Carney to meet with steelworkers as U.S. trade talks continue
It has been more than a month since U.S. President Donald Trump doubled tariffs on steel and aluminum from 25 to 50 per cent, adding further economic insult to the two industries in Canada.
Carney met with his cabinet virtually on Tuesday and told reporters before that meeting he doesn't think Trump will agree to any trade deals without including some tariffs.
Get breaking National news
For news impacting Canada and around the world, sign up for breaking news alerts delivered directly to you when they happen. Sign up for breaking National newsletter Sign Up
By providing your email address, you have read and agree to Global News' Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy
Carney will tour a steel company in the city and meet with workers during his visit to Hamilton.
0:53
Carney says talks will 'intensify' as he meets with cabinet amid Trump's 35% tariffs
Carney and Trump have been negotiating a new economic and security pact since early May and last week Trump unilaterally pushed the deadline for reaching that from July 21 to Aug. 1.
Story continues below advertisement
He told Carney in a letter on July 10 Canada will be hit with 35 per cent tariffs that day, with the White House saying the current plan is for that to apply only to those Canadian imports not covered under the existing Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement.
Carney says negotiations with the U.S. are likely to intensify as that Aug. 1 deadline approaches.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Global News
11 minutes ago
- Global News
Harvard to face Trump administration in court over funding cuts
Harvard University will appear in federal court Monday to make the case that the Trump administration illegally cut US$2.6 billion from the storied college — a pivotal moment in its battle against the federal government. If U.S. District Judge Allison Burroughs decides in the university's favor, the ruling would reverse a series of funding freezes that later became outright cuts as the Trump administration escalated its fight with the nation's oldest and wealthiest university. Such a ruling, if it stands, would revive Harvard's sprawling scientific and medical research operation and hundreds of projects that lost federal money. 'This case involves the Government's efforts to use the withholding of federal funding as leverage to gain control of academic decisionmaking at Harvard,' the university said in its complaint. 'All told, the tradeoff put to Harvard and other universities is clear: Allow the Government to micromanage your academic institution or jeopardize the institution's ability to pursue medical breakthroughs, scientific discoveries, and innovative solutions.' Story continues below advertisement A second lawsuit over the cuts filed by the American Association of University Professors and its Harvard faculty chapter has been consolidated with the university's. Harvard's lawsuit accuses President Donald Trump's administration of waging a retaliation campaign against the university after it rejected a series of demands in an April 11 letter from a federal antisemitism task force. 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 The letter demanded sweeping changes related to campus protests, academics and admissions. For example, the letter told Harvard to audit the viewpoints of students and faculty and admit more students or hire new professors if the campus was found to lack diverse points of view. The letter was meant to address government accusations that the university had become a hotbed of liberalism and tolerated anti-Jewish harassment on campus. 0:41 Trump signs proclamation to block almost all international students from attending Harvard Harvard President Alan Garber pledged to fight antisemitism but said no government 'should dictate what private universities can teach, whom they can admit and hire, and which areas of study and inquiry they can pursue.' Story continues below advertisement The same day Harvard rejected the demands, Trump officials moved to freeze US$2.2 billion in research grants. Education Secretary Linda McMahon declared in May that Harvard would no longer be eligible for new grants, and weeks later the administration began canceling contracts with Harvard. As Harvard fought the funding freeze in court, individual agencies began sending letters announcing that the frozen research grants were being terminated. They cited a clause that allows grants to be scrapped if they no longer align with government policies. Harvard, which has the nation's largest endowment at US$53 billion, has moved to self-fund some of its research, but warned it can't absorb the full cost of the federal cuts. In court filings, the school said the government 'fails to explain how the termination of funding for research to treat cancer, support veterans, and improve national security addresses antisemitism.' The Trump administration denies the cuts were made in retaliation, saying the grants were under review even before the April demand letter was sent. It argues the government has wide discretion to cancel contracts for policy reasons. 'It is the policy of the United States under the Trump Administration not to fund institutions that fail to adequately address antisemitism in their programs,' it said in court documents. The research funding is only one front in Harvard's fight with the federal government. The Trump administration also has sought to prevent the school from hosting foreign students, and Trump has threatened to revoke Harvard's tax-exempt status. Story continues below advertisement Finally, last month, the Trump administration formally issued a finding that the school tolerated antisemitism — a step that eventually could jeopardize all of Harvard's federal funding, including federal student loans or grants. The penalty is typically referred to as a 'death sentence.'
Toronto Sun
11 minutes ago
- Toronto Sun
CHARLEBOIS: Why food prices haven't spiked due to tariffs — yet
A shopper looks at a grocery bill in this file photo. Photo by Getty Images For months now, consumers across North America have been wondering: Where's the inflation? With tariffs making headlines constantly — particularly under the Trump administration — many expected food prices to spike. Yet, grocery bills haven't exploded. Not yet. This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. THIS CONTENT IS RESERVED FOR SUBSCRIBERS ONLY Subscribe now to read the latest news in your city and across Canada. Unlimited online access to articles from across Canada with one account. Get exclusive access to the Toronto Sun ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition that you can share, download and comment on. Enjoy insights and behind-the-scenes analysis from our award-winning journalists. Support local journalists and the next generation of journalists. Daily puzzles including the New York Times Crossword. SUBSCRIBE TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES Subscribe now to read the latest news in your city and across Canada. Unlimited online access to articles from across Canada with one account. Get exclusive access to the Toronto Sun ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition that you can share, download and comment on. Enjoy insights and behind-the-scenes analysis from our award-winning journalists. Support local journalists and the next generation of journalists. Daily puzzles including the New York Times Crossword. REGISTER / SIGN IN TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience. Access articles from across Canada with one account. Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments. Enjoy additional articles per month. Get email updates from your favourite authors. THIS ARTICLE IS FREE TO READ REGISTER TO UNLOCK. Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience. Access articles from across Canada with one account Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments Enjoy additional articles per month Get email updates from your favourite authors Don't have an account? Create Account As John Rapley, a leading economist, and others recently explained, that calm may be misleading. In Canada, food inflation in June came in at a moderate 2.8%, still well above the overall inflation rate of 1.9%, according to Statistics Canada. That gap underscores how food is still outpacing general inflation — but the divergence is narrowing, at least for now. Food inflation has eased from 3.8% earlier this year, but the rate of decline is slowing. In the United States, the trend is even more pronounced. The U.S. Consumer Price Index rose 2.7% year-over-year in June, while food prices climbed by approximately 3%. Grocery store prices matched that rate, and restaurant meals rose even more sharply. Prices for beef, coffee and citrus saw month-over-month increases exceeding 2%, showing clear signs of price pressure. Your noon-hour look at what's happening in Toronto and beyond. By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc. Please try again This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. There's a dangerous assumption circulating in public discourse: If tariffs haven't already translated into higher prices, they probably won't. But food inflation doesn't follow a linear or predictable timetable. In fact, the current lull may signal something more troubling — a delayed blow to household budgets that could hit when consumers are least prepared. Donald Trump famously told Walmart a few months ago to 'eat up tariffs,' arguing that a giant like Walmart can absorb costs — until it can't. Rising input and inventory costs will eventually make their way up the food chain. When tariffs are announced, importers often rush to stockpile goods before the new duties apply. In the food sector, that means filling warehouses with tariff-free inventory — cheaper ingredients, packaging, even finished products. Retailers also hesitate to raise prices immediately, opting instead to absorb short-term costs to stay competitive, banking on smoother negotiations or more favourable media coverage. This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. But those buffers don't last forever. Eventually, the warehouse shelves are emptied, and what replaces them is significantly more expensive. When that transition happens, price increases aren't gradual — they're abrupt. A $4.99 product suddenly becomes $5.69. It's subtle, but it's real. These step changes chip away at consumer trust and spark frustration, often directed at grocers, suppliers or policymakers. These numbers may not seem alarming in isolation — but they highlight a persistent gap between general inflation and the cost of feeding a family. And many retailers are still relying on pre-tariff inventories. That cushion is vanishing. RECOMMENDED VIDEO Then there's the 'uncertainty tax.' With Donald Trump's unpredictable Truth Social posts and erratic trade rhetoric, many food companies are preemptively pricing in the risk of higher tariffs to protect margins. Ironically, this ends up costing consumers more. In many ways, it's less damaging to know tariffs will be high than to be left in the dark. This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. This type of inflation — delayed, compressed, and poorly understood — is especially difficult for central banks to manage. It's not driven by overheated demand but by distorted supply chains. Interest rate hikes won't reverse trade disruptions. But if consumer expectations shift — if people begin to panic-buy or demand higher wages — the inflationary cycle becomes self-perpetuating. In Canada, the stakes may be even higher. Our food system depends heavily on imported inputs — fertilizers, animal feed, specialty ingredients, packaging—and we are directly exposed to the consequences of U.S. trade policy. If Washington tightens tariffs on China or Mexico, the cost shock will ripple through Canadian supply chains, often without warning. This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. So far, Canada's food inflation has moderated — and that's welcome news. But policymakers should be cautious about claiming victory. The lagging effects of tariffs — and the misplaced sense of security they create — risk lulling consumers and officials into complacency. In economics, timing is everything. And in food, timing can mean the difference between affordability and anxiety. — Dr. Sylvain Charlebois is the Director of the Agri-Food Analytics Lab at Dalhousie University and co-host of The Food Professor Podcast. He is currently a visiting scholar at McGill University in Montreal. Toronto & GTA Canada Toronto & GTA Football Editorial Cartoons
National Post
11 minutes ago
- National Post
The pandemic drove up inflation. How come, years later, we're still paying more?
Article content While the programs broadly succeeded in providing relief to individuals and businesses and creating a cushion for the economy during a crisis, the C.D. Howe Institute noted that injecting that much extra money into an economy while unemployment is low results in inflation. Article content David Andolfatto, chair of the department of economics at the University of Miami and an international fellow at the C.D. Howe Institute, said inflation should be expected when governments add that much extra demand to the economy. 'Of course prices went up,' he said. 'There's no such thing as a free lunch. Somebody will have to pay.' Article content And not only do consumers pay higher prices but they must then pay again with the higher interest rates the central bank then implemented to try bringing those prices back down. In 2020, interest rates were down to 0.25 per cent as the Bank of Canada aimed to cushion the blow from the pandemic; by 2023, the rate had risen 20-fold, to five per cent. Article content Jean-Francois Perrault, chief economist at the Bank of Nova Scotia, estimated in a November 2023 report that government spending and pandemic-era transfers to Canadians were responsible for about 42 per cent (200 of the 475 basis points) of the increase in the Bank of Canada's prime interest rate during that period. About one-third of those interest rate hikes can be traced back to provincial governments, he calculated. Article content Since the start of 2023, inflation has remained at less than four per cent, just over the Bank of Canada's preferred band of between one and three per cent, but a big decrease from the peak of pandemic-era inflation. Article content And, at least for now, it's largely under control. Statistics Canada reported last week that Canada's inflation rate accelerated to 1.9 per cent in June, up from 1.7 per cent the previous month. Article content Why have some prices kept rising since the pandemic? Article content The Russian invasion of Ukraine, for example, still hasn't been resolved. Many of the people who started working from home during the pandemic still do so, either part-time or full-time, which puts a little more money in most of their pockets. The glut of baby boomers is also at the stage of life where many are retiring, having saved up their money, and now want to spend it. Article content Article content Katherine Judge, senior economist at CIBC Capital Markets said consumer markets are also still getting a boost from pent-up demand and extra savings that consumers accumulated during the pandemic. Article content Wages, meanwhile, have actually been growing faster than inflation since mid-2024, so household purchasing power has also increased. Article content In recent months, the tariff wars launched by U.S. President Donald Trump have started to put upward pressure on inflation in both components and finished goods and will continue to do so unless they are resolved. Article content Economists say that prices don't normally drop — or even approach inflation of less than one per cent — unless demand falls because the economy is in a recession or governments adopt severe cost-cutting measures. Article content Neither has happened since the pandemic. The federal government kept running large deficits in spending. And while it has spoken recently about cutting costs in the bureaucracy, it also plans to boost outlays on defence and infrastructure projects.
