G7 leaders should ignore Donald Trump outbursts at Alberta summit: Chrétien
Former prime minister Jean Chrétien says dignitaries attending next week's G7 leaders summit in Alberta should avoid engaging the 'crazy' from U.S. President Donald Trump.
Chrétien, speaking Thursday at a conference in Calgary, said leaders can't predict what Trump might do, the president can be a bully and it would be best if the rest of the G7 leaders ignored any outbursts.
'If he has decided to make a show to be in the news, he will do something crazy,' Chrétien said.
'Let him do it and keep talking normally.'
Tweet This
Click to share quote on Twitter: "Let him do it and keep talking normally."
Chrétien said leaders should follow the example set by Prime Minister Mark Carney when he visited Trump at the White House last month.
'When Trump talked about Canada to be part of the United States, (Carney) just said, 'Canada is not for sale, the White House is not for sale, Buckingham Palace is not for sale,'' Chrétien said.
Story continues below advertisement
'Trump said 'Never say never' (but Carney) didn't even reply. He just moved on with the discussion. It's the way to handle that.'
Carney is hosting Trump and world leaders from France, Germany, Japan, the United Kingdom, Italy and the European Union for the three-day summit starting Sunday in the Rocky Mountains southwest of Calgary.
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
Chrétien, who was speaking alongside his former deputy prime minister and finance minister John Manley, also said he supported Carney's decision to invite India's Prime Minister Narendra Modi to the summit.
Carney has been criticized for the invitation, including by a member of his own Liberal caucus, due to ongoing tensions between Canada and India over foreign interference and the 2023 killing of Sikh separatism activist Hardeep Singh Nijjar in B.C. The RCMP has said it has evidence linking members of the Indian government to Singh's death.
Story continues below advertisement
'It's always good to talk,' Chrétien said of the Modi invite. 'They will be able to talk and they will see there are other problems.'
'You have to navigate. You cannot always go on your high horse for every little problem you're confronted with.'
Chrétien was one of two former Canadian prime ministers speaking at the conference, which is being hosted by the University of Calgary's School of Public Policy and the G7 Research Group.
The university says the conference is meant to bring experts and officials together to explain key issues G7 leaders are facing heading into the summit.
Alberta Premier Danielle Smith also spoke at the conference.
She said the possibility of an economic and security deal between Canada and the United States being signed at the G7 would be an extraordinary step.
Story continues below advertisement
But she urged Canada to continue finding new trading partners even if the relationship between the two countries begins to smooth over.
'Let's not take our foot off the gas,' Smith said.
Former prime minister Joe Clark was to give the closing keynote speech.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Global News
20 minutes ago
- Global News
Danielle Smith pitches B.C. on pipeline project, saying it benefits ‘all Canadians'
Alberta Premier Danielle Smith is making a pipeline pitch directly to British Columbians. Smith told Global News that Canada needs to take advantage of this moment of national unity to respond to U.S. President Donald Trump's threats. 'When you look at the potential for a million barrels a day at today's prices, that's about 20 billion dollars worth of value,' Smith told Focus BC. 'It doesn't just go to Alberta, it benefits all Canadians.' Smith is leaning on the Team Canada approach but does acknowledge that there still need to be work to address Indigenous concerns. 'We hear the environmental concerns and that is why it is good to have Indigenous partners so we can reroute the route, and deal with issues on the ground,' she said. Story continues below advertisement 'I know a few things need to be modified, but we can get to yes.' 2:01 Pipeline dream: Alberta premier makes pitch at Global Energy Show There is still no proponent for the pipeline project but the previous iteration of a pipeline to the coast destroyed the relationship with then Alberta Premier Alison Redford and then B.C. Premier Christy Clark. 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 Smith said the difference this time is the vision to export the material out of Prince Rupert, rather than Kitimat, where navigating tankers is harder. 'Let's go to a port that is already shipping goods, that is ice-free year-round,' she added. B.C. Energy Minister Adrian Dix says the province is opposed to the new pipeline and instead, Alberta should focus on building out the Trans Mountain Pipeline expansion, which already cost taxpayers more than $34 billion. Story continues below advertisement 'We still need to get some work to get value for that pipeline,' Dix said. 'We have been supportive of that now that taxpayers have paid for it. The idea that taxpayers would subsidize a project that has no proponent makes no sense to us.' Watch the full interview with Smith above.
Winnipeg Free Press
30 minutes ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Appeals court won't reconsider ruling that Trump must pay E. Jean Carroll $5M in sex abuse case
NEW YORK (AP) — A federal appeals court won't reconsider its ruling upholding a $5 million civil judgment against President Donald Trump in a civil lawsuit alleging he sexually abused a writer in a Manhattan department store in the mid-1990s. In an 8-2 vote Friday, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected Trump's petition for the full appellate court to rehear arguments in his challenge to the jury's finding that he sexually abused advice columnist E. Jean Carroll and defamed her with comments he made in October 2022. Carroll testified at a 2023 trial that Trump turned a friendly encounter in spring 1996 into a violent attack after they playfully entered the store's dressing room. A three-judge panel of the appeals court upheld the verdict in December, rejecting Trump's claims that trial Judge Lewis A. Kaplan's decisions spoiled the trial, including allowing two other Trump sexual abuse accusers to testify. The women said Trump committed similar acts against them in the 1970s and in 2005. Trump denied all three women's allegations. In an opinion Friday, four judges voting to reject rehearing wrote: 'Simply re-litigating a case is not an appropriate use' of the process. 'In those rare instances in which a case warrants our collective consideration, it is almost always because it involves a question of exceptional importance,' or a conflict between precedent and the appellate panel's opinion, Judges Myrna Pérez, Eunice C. Lee, Beth Robinson and Sarah A.L. Merriam wrote. All four were appointed by President Joe Biden, Trump's one-time Democratic rival. The two dissenting judges, Trump appointees, Steven J. Menashi and Michael H. Park, wrote that the trial 'consisted of a series of indefensible evidentiary rulings.' 'The result was a jury verdict based on impermissible character evidence and few reliable facts,' they wrote. 'No one can have any confidence that the jury would have returned the same verdict if the normal rules of evidence had been applied.' Carroll's lawyer, Roberta Kaplan, said in a statement: 'E. Jean Carroll is very pleased with today's decision.' 'Although President Trump continues to try every possible maneuver to challenge the findings of two separate juries, those efforts have failed. He remains liable for sexual assault and defamation,' said Kaplan, who is not related to the judge. Trump skipped the trial after repeatedly denying the attack ever happened. He briefly testified at a follow-up defamation trial last year that resulted in an $83.3 million award. The second trial resulted from comments then-President Trump made in 2019 after Carroll first made the accusations publicly in a memoir. Kaplan presided over both trials and instructed the second jury to accept the first jury's finding that Trump had sexually abused Carroll. Arguments in that appeal are set for June 24. The Associated Press does not identify people who say they have been sexually assaulted unless they come forward publicly, as Carroll has done. ___
Vancouver Sun
an hour ago
- Vancouver Sun
Canada's giant immigration industry will have to get used to 'intense' public debate
When I was asked to address members of the immigration division of the Canadian Bar Association, I expected an audience of maybe 25 to 50 lawyers. But last Saturday, 400 immigration lawyers showed up at the Victoria Convention Centre to hear what three Canadian journalists and a think-tank member had to say about the media's impact on migration. The panel was asked to address immigration lawyers' fears that heightened media coverage is 'sparking intense public debate' and influencing 'how immigrants are perceived and how decisions are made.' In addition to offering our thoughts, panel members learned there are actually more than 1,200 immigration lawyers in the Canadian Bar Association, with their numbers mushrooming in the past 15 years. Stay on top of the latest real estate news and home design trends. By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc. A welcome email is on its way. If you don't see it, please check your junk folder. The next issue of Westcoast Homes will soon be in your inbox. Please try again Interested in more newsletters? Browse here. I noted there are another 13,000 licensed immigration consultants in Canada, a doubling in just seven years. The lawyers in Victoria let us know, justifiably, that the 'consultants' are not as highly trained as lawyers, or as regulated. On top of these private players employed in the migration sector, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada has doubled its staff in a decade to more than 13,000 employees . Altogether, these professionals and workers add up to an army of more than 27,000 immigration specialists (about the same as the number of soldiers and staff employed by Canada's Department of Defence). All make their living helping migrants navigate the complexities of becoming a foreign student, temporary worker, reunified family member, investor immigrant or permanent resident of Canada. In addition, the C.D. Howe Institute maintains another huge cohort that does somewhat the same thing. Unlicensed agents — from the fields of travel, education and labour — also take fees for advising clients on how to get into Canada and stay there. The institute's Tingting Zhang and Parisa Mahboubi, therefore, maintain there should be many more licensed consultants — and that the government should offer better aid to the roughly six million people whose applications are each year processed for entry into Canada. In other words, the 400 lawyers who gathered last week at the Victoria Conference Centre represented just a fragment of the immigration business in Canada. No wonder it's called one of the country's biggest industries. Understandably, the gathered immigration lawyers, the slight majority of whom were women, wanted to do everything they could to help the clients in Canada and around the world who come to them. Their questions and comments all revolved around the hope that borders be more open and the often-labyrinthine migration process easier. They also worried about declining support for immigration. A Leger poll this spring found 58 per cent of Canadians believe migration rates are 'too high' . Even half of those who have been in the country less than a decade feel that way. Given the lawyers' desire to assist their clients, many were wary that in the past two years more journalists have been digging into migration policy and its impact. That's in large part because former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau doubled immigration levels and increased the number of guest workers and foreign students by five times . Almost three million non-permanent residents now comprise 7.3 per cent of the population, up from 1.4 per cent in 2015. The lawyers noted that, after decades in which journalists essentially avoided migration issues, many more articles were being written about such topics as the sudden jump in asylum seekers, tens of thousands of international students not attending school, businesses exploiting temporary workers and population pressures on housing and rents. Two panelists, Toronto Star immigration reporter Nicholas Keung and Steve D'Souza of CBC's Fifth Estate, emphasized the value of talking to migrants to develop poignant 'human interest' stories. They have also investigated how bosses, fly-by-night colleges and some migrants have taken part in scams. In response to CBA's concerns that Canada's media were producing 'stories that have become a lightning rod for public sentiment, shaping how immigrants are perceived and how decisions are made,' the journalists on the panel explained it's our duty to cover migration stories, and all stories, in a way that is 'fair, balanced and accurate.' Although panelist Daniel Bernhard, of the Institute for Canadian Citizenship, correctly said that some journalism about migration is superficial, I suggested it's generally a good thing Canada's long-standing national taboo against reporting on and debating migration policy has eased. Although some politicians, migration lawyers, consultants and other agents may not always like it, I also said journalists' goal is to responsibly probe to the truth of a matter and, beyond that, to 'let the chips fall where they may.' Since my Vancouver Sun editors about a dozen years ago asked me to produce more analyses about migration, I have learned covering the beat essentially amounts to writing about the 'winners and losers' of migration policy, which in Canada is put together behind closed doors. Some examples. Applied ethicists point to how it's one thing for Canadians to worry about a 'brain drain' — about losing talented citizens to places like the U.S. and Singapore. The more worrisome flip side, for countries in Africa and East Asia, is that Canada is actively draining away their brainy people, be they physicians or entrepreneurs. Then there are the 2.8 million temporary workers in Canada, many of them international students paying exorbitant school fees. Some have been winners, getting solid educations and decent jobs in their homelands or permanent residency in Canada. Others have been exploited for their willingness to work for low wages — which has, in turn, been a losing proposition for other low-skill workers in Canada. The job of tracking migration policies' winners and losers is endless, including covering the squeeze that rapid population growth and the trans-national migration of foreign capital is putting on those trying to pay Canadian housing costs and rents . Suffice it to say, journalists' job is to shine as much light as possible on this vast system, which impacts millions. The ultimate goal is to encourage the creation of policies that best serve the most people, which is one way to advance the common good. dtodd@
