Premiers have no cohesive plan against Trump’s tariffs except appeasement

A testament to incoming U.S. president Donald Trump’s influence is the fact that despite not yet being sworn into office, his policy agenda is already making waves.

Trump posted on Truth Social that he plans on applying and maintaining a 25-per-cent tariff on all Mexican and Canadian imports until both countries meet his demands on drug smuggling and irregular migration.

With an existential threat posed to North America’s own “special relationship,” one would think that Canadian politicians would take it as a signal to circle the wagons and plan a cohesive way forward.

When all 13 premiers held a Council of the Federation meeting on Dec. 16 — and meeting chair and Ontario Premier Doug Ford stated that there was a consensus on fighting back with retaliatory tariffs — it looked like that would be the case, but no. 

Ford noted how all premiers are united on the need to strengthen Canada’s border security and for the country to meet its national defence spending promise of two per cent of the GDP, which Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, who has since announced his plans to resign, has vowed to make good on by 2032.

Soon after the premiers’ meeting, the federal government introduced a proposed joint-border “strike force” and $1.3 billion towards border security.

In November, Ford stated that Canada and the U.S. should sign a bilateral free-trade deal sans Mexico because it is a “backdoor” for Chinese-made goods.

While Ford has threatened to cut energy from Ontario to the U.S., he also warned two days after the council’s meeting that “Mexico has to make a decision: you’re either with Beijing or you’re with Washington.” Combine that with his feeling of familial betrayal when the tariffs were first proposed, and you get the picture that Ford is firmly on the U.S.’s side and willing to throw Mexico under the bus.

Then there is Alberta Premier Danielle Smith. In the aforementioned Council of the Federation, she was a dissenter in the notion of retaliatory tariffs, favouring diplomacy so as to ensure Alberta’s energy market stays stable.

Smith also backs cutting Mexico from the U.S., Canada, and Mexico’s trilateral free-trade agreement because of Chinese investments and trade. Smith has also announced a $29-million plan to establish an Albertan border patrol force, the need and effectiveness of which has been questioned by experts.

Smith is also big on “Albertan sovereignty,” and it appears her idea of sovereignty includes the right to independently fold to outside pressure.

Quebec Premier François Legault has also hopped on the border security bandwagon, calling Trump’s border concerns “legitimate” and expressing dissatisfaction with the proposed federal border reforms.

Quebec has an autonomous immigration policy, which Legault’s government has been using to restrict immigration.

Legault has also called for a tightening of visas and has also expressed dissent towards retaliatory tariffs. His party, the Coalition Avenir Québec, has been losing in the polls to the Parti Québécois, so he has the most to gain, and lose, by toeing the Trumpian line ahead of the 2026 provincial election.

The pattern is one of capitulation. With how deeply intertwined the Canadian economy is to the U.S. economy, federal and provincial leaders — to varying degrees — are willing to bend the knee. They all believe that a soft hand is the key to appealing to Trump and it is a game to see who can give the most away.

The distinct lack of dignity or unity in confronting Trump’s tariffs makes it no real shock that he felt comfortable calling Canada the “51st state.” Canada ought to show a willingness to pivot from the U.S., but lacks the alternative means and political will to stand upright and walk away.