A way for Canada to reduce its dependency on the U.S. would be to diversify its trading partners, which, in turn, would strengthen Canada’s bargaining position.
Every province and industry has been holding trade missions for decades to diversify markets. It’s not that it’s easy to disconnect the US apron strings, but it’s certainly been at the top of any trade organizations mind since at least the 70s.
Since we’ve had disputes like softwood lumber and BSE, local value-added chains have been also a massive push to incentivize and fund. Things like packing plants, lumber mills, canola crush plants, mixed product pipelines to the coast, and all the shipping terminals that make that product go away take decades to plan and implement but are another piece of the puzzle of trade independence. Those things have been in the works for a long time and every dispute with the US in the last half century have added momentum to that push.
Yeah, unfortunately basic geography means there’s likely a hard limit on how much diversification is realistic.
We absolutely should do everything we can to reduce our reliance on the US, but options become limited once you remove rail and road from the equation.
Plus, we really have not done much infrastructure spending in the last decade. I saw a report that said most of our public infrastructure is 20 to 40 years without significant maintenance. That’s horrendous and not helping us diversify at all.
I’m really mystified by this lack of awareness of work done in the past on international diversification. There have been great strides made in where we were even 20 years ago for international trade excluding the US. I’ve been on unpaid boards (non-profit, industry) where that’s been the primary focus for my entire term. We’ve worked with all levels of government to try to streamline trade barriers between Canada and other countries because nobody, private or public, trusts the US to not swing their dicks around, even with sympathetic administrations in place.
Honestly, it’s kind of deflating to see that work ignored.
Good for you - and that sounds fascinating. At the end of the day 0 km of extra shipping is just a really good deal, though. Maybe you know if trade across the boarder has increased or decreased by percentage of our GDP, but I’m not hopeful.
I did learn recently that our free trade agreements cover waaay more geography than I would have guessed.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !canada@lemmy.ca
Oh, great idea. Nobody ever thought of that before.
Honestly? They really didn’t. For a while Canada emphasized US trade for security reasons. We really should be developing closer ties to the EU.
Every province and industry has been holding trade missions for decades to diversify markets. It’s not that it’s easy to disconnect the US apron strings, but it’s certainly been at the top of any trade organizations mind since at least the 70s.
Since we’ve had disputes like softwood lumber and BSE, local value-added chains have been also a massive push to incentivize and fund. Things like packing plants, lumber mills, canola crush plants, mixed product pipelines to the coast, and all the shipping terminals that make that product go away take decades to plan and implement but are another piece of the puzzle of trade independence. Those things have been in the works for a long time and every dispute with the US in the last half century have added momentum to that push.
Yeah, unfortunately basic geography means there’s likely a hard limit on how much diversification is realistic.
We absolutely should do everything we can to reduce our reliance on the US, but options become limited once you remove rail and road from the equation.
Plus, we really have not done much infrastructure spending in the last decade. I saw a report that said most of our public infrastructure is 20 to 40 years without significant maintenance. That’s horrendous and not helping us diversify at all.
It’s not a new concept, but it feels less like a speculative fiction and more like a serious policy idea now.
I’m really mystified by this lack of awareness of work done in the past on international diversification. There have been great strides made in where we were even 20 years ago for international trade excluding the US. I’ve been on unpaid boards (non-profit, industry) where that’s been the primary focus for my entire term. We’ve worked with all levels of government to try to streamline trade barriers between Canada and other countries because nobody, private or public, trusts the US to not swing their dicks around, even with sympathetic administrations in place.
Honestly, it’s kind of deflating to see that work ignored.
Good for you - and that sounds fascinating. At the end of the day 0 km of extra shipping is just a really good deal, though. Maybe you know if trade across the boarder has increased or decreased by percentage of our GDP, but I’m not hopeful.
I did learn recently that our free trade agreements cover waaay more geography than I would have guessed.