Holy cow, an actual interview with an actual cabinet minister containing actual answers instead of prepared bullshit! What a refreshing change from last year!
Unless Canada’s standard of living is to drop even further, Canada must stay at the negotiating table.
Canada’s low productivity hinders Canada’s competitiveness and is the basic reason Canada has not been able to diversify its trading relationships.
Canada needs trade with the US as much as we hate to admit it and as much as we dislike Trump.
The notion we can do without such trade is a fond hope - as much as our negotiators are frustrated, they are going to have to stay at the table and deal with this reality.
Carney’s decision to recognize a Palestinian state is simply indicative of the neo-progressive Liberal paucity of common sense and judgement.
Agree with this. We have no leverage, no ability to bargain from a position of strength until we have a robust domestic economy and competitive exports.
Solving Impact Assessment and Indigenous Consultation for major projects may not be perceived to be the most urgent item to support US trade talks, but it’s actually the most important.
Without it, what can possibly replace the lost jobs from the Ontario auto industry, for example? Right now we can’t build anything new (and that’s only slight hyperbole).
Of course, we might have leverage, and more prosperity generally, if we dropped the supply management that is a big barrier in *all* our trade talks with other countries. I cannot believe that this hasn't come to a head yet.
We have no leverage, no ability to bargain from a position of strength until we have a robust domestic economy and competitive exports.
END QUOTE
This is simply incorrect. Canada is the USA's biggest export market. Period.
Canada also sells all manner of goods that are * e-s-s-e-n-t-i-a-l * to US economic activity, including potash, oil and natural gas, electricity, automotive-sector products and so on.
Canadian firms and universities also provide services that companies in the United States value, including tech-sector services that are important to their development of new technologies, including artificial intelligence.
I hope that those responsible for Canada's foreign policy, apprehend, as you apparently do not, the advantages we have to work with when negotiating with the United States.
Threatening to cut off genuinely essential exports like potash or oil or uranium would enormously harm our own economy, would likely split up the country (oil and potash is in AB and SK and basically nowhere else), and might provoke Trump into actual serious action that we are in no way ready to handle. There’s a reason not one of Carney’s cabinet has floated this kind of action as a serious option.
Japan attacked Pearl Harbor in anticipation of the coming oil blockade. That’s how serious that kind of action is!
We need trade strength, yes, but we have to fight proportionally, not waving a red flag in front of a bull if we’re not ready to handle the bull’s response.
As far as oil goes we only have one customer - the USA. We have allowed Canada to be fooled into a monopsony relationship. If we cut off oil to the US where are we going to sell it? We refuse to build pipelines that give us access to offshore markets.
Yes, Canada has a productivity problem. Yes, having a proper and extensive economic relationship with the United States is important.
However, Canada's principled (and indignant) response to the Trump administration's unreasonable (indeed, completely illogical) posturing WRT to the US relationship with the United States is hardly wrongheaded.
As for the Canadian government's position on the Palestinian state, even credible scholars in Israel itself have recognized the Netanyahu regime's policies in Gaza and the West Bank as genocide. Indeed, Canada and its allies' arguable need to become MUCH tougher with the Netanyahu regime on this score.
Canada’s response to Trump’s clumsy attempt to deal with trade and security irritants was understandably motivated by resentment, fear and the latent anti-Americanism that has been part of our culture since before Confederation.
It was a visceral and emotional reaction - not one based on clear thinking or thoughtful consideration of the consequences.
The Liberal government’s recognition of a Palestinian state is an ill-timed gesture of questionable value given the current conflict is not about Palestinian nationalism but is the continuation of Israel’s ongoing fight against fundamentalist Islam that started when Israeli statehood was granted.
The Palestinians can’t or will not prevent Internal or external Islamists from using Gaza as a staging area for the fight to eradicate Israel.
Palestinians could not live peaceably with Israel if indeed they wanted to because fundamentalist Islam simply won’t allow them to.
The death and destruction in Gaza would end with the surrender of Hamas but the destruction of Israel is far more important to them than the welfare of Palestinian non-combatants.
The death and destruction in Gaza would end with the surrender of Hamas but the destruction of Israel is far more important to them than the welfare of Palestinian non-combatants.
END QUOTE
No politician or military official, regardless of country, is permitted to pick and choose what international laws they obey.
I refer you to the "Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I), 8 June 1977.". In particular, note the following:
QUOTE
Article 69 - Basic needs in occupied territories
1. In addition to the duties specified in Article 55 of the Fourth Convention concerning food and medical supplies, the Occupying Power shall, to the fullest extent of the means available to it and without any adverse distinction, also ensure the provision of clothing, bedding, means of shelter, other supplies essential to the survival of the civilian population of the occupied territory and objects necessary for religious worship.
END QUOTE
Many observers have suggested that Israel is in gross violation of international law because it has failed to "ensure the provision of ... other supplies essential to the survival of the civilian population of the occupied territory..."
In 1949 there was little or no anticipation of the asymmetric warfare that would develop.
The provisions were intended to apply to nations contesting against each other with orthodox uniformed combatants.
It did not foresee conflicts involving un-uniformed combatants that cannot be distinguished from non-combatants.
In WWII, ununiformed combatants were subject to summary execution.
The issue in Gaza is that the ununiformed forces have been intercepting aide intended for the non-combatants and selling it to them to fund their fight against the IDF.
The IDF has attempted to meet the provisions of Article 69 but the ununiformed Hamas fighters have obstructed those efforts at every turn.
NGO’s as well have been similarly obstructed.
If tried by an impartial tribunal, it would be highly unlikely that the evidence would support the charge that Israel has purposely failed to provide aid to the non-combatant populations when fact is separated from the propaganda generated by Hamas that is accepted without question by Western media.
One of the primary facts is that Israel has ‘failed’ because Hamas has made it virtually impossible for aide to be distributed to the non-combatant population of Gaza.
Observers ‘suggestions’ are often coloured by political biases that, when cross examined, are likely to be exposed.
WRT “western news media coverage”, I’m not convinced that this has all been “going Hamas’s way”.
Be that as it may, the Israells’ credibility has been undermined by actions taken in the West Bank over decades by extremist settlers, with the support of successive Israeli governments.
Make no mistake. I do believe that Hamas is culpable for crimes against humanity. However, two wrongs do not make a right.
I am in agreement with you regarding the extremist settlers - Israel does itself no favours by tolerating the actions of its own fundamentalist radicals and their expansionist agenda.
There is absolutely no need or credible rationale for their incursions and displacing the Arab population - just as there is no need or credible rationale for the efforts of fundamentalist Islam to destroy Israel.
The elephant in the room is our system of Dairy Supply Management. Until that disappears Canada won't get far in trade negotiations. I understand that the dairy quota, by itself, in Canada is worth more than the cows and accessories. I suspect that getting rid of supply management would require a massive buyout of dairy quotas by the Feds - that is by the taxpayer. Supply management is a typically stupid part of our currently stupid country.
Oh yes, why not do something else dumb, like Carney's Palestine blunder?
The C team just is not up to the task but I'm happy for them that they have jolly conversations in Washington.
Glad to see you are getting interviews AND answers to your questions Paul, whether via Substack or at the PM’s recent press conferences. This in itself is a change. That said, after a moment such as the non-event of the deadline passing last night, one wonders why the PM did not seek to “speak to the people” himself? As we come to grips with the realization that deals with the US govt — future and past — are either elusive or unstable, and that this will be a protracted time of unpredictability and instability (extending to well after the CUSMA re-negotiation), surely Canadians need to hear directly from the PM - some kind of series of fireside chats to keep up the Canadian resolve? Always wondering with some sort of garrumph at PMO comms strategy. They never seem to get it right.
Trump never changes his mind... until he does, again and again and again with a caprice and malevolence toward the US's closest allies. How is it possible that Congress will permit him to openly defy laws, the Courts and the Constitution? It borders on treason and exceeds Trump's own seditiousness.
The answer boils down to crude, sinister personal threats by a gangster, who, with a nudge and a wink can direct his supporters, especially the Jan. 6 "patriots" he freed from prison, to perform his bidding.
“Trump bad” thinking in public will not help Canada in anyway.
One compliment I will give Carney and LeBlanc is unlike the previous government they refrain from public digs at Trump and Republicans. Sure, you might win votes at home, but it does not help Canada get through this time of tariffs and trade wars.
Ah, silence. I see. OK. Head down, on your knees, cap in hand. The better to get kicked.
But no one has answered the basic question. Why does Congress, or more correctly the Republican Party, put up with this and let him walk all over them? Do they really agree with his methods and political "philosophy"? We know the Courts and Justice systems are in his pocket, stacked as they are with his appointees. But is there no majority who disapprove of his methods, or are they all cowards?
Would you and I have a better conversation if I directed ad hominems at you (aka insults)? Of course the answer is no.
You can be strong like Mexico and still get some measure of success. I notice that the Mexican President and her administration stay clear of insulting Trump. They are giving in to the USA on some issues like drugs and cartels. Quietly trying to get the best trade deal possible.
I am no fan of President Trump, but I understand that throwing jabs at him will 100% fail. And the USA has a far stronger economy than Canada so our leverage is very small.
Good luck to Dominic LeBlanc and his team cause they clearly need it.
As hominen? Please. I'm still waiting for a credible answer to the important questions I asked. Anyone??
It's up to Congress to rein him in, but they won't because they are literally petrified by the "nasty" he'll bring upon them for stepping out of line. Name your poison. Trump's lack of the slightest moral character has filtered down to the lowliest Republican representative.
And to think that some Canadians regard their possible future as the 51st state is a great idea! Hoo boy, try unpacking that one.
I did not say that you were engaging in ad hominem attacks.
I used it as an illustration of how conversations get derailed and ended when people let insults and reactions to Trumpian language dominate the discussion. The same when countries try to negotiate with the Trump administration.
One can complain all they want about Congress, but as a Canadian my influence on that legislative body is nil. So, then it is up to Canadians to pressure our government to try a different tack in negotiations with Trump. Or to elect a different administration.
According to polls I have seen the number of Canadians supportive of being the 51st state is at best 20%. Heck, I do not want it.
In regard to your questions: they are asking what US citizens can do (US courts and constitution). If you are American it is up to you.
The answer is simple: because republican voters are first and foremost Trump voters now, and they want those votes at this point in time. I’m not saying it is a good thing for America and their democracy. I’m not saying they shouldn’t get a backbone and try to revolt against authoritarian rule. It is the answer to your question.
Thanks for this interview and the great, direct, relevant questions. Really appreciate this.
As for the comments here disparaging the Carney team’s negotiations…. I just feel like there is too little patience. This was never going to be easy or simple or quick - not if you’re determined to try to get the best deal and not just cave. And, honestly, when almost all of our trade is exempt… the pressure is not that great. (I’m not sloughing off the pain that the aluminum and steel tarrifs cause, but we can’t cave on everything just for that, which I doubt Trump will move on anyway.) Of course it makes sense to negotiate and to do it in person. And it’s important we come to some kind of agreement.
As for Palestine recognition, that won’t affect this trade negotiation. And Carney put 3 key qualifiers on it, which make sense to me.
Honestly, Is it impossible for us to discuss politics without being koolaid ideological about them?
Any attempts to deal with China and their tariffs on agricultural goods and seafood?
Getting hit by the two biggest economies. Would a different administration in Canada do any better? Who knows, but the Liberals are not up to the task.
Would be nice to hear about those big economic project before school starts again. I believe less and less about the value of all the hours spent by Leblanc and all talking with politicians who have no power of decisions down under. Carney s decision about Palestine hurt Canada more than anything else.
Even if a deal was reached, there is nothing to say that The President wouldn't have changed his mind a few times for personal reasons, irrespective of Canada's foreign policy and Palestinian Statehood, which is really a red herring here. Canada is still not the 51st state, so there's no need to cede, just yet.
In answering the question about whether time in Washington is time well spent, LeBlanc said, "Certainly the time we spent, up to and including this week: yes." Allow me to translate: For both internal and external political purposes, we must kiss the ring of our superpower neighbour even if those running DC would fail introductory courses in both economics and international relations.
I'm sure he'd like to (cottage country, where I've never been, has to be nicer than summer in sweltering DC), but sometimes even senior governmental officials like the Minster of Janitorial Affairs (hat tip to David Cochrane) have to keep taking one for the team. At least LeBlanc and Hillman can commiserate with one another. Hope that either or both will write candid memoirs after their political careers end.
The Trump Administration is practicing economic statecraft (geopolitical economics) as it has been practiced for most of history except for the unipolar moment. One many not agree with the methods Trump is using (one could use others) to attempt to remedy the massive unsustainable global imbalances in trade and capital flows, and the resulting growing wealth inequaility, but the problems he is trying to address are real and are effectively forcing functions that are driving the return of economic statecraft. (It would be somebody else if it were not Trump). The pause in history that the unipolar moment created, the dominance of capital over labour, the widening gyre of global imbalances is over.
Well done, Paul Wells. That's the clearest bit of talk I have heard from a Liberal cabinet minister in a decade. I don't believe half of it but that's not your fault. The major projects effort is a joke. This country is bureaucratized beyond repair. And going on about supporting Israel's right to self defence while offering support to Hamas ambitions is both hypocritical and down right evil. In a way, I am sorry that you have to take these people seriously. I don't, except for the damage that they do. Best wishes.
It strikes me that having the same minister in charge of negotiations with the US and in charge of the major projects is interesting. Shouldn't he have a third portfolio as well? Just in case he has a spare moment.
Also. I thought that the meetings with Indigenous leaders were not consultations. Yet he seems to be saying they were and are.
With you on all of this. I don’t love having us trade and major one Canadian economy projects under one minister. C’mon. Both are huge files and need laser focus. How do you expect to move fast on the major projects in Canada when you’re in Washington for months on end.
I don’t care about the size of cabinet. Just have the number you need to represent everything we need to represent and yo get the job done. We overthink these optics. If it functions well, great.
And I honestly love your laughing response idea. It would be funny, but it might actually make more of an impact in terms of finally undercutting that claim. Fingers crossed in the judicial ruling!
Monsieur LeBlanc is the quintessential loyal foot soldier. We should expect nothing less. That his newest ‘General’ is beyond incompetent, is yet again disappointing. Canadians are slowly being conditioned to ‘expect nothing and like it’. Realizing that, the cynic in me says it is a small comfort to see these people (gathered in lieu of a government) focus their incompetence in destroying our auto industry now that the oil and gas jewel is nicely emasculated. Maybe Ontarios loss of their economic engine will wake up that voting mass for a more than needed change. As for the country of Quebec, hey we can sleep well knowing we might still have poutine.
Ugh. Public Relations and spin, spin, spin. It all sounds like an exercise in corporate relationships management 101.
To be fair, he was hardly likely to have said anything critical. But I still think this approach is a mistake. Trump and his administration are dishonest and disrespectful.
Less evasive, sure, but this is still information-free space-filling if you ask me. This is how CEOs sound when they don't want to tell anyone anything. "Is it positive? Sure! Is it negative? Not really, but from some perspectives!"
It would have been a better tactic to laugh at them when they said it was because of the fentanyl.
Holy cow, an actual interview with an actual cabinet minister containing actual answers instead of prepared bullshit! What a refreshing change from last year!
Unless Canada’s standard of living is to drop even further, Canada must stay at the negotiating table.
Canada’s low productivity hinders Canada’s competitiveness and is the basic reason Canada has not been able to diversify its trading relationships.
Canada needs trade with the US as much as we hate to admit it and as much as we dislike Trump.
The notion we can do without such trade is a fond hope - as much as our negotiators are frustrated, they are going to have to stay at the table and deal with this reality.
Carney’s decision to recognize a Palestinian state is simply indicative of the neo-progressive Liberal paucity of common sense and judgement.
Agree with this. We have no leverage, no ability to bargain from a position of strength until we have a robust domestic economy and competitive exports.
Solving Impact Assessment and Indigenous Consultation for major projects may not be perceived to be the most urgent item to support US trade talks, but it’s actually the most important.
Without it, what can possibly replace the lost jobs from the Ontario auto industry, for example? Right now we can’t build anything new (and that’s only slight hyperbole).
Of course, we might have leverage, and more prosperity generally, if we dropped the supply management that is a big barrier in *all* our trade talks with other countries. I cannot believe that this hasn't come to a head yet.
QUOTE
We have no leverage, no ability to bargain from a position of strength until we have a robust domestic economy and competitive exports.
END QUOTE
This is simply incorrect. Canada is the USA's biggest export market. Period.
Canada also sells all manner of goods that are * e-s-s-e-n-t-i-a-l * to US economic activity, including potash, oil and natural gas, electricity, automotive-sector products and so on.
Canadian firms and universities also provide services that companies in the United States value, including tech-sector services that are important to their development of new technologies, including artificial intelligence.
I hope that those responsible for Canada's foreign policy, apprehend, as you apparently do not, the advantages we have to work with when negotiating with the United States.
Threatening to cut off genuinely essential exports like potash or oil or uranium would enormously harm our own economy, would likely split up the country (oil and potash is in AB and SK and basically nowhere else), and might provoke Trump into actual serious action that we are in no way ready to handle. There’s a reason not one of Carney’s cabinet has floated this kind of action as a serious option.
Japan attacked Pearl Harbor in anticipation of the coming oil blockade. That’s how serious that kind of action is!
We need trade strength, yes, but we have to fight proportionally, not waving a red flag in front of a bull if we’re not ready to handle the bull’s response.
I certainly was not advocating the precipitous "cutting off" of these things.
My commentary was meant to address your claim that we have "no leverage". This is demonstrably untrue.
As far as oil goes we only have one customer - the USA. We have allowed Canada to be fooled into a monopsony relationship. If we cut off oil to the US where are we going to sell it? We refuse to build pipelines that give us access to offshore markets.
Dumb old Canada always loves to be a loser.
Your arguments are misleading, at best.
Yes, Canada has a productivity problem. Yes, having a proper and extensive economic relationship with the United States is important.
However, Canada's principled (and indignant) response to the Trump administration's unreasonable (indeed, completely illogical) posturing WRT to the US relationship with the United States is hardly wrongheaded.
As for the Canadian government's position on the Palestinian state, even credible scholars in Israel itself have recognized the Netanyahu regime's policies in Gaza and the West Bank as genocide. Indeed, Canada and its allies' arguable need to become MUCH tougher with the Netanyahu regime on this score.
C.f.: Ha Hellyer, Recognition of Palestinian statehood is not enough when it comes to Gaza, The Financial Times, 1 August 2025, https://www.ft.com/content/e5748331-44e3-4580-afd5-f35181eacefb
Canada’s response to Trump’s clumsy attempt to deal with trade and security irritants was understandably motivated by resentment, fear and the latent anti-Americanism that has been part of our culture since before Confederation.
It was a visceral and emotional reaction - not one based on clear thinking or thoughtful consideration of the consequences.
The Liberal government’s recognition of a Palestinian state is an ill-timed gesture of questionable value given the current conflict is not about Palestinian nationalism but is the continuation of Israel’s ongoing fight against fundamentalist Islam that started when Israeli statehood was granted.
The Palestinians can’t or will not prevent Internal or external Islamists from using Gaza as a staging area for the fight to eradicate Israel.
Palestinians could not live peaceably with Israel if indeed they wanted to because fundamentalist Islam simply won’t allow them to.
The death and destruction in Gaza would end with the surrender of Hamas but the destruction of Israel is far more important to them than the welfare of Palestinian non-combatants.
QUOTE
The death and destruction in Gaza would end with the surrender of Hamas but the destruction of Israel is far more important to them than the welfare of Palestinian non-combatants.
END QUOTE
No politician or military official, regardless of country, is permitted to pick and choose what international laws they obey.
I refer you to the "Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I), 8 June 1977.". In particular, note the following:
QUOTE
Article 69 - Basic needs in occupied territories
1. In addition to the duties specified in Article 55 of the Fourth Convention concerning food and medical supplies, the Occupying Power shall, to the fullest extent of the means available to it and without any adverse distinction, also ensure the provision of clothing, bedding, means of shelter, other supplies essential to the survival of the civilian population of the occupied territory and objects necessary for religious worship.
END QUOTE
Many observers have suggested that Israel is in gross violation of international law because it has failed to "ensure the provision of ... other supplies essential to the survival of the civilian population of the occupied territory..."
In 1949 there was little or no anticipation of the asymmetric warfare that would develop.
The provisions were intended to apply to nations contesting against each other with orthodox uniformed combatants.
It did not foresee conflicts involving un-uniformed combatants that cannot be distinguished from non-combatants.
In WWII, ununiformed combatants were subject to summary execution.
The issue in Gaza is that the ununiformed forces have been intercepting aide intended for the non-combatants and selling it to them to fund their fight against the IDF.
The IDF has attempted to meet the provisions of Article 69 but the ununiformed Hamas fighters have obstructed those efforts at every turn.
NGO’s as well have been similarly obstructed.
If tried by an impartial tribunal, it would be highly unlikely that the evidence would support the charge that Israel has purposely failed to provide aid to the non-combatant populations when fact is separated from the propaganda generated by Hamas that is accepted without question by Western media.
One of the primary facts is that Israel has ‘failed’ because Hamas has made it virtually impossible for aide to be distributed to the non-combatant population of Gaza.
Observers ‘suggestions’ are often coloured by political biases that, when cross examined, are likely to be exposed.
You make a compelling argument.
WRT “western news media coverage”, I’m not convinced that this has all been “going Hamas’s way”.
Be that as it may, the Israells’ credibility has been undermined by actions taken in the West Bank over decades by extremist settlers, with the support of successive Israeli governments.
Make no mistake. I do believe that Hamas is culpable for crimes against humanity. However, two wrongs do not make a right.
I am in agreement with you regarding the extremist settlers - Israel does itself no favours by tolerating the actions of its own fundamentalist radicals and their expansionist agenda.
There is absolutely no need or credible rationale for their incursions and displacing the Arab population - just as there is no need or credible rationale for the efforts of fundamentalist Islam to destroy Israel.
If major projects are coming as soon as the Fall, shouldn't we have a few details by now?
The elephant in the room is our system of Dairy Supply Management. Until that disappears Canada won't get far in trade negotiations. I understand that the dairy quota, by itself, in Canada is worth more than the cows and accessories. I suspect that getting rid of supply management would require a massive buyout of dairy quotas by the Feds - that is by the taxpayer. Supply management is a typically stupid part of our currently stupid country.
Oh yes, why not do something else dumb, like Carney's Palestine blunder?
The C team just is not up to the task but I'm happy for them that they have jolly conversations in Washington.
Glad to see you are getting interviews AND answers to your questions Paul, whether via Substack or at the PM’s recent press conferences. This in itself is a change. That said, after a moment such as the non-event of the deadline passing last night, one wonders why the PM did not seek to “speak to the people” himself? As we come to grips with the realization that deals with the US govt — future and past — are either elusive or unstable, and that this will be a protracted time of unpredictability and instability (extending to well after the CUSMA re-negotiation), surely Canadians need to hear directly from the PM - some kind of series of fireside chats to keep up the Canadian resolve? Always wondering with some sort of garrumph at PMO comms strategy. They never seem to get it right.
Trump never changes his mind... until he does, again and again and again with a caprice and malevolence toward the US's closest allies. How is it possible that Congress will permit him to openly defy laws, the Courts and the Constitution? It borders on treason and exceeds Trump's own seditiousness.
The answer boils down to crude, sinister personal threats by a gangster, who, with a nudge and a wink can direct his supporters, especially the Jan. 6 "patriots" he freed from prison, to perform his bidding.
“Trump bad” thinking in public will not help Canada in anyway.
One compliment I will give Carney and LeBlanc is unlike the previous government they refrain from public digs at Trump and Republicans. Sure, you might win votes at home, but it does not help Canada get through this time of tariffs and trade wars.
Ah, silence. I see. OK. Head down, on your knees, cap in hand. The better to get kicked.
But no one has answered the basic question. Why does Congress, or more correctly the Republican Party, put up with this and let him walk all over them? Do they really agree with his methods and political "philosophy"? We know the Courts and Justice systems are in his pocket, stacked as they are with his appointees. But is there no majority who disapprove of his methods, or are they all cowards?
Not what I said.
Would you and I have a better conversation if I directed ad hominems at you (aka insults)? Of course the answer is no.
You can be strong like Mexico and still get some measure of success. I notice that the Mexican President and her administration stay clear of insulting Trump. They are giving in to the USA on some issues like drugs and cartels. Quietly trying to get the best trade deal possible.
I am no fan of President Trump, but I understand that throwing jabs at him will 100% fail. And the USA has a far stronger economy than Canada so our leverage is very small.
Good luck to Dominic LeBlanc and his team cause they clearly need it.
As hominen? Please. I'm still waiting for a credible answer to the important questions I asked. Anyone??
It's up to Congress to rein him in, but they won't because they are literally petrified by the "nasty" he'll bring upon them for stepping out of line. Name your poison. Trump's lack of the slightest moral character has filtered down to the lowliest Republican representative.
And to think that some Canadians regard their possible future as the 51st state is a great idea! Hoo boy, try unpacking that one.
I did not say that you were engaging in ad hominem attacks.
I used it as an illustration of how conversations get derailed and ended when people let insults and reactions to Trumpian language dominate the discussion. The same when countries try to negotiate with the Trump administration.
One can complain all they want about Congress, but as a Canadian my influence on that legislative body is nil. So, then it is up to Canadians to pressure our government to try a different tack in negotiations with Trump. Or to elect a different administration.
According to polls I have seen the number of Canadians supportive of being the 51st state is at best 20%. Heck, I do not want it.
In regard to your questions: they are asking what US citizens can do (US courts and constitution). If you are American it is up to you.
Good luck with your quest to change US politics.
The answer is simple: because republican voters are first and foremost Trump voters now, and they want those votes at this point in time. I’m not saying it is a good thing for America and their democracy. I’m not saying they shouldn’t get a backbone and try to revolt against authoritarian rule. It is the answer to your question.
Ya' think.
Thanks for this interview and the great, direct, relevant questions. Really appreciate this.
As for the comments here disparaging the Carney team’s negotiations…. I just feel like there is too little patience. This was never going to be easy or simple or quick - not if you’re determined to try to get the best deal and not just cave. And, honestly, when almost all of our trade is exempt… the pressure is not that great. (I’m not sloughing off the pain that the aluminum and steel tarrifs cause, but we can’t cave on everything just for that, which I doubt Trump will move on anyway.) Of course it makes sense to negotiate and to do it in person. And it’s important we come to some kind of agreement.
As for Palestine recognition, that won’t affect this trade negotiation. And Carney put 3 key qualifiers on it, which make sense to me.
Honestly, Is it impossible for us to discuss politics without being koolaid ideological about them?
Any attempts to deal with China and their tariffs on agricultural goods and seafood?
Getting hit by the two biggest economies. Would a different administration in Canada do any better? Who knows, but the Liberals are not up to the task.
Would be nice to hear about those big economic project before school starts again. I believe less and less about the value of all the hours spent by Leblanc and all talking with politicians who have no power of decisions down under. Carney s decision about Palestine hurt Canada more than anything else.
Even if a deal was reached, there is nothing to say that The President wouldn't have changed his mind a few times for personal reasons, irrespective of Canada's foreign policy and Palestinian Statehood, which is really a red herring here. Canada is still not the 51st state, so there's no need to cede, just yet.
In answering the question about whether time in Washington is time well spent, LeBlanc said, "Certainly the time we spent, up to and including this week: yes." Allow me to translate: For both internal and external political purposes, we must kiss the ring of our superpower neighbour even if those running DC would fail introductory courses in both economics and international relations.
I wasn't able to dig deeply on this, but another reading of that answer could be: Until today, sure, but after today, to hell with this.
I'm sure he'd like to (cottage country, where I've never been, has to be nicer than summer in sweltering DC), but sometimes even senior governmental officials like the Minster of Janitorial Affairs (hat tip to David Cochrane) have to keep taking one for the team. At least LeBlanc and Hillman can commiserate with one another. Hope that either or both will write candid memoirs after their political careers end.
That was my take, now do we have a new strategy.
The Trump Administration is practicing economic statecraft (geopolitical economics) as it has been practiced for most of history except for the unipolar moment. One many not agree with the methods Trump is using (one could use others) to attempt to remedy the massive unsustainable global imbalances in trade and capital flows, and the resulting growing wealth inequaility, but the problems he is trying to address are real and are effectively forcing functions that are driving the return of economic statecraft. (It would be somebody else if it were not Trump). The pause in history that the unipolar moment created, the dominance of capital over labour, the widening gyre of global imbalances is over.
Well done, Paul Wells. That's the clearest bit of talk I have heard from a Liberal cabinet minister in a decade. I don't believe half of it but that's not your fault. The major projects effort is a joke. This country is bureaucratized beyond repair. And going on about supporting Israel's right to self defence while offering support to Hamas ambitions is both hypocritical and down right evil. In a way, I am sorry that you have to take these people seriously. I don't, except for the damage that they do. Best wishes.
It strikes me that having the same minister in charge of negotiations with the US and in charge of the major projects is interesting. Shouldn't he have a third portfolio as well? Just in case he has a spare moment.
Also. I thought that the meetings with Indigenous leaders were not consultations. Yet he seems to be saying they were and are.
With you on all of this. I don’t love having us trade and major one Canadian economy projects under one minister. C’mon. Both are huge files and need laser focus. How do you expect to move fast on the major projects in Canada when you’re in Washington for months on end.
I don’t care about the size of cabinet. Just have the number you need to represent everything we need to represent and yo get the job done. We overthink these optics. If it functions well, great.
And I honestly love your laughing response idea. It would be funny, but it might actually make more of an impact in terms of finally undercutting that claim. Fingers crossed in the judicial ruling!
Monsieur LeBlanc is the quintessential loyal foot soldier. We should expect nothing less. That his newest ‘General’ is beyond incompetent, is yet again disappointing. Canadians are slowly being conditioned to ‘expect nothing and like it’. Realizing that, the cynic in me says it is a small comfort to see these people (gathered in lieu of a government) focus their incompetence in destroying our auto industry now that the oil and gas jewel is nicely emasculated. Maybe Ontarios loss of their economic engine will wake up that voting mass for a more than needed change. As for the country of Quebec, hey we can sleep well knowing we might still have poutine.
Ugh. Public Relations and spin, spin, spin. It all sounds like an exercise in corporate relationships management 101.
To be fair, he was hardly likely to have said anything critical. But I still think this approach is a mistake. Trump and his administration are dishonest and disrespectful.
Less evasive, sure, but this is still information-free space-filling if you ask me. This is how CEOs sound when they don't want to tell anyone anything. "Is it positive? Sure! Is it negative? Not really, but from some perspectives!"
It would have been a better tactic to laugh at them when they said it was because of the fentanyl.
Claudia Sheinbaum, "Thanks but no thanks." Waiting for this government to get something right.