No Budget ?

The Liberal government of Prime Minister Mark Carney will not table a federal budget this year, Finance Minister François-Philippe Champagne said. He made significant justifications including the excuse to include a fall economic statement instead. This choice undermined Ottawa's fiscal credibility amid mounting international economic uncertainty.

However, the situation appeared even more dire. The foundation of our Parliamentary democracy and our Westminster model is “the power of the purse”. The primary role of Parliament is to scrutinize and approve government spending. Parliament is not the government, but an independent institution of the people, where the government (the Executive) must seek permission to tax and spend the people’s money, and to get legislation approved.

Parliament developed and evolved through the centuries before the invention of political parties and the position of a Prime Minister. Parliament is foundational to the governance of the nation.

Such a prolonged absence of a properly presented budget would strike at the very core of our democracy. It is not a matter to be taken lightly. A federal budget is the most crucial legislative matter a government can present. It serves as a vital update on the nation's financial health and outlines the spending priorities for which it must be held accountable.

The unusual decision marked the first time since 2020, at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, that Canada had gone without an annual budget. Minister Champagne defended the choice with details, falsely claiming the need to prioritize a promised tax cut and a throne speech before Parliament adjourns in June. He rationalized by saying, “Canadians have seen the priorities we outlined during the campaign. We’re taking a step-by-step approach.”

The policy choice was a massive crack in Carney's credibility as a financial manager. With a huge finance department at his disposal, the Prime Minister was not credible if he could not present a budget. It was a ridiculous policy. It appeared to be the same behaviour that plagued the Liberals for the last decade, disregarding the basics of Parliament. Carney was a banker; what banker could not get a budget together to fulfil his constitutional duty to Canadians?

Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre observed that Carney, a former Bank of England governor and hailed by Liberal supporters as an economic heavyweight, was abandoning his responsibility and accountability. “After months of promising ‘serious leadership’, Carney delivers delays and dysfunction,” Poilievre wrote on social media. “You don’t need a PhD in economics to know that hiding from a budget isn't governance." This criticism from the opposition is a crucial part of our democratic system, ensuring that the government is held accountable for its decisions.

The absence of a budget was a political signal that something was seriously wrong. While governments occasionally adjust fiscal timelines after elections, there was no practical reason for a “no-budget process”. Former Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s Conservatives tabled a budget in June 2011, just weeks after a May election. By contrast, the Liberals argued that more time was needed to factor uncertainty, pointing to volatile trade tensions with the US and sluggish global growth.

The avoidance struck at the heart of Carney’s political credentials. Carney campaigned on a pledge to restore rigor to federal finances. Instead, they appeared to be running away from their duty.

The nation is in dire need of a fiscal plan to navigate the uncertainty. The Liberal election platform was built on assumptions that may no longer hold. The economy is now weaker, and the deficit is likely higher. The absence of a budget was not just a procedural issue; it has significant implications for our financial future, and Canadians need to be aware. They are the legal plans for the government to signal to Canadians and the world where the economy is headed.

In front of cameras, Carney signed a meaningless document to symbolize the small change in income tax rates for the bottom tier. The actual change requires legislation, so we again have a Liberal image over substance.

Nevertheless, a full budget is not just a document for the financial community, as it is the core document for action for how a government will lead and implement its agenda. It is the roadmap for the government's actions. However, Finance Minister Champagne said they had several priorities to tackle before the House of Commons is scheduled to rise in June, but tabling a budget was not one of them.

It is unacceptable that the government would not put forward a full budget when it could. After months of building expectations and promising serious leadership, Carney announced that he would deliver nothing. Canadians were told that Mark Carney, the supposed serious economist, would bring competence. Instead, Canada observed dysfunction.

The budget is supposed to be tabled in April. However, due to the federal election and the fact that Parliament was prorogued before the election, no budget has been tabled this year.

However, the election timing does not prevent the government from tabling a budget. Parliament must still pass the primary and supplementary estimates, which are the legislative core needed for the government to function.

Governments must table main estimates once a year and supplementary estimates three times throughout the year. The main estimates need to be passed every year. The next deadline for the supplementary estimates to pass is June.

The House will return on Monday, May 26, and the ‘throne speech’ will be read the following day. A vote on the speech will be the first democratic test of “confidence” from Parliament that the Liberals must win to stay in power. However, the ongoing substantive test is to pass a budget in the House of Commons. The Liberals need a budget to be legitimate. The 'throne speech' sets the tone for the government's upcoming agenda, and the subsequent budget is expected to provide the financial details to support this agenda.

The Liberals were criticized for their ‘no-budget announcement’. It was outrageous that the government would not table a budget for over a year. Their excuse about too many moving parts to be accurate was not real. Competent bureaucrats could give 'best-and-worst' scenarios.

Canada needed a full budget in September at the latest. Their excuse implied that they did not take Parliament and legal governance seriously. A budget must honestly recount the international challenges, describe financial plans, and have them voted upon.

The Conservatives are right about the central behaviour of governance. The Prime Minister’s policy was demeaning to the nation and was not an acceptable standard. It seemed to be the slippery slope to despotism and top-down dictatorship by avoiding Parliament for its most central function.

By not attempting to come forward with an economic plan, they undermined any credibility about carefully managing public finances. Private sector business plans and the financial markets are left guessing. Private sector financing would be placed on hold.

By delaying in order to account for uncertainty, the government would create more uncertainty. Government bonds are used to raise funds. Investors will have less confidence in buying government bonds without a clear picture of the government's finances. Bond rating agencies would not like the government's failure to produce core financial documents.

The government uses “special warrants” to keep the lights on during elections. In May, a special warrant was issued to cover operating costs until June. These are "stopgap measures" that eventually must be voted on in Parliament.

Mr. Carney claimed during the election that he had a plan. He mocked the Conservatives by saying that a slogan is not a plan. However, the budget is the plan. Yet, the Liberals were saying ‘no budget’ and no prospect for one.

With all the government resources, there was no reason not to present a budget. The dishonesties were mounting up. They claimed to be fighting back against Trump's tariffs with Canadian tariffs, but then secretly removed them.

They also claimed to be the answer to the financial dilemma, but they had no budget plan. The repeated message was clear. The Liberal government would not table a federal budget this year. Finance Minister François-Philippe Champagne reconfirmed the policy to many media outlets.

Then days later, in answer to a media scrum in Rome, Prime Minister Mark Carney said on Sunday morning that he will table a Budget this fall. The change was a significant correction on the fly without a Cabinet meeting   —make it up as we go. Likely it was the Conservative response to the finance minister that revealed their serious error. They were embarrassed, as they had no plan when they claimed to have one. They were forced to change course to a sensible direction.

However, what does “the fall” mean? Maybe mid September or even December? Given all the dissembling and Liberal myth making, we must keep perspective, that Canada is about its people and the land, not the Liberal party. Canadians know what is needed, and they will eventually discover that the Liberals can’t deliver it.

 

Proved Accurate

The very day the election writ dropped on March 23, I published the following, and my article has proved accurate. “The media would try to make the election all about standing up to US President Trump, which is a deceptive issue. Trump will be Trump, regardless. No matter who is elected Canadian leader, Trump will remain his unpredictable self. The key to Canada’s success is finding better internal governance that can withstand any international challenge. Wise Canadians must take care of business without false distractions.”

Again, on April 6, I wrote that Trump was a deceptive distraction. However, during the election, the Liberals played the fear card. Lazy voters did not want to look deeply at policy, and especially the track record of Liberalism in Canada. When later questioned, few Liberal voters could say why they voted for Carney specifically. They never read a platform document. They wanted to believe the smear myths about Pierre Poilievre because they wanted Papa Carney to take care of them. They also wanted to forget and deny what Liberal policy had done to Canada. Carney was their comfort refuge and also their cover for denialism.

Canadian voters got played. Carney eventually had to visit Trump, which wasn't very pleasant for Canada. Astute readers of the White House of Donald Trump knew there would be no change or negotiation that Carney could make to have tariffs disappear. However, the Liberal machine played upon voters' fear, then offered Carney as the negotiator saviour of Canada. Voters were deceived. I knew that Trump would not change for Carney.

What Carney got in the Oval Office was no change to the substance or intent of trade policy. Carney got a smile, a handshake, a simple lunch, a reiteration of all that Trump has said about tariffs, and a repeat of the 'Canada 51st State' insult.

Sitting beside Carney, Trump was asked directly in the Oval Office if anything could be done to remove tariffs. Trump's direct and unequivocal response was a resounding “no” that left no room for doubt.

REPORTER: Tariffing Canada. Is there anything he (Carney) can say to you in the course of your meetings with them today that would get you to lift tariffs on Canada?

TRUMP: No.   REPORTER: Why not?   TRUMP: Just the way it is.

The only cover-up answer Carney could offer reporters later at the Canadian Embassy was that there is a "process" of discussing the larger Canada-USA relationship.

This directness of Trump's response underscores the futility of Carney dealing with Trump, and reveals the Liberal scam. It's time Canadians realized the Liberals played the system and misled voters into a false choice. 

The future for Canada is to rid ourselves of our political self-harm, and put the Canadian house in order with a Conservative Federal government as soon as possible.

Carney visits Trump

Prime Minister Carney met President Trump in the White House on May 6, 2025.

The legacy media hailed the meeting in the Oval Office as a success. However, no changes were made in the substance or intent of trade policy. Carney got a smile, a handshake, a simple lunch, a reiteration of all that Trump has said about tariffs, and a repeat of the 'Canada 51st State' insult.

The CBC pumped up praise for Prime Minister Carney for the accomplishment of the visit. He survived without humiliation or being “Zelenskyy'd". The notion is that if the USA and Canada keep talking, an economic war will cool as Canada negotiates and the USA dictates.

Canada may not have our best team in Washington DC, but it is all we have for ethereal reasons of TV image and personal impressions, not based on substance, policy, or values.

There was no “white smoke” from the Canadian Embassy. However, bilateral relations were in dark, smoky ruins from Trump's social media quotes and his hurtful "executive orders".

Conservatives are naturally patriotic and wish the Prime Minister success in dealing with the USA for Canada's best interests. Canadians and Americans need to understand the significant integrated nature of our economies. Canada is the USA's best economic customer, and it is the only country with some military integration with the USA. Our broad electrical grid is connected to the USA, as it purchases significant Canadian electrical energy. Our major oil pipelines go southward. This understanding is crucial for navigating the complexities of our economic relations.

Canada has always made cars, beginning with the 1904 Ford plant in Walkerville, Ontario. There is a long history of auto manufacturing at branch plants of American companies in Canada. Under current trade rules, there are no Canadian or American cars, as integration means mutually ours. Various car tariffs, such as the 1965 Auto Pact and the 1994 NAFTA, have been negotiated. Canada has historically sold forest products to the USA, but US protectionism has often disputed lumber trade agreements.

Canada will always trade with the USA, but Canada must first get its own house in order, to diversify international business. Canada should be a global economic leader, but socialist ideology has hurt our standard of living. Canada has natural resources and a skilled workforce that uses the latest technology. Yet it is Canada's fault that our economy has significantly fallen behind our competitors.

The Trudeau administration created a poor economic climate for growth. Consequently, international investment went elsewhere. Until a Conservative federal government can take office, we can only hope that the Liberals will keep borrowing from the Conservative political platform and make the required complete turnaround.

Canadians must politically support governance that is in their best interest. Sadly, during the election, astute readers of the White House of Donald Trump knew there would be no change or negotiation that Carney could make to have tariffs disappear. However, the Liberal machine played upon voters' fear, then offered Carney as the negotiator saviour of Canada. Voters were deceived, as insiders knew that Trump would not change for Carney. 

Sitting beside Carney, Trump was asked directly in the Oval Office if anything could be done to remove tariffs. Trump's direct and unequivocal response was a resounding “no” that left no room for doubt. 

REPORTER: Tariffing Canada. Is there anything he (Carney) can say to you in the course of your meetings with them today that would get you to lift tariffs on Canada?

TRUMP: No.   REPORTER: Why not?   TRUMP: Just the way it is.

The only cover-up answer Carney could offer reporters later at the Canadian Embassy was that there is a "process" of discussing the larger Canada-USA relationship.

This directness of Trump's response underscores the futility of the situation. It's time Canadians realized the Liberals scammed and misled into a false choice. The future for Canada is to rid ourselves of our political self-harm, and put the Canadian house in order with a Conservative federal government as soon as possible.

 

Election 2025 Observations

 

The April 28, 2025, Canadian federal election unfolded as a gripping drama.  The Conservatives, advocating for ‘change’, were poised for a victory, but the voters surprised everyone by choosing a familiar path with a Carney twist.  The Liberal Party, which had been on the brink of collapse under Justin Trudeau, experienced a remarkable resurgence with Mark Carney at the helm.  In a nail-biting finish, the Conservatives, led by Pierre Poilievre and enjoying a significant lead in the polls, were narrowly overtaken at the finish line. 

Traditional third-party NDP support had been gradually dissolving, eventually coalescing behind their nearest policy cousin, the Liberals.  Their previous ‘confidence and supply agreement’ with the Liberals started the disaffection, but a likely Conservative election win sealed the fate, when many NDP voters held their nose and voted Liberal. 

The result was a significant victory for the Liberal government, which secured 43.5% of the popular vote, the best showing since 1980.  The Conservative opposition secured 41% of the vote, and the decimated NDP marked a clear shift in the political landscape.

In the 343 seat House of Commons, the Liberals secured 169, just three short of a majority in the House of Commons. Pierre Poilievre’s Conservative Party followed with 143 seats, even though he lost his parliamentary chair to a Liberal upstart.  That problem will soon be solved in a by-election.

The regional Bloc Québécois from Quebec won 23 seats and finished third.  Led by Yves-François Blanchet, the Bloc ran its usual separatist campaign based on Quebec’s autonomy and cultural pride but lost strength to the Liberals.  The New Democratic Party dropped to just seven seats, with leader Jagmeet Singh losing his riding, and the Green Party held onto a single seat.

The 2025 Canadian federal election witnessed a significant surge in voter participation, with 69% of registered voters casting their ballots.  This marked the highest voter turnout since 2015, signaling a heightened level of political engagement among Canadians.

Two events framed the election: Trudeau’s resignation and Donald Trump’s return as the U.S. President.  Together, these events changed the ballot questions, turning a contest about the faults of the Justin Trudeau administration into an image-impression contest over who might best deal with Donald Trump’s insults and tariff threats.

Some post-election observations can be made.

McLuhan's insight was that the media is the message.  This was a phrase coined by the Canadian communication theorist Marshall McLuhan and the title of the first chapter in his 1964 book ‘Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man’.

The media, particularly social media, played a pivotal role in the election.  Pierre Poilievre strategically leveraged platforms like Facebook, X, TikTok, and YouTube, using viral videos and catchy slogans like “Axe the Tax” to rally voters around affordability and housing issues.  Some even speculated that Poilievre could be the first social media personality to ascend to the position of Prime Minister.  In a departure from tradition, the Conservative campaign largely bypassed traditional mainstream media, viewing them as adversaries rather than allies.

In contrast, Mark Carney took a traditional approach, building relationships with legacy outlets.  Older voters still consume legacy media news, contributing to some of the Conservatives' loss of support.

Carney’s droll media image benefited from legacy media’s favourable coverage, highlighting experience and stability in contrast to Poilievre’s alleged confrontational style.  Carney’s dominance in legacy media helped frame the election as a choice between uncertainty and predictability, or perhaps risky change for competence.  Papa Carney would take care of you.  The election reaffirmed the importance of a multi-media strategy that has social media reach undergirded with traditional sources.

Carney seemed for many to be the right kind of guy for the moment.  Carney had never been elected or tested at the political level, so there was somewhat of a blank slate, which voters could then ascribe to him whatever they subconsciously needed.  He appeared to have a strong resume from the Bank of Canada and the Bank of England that projected competence during a crisis.  Carney offered a deliberate blend of pseudo-professionalism that reassured rattled voters.

Trump’s election, Trudeau’s demise, and replacement changed the ballot choice.  The legacy media played a pivotal role in shaping the narrative, making full play of every question for the Conservatives, and glossing over the reality of the real Mark Carney.

The Conservatives had built solid, hard-won support by crossing the country with a clear campaign repeating memorable slogans such as “Axe the Tax,” “Build the Homes,” “Fix the Budget,” and “Stop the Crime.”  The slogans were based upon ready legislation and detailed administrative policy changes that the Conservatives promised to implement quickly.

Poilievre’s opening theme boldly stated the obvious reality for many: ‘Canada was broken.’  Voters were exhausted from the Liberal government’s inept and erratic rule during COVID-19.  Canada also had a housing crisis made worse by a Liberal administration that allowed too many immigrants within a year.  Inflation and crime were significant disenchantments.  The colossal national debt and mounting interest payments were very worrisome.

When Chrystia Freeland resigned as Finance Minister on December 16, 2024, just before she was to deliver the fall economic statement, it was a direct fatal move against Prime Minister Trudeau.  During the Christmas break, the Liberal Party looked like it was dissolving in the polls, with Poilievre’s Conservatives with 45% support, 21% for the NDP, 16% for the Liberal Party, and 11% for the Bloc Québécois.  Trudeau was forced to resign on January 6, 2025.  Mark Carney soon emerged from the political mess as the replacement Prime Minister.

Donald Trump's return to the White House and the launch of a trade war were traumatic and enraging experiences for Canadians.  Trump’s musing that Canada should be the 51st state of the USA was the supreme insult.  This led to a surge of nationalism, with Canadians boycotting USA-made products and cancelling cross-border travel, highlighting the tension and uncertainty in Canadian politics.

In response to the Trump challenge, Carney’s first acts were to scrap the consumer part of the carbon tax and reverse Trudeau’s capital gains tax hike, thus signalling a policy shift.  He borrowed the Conservative policy goal to realize Canada’s constitution as one economic unit.  In an emotional response, Canadians overwhelmingly supported political talk of tariff retaliation. 

Carney then visited the leaders of England, France, and the European Union instead of Donald Trump.  The political image-making was clear, and Carney was doing the obvious.  Canada must become less dependent on the unreliable USA.  However, Carney required political legitimacy for his leadership, so he duly called a national election for April 28^th.

During the federal election, the Conservatives called for ‘change,’ but voters did not care much about carbon taxes, Justin Trudeau, or policy slogans. They became rather vaguely emotional about who would comfort and protect Canada in a time of sudden uncertainty.

Carney played the fear card and warned repeatedly that Trump “wants to break us so America can own us.”  This new political drama put the Conservatives in an undefined position.  The truth for Canada was our internal governance, the failures of the Liberal political philosophy, and the many internal practical fixes and policy changes that were greatly needed. 

However, many voters seemed spooked and simply opted for the easy answer: comforting Mark Carney.  Compared to Poilievre’s assertive style, which he had used to wake up Canada and say that help and relief were on the way with ‘change’, voters saw Carney as the comforting daddy ‘adult in the room’. 

No matter how Poilievre tried to place Carney into the Justin Trudeau narrative, fear and comfort without reflective analysis carried the Liberals forward.  When asked why voters chose, it was never about reading a Party platform.  Few could cogently state anything Carney promised about a future vision or plan for the country when directly questioned.  Liberal voters had a vague impression that their best bet was with Carney because of Trump.  The new version of the Liberals also allowed political denialism of what the Liberal Party had done to Canada.  Reactive support for Carney allowed past political sins to be suppressed and forgotten. 

Poilievre’s inability to pivot politically in his message was the chattering class's narrative.  They did not hear or want to listen to the relevant policy message that Canada had to get its own house in order to face all challenges, whether they be Trump or other international economic shocks.

Poilievre’s Conservatives campaigned for years on anti-carbon tax and anti-Justin Trudeau political philosophy.  As Poilievre’s points scored home, the defense was that his rhetoric often echoed Trump’s populist slogans.  Since admission of guilt or policy change would not be forthcoming from Liberals, the response was a smear about Poilievre’s style rather than substance. 

However, Poilievre adapted with a ‘Canada First’ message.  His reminders about the cost of living, high taxes, and crime didn’t break through the voter fog until the campaign's last week, when Conservatives appeared to be gaining momentum, but it was somewhat late.

Pierre Poilievre created a larger Conservative coalition, but in the process, he pushed most NDP voters into the arms of Mark Carney.  That is the backhanded Liberal explanation.  In truth, NDP voters were becoming disenchanted, but they had lived for generations on false anti-conservative myths and resentment.  The NDP's collapse was mainly internal, eventually unfolding into a two-party contest.  The NDP voting coalition with the Liberals had made them both accountable for the administrative record of failure. 

If Canada evolves temporarily into a two-party format, Poilievre must heal some relationships and further broaden the Conservative base.  The 2025 election wasn’t just a contest of parties or political philosophies—it was a contest of tone and vague leadership style in a world turned upside down by Trump.

When Canadians were forced to choose between a combative populist who uncovered the sins of the mighty, and a calm technocrat ready to provide a haven to cover shame, many chose the myth of stability and comfort wrapped in a renewed love of our flag.

The outcome was a rebalance in voting patterns and the temporary emergence of a two-party focus, with a stronger Conservative movement and a resurrection of the Liberal Party.  It was image over substance. 

Liberal Budget Fail

Liberal Budget Fail   April 21, 2025

The Liberal platform promises $130 billion in new measures over four years, adding $225 billion to federal debt. It is hurtful that Justin Trudeau's style of economics is repeated. Mark Carney, the banker, is revealed to be worse at financial management than the previous Liberal finance minister, Chrystia Freeland. There was no timeline to balance the federal budget to end Canada’s downward spiral.

The Liberals are adding new measures over the next four years, that when combined with existing spending, will add $225 billion to the federal debt. This is all borrowed money that Canada does not have. Carney also had to admit that the federal public service had grown at an unsustainable rate of 40% over the last decade under the Liberal administration, but he offered no plausible remedy. This significant increase in debt could lead to higher taxes, reduced government services, and increased interest payments, all of which will have profound implications for Canada's financial future.

One of the largest spending initiatives in the election platform unveiled Saturday is a 1%-point reduction in the lowest income tax rate from 15% to 14%.

There is also a promise to increase defense spending by $18 billion to meet the 2% NATO spending target.

Carney's plan to increase home building is to create a new agency called Build Canada Homes (BCH), which will cost about $3 billion annually. However, there are concerns that this will likely create another inefficient bureaucracy rather than properly incentivize the private sector for home building. The problem is that a government agency is not as efficient or innovative as the private sector in addressing the housing crisis, and the $ 3 billion annual cost could be better spent on other initiatives.

If re-elected, the Liberals promise to provide municipalities with $1.5 billion per year in funding to help reduce the development charges they impose on new construction.

The Liberals describe spending in four main areas:

Social: This category includes supporting the arts, rural transit, Indigenous loan guarantees, and CBC/Radio-Canada. When taken together, infrastructure funding for projects such as high-speed rail, community, and health infrastructure comes to $20 billion over four years.

Security: This file includes the $18 billion in defense spending and more than $4 billion in tariff response funding. It includes about $1.7 billion in additional spending for the RCMP to train more personnel, establish a new training academy, and boost basic pay for recruits.

Protection: This category includes healthcare initiatives such as medical school residencies and youth mental health. When combined, the healthcare initiatives will cost $3.5 billion over the next four years.

Building: The last category includes the $22 billion for housing. It also consists of the $12.5 billion for scrapping their previous mistake on capital gains taxation and the $12.5 billion to extend the Accelerated Investment Incentive.

Revenues: The Liberals only account for tariff revenue in the first year of the four-year plan. Their fantasy wish is that the consequences of the Trump tariffs will have passed by in a year or so.

This year's operating budget deficit is predicted to be just over $9 billion, a staggering figure that the Liberal platform predicts can be reduced to a mere $220 million by 2028-29. This significant deficit raises serious concerns about Canada's financial future, underscoring the urgency.

Overall, in 2025-26, the Liberal platform predicts that the annual deficit will be $62.3 billion. They hope the debt-to-GDP ratio will drop the following year as the annual deficit shrinks to $60 billion. They overlook how rising interest payments crowd out available funds for healthcare support.

In the fall economic statement, the deficit in 2025-26 was projected to be $42.2 billion before dropping to $31 billion in 2026-27. Consequently, the Liberals' financial projections prove to be little more than wishful thinking.

In traditional Liberal fashion, the gap between promise and reality is never reconciled. This lack of transparency and accountability is disappointing, as Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre pointed out that Carney's platform would make life even more expensive. Mr. Carney plans to run an even bigger inflationary deficit than Justin Trudeau had budgeted, which should make us more skeptical and cautious about the Liberals’ financial promises.

Pierre Poilievre said Mark Carney’s fiscal plan is a ’sneaky accounting trick’ to avoid balancing the budget. Carney promised to split the budget into two streams—capital and operating spending—by balancing the operating side while running capital spending deficits. Given the new Liberal document, Canada would be seriously hurt financially with Carney Liberals at the helm.

Trump is a deceptive distraction. April 6, 2025

 

Trump is a deceptive distraction. April 6, 2025

The media's attempt to steer the election towards standing up to US President Trump is a deceptive distraction. Trump will be Trump, regardless of who leads Canada. His global tariffs have affected many, and Canada is just a small part of his scheme. Carney, with no unique insight or skill to deal with Trump's tariffs, is not the solution. The key to Canada's success lies in our ability to achieve better internal governance that can withstand any international challenge. Carney’s approach has already failed Canada. It's time for wise Canadians to focus on our own issues and not be swayed by false distractions. The answer lies in a majority Conservative government.

For voters, the question of which Canadian prime minister can best deal with Trump is incorrect. The intelligent question is, who can best get our own house in order to then deal with all challenges, such as China, the US, and Russian subversion? Who can best lead this country back to its prominence for the next four years? Ten years of Liberal rule has left us in a state of ruin, and another four years of the same people and a Liberal PM will not fix it. A Conservative majority government is the beacon of hope in an uncertain world. Conservatives saved Canada in the last international financial meltdown in 2008; the same philosophical economic approach can save us again. Donald Trump shouldn't be the excuse for 'Liberal failure'

Dour Mark Carney says he wants to earn the right to remain PM. However, his economic policies have already failed, and he is presenting essentially the same old Cabinet that has devastated Canada. He is trying to show the government as new, and that all past sins and hurtful Liberal philosophy have been washed away. His mantra about a "new government" is dishonest beyond belief.

Carney says in a TV commercial, with soft tones, sitting comfortably dressed in a sweater, that Canada used to build things like homes for average-income people. He does not admit that it was Liberal government policies that hurt Canada, to put us where we are concerning house building. He was the prominent economic adviser to the Liberals and essentially wrote their last Budget. Carney is saying he can rescue Canada from himself. Intelligent people don’t buy it. His list of false statements grows.

Leonard Waverman, professor emeritus and former dean of finance at McMaster University, said. “A Mark Carney win would be good for Donald Trump. When I read about the very pleasant exchanges between President Trump and Liberal leader Mark Carney, I was a bit surprised. Why would President Trump seem to enjoy a conversation with someone like Carney, a proverbial global elitist, educated at Oxford and a former bank governor in Canada and then the UK ?”

“Furthermore, Carney is a committed environmentalist—including being the co-chair for the Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero (GFANZ) and the UN special envoy for climate action—something that Trump normally abhors.”

“It almost causes one’s Machiavellian hat to pop on their head. Ostensibly, everyone in the US administration has known about Canada's poor economic performance since 2014. Flat-lined GNP per capita growth, the lowest labour productivity growth of any economy in the West, large budgetary deficits, and anemic real growth. Most of this happened during the Liberal government's nearly ten years in office.”

“Pinning all of that on the Liberals alone might not be fair, but the party under Trudeau does deserve much of the blame. Canada's dismal innovation and productivity performance did not galvanize them into action while in government. Instead, the Liberals seemed to be more concerned with Canadian content on television and social media.”

“But still, why would Trump prefer Canada to have Carney and another four years of Liberals instead of Pierre Poilievre, who has a real growth agenda? The answer may be simple: the US under Trump does not want a stronger, more productive Canada, one infused with real growth and that can compete with US energy exports. You can't ride a strong, prosperous, and economically secure Canada into oblivion or make it the 51st state.”

“And the Liberals seem to be playing into Trump's hand. Carney stated that reducing the cap on oil and gas emissions would be good since Canada could develop more energy resources. His natural resources minister quickly rebuked him, stating that the cap would remain. Carney quickly reversed himself. To see the supposed saviour of Liberal Party fortunes unable to change his own party's policy is telling.”

“It shows that the Liberal Party, if given another four-year mandate, will be the same party of the last decade, with a new titular leader but with many of the same ruinous policies in place. Bad for Canada, but good for Trump for making America great again.”

On the local scene, Carney does not know Nepean, the riding he's running in. Does Mark Carney know where the Walter Baker Centre is or who it’s named after? Or about the history of the Nepean bell or Ken Ross Park? These are questions locals would have asked him, given the chance, writes Charlie Senack in the Ottawa Citizen.

Liberal Party Leader Mark Carney was in Ottawa recently, but the local news media had very little luck covering his campaign. Locations of his events were kept secret, access to local journalists was denied, and no questions were answered from reporters. This lack of transparency is an insult to Nepean residents, who have the right to hear from the man whose name will be on the ballot in their riding.

It all began on Saturday when local journalists were told they could not cover Carney’s campaign launch in Nepean. On Sunday, Carney had two campaign stops in Canada’s capital, but the events were closed to all media, national or local. “Where’s the transparency or public accountability?” says Charlie Senack

Journalists have a lot of questions. This is one of the most monumental elections in Canadian history. Nepean residents want to meet the man who hopes to represent that riding and hold the county’s top job. Their trust is understandably low.

Since 2015, Nepean has been served by Liberal Chandra Arya, who was told just days before the election call that he would not be allowed to run under the Liberal party banner. In January, he was kicked out of the Liberal leadership race, but no official reasons were given. Subsequent media reports suggest it was related to a trip Arya made to India in 2024. Whatever the reason, Canadians deserve to know.

Charlie Senack writes about Carney's slim connection to Nepean. Nepean is far from home for Carney, who lives in Rockcliffe Park. The differences between the two districts are hard to miss.

Nepean is a suburb with about 130,000 residents. Most working-class folk send their kids to public schools, attend fitness classes at the Minto Recreation Centre, and meet for coffee at the local Timmys. The average income is $62,000. Rockcliffe Park is for the wealthy: the average income there is about $256,000. The homes are lavish, lifestyles differ, and many kids attend private school.

Perhaps Carney needs to brush up on his local history. During his speech outside Rideau Hall on March 23, he mistakenly said Bells Corners was part of Nepean. Surely any candidate should know that a riding review has moved that neighbourhood into Kanata-Carleton.

The party also cannot underestimate the power of the Conservatives. Party Leader Pierre Poilievre used to represent the Nepean riding. This time around, Barbara Bal's name is on the ballot. She lives there, has served on the Fallowfield Village Community Association, and has been knocking on doors for 18 months. Is Carney the change Nepean needs? Of course not.

Mark Carney is a mirage—a reasonable facsimile floated by a honeymoon period of hopes, and for now, a lot of willful blindness by the media about his past. To our detriment, some Canadians will not see it for what it is. Carney's myth-making goes to character. Unlike his comical memory lapses, he has been caught in several lies and outright exaggerations in the campaign. He is not a leader to get the Canadian house in order.

The best way to promote Canada’s interests, defend against trade provocations, and create more substantial international trade options, is to finally deal with our internal political weaknesses, and elect a majority Conservative government under leader Pierre Poilievre. Keep the best and fix the rest.

Carney would have us become more European. Trump wants us to become Americans. Conservatives want us to be even more Canadian. Only Conservatives will restore Canada's promise: where hard work results in a good life—a home on a safe street, protected by solid borders and proper law enforcement, under a proud flag. Canadians must put Canada first.

Brian Lilley in The Sun says it very clearly. "It appears that for some Canadians, the only issue on the ballot for the upcoming federal election is Donald Trump. That’s odd because Trump doesn’t live here, he’s not Canadian, he doesn’t vote here, and he doesn’t invent or implement Canadian policies.”

“Yet, after nearly a decade of the same party in power, a party that was quite unpopular until recently due to their policies, we could very well re-elect the Liberals – not because of them or their leader but because of Trump.” “While the Liberals have changed leaders from Justin Trudeau to Mark Carney, the team around Carney is the same. The thinking that Carney is putting forward is mostly the same as we saw under Justin Trudeau. So, why reward them by giving them another mandate just because of Trump? It wasn't Donald Trump who gave us rising unemployment; it was the Liberals. The Friday report's unemployment rate rose to 6.7% compared to 5% two years ago.”

Pierre Poilievre continues to campaign across the country about vital Canadian issues. He has not succumbed to the ‘talking heads’ about how he must pivot and talk mostly against Trump. This is a Canadian election. It is about replacing our failed economic and social philosophy and bad actors who now have a new frontman. The election is about supporting ethical and wise governance in Canada's daily life. When we get ourselves in order as a nation, Canada can face any challenge and win.

 Compiled by Paul Forseth

Canadian federal election is April 28, 2025.

March 23, 2025March 23, 2025

The federal election is April 28, 2025. The media falsely portrays it as a showdown between two political leaders  -Carney or Poilievre.  Others see it as the eternal human struggle between good and evil. Groups gather to obtain power with political brands and memberships. They create stories to entice voters and sell hopes to chart a national destiny. The first casualty of an election is the truth.

The media would try to make the election all about standing up to US President Trump, which is a deceptive issue. Trump will be Trump, regardless. No matter who is elected Canadian leader, Trump will remain his unpredictable self. The key to Canada’s success is finding better internal governance that can withstand any international challenge. Wise Canadians must take care of business without false distractions.

The nature of media creates a contest that all turn on the whims of a charismatic leader, a form of dictatorship where the winner takes all. The media plays a significant role in shaping the election narrative, often focusing on the leaders' personalities, jokes, and quips rather than the governance policies. However, the mechanics of government are significantly more complex. Judging by the public noise, one would think that Canadians who vote, only give reasons for voting based on emotion, historical prejudice, and slick advertising, regardless of facts, truth, or ethics.

The election campaign for 343 seats in the House of Commons will last 37 days. While other parties are running, the Liberals and the Conservatives are the only ones who have a chance to form a government. The party that commands a majority in Parliament, either alone or with the support of another party, will form the next government, and its leader will be Prime Minister.

When casting your vote, think beyond immediate gain and consider the long-term implications for future generations. This forward-thinking approach is necessary for our nation's enduring prosperity. This election is not about short-term wins but fortifying Canada to withstand any challenge to our country.

In its most basic form, our Westminster Parliamentary model says the political Party that wins the most local voting races to claim seats in the House of Commons, gets the first opportunity to form a working government if it can maintain the chamber's 'voting confidence'.

On March 23, the media claimed that the political contest was a tie with a slight edge to the Liberals, who were severely down in popularity just a few weeks ago. The Liberals seem to look for human saviours, such as their last leader, who brought the Party from third place of 34 seats in 2011 up to a 184-seat majority in 2015, then was forced to resign the leadership as the Liberals faced certain political ignominy at the polls. They now have a new leader who has never been elected to anything, and they aspire to keep political control with a fourth term in office, using the same Ministers with the same political philosophy.

The history of the Liberals has been about obtaining power and keeping it, and by being willing to appear to adapt to the winds of social change through the years. Some of their historical policies include deficit spending, solidifying universal health care, the Canada Pension Plan, Canada Student Loans, unification of the armed forces, multilateralism and official bilingualism, gun control, the patriation of the Constitution of Canada with a Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the Clarity Act, same-sex marriage, euthanasia, cannabis, national carbon pricing, expanded access to abortion, assisted suicide (MAID).

The Conservative Party leadership created Canada in 1867. The Party generally supports conservative social and economic policies such as balanced budgets, a strong federal government with provincial rights for the legislatures, governance under the mantra of ‘peace – order - and good government’, and the Canadian Bill of Rights. Its economic policies include reducing taxes, creating a tax-free savings account (TFSA), and implementing universal childcare benefits. In recent history, they eliminated the long-gun registry, introduced mandatory minimum sentences for violent crime, raised the age of consent to 16 years, permitted the construction of several pipelines, withdrew Canada from the international Kyoto Protocol, and safely guided Canada through the worst global economic crisis since WWII, yet emerging with a balanced budget.

In foreign affairs, they maintained membership in many international organizations while protecting independence, supported the UN and the State of Israel, negotiated the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA), and negotiated the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). Due to the Conservative administration, Canada has over 100 international trade agreements and active negotiations.

Canada’s trade with the United States dominates the Canadian economy, and Conservatives started the modern era of trade deals with the USA. Canadian politicians have debated free trade with the USA since 1866 when countries mainly used tariffs for international relations. Trade with the United States was the main topic in the 1911 Canadian Federal Election and was led primarily by the Conservative Party in the 1984 and 1988 Canadian elections. 

Although many bilateral agreements reduced tariffs, a freer trade agreement was not reached until the Conservatives developed the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) in 1994. The agreement increased trade among all three member countries and has dramatically benefitted Canada, the USA, and Mexico.

How did we get here politically for 2025? The current standing in the House of Commons is Liberal 152, Conservative 120, Bloc Quebecois 33, NDP 24, Green 2, Independent 3, and Vacant 4. The Liberals have held a minority government since 2021 with the support of the NDP.

On January 6, 2025, Trudeau announced his pending resignation as leader of the Liberal Party and as the Prime Minister of Canada. He asked Governor General Mary Simon to prorogue Parliament until March. Proroguing Parliament, a constitutional power of the Governor General, effectively ends a session of Parliament. The Liberal Prime Minister was forced to resign in disgrace and was quickly replaced by Mark Carney. Mark Carney, the former governor of the Bank of Canada, won a brief internal leadership vote and was sworn in as Prime Minister on March 14. He appointed a new Cabinet, beginning the 30th Canadian Ministry. He has chosen to try and extend Liberal power via a national election on April 28, 2025.

According to the polls, cost-of-living issues continue to dominate Canadians' priorities. Many ranked inflation and the cost of living as their top priority. Healthcare took the second spot, and other pocketbook issues dominated the rest of the list. Housing availability was critical, followed by immigration, employment, and jobs. Taxes, poverty, social inequality, and government debt were also mentioned.  While the new Liberal leader tries to run against his Party's record, it is an unacceptable legacy that cannot be endorsed at the ballot box.

Canada, under failed leadership, is only now trying to play catch-up about internal trade barriers. By not investing in internal trade links, national pipelines, and a national electrical grid, Canada has been left vulnerable to international markets. Despite positive political talk about our north over ten years, the government has failed to deliver.

The best way to promote Canada’s interests, defend against trade provocations, and create more substantial international trade options is to get our house in order and elect a strong majority Conservative government under leader Pierre Poilievre. Keep the best and fix the rest.

Carney would have us become more European. Trump wants us to become Americans.  Conservatives want us to be even more Canadian.

Only Conservatives will restore Canada’s promise: Where hard work results in a good life - a home on a safe street, protected by solid borders and proper law enforcement, under a proud flag. Canadians must put Canada first.

-compiled by Paul Forseth

 

Carney and truth?

March 19, 2025

Liberal Leader Mark Carney keeps showing he has a problem with the truth.  Liberal supporters looking for a rescue, take note.  Carney had a questionable history at the Bank of England, and left before his term ended.  In his first little speech in front of Rideau Hall as Prime Minister, he falsely tried to present the Cabinet as new.  All were old Trudeau stalwarts who are accountable for the disastrous Trudeau economic legacy.

In an interview, Carney falsely claimed he helped balance the budget with Paul Martin, a claim that is simply not true.  He also told untruths during the Liberal leadership clubhouse TV chat.  His assertion that he helped Paul Martin balance the budget was the most egregious of these.  He said, “It was my privilege to work with Paul Martin when he balanced the books and kept the books balanced.”  The reality is that Mark Carney never worked with Paul Martin, and played no role in balancing the books under the direction of Jean Chretien with political help from the Reform Party, leading to the first fully balanced budget in 30 years.  Carney wasn’t working for the federal government at that time, as he was still with Goldman Sachs.  He never did work with Paul Martin, the finance minister, as he left Goldman Sachs to become a Deputy Governor at the Bank of Canada in 2003.  In 2004, he took a position as associate deputy minister of finance, but by then, Paul Martin was prime minister, and the budget had long been balanced.

As chair of Brookfield Asset Management, Carney was complicit in the decision to move the company's head office from Toronto to the U.S., taking Canadian jobs with it.  Despite his role in this decision, he falsely claimed that because the decision taken by the board last fall was only formalized in January, he had nothing to do with it.  This blatant attempt to avoid accountability is a slap in the face to the Canadian public.

To insult voter intelligence, he claimed he saved Canada’s economy during the 2008-09 financial crisis.  He only played a partial role at arm's length from Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his great Finance Minister Jim Flaherty.  Carney’s part was made easy due to the fiscal, budgetary, and political decisions made by Harper and Flaherty.  Carney played the damnable act of "stolen valor."

Carney has been very evasive about his many ownership conflicts of interest, dismissing all media questions by boasting that he placed ownerships into a blind trust before the date required.  In recent interviews, he pretended amnesia about what went into the trust.  During a persistent media scrum, when not wanting to answer with truth and disclosure, he responded with churlish contempt to the questioner to avoid substance, like a child caught in a lie.

The Liberal pattern of deception and self-interest seems to be repeating itself.  It has become a cultural conclusion that former Liberal Prime Minister Paul Martin, when he was Finance Minister, cheated about his 'trust', and also shaped Canadian law to favour his companies.  This pattern of Liberal leadership behaviour should serve as a warning to all Canadians.

Carney recently held a fake signing ceremony to end the carbon tax, perhaps trying to mimic President Trump’s signing of his infamous executive orders.  In the presence of some of his cabinet ministers, Carney signed a meaningless document for media consumption.  The actual paperwork had to be accomplished later to process a real Order in Council that only becomes viable if the Governor General signs.  It seems the media knows more about the Prime Ministerial process than the actual Prime Minister.

Without any electoral legitimacy, Carney now represents Canada abroad as Prime Minister.  We can only hope that voters will soon end his maneuvers.

Carney has made claims about having done things he hasn’t done or exaggerated his role while also denying moving the Brookfield HQ when the record shows otherwise. The man who is Prime Minister is showing he has a problem with the truth, just like Justin Trudeau.

 

Tariffs Against Canada

 

March 16, 2025

The United States's tariff policy is now focused on dealing with its yearly deficit in federal spending. The US is in trouble with its annual budget. It had a disastrous federal shortfall of $1.83 trillion in fiscal 2024.

Trump is responding in several ways. The first is a significant budget Bill that calls for trillions of dollars in spending and tax cuts, which must not deepen the deficit while keeping tax levels low.

The next is internal efficiencies found through Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency. Finally, tariffs are a revenue source and an incentive to reposition investment into the United States.

The plan is to impose tariffs on countries worldwide. The countries that submit to the US may be able to mitigate tariffs in exchange for US advantages.

As a direct response to Trump's actions, Canada has retaliated by applying a 25% tariff to some $60 billion worth of American goods entering Canada. This tit-for-tat escalation is a clear sign of deteriorating US-Canada relations. If the US continues its aggressive policies towards Canada, more Canadian tariffs are on the horizon, further straining the relationship.

To help politically with the American voter, Trump has been ‘trash-talking’ against Canada to justify his economic aggression.

Here is a fact check of Trump’s false statements, a crucial exercise in the current political climate to keep the public informed and empowered. 

Canadians' views on becoming the 51st state: In January, Trump falsely claimed to reporters that the people of Canada liked his idea of Canada joining the US. In fact, all polls show the idea is massively unpopular with Canadians. All Canadian political leaders have vehemently rejected the notion. The nation felt insulted and betrayed by its friend.

The US trade deficit with Canada: Trump has repeatedly said the US has a $200 billion trade deficit with Canada. That is false. Canada is the USA's best international customer. Take Canadian oil out of the equation, and Canada has a trade deficit, and the US has a surplus of $58 billion. Canada also subsidizes the US, as the US does not pay the world price for Canadian oil but gets an insider deal. The US must import oil to meet its needs.

Canada’s tariffs: Trump falsely claimed that Canada is among the highest-tariffing nations worldwide. In fact, Canada has relatively low tariffs, though it has now announced new retaliatory tariffs in response to Trump's tariffs on Canada. Canada was just 102nd-highest on a World Bank list of 137 countries' trade-weighted average tariff rates in 2022 – and had a lower average (1.37%) than the United States (1.49%).

Canada's dairy tariffs: Trump falsely claimed that Canada's dairy tariff situation was well handled when he left office the first time, but they kept raising it under Biden. In fact, Canada did not raise its dairy tariffs during the Biden administration. The tariffs Trump is denouncing were left in place by the US- Mexico- Canada Agreement that Trump signed in 2018, though that agreement secured greater US access to the Canadian dairy market, which they have not filled. The US dairy industry is also highly subsidized.

Trump also fails to mention that Canada's high dairy tariffs only apply after the US has hit a certain Trump-negotiated quantity of tariff-free dairy sales to Canada. The US is not hitting its zero-tariff maximum in any category of dairy sales in Canada, so tariffs aren’t being applied.

Canada’s imports of US agricultural products: Trump claimed that Canada doesn’t sufficiently import US agricultural products. This is false. According to the US Department of Agriculture, Canada was the world's second-largest buyer of US agricultural exports in 2024, purchasing about $28.4 billion.

While Canada does limit foreign access to its dairy, egg, and poultry markets, these are exceptions rather than the rule. This is done to prevent dumping and boom-and-bust cycles. It also supports family-sized farms against large corporate takeovers. On its website, the US Department of Agriculture notes that almost all US agricultural exports to Canada face zero tariffs or quotas. Canada consistently ranks among the top markets for US agricultural product exports, representing one of the most significant and reliable trading partners.

Canada and US banks: Trump falsely claimed Canada prohibits US banks. While Canada's high-quality regulations have discouraged some foreign banks from opening retail branches, Canada does not forbid these banks, as US banks have been operating in Canada for over a century. The Canadian Bankers Association industry group says, "There are 16 U.S.-based bank subsidiaries and branches with around C$113 billion in assets currently operating in Canada and that U.S. banks now make up approximately half of all foreign bank assets in Canada."

Canada, Russia, and China: Trump falsely claimed that Canada joining the US would secure Canada "from the threat of the Russian and Chinese Ships that are constantly surrounding them."  Canada has never been surrounded by Russian and Chinese ships. A few Russian and Chinese military ships and jets, as well as Chinese research vessels, were viewed with suspicion by Canada and the US and have been occasionally spotted in recent years in the vicinity of Alaska – and have been monitored or intercepted by both the Canadian and US militaries in coordinated protection.

The Canadian government has warned that among the potential threats in its Arctic, was increased Russian activity and Canadian air approaches, and China’s regular deployment of dual-use research and military application vessels as surveillance platforms to collect data. Canada was never surrounded. Canada is strongly investing in northern protection.

Trudeau and the trade war: Trump falsely said in a social media post: “I think that Justin Trudeau is using the Tariff problem, which he has largely caused, to run again for Prime Minister.”  Trudeau’s successor as Liberal Party leader and Prime Minister has been installed according to the Canadian plan. Mark Carney is now Canada's Prime Minister and will soon call a national election.

Canada's defense spending: Trump falsely claimed that Canada spends "less than 1%" of GDP on defense. Official NATO figures show Canada spent an estimated 1.37% of GDP on defense in 2024, up from an estimated 1.31% in 2023. That is short of NATO's 2% target, which incoming Prime Minister Mark Carney has vowed to meet by 2030. It is not as low as Trump claimed. However, Canada ranks 7^th highest in actual money spent among NATO's 32 countries. Tariffs make it harder for Canada to increase its defense spending.

President Trump claims he's targeting Canada because he's concerned about Canada’s supposedly lax approach on the border to fentanyl and migrants. It was the initial false excuse for using emergency powers. Otherwise, it would take an act of Congress.

Data shows Canada has more reason to worry about what's going north into Canada from the US. There's been an influx into Canada of illegal aliens, drugs, and guns, which fuels crime, death, and addiction. Canadian officials seized more illicit drugs coming from the US last year than what the Americans captured on their side of the 49th parallel. Criminal activity is a concern on both sides.

The Canadian Border Services Agency measures cannabis, hashish, cocaine and crack, heroin, some opioids (like opium, methadone, and morphine), and drug-related precursor chemicals seized in grams. Transnational criminal organizations profit from substances that cause great harm to both countries. Canada lives next door to the largest weapons market in the world, and the largest drug market in the world. Capacity creates its own demand, and since the US is such a huge market for general crime that is without adequate suppression enforcement, nefarious opportunities are filled by criminals.

In response to crime coming to Canada, as well as Trump's complaints, Canada assigned an additional $ 1.3 billion for border enforcement to assuage US concerns about drugs and migrants. However, the real benefit is for the public safety of Canadians in terms of having additional resources to interdict illicit firearms and a host of other drugs coming north.

Canada is not a significant source of drugs entering the U.S.  Less than one percent of all fentanyl seized in the US comes from Canada.

In conclusion, Trump's goals are simple but challenging to achieve with his ham-fisted method. Cultures do not respond well to threats and aggression. Sometimes, tariffs help discourage bad behaviour, such as foreign dumping of goods below cost to dominate and control a market.

However, blanket tariffs against years of developed supply chain efficiencies hurt everyone and will not result in a new era of "made in the USA."

Additionally, the USA has ruined its international reputation as a reliable partner and treaty keeper, as trust has evaporated. Instead of professionally negotiating over problem inequities and disparities, the USA is alienating the partners it needs for resources and the customers it would like to have for its products.

The path the USA is on will devolve into isolation and economic stagnation. International evil tyrants will be emboldened, and the world will become a more dangerous place. Disturbing the world economic order to such a degree will possibly give rise to new forms of terrorism onto American soil. The future looks dark.

Source Significantly from  Daniel Dale, CNN March 12/25 and varied internet articles.

 

The USA puts tariffs against Canada

 

March 5, 2025

The USA has imposed tariffs on Canada. These tariffs are unjustified and appear to be ideological rather than fact-based.

The United States administration has decided to impose 25% tariffs on Canadian exports and 10% tariffs on Canadian energy. This has unsettled most Western nations concerning USA's reliability.

An initial excuse was illegal drugs coming over the border. While less than 1% of the fentanyl intercepted at the US border comes from Canada, we have worked relentlessly to address this scourge that affects Canadians and Americans alike. To be cooperative and responsive, we implemented a $1.3 billion border plan with new helicopters with infrared sensing, boots on the ground, more coordination with US security agencies, and increased resources to stop any flow of fentanyl. We appointed a Fentanyl Czar, listed transnational criminal cartels as terrorist organizations, launched the Joint Operational Intelligence Cell and established a Canada-U.S. Joint Strike Force on organized crime. In partnership with the United States, fentanyl seizures from Canada have dropped 97% between December 2024 and January 2025 to a near-zero low of 0.03 pounds seized by US Customs and Border Protection. The drug problem at the border was solved.

To circumvent the legal limits of Presidential Executive Order power versus Congressional Law authority, the topic of fentanyl has been the excuse but not the reality. Canadian border officials captured more drugs coming in from the US than their American counterparts caught going south, according to data from both countries. US Customs and Border Protection data shows far more fentanyl came into the US through their own coastal ports directly, compared to what was seized at the Canadian border last year. Additionally, there would not be such a great drug problem if market demand was reduced through proper drug enforcement within the US.

Canada will not let the unjustified tariffs go unanswered. Canada will respond with 25% tariffs against many American goods – starting with tariffs on $30 billion worth of goods immediately, and tariffs on the remaining $125 billion on American products in 21 days. Our tariffs will remain in place until the US trade action is withdrawn, and should US tariffs not cease, we are in active and ongoing discussions with provinces and territories to pursue several non-tariff measures. While we urge the US administration to reconsider their meanspirited tariffs, Canada remains firm in standing for our economy, our workers, and for treaties to be kept. Discussions are ongoing. The existing legal dispute mechanisms are also being used.

Canada should not be punished to pay for American fiscal deficits and USA overspending. Outside of the value of Canadian energy sent to the US, Canada buys more American general goods than it sells southward. Additionally, Canada subsidizes the USA price of its energy sold to the USA.

As a result of these tariffs, Americans will face increased costs for everyday necessities such as groceries, gas, and cars. This could lead to the loss of thousands of jobs. The tariffs disrupt a successful and fair trading relationship and violate the trade agreement that President Trump negotiated in his last term.

Historical data does not support the notion that tariffs will increase jobs and general manufacturing in the USA. While a few jobs may be gained from repositioning, the economic disruption will likely cause larger overall job loss in both the USA and Canada. The accounting numbers make it clear that everyone loses. The new US tariff policy has been made on emotions, without a professional analysis of the facts.

Canada, the USA's greatest friend, has been attacked with hurtful tariffs without justification. The arguments in favour of tariffs fail even the most straightforward analysis.