LP_468x60
on-the-record-468x60-white

William Shatner appeared in a Fox News interview after Prime Minister Mark Carney and President Donald Trump had their first meeting on May 6, 2025.

Canadian actor and comedian William Shatner had a counter-offer to President Donald Trump’s suggestion of turning Canada into the 51st state.

Shatner

spoke to host Jesse Watters on Fox News

after Prime Minister Mark Carney met with the American leader at the White House on Tuesday. In the interview, Shatner joked about what he thought could be a good solution for Carney to turn the tables on Trump.

“I’ve dealt a little in real estate and I’m going to say to Carney, ‘Do a real estate deal. Make a counter offer.’ Let’s offer … to the United States to be the 11th province,” he said. “Think of the joy… It’s the best thing.”

Carney ‘let Trump be the star’: Analyzing the Oval Office meeting, from pleasantries to insults

He added: “Here (in Canada) you have a friendly group of people saying come on over. It’s cleaner. There’s plenty of power. Some lovely people who want to work with you.”

Tensions between Canada and the United States have been heightened since Trump took office. This is largely due to the president’s rhetoric about making Canada the 51st state, as well as an ongoing trade war and

stricter travel policies

. Canadians have been resolute in trying to

buy local goods

and have even been opting to travel within in the country,

rather than vacationing in the U.S.

Shatner said that everyone was acting “so serious about what is an unserious offer” from Trump.

He also brought up Canada’s history, highlighting the country’s role in the Second World War.

“Canada’s been around for 150 years more and they’ve had a noble service… Vimy Ridge, Juno Beach, Dieppe. Tens of thousands of Canadian soldiers have died in the fight for freedom and making the world playable for all of us. You can’t denigrate that. You can’t deny that,” said Shatner.

 U.S. President Donald Trump meets with Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney in the Oval Office at the White House on May 6, 2025 in Washington, DC.

Watters brought up the fact that by persisting, Trump may eventually get what he wants.

“At a certain point, persistence becomes insulting,” said Shatner.

At Tuesday’s

meeting in the Oval Office

, Trump and Carney addressed talk of the 51st state.

“As you know from real estate, there are some places that are never for sale,” said Carney.

Trump responded: “Time will tell. It’s only time. But I say never say never.”

Shatner said that he wasn’t sure “what all the fuss is about,” saying that Canada and the U.S. are “two noble countries side by side.”

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 new study published in JAMA Neurology debunks “an alleged ‘mystery’ neurological illness” that emerged in New Brunswick six years ago.

A new study is debunking “an alleged ‘mystery’ neurological illness” that emerged in New Brunswick six years ago.

The research,

published Wednesday in JAMA Neurology

, took another careful look at 25 cases of people previously diagnosed with what’s dubbed a neurological syndrome of unknown cause (NSUC), 11 of whom have since died.

“There was no evidence supporting a diagnosis of NSUC in this cohort,” the study concludes.

Instead, well-known conditions were identified in all 25 cases, including common neurodegenerative diseases, functional neurological disorder, traumatic brain injury and metastatic cancer.

“Based on the 11 autopsy cases, a new disease was extremely unlikely, with a probability less than .001,” said the study.

New Brunswick neurologist Dr. Alier Marrero has said he’s seen hundreds of patients in recent years

including some from neighbouring Nova Scotia

who are experiencing inexplicable symptoms of neurological decline. Those include anxieties and difficulty sleeping, as well as more acute symptoms including limb pain and trouble balancing, teeth chattering, violent muscle spasms, vision problems and hallucinations. Many of them were under the age of 45.

Last November, New Brunswick Premier Susan Holt said she wanted the Public Health Agency of Canada to investigate.

An oversight committee appointed by Progressive Conservative Blaine Higgs’ former government rejected the idea that the cases are linked. It indicated that most of the patients in the cluster were misdiagnosed.

“Despite these findings, the number of cases reported in the media has grown to more than 500 patients with more than 50 deaths, although (Public Health New Brunswick) has received only 222 verified submissions,” said the new study. “Speculations regarding the underlying cause have included an unknown prion disease, toxins from cyanobacteria, glyphosate, glufosinate, and heavy metals. However, despite extensive media attention, no clinical or pathological case descriptions have been published in the medical literature to our knowledge.”

The sample of 25 cases was drawn from a cohort of 222 people who received an initial NSUC diagnosis.

“Eligible patients were offered a second opinion; four families of deceased patients provided consent for reporting autopsies and waivers of consent were obtained for seven,” said the study.

The research was conducted at Horizon Health Network in New Brunswick and University Health Network in Ontario.

“Complex neurological disorders benefit from a second, independent and/or subspecialist evaluation and require multidisciplinary support throughout the diagnostic journey,” said the study that collected data between November 2023 and this past March.

“Clinical and neuropathological evaluations demonstrated that all 25 cases were attributable to well characterized neurological disorders,” it said. “The final primary diagnoses, and in some cases secondary diagnoses, included Alzheimer disease, Parkinson disease, progressive supranuclear palsy, other neurodegenerative conditions, functional neurological disorder, traumatic brain injury or persisting post concussion symptoms, and others.”

The independent assessment of 25 patients “provides no support for an undiagnosed mystery disease in New Brunswick,” said the study.

“The gold standard, neuropathological assessments with second, blinded independent evaluations, revealed well-defined diagnoses for 11 deceased patients.”

When all 25 cases were included in the mix, “100 per cent of patients in this sample did not have a new disease and with 95 per cent confidence, the probability of no new disease is between 87 per cent and 100 per cent,” said the study.

“The lower bound of 87 per cent reflects a conservative estimate based on the data and statistical methods accounting for uncertainty in the sample, including the possibility of diagnostic error or unmeasured variability. However, practical knowledge and clinical reasoning suggest that the actual probability of no new disease is much closer to the upper bound of 100 per cent.”

The new study said “it is crucial to highlight the factors that fuel persistent public concern of a mystery disease despite the provincial investigation rejecting this possibility. Public trust in health institutions has decreased since the COVID-19 pandemic, while trust in individual healthcare professionals remains high, which can make vulnerable people susceptible to claims that the institutional oversight processes are flawed, especially if originating from trusted physicians.”

The new research comes with a caution.

Misinformation regarding the New Brunswick “cluster has proliferated in both traditional and social media, from not only the predictable and easily identifiable groups coopting the crisis to suit their agenda, such as antivaccine advocates, but also those who are unknowingly amplifying an incorrect diagnosis from their physician,” said the study.

“In this way, misdiagnosis and misinformation become inextricably entwined and amplify patient harm exponentially: to the best of our knowledge, only 14 patients sought independent reevaluation by another neurologist when offered, and 52 refused a second opinion, choosing instead to remain with the one neurologist who originally made and continues to promote the diagnosis of a mystery disease. Not only do our data indicate that affected patients likely have other diagnosable neurological conditions that could benefit from multidisciplinary treatment and other resources, but the low uptake also impedes the rigorous scientific evaluations necessary to counter the claims raised in the first place.”

For his part, Marrero, the New Brunswick neurologist who made the original diagnoses, said in an email Wednesday that he’s “appalled that a parallel investigation with a small number of patients, has apparently been conducted for a long time, without our knowledge or our patients and families’ knowledge.”

Marrero said he is “in profound disagreement with the study conclusions and (has) many questions regarding the methods and the content, including cases never evaluated by us or that might have not been part of this cluster.”

Marrero is “also surprised that a publication about such a potential impact, happening in parallel to an ongoing public health investigation, and that include data until March 2025, was published so speedily in a matter of weeks. I am sure that our patients, families and communities share the same very serious concerns.”

The Moncton neurologist said he has “evaluated more than 500 patients in this cluster, and provided a significant amount of unequivocal, sometimes critical environmental exposure evidence, as well as rare autoimmune markers in many of them. As such, I trust that the current process of independent multidisciplinary scientific investigation, and extensive files analysis that is underway by our public health authorities, could provide appropriate answers to our communities.”

Marrero is “hopeful that this process would include not only comprehensive additional (patient) testing, but also testing for water, food, soil and air samples in the affected areas, as well as additional patient support and effective prevention and treatments measures.”

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.


Aerial view of Trans-Canada Highway during a vibrant sunny summer day. Taken near Calgary, Alberta, Canada.

Set for release on May 13 with Sutherland House Books, Canada’s Main Street: The Epic Story of the Trans-Canada Highway by Craig Baird finally gives this nation-shaping infrastructure project its due. In this excerpt, Baird introduces the ambitious, messy and overlooked saga of the coast-to-coast highway that is the true spine of modern Canada.

The Trans-Canada Highway. We live by it. We drive on it. We depend on it for the goods we use. And yet, we barely think about it. Why?

Is it because, for most of us, the Trans-Canada Highway has always just been there? Something we take for granted and don’t think about? With success has come invisibility.

Maybe it is because the Trans-Canada feels like history that is too recent. Maybe it needs another century, like the

Canadian Pacific Railway

(CPR), to give it historical context.

What a contrast when we think about the CPR — the other cross-country, nation-building transportation system. In 1970,

Pierre Berton

released his magnum opus, The National Dream. The book told the story of the planning and inception of the CPR, covering the years 1871 to 1881. The following year, he followed up with The Last Spike, which covered the years 1881 to 1885. Those years saw the construction and completion of the CPR.

The books galvanized the public. They presented history in a way that was not dryly academic, but something any regular Canadian, even one who thought they weren’t interested in history, could enjoy. They both became instant best-sellers and inspired the CBC’s TV docuseries,

The National Dream

, which attracted a record three million viewers at a time when Canada’s population was only 22 million. Both books were also critically well-received, with The Last Spike winning the 1971 Governor General’s Award for English-language non-fiction.

It seems fitting somehow that the definitive work on the CPR was released at the same time the Trans-Canada Highway was (finally) being finished.

The construction of the CPR was an amazing project that changed the history of Canada forever. It was a tale of scandals, greed, needless death and amazing triumphs. It easily overshadows the significance of the Trans-Canada Highway in the eyes of Canadians. There have been no big productions for television or film about the Trans-Canada Highway. Very few books have been written about it and most focused on what you could see travelling it, rather than on how the road was built. Back in 1967,

Gordon Lightfoot

wrote a song about the CPR, “The Canadian Railroad Trilogy,” one of his greatest works. Has anyone ever written about the Trans-Canada Highway? Maybe the closest we have is “Life Is a Highway,” by Tom Cochrane.

To those who created it, however, building the Trans-Canada was every bit as important as the CPR. The construction took longer than the CPR, cost more, and involved negotiations with the provinces that resembled nothing so much as cat herding. It took a year just to get some of the provinces to sign the agreement on the highway and start selecting their routes. Several didn’t sign right away, and Quebec held off for a full decade. The building of the CPR was no easy task politically. There was no single, large company, like the CPR, to oversee the construction of the entire Trans-Canada from coast to coast — just premiers in each province, all wanting to use the highway for their own political ends. Maybe that is why we don’t see the highway for the engineering marvel that it is. It doesn’t even seem much in comparison to the story of the

Alaska Highway

, built in only months during a time of war. Yet, it was built — far behind schedule and well over budget, but it got done.

To those who use the highway, it has been enormously consequential. People say that the United States is a country built by the automobile, but Canada can make that claim as well. We are much larger, and much more sparsely populated, and the highways we build truly connect all of us, and none more so than the Trans-Canada. It tied the country together as the automobile overtook the railroad as the dominant form of travel during the highway’s construction. As we’ll see, the highway may have altered the country even more than the railway did.

When the agreement to build the highway was signed in 1949, Gordie Howe was three years into his legendary career. Bobby Orr was a toddler. When the highway was finally finished, Howe had retired (at least temporarily), and Orr was the greatest NHL star the world had known and a Stanley Cup champion.

Medicare

, a

new Canadian flag

, the

Trans-Canada Pipeline

, and the

St. Lawrence Seaway

— none of these things existed when work on the highway began.

The highway was supposed to be completed in 1957, but only Saskatchewan met that deadline. Most provinces finished in the 1960s, while others completed it in the early 1970s. At times, it must have felt as if it was never going to be finished.

In a half-true act of political showmanship, Prime Minister

John Diefenbaker

tamped down asphalt at the Rogers Pass in September 1962 to announce the highway officially completed. In fact, it was still under construction in places such as Nova Scotia and Newfoundland. In the latter, the majority of the road was still gravel, and it would be another three years before someone could drive clear across the province along the highway.

Once all the pieces were built and paved, the Trans-Canada ran coast to coast, covering 7,821 kilometres. For much of its history, it was a two-lane system. Even today, much of the highway remains two-lane. The longest stretch of divided highway runs from the Manitoba-Ontario border to the Rocky Mountains, covering a distance of over 1,500 kilometres.

Knowing just how many people use the Trans-Canada Highway today is difficult. In places like Calgary and Vancouver, it runs directly into the city and is used by tens of thousands of people every day to go to and from work, shopping, hockey games, and a multitude of other events. Each year, four million people visit Banff, only accessible from the east and west along the Trans-Canada Highway. According to Statistics Canada in 2021, 77 per cent of goods moved in Canada were transported by truck. Not every truck will take the Trans-Canada Highway, especially through northern Alberta and Saskatchewan, where the

Yellowhead Highway

is the main route. But almost all goods that arrive in Canada at any of our main ports, excepting Prince Rupert, British Columbia, are going to be on the Trans-Canada at least part of their journey. It doesn’t matter if it is apples and oranges or computers and cars, if a truck is hauling it, it is touching that highway at some point. Of the 15 largest cities in Canada, seven are along the Trans-Canada Highway route. All of that started with the signing of a piece of paper decades ago.

Statistics aside, almost every Canadian you meet will have indelible memories of the Trans-Canada. There is likely barely a Canadian alive, famous or not-so-famous, who has not driven along at least part of it. Certainly, far more of us have been on that road than have taken the railway anywhere in Canada. It is the highway on which millions of us have enjoyed family vacations and ambitious road trips, or driven to university for the first time, or moved for a new job. It is the highway that many took to see

Expo 67

in Montreal, Expo 86 in Vancouver two decades later, the 1988 Olympics in Calgary, and the 2010 Olympics in Vancouver. It is the road that

Terry Fox

ran on his Marathon of Hope. It is the path Rick Hansen took on his

Man in Motion Tour

. At rest stops, rock outcrops, and roadside attractions, the Trans-Canada provides memories to those on their own voyages of discovery. It has seen joy and sadness, death and, likely, a few births.

The highway touches two oceans and repasses through many cultures, and even more towns. And as the CPR did in the 19th century, it affirms the idea of a united country. Long gone are the days when a Canadian had to drive through the United States to cover the distance from one Canadian coast to another.

I have travelled stretches of the highway more times than I can count, but only once all the way from west to east in a single great journey. Along the way, I saw towns that passed in the blink of an eye, took pictures at the oddest roadside attractions, and drove through some of the most important cities in the country. I have always been fascinated with every aspect of the Trans-Canada, from the pioneers who drove across the country along the highway’s route (or parts of it) before it was built to its crucial role as the main economic and cultural artery of our nation today.

This is the story of the highway that changed Canada forever.

What does the highway mean?

Regardless of whether you consider the Trans-Canada Highway to have been finished in 1962, when it was officially opened, or in 1971 when Newfoundland and B.C. finally finished their last pieces of construction, it was then the longest highway in the world at 7,476 kilometres. That title has long since passed to other roads. The Trans-Canada sits 17th in the world today, having been eclipsed by highways in Africa, Eurasia, China, Russia and Australia. The Pan-American Highway, stretching from Alaska to Argentina, is 30,000 kilometres long, if you ignore the impassible 160-kilometre Darien Gap between Panama and Columbia. Australia’s Highway 1 is almost double the length of Canada’s Highway 1, although it is a system of highways rather than a single road. The Trans-Canada remains the longest single highway in one country in the world and, of course, it is also the longest highway in Canada.

Since those early years, the Trans-Canada Highway network has expanded. Today it is much more than one road across the country. Where once there was a single route along the St. Lawrence River in Quebec, now you have a choice of three routes to take you into Ontario: You can drive the northern route through Ontario; pass through Toronto and the other larger cities of Southern Ontario; or visit the nation’s capital. Only one route goes into Manitoba, but in the province, the highway splits into the Yellowhead and main Trans-Canada Highway route that will take you across the prairies and onto the coast of British Columbia.

Additionally, the Trans-Canada has been undergoing almost constant improvements since its initial completion. It has been twinned and divided in many high-traffic areas. It has been realigned in some places and bypasses have been built around cities along the route, including Calgary, Winnipeg and Thunder Bay. Safety pullouts and rest areas have been constructed. There are new avalanche controls and snow fences, especially in the Rogers Pass region. Signage has improved. Wildlife fences, overpasses and underpasses have been constructed to minimize the environmental impact of the highway.

All these statistics and facts are important to an understanding of the Trans-Canada achievement, but they don’t answer a bigger question: What does the highway mean?

Why doesn’t the highway elicit the same wonder in our history as the trans-continental railway? Why isn’t the image of John Diefenbaker tamping down the last bit of highway in the Rogers Pass on the same level as the Sir Donald Smith driving in the last spike on the highway?

Some may say it comes down to nation-building. The CPR is seen as something that linked the entire country for the first time. It spurred the movement of people into Western Canada, at the expense of the First Nations, who were pushed to reserves. The railroad literally created communities on the prairies and made it possible to travel across the country in days, rather than weeks or months.

Yet the Trans-Canada Highway has done its share of nation-building. It has changed the shape of Canada, stimulating growth in communities and helping them prosper, while dooming others to disappear because they did not sit along its route. The Canso Causeway section of the highway connected Cape Breton Island to mainland Nova Scotia for the first time.

Confederation Bridge

provided the first fixed link between Prince Edward Island and the rest of Canada — something that would not have happened without the Trans-Canada network. Highway 1 through Northern Ontario brought communities such as Wawa out of the wilderness, and the Rogers Pass section of the Trans-Canada made it easy to pass from B.C. to eastern parts of Canada.

The highway changed how Canadians travel, and how they experience the country and its scattered communities.

There may have been ferries or railways or rudimentary roads and trails that crossed these same parts before the Trans-Canada, but it brought the whole of Canada within reach of anyone with a vehicle or a bus ticket. It gave people the freedom to go where they wanted. They were no longer bound by a single track between towns. They could branch off and explore. The highway has been vital for remote and rural communities, connecting them to larger economic centres. Areas that were once isolated gained better access to health care, education and improved quality of life.

The Trans-Canada has been critical for trade, connecting Canada’s major ports, cities and rural areas, enabling the efficient movement of goods across regions. It has provided a sturdier foundation for national and regional economies, supporting sectors like trucking, agriculture and manufacturing by reducing travel times and costs. It also facilitated resource development in areas rich in natural resources, allowing for economic growth in previously inaccessible regions.

The highway has made Canadian landmarks, national parks and natural attractions more accessible, encouraging Canadians to explore their own country and drawing international tourists. It has enabled people from different parts of Canada to experience the unique cultures, landscapes and histories within their own borders, fostering a shared national heritage. There were no roadside attractions in the days of the railroad. Today, you can hit hundreds of them along the highway. Some, such as the

Wawa Goose

or

Mac the Moose

, are massive; others, including

the world’s largest Coca-Cola

, are strange. All have their fans.

The country needed a universal road that would allow someone from Newfoundland to drive straight to British Columbia without leaving the country, and vice versa. It was needed as much psychologically as it was economically. The Trans-Canada Highway became a symbol of the country’s progress during a transformative time. When work started, Canada was only five years out of a world war, and already diving into a war in Korea. During its construction, Canadians saw the dawn of the television age. Quebec went through a rapid transformation, spurred on by opening itself to the world through Expo 67. That memorable fair was visited by millions of Canadians and for many, it was the Trans-Canada Highway that made it possible.

Canada was coming into its own as the highway’s work was finishing. In 1967, as the country finally celebrated itself for possibly the first time in its history, people wanted to learn about their country. And in a move, we can be sure no one planning the highway ever foresaw, that centennial year was full of people who were ready to explore the country by walking along the highway.

Hank Gallant

, a 24-year-old living in British Columbia, had spent the previous few years working in mines, learning to weld and operate heavy equipment. With the centennial year beckoning, he decided he wanted to do something to celebrate it. He chose a relatively easy task. He was going to walk across Canada.

On Feb. 6, 1967, Gallant dipped his toe in the Pacific Ocean, turned to the east and started putting one foot in front of the other. He told his friends about his plan, and they told him he’d never make it. When he asked local businesses for support, they didn’t take him seriously. Eventually, Gallant stopped telling anyone, but he kept walking toward where the sun rose over Canada. He had some food and some clothes in a backpack and a Gibson guitar covered by a flap of canvas to keep it dry. His pack had a hand-lettered sign saying, “Victoria to Bonavista, Centennial 67 Walker. No Rides Please.”

Right from the very beginning, Gallant experienced the kindness of strangers. He pulled a ligament in his leg even before getting out of British Columbia. A rancher treated it for him. Near Creston, a couple gave him a homecooked spaghetti dinner. When he reached the outskirts of Cranbrook, 40 people welcomed him. It snowed from there all the way to Alberta, which he reached on March 9.

The mountains were far from an easy stroll for Gallant, but he refused to give up. He swore to himself he would complete the journey or die trying. To keep his mind occupied, he wrote songs in his head as he walked.

By early April, he had reached Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan, and newspapers were starting to take notice of his journey. By Oak Lake, Manitoba, the principal of the local school cancelled all classes so students could greet Gallant as he walked into the community. On May 1, he arrived in Winnipeg and endured his ninth blizzard since leaving Vancouver. He told the Winnipeg Free Press, “I can’t offer any centennial project a thousand bucks. This is what I have to offer as an individual centennial project. It proves to the outside world that Canadians themselves are doing something about centennial, not only governments, with their libraries and statues.”

After a few days of working at a meat packing plant in Winnipeg to put some cash in his wallet, he set off again toward the east coast. As he made his way through Northern Ontario along Lake Superior, drivers would go to the next town and buy him a meal at a restaurant to enjoy upon his arrival.

When he stepped foot in Montreal, he was given a special tour of the Expo 67 grounds.

In late September, he reached New Brunswick, took a ferry to Prince Edward Island, then another to Nova Scotia. On Nov. 13, his 25th birthday, he walked into St. John’s, Newfoundland, and finished his journey after 280 days of walking. “I went to the harbour,” he said. “I took off my boots and my socks and did what I had done on the Pacific Coast at Beacon Hill Park. I dipped my toe in the Atlantic.”

Gallant was far from the only person to take a journey across the country that Centennial Year. Filip Moen walked from Halifax to Vancouver with his German Shepard, Bruno. That journey took only 131 days. Stan Guignard took his family in a 1915 Model T from North Bay, Ontario, to Montreal, a distance of 550 kilometres.

Kurt Johnson, a 24-year-old gold mine surveyor from Timmins decided 1967 was the best year to see the country. On June 20, in Vancouver, with a scroll that brought greetings from Timmins’ City Council and 1,000 business cards to thank drivers for rides, he stuck out his thumb and got ready to hitchhike across the country.

Scarcely a year went by without someone trying to make it across Canada without a vehicle. Far more, of course, made the trip in a car or truck. It is estimated that the highway supports more than 20 million vehicle trips annually.

No human being has ever been more closely identified with the Trans-Canada, however, than Terry Fox, a Canadian athlete, humanitarian, and cancer research activist who became a national hero for his remarkable attempt to run the full length of the Trans-Canada Highway on one leg to raise money and awareness for cancer research. Born in 1958 in Winnipeg, Manitoba, and raised in British Columbia, Fox lost his right leg to osteosarcoma in 1977. In 1980, he embarked on the “Marathon of Hope,” aiming to run from St. John’s, Newfoundland, to the Pacific Ocean in Victoria. Fox ran nearly a marathon (26 miles) a day for 143 days, covering 5,373 kilometres, before his cancer returned, forcing him to stop near Thunder Bay, Ont. Although he could not complete his journey and passed away in 1981, his legacy endures, with millions raised annually worldwide for cancer research through the Terry Fox Foundation and annual Terry Fox Runs held in his honour.

Terry Fox was the one man who truly linked the highway together from start to finish with his dream of raising money for cancer. The image of him shuffle-hopping along the highway is firmly entrenched in the minds of Canadians. Today, a statue marks the start of his journey in St. John’s, and another marks his destination, the terminus of the Trans-Canada in Victoria, B.C., and a third overlooks the highway near Thunder Bay where the Marathon of Hope came to an end.

Fox inspired many people, including British Columbia Paralympian Rick Hansen. He not only completed Fox’s journey down the Trans-Canada in a wheelchair but went on to wheel over 40,000 kilometres through 34 countries between 1985 and 1987, raising money for spinal cord research and accessibility programs. The last leg of his journey saw him wheel across Canada again, this time east to west, culminating in a grand finish in Vancouver.

Something special

For me, the highway has always been something special. I was born near it in the Foothills Hospital in Calgary. I’ve lived along it in various places during my life.

In the early 2010s, I lived in a community called Gull Lake, Sask. It sits right along the Trans-Canada Highway. I remember hearing from seniors in the community how the highway was once just two lanes of gravel, so many years ago. By my time, it was a double-lane highway, with cars driving toward Swift Current in one direction, or Medicine Hat in the other. I would stand out in my front yard at night and look at that highway. When I saw the lights moving along the road, it always felt comforting. It was something to tell me that everything was OK — that as long as that highway existed and people drove along it, the world was OK.

I don’t live along the highway anymore, but it is still an important part of my life. Not a year goes by that I don’t make a journey somewhere in Canada along it. And as I drive along, I know that for hundreds and thousands of kilometres in each direction, there are many others doing the same as me. Some drive along the Trans-Canada for work. Some are driving home. And some are just driving the highway to see what the country has to offer.

That is the great legacy of the Trans-Canada Highway. It is more than the sum of the political wrangling and the impressive engineering feats that built the road and connected the country. Its legacy is that it allows Canadians to drive from one ocean to another, to see at close range Canada’s scale and beauty, to learn more of its diversity and its people, and maybe, I hope, to feel less divided and remote from those who live over the next hill, around the next bend, or far over the horizon.


54 per cent of Canadians surveyed said that they no longer feel welcome in the United States.

More than half of Canadians no longer feel welcome or safe travelling to the United States, according to a new poll.

The Leger survey conducted for the Association for Canadian Studies (ACS) ahead of Prime Minister Mark Carney’s first in-person

meeting with U.S. President Donald Trump

at the White House on Tuesday, found that a majority (52 per cent) of respondents agree that “it is no longer safe for all Canadians travelling to the United States.” Slightly more (54 per cent) don’t feel welcome anymore. Less than a third of Canadians (29 per cent) said they disagree that it is no longer safe and 27 per cent said they still feel welcome. In both cases, 19 per cent said they don’t know.

Between an ongoing trade war, Trump’s repeated calls to make Canada the 51st state and increased security at the southern border, tensions have been increasing between the neighbouring countries. Jack Jedwab, president and CEO of the ACS, said these tensions are causing Canadians to worry.

“If Canadians have serious concerns about this, it has ramifications for our ongoing travel and interaction with Americans and with the United States,” he said. “It’s something that needs to be addressed and it’s something that Mr. Carney needs to help Mr. Trump understand.”

Jedwab said he doesn’t think Canadians’ concerns are being seen as a priority by the American leadership, and that the president should be paying more attention.

“There are economic ramifications arising from Canadians not feeling secure when travelling to the United States and not feeling welcome in the country that we generally see as the home of our main allies,” he said.

Respondents aged 55 and over were most likely (59 per cent) to agree that it is no longer safe to travel to the U.S., as well as those in Atlantic Canada (55 per cent) and British Columbia (57 per cent). Canadians aged 18 to 54 were less likely to agree, as well as Albertans (47 per cent in both cases). Canadians in Atlantic Canada were also the most likely (64 per cent) to feel like they are not welcome in the United States, followed by Quebecers (58 per cent). Sixty per cent of those aged 55 and older felt the same.

Canadian visits to the United States have been decreasing. As of March 2025, Canadians had booked 70 per cent fewer flights to American destinations for April to September, when compared to March 2024, according to a market analysis by

OAG, a global air travel data provider.

Jedwab said recent stories of people’s experiences crossing the border are creating the level of anxiety that is reflected in the survey.

“Some of the level of concern is arising from recent stories we’re hearing about Canadians.… (They’re) reporting that they’re being checked in ways that they have not been checked before,” he said.

According to the

U.S. Travel Association

, the United States receives the most international visitors from Canada, with 20.4 million visits in 2024. It creates 140,000 American jobs and generates $20.5 billion.

The poll also asked Canadians to respond to Trump’s claim that the Canada-U.S. border is an artificial boundary. Trump said in an interview with NBC’s Meet the Press that aired Sunday that the border is an “artificial line” that prevents the two territories from forming a “beautiful country.”

Just under half of Canadians don’t believe the border between the two countries is artificial, while almost a third don’t know what to think.

Forty-seven per cent of respondents disagreed that “the line/boundary between Canada and the United States was drawn artificially,” but 23 per cent agreed with Trump and 30 per cent said they don’t know.

For respondents between the ages of 18 and 24, 39 per cent said, “I don’t know.” Less than a third (32 per cent) said the border is not artificial, while 29 per cent said that it is.

“The most surprising part was that younger people were less sure about (the line/boundary being artificial), so they may be sort of more vulnerable to that type of rhetoric,” he said.

Leger conducted the online survey of 1,626 respondents across Canada between May 1 and 3. A margin of error cannot be associated with a non-probability sample in a panel survey for comparison purposes. A probability sample of 1,626 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.


Prime Minister Mark Carney speaks to reporters alongside U.S. President Donald Trump in the Oval Office on May 6, 2025, in Washington, DC.

Prime Minister

Mark Carney

met U.S. President

Donald Trump

in person for the first time at the Oval Office on Tuesday. Carney arrived at about 11:55 a.m. and was greeted by Trump with a handshake, after which they both raised a fist to the cameras.

The meeting lasted for about 30 minutes, after which they moved to a private working luncheon with their teams in the Cabinet Room. Here’s some of what was said in front of the press.

Trump introduces Carney to the press

A few days ago, he won a very big election in Canada, and I think I was probably the greatest thing that happened to him. His party was losing by a lot, and he ended up winning. So I really want to congratulate him, probably one of the greatest comebacks in the history of politics, maybe even greater than mine.

Trump on the Canadian election

I think Canada chose a very talented person, a very good person. Because we spoke before the election quite a few times. And it’s an honour to have you at the White House and the Oval Office…. But I just want to congratulate you. You ran a really great race. I watched the debate and I thought you were excellent. And I think we have a lot of things in common. We have some tough points to go over and that’ll be fine.

Carney’s response

Thank you for your hospitality, and above all for your leadership. You’re a transformational president, focus on the economy with a relentless focus on the American worker, securing your borders, ending the scourge of fentanyl and other opioids, and securing the world…. The history of Canada and the U.S. is we’re stronger when we work together, and there’s many opportunities to work together and I look forward to addressing some of those issues that we have but also finding those areas of mutual co-operation so we can move forward.

Trump on Carney’s victory in the election

I have a lot of respect for this man, and I watched him come up essentially through the ranks when he wasn’t given much of a chance. And he did. He ran a really great campaign. He did a really great debate. I think that debate was very helpful.

Trump on Canada

We’re going to be friends with Canada. Regardless of anything, we’re going to be friends with Canada. Canada is a very special place to me. I know so many people that live in Canada. My parents had relatives that lived in Canada, my mother in particular. And no, I love Canada, I have a lot of respect for the Canadians. Wayne Gretzky, I mean, how good — the Great One.

Trump on Canada as the 51st state

I still believe that. But, you know, takes two to tango, right? But, no, I do. I mean, I believe it would be a massive tax cut for the Canadian citizens. You get free military, get tremendous medical cares and other things. There would be a lot of advantages, but it would be a massive tax cut, and it’s also a beautiful — you know, as a real estate developer, you know, I’m a real estate developer at heart, when you get rid of that artificially drawn line — somebody drew that line many years ago, like a ruler, just a straight line right across the top of the country. When you look at that beautiful formation, when it’s together, I’m a very artistic person. But when I looked at that, I said, that’s the way it was meant to be. I do feel it’s much better for Canada. But we’re not going to be discussing that unless someone wants to discuss it.

Carney weighs in

As you know from real estate, there are some places that are never for sale. We’re sitting in one right now. Buckingham Palace that you visited as well. And having met with the owners of Canada over the course of the campaign, last several months, it’s not for sale. Won’t be for sale, ever.

Trump’s response

Time will tell. It’s only time. But I say never say never. I’ve had many, many things that were not doable, and they ended up being doable and only doable in a very friendly way. But if it’s to everybody’s benefit, you know, Canada loves us and we love Canada, that’s, I think the No. 1 thing that’s important, but we’ll see. Over time, we’ll see what happens.

Trump on trade deals

We don’t have to sign deals. They have to sign deals with us. They want a piece of our market. We don’t want a piece of their market. We don’t care about their market…. Think of us as a super luxury store, a store that has the goods. You’re going to come and you’re going to pay a price, and we’re going to give you a very good price. We’re going to make very good deals, and in some cases, we’ll adjust, but that’s where it is. And we’ve been ripped off by everybody for 50 years, and we’re just not going to do that anymore. We can’t do that, and we can’t let any country do that to us. We’re just not going to do it anymore.

Trump on the USMCA

I won’t say this about Mark, but I didn’t like his predecessor. I didn’t like a person that worked — she was terrible, actually, she was a terrible person, and she really hurt that deal very badly, because she tried to take advantage of the deal, and she didn’t get away with it. You know who I’m talking about (Chrystia Freeland)…. We do have a negotiation coming up over the next year or so, to adjust it or terminate it.

Carney’s response

I’ll say a word on USMCA, if I may, Mr. President. It is a basis for a broader negotiation. Some things about it are going to have to change. And part of the way you’ve conducted these tariffs has taken advantage of existing aspects of USMCA. So it’s going to have to change. There’s other elements that are coming, and that’s part of what we’re going to discuss.

Trump on trade with Canada

We don’t much business with Canada, from our standpoint. They do a lot of business with us.

Trump’s on whether Carney could say something to change his mind on tariffs

No. Just the way it is.

On whether he would respect Canada’s refusal to be the 51st state

Sure I would. But this is not necessarily a one-day deal. This is over a period of time they have to make that decision.

Carney’s response to both those questions

Respectfully, Canadians view on this is not going to change, on the 51st state. Secondly, we are the largest client of the United States in the totality of all the goods. So we are the largest client of the United States. We have a tremendous auto sector between the two of us, and the changes that have been made have been helpful. You know, 50 per cent of a car that comes from Canada is American. That’s not like anywhere else in the world. And to your question about is there one thing? No, this is a bigger discussion. There are much bigger forces involved. And this will take some time and some discussions, and that’s why we’re here.

Trump’s reply

This is a very friendly conversation, but we want to make our own cars. We don’t really want cars from Canada, and we put tariffs on cars from Canada, and at a certain point it won’t make economic sense for Canada to build those cars. And we don’t want steel from Canada because we’re making our own steel.

Trump’s final word

We protect Canada militarily, and we always will. That’s not a money thing, but we always will. But, you know, it’s not fair. But why are we subsidizing Canada $200 billion a year, or whatever the number might be, it’s a very substantial number. And it’s hard for the American taxpayer to say gee whiz we love doing that. Thank you very much.

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.


Prime Minister Mark Carney and U.S. President Donald Trump at the White House on Tuesday, May 6, 2025.

Prime Minister

Mark Carney

met U.S. President

Donald Trump

at the White House on Tuesday for the first time since his election. Both made a point to make nice,

praising each other as “transformational” leaders

and pledging a friendship that will survive despite Trump’s unchanged desire to make Canada an American state.

“As you know, from real estate, there are some places that are not for sale. We’re sitting in one right now,” Carney said. Canada “is not for sale, won’t be for sale, ever, but the opportunity is in the partnership.”

“Never say never,” Trump said. Then both men agreeably moved on. Trump did most of the talking, while Carney emphasized what they agree on, ignored the rest, especially the automotive industry, sat alert and patient as Trump rambled about diverse matters, and declined to rise to his insults of other politicians, notably his minister of transport and internal trade, ​Chrystia Freeland.

To sketch this fireside chat, National Post asked three political experts to parse their words and demeanour with an eye to describing this important new relationship. Rob Goodman is associate professor of politics at Toronto Metropolitan University, author of Words on Fire: Eloquence and Its Conditions, about the current state of political rhetoric, and former speech writer for U.S. House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer and Senator Chris Dodd. Robert Danisch is professor in communication arts at the University of Waterloo, studies political rhetoric in democratic societies. Jeni Armstrong teaches political communication at Carleton University and was lead speech writer to former prime minister Justin Trudeau from 2015 to 2018. They spoke with National Post reporter Joseph Brean.

Bad Start I

Just before the scheduled start time, Trump posted on social media that America subsidizes Canada by $200-billion a year and other provocations, such as” “we don’t need ANYTHING they have, other than their friendship, which hopefully we will maintain. They, on the other hand, need EVERYTHING from us!”

“I don’t think it’s surprising. This is a president who comes out of reality TV,” Goodman said. “Establishing conflict and dramatic stakes is how he uses his techniques.”

Bad Start II

Carney is late. This threatens to look bad, sloppy, rude. Who’s late to the White House?

Bad Start III

CBC News reports the delay is actually on the White House side, and Carney is on site, waiting at the gate in his vehicle.

The Handshake

Trump appears at the door to greet Carney. They shake hands, pat each other’s shoulder. There was no yanking of the arm, as Trump has often done, famously to Justin Trudeau. Both give a fist up to the cameras, Trump first, then Carney in response. Dansich saw this as Carney showing a genuine affinity to Trump, what social psychologists call mirroring body language.

The Wink

The mood is so genial in the Oval Office that Carney winks at someone off camera before things begin. He has a habit of doing this at important moments, including his inauguration.

The Pleasantries

Trump congratulates Carney on “probably one of the greatest comebacks in the history of politics, maybe even greater than mine.”

“These comments about positive stuff, it’s in the context of aggression and attacks on sovereignty, but the affect is much more outwardly conciliatory,” Goodman said. He thinks Trump uses a “backslapping clubbiness” and a false “bonhomie” that is familiar from the New York real estate world. He was even a little funny, Armstrong said, and made Carney laugh with his claim to be “probably the greatest thing that ever happened to him.”

“I have a lot of respect for this man. I watched him come up through the ranks when he wasn’t given much of a chance,” Trump said.

Danisch said there are two ways to interpret that. The generous one is that Trump is saying he knows the Goldman Sachs guys and Carney was never going to rise among them. The ungenerous is that he doesn’t really know Carney at all and he chose a cliché.

Carney congratulates Trump on being a “transformational” president and says he has been elected to similarly transform Canada.

“Carney was quite shrewd to point to that so that right wing media can interpret it as respectful and positive and left wing can interpret it as horribly negative. That seemed practised and intentional,” Danisch said. Armstrong, likewise, said “transformational” was “a great word to use because, like the word ‘consequential,’ it’s kind of value neutral. It’s a word you can use to describe someone or something without necessarily weighing in on whether you think it’s good or bad.”

Carney emphasizes military spending, border security and fentanyl.

“He knows that this is a Trump preoccupation so he might as well take the initiative on it,” Goodman said. He compared it to dealing with an elderly relative. “You kind of have to humour their perception of the world to avoid blowing things up, but you have to be assertive and stand up for yourself. Getting that balance right is hard.”

“I did find it a bit strange that the president referred to the prime minister by his first name when talking about the conflict in Ukraine (‘Mark wants it ended’) but hey, I’ll take it if it means this is decent working relationship,” Armstrong said.

The 51st State

“I’m not surprised that this topic came up, but I guess I’m relieved to see that it entered the chat via a question from a reporter as opposed to Trump saying it unprompted,” Armstrong said. In any case, Trump’s annexation pitch has softened. He says he still wants it, but it “takes two to tango,” and then expanded on why Canadians should agree to this “wonderful marriage.”

In reply, Carney “was as forceful and direct as possible,” Goodman said. “Having one’s national sovereignty challenged and demeaned in the way Trump has, I think those are really emotional issues, and I think it’s both natural and expected that, on the spot, that’s the sort of thing that could provoke anger, or emotional pushback. I don’t think that’s Mark Carney’s style.” Trump is sensitive to pushback, he said, as much as he presents as a tough guy, so Carney’s confident dismissal was well judged not to derail the meeting, “as satisfying as that might be,” Goodman said.

Armstrong said she liked this response, with its “appeal to Trump’s expertise as a real estate guy,” the comparison to the White House and Buckingham Palace as other placed that are not for sale, the “masterful” reference to Canadians as “owners” of the country, “and finally, the pivot away from the 51st state nonsense to what is practically achievable, with a hint of a Taylor Swift reference (‘won’t be for sale ever’).”

Trump was conciliatory, but added “never say never.”

“I thought that was a good line. It allowed Trump to save some face. It allowed Trump to reiterate the point that this is not going to be a violent invasion, it is a deal, in his mind,” Danisch said. “I think they both got out of that exchange what they needed to.”

The Wayne Gretzky Mention

Trump said he has a lot of respect for Canada, and the first thing that came to his mind, after a mention of his parents’ relatives who lived there, was Wayne Gretzky. Danisch said this was an effort to demonstrate his knowledge of Canada, but it came across like saying he has friends in Canada. “These are clichés that Americans trot out to demonstrate some familiarity with Canada,” Danisch said. “I think it’s to try to ingratiate one’s self, I don’t think people generally realize it doesn’t do it.”

It did not help that Trump seemed to say Alex Ovechkin was Canadian too, because he is not only not Canadian, but Russian.

The Chrystia Freeland Insult

In saying that USCMA is still a good deal, Trump takes a shot at former deputy prime minister Freeland, who negotiated it, calling her a “terrible person,” but drawing no reaction. It was a little like when someone tells a rude joke in a polite context. “It’s not just the rudeness but it’s the way that is degrades you as someone who is part of that interaction,” Goodman said. People who violate social norms want others to join them. “It validates them. That’s the social psychology of Trump’s instincts for interpersonal dominance. He wants your hands to be dirty as well.”

Later, when Trump asked if Carney had heard of Gavin “Newscum” Newsom, Carney nodded once with a wry smile and sucked his cheek as if to indicate he’s not saying anything. This was “studied neutrality,” Danisch said.

The Auto Trade, Subsidy, and a Good Ending

Carney seemed to ignore Trump’s long-winded discourse on the automotive industry. “I think Trump made clear that it’s on the mind of his administration, and making progress there is an interest. If that’s the substantive thing that comes put of this, that’s pretty well done by Carney,” Danisch said. But it went on so long, and then Trump started talking about his belief that the U.S. “subsidizes” Canada by $200 billion a year “or whatever the number might be.”

Carney folded his hands, and was clearly getting ready to speak, when Trump abruptly ended the whole event. “Trump always needs to have the last word and he took it and he repeated his position,” Danisch said. “Carney seems uninterested in the media spectacle of the whole thing, and that really benefited him, to sit there like the adult in the room and let Trump be the star.”

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.


Premier Danielle Smith speaks to reporters at the Alberta Legislature, in Edmonton Tuesday May 6, 2025.

OTTAWA — Alberta Premier Danielle Smith says that her United Conservative Party supports national unity, but adds that she won’t stop members of her caucus from expressing different views on Alberta separation.

Smith told reporters on Tuesday that she wasn’t bothered by UCP MLA Jason Stephan

publicly calling for a referendum

on Alberta separation one day earlier.

“We all have different ideas about how we get respect from Ottawa … I’m not going to be demonizing anybody who may have a different view than me,” Smith said when asked whether she’d had a chance to talk to Stephan about his remarks.

Stephan declined to say how he’d vote in a referendum on Albertan independence.

The central Alberta MLA

wrote in an op-ed last week

that it was time for “Alberta to explore other options” outside of confederation, after the Liberals won their fourth straight federal election.

Stephan didn’t immediately respond to a request to be interviewed for this article.

Smith stressed

the party’s founding agreement

was clear on the matter of Alberta’s place within the confederation.

“Loyalty to a united Canada… is one of the founding statements of our party, so I would say I and my caucus are supportive of that,” said Smith.

“We are supportive of trying to find a way to exercise our constitutional sovereignty within a united Canada.”

Smith said that she hopes to beat back separatism with her words, rather than heavy-handed actions, in the weeks and months to come.

“All I can do is try to convince people that my view is right… and I’m hopeful to convince all Albertans,” said Smith.

Smith added that this was a conversation that needed to take place among Albertans, and not

interlopers like Ontario Premier Doug Ford

.

“I don’t tell (Ford) how he should run his province, and I would hope that he doesn’t tell me how I should run mine,” said Smith.

Ford

slammed Smith just hours earlier

for opening the door to a referendum at a time when Canada faced an existential crisis from south of the border.

She stressed that she and Ford have a “respectful relationship.”

Smith said in a Monday address to Albertans that a question on Albertan independence will be added to the referendum ballot in 2026, if it gets enough signatures.

Speaking from Washington, D.C., Prime Minister Mark Carney was evasive when asked about the possibility of an Alberta referendum.

“As an Albertan, I firmly believe that… Canada is stronger when we work together,” said Carney.

“You can always ask a question but I know (how) I would respond.”

National Post

rmohamed@postmedia.com

Get more deep-dive National Post political coverage and analysis in your inbox with the Political Hack newsletter, where Ottawa bureau chief Stuart Thomson and political analyst Tasha Kheiriddin get at what’s really going on behind the scenes on Parliament Hill every Wednesday and Friday, exclusively for subscribers. Sign up here.

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.


U.S. Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick speaks as President Donald Trump and Prime Minister Mark Carney look on in the Oval Office on May 6, 2025. (Photo by Jim WATSON / AFP)

Howard Lutnick made headlines this week, ahead of Prime Minister Mark Carney’s meeting with President Donald Trump in the Oval Office, by calling Canada “a socialist regime”
that feeds off of America.

He
has said, as a result, that
he is skeptical a trade deal can be made with America’s northern neighbour.

Who is Howard Lutnick?

Lutnick, 63, is an American

billionaire businessman

, philanthropist, and politician who is serving as the 41st United States

Secretary of Commerce

. He assumed office in February 2025 under President Donald Trump.

His

estimated net worth

is between $2 billion and $4 billion, stemming largely from his ownership stake in Cantor Fitzgerald. He is a

graduate

of Haverford College and is married with four children.

Lutnick is best known for his lengthy tenure as chairman and CEO of

Cantor Fitzgerald

, a major Wall Street financial services firm. He survived the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, which claimed the lives of 658 Cantor Fitzgerald employees, including his brother. He then became

widely recognized

for leading the firm’s recovery and his charitable work supporting the families of victims through the Cantor Fitzgerald Relief Fund.

In government, Lutnick has been a

vocal advocate

for aggressive trade policies, including broad tariffs, and oversees major economic initiatives such as semiconductor manufacturing and broadband expansion.

 U.S. Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick disembarks from Air Force One on May 4, 2025.

What does he do as secretary of commerce?

He oversees the Department of Commerce

, which employs about 50,000 people and manages a wide range of activities, including collecting economic data (like the census), issuing weather reports, and running agencies such as the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

A key element of his role is to implement and manage U.S. trade policy, especially President Trump’s aggressive tariff agenda, negotiating trade deals, and enforcing trade restrictions with both allies and adversaries.

He also advocates for American industries in international trade negotiations.

He has been overseeing federal investments in

technology and infrastructure

, such as funding new semiconductor (computer chip) factories, expanding broadband access, and advancing domestic mining and manufacturing.

He shapes U.S. policy on artificial intelligence, semiconductors, and technology exports, including restricting certain technologies from being transferred abroad and advising on cryptocurrency regulation.

What is Lutnick’s view of Trump’s tariffs?

Lutnick is a strong public supporter of tariffs as a tool to protect American industry and reset the global trade balance. He has repeatedly

defended President Trump’s aggressive tariff policies

, arguing that they are necessary to revive U.S. manufacturing and address what he describes as decades of unfair treatment by other countries.

He has stated that the new tariffs are

“here to stay”

and not open to negotiation, emphasizing that this marks a major shift in U.S. trade policy.

And he

insists

“the rest of the world has been ripping us off for all these many years” and that the U.S. must now “protect ourselves.” Lutnick has also said that companies unhappy with tariffs should consider moving their production to the United States.

However, while he is a vocal advocate for tariffs in public,

behind the scenes, Lutnick has reportedly sometimes urged a more moderate approach

, including proposing delays or targeted relief for certain industries when market turmoil or business concerns arise.

Lutnick believes America’s

manufacturing

,

auto

, agriculture and

tech

industries will benefit most from tariffs.

 President Donald Trump speaks in the Oval Office, on April 17, as Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick looks on.

What is Lutnick’s position on Canada?

Lutnick takes a skeptical and confrontational stance toward Canada regarding trade. He has repeatedly referred to Canada as a “socialist regime” that is economically dependent on the United States and benefits disproportionately from the relationship. He questions

why the U.S. manufactures cars and produces films in Canada

, suggesting that these practices should be reconsidered to favour American industry.

He has been critical of Canada’s retaliatory tariffs in response to U.S. steel and aluminum tariffs,

blasting them as “tone deaf.”

Although he has occasionally hinted at the possibility of compromise or scaling back tariffs, his

overall position remains

that the U.S. must be treated with more respect and that the current trade dynamic is unbalanced.

How has Canada responded to Lutnick’s comments?

Canada has responded to Lutnick’s comments on tariffs and the broader U.S. tariff policy by taking a firm, measured approach.

Mark Carney has publicly rejected

Lutnick’s and Trump’s aggressive stance, declaring that America’s threats to “weaken us so that America can claim ownership” will “never … ever occur,” while also acknowledging that the relationship has fundamentally shifted.

However, despite the tensions, Carney has also struck a conciliatory note, emphasizing a desire for continued partnership even amid disagreements.

Canadian officials described recent meetings with Lutnick as “constructive,” but made clear they

do not expect immediate changes to the U.S. administration’s “punishing tariffs.”

Canada continues to seek dialogue while maintaining its countermeasures, as seen in the Oval Office meeting.

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.


Parti Quebecois Leader Paul St-Pierre Plamondon during question period Tuesday, November 19, 2024 at the legislature in Quebec City.

OTTAWA — Alberta Premier Danielle Smith has an ally in Quebec and his name is Paul St-Pierre Plamondon, the Parti Québécois leader.

A day after Smith threatened the federal government of including a referendum question on separation in 2026 if her province didn’t have the Accord, she thinks it deserves with Ottawa, St-Pierre Plamondon said Smith made a “striking gesture” for the “autonomy and defence of her own province.”

“It doesn’t matter what referendum they hold, because obviously it’s under construction. But I totally agree with provinces that stand up, that are loyal to their own Parliament, that are capable of showing a strong hand. And that’s the key word, strong hand,” said St-Pierre Plamondon, who is often called PSPP in Quebec.

In a in a

livestreamed address Monday

, Premier Smith called on Prime Minister Mark Carney to negotiate a new deal between Ottawa and Alberta guaranteeing more pipelines and changes to equalization.

“We hope this will result in a binding agreement that Albertans can have confidence in. Call it an ‘Alberta accord’,” said Smith who then called Alberta’s separation “the elephant in the room.”

“The vast majority of (separatists) are not fringe voices… They are loyal Albertans,” she said. “They’re … our friends and neighbours who’ve just had enough of having their livelihoods and prosperity attacked by a hostile federal government.”

At a press conference at Quebec’s National Assembly, St-Pierre Plamondon said it was a “good thing” if other provinces are able to “stand up to the federal government”.

He added that “other provinces are showing” that Canada has issues that affect all provinces in terms of “abuse of power”.

St-Pierre Plamondon then went on the offensive against the province’s journalists for not covering

the rebound in support of Quebec secession

.

A recent Postmedia-Leger poll

revealed that support for Quebec independence, which had fallen below 30 per cent in recent month, sits back at nearly 40 per cent.

Even though Canada is engaged in a tariff war with its closest ally, support for Quebec independence has reached 36 per cent according to new data.

“The most recent and most precise information is the independence of Quebec at 40 per cent, it is the increase in independence in Alberta,” he said.

Léger also polled Canadians from all provinces about their opinion about their province’s independence. The result was that 29 per cent of Albertans supported Alberta sovereignty while an overwhelming majority of the 2,309 respondents (71 per cent) were opposed.

National Post
atrepanier@postmedia.com

Get more deep-dive National Post political coverage and analysis in your inbox with the Political Hack newsletter, where Ottawa bureau chief Stuart Thomson and political analyst Tasha Kheiriddin get at what’s really going on behind the scenes on Parliament Hill every Wednesday and Friday, exclusively for subscribers. Sign up here.

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.


Don Davies at an NDP office in Vancouver, B.C, April 28, 2025.

The New Democratic Party of Canada has chosen Don Davies as its new interim leader, after Jagmeet Singh announced his resignation as head of the party. Singh lost his own Burnaby Central seat in British Columbia in the April 28 federal election.

Who is Don Davies?

Don Davies was born in Edmonton in 1963 and earned a Bachelor of Arts in political science and a Bachelor of Laws at the University of Alberta. He worked as a researcher at the Legislative Assembly of Alberta and an assistant in policy and communications for Ray Martin during his time as NDP leader of the official opposition of Alberta.

Davies later moved to Vancouver and was first elected to the House of Commons in 2008 in the riding of Vancouver Kingsway. He has won six straight elections in that riding, although the latest, in this year’s election, was his narrowest victory when he beat Liberal candidate Amy Gill by just over 300 votes.

What Parliamentary groups does he belong to?

Davies has a

long list of membership

in Parliamentary associations and inter-Parliamentary groups. He is currently a vice-chair of the Canada-China Legislative Association, which provides a forum for the discussion of challenges facing the two countries and the Asia-Pacific region. He is also a member of the executive of the Canada-Europe Parliamentary Association, a similar group that fosters the exchange of information and ideas between Canadian parliamentarians and those from Europe.

Davies has also been also a member of the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians since 2020, his term ending when the latest election was called. He was also named the NDP’s

critic for finance

in April, ahead of the election.

How was he chosen as interim leader?

In a statement, the NDP said its Federal Council had made the decision in consultation with its reduced caucus.

“While the recent election results were not what we hoped for, our commitment to building a better Canada has never been stronger,” party president Mary Shortall said in a statement.

She added: “With a renewed sense of purpose, we will hold the government to account and keep fighting for the issues we heard about on doorsteps across the country – public health care, affordable homes, good jobs, and making the ultra-rich finally pay their fair share.”

What’s next for Davies?

The NDP fared poorly in the election, dropping to 7 seats from 24, and falling short of the 12-seat threshold required to retain

official party status

. So Davies will not have access to the budgets and staff positions available to the official parties in the House of Commons.

Add to this the fact that Alberta’s New Democratic Party has

voted overwhelmingly

to cut traditional membership ties with the federal NDP. Delegates in Edmonton voted on Saturday to allow provincial members to opt out of joining the federal NDP, a move its leader, Naheed Nenshi, campaigned on last year.

And Charlie Angus, a former NDP MP who did not run in the latest election,

told the Canadian Press

that the party lost touch with its core supporters by focusing too much on Singh.

“I think it’d be really dangerous to tell ourselves that we were simply the victims of strategic voting, and it was the times and there was nothing we could do,” he said. “We stopped being the New Democratic Party of Canada some time ago and we became a leader-driven movement.”

When will a permanent leader be chosen?

No date has been set for when the party will choose its permanent leader.

NDP MPs Leah Gazan (Winnipeg Centre) and Jenny Kwan (Vancouver East)

told National Post

they did not rule out running for permanent party leadership to help “rebuild the movement,” but said they were focused on meeting with caucus mates and party members first.

Other’s who have signalled they might consider a run for NDP leadership include former MP

Ruth Ellen Brosseau

, outgoing Montreal Mayor

Valérie Plante

and NDP MP Heather McPherson. Quebec MP and party stalwart Alexandre Boulerice had been considered by many as a leading contender for interim leadership.

— With files from Canadian Press

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.