Thousands evacuated as wildfires burn in northern Manitoba
May 29 (UPI) -- Thousands of First Nations people in northern Manitoba are being evacuated as the central Canadian province issued a state of emergency to battle fast-moving wildfires, officials said.
There are a number of wildfires burning across thousands of acres in northern Manitoba, mostly near the border with Saskatchewan.
Manitoba Keewatinowi Okimakanak, which represents 26 First Nations communities in the province, said in a statement that evacuation orders have been issued for nearly 17,500 people in four First Nations communities with two more communities on evacuation notice.
"A lot of our First Nations are under threat because of the fires that have consumed a lot of territory in our area, and I'm just asking all of you, my relatives, to be strong and to be brave and to be courageous during this very difficult time," MKO Grand Chief Garrison Settee said in a recorded statement published to Facebook.
"This is a very, very critical time in our First Nations."
Premier Wab Kinew of Manitoba on Wednesday declared a provincewide state of emergency, which will be in effect for 30 days to ensure federal, provincial and local resources can be deployed in a coordinated response.
Manitoba has declared a province-wide state of emergency to safely evacuate and shelter 17,000 people - the largest wildfire evacuation in recent memory.
To those leaving home: you're not alone. These measures protect you. We'll get through this - together. pic.twitter.com/sLSU0X06qt— Wab Kinew (@WabKinew) May 29, 2025
A statement from the provincial government states that evacuation orders have beeb issued for the city of Flin Flon and the First Nations of Pimicikamak and Mathias Colomb.
"This is the largest evacuation in many Manitobans' living memory," Kinew said during a press conference.
"This is a moment of fear and uncertainty. This is a moment of concern. But I want to tell you that your fellow Manitobans will welcome you. We will get through this difficult period, and we will get through this trying period the way we always do -- by working together. "
He said he has spoken with Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, who agreed to his request for assistance from the Canadian Armed Forces.
The military, he said, will be aiding with evacuation flights to the province' capital of Winnipeg.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Fact check: More people leave than arrive on current youth mobility schemes
On the BBC's Today programme on May 19, from around two hours and 21 minutes, Business and Trade Secretary Jonathan Reynolds said the UK's youth mobility arrangements with other countries reduce net migration. Asked 'how do you know there will be fewer people coming here than leaving?' Mr Reynolds said: 'Well, I've got 13 schemes in action already and that's the evidence of them.' He later added: 'I tell you the evidence of the current schemes just so you know is that they're a net negative on immigration.' Around 24,400 youth mobility visas were issued to people wanting to come to the UK in 2024. Although figures are patchy for how many Britons go abroad, data from just three countries – Australia, New Zealand and Canada – suggests that 68,495 British citizens travelled to those countries in 2024 (the Australian data is for the 12 months to the end of June 2024). That would suggest that Mr Reynolds is right. However it does not take into account that Britons going abroad on these temporary visas will sooner or later come back, as will those who come to the UK. It is also not clear that this pattern will repeat in any similar deal with the EU. The UK population is much larger than those of Australia, New Zealand and Canada, so there are more Britons who can go to those countries than can come here. With the EU that is reversed. How many people come to the UK on a youth mobility visa? Government data shows there were 24,437 people who were handed a youth mobility visa last year. Most of these were from one of the 13 countries with which the UK has a reciprocal arrangement. A small handful of visas – 131 in total – were for people from countries other than the 13. The Migration Observatory at the University of Oxford has suggested that these are the result of errors in data recording, or due to people having dual nationalities. The top three countries that sent people to the UK on youth mobility visas between January and December 2024 were Australia (9,754 visas), New Zealand (4,304 visas) and Canada (3,060 visas). How many Britons go abroad on youth mobility type schemes? Figures are patchy on how many British people have gone abroad on a youth mobility scheme. The Department for Business and Trade was unable to share data. Australia publishes a twice-yearly report into what it calls its working holiday visa programme. That is the Australian equivalent to the UK's youth mobility scheme. The latest such report covered the 12 months to the end of June 2024. That report showed that Australia issued 48,973 working holiday visas to UK citizens. Data from New Zealand is available on the website of the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment. Using its migration data explorer produces a spreadsheet which shows that there were 9,486 working holiday visas granted by New Zealand to UK citizens in between January and December 2024. Canadian data does not appear to be publicly available, but the figures were provided to the PA news agency by the Canadian Department for Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship. The data shows that in 2024 there were 9,972 work permits issued to UK and UK overseas territories citizens under the country's working holiday scheme, and a further 64 people had their permits extended. How do incoming youth mobility visas compare to outgoing? Net migration is a figure which subtracts the number of people coming into the country from the number of people leaving. The data cited above suggests that while 9,754 Australians came to the UK on youth mobility visas, 48,973 Britons went in the opposite direction. It must be noted that the time periods measured here are different, the Australian data is for the 12 months ending June 2024, while the UK data is for the 12 months ending December 2024. Meanwhile the data suggests that 4,304 New Zealanders came to the UK while 9,486 Britons went in the other direction. Data further shows that 3,060 Canadians came to the UK in 2024, while 9,972 Britons went in the other direction. This suggests that for each of these three countries the youth mobility schemes are – as Mr Reynolds suggested – reducing net migration. In fact Australia alone appears to receive twice as many Britons (48,973) as all people who the UK receives from all 13 countries added together (24,437). However, it should be noted that because youth mobility schemes are time-limited, Britons going abroad and people who have come to the UK on such visas will eventually be forced to return. This means the UK's inbound migration figures should take into account not just Australians and Canadians – for example – coming to the UK, but also Britons returning from Australia and Canada after their youth mobility visas expire. If it is assumed that everyone returns then over a longer time frame the youth mobility programmes will have a neutral impact on net immigration because every Briton who leaves the UK will come back and every non-Briton who comes to the UK will leave. This does not take into account the people – both Britons abroad and non-Britons in the UK – who apply for a different visa to stay in their adopted country. Do these conclusions also apply to the EU scheme? The impact on net migration of the potential EU scheme will depend on the details of the agreement between London and Brussels. Madeleine Sumption, director at the Migration Observatory, told the PA news agency that the size of the cap on the programme would be vital for the impact on net migration. She said the fact the UK sends more people to Australia, Canada and New Zealand than it receives from them 'probably results from the fact that the UK has a much larger population than they do, so we just have more young people potentially interested in moving'. With the EU scheme, Ms Sumption said, the population sizes are flipped – that is to say the EU's population is much bigger than the UK, leaving more young people who might be willing to come here. Therefore the smaller the cap on the number of visas is, the more likely both the EU and UK will fill their quotas. If both fill their quotas – and the quotas going both ways are the same – then the impact on net migration will be zero. However if the cap is large then it is more likely that there will not be as many Britons going to Europe as are coming in the opposite direction, which will bring up net migration. But, as with the existing schemes, both Britons in Europe and Europeans in the UK will eventually have to leave unless they find another visa, which over the long run should mean that the programme has a neutral impact on net migration. BBC – Today, 19/05/2025 Migration Observatory – What is the Youth Mobility Scheme and how does it work? (archived) – Entry clearance visas granted outside the UK (archived page and spreadsheet, using tab Data_Vis_D02) Australian Department of Home Affairs – Visitor visa statistics (archived) Australian Department of Home Affairs – Working Holiday Maker visa program report (archived) New Zealand Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment – Migration data explorer (archived page and downloaded spreadsheet. To download the correct spreadsheet, instructions can be found at (archived): In dataset select 'W1 work decisions', in time period select 'calendar year' and in variables select 'application substream', 'application criteria' and 'decision type') Canadian data provided to PA news agency (archived) Madeleine Sumption profile (archived)
UPI
an hour ago
- UPI
President Donald Trump, Chinese President Xi Jinping discuss trade deal in 'very good' phone call
June 5 (UPI) -- President Donald Trump said Thursday that he and Chinese President Xi Jinping spoke on the phone that morning about the trade deal currently in place between the United States and China. Trump described the call as "very good" in a post on Truth Social, adding he and Xi discussed the "intricacies" of the trade deal between the two nations. "The call lasted approximately one and a half hours, and resulted in a very positive conclusion for both countries." Trump posted to Truth Social Thursday. Trump said the two hashed out a future meeting in regard to rare earth minerals. "There should no longer be any questions respecting the complexity of rare earth products. Our respective teams will be meeting shortly at a location to be determined," Trump said. The Trump administration had expected China to ease export restrictions on rare earth minerals after talks held last month. China had imposed those restrictions in April in response to tariffs levied by Trump on Chinese goods. Trump also noted that Xi invited him to visit China, which was also confirmed by Chinese state media. "I reciprocated. As presidents of two great nations, this is something that we both look forward to doing," he said. Neither spoke of Ukraine's war on Russia or any issues that involved Iran, according to Trump, who added that the media will be informed when the meeting between the two countries will take place. However, as per the account posted to Chinese state media Thursday, Xi also allegedly said the United States should "handle Taiwan question with caution" in order to avoid "danger of conflict, confrontation," and that Trump told him "Chinese students are welcome to study" in the United States. There has been no confirmation from the Trump administration in regard to either of these claims. The U.S. State Department announced last month it would "aggressively revoke visas for Chinese students, including those with connections to the Chinese Communist Party or studying in critical fields. We will also revise visa criteria to enhance scrutiny of all future visa applications from the People's Republic of China and Hong Kong." Trump made no mention of either of those points of conversation purported by Chinese state media. The two leaders are believed to have last spoken in January before Trump's inauguration.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Supreme Court revives straight woman's 'reverse discrimination' suit
June 5 (UPI) -- The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled Thursday that a straight woman can move forward with her Title VII Civil Rights Act job discrimination lawsuit, which claimed "reverse discrimination." The justices voted 9-0 to side with Marlean Ames, ruling that she faced a higher burden to be able to sue for discrimination as a straight woman after she was passed up for job opportunities in favor of two LGBTQ applicants. "We conclude that Title VII does not impose such a heightened standard on majority-group plaintiffs," the court wrote. Ames sued the Ohio Department of Youth Services after she was denied a management position in favor of a lesbian woman hired for that job. She also lost out on another job at the agency when a gay man was hired instead as a program administrator. The lower court judgment was vacated and the Ames case was remanded back to the lower court to be heard applying the Supreme Court's finding. The decision said the Sixth Circuit erred when it "implemented a rule that requires certain Title VII plaintiffs-those who are members of majority groups-to satisfy a heightened evidentiary standard." The ruling makes it easier for majority-group plaintiffs to argue "reverse discrimination" lawsuits. At issue was the "background circumstances" rule. As interpreted by the Sixth Circuit, that rule requires members of a majority group to satisfy a heightened evidentiary standard in Title VII lawsuits. "Congress left no room for courts to impose special requirements on majority-group plaintiffs alone," the Supreme Court decision said. "The Sixth Circuit's 'background circumstances' rule requires plaintiffs who are members of a majority group to bear an additional burden at step one. But the text of Title VII's disparate-treatment provision draws no distinctions between majority-group plaintiffs and minority-group plaintiffs." The Supreme Court said that provision "focuses on individuals rather than groups, barring discrimination against 'any individual' because of protected characteristics." The high court rejected Ohio's argument that the "background circumstances" rule does not subject majority-group plaintiffs to a heightened legal standard when they sue alleging discrimination under Title VII. "The 'background circumstances' rule -- which subjects all majority-group plaintiffs to the same, highly specific evidentiary standard in every case -- ignores the Court's instruction to avoid inflexible applications of the prima facie standard," the Supreme Court wrote. The Supreme Court held that "the standard for proving disparate treatment under Title VII does not vary based on whether or not the plaintiff is a member of a majority group." The Civil Rights Act bars discrimination based on "race, color, religion, sex or national origin." Ohio maintained Ames was not chosen for the jobs in question due to her lack of the necessary vision and leadership skills, not because she was straight. A three-judge Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals panel agreed that Ames would have been likely to prevail if she was a gay woman. But they ruled against her due to the higher burden created by the Sixth Circuit interpretation of the "background circumstances" rule.
