By KEN MORITSUGU and ROB GILLIES, Associated Press

BEIJING (AP) — Breaking with the United States, Canada has agreed to cut its 100% tariff on Chinese electric cars in return for lower tariffs on Canadian farm products, Prime Minister Mark Carney said Friday.

Carney made the announcement after two days of meetings with Chinese leaders. He said there would be an initial annual cap of 49,000 vehicles on Chinese EV exports to Canada, growing to about 70,000 over five years. China will reduce its total tariff on canola seeds, a major Canadian export, from 84% to about 15%, he told reporters.

Canada’s Prime Minister Mark Carney, center, arrives to meet with Chinese President Xi Jinping, at the Great Hall of the People in Beijing, China, Friday, Jan. 16, 2026. (AP Photo/Vincent Thian, Pool)

“Our relationship has progressed in recent months with China. It is more predictable and you see results coming from that,” Carney said.

Carney hasn’t been able to reach a deal with U.S. President Donald Trump to reduce some tariffs that are punishing some key sectors of the Canadian economy and Trump has previously talked about making Canada the 51st state.

Earlier Friday, Carney and Chinese leader Xi Jinping pledged to improve relations between their two nations after years of acrimony.

Xi told Carney in a meeting at the Great Hall of the People that he is willing to continue working to improve ties, noting that talks have been underway on restoring and restarting cooperation since the two held an initial meeting in October on the sidelines of a regional economic conference in South Korea.

Carney looks to improve global governance

Carney, the first Canadian prime minister to visit China in eight years, told Xi that better relations would help improve a global governance system that he described as “under great strain.”

Chinese President Xi Jinping, centre, reacts during a meeting with Canada’s Prime Minister Mark Carney (not in the picture), at the Great Hall of the People in Beijing, China, Friday, Jan. 16, 2026. (AP Photo/Vincent Thian, Pool)

Later, he said at the news conference that the system may give way at least in part to country-to-country or regional agreements rather than the global ones that have underpinned economic growth in the post-World War II era.

“The question is: What gets built in that place? How much of a patchwork is it?” he said.

The new reality reflects in large part the so-called America-first approach of Trump. The tariffs he has imposed have hit both the Canadian and Chinese economies. Carney, who has met with several leading Chinese companies in Beijing, said ahead of his trip that his government is focused on building an economy less reliant on the U.S. at what he called “a time of global trade disruption.”

A Canadian business owner in China called Carney’s visit game-changing, saying it re-establishes dialogue, respect and a framework between the two nations.

“These three things we didn’t have,” said Jacob Cooke, the CEO of WPIC Marketing + Technologies, which helps exporters navigate the Chinese market. “The parties were not talking for years.”

Canada had been aligned with US on tariffs

Canada had followed the U.S. in putting tariffs of 100% on EVs from China and 25% on steel and aluminum under former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, Carney’s predecessor.

Related Articles

Taiwan hails its ‘best’ trade deal with US, as China protests

Prayer leader in Iran and the faithful call for executions over protests, a red line for Trump

Today in History: January 16, Wayne Newton performs 25,000th Las Vegas show

An app’s blunt life check adds another layer to the loneliness crisis in China

US and Taiwan sign $250B trade deal, cutting tariffs on Taiwanese goods

China responded by imposing duties of 100% on Canadian canola oil and meal and 25% on pork and seafood. It added a 75.8% tariff on canola seeds last August. Collectively, the import taxes effectively closed the Chinese market to Canadian canola, an industry group has said. Overall, China’s imports from Canada fell 10.4% last year to $41.7 billion, according to Chinese trade data.

Carney tried to address the concerns of Canadian automakers and auto workers by saying the initial cap on Chinese EV imports was about 3% of the 1.8 million vehicles sold in Canada annually and that, in exchange, China is expected to begin investing in the Canadian auto industry within three years.

“We’re building (a) new part of our car industry, building cars of the future in partnership, bringing affordable autos for Canadians at a time when affordability is top of mind, and doing it at a scale that allows for a smooth transition in the sector,” he said.

“For the exchange of a small piece of the Canadian market, we have a commitment. We are waiting for an investment commitment in Canada. The real leaders of the new industry. So it’s an agreement that will create the future for our industry.”

But Ontario Premier Doug Ford, the leader of Canada’s most populous province where the country’s auto sector is based, blasted the deal.

“Make no mistake: China now has a foothold in the Canadian market and will use it to their full advantage at the expense of Canadian workers,” Ford posted on social media.

“Worse, by lowering tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles this lopsided deal risks closing the door on Canadian automakers to the American market, our largest export destination.”

China sees an opening under Trump

China is hoping Trump’s pressure tactics on allies such as Canada will drive them to pursue a foreign policy that is less aligned with the United States. The U.S. president has suggested Canada could become America’s 51st state.

Carney, though, noted Canada’s relationship with the U.S. is much more multifaceted, deeper and broader. Canada and China have different systems and disagree on issues such as human rights, he said, limiting the scope of their engagement even as they seek ways to cooperate on areas of common interest.

The Canadian leader leaves China on Saturday and visits Qatar on Sunday before attending the annual gathering of the World Economic Forum in Switzerland next week. He will meet business leaders and investors in Qatar to promote trade and investment, his office said.

Gillies reported from Toronto. Associated Press business writer Chan Ho-him in Hong Kong contributed to this report.

By HANNAH SCHOENBAUM and MATTHEW BROWN, Associated Press

SALT LAKE CITY (AP) — The 22-year-old Utah man charged with killing conservative activist Charlie Kirk is due back in court Friday as his attorneys seek to disqualify prosecutors in the case over an alleged conflict of interest.

Related Articles

Today in History: January 16, Wayne Newton performs 25,000th Las Vegas show

Ex-Sen. Kyrsten Sinema sued for allegedly breaking up bodyguard’s marriage

CDC studies show value of nationwide wastewater disease surveillance, as potential funding cut looms

Postal Service unveils new Muhammad Ali stamp in champ’s hometown

Kaiser affiliates will pay $556M to settle a lawsuit alleging Medicare fraud

Tyler Robinson is charged with aggravated murder in Kirk’s Sept. 10 shooting on the Utah Valley University campus in Orem, just a few miles north of the Provo courthouse. Prosecutors with the Utah County Attorney’s Office plan to seek the death penalty if Robinson is convicted. Robinson has not yet entered a plea.

An 18-year-old child of a deputy county attorney attended the campus event where Kirk was shot. The child, whose name was redacted from court filings, later texted with their father in the Utah County Attorney’s Office to describe the chaotic events around the shooting, the filings from prosecutors and defense lawyers state.

Defense attorneys say that personal relationship is a conflict of interest that “raises serious concerns about past and future prosecutorial decision-making in this case,” according to court documents. They also argue that the “rush” to seek the death penalty against Robinson is evidence of “strong emotional reactions” by the prosecution and merits the disqualification of the entire team.

Several thousand people attended the outdoor rally where Kirk, a co-founder of Turning Point USA who helped mobilize young people to vote for President Donald Trump, was shot as he took questions from the audience. The child of the deputy county attorney did not see the shooting, according to an affidavit submitted by prosecutors.

“While the second person in line was speaking with Charlie, I was looking around the crowd when I heard a loud sound, like a pop. Someone yelled, ‘he’s been shot,’” the child stated in the affidavit.

The child later texted a family group chat to say “CHARLIE GOT SHOT.” In the aftermath of the shooting, the child did not miss classes or other activities, and reported no lasting trauma “aside from being scared at the time,” the affidavit said.

Prosecutors have asked District Judge Tony Graf to deny the disqualification request.

FILE – Fourth District Court Judge Tony Graf presides over a hearing for Tyler Robinson, who is accused of fatally shooting Charlie Kirk, Thursday, Dec. 11, 2025, in Provo, Utah. (Rick Egan/The Salt Lake Tribune via AP, Pool, File)

“Under these circumstances, there is virtually no risk, let alone a significant risk, that it would arouse such emotions in any father-prosecutor as to render him unable to fairly prosecute the case,” Utah County Attorney Jeffrey Gray said in a filing.

Gray also said the child was “neither a material witness nor a victim in the case” and that “nearly everything” the person knows about the actual homicide is mere hearsay.

The Associated Press left email and telephone messages for Robinson’s defense attorney, Kathryn Nester.

Prosecutors have said text messages and DNA evidence connect Robinson to the killing. Robinson reportedly texted his romantic partner that he targeted Kirk because he “had enough of his hatred.”

At recent hearings, Robinson’s legal team has pushed to limit media access in the high-profile case. Graf has prohibited media from publishing photos, videos and live broadcasts that show Robinson’s restraints to help protect his presumption of innocence before a trial.

The judge has not ruled on a suggestion by the defense to ban cameras in the courtroom.

Prosecutors are expected to lay out their case against Robinson at a preliminary hearing scheduled to begin May 18.

Brown reported from Billings, Montana.

By MATTHEW PERRONE, Associated Press Health Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Food and Drug Administration commissioner’s effort to drastically shorten the review of drugs favored by President Donald Trump’s administration is causing alarm across the agency, stoking worries that the plan may run afoul of legal, ethical and scientific standards long used to vet the safety and effectiveness of new medicines.

FILE – The Food and Drug Administration seal is seen at the Hubert Humphrey Building Auditorium in Washington, April 22, 2025. (AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana, File)

Marty Makary’s program is causing new anxiety and confusion among staff already rocked by layoffs, buyouts and leadership upheavals, according to seven current or recently departed staffers. The people spoke to The Associated Press on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss confidential agency matters.

At the highest levels of the FDA, questions remain about which officials have the legal authority to sign off on drugs cleared under the Commissioner’s National Priority Voucher program, which promises approval in as little as one month for medicines that support “U.S. national interests.”

Traditionally, approval decisions have nearly always been handled by FDA review scientists and their immediate supervisors, not the agency’s political appointees and senior leaders.

But drug reviewers say they’ve received little information about the new program’s workings. And some staffers working on a highly anticipated anti-obesity pill were recently told they can skip certain regulatory steps to meet top officials’ aggressive deadlines.

Outside experts point out that FDA drug reviews — which range from six to 10 months — are already the fastest in the world.

“The concept of doing a review in one to two months just does not have scientific precedent,” said Dr. Aaron Kesselheim, a professor at Harvard Medical School. “FDA cannot do the same detailed review that it does of a regular application in one to two months, and it doesn’t have the resources to do it.”

On Thursday Reuters reported that FDA officials have delayed the review of two drugs in the program, in part due to safety concerns, including the death of a patient taking one of the medications.

Health and Human Services spokesman Andrew Nixon said the voucher program prioritizes “gold standard scientific review” and aims to deliver “meaningful and effective treatments and cures.”

The program remains popular at the White House, where pricing concessions announced by the Republican president have repeatedly been accompanied by FDA vouchers for drugmakers that agree to cut their prices.

For instance, when the White House announced that Eli Lilly and Novo Nordisk would reduce prices on their popular obesity drugs, FDA staffers had to scramble to vet new vouchers for both companies in time for Trump’s news conference, according to multiple people involved in the process.

That’s sparked widespread concern that FDA drug reviews — long pegged to objective standards and procedures — have become open to political interference.

“It’s extraordinary to have such an opaque application process, one that is obviously susceptible to politicization,” said Paul Kim, a former FDA attorney who now works with pharmaceutical clients.

Top FDA officials declined to sign off on expedited approvals

Many of the concerns around the program stem from the fact that it hasn’t been laid out in federal rules and regulations.

Related Articles

Are Trump’s supporters getting what they want from his second term? Here’s what a new poll shows

Senators worry that US Postal Service changes could disenfranchise voters who cast ballots by mail

Democrats hope a blue wave washes over Wisconsin and gives them total control of battleground state

Top ICE official resigns to seek battleground congressional seat in Ohio

US names major sporting events other than World Cup, Olympics exempt from Trump visa ban

The FDA already has more than a half-dozen programs intended to speed up or streamline reviews for promising drugs — all approved by Congress, with regulations written by agency staff.

In contrast, information about the voucher program is mostly confined to an agency website. Drugmakers can apply by submitting a 350-word “statement of interest.”

Increasingly, agency leaders such as Dr. Vinay Prasad, the FDA’s top medical officer and vaccine center director, have been contacting drugmakers directly about awarding vouchers. That’s created quandaries for FDA staffers on even basic questions, such as how to formally award a voucher to a company that didn’t request one.

Nixon, the HHS spokesman, said that voucher submissions are evaluated by “a senior, multidisciplinary review committee,” led by Prasad.

Questions about the legality of the program led the FDA’s then-drug director, Dr. George Tidmarsh, to decline to sign off on approvals under the pathway, according to several people with direct knowledge of the matter. Tidmarsh resigned from the agency in November after a lawsuit challenging his conduct on issues unrelated to the voucher program.

After his departure, Sara Brenner, the FDA’s principal deputy commissioner, was set to have the power to decide, but she also declined the role after looking further into the legal implications, according to the people. Currently the agency’s deputy chief medical officer, Dr. Mallika Mundkur, who works under Prasad, is taking on the responsibility.

Giving final approval to a drug carries significant legal risks, essentially certifying that the medicine meets FDA standards for safety and effectiveness. If unexpected safety problems later emerge, both the agency and individual staffers could be pulled into investigations or lawsuits.

Traditionally, approval comes from FDA drug office directors, made in consultation with a team of reviewers. Under the voucher program, approval comes through a committee vote by senior agency leaders led by Prasad, according to multiple people familiar with the process. Staff reviewers don’t get a vote.

“It is a complete reversal from the normal review process, which is traditionally led by the scientists who are the ones immersed in the data,” said Kesselheim, who is a lawyer and a medical researcher.

Not everyone sees problems with the program. Dan Troy, the FDA’s top lawyer under President George W. Bush, a Republican, says federal law gives the commissioner broad discretion to reorganize the handling of drug reviews.

Still, he says, the voucher program, like many of Makary’s initiatives, may be short-lived because it isn’t codified.

“If you live by the press release then you die by the press release,” Troy said. “Anything that they’re doing now could be wiped out in a moment by the next administration.”

The voucher program has ballooned after outreach by FDA officials

Initially framed as a pilot program of no more than five drugs, it has expanded to 18 vouchers awarded, with more under consideration. That puts extra pressure on the agency’s drug center, where 20% of the staff has left through retirements, buyouts or resignations over the past year.

When Makary unveiled the program in October there were immediate concerns about the unprecedented power he would have in deciding which companies benefit.

Makary then said that nominations for drugs would come from career staffers. Indeed, some of the early drugs were recommended by FDA reviewers, according to two people familiar with the process. They said FDA staffers deliberately selected drugs that could be vetted quickly.

But, increasingly, selection decisions are led by Prasad or other senior officials, sometimes unbeknownst to FDA staff, according to three people. In one case, FDA reviewers learned from GlaxoSmithKline representatives that Prasad had contacted the company about a voucher.

Access to Makary is limited because he does not use a government email account to do business, according to people familiar with the matter, breaking with longstanding precedent.

Under pressure from drugmakers, some FDA reviewers were told they can skip steps

Once a voucher is awarded, some drugmakers have their own interpretation of the review timeline — creating further confusion and anxiety among staff.

Two people involved in the ongoing review of Eli Lilly’s anti-obesity pill said company executives initially told the FDA they expected the drug approved within two months.

The timeline alarmed FDA reviewers because it did not include the agency’s standard 60-day prefiling period, when staffers check the application to ensure it isn’t missing essential information. That 60-day window has been in place for more than 30 years.

Lilly pushed for a quicker filing turnaround, demanding one week. Eventually the agency and the company agreed to a two-week period.

Nixon declined to comment on the specifics of Lilly’s review but said FDA reviewers can “adjust timelines as needed.”

Staffers were pushed to keep the application moving forward, even though key pieces of data about the drug’s chemistry appeared to be missing. When reviewers raised concerns about some of the gaps during an internal meeting, they were told by one senior official: “If the science is sound then you can overlook the regulations.”

Former reviewers and outside experts say that approach is the opposite of how FDA reviews should work: By following the regulations, staffers scientifically confirm the safety and effectiveness of drugs.

Skipping review steps could also carry risks for drugmakers if future FDA leaders decide a drug wasn’t properly vetted. Like other experts, Kesselheim says the program may not last beyond the current administration.

“They are fundamentally changing the application of the standards, but the underlying law remains what it is,” he said. “The hope is that one day we will return to these scientifically sound, legally sound principles.”

The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Department of Science Education and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

Alary’s Bar in downtown St. Paul has decided to bring kitchen operations in-house after hosting an outside barbecue operation for a year.

Owner Bill Collins said the bar worked with chef Steve Hesse (Pajarito, Yankee Tavern, Lucky’s 13 and more) to help develop the menu, which leans into the establishment’s Chicago roots (it’s a Chicago Bears bar). Chef Javier Alcantara, formerly of Crave, Stellas and Grackle in Maple Grove, is heading up the kitchen.

The new menu includes Chicago favorites like Chicago Beef and a Chicago Dog, as well as Polish sausage. Other fun bar foods like tachos, buffalo chicken dip, wings and a few burgers round things out.

The switchover happened almost immediately after chef Mik German and his 328 Grill popped up in the space during the 2025 World Junior Ice Hockey Championships.

“We plan to slowly tweak the menu; I am guessing it will be a month or so before we dial it in,” Collins said.

Alary’s Bar: 139 E. Seventh St., St. Paul; 651-224-7717; alarys.com

Related Articles

5 tips — and dishes — to get your new year off to a healthy start

This easy cornbread is spicy-cheesy goodness

Gretchen’s Table: Re-create Anthony Bourdain’s beef bourguignon

Date-night dinner specials: Spoil your sweetie for less

This beef taco recipe from the cookbook ‘Plantas’ uses salsa for seasoning the meat