Article content
Canada’s chief negotiator has pointed out that the U.S. commerce secretary was not at the table when trade talks broke down nearly two weeks ago.
Sign In or Create an Account
or View more offersArticle content
Howard Lutnick has said that the tariff level on medium- and heavy-duty trucks was not discussed until 4 p.m. on Friday, August 21, just before the Canadian side walked away from talks.
Article contentWe apologize, but this video has failed to load.Try refreshing your browser, or
tap here to see other videos from our team.We apologize, but this video has failed to load.Try refreshing your browser, or
tap here to see other videos from our team.Article content
Janice Charette’s point was that the truck issue was discussed repeatedly by negotiators in the room, a place where the commerce secretary was noticeable by his absence.
Article content
Story continues below
This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.
Article content
It seems highly likely that Lutnick was trying to repeat the tactic that worked for him over the Gordie Howe bridge negotiations by pushing for more advantageous terms at the 11th hour — in this case, exempting trucks from the tariff reduction on passenger cars. It didn’t work this time.
Article contentArticle content
But if Lutnick was not in the negotiation room, by his own account, he was with Donald Trump when the president thought he had reached a deal with Prime Minister Mark Carney.
Article content
Lutnick told CNBC on Wednesday that a deal was reached, prompting Trump to put out a social media post to that effect.
Article content
By the afternoon of Friday the 21st, Canada was adding “crazy ideas” to the mix, Lutnick said.
Article content
“I said to one of their ministers: ‘Are you actually trying to blow this up?’ His answer was: ‘I’m not allowed to say that’.”
Article content
Lutnick’s allegation is that the Canadians walked away for political reasons to do with the provincial election in Quebec and the independence referendum in Alberta.
Article content
For people who have clearly lost touch with morality, there is a curious sense of moral outrage among the senior figures of the Trump administration. They feel genuinely aggrieved that they were misled and disrespected by the Carney government.
Article content
Story continues below
This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.
Article content
That is, of course, their concern. But it should worry Canadians that their government’s account is at best ambiguous. The prime minister has told a version of the past that cannot be disproved by the available facts, but which places heavier emphasis on culture, language and sovereignty issues than the events may warrant.
Article contentRead More
- John Ivison: Doug Ford’s veto of a U.S. trade deal cannot stand
- John Ivison: Things are about to get verrrrrry ugly
- Story continues belowThis advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.
Article content
The public still trusts the prime minister, but his reputation for candour was dented by his version of the Gordie Howe bridge-funding deal and it may take further hits as accounts of how the talks broke down continue to trickle out. Strategic ambiguity was his stock in trade as a bank governor trying not to show his hand on the direction of future interest rates. It is a linguistic approach less suited to politics.
Article content
This is not to suggest that Trump does not covet Canada and is not seeking to destroy its auto industry. Carney’s campaign slogan that the president is trying to break us so he can own us resonated because it is accurate.
Article content
But at the negotiating table, a deal was reached that would have withstood U.S. inquiries about the discoverability of French-language shows on Netflix and its interest in aligning future trade agreements. (As U.S. trade negotiator Jamieson Greer pointed out, the existing CUSMA agreement includes a provision which gives the U.S. influence over future deals with non-market players.)