Pete Hoeskstra says Donald Trump thinks Canadians are mean and nasty for boycotting American booze and travel. But for the first time in my lifetime, the federal and provincial leaders seem committed to work together in securing long-term solutions for Canada. If we can exert monetary influence simply by using our won purchasing power, there is nothing mean or nasty about that.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on July 28, 2025.

OTTAWA—Canadians are mean, nasty people, according to the new American ambassador to Canada.

Why does he say we are nasty? Because we insist on exercising what little personal power we have to send a message to the government of Donald Trump.

If we can exert monetary influence simply by using our won purchasing power, there is nothing mean or nasty about that.

The fact the American liquor purchases to Canada are down by 66 per cent is a result of individual decisions by Canadian consumers to purchase from countries that support us, not those that punish us.

According to a June report by Statistics Canada, Canadian travel to the United States was down in May by 38.1 per cent compared to a year earlier.

British Columbia Premier David Eby countered the ambassadorial attack last week, saying that the efforts made by individual Canadians are having an effect.

“If you’re a mean and nasty Canadian for standing up for our sovereignty and our jobs, well, I think most Canadians would be proud to be considered mean and nasty.”

American ambassador Pete Hoekstra was speaking to a group of Americans gathered at the Pacific Northwest Economic Summit. He told them President Trump shared the view of Canadians being nasty for not stocking American alcohol and refusing to travel to the states.

The ambassador then joked that he had no trouble getting personal alcohol into Canada as long as his car was not checked at the border.

Normally, an ambassador is supposed to be someone who smooths differences between his or her home country and his or her ambassadorial posting. The ambassador isn’t usually the one tossing insults about Canadians.

But these are not ordinary times and Hoeskstra is no ordinary ambassador.

As the country edges closer to a date on the imposition of more tariffs from the United States, we can certainly not count on the American ambassador to be promoting a reconciliation with Canadians. Instead, he is making things worse, and Canadians will continue to dig in with their own personal boycott of American goods and travel.

The prime minister and premiers are working together to soften the deadline and broaden the benefits of the outcome. Prime Minister Mark Carney has had to back down from his self-imposed aggressive time frame for completion of the tariff negotiations.

He is learning quickly that sometimes a political compromise is the only solution. Elbows up can be a good hockey metaphor. But in politics, elbows in may sometimes be required.

And given the mixed messages emanating from Washington, the Canadian government will have to count on the continued support of individual Canadians to put pressure on the United States.

We know the citizen boycott is working because multiple governors from American states are reaching out to try and convince us to change our minds.

Their argument is that they are not the enemy. And they are right. But in the absence of any logical negotiation by the Trump team, Canadians have no choice but to continue with our personal elbows up.

That means refusing to allow American alcohol to be sold in Canadian liquor outlets and continuing to travel anywhere in Canada or elsewhere in the world. But not America.

Carney’s decision to reach out to other jurisdictions, including Europe and Mexico, with agreements that may simply bypass the United States is definitely the way to go.

And businesses looking for opportunities to repurpose their supply chains or secure raw materials from new markets must continue doing so.

But if Canadian individual decisions to stop buying American piqued the ire of the White House, we know that now is not the time to stop.

Will we succeed in negotiating the tariff agreement with the United States that will meet our needs? Only time will tell.

The good news is that for the first time in my lifetime, the federal and provincial leaders seem committed to work together in securing long-term solutions.

The country is also working quickly to break down trade barriers between provinces, which will generate economic growth and more inter-provincial commerce.

We do not have the geopolitical heft of our neighbours to the south. But if we stick together, our efforts can shake things up in Washington.

In the past, Canada was always seen as the friendly neighbour to the North. The most prominent word in our vocabulary was sorry.

The attack on our country by President Trump has changed all that. If Trump thinks that we are mean and nasty now, he ain’t seen nothing yet.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.

Trump will definitely be pushing hard for dairy concessions but Carney cannot afford to cave on supply management.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on July 7, 2025.

To cave or not to cave, that is the question.

According to Karoline Leavitt, the White House’s press secretary, Canada caved.

According to Prime Minister Mark Carney, his administration cancelled a tax initiative of the previous government in order to get trade negotiations back on track.

Carney knew there would not be too much push back in Canada since the tax was opposed by Conservatives and poorly understood by Canadians.

The trade-off of continuing negotiations in lieu of taxing American high-tech companies in the short term seems like a fairly easy call.

Many workers in the steel, aluminum, and auto industries are already seeing their jobs affected by American tariffs, so the sooner an agreement can be reached between Canada and the United States, the better.

But Leavitt’s crowing from the podium did allow Conservative Party Leader Pierre Poilievre to claim that the government has its elbows down in the fight for Canadian jobs.

To be fair, Finance Minister François-Philippe Champagne’s announcement of the cancellation of the Digital Services Tax was met with a major yawn by the public.

But those in the know understand that the tax mimicked a similar levy already imposed by the European Union, with countries like France and Spain already imposing a three-per-cent tax on companies providing certain digital services. In France, the tax is levied on firms with global revenues in excess of 750-million euros and in excess of revenues of 25-million in France.

Turkey has a DST more than double that of EU countries, with the levy weighing in at 7.5 per cent.

Canada has been a leader in finding ways to fund local content via the tax system, and it was fully expected in the streaming world that the digital tax passed last year was untouchable. It was not widely debated and as late as last week, Champagne confirmed the tax would be going ahead.

That was then and this is now. Carney obviously took a look at the big picture and decided he could afford to cancel the tax with little political punishment.

But there are other elements facing much more opposition if Carney plans to meet the deadline of July 21 for a trade agreement with the U.S. That was the timeline tentatively established by the American president and the Canadian prime minister at their G7 meeting in Kananaskis, Alta.

Trump keeps reinforcing his government’s opposition to Canada’s supply management system in our dairy industry.

That is one issue that is widely understood and broadly supported by all political parties.

It has even been subject to the provision that no government could eliminate supply management without a parliamentary vote.

The government and all opposition parties support the Canadian supply management system that limits imports of dairy products including milk and cheese, and adds heavy tariffs to some dairy items.

In reality, the heavy fees that Trump keeps referring to have never actually been applied because no American companies have imported enough dairy products into Canada to trigger the fee.

But on every occasion, Trump keeps referring to how “nasty” Canadian negotiators are, and how he would like to see the dairy system released from any agreement on supply management.

This is one hurdle that Carney will not be able to bypass as easily as he did with the DST.

The Bloc Québécois and the Tories have already indicated their support for retaining supply management. The only party that opposes it is the People’s Party, led by Maxime Bernier, which has no seats in Parliament. In fact, it was Bernier’s opposition to supply management that cost him the Conservative Party leadership in 2017. He was leading in 12 rounds of voting against Andrew Scheer and eventually lost the Tory leadership because of the support Scheer received from dairy farmers in Quebec.

Carney is committed to the July deadline for a trade agreement, but the pursuit of a deal will definitely put supply management on the line.

And this is one area where “elbows up” is required on the Canadian side. Carney cannot afford to cave on supply management ,and Trump will definitely be pushing hard for dairy concessions.

The political damage Carney would suffer from giving up on supply management is equally as important as the fight for steel, autos, and aluminum.

If Leavitt was crowing about Canada caving on the digital tax, she would be absolutely ecstatic if supply management were sacrificed to the larger trade agenda.

Carney’s elbows up strategy has worked so far. But the stakes are getting higher.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.

Had Donald Trump not weighed in with his threat to annex Canada, and had Justin Trudeau decided to remain and fight this election, the outcome would definitely be quite different.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on April 28, 2025.

OTTAWA—They used to say that six months is a lifetime in politics.

Two months is a lifetime in Canadian politics these days.

Two months ago, Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre was headed to a majority government.

Liberals had been languishing 20 points behind in the polls, and incumbents were voting with their feet.

Cabinet ministers were leaving politics (for family reasons), and Liberal party organizers were scrambling to simply fill the nominations across the country.

Because it looked as though the Liberals were potentially headed for third-party status, nobody wanted to step up and offer themselves as sacrificial lambs at the altar of a Poilievre government.

Organizers muttered privately that nothing could avert impending disaster, and Members of Parliament should batten down the hatches and just kept working their ridings in the hopes they might survive the oncoming storm.

Then the impossible happened. Less than two months ago, the Liberals elected Mark Carney in a landslide.

Even though Carney had been serving as economic adviser to then-prime minister Justin Trudeau for some time, he was seen as an agent of change, a political newcomer who actually had experience fighting the international shock waves that American President Donald Trump was sending around the world.

He was also fiscally conservative enough to focus his election promises on operational changes. Where the previous prime minister had increased operational spending by nine per cent annually, Carney has committed to a two per cent increase.

Former Conservative deputy leader Lisa Raitt characterized it this way on CTV last week, “They like the Conservative policies, but they want Mark Carney to implement them.” That was her conclusion after canvassing in Ontario and Cape Breton, N.S., where she reinforced the notion that people just don’t like Poilievre.

She is right on that count. The gender and age gap in voting preferences is startling, with women supporting Carney by a margin of 20 per cent. The so-called Boomer generation is also largely supportive of the Liberals.

To counter that message, the Conservatives used the last week of the campaign to run an ad of two older men on a golf course chatting about how they had to get rid of the Liberals. They also trotted out a very sombre ad of former prime minister Stephen Harper intoning on his reasons for supporting Poilievre.

In the first instance, if the Conservatives are trying to appeal to women voters, the last thing they need to see is two men on a golf course. The tone-deaf nature of that ad was equivalent to a late-campaign corporate endorsement for Poilievre led by Fairfax Financial CEO Prem Watsa and entitled, “Friends of Free Enterprise in Canada.” The group ran full-page ads in newspapers across the country the weekend before before the first leaders debate.

Again the message bombed. Among the 33 leaders who signed on, 32 were men. Any woman reading the advertisement would simply ask “if the Tory leader had that little support among women, why would I bother voting for him?”

So Carney moved enough to the right to convince lifelong Tories to vote for him, and his ‘Elbows Up’ approach to Trump convinced many New Democrats to park their vote with the Liberals.

Just this week, I was chatting with a former labour leader and lifelong New Democrat who was celebrating his 100th birthday.

On the call, he confessed to me that he had voted Liberal for the first time in his life, and he convinced a couple of friends to do the same.

So even though Poilievre had enough resources to throw lots of money at late-campaign advertising, even that effort struck the wrong note, and merely reinforced the decision of many people who were leaning towards Carney.

At the end of the day, the Liberals also need to send a thank-you note to Donald Trump, whose insulting behaviour to Trudeau in particular and the country in general prompted a complete redrawing of the Canadian political map.

Had Trump not weighed in with his threat to annex Canada, and had Trudeau decided to remain and fight this election, the outcome would definitely be quite different.

As it is, the Poilievre anti-Trudeau/carbon tax campaign did not survive the test of time. He could not or would not pivot his message, and as a result, he will probably have to pivot right out of politics after this election.

Raitt underscored Poilievre’s personal unpopularity as one of the reasons the party was failing badly.

What a difference two months makes.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.

If the Liberal leader keeps his cool and avoids attack mode, he can reinforce the impression that he is calm, thoughtful, and fully prepared to deal with future White House bullies. 

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on April 21, 2025.

OTTAWA—Only in Canada would a hockey game trump a federal election debate.

The Montreal Canadiens had one last chance to make the playoffs last week, and their game was in conflict with the national leaders’ debate in French.

The simple solution was to move the debate forward to an earlier time. The move probably helped the front-runner more than anyone else.

Liberal Leader Mark Carney struggles more in French than the rest, but the move may have meant fewer Quebecers watched the debate in person. Some were likely still en route from work, and others were preparing dinner for their families. Six o’clock is probably the worst time for a political debate.

But there’s also a school of thought to say that debates really don’t change much.

Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre had better hope that they are wrong because he needs a major boost to have any chance of beating the Liberals on April 28.

In reality, there are very few occasions when a knockout punch decides an election.

Most people remember Brian Mulroney’s response when then-prime minister John Turner was asked to defend a series of appointments forced upon him by predecessor Pierre Trudeau.

Turner’s response, “I had no option,” caused Progressive Conservative leader Mulroney to jab him with a pointed finger. “You, sir, had an option.” That knockout punch led the PCs to a historic victory of 211 seats in the September 1984 election.

Many have compared that debate scenario to this year’s campaign. Both campaigns saw unpopular Trudeaus leaving their positions as prime minister.

Both saw a new leader take over who had been outside the previous prime minister’s direct orbit. In Turner’s case, he left government after a disagreement with the prime minister, and returned when the leadership position opened up anew.

In Carney’s case, he is brand new to politics. But his previous work as an adviser to Justin Trudeau meant that he was not completely separated from the previous regime.

He, too, has experienced a post-leadership bump. That would likely have slumped in the rollout of a regular election campaign.

But United States President Donald Trump made sure that this was not an ordinary Canadian election.

He caused a pan-Canadian call to arms with his constant musings about annexing our country, and referring to our prime minister as “governor.”

Carney came out as the leader most likely to defend this country’s interests against American protectionism and against a president who seems to enjoy belittling allies and supporting former enemies.

It has been lost on no-one that the president exempted Russia and North Korea in the global tariff attacks that saw him turn his back on Europe, Canada, and other former allies recently.

The debates in French and English last week permitted Poilievre to exercise his acrid humour in a frontal attack on Carney. But he had to use caution because if he were to be seen as too nasty, that would simply reinforce the animus that Canadian women voters have already identified in him.

There is a reason that he is running 20 points behind when it comes to support from women. His nasty, three-word slogans get the anti-vaxxers motivated, but have the opposite effect on women who are concerned with issues like language and behaviour. They want to provide good examples to their children, and when it gets too nasty, politicians simply lose their support.

I was on the debate preparation team for Trudeau in his first election, and the whole group was encouraging him to hit hard. He refused to do so, saying he wanted to show that politics didn’t have to be dirty.

He was right. Running in third place, Trudeau took a nasty hit from then-NDP leader Thomas Mulcair, and in a calm voice, he reminded Mulcair that debate day was the anniversary of his father’s death. Mulcair melted and Trudeau vaulted to first place in an election victory that no one had seen coming.

All that to say that debates do count. But for the current Liberal momentum to be blunted, it would mean a direct hit from the Conservatives, the Bloc Québécois and the New Democrats. They are all fighting for their lives, so any onlooker can expect a full-frontal attack on the prime minister.

If he keeps his cool and doesn’t fall into attack mode, Carney can reinforce the impression that he is calm, thoughtful, and fully prepared to deal with future White House bullies.

That perception will be important since, if Carney is successful at the end of the month, his anti-bullying days may just be starting.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.

We are at the halfway point in the election, but much could happen in the yin and the yang of the campaign. 

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on April 14, 2025.

OTTAWA—Does size matter? Pierre Poilievre seems to think so.

In this regard, he is aligning himself closely with U.S. President Donald Trump, who claimed that his inauguration day crowds during his first term were bigger than anything posted by Barack Obama.

Poilievre has also claimed his crowds are the biggest in history, which, of course, is false.

Back in 1979, governing Liberals managed to organize a rally of more than 20,000 people in Toronto’s Maple Leaf Gardens and then went on to lose the election to the Conservatives.

Rallies definitely help to charge up the base, which serves to grow the ground game of local candidates, but they also chew up a lot of time that could be better used recruiting new supporters.

In Poilievre’s case, he has a solid group of core followers who will never waver. They also tend to be opponents of vaccinations, and the so-called “woke” world they are living in.

But the work to grow his base will actually decide the election. If he cannot do that, it doesn’t matter how many of the faithful line up to join his rallies, he won’t win.

As for organizers, most will tell you that the campaign focus should be on local organizational voter-identification. This is not getting done when people are busy getting supporters to rallies.

How is that relevant?

When prime minister Brian Mulroney won his second election back in 1988, his party managed to secure victory in 20 ridings by less than 1,000 votes. In a tight race, what matters most is who actually gets to the polls to vote.

If the current numbers hold, (and that is not likely) the Liberals will win a comfortable majority and the race will be called within an hour of the polls closing.

But if the gap narrows, the number of seats with a margin of less than 1,000 votes could actually decide the election.

We are at the halfway point in the election, but much could happen in the yin and the yang of the campaign.

The debates in French and English will be very important because if Prime Minister Mark Carney stumbles, he will definitely curb the enthusiasm of his campaign.

Poilievre’s support is obviously not as wide, but it is very deep. In the case of Carney, his supporter is much broader, but without the depth of loyalty that Poilievre is enjoying.

People like Carney’s background and think that he has the right financial chops to deal with the chaos caused by Trump’s tariffs.

He will need to reinforce that impression during the debates, with particular attention to his performance in the French language.

Most French speakers are satisfied that Carney’s capacity in Canada’s second official language is not a vote-loser. Carney is particularly popular in Quebec.

During the final days of prime minister Justin Trudeau’s time in office, Liberals were lagging badly, but the Conservatives were not much more popular. The Bloc benefited from those numbers, with leader Yves-François Blanchet looking to form a majority in Quebec. But the Quebec numbers now show that Blanchet could lose even in his own riding.

New Democratic Party Leader Jagmeet Singh is facing the same possibility as his single-digit polling could mean a massive rout for his party, including the potential loss of his own seat.

Singh is focusing his message on convincing Canadians that minority governments work better for people, in an effort to stem the massive move of New Democratic voters to the Liberals.

As long as Trump keeps threatening the world order, Canadians who are seeing their cost-of-living rise and their bank accounts shrink, want to rally around a leader who will fight the American president.

A minority Parliament would not provide Canadians with certainty in the global crisis that Trump has created.

A tight race between the Liberals and the Conservatives will create even more challenges for the Bloc and the NDP. In the global crisis, Canadians will want a strong prime minister. Those dynamics mean that this election has become a two-party race. And if you look at crowd-size, it looks as though Poilievre has an edge.

Carney’s crowds are growing in size as well, but the Liberal party’s focus is on a tight, get-out-the-vote campaign in every riding. That means that, while Tory supporters are following their leader in rallies, Liberals are looking for new voters in canvassing, phoning and social media activities.

Both parties are obviously working their ground game, but Poilievre’s push for big crowds does not mean victory.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.

The Liberal leader is leading in all demographic groups except for men aged 35 to 54

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on April 7, 2025.

OTTAWA—Women are stampeding to the Liberals in this election.

The most recent Ipsos Reid poll showed that, for women over the age of 55, Prime Minister Mark Carney holds a 27-point lead over Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre.

The Liberal leader is leading in all demographic groups except for men aged 35 to 54.

But the startling gap between women and men is worth examining.

Poilievre didn’t help himself last week when he launched his housing strategy claiming that women’s biological clock would run out before a Liberal housing program would help.

“I don’t think any woman wants to hear Pierre Poilievre talking about their body, period!” was the immediate retort from New Democratic Party Leader Jagmeet Singh.

Critics on social media questioned why Poilievre plans to cancel national childcare if he is so interested in women having babies.

The social gains introduced by the Liberals over the last decade are particularly important for women.

Obviously, childcare is huge, and the dental care program is especially important for older women on fixed incomes who cannot afford dental work. Ditto for school lunch programs and pharmacare, including free birth control, IUDs, hormonal implants, and the morning-after pill.

Poilievre is definitely not on board with national childcare, and has been ambiguous about dental and pharmacare. He has promised that no person currently covered under those programs would be cut off, but is silent on the extension of the programs to others. He also voted against the National School Food Program, and is silent on its continuation.

These are issues of particular interest to women.

It is not lost on them that several dozen members of the Conservative caucus have pledged to support limitations on abortion through private members’ bills. Poilievre himself, in his very first speech to Parliament, spoke out in opposition to public health funding for transgender medical services.

The Trump Supreme Court nominations that resulted in an end to reproductive choice in the United States, and the United States president decision to abolish equal rights policies for women, minorities, gays, and transsexuals has frightened Canadian women, as well. If it could happen there, what about us? Poilievre doesn’t pass that smell test.

Carney leads dramatically in net-positive favourability. That sum is the number achieved when you deduct unfavourable from the favourable viewpoints to discover what people think about each candidate.

Carney is enjoying a positive favourability among men and women. With men, the net range is 18-plus while for women it is 26-plus, according to the same poll.

The difference between Carney’s favourability rating and Poilievre’s unfavourable is stunning. Three in five women—at 61 per cent—say they have an unfavourable view of Poilievre.

Carney has also managed to attract the majority of young voters, a crucial element in Justin Trudeau’s 2015 majority government victory.

Forty-five per cent of young men between the ages of 18 and 34 now support the Liberals, and 46 per cent of men over 54 years old support the Liberals.

We are almost four weeks away from the vote, and the leaders’ debates could both have an effect on the outcome.

Poilievre has been cautioned publicly by members of his own party that he needs to pivot away from the anti-Liberal message to an anti-Trump stance.

But the challenge for the Conservative leader is that a significant percentage of his base also supports Trump. So if he is too tough on the American president, he will lose supporters, as well.

Alberta Premier Danielle Smith, who is busy courting Trumpian podcasters and running her own “Trash Canada” campaign, is stoking the flames of separation in Alberta, which is decidedly unhelpful to her federal leader.

Poilievre not only has had to pivot on message that Canada is broken, he also has to attack Trump. The “lost Liberal decade” phrase, which peppers all his public declarations, seems to reinforce the notion that Canada is broken, even while his Bring it Home/Canada First mantra sounds like a page out of the Trump playbook.

Of course, Trump’s chaotic approach to government is ensuring that his prints are all over this Canadian election.

His ill-advised Liberation Day announcement of worldwide tariffs on April 2 has certainly caught everyone’s attention. Even if the American Senate is successful in reversing the emergency resolution that allowed the president to impose tariffs, it is going to take time for this to happen.

Financial markets and ordinary citizens in the United States are already very nervous about the cost of these tariffs.

But Trump’s tenure is four years, and Poilievre only has three weeks.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on March 24, 2025.

OTTAWA—Trump is rooting for Carney. Who would believe it?

Nobody. The notion that the president of the United States would support the leader of a party he has been insulting and demeaning, is as believable as his claim that he won the 2020 election.

Donald Trump has spent the first two months of his term in office trashing the Liberal government and threatening the country with economic takeover.

Donald Trump has spent the first two months of his term in office trashing the Liberal government and threatening the country with economic takeover.

The interview given by the president in which he states he would rather deal with Liberals because the Conservative leader said bad things about him is simply another of Trump’s multiple contradictory positions.

Pierre Poilievre jumped on the statement, claiming that he is the strong Canadian leader to fight the constant flow of attacks from the president.

But he will have a tough time convincing most Canadians of that, since his whole career has been based on copying the messaging and governing approaches of Trump.

Just last week, Poilievre announced he would break a longstanding tradition, by kicking journalists off his campaign plane during the upcoming election.

Poilievre barring reporters from his aircraft is akin to Trump’s decision to eject legitimate journalists from the White House briefings and replace them with so-called social media journalists.

One of those newbies posed a ridiculous question on Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s clothing choices during the recent disastrous meeting with the Ukrainian president.

Poilievre supporters regularly denigrate the Canadian mainstream media, labelling them as legacy journalists with whom the Conservative leader refuses to engage.

CBC’s Rosemary Barton is constantly reaching out on social media simply asking for an interview with the leader of the official opposition.

Poilievre has also recently released details on his party’s position to cancel foreign aid in favour of military reinvestment.

That is the same position taken by Trump, who authorized Elon Musk and the Department of Government Efficiency to eliminate international aid.

That cancellation was questioned last week in a Federal Court judgment ruling that the dismantling of USAID was likely unconstitutional.

It is unclear whether the White House will even heed this court ruling as Trump has pushed back against another court ruling opposing the mass deportations being carried out under government orders.

The chief judge of the American Supreme Court issued a video warning to the president, after Trump threatened a judge with impeachment because of a ruling.

Last week, Poilievre repeated his promise that he would have no problem firing the governor of the Bank of Canada.

Poilievre refuses to accept the independence of those responsible for Canada’s monetary policy just as Trump threatens the independence of the judicial system.

Some believe that Trump’s comments were specifically intended to help the Conservative leader, but the presidential tirade was more likely directed against Poilievre’s negative commentary on Trump.

“The Conservative that’s running is stupidly no friend of mine. I don’t know but he said negative things. So when he says negative things, I couldn’t care less. … It is easier to deal actually with a Liberal. And maybe they’re going to win, but I don’t really care.” Trump said in an interview on Fox News.

Poilievre jumped on the attack saying,

“It’s true. I am a strong leader. I am a tough guy to deal with….By contrast the Liberals…have driven a half trillion dollars of investment to the U.S.”

Poilievre’s pro-Canada positioning is relatively new. He has spent most of his time in opposition saying Canada is broken because of the tax policies of former prime minister Justin Trudeau.

Now Trudeau is gone, the carbon pricing is gone, and Poilievre is trying to pivot into a posture as the strong man for Canada.

Trump’s declaration will definitely soften the MAGA edges that have been dogging Poilievre.

If the ballot question in the election is “who is best prepared to deal with an erratic American bent on annexing Canada,” current polls place Prime Minister Mark Carney in first place.

Trump could be blamed for the turnaround.

In an unprecedented political comeback, the Liberal Party has reached polling parity with the Conservatives since the election of Carney.

Trump is not oblivious to the astonishing political upswing of the Liberals.

He must be steaming that Carney’s first international trip was to Europe, not Mar-a-Lago. Carney also managed to purchase an Australian early warning radar system that was supposed to be destined for the United States.

One of Canada’s first financial moves under Carney was to sell off American dollars in a Canadian government bond offering.

Trump has met his match.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.

If this fight continues, the federal government may have to consider overriding Danielle Smith’s objections. The pain of tariffs needs to be shared across the country. If Ontario and Quebec are facing tariffs on steel, aluminum and automobiles, every province has to do their part. 

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on March 17, 2025.

OTTAWA—The roller-coaster ride facing our country is unlikely to end soon.

U.S. President Donald Trump is doubling down on his false claims that Canada is responsible for the tariff wars engulfing both countries.

And he continues to repeat that Canada’s best economic path would be to simply join the United States. Trump has been publicly questioning the boundaries between the two countries, and the organizations that manage boundary issues and shared watersheds.

The International Boundary Commission has maintained the integrity of the border since a treaty signed in 1925. The current boundary was surveyed and demarcated in 1908. Since that time, there has been zero claim that the border designation is wrong.

But we are dealing with a president who thinks he can rename the Gulf of Mexico simply by executive order.

He can also decide that news organizations refusing to carry the Gulf of America geographic designation will no longer be part of the White House press pool.

Reuters and the Associated Press have both been kept out of White House briefings for not bowing to the president’s order.

The White House Correspondence Association used to be responsible for managing the media membership and presidential pool access. It has criticized the change in policy, but Trump has said he wants new media included.

The president has also decided to further snuff out free speech by authorizing U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement to deport anyone in the country on a temporary permit who participates in legal demonstrations.

So much for America’s First Amendment guaranteeing free speech.

Trump’s disrespect for Canada continues apace, even though the vast majority of Canadians have made it very clear that they are not interested in becoming the 51st state.

The only organized group that seems lukewarm to the fight for Canada is the truckers’ Ottawa occupation group.

Leader Tamara Lich—still awaiting the verdict in her trial for mischief, intimidation and counselling people to break the law—went on social media to complain about the slogan “Elbows Up,” calling it “the stupidest slogan I ever heard of.”

Mike Myers didn’t agree with her. In his recent appearance on Saturday Night Live, the Canadian comedian launched the “elbows up” movement after playing Elon Musk on the show. At the very end of the episode, Myers opened his vest, showing his ‘Canada Is Not For Sale’ T-shirt, and mouthed the words “elbows up” message while crooking his left elbow up. Every Canadian knew exactly what he meant. #ElbowsUp became a rallying cry that Liberal Leader Mark Carney referenced in his victory speech at the party convention last weekend, as did outgoing prime minister Justin Trudeau.

Some of the Liberal government’s more vocal opponents don’t like the unity message. It will be interesting to see how the leader of the official opposition manages this national consensus.

Pierre Poilievre has expended so much political energy to convince people that Canada is broken that it is tough for him to embrace a national, united fight for the country.

His core support draws from anti-vax truckers and if he appears to be too pro-Canada, that could cost him dearly. Alberta Premier Danielle Smith has made it clear she will risk nothing in her tariff fight.

While most other premiers appear focused on this existential fight of our lives, Smith heads off to Florida March 27 to headline a conservative event with Ben Shapiro, a strong supporter of the plan to overrun our nation.

“When we take over Canada, you will be expelled to Panama to work the canal,” he wrote in a social post to prime minister Justin Trudeau in January.

Alberta New Democratic Party Leader Naheed Nenshi called Smith’s participation in the US$1,500 ticketed event, “Despicable. These are not the kind of people that Albertans want her associating with,” Nenshi told reporters.

Smith defended her participation, saying she will be influencing millions of followers on Shapiro’s social media account.

The premier has also been on Breitbart, saying she is getting the message out, but unlike Ontario Premier Doug Ford, her main strategy appears to be appeasement.

Smith repeatedly states that Alberta will not retaliate with oil and gas tariffs, even though the brief threat of electricity tariffication got Trump’s attention.

If this fight continues, the federal government may have to consider overriding her objections. The pain of tariffs needs to be shared across the country. If Ontario and Quebec are facing tariffs on steel, aluminum and automobiles, every province has to do their part.

A fuel tariff would be immediate cause a hike in gasoline prices south of the border. Gas-guzzling pro-Trump truckers would not be amused.

Canada needs all elbows up!

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.

United States President Donald Trump has been able to turn most of the world against him, but his unfair tariff war against Canada will also bring some positive changes to Canadian public policy.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on March 10, 2025.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is going out on a high.

So much so that some believe he will remain prime minister until a quick election makes a decision on future leadership.

The thinking behind this new political twist is that Trudeau would be able to fight the tariff war internationally while the new Liberal leader would focus on fighting the opposition in a Canada-wide campaign.

That decision will be up to the winner.

United States President Donald Trump has been able to turn most of the world against him, but his unfair tariff war against our country will also bring some positive changes to Canadian public policy.

Canadians are united in their resolve to fight what Foreign Affairs Minister Mélanie Joly characterizes as an existential threat.

Former Alberta United Conservative Party leader Jason Kenney has come out gangbusters, lauding Canada’s decision to fight American tariffs with all possible tools at our disposal.

His social media message was an indirect hit at current UCP leader Danielle Smith, the only domestic leader who has been publicly undermining the Canadian tariff response strategy.

Only minutes after Trump announced illegal 25-per-cent tariffs on almost everything, and a 10-per-cent tariff on energy, Smith undercut the feds by announcing on an American media outlet that she would not retaliate with her tariffs on oil and gas.

Any good negotiator would never make such an admission on Fox News in a foreign country without having a discussion with Canadian partners. Smith obviously doesn’t have much concern for industries other than Alberta’s petroleum producers. Her official response is that she is onside with the prime minister and other premiers, but her actions say otherwise. Like Trump, she is an untrustworthy ally.

Compare Smith’s response to that of re-elected Progressive Conservative Ontario Premier Doug Ford. He is threatening to cut off electrical exports, and has cancelled the $100-million Starlink satellite deal with Elon Musk’s company.

Ford’s aggressive response caught Washington’s attention, as well, so much so that he received a call from American tariff designer, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick.

Lutnick tried to convince Ford that Canada should enter into negotiations to lower the illegal tariffs.

Ford pushed back and insisted that the only negotiation was to end the tariffs totally.

United against the tariff war—possibly minus Premier Smith—Canadians have also seen this fight for our sovereignty spread to Quebec.

For the first time, the premier of Quebec is on the same page as the rest of the country. For the first time, the fight for sovereignty is not aimed at Ottawa, but at Washington, D.C.

Josh Morgan, mayor of London, Ont., and chair of the Canadian Federation of Municipalities big city mayors’ caucus, is calling for municipalities to change procurement rules to encourage “Buy Non-American” purchases. Morgan says the 25-per-cent tariffs have forced municipalities to move away from American purchasing where possible.

That means sourcing Canadian or international replacements for anything that municipalities, hospitals, schools, and other public institutions purchase.

A “Buy Canadian” strategy embraced by municipalities across the country could be huge. Provincial and federal institutions need to follow suit, including Crown corporations.

The federal government is the largest property owner and purchaser in the nation, and a shift in procurement policy to buy Canadian could rejuvenate businesses hit by Trump’s economic attack.

Quebecers are motivated because they also know that if Trump’s annexation threat were to come true, he would quickly squash the French language in public policy.

The idea that a country is founded on two official languages is an anathema to Trump’s vision of a white, anti-diversity population.

The president’s new slogan is “Make America Rich Again,” but the stock market reaction to his tariffs doesn’t match his rhetoric.

Fox News carried an analysis of the tariffication on trucks, saying it would boost the cost of a Dodge Ram truck from $80,000 to $100,000.

One dealer in Pennsylvania told Fox News that a truck purchase cancellation has already occurred because of the price hike.

House prices in the U.S. are expected to jump 10 per cent, and Republicans—facing trouble in their districts with lost Canadian booze and orange juice sales—are starting to knock on the president’s door.

Trump’s tariff war has woken up his base at home. When the market for bourbon and trucks is facing a crisis, you know the president will have to act.

An offer to negotiate his illegal tariffs should be a non-starter for Canada.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.

A Quebec City high-speed rail connection to Toronto will do more to unite the country than simply a rail connection. It will get people moving in an east-west direction, which can only help strengthen the ties that bind us. We have Trump to thank for this wake-up call.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on February 24, 2025.

OTTAWA—Trump lemons may become Canada’s lemonade.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s high-speed electric rail announcement last week is one case in point.

The interest in high-speed rail has been percolating for years.

But it finally looks as though a consortium capable of completing the project will focus on linking Quebec City to Toronto.

The original idea called for a rail line from Windsor to Quebec City. That makes the most sense as the population from Toronto to Windsor can support a rail service with more certainty than the route from Quebec City to Montreal.

Trudeau’s announcement in the dying days of his administration will be a legacy in the same way that Sir John A. Macdonald is recognized as the builder of Canada’s first cross-country rail service.

The project has been made that much more important in the current climate of economic fear created by American President Donald Trump.

It is not just the ridiculous statements made by the American president. His aggressive, illegal ruminations about taking over our country have been met with very little objection from our American friends and neighbours.

It is commonplace to hear that Canada and the United States share friends and, in many cases, family, given our proximity and open border.

So most Canadians were flummoxed when the president’s comments were not repudiated by American opinion leaders.

Lawrence Martin wrote a column in The Globe and Mail, riffing off the original Gone with the Wind film with his claim that “Quite frankly Canada, we don’t give a damn.”

His perspective, shared by many, was an expression of disappointment in America’s silence on tariffs and the unwanted annexation invitation.

Europeans weren’t paying much attention until U.S. Vice-President J.D. Vance delivered a shocker of a speech at the Munich Security Conference on Valentine’s Day.

Vance’s claim that European democracy and free speech are backsliding was seen as an ideological declaration of war against former allies.

Europe obviously won’t get any help from the Americans if Russia decides to extend its war to other parts of eastern Europe.

Canada needs to join a European-led military response. We also need to strengthen our interprovincial relations.

That is where the train comes in. More Quebecers travelling to Ontario and vice-versa will accelerate internal integration.

Trudeau is the first prime minister to invest heavily in mass transit at the local level in communities across the country.

A move toward rapid, electrified transportation is one element that will accelerate links between Ontario and Quebec.

Existing barriers were specifically designed by governments to protect home advantage. They serve to limit the growth of economies in other provinces, and protect jobs in their own jurisdictions.

For every barrier that is eliminated, there will be some whose provincial economic interests will seek to stymie integration.

Trains are not the only investment to link regions.

It is time for a transnational pipeline to get western oil to eastern markets.

If we want to call ourselves a country, we have to be prepared to make changes to protectionist provincial laws that pit one region against another.

A Quebec City connection to Toronto will do more to unite the country than simply a rail connection.

It will get people moving in an east-west direction, which can only help strengthen the ties that bind us.

We have Trump to thank for this wakeup call, as the United States has set itself up as an isolationist bully with a predilection for dictators.

Vance met with a right-wing German opposition leader after his blistering attack on existing governments prompted the security summit chair to break down in tears during his closing address.

The initial audience response was a mixture of disbelief and incomprehension. But Europe has finally awoken to the dangers of Trumpism.

We can expect similar attacks as long as Trump is in office.

Global institutions that have helped shape world health, justice, and economic policy hold no sway with Trump.

He has already moved to eliminate American participation in the World Health Organization, and has issued sanctions against the International Criminal Court.

While the Canadian government tackles the issues outlined by the White House to avoid tariffs, there is zero certainty that this will result in more Canada-U.S. co-operation.

We can expect the contrary. The only thing that will stop Trump is if he sees that his erratic leadership results in a downward stock market trajectory.

The World Trade Organization warned us last week that tariff wars could trigger a global recession.

For Trump, money talks.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.