Latest news with #CanadianOfficials
National Post
2 days ago
- Health
- National Post
Lawyer insists foreign adversary is behind Canadian diplomats' Havana Syndrome
Article content The Global Affairs report traces the various steps federal agencies have taken over the years in response to the illness complaints, including security, medical and environmental assessments. Article content A multi-agency Integrated National Security Enforcement Team, led by the RCMP, opened an investigation in June 2017. Article content Global Affairs and RCMP officials began travelling regularly to Cuba as part of the investigation to look at the possibility of malicious attacks, the report says. Canadian officials also shared information with foreign partners, including the United States. Article content In 2019, instruments designed to detect and capture evidence of acoustic and radiation surges, and to measure environmental effects — such as temperature, humidity, barometric pressure and ozone levels — were installed in the living quarters of Canadian staff in Havana. Article content 'The data collected from the instruments did not provide relevant and probative information to identify a cause for the symptoms,' the Global Affairs report says. 'As such, in 2022, the instruments were removed.' Article content Article content The integrated national security team concluded 'there was no criminality and no evidence attributing these health symptoms to a foreign actor,' the report adds. Article content 'In their conclusions, the RCMP and other domestic partner agencies assess that there is no known criminality, no known attribution for (unexplained health incidents) and no patterns related to symptoms, age, gender, location, or other variable.' Article content The U.S. intelligence community looked at possible evidence of a foreign adversary's involvement, the feasibility of tools that could cause the reported symptoms and whether medical analysis could help find answers. Article content A March 1, 2023, report from the U.S. National Intelligence Council said these lines of inquiry led most intelligence community agencies to conclude — with varying levels of confidence — that it was 'very unlikely' a foreign adversary was responsible for the health issues reported by American personnel. Article content Global Affairs, the Canadian Security Intelligence Service and the RCMP subsequently met to discuss the U.S. council's findings. Article content Article content The RCMP indicated that 'since no criminality was uncovered, its criminal investigation would be concluded,' and CSIS advised it also would be wrapping up its investigations for similar reasons, the Global Affairs report says. Article content Overall, the Canadian efforts 'have not uncovered a clear common cause of the symptoms experienced by government of Canada employees,' the report adds. 'Canada's findings are aligned with the conclusions of the United States on their various health studies and the security report published by the National Intelligence Council.' Article content Miller points to other research and testimony that challenge those findings. Article content Lawyer Mark Zaid, representing several U.S. personnel with symptoms, told a congressional hearing in May 2024 that there was intelligence, scientific and medical evidence substantiating the reports of anomalous health incidents, and that some were caused by a foreign adversary. Article content Zaid, who had authorized access to secret details, said he was convinced that 'the evidence that exists in the classified arena directly contradicts the public conclusions' provided by U.S. federal agencies about the cause of the health symptoms.
Yahoo
4 days ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
Canada didn't push for plastic production cap in talks on global treaty
OTTAWA — Canadian officials negotiating a global treaty to end plastic pollution at the United Nations say they didn't push other countries to agree to a cap on plastic production because such a measure likely would not be adopted. The sixth round of talks wrapped up in Geneva Friday without a consensus on a legally-binding international treaty to end plastic waste by 2040. The latest negotiations included 1,400 member delegates from 183 countries, and nearly 1,000 observers from more than 400 organizations. The negotiations started in 2022 and Canada has been instrumental in bringing countries to the table, having hosted the fourth round of talks in 2024. But countries are at odds now over how far the agreement should go, with many nations opposing caps on plastic production. Scientists estimate more than 350 million tonnes of plastic are thrown out every year. Less than one-tenth is recycled and more than one-fifth ends up in the environment, where it is harmful to people and other living things. In a technical briefing Friday, Environment Canada officials said Canada didn't press the idea of a production cap in order to reach consensus on a treaty. The Canadian delegation sought to address production in a final agreement by focusing instead on sustainable consumption, officials said. Reuters reported last week that the United States was circulating a memo to other countries urging them to reject any treaty which imposes limits on plastic production and plastic chemical additives. Canadian officials said Friday they saw no such memo. Officials said they weren't discouraged by the lack of an agreement after six rounds of negotiations, and hope to press on with another round of talks to hammer out a deal. Canada did try to push for press for language in the agreement that would affirm the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Following negotiations in South Korea last November, which ended without an agreement, the draft version of the treaty removed references to UNDRIP. Canada managed to get 45 other countries to back its proposal, but the final draft of the treaty published Friday didn't contain any of the UNDRIP provisions Canada sought to include. While Environment Canada officials wouldn't elaborate on the negotiating positions of other nations, the department said the lack of UNDRIP language is likely due to the fact that it's not a priority for other countries. Karen Wirsig, senior program manager for plastics at Environmental Defence Canada, said Canada "showed up strong" to the latest round of negotiations but must now work with allies to make the case for plastic production caps. "The process established for the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee has failed and Canada must now work with its allies to keep up the momentum," said Wirsig, who was among the international observers in Geneva. "At the same time, Canada must pursue domestic policy aligned with the ambition it has shown on the world stage." Some of the work Canada has done includes banning microbeads in toiletries and tightening standards on plastic produced domestically. This report by The Canadian Press was first published Aug. 15, 2025. Nick Murray, The Canadian Press Sign in to access your portfolio
CBC
09-08-2025
- Business
- CBC
Deal or no deal, Mark Carney has to manage a new relationship with the United States
Social Sharing A week after the latest deadline to somehow resolve the trade war that Donald Trump has launched against Canada — and with Canadian officials now looking ahead to a full renegotiation of the Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement — many things remain unclear. But when Mark Carney spoke to reporters in British Columbia on Tuesday, he expressed clarity about at least one thing. "While we'll continue to work with the United States on the many mutually beneficial opportunities that we share in trade and investment," the prime minister said, "it is clear that we cannot count, or fully rely, on what has been our most-valued trading relationship, for our prosperity." Such comments follow from Carney's insistence in March that Canada's "old relationship" with the United States was "over." And it remains remarkable to hear a prime minister talk this way about this country's largest trading partner and closest ally, with whom Canada has spent most of the last century growing steadily closer. But it's also increasingly hard to dispute. "And that's why," Carney continued on Tuesday, "we're increasingly focused on building our strength at home and finding new opportunities for Canadian companies and workers abroad." Carney will still obviously be judged on how he navigates the current dispute. But deal or no deal — tariffs or no tariffs — the larger question is how Canada should navigate this new world. What does a 'deal' with Trump look like? In some ways, Canada's moment of crisis seemed to deflate over the last couple months. Trump is talking less about annexing Canada. Some of his tariffs have turned out to be lower than he originally threatened. And Canada's exports are, overall, facing a lower level of tariffs than many other countries. But there are still tariffs. The effective overall tariff rate imposed by the United States on imports is now estimated to be 18.6 per cent — the highest it has been since 1933. For Canada, the effective rate is estimated to be 13.1 per cent. "You should think of Trump's trade policy as the second coming of the 1930 Smoot-Hawley tariff, effectively reversing the results of 90 years of trade liberalization," economist Paul Krugman wrote this week. Contrary to speculation that Trump was just wielding tariffs as a bargaining tactic, he's making import taxes a feature of the "deals" he is signing with other countries. He is apparently willing to accept the risks to the American economy and the additional costs that will be imposed on American households, to say nothing of the damage done to relations between the United States and other countries. WATCH | What is the impact of Trump's tariffs?: How are the new U.S. tariff rates affecting businesses, consumers? 1 day ago "The U.S. is in the process of fundamentally changing all of its trading relationships," Carney said. "In a series of agreements, America is, in effect, charging for access to its economy through a combination of higher baseline tariffs, unilateral trade liberalization by its partners and new commitments to invest in the United States." Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre tried to blame Carney this week for the continued presence of American tariffs and accused the prime minister of "bending over backwards" to make concessions to the American president. He also said the goal should still be "unfettered access to the American market." Those comments are at least a reminder of how much Carney might have at stake in the current negotiations and in the negotiations to come — though it remains to be seen how much the Canadian public expects from Carney in this situation. Of course, even if Carney's government is able to come to an agreement with the Trump administration, the available evidence suggests any deal is subject to change. Similarly, it would now seem naive to imagine that some kind of durable pre-2016 normalcy will return if or when Trump is no longer president. Is it time for a new third option? The push and pull of Canada's relationship to the United States is one of the strongest through lines of Canadian history. But the current moment may have something in common with where Canada briefly found itself in 1972. Fifty-three years ago, Mitchell Sharp, then secretary of state for external affairs, put his name to a 24-page paper entitled, Canada-U.S. Relations: Options for the Future. Against the backdrop of a shifting global order, concerns about Canadian economic and cultural independence and a series of sudden moves by the American administration, Sharp surmised that Canada had three options. First, Canada could continue with the status quo, managing its relations with the United States on a case-by-case basis and dealing with problems as they arose. Second, Canada could "move deliberately toward closer integration with the United States," possibly via a free trade deal. Alternatively, Canada could "pursue a comprehensive long-term strategy to develop and strengthen the Canadian economy and other aspects of its national life and in the process to reduce the present Canadian vulnerability." WATCH | Former N.L. premier on Carney's approach: Carney's approach to U.S. trade negotiations 'wise and strategic,' says former N.L. premier 2 days ago Andrew Furey, former premier of Newfoundland and Labrador, says the most 'sound' way to negotiate with the United States is in 'a calm, rational, Canadian manner.' This comes as U.S. President Donald Trump began levying higher import taxes on dozens of countries Thursday. While Sharp was advocating for the third scenario, Canadians, under a different government, eventually went with the second course. And what came to be known as the " third option" fell into some disrepute, associated with some of Pierre Trudeau's more nationalistic economic interventions and an ill-fated pursuit of new trade partners. There's no evidence that Carney has taken any particular inspiration from the third option. But Sharp's description reads somewhat like a wordier way of saying "Canada strong" — the Liberal campaign slogan in the spring's election. (For that matter, it's perhaps broadly in line with some of what Poilievre has said about the need to strengthen the Canadian economy.) In Sharp's own later judgement, his paper helped to marshal public support for Canadian cultural institutions, but "did not … bring about any significant change in the direction of our trade." And while it "implied an internal restructuring of the Canadian economy to reduce our dependence on the United States" that "wasn't attempted and probably was too difficult to achieve given the overlapping jurisdictions of the federal and provincial governments." For Canada, trade diversification qualifies as one of those things that, if it was easy to do, someone would have done by now. Indeed, efforts by Pierre Trudeau's government to build bridges to new markets might be regarded as a "warning sign" that "what the government wants and what private investment wants are often at odds," says Asa McKercher, a research chair in Canada-U.S. relations at St. Francis Xavier University. Carney arguably starts from a better position, McKercher says, because Canada is now operating with a number of comprehensive free trade agreements with partners beyond the United States. "Where the rubber will hit the road is will there be serious efforts to actually get Canadian companies, particularly small and medium businesses, the business links and actually capitalize on these trade agreements," McKercher says. "If I were the Carney government, if I were to learn something from the third option, particularly in the trade diversification, I'd say you actually have to make a serious effort at actually linking Canadian businesses to other businesses and government agencies." It's likely still necessary to be realistic about what's possible. Even Sharp conceded that "the United States would almost certainly remain Canada's most important market and source of supply by a very considerable margin." The third option, he wrote, would merely be directed toward "reducing Canada's vulnerability, particularly in relation to the United States."
CTV News
05-08-2025
- Politics
- CTV News
Former foreign affairs minister on why the ‘elbows up' tariff retaliation ‘backfired'
Watch Former foreign affairs minister Peter MacKay comments on Canadian officials participating in trade talks in Mexico and how Trump may react to the visit.
Yahoo
27-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
WTO to Intervene in Trade Disputes Between Canada and China
The United States isn't the only North American nation embroiled in a trade conflict with China. This week, the Asian sourcing superpower issued its second request with the World Trade Organization (WTO) for the establishment of a dispute panel to address Canadian surtaxes on certain products hailing from China, from electric vehicles to steel and aluminum. More from Sourcing Journal FedEx Faces $170M in Tariff Headwinds as US Cracks Down on De Minimis China Port Volumes Hit Record Highs on US Tariff Truce DHL Express Canada Seeks 'Anti-Scab' Law Exemption, Citing 'Essential' Services The follow-up with the Geneva-based international trade regulation body comes about a month after China's first request for a panel, which Canada said at the time that it was not ready to accept. Chinese trade officials told the WTO that the country sees Canada's taxes on the industrial products as inconsistent with provisions of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), a multilateral agreement regulating trade between 153 countries. China said it was open to constructive discussions, and remains committed to resolving the dispute with Canada. Canadian officials called it 'unfortunate' that China included claims related to certain solar products, critical minerals, semiconductors, permanent magnets and natural graphite in its request, saying that there aren't currently any surtaxes on them. Canada asserted that China failed to identify the specific issues at play with its request, a requirement under the Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU), which establishes rules for resolving trade disagreements. The country also defended its surtaxes on steel and aluminum, saying those measures are justified under the GATT and that it was fully prepared to defend its stance. Nonetheless, Canada said it was committed to maintaining a constructive dialogue with China 'even as the dispute moves to the panel stage,' officials told the WTO. A panel is established when the parties at odds can't come to a resolution through consultations. The U.S. added its voice to the mix, saying China had responded to Canada's surtaxes by imposing tariffs on Canadian agricultural and fishery products. Those duties, impacting certain oils and animal feed, taxed Canadian imports at a rate of 100 percent. Australia, the European Union, India, Japan, the Republic of Korea, Malaysia, Norway, the Russian Federation, Singapore, Switzerland, Turkey, the United Kingdom, Ukraine and the U.S. reserved their third-party rights to participate in the proceedings, the WTO noted. In turn, Canada submitted a second request for a panel to discuss the Chinese tariffs on its exports the same day. First submitted on March 20, Canada's filing requested consultations with China, though the country later moved to request a panel on the matter. The country's officials said China's duties violated WTO rules, adding that because the issue concerns perishable goods, like food products, the case should be treated as urgent. China said it plans to defend itself and is confident that its actions will be found to be in compliance with WTO rules. The WTO agreed Monday to move forward with convening panels on both disputes.
