Airbnb bookings in B.C. at risk of cancellations amid short-term rental registration woes
Short-term rental platform Airbnb says thousands of reservations in B.C. are at risk of cancellation due to delays with the province's short-term rental registration process. But as Tanushi Bhatnagar reports, the government says it has given the hosting platform enough time to comply.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Global News
an hour ago
- Global News
Progress on lifting Trump's tariffs on Canada ‘not fast enough': LeBlanc
The cabinet official leading Canada's negotiations with the Trump administration says talks on removing tariffs aren't going fast enough, pouring cold water on the hope a deal will be announced at this week's G7 summit. Dominic LeBlanc, the minister responsible for Canada-U.S. trade, says that while conversations on a new economic and security partnership are 'frequent and constructive … we don't have the outcome we want yet' — particularly the lifting of recently doubled tariffs on steel and aluminum, as well as duties imposed on the auto sector and other goods. 'I'm hopeful we'll get there, but it's not fast enough,' he told Mercedes Stephenson in an interview that aired Sunday on The West Block. 'Our hope was that we would have made more progress before the president arrives in Alberta for the G7. We haven't hit that sweep spot.' Story continues below advertisement U.S. President Donald Trump is set to meet with Prime Minister Mark Carney when G7 leaders gather in Kananaskis, Alta., on Sunday for three days of talks. All eyes will be on whether a trade agreement or a framework of a deal can be reached at the summit. The two leaders have spoken directly 'on a number of occasions' since their meeting last month at the White House, LeBlanc confirmed, including 'informally on a range of issues.' 'Those conversations, (from) my understanding, aren't exclusively on one particular subject,' he said. The G7 will provide 'an opportunity to continue that conversation,' he added. 1:00 U.S. ambassador to Canada hints at progress on trade deal Reports of the behind-the-scenes talks between Carney and Trump had raised hopes that a deal was imminent. Pete Hoekstra, the U.S. ambassador to Canada, would neither confirm nor deny reports last week that a deal framework was in the works, but expressed optimism that the talks were bearing fruit during a fireside chat with Stephenson at the Canadian Club of Ottawa. Story continues below advertisement LeBlanc also said he's 'eternally optimistic,' but warned time is running out to secure a deal before Canada strikes back at Trump's latest tariffs. 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 'I believe that the economic damage the Americans are doing to themselves will at one point force a change in policy,' he said, 'but we understand the reasonable frustration of Canadian businesses and workers. 'If we conclude in a short period of time that we're not close to a deal, obviously, as we've said, the country will look at what might be further measures to retaliate against that doubling of the steel and aluminum tariffs.' The minister would not say what those countermeasures may be, or if the government considers the G7 summit a deadline. Canadian industries and provincial politicians like Ontario Premier Doug Ford have been pushing Ottawa for new counter-tariffs on the U.S. Canada has already put tariffs on $60 billion worth of U.S. goods, a move LeBlanc acknowledged 'is not without challenge for the Canadian economy' and is further fuelling the desire to resolve the dispute 'as quickly as possible.' 4:06 Labour advocates urge feds to retaliate against U.S. tariffs LeBlanc — one of several key ministers negotiating with their Trump administration counterparts — said he has made the case to U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick and other administration officials that co-operation on shared issues like defence can't happen 'at the same time as they're hammering our economy with these punitive tariffs.' Story continues below advertisement Lutnick, Hoekstra and other officials have previously said tariffs on Canada will likely stay put under any future deal, even at a lower rate. Trump has imposed a 10 per cent baseline tariff on nearly all global trading partners, which remains in place under a new trade framework with the United Kingdom that was announced last month. LeBlanc said he's ensuring talks with the U.S. remain 'collaborative and constructive' despite the tensions at play under Trump. Despite renewed efforts to diversify Canada's trading partners and shore up the domestic economy, he said Canada doesn't seek to break away from the U.S. entirely. 'They're our most important economic trading and security partner, and geography means that will always be the case,' he said. 'My approach (is that) being belligerent or sort of confrontational in a way that's not particularly constructive, I don't think advances the case. 'The Americans, we hope and believe, will change these decisions because it's in their economic and security interest to do so.' Modi invitation to G7 'reasonable decision' The opportunity to secure and bolster economic partnerships with other countries will be a major focus for Carney at the G7 summit, beyond the meetings with Trump. Story continues below advertisement LeBlanc said that was the main impetus for inviting Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi to the summit despite allegations that Modi's government has been involved in the murders, attempted murders and surveillance of Sikh nationals on Canadian soil. 3:21 Indian agent alleged to be behind Jagmeet Singh surveillance The invite has earned Carney criticism from Sikh diaspora groups, opposition MPs and even members of the Liberal caucus. '(Carney's) responsibility as chair of the G7 is to have a conversation around economic security involving things like critical minerals, involving new and emerging markets that are in the interest of G7 partners,' LeBlanc said. 'So an invitation like that to a significant economic player in the person of the prime minister of India is not unusual. 'That being said … there are investigations that are properly in the hands of police authorities and perhaps ultimately prosecutors, if that's where these things go, that can also exist at the same time as a conversation takes place around economic and global security issues. Story continues below advertisement 'We think that's a reasonable decision to take.' Modi's invitation was given renewed scrutiny last week after Global News revealed that a suspected agent of the Indian government was surveilling Jagmeet Singh, who was placed under RCMP protection in late 2023 while he was serving as leader of the NDP. The NDP called on Carney to revoke Modi's invitation following the report. LeBlanc, who was public safety minister at the time Singh was put under police protection, told Stephenson he continues to have faith in the RCMP to investigate foreign interference and protect political leaders and diaspora groups. 'The RCMP, in my view, do terrific work in dealing with this, and that work continues,' he said.
CBC
an hour ago
- CBC
Where the G7 came from — and where it might go in the era of Trump
Historian Samuel Beroud has a pet peeve whenever anyone asks him about the origins of the annual Group of Seven (G7) summit. As the well-worn narrative goes, the G7 (originally the G6 before Canada joined In 1976) was set up as a forum among the world's leading industrialized nations following the economic shocks of the early 1970s, including the collapse of the Bretton Woods monetary system and the oil price crisis. The first summit was hosted by French President Valéry Giscard d'Estaing and German Chancellor Helmut Schmidt in 1975. The two leaders met with the heads of the U.K., Italy, Japan and the U.S. for a fireside chat at the Château de Rambouillet, just outside of Paris. It is said that the gathering was necessary to shepherd the world economy and prevent disputes from escalating into nasty trade wars — but more importantly to reassure the public and the markets that the leaders were in charge and managing things. "I have a very critical interpretation of the G7, because if you look at things, basically the first G7 took place after the recovery of 1975 has already happened," said Beroud, a fellow at the Washington-based Wilson Center and PhD candidate at the University of Geneva. "So there is already like a trick from the politician to say, 'Look, we are solving global economic problems,' when they know already that the recovery has already started." There was, however, geopolitical value in meeting face-to-face and a clear message at the time, Beroud said. "The Western world has gone through a period of tension, but now we are united again and we are ready to face challenges from the outside. So this is the main message of the first G7 summit." Good luck getting there this week. Projecting a sense of calm reassurance as the global economy is upended by the Trump administration's trade war — not to mention hot wars in both the Middle East and Ukraine — would be nice. Hopefully the leaders gathering in the majestic wilderness of Kananaskis, Alta., this week get the memo. Whether that reassurance involves unity on key economic and security questions is in question — even doubtful. Perhaps more so than at any other point in the five-decade history of these summits. As host, the Canadian government seems to have given up on a summit-ending communiqué and appears poised for less comprehensive "action-oriented" statements. We all know why. Aside from a destructive trade war and the routine disparaging of allies, there is little common ground between U.S. President Donald Trump and the other leaders on key economic, environmental and security issues — notably Ukraine. WATCH | Why there likely won't be a leaders' communiqué coming out of the G7: Why won't there be a leaders' communique coming out of next week's G7? | Power & Politics 3 days ago Duration 14:19 Creon Butler, who helped organize Britain's G7 priorities for almost a decade, wrote last fall that with Trump in the picture, the G7 is so hamstrung — the areas of co-operation and agreement so few — that allies would be better off meeting in smaller groups, without the United States. "I think the problem now, frankly, is for all of that to work, you need a level of trust among the members, which despite … quite a few bumpy periods along the way, has always been there," said Butler, who served under former prime ministers David Cameron, Theresa May, and Boris Johnson. "I question now whether that level of trust is there with the U.S. to make it function in the way it has in the past." Questions of relevancy Throughout its existence, there have been other times when the G7 was a loggerheads over either a range of or specific policies, Butler said. But it's never been this stark. In light of its declining collective economic clout, the G7 has also faced existential questions. The arrival of the G20 in the early 2000s and the BRICS alliance raised the spectre of relevance in the face of a changing world. "There was actually a period where people wondered within the G7, do we still need the G7?" said Butler. One of those moments was in the run-up to the 2008 financial crisis and before the cascading eurozone debt crisis. "It was the eurozone crisis, which was very fundamentally a G7 crisis — or Europe and other advanced countries — which clearly gave the G7 a continuing purpose," he said. More recently, it found purpose in the need to respond to Russia's attack on Ukraine. After ambling along in the face of the first argumentative Trump administration, the G7 came back in full force as the co-ordinating group for sanctions on Russia following its 2022 full-scale invasion — a time when everyone was on-board. Conversation doesn't always need consensus Given the deluge of events and the speed with which Trump has moved to upend the global order, those days seem very long ago. So what's the purpose now? "The G7s are [to] talk shop at the end of the day, right?" said Phil Luck, a former deputy chief economist at the U.S. State Department, now with the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies. "We get together and talk about things. So the question is what use is that? … I think there's always use in talking. I think it tends to not be that costly. And I think, if nothing else, talking can try to iron out disagreements. And that can be helpful." Sen. Peter Boehm, Canada's former G7 deputy minister, agreed there is value in talking — especially now — even if there's no consensus. After watching leaders behind closed doors at several summits, he said there's a lot to be learned from how they tackled their differences in the past. "Inside the room, it's not like everyone is close to fisticuffs or anything like that. It's a very cordial atmosphere," said Boehm, who disagreed with the notion that another forum — without the U.S. — is needed. "You can agree to disagree." When you look at recent history, everyone focuses on Trump's 2018 Air Force One Twitter outburst as torpedoing the consensus at the Charlevoix summit. But Boehm said history has shown there are ways to manage the discussion with the mercurial president — and he believes Prime Minister Mark Carney can keep Trump tuned in. "What I would say is bring him … into the meeting, [bring] President Trump into the conversation — and as often as you can, so that he does not lose interest," said Boehm. "And defer to him, because he is the president of the United States." But history and ego-management can only take you so far, and the bigger question becomes how other leaders respond to both Trump's policies and his potential tantrums. "I think the big challenge for Prime Minister Carney is to ensure that some sort of solidarity is demonstrated," said Boehm. "There won't be consensus on everything. There never has been. "But at least to have a modicum of a consensual view, where the G7 can present itself to the world and say, 'We had a good discussion on topics X, Y and Z, and this is what we propose to undertake.'" As the world's largest economy, nations over the years have grown accustomed to the United States — the so-called G1 — setting the agenda and leading the discussion. As the Trump administration jettisons the country's mantle of global leadership, Luck said it will be up to other G7 members to try to find consensus with the U.S. where they can — and lead on consequential issues that no longer interest America. "I think the world will be waiting for a while for us to show the type of moral leadership that I think people are used to. Or that we like to think that people are used to," he said.
National Post
3 hours ago
- National Post
First Nations are mired in 'soft communism.' This leader has the fix
Stephen Buffalo is a very constructive guy. He's a man who seeks solutions, and he's open to Prime Minister Mark Carney's ambitious nation-building campaign. He also wants Carney and all Canadians to understand, though: Indigenous consent to these projects has a price tag. Article content 'Give us a chance to make our own wealth,' says Stephen, long-time advocate for First Nations' economic development and member of the Samson Cree Nation from Maskwacis, Alta. Article content Article content Article content 'To be part of the mainstream and part of the economy and at the end of the day, everyone benefits: the proponent benefits, the government benefits, and we benefit, you know, First Nations that are participating.' Article content Article content The 'new' Liberal government has pledged — in the recently tabled 'One Canadian Economy Act' — to speed up approvals for major energy and infrastructure projects that strengthen Canada's autonomy, resilience and security, have undeniable national benefits, are likely to be successfully executed, drive Canada's clean grown potential and reflect priorities of Indigenous leaders. Article content Carney assured that fast-tracking major projects won't shortcut meaningful consultation with Indigenous peoples whose Charter or treaty rights may be affected. A Major Projects Office, created to assist project proponents through the assessment and consultation process, will lean on an Indigenous advisory council for advice. Article content And in an effort to reinforce Indigenous voice in governance, Carney's cabinet includes three Indigenous ministers: Rebecca Chartrand, as minister of northern and Arctic affairs; Mandy Gull-Masty, as minister of Indigenous services; and Buckley Belanger, as secretary of state for rural development. Article content Article content I ask Stephen: Do Carney's announcements signal real change in the federal government's paternalistic relationship with Indigenous communities? After watching the undermining of Jody Wilson-Raybould's leadership by the previous Liberal administration, I'm wary. Article content Article content He grins, and answers: 'I'm trying to.' Article content This isn't the first time I've sat down with Stephen for a no-holds-barred conversation about how Indigenous leaders perceive what's going on in the world. As CEO of the Indian Resource Council, Stephen speaks on behalf of 130 First Nations across Canada that have oil and gas production on their land, or the potential for production. He also speaks forcefully — as a 53-year-old father who wants to see his kids have the opportunity to thrive in mainstream society. Article content When we met 18 months ago, he was lobbying to have the Indian Act repealed because it was getting in the way of First Nations' full participation in resource development. 'We cannot live in soft communism,' he chided, 'where bureaucrats tell us how to live, what to do.'
