Trade talks between the United States and China made “good headway” last week in Beijing and the two sides aim to bridge differences during talks that could extend beyond three days this week, White House economic adviser Larry Kudlow said.
Kudlow, speaking to reporters on Wednesday at an event organized by the Christian Science Monitor, said China had recognized problems for the first time during the talks that the United States has raised for years.
Negotiations continued in Washington on Wednesday after meetings last week in Beijing, spearheaded by U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer and Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin.
President Donald Trump will meet with Vice-Premier Liu He, who is leading the Chinese side in the talks, in the Oval Office at 4:30 p.m. ET on Thursday, the White House said.
The United States and China have levied tariffs on hundreds of billions of dollars’ worth of two-way trade since July 2018. Trump has said he wants a “great deal” with China and has hinted that tariffs could remain in place for some time.
Chinese commitments to increase purchases of American agricultural, energy and manufactured products are expected to be part of a final deal, and a person familiar with the talks said China would get about six years to meet those commitments, or until 2025.
The deadline was reported earlier by Bloomberg, but Trump administration officials previously said that a six-year timeline for purchases exceeding $1 trillion had been under discussion.
A final number for the amount of purchases has not been settled, the person said.
‘We’re not there yet’
Kudlow said Liu and his team would remain in Washington for three days and possibly longer.
“We’re covering issues that have never really been covered before, including enforcement,” Kudlow said, listing U.S. accusations that Beijing engages in intellectual property theft, forced transfer of technology from U.S. companies doing business in China, cyber hacking, tariffs and non-tariff barriers for commodity trading.
“All making good progress, all making good headway, but we’re not there yet,” he said about those areas. “We hope this week to get closer.”
Kudlow said it was significant that China had “acknowledged these problems for the first time. They were in denial.”
Those structural issues along with the way a potential deal would be enforced have been sticking points during months of talks between the world’s two largest economies.
Kudlow said on Wednesday that U.S. charges against Chinese telecommunications giant Huawei Technologies Co Ltd had generally not come up during trade talks.
Kudlow also said no decisions had been made on tariffs on auto imports coming from top U.S. allies.
Border Security and Organized Crime Reduction Minister Bill Blair was non-committal Wednesday about delivering a government-commissioned report on a handgun ban during this parliamentary session.
Blair also suggested the Liberals could revisit this issue if the government is re-elected in the fall.
“Canadians expect us to take the time to do it right and I’ve been doing my very best to take that time,” the former top Toronto cop told a Senate committee studying Bill C-71 Wednesday.
“As everyone can appreciate, this is a very complex discussion. We’ve looked at a number of ways we can maintain public safety but my job was also … and it’s an important caveat that the prime minister put on my mandate … to conduct that examination in a way that was also respectful of those Canadians who do responsibly own those firearms.”
Blair said he and his department are still engaged in an “exhaustive examination” of handguns in Canada. Blair initially said he would finish his consultations on the subject by the end of 2018.
When asked by Independent Sen. Marilou McPhedran if the government’s promised report would be made public by the time Parliament rises at the end of June, Blair hedged.
“As quick as I’m able, ma’am, but I can’t give you a time,” he said.
Bill C-71 is considered by many gun control advocates to be a relatively modest set of reforms to firearms law. Blair suggested Wednesday that if the Liberal government can’t do more on the firearms file this year, he’ll try again later. McPhedran said that suggestion was based on an “interesting assumption” — that the Liberals will win the fall federal election.
“It’s not an assumption, it’s an intent,” Blair said to McPhedran.
“If I can’t get it done now, I’ll come back and do it later. I know there are people who are saying, ‘Just do it quickly,’ but frankly I think we should do it right.”
When asked about the minister’s comments, a spokesperson for Blair said: “The government is still planning on releasing the report early 2019.”
The chances of the government introducing and passing new gun legislation at this late stage of the parliamentary process — with only eight weeks left on the calendar before Parliament rises for its summer break — is next to non-existent.
Legislation typically takes months to move through the House of Commons and Senate. Bill C-71, for example, was introduced more than a year ago and is still being studied by the upper house.
Heidi Rathjen, a gun control activist and survivor of the 1989 Polytechnique massacre, said anything less than a law introducing a handgun ban in the government’s current mandate would amount to a broken promise.
It would be a betrayal for them to simply kick this can down the road and promise something else, again, in the next election campaign.– Heidi Rathjen
The 2015 Liberal election platform included a commitment “to take action to get handguns and assault weapons off our streets.”
“They are breaking their word to Canadians. It would be a betrayal for them to simply kick this can down the road and promise something else, again, in the next election campaign,” Rathjen said.
“The Liberals, historically, have been in favour of gun control and now they’re just living in fear of the gun lobby and a small but very well-organized, very aggressive group of voters who speak of gun ‘rights.’ There is no right to own a gun in this country.
“It’s extremely discouraging. This government has been dragging its feet. Bill C-71 was only tabled last March and even that’s weak and the bare minimum of what the Liberals should do.”
To that end, McPhedran has suggested Bill C-71 should be amended to classify all handguns as “prohibited” firearms — the most restrictive classification for a firearm in Canada’s three-tier system, a move that would make tens of thousands of licensed owners ineligible and all but dismantle the existing legal supply chain.
“A bird in the hand, minister,” she said.
C-71 includes enhanced background checks for anyone applying for a Possession and Acquisition License (PAL) or a restricted PAL, mandatory record-keeping for firearms retailers, changes to the authorization to transport (ATT) rules, and the reclassification of two types of firearms.
Any would-be gun owner in Canada already has to submit to an extensive background check and complete a training course.
The Liberal government has faced mounting pressure from gun control groups to take action on the firearms file after New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern implemented a sweeping ban on so-called “military-style” semiautomatic firearms only days after a deadly mosque shooting in Christchurch.
“New Zealand shows us that if there’s political will, political courage, political leadership, a government can move extremely quickly to take action when its comes to protecting public safety,” Rathjen said.
But Blair said the Liberal government is not interested in implementing a handgun ban in such a short span of time.
“I think it’s important, before we make a decision on such an important issue of public policy and public safety, we make ourselves as well-informed as possible.”
Gun rights advocates maintain targeting legal firearms owners, through either C-71 or a potential ban, is the wrong approach given that much of the gun-related crime in this country is perpetrated by criminals using handguns smuggled from the U.S.
“The lion’s share of firearms homicide is committed by illegal gun owners. No methodologically valid study has been able to find evidence that stricter gun laws, or even gun bans, have reduced general homicide rates or spousal homicide rates,” said Gary Mauser, a professor emeritus at Simon Fraser University and a noted gun rights advocate.
Out of all the violent gun crimes in 2017 in Canada, 59 per cent involved a handgun, 18 per cent involved a rifle or a shotgun, 6 per cent involved a fully automatic firearm, sawed-off rifle or shotgun and 17 per cent involved a firearm-like weapon or an unknown type of firearm, according to data from StatsCan.
A recent sighting of southern resident killer whales near Monterey, Calif., has researchers taking note — as the pod usually calls the waters off B.C. and Washington state home.
Josh McInnes, research coordinator at Marine Life Studies in Monterey, was one of the scientists who spotted the pod of killer whales that had ventured more than 1,000 kilometres south.
McInnes was on a project studying transient whales that hunt grey whales migrating north.
“I saw a bunch of spouts in the distance and tall dorsal fins,” he told On The Island host Gregor Craigie.
“As they got closer, I took a photograph and looked right away and I recognized L pod, which is … one of the local southern resident pods that frequents the waters off Washington and British Columbia.
“I’ve spent many years in the water watching them. I knew right away by their markings on their dorsal fin, the saddle patches, that was them.”
The findings shocked McInnes and his colleagues, who had never seen the resident whales so far south.
A researcher thinks the whales may have been looking for food in California. (Marine Life Studies)
Could be travelling for food
So why were the whales — around 25 of them — so far from home?
McInnes says salmon are starting to come to the ocean in that part of the U.S. and the whales, which eat the salmon, might be looking for food.
“It’s a really positive thing to see, that they’re possibly in a different region where salmon might be better off, than, say, up in the Pacific Northwest, where we know chinook is critically endangered,” he suggested.
It’s not known if travelling south for food could become a trend for the southern residents. Whale research, he said, only began in the 1970s and historical data is poor.
More studies are required, but McInnes says it is possible the whales are becoming more willing to travel to find food.
The whales he observed on their California sojourn, at least, appeared to be in good health.
The thing about standing for an ideal is that people expect you to live up to it — or at least to their idea of it.
Justin Trudeau built his leadership upon a set of ideals: “sunny ways,” cabinet government, transparency, openness, inclusion, reconciliation, gender equality and doing things “differently.” Trudeau’s commitment to nearly every one of those principles has been challenged by critics and rivals over the last two months — his commitment to feminism in particular, now that Jody Wilson-Raybould and Jane Philpott have been expelled from the Liberal parliamentary caucus.
Outside the House of Commons on Tuesday, reporters pressed Trudeau and his ministers to comment on the government’s feminist credentials and the message sent to young women by the expulsions of two women who had become the prime minister’s prominent critics.
“We have a strong prime minister that is a feminist. We have a feminist agenda. Our record speaks for itself,” said Mélanie Joly, the tourism minister. “As to my two colleagues, I would argue that loyalty and feminism are two different things. And actually, there is no female or male definition of loyalty. It’s either you have team spirit, you want to work in a team, or you don’t.”
So perhaps two male ministers, behaving exactly the same way, would have met the same fate.
At the Daughters of the Vote event in the House on Tuesday — a biannual gathering that puts young women in the seats of MPs for a morning of speeches and discussion — some 50 delegates stood and silently turned their backs as the prime minister delivered his remarks.
An awkward diversion
Trudeau acknowledged the obvious tension of the day, but then awkwardly tried to contrast the departure of two strong women with … the continued presence of two strong women.
“I know nobody in here wants to have to pick who to believe between Jody Wilson Raybould and Chrystia Freeland,” he said. “Nobody wants to know that one person has to be right and another person has to be wrong between Jane Philpott or Maryam Monsef.”
That women stood behind Trudeau’s decision to expel Wilson-Raybould and Philpott likely is not irrelevant. But maybe it’s not the prime minister’s task to pit them against each other.
It’s likely not up to any one person (certainly not me) to say whether Trudeau is a good feminist. But if there was any solace for Trudeau in the Commons yesterday, it was in the fact that all 338 of those young women — even the ones unhappy with him — stayed in the chamber as he spoke. Moments prior, several dozen delegates simply walked out on Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer’s speech.
(On the other hand, NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh’s speech was received enthusiastically by the group — which might make Trudeau anxious.)
“By kicking the first Indigenous former attorney general of Canada out of caucus for upholding the law, the prime minister has made it clear that principled women who dare to stand up to him are not welcome in the Liberal Party,” the NDP’s Jenny Kwan charged in question period. “Is this what a self-proclaimed feminist looks like in 2019?”
Trudeau tried to make the case for his own feminism, or at least for his government’s commitment to the ideal: a development assistance policy aimed at women and girls, gender-based analysis of budgets, legislated pay equity, funding for women’s organizations and a gender-balanced cabinet.
Then the prime minister offered a bit of meta commentary.
“I recognize there is much more to do and I am proud that there is now a contest among party leaders to see who can be the better feminist. I think that is a great thing for this country. I think that is a great thing for Parliament.”
Perhaps there’s some solace there too.
Thus far, but not far enough
The struggle between Trudeau and his ideals has been real. He waived solicitor-client privilege and cabinet confidentiality to allow Wilson-Raybould to speak about her time as attorney general, but she objected that the waiver did not go far enough. Liberal members of the justice committee were apparently free to look into the SNC affair, but then the hearings were abandoned.
In both cases, Trudeau probably went further than Stephen Harper would have gone. But in neither case did he go as far as he could have.
In vowing to do things differently, he raised the expectation that — when confronted with a profound challenge — he would be perfectly forthcoming, without regard for the normal political impulse to control the narrative and limit the damage.
Former justice minister Jody Wilson-Raybould leaves West Block on Parliament Hill in Ottawa, April 2, 2019. (Chris Wattie/Reuters)
In appointing the first Indigenous minister of justice and attorney general, he put an incredible burden on himself and his office to ensure both her success and a good working relationship between them. That made the possibility of moving her, or demoting her, a daunting prospect.
For all that, Trudeau might now fall back on what he’s been insisting all along — that neither he nor his office did anything wrong (the claim that they did is at least in dispute) and that their cause (saving jobs) was just.
Wilson-Raybould says she told Gerry Butts, Trudeau’s former adviser, that the Prime Minister’s Office was inappropriately pressuring her. Butts disputes that claim. Wilson-Raybould did raise a concern in a phone call with the clerk of the Privy Council, Michael Wernick. But Wernick seems not to have told Trudeau about what she said.
The power of symbolism
Liberals will also argue that they had perfectly valid reasons for wanting Wilson-Raybould and Philpott gone from caucus — starting with the fact that, at the very least, they had reasons to believe they no longer all shared the same goal.
But Trudeau and his fellow Liberals must understand the symbolic value of everything that’s happened with the SNC-Lavalin file. Two impressive women now sit outside the Liberal caucus. We’re still waiting on an ethics commissioner probe; the facts have not been fully and completely aired.
Maybe his political opponents weren’t complaining in good faith. Maybe nothing would have satisfied them.
But the last two months will still weigh down any attempt by Trudeau to lay claim to those ideals. Trudeau must hope that giving voice to those ideals, and his pursuit of them, still count for something, even if he has not always fully embodied the ideal.
Some of the world’s top marine biologists are meeting in Moscow this week to try to save nearly 100 whales — including 11 orcas and 87 belugas — held captive since autumn in what critics have dubbed Russia’s “whale jail.”
Since November, the cetaceans have been kept in small pens, which are often on the verge of freezing over, in a bay not far from Vladivostok on Russia’s Pacific Coast.
The whales were captured by several Russian companies intent on selling them to Chinese aquariums, a practice that until now has been perfectly legal in Russia.
“These are conditions that the animals shouldn’t be in. Their health is slowly deteriorating,” said Grigory Tsidulko, a marine mammal expert who’s been consulting with Greenpeace over the fate of the creatures.
The team arriving in Moscow on Thursday is headed up by Jean-Michel Cousteau, the 81-year-old son of the famous French oceanographer Jacques Cousteau. The group, which includes international experts as well as some of Russia’s top whale researchers, is expected to travel to Vladivostok over the weekend to survey the health of the whales and present options to Russian authorities for releasing them.
A public outcry led by animal welfare activists in Russia and supported by Hollywood celebrities such as Canadian-born animal welfare campaigner Pamela Anderson, pushed the government of President Vladimir Putin to pronounce that the whales should be freed.
If that happens, biologists say it could be the largest mass release of captive cetaceans ever. But many who’ve been following the saga of the “jailed” whales have their doubts it will.
An overhead view of the pens holding belugas and orcas at the facility in Srednyaya Bay, in southeastern Russia. (Reuters)
There’s also a growing debate about whether the animals could survive. “It would be absolutely irresponsible if you just open the pens and let those whales swim away,” said Tsidulko, noting that orcas are highly social creatures and maintain close family units in the wild.
“They have never been in the places where they’re being kept in captivity. Right now, there’s not enough food for them where they’re being held.”
Russian environmental groups have been pushing the Putin government for years to stop the trade in ocean mammals. The four companies that captured these animals were issued legal permits to keep the whales for “educational” reasons. They then quickly turned around and cut deals with Chinese marine parks, where an orca can sell for up to $5 million US each, according to several animal welfare groups that have investigated the practice.
Greenpeace estimates a beluga can sell for up to $150,000 US.
Statistics from the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) suggest as many as 13 orcas caught in Russian waters were sold to China between 2013 and 2016.
Marine mammal expert Grigory Tsidulko has been consulting with Greenpeace over how the captive whales should be freed. (Pascal Dumont/CBC)
In April 2018, Russia passed a new law to close a loophole allowing the “educational” capture of belugas and orcas. Tsidulko said it’s unclear how the new rules are being enforced, and whether companies will use other parts of Russia’s fishery act to continue catching whales.
Russia’s fisheries department does not consider orcas or killer whales to be endangered species.
Russian police intervened to stop the sale of the whales in the Vladivostok pens last month, claiming the companies didn’t have the proper permits, leaving the animals in limbo.
Many of the whales were captured near Sakhalin Island in the Sea of Okhotsk, which is more than 1,500 kilometres away from where the sea mammals are being kept now.
Russian authorities have suggested the companies responsible may need to lift the whales onto barges and transport them back to the places where they were captured. However, the region won’t be ice-free — and thus easily accessible — until the summer.
There are also concerns that the youngest belugas, some of which were babies when they were caught, have become too accustomed to being fed by humans in the months they’ve been in captivity.
Tsidulko said his fear is that some, perhaps even most, of the whales may be deemed “non-releasable,” and end up being sold to clients in China.
The video below shows some of the whales being held in captivity:
Since November, beluga and orca whales have been kept in small pens not far from Vladivostok on Russia’s Pacific Coast. 4:06
All of this has led activists to wonder how many of the whales will ever live in the wild again.
“At the moment, nobody has said these animals will be released, and nobody has said they no longer belong to the companies,” said Tsidulko.
Later this month, the fisheries department will hold public hearings on setting a total allowable catch (TAC) of 10 orcas and 82 belugas for 2020.
While some of the animals may be slaughtered and used for food by Indigenous communities, Tsidulko laments the fact that Russia “remains one of the few countries that sells live cetaceans for public displays and shows.”
“On the one side, we are saying that they are so intelligent and so much like humans. On the other hand, we’re saying if someone wants to have a 20-minute show with a bucket of popcorn, then we can catch them and bring them for public pleasure. There’s something really wrong with this.”
In Canada, a bill that would ban aquariums from having dolphins and whales in captivity has already passed through the Senate, and is now in the House of Commons. Critics, including the owners of Marineland in southern Ontario, have said the bill will hurt science and legitimate research programs.
Vancouver’s Aquarium, which used to keep orcas and belugas for public performances, also initially strongly opposed the legislation. It no longer puts the whales on public display.
Tokyo prosecutors say the latest arrest of former Nissan chairman Carlos Ghosn was based on suspicion he diverted $5 million US from funds that were being relayed from a Nissan subsidiary to an overseas dealership.
TV footage Thursday morning showed officials entering Ghosn’s apartment, and a car later going to the prosecutors’ office, barely a month after Ghosn was released on bail from the earlier arrests related to alleged financial misconduct while he led the Japanese automaker.
In a statement Ghosn strongly declared his innocence.
“My arrest this morning is outrageous and arbitrary. It is part of another attempt by some individuals at Nissan to silence me by misleading the prosecutors. Why arrest me except to try to break me? I will not be broken. I am innocent of the groundless charges and accusations against me.”
He was first arrested in November on charges of under-reporting his compensation.
The prosecutors said the diverted money is suspected of going to a company Ghosn virtually ran. The statement issued Thursday did not mention Oman. But an investigation by Nissan Motor Co.’s French alliance partner Renault has centered on payments to a dealership in Oman in which some of the money is suspected of having been channeled for Ghosn’s personal use.
U.S. whistleblower Edward Snowden is urging the Canadian government to accept all seven of the people who sheltered him in Hong Kong while he was fleeing prosecution as refugees.
In a rare interview, he tells The National’s Adrienne Arsenault that every day the individuals remain in Hong Kong, “they are in immediate danger.”
Two members of the group, Vanessa Rodel and her daughter seven-year-old Keana, arrived in Canada last week. The whole story reads a bit like a movie script. And why not?
The reason Canadians know their story at all is because filmmaker Oliver Stone made a movie about Snowden, and along the way — at some point during the scripting process it’s believed — information got out that revealed how Rodel and Keana’s lives — along with the rest of the group’s — were intertwined with Snowden’s.
Edward Snowden leaked classified NSA documents in 2013. The United States declared him a traitor and Snowden fled prosecution. (The Guardian/Associated Press)
Back in 2013, Snowden leaked classified documents from the U.S. National Security Agency, where he had been working as a contractor. The documents revealed a massive government surveillance operation, and the United States declared him a traitor. Snowden fled to avoid prosecution, at one point winding up in Hong Kong.
That’s where he met Rodel.
She and two other families — refugees themselves having fled the Philippines and Sri Lanka — sheltered Snowden in their tiny homes in Hong Kong while he was on the run.
The seven people who sheltered Snowden in Hong Kong. Sri Lankan refugee Supun Thilina Kellapatha, 3rd from the left, his partner Nadeeka, left, with their baby boy Dinath and daughter Sethumdi, Sri Lankan refugee Ajith Puspa, 3rd from the right, Rodel, right, and her daughter Keana. (Isaac Lawrence/AFP/Getty Images)
Now, from his apartment in Russia, where Edward Snowden lives in exile, he is pleading with Canada to let in the other families — the three adults and two children who were left behind.
“These people helped me in 2013,” Snowden told Arsenault by video chat. “And yet here we are 2019.”
Snowden says Canada is best positioned to welcome all seven refugees. (Jean-François Bisson/CBC News)
Snowden found himself living with the families in Hong Kong six years ago because of a Canadian lawyer, Robert Tibbo. He was Snowden’s lawyer and he was also working for the families, trying to keep them from being deported and trying to get them safely out of Hong Kong.
“I would say this one guy… is perhaps the reason [the families] haven’t been sent back yet,” Snowden said.
He believes it took the leak during the moviemaking to get the world to pay attention to the families’ plight. He says Rodel and her daughter would not be in Canada were it not “for the profile they got from this film” and “the insanity of the response of the Hong Kong government to having their mistreatment of these refugee families … suddenly thrust into the global spotlight.”
Snowden describes what the refugee families face daily living in Hong Kong.
Edward Snowden tells Adrienne Arsenault about the danger the people who helped hide him in Hong Kong face now that what they did is public. 1:29
Rodel and Keana, another refugee couple and their two children, and a third man were all living as refugees in Hong Kong in 2013. They were poor, prohibited from working by the Hong Kong government, living in cramped spaces.
“The bathroom sink was the kitchen sink,” said Snowden. Over a period of about three weeks, he crowded into each of the families’ three homes with them. It wasn’t long before he moved on to Russia — but it was long enough to have a negative impact on Rodel and the others.
Their lives were already difficult, Snowden said. And once the Hong Kong government got wind through the movie leak that the families had sheltered Snowden, their situation got worse. Snowden says the government basically retaliated, removing their refugee stipends and access to food and housing.
Arsenault asks Snowden what it was like to realize that the very people who had helped him were being made to pay for it.
Edward Snowden tells Adrienne Arsenault that the people who helped him are being made to suffer again and again. 1:41
That’s when Snowden says the effort to get the families refugee status in another country began. He believes Canada is best positioned to help them.
“These children are stateless and they will never live a free life unless they are welcomed into and protected by a state. And the only one who is in a position to do so right now, who has the legal framework to do so right now is Canada.”
The only thing they did is they helped someone who was facing retaliation for telling the truth.– Edward Snowden
The paperwork requesting asylum from Canada was filed in early 2017 and Snowden says their situation is dire. He says the families will be deported to Sri Lanka where they where they claim to face torture and death threats. He is enormously grateful that Rodel and Keana are here, but says there is clearly something preventing the other five from being immediately brought to Canada, too.
“If this process is independent, If it’s truly independent, they already would have been admitted. I believe and everyone else believes the only reason this process for admission has taken so long is simply because the Canadian government is bending over backwards not to create an appearance that might irritate the United States government.”
That’s because the United States still considers Snowden a traitor and he still faces charges in the U.S. related to his exposure of what was considered state secrets.
Snowden says that shouldn’t matter.
“The only thing they did is they helped someone who was facing retaliation for telling the truth. And if that’s something that Canada can’t stand behind, that’s something we need to know publicly rather than them sort of doing it privately.”
He added, “Admitting these families is something Canada can be proud of. And seeing these families have a happy ending, I think in the fullness of history is something that the United States will be very much glad happened.”
Watch Adrienne’s full interview from The National:
Former CIA employee and NSA whistle-blower Edward Snowden has a message for Canada. He sat down for an exclusive interview with The National’s Adrienne Arsenault. 7:45
The Manitoba government will go to court over Ottawa’s imposition of a carbon tax.
Premier Brian Pallister revealed Wednesday his government will launch a legal challenge against the federal government, which imposed its new levy as promised on Manitoba, along with three other provinces, Monday.
“We’re going to court, sadly, to challenge the Ottawa carbon tax because Ottawa cannot impose a carbon tax on a province that has a credible greenhouse gas-reduction plan of its own, and we do,” he told reporters.
The federal government’s carbon tax came into effect April 1 for four provinces — Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario and New Brunswick — that didn’t meet Ottawa’s standard for a sufficient carbon pricing system.
The carbon tax is now charged on 21 different fuel inputs in those provinces, including gasoline, at a rate of $20 per tonne of carbon emissions. That will gradually rise to $50 per tonne by 2022.
Manitoba backed away from that plan, which proposed a flat carbon price of $25 per tonne, when the federal Liberal government declared it didn’t go far enough.
The premier also said it wasn’t fair that the federal government had offered exceptions to other provinces, but not Manitoba.
He’s previously said Quebec’s cap-and-trade program is much less stringent than the flat $25-per-tonne price he proposed before he withdrew the Manitoba carbon tax, and has argued Manitoba isn’t given credit for the clean energy it produces.
“I’m the only Conservative premier in the country that took steps to develop a green plan, which actually involves our people here contributing somewhat to a levy.”
The federal Liberal government will begin levying its carbon tax on greenhouse gas-emitting fuels today in the four provinces that have refused to take part in the pan-Canadian climate framework. 4:35
Pallister said his decision was influenced by discussions with government lawyers, and that Manitoba’s legal argument is more convincing now that the federal backstop is in place.
“There’s no point launching the case unless they were going to intrude on Manitoba’s jurisdiction,” he said of the federal government. “They didn’t do that until this past Monday.”
Manitoba will withdraw the court challenge, which may take two to three years to wind through the legal channels, Pallister said, if the Saskatchewan court challenge succeeds, or if the Trudeau government is defeated in the next federal election.
“My hope would be it’s resolved by previous court decisions and we don’t need to carry it further,” Pallister said. “I guess I could be accused of trying to save money, yet again.”
If Ottawa’s plan is rejected, Pallister wouldn’t say whether he would implement the carbon tax plan his government originally proposed.
Manitoba has ‘flip-flopped’: environment minister
Federal Environment Minister Catherine McKenna is dismayed by Pallister’s thinking.
“I think it’s really ironic,” she said from Ottawa.
“The day after we release a climate report for Canada by our scientists that said that Canada’s warming is double the world average that we have the premier of Manitoba deciding to take us to court, to spend taxpayer money fighting climate action as opposed to fighting climate change,” McKenna said.
Minister of Environment and Climate Change Catherine McKenna condemned the Manitoba government for choosing to fight Ottawa in court over the carbon tax, just one day after a report found that Ottawa was warming at twice the world’s average. (Sean Kilpatrick/Canadian Press)
“Manitoba had an opportunity to have a plan and, unfortunately, they flip-flopped so many times.”
He said this lawsuit, which he described as “frivolous,” won’t change that.
“We can debate the merits of the carbon pricing measure, but I can tell you one thing for sure: taking the federal government to court on this is just going to waste taxpayer money and it’s going to do absolutely nothing to fight climate change here.”
The legal opinion said the province could legally snub the federal carbon tax scheme if it demonstrated that its plan was equally effective at cutting emissions.
The government would be better off returning to the negotiating table with the federal government, argued Manitoba Liberal Leader Dougald Lamont.
“To go against the advice of a very well-respected law prof who you’ve paid tens of thousands of dollars to give you advice on this matter doesn’t make any sense to me.”
A 22-year-old epilepsy patient is risking arrest — refusing to leave her hospital room at Vancouver General Hospital — claiming the medical system has failed to provide her with a plan of care and that her life is at risk.
Tavia Marlatt has severe epilepsy and can sometimes experience up to 50 seizures a day. Her condition means she can’t live on her own in case she has a seizure and needs someone to administer emergency medication.
Marlatt has been at VGH for the past eight days, undergoing tests to determine whether targeted brain surgery could ease her epilepsy.
Instead, results showed that her epilepsy is critically severe — while doctors thought the seizures were stemming from her left frontal lobe, they’re actually coming from three different spots in her brain.
Because she’s occupying one of just two beds dedicated to seizure assessment in B.C., she’s being discharged on Thursday — a decision she says will put her life in jeopardy.
“I’ve been told that I have to leave the hospital, that [staying] is not an option. So if they need the police to come in here and take me out then that’s fine. If I have to get something put on my criminal record for standing up for what I believe in that’s fine,” she said.
Marlatt and her mother, Renee, who works as a trained special needs caregiver, have been fighting for her right to live at home, rather than have her moved into an institution. (Evan Mitsui/CBC)
Even spending short amounts of time alone can be dangerous for Marlatt, who recently broke her jaw in four places after experiencing a seizure while walking on the side of the road. She also has borderline personality disorder and cognitive deficits.
But the Fraser Health Authority has denied funding that would allow the family to organize in-home care, saying the authority would instead pay for Tavia Marlatt’s care in a group home or at a government-run facility.
“The goal is to get funding so we can hire somebody … while my mom is not home, so that my mom doesn’t come home one day and I’m dead on the floor because there was no one there to put me on my side in the recovery position,” said Marlatt.
“The thought that they think it’s OK for me to go to a group home … that’s also a spit in my face.”
Results from recent tests showed that Marlatt’s epilepsy is more severe than originally thought — while doctors thought the seizures originated from her left frontal lobe, they’re actually coming from three different spots in her brain. (Evan Mitsui/CBC)
Kim Davidson, executive director of the BC Epilepsy Society, said the family’s position is not meant to be adversarial.
“We’re asking for the basic needs that this young woman requires in order to be safe in our community, that’s it,” she said.
“I think the health-care system needs to [think about] — what does this look like if this turns into a coroner’s inquest?”
Awaiting response from authorities
Davidson said she’s contacted Fraser Health and the minister of health multiple times about the case, with no response. She said that while the doctors working on Marlatt’s case are “extraordinary,” the bureaucracy of the health-care system “is going to cost someone their life.”
Fraser Health previously sent CBC News a statement explaining that in cases like Marlatt’s, community support homes are offered as an option because many caregivers are highly trained to deal with complex care needs.
On Wednesday afternoon B.C. Health Minister Adrian Dix declined to comment on the specifics of the case due to privacy.
“It’s going to be the clinicians and the people working on the issue that are going to work out the care plan, they have to work it out with the family with the tools that we have,” he said.
“A disease such as epilepsy puts an enormous burden on everyone involved and I understand that.”
Even spending short amounts of time alone can be dangerous for Marlatt, who recently broke her jaw in four places after experiencing a seizure while walking on the side of the road. (Evan Mitsui/CBC)
A local developer is hoping to transform a series of properties across from Stadium LRT, once owned by an infamous Edmonton landlord, into a six-storey apartment building.
The proposed site is largely a mix of boarded-up homes and vacant lands. The properties have been the subject of public health complaints and safety concerns from neighbours in the past.
Parkdale residents had their first look at the proposed apartment building on Thursday at a public consultation organized by the city. The developer, Gina Xiu Ling Cai, is asking the city to rezone eight lots on 86th Street from low-rise to medium-rise to accommodate plans for a 50-unit building, with commercial space fronting onto the busy arterial roadway.
The boarded-up property on 86th Street, which was previously connected to an infamous Edmonton landlord, is now part of a proposed site for a mid-rise apartment building. (Jordan Omstead/CBC)
“She’s trying to bring vibrancy back to the community. She’s trying to rebuild something that has a very negative outlook,” said Kaylyn Stark, a planner with Invistec Consulting, which is working with Cai on the rezoning application.
In an interview with CBC News, Stark helped translate for Cai, who speaks limited English.
Properties once connected to infamous Edmonton landlord
Cai said about she purchased some of the lots on the proposed site from Abdullah Shah, also known as Carmen Prevez, about a year ago.
Shah, an infamous Edmonton landlord, has a lengthy criminal record from cocaine trafficking to organizing a $30 million fraud scheme. He is currently in custody on charges of conspiracy and aggravated assault for allegedly paying people to attack a man.
Local residents have also accused Shah of being an absentee landlord and ignoring complaints against tenants in his buildings.
AHS ordered Shah to vacate one of the buildings in 2015 after an inspection found sewer backup in the basement, water damage and a shower nozzle held together with tape.
Mustafa Aral said his house backs onto the site of a proposed 50-unit apartment building. (Jordan Omstead/CBC)
Cai said she was aware of the previous concerns with the properties. She said she did not know Shah or have any connections to him.
Mustafa Aral, whose house backs onto the proposed site, said he’s shared security footage taken from around his home to police in relation to armed robbery and drug trafficking incidents.
“I’m actually very excited that something new is happening in my neighbourhood, and finally we’re done with those problem houses,” he said.
The property owner displayed renderings of the proposed apartment building at a public consultation meeting on Thursday at the Parkdale-Cromdale Community League. (Jordan Omstead/CBC)
AHS ordered Cai, the new owner, to make repairs on the only property on the site with a tenant last month after an AHS inspection found the stove was broken, heater vents were missing from the attic and the kitchen cupboards had fallen into disrepair.
Aral said Cai had managed the property “terribly” and was concerned similar issues might carry over into a prospective apartment building.
Cai said she was working with the tenant to find new housing as the rezoning application moves ahead. She said tenants in the three other properties on the proposed site had been evicted.
‘Parkdale is in transition’
Jim Gendron, the chair of the neighbourhood development committee with the Cromdale-Parkdale community league, said the housing stock in the area is nearing the end of its life. He said the idea of an apartment building within walking distance of an LRT station was an excellent idea for the community.
“Parkdale is in transition, Cromdale is in transition. And so far, what we’re starting to see with this kind development is positive opportunities that transition,” he said.
Jim Gendron, chair of the community league’s neighbourhood development committee, said the proposed apartment buildings were an excellent idea. (Jordan Omstead/CBC)
The developer said the price and target demographic of the proposed apartment building hasn’t been decided, but it would be market housing.
“There’s no way to bring people into the community with vacant lots and boarded up houses. We’re creating the opportunity for new people to come to the community and build on a mature neighbourhood,” said Stark, the planner with the consulting company.
The rezoning application still needs to go before council. Cai said she is hoping the application will get approved by June and construction can start in the fall, or next spring by the latest.