Liberals poised to table bill to knock down internal trade barriers
OTTAWA - The Liberal government is poised to table landmark legislation to break down internal trade barriers and increase labour mobility within Canada.
The government has put a bill on the House of Commons notice paper that could potentially be tabled as early as today.
Prime Minister Mark Carney has pledged to break down internal trade barriers by Canada Day to create one economy — although the time left on the parliamentary calendar suggests the legislation will not gain Royal Assent by the time the House rises for the summer.
It also comes just days after Carney met with the country's premiers to discuss the need to build major projects across Canada and fast-track their approval.
Several other provinces, including Ontario and Quebec, have also tabled such legislation to remove interprovincial barriers to the trade of goods across the country.
It comes against a backdrop of U.S. President Donald Trump roiling the country's economy with stop-and-go tariffs in an escalating trade war — and as Carney has been engaged in behind-the-scenes talks with Trump on trade.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 6, 2025.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
31 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Clean energy tax cuts in reconciliation budget would stall renewable energy projects in Iowa
Wind turbines along west-bound Interstate 80 on March 29, 2025. (Photo by Cami Koons/Iowa Capital Dispatch) Clean energy advocates said Iowa stands to lose jobs, manufacturing facilities, renewable energy project expansions and face more expensive utility bills if Congress passes the budget reconciliation bill as is. Many of these credits were extended via the Biden-era Inflation Reduction Act, which put them under attack from Republican lawmakers opposed to the green policies. Renewable energy advocates say continued investment into wind, solar and other clean energy sources, regardless of environmental impact, is vital to meeting growing energy demands. Nearly three-fifths of Iowa's total electricity generation comes from renewable sources, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, which also reports Iowa is one of the top states for solar and wind energy generation. Since 2019, Iowa has generated more electricity via wind than from coal and continues to grow its solar production. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX Kristina Costa, who formerly worked at the White House implementing the Inflation Reduction Act's energy and climate policies, said the IRA established at least 10 years of tax credits to support clean energy industries, which launched new projects and expanded the industry. 'The House bill that the Republicans passed explodes that entire paradigm,' Costa said. 'It functions as a full repeal of the Inflation Reduction Act.' Costa, during a Thursday press conference with Climate Power, said the bill 'really radically' changes how clean electricity developers can plan and develop their projects, by eliminating the ability to 'lock in' a tax treatment at the start of construction. 'This is going to create a lot of uncertainty for project developers,' Costa said. 'It's going to raise financing costs for project developers pretty considerably … but it also just means that fewer projects will end up qualifying for the credits.' Clean energy tax credits impact transportation, power generation, industry and construction and create incentives for projects like renewable vehicle fuels, solar, wind, nuclear power generation and more. Per the reconciliation bill text as it passed the House May 22, the bill would terminate clean vehicle credits, residential energy efficiency credits, hydrogen fuel credits and place restrictions on credits for clean electricity production, zero-emission nuclear energy production and other sectors. Some of the restrictions include strict construction timeline requirements, like beginning construction within 60 days of enactment, and bringing the projects online by 2028. Costa said these timelines create an 'incredibly sharp cliff' for developers to work within for projects that often take years and can face lengthy setbacks from supply chain disruptions. The budget bill also has extensive language pertaining to and restricting projects that have any ties to foreign entities. Costa said these restrictions are 'very complicated, unworkable, Byzantine requirements' that impose 'a lot of red tape' for developers and would have the 'immediate effect of freezing the market.' She said it would require companies to understand where 'literally every nut, bolt, screw and wire in a project they are building comes from' and certify that it does not have any ties to China or to Russia. Costa said gutting these policies will lead to increased energy costs for American customers. A study from Clean Energy Buyers Association analyzed the impact of removing just two clean energy tax credit programs, and found it would cause an average increase of 7% for residential electricity costs. Part of the problem is an anticipated 2% energy demand increase nationwide, in 2025 and again in 2026, according to the EIA. Much of that energy demand is a result of battery manufacturing and data centers. Iowa alone has roughly 100 data centers, which is one of the largest concentrations in the midwest. 'The near term additions to the grid are going to come from renewables, or they're supposed to come from renewables under the current tax regime,' Costa said. 'That is why you would see these consumer electricity price increases.' A spokesperson for Alliant Energy, one of Iowa's utility companies with significant investments in solar and wind energy, said the company is monitoring the bill. A spokesperson for MidAmerican Energy declined to comment on the pending legislation. Earlier this year, NextEra Energy proposed restarting its Duane Arnold Energy Center, a nuclear plant near Palo. A representative from the company did not answer questions about the impact the Republican-sponsored bill would have on the Iowa project. A study from The Nature Conservancy found that clean energy tax credits in Iowa alone would add more than $238 million in annual economic value to Iowa, if left intact through 2032. Repeal of the credits would also affect associated manufacturing companies, like those that make solar panel parts, or wind turbine blades. Analysis from Climate Power found 400,000 jobs nationwide would be in jeopardy without the tax credits supporting the expanding industry. Joe Zimsen, an Iowa resident with 10 years of construction experience in the wind industry, said the IRA created a 'tremendous amount of hope' among his colleagues in the industry that has now 'disintegrated' because of budget bill. Zimsen formerly worked on wind projects near Grinnell, but now works for Renew Energy as a construction manager for off-shore wind projects. He and his family still live in Iowa, and he urged Iowa senators to oppose the bill as it is currently written. 'This policy of killing offshore and onshore wind and solar energy is going to have tremendous detrimental effects and set us back another 10 to 15 years behind our competitors, like China and Europe,' Zimsen said. 'We can't afford to do that.' U.S. Sen. Chuck Grassley said Tuesday that wind energy incentives have been at risk since 2015 when he worked to extend them, and he said he senators would try to find a 'compromise' on them again, Radio Iowa reported. But, the so-called, 'big beautiful bill' comprises much more than just clean energy concerns, which Grassley said means one issue can't 'stand in the way' of the rest of the bill. U.S. Sen. Joni Ernst's office did not respond to requests for comment. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Hamilton Spectator
34 minutes ago
- Hamilton Spectator
AFN to hold emergency meeting with chiefs on major projects bill
OTTAWA - The Assembly of First Nations will hold an emergency meeting next week to discuss the implications of federal legislation that would speed up approvals for major projects. National Chief Cindy Woodhouse Nepinak met Thursday with Prime Minister Mark Carney about his government's new bill, tabled Friday. She said she remains 'deeply concerned' about the legislation's potential impact on First Nations. 'First Nations support efforts to protect Canada from economic uncertainty and advance resource revenue sharing agreements,' she said. 'However, First Nations are very concerned that this proposal may violate many collective rights … Failure to obtain free, prior and informed consent will likely result in protracted litigation.' The major projects bill is twinned legislation meant to break down internal trade barriers and cut red tape for major projects. The bill sets out five criteria to evaluate whether a project is in the national interest. They include the project's likelihood of success, whether it would strengthen the country's resiliency and advance the interests of Indigenous peoples, and whether it would contribute to economic growth in an environmentally responsible way. Woodhouse Nepinak said the Assembly of First Nations only received a copy of the bill Friday and the group's legal team is reviewing it with elders. First Nations leaders were informed of the government's plans for major projects and were asked to report back any concerns within one week. Woodhouse Nepinak previously said it wasn't clear whether the government told each First Nation of its plans or just provincial and national lobby groups that work to advance their interests. She said she's told Carney 'that he needs to meet with rights-holders directly. He can't use the AFN to bypass First Nations.' Asked whether the time First Nations leaders were given to review Ottawa's plans was enough to allow the federal government to claim it consulted with Indigenous Peoples, as it did Friday, Woodhouse Nepinak said it wasn't. 'That's insufficient, and that's not acceptable,' she said. The Assembly of First Nations is an advocacy body that lobbies on behalf of rights-holding First Nations governments through resolutions passed in annual general or special assemblies. The emergency meeting next week could see chiefs give the Assembly of First Nations direction on how they want to move forward. 'It's long overdue that we have this big talk,' Woodhouse Nepinak said. Former national chief Phil Fontaine called for the emergency meeting on Monday, saying Canada's governments are trampling on the rights of Indigenous Peoples as provinces and the federal government try to build up the economy in a hurry. Leaders have warned widespread protests and blockades aren't off the table if their rights aren't respected and they are not properly consulted. This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 6, 2025. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
USA Today
44 minutes ago
- USA Today
The post-fight fallout from Trump-Musk battle could get even uglier
The post-fight fallout from Trump-Musk battle could get even uglier Show Caption Hide Caption Six takeaways from the President Donald Trump, Elon Musk feud From disappointment to threats, here are six takeaways from the public spat between President Donald Trump and Elon Musk. WASHINGTON – If you think the thermonuclear blowout between President Donald Trump and tech billionaire Elon Musk was bad, wait until the asset-splitting part of the divorce gets underway. The battle royale between the world's most powerful man and its richest inhabitant appears to be mostly over, save for some residual skirmishing on the social media platforms separately owned by Trump and Musk. Neither man can convincingly declare himself a winner in the dissolution of a partnership so mutually beneficial that it helped propel one to the White House and the other to even more ungodly amounts of wealth in the form of government contracts and regulatory relief. The fight began over Musk's public criticism of Trump's 'Big Beautiful' budget bill and the projected $2.5 trillion increase it would cause to the federal deficit. But it devolved into a mudslinging spectacle that included Musk publicly accusing Trump of blocking the release of the Jeffrey Epstein sex trafficking files held by the Justice Department because he's implicated in them. But who will lose most when the proverbial dust from the dustup finally settles? 'I don't think anybody knows,' said veteran Republican political strategist Doug Heye. 'Clearly, what we've seen just in the past few months is that if Trump views you as an enemy, he's going to try and use levers of government against you,' said Heye, a senior official since 1990 who served in the George W. Bush White House, the House and Senate and on the Republican National Committee. 'And it may be that some of his supporters, or a lot of his supporters, want that. We'll have to see.' What does Musk stand to lose? The White House said June 6 that Trump was considering selling the Tesla Model S he purportedly purchased from the CEO of the electric car company when its stock was tanking as a result of Americans opposed to Musk's tactics as head of the cost-cutting Department of Government Efficiency. More: 'Elon is going to get decimated:' How Trump's feud with the world's richest man might end Within hours of the Trump-Musk fight going public on June 5, Tesla shares dropped 15%, wiping over $100 billion from the company's $1 trillion market value. More broadly, Musk's various companies have benefited from at least $38 billion in government contracts, loans, subsidies and tax credits over the past two decades, often at critical moments. Most have come from contracts between his SpaceX satellite firm and the Department of Defense and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). And while Musk's myriad businesses are deeply intertwined with the U.S. government in the form of multi-year contracts, his feud with Trump jeopardizes those, too. Also at risk: Musk's burgeoning projects like self-driving cars and trucks, protections from tariffs and other proposed alliances with the government. Musk has also used his Trump connections to sell his Starlink satellite communications services to various U.S. agencies and foreign governments, as well as his The Boring Company tunneling firm, his xAI artificial intelligence firm and other products. More: President Trump threatens Elon Musk's billions in government contracts as alliance craters Without Trump's support, those current and proposed government contracts could dwindle or disappear, though the latter likely would result in protracted litigation. Trump could also, conceivably, sign an executive order to seize SpaceX under the Defense Production Act and even deport Musk for immigration violations, two nuclear options proposed Thursday by former Trump advisor Steve Bannon. What does Trump stand to lose? While Trump controls the levers of government, Musk has at least one ace in the hole – his control over X, which he claims not only handed Trump his November election victory but also Republican control of the House and possibly Senate. Musk is already using X – and his 220.8 million followers on it – to try to turn public opinion against Trump after trashing Trump's deficit-hiking budget bill. Musk said this week he would pull SpaceX's support of its Dragon spaceship that ferries astronauts and supplies to the International Space Station. He's predicted that Trump's tariffs would cause a recession this year. The tech billionaire has also conducted one of his rhetorically slanted polls on X to see how many people want a third political party 'that actually represents the 80% in the middle' between the Republican and Democratic parties. Its results, pinned to the top of Musk's X profile, were predictably in favor of it, 80.4% to 19.6%. Those kinds of broadsides could be a particularly powerful cudgel against Trump just five months into his second term. Musk could also wield a political tactic he's used to help Trump in the past, but this time, financing opponents of his political candidates in the upcoming mid-term elections. A win-win for both Trump and Musk? Heye said that despite all the incendiary rhetoric, there's still room for reconciliation or even a public recoupling. Heye, the veteran GOP official, cited the case of Reince Priebus, Trump's former White House Chief of Staff, who found out Trump fired him on a rainy airport Tarmac in 2017 after traveling with the President on Air Force One. Priebus was forced to find his own way home, Heye said, but soon found himself back in Trump's good graces. 'A relationship with Donald Trump going south is not something new in this political world,' Heye said. 'But Donald Trump always allows people to come back if they say the right things.' Already, Musk has appeared to back down from his threat of taking his Dragon spacecraft out of operation, after an X poster told him, "This is a shame this back and forth. You are both better than this. Cool off and take a step back for a couple days." In response, Musk replied late Thursday, "Good advice. Ok, we won't decommission Dragon."
