Carney says he'll only sign a U.S. trade deal 'in the best interest of Canadians' (www.cbc.ca)

submitted 6 days ago by Arkouda@lemmy.ca to c/canada@lemmy.ca

29 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 29 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] floofloof@lemmy.ca 36 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

He is good at saying the right things. Liberals in general aren't terrible at saying what people want to hear. When it comes to doing what they said, that's another story.

[-] wampus@lemmy.ca 12 points 6 days ago

Yeah, the semantics are already on display in what they're saying here. "a deal that will be in the best interest of Canadians" can be spun really easily.

"Yes, we bent over and spread our cheeks by removing a ton of protections in various industries, selling out those interests to Trump's whims... but securing lower tariffs on all other trade was in the best interest of Canadians in general"

"Yes, we capitulated on every point you mention, but a trade deal with the US is still better than no trade deal with the US, for the interests of Canada"

"Sure, we brought in legislation that lets us suppress Canadian's rights, so that we can allow US companies to ignore things like environmental concerns while they extract Canada's resources and sell them for US profit... but doing that's in Canada's best interest, compared to getting invaded/annexed".

It's just like how they scream elbows up! Let's avoid American control in our gov procurement! Except for Microsoft, or other tech giants, even though they're heavily implicated in the authoritarian shift down south... cause that'd be hard to change, and all our stuff is in their cloud already...

[-] Arkouda@lemmy.ca 3 points 6 days ago

What has he said he was going to do that he hasn't done yet?

[-] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 25 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

You could look at him removing the digital services tax and negotiating with the US as anti-Canada things he’s done

Despite him saying he’s looking out for Canada

[-] Reannlegge@lemmy.ca 4 points 4 days ago

Hopefully the DST comes back next week!

[-] Arkouda@lemmy.ca -3 points 6 days ago

You could look at him removing the digital services tax and negotiating with the US as anti-Canada things he’s done

Despite him saying he’s looking out for Canada

One could look at it like that, but I do not see why they would. Can you explain why one would see it that way?

[-] healthetank@lemmy.ca 18 points 6 days ago

Not the other guy, but I've been disappointed so far. For a PM elected, almost entirely, based on taking a firm stance against the US, he hasn't taken that approach.

Now maybe there's more going on behind the scenes, and the final agreement hasn't come out, but I've been disappointed with what's been publicized. I'm open to my view changing, but believing that conciliation works with bullies, or that any agreement is worth anything (considering Trump ripped up deals he previously wrote in his last term) is ridiculous.

[-] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 1 points 4 days ago

Now maybe there's more going on behind the scenes,

It would be naive to think there isn't.

[-] Arkouda@lemmy.ca 1 points 5 days ago

"The Government of Canada will not accept a bad deal," Carney said in French in Huntsville, Ont., Tuesday. "Our objective is not to reach a deal whatever it costs. We are pursuing a deal that will be in the best interest of Canadians."

When it comes to the prospect of reaching a deal, Carney said "we'll see" and that "complex negotiations" continue. He said if there isn't a deal that works for Canada, his government will "take stock" and consider what to do next.

This doesn't sound like what you are describing, and seems firm considering how dangerous of a situation this is.

"I've had over 80 bilaterals with world leaders since I became prime minister. A number of the premiers have been on major trade missions. We have other things to do," he said.

This sounds like the Government has other plans for when Trump talks fall through. Which has been being worked on over the last few months. From trade to arms procurement there is a lot of diversification efforts happening across governments.

There is a lot going on and the focus doesn't really seem to be getting something from the US anytime soon.

[-] healthetank@lemmy.ca 2 points 4 days ago

The question was what has Carney done (or not done) that he said he would (or would not) do.

He was elected on a strong, elbows up approach. So far, he has capitulated on the DST without us seeing any gain or concessions from that. And no, returning to the bargaining table does not count.

Not suspended the DST pending an agreement, but rescinded fully. My point is that he has not taken the firm stance I expected of him.

[-] Arkouda@lemmy.ca 0 points 4 days ago

What do you expect him to do, as in, what does a "firm stance" look like to you?

[-] healthetank@lemmy.ca 1 points 4 days ago

Not suspended the DST pending an agreement, but rescinded fully

Its not hard to say "were willing to play ball, provided this leads to an agreement".

I'm not opposed to dropping the DST, I'm opposed to dropping it rather than suspending it so trump will come talk at the table.

[-] Arkouda@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 days ago

Trump says "No further negotiations if the DST goes through"

I am asking you specifically, what does a firm stance look like to you in that situation?

What are the consequences of that stance?

[-] healthetank@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 days ago

I don't know how to be clearer for you.

A hard stance looks like this:

"Canada values its strong partnership with the United States and acknowledges the concerns raised over our proposed DST. In a show of good faith and commitment to reaching a balanced trade agreement, we are suspending the DST indefinitely.

However, if a mutually acceptable agreement cannot be reached, Canada reserves the right to implement the measure as planned. Our goal remains a fair and forward-looking solution that supports a level playing field for all."

Thus we reached trumps goal - DST doesn't move forward or go through. It stays exactly where it is, but its not a concession for nothing, and makes it clear that the DST remains part of the negotiations.

[-] Arkouda@lemmy.ca -1 points 3 days ago

What information do you have that says we won't institute the DST in the future if no deal is reached?

[-] healthetank@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 days ago

What proof you have he will? He has given no indication of it, and it is currently canceled.

[-] Arkouda@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 days ago

He has given no indication of it, and it is currently canceled.

"To support those negotiations, the Minister of Finance and National Revenue, the Honourable François-Philippe Champagne, announced today that Canada would rescind the Digital Services Tax (DST) in anticipation of a mutually beneficial comprehensive trade arrangement with the United States."

https://www.canada.ca/en/department-finance/news/2025/06/canada-rescinds-digital-services-tax-to-advance-broader-trade-negotiations-with-the-united-states.html

Seems that the rescinding of this legislation is tied to a "mutually beneficial and comprehensive trade arrangement" demonstrating that the DST is not currently completely off the table. In fact, the legislation to rescind it hasn't been tabled yet.

"The June 30, 2025 collection will be halted, and Minister Champagne will soon bring forward legislation to rescind the Digital Services Tax Act."

What information do you have that says we won’t institute the DST in the future if no deal is reached?

[-] Thedogdrinkscoffee@lemmy.ca 15 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

I would argue this time Carney's comment is a worthless plattitude. You can sign anything and claim it was the best deal for Canada.

[-] Arkouda@lemmy.ca 0 points 6 days ago

What supports your argument?

[-] Thedogdrinkscoffee@lemmy.ca 5 points 5 days ago

The logic of what I just said.

[-] Arkouda@lemmy.ca 2 points 5 days ago

I would argue this time Carney’s comment is a worthless plattitude. You can sign anything and claim it was the best deal for Canada.

What does a good deal for Canada look like to you?

[-] Thedogdrinkscoffee@lemmy.ca 10 points 5 days ago

With the US? It has nothing to do with Canada and everything to do with the US honouring a deal, let alone a fair one based on reciprocity and mutual benefit.

Trump is a bad faith actor who is bound by no court, no law or Congress. There is no deal to be had. He won't honour anything. We are wasting our time.

All we can do is reciprocate. They want Tarrifs, let's fucking GOOOOOOO! Wherever it hurts. Oil, energy, materials and critical resources. In equal measure to what they do to us. We must undo the 35 years of NAFTA integration and stand on our own two feet.

[-] healthetank@lemmy.ca 3 points 4 days ago

I agree - given that trump was the one who made the last round of NAFTA (aka the USMCA cuz god forbid the US isn't the first in the title), which he has now torn up, there is no reason to expect him to honour any agreement we make now.

I'd prefer to not jump right into a pissing match with an enormous economy like the US, but I think we can stand firm on what we let them push us to do. I'd like to see any tariffs we do apply directly solely to small businesses which can shoe a demonstrable loss in revenue due to the tariffs, but given Carney/lib history, I'm guessing it'll be gobbled up by larger corps instead.

Time will tell how his capitulation on the DST goes, but so far I'm not impressed.

[-] n3m37h@sh.itjust.works 15 points 6 days ago

No deal with amerika will be in the best interest of Canadians. Trump/Repubs are too greedy

[-] Hobbes_Dent@lemmy.world 13 points 6 days ago

We should just bill by the hour for negotiations and have a signing fee. They probably won’t even think it’s odd.

The agreement will be fucked with either way so may as well.

[-] Thedogdrinkscoffee@lemmy.ca 14 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

The agreement will be ~~fucked~~

Worthless. There is no deal to be had with Trump. He is a bad faith actor not bound by honour, credibility, a supreme court, the rule of law or Congress.

There is literally no point in negotiating anything. Whatever agreement that is signed, won't be honored.

We're going to learn this the hard way, again.

[-] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 3 points 4 days ago

There is literally no point in negotiating anything.

While Trump is involved, part of the point of continued "negotiating" is to try and prevent him from doing anything massively damaging while "negotiations are still in progress".

[-] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 9 points 5 days ago

There is no deal to be had with Trump. He is a bad faith actor not bound by honour, credibility, a supreme court, the rule of law or Congress.

There is literally no point in negotiating anything. Whatever agreement that is signed, won’t be honored.

I have to agree. What's the point of "negotiating" with a criminal fraudster? He literally changes his mind more than he changes his underwear. There is no "deal" or "contract" or "agreement" with him.