this post was submitted on 21 Mar 2025
33 points (94.6% liked)

Canada

9064 readers
1719 users here now

What's going on Canada?

Related Communities

🍁 Meta

🗺️ Provinces / Territories

🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.

🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer

💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.

💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales

🗣️ Politics

🍁 Social / Culture

Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
otter@lemmy.ca
mp3@lemmy.ca
33
Ford stands by Chinese EV tariffs, Moe says they protect ‘non-existent’ Ontario industry (globalnews.ca)
submitted 1 day ago by NightOwl@lemmy.ca to c/canada@lemmy.ca
17 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

The Chinese government promised a 100 per cent levy on Canadian canola oil and meal, plus a 25 per cent duty on seafood and pork. Those tariffs on Canadian goods imported to China kick in on Thursday.

As the tariffs take effect, Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe called on the federal government to remove its levies on electric vehicles amid fears that his province could face job losses and face the brunt of the blowback.

Moe pointedly called it “a Western Canadian expense at the benefit of a non-existent EV auto industry in Eastern Canada.”

Faced with calls to rethink the tariffs, Ford’s office said the premier continues to back the tax on Chinese-made vehicles.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] wampus@lemmy.ca 5 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

Western Canadian here (BC) -- I agree with Moe on this one.

Tariffs on them imply they're still generally safe to use / drive -- it's not a 'ban' after all, for being unfit for the road or a security risk. Tariffs make sense to some degree if/when there's a local industry you're protecting, especially if/when the good is a luxury.

In the case of EVs though, getting off of gas is a priority in terms of reducing emissions / combating climate change -- it's not so much a luxury even, given how many of our cities are designed for car-oriented travel. I'd rather we had $20k EV options from BYD, rather than we continued to push gas cars and/or EVs that are in the $40-50k from US manufacturers, as it'd mean faster adoption of EVs and faster exit from gas cars. We have literally had multiple cities burn to the ground due to climate change lately. You'd think we'd be above political nonsense on this subject.

[–] rabber@lemmy.ca -2 points 19 hours ago (2 children)

EVs aren't going to save the environment. There's still emissions, it's just not coming directly from the car's exhaust

[–] OminousOrange@lemmy.ca 3 points 15 hours ago

EVs have lower lifetime CO2e emissions, even when the grid is quite carbon intensive. I agree that walkable development and widely available transit alternatives would be better, but EVs are a step in the right direction. Transforming car-dependent cities is not going to happen overnight.

[–] wampus@lemmy.ca 5 points 19 hours ago

"This one thing won't be a magic bullet that saves the environment, so we shouldn't do it!" .... huh?

They're less damaging overall, and more sustainable.