LP_468x60
on-the-record-468x60-white

A bruise can be seen on the back of U.S. President Donald Trump's left hand at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.

U.S. President Donald Trump says a large bruise on his left hand was caused by bumping it on furniture while in Davos, Switzerland for the World Economic Forum.

“I clipped it on the table,” he

told CNN

Thursday on Air Force One.

Trump takes aspirin, which makes him prone to bruising.

He was

diagnosed with chronic venous insufficiency

in July 2025. His physician, Navy Capt. Sean Barbabella, said he takes 325 milligrams of aspirin a day to treat the condition.

Aspirin thins the blood and prevents clots, according to the

Mayo Clinic

. Blood clots inside an artery can slow or stop blood flow to the heart, which can can cause a heart attack.

“I would say, take aspirin if you like your heart, but don’t take aspirin if you don’t want to have a little bruising,” Trump said on Air Force One. “I take the big aspirin, and when you take the big aspirin, they tell you, you bruise. The doctor said, ‘You don’t have to take that, sir, you’re very healthy.’ I said, ‘I’m not taking any chances.’”

How does taking aspirin cause bruising?

Harvard Health

confirms that bruises can occur while taking aspirin due to a minor blow or injury. “Even slight bumps that you don’t even notice can cause bruises … (Aspirin) can make you bleed a little more easily, including the below-the-skin bleeding seen in bruises.”

Small cuts may take a bit longer than usual to stop bleeding, says Harvard Health. And sometimes people find their gums bleed more easily when they floss or brush after starting low-dose aspirin.

Daily aspirin therapy is prescribed for lowering the risk of heart attack and stroke, according to the

Mayo Clinic

. It may be recommended for primary prevention of heart attack or stroke. It can also act as secondary prevention for people who have had a heart attack or stroke or have heart disease.

What is Trump’s history of bruising?

Trump has had bruising on his right hand for some time, according to CNN. It predated his return to the White House but drew more attention after he began covering it with heavy makeup and bandages as well as shielding it from cameras with his other hand.

Then left-hand bruising was spotted late last year, says CNN, raising questions about his health.

The president told the Wall Street Journal

in a recent interview

that he takes a higher dose of daily aspirin than his doctors recommend, arguing “aspirin is good for thinning out the blood.”

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt, also said on Thursday that the bruising was caused by Trump bumping a table. She has noted his

frequent hand-shaking

and connected it with daily aspirin use and easier bruising.

Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here.


A winter storm on Brockville's Blockhouse Island in Ontario on Jan. 28, 2025. Resident Randy Sloan walked his dog nearby.

Much of the country is facing hazardous or severe cold weather warnings going into the weekend, as a “destructive” winter storm from the United States is expected to hit Canada.

Here’s what to know should you have air travel planned in the coming days.

What are Canadian airlines telling travellers?

Flair Airlines told National Post its forecasters are “actively monitoring a forecasted storm on the East Coast of the U.S. and into the GTA.”

“Flair recommends checking your flight status online regularly and arriving at the airport early,” the airline said.

“Passengers whose flights may be impacted should stay home and check their emails for communications about rebooking and refund options. We will keep all passengers informed about the status of their flights and any available options.”

Porter Airlines told National Post that “winter weather may disrupt travel this weekend across the network.”

“Complimentary moves are available on many routes beginning Saturday evening until Monday; passengers are encouraged to check their flight status and manage their booking on flyporter.com,” it said.

 Road closures and prolonged utility outages are possible as Environment Canada is advising a major winter storm is expected to arrive in the region Sunday evening and continue into Monday night.

Air Canada told National Post it was currently monitoring the situation. “As we always do, we advise customers to check before going to the airport to be sure their flight is operating on schedule,” it said.

“In anticipation there will be some impact, we are reviewing our schedule in anticipation we may be forced to cancel flights and to ensure we have aircraft and crews positioned for a faster recovery.”

The airline said there is a goodwill policy in place so travellers can change their travel plans with no change fee. “This serves the double purpose of enabling those who no longer wish to travel to make changes and it also frees up space on aircraft in the event we need to rebook customers or consolidate flights due to airport weather constraints,” the statement said.

The airline said it would be providing updates “directly to any affected customers as the storm progresses, which is why it is important customers provide us contact information.”

On its website, it says that “extreme cold is causing delays” at Toronto’s Pearson and Montreal’s Trudeau airports.

Travellers flying from those locations can

change their flight at no cost

, the airline says.

This applies to travellers who purchased tickets no later than Jan. 21. (For those going through Pearson, it applies to passengers who booked flights for travel between Jan. 23 and Jan. 26. For those going through Trudeau, it applies to passengers who booked flights for travel between Jan. 24 and Jan. 25).

On Friday, 12 per cent of all Air Canada flights were cancelled and there were nearly 150 flight cancellations at Pearson, according to U.K.-based

air passenger rights firm SkyRefund

. The firm cited the American winter storm as the likely culprit.

“Passengers should be prepared for many difficulties traveling, with the potential of being stuck at an airport for multiple days if the disruption persists. Try to familiarize yourself with your airline’s disruption policies and have a way to keep up to date with any updates they provide,” said SkyRefund CEO Ivaylo Danailov.

WestJet told National Post it recommends that “guests travelling across regions in Canada with cold-weather warnings check the status of their flight before heading to the airport.”

“We also recommend that folks plan to arrive at the airport earlier than usual,” the statement said.

Air Transat did not immediately respond to National Post’s request.

Canada’s busiest airport, Toronto’s Pearson, posted on X Friday morning saying temperatures felt like -22 degrees with the windchill. It said deicing operations for departing aircrafts were underway.

The airport is expecting more than 120,000 people to travel through its terminals, with approximately 60 per cent travelling through Terminal 1.

“In these extreme cold conditions, outdoor crews must take more frequent warming breaks to limit exposure. While this can slow some airfield operations, it is essential to protect the health and safety of everyone working outside,” the airport said on X.

What are air passenger rights should weather disrupt travel?

Travellers who have planned a trip should monitor flights closely. “If a flight is cancelled for genuine weather reasons, the passenger is entitled to a choice between a refund in the original form of payment and alternate transportation,” says president of advocacy group Air Passenger Rights Gábor Lukács.

Large carriers like Air Canada, WestJet, Flair and Porter must rebook passengers on the next available flight of their own or partner airlines departing within 48 hours of the original departure time, if a flight is cancelled due to weather, Lukács said.

 Kiosks at Terminal 3 at Toronto Pearson International Airport.

“If they are unable to do so, they must buy the passenger a seat on the next available flight of ANY carrier, including competitors,” he said. “The airline cannot charge the passenger for putting them in a higher class of service (e.g., business class) if those are the only available seats.”

If the airline does not, “the passenger can buy a ticket on a competitor airline, and then the original airline is liable for the passenger’s expenses caused by the failure to comply with the obligation,” he added.

Lukács advised travellers to be cautious in “distinguishing flight cancellations that are genuinely due to weather as opposed to those that the airline blames on the weather but could have been avoided with due diligence by the airline.”

Is the coming winter storm a big deal?

According to Environment Canada, Manitoba and Saskatchewan will have windchills between -40 and -50 degrees. Meanwhile, Labrador City and Wabush, NL are expecting the same. Most of northern Ontario will get windchills of up to -48 degrees. These areas have received orange warnings, meaning “severe weather is likely to cause significant damage, disruption, or health impacts.” Orange alerts are uncommon, Environment Canada says online.

 Ottawa, along with much of southern Ontario and parts of Quebec, was facing another wallop of a winter storm Sunday, bringing more snow and high winds.

Other regions in Canada — parts of Alberta, southern Ontario, Prince Edward Island, New Brunswick and Quebec — are under more common yellow alerts, meaning “hazardous weather may cause damage, disruption, or health impacts.”

Complicating matters, especially for travellers, is what the

Weather Network is describing as a “destructive ice storm”

from the U.S. with “a significant blanket of snowfall.” That storm is “forecast to intensify as it tracks south of Atlantic Canada late Sunday night,”

the Weather Network said

. It could also bring

“significant impacts”

to parts of Ontario and Quebec through Monday.

Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here.


Anita Anand, Minister of Foreign Affairs, looks on her phone before a press conference in Quebec City on Thursday January 22, 2026.

QUEBEC CITY — Foreign Affairs Minister Anita Anand said on Friday that Canada will continue to stay true to its “values” in helping the people of Gaza.

Anand’s comments come amid U.S. President Donald Trump’s latest bombshell that he was

withdrawing Prime Minister Mark Carney’s invitation

to join his “Board of Peace.”

 Trump’s message on Truth Social was brief and to the point.

“Our values have been clear,” she said. “Hamas should have no role in the future governance of Palestine. Hamas must demilitarize and disarm. There must be a ceasefire, and Israelis and Palestinians must be able to live in peace and security side by side.”

Anand said that the Canadian government have already put on the table approximately $400 million in humanitarian aid and will continue to do so regardless of the situation.

“That has been a priority of mine and ours in this government, and we will continue with that process, without question,” she said.

Anand said she is “constantly” in touch with her G7 counterparts on the situation in Gaza.

 Prime Minister Mark Carney, right, and Bonhomme Carnaval hug at the beginning of a Cabinet planning forum in front of the Governor General summer residence at the Citadelle in Quebec City, Thursday, Jan. 22, 2026.

Carney’s ministers are in meetings in chilly Quebec City for their “cabinet planning forum” ahead of the new session starting Monday.

On Thursday evening, they were enjoying fine dining at the Château Frontenac when news of Trump rescinding his invitation to Carney to the “Board of Peace” popped on their phones.

“Dear Prime Minister Carney: Please let this Letter serve to represent that the Board of Peace is withdrawing its invitation to you regarding Canada’s joining, what will be, the most prestigious Board of Leaders ever assembled, at any time,” he wrote on social media.

The latest turn of events seemingly marks an escalation of the tensions between Canada and the U.S. after Carney offered a widely praised speech at the World Economic Forum.

On Tuesday, Carney declared to the audience that the old “rules-based international order” was dead and exhorted countries to speak out against bullies and “hegemons.” He, however, did not single out Trump or any other world leaders by name.

 U.S. President Donald Trump gestures during the World Economic Forum (WEF) annual meeting in Davos on Jan. 21, 2026.

The later after, Trump told the Davos crowd that Canada — and its prime minister — should be “grateful” to its southern neighbour.

“They should be grateful to us, Canada — but they’re not. Canada lives because of the United States. Remember that, Mark, the next time you make your statements.”

On Thursday, Carney offered a succinct rebuttal in an address in Quebec City.

“Canada and the United States have built a remarkable partnership in the economy, in security and in enriched cultural exchanges,” he said.

“Canada doesn’t live because of the United States. Canada thrives because we are Canadian.”

Carney had accepted a role on

Trump’s newly formed “Board of Peace”

last week, according to a senior government official, but grew more cautious as the days went by after it was revealed that the U.S. President would ask for a membership fee of $1 billion US.

 U.S. President Donald Trump, far right, pats Armenia’s Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan on the knee as Agentine President Javier Milei, left, looks prior to Board of Peace signing event in Davos, Switzerland on Thursday.

“We think there (are) aspects of the governance and the decision-making process that could be improved,” Carney said in Davos.

Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our politics newsletter, First Reading, here.


Piper James, a 19-year-old from Campbell River. was found dead on an Australian beach on Jan. 19, 2026.

The family of a Canadian backpacker Piper James received preliminary results investigating her death after her body was found on an Australia beach earlier this week.

“The autopsy has found physical evidence consistent with drowning and injuries consistent with dingo bites. Pre-mortem dingo bite marks are not likely to have caused immediate death. There are extensive post-mortem dingo bite marks,” a Queensland coroners court spokesperson said on Friday,

The Guardian

reported.

Police were called to the beach on K’gari, formerly known as Fraser Island, on Monday. The island is located off of the Queensland coast. The 19-year-old had gone for a swim at 5 a.m. A few hours later, James’ body surrounded by a pack of dingoes was discovered by two passersby. A postmortem into how she died started on Wednesday.

 Piper James, the 19-year-old Canadian found dead in Australian, is seen in this image published widely across local Australian media. Piper was found on K’gari (formerly Fraser Island), an island in Queensland in north-eastern Australia.

“(It) was obviously a very traumatic and horrific scene for them (authorities) to uncover,” police Insp. Paul Algie said, per

news.com.au

.

Authorities in Australia said Piper was working at a backpacker hostel and had been living and working on the island with a friend for six weeks.

A day after her death was announced, Piper’s dad Todd James posted a tribute on Facebook.

“Our hearts are shattered as we share the tragic loss of our beautiful daughter, Piper,” he wrote. “We will always remember her infectious laugh and her kind spirit. I admired her strength and determination to go after her dreams.”

The father said Piper “grew into her beautiful self” and that he said he enjoyed hearing about the “bonds and friendships she was developing.”

“She loved and was proud of her work at BC Wildfire Services,” he said. “Piper would work hard so she could play hard. So many are going to miss you, my precious little baby girl. Maybe gone, but how can we ever forget you?”

 Piper James has been identified as a Canadian woman who was found dead, surrounded by dingoes, on an island in Australia on Jan. 19, 2025.

Piper’s close friend Brianna Falk told Canadian Press on Tuesday that she and Piper “had so many plans and she was so young.” The two meet three years ago, in a high school English class they attended in Campbell River, B.C. “You never think that it is going to be somebody that you know, let alone one of your closest friends.”

She described Piper as someone who loved nature and “was always down to talk.”

Falk told the outlet that James’ plan to travel to Australia was “spur of the moment” and was hatched around six months ago. James, who went to Australia with another friend, “mentioned that they didn’t really have a plan, and it was very nice and free-spirited,” said Falk.

“They were having a blast,” she added.

A spokesperson for Global Affairs Canada on Monday extended condolences to the family and loved ones.

“Canadian officials are providing consular assistance to the family. Due to privacy considerations, no further information can be disclosed,” the spokesperson told National Post in an email.

Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here.


Marion Buller helmed the National Inquiry on Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls.

Indigenous women and girls are killed at rates six times higher than non-Indigenous women — yet the perpetrators are frequently convicted of lesser offences than those guilty in the deaths of non-Indigenous victims.

In virtually all cases involving Indigenous women, the victim and accused knew each other.

The Investigative Journalism Bureau reviewed 1,329 cases in which women and girls were killed or died under suspicious circumstances in Canada between 2019 and 2025. Just over 25 per cent — or  340 victims — were Indigenous. Of those cases, 165 have been resolved in court. 
 

Seventy-six of the Indigenous cases that were resolved in court — or 46 per cent — ended with a finding of manslaughter, which criminal lawyers say is characterized by a lack of intent to kill. Manslaughter was the singlemost common sentencing outcome in the homicides of Indigenous females.
 

In contrast, of the 384 concluded cases involving non-Indigenous victims, only 24 per cent ended with a manslaughter outcome. The most common finding was second-degree murder, the outcome in 137 — or 36 per cent — of these cases.
 

Second-degree murder carries a minimum sentence of 10 years and a maximum of life in prison, while manslaughter carries no minimum sentence unless a firearm is involved.
 
 

The numbers 

appear

 to show differences in how Indigenous and non-Indigenous cases are dealt with, said Michael Spratt, an Ottawa criminal defence lawyer for 20 years.
 

“When you look systemically … [Indigenous women’s] lives and their health and their safety are not valued as highly,”
 he says.
 

“It is something that should cause further inquiry.”
 

The IJB analysis uncovered several anomalies in how the justice system deals with those who kill Indigenous women. 
 
 

For instance, the most serious charge in Canada’s justice system is first-degree murder, carrying a mandatory sentence of life in prison. Only 25 per cent of those accused in the deaths of Indigenous women and girls faced that charge. In cases with non-Indigenous female victims, first-degree murder charges were laid 37 per cent of the time. 
 
 

When an Indigenous woman is killed, 64 per cent of cases end with a plea bargain, compared to 57 per cent in cases with a non-Indigenous victim. (The average sentence for the death of Indigenous and non-Indigenous women remains the same: just over 10 years.)
 

Legal experts say the reasons behind the numerical discrepancies are complex. 
 

Indigenous people are over-represented in the Canadian justice system compared to their share of the population, as both victims and accused, according to StatCan.

Lawyer Marion Buller, a former judge, chief commissioner of the 2016 Murdered and Missing Indigenous Women and Girls Inquiry and an elder from the Mistawasis Nehiyawak First Nation, says the IJB’s findings reflect “important systemic problems” that impact the outcomes of cases involving female Indigenous victims.
 

“If police don’t see 

the

 life as being as important … how does that affect how they collect the evidence that goes before the prosecutor? Or a prosecutor says, ‘I’ll take a guilty plea to manslaughter so we don’t have to clog up the courts with three months’ or two months’ worth of trial time,’” said Buller.
 
 

“We Indigenous women, for the most part, live in the margins — in the shadows. Our lives just simply aren’t as valuable as other people’s lives.”
 

The IJB’s analysis also showed 16 per cent of killings or suspicious deaths of Indigenous women in the last seven years are unsolved, a rate four percentage points higher than for non-Indigenous cases. 
 

Ann Maje Raider, executive director of the Liard Aboriginal Women’s Society in the Yukon, says a perception of greater leniency in the justice system around the deaths of Indigenous women is making the problem worse.
 

“(Perpetrators) know they’re not going to get anything,” Raider says. “And the reason is that the justice institution has failed us.”
 

***  

Almost all —

97 per cent

— of female Indigenous victims in the IJB’s database whose outcomes were known were killed by someone they knew. The figure is also high — 90 per cent — for non-Indigenous victims.
 

Of the accused in Indigenous cases whose previous history was available to reporters, almost all — 94 per cent — had red flags in their past, such as arrests and convictions, contact with child services or significant mental health issues. 
 

In remote areas, including reserves, restraining orders are often ineffective in keeping perpetrators away from victims
,
 says Buller. Because of this, Indigenous women and girls face unique challenges to protect themselves from fatal violence. For many, access to resources and shelters is limited or non-existent, while stigma from speaking up is profound. 
 
 

Arrests for violent crimes become a “revolving door,” said Isabel Daniels, an Indigenous woman and co-founder of Velma’s House for survivors of exploitation and human trafficking in Winnipeg. Daniels believes Canada needs a network of 24/7 safe houses and shelters to keep Indigenous females safe, especially in remote communities.
 

“Safety is just a word in a dictionary for Indigenous women,” said Daniels.
 

 Grand Chief Stewart Phillip speaks during a news conference at Justice for Girls in Vancouver on May 5, 2025.

Grand Chief Stewart Phillip of the Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs says the justice and police systems need improvements that tackle the issues of abusers not being charged or convicted, or sometimes receiving “inconsequential” sentences. 
 

“Until that changes, we’re going to see a continuation and an escalation in intimate partner physical assaults and murder,” said Phillip.
 

— With files from Jenna Olsen, Dori Seeman and Lindsay Carte.
 
 

The Investigative Journalism Bureau 
(IJB) at the University of Toronto’s Dalla Lana School of Public Health is a collaborative investigative newsroom supported by Postmedia that partners with academics, researchers and journalists while training the next generation of investigative reporters.
 

 

Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our newsletters here.


Rejean Landry with his daughter Emali and son Sebastien during their trip to Portugal in July 2022. (Photo credit: Rejean Landry)

A retired Ottawa business consultant and father has taken on Air Canada and won — twice.

Rejean Landry

‘s plans for a summer 2022 trip to Portugal for himself and adult children were disrupted by Air Canada delays and ticket cancellations. Landry eventually took his complaints about the airline’s handling of trip to small claims court late last year. Then when Air Canada appealed, he fought the airline in the Ontario Superior Court.

But there won’t be a third time. Air Canada has confirmed with National Post that it won’t be appealing again.

Peter Fitzpatrick, manager of corporate communications for Air Canada says the airline appealed the small claims court decision because it disagreed with how the law was interpreted. Canada’s Air Passenger Protection Regulations (APPR) are “fairly new … and there are few cases interpreting them,” Fitzpatrick wrote in a recent email to National Post, adding, “it is important that they be interpreted correctly. Our concern was and remains that they were not.”

Toronto litigators represented Air Canada at both levels of court, whereas Landry represented himself in small claims court and didn’t hire a lawyer until Air Canada filed its appeal.

The judges in both levels of court ruled against Air Canada. The airline will have to pay almost $15,000 in compensation, the

Ontario Superior Court said

 in a decision released on Jan. 12.

 Ottawa man, Rejean Landry with his son Sebastien and daughter Emali decided to enjoy a forced layover in Toronto when their flight to Portugal was delayed. (Photo credit: Rejean Landry)

Landry booked the trip for himself and two adult children from Montreal to Portugal via Toronto, travelling on July 2, 2022. He also bought return tickets for his two children from Lisbon to Toronto on July 16, 2022, and a return ticket for himself, leaving Lisbon for Montreal on Aug. 2, 2022.

His son Sebastien (now 24) and daughter Emali (now 21) had to come back earlier for summer jobs. Only semi-retired at the time, Landry decided to stay on a little longer.

It was that summer when

airlines were getting back on their feet

, restarting travel after COVID restrictions were lifted, recounts Landry.

The Landrys were forced to navigate that post-COVID travel storm. Their flight from Montreal to Toronto was delayed. And since the flight to Lisbon would have been missed, Landry purchased three new higher-fare, refundable tickets from Toronto to Lisbon.

When they got to Toronto, Landry says he was told by an Air Canada agent they should use the new tickets. She also transferred their luggage so it would be connected to the new tickets. Then she told them to go into the city and enjoy themselves, recounts Landry.

Later, when his kids went to the airport in Lisbon to fly back to Canada, they were told their return flights had been cancelled because they hadn’t used the first portion of their tickets to get to Lisbon. So, he had to buy new tickets for them.

 Rejean Landry at Pearson Airport in front of what he called a “mountain of unclaimed suitcases” during the fraught summer of air travel in 2022. (Photo credit: Rejean Landry)

Landry pursued his complaints with Air Canada after returning from his trip, exchanging
emails with the airline for months. Initially, he simply wanted a refund for the new Toronto to Lisbon tickets worth $6,500. But when he didn’t get a positive response from Air Canada, he decided to take his battle to small claims court.

The small claims court ruled in Landry’s favour, ordering Air Canada to pay compensation for the delay of the flights from Montreal to Toronto, the cost of the replacement tickets from Toronto to Portugal,

compensation for “denial of boarding” (his children’s cancelled flights)

and the cost of his children’s return flights from Lisbon.

His tabulation of the costs that went into the roughly $15K award are as follows: $1,000 each for the initial delay, $6.5K for the new tickets, $1.8 for each of his children and the denial of boarding, plus other connected fees and costs.

Air Canada tried to argue Landry shouldn’t have booked replacement flights, and instead should have waited for the airline to rebook them.

“They said I shouldn’t have accepted what the Air Canada agent said, that I should have found another agent to help.”

Neither the small claims court, nor Superior Court Justice Ian Carter found any merit in Air Canada’s argument. Sinclair ruled that there was no evidence Air Canada informed Landry he had to wait to be rebooked.

“In fact, there is nothing … in the Montreal Convention that states a passenger must wait to accept a new flight from the airline,” wrote Sinclair in his decision. (The Montreal Convention is a treaty that governs international travel and airline liability and covers concerns such as passenger injury/death, baggage issues, and delays.)

Justice Carter noted that Air Canada has a rebooking tool that will attempt to automatically re-book a passenger on a later flight if there are delays, and if the tool is successful the passenger will receive notification of a revised itinerary. “However, there was no evidence that the rebooking tool had been activated or that Air Canada made any other attempt to rebook (Landry)” he wrote.

Carter was also abrupt in assessing Air Canada’s handling of the entire matter: “As noted by the (small claims court judge), this entire claim could have been avoided if Air Canada, in its multitude of emails to its waiting passengers in Montreal, had clearly stated words to the effect that he should not make any attempts to rebook and that Air Canada would do it automatically.”

 Rejean Landry enjoying his 2022 vacation in Portugal. (Photo credit: Rejean Landry)

In preparing for his case against Air Canada in small claims court, Landry reached out to

Gábor Lukács

, founder and coordinator of

Air Passenger Rights

, an

 independent nonprofit organization

that advocates for the rights of the travelling public.

“There are three important principles coming out from this decision,” Lukács told National Post in an email.

First, he said, if Air Canada had provided what known as “alternate transportation” (when an airline rebooks on one of it’s own planes or one of its partner airlines within nine hours, or another carrier withing 48 hours), then the compensation for the initial delay would have been $400 each for Landry and his children. Since that didn’t happen, the compensation was set at $1,000 each.

“I

f the airline fails to offer alternate
transportation at all, or offers one that does not meet the APPR’s (Canadian air passenger protection rights)
requirements, then it is in breach of contract. The passenger can and
should buy a flight on another airline (as Landry did), and the airline’s liability is not
for a refund of the passenger’s airfare, but instead for the cost of the
replacement flight , which is often far more than the original airfare
the passenger paid.”

Second, notes

Lukács, as Justice Carter stated in his decision,
there is nothing in the
Montreal Convention that states that a passenger must wait to accept a
new
flight from the airline. “This is also a very important point. The onus
is
on the airline to offer alternate transportation, but if they fail to do
so, the passenger does not have to sit around like a lame duck.”

Finally, he praised Sinclair’s decision as “

an indication that the judiciary sees
through what airlines are doing to passengers, and judicial patience and
goodwill are running thin.
Overall, it is a fair and impartial decision that holds the airline to
the
intent and purpose of the law, and does not cut the airline any slack.”

Indeed, Sinclair dismissed Air Canada’s appeal.

It’s been almost four years since Landry’s case of delayed fight began, but

despite the time the case has taken

, he urges other travellers battling airline complaints to take their fights to court.

Despite the time the case has taken, is Landry pleased with the outcome? “Absolutely,” he says, “but I haven’t received the money yet.”

Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here.


In this photo obtained by The Associated Press, Iranians attend an anti-government protest in Tehran, Iran, Friday, Jan. 9, 2026.

Canadians are divided over whether government support should be offered to protesters in Iran, according to a new poll.

Just 26 per cent of Canadians said the federal government should publicly declare support for the protesters, while 30 per cent said it should not, according to a national poll conducted by Leger for the Association for Canadian Studies. Forty per cent of respondents said they didn’t know and four per cent did not respond.

The numbers were similar when Canadians were asked if Canada should pressure allies to support Iranian protesters. The poll found that 22 per cent said “yes,” 33 per cent said “no,” 41 per cent said they “don’t know” and five per cent preferred not to respond.

“I was surprised at the extent to which there seemed to be a fair bit of reticence on the part of Canadians to extend support for the protesters,” Jack Jedwab told National Post. Jedwab is the president and CEO of the Association for Canadian Studies and the Metropolis Institute.

“I thought (support) would be higher. My takeaway from it is when you look at the people who say, ‘I’m following it,’ or, ‘I have a good knowledge of the issues,’ they’re far more inclined, in the reasonably strong majority, to say that support should be provided for the protesters.”

 Protesters march in downtown Tehran, Iran, Monday, Dec. 29, 2025.

The uprising in the Middle Eastern country began at the end of December after its economy collapsed. Initially, shopkeepers in the nation’s capital of Tehran took to the streets, The New York Times

reported

. But soon, university students and other Iranians joined in and the protests have continued into the new year.

They eventually turned deadly, with some sources

estimating the number of fatalities at 12,000

as of last week. On Wednesday, the Iranian government said the number was much lower. In a state television broadcast, the Interior Ministry and the Foundation of Martyrs and Veterans Affairs said 3,117 had been killed, The Associated Press reported. A Canadian citizen was among those killed, Foreign Minister Anita Anand

said

last week.

The protests have sparked outrage on a global scale, including in Canada, as Iranian leader Ali Khamenei continues to try to squash the rebellion and enforce a communication blackout.

 Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei during a meeting in Tehran on Jan. 17, 2026.

Canadians have gathered in the thousands for demonstrations in support of the Iranian people. One such event took place in

Montreal on Jan. 10

and another in downtown Toronto on Wednesday evening.

However, according to the new poll, only a quarter of Canadians say they are closely following the protests and only about three in 10 say they have good knowledge of the underlying issues.

“That suggests that there’s some importance here in making people more aware of what’s happening there,” said Jedwab.

“We’re not getting news out of Iran, and that’s part of the strategy, I presume, to try to prevent news from getting out, and that will make it more challenging for people to have a greater understanding of what’s going on there and how it’s evolving.”

 Thousands marched in downtown Montreal on Saturday for a free Iran.

But as Jedwab noted, awareness about the issue significantly boosts support.

Among those who are following the events, nearly half support pressuring allies and 57 per cent support a public declaration of support by the Canadian government. It’s similar for Canadians who have greater knowledge about the situation in Iran. The poll found that45 per cent support Canada pressuring allies and 52 per cent support a public declaration of support for the protesters.

“I suspect what we’ll probably see is a lot of the Iranian population in Canada and the United States try to make more information available,” said Jedwab. “My sense is that the majority of Iranians in Canada are probably quite concerned with what’s going on there.”

The online survey by Leger for the Association for Canadian Studies was conducted from Jan. 16 to Jan. 18 among 1,527 respondents in Canada. A margin of error cannot be associated with a non-probability sample in a panel survey. A probability sample of 1,527 respondents would have a margin of error of plus or minus 2.5 per cent, 19 times out of 20.

Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here.


U.S. President Donald Trump gestures during the World Economic Forum (WEF) annual meeting in Davos on Jan. 21, 2026.

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Since early January 2026 — fresh off his Venezuela operation — U.S. President Donald Trump escalated demands for American ownership of Greenland, threatening a U.S. invasion of the Danish territory and 10 per cent tariffs on NATO allies unless they backed him.

Nordic and other European troops were moved to Greenland as a result, and many had begun to imagine thousands of U.S. soldiers invading the island that Trump claims is key to world security. But then, at Davos on Wednesday, Trump made a U-turn

“We probably won’t get anything unless I decide to use excessive strength and force, where we would be, frankly, unstoppable, but I won’t do that,” Trump told those gathered at the World Economic Forum in Switzerland. 

“I don’t want to use force. I won’t use force.”

European leaders breathed a sigh of relief, stock markets rallied, and Denmark welcomed the de-escalation. Hours later, after meeting with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte at Davos, Trump then announced a “framework for a future deal” on Greenland that would involve the U.S. and NATO enhancing Arctic security — and notably not affecting Denmark’s sovereignty.

But a framework for allied cooperation on Arctic security has been in place for decades, making this simply an elegant way of backing down on untenable bluffs. Analysts say Trump had no legal authority to impose the tariffs he threatened, and invading would have weakened NATO and Arctic defence, rather than strengthening it.

Tariff tundra

Last weekend, Trump threatened a 10 per cent tariff on products from Denmark, the United Kingdom, Norway, Sweden, France, Germany, Finland, and the Netherlands, taking effect on Feb. 1. If the allies didn’t comply with his demand to purchase Greenland by June 1, he said the duties would rise to 25 per cent.

When asked which legislation the president could use to impose such levies, Inu Manak, senior fellow for international trade at the Council on Foreign Relations, made it clear she thought it was an empty threat. 

“I can’t think of any trade statute that would allow that to happen,” she explained. 

Instead, said Manak, Trump was likely relying on the flexibility of the tariffs he’s imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act — the fentanyl and reciprocal tariffs he’s imposed over the past year — to punish the Europeans.

Trouble is, that authority is expected to be snatched away by the U.S. Supreme Court, which fast-tracked the case involving IEEPA’s use to impose tariffs and will soon rule on their legality. 


Trump was likely putting his hopes on continuing to use IEEPA, Manak said, in the hopes that “it gives so much flexibility to the president to act on national security grounds that he can use it to raise tariffs on anything.”

Trade watchers are eagerly awaiting the court’s ruling, and most believe the tariffs will be deemed illegal, but many still wonder how broad the ruling will be. 

“Are they going to say IEEPA doesn’t allow
these
tariffs?” she asks. “Or are they going to say that IEEPA doesn’t allow
any
tariffs?”

In other words, the justices may leave room for IEEPA to be invoked for other types of tariffs. 

Using something like Section 232, from the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, said Manak, wouldn’t work, as that statute only applies where importation poses a national security threat and is used for targeting specific products.

So, unless the Supreme Court rubberstamps Trump’s use of IEEPA for tariffs — which experts say is highly unlikely — the president’s tariff threats over Greenland would’ve gone nowhere anyway.

Even if the Supreme Court rules in Trump’s favour or issues a narrow ruling, leaving some wiggle room, the president’s continued use of tariffs as coercive weapons will depend, said Manak, on the extent of their economic costs on the United States. While many companies frontloaded stock early last year as a way of buffering the impact of tariffs, those stocks are running low, and prices are rising.

“Trump already created some space to lower tariffs last year, particularly on food products and grocery items,” she said, noting “he is aware that there is an economic impact that’s negative.” 

The other possible mitigating factor is Congress, as House Republican leaders’ ban on tariff-repeal votes expires at the end of the month, paving the way for Democrats and Republican moderates to force a vote ahead of the midterms.

Last summer, Manak noted, many Republicans got a lot of flak in town halls for supporting Trump’s tariffs, and those leaders likely want a chance to go on the record to oppose them. And if the Democrats can flip the House, regaining its leadership, they would also be in a stronger position to oppose the duties. 

But Trump’s tariffs weren’t the only untenable bluff in his Greenland gambit; his Arctic security rationale drew sharp criticism from defence analysts.

Arctic security reality

Trump argued that owning Greenland was key to Arctic security, owing to threats posed by both China and Russia, but security analysts disagreed. 

“This notion that [the Arctic is] surrounded by Russian and Chinese ships is a preposterous figment of his imagination,” said Whitney Lackenbauer, research chair of the study of the Canadian North at Trent University. 

Such rhetoric, he said, makes it look like Russia is going to invade the Canadian Arctic, he said. “They’ve got more than enough oil and gas in their own Arctic.”

The main military threat, he explained, is
through
the Arctic, not an invasion of it.

Connor McPartland, assistant director of the Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security at the Atlantic Council, explained that Russia poses the biggest near-term challenge with the potential to launch ballistic or hypersonic missiles over the North Pole — and toward the United States or Canada. He also noted the presence of Russia’s strategic submarines near the Kola Peninsula.

China’s activity in the region, meanwhile, is growing with dual-use research expeditions, joint Russian patrols, and energy partnerships, but any Chinese threat is a longer-term concern, he said.

The problem for Canada, Lackenbauer and McPartland acknowledged, is that the Arctic has been strategically neglected by the West for decades. 

“We’re in a bit of a precarious situation where we do have to make investments in Arctic defence,” said Lackenbauer, “both for national and collective North American reasons.”

“But we have to be really careful that we’re not legitimizing American narratives that are not reflective of the real security environment that we face.”

Canada identified what was needed for Arctic security years ago – in its 2017 “Strong, Secured, Engaged” policy — from NORAD (sensor and infrastructure) modernization and new subs to over‑the‑horizon radar, satellite upgrades, and F-35s. 

A contract is in place with Australia for the radar, but as for the rest, said Rob Huebert, politics professor at the University of Calgary and a senior fellow at the Macdonald-Laurier Institute, “we’ve only started to get really serious about it after 2022 [with Russia’s invasion of Ukraine], and here we are in 2026,” he said, pointing to little progress.

Canada is awaiting a government decision on whether to indeed procure the F-35s, as initially planned, or the Swedish Gripen. The military has strongly recommended sticking with the F-35, the U.S. model, but experts say any decision would mark progress.

As a result of making little progress on the 2017 plans, “we’ve left ourselves vulnerable to a very irrational actor,” Huebert said, referring to Trump.

But an invasion of Greenland wouldn’t improve Arctic security, it would have the opposite effect, he added.

Invading a NATO country would either blow up or devastatingly weaken the NATO alliance, especially as Russia develops stealthier systems that could evade detection.

It would also send a signal to both Chinese President Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin that “as long as we leave his interests alone in the Western hemisphere, we can take actions against Taiwan, Poland, the Balkans.”

“What happens if the Americans truly only meant that the spheres of influence pertain to them, and they turn around and suddenly see China attacking Taiwan and say, ‘Oh, you can’t do that.’?” he said.

“That’s how wars actually do start by accident.”

Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our newsletters here.


Leader of the Conservative Party Pierre Poilievre, left, speaks with Prime Minister Mark Carney before Question Period, on Parliament Hill in Ottawa, Monday, Sept. 15, 2025.

OTTAWA — Canada’s two main political party leaders won’t boast about the connection, but they have at least one important thing in common these days: As a new session of Parliament opens Monday, they’re both sitting on hot seats.

Facing upcoming periods that may well determine their political fates, Prime Minister Mark Carney and Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre are both approaching hurdles they need to get over in the coming weeks and months to ensure their grips on power.

The Liberals are still polling at about the same level as they were during last year’s election, with Carney’s personal approval numbers staying strong, and the prime minister is coming off an international trip that ended with a well-received speech in Davos that drove international headlines. But the prime minister’s situation is more complicated, and sneakily more precarious, than it might at first appear.

As he tries to reshape the Canadian economy amid slowing growth and the reign of an unpredictable and bellicose U.S. president, Carney faces a challenging agenda, arguably one of the busiest in recent generations.

First, he needs to publicly defend Canada’s interests while staying out of Trump’s doghouse. The North American free trade deal is up for review later this year and the mercurial president’s moods – not to mention his naughty list – seem to go a long way in shaping U.S. policy. Trump threatened last week to boost tariffs on European allies, for example, who didn’t go along with his wish to take over Greenland.

Second, Carney needs to continue to move quickly.

One of the main challenges, analysts say, is that many of the promised solutions to some of the country’s most pressing issues — Canada-U.S. trade, diversifying exports, low productivity, inter-provincial free trade, housing, and infrastructure — require long-term fixes. Reshaping the economic landscape to attract more investment and to find new markets for Canadian exports, for example, convincing developers, provinces and municipalities to take the steps needed to put up more houses, and building or renovating ports, rail and airports are all long-term issues that will take many years to fix.

News releases, federal-provincial MOUs and trade missions to Asia may be necessary steps, but they don’t put food on the table like signed export contracts and concrete being poured.

Some analysts say 2026 will be the year when Canadians get frustrated if they don’t see tangible results such as, for example, the start of construction of a new or enhanced energy pipeline to the west coast, a dramatic increase in housing starts, or a leak-proof deal on inter-provincial free trade. He scored a potential win last week when he signed a trade deal with China that is expected to lower or eliminate tariffs on some Canadian agricultural exports, while cutting tariffs on 49,000 Chinese-made electric vehicles.

If Carney doesn’t get beyond plans and promises, analysts say, his grip on power could be weakened, which could lead to the opposition parties triggering an election.

“I think Canadians wanted to give him some room to get things done,” said Brian Lee Crowley, managing director of the Macdonald-Laurier Institute. “But they won’t wait forever.”

The political waters could get murkier later in the year. Québec will hold an election in October, which could affect the Bloc Québécois’ willingness to trigger a federal election. A month later, the U.S. mid-term elections could have a profound effect on Canada, and many other things, as the Democrats aim to take back control of Congress and provide Trump with a more formidable opposition.

Tyler Meredith, a senior policy advisor in the Trudeau government, suggested that Carney focus over the coming year primarily on key domestic issues, such as affordability, housing and industrial strategy, and less on geo-political matters that are largely out of Canada’s hands. The domestic agenda is “still where the ball game is,” he said.

But Carney will need to explain very clearly to Canadians how these complicated, long-term domestic issues affect their wallets and lives, Meredith said.

Opinion polls agree that Canadians have so far given the Carney government a pass in that they trust the prime minister and his resum

é

, but that they want to see some clear, tangible wins.

Lori Turnbull, a political science professor at Dalhousie University in Halifax, said Carney likely gets a longer leash from voters because he’s mostly selling credentials and competence.

“I think there’s a sense that he needs some time,” she said. “He’s not really asking you to like him.”

But analysts said there’s one big win that would likely override tepid results on many other files: Canada-U.S. trade.

If Carney were able to land a refurbished or renegotiated trade deal with the United States, and perhaps Mexico, that was widely deemed to be reasonable, it could provide the Canadian economy with a jump start and reinforce voters’ faith in the former central banker. Not landing a trade deal could be equally impactful to the political landscape.

“That’s one issue where something has to give,” said Sanjay Jeram, a political scientist at Simon Fraser University in Vancouver. “He could really use a win or it could be challenging for him to maintain the unwavering support.”

Canadians are unclear what’s going on in North American trade and may be growing impatient, according to a recent Leger poll. They’re also becoming more pessimistic about what they expect from trade relations for this year, with 41 per cent saying they figure things will get worse, compared to 20 per cent who expect things will improve.

“We’re not necessarily seeing action,” said Andrew Enns, executive vice-president of Leger’s Central Canada operations. “And I think Canadians are starting to question the effectiveness of the government’s response.”

In the interim, before that review of North American trade, Carney will try to fill the export void by trying to forge closer relations with economic heavyweights such as China and India, and smaller trading partners such as those in the Mid-east. That’s why Carney travelled last week to Qatar to meet investors and political leaders, following meetings in China.

“We have to do more business,” said Meredith.

As almost always in politics though, a strong economy hides a lot of warts.

Economists don’t expect the Canadian economy to provide the Carney government with that cover in 2026, but many do see the year as pivotal in determining longer-term growth.

Dave McKay, chief executive of Royal Bank of Canada, said earlier this month that Canada’s economy is looking strong for the coming year, in large part because of the federal government’s efforts to accelerate energy projects and housing.

McKay also said that the planned renegotiation later this year of the Canada-U.S.-Mexico free trade agreement will play a major role in Canada’s economic performance, but that he’s confident that any changes to the existing deal won’t dramatically affect continental trade.

“I’ve been more excited about Canada than I have been in the last decade. The tone at the top is really good.”

Dawn Desjardins, chief economist at Deloitte Canada, said her company forecasts modest growth of 1.5 per cent for the Canadian economy in 2026 as exporters face uncertainty at the Canada-U.S. border.

But Desjardins expects that the next 12 months will mark “an inflection point” as governments carry out policies to make investment more attractive.

“From improving infrastructure to eliminating barriers to internal trade and reducing regulatory hurdles, Canada is hitting the reset button,” Desjardins wrote in a new report.

In keeping with the government’s key challenge – and perhaps security blanket – Desjardins adds that Canadians shouldn’t expect governments to complete the structural economic changes over night.

The Carney government, which says it’s moving the Canadian economy “from reliance to resilience” by attracting more investment and doubling non-U.S. exports over the next decade, is hoping that that message is heard in the coming months.

For the Liberal prime minister, not to mention his Conservative rival, the future may rest on it.

As Carney basks in the international headlines from his recent trip abroad, Poilievre is working on convincing Tory voters that he’s still the party’s best bet to lead them in the next election.

With the return of Parliament, both of the main party leaders are being threatened by circumstances that are at least somewhat out of their hands, and the possibility of a federal election later this year that could see the loser tossed aside.

As one veteran Conservative insider put it: both leaders need to “win or go home.”

Crowley said the two leaders share the difficult challenge of needing to meet long-term goals over the short term. “It’s a critical time for both of our aspiring leaders.”

Poilievre’s challenge is likely the more clear cut of the two.

As he was the party leader during a losing federal election, he will be subject to an automatic, secret-ballot leadership review to be held in Calgary at the end of the month. Technically, he must win a majority to keep his job and earn the right to make his case again to the national electorate. But in reality, he will need to do better than that by a significant but unknown margin to be able to stay on.

Poilievre has some cards in his hand. With undeniable, true-blue Conservative credentials, he’s popular within the party, although perhaps less so than about a year ago when he and his party seemed headed for a slam dunk election win.

And so far at least, there’s no clear alternative to Poilievre’s leadership, or even a widely whispered heir apparent.

Even if he’s very likely to remain as Tory leader after the vote, that doesn’t mean there isn’t still a lot on the line.

Turnbull said Poilievre could survive the leadership review, but still be weakened within caucus if party voters don’t give him a strong mandate. “Caucus relations break down over time.”

Poilievre is also exiting a 2025 where his armour was severely dented, losing a massive lead in the polls and his own seat in the April election, then a couple of defectors to the Liberals later in the year. Amid rumours of possible further floor crossers, the governing party is now just a single MP short of the combined number of legislators of the opposition parties.

SFU’s Jeram said enough has gone wrong that he doesn’t think Poilievre will still be the Tory leader during the next election.

But supporters point to the fact that Poilievre won more votes in the last election than any Conservative leader in Canadian history. The context, however, is that voter turnout was high (about 68.7 per cent of eligible voters, the most in more than three decades), the population has been on a steady climb, and the Conservatives still lost to their rivals for the fourth consecutive election.

Critics also point out that the Conservatives’ lofty vote total in April was mitigated by voters’ flocking to the two major parties during an election that was largely fought over Canada’s response to the Trump tariffs. About 85 per cent of voters opted for the Liberals or the Conservatives, a staggering increase compared to the previous election just four years earlier when 66.3 per cent of voters did so. That level of dominance in a federal election by the two major parties hadn’t been seen in almost 70 years.

Despite the lofty vote totals less than a year ago, Poilievre’s approval numbers have also lagged those of his party, never a good sign for a political leader.

Recent opinion polls have usually showed the Liberals with a modest single-digit lead over the Conservatives, while Poilievre’s approval ratings with the general public, in contrast with his strong support within his party, tend to be about half those of Carney (50 per cent versus 25).

On the surface, Carney would appear to be on solid political ground — much more so than his key rival. But the two parties remain locked in a virtual dead heat nationally and, as Poilievre learned a year ago, things can change quickly in Canadian politics.

“The Liberals held a comfortable lead through much of last year,” said David Valentin, principal at Liaison Strategies, following the Jan. 5 release of a new poll. “But the Conservatives have steadily closed the gap and right now we’re essentially looking at a national tie.”

National Post

Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here.


OTTAWA

— As Prime Minister Mark Carney’s speech about the need for middle powers to unite against “hegemons” receives international praise, his main political rival back in Canada calls him “lucky” to be judged by his words. 

Opposition Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre on Thursday afternoon released his rebuttal to the prime minister’s address, delivered two days earlier at a meeting of political and business elites at the World Economic Forum.

“So far, Mr. Carney has been lucky that he’s been judged by his rhetoric and his stated intention, by the number of his trips and meetings overseas,” Poilievre said in a statement, circulated by his office.

“Because nearly a year into his term, the rhetoric has changed, but reality has not. There is an illusion of purpose, but no results to back it up.”

Poilievre’s response comes as Carney’s speech about how middle power countries must confront the fact that the rules-based international orders as they depended on was no more has reverberated internationally, earning praise from Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum as well as

Jim Chalmers, Australia’s treasurer. 

Meanwhile, members of Poilievre’s caucus have spent the past two days firing off posts on social media about how Carney has failed to make progress on plans for potential new pipeline construction, bolstering the country’s military capacity addressing Canadians’ affordability concerns.

In his lengthy statement on Thursday, Poilievre offered some of his own praise for the prime minister’s earlier remarks, calling his speech in Davos “well-crafted and eloquently delivered.”

“The prime minister is right to restate what many have said for years: Canada must become more self-reliant, less dependent and work with like-minded countries to advance our interests. Conservatives are, as always, willing to work with him to turn these words into results. ”

With Canadians dealing with issues like high food and housing costs and the country’s military still lacking personnel and equipment, Poilievre argued things have only “gotten worse” since Carney became prime minister almost a year ago.

The Conservative leader pointed to how the Carney government has yet to pass any of its proposed Criminal Code reforms and how the prime minister has yet to fulfill his “signature promise” of successfully negotiating a trade deal with U.S President Donald Trump.

Poilievre also underscored that regardless of Canadians’ feelings towards the U.S. administration, Canada’s relationship with its closest neighbour remains.

“I know it’s tempting to say our relationship with America is over forever. But here is the reality: We still live next door to the biggest economy and military the world has ever seen. We sell 20 times more to the U.S. than to China. (One) in 10 Canadian jobs rely directly and indirectly on trade with America.”

“We owe it to those workers, our family, friends and fellow Canadians, to ensure those jobs don’t go away,” added Poilievre.

He went on to call for people to keep in mind that “our trade and security partnership with the U.S. is centuries-old and will outlast one president,” and that tariffs may be a reality of the future, regardless of whether a Republican or Democrat was in the White House.

Poilievre also took aim at Canada’s recent trade deal with China, saying that “we cannot throw caution to the wind” when it comes to dealing with the Chinese Community Party regime, which he said “kidnaps our citizens, steals our technology, interferes with our elections.”

The Conservative leader then repeated his previous calls for the Carney government to get rid of laws the party deems as stifling economic investment, such as Impact Assessment Act, oil tanker moratorium off the coast of B.C., as well as the industrial carbon tax.

Poilievre, who last week took to X to affirm support for Greenland’s sovereignty, also touched on the issue in Thursday’s statement.

“We support the sovereignty of Greenland and Denmark. But we also must be able to support our own sovereignty,” he said, underscoring concerns about Canada’s NATO capacity.

Poilievre’s statement come as some within the party suggest it would be wise for the Conservatives to flesh out more of its own foreign policy and ensure that Poilievre is positioned in such a way that future voters could envision him on a world stage, not solely focused on cost-of-living issues.

The Conservative leader has over the past year faced criticism from within about his ability to pivot to confront the Canada-U.S. issue, which dominated much of last year’s federal election campaign, which the Liberals won.

He will face a leadership review next week.

-National Post

Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our politics newsletter, First Reading, here.