( MENAFN - Robotics & automation News) Opinion: Will autonomous cars ever gain regulatory approval to operate freely on public roads? The news that General Motors has decided to fold cruise into its overall business should send shock waves through the industry. If Cruise can't do it, with all its money and giant parent's backing, who can? Cruise is a relatively new startup which had huge optimism around it because several billion dollars were invested into it and a lot of people still believe autonomous cars are the future of global road traffic. But after burning through $10 billion and only generating $500 million in revenue, Cruise seems to have lost its parent company's confidence and has now been absorbed into the historic automotive giant, with its technology being repackaged into GM production cars as, essentially, an advanced driver assistance system called“Super Cruise”. The imminent disappearance of a specialist autonomous car developer of such a size raises the question of whether the nascent autonomous car sector has any hope at all to become a sizeable market. Or whether a combination of regulatory hurdles, public apprehension and technological limitations will turn everything into the proverbial white elephant, with tens of billions invested and little to nothing in return. Autonomous vehicles represent a technological leap that had promised – and still promises – to revolutionise transportation. Its proponents are always keen to promote the potential to reduce accidents, improve traffic efficiency, and lower emissions. Despite unconvincing evidence for such claims, these vehicles are often heralded as the future of mobility. Yet, despite years of development and billions of dollars in investments, their widespread adoption remains uncertain – unless you're watching sci-fi films, in which case they are everywhere. The critical question is: Are autonomous cars safe enough to convince regulators and governments to allow them to operate freely on public roads? This article explores the safety, regulatory, and economic dimensions of this question, using examples from test programs around the globe and examining what the future holds for the industry. Over the past decade, autonomous vehicle technology has advanced significantly. Companies like Waymo, Tesla, and Baidu have made strides in areas such as lidar, AI-powered navigation, and vehicle-to-vehicle communication. For instance, Waymo has conducted extensive trials in Phoenix, Arizona, where its driverless taxis operate under controlled conditions. Similarly, Tesla's Full Self-Driving (FSD) system, while controversial, has amassed vast amounts of real-world driving data. Despite these advancements, challenges persist. Autonomous systems often struggle with so-called“edge cases” – rare but critical scenarios like erratic pedestrian behaviour or ambiguous road markings. Additionally, sensor reliability in adverse weather conditions, such as heavy rain or snow, remains a major hurdle. These limitations underline the gap between the promise of autonomous vehicles and their readiness for unrestricted use on public roads. Taken together, these technological limitations mean that fully autonomous vehicles on regular public roads are not going to happen in the foreseeable future. In 10-15 years maybe, possibly, but not anytime before that. But that's just our view. Regulators worldwide are cautious about allowing autonomous vehicles to operate freely. Safety is the foremost concern: any failure in an autonomous vehicle system could have catastrophic consequences. Governments and regulatory bodies demand near-zero failure rates, a standard that current technology emphatically has not met. Examples of regulatory roadblocks abound. In California, stringent testing requirements have slowed the implementation of autonomous vehicles, even for companies with significant technological prowess. In Europe, regulators have adopted a similarly cautious approach, emphasising strict compliance with safety standards and liability frameworks. Public perception also plays a significant role; incidents like the fatal Uber self-driving car crash in 2018 have prompted scepticism and heightened scrutiny. And with good reason. The fact is that, in completely new and unforeseen situations, an autonomous car cannot use its own judgment because it hasn't got any; and the data it has been trained on won't help because it doesn't contain any information about this new and novel situation because it may never have happened before or even have been imagined before. So, bridging the gap between current capabilities and regulatory expectations is a formidable task. Autonomous systems must achieve a level of reliability that matches or exceeds human drivers while addressing the unpredictability of human behaviour. Unfair though it may be, autonomous driving technology has got to surpass human drivers in many ways for it to convince the public. While advances in AI and machine learning show promise, they may never fully eliminate the edge cases that confound autonomous vehicles systems. Ethical dilemmas also complicate the path forward. Decision-making algorithms face scenarios akin to the classic trolley problem: should the car prioritise the safety of its passengers or pedestrians? Resolving these questions in a manner acceptable to regulators, insurers, and the public is crucial for autonomous vehicles to gain approval. And that is very unlikely in the near-term future. Yes, many autonomous vehicles are being operated on large, industrial sites or transport hubs where there are no pedestrians and far few obstacles, but the chaos of some public roads in the world would basically overload the circuits of a typical autonomous car – it just would not be able to cope. General Motors' decision to close Cruise highlights the immense challenges facing the industry. Despite years of development and significant investment, Cruise's progress was insufficient to justify continued funding. This move raises broader questions about the viability of autonomous vehicle companies. Other players in the field are adopting varied strategies. Waymo, for example, has pivoted toward partnerships with logistics and ride-hailing companies to create practical, revenue-generating applications for its technology. Meanwhile, Tesla continues to position its FSD system as a consumer-oriented product, albeit with significant controversy surrounding its safety claims. These differing approaches reflect the uncertainty and high stakes of the autonomous vehicle market. If autonomous vehicles were to gain regulatory approval, the market potential is immense. Estimates from McKinsey suggest that the global autonomous vehicles market could reach $1.6 trillion annually by 2030, encompassing ride-hailing, freight, and last-mile delivery. However, this growth depends on overcoming regulatory and technological hurdles, as well as public acceptance, none of which – as has been said repeatedly in this article but needs to be emphasised – has been done. Geographical differences also shape the market's outlook. Some analysts say that urban centres, with their dense populations and structured environments, are“more likely” to adopt autonomous vehicles than rural areas. They might point to countries like China, which have shown a willingness to rapidly implement emerging technologies, but we would argue that such an example is not appropriate. In fact, the opposite is more likely – there are fewer obstacles and complications on rural roads, desert roads and so on, so it stands to reason that autonomous cars will be better suited to such environments. Still, China might currently be leading the way, but that's because Chinese regulators are apparently not as strict in some ways as their counterparts in Europe and America. China still probably considers itself an emerging economy and may take risks that mature economies would not take in order to enable an apparently promising sector like autonomous vehicles to grow. That is a problem for many reasons, not least of which is that a less regulated environment may lead to faster refinement of the technology through trial and error – no matter how dangerous to humans that refinement process is. China, being the largest car market in the world, could incorporate autonomous cars into its public road system earlier than the West, which means that European and American car companies that are still developing autonomous cars should be able to get the returns on their investments over there. And then, maybe, eventually, sell in Europe and in America and the rest of the world. Regulatory caution in the US and Europe may slow progress in their respective regions, but that doesn't mean that they can't enter the market at a later stage. When Japanese watchmakers started producing cheap quartz watches in the 1960s and '70s, they nearly killed off the entire Swiss watchmaking industry. But the technological shift had to take place. Switzerland was essentially stuck in past, with unions and regulators preventing the modernisation of the watchmaking sector. But when quartz watches outsold mechanical watches for the first time in 1970, the Swiss watchmakers realised they had to change. Switzerland reorganised itself to adapt and is still the fourth-largest watchmaking nation in the world today . Similarly, when Japanese carmakers produced cheap, reliable cars that put European and American cars to shame because of their constant breaking down and so on – let's be honest – it forced Western carmakers to improve the product and that, in turn, led to maintaining a very large worldwide market share. At least half the car brands in any top 10 global list will be American or European car companies. The dream of autonomous vehicles operating freely on public roads remains elusive. In fact, for now, it could be argued that it's nothing but a pipe dream. Technological challenges, regulatory hurdles, and public scepticism form significant barriers that will take years, if not decades, to overcome. While we do believe that autonomous cars and vehicles will eventually outnumber human-driven cars on the road, that eventuality is more than a decade away – we'd say several decades but we don't want to depress everyone too much. Companies developing autonomous cars face tough decisions about whether to continue investing in this space or pivot to other opportunities, like GM has decided. While the market potential is vast, making money in it requires substantial breakthroughs in both technology and policy. As the industry navigates these complexities, one question looms large: Will autonomous vehicles ever be safe enough to earn the approval of the regulators and the trust of the public? Until that question is answered, the road to widespread adoption will remain a long and rocky one. MENAFN13122024005532012229ID1108992067 Legal Disclaimer: MENAFN provides the information “as is” without warranty of any kind. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, images, videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information contained in this article. If you have any complaints or copyright issues related to this article, kindly contact the provider above.Michigan upsets No. 2 Ohio State 13-10 for Wolverines' 4th straight win over bitter rival
Bruno Delamarre Named Senior VP for Noventiq in MEAThurston County Sheriff's Office gets federal grant to purchase two more 'Grappler Police Bumper' systems
A 7-year-old rivalry between tech leaders Elon Musk and Sam Altman over who should run OpenAI and prevent an artificial intelligence "dictatorship" is now heading to a federal judge as Musk seeks to halt the ChatGPT maker's ongoing shift into a for-profit company. Musk, an early OpenAI investor and board member, sued the artificial intelligence company earlier this year alleging it had betrayed its founding aims as a nonprofit research lab benefiting the public good rather than pursuing profits. Musk has since escalated the dispute, adding new claims and asking for a court order that would stop OpenAI’s plans to convert itself into a for-profit business more fully. The world's richest man, whose companies include Tesla, SpaceX and social media platform X, last year started his own rival AI company, xAI. Musk says it faces unfair competition from OpenAI and its close business partner Microsoft, which has supplied the huge computing resources needed to build AI systems such as ChatGPT. “OpenAI and Microsoft together exploiting Musk’s donations so they can build a for-profit monopoly, one now specifically targeting xAI, is just too much,” says Musk's filing that alleges the companies are violating the terms of Musk’s foundational contributions to the charity. OpenAI filed a response Friday opposing Musk’s requested order, saying it would “debilitate OpenAI’s business” and mission to the advantage of Musk and his own AI company and is based on “far-fetched” legal claims. A hearing is set for January before U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers in Oakland, California. At the heart of the dispute is a 2017 internal power struggle at the fledgling startup that led to Altman becoming OpenAI's CEO. Musk also sought to be CEO and in an email outlined a plan where he would “unequivocally have initial control of the company” but said that would be temporary. He grew frustrated after two other OpenAI co-founders said he would hold too much power as a major shareholder and chief executive if the startup succeeded in its goal to achieve better-than-human AI known as artificial general intelligence , or AGI. Musk has long voiced concerns about how advanced forms of AI could threaten humanity. “The current structure provides you with a path where you end up with unilateral absolute control over the AGI," said a 2017 email to Musk from co-founders Ilya Sutskever and Greg Brockman. “You stated that you don't want to control the final AGI, but during this negotiation, you've shown to us that absolute control is extremely important to you.” In the same email, titled “Honest Thoughts,” Sutskever and Brockman also voiced concerns about Altman's desire to be CEO and whether he was motivated by “political goals.” Altman eventually succeeded in becoming CEO, and has remained so except for a period last year when he was fired and then reinstated days later after the board that ousted him was replaced. OpenAI published the messages Friday in a blog post meant to show its side of the story, particularly Musk's early support for the idea of making OpenAI a for-profit business so it could raise money for the hardware and computer power that AI needs. It was Musk, through his wealth manager Jared Birchall, who first registered “Open Artificial Intelligence Technologies, Inc.,” a public benefit corporation, in September 2017. Then came the “Honest Thoughts” email that Musk described as the “final straw.” “Either go do something on your own or continue with OpenAI as a nonprofit,” Musk wrote back. OpenAI said Musk later proposed merging the startup into Tesla before resigning as the co-chair of OpenAI's board in early 2018. Musk didn't respond to emailed requests for comment sent to his companies Friday. Asked about his frayed relationship with Musk at a New York Times conference last week, Altman said he felt “tremendously sad” but also characterized Musk’s legal fight as one about business competition. “He’s a competitor and we’re doing well,” Altman said. He also said at the conference that he is “not that worried” about the Tesla CEO’s influence with President-elect Donald Trump. OpenAI said Friday that Altman plans to make a $1 million personal donation to Trump’s inauguration fund, joining a number of tech companies and executives who are working to improve their relationships with the incoming administration. —————————— The Associated Press and OpenAI have a licensing and technology agreement allowing OpenAI access to part of the AP’s text archives. This story has been updated to correct the name of the company registered in 2017. It was Open Artificial Intelligence Technologies, Inc., not Open Artificial Technologies Technologies, Inc.WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. (AP) — An online spat between factions of Donald Trump's supporters over immigration and the tech industry has thrown internal divisions in his political movement into public display, previewing the fissures and contradictory views his coalition could bring to the White House. The rift laid bare the tensions between the newest flank of Trump's movement — wealthy members of the tech world including billionaire Elon Musk and fellow entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy and their call for more highly skilled workers in their industry — and people in Trump's Make America Great Again base who championed his hardline immigration policies. The debate touched off this week when Laura Loomer , a right-wing provocateur with a history of racist and conspiratorial comments, criticized Trump’s selection of Sriram Krishnan as an adviser on artificial intelligence policy in his coming administration. Krishnan favors the ability to bring more skilled immigrants into the U.S. Loomer declared the stance to be “not America First policy” and said the tech executives who have aligned themselves with Trump were doing so to enrich themselves. Much of the debate played out on the social media network X, which Musk owns. Loomer's comments sparked a back-and-forth with venture capitalist and former PayPal executive David Sacks , whom Trump has tapped to be the “White House A.I. & Crypto Czar." Musk and Ramaswamy, whom Trump has tasked with finding ways to cut the federal government , weighed in, defending the tech industry's need to bring in foreign workers. It bloomed into a larger debate with more figures from the hard-right weighing in about the need to hire U.S. workers, whether values in American culture can produce the best engineers, free speech on the internet, the newfound influence tech figures have in Trump's world and what his political movement stands for. Trump has not yet weighed in on the rift. His presidential transition team did not respond to questions about positions on visas for highly skilled workers or the debate between his supporters online. Instead, his team instead sent a link to a post on X by longtime adviser and immigration hard-liner Stephen Miller that was a transcript of a speech Trump gave in 2020 at Mount Rushmore in which he praised figures and moments from American history. Musk, the world's richest man who has grown remarkably close to the president-elect , was a central figure in the debate, not only for his stature in Trump's movement but his stance on the tech industry's hiring of foreign workers. Technology companies say H-1B visas for skilled workers, used by software engineers and others in the tech industry, are critical for hard-to-fill positions. But critics have said they undercut U.S. citizens who could take those jobs. Some on the right have called for the program to be eliminated, not expanded. Born in South Africa, Musk was once on an a H-1B visa himself and defended the industry's need to bring in foreign workers. “There is a permanent shortage of excellent engineering talent," he said in a post. “It is the fundamental limiting factor in Silicon Valley.” Trump's own positions over the years have reflected the divide in his movement. His tough immigration policies, including his pledge for a mass deportation, were central to his winning presidential campaign. He has focused on immigrants who come into the U.S. illegally but he has also sought curbs on legal immigration , including family-based visas. As a presidential candidate in 2016, Trump called the H-1B visa program “very bad” and “unfair” for U.S. workers. After he became president, Trump in 2017 issued a “Buy American and Hire American” executive order , which directed Cabinet members to suggest changes to ensure H-1B visas were awarded to the highest-paid or most-skilled applicants to protect American workers. Trump's businesses, however, have hired foreign workers, including waiters and cooks at his Mar-a-Lago club , and his social media company behind his Truth Social app has used the the H-1B program for highly skilled workers. During his 2024 campaign for president, as he made immigration his signature issue, Trump said immigrants in the country illegally are “poisoning the blood of our country" and promised to carry out the largest deportation operation in U.S. history. But in a sharp departure from his usual alarmist message around immigration generally, Trump told a podcast this year that he wants to give automatic green cards to foreign students who graduate from U.S. colleges. “I think you should get automatically, as part of your diploma, a green card to be able to stay in this country," he told the “All-In" podcast with people from the venture capital and technology world. Those comments came on the cusp of Trump's budding alliance with tech industry figures, but he did not make the idea a regular part of his campaign message or detail any plans to pursue such changes.
Area Dance Team: C-I sweeps for 2nd straight weekendA nonprofit leader, a social worker: Here are the stories of the people on Biden's clemency list
Victory Capital Management Inc. Has $3.34 Million Stock Position in Resideo Technologies, Inc. (NYSE:REZI)
Bunnings Partnered With Victoria Police On Controversial Facial Recognition Tech
Animals Don't miss out on the headlines from Animals. Followed categories will be added to My News. Japanese monkeys living in Launceston will be prevented from reproducing due to concerns of disease and inbreeding within the group. For more than 40 years, visitors to Launceston’s City Park have been able to view the macaques frolicking about in an enclosure. But by 20250 it is expected there will be no monkeys left in the park. In 2000, it was revealed the herpes B virus had spread through the monkeys, although previous discussions of euthanising the troop were politically unpopular. The monkeys which given to Launceston by Japanese sister city Ikeda in 1981. Picture: City of Launceston Now there are increasing concerns about a lack of genetic diversity within the group. The City of Launceston has decided to desex the male members of the macaque troop to prevent the animals from breeding. It is expected that the desexing of the troop will take two years to complete. The council said while it was grateful to receive the monkeys, by today’s standards they would not keep these animals in an enclosure. They also said it was important to take into consideration the needs of the monkeys and the greater community. On Thursday afternoon, a council meeting voted 10-1 in favour of sterilisation, after hearing there were signs of miscarriages and stillbirths in the troop. Japanese macaques play about in Launceston's City Park. Picture: City of Launceston “We know the Launceston community cares very much about the welfare of the City Park monkeys,” Launceston Mayor Matthew Garwood said. “That’s a sentiment that’s also very much shared by both councillors and staff. “The inability to introduce new genetic stock and the serious impacts on their health and wellbeing means we need to begin to consider the future of the troop. “[The] decision was a difficult one, but it prioritises the welfare of the monkey troop so we can keep them as healthy and happy as possible for as long as possible. Mr Garwood said he would write to the mayor of Ikeda following the decision. Councillor Andrea Dawkins said if the city was offered this same opportunity today the city would be unlikely take it. “There is a lot of interest in these monkeys as there should be because there is so much interest in the way humans react with animals and we take it for granted they are a part of our lives,” she said. “Communities have changed and animals in captivity for the enjoyment of humans is some; thing we’ve moved through.” Originally published as Launceston council to sterilise iconic Japanese macaques More related stories Animals Dog act: Moment sick dog dumped in yard A dog is set to have life saving surgery after it was allegedly dumped in a random yard with a heartbreaking note. Read more Animals Dire warning over Aussie tourist hotspot A major warning has been issued to tourists planning to visit an Australian hotspot known for its famous coastal scenery and marine populations. Read morePenn State seeks to stay perfect, takes on Fordham
The Borno State Government has approved N1.6 billion for the rehabilitation of 33 educational institutions affected by the recent floods in the state. The funding is aimed at restoring critical educational infrastructure and providing safe, conducive learning environments for students in the flood-impacted areas. Alhaji Lawan Abba-Wakilbe, the State’s Commissioner for Education, Science, Technology, and Innovation, made the announcement on Saturday, noting that the affected schools are spread across Maiduguri, Jere, Mafa, Konduga, Chibok, and Damboa local government areas, as reported by the News Agency of Nigeria. Related Stories Blackout in Borno, Yobe as vandals destroy Gombe-Maiduguri transmission three months after repair FG to partner private sector to create disaster relief fund, targets FAAC allocation “Borno Government says it has approved N1.6 billion for the rehabilitation of 33 educational institutions affected by the recent floods in the state. “The affected schools cut across Maiduguri, Jere, Mafa, Konduga, Chibok, and Damboa local government areas of the state. “Alhaji Lawan Abba-Wakilbe, the Commissioner for Education, Science, Technology, and Innovation announced this on Saturday in Maiduguri,” the NAN report read in part. Abba-Wakilbe noted that the rehabilitation effort is part of a broader plan to address the damages caused by the floods, which have disrupted education for many students in the state. The Commissioner emphasized the government’s strong commitment to restoring learning facilities and ensuring uninterrupted education. He noted that the N1.6 billion will be allocated directly to the affected schools through the School-Based Management Committees (SBMCs), which will oversee the implementation of the School Improvement Plan (SIP) for each institution. Abba-Wakilbe stressed that the committees have earned a reputation for effectively managing previous projects, and they will ensure that the rehabilitation funds are used efficiently. The amount allocated to each school will be determined based on the level of damage sustained. The Commissioner also announced that the rehabilitation initiative will extend beyond the schools to include the state’s Library Board and the Scholarship Board, further strengthening the restoration of educational resources across Borno. Abba-Wakilbe stressed that the Borno State Ministry of Education, Science, Technology, and Innovation has set up a monitoring team to ensure the proper use of the funds. To enhance transparency, he revealed that plans are also underway to engage an auditor and financial consultant to oversee the process. The Commissioner urged school management without operational accounts to open them promptly to facilitate the fund distribution. The report also noted that the announcement has received widespread support from educators and parents, with many expressing optimism that the rehabilitation efforts will help students return to a safer, more stable learning environment.Japanese monkeys living in Launceston will be prevented from reproducing due to concerns of disease and inbreeding within the group. For more than 40 years, visitors to Launceston’s City Park have been able to view the macaques frolicking about in an enclosure. But by 20250 it is expected there will be no monkeys left in the park. In 2000, it was revealed the herpes B virus had spread through the monkeys, although previous discussions of euthanising the troop were politically unpopular. Now there are increasing concerns about a lack of genetic diversity within the group. The City of Launceston has decided to desex the male members of the macaque troop to prevent the animals from breeding. It is expected that the desexing of the troop will take two years to complete. The council said while it was grateful to receive the monkeys, by today’s standards they would not keep these animals in an enclosure. They also said it was important to take into consideration the needs of the monkeys and the greater community. On Thursday afternoon, a council meeting voted 10-1 in favour of sterilisation, after hearing there were signs of miscarriages and stillbirths in the troop. “We know the Launceston community cares very much about the welfare of the City Park monkeys,” Launceston Mayor Matthew Garwood said. “That’s a sentiment that’s also very much shared by both councillors and staff. “The inability to introduce new genetic stock and the serious impacts on their health and wellbeing means we need to begin to consider the future of the troop. “[The] decision was a difficult one, but it prioritises the welfare of the monkey troop so we can keep them as healthy and happy as possible for as long as possible. Mr Garwood said he would write to the mayor of Ikeda following the decision. Councillor Andrea Dawkins said if the city was offered this same opportunity today the city would be unlikely take it. “There is a lot of interest in these monkeys as there should be because there is so much interest in the way humans react with animals and we take it for granted they are a part of our lives,” she said. “Communities have changed and animals in captivity for the enjoyment of humans is some; thing we’ve moved through.” Originally published as Launceston council to sterilise iconic Japanese macaquesSan Francisco Federal Building renamed in honor of Speaker Emeritus Nancy Pelosi
Thrivent Financial for Lutherans Sells 5,446 Shares of Vontier Co. (NYSE:VNT)NHL Trade Talk Prediction: Clock Ticking on Kuzmenko’s NHL Career
OTTAWA — A former chief adviser and close friend to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said Friday he doesn't think Trudeau will stay on to lead the Liberals in the next election. Gerald Butts wrote in a Substack newsletter that Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland's surprise resignation from cabinet last week dealt Trudeau a staggering blow that loosened his already tenuous grip on the party. His post came the same day the Conservatives said they will move to bring down the government as early as the end of January, by first moving a non-confidence motion in a House committee that will sit Jan. 7. Trudeau is said to be thinking about his future during the holiday break, as an increasing number of current and former Liberal MPs publicly call on him to step down for the good of the party. Butts said Trudeau was "unlikely" to lead the party into the next campaign before Freeland's stunning departure and is "now much less likely to do so." Just a week ago, Butts joined the Liberal Christmas party confab in Ottawa alongside Trudeau's longtime chief of staff and close confidant Katie Telford. Butts, who has been friends with Trudeau since they studied together at McGill University, and Telford were part of the original team Trudeau, helping craft both his leadership bid in 2013 and his first winning election campaign in 2015. Butts then served as Trudeau's principal secretary during the first Trudeau term. He wrote that the Liberals are back now to where they were before Trudeau took over the party in 2013, in terms of their popularity and voters viewing them as out-of-touch. Butts, who did not reply to requests for comment on Friday, said in his article that Freeland's sudden departure is bad news for the party and that it should prepare to hold a leadership race rather than anoint Freeland or anyone else as leader. "If, as is now widely expected, Mr. Trudeau’s resignation is imminent, the only way forward is a real leadership race," Butts wrote. "If you want to know who can play hockey, put on a hockey game. It doesn’t matter who you think you support at this moment, we’ll all have a more seasoned view if we see these people in live action." Trudeau has multiple options should he decide that he will not lead the Liberals into the next election but none of them leave a long runway for a leadership race. The longest option would see him prorogue Parliament for a stretch of time to give his party breathing room for a leadership race without having to face confidence votes that could force an election this winter. But Parliament would have to return within a few months, meaning the Liberals would not have very long for campaigning compared to past party leadership races. The last race that elected Trudeau as leader lasted nearly two years. Eddie Goldenberg, who was chief of staff to former Liberal prime minister Jean Chrétien, wrote a column in the wake of Freeland's surprise resignation arguing that a party leadership race would take too long to organize and properly execute. He called for the Liberals to instead install Freeland as leader, after seeing her get a surge in support for taking a stand against Trudeau. Butts is not the only one who thinks that's the wrong move. Trudeau's former environment minister Catherine McKenna last week also argued the party needs a "short, serious leadership race" in a comment she made to The Canadian Press shortly after Freeland quit. Public opinion polling in Canada has put Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre light years ahead of Trudeau for more than the past year, with polling aggregator 338 Canada projecting a Conservative majority of 232 seats by sweeping nearly everywhere but Quebec. Butts said Freeland's abrupt exit from cabinet also means the next election will probably come sooner rather than later next year — and that it's even more likely now to result in a Conservative majority government. Conservatives have agitated for the past year for an immediate election fought over Trudeau's hallmark policies, namely his controversial carbon pricing regime. Conservative MP John Williamson said Friday he will try to get the ball rolling early in the new year on a non-confidence vote that could topple the Liberal government in little more than a month. Williamson, who chairs the public accounts committee, said in a social media post that he will put forward his non-confidence motion at a committee hearing on Jan. 7, and that the committee can later kick it over to the House of Commons to deal with once it returns on Jan. 27. That could be voted on as early as Jan. 30, and could bring an immediate election if it passes. Three non-confidence motions brought by the Tories failed in the fall. However, NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh said in the days after Freeland quit cabinet that he is now ready to vote down the government. “The Liberals don’t deserve another chance," he said in a letter posted to social media on Dec. 20, vowing that the NDP will put forward their own motion of non-confidence when parliament resumes and "vote to bring this government down." Williamson was not made available for an interview about the matter. The Conservatives issued a statement Friday morning that said Singh should support their motion for an earlier vote and be prepared to live up to his words. Nothing guarantees Williamson's move will survive committee or pass in a final vote, and Singh could opt to instead wait for the NDP's own opportunity to craft the wording over the key vote, then try to claim credit for toppling the government should his motion pass. That NDP opposition day vote, one of seven divided up among the opposition parties and scheduled by the governing party, would have to take place by March 26, according to the House of Commons standing orders. The NDP did not respond to a request for comment. This report by The Canadian Press was first published Dec. 27, 2024. Kyle Duggan, The Canadian PressPublished 4:48 pm Thursday, November 21, 2024 By Data Skrive Ranked teams are on the Friday college basketball schedule for four games, including the Oklahoma Sooners playing the UNLV Rebels. Watch women’s college basketball, other live sports and more on Fubo. What is Fubo? Fubo is a streaming service that gives you access to your favorite live sports and shows on demand. Use our link to sign up for a free trial. Catch tons of live women’s college basketball , plus original programming, with ESPN+ or the Disney Bundle.Ukraine must be in strong position for negotiations, Starmer to say