The Current - Smith splits from other premiers on Trump’s tariffs

Episode Date: January 16, 2025

The prime minister and premiers said Wednesday that they will do all they can to stop Donald Trump’s threatened tariffs, with only Alberta Premier Danielle Smith refusing to sign the joint statement. We discuss whether a unified Canadian response to the crisis is possible with our national affairs panel: the CBC’s Kathleen Petty, the Toronto Star’s Ryan Tumilty; and The Globe and Mail's Stephanie Levitz.

Hey, I'm Johanna Wagstaff. And hi there, I'm Rohith Joseph. And we're asking for 10 minutes of your day to go through the 10 things that the UN recommends we can all do when it comes to climate change. Please don't leave. No! And also the things aren't new. We are just wired to not do them. We promise you to help you figure out your brains and you and your people can make better choices to combat climate change. 10 minutes to save the planet is available now

on CBC Listen and everywhere you get your podcasts. This is a CBC podcast. Hello, I'm Matt Galloway and this is the current podcast. In just a few days from now, Donald Trump will be sworn in as President of the United States and in one of his first acts of business, he has vowed to impose 25% tariffs on Canada. Canada's premier met with the Prime Minister in Ottawa yesterday to figure out a game plan. Here is how the Premier of Ontario, Doug Ford, described what's at stake.

There's never been a time that's more important for Canadians to be united, to stand up, and making sure that our voice is heard. And the retaliatory tariffs need to be hard. We have to send a message when someone comes up and tries to destroy our economy, it will be devastating for Canadians. The premiers, however, are not entirely united on this issue. The premier of Alberta, Danielle Smith, refused to sign on to the leader's final statement. Instead, she posted a message on X objecting

to Ottawa's approach, specifically its refusal to rule out cutting off energy exports to the United States. Here to unpack all of this is our national affairs panel. Kathleen Petty is the host of the CBC political podcast, West of Centre. She is in Calgary.

Toronto Star parliamentary reporter, Ryan T. She is in Calgary. Toronto star, parliamentary reporter, Ryan Tomlety is in our Ottawa studio and here with me in Toronto is Stephanie Levitz from the Global Mails Ottawa Bureau. Good morning, everyone. Good morning. Good morning.

Kathleen, let's start with you. Why is Danielle Smith, the odd premier out here? Can I just say I knew you were going to start with me, it's kind of obvious, right? Begin with the beginning. Yes. One thing I will say is that it's never a slow news day if you cover politics in this province,

but I would suggest that it was sort of evident this is what was going to happen. She signaled Matt very clearly that she was not interested in anything that would in some way either reduce her ability to export or to tariff anything that she would export. And she had warned Ottawa this would trigger a national unity crisis if they tried to do that. But it's worth noting that the other energy producing provinces, the big ones, which

would be Saskatchewan and Newfoundland, although not nearly to the extent of Alberta, did sign on to this communique and she was the only one who did not, she also didn't show up for the meeting. She is on vacation, but it has been noted that she interrupted her vacation to meet with Trump and not with the premieres. Here's what she said then after that meeting

with Donald Trump at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida about that idea of cutting off Alberta's oil and gas to the US. Oil and gas is owned by the provinces, principally Alberta, and we won't stand for that. And you should never ever threaten something you cannot do. Why do you think, Kathleen, I just want to stick with you just for a minute, why do you think she's voicing

her objections so publicly? One of the things people have said, Doug Ford said that if you're in a card game, you don't show the opposition your cards. Why is she saying this publicly? Yeah, it's kind of interesting, isn't it? I mean, just to keep with the poker analogy, she, you know, it's one of those cases

where she's showing your hand when you have pocket aces and then offering to throw them back anyway. And because obviously energy oil in particular is the big piece of leverage here. But the other thing that she went on at some length about, Matt, is this longstanding sort of grievance about the relationship with Ottawa when it comes to energy. And we're seeing a lot of reaction to that, even citing that today, going back to things like Energy East and Northern Gateway, and of course Bill C-69 and Bill C-59, the point being that those who were

supporting her are saying there was no Team Canada when Alberta tried to expand its ability to export to other markets. So to in some way handicap oil exports at this point is just not on. And the other thing I think it is worth noting Trevor Toome I think a lot of people are familiar with the USC economist has crunched the. And he concludes that Alberta is in fact, the most tariff exposed. So if you take a look at income from exports to the US as a share of GDP, Alberta's is by far the highest at 26%. So the premier of Ontario was not impressed.

Have a listen to what Doug Ford said. I respect that she's concerned about protecting her energy and that's her choice. That is her choice. But I have a little different theory. I have a different theory that protect your jurisdiction, but country comes first. How do you think that's playing in Alberta, Kathleen? Country comes first. I mean, the suggestion is that she's putting her own interests ahead of the country's interests. Well, she would argue that protecting the industry is ultimately protecting Canada.

And she's also, she has also made the point that she thinks negotiation is the way to go over retaliation, although she's, she's not necessarily opposed to the part of the communique about imposing tariffs on imports from the U.S. It's about, and this is fairly far down the list, that they said everything was on the table, but the idea of restricting exports of energy or anything else for that matter, or taxing on this end, experts going into the US is very far down the list is sort of a card that you play last.

But she thinks that there's a way around this and that the terrorists may well get imposed, but she thinks that there's a way out that doesn't involve using the nuclear option. It's interesting. The Premier of Ontario, Doug Ford, has become in many ways a focal point in speaking out from his perspective. He's wearing this cap saying Canada is not for sale or what have you. And that got praise from the Prime Minister.

Have a listen to this. He's just pointed out that he's a Canadian first as much as he's passionate about Ontario. And I think that's something that we all share across this table of saying, you know what, the interest of this country means we're going to have to look at everything we can and we'll make sure that it's fair across the country, but nothing can be off the table if the US continues to choose to move forward with these punishing tariffs. Stephanie, what do you think the prime minister has created in stepping down? Is there a leadership vacuum at the center in this crucial moment in these relations

between Canada and the United States? If there wasn't a leadership vacuum at the center, one wonders if Daniel Smith would be taking the position she is. If there had been a sense from the beginning, let's say, that the Prime Minister called all of the premiers, you know, the minute Trump levied this threat, and called all the premiers into a room and said, okay, we need a unified national plan on this.

Danielle, I want you to do this. And Doug, I'd like you to do that. And Scott, could you please do this? That didn't happen. The premiers, you know, the initial contact with premiers was many days after that initial threat. This meeting is, you know, days away from the Trump inauguration. That didn't happen. The initial contact with premiers was many days after that initial threat. This meeting is days away from the Trump inauguration.

And while there's always been a tension for sure between Premier Daniel Smith and Justin Trudeau, absolutely, this was a moment where you would have thought there might have been a little bilateral diplomacy that was necessary before going into this collective meeting, knowing about that tension, knowing how she feels that Alberta is always given the short end of the stick and is exploited. If she's protecting, if she believes she's protecting the interests of her province and the constituents in her province, what are the risks of that approach, do you think? I mean, there's the economic risk, obviously, if this is our biggest cudgel with which to

beat the United States over the head, and now it's off the table. I mean, again, it's a question of people saying for days now, weeks now, that our political instability right here is akin to Canada rolling over and showing its belly to the United States, right? And this is another element of that. If Mr. Trump is seen as a dealmaker, he's seen as someone who looks to exploit weakness, this is a weakness.

And if he doesn't face a unified front of leaders in this country saying everything is on the table, we've threatened this, maybe he doesn't back off. Ryan, Scott Moe, the Premier of Saskatchewan has said that this will be the most divisive conversation this country has ever had. Daniel Smith has talked about this provoking a national unity crisis. Are we there already? I don't think we're there already, but I think you can see the building blocks of it. These tariffs are not going to hit every Canadian province equally, even if they're applied

universally as the president has threatened. Some provinces, as we've talked about, are more trade exposed. Daniel Smith is doing this because her province is extra exposed. Her province ships most of the oil and gas to the U.S. so when you talk about cutting it off, you know, they're the ones that are going to pay that cost and certainly there's lots of, you know, historic grievances about how Alberta has sold its oil and gas that are coming to the fore here. But, you know, I think what you did, we were talking about the person who wasn't speaking with the group, everybody else

was. And a lot of those provinces have plenty at stake. You know Ontario, Newfoundland, and Quebec didn't take off the table the idea of you know export tariffs on electricity, of which they sell a great deal. So we are focusing on the person who's not in line with the premiers, but most of them were. The prime minister said, this is the phrase that everybody uses,

everything is on the table. You feel for the legs of the table because it's gotta be weighed down significantly. But Ryan, do we know what's on the table? What are the options that are actually being discussed? Yeah, you know, I don't think the options are that varied. You know, in a trade war, there's only so many things you can do.

So, you know, some sort of across the board retaliatory tariffs, I think are on the table to risk breaking said table eventually. I don't think the government plans to do everything it possibly can on day one. I think it will ramp up its response. That's certainly what my colleagues have been reporting. You want to make the pain be felt gradually because Canada does not want this trade war. However hard we fight it, we will lose. So we want to avoid this trade

war if we can, but we want to ramp up the pressure gradually, I think, to make U.S. consumers. Because I don't think Donald Trump cares, but you want to make U.S. consumers and ultimately U.S. voters feel this pain. People are already in pain in this country. Was there any talk, Ryan, about feel this pain. People are already in pain in this country. Was there any talk, Ryan, about how to ensure that those who suffer from a possible trade war, which might be all of us, would get the help that they need? Yeah, I mean, I think that's something

that the government is gonna have to consider. Last time there was a smaller trade war, we saw compensation to some of the industries that were hit particularly poorly. That happens, but I don't know that you can if Donald Trump is serious about a 25% across-the-board tariff on Canadian products that is gonna hurt everybody in a way that is unavoidable and almost irreparable. What did you make Kathleen of the trip to Mar-a-Lago?

Daniel Smith going down, as you said, interrupting her vacation to go down and shake the hand and speak with Donald Trump alongside Kevin O'Leary, Jordan Peterson apparently was there as well, what did you make of that? Right, well a couple of things. Kevin O'Leary talked about how she could really work her room so that she was talking to more than just Donald Trump.

Even though I was surprised, I wasn't shocked that she made that happen. Is she freelancing? I mean, was there something like this? So something like this was not coordinated. No, no. She was freelancing and it was Kevin O'Leary that created the path for her to be there. It was a little bit like saying, the saying, hold my beer. It was a little bit like saying, hold my orange juice. That might be tariff pretty soon, but hold my orange juice. Because it really has been her and Ford,

I would argue, among all political leaders, including federal leaders, that have been the most high profile in sort of making the case. But they've been making slightly different cases. And her case, most especially, although Ford has been very diplomatic, was still saying, but if we have to retaliate, we will. That's never been her message.

Her message has always been, if we can just explain to him what the states are for the United States, I think he'll see reason and see that this is just going to hurt him. And as you know, she came out of it convinced that the tariffs would be imposed, although she was still talking about subsequent to that, being able to, uh, create some kind of curve out. And I guess none of us really know, uh, what, if anything, he said, uh, to, um, give her any confidence that that was a possibility.

Which leads to some of the, I mean, say, take what you will from what people say online, but the language was very strong in terms of how she was being portrayed going down there, speaking to Donald Trump when he's making these threats without perhaps the authorization or at the very least the buy-in from other premieres. People have worried whether she's selling the country out. People, again, the language is like a quizzling or something like that. What do you make of that?

Well, it's interesting because the prime Minister yesterday, he was essentially asked that question and he said, you know, great, let everyone sort of do what they can to make the case on behalf of Canada. He's praised those efforts. I don't know if he was thinking specifically about what we're necessarily seeing now, but you can help, I don't know if you've seen, I know you're familiar with the statement that she issued, but I don't know if you saw the post on ads. Yes. But it's kind of an interesting post, right?

Because the graphic on it is a combination of the US flag, the stars and stripes and the maple leaf, except you can't even see the maple leaf. Because over the maple leaf, that's where it says no Ottawa tariffs and Alberta energy exports. So it's kind of stark. And I think that's where, you know, people might interpret that as she's on team Trump more than she's on team Canada, and therein, I think,

lies some risk for her. Stephanie, who is speaking for Team Canada? Oh, that's a good question. I mean, I guess in some degree it's who is speaking to who, right? Doug Ford in his decision to do a round of interviews on American television networks like Fox has emerged as a voice for Canada in a way perhaps Justin Trudeau has not. When Justin Trudeau chooses to go on MSNBC or CNN, those are not necessarily audiences, although those might be shows that Canadians watch. That's not the network that Trump is watching. That is not the network that Donald Trump is watching or the Republican leadership in this country,

because the point has to be made that in addition to dealing with Donald Trump, Canadian leaders are trying as well to deal with the politicians and to dealing with Donald Trump, Canadian leaders are trying as well to deal with the politicians and the influencers around Donald Trump, the state governors, the local congressmen, everyone who's going to be affected by this because it needs to be a full court press in this issue. And so one of the things we're missing sort of in all of this is that we understand what Mr. Trump wants to do. What we don't understand is what it's going to take to stop him,

which is to say, yes, we can levy retaliatory terrorists, but what exactly is it that he wants from Canada? I mean, if we've unveiled a multi-billion dollar plan to beef up our border and keep making the case that really fentanyl, yes, it's a problem domestically for Canada, but we're not shipping a lot of it to the United States. What is the thing that's going to make him not impose these tariffs when he sort of framed them in the context of border security? It seems like that argument has disappeared.

So what are the questions that Canadians should be looking for their leaders to answer? There are a lot of unknowns. And one of the big unknowns is you don't actually know what Donald Trump is going to do. What he says he's going to do may not be what he does, but there's great anxiety. Doug Ford is talking about hundreds of thousands of jobs in that province alone being lost because of these tariffs. So what are the answers that you think Canadians should be looking for? One of them is what is the plan, which is to say not that okay you are going to impose retaliatory tariffs on you know Florida orange juice, but I think you know in an era of misinformation,

disinformation, facts going all over the place, it would be helpful if our leadership was willing to have a frank conversation with Canadians. This is our economic analysis of the damage we might be facing. These are the industries that will be hit the hardest. Hey business, you know, we have these programs already let's say in place that you could take advantage of to protect your supply chains and other things. So just a sense of the truth for Canadians, what their analysis is and what the plan is looking forward and you don't necessarily need to throw all your cards on the table. Do we need our leadership to be very clear with Canadians at this

moment in time? Okay on day one we will impose tariffs, retaliatory tariffs on Orange Juice and on day two, it will be on Harley-Davidson's and on day three, it will be on something else. But a sense, and that sense slightly did emerge from this Premier's meeting finally, that there is a plan, there is some kind of perhaps actual document that says we will do these things and Canadians should get as much transparency as possible. In 2017, it felt like drugs were everywhere in the news. So I started a podcast called On Drugs. We covered a lot of ground over two seasons, but there are still so many more stories to tell.

I'm Jeff Turner and I'm back with season three of On Drugs and this time it's gonna get personal. I don't know who sober Jeff is. I don't even know if I like that guy. On Drugs is available now wherever you get your podcasts. Ryan the complication here is that that liberals are also picking a new leader right and we're likely to have a federal election so how likely is it that whatever is talked about at that table is still going to be in place in a couple of weeks or a couple of months?

Yeah, and I think that is one of the challenges of any sort of threat that the Canadian government might be making, is we can make it for three months at a time. I think we now know what the next Canadian election is gonna be about. It is gonna be about Trump. He has inserted himself into our politics with this move. I fully expect these tariffs to

come in because now Donald Trump talks about them not as something to push us into better border security or to fix the trade relationship. Now he talks about them as something to bring in revenue. He is talking about this as a money-making opportunity for the US government. And he needs that money to pay for tax cuts and other things that he wants to do. And I don't know how you avoid that. So I think, yes, Canada is in an interesting position here because our political leadership is about to change in some way.

And that's why I think it's important to hear from, you know, every Canadian politician about how they're going to respond to this threat because one of them is going to have to hold the ball. Do we have a census to help Pierre-Paul Léovre would respond to this if he were prime minister? He said tariffs if necessary, but not necessarily tariffs, I believe. And I think he is fully prepared. There are only so many plays you can run in a situation like this.

So I don't actually know that the difference in response between Pierre Poliev is gonna be that significant from what Justin Trudeau will do, because there are only so many clubs in the bag. You can bring in tariffs, you can roll over. None of the options are good. Later today, Mark Carney will announce that he would like to be the next leader of the Liberal Party.

He's making that announcement in Edmonton. He was on The Daily Show earlier this week. Have a listen to what he said to Jon Stewart about this. Is there a fear now that there will be an economic trade war with Canada? How much of this do you believe is bluster and how much preparation do you need to do for it? Well, we have to prepare for it. And I think, you know, you look at what happened five, six years ago when we did have a similar

situation with the trade war. But that was only a lumber and there was only a few things. Lumber is very important to us, John. The, you know, it's fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me, right? Steph, do we have any sense as to how Mark Carney would handle this? Again, doing an interview on a US network is one thing, but when he's going to have, this will be the first issue,

if he wants to be the Liberal Party, this will be the first issue that he has to deal with. And I'm really looking forward to, you know, now that he will make his leadership ambitions public, getting to press him on that, right? I think we're going to have to ask all of the liberal leadership candidates pretty tough questions about how the Trump era 2.0,

you know, fits into their economic plans for this country, because how does it, you know, when Krista Freeland, the former finance minister, when she quit on December 16th, and she talked about the prime minister not being serious and being more devoted to political gimmicks than anything else, we needed to quote unquote, keep our fiscal firepower. Well, what does that mean in practice when you are also a liberal party and a liberal government that is committed to hundreds of billions of dollars of new spending in social programs, when you have a deficit that's approaching north of $60 billion? That's a problem for any liberal leadership contender because they're not just running

to be the leader of the liberal party. They will, for at least a time, be Prime Minister and have to deal with this. And without Parliament sitting right now with no accountability for our leaders, no opportunity for the opposition to press them on what Canada's plans are, this leadership race is the opportunity for the public to demand answers. Kathleen, what's your sense as to whether those who want to lead this country are prepared to deal not just with the United States, but the United States that we are living beside now?

Well, I think certainly in this province, I think everyone is frankly a lot more interested in what Pierre Pauliev is going to do, not so much what liberal leadership contenders are going to do, because I think most people expect this runway to be pretty short for whoever becomes Prime Minister. I mean, we'll see. This country's full of surprises. So I never count on anything to be honest, but that seems to be the expectation.

And I know Pierre-Paul Lievre's having a media bail later today and you can bet that this Team Canada with one player benched essentially, because she benched herself, is going to be a big topic of the kinds of questions he's going to be asked, what kind of response he's going to give, I don't know, but they are largely aligned, Daniel Smith and Pierre Poliev, so I will be most interested to hear what he says because let's be frank, the oil and gas is by far the most valuable export Canada has, by far. And so if you can't use that as leverage, it certainly weakens your position. If you get that, you know, as Roy pointed out, this isn't going to be the immediate thing.

But if these tariffs go in and stay, you know, you have to have all those levers at your disposal, one would think, as a national leader. Stephanie, we just have a few seconds left. Pierre Polyaf has talked about how he wants a carbon tax election. Is this going to be a carbon tax election or is it going to be about the United States and Donald Trump? He insists that it will remain a carbon tax election because from his point of view, the consumer price on carbon is disastrous for our economy and is another

sort of reason why we are so in so much economic danger in the face of Donald Trump. Whether he can hold to that, the extent to which the liberal candidates might be preparing to walk back the consumer carbon price could change. And he might not have control over the narrative in a way he hoped to have control because so much has changed since he became leader of the Conservative Party. Great to have you all here. We will reconvene as this unfolds. Thank you very much. Thank you. You're welcome.

Stephanie Levitz is with The Globe and Mail, Ryan Tumulty is with The Toronto Star, and Kathleen Petty is with your own CBC. For more CBC podcasts, go to cbc.ca slash podcasts.