The Current - Premiers meet with the PM to discuss Trump’s tariffs

Episode Date: July 24, 2025

Canada’s 13 Premiers, and Prime Minister Mark Carney, met in Ontario’s cottage country this week. Not to have a relaxing summer break, but to discuss big issues that face this country. The most pressing one; the looming deadline for a new trade agreement with the United States. Susan Holt is the Premier of New Brunswick, she tells us what was accomplished in that room, and how a deal can be reached with the U.S. President Donald Trump.

If you're listening to this, I already know you have great taste in podcasts. But maybe, if you're like me, you still wonder if you're missing out on the best stuff. That's where the Sounds Good newsletter can help you out. Every other Thursday, the audio files at CBC Podcasts highlight one must-hear show and lots of other new and noteworthy titles. They do conversation starters, they do hidden gems, and they also tell you about the stuff they love that they didn't make. Go to cbc.ca slash sounds good to subscribe.

This is a CBC Podcast. Hello, I'm Matt Galloway and this is the current podcast. Over the past three days, all 13 of Canada's premiers and the prime minister came together in Ontario's cottage country. But despite the location, this was not about beers and bonfires and relaxing by the dock. There were big issues on the agenda. The most pressing being the looming trade deadline for a new trade agreement with the United States. US President Donald Trump has threatened to hit Canada with 35% tariffs if a new deal is not reached by August 1. Prime Minister Mark Carney spoke with reporters after day two of the summit about whether

that deadline is actually realistic. That depends. There's two sides to a deal. Obviously we're working on behalf of Canadians and we will agree a deal if there's one on the table that is in the best interest of Canadians, just as the United States will do in the look for the best interests of the U.S. As the meeting wrapped, Ontario Premier Doug Ford said Canada should be talking tough at this stage of negotiations.

We buy more products off the U.S. than Japan and Korea, China, Mexico, and the UK combined. I think we throw France in there too. But anyways, we're an economic powerhouse, folks. We don't have to take a backseat to anyone. And we sure the heck don't have to take a backseat to Donald Trump. So for her perspective on this week's meeting, we've reached the Premier of New Brunswick, Susan Holt. Premier Holt, good morning.

It's nice to have you with us. Thanks for having me, P. I appreciate it. This meeting yesterday when I was watching the closing news scrums and so on and so forth seemed a bit like a loving between the premiers and Prime Minister Mark Carney, especially compared to past federal provincial meetings, which have been more antagonistic. What was your reading of the vibe in the room? Well, I think you're not wrong. We do really appreciate the opportunity to get together and to chat with each other about what's going on in each of our provinces to learn from the prime minister

what's going on in his world. And I think all of the premiers appreciate how direct and how much substance the prime minister shares with us on a number of different files. So we do get along. There's lots of points in which we're aligned and right now facing the threat that we're facing from the US. We are united and working together like never before. Okay. So let's talk about that deadline, which is August the 1st. The Prime Minister has

said he won't accept a bad deal just for the sake of a quick deal. How much time do you think Canada has to play with here? Oh gosh, that's a good question. It's hard to predict how long we can continue like this except for what is like this. We have a president who keeps changing the goalposts and the game and the impact on our economy is negative. I think what we're seeing in New Brunswick is very similar to what they're seeing elsewhere. Investment has slowed to a standstill. Employment is not expanding the way it otherwise would.

The uncertainty, regardless of the tariffs, is really, really damaging to companies that want to move ahead but just have no idea what to expect at any given moment from the US. So we do want a deal. Everyone, including the Prime Minister, wants a deal and ideally a deal with no tariffs with the US. But when we look at some of the deals that other countries have signed, well, those aren't deals that we want and those are worse than what we have now because right now a good portion of the Canadian economy is compliant with the USMCA and thus not exposed to tariffs. And what you probably saw from the premiers is that we have a lot of confidence in this Prime Minister to be at the table and make those calls about

what is in Canada's best interest. And he's been listening to us explain to him what matters most to our provinces, like softwood lumber and New Brunswick's case. And so Premier Holt, you said, we don't like what we're seeing in these other deals or really framework of deal 10% for the UK, 15% on Japanese made autos. Are you saying that Canada wouldn't accept those kinds

of deals at 10% tariff or 15% tariff? Well, obviously it depends on the conditions, but we support what you heard from the Prime Minister, that this isn't a deal at all costs. This is getting the best possible deal. We don't want something worse than where we're standing right now

for the sake of urgency. And so if he doesn't see a deal that he likes come August 1st, then I think he has the premier support to walk away and continue to work for something better rather than accept some things that we've seen other countries do that would not be in Canada's interest. That support from his provincial counterparts though, that's where we see a little bit perhaps division. For example, Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moho said he doesn't want counter tariffs, that would hurt his province. How important is it that there's consensus among the premiers on these issues?

Where do you stand on retaliatory tariffs? Well, we have some retaliatory tariffs in place right now. There are a number of downsides to those and that's why we've been working pretty closely with the federal government to get the exemptions we need and the returns from those retaliatory tariffs to cover the damage, I guess, with companies in New Brunswick. And ultimately, again, we want a no-tariff environment. That includes no retaliatory tariffs. But the ones that we have in place right now were chosen very strategically to apply to

U.S. goods that don't really have a counterpart or a Canadian equivalent and a process to make sure that those tariff remissions are going back to the people and companies impacted. And so I don't think we, I'm not super keen on new counter tariffs, but like I said before, I trust Prime Minister Carney to get the best possible deal in the face of who knows what the US is going to bring forward because that continues to change by the day. So the situation is unpredictable and I'm prepared and confident that between Ambassador Helm and Minister LeBlanc and the Prime Minister, they understand what we need from this and are going to look after the best interests of our country.

The other thing that Canadians need according to the Prime Minister, according to you and your fellow provincial counterparts, is breaking down those inter-provincial trade barriers, something that the Prime Minister has promised to eliminate on the federal side by Canada Day. In terms of the various problems, in terms of your problems, where do things stand right now? Because this is sort of being seen as more than a salve to the problem, but like we need to get this going.

So where is it right now? Yeah, I'm really glad you asked about that because we spent a lot of time talking about internal trade yesterday. And all of us are on the Council of the Federation at the premieres want to see this move and move faster. And so we're actually really pleased with what the federal government has committed to and seems willing to remove all of their exemptions. Provinces have been moving to remove their exemptions.

We're seeing legislation passed. We just signed a new memorandum of understanding with Manitoba a couple of days ago for mutual recognition of our goods and services between New Brunswick and Manitoba. And what that means, it's invisible. It's a little bit hard to see. But that means that an entrepreneur in New Brunswick who is working on a product and used to think, ah, look, I can't ship to Manitoba because I'd need a huge order and I'd have to repackage my product with the kind of labeling that works for them and this and that and the other thing.

And it's not worth that added cost. Now they can send the product that they have in their warehouse labeled for New Brunswick or Nova Scotia or wherever, they can sell that product in Manitoba without having to invest in new packaging and to get it ready. So it opens up a new market without the added cost or administrative burden that these internal barriers created. So it may be hard to tell that the product that you see on the shelves that's come from a different province now has lesser requirements on it to be unique to the province that it's

in. Some business groups though have been complaining about this sort of like deal with this province between this province, sort of patchwork approach to solving this problem with these individual provinces striking deals with one another. Is there not a better solution or what is a solution to that? I can appreciate that because maybe, well, I know I'm impatient and other premiers similarly wanted to move and we could move quickly

on a bilateral basis, but the ultimate goal is to get a new CFTA, a new Canada Free Trade Agreement that covers all of these MOUs that are in place, that sort of supersedes, there's bigger and better than all of them, and that is simple and clear, removes as many of the exemptions that are currently in the existing agreement as possible, gives a simple reference document for entrepreneurs that they don't have to have an advanced degree to figure out what they can do where between which provinces. And I think we're aiming for that by December. That's been the goal that I've understood is getting that new Canada Free Trade Agreement

in place that all provinces can sign on to that'll take us massive steps ahead of where we are now. Any new deal between the US and Canada still exists within the framework of a very mercurial US president. How much do you worry that any kind of deal you might end up, he'll just tear up or it could evaporate the next day or the next week or the next month? Oh gosh, we talked about this too. That how, you know, while we're all pushing for a deal, we have very little

confidence that any deal signed will turn out to be persistent because the president, I don't know that I'd call him mercurial, I'd call it irrational, unpredictable. He's put in place unjustified and illegal taxes on the American people and the Canadian people. And so, I mean, that's, that's partly why we're pushing to have the US, Canada, Mexico agreement at renegotiations start a bit sooner because we think if we can get his support for an ultimate agreement, then maybe he'll let it stand for a handful of years like he did last time. Premier Holt, it's very good to hear from you. Thank you for joining us. Appreciate it so much. Yeah, I enjoy the conversation. Thanks, Pia. Susan Holt is the Premier of New Brunswick. Hey, I'm Jill Deacon, and I'm excited to share my new podcast with you.

A Love Affair with the Unknown is conversations with smart, funny people navigating life's unknowns with courage and candor, something we could all use during these wildly uncertain times. Me and I started to cry. And I realized I haven't dealt with anything. My family's motto was I'm not going to be able to handle that. Listen and subscribe to A Love Affair with the Unknown wherever you get your podcasts. New episodes drop every Tuesday. Well, keeping a close eye on the Canada-US trade negotiations is Carlo Dade. Carlo is the director of international policy at the School of Public Policy at the University of

Calgary. Carlo, good morning to you. Good morning. You just heard the Premier New Brunswick say we're not even confident that the US president would stick to any kind of deal. Is it important for our country to get a deal by that August 1st deadline? Yes,, of course, but it depends upon how you define deal. This is an absolutely critical point. What we're talking about with the president's current campaign are not what people think of as traditional trade deals, serious negotiations, multiple pages, long rounds. In fact, what we have now is only one short deal, four pages with the UK, and

we have a series of fact sheets issued by the White House. And only one of those fact sheets is actually turned into something. And that's the agreement with the UK. And it's only about three pages and really only covers two topics, all those and all those in steel. There is bylaw the fact that Congress is the one that does trade deals. It has to approve it. Donald Trump has been circumventing all this saying I have all these workarounds and I have these deals. They're not really deals.

Can you explain, there's this court case going on, the implications about the constitutionality of Trump's tariffs and what is expected to happen within the next few weeks? Sure. So very quickly, what we've seen is the president use executive action, and we'll get into that in a second, to impose tariffs. He then goes back and he's been using executive action to countermand the tariffs he's imposed. So you've had a series of orders from the president. These are things that can be done at presidential whim, basically, and can be taken away or changed just

as fast as they've come. So to Premier Holt's point, you're not dealing with a car dealership. You're not dealing with your local Ford dealership to sign a contract here. You've gone to the shady part of town and you're dealing with a used car sales guy. So the powers that the president has, yes. There are five powers the president has given to him by Congress, delegated by Congress, that allow the president to impose changes. The one he's using for these global tariffs is the International Emergency Powers Act. This basically, the president has taken this to mean that he can assign tariffs anytime, anywhere, any amount on anyone, anyhow he chooses. This has been subject to court challenge. The steel and

aluminum tariffs are another power, and that's not subject to court challenge. But the courts in the US, specifically the Court of International Trade, a three-judge panel, including a Trump-appointed judge, have ruled these tariffs illegal and unconstitutional. That case is under appeal, and that appeal starts the end of this month. So we're going to soon have a second ruling as to whether or not the appeals court upholds a decision. If that happens, the tariffs end, and the administration has to refund money to US importers

that have paid the tariffs. And one could imagine that no matter which way the ruling goes with the Court of Appeal, this could eventually make its way up to the Supreme Court and if it rules that the Trump administration's use of emergency powers to impose tariffs is unconstitutional does that mean the administration would have to back off the tariff approach almost completely? It would largely have to back off the president has four or five other powers, such as steel and aluminum, but each of those aren't anywhere, anytime, anyhow at the snap of my fingers.

Those require, such as steel and aluminum tariffs, require an investigation that can take four months to close to a year. It requires, you know, public hearings. The other measures have similar limits. They can only last for 150 days, tariffs can only go to a certain percent. So the president's power would be severely compromised. The investigations take time, even if they are done

quickly, and it would really limit what the president can do. But for us, steel and aluminum tariffs would still be on the table. The coming tariffs on pharmaceuticals would still be on the table, the coming tariffs on pharmaceuticals would still be on the table, those use a different statute. But for the fentanyl tariffs off the table, the global liberation day tariffs off the table. So of course we're not the only country negotiating with the United States trying to get

some kind of trade arrangement. How risky is it for us to take a wait and see approach with the United States trying to get some kind of trade arrangement. How risky is it for us to take a wait-and-see approach with the US when our economy, much of it, is on the line? It's extremely risky. If you've seen the fact sheets or the offer sheets that the president has put out, there's a clear trajectory if the UK is signing up for deals that include a baseline TEF. Actually, no, the UK didn't get a baseline, but Indonesia, Japan, if there are a series of other countries that have agreed to this term

and Canada suddenly goes from hiding amongst the one of 90 countries, 90 deals in 90 days, if we suddenly take center stage, because we're the ones that have thumbed our nose at Donald Trump, well, you can imagine how the administration will take that. So you don't want to take a bad deal, but really do you have a choice? I think tariffs are coming. Other countries are getting a baseline tariff. So unless the Supreme

Court or the courts rule that the president's actions are illegal, we're probably also looking at some sort of baseline tariff. The days of NAFTA and free access to the U.S., I don't think are there anymore. We're going to have to pay more for access to the U.S. market. Except the argument that Premier Doug Ford might make, and you heard it in the clip at the beginning of our program, is like we are a unique relationship with the United States, given how much we buy from them compared to, as he listed, a number of European countries all added together, don't even add up to what Canada's doing. So is that uniqueness part of what we have in our arsenal of leverage, do you

think, with the Americans? I don't think it's what we... The Americans don't see it the same way. And the Americans, as Donald Trump says, are the ones holding the cards. I think it would be a mistake to overestimate our importance to the US and and more importantly, the willingness of Donald Trump to take what Premier Holt described as what irrational and reasonable actions that counter US interests. There are enormous amounts of facts and evidence of the Americans taking unreasonable steps, steps that would be considered irrational and steps that would be considered to harm

their own interests. It's that sort of thinking that the Americans won't do this that got us into trouble with terrorists, meaning that we were surprised that the Americans actually went ahead and did something. So several of us have been writing that, no, if you look at the America First movement, if you look at Donald Trump's history, he will do things that are irrational and counter to US interests. And that certainly was the case with terrorists. And we were certainly caught by surprise, partially because of this rhetoric, that we are too important for the Americans

to do something like that. So I would argue that, you know, history doesn't indicate the future, past performance doesn't indicate future performance with the stock, but you gotta look at what's happened and really doubt that that argument will hold going forward. I just have about a minute left Carlo with you. The premier of New Brunswick also talked about and the premier's talked

about this week knocking down those internal trade barriers to get better free trade across our own country. Is that going to help us at this point? Marginally. Look, if you have a company that's lost a customer in the US, say a company in New Brunswick who's done business with New England, and you need that company to find an opportunity in Canada, striking down barriers isn't going to help that company find an opportunity in Manitoba, a market they know nothing about. It's the same as a company in Nova Scotia, New Brunswick that's been trading with the US, and we signed an agreement

with Honduras. We get rid of trade barriers with Honduras. That company is not magically going to find barriers with Honduras. We take that company, and we provide services, people, trade commissioners, to help them find opportunities. We need the same thing in Canada. Removing barriers will not magically

help a company in Lethbridge and southern Alberta suddenly find thing in Canada. Removing barriers will not magically help a company in Lethbridge in southern Alberta suddenly find opportunities in Quebec. If we want this to help, we're actually going to have to do the hard work of helping companies setting up an internal trade commissioner service. The province is conducting trade fairs back and forth. So it's a first step, but it's not the most important step for the emergency that we face today It's yesterday's problem, but we've got a new reality and we've got a new problem today and we need to shift Carlo always good to get your analysis. Thank you Thank you. Carlo date is the director for international policy at the School of Public Policy at the University of Calgary You've been listening to the current podcast. My name is Matt Galloway. Thanks for listening. I'll talk to you soon.