The last budget was silent on NAFC funding which is scheduled to sunset because the existing 10-year funding agreement ends in 2026

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on December 15, 2025.

OTTAWA—The minister of Canadian culture and identity has an almost impossible job. The idea of a monolithic Canadian culture is a challenge in itself.

Marc Miller is also responsible for official languages, minority language English support in Quebec, and French outside Quebec.

The focus on official languages overshadows support for Indigenous Peoples. When I became Canadian heritage minister in 1995, almost all funding was directed to activities promoting the languages of Shakespeare and Molière.

Indigenous applicants for cultural funding were redirected to the Department of Indian and Northern Affairs, even though that department had no funding for culture.

The government claimed to be supporting Canadian culture, but was really financing European-based culture.

When it came to First Nations, there was no investment in promoting Indigenous identities though books, television, film, live performances, or any other artistic medium that supported self-identity.

In the last budget, the vast majority of Indigenous funding targeted infrastructure and investment within Indigenous territories.

It is very popular these days to open every ceremony with an acknowledgement that we, as colonizers, live on the ceded or unceded territory of various First Nations. Ceded territory signifies those lands where successive governments signed treaties with First Nations. Unceded territories includes lands where a treaty on land ownership was never concluded.

The Parliament of Canada was built on Algonquin land that has not been ceded to the Crown.

Most of today’s governance policies involve engagement of Indigenous Peoples living on those territories.

But the reality is that 60 per cent of Indigenous Peoples do not live on the lands that their ancestors inhabited. They migrate to cities, and are expected to be served via the same services available to all other citizens.

The recent budget outlined more than $16-billion in funding initiatives largely focused on Indigenous territorial investments.

But it was silent on any future funding for the National Association of Friendship Centres (NAFC).

The last budget under then-prime minister Justin Trudeau allocated $27.5-million in 2024 to the NAFC which administers more than 100 centres in small and large communities across the country.

When you compare the friendship centre budget to the investment on Indigenous territories, the contrast is already very stark.

For the majority of Indigenous Peoples living away from their homes, friendship centres are the first places of welcome that can help in their transition.

The centres offer housing, job-search assistance, mental-health programs, and addiction support.

Most provide a much-needed medical and social service link to the outside community.

The Nov. 4 budget was silent on NAFC funding which is scheduled to sunset because the existing 10-year funding agreement ends in 2026.

Leaders from dozens of friendship centres across the country descended on Ottawa last week for a summit on their continued existence.

Speaker after speaker made the case that survival is crucial to the reconciliation process that the government has committed to.

Miller attended the event, joined by Indigenous Services Minister Mandy Gull-Masty. Both spoke positively in support of funding friendship centres.

If anyone understands that the key to Canadian identity is Indigenous, it’s Miller.

He is still held in high regard for his work as minister responsible for Indigenous services, and minister of Crown-Indigenous relations.

On a personal basis, Miller was the first MP in history to make a statement in the Mohawk language, studying a community-based program developed by the Six Nations of the Grand River near Brantford, Ont.

Miller recently faced some criticism for his reaction to a question on the decline of French-language speakers in Quebec. Miller said he was “fed up” with the language debate, raising the ire of Quebec Premier François Legault, who called him a “disgrace.”

Miller’s exasperation stemmed from the fact that language is constantly used by politicians as a political weapon.

He won’t face that issue with Indigenous Peoples. But he will be challenged to put his historic support for them to the test by returning full funding to friendship centres from coast to coast to coast.

Meanwhile, centres are scrambling because they literally do not know what will happen in three months.

The NAFC’s interim CEO advised the government that March 31, 2026, layoffs are being contemplated because that is when budget certainty ends.

Deputy minister of Indigenous Services, Algonquin Gina Wilson, has confirmed that funding will be renewed, but no one knows by how much and when.

Millions of Indigenous Peoples are hoping Miller and Gull-Masty will deliver more than a lump of coal this Christmas.

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

The prime minister’s refusal to embrace a feminist foreign policy did not get him a single vote. Nor did the abolition of an ambassadorship. But women are taking notice.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on December 8, 2025.

OTTAWA—Prime Minister Mark Carney was elected this past April thanks to an estrogen wave.

That was what a key female Liberal organizer had to say about his victory. She said that wherever she travelled, knocking on doors for the Grits, women had confidence in him, and they were the ones reversing the Liberal electoral fate.

Only a few months ago, Liberals were expecting to hold their next Christmas party in a phone booth. Instead, the party is flooded with requests from people who want to join the winning team in this seasonal celebration.

All has been going well. But there are some clouds on the horizon that the leader should be taking seriously.

Words matter—especially when you are in politics. A single comment can be parsed to death.

How many articles were written when then-prime minister Jean Chrétien in 1997 downplayed the police use of pepper spray during a protest against a G20 meeting in British Columbia?

“For me, pepper, I put it on my plate,” was Chrétien’s comical way of minimizing the confrontation.

More recently, Prime Minister Mark Carney declined to characterize Canada’s foreign policy as “feminist” during a press conference following the recent G20 summit in South Africa.

Some saw this as wordsmithing.

Others saw it as a pivot away from the Justin Trudeau government’s 2017 Feminist International Assistance Policy, intended to focus on foreign aid that supports women’s empowerment and gender equality.

The policy was a rebuttal of the previous Stephen Harper Conservative government, which instructed officials to remove gender-based analysis from all cabinet documents.

Carney’s international admission that Canada’s feminist foreign policy was dead has sent ripples throughout the domestic foreign aid community.

Last week, a group of 92 organizations headed by Oxfam addressed an open letter to the prime minister, complaining of foreign aid cuts, and confusion around gender equality.

The organization also called for the re-establishment of an ambassador for women, peace, and security, a post that was folded into the foreign affairs department last March.

Most of us have probably never heard of this envoy, but according to Global Affairs Minister Anita Anand, Jacqueline O’Neill will continue to advocate in that area, sans official ambassadorial designation.

Carney’s statement in South Africa reinforced his initial cabinet decision to eliminate the department of Women and Gender Equality, arguing it could responsibly be included in the ministry for culture and identity.

That faux pas was reversed two months later because of the political backlash it caused.

Similar opposition is quietly brewing internally on feminist foreign policy issues.

A group of senior Liberal women, united on social media, have made it very clear they would be lobbying colleagues at the Christmas party next week.

There is also work within the Liberal women’s caucus, headed by Quebec MP Linda Lapointe, to have the issue referred to the main caucus.

The women’s caucus was crucial in getting Carney to reverse his position and reinstate WAGE as a full ministry.

The open letter from many groups that work internationally on women’s issues will definitely have some effect, but the angst of Liberal women will be even more crucial.

Carney probably thought his rebuttal of a feminist foreign policy would be understood.

He said he wanted gender equality to be a part of the government’s funding mechanisms.

But his focus on defence spending and identifying major projects for national funding means the majority of mega-financing will be focused on men’s jobs.

Like it or not, fewer than 20 per cent of the jobs in the energy sector go to women.

Less than 20 per cent of the Canadian military is also made up of women, and similar numbers apply to defence industries supplying the military.

If only one in five of the big jobs created goes to women, it will be felt in our employment numbers.

More importantly, Carney’s election to the top job was largely dependent on the women’s vote. Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre was able to secure support from young and middle-aged men in numbers big enough to form government.

But it was women who made sure that Carney got the nod.

No wave lasts forever. An estrogen wave is just as vulnerable to destruction as any other wave.

But surely the loss of support from women should not be based on misspoken messages.

Carney’s refusal to embrace a feminist foreign policy did not get him a single vote. Nor did the abolition of an ambassadorship. But women are taking notice.

The prime minister needs estrogen to win. A feminist agenda reset is in order.

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

Jean Chrétien belled the Alberta cat in a way that everyone can understand: ‘They never sold as much oil as they have today and they’re complaining as if they are going bankrupt?’ 

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

OTTAWA—Jean Chrétien spent more than 40 years in public life. Upon taking his leave, he still maintains a rabid interest in politics, and has often joked about returning to help the Liberal Party when it has been in need.

Prime Minister Mark Carney thought so much of Chrétien that he invited him to the government’s first swearing in on March 14 at Rideau Hall. At that point, Chrétien revealed a little historical gem. Carney’s father had run for the Liberals in an Edmonton riding back in the 1980 federal election.

Carney’s invitation to Chrétien was an abrupt departure from his predecessor’s government’s treatment of the former prime minister.

Justin Trudeau liked to reach out across the aisle to enlist former Conservatives like Rona Ambrose to work with cabinet on files. But his government was loathe to involve former prime ministers or former senior Liberal cabinet ministers in any policy or political development.

At one point, business leaders across the country and former prime minister Brian Mulroney reached out to Trudeau to convince him that Chrétien could negotiate a peace agreement with the Chinese after the arrest of Huawei executive Meng Wanzhou in 2018.

The offer was leaked to the media before it had been accepted by the Prime Minister’s Office. Then-foreign affairs minister Chrystia Freeland went ahead to publicly snub Chrétien by stating that if she needed his help, she would be in touch.

Trudeau was probably worried about working too closely with his father’s generation, since Chrétien had been a minister with Pierre Trudeau, working closely on the 1982 repatriation of the Constitution and the establishment of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

As political offspring, younger Trudeau obviously wanted to chart his own course, but in bypassing Chrétien, his government ignored wisdom that could have helped.

Trudeau’s fight with the Chinese went on for two years. Even after the telecom executive had been freed in a deal crafted with the Americans in 2021, Canada continued to suffer the ire of a Chinese government insulted by the government’s treatment of a senior business leader.

Chrétien could easily have gotten the Canadian government out of this mess because he also had a deep personal relationship with members of the Chinese government, and that history would have resulted in a solution.

Instead, political neophytes like Freeland kept repeating the promise to uphold “law and order,” all the while doing the Americans’ dirty work.

The United States government used Canada as a stand-in, and then cut a deal with Wanzhou that made our southern neighbours look good while this country suffered.

Chrétien’s wisdom shone through again last week when he weighed in on current Canadian politics and the peculiar stance of Alberta Premier Danielle Smith.

His simple “I put pepper on my plate” logic applied in many areas. And as he said about Smith, she is flirting with the separatists on the one hand, while on the other hand, she wants Canada to intervene in the provincial politics of neighbouring British Columbia.

Chrétien also pulled no punches when recently referring to U.S. President Donald Trump as a leader who is posing a threat to democracy.

The former prime minister, who learned to speak English in his thirties, possesses the gift of straight talk in both official languages.

Some Quebec elites in his day criticized him because they felt his use of the French language was not sophisticated enough for their crowd. They believed his vocabulary could be subjected to ridicule.

On the contrary, people love his ability to take a complex question and boil it down to the truth.

The truth for Smith is that she is talking out of both sides of her mouth. While loosening the rules and numerical requirements for a referendum, Smith is sending a signal to her supporters that separation is positive.

She also continues to threaten separation if her government’s proposed pipeline project is not immediately endorsed by the rest of Canada. She can’t convince a private sector company to invest in the project, but, nonetheless, she keeps repeating that this is a test for the country.

Chrétien belled the Alberta cat in a way that everyone can understand: “They never sold as much oil as they have today, and they’re complaining as if they are going bankrupt?”

Chrétien always mixes wisdom with humour.

When his beloved wife Aline was alive, the former prime minister joked that she was only one stopping him from jumping back into politics.

He still weighs in periodically, and reminds all of us that to be good in politics, funny trumps nasty.

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 May 19, 2025.

OTTAWA—Pierre Poilievre’s people say they want him to soften his edges.

It doesn’t seem like he is listening.

In his press conference following the appointment of the new cabinet last week, Poilievre said a few nice words in the beginning, but then he could not refrain from individually attacking almost everything about the new Liberal cabinet.

His attacks were all very personal. He went so far as to accuse new Justice Minister Sean Fraser of being responsible for the housing crisis.

Poilievre despises Chrystia Freeland, and was positively vitriolic when referencing her contributions to the previous government.

Poilievre still hasn’t figured out that the best way to succeed in politics is to be hard on issues and soft on people.

He needs to understand why women, in particular, do not support him.

His style of politics—using nasty, personal vitriol mixed in with simple sloganeering—does not sit well with women.

Some men like the vitriol. They are up for a good fight. Poilievre got a roar from the crowd when his presence was announced at the Montreal Ultimate Fighting Championship last week.

But the crowd was mostly the same group who are already part of his core voting supporters. If he wants to grow, he has to reach out beyond them and try for the softer side.

The audience at the Bell Centre was mostly young men, and even though there was a women’s bout, not many were visible in the audience.

Why? Because most women don’t like fighting. And the nasty personal nature of the Poilievre attacks during the election did not win him many female supporters.

Some might argue I am being too harsh. When former prime minister Justin Trudeau participated in a boxing match, his victory was hailed as a political stroke of genius. But Trudeau was trying to reverse his image as a softy drama teacher. When he did manage to beat down Senator Patrick Brazeau, everyone was shocked at how easily it happened.

Then he moved on.

In Poilievre’s case, he seems stuck in fighting mode, even when the times dictate a change in tone.

Canadians awarded a near-majority mandate to Prime Minister Mark Carney’s team, and, like it or not, Poilievre is going to have to at least pretend that he wants to work with the government.

Instead, conspiracy theories about how he lost his seat are being used as fundraising tools for his party.

Contrary to the rumour mill, the redistribution that happens every decade is carried out by the non-partisan Federal Election Boundaries Commission. The chair of the commission in each province is named by the chief justice of each province, and other members are named by the Speaker of the House of Commons, who is also chosen by an all-party vote.

Poilievre actually gained more Conservatives in his new riding after redistribution.

But he lost by more than 4,000 votes because people were upset about how he backed the anti-vaxxer occupiers who took over the streets of Ottawa for almost a month in 2022.

Poilievre picked his side, bringing donuts and coffee to people who blasted truck horns 24 hours a day in residential communities. As for his constituents, they were on the other side.

And his Liberal opponent Bruce Fanjoy spent two years knocking on every door in the riding.

Now Poilievre is being shuffled off to Alberta to run in what is arguably one of the safest Conservative seats in the country.

He will be confronted with separatists who have already begun their campaign to take Alberta out of the country. Premier Danielle Smith has loosened the rules to get a referendum on the ballot by lowering the threshold and allowing businesses to fund referenda efforts.

Not sure why a business should have a say in a vote on the future of the country, but Smith has admitted publicly the changes were allowed in an effort to keep her United Conservative Party from splitting into two factions, and opening the door to the election of Alberta New Democratic Party Leader Naheed Nenshi.

Poilievre will not be able to avoid that fight, and the whole country will be watching him.

If he does plan to win the next election, Poilievre needs to focus on the real fight ahead.

The country is in a tariff war with United States President Donald Trump, and we need all hands deck to save Canadian jobs and industries. If he insists on continuing the election fight against the Liberals, Poilievre is never going to increase his base or get women back.

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.

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.

Karina Gould is a force to be reckoned with. If Liberal voters actually want a future that will reflect the best elements of the Trudeau era, they should vote Gould, writes Sheila Copps.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on March 3, 2025.

OTTAWA—Karina Gould, who I endorse for leader, blew everyone out of the water in the English Liberal leadership debate last week.

In her own words, repeatedly, she is not Conservative light.

Why is that important? Because contrary to the media crowning of Mark Carney, this is actually a race for the hearts and minds of Liberals.

Many Liberals are extremely happy with the legacy left by the team of outgoing Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.

The list of accomplishments is long. Trudeau will be viewed as the most progressive prime minister in my lifetime.

Universal childcare, school food programs, dental care, reconciliation, educational parity for Indigenous children, real action on climate change, hiking seniors’ benefits, managing a pandemic with amongst the lowest death rates in the G7, heavy investments in mass transit as part of the fight against global warming, taking the lead in housing for the first time in 30 years, signing a health agreement that will force provinces finally to share critical data, the first ever gender-equal cabinet—I could go on, but you get my point.

For Liberals who believe that public life is a chance to do something for the betterment of all, Trudeau’s record has proven it in spades.

Of course, he was unpopular in the end, and his decision to leave was the right one. Anyone who has studied politics knows that three terms is the maximum in the modern age as politics is the only profession where the more experience you get the more people want to get rid of you. The only governments that extend beyond that are dictatorships where public money is spent to massage the image of the leader, and opponents are either jailed or murdered.

In that context, don’t be surprised to see a move to end the two-term limit imposed on American presidents. At the latest meeting of Conservative zealots in the United States, President Donald Trump’s pardoned friend Steve Bannon gave a speech promoting presidency for life status for Trump which ended in a Nazi salute.

Given the U.S. vote at the United Nations, refusing to condemn Russia for the illegal invasion of Ukraine, anything can happen.

Much of the two Liberal debates in French and English focussed on how to fight Trump, and the stormy seas ahead under his watch.

Chrystia Freeland positioned herself as the Trump-beater, and given that the American president has personally singled her out when attacking Canada, she has the credibility to back up that claim.

But this election is not just about Trump.

Carney has made it clear that he wants to move the party to the right, and he took some swings at the current government for too much spending.

That approach will definitely appeal to Conservatives who can’t support Pierre Poilievre’s “broken” vision of Canada.

But for Liberals to win the next election, they will need to draw the majority of their support from liberally minded New Democrats.

Recent polls focusing on the post-Trudeau Liberal surge have confirmed that the majority of the shift is coming from left-wing voters who are returning to the Liberals.

If they think the party has a Conservative-light leader, the door will open for Jagmeet Singh to reassert himself in the same way that Jack Layton did during the Orange Crush that almost brought the New Democrats to government.

So the election of a Liberal leader who is focused on moving to the right may not be the best bet for the party.

By all accounts, Gould was the clear debate winner in English, and had the greatest of ease in French.

It was obvious to all that Carney needs work in that department, and Freeland is also not as convincing in French.

By articulating a clear difference with Carney, Gould has managed to vault herself into a fray which previously included only the two so-called front-runners.

Gould is a force to be reckoned with. If Liberal voters actually want a future that will reflect the best elements of the Trudeau era, they should vote Gould.

That includes support for the carbon rebate, which was destroyed by Poilievre’s sloganeering.

Trudeau refused to spend any government money explaining what the program involved because early in his first term, he opted out of advertising. That was a dumb mistake which cost the Liberals dearly.

But the program itself is sound, and the fact that Gould defended it as vociferously as she did—while all others were running away—is another point in her favour.

She is a truly liberal Liberal.

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.

Donald Trump keeps saying that Canada will be better off, with a better health-care system, better jobs and a better economy if it joins the United States.

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

OTTAWA—Sixty years have passed since Canada broke from British tradition to adopt a unique flag.

The distinctive red Maple Leaf is now recognized around the world as a symbol of Canada, but it was a much more divisive debate six decades ago.

With the exception of U.S. President Donald Trump, most people see our flag as a symbol of freedom and diversity. It often adorns backpacks of young travellers as a flag that is welcomed everywhere.

It wasn’t always so. In 1965, the Progressive Conservatives thought the adoption of a new flag was an insult to those who fought in two world wars under the unofficial national Red Ensign. The ensign included a smaller union jack and a Canadian coat of arms.

Former prime minister John Diefenbaker made it his personal mission to fight the flag.

Prime minister Lester Pearson preferred another design, which included three red flags attached by a stem with a blue border. The original designer of the flag, Mount Allison University historian George Stanley, received death threats.

The Tories voted for the single maple leaf design, thinking Liberals would support the tri-leaf version that was called the Pearson Pennant. Instead, Liberals also supported the single Maple Leaf, and an all-party committee voted 15-0 in favour of the Stanley-designed flag that was inspired by the flag of the Royal Military College in Kingston.

While the world may have embraced it, even modern-day Conservative governments have not been so celebratory.

On the 50th anniversary of the introduction of the flag, then-Canadian heritage minister Conservative Shelly Glover refused to organize a celebration of the event.

While local flag-raisings took place across the country, the only official national celebration was held by then-governor general David Johnston.

Current Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre has taken a more celebratory approach to the flag.

In Tory advertisements, Poilievre is often seen walking in a field under the shadow of a huge Canadian flag.

The use of the flag as a symbol adopted by anti-vax truckers has now made its display permissible for all political stripes.

Trump recently communicated his message of economic domination by tweeting a photograph of himself standing on a mountain with a Canadian flag flying proudly behind him.

And five living Canadian prime ministers called on all Canadians to fly our flag on the anniversary date as a message to Trump that our country has no intention of becoming America’s 51st state.

In a joint letter signed by former prime ministers Stephen Harper, Joe Clark, Paul Martin, Kim Campbell, and Jean Chrétien, the leaders called on Canadians to fly the flag this past Saturday to answer the “threats and insults from Donald Trump.”

And while in Brussels attending a meeting with European leaders, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau made it very clear that there’s “not a snowball’s chance in hell” of Canada joining the United States.

He’s enlisting the support of international partners, including the European Union, as most states have been strangely silent on Trump’s annexation comments.

Europeans are listening now because Trump has been threatening them with tariffs, as well.

The Danish government has reacted to Trump’s announcement that he would like to take over Greenland. As well as threatening retaliatory tariffs on Ozempic, Denmark’s biggest export to the U.S., some Danes have launched a petition to buy California.

While all Canadians are now uniting behind the flag, the Trump threat may also serve to be a catalyst for breaking down interprovincial barriers.

If we can build a pipeline to send Alberta crude for refining in Illinois and Texas, surely, we can do the same for eastern Canada.

So when we have been delivered lemons by Trump, we need to make lemonade. And we need to start recognizing the great benefits that come with life under the Canadian flag.

Poilievre’s message that Canada is broken now needs reworking, and he was slated to deliver a major pivotal speech this past weekend.

His message will need massaging because the idea that Canada is broken plays right into the hands of Trump, who plans to crush our country economically.

Trump keeps saying that Canada will be better off, with a better health-care system, better jobs and a better economy if we join the U.S.

He also revealed earlier last week that when it comes to takeover of foreign lands, he believes he has the legal right to “take over the Gaza Strip and occupy it.”

Insert “Canada,” and we have an idea of what might be coming.

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

Up until Doug Ford’s hot mic comments about Donald Trump, he was smooth sailing as Captain Canada, but he’s hit some rough waters.

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

OTTAWA—Captain Canada has no clothes. Ontario’s Doug Ford lost that standing when it was revealed last week in a leaked hot microphone recording that he was a huge Trump fan who celebrated when Donald Trump was victorious.

“On election day, was I happy this guy won? One hundred per cent I was,” Ford told supporters while chatting with a few of them on Feb. 3 at a campaign event. “Then the guy pulled out the knife and fucking yanked it in us.”

In that regard, Ford joined a minority of Canadians as the vast majority were hoping for another outcome to the American election.

Ford said all the right things in the lead-up to the tariff war, including wearing the mantle of Captain Canada in multiple American television interviews.

His negative numbers were neutralized as a result of these interventions, and it looked like Ford would be sailing to a second term.

Then came the revelations of what he really thinks. Ford called a snap election banking on two things: the unpopularity of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, and the popularity of Ford’s personal fight for Canada.

But now he has faced a serious hit to his plan on both those fronts.

First, the prime minister’s reaction to the tariffs, including an incredible speech to the nation and a robust response to Trump’s proposed plan, have actually boosted his popularity.

It is hard for Ford to run against Trudeau, and then get on television to say how we all want to work together.

Second, Ford’s attachment to Trump, and the fact that he is sticking to a multi-million Starlink satellite contract with Elon Musk is causing pain on political fronts.

Ford briefly announced he would cancel the deal, but then revoked his cancellation when the tariff threat was put on pause for 30 days.

Trump may have paused, and his attention temporarily pivoted to an insane suggestion to kick all Palestinians out of Gaza and turn the place into an American-owned resort. For a president who campaigned on staying out of other countries’ business, he is off to a poor start.

Trump continually repeats his dream to literally turn Canada into the 51st state. And Canadians are literally not buying it. The national move to “Buy Canadian” and to refuse American purchases or travel shows no signs of pausing.

Trump has even managed to turn Quebecers into ardent Canadian nationalists. The boycott is being felt so broadly that Boston Pizza felt compelled to underscore its Canadian identity.

The company took the unprecedented step of clarifying through social media that despite its name, it is not American.

In fact, it is so Canadian, it was even started by a former Mountie.

The Boston Pizza mea culpa is proof positive that the Buy Canadian movement is working. Even after the American president postponed tariff threats for 30 days, Canadians appear to be launching their own trade war.

And if the label or destination is American, the answer is no.

As for Ford’s Conservative counterpart in Ottawa, Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre is still reeling from the fact that his carbon tax election has been pulverized by a change in Liberal leadership and the fight against Trump’s political agenda.

Poilievre is also too closely aligned with Alberta Premier Danielle Smith, the only Canadian politician bent on weakening her country’s leadership by siding with Trump.

It took Smith only hours after the announcement that Trudeau had been successful in postponing tariffs for the Alberta premier to start attacking him again, and defending Trump’s actions as understandable.

Only a month ago, pundits were claiming that Smith was in the ascendancy as Trudeau was leaving and Poilievre appeared poised to become prime minister.

Thank Trump for a trade war that vaults the federal Liberals into top spot in Ontario for the first time in almost two years.

Mainstreet Research polling published last week showed the federal Liberals at 43 per cent while the Conservatives are at 39 per cent. That has not been replicated in the provincial election trending yet, but Ford’s support of Trump is already provoking some movement in the race.

The hatred for Trudeau that was supposed to be the underpinnings of a successful Ford re-election has diminished, and with the fight for Canada, the premier has to be cautious about his attacks on the prime minister.

As for Poilievre, he has largely disappeared, not doubt huddled with supporters trying to craft a new three-word slogan as “Canada is Broken” no longer cuts it.

Perhaps he should pivot to a four-word pitch.

There is a new MAGA hat circulating featuring the Canadian flag, and the words Make America Go Away.

That is a hat the Tories should be wearing because as long as the threat of Trump’s annexation plans remains, Canada will not be broken.

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