Tag Archives: Tariffs

Canada’s reputation up for sale

Posted on by
1

Prime minister Mark Carney is currently in Türkiye to sign a new “strategic partnership” with the Erdogan regime, and once again pretend that there are no human rights concerns in that country, or that the government of a supposed democracy hasn’t been acting in an autocratic manner and delegitimizing its opposition parties, and civil society groups including a recent crackdown on LGBTQ+ groups in the country. Even when a number of European countries put out a statement about the crackdowns, Canada refused to sign on because we’re trying to sign a bilateral trade deal with Türkiye before the end of the year.

In case it hasn’t become perfectly obvious, the government’s line that “Where we have differences of opinion, we discuss those in private” is clearly not good enough. What the public silence means is that a country like Canada doesn’t have a problem with what they’re doing, so it becomes a signal that they can continue such behaviours without repercussions. I’m sure a private scolding is really going to make them sorry! It’s also a tacit signal that our reputation as a defender of human rights is now up for sale. If countries with horrific records (China, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and now Türkiye) want Canada to shut up about it, well, all they have to do is wave some dollar signs in front of Carney’s face, and suddenly he’s their best friend, and touting “pragmatism” and “realism.” This kind of transactionalism isn’t values-based (which, remember, Carney claims to care about), nor is it “realistic” or “pragmatic.” It’s crass, money-grubbing, and a betrayal of the things that Canada has at least publicly claimed to stand up for over the past number of decades (even if we had our own issues).

https://bsky.app/profile/emmettmacfarlane.com/post/3myirjyqqu22o

There is a whole other discourse around this about Canada doing business with unsavoury regimes rather than just democracies, because that’s somewhat limiting, but even if that’s the case, it doesn’t mean that we need to be silent and tacitly endorse the things that they’re doing. We can publicly say we’re going to trade with you, but we want to actually engage on human rights. We’ve done it before, and had a whole human rights agreement as part of the free trade deal with Colombia that included reporting mechanisms. The silence is damning, and if Carney wants to at least pretend that he’s a Liberal, he should actually say something out loud for a change.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2026-10-22T19:08:02.001Z

My Latest:

  • My column worries about the fact that Mark Carney has signalled an openness to constitutional negotiations with some bad actors among the premiers.
  • My Loonie Politics Quick Take points out that it’s going to be impossible to deprive Alberta separatists of oxygen if we keep treating the false grievances as real.

Continue reading →

QP: Commissionaires and deficit numbers

Posted on by
Reply

The PM was in the building but not present, while Pierre Poilievre was in Calgary. After some tearful statements about Wainwright, it was Michael Barrett who led off, and he lamented that the CRA went with an American-linked security firm instead of the Canadian Commissionaires for a contract (ignoring that the Commissionaires are no longer a company that primarily hires veterans). Wayne Long reminded him that politicians are not involved with such decisions and the CRA operates independently, and that the CRA has a policy of prioritising Canadian procurement, and that this was a Canadian-owned firm. Barrett repeated the question, and got the same response. Melissa Lantsman took over and raised the PBO’s latest report and its dire warnings, and demanded the government rein in spending. François-Philippe Champagne replied with the “good news” of our growth figures and the fact that we have the lowest debt and deficit in the G7. Lantsman disputed this, and Champagne carried on with more good news, decrying the Conservatives talking down the economy. Luc Berthold took over to read the same script about the PBO en français, and Champagne listed some benefits available to Canadians. Berthold retorted that every new benefit means more Canadians at food banks (erm, correlation ≠ causation, my dude), and Champagne decried that the Conservatives only vote against supports for Canadians.

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, and he denounced Bill C-39 as an abuse of power, and Steven MacKinnon took the opportunity to thank Albertans for voting in favour of Canada, and then mouthed some platitudes about the bill. Blanchet listed ways that C-39 could be an attack on Quebec or national unity, and MacKinnon shrugged this off. Gabriel Ste-Marie listed the former employers of the Energy Regulator—all former oil executives, but Dominic LeBlanc gave him some bland assurances about valuing science and it only applying to federal bodies.

Continue reading →

Detroit Theatre

Posted on by

In a bit of bizarre theatre, Pierre Poilievre went to Detroit yesterday to talk to business leaders about the benefits of tariff-free trade. In other words, something every rational person already knows, but that Trump refuses to believe, and along the way, others have become convinced of the benefits of tariffs, including certain Democrats and the United Auto Workers. But first, he had to hold a press conference in Windsor to give his usual talking points about how the two governments need to get a deal, even though there is no deal to be had.

Poilievre is off to Detroit to engage in some more theatre.This is solely for the benefit of his online audience.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-10-12T18:39:06.830Z

But perhaps more bizarre was how his trade critic, Kyle Seeback, went on Power & Politics later in the day to articulate that apparently, the Carney government just hasn’t found the proper win-win with Trump yet. No, seriously, that’s the position of the Conservatives, because clearly, this is Carney’s fault and Trump must be a rational actor. He then had to choke out a bunch of bullshit when pressed about how there could possibly be a deal when Trump can’t live up to any agreement he makes (and then spiralled as he insisted that the government taking over TMX was bad, and that nationalizing Stelco would be bad, but having the government build Pacific Link would be good, because tHaT’s DiFfErEnT!) Seeback revealed himself to be terminally unserious, as much as his whole party is terminally unserious, particularly on this file. They keep insisting that Carney needs to get a deal when there is no deal to be had, while their idea of “helping’ is magical thinking. Just risible from top to bottom.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2026-10-13T19:08:01.544Z

My Latest:

  • My Xtra Magazine column contrasts two LGBTQ+ group’s demands on Parliament Hill, and why one is more likely to achieve something than the other.
  • For National Magazine, I delve into Friday’s Supreme Court of Canada decision to resolve the tension in sentencing when there is an Indigenous accused and victim.
  • My long weekend column praises Liberal backbencher Patrick Weiler for standing up for his constituents in the face of his party’s own bill as a backbencher should.
  • My Loonie Politics Quick Take explains the unusual committee process for Bill C-39.

Continue reading →

No tariff relief in sight with two parties in favour

Posted on by

The heads of the two main automotive lobbies were on the Hill yesterday to call for a resumption of negotiations so that tariff-free access can be returned to the auto sector, which is integrated across the border. The problem is that it’s not Canada that’s the problem here, it’s the US, and not just Trump. To wit, even Democrats are saying they would keep tariffs in place, particularly ones the UAW are calling for.

The trouble, you see, is that the U.S. now has two pro-tariff parties.

— David Reevely (@davidreevely.bsky.social) 2026-10-09T00:25:07.710Z

The UAW want to keep the section 232 tariffs in place to protect the US auto industry, Canada be damned. So much for so-so-solidarity with their Canadian brethren and sistren! I think that the auto industry in this country needs to seriously start thinking about a different future because we’re not going to get back to the old status quo. There is simply too much pressure in the US to maintain protectionism, and that ends badly for us, and the longer we keep waiting for something to change in the hopes that the old normal will return, the more our industry is going to suffer.

Disinfo cowardice

Canada has withdrawn its sponsorship of a European disinformation conference because of American pressure. Some of the panels at this conference included discussions of Americans as sources of disinformation, and so they leaned on us, and Lithuania, among others, to pull out, and Canada backed out. They made a bunch of excuses about how there were changes to the “framing” of several panels, which organizers disputed and had receipts, and the CBC even used the Wayback Machine to confirm that Global Affairs was lying to them. This is a very bad sign for the future, and where we can assert our own sovereignty, especially in the face of American pressure and yes, disinformation. Once again, Carney is showing cowardice while making a big roar.

4 What does the Carney government‘s inability to withstand pressure over a few panels at a conference tell us about its willingness to actually regulate US tech companies, or to pursue “digital sovereignty”? Does Mark Carney’s digital sovereignty include predatory and monopolistic US corporations?

— Blayne Haggart (@bhaggart.bsky.social) 2026-10-08T10:46:22.753Z

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2026-10-08T19:08:02.783Z

Continue reading →

QP: Plaintive wails about Canadian steel

Posted on by

The prime minister was present today, unusually for a Monday, as was Pierre Poilievre across from him. Poilievre led off in French, noted the prime minister’s stated goal of buying more Canadian, but an analysis from the Toronto Star shows that both dollar amounts and share of procurement were up when it comes to American procurements. Mark Carney toute that they have a buy Canadian policy, and listed off several of the big ticket items. Poilievre repeated the same question in English, and got the same response with the added point about the pipeline announcement last week. Poilievre repeated the same question and said that there were nothing but promises with no results, and Carney listed projects where shovels were in the ground. Poilievre sniped back that he was taking credit for projects approved before he was in office, and noted that the steel for LNG-2 was coming from China and not Hamilton. Carney praised the announcement, and said there would be 15,000 tonnes of Canadian steel in the “broader ecosystem” of the project. Poilievre then blamed Carney for the Stelco owner’s decisions, and demanded more projects with Canadian steel. Carney said that there was such a project—Pacific Link—while they were going after the owners to the full force of the law for not living up to their promises. Poilievre gave another paean about Canadian steel, and Carney repeated his same points about LNG-2 and invited Poilievre to support Bill C-39.

Christine Normandin led for the Bloc, and she lambasted the government for subsidising Pacific Link with no environmental assessment, and that the private sector has no interest in. Carney insisted that the pipeline was in the national interest because it would make Canada more independent, prosperous, and “inclusive.” Normandin accused Carney of putting his personal interests above the law, and Carney patted himself on the back for Churchill Falls. Xavier Barsalou-Duval took his own shot at the diminution of environmental standards and making the Henry VIII powers permanent. Carney responded with some bafflegab about building.

Continue reading →

QP: Back in the saddle for another fall sitting

Posted on by

The first day back from summer break, and the PM graced us with his presence for the only time in the next two weeks, before he jets off to New York. Pierre Poilievre led off by asking about the shooting at the Belleville synagogue last night, and asked for “prayers and love” for the Jewish community and the injured contestable, and a condemnation of violence. Mark Carney, haltingly, with Shatner commas, offered thoughts and prayers for the officer, the community, and condemned all forms of violence. Poilievre turned to French, and spoke to the camera about the Conservatives “fighting for you,” before turning to Carney to accuse him of increasing inflation by “doubling deficits.” Carney, in French, said that they would work “tooth and nail” to make lives more affordable and listed tax cuts they have undertaken, and benefits they have enhanced. Poilievre switched to English to do the exact same thing, and Carney this time staged when the next benefits cheque is coming and listed things Poilievre voted against. Poilievre relayed a sob story from a constituent that was totally real about how hard she has it, and Carney noted that there are three wars affecting how much Canadians pay, before repeating when the next benefit cheque is released. Poilievre then spouted a tonne of bullshit about supposed “Liberal taxes” and Carney listed how those items don’t affect prices. Poilievre then read another sob story from “Justin” and Carney said that the government is working for the “Justins and Justines” around the country, and patted himself on the back for trade talks. 

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, and he suggested the government bring back the digital services tax so that the web giants can pay their fair share. Carney, en français, patted himself of the back for the highest contributions in history, and that they don’t need new taxes that would hurt Canadians. Blanchet disputed this, and in the interests of working with Europe, wanted the same tax. Carney simply said no. Blanchet again called for these taxes on web giants, who are richer than some countries, and Carney said it was the Americans who failed to bring constraints on the French language and culture while his government protects them.

Continue reading →

Was it really always “Plan A”?

Posted on by

Over the long weekend, prime minister Mark Carney released another one of this “Forward Guidance” videos, to talk about the current moment we find ourselves in with the trade war. Some of this was a good bit of history in that one of the reasons for confederation was to guard against American predation, though he didn’t fully spell out that Sir John A Macdonald was very concerned that a newly militarized US post-Civil War would turn their attention northward. And yes, American tariffs did force the newly-united Canadians to better develop their own internal markets because yes, we did a lot of north-south trade at the time as well. He brought up the “iron spine” of the trans-Canada railway with some lip-service as to the human cost of it (more than he has in the past), but from there his metaphors started to drift again. The thing is, that “iron spine” has weakened considerably since free trade, and it’s been a whole lot of north-south trade once again, and his trying to say that the new north-south iron spine would be around energy, both electricity and crude oil, didn’t really make a lot of sense.

More than that, however, Carney was engaging in some revisionist history of his own, insisting that building up our industry domestically and to export to more markets was “always Plan A” didn’t really mesh with his stated desire during negotiations to have a stronger security and defence relationship with the US. He lamented in the video that the Americans were trying to force dependency, but Carney’s own goals included a stronger comprehensive relationship, so it feels a lot like he’s trying to play both sides here. He also said that there’s no going back to “normal” with the US, but again, this has been his whole strategy up until two weeks ago. It feels like he’s only just started saying things he was supposed to be saying all along two weeks ago, and is now pretending like it’s what he was always saying.

And then, of course, he brought up digital asbestos, because it’s “important,” and insisted that Canada would be maintaining its values and sovereignty with it. Erm, really? How? This is just lip service while he continues to swallow the CEO hype around it rather than waking up to the fact that this is garbage tech that is burning cash and the environment, and like he’s trying to be the last guy in before the bubble bursts. It’s getting cringey how much Carney and Evan Solomon are still enthralled by the false promises, like their lives depended on it.

My Latest:

  • For National Magazine, I got some reaction to the news that the Ontario Courts’ case management system suffered a hack.
  • My weekend column wonders if it’s time that we get serious about domestically-built EVs, as the age of the integrated North American auto industry appears to be over.
  • My column on the Conservatives on the Remain side of the Alberta referendum trying to have it both ways by blaming Liberals, playing into Separatist hands.

Continue reading →

Pinky-swearing data centre expectations

Posted on by

Yesterday morning, minister of digital asbestos, Evan Solomon, was in Markham to announce that the government had created a new framework of “key expectations” for building data centres in Canada, and that 23 major digital asbestos companies had signed on. It all sounds good, until you realise that this is a voluntary code of conduct made with bad faith actors, and that the federal government has pretty much no levers to enforce any of these promises that these companies make, because so much of the regulation is either a provincial or municipal responsibility. So what you have instead is Solomon once again putting on a performance for the cheap seats at the community theatre, and is expecting applause and bouquets for said performance. It’s like we’re back in the Trudeau era of “the announcement is the policy.” This is not serious governance, and governance is the cornerstone of digital sovereignty—that thing that Solomon keeps claiming to care about.

Non-binding 'expectations'? Solomon & Carney are not serious about governing data centres in Canada; they're offside w/ the large & growing anti-data centre public sentiment. These companies won't comply w/ voluntary 'rules.' They have lied about energy & water use. This is weak & shameful.

— Natasha Tusikov (@ntusikov.bsky.social) 2026-09-03T18:53:05.383Z

In technical terms, this is referred to as a "pinky swear." And it's just as binding and effective."The responsible development principles do not include any compliance mechanism or penalties for broken pledges."This is not serious governance.

— Blayne Haggart (@bhaggart.bsky.social) 2026-09-03T17:01:43.644Z

@ntusikov.bsky.social and I wrote this oped about social media regulation, but its main point stands here. Regulatory theory tells us that voluntary agreements don't work with bad actors. The companies listed above are some of the least trustworthy of the past several decades.This is just empty PR.

— Blayne Haggart (@bhaggart.bsky.social) 2026-09-03T17:01:43.645Z

Later in the day, prime minister Mark Carney announced via press release the launch of Digital Transformation Canada, which aims to “refine how the government develops, buys and uses technology.” While this could be a good thing, particularly if it means developing home-grown digital solutions that would get us off of American platforms, that was not really mentioned in the release at all. Instead, it was more about the CEO bullshit around digital asbestos, with “eliminating duplication” and “improve outcomes,” which just sounds like more hype that Carney has swallowed. We have real needs when it comes to our digital sovereignty, but if there is any consideration about how to do that, it doesn’t appear to be coming from this plan as outlined.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2026-09-03T13:08:02.353Z

Programming Note: I am taking an extra-long weekend, so posts will resume later in the week. Enjoy!

Continue reading →

Ignore the toddler meltdown in the cereal aisle

Posted on by

The Trump administration players continue to try and spin their own versions of how the talks collapsed, with Trump insisting that we’re “nasty” and the “worst” (because we won’t just submit), we also saw Howard Lutnick claim that Carney has manufactured all of this because of the Quebec election and the Alberta referendum, and that once those over, Canadian officials will come flooding back to Washington to resume talks. Sure, Jan. Meanwhile, Dominic LeBlanc has taken notes of their denials over certain files, and is taking those as assurances that the “trade irritants” they keep identifying won’t be brought up any longer and publicly saying so. Clever.

Lutnick accuses Mark Carney of "manufacturing" a controversy over trade so Alberta doesn't secede from Canada

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar.com) 2026-08-27T18:18:00.166Z

Meanwhile, Trump’s continued tantrum saw him sign an executive order to demand that the US Department of Interior change the name of Lake Ontario to Lake America, which is going to be another loyalty test for MAGA adherents going forward. And of course, we had a bunch of Canadian media outlets falling all over themselves to try and get reactions to this (and a certain CBC guest host was extremely cringey about it), when we don’t need to respond to this. We can just ignore it, guys. Take Shannon Proudfoot’s advice here, and treat this like a toddler having a meltdown in the cereal aisle. He’s trying to get attention, and if you don’t give it to him, he’ll move on to something else, and you won’t have to make an ass of yourself trying to “get reactions” to this bit of nonsense. Nobody wins by taking this seriously, so just stop.

The last time the Americans tried to claim Lake Ontario in 1813, we intentionally lured them into Fort York and then blew up our entire gunpowder magazine to kill as many Americans as possible.A foundation part of Toronto history is "blowing our own fort to smithereens rather than being American"

— ℳatt (@matttomic.bsky.social) 2026-08-27T18:15:24.761Z

I mean this very, very seriously: It is absolutely an option for us to ignore his idiotic Lake America stunt. We can do that. We can just tune it out like you would block out a child howling at you in the cereal aisle, recognizing that to do anything else would be to give the whiner what they want.

— Shannon Proudfoot (@sproudfoot.bsky.social) 2026-08-27T17:54:13.273Z

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2026-08-27T19:08:03.250Z

My Latest:

  • My column takes note of where we’re at with the trade war, and the fact that Carney spent a year-and-a-half making concessions for a deal that was never real.
  • My Loonie Politics Quick Take points to the difficulties about sacrificing the Online News Act for a deal that didn’t come to pass, which would be a Pandora’s Box.

Continue reading →

Greer’s version and his telling non-denials

Posted on by

The info war aspect of our trade war is heating up, both in terms of childish tantrum—see Trump’s Instagram post of the bald eagle attacking the Canada goose (neglecting that in the end of that particular exchange, which was caught on video a couple of years ago, the goose eventually prevailed and drove the eagle off), but also American officials giving their version of what happened. Jamieson Greer was on CBC to insist that everything was fine on Tuesday night when Trump and prime minister Mark Carney spoke on the phone, and then at the last minute, the Canadians had new demands, presumably coming from the premiers. But there were some interesting omissions and non-denials in that interview, both ignoring the involvement of Howard Lutnick, and shrugging off disagreements around implementing that agreement, which is a pretty important detail. When the details of implementation include expanding just what is covered by auto tariffs, that’s a big detail, for example. And Greer did not deny that the point of this is to destroy the auto industry in Canada, trying to recast the Auto Pact and previous trade agreements as Canada somehow taking advantage of the American industry, which is hardly what happened. That non-denial spoke volumes, pretty much confirmed that this is the goal. (For more, Jennifer Robson goes through his responses and annotates them here).

Meanwhile, back in Canada, Scott Moe again roared that he didn’t want any hint of export taxes on energy or potash, nor is he going to take US booze off the shelves in the province—but he will subject it to an additional 50 percent tariff, which is the most useless symbolic gesture since most people are boycotting it of their own accord. As for Danielle Smith, she held a press conference and gave a dire warning about the effect of any export taxes, that it will force Americans to import heavy oil from Venezuela and it will cause a chain reaction and destroy the Canadian economy. I am dubious, not the least of which is that if you paid any attention to the discourse around the American kidnapping of the Venezuelan president, that the state of the oil industry in that country is so dire that it would take a decade of sustained investment to bring them back up to an export capacity that would threaten us, and no major oil company wants to invest because of their past investments being expropriated. So, I’m really not sure that Smith’s scenario is all that credible. I’m not saying there wouldn’t be retaliation, because you can bet there would be, but her scenario comes off as abject nonsense (while she continues to counsel capitulation). Smith also rejected the calls to cancel her referendums because of the trade war, like the Parti Québécois leader promised to hold off on. Smith claimed it’s because she’s following her “citizenship initiation” law, but she gamed those rules to ensure there would be a referendum, so this is her putting her own party problems above the nation, once again.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2026-08-26T19:08:03.507Z

My Latest:

Continue reading →