Canadian steel firms say weak tariff response risks wider layoffs
A group of Canadian steel producers said the government's plan to restrict foreign steel imports isn't strong enough and warned that the industry is set to shed thousands more jobs because of U.S. tariffs.
Article content
Prime Minister Mark Carney's government introduced new tariff-rate quotas last week to limit imports of steel and said it may adjust tariffs on U.S. steel products on July 21, depending on the status of trade talks with the Trump administration.
Article content
Article content
The U.S. has increased tariffs on foreign steel and aluminum to 50%. So far, Canada has decided not to match that, keeping its retaliatory levies at 25%.
Article content
Article content
'We have significantly dropped shipments and have experienced close to 1,000 job losses to date and are preparing for thousands more,' Catherine Cobden, chief executive officer of the Canadian Steel Producers Association, said in a statement Thursday. 'We are concerned that the immediate measures fail to address the crisis we are in.'
Article content
The tariff-rate quotas apply to steel-exporting countries that Canada doesn't have a trade agreement with. They only kick in if those countries exceed the volumes of steel they shipped to Canada last year. That 'will do little to support our industry,' said the CSPA, which represents producers including Algoma Steel Group Inc. and ArcelorMittal SA.
Article content
Article content
The United Steelworkers union also criticized the government's plan as 'too narrow,' saying it doesn't apply to two-thirds of imports to Canada, including from countries including South Korea and Vietnam, 'despite repeated dumping violations.'
Article content
Article content
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Canada News.Net
an hour ago
- Canada News.Net
CDPQ Boosts Climate Investments While Other Pensions Maintain Fossil Industry Ties
One of Canada's leading pension funds has pledged to dramatically increase its "climate action" investments to $400 billion by 2030, while a watchdog group warns that many other funds are unduly influenced by fossil fuel-affiliated directors on their boards. The $400-billion target showed up in a five-year climate strategy released last week by the Caisse de depot et placement du Quebec (CDPQ). The Caisse had already surpassed its previous goal, established in 2021, to invest $54 billion in low-carbon assets and another $10 billion in "industrial decarbonization" by 2025, ESG Today reports. At the end of last year, CDPQ reported total assets of $473 billion. "In 2025, we are entering a new phase in our climate strategy with the ambition to accelerate the decarbonization of companies and the economy," the eight-page strategy states [ pdf ]. "This is the best approach for long-term performance for our depositors." "We are reaffirming our sustainable investing convictions because they are at the heart of our fiduciary responsibility," said CDPQ President and CEO Charles Emond. "We are demonstrating even greater ambition by going beyond calculating our portfolio's carbon emissions to work even harder on transitioning the real economy across all sectors by encouraging the companies we invest in to adopt clear and credible decarbonization plans. We do this with a view to long-term value creation and sound risk management for our depositors." View our latest digests The strategy includes: Helping companies "seize business opportunities and set decarbonization goals"; Select companies that have set climate transition plans and can explain how they intend to meet them; Invest in less "climate-mature" industries or companies "to help them reduce their carbon footprints"; Rely on international best practices to assess the quality of companies' transition plans. The strategy "reveals a credible, comprehensive and clear-eyed plan to protect Quebec pensions by achieving net-zero by 2050 and investing in a safe climate future," Toronto-based Shift Action for Pension Wealth and Planet Health said in a release. "The strategy further positions CDPQ as a global climate leader among institutional investors and exposes yawning shortcomings in the climate strategies of many other Canadian pension managers, particularly the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board." This week, Shift released an analysis of fossil fuel influence on Canadian pension boards, an update of a report the organization first produced in 2022. The original report concluded that seven of the country's 10 biggest pension funds had at least one fossil executive on their boards. This year's research determined that: CPPIB, which abandoned is 2050 net-zero commitment last month, has three fossil directors, accounting for 30% of its board seats. Alberta Investment Management Corporation (AIMCo), where the Alberta government recently purged the previous board, has two, including former prime minister Stephen Harper as chair. The Ontario Teachers' Pension Plan has two directors who "sit on the boards of fossil fuel companies pushing to expand pipelines, build [liquefied natural gas] terminals, and dismantle key climate policies." The Public Sector Pension Investment Board (PSP) and Ontario Municipal Employees Retirement System (OMERS) have one each. The report lays out the systemic risks pension funds face as a result of climate change and the transition off carbon, warning that management decisions in response "may be compromised when those at the helm have ties to the fossil fuel industry." It lays out a scenario in which a pension fund board member who's also a director of an oil and gas company must weigh their duty to the fund against the legal imperative to maximize their company's profit. "When the pension fund evaluates whether to continue investing in oil and gas, does that director advocate for the sector's short-term interests-or for the long-term financial security of a 30-year-old plan member who won't retire for decades?" the report asks. "This reflects a deep structural conflict: how can a director reconcile their legal obligation to maximize shareholder value for a fossil fuel company with their fiduciary duty to act in the best long-term interests of pension beneficiaries facing escalating climate risk?" Shift adds that, "critically, pension funds do not disclose whether conflicted directors recuse themselves from such decisions. This lack of transparency makes it impossible to determine how-or whether-conflicts of interest are managed. It is also unclear whether pension trustees, directors, and sponsors have the climate expertise to understand how these overlapping roles can create potential conflicts which could negatively impact long-term returns for beneficiaries."
Canada News.Net
an hour ago
- Canada News.Net
Canada's EV Market Was Already in Trouble-Tariffs Made It Worse, Workers Say
Bob Pulham recalls the optimism in the air when General Motors began producing electric vans in Ingersoll, Ontario, in late 2022. As the first BrightDrop commercial van rolled off the line at the CAMI Assembly plant, GM executives, union leaders and former prime minister Justin Trudeau touted it as a major milestone for electric vehicle production in Canada, The Canadian Press reports. Pulham, a Unifor representative at the plant, remembers talk of increasing shifts and hiring more people to produce 50,000 such delivery vans annually by 2025. But the sales never picked up, the plant kept slowing down the production line amid sluggish demand and the optimism slowly faded. This April, GM announced it would idle the plant for several months and resume production in October with just one shift. Union members say about half of 1,200 workers at the plant will be gone as a result. "I feel bad for all 600 that are being laid off. It's a horrible position to be put in," Pulham said in an interview. "It's a crazy amount of uncertainty and I think that hurts people." The announcement came shortly after U.S. President Donald Trump imposed tariffs on Canadian-made vehicles, but a GM Canada spokesperson said the halt was directly related to lower-than-expected demand for the BrightDrop vans. Pulham, who began working at the CAMI plant more than three decades ago, said his wife has also been laid off and is now pondering whether to go back to school or search for a new job. Several other companies, including Honda, Stellantis, Umicore, and Ford have also delayed or scrapped their EV projects amid the slow sales growth and the ongoing trade war. GM Canada said reducing production in Ingersoll was necessary to adjust to market demand and balance inventory. But workers at the CAMI plant say Trump's tariffs made things even worse. They've experienced the industry's ups and downs over the decades, but say this challenge is especially difficult at a time of great economic uncertainty. "There's a push to build (vehicles) in the U.S., and that has caused a lot of issues over here," Pulham said. "So, it's not a good situation." View our latest digests Mike Van Boekel, the Unifor Local 88 CAMI plant chairperson, said even though workers knew layoffs were on the horizon, the news was still shocking for many. "It was terrible," he said. "I thought we were going to lose a shift. I was worried in the back of my mind ... and now it has come true." GM's ambitious plan to be at the "forefront of a big wave" of electric delivery van production didn't materialize because the timing was not right, Boekel said. He felt the company was gaining some momentum before the imposition of 25% tariffs on Canadian-made vehicles. GM had just received an order of a thousand delivery vans from the U.S. grocery chain giant Kroger, he said. "So, it looked like we were just getting to go and all of a sudden, the tariffs came on," he said, adding that CAMI workers will still produce Kroger's vans when they return to the factory this fall. Workers aren't the only ones feeling the pain. The ripple effects of layoffs are a source of concern for Ingersoll Mayor Brian Petrie. The CAMI plant, which spans two million square feet, is the largest employer in the southwestern Ontario town of about 14,000 people. Petrie said Ingersoll expects to receive $1.8 million in municipal taxes from the company this year, which is around 10% of the total levies the town is expected to collect. "It is devastating because we're not talking about new employees here, either, these are long serving employees and ... they've had a tough road going up to that point," Petrie said in a recent interview at his office. The federal government under Trudeau set a target of 100% zero-emission sales of light duty vehicles by 2035. Environment Minister Julie Dabrusin indicated mid June that the mandate won't be changing. But that goal seems hard to achieve, Petrie said. "It's honest to say that I think everybody may have misunderstood the scale of the problem that we're facing to do the EV switch," he said. "I think all of them will admit that it's been a bigger problem than they once thought." Still, he thinks the more than $50 billion in investments that Canada has pledged since 2020 to incentivize the EV supply chain will pay off in the long term. Some provinces, including Manitoba and Quebec, are offering rebates for electric vehicle purchases. B.C.'s rebate program, which was the longest running in the country, was paused last month. Ontario scrapped its rebate program after Premier Doug Ford's Progressive Conservatives won the election in 2018. The federal government also halted in January its Incentives for Zero-Emission Vehicles program, which offered up to $5,000 off the cost of a new electric vehicle. Dabrusin said Ottawa intends to bring back consumer rebates for EVs, but doesn't yet know what they'll look like. Zero-emissions vehicles represented only 8.7% of all new vehicle sales in Canada in the first quarter of 2025-a drop from 16.5% in the fourth quarter of 2024, according to data from Statistics Canada. The sales of EVs and plug-in hybrids had steadily increased from below 1% in 2017 to 14.6% in 2024, but experts say the growth hasn't been nearly as fast as many expected. Dan Park, CEO of online used car retailer Clutch, said EV adoption has been slower in Canada because people normally drive long distances in colder temperatures, which reduces battery life by 20 to 40% and slows down the charging speed. "Canada is just a fundamentally harder market to have," he said. "Until technology and battery life is improved to be able to handle colder conditions, I think Canadians will just shy away from it." Park said EVs make up only 5% of Clutch's inventory, which is tied to consumer demand. He said consumer rebates and production subsidies "artificially propped up the market," and provincial and federal governments should instead invest in a stronger charging infrastructure to encourage more Canadians to adopt EVs. A recent survey by consumer insights firm J.D. Power shows that only 28% of nearly 4,000 respondents said they were "very likely" or "somewhat likely" to consider an EV for their next vehicle purchase, down from 29% last year and 34$ in 2023. The survey also found that 75% of new vehicle purchasers aren't confident Canada can reach its 2035 zero-emission vehicle sales goal. Manufacturers took note of the lacklustre interest. Honda Canada announced in May that it's postponing a $15-billion EV project in Ontario, citing the "unexpected slowdown" in the market. Stellantis is postponing the production of an EV model of 2026 Dodge Charger Daytona R/T at its Windsor, Ont., plant as it assesses the effects of U.S. tariffs. And Ford Motor Co. said it will assemble F-Series Super Duty pickup trucks at its Oakville, Ont., plant beginning in 2026 instead of planned electric vehicle production at the site. Despite the setbacks, Environment and Climate Change Canada said it will continue to support investments and innovations in the EV supply chain. Canada's zero-emissions vehicle sales mandates ensure "Canadians have access to electric vehicles, which offer long-term savings for consumers," department spokesperson Hermine Landry said in a statement. "Transportation emissions have declined to levels not seen in decades, demonstrating that we can grow our economy while also fighting climate change," Landry said. "It is important to remain focused on the fact that the real threat to the Canadian auto industry right now are the unjustified tariffs from the United States." Overall, Canadians buy around two million new vehicles annually and the country produces approximately 1.5 million of them, according to Unifor. Autoworkers say the federal government should push for more vehicle production in Canada from manufacturers such as Kia, Hyundai, Mitsubishi and others that don't have any production footprint in the country, to offset the impact of U.S. tariffs. "It'd be nice, (if) the government stands up for us and you know says to these big companies, 'If you want to sell here, then you need to build here as well,'" said Paul Harvey, who works as a framing team leader at CAMI. Harvey said that although he and his wife will keep their jobs at the CAMI plant in Ingersoll, they will both have to work the same hours when production resumes on one shift. With four children at home, that means the couple will need a new child-care plan and increased costs will come with it. Harvey, who has been an autoworker for 20 years, said it would be "kind of silly" to think that the transition to electric vehicles would happen at the flick of a switch. He said he and his wife remain optimistic about the EV market and that's why they purchased a Chevy Blazer EV just a few weeks ago. "We're committed to moving into the future with the electrified vehicles," he said. "I do believe it will get there eventually." This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 19, 2025.
Winnipeg Free Press
2 hours ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
America First — it all depends on the day
Opinion When faced with making a major decision or delivering important legislation, U.S. President Donald Trump has a well-documented penchant for promising all will be accomplished in a proverbial 'two weeks.' And nearly every time he has made this declaration — about, for example, new tax legislation and a revamped health-care plan during his first term and more recently, ending the Russia-Ukraine war — 14 days later, no decisions have been made and no legislation has been forthcoming. Hence, his pronouncement on June 19 that he would decide whether to approve bombing Iran's key nuclear sites within two weeks was met with the usual eye-rolling and sarcastic tittering. Talk-show host Jimmy Kimmel ran a hilarious compilation of many of Trump's two-week declarations. 'He lies a lot,' said Kimmel. 'So who the hell knows what he's going to do.' Lo and behold, on June 21, Trump made a decision and U.S. B-2 bombers dropped massive bombs at three nuclear facilities. Trump immediately claimed the bombing 'completely and fully obliterated' Iran's nuclear program. That now seems unlikely, according to a classified U.S. intelligence report leaked to the press. Iran's program, the report noted, has been set back by months, but more than likely has not been eliminated. Predictably, the White House declared that assessment 'flat-out wrong.' Trump has never been consistent. No matter: the fact this military action does not fit into the isolationist 'America First' platform he campaigned on has already been rationalized away by diehard MAGA Republicans. The majority of them have perceived it as a one-time offensive intrusion into world affairs, an action outside the self-contained U.S. bubble. And that seems to be the case. Iran retaliated on June 23, by launching missiles at an American military base in Qatar, but air defense systems intercepted them before they did any damage. According to news reports, Iran informed officials in Qatar of the impending attack, which suggests Iran does not want to get into an all-out war with the U.S. And Trump said he won't retaliate. Early on June 24, Trump declared Iran and Israel had agreed to a cease-fire, yet both countries continued to attack each other, raising Trump's ire. By the end of the day, the fighting seemed to have stopped and the 'fragile cease-fire,' as the New York Times called it, appears to be holding — at least for the moment. As pragmatic — and, dare I say, strategically necessary — as was Trump's decision to try to stop the ruthless Iranian regime from becoming a nuclear power and to force cease-fire, it does not discount how, in less than six months, Trump has upended the military and economic alliances and policies that have effectively governed world affairs since the end of the Second World War. Yes, the so-called 'Cold War' between the U.S. and the former Soviet Union was a dangerous era of nuclear brinksmanship that nearly started a third world war. But that war did not happen; instead, the U.S. initiated the Marshall Plan to rebuild of war-torn western Europe, which led to decades of economic prosperity. Advances in technology had a generally positive impact on people's lives, and the defeat of Nazi Germany, fascist Italy and the militaristic Empire of Japan was a boon for the spread of democracy. Franklin D. Roosevelt, the U.S. president during the 1930s and the Second World War, was keen to aid Britain before and after the war started in September 1939, but he was hamstrung by the same kind of isolationist 'America First' policy that Trump so proudly touts. Until, that is, the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor in December 1941. There were periods in the 1890s, and during the last 18 months of the First World War, when the U.S. was active in world affairs. But for the most part, from the American Revolution to December 1941, the country's leaders were determined to stay out of European entanglements. That dictum was established by president George Washington, who said in his 1796 farewell address, 'The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is in extending our commercial relations, (and) to have with them as little political connection as possible.' More than a century later, during the November 1916 presidential campaign, incumbent Democrat candidate Woodrow Wilson used the slogan 'America First,' promising to keep the U.S. out of the First World War. That did not happen, as Germany's foolish decision to offer — in the Zimmermann telegram — to assist Mexico to reclaim territory lost to the Americans compelled Wilson to obtain Congress's support to enter the war, as is required by the U.S. constitution. Trump did not seek congressional approval for the military action against Iran, though such approval is (probably) required by the War Powers Resolution of 1973. After the First World War ended, the 'America First' policy kicked in again. The Republican-controlled senate ensured the U.S. was not part of the League of Nations, the predecessor of the United Nations, established to promote world peace. Without American support, the League faltered badly, allowing Mussolini, Hitler and Japan's leaders to do pretty well as they wanted until Britain finally took action against Hitler in September 1939. A lot of Americans, including famed aviator Charles Lindbergh, a supporter of the 'America First Committee,' had no problem with that. In a controversial speech in Des Moines, Iowa in September 1941, Lindbergh blamed FDR and his administration and the 'British and Jewish races' for deceiving the American public with war propaganda. Despite the praise Trump has received from several world leaders, most Republicans and even some Democrats for ordering the strike on Iran and negotiating a cease-fire, he remains the erratic and unpredictable would-be authoritarian he always has been. Now & Then is a column in which historian Allan Levine puts the events of today in a historical context.
