negotiations that led to the impasse. The weighted survey came from a randomized sample of 1,507 Canadian adults, with a margin of error of +/- 2.0 percentage points, 19 times out of 20. With files from CBC's Jenna Benchetrit
Vancouver Sun
a minute ago
- Vancouver Sun
Proposed national class action filed against Amazon for breaching privacy of Alexa users
A proposed class action lawsuit has been filed in the B.C. Supreme Court against Amazon over its Alexa technology. The lawsuit, submitted by B.C. law firm Charney Lawyers , alleges that Alexa products have collected more personal data from Canadian users than Amazon has disclosed. It also alleges that the tech giant retained the information, even when users tried to delete it, using it for business purposes such as training artificial intelligence and developing targeted advertising. The class action was filed in B.C., on behalf of representative plaintiff, Joseph Stoney, but its aim is to be national in scope. If the class action is certified by the court, it would cover all Canadian residents who had an Amazon Alexa account between 2014 and July 19, 2023. Start your day with a roundup of B.C.-focused news and opinion. By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc. A welcome email is on its way. If you don't see it, please check your junk folder. The next issue of Sunrise will soon be in your inbox. Please try again Interested in more newsletters? Browse here. 'Had they learned about this after signing up for Alexa, users would have discontinued their accounts,' the statement of claim asserts. The essence of the lawsuit is the allegation that Amazon failed to obtain meaningful, informed consent for retention and use of this data. As a result, the alleged data collection and use breached both privacy and consumer protection laws in Canada. 'In its terms of service Amazon made explicit commitments to Alexa users regarding their privacy. However, rather than protecting users privacy, Amazon: (1) kept the data it took from Alexa indefinitely; (2) used that data to train its algorithms, machine learning programs and AI; and (3) failed to fully delete the data when customers asked it to.' The suit sets out that since 2014, Amazon has been developing and selling Amazon 'Echo' devices, which are controlled by its cloud-based voice assistant, Alexa. Alexa can activate intentionally or accidentally, the claim says. Once Alexa begins streaming audio to the cloud, the audio interaction is transcribed to text, the lawsuit states. Then it is processed by an algorithm that instructs the Alexa how to respond to the user. If a request has been processed, a copy of the audio file, the transcription, the resulting instructions to Alexa, and any associated metadata is stored in an Amazon database, the claim alleges. Prior to 2020, users had no way to delete Alexa interaction-related data, and it was stored indefinitely, says the claim. And even though Amazon introduced a deletion function in 2020, it adds, Amazon only deleted the audio file, while retaining a transcription, the instructions, and associated metadata. 'When a user chose to delete the data on one or more of their interactions with Alexa, Amazon changed what was visible to the user so that it appeared that the interactions had been completely deleted even though Amazon was actually retaining everything except the audio file,' the claim says. Charney Lawyers also argues that some of this data may have been collected accidentally when Alexa mistook regular sounds for its 'wake word.' This means conversations users never intended for the device might have been picked up, transcribed and saved. The claim notes that in May 2023, the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) filed a complaint against Amazon, alleging the company falsely represented that Alexa app users could delete voice recordings, transcripts and metadata. And instead, Amazon allegedly only deleted voice recordings, keeping transcripts and associated metadata. In July 2023, Amazon agreed to pay a US$25-million fine and 'effectively admitted to a number of instances of unlawful data misuse.' The suit seeks damages, repayment of any profits Amazon gained from the use of the data, as well as repayment of the amount users paid for Alexa products and services. For potential participants in the suit, there is a registration page set up by Charney Lawyers for people who want updates or to potentially take part in the action. Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here .
Vancouver Sun
a minute ago
- Vancouver Sun
Wife's ADHD cited by Federal Court in reasons for delaying deportation of man from India
A Federal Court judge has temporarily stopped the deportation of a man from India over Ottawa's handling of health concerns by his Canadian wife who has ADHD, and financial problems his departure would cause his sister. Jagjit Singh, a citizen of India, came to Canada in 2021 on a temporary resident visa and made a refugee claim for asylum. While that claim was being processed, he met a Canadian woman, in November 2024, and married her the following January. The woman, identified only by the initials L.B., in the court decision, submitted a spousal sponsorship for her new husband to become a permanent resident of Canada a couple of weeks later, after which he withdrew his refugee claim. Start your day with a roundup of B.C.-focused news and opinion. By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc. A welcome email is on its way. If you don't see it, please check your junk folder. The next issue of Sunrise will soon be in your inbox. Please try again Interested in more newsletters? Browse here. While one arm of the immigration system was processing the spousal sponsorship, another arm was dealing with a man who was no longer seeking refugee protection and so had overstayed his original visa. In May his wife was notified she met the eligibility requirements to sponsor Singh and, in July, Singh was given a removal date for August. He asked Canada Border Services Agency officials to delay his deportation until after his wife's application was adjudicated. CBSA refused his request. Singh then sought intervention from the Federal Court to delay his removal. His case was heard by Federal Court Justice Avvy Yao-Yao Go on Tuesday and her decision was released the same day. Lawyers for Singh claimed five grounds for a delay, including various ways that the CBSA mishandled and misapplied evidence in the case to a degree suggesting they had not reviewed the submission Singh had made. The judge said not all of Singh's grounds were persuasive, but only one serious issue was needed for a stay to be granted, and she saw one. 'There is at least one serious issue with respect to the Officer's assessment of the evidence the Applicant submitted in support of his deferral request, and the Officer's interpretation of the scope of their discretion,' Go wrote in her decision. She found the border officer did not properly consider the issue of irreparable harm. 'Irreparable harm refers to harm which cannot be compensated in money; it is the nature rather than the magnitude of the harm,' her judgment says. It doesn't have to be the person being deported that is harmed, it can be 'specific harm that is demonstrated in regard to any persons directly affected by the removal, and who will be remaining in Canada.' In this case, Go found that there was evidence of harm to Singh's wife, who has ADHD, and to Singh's sister, who will suffer financially because the couple pay to live in her house. The CBSA officer's dismissal of the concerns was not based on evidence before the court, Go said. 'In the case before me, there is evidence that L.B. suffers from ADHD which impairs her ability to manage time, stress, focus and everyday responsibilities and that the Applicant provides her with support by, among other things, helping her maintain daily structure and reminders for medications and appointments, and providing her with emotional stability and mental health support. The evidence before the Court also indicates L.B. cannot rely on other family members to support her. 'The evidence before the Court further indicates that the Applicant's sister has put her house on sale in light of the Decision denying the Applicant's request to defer his removal.' In court, the government argued the couple's spousal sponsorship application faces further investigation due to 'possible bona fide concerns,' suggesting CBSA wants to see whether their marriage is a sham for immigration purposes. Singh's lawyers responded that the couple has not been asked for any information in that probe, so the delay is the government's fault, not Singh's. 'In the end,' Go wrote, 'taking into consideration the irreparable harm to the Applicant's spouse on the one hand, and the inconvenience to the Respondent caused by delay in removal on the other, I find that granting the stay until the underlying (application for judicial review) is determined would be just and equitable in all the circumstances of the case.' Go said Singh could stay in Canada until that review happens. • Email: ahumphreys@ | X: AD_Humphreys Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark and sign up for our newsletters here .
