Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

Alberta

Firm handshakes, hard lines: Trudeau, Biden to talk protectionism, Haiti, migration

Published

9 minute read

WASHINGTON — He’s hell-bent on restoring blue-collar American manufacturing to its former glory, considers free trade a dirty word and wants Canada to wade voluntarily into a failed, gang-ravaged state that’s a quagmire waiting to happen. 

To be sure, Joe Biden is no Donald Trump. But he doesn’t always make it obvious. 

The U.S. president arrives in Ottawa tonight on a whirlwind 24-hour visit — a significantly less elaborate itinerary than first envisioned in the Prime Minister’s Office — two full years since becoming commander-in-chief.

“This will be the first true, in-person bilateral meeting between the two leaders in Canada since 2009,” said White House National Security Council spokesman John Kirby. 

The first year of Biden’s term focused on rebuilding Canada-U.S. relations following Trump’s divisive term in office. The second focused on meeting obligations, “including prioritizing orderly and safe migration through regular pathways,” Kirby said. 

“Now, heading into the third, this visit is about taking stock of what we’ve done, where we are and what we need to prioritize for the future.”  

While he’s far less undiplomatic and publicly combative than his both-barrels predecessor, Biden’s first two years in the Oval Office produced more than enough political headaches for Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. 

Friday’s meetings may not offer much remedy. 

High on Canada’s wish list will be frank talk on Buy American, the age-old protectionist doctrine resurrected by every 21st-century president short of George W. Bush and one of Biden’s favourite domestic political messages. 

“The president is very committed to policies that create jobs in the United States, and we don’t take issue with that policy,” said Kirsten Hillman, Canada’s ambassador to the U.S. 

“What we say is … when you apply it to Canada and deeply integrated Canada supply chains, it does not serve your policy purpose. It does the exact opposite.” 

Fully 60 per cent of the physical goods that Canada sells stateside “go into the manufacturing of other products,” and much the same is true of what Canada buys from the U.S., she added. 

“So if we start carving each other out of our supply chains, the economic impact on jobs in our own country is going to be enormous. We’re shooting ourselves in the foot, essentially — both countries.” 

Canada is also likely to be playing defence on Haiti, the impoverished, quake-ravaged Caribbean nation on the island of Hispaniola that has devolved into a failed state since the 2021 assassination of president Jovenel Moïse. 

Roving gangs of marauders now control more than half of Port-au-Prince, the capital city of a country in the grips of a cholera outbreak with little access to medical help, a near-total lack of public security and a powerless interim government. 

The Biden administration, its hands full with Russia’s war in Ukraine, the rise of China and other great-power concerns, wants Canada — home to a large diaspora of French-speaking Haitians, mostly in Quebec — to take a lead role.

“It’s a fair amount of pressure,” said Carleton University professor Stephen Saideman. “The reality is that Trudeau doesn’t want to do this, and so he comes up with whatever arguments he can to deflect this.”

“I am hopeful … that Canada will be able to step in and take some leadership in Haiti, because that will matter in Washington,” said Gordon Giffin, who served as Bill Clinton’s envoy to Ottawa from 1997 to 2001. 

“Taking that one off of our menu would be a big help to the U.S. administration.” 

Though it might seem simplistic at the highest levels of intergovernmental relations, the quid pro quo approach is foundational to how countries get along and manage various irritants in the relationship, he suggested. 

“I do think it’s a prototypical example of the United States saying, ‘We need you to help us out on this one,'” Giffin told a panel hosted by the Americas Council and the Council of the Americas. 

He recalled the frequent interactions between his old boss and Jean Chrétien, who was prime minister while Clinton was in the White House and a man Giffin described as “the consummate dealmaker.” 

Chrétien “looked for places where Bill Clinton needed a little bit of help,” Giffin said. 

“I would very quickly hear, ‘OK, we’re going to do this, Gordon, but for that, I need this,'” he said in his best Chrétien drawl. “I’m sorry, that’s just human nature, and it’s part of the deal.” 

National Security Council spokesman John Kirby would not say Wednesday whether Biden intends to make a direct demand of Trudeau on Haiti. 

“They share a concern about the dire situation down there from a security and humanitarian perspective — this is not something that is unfamiliar to either the prime minister or the president,” Kirby said. 

“As for a multinational force or anything like that, I don’t want to get ahead of the conversation here. But as we’ve said before, if there’s a need for that, if there’s a place for that, that’s all going to have to be worked out directly with the Haitian government and with the UN.”

Kirby also played down expectations on another big Canadian ask: renegotiating the Safe Third Country Agreement, a 2004 treaty between the two countries that many blame for a recent spike in irregular migration. 

On issues of migration, “we’re well aware of Canadian concerns. We have concerns of our own,” Kirby said. “It’s a hemispheric, shared regional challenge. So I have no doubt that they’ll discuss it.” 

Senior government officials in Ottawa say the discussion on Haiti will involve the two leaders, but not Haitians themselves. Trudeau has so far focused on sanctions, helping Haitian authorities with surveillance support to track gang activity, and building a political consensus on how the West can best help. 

Saideman, who has previously worked with the U.S. Department of Defense, said Ottawa is trying to avoid that at all costs. “This government does not want to suffer tremendous costs or cement tremendous risks.”

He noted that Canada’s largest deployment is currently in Latvia and Ottawa has agreed to expand its presence to shore up that country’s border with Russia.

Saideman said it would be impossible to expand that force while leading an intervention in Haiti, particularly because each deployed unit generally requires a second unit undergoing training and a third recovering from the previous rotation.

In addition, gang violence would be significantly more risky than past missions aimed at preventing clashes between warring armies, such as in Bosnia or Cyprus.

“I’m not saying we shouldn’t do it, but I can see why the government is cautious about it,” said Saideman, who is director of the Canadian Defence and Security Network.

“In Haiti, this has not been the first rodeo,” he said. “The previous missions didn’t fix things, didn’t lead to a lasting solution.”

This report by The Canadian Press was first published March 23, 2023.

— With files from Dylan Robertson in Ottawa

James McCarten, The Canadian Press

Storytelling is in our DNA. We provide credible, compelling multimedia storytelling and services in English and French to help captivate your digital, broadcast and print audiences. As Canada’s national news agency for 100 years, we give Canadians an unbiased news source, driven by truth, accuracy and timeliness.

Follow Author

Alberta

Low oil prices could have big consequences for Alberta’s finances

Published on

From the Fraser Institute

By Tegan Hill

Amid the tariff war, the price of West Texas Intermediate oil—a common benchmark—recently dropped below US$60 per barrel. Given every $1 drop in oil prices is an estimated $750 million hit to provincial revenues, if oil prices remain low for long, there could be big implications for Alberta’s budget.

The Smith government already projects a $5.2 billion budget deficit in 2025/26 with continued deficits over the following two years. This year’s deficit is based on oil prices averaging US$68.00 per barrel. While the budget does include a $4 billion “contingency” for unforeseen events, given the economic and fiscal impact of Trump’s tariffs, it could quickly be eaten up.

Budget deficits come with costs for Albertans, who will already pay a projected $600 each in provincial government debt interest in 2025/26. That’s money that could have gone towards health care and education, or even tax relief.

Unfortunately, this is all part of the resource revenue rollercoaster that’s are all too familiar to Albertans.

Resource revenue (including oil and gas royalties) is inherently volatile. In the last 10 years alone, it has been as high as $25.2 billion in 2022/23 and as low as $2.8 billion in 2015/16. The provincial government typically enjoys budget surpluses—and increases government spending—when oil prices and resource revenue is relatively high, but is thrown into deficits when resource revenues inevitably fall.

Fortunately, the Smith government can mitigate this volatility.

The key is limiting the level of resource revenue included in the budget to a set stable amount. Any resource revenue above that stable amount is automatically saved in a rainy-day fund to be withdrawn to maintain that stable amount in the budget during years of relatively low resource revenue. The logic is simple: save during the good times so you can weather the storm during bad times.

Indeed, if the Smith government had created a rainy-day account in 2023, for example, it could have already built up a sizeable fund to help stabilize the budget when resource revenue declines. While the Smith government has deposited some money in the Heritage Fund in recent years, it has not created a dedicated rainy-day account or introduced a similar mechanism to help stabilize provincial finances.

Limiting the amount of resource revenue in the budget, particularly during times of relatively high resource revenue, also tempers demand for higher spending, which is only fiscally sustainable with permanently high resource revenues. In other words, if the government creates a rainy-day account, spending would become more closely align with stable ongoing levels of revenue.

And it’s not too late. To end the boom-bust cycle and finally help stabilize provincial finances, the Smith government should create a rainy-day account.

Continue Reading

Alberta

Governments in Alberta should spur homebuilding amid population explosion

Published on

From the Fraser Institute

By Tegan Hill and Austin Thompson

In 2024, construction started on 47,827 housing units—the most since 48,336 units in 2007 when population growth was less than half of what it was in 2024.

Alberta has long been viewed as an oasis in Canada’s overheated housing market—a refuge for Canadians priced out of high-cost centres such as Vancouver and Toronto. But the oasis is starting to dry up. House prices and rents in the province have spiked by about one-third since the start of the pandemic. According to a recent Maru poll, more than 70 per cent of Calgarians and Edmontonians doubt they will ever be able to afford a home in their city. Which raises the question: how much longer can this go on?

Alberta’s housing affordability problem reflects a simple reality—not enough homes have been built to accommodate the province’s growing population. The result? More Albertans competing for the same homes and rental units, pushing prices higher.

Population growth has always been volatile in Alberta, but the recent surge, fuelled by record levels of immigration, is unprecedented. Alberta has set new population growth records every year since 2022, culminating in the largest-ever increase of 186,704 new residents in 2024—nearly 70 per cent more than the largest pre-pandemic increase in 2013.

Homebuilding has increased, but not enough to keep pace with the rise in population. In 2024, construction started on 47,827 housing units—the most since 48,336 units in 2007 when population growth was less than half of what it was in 2024.

Moreover, from 1972 to 2019, Alberta added 2.1 new residents (on average) for every housing unit started compared to 3.9 new residents for every housing unit started in 2024. Put differently, today nearly twice as many new residents are potentially competing for each new home compared to historical norms.

While Alberta attracts more Canadians from other provinces than any other province, federal immigration and residency policies drive Alberta’s population growth. So while the provincial government has little control over its population growth, provincial and municipal governments can affect the pace of homebuilding.

For example, recent provincial amendments to the city charters in Calgary and Edmonton have helped standardize building codes, which should minimize cost and complexity for builders who operate across different jurisdictions. Municipal zoning reforms in CalgaryEdmonton and Red Deer have made it easier to build higher-density housing, and Lethbridge and Medicine Hat may soon follow suit. These changes should make it easier and faster to build homes, helping Alberta maintain some of the least restrictive building rules and quickest approval timelines in Canada.

There is, however, room for improvement. Policymakers at both the provincial and municipal level should streamline rules for building, reduce regulatory uncertainty and development costs, and shorten timelines for permit approvals. Calgary, for instance, imposes fees on developers to fund a wide array of public infrastructure—including roads, sewers, libraries, even buses—while Edmonton currently only imposes fees to fund the construction of new firehalls.

It’s difficult to say how long Alberta’s housing affordability woes will endure, but the situation is unlikely to improve unless homebuilding increases, spurred by government policies that facilitate more development.

Tegan Hill

Director, Alberta Policy, Fraser Institute

Austin Thompson

Senior Policy Analyst, Fraser Institute
Continue Reading

Trending

X