Rattled over Trump’s tariff threat, Canada’s leaders are pointing fingers at each other

Canadian political leaders cannot control Donald Trump becoming the next president of the United States. Nor can they stop him from threatening to take illogical steps that could hurt American businesses and consumers almost as much as they would hurt Canadians.

But Canadian political leaders can control how they respond to these threats and actions. And Canadians can gauge how serious those responses are.

Trump is promising to impose a 25 percent tariff on all goods entering the United States from Canada and Mexico unless both countries stop what he calls an “invasion” of drugs, “especially Fentanyl, and all illegal aliens” in the United States.

While the number of migrants crossing the US northern border has increased in the past yearis the human and drug trafficking moving from Canada to the United States still a small fraction of what moves across the US southern border with Mexico.

Either way, it is primarily America’s responsibility to prevent unwanted people and things from entering the United States – just as it was primarily Canada’s problem to solve when thousands of people began crossing from the US to Canada at Roxham Road.

And while the imposition of new tariffs would undoubtedly cause major problems for Canadian businesses and pose a serious threat to the national economy, it would also creating problems for American companies and raising prices for American consumers — especially if the US tariffs are inviting retaliation from Canada and Mexico.

“The fact is we need them and they need us,” Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland said Tuesday. “We sell them oil. We sell them electricity. We sell them critical minerals and metals.”

The premiers concede and Poilievre stumps

Flavio Volpe, chairman of the Automotive Parts Manufacturers Association, appealed for calm in a post on social media Monday evening.

“We need to learn to deal with these tactics,” he wrote. “Patience.”

Volpe represents an industry that has a lot at stake, and his advice can be wise – not least because Trump’s threat may just be the opening act in a larger negotiation.

But the political cycle does not allow for patience.

“The federal government needs to take the situation at our border seriously,” Ontario Premier Doug Ford tweeted less than an hour and a half after Trump issued his threat Monday night.

Speaking to reporters Tuesday morning, Ford said it was “unfair” and even “insulting” for Trump to talk about Canada and Mexico in the same sentence. But he still seemed to concede that the president-elect had a point.

“We have to do better at our borders,” the Prime Minister said.

Alberta Premier Danielle Smith offered a similar concession. The incoming administration, she said“have valid concerns related to illegal activities at our shared border.”

Perhaps the prime ministers think it is a smart counter move to accept Trump’s logic. And pointing a finger of blame or responsibility at the federal government — which has jurisdiction over borders — is just something that comes naturally to the premiere.

But while federal Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre had nothing good to say about the Liberal government, he was willing to describe Trump’s threatened tariffs as “unfounded.”

In Poilievre’s assessment, Trump’s return means Canada needs a leader with “brains” and a “spine.” And that leader must have a “plan” – specifically a “Canada first” plan.

While declaring it’s time to put partisanship aside, Poilievre outlined a plan that largely aligns with things he’s been calling for for months — such as the repeal of the federal carbon tax and an end to plans for a ceiling on greenhouse gas emissions from the oil and gas industry.

It is not clear that any of Poilievre’s ideas would cause Trump to withdraw his threat. Instead, Poilievre’s argument seems to be that implementing his prescribed policy changes would make the Canadian economy stronger and somewhat better able to withstand the actions Trump takes.

In other words, the Conservative leader appeared to be saying that the return of Donald Trump is yet another reason why Pierre Poilievre should be prime minister.

Singh wants a ‘fight’, Trudeau promises to act ‘methodically’

Asked by reporters, Poilievre allowed that he would consider taking retaliatory action against the United States if necessary.

But the loudest rattling of sabers on Tuesday was Jagmeet Singh.

“The only thing a bully responds to is strength,” the NDP leader said during question period.

Singh said the Prime Minister should “fight like hell” and called on the government to establish a “war room.” The prime minister seemed unconvinced.

“I don’t think the idea of ​​going to war with the United States is what anybody wants,” Trudeau replied.

Trudeau said that while his government would “stand up” for Canadians, it would do so “seriously” and “methodically … without freaking out like the leader of the NDP seems to be.”

If war is off the table, it remains to be seen what else Canada – and Canadians – may decide to do instead.

Public Safety Minister Dominic LeBlanc pointed to the work already being done with US officials to monitor the border, telling CBC’s Power & Politics that he believes Canada has a “good story” to tell in that regard.

The prime minister calls for a first ministerial meeting on Wednesday; both Trudeau and Freeland spoke of the importance of a “Team Canada” approach. Freeland acknowledged that Canada responded to previous Trump tariffs with its own “targeted” tariffs.

All of this is largely consistent with what the Trudeau government did during Trump’s first term.

Trudeau stopped briefly to speak with reporters Tuesday morning and said he and the president-elect had a “good call” Monday night.

“Obviously we talked about laying out the facts about how the intense and effective relations between our two countries flow back and forth. We talked about some of the challenges that we can work on together,” he said.

“This is something we can do. Laying out the facts, moving forward in constructive ways. This is a relationship that we know requires a certain amount of work, and that’s what we’re going to do.”

“Laying out the facts” may seem like a futile – even naive – gesture right now. But it is not obvious that others have any better ideas.