No bending the knee, no kissing the ring, no surrender. We have come way too far to give it all, or part of what we have so far achieved, up. Only, and only if the deal benefits Canada, should we even consider signing.
What a pickle situation to be caught up in. Personally I wouldn’t trust trump more than I would trust being stuck in a three cubit foot room with a nest of rattle snakes. The reason I say this is because of the question you mentioned Fred. Why has trump picked January 1st to threaten 50% tariffs just before the new congress kicks in January 3rd? Man that sets off alarm bells in my head. Who is he playing with? His political opponents or our country which he covets? To me none of these questions can be answered until he shows more of what cards he’s playing with. Carney thankfully is a very smart guy and I believe that what you wrote about in your previous article about how important it is to read the fine print. I think Carney, if he takes his time, can work his way through this situation. I would also like to see some of the trade agreements made with other countries not fast tracked necessarily but cemented with some forward movement. These are just my thoughts.
I think you have touched on an important point Tracy F. Nothing Trump has done tells me he has a wide vision of the world, and even when he pretends to influence the world, it ultimately turns out to be about him and how he thinks he is seen by Americans.
In my theory, he really doesn’t care about Canada so much as he cares about how he can use Canada for his political purposes—deflecting from Epstein files, the Iran War, etc. Jan 1 might be a convenient date that put the decision a little later so he didn’t have to deal with it, or it could have deep meaning. Nobody knows, but my bet is he was hedging by saying Jan 1.
Carney is smart and sees several moves ahead. He’s got this.
Boy I hope you are right in how this plays out with Carney at the helm and our government fully behind him. (They had better be). That in itself may prove to be a miracle. Trump needs to be dealt with very carefully. I say this because everything the man touches gets damaged. He has the ego of a three year old I think (he reminds me of my nephew and how he reacted when his toy was taken away). Then I look at what he is doing to his own country and the type of people (inept) he has chosen to be in his administration. I’m stopping here because I’m giving myself a headache. 😳
I’m going to listen to you for my own sake!! Thank you! 😉
A good article, Fred. As a general rule in life timing is everything.
I am confident three things will occur. One, the Democrats and Trump won’t be in agreement anytime soon after January 1st.
Two, forget Keystone or make America pay for it. Let’s ship crude to more appreciative Asian customers at a better price.
Three, our PM and negotiators have done well thus far in this American caused trade and tariff mess. They will stay the course for what is best for us.
Another important detail: Canadians do not want to go back to the way things were. The degree to which our economy relies on the US needs to change permanently. Even if the Dems are able to effectively undo all the tariffs and bring a better deal to the table, Canada will continue to diversify away from the US. We can't unlearn the reality we have faced over the last two years. At any given time the US is one bad election away from becoming completely hostile to Canada. We cannot trust them as an ally, and we need to be prepared for that.
Trump's playing with lots of fire here: At what point would the Big 3 (at Canada's encouragement) simply say "well, I guess we are making ____ model vehicle entirely in Canada, with entirely Canadian parts/labour (and/or Mexican, as CUSMA will allow tariff-free transfer between the two serious countries who are respecting the agreement) for sale in the Canadian market?
They might consider that, given that the other option for Canada is to abandon Big 3 entirely and "do something" with other foreign auto manufacturers. Those countries are likely not eager to assemble vehicles here for only the Canadian market, but maybe there's some other value proposition that could help.
The other thing that there's been some silence about -- if the Jan 1 tariff goes into force, what is Canada's retaliation in kind?
Unlike the chattering classes, I believe that the worst thing PM can do is yield to pressure to make a deal to save a few jobs for short-term gain. The auto industry has been on life support for some time, and it would be better for the whole country if Carney was free to reinvent manufacturing with an industry we need strategically and let hiring follow.
There will be plenty of need for manufacturing and the kinds of things that a pivot away from auto manufacturing would provide. Example: Canada designed a new kind of jeep that Ukraine is making for its army. How about making some for us? Pipelines need steel, as do electrical transmission structures. Ships. Ferry boats, ice breakers. Like many other consumers, I am never going to buy a North American car. Make something we need that can be the best.
For the Ukrainian "General Purpose" (JEEP) vehicle, it was really a very light armoured vehicle. Streit is the company, and while it was the Canadian operation that did the initial work, the company is headquartered in United Arab Emirates (just trivia here).
But in parallel, Roshel also builds heavier armoured cars for UA (though they are doing more of that work in UA itself). But with today's official purchase of Stellantis' Brampton assembly factory . . . . . .
Mr Rowson, I, too, have considered whether Canada and Mexico can cooperate together. Beyond countries, products from Canada and to Mexico need to travel via the Pacific Ocean. Or… By land, through Washington State, Oregon, and California, plus Mexican States.
I wonder? if a separate Trade Deal, including CUSMA items, BUT adding items and considerations desirable to these three U.S. States, affected Mexican States, and signatory affected Canadian provinces (especially British Columbia, due to it’s ports), could be arranged by railway, by highway, or by air? All negotiators to this narrower Agreement have reason, anxiety due to trump, much to gain, more to lose, and a freer hand. Such an Agreement is pertinent, timely, more easily re-negotiated with immediate, perhaps urgent, concerns in mind by all State and Provincial parties. Flexibility is key. I’ve also been wondering if this narrower Agreement might be less impactful on the environment? Thoughts? (I’m not into prayers, but, thank you).
Canada and Mexico have already had a fair bit of cabinet minister-level trade missions, plus Carney meeting Sheinbaum, too. It's not as splashy, because everything discussed is already allowed under CUSMA (or as the Mexicans call it, T-MEC). It's just that we were both used to selling/buying with USA as the middleman. Now, it's happening a bit more directly.
Assuming the US Government behaves (as in, respects the treaty -- which they are only partially doing right now, so the assumption is a bit shaky), product can be loaded onto a CPKC train car in Mexico, make its way through Arizona, etc. through to Winnipeg (and then wherever needed in Canada) without one once of US tariff hitting it. The track exists in the plains states -- west coast is far too mountainous.
If anything is offloaded into the USA, then the tariffs would hit it -- so no-go with the Pacific states, unfortunately (at least, at this time). To do what you suggest, regardless of the mode of travel, would have to imply that the Pacific States were no longer part of the USA, as the treaty/tariff arrangements are handled federally - or at least federal trade policy supersedes state/international agreements. But we will see what happens in January -- if both Houses of Congress can achieve 2/3 approval of legislation to rescind tariffs with Canada/Mexico (and while they are at it, remove the delegation of tariff power to the President), then maybe something becomes more possible.
* The 2/3 bit is a requirement to override a presidential veto. Both houses have to have a quorum (half+1 of the members present) and then 2/3 of those in attendance.
Thank you for responding, Mr Rowson. I use a SG25 Android. Substack deletes my incomplete comments on some sites (yours is one such) when I move to search a spelling. It is ridiculous. I won't bore you with the erased particulars, but I was writing that IQ47 has plans to continue his imperial rule. They're in place. The real emperor, Stephen Miller, is positioned and poised to rule from now on. And survival, not mere trade, might be Canadian's main concern from November 9th, 2026 onwards.
I really couldn't care less if kxl never got built. The oil companies will expect the government to pay for it, won't be willing to pay full fare to use it, and thay are 80-90% foreign owned so the profits will go elsewhere, and due increased automation fewer Canadians will be working in the oilfields.
Agreed, Mr Williams. I was relieved when Kxl was dumped. I want it turfed forever. I know Alberta oil creatures. The owners are pan national. They have no cares for nations, people, environment, or ANYTHING past the accretion of money. Money is difficult to eat, hunkered in bunkers.
I generally beleive this about all the foreign owned entities extracting profits from Canadian resources. Profits need to stay in Canada to build for Canadians.
It’s the holiday season. Many business make their entire year of revenue over the next six weeks. They survived one year without Canadian consumers. This will be their second year. We’re not coming back until Trump is dead.
No bending the knee, no kissing the ring, no surrender. We have come way too far to give it all, or part of what we have so far achieved, up. Only, and only if the deal benefits Canada, should we even consider signing.
What a pickle situation to be caught up in. Personally I wouldn’t trust trump more than I would trust being stuck in a three cubit foot room with a nest of rattle snakes. The reason I say this is because of the question you mentioned Fred. Why has trump picked January 1st to threaten 50% tariffs just before the new congress kicks in January 3rd? Man that sets off alarm bells in my head. Who is he playing with? His political opponents or our country which he covets? To me none of these questions can be answered until he shows more of what cards he’s playing with. Carney thankfully is a very smart guy and I believe that what you wrote about in your previous article about how important it is to read the fine print. I think Carney, if he takes his time, can work his way through this situation. I would also like to see some of the trade agreements made with other countries not fast tracked necessarily but cemented with some forward movement. These are just my thoughts.
I think you have touched on an important point Tracy F. Nothing Trump has done tells me he has a wide vision of the world, and even when he pretends to influence the world, it ultimately turns out to be about him and how he thinks he is seen by Americans.
In my theory, he really doesn’t care about Canada so much as he cares about how he can use Canada for his political purposes—deflecting from Epstein files, the Iran War, etc. Jan 1 might be a convenient date that put the decision a little later so he didn’t have to deal with it, or it could have deep meaning. Nobody knows, but my bet is he was hedging by saying Jan 1.
Carney is smart and sees several moves ahead. He’s got this.
Boy I hope you are right in how this plays out with Carney at the helm and our government fully behind him. (They had better be). That in itself may prove to be a miracle. Trump needs to be dealt with very carefully. I say this because everything the man touches gets damaged. He has the ego of a three year old I think (he reminds me of my nephew and how he reacted when his toy was taken away). Then I look at what he is doing to his own country and the type of people (inept) he has chosen to be in his administration. I’m stopping here because I’m giving myself a headache. 😳
I’m going to listen to you for my own sake!! Thank you! 😉
I think he is picking on Canada because Melania was making googoo eyes at Trudeau.
If any deal appears it has to be good for Canada or not at all. We already HAVE a deal.
Well said, Fred. I couldn’t agree more, and I suspect our Prime Minister’s on the same page.
A good article, Fred. As a general rule in life timing is everything.
I am confident three things will occur. One, the Democrats and Trump won’t be in agreement anytime soon after January 1st.
Two, forget Keystone or make America pay for it. Let’s ship crude to more appreciative Asian customers at a better price.
Three, our PM and negotiators have done well thus far in this American caused trade and tariff mess. They will stay the course for what is best for us.
“Tariffs are negotiable. Sovereignty isn’t.” Great phrase, great piece!
Another important detail: Canadians do not want to go back to the way things were. The degree to which our economy relies on the US needs to change permanently. Even if the Dems are able to effectively undo all the tariffs and bring a better deal to the table, Canada will continue to diversify away from the US. We can't unlearn the reality we have faced over the last two years. At any given time the US is one bad election away from becoming completely hostile to Canada. We cannot trust them as an ally, and we need to be prepared for that.
Trump's playing with lots of fire here: At what point would the Big 3 (at Canada's encouragement) simply say "well, I guess we are making ____ model vehicle entirely in Canada, with entirely Canadian parts/labour (and/or Mexican, as CUSMA will allow tariff-free transfer between the two serious countries who are respecting the agreement) for sale in the Canadian market?
They might consider that, given that the other option for Canada is to abandon Big 3 entirely and "do something" with other foreign auto manufacturers. Those countries are likely not eager to assemble vehicles here for only the Canadian market, but maybe there's some other value proposition that could help.
The other thing that there's been some silence about -- if the Jan 1 tariff goes into force, what is Canada's retaliation in kind?
Unlike the chattering classes, I believe that the worst thing PM can do is yield to pressure to make a deal to save a few jobs for short-term gain. The auto industry has been on life support for some time, and it would be better for the whole country if Carney was free to reinvent manufacturing with an industry we need strategically and let hiring follow.
There will be plenty of need for manufacturing and the kinds of things that a pivot away from auto manufacturing would provide. Example: Canada designed a new kind of jeep that Ukraine is making for its army. How about making some for us? Pipelines need steel, as do electrical transmission structures. Ships. Ferry boats, ice breakers. Like many other consumers, I am never going to buy a North American car. Make something we need that can be the best.
For the Ukrainian "General Purpose" (JEEP) vehicle, it was really a very light armoured vehicle. Streit is the company, and while it was the Canadian operation that did the initial work, the company is headquartered in United Arab Emirates (just trivia here).
But in parallel, Roshel also builds heavier armoured cars for UA (though they are doing more of that work in UA itself). But with today's official purchase of Stellantis' Brampton assembly factory . . . . . .
Mr Rowson, I, too, have considered whether Canada and Mexico can cooperate together. Beyond countries, products from Canada and to Mexico need to travel via the Pacific Ocean. Or… By land, through Washington State, Oregon, and California, plus Mexican States.
I wonder? if a separate Trade Deal, including CUSMA items, BUT adding items and considerations desirable to these three U.S. States, affected Mexican States, and signatory affected Canadian provinces (especially British Columbia, due to it’s ports), could be arranged by railway, by highway, or by air? All negotiators to this narrower Agreement have reason, anxiety due to trump, much to gain, more to lose, and a freer hand. Such an Agreement is pertinent, timely, more easily re-negotiated with immediate, perhaps urgent, concerns in mind by all State and Provincial parties. Flexibility is key. I’ve also been wondering if this narrower Agreement might be less impactful on the environment? Thoughts? (I’m not into prayers, but, thank you).
Canada and Mexico have already had a fair bit of cabinet minister-level trade missions, plus Carney meeting Sheinbaum, too. It's not as splashy, because everything discussed is already allowed under CUSMA (or as the Mexicans call it, T-MEC). It's just that we were both used to selling/buying with USA as the middleman. Now, it's happening a bit more directly.
Assuming the US Government behaves (as in, respects the treaty -- which they are only partially doing right now, so the assumption is a bit shaky), product can be loaded onto a CPKC train car in Mexico, make its way through Arizona, etc. through to Winnipeg (and then wherever needed in Canada) without one once of US tariff hitting it. The track exists in the plains states -- west coast is far too mountainous.
If anything is offloaded into the USA, then the tariffs would hit it -- so no-go with the Pacific states, unfortunately (at least, at this time). To do what you suggest, regardless of the mode of travel, would have to imply that the Pacific States were no longer part of the USA, as the treaty/tariff arrangements are handled federally - or at least federal trade policy supersedes state/international agreements. But we will see what happens in January -- if both Houses of Congress can achieve 2/3 approval of legislation to rescind tariffs with Canada/Mexico (and while they are at it, remove the delegation of tariff power to the President), then maybe something becomes more possible.
* The 2/3 bit is a requirement to override a presidential veto. Both houses have to have a quorum (half+1 of the members present) and then 2/3 of those in attendance.
Thank you for responding, Mr Rowson. I use a SG25 Android. Substack deletes my incomplete comments on some sites (yours is one such) when I move to search a spelling. It is ridiculous. I won't bore you with the erased particulars, but I was writing that IQ47 has plans to continue his imperial rule. They're in place. The real emperor, Stephen Miller, is positioned and poised to rule from now on. And survival, not mere trade, might be Canadian's main concern from November 9th, 2026 onwards.
That's my worry, too -- the signs are there. The next two months or so will really indicate the state of things.
I really couldn't care less if kxl never got built. The oil companies will expect the government to pay for it, won't be willing to pay full fare to use it, and thay are 80-90% foreign owned so the profits will go elsewhere, and due increased automation fewer Canadians will be working in the oilfields.
Agreed, Mr Williams. I was relieved when Kxl was dumped. I want it turfed forever. I know Alberta oil creatures. The owners are pan national. They have no cares for nations, people, environment, or ANYTHING past the accretion of money. Money is difficult to eat, hunkered in bunkers.
I generally beleive this about all the foreign owned entities extracting profits from Canadian resources. Profits need to stay in Canada to build for Canadians.
Thank you for clarifying this situation Fred
It’s the holiday season. Many business make their entire year of revenue over the next six weeks. They survived one year without Canadian consumers. This will be their second year. We’re not coming back until Trump is dead.