00:00:49.900And I think the prime minister is feeling that certainly.
00:00:52.980I don't think that he expected the very public intervention by countries like Germany and
00:00:59.240France and Italy pushing back against this term around associate member status. So you saw him
00:01:05.320try to condition around, you know, what it's actually called, what it actually means. Maybe
00:01:09.900that doesn't matter so much. But of course, words do matter. And the depth and maturity of this
00:01:15.940relationship matters quite a bit. It matters enough that those member states needed to intervene at
00:01:21.520all. And you saw, you know, even just in the late part of this week, the prime minister still
00:01:26.500insisting that associate membership is on the table. So I think truthfully, what's happened
00:01:31.400here, Mark, is the government in an attempt to message and brand this has failed to deliver any
00:01:38.700real substance or tangible differences that this summit has has resulted in. It reminds me a lot
00:01:45.360of the Canada Investment Summit, lots of talk about potential deals, not a whole lot in terms
00:01:51.380of substance when when you get to the readouts and so by putting too much focus on what we were
00:01:56.880going to call this thing now that we can't call it that or that there's some real opposition to
00:02:01.540calling it that there's not a whole lot of uh there's not a whole lot of tactile uh things
00:02:06.780coming out of this for the prime minister to grab onto yeah one thing that he did say at one point
00:02:12.200was we continue to trade with the eu so whether we're associate members officially or not but
00:02:18.100that trade with Europe is nothing new. I mean, we've had a trade deal with Europe since the
00:02:23.160Harper years. So I don't see where we're gaining. One thing we could gain is access for our beef.
00:02:28.400I mean, if Mark Carney really wants to do something good for this country,
00:02:32.120why doesn't he talk to Ms. von der Leyen and maybe some of her colleagues over there and
00:02:37.280some of the other presidents and leaders of these countries to start accepting Canadian beef? I
00:02:42.040think that would be a great step forward. That would be something he could say, look,
00:02:45.480I've actually done this. And or even even to the countries that have yet to ratify that trade
00:02:51.220agreement. Why don't we start there and try to get things moving for agreements we already have
00:02:56.160before starting anew with, you know, I for brand new agreements and a lack of clarity on what they
00:03:02.460actually mean. It also, you know, we're forging closer ties with Europe, Mark. Shouldn't we also
00:03:07.680be able to negotiate no unprovoked and unjustified tariffs against steel and other products that are
00:03:16.000set to come into effect by the EU. Of course, Canadians rightly are very upset about those
00:03:21.260unjustified tariffs coming at us from the United States. Europe is about to tariff $3 billion of
00:03:26.580goods coming from Canada at a time when a lot of our resource sector is, of course, facing
00:03:31.060financial hardship and pressure because of those U.S. tariffs. So I'm left wondering if, you know,
00:03:37.240all of this talk about closer collaboration with Europe can't even get us some reprieve
00:03:42.200on some of those tariff measures despite Canada having an industrial carbon tax already.
00:03:47.560What good is associate member status? What good is really all of this effort if we can't even do
00:03:51.800the bare minimum? Meantime, the midterm elections are almost upon us in the United States. How do
00:03:59.160you think that will affect, once it's over, our ability to get a trade deal with the United States?
00:04:04.280Because there has been some issues around people like Pete Hoekstra, the U.S. ambassador to Canada, suggesting that, you know, we've been interfering with their elections.
00:04:13.600And if that turns out badly for the Republicans, you know, Mr. Trump is not above looking for a little bit of payback.
00:04:25.980And he's going to be there for another two years.
00:04:28.300So I don't know how this is going to look, but it'll be interesting watching the results of that midterm.
00:04:32.540Well, what's remarkable to me is that the very people who say that Trump is unpredictable and punitive and a bully seem to think that he will be humbled by the election result on Tuesday and come on his knees begging Canada for a deal when the reality, I think, looks very, very different.
00:04:53.380You know, if the president, excuse me, suffers a political defeat on Tuesday, I think it's very natural to assume two things.
00:05:01.920Number one, their attention will focus immediately inward on the part of the Republicans and trying to figure out how to manage the administration with a challenge in both houses, if that's what we get.
00:05:13.460But also this idea that Canada would take credit for a political defeat, but get a president on the other side of that that wants to come and negotiate with us.
00:05:22.740I think the truth here is that, you know, the last week or 10 days saw a little bit of activity from the U.S. side suggesting things were not so bad and that Canada could come back to the table.
00:05:35.260I don't know that we're going to get that same message after Tuesday.
00:05:38.120And I certainly don't know that we are going to get a better deal than what was on offer in August.
00:05:44.360I'm just, I'm not sure what the dynamic is such that, you know, we would expect a better deal for Canada when this has been a pain in the side of the president.
00:05:54.460Their circumstance, their financial circumstance looks very different than Canada's does by way of these tariffs.
00:06:01.760And we are also the ones that have to deal with a 50% auto tariff coming into effect at the end of December unless we get a breakthrough in negotiating with the United States.
00:06:11.560So if there's an effort after the midterm to try and get back to the table, I think it's Canada that's probably looking to initiate that, not the U.S. side, because that 50% tariff is hanging like a sort of Damocles over our heads.
00:06:24.140Yeah, I think this highlights the hazards of trying to play a cozy relationship, getting too partisan in terms of our support for one party or the other in the United States.
00:06:35.480And as you know, we've got Maya Johnson as a key advisor.0.95
00:06:39.100She's a Democrat party at Clinton.0.95
00:06:41.560uh, operative, if you want to call her that longtime Democrat in the United States, uh,
00:06:46.940we've seen him meet with Obama. I mean, we've seen, uh, former president Clinton come out
00:06:53.580and shower Mr. Kearney with praise, calling him a friend. I mean, this is getting a little
00:06:58.820uncomfortable because if for instance, they do hold on to say the Senate, you know, they,
00:07:05.580if what happens in the midterm say, doesn't work entirely for the Democrats, then that
00:07:11.540could not bode well for us as well well we will have kind of painted ourselves in a corner um you
00:07:17.740know as supporters of the other party and so none of this works and so that's that's why you have to
00:07:24.780really play the narrow road you know you never show partisanship or favoritism towards one party
00:07:31.020or another and i think unfortunately the carny government has come out and said we're with the
00:07:37.060Democrats, and that can't help us no matter what happens.
00:07:41.300Well, I get we've been trying to have it both ways.
00:07:43.520We've been suggesting through our industry minister that tariffs that have been placed
00:07:48.020on certain sectors in certain states in the U.S. may have an impact, and then we're turning
00:07:54.340around and saying, well, no, of course, we're not interfering at all.
00:07:56.600Again, we can't look at a result on Tuesday and take credit for the role that tariffs
00:08:02.780from canada have played uh in a potential defeat for the president but that not bear the consequence
00:08:08.700of what that looks like if maybe that defeat doesn't transpire or perhaps it does and we're
00:08:12.780held accountable for the role that we did play we can't take credit uh and then try to to shift
00:08:17.100avoidance and the blame um so you know i think that during election periods both sides should
00:08:21.660be staying out of each other's politics uh of course you can't control what uh what another
00:08:26.220party is going to do but you know certainly the staffing in the prime minister's office
00:08:29.660This is something very much that is under your control, as is, you know, members of parliament going and campaigning for Democrat politicians in the U.S., which we had a sitting member of liberal parliament do within the last four months, despite the heat of this trade dispute.
00:08:44.500So those things we can control. And the fact that an effort wasn't made to create that distance mark, I think doesn't bode well for the future of that relationship or those allegations that are coming from the U.S.
00:08:55.320Yeah, I mean, I can't help but wonder what would happen if the situation was reversed and say the Trump administration was trying to play favorites in an election in Canada, clearly favoring the Conservatives. As it turned out, he seemed to be favoring Carney, from what I recall, based on one thing he said. I think he said, well, I'd rather deal with the Liberal.
00:09:17.140Well, and we worked ourselves into a lather and a froth around the suggestion of U.S. involvement even in the Alberta separation referendum, which to be clear, they should not be interfering in that. That's a question for Albertans to answer for themselves.
00:09:30.480But when the shoe is on the other foot and you see Canadian politicians campaigning with Democrats, I would say playing footsie with this idea that maybe our tariff impacts might somehow maybe have an impact in the midterm election results.
00:09:46.520You can't have it both ways and you can't be hypocritical in that nature.
00:09:51.040Yeah, I think the Alberta independence comparison is a very good one.
00:09:54.240We didn't hear from Americans coming to Alberta and, you know, knocking on doors.
00:09:59.260We didn't see any of that or any of the governors, for instance, of Montana or Idaho or any of these other states trying to tip the balance in favor of the yay side for independence.
00:10:15.600And yet we don't seem to take any qualms about deliberately targeting our tariff to red states.0.87
00:10:23.920You know, let's punish those guys, not so much those guys.0.52
00:10:26.640And if we are expecting, you know, humility and understanding from the president, I think that goes against every kind of, you know, motivation he has, but also how our government has treated him and his actions to this point. Right. So I don't think that we're going to be met with with open arms after November 3 based on based on how things are trending. And I can't really say that I blame them for that.
00:10:55.480our government is more focused, Mark, on scoring cheap political points and trying to keep people
00:11:02.180very engaged and enraged about the United States than they are actually solving this trade dispute
00:11:08.600and doing what's best for the Canadian economy, which is getting some stability through that
00:11:12.760trade relationship. I'd really like to see the difference between any future trade deal and the
00:11:17.220one that Prime Minister Carney walked away from August 21st. I just can't help but thinking the
00:11:24.280wonder you know what's the difference there how much of that was political the difference to pull
00:11:29.300out ahead of the midterms i mean if he had agreed to a deal that might have given trump a boost
00:11:35.180especially in some of the northern states you know like michigan for instance and
00:11:39.300new york and we would we be having the conversation around stelco that we're having right now
00:11:45.540if we had actually gotten to some kind of an agreement back in august of course we'll never
00:11:50.160know because immediately after things blew up with trade there was an effort to make sure that none
00:11:55.600of those details ever came to light at least not from our government and we've got still competing
00:12:00.480accounts of how things fell apart what those red lines were and why and you know i'm still a big
00:12:06.560believer not in sharing you know term sheets nobody's looking for secret trade negotiation
00:12:12.240tactics here but how on earth could we compare as the public as canadians the deal that we may get
00:12:18.720in the future to what's been offered in the past and make a judgment call on whether or not it's a
00:12:23.320better or worse deal when the first deal that was, again, so close that it was marketed to
00:12:28.700premiers, marketed to cabinet. This was not a pie in the sky thing. This was a real thing that was
00:12:32.920about to happen. How on earth could we say that that one was bad and this other one was good when
00:12:38.060the first one is completely shrouded in secrecy? Yeah, exactly. And now it comes out and say that
00:12:43.000it was a threat to our sovereignty. And, you know, they didn't want the French factor, but
00:12:49.080none of that makes sense. I mean, if that deal was that bad, then why did it get to the point of
00:12:53.360almost signing it and agreeing to it at the 11th hour? You know, if a deal is that terrible,
00:12:58.720you don't get anywhere close to signing it. And, you know, I can't help but get the disturbing
00:13:04.300sense that Prime Minister Carney would rather walk away from a trade deal than give Trump
00:13:12.180a boost. So in other words, conversely, you'd rather damage Trump ahead of the midterms than
00:13:17.620he would get a deal that would benefit Canadians. And to your point, possibly save a lot of jobs
00:13:23.560at Stelco. Last word to you. Yeah, I think that is a very fair concern. Where we are now is the
00:13:31.920public is looking at the relationship with you, not just the president, but America and asking,
00:13:38.820you know, is this going to serve Canada long term? That seems to be a very emotional conversation
00:13:45.820and not one that is rooted in the economic reality or even the cultural reality between
00:13:52.100our two countries. I think the prime minister has set himself up here where any kind of a tariff
00:13:58.320is going to be viewed by Canadians as a loss. You saw the chief trade negotiator say within the last
00:14:05.220week, you know, really our goal here is to get the lowest tariff rate possible and the greatest
00:14:09.180number of goods. I'm not a trade negotiator, but I think a lot of Canadians would have thought that
00:14:14.700that was our goal at the outset when this all began March or April of 2025. So I think we've
00:14:20.500got a public that's been worked into a frenzy, aided by some very hot rhetoric and spinning
00:14:27.120from our government about what a good deal is and is not. And I think that the Prime Minister's
00:14:33.380reality now is trying to meet the expectations that he has set for himself and played a role
00:14:38.460in setting about what a good deal is or isn't. And I'm not sure that a tariff-free future
00:14:43.480is a realistic proposition for Canada. Well, yeah. I mean, remember that was
00:14:48.800his election promise. His key promise was getting a winning trade agreement with the United States.
00:14:53.960That was supposed to happen last year. Kate, thank you so much for coming on the show. We
00:14:57.820appreciate it. Anytime. Take care. Kate Harrison, Summa Strategies. If you enjoyed
00:15:03.080the show and appreciate great independent journalism, please consider becoming a premier
00:15:06.900member of Juno News by going to junonews.com backslash straight up. There it is below. It
00:15:13.880helps us do what we do. Thank you so much for tuning in. We'll see you next time.