When Carney doesn't release the information you are calling for, will you finally decide that it is time to stop simply assuming, without evidence, that he is being truthful and acting in the interests of Canadians as a nation?
"Without evidence" is of course generous, considering the Howe bridge case, and its clear evidence that Carney is willing to lie for political reasons. "Less than candid", forsooth.
First of all, Rob, I think there is ample evidence that the Prime Minister is willing to put the interests of the Liberal Party before that of the Country.
Secondly, Mr. Carney’s relationship with the truth is tenuous at best; how many instances would you require to consider this fact?
I agree with Matt that there should be full transparency to demonstrate honesty and integrity in desiring a deal. But, like you, I am waiting for the evidence knowing Carney does not have a good track record when it comes to governing with those values.
In the meantime, I've encountered some American sites that are saying 11th hour additions by the drop-in American admins caused enough havoc to stop the talks immediately, and for the Canadians to be recalled entirely, which indicates Canadian outrage rather than anyone pushing a few closing points on an already mostly-done deal and having the Canadians overreact.
I am so done with being fed talking points and narrative. I miss the fifth estate having an honest and independent voice working on behalf of everyone to bring facts into the light and letting each of us weigh and balance what's probably true. This post, as an opinion piece combined with a fair bit of guesswork and flag-waving rah-rahing, doesn't fit the bill and I don't know where it's hanging out in these partisan days. I'll keep looking.
Having said that (and those who follow my comments here know I'm no fanboy of Mr. Carney), when one actually watches AND listens to the entire Q&A section of the press conference, you can literally see Carney biting his tongue to not reveal the depth of the frustration he feels with how the negotiations ended (this is towards the end of the Q&A). One would have to be an extremely gifted actor to fake what I saw. M&J allude to this in their Dispatch as well - in this particular case, I don't think it was an act. I think he's genuinely frustrated.
This is not to say that Carney and the Canadian negotiators were not up to their own chicanery during these negotiations; of course they were; that's the Liberal playbook. That does not mean they necessarily were lying about the 11th hour additions (conditions?) to the draft agreement inserted by (we read) Howard Lutnick; in fact, that appears to be this US Administration's modus operandi around the world with trade agreements, based on all available evidence to date.
I'm with our Editors on this one; blast the details wide open, everywhere and anywhere, on repeat. I particularily like hiring the Iranian Lego animator. Do it.
The other thing repeated often in Carney's speech and Q&A is the subtext that Canada needs to become a hell of a lot more competitive - through other trading partners, not the least of which between provinces - this crisis with the US might be just the right time for the feds to REALLY push the provinces to hack away at interprovincial trade barriers they've to date really only given lip service to.
It might even be a good time for Carney's team let slip some of the backroom pressure they receive from the Canadian side (such as the dairy mafia and other oligarchic interests in this country) in an effort to get all the bad actors feeling a little late summer intense sunlight-as-disinfectant.
I'm not for 'Elbows Up', which was always stupid but it might be time for Olympic Final style fast, creative, and hard checking hockey tactics in this trade war.
It's interesting how even Liberal supporters in this thread are calling for Carney to release the details. The question for each of them to answer with their own consciences is what they will decide if no details are released. Will that change your views about the Liberals, or at least about these negotiations? Or will you continue to take Carney on faith?
We are looking at an info-free environment because both sides are incredibly unreliable narrators. Trump, Lutnick and their cabal are obviously habitual liars of the highest order, but Carney and the Liberals have shown themselves to be just about as cynical and self-interested. Even Trudeau was (marginally) more honest and it was easier to tell when he was full of shit.
One or both parties could have been looking to torpedo the deal on purpose, and the Canadian media-wide chorus fulfilling the boomer "war" fantasy is suddenly so thick you could choke on it. (Unreasonable tariffs on 5% of our exports? That's basically the same as carpet bombing Montreal!) A better political situation for Mark Carney would be hard to imagine. Whether or not he was genuinely frustrated by negotiations, it's clear that no deal is better than perhaps any deal for his political fortunes at least in the short term. As long as that fact remains, it's hard to believe anything we see.
And I still think there eventually will be a deal once everyone plays enough performative hardball for their base. It won't last, it won't be in good faith, we get to do this all over again until Trump is gone, but nobody wants the actual fallout if there isn't one.
After Lutnick's interview, flatly contradicting Carney's story, releasing this information becomes more important than ever. Which is why I doubt it will happen.
The Prime Minister probably should convene the House of Commons for an emergency debate about next steps. This would afford his government the opportunity to out Trump and his disingenuous sycophants for their games-playing.
As for Jamil Jivani, well, I'm at a loss for words when it comes to his treachery.
Jivani seems to fit the pattern of a long tradition of useful idiots shilling for nasty autocrats. Since the end of World War 2, we’re just more accustomed to them being aligned with the Soviets/Russia or China.
Or, maybe Jivani's right. Canadians should not let Carney get away with lack of information, meaningless words and photo ops with outrage. Voters don't have the information.
And maybe Carney wants to be forever globe trotting and an ask that stops the globe trotting and China pleasing is very personal to him. Where is that list of agreements with other countries that he's recently made, along with some info on how different these new agreements are from the previous agreements?
Jivani is not doing this in response to Carney. He's doing this to raise his own profile, although I don't discount the possibility that he really is unintelligent enough to believe that "his friend", JD Vance, is reaching out to him out of sincere concern for our country.
As for the rest, it seems fairly clear to me that your prejudice against Carney and the Liberals is skewing your analysis.
Having said that, I agree with Matt and Jen WRT the need for an emergency session of the House of Commons. Things must be discussed and His Majesty's Loyal Opposition, together with the other political parties, must be given an opportunity to weigh in, on our collective behalf.
That is a fun thought, but the Liberal Party of Canada has nothing but contempt for Parliament, committee, disclosure of documents, or any notion of debate.
Not taking the PM's word is treachery. Yes, he lied about the Howe bridge deal for political reasons, but that doesn't justify distrust now. What solid evidence do you have that he's lying in this case? 😀
Let's not accuse anyone of lying - using a word like lying is a bad idea unless there is proof and context. Voters don't have the information to know what the issues are. He's just done a photo op and that's not information.
“The collapse of the trade talks may have exposed a rift inside the Trump administration. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick got more involved in the negotiations late in the process, Politico reported, after feeling that the framework of the deal negotiated by Jamieson Greer, the U.S. trade representative, infringed on duties Lutnick oversees like those on cars, steel and aluminum.”
Both you and DA are offering nothing but cop-outs. When someone says "X", and then is asked to back "X" up with examples and independent reporting, it is only good form to do so.
To claim that "it's obvious" is little more than an exercise in side-stepping the issue.
We literally used the Howe bridge as an example of mendacity. I suppose we can use all climate policy and supply management, plus all the recent censorship bills and, as I said above, mass third world immigration, as examples of putting political interests ahead of the interests of the nation. Not to mention DEI. And media subsidies.
These are not reasons. These are statements of ideological objection to Liberal policy, although I guess you think that most of these were mostly by the previous government under Justin Trudeau’s leadership.
Carney’s government is different, you know.
I would add that the way in which you presented these was, shall we say, somewhat misleading…
The criticism of the Prime Minister’s handling of questions related to our management of negotiations with the Americans in respect of the Geordie Howe bridge is valid.
It is treachery to freelance in a foreign capital, without regard for the very real threats to Canada. Besides which, you keep claiming that "the Liberals put their interests ahead of the country".
On what basis do you make the claim, beyond saying "that's just the way they are"?
I'm sure he's a very nice man, and he may be very sincere in his intentations, but it's painfully obvious he's being played like a fiddle by JD & the Trump Team.
I'm sure the Liberals appreciate Jivani's efforts from a domestic political perspective as well.
If the situation was as serious as all the sturm und drang coming from Liberals and the media, we would have to recall Parliament. But that won't happen because Parliament provides even a basic symbolic check on our engineered majority government, and we can't have that. Also the markets would be responding... like at all. Which they so far aren't.
I can't disagree on Jivani. I think at this point he should be kicked out of the party and go sit (by himself) as a PPC or Maverick or whatever. He's an electability anchor even if there is some truth to some of what he says, sometimes. You'd think his connection with the Trump administration would be an asset, a useful back channel. But as MG has pointed out it seems like the Americans are playing him rather than the other way around. He comes off as an open Trump sympathizer and apologist. And he can't keep his mouth shut.
Maybe the Liberals can pick him up and suddenly he will be singing from their entire hymn book. Unlimited bribe money can override any ideological difference after all.
Trump sees the world like a mob boss: the Americas are his turf, and we’re supposed to do whatever he tells us to do and give him whatever he demands. In his mind, Xi and Putin are rival mob bosses with their own turf where they get to call the shots, and you show deference and courtesy to them.
That’s what Canada is dealing with. However, Trump is deeply unpopular in his own country, is likely to have his political power sharply crimped in the midterms, and is suffering legal setbacks that may well strip him of his latest attempt to use tariffs as weapons. Compounding all of this is his incompetence and stupidity: he’s stuck his country in a quagmire against a 3rd rate power and is poised to suffer a strategic defeat, he’s squandered American military strength in the process by wasting its munitions stockpile and overstretching the organization, his tariff and trade policies are hurting their economy, and his fiscal mismanagement is threatening an actual fiscal crisis as the bond market balks.
Trump’s a threat, but he’s also extremely vulnerable. Information war is the way to go, and Carney’s clearly on the right path by trying to rally other counties against Trump. There’s no need to give him any kind of win when he’s defeating himself, and compromising Canadian sovereignty to become part of a country that chose Trump twice and almost elected him a 3rd time is insane.
Thank you. I'd missed this upsetting little gem of news in my offline weekend mode. Going public with the receipts is an interesting suggestion, if we have the courage for it.
I agree that Carney was enraged and was totally impressed at his self-control; the slight smile when a reporter mentioned Lutnick and his laugh about followup questions. It was great to hear a speech delivered directly and with none of the breathy, theatrical pauses we'd gotten used to with the last guy.
About Poilievre and Jivani: It must be quite the head-sweller for a rookie backbencher to be invited to the White House by his pal, the vice president (and possible future president) of the United States. Also, for his freelance diplomacy to be praised by that vice president who simultaneously dismissed his boss. Might Jivani fancy himself leading a Maple MAGA takeover of the party, and might the Vance think it would be handy to have a friend as governor of the vassal state to his north? Name recognition, a third of the base, foreign money, separatist/culture war organizers, a leadership contest which can be won with instant party members... It's not an outlandish dream.
You're right that Poilievre's power will only crumble further if Jivani remains free to thumb his nose at Poilievre's policies. But Poilievre has always winked at the Maple MAGA base and counted on its support. How does he credibly rein in Jivani? Why should Jivani fear him? If he were ousted from caucus, how many members would leave with him to sit an Independent Conservatives? And what would JD say?
The problem for the Conservatives is that there’s a fault line in their party because an influential minority of politicians and supporters are sympathetic with Trump and MAGA. I don’t know how significant it really is in terms of numbers, but clearly it worried Poilievre enough that he pulled his punches regarding Trump in 2025. That became a factor in his election loss to Carney.
See my comments above - Jivani may be a very nice fellow, but he's a useful idiot to his 'friend' JD Vance, the US Administration in general, and for the Liberals domestically.
> But Poilievre has always winked at the Maple MAGA base and counted on its support. How does he credibly rein in Jivani?
By just doing it, however he feels like doing it. He doesn't need credibility, he can just do it.
Mr. Jivani might fancy himself as capable of leading a maple maga takeover of the conservative party, but that's not realistic. Mr. Polievre may have winked a so-called "Maple Maga", but the keyword there is "winked" not "embraced".
Yeah, sure, there's conservatives with a soft spot for maga. Not enough to shoulder Pierre Poilievre aside though and there's definitely way too many conservatives who want to win an election, not win #1 place in the JD. Vance fan club. The danger to him comes from someone who can be "tougher" on the Americans, not Mr. Jivani.
It's also worth noting that so-called "maple maga" isn't a unified thing. Some wish they were Americans... others really don't and really just wish some of the domestic policies were applied in Canada. The obvious one here is culture wars... some like the maga crowd when it points out that trans-"women" are not women at all and are just men with faith-based belief system about themselves, but don't at all like Trump's other policies, particularly the ones that hit Canada.
I subscribed to this theory. Lutnick is Trump‘s primary ball cuddler and number one useful idiot. I’m sure he’s stuck his nose in and stirred up a bunch of shit that nobody wanted. It will be interesting in the next two weeks if Trump throws him under the bus? Or he is the messenger of what Trump really wants. The White House is in complete disarray. Canada botched trade deal, never ending Iran bad news, poor domestic economic news, Spotlight on Natalie. Setting new lows week by week.
Since the Trump family and the Lutnick family just went into the banking business together I don't think Howie has to worry about buses just yet, if ever. Lutnick will be one of the people in the bunker with Trump at the end of this.
Donald Trump reflects the US position succinctly IMO. An expansion of the free ride that Canada has been getting in the defence area for generations. Low cost, comparatively few Canadian boys and girls dying in foreign lands. And Canada is making a sovereignty fuss with the US over French labeling which I suspect the vast majority of English speaking Canadians have no use for and would be pleased to see disappear. Carney sounded to me like Queen Gertrude in Hamlet given that the Liberal majority depends on 44 of the 78 Quebec seats and there are another 299 elected Members of the lower house). And making deals for spyware laden Chinese EVs which they expect the US to let into their country?
I am mystified by Canadians who continue to think that Canada is responsible for Trump’s behaviour to us. Yes, we have been laggards on defence since at least the fall of the Berlin Wall. We took the “peace dividend” a little too earnestly. Years too late, but we have started to amend our ways.
Trump is a narcissistic psychopathic bully. All he cares about is dominance and subjugation. His first pretext for applying tariffs against Canada was “all” the fentanyl smuggled into the US from Canada. How much you might ask? Maybe less than 1% of the total entering the US. It would have been laughable from anyone else, but he is the President of the USA. He was looking for anything, however lame, on which to hang his bullying so that it looked defensible. What else has he latched onto? An ad quoting Ronald Reagan, wildfire smoke, Canadian retaliatory tariffs and not stocking American alcohol.
Canada has done itself no favours over the past couple or three decades, but make no mistake. We are not responsible for the idiotic and chaotic behaviour of Trump against Canada.
The majority of English-speaking Canadians support bilingualism and have zero issue with French on product labels nice try at sowing fake divisions there buddy.
With all due respect I beg to disagree. French English differences IMO are the elephant in the room of Canadian politics. Having seen the wholesale “reengineering” (expression courtesy of senator Anne Cools) of Canada’s Anglo culture that began with Trudeau Senior and continues to this day, the differences are stronger than ever. Having 10 percent of the population (4 million old stock French Quebeckers in a population of 40 million) dominate civil service supervisory positions is a recipe for resentment just to cite one of many instances. I have also noticed that the closer the two communities geographically the greater the hostility. The Ottawa valley is a prime example. Of course this is done in the polite smiling backstabbing way so beloved by Canadians.
I take issue,with the labels. Metric system is a bust. I’m bilingual,I don’t force other Canadians to speak only French to me,or act like an asshole when they speak only English. I’ve made my decision,I’m voting for a Referendum in Alberta. Why is it ok if Quebec talks seperation,heaven forbid if us ‘oil barons’ bring it up
Nobody said Trump isn’t a loose cannon. And yes he reverses himself at times. But if you look a terms of trade Canada subsidizes a lot of its products which if it were done by Communist China would be considered dumping.
At least Trump is an open book. I find this far more refreshing than the obsessive secrecy fetish of the current government. Canada seems to prefer a shit eating grin and say nothing approach.
Oh there’s no doubt most countries subsidize their products to some degree. But regardless of how wrong he might turn out to be, at least Trump is open about it. What really rankles is Carney’s arrogant father knows best attitude embodied in his and his government’s secrecy fetish. At least you know what side Trump is on.
This has nothing to do with US indignation regarding past Canadian failures on the military strategy front. It probably has a lot more to do with Donald Trump's primitive desire to dominate, a la 20th Century dictators, and the beliefs of those who support him. You know, the simplistic MAGA crowd.
Oh, and it is likely informed, as well, by Trump's antediluvian understanding of economics and international trade.
WRT your theory about "the Liberals" and your apparent belief that ANY interaction with the PRC is treachery, well, keep on indulging your hobby horse. Ignoring the Chinese makes no sense. What's more, making them into a bigger threat than a powerful, hostile and treacherous neighbour is actually laughable.
Oh it’s impossible to ignore the Red Chinese impact on the Canadian economy and government. I can’t begin to imagine the jump in Canada’s cost of living if Canadian Tire and Amazon suddenly started to only sell products made by Canadians from Canadian materials. At least Donald Trump’s tariff initiatives has managed to breathe new patriotism in Canada. Hopefully it’ll last and won’t be a dead cat bounce as they say in the stock market. But if you’re going to be a satellite of a bigger economy, at least you won’t have to learn a new language if you stay with your neighbo(add “u”to taste)r.
China does not pose the kind of existential threat to Canada that the United States currently poses. To think otherwise is to ignore geography, intention and capability.
Oh I don’t think anyone has clean hands. The Chinese are building or have built more large icebreakers ( 9 out of the 10 largest IIRC) than the rest of the world. Clearly interested both in Arctic resources and control of Arctic sea lanes that will open up with climate warning. The US is not massing troops on the Canadian border. Trump does shoot from the lip at times but most countries have learned to ignore his bombast.
I think it’s a toss up between the two superpowers from Canada’s perspective. At least Canadians share more cultural similarities and values with Americans than with the Red Chinese. The Red Chinese are racially homogenous and appear to me anyways to share little or no culture or values with North Americans (Canada and the respective United States of America and of Mexico)
You are misreading what I wrote. I am no fan of the regime in Beijing. However, the geography and the REAL words uttered by Trump make the United States a clear and present danger to Canada.
The PRC, which has a dreadful record of interfering in the political and cultural affairs of other countries, despite its vehement denials, is obviously a country that we must keep an eye on.
But they are not going to invade Canada.
BTW, what's all this "Red Chinese" stuff? That's terminology from the 1950s. Yes, the regime is Leninist and totalitarian in nature, but the United States is arguably quickly undermining what democratic credentials it still had prior to Trump.
Some good points. I grew up with the term Red Chinese and it’s still the most accurate description IMO. I do like your totalitarian Leninist label though.
I don’t think the Chinese need to invade Canada. IMO the trend towards totalitarianism is already quite evident in Canada. The suppression of free speech with loosely defined hate speech laws, the ever increasing use of surveillance cameras in urban areas which include between 80 and 90 percent of the population, the secrecy fetish of politicians, legacy mass media funded by government, a Supreme Court where 7 of 9 justices owe their appointments to Justin Trudeau and whose future members must all be fluent in French without a translator, over 100000 citizens euthanized by people paid by their own government, are all making Canada a perfect example of the society depicted by Orwell in his “1984” work.
. . . or spyware laden American Teslas (and other such tech), smartphones (have you ever tried to turn of location tracking? it's pretty hard to do it and still have the phone function, even when location info isn't really needed). The argument really does work both ways, John.
Oh, and so far, all the "Chinese" EV's that have been imported are also Teslas!
And remember that Canada was into the world wars well before USA finished playing with themselves. And we made their first 150 destroyers for them, because they didn't have the capacity at the time.
When NATO came about, USA REQUIRED Europe (and to some extent, Canada) to not build up their forces, and to be reliant on American resources. Ostensibly, this was to prevent any country in Europe from having a large army again (and thus a real WWII repeat). Canada was included in that.
So yes, since the Avro Arrow (which was superior to anything the USA had at the time), Canada got told/convinced to take a back seat on defence. And Trump et al have rewrote the history books to say we (and Europe) were "free-loading".
Back to "spyware" for a moment - do you know that the F-35 ecosystem is really one big USA computer network with a bunch of flying nodes? The planes might have different country logos on them, but it's really one big American (controlled) network. All of the data, etc. is stored in American computers (nobody else can access it). You want to talk about "foreign equipment with lots of spyware in it", F-35 is far more a threat than the Chinese EVs. I'm not even sure that Carney envisioned those cars going south, but rather that they were for Canadian consumption (since the N.Am big three seem to have largely abandoned the effort).
So now, we are not taking a back seat anymore.
(PS: I'm concerned about Chinese spyware, too. But Americans do it as well. Would be better if we just came up with our own Canadian car with our own tech).
> smartphones (have you ever tried to turn of location tracking? it's pretty hard to do it and still have the phone function, even when location info isn't really needed).
If you're serious about avoiding that, try out Graphene OS. As a bonus.. started in Canada and still based here.
You'll need a Pixel phone, but second hand is a pretty cheap way to try this out. It's not for the Google elements, (those are gone on install), but because of the hardware security. It's really worth checking out. You can de-google entirely or only partially as they've got a version of google services that you can install as a regular sand-boxed app.
Oh and get a proton mail account. Their VPN is great too.
Yep everyone is in the spyware game. It’s something we have to get used to. Not sure we can get along without location services as you mention. But we should make it at least a little difficult for our enemies.
“We also need urgent economic reforms to restore growth, protect jobs and save our industry. That must include ending the industrial carbon tax, repealing anti-development laws, green lighting the 500 economic projects awaiting federal approval and major tax reforms to return investment to our country, reward work, and recharge our economy.”
Has it occurred to anyone that, if we had addressed some of these issues in the past, oh, eighteen months or eleven years, that we would not be in the unenviable position in which we find ourselves?
Has it occurred to anyone that removing bad policies, such as Supply Management, interprovincial trade barriers, and protections for inefficient industries, are not concessions, if they make our Country more resilient per se?
Why the urgency to return Parliament early, when the ruling Liberal Party Government has nothing but distain and contempt for Parliament?
Why the sudden demand that Parliament be recognized by this Government, when it simply uses its majority to shut down the stellar committee work done by the Conservatives members?
I noticed there was little lament for the 100,000 odd folks who will lose jobs, so that others can keep their flailing elbows up.
You got your trade war, folks; enjoy your moment of glory.
He does not operate transparently, perhaps you’ve never noticed that literally every word he utters is boilerplate bromides with ZERO details.
…and as to why this deal collapsed, allow me to offer an alternate theory.
We have three by-elections happening a little over a week from now.
Carney was staring at polls which said Canadians are in no mood to hear that Canada made ANY concessions to get a deal - and PM Resume knows better than anyone that no deal comes together unless both sides make SOME concessions.
So he had a choice.
He could spend the next week or so backpedaling and trying to explain the concessions he made - or he could spend this next week thumping his chest about how he “stood up to Trump”
…which do you think would help ensure victory in those by-elections?
I keep saying this, but Mark Carney DOES NOT WANT a deal with America. He won the election by convincing Canadians he would FIGHT America - and his popularity is assured as long as we are fighting
As soon as we have a deal, people might start looking around and figuring out what the rest of his agenda is all about.
So he will keep fighting, no matter what it costs (YOU)….
These were my thoughts exactly. This is why it is so important for us to see the entirety of the deal and the timing of any changes. If honest deal breaking clauses and politically motivated outrage equal 100% of the line, where would the slider between the two lay? 50-50? 30-70?
The big thing I like about "The Line" is that I don't always agree with Jen and Matt, but they do give me things to think about, either way (and I do often agree as well -- I'm meaning that it isn't a slam-dunk either way!).
Today's "I don't quite agree" is about the quoted second sentence/paragraph from Poilievre: that it is "pretty good". It's more of his usual campaigning (to get votes) rather than discussing a legitimate alternative, at least for one (possibly two) of his points:
Canada should NOT end the industrial carbon tax. I don't say this for political reasons, but rather for foreign trade/economic reasons. Almost all countries that Canada is trying to establish an FTA/CEPA with are on board and expect such taxes/pricing on industrial products they import (Europe especially). So if we don't put something on it, THEY most certainly will, while they also note that "Canada isn't with the tour" (a reputational hit). Having the tax doesn't eliminate "our competitiveness", but rather enhances it, on the foreign trade front.
So, it's fine that he wants to say it as a political thing (and presumably to get votes), but it shows a lack of understanding of the real trade world (I'll back the economist for now, who seems to really understand it, even with the GHB incident). And by extension, does that mean journalists aren't researching the implications as well, if they say this is a "good statement", because I don't think it is, if the trade ramifications are being ignored.
The rest of the paragraph falls into the usual political discourse (not necessarily helpful) or does echo matters that do raise good questions - latter points of the statement, in particular.
Disclosure: I'm one of those, what the Americans would call "undecided" voters: I look at what's happening in the world, then assess what leaders say, and then make my conclusions/votes/support based upon who's saying the most coherent strategy to fit our crises of the moment. I've voted for all three main political parties in my life, depending upon the calculus at the time.
PS: Spot-on agreement with pretty much everything else in this week's dispatch.
I, good Conservative, capitulate. I've long mourned the Canadian affection for whining and complaining, for always pooping on Americans, for the Liberal-induced and paltry state of our economy.
Not any more! I'm signing up for "Wartime Canada". Give me a leader--of any political stripe--with determination and a plan...and I'll work for free. Give me a company bashed by tariffs and I'll use whatever business skills I have that will help stay afloat.
But for God's sake, if there's anyone out therewith a way forward, now's the time. I'd like to see The Line take on the challlenge of locating that "anyone".
If you are looking for a credible analysis of the situation, check out Deeper Look by Michael D. Sellers on Substack. He is a former intelligence officer and writes his material like it is a situational report.
He outlines the red flags that would have turned Canada into (his term) a vassal state. Just two of them are the US telling us who we are allowed to trade with, and getting first dibs on all our critical minerals. When you finish reading, you will understand ...and probably join in... Carney's leashed rage
To read this incisive article, go to substack.com, find the search box on the upper right corner and put in the article title;
"What Really Blew Up the U.S.-Canada Trade Talks? A Deeper Look Analysis"
Boy, Wab is the biggest con man around. Go to " liquormarts.ca " . Which is the Manitoba Government owned liquor store. The banner headline reads; "Remaining stock of US liquor is available at all Manitoba Liquor Marts". There are 377 different items today. Yesterday it was 389 so we Manitoban's are buying it. An item is a type of which there can be 100's of it on the shelves.
What’s the con? All of that stuff was already bought and paid for by the Manitoba Liquor Board before all this happened. They’re not buying more; they’re just not leaving stock to collect dust in a warehouse.
More Covid-style all-encompassing, thought-terminating moral panic, forever, always.
Other countries have struck deals and endured tariffs from this chaotic and deranged US regime, but only in Canada do we have to also endure this dreary perpetual theatrical performance from our politicians and media.
Calling this stupid minor trade dispute a "war" does a disservice to everyone in human history who has been affected by a real one.
What would we be talking about, right now, if Donald Trump was not the US President? What problems could we fix? What steps could we take to improve as a country? That's what I want to talk about. Not this stupidity, and not fucking play-acting that we are all noble warriors going to battle on a white horse with our heads held high and righteousness in our hearts.
Have you considered that it’s not just for domestic political consumption, but that through these (admittedly too dramatic) speeches, Carney is trying to stiffen the backs of some of the other (European) countries in order to further Canadian trade aims with Europe?
What trade aims does Europe need further convincing on? My understanding is that the limitations are in our ability to transport resources there, both due to lack of built capacity (e.g. LNG terminals) and problems inherent in the distances. If we aren't trading at max capacity with every willing partner, we are pretty close.
The overblown speeches are for other overseas consumption as well, to be certain, but it's to burnish Carney's credentials as the "leader of the anti-Trump resistance" as the Globe so obligingly put it, as an end in itself.
Yesterday, I disagreed with Matt on Twitter on full disclosure. My logic went something along the lines of "if Carney had agreed to give on dairy, why would he say that out loud and lose votes for something for which he didn't receive a corresponding benefit?". While that argument is still true, with 24 hours of distance I have come around to thinking full disclosure is the way to go, votes be damned. If we're at war (and I agree that we are) then political considerations should come a distant second to the immediate and real threat to our economy, especially if Carney believes (as he appears to) that that threat is existential.
When Carney doesn't release the information you are calling for, will you finally decide that it is time to stop simply assuming, without evidence, that he is being truthful and acting in the interests of Canadians as a nation?
"Without evidence" is of course generous, considering the Howe bridge case, and its clear evidence that Carney is willing to lie for political reasons. "Less than candid", forsooth.
Yet you assume, without evidence, that he is acting in his own self-interest.
First of all, Rob, I think there is ample evidence that the Prime Minister is willing to put the interests of the Liberal Party before that of the Country.
Secondly, Mr. Carney’s relationship with the truth is tenuous at best; how many instances would you require to consider this fact?
The man certainly doesn't like it when reporters ask him questions.
Don’t question him,he forgets his talking points! lol
No. I am reserving judgement until he releases details. Refusing to do so is, of course, evidence that he has something to hide.
I agree with Matt that there should be full transparency to demonstrate honesty and integrity in desiring a deal. But, like you, I am waiting for the evidence knowing Carney does not have a good track record when it comes to governing with those values.
In the meantime, I've encountered some American sites that are saying 11th hour additions by the drop-in American admins caused enough havoc to stop the talks immediately, and for the Canadians to be recalled entirely, which indicates Canadian outrage rather than anyone pushing a few closing points on an already mostly-done deal and having the Canadians overreact.
I am so done with being fed talking points and narrative. I miss the fifth estate having an honest and independent voice working on behalf of everyone to bring facts into the light and letting each of us weigh and balance what's probably true. This post, as an opinion piece combined with a fair bit of guesswork and flag-waving rah-rahing, doesn't fit the bill and I don't know where it's hanging out in these partisan days. I'll keep looking.
Evidence of acting for the Liberal party interests
Of course he's a liar; all politicians are.
Having said that (and those who follow my comments here know I'm no fanboy of Mr. Carney), when one actually watches AND listens to the entire Q&A section of the press conference, you can literally see Carney biting his tongue to not reveal the depth of the frustration he feels with how the negotiations ended (this is towards the end of the Q&A). One would have to be an extremely gifted actor to fake what I saw. M&J allude to this in their Dispatch as well - in this particular case, I don't think it was an act. I think he's genuinely frustrated.
This is not to say that Carney and the Canadian negotiators were not up to their own chicanery during these negotiations; of course they were; that's the Liberal playbook. That does not mean they necessarily were lying about the 11th hour additions (conditions?) to the draft agreement inserted by (we read) Howard Lutnick; in fact, that appears to be this US Administration's modus operandi around the world with trade agreements, based on all available evidence to date.
I'm with our Editors on this one; blast the details wide open, everywhere and anywhere, on repeat. I particularily like hiring the Iranian Lego animator. Do it.
The other thing repeated often in Carney's speech and Q&A is the subtext that Canada needs to become a hell of a lot more competitive - through other trading partners, not the least of which between provinces - this crisis with the US might be just the right time for the feds to REALLY push the provinces to hack away at interprovincial trade barriers they've to date really only given lip service to.
It might even be a good time for Carney's team let slip some of the backroom pressure they receive from the Canadian side (such as the dairy mafia and other oligarchic interests in this country) in an effort to get all the bad actors feeling a little late summer intense sunlight-as-disinfectant.
I'm not for 'Elbows Up', which was always stupid but it might be time for Olympic Final style fast, creative, and hard checking hockey tactics in this trade war.
It's interesting how even Liberal supporters in this thread are calling for Carney to release the details. The question for each of them to answer with their own consciences is what they will decide if no details are released. Will that change your views about the Liberals, or at least about these negotiations? Or will you continue to take Carney on faith?
We are looking at an info-free environment because both sides are incredibly unreliable narrators. Trump, Lutnick and their cabal are obviously habitual liars of the highest order, but Carney and the Liberals have shown themselves to be just about as cynical and self-interested. Even Trudeau was (marginally) more honest and it was easier to tell when he was full of shit.
One or both parties could have been looking to torpedo the deal on purpose, and the Canadian media-wide chorus fulfilling the boomer "war" fantasy is suddenly so thick you could choke on it. (Unreasonable tariffs on 5% of our exports? That's basically the same as carpet bombing Montreal!) A better political situation for Mark Carney would be hard to imagine. Whether or not he was genuinely frustrated by negotiations, it's clear that no deal is better than perhaps any deal for his political fortunes at least in the short term. As long as that fact remains, it's hard to believe anything we see.
And I still think there eventually will be a deal once everyone plays enough performative hardball for their base. It won't last, it won't be in good faith, we get to do this all over again until Trump is gone, but nobody wants the actual fallout if there isn't one.
After Lutnick's interview, flatly contradicting Carney's story, releasing this information becomes more important than ever. Which is why I doubt it will happen.
The Prime Minister probably should convene the House of Commons for an emergency debate about next steps. This would afford his government the opportunity to out Trump and his disingenuous sycophants for their games-playing.
As for Jamil Jivani, well, I'm at a loss for words when it comes to his treachery.
Jivani seems to fit the pattern of a long tradition of useful idiots shilling for nasty autocrats. Since the end of World War 2, we’re just more accustomed to them being aligned with the Soviets/Russia or China.
Or, maybe Jivani's right. Canadians should not let Carney get away with lack of information, meaningless words and photo ops with outrage. Voters don't have the information.
And maybe Carney wants to be forever globe trotting and an ask that stops the globe trotting and China pleasing is very personal to him. Where is that list of agreements with other countries that he's recently made, along with some info on how different these new agreements are from the previous agreements?
Jivani is not doing this in response to Carney. He's doing this to raise his own profile, although I don't discount the possibility that he really is unintelligent enough to believe that "his friend", JD Vance, is reaching out to him out of sincere concern for our country.
As for the rest, it seems fairly clear to me that your prejudice against Carney and the Liberals is skewing your analysis.
Having said that, I agree with Matt and Jen WRT the need for an emergency session of the House of Commons. Things must be discussed and His Majesty's Loyal Opposition, together with the other political parties, must be given an opportunity to weigh in, on our collective behalf.
That is a fun thought, but the Liberal Party of Canada has nothing but contempt for Parliament, committee, disclosure of documents, or any notion of debate.
Then point me to the information that voters need to make an informed decision.
Not taking the PM's word is treachery. Yes, he lied about the Howe bridge deal for political reasons, but that doesn't justify distrust now. What solid evidence do you have that he's lying in this case? 😀
Let's not accuse anyone of lying - using a word like lying is a bad idea unless there is proof and context. Voters don't have the information to know what the issues are. He's just done a photo op and that's not information.
"Must". What will you decide if it doesn't happen? Or if there is a session but no information is released?
Agreed.
“The collapse of the trade talks may have exposed a rift inside the Trump administration. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick got more involved in the negotiations late in the process, Politico reported, after feeling that the framework of the deal negotiated by Jamieson Greer, the U.S. trade representative, infringed on duties Lutnick oversees like those on cars, steel and aluminum.”
From the New York Times - Andrew Ross Sorkin
It's not treachery to say that the Liberals put their interests ahead of the country. It's common sense. That's what they do.
How much evidence does one require to admit that which is right in front of his eyes, and right beneath his nose?
There are none so blind as those who will not see.
Both you and DA are offering nothing but cop-outs. When someone says "X", and then is asked to back "X" up with examples and independent reporting, it is only good form to do so.
To claim that "it's obvious" is little more than an exercise in side-stepping the issue.
We literally used the Howe bridge as an example of mendacity. I suppose we can use all climate policy and supply management, plus all the recent censorship bills and, as I said above, mass third world immigration, as examples of putting political interests ahead of the interests of the nation. Not to mention DEI. And media subsidies.
These are not reasons. These are statements of ideological objection to Liberal policy, although I guess you think that most of these were mostly by the previous government under Justin Trudeau’s leadership.
Carney’s government is different, you know.
I would add that the way in which you presented these was, shall we say, somewhat misleading…
Prime Minister Carney lied about the terms of the Gordie Howe Bridge.
So, a reasonable fellow might be hesitant to believe what he says a second time, with respect to the events of Friday evening.
I would like to verify the Prime Minister’s version of events before making a decision.
Far from copping out, I am using the information available-some of it weighted and some discounted- to determine and assess the fallout.
The criticism of the Prime Minister’s handling of questions related to our management of negotiations with the Americans in respect of the Geordie Howe bridge is valid.
It is treachery to freelance in a foreign capital, without regard for the very real threats to Canada. Besides which, you keep claiming that "the Liberals put their interests ahead of the country".
On what basis do you make the claim, beyond saying "that's just the way they are"?
You may not have noticed, but this PM has little regard for Parliament.
He will announce “next steps” all on his own, as per usual.
Jivani is a useful idiot for the Trump team.
I'm sure he's a very nice man, and he may be very sincere in his intentations, but it's painfully obvious he's being played like a fiddle by JD & the Trump Team.
I'm sure the Liberals appreciate Jivani's efforts from a domestic political perspective as well.
If the situation was as serious as all the sturm und drang coming from Liberals and the media, we would have to recall Parliament. But that won't happen because Parliament provides even a basic symbolic check on our engineered majority government, and we can't have that. Also the markets would be responding... like at all. Which they so far aren't.
I can't disagree on Jivani. I think at this point he should be kicked out of the party and go sit (by himself) as a PPC or Maverick or whatever. He's an electability anchor even if there is some truth to some of what he says, sometimes. You'd think his connection with the Trump administration would be an asset, a useful back channel. But as MG has pointed out it seems like the Americans are playing him rather than the other way around. He comes off as an open Trump sympathizer and apologist. And he can't keep his mouth shut.
Maybe the Liberals can pick him up and suddenly he will be singing from their entire hymn book. Unlimited bribe money can override any ideological difference after all.
Apparently Jivani prefers to be bent over a barrel?
He does not think he is being bent over.
He's been wined and dined by his 'buddy' JD Vance.
He has 'influence' with them, you see.
Just ask him.
Trump sees the world like a mob boss: the Americas are his turf, and we’re supposed to do whatever he tells us to do and give him whatever he demands. In his mind, Xi and Putin are rival mob bosses with their own turf where they get to call the shots, and you show deference and courtesy to them.
That’s what Canada is dealing with. However, Trump is deeply unpopular in his own country, is likely to have his political power sharply crimped in the midterms, and is suffering legal setbacks that may well strip him of his latest attempt to use tariffs as weapons. Compounding all of this is his incompetence and stupidity: he’s stuck his country in a quagmire against a 3rd rate power and is poised to suffer a strategic defeat, he’s squandered American military strength in the process by wasting its munitions stockpile and overstretching the organization, his tariff and trade policies are hurting their economy, and his fiscal mismanagement is threatening an actual fiscal crisis as the bond market balks.
Trump’s a threat, but he’s also extremely vulnerable. Information war is the way to go, and Carney’s clearly on the right path by trying to rally other counties against Trump. There’s no need to give him any kind of win when he’s defeating himself, and compromising Canadian sovereignty to become part of a country that chose Trump twice and almost elected him a 3rd time is insane.
Thank you. I'd missed this upsetting little gem of news in my offline weekend mode. Going public with the receipts is an interesting suggestion, if we have the courage for it.
I agree that Carney was enraged and was totally impressed at his self-control; the slight smile when a reporter mentioned Lutnick and his laugh about followup questions. It was great to hear a speech delivered directly and with none of the breathy, theatrical pauses we'd gotten used to with the last guy.
About Poilievre and Jivani: It must be quite the head-sweller for a rookie backbencher to be invited to the White House by his pal, the vice president (and possible future president) of the United States. Also, for his freelance diplomacy to be praised by that vice president who simultaneously dismissed his boss. Might Jivani fancy himself leading a Maple MAGA takeover of the party, and might the Vance think it would be handy to have a friend as governor of the vassal state to his north? Name recognition, a third of the base, foreign money, separatist/culture war organizers, a leadership contest which can be won with instant party members... It's not an outlandish dream.
You're right that Poilievre's power will only crumble further if Jivani remains free to thumb his nose at Poilievre's policies. But Poilievre has always winked at the Maple MAGA base and counted on its support. How does he credibly rein in Jivani? Why should Jivani fear him? If he were ousted from caucus, how many members would leave with him to sit an Independent Conservatives? And what would JD say?
The problem for the Conservatives is that there’s a fault line in their party because an influential minority of politicians and supporters are sympathetic with Trump and MAGA. I don’t know how significant it really is in terms of numbers, but clearly it worried Poilievre enough that he pulled his punches regarding Trump in 2025. That became a factor in his election loss to Carney.
See my comments above - Jivani may be a very nice fellow, but he's a useful idiot to his 'friend' JD Vance, the US Administration in general, and for the Liberals domestically.
> But Poilievre has always winked at the Maple MAGA base and counted on its support. How does he credibly rein in Jivani?
By just doing it, however he feels like doing it. He doesn't need credibility, he can just do it.
Mr. Jivani might fancy himself as capable of leading a maple maga takeover of the conservative party, but that's not realistic. Mr. Polievre may have winked a so-called "Maple Maga", but the keyword there is "winked" not "embraced".
Yeah, sure, there's conservatives with a soft spot for maga. Not enough to shoulder Pierre Poilievre aside though and there's definitely way too many conservatives who want to win an election, not win #1 place in the JD. Vance fan club. The danger to him comes from someone who can be "tougher" on the Americans, not Mr. Jivani.
It's also worth noting that so-called "maple maga" isn't a unified thing. Some wish they were Americans... others really don't and really just wish some of the domestic policies were applied in Canada. The obvious one here is culture wars... some like the maga crowd when it points out that trans-"women" are not women at all and are just men with faith-based belief system about themselves, but don't at all like Trump's other policies, particularly the ones that hit Canada.
Other's are reporting that Lutnick and Carney spoke by phone several times - pretty sure that could have been Carney's emotional trigger
I subscribed to this theory. Lutnick is Trump‘s primary ball cuddler and number one useful idiot. I’m sure he’s stuck his nose in and stirred up a bunch of shit that nobody wanted. It will be interesting in the next two weeks if Trump throws him under the bus? Or he is the messenger of what Trump really wants. The White House is in complete disarray. Canada botched trade deal, never ending Iran bad news, poor domestic economic news, Spotlight on Natalie. Setting new lows week by week.
Since the Trump family and the Lutnick family just went into the banking business together I don't think Howie has to worry about buses just yet, if ever. Lutnick will be one of the people in the bunker with Trump at the end of this.
:(
Donald Trump reflects the US position succinctly IMO. An expansion of the free ride that Canada has been getting in the defence area for generations. Low cost, comparatively few Canadian boys and girls dying in foreign lands. And Canada is making a sovereignty fuss with the US over French labeling which I suspect the vast majority of English speaking Canadians have no use for and would be pleased to see disappear. Carney sounded to me like Queen Gertrude in Hamlet given that the Liberal majority depends on 44 of the 78 Quebec seats and there are another 299 elected Members of the lower house). And making deals for spyware laden Chinese EVs which they expect the US to let into their country?
I am mystified by Canadians who continue to think that Canada is responsible for Trump’s behaviour to us. Yes, we have been laggards on defence since at least the fall of the Berlin Wall. We took the “peace dividend” a little too earnestly. Years too late, but we have started to amend our ways.
Trump is a narcissistic psychopathic bully. All he cares about is dominance and subjugation. His first pretext for applying tariffs against Canada was “all” the fentanyl smuggled into the US from Canada. How much you might ask? Maybe less than 1% of the total entering the US. It would have been laughable from anyone else, but he is the President of the USA. He was looking for anything, however lame, on which to hang his bullying so that it looked defensible. What else has he latched onto? An ad quoting Ronald Reagan, wildfire smoke, Canadian retaliatory tariffs and not stocking American alcohol.
Canada has done itself no favours over the past couple or three decades, but make no mistake. We are not responsible for the idiotic and chaotic behaviour of Trump against Canada.
The majority of English-speaking Canadians support bilingualism and have zero issue with French on product labels nice try at sowing fake divisions there buddy.
With all due respect I beg to disagree. French English differences IMO are the elephant in the room of Canadian politics. Having seen the wholesale “reengineering” (expression courtesy of senator Anne Cools) of Canada’s Anglo culture that began with Trudeau Senior and continues to this day, the differences are stronger than ever. Having 10 percent of the population (4 million old stock French Quebeckers in a population of 40 million) dominate civil service supervisory positions is a recipe for resentment just to cite one of many instances. I have also noticed that the closer the two communities geographically the greater the hostility. The Ottawa valley is a prime example. Of course this is done in the polite smiling backstabbing way so beloved by Canadians.
I take issue,with the labels. Metric system is a bust. I’m bilingual,I don’t force other Canadians to speak only French to me,or act like an asshole when they speak only English. I’ve made my decision,I’m voting for a Referendum in Alberta. Why is it ok if Quebec talks seperation,heaven forbid if us ‘oil barons’ bring it up
> Metric system is a bust.
With respect, you're a retiree. You're the wrong generation to realize how incorrect that statement is.
I wish I had seen this earlier. It’s hilarious! Like all good satire it has a grain of truth or two https://www.facebook.com/reel/2295688641272961/?fs=e&s=TIeQ9V&fs=e&fs=e
No
Nobody said Trump isn’t a loose cannon. And yes he reverses himself at times. But if you look a terms of trade Canada subsidizes a lot of its products which if it were done by Communist China would be considered dumping.
At least Trump is an open book. I find this far more refreshing than the obsessive secrecy fetish of the current government. Canada seems to prefer a shit eating grin and say nothing approach.
If Canada were the only country to subsidize its products, you might have point.
As for Trump being an open book, well, he is open about his designs on Canada. How that can be refreshing escapes me.
Oh there’s no doubt most countries subsidize their products to some degree. But regardless of how wrong he might turn out to be, at least Trump is open about it. What really rankles is Carney’s arrogant father knows best attitude embodied in his and his government’s secrecy fetish. At least you know what side Trump is on.
Which products do we subsidize and export to the USA?
I mean, yes we subsidize the CBC, but I don't think we sell much of that in the USA.
This has nothing to do with US indignation regarding past Canadian failures on the military strategy front. It probably has a lot more to do with Donald Trump's primitive desire to dominate, a la 20th Century dictators, and the beliefs of those who support him. You know, the simplistic MAGA crowd.
Oh, and it is likely informed, as well, by Trump's antediluvian understanding of economics and international trade.
WRT your theory about "the Liberals" and your apparent belief that ANY interaction with the PRC is treachery, well, keep on indulging your hobby horse. Ignoring the Chinese makes no sense. What's more, making them into a bigger threat than a powerful, hostile and treacherous neighbour is actually laughable.
Oh it’s impossible to ignore the Red Chinese impact on the Canadian economy and government. I can’t begin to imagine the jump in Canada’s cost of living if Canadian Tire and Amazon suddenly started to only sell products made by Canadians from Canadian materials. At least Donald Trump’s tariff initiatives has managed to breathe new patriotism in Canada. Hopefully it’ll last and won’t be a dead cat bounce as they say in the stock market. But if you’re going to be a satellite of a bigger economy, at least you won’t have to learn a new language if you stay with your neighbo(add “u”to taste)r.
China does not pose the kind of existential threat to Canada that the United States currently poses. To think otherwise is to ignore geography, intention and capability.
Trump has out-and-out said he wants to annex us.
Oh I don’t think anyone has clean hands. The Chinese are building or have built more large icebreakers ( 9 out of the 10 largest IIRC) than the rest of the world. Clearly interested both in Arctic resources and control of Arctic sea lanes that will open up with climate warning. The US is not massing troops on the Canadian border. Trump does shoot from the lip at times but most countries have learned to ignore his bombast.
I think it’s a toss up between the two superpowers from Canada’s perspective. At least Canadians share more cultural similarities and values with Americans than with the Red Chinese. The Red Chinese are racially homogenous and appear to me anyways to share little or no culture or values with North Americans (Canada and the respective United States of America and of Mexico)
You are misreading what I wrote. I am no fan of the regime in Beijing. However, the geography and the REAL words uttered by Trump make the United States a clear and present danger to Canada.
The PRC, which has a dreadful record of interfering in the political and cultural affairs of other countries, despite its vehement denials, is obviously a country that we must keep an eye on.
But they are not going to invade Canada.
BTW, what's all this "Red Chinese" stuff? That's terminology from the 1950s. Yes, the regime is Leninist and totalitarian in nature, but the United States is arguably quickly undermining what democratic credentials it still had prior to Trump.
Some good points. I grew up with the term Red Chinese and it’s still the most accurate description IMO. I do like your totalitarian Leninist label though.
I don’t think the Chinese need to invade Canada. IMO the trend towards totalitarianism is already quite evident in Canada. The suppression of free speech with loosely defined hate speech laws, the ever increasing use of surveillance cameras in urban areas which include between 80 and 90 percent of the population, the secrecy fetish of politicians, legacy mass media funded by government, a Supreme Court where 7 of 9 justices owe their appointments to Justin Trudeau and whose future members must all be fluent in French without a translator, over 100000 citizens euthanized by people paid by their own government, are all making Canada a perfect example of the society depicted by Orwell in his “1984” work.
. . . or spyware laden American Teslas (and other such tech), smartphones (have you ever tried to turn of location tracking? it's pretty hard to do it and still have the phone function, even when location info isn't really needed). The argument really does work both ways, John.
Oh, and so far, all the "Chinese" EV's that have been imported are also Teslas!
And remember that Canada was into the world wars well before USA finished playing with themselves. And we made their first 150 destroyers for them, because they didn't have the capacity at the time.
When NATO came about, USA REQUIRED Europe (and to some extent, Canada) to not build up their forces, and to be reliant on American resources. Ostensibly, this was to prevent any country in Europe from having a large army again (and thus a real WWII repeat). Canada was included in that.
So yes, since the Avro Arrow (which was superior to anything the USA had at the time), Canada got told/convinced to take a back seat on defence. And Trump et al have rewrote the history books to say we (and Europe) were "free-loading".
Back to "spyware" for a moment - do you know that the F-35 ecosystem is really one big USA computer network with a bunch of flying nodes? The planes might have different country logos on them, but it's really one big American (controlled) network. All of the data, etc. is stored in American computers (nobody else can access it). You want to talk about "foreign equipment with lots of spyware in it", F-35 is far more a threat than the Chinese EVs. I'm not even sure that Carney envisioned those cars going south, but rather that they were for Canadian consumption (since the N.Am big three seem to have largely abandoned the effort).
So now, we are not taking a back seat anymore.
(PS: I'm concerned about Chinese spyware, too. But Americans do it as well. Would be better if we just came up with our own Canadian car with our own tech).
> smartphones (have you ever tried to turn of location tracking? it's pretty hard to do it and still have the phone function, even when location info isn't really needed).
If you're serious about avoiding that, try out Graphene OS. As a bonus.. started in Canada and still based here.
You'll need a Pixel phone, but second hand is a pretty cheap way to try this out. It's not for the Google elements, (those are gone on install), but because of the hardware security. It's really worth checking out. You can de-google entirely or only partially as they've got a version of google services that you can install as a regular sand-boxed app.
Oh and get a proton mail account. Their VPN is great too.
Yep everyone is in the spyware game. It’s something we have to get used to. Not sure we can get along without location services as you mention. But we should make it at least a little difficult for our enemies.
Or, Canadians should be united in buying themselves less sophisticated used cars.
If no one buys these spyware-laden new cars, they won't be offered for sale for long.
30 day ban for a personal attack on commoner.
I reiterate my long-standing plea for all of you to behave.
In the word of the great American philosopher Samuel P. Elliot, "Yup."
“We also need urgent economic reforms to restore growth, protect jobs and save our industry. That must include ending the industrial carbon tax, repealing anti-development laws, green lighting the 500 economic projects awaiting federal approval and major tax reforms to return investment to our country, reward work, and recharge our economy.”
Has it occurred to anyone that, if we had addressed some of these issues in the past, oh, eighteen months or eleven years, that we would not be in the unenviable position in which we find ourselves?
Has it occurred to anyone that removing bad policies, such as Supply Management, interprovincial trade barriers, and protections for inefficient industries, are not concessions, if they make our Country more resilient per se?
Why the urgency to return Parliament early, when the ruling Liberal Party Government has nothing but distain and contempt for Parliament?
Why the sudden demand that Parliament be recognized by this Government, when it simply uses its majority to shut down the stellar committee work done by the Conservatives members?
I noticed there was little lament for the 100,000 odd folks who will lose jobs, so that others can keep their flailing elbows up.
You got your trade war, folks; enjoy your moment of glory.
Carney will do exactly none of this.
He does not operate transparently, perhaps you’ve never noticed that literally every word he utters is boilerplate bromides with ZERO details.
…and as to why this deal collapsed, allow me to offer an alternate theory.
We have three by-elections happening a little over a week from now.
Carney was staring at polls which said Canadians are in no mood to hear that Canada made ANY concessions to get a deal - and PM Resume knows better than anyone that no deal comes together unless both sides make SOME concessions.
So he had a choice.
He could spend the next week or so backpedaling and trying to explain the concessions he made - or he could spend this next week thumping his chest about how he “stood up to Trump”
…which do you think would help ensure victory in those by-elections?
I keep saying this, but Mark Carney DOES NOT WANT a deal with America. He won the election by convincing Canadians he would FIGHT America - and his popularity is assured as long as we are fighting
As soon as we have a deal, people might start looking around and figuring out what the rest of his agenda is all about.
So he will keep fighting, no matter what it costs (YOU)….
Canada is not a serious country.
These were my thoughts exactly. This is why it is so important for us to see the entirety of the deal and the timing of any changes. If honest deal breaking clauses and politically motivated outrage equal 100% of the line, where would the slider between the two lay? 50-50? 30-70?
The big thing I like about "The Line" is that I don't always agree with Jen and Matt, but they do give me things to think about, either way (and I do often agree as well -- I'm meaning that it isn't a slam-dunk either way!).
Today's "I don't quite agree" is about the quoted second sentence/paragraph from Poilievre: that it is "pretty good". It's more of his usual campaigning (to get votes) rather than discussing a legitimate alternative, at least for one (possibly two) of his points:
Canada should NOT end the industrial carbon tax. I don't say this for political reasons, but rather for foreign trade/economic reasons. Almost all countries that Canada is trying to establish an FTA/CEPA with are on board and expect such taxes/pricing on industrial products they import (Europe especially). So if we don't put something on it, THEY most certainly will, while they also note that "Canada isn't with the tour" (a reputational hit). Having the tax doesn't eliminate "our competitiveness", but rather enhances it, on the foreign trade front.
So, it's fine that he wants to say it as a political thing (and presumably to get votes), but it shows a lack of understanding of the real trade world (I'll back the economist for now, who seems to really understand it, even with the GHB incident). And by extension, does that mean journalists aren't researching the implications as well, if they say this is a "good statement", because I don't think it is, if the trade ramifications are being ignored.
The rest of the paragraph falls into the usual political discourse (not necessarily helpful) or does echo matters that do raise good questions - latter points of the statement, in particular.
Disclosure: I'm one of those, what the Americans would call "undecided" voters: I look at what's happening in the world, then assess what leaders say, and then make my conclusions/votes/support based upon who's saying the most coherent strategy to fit our crises of the moment. I've voted for all three main political parties in my life, depending upon the calculus at the time.
PS: Spot-on agreement with pretty much everything else in this week's dispatch.
I, good Conservative, capitulate. I've long mourned the Canadian affection for whining and complaining, for always pooping on Americans, for the Liberal-induced and paltry state of our economy.
Not any more! I'm signing up for "Wartime Canada". Give me a leader--of any political stripe--with determination and a plan...and I'll work for free. Give me a company bashed by tariffs and I'll use whatever business skills I have that will help stay afloat.
But for God's sake, if there's anyone out therewith a way forward, now's the time. I'd like to see The Line take on the challlenge of locating that "anyone".
If you are looking for a credible analysis of the situation, check out Deeper Look by Michael D. Sellers on Substack. He is a former intelligence officer and writes his material like it is a situational report.
He outlines the red flags that would have turned Canada into (his term) a vassal state. Just two of them are the US telling us who we are allowed to trade with, and getting first dibs on all our critical minerals. When you finish reading, you will understand ...and probably join in... Carney's leashed rage
To read this incisive article, go to substack.com, find the search box on the upper right corner and put in the article title;
"What Really Blew Up the U.S.-Canada Trade Talks? A Deeper Look Analysis"
Thank you for providing that link. It was an excellent article.
Thanks for this ... I haven't gone there yet, but am curious.
Boy, Wab is the biggest con man around. Go to " liquormarts.ca " . Which is the Manitoba Government owned liquor store. The banner headline reads; "Remaining stock of US liquor is available at all Manitoba Liquor Marts". There are 377 different items today. Yesterday it was 389 so we Manitoban's are buying it. An item is a type of which there can be 100's of it on the shelves.
What’s the con? All of that stuff was already bought and paid for by the Manitoba Liquor Board before all this happened. They’re not buying more; they’re just not leaving stock to collect dust in a warehouse.
More Covid-style all-encompassing, thought-terminating moral panic, forever, always.
Other countries have struck deals and endured tariffs from this chaotic and deranged US regime, but only in Canada do we have to also endure this dreary perpetual theatrical performance from our politicians and media.
Calling this stupid minor trade dispute a "war" does a disservice to everyone in human history who has been affected by a real one.
What would we be talking about, right now, if Donald Trump was not the US President? What problems could we fix? What steps could we take to improve as a country? That's what I want to talk about. Not this stupidity, and not fucking play-acting that we are all noble warriors going to battle on a white horse with our heads held high and righteousness in our hearts.
Have you considered that it’s not just for domestic political consumption, but that through these (admittedly too dramatic) speeches, Carney is trying to stiffen the backs of some of the other (European) countries in order to further Canadian trade aims with Europe?
What trade aims does Europe need further convincing on? My understanding is that the limitations are in our ability to transport resources there, both due to lack of built capacity (e.g. LNG terminals) and problems inherent in the distances. If we aren't trading at max capacity with every willing partner, we are pretty close.
The overblown speeches are for other overseas consumption as well, to be certain, but it's to burnish Carney's credentials as the "leader of the anti-Trump resistance" as the Globe so obligingly put it, as an end in itself.
Yesterday, I disagreed with Matt on Twitter on full disclosure. My logic went something along the lines of "if Carney had agreed to give on dairy, why would he say that out loud and lose votes for something for which he didn't receive a corresponding benefit?". While that argument is still true, with 24 hours of distance I have come around to thinking full disclosure is the way to go, votes be damned. If we're at war (and I agree that we are) then political considerations should come a distant second to the immediate and real threat to our economy, especially if Carney believes (as he appears to) that that threat is existential.
TL:DR: Matt was right.
Shields up! Phasers to max!
So glad you mentioned the irritant..
The Dairy Farmers. Wonderful how many jobs they are losing compared to the other categories … looking at 90k