Afternoon front page: The importance of teaching Canadian history; is Trump escalating the trade war?; and more
- A 2025 poll revealed many young Canadians lack awareness of historical concepts like Manifest Destiny, sparking debate among educators about how much and whose history should be taught in schools.
- An economist commented that recent adjustments to tariffs under Trump’s trade policies should not be seen as an escalation in trade tensions.
- British Columbia’s government, led by David Eby, has introduced “Never 51st State” signs to express opposition to certain U.S. policies.
- In Quebec, concerns have risen over U.S. eggs being sold domestically during high demand periods, despite ongoing lobbying to maintain Canada’s supply-management system for agriculture.
It’s Wednesday, September 9. Here are the top stories we’re following today.
A 2025 poll showed that “an alarming proportion of (young Canadians) … didn’t see the threat posed by Trump and Manifest Destiny. They had no idea what Manifest Destiny is, so how can you confront it?” says one advocate for increased history education. Many educators agree schools should devote more time to teaching history. But there is disagreement on how much — and whose version of — history to teach.
Read the story
“I think the overall effect might be limited. Adjusting what products are covered by the tariffs isn’t something that should be, in my view, interpreted as escalation,” one economist says of Trump’s latest trade proclamations.
Read the story
The new signs, with their ‘Never 51st State’ message, are one of several measures that David Eby’s government has taken to signal its displeasure with U.S. policy
Read the story
There has been much angst in Quebec lately over the discovery that on occasions when demand is too high, eggs from the U.S. are being sold in Canada, Selley writes. He notes that one of the companies doing this regularly lobbies Ottawa to maintain the supply-management system, which is meant to prevent overproduction and underproduction.
Read the column
“We got along extremely well in the latter half of the 19th century and the early 20th century when we both kind of agreed that we don’t want to trade with each other. That was not an antagonistic time. It’s modern global rules-based trade that creates all this antagonism, where people are trained to think of tariffs as a sanction,” says Charles Benoit of Coalition for a Prosperous America.
Read the story