The high drama taking place in Parliament this week is entertaining in a morbid sort of way, but gawking too long at the mess diverts our attention from our number one priority—shoring up our relationship with the United States.
The spasmodic furor and tumult characterizing the public response to date of Canada’s political leadership to the tariff threats of President-elect Donald Trump have become a national embarrassment and further diminishment of our already precarious status in world affairs. To start, we witnessed the prime minister’s sudden pilgrimage to Mar-a-Lago where he essentially genuflected before Trump and was rewarded with becoming the butt of an ongoing joke about being the governor of America’s 51st state.
Then came the grand alliance of Team Canada between Ottawa and the premiers—which quickly broke down into widely differing provincial incursions into federal affairs. Along with assorted pronouncements on international relations, including throwing CUSMA partner Mexico under the bus, Alberta is apparently establishing its own border ranger strike force, despite adjacent crossing points in British Columbia or Saskatchewan, while Ontario is going to unleash its potent energy weapons at the northeastern United States.
The Gilbert and Sullivan light opera antics of the prime minister and the premiers as they scramble about making proclamations and react like so many chickens with their heads cut off is unbecoming, to say the least. At its worst, it is politically and economically damaging as it reveals divisions and weaknesses for all to see. Canada’s political leaders seem to be more concerned with scoring short-term political points that play to their constituencies and re-election prospects than with the business at hand, which is securing Canada’s place in the world. Indeed, the contradictions inherent in this behaviour to date are simply amazing.
The prime minister first supplicates the president-elect to curry favour and basks in the audacity of the move and then on his return decides to pontificate on America’s failure to elect a female president. Alberta’s premier, usually an advocate of stay-in-your-lane federalism, decides to get into international border enforcement because it seems like a good opportunity to show the federal government how Alberta can do Ottawa’s job better.
Ontario’s premier is the most enigmatic with his shoot first and figure it out later approach. Amidst this bluster is no acknowledgement of how cointegrated Ontario’s electricity system is with its U.S. neighbours, nor the fact that much of southern Ontario’s natural gas for both winter heating and electricity generation comes via a pipeline that traverses the United States.
And the remaining premiers adjudicate publicly on the ideas waiting for the opportunity to gain favour with one side or another or who knows, perhaps planning to cut their own deals via secret missions to Mar-a-Lago. This madness must stop and the best way to bring sanity to the situation is through the following three simple rules for dealing with Trump.
1. Never make the boss look bad.
Donald Trump was and will again be a U.S. president pas commes les autres. Do not listen to the pundits. He is not an imperial president or a strategic deal maker or a wily transactional coyote or any of those things we say to try and rationalize his often-quixotic pronouncements. He is simply the boss of a family firm that is going to be in charge of the United States, and the last thing you want to do is say or do something that makes him look bad.
So, going to Mar-a-Lago to beg and make the boss feel important—that is good. Coming home and saying that Americans lost the opportunity to pick a better boss—that is bad.
2. Do or do not. There is no threaten.
The calibre of our political leaders is certainly not akin to those of yesteryear with working-class roots street smarts such as Brian Mulroney or Jean Chretien. In all aspects of their political lives, these gentlemen always knew when and how to flatter the boss and when to go for the jugular so to speak. The Americans are our friends, and one does not threaten friends. We do have more tools at our disposal than they think given the integration of our economies, but they are not impressed by words. Americans respond to actions rather than words. There is no point in making threats. Just go about your business quietly and then do what you must to make your point.
Publicly, all our leaders need to do is say they are “examining all options” or “leaving no stone unturned.” If you really want to cut off someone’s power to make a point, why would you tell them you are going to do it thereby removing the element of surprise? There is no more vivid demonstration of vulnerability than a sudden power failure in a January blizzard or a July heat wave due to “unforeseen” maintenance issues.
3. Know when to say something and when to say nothing.
This is the most difficult rule of all to master because most of the time it requires that you say nothing, and saying nothing is often seen by politicians as akin to doing nothing. Politicians like to say things because it seems like they are doing something even if they are doing nothing. However, as my father used to say (and it does somehow sound more profound in the Abruzzese dialect), if you wish to kick at every stone that comes across your path while out walking, then you will come home without your feet. This third rule simply means you have to know how and when to pick your targets: when to say something, when to say nothing, and, in the long run, when to act.
Ultimately, reacting to every trolling post or wild provocation with a federal-provincial meeting extravaganza and press conference only provides Trump with more information and bargaining chips. Trump has announced he will implement tariffs if he does not get what he wants, and what he wants is liable to change in the fullness of time. Giving him what he first asks for quickly will only whet his appetite to ask for more. Ask for clarification, request more information, make plans to do what you can to meet demands, and then quietly prepare contingencies but do not publicly advertise them and hope you do not have to use them.
It is going to be a tough four years, but right out the gate, so far the behaviour of our political leadership is not making things any easier.
Livio Di Matteo is a contributor to The Hub, Professor of Economics at Lakehead University, and a Member of the Canadian Institute for Health Information National Health Expenditure Advisory Group.
