Prime Minister Justin Trudeau looked a bit embarrassed, even humiliated … like a surrendering foe … seated next to Donald Trump at his Mar-a-Lago dinner table Friday night, along with several smiling Republican personalities and surrounded by several other tables filled with Trump’s social, business and political cronies.
This was no social occasion, no dinner with friends or allies, no special honour for Canada’s leader as the next US President’s first invited or celebrated foreign dignitary.
And certainly, not a negotiating session among equals at a mutually-agreed neutral location.
Let’s keep it real: Trudeau, accompanied by his Chief of Staff Katie Telford and Public Safety Minister Dominic Leblanc, was literally on Trump’s home turf, almost submissively, trying to stop the President-elect’s threatened economic attack on Canada as soon as he takes office in January … trying to avoid the potential costs and carnage that could be inflicted on Canada’s economy.
Trudeau was using his best weapon at this point: feeding Trump’s bloated ego, by flying directly to Palm Beach and no doubt reminding him how long Canada/US have been good friends/allies, how American exporters have benefited from the USMCA deal engineered during Trump’s first term … and promising now to do better at keeping illegals from crossing the northern border into the US and interdicting fentanyl and other illicit drugs from heading south as well.
It certainly was a different approach from Mexico’s new President President Claudia Sheinbaum’s initial loud and public reaction Tuesday that Mexico would retaliate with tariffs of its own if Trump imposed his threatened 25% tariffs on all Mexican exports to the US.
Frankly, my own initial reaction to Trump’s threat was closer to hers.
Let all those Washington apples spoil on the ground, I thought: let Idaho’s potatoes rot in the ground, let California’s millions of dollars of Canada-bound produce turn into compost, let’s retaliate with duties on all manufactured goods and food imports from the 36 US states whose prime export market is Canada, and let’s add a 25% tariff on the $57 Billion dollars of US-made automobiles sold each year in Canada, even if it increases even more sales in Canada of cars built in Japan, Korea, Europe, even China.
Of course, that would likely also raise prices for Canadian families … already struggling with high grocery and other imported product costs.
Luckily, I am not Prime Minister!
Clearly, Canada … ie Trudeau … had decided loud vows of retaliation was not the way to go with Trump.
At least, not initially.
Canada has been down this road with Trump before; and, when talks, negotiations and logic failed and Trump did impose tariffs, Canada responded with limited, specific targeted duties … and the US/Canada eventually worked out our differences, for a while.
Now, here we go again … and the goal of both sides should be to address the issues causing problems (illegals, security, drugs, guns, trade/market issues etc.) without adding to consumer costs or loss of jobs on both sides of the border.
That’s what Trudeau’s Friday dinner effort was all about … even if he had to eat a little crow.
Which brings me to Pierre Poilievre.
It is the DUTY of the Opposition to oppose, to criticize and expose weaknesses, omissions and failures of the government, its proposed solutions and actions.
But when you aspire to be Prime Minister … and all the polls say you WILL be, in less than a year … I believe Canadians should be able to expect something more: real proposed solutions to real existing problems.
Sunday Poilievre called for increased border patrols and “technology to crack down on illegal drug trafficking, as well as tightening visa rules and working with provincial law enforcement”.
Pretty puny moves, considering the magnitude of Trump’s bellicose complaints and threats.
According to CTV News, Poilievre also “demanded the federal government present a plan before Parliament to beef up border security”.
(You can read the full story here: https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/poilievre-calls-for-asylum-seeker-cap-border-plan-as-u-s-tariff-threat-looms-1.7129740.)
Poilievre has been very heavy on criticism of Trudeau, but very light on proposed solutions.
“No wonder foreign leaders believe they can walk all over him, they see him as a weak, incompetent leader who does not even have the support of his own caucus,” Poilievre said earlier this week.
Great sound bite … but I think Poilievre and the Conservative shadow cabinet should be able to come up with more than that in the face of such major critical threats from the US!
“In Canada, a government official said Canada is preparing for every eventuality and has started thinking about what items to target with tariffs in retaliation,” the Associated Press reported last week.
“Canada, for instance, announced billions of new duties in 2018 against the U.S. in a tit-for-tat response to new taxes on Canadian steel and aluminum,” the AP said.
“Many of the U.S. products were chosen for their political rather than economic impact. For example, Canada imports $3 million worth of yogurt from the U.S. annually and most comes from one plant in Wisconsin, home state of then-House Speaker Paul Ryan. That product was hit with a 10% duty. Another product on the list was whiskey, which comes from Tennessee and Kentucky, the latter of which is the home state of then-Republican Senate leader Mitch McConnell.”
That’s what the Trudeau government did: I want to know what would a Poilievre government do?
Would Poilievre have gone to dinner at Mar-a-Lago? Would he do as Mexico’s President did … openly threaten retaliatory tariffs? On all US or specific products? Would he have handled Trump differently? How?
Sound bites entertain … but solutions require substance.
What would Poilievre do differently from Trudeau or the Liberal government in dealing with Trump and his threats?
Hopefully, the “working’ media will start pressing Poilievre on that.
Harv Oberfeld
(Follow @harveyoberfeld on “X” for FREE First Alerts of new postings on this Blog.)