Joe Oliver: Canada needs to focus on its vital interests

Skip to Content News Archives Economy Energy Oil & Gas Renewables Electric Vehicles Mining Commodities Agriculture Real Estate Mortgages Mortgage Rates Finance Banking Insurance Fintech Cryptocurrency Work Wealth Smart Money Wealth Management Investor Personal Finance Family Finance Retirement Taxes High Net Worth FP Comment Executive Women Puzzmo Newsletters Financial Times Business Essentials More Innovation Information Technology FP500 Podcasts Small Business Lives Told Tails Told Shopping Financial Post Store Obituaries Place a Notice Advertising Advertising With Us Advertising Solutions Postmedia Ad Manager Sponsorship Requests Classifieds Place a Classifieds ad Working Profile Settings My Subscriptions My Offers Newsletters Customer Service FAQ News Economy Energy Mining Real Estate Finance Work Wealth Investor FP Comment Executive Women Puzzmo Newsletters Financial Times Business Essentials This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.HomeFP CommentJoe Oliver: Canada needs to focus on its vital interestsA strong economy is Canada's biggest foreign policy need and Ottawa can pursue that goal without triggering Donald TrumpLast updated 5 minutes ago Prime Minister Mark Carney during a welcoming ceremony at the Parliament of Canada on Sept. 24, 2026 in Ottawa. Photo by Dave Chan/AFP via Getty ImagesMark Carney’s elbows-up aggressiveness appeals to all Canadians’ patriotism, but especially to the instinctive anti-Americanism of the liberal left. It also conveniently deflects from the fact that the now 38 per cent gap between the Americans’ GDP per capita and ours mainly reflects Canada’s own economic policy failures since 2015.THIS CONTENT IS RESERVED FOR SUBSCRIBERS ONLYSubscribe now to read the latest news in your city and across Canada.Exclusive articles from Barbara Shecter, Joe O'Connor, Gabriel Friedman, and others.Daily content from Financial Times, the world's leading global business publication.Unlimited online access to read articles from Financial Post, National Post and 15 news sites across Canada with one account.National Post ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition to view on any device, share and comment on.Daily puzzles, including the New York Times Crossword.SUBSCRIBE TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLESSubscribe now to read the latest news in your city and across Canada.Exclusive articles from Barbara Shecter, Joe O'Connor, Gabriel Friedman and others.Daily content from Financial Times, the world's leading global business publication.Unlimited online access to read articles from Financial Post, National Post and 15 news sites across Canada with one account.National Post ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition to view on any device, share and comment on.Daily puzzles, including the New York Times Crossword.REGISTER / SIGN IN TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLESCreate an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience.Access articles from across Canada with one account.Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments.Enjoy additional articles per month.Get email updates from your favourite authors.THIS ARTICLE IS FREE TO READ REGISTER TO UNLOCK.Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience.Access articles from across Canada with one accountShare your thoughts and join the conversation in the commentsEnjoy additional articles per monthGet email updates from your favourite authorsSign In or Create an AccountCanadians seem willing to accept the prime minister’s version of what led to the collapse in trade negotiations, even though they have to accept it on faith, without access to the details. They resent the deluge of demeaning insults from the White House and reject allegations that somehow Canada is taking advantage of Americans in a trade agreement President Donald Trump himself negotiated, signed and praised.This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.However galling all this is, we need to be hard-nosed about our interests in a vitally important but asymmetrical relationship. Canada and the U.S. are geographically inseparable and we live under the American defence umbrella. We have also benefitted enormously from trade with the richest market in the world, with which we are deeply integrated. Not surprisingly, according to the OECD, “trade uncertainty and tariffs have significantly worsened the economic outlook.”Get the latest headlines, breaking news and columns.By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc.A welcome email is on its way. If you don't see it, please check your junk folder.The next issue of Top Stories will soon be in your inbox.We encountered an issue signing you up. Please try againToo many small and medium-sized businesses, which account for 64 per cent of private-sector employment, have either expanded in the U.S., delayed investment in Canada, shuttered plants here or simply gone out of business. The jobs that have been lost as a result will be difficult to replace.There is a fundamental difference, however, between unacceptable incursions on our sovereignty and commercial concessions in the context of a comprehensive trade deal. Canada has shed blood and treasure to preserve its independence and that of others, in partnership with Americans — as we should keep reminding them. To avoid becoming a vassal state we should certainly be prepared to suffer economically. But if what is at stake is, not sovereignty, but whether a deal is acceptable commercially, then there can and should be a debate about tactics and substance, without accusations of disloyalty.This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.Current negotiations present very serious economic risks. Changes in CUSMA’s automotive rules of origin or in the incentives that cause manufacturers to relocate final assembly or parts production in the U.S. risk permanent loss of Canadian production. President Trump’s Section 232 tariffs of up to 50 per cent on steel, aluminum and copper and derivatives have reduced Canadian steel exports by a half, according to the Bank of Canada.Canadian softwood lumber continues to face the long-standing U.S. anti-dumping and countervailing-duty regime. But now the U.S. has also applied a 10 per cent Section 232 tariff on softwood timber and lumber, with no CUSMA exemption. It has also imposed 50 per cent Section 338 tariffs on $27.6 billion of Canadian goods, again without exempting CUSMA-compliant products. There is no guarantee a changed Congress or even a new administration would improve matters.We have to balance the costs of these and other measures against the enormous benefits of access to the U.S. market. It was a tactical question whether we should have walked away from talks rather than say firmly: “This does not work for us, so let’s keep talking until we arrive at a compromise that benefits both parties.” It’s not too late to take this approach, since talks apparently are continuing in the background.This advertisement has not loaded yet.This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.Then there is the question of retaliatory tariffs, which are certainly satisfying and have worked politically for the prime minister. Canada may gain negotiating leverage from them, but we do so by imposing additional costs on our own consumers and businesses and risking further U.S. retaliation against our economy, which depends much more on trade with the Americans than they depend on trade with us.With the stakes so high, Canadians have a right to know precisely what we are sacrificing for and what tactics are being used to achieve our goals.Mark Carney has become a darling of EU leaders and the Laurentian and Davos elites with speeches proposing a middle-power alliance to confront the “hegemons.” But Washington — understandably — perceives his rhetoric as provocative. His recommendation that the world reduce its dependence on the U.S. dollar by moving toward a multipolar system of reserve currencies challenges a central pillar of American financial and strategic influence. His overtures to China raise suspicions in the U.S., notwithstanding Xi Jinping’s recent meeting with Trump. And then there were the gratuitous remarks about responding to the “extreme tail risk” of a U.S.-led military invasion. Canada may end up paying a steep price for Carney’s ideological and intellectual indulgence.This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.Confrontation has brought political benefits for the government, but they should not be confused with Canada’s broader economic interests. With so much at risk, a more cautious and conciliatory approach would be wiser than deliberately provoking a president given to sudden and unpredictable reactions.Ultimately, Canada’s negotiating position and sovereignty in an integrated North-American marketplace depend on a resilient and dynamic domestic economy, which requires Carney to address inadequate private-sector investment, poor productivity and anemic growth in per capita GDP — things he can do without triggering Donald Trump.Joe Oliver was minister of natural resources and finance in the Harper government.This advertisement has not loaded yet.Notice for the Postmedia NetworkThis website uses cookies to personalize your content (including ads), and allows us to analyze our traffic. Read more about cookies here. By continuing to use our site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.