Where do Canadian farmers fit in the Trump Presidency mix?

Coming to the end of 2024, I reflect on profound changes in my life and our world. A year ago, I didn’t know my lovely wife Angelinda existed, yet today, we share a life together in Holy matrimony, filled with love and gratitude. While I could write volumes about marriage and its blessings, today, I focus on the seismic shifts shaping our broader world.
One of the most significant changes this year is the election of Donald J. Trump as President of the United States. Over 76 million Americans trusted his leadership, sparking widespread discussion and speculation about what his presidency would mean for Canada, particularly in agriculture.
As the agricultural industry faces uncertainty and opportunity, Canadian farmers are left wondering how changes in U.S. policy will ripple across our borders. From trade agreements to market access, the implications of this political shift could reshape the landscape of farming and food production in Canada.
It’s essential to remain informed and proactive in times of change. The coming months and years will reveal much about Canadian agriculture’s challenges and opportunities. Together, we must navigate these waters with wisdom and resilience, steadily focusing on the values and principles that guide our work in this vital industry.
As a businessman, Trump’s style may be more refined, with less ego and more focus on practical outcomes than the first time. If we play our cards wisely, this could open new opportunities for Canada-U.S. agricultural trade. But this also comes with a warning: if we throw darts across the border, we should prepare for missiles in return.
A cooperative approach could level the playing field, especially if Canadian stakeholders are united in their strategy. We need a stakeholders’ meeting to prepare, as any missteps in dealing with Trump’s administration could have severe consequences for Canadian farmers.
Cam Dahl, general manager of Manitoba Pork, outlined key considerations as Canada prepares for the 2026 Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement (CUSMA) review, emphasizing the urgent need for a strategic agricultural trade plan. He warned that continued U.S. support for CUSMA might hinge on increased Canadian defence spending, with agriculture—especially the dairy sector—becoming a focal point for U.S. negotiators. Dahl criticized the absence of a comprehensive strategy, calling on the Government of Canada to bring together farmers, processors, and provincial governments to craft a unified response.
He highlighted five essential components of Canada’s approach. First, governments should not sacrifice any commodity group or region to protect others, as illustrated by China’s retaliatory investigation into Canadian canola exports following tariffs on electric vehicles, aluminum, and steel.
Second, Canada must stress the benefits of open trade to U.S. national security and demonstrate that diplomatic disputes will not disrupt the deeply integrated North American agricultural market.
Third, Dahl urged Canada to push back against U.S. protectionist measures, such as country-of-origin labelling regulations, which raise consumer prices and harm Canadian farmers. He suggested advocating for solutions like a “product of North America” label to preserve market integration.
Fourth, Dahl underscored the importance of unified national standards, pointing to California’s Proposition 12, which imposes animal-raising conditions on jurisdictions outside the state, including Canada. He warned that fragmented standards across states could harm North American trade and increase consumer and farmer costs.
Finally, he called for a unified Canadian voice across governments, industries, and farmers, ensuring a consistent message to U.S. policymakers. Dahl stressed that time is of the essence, as Canada depends on the U.S. more than the U.S. depends on Canada, making strategic preparation critical.
My friend Karl said that dealing with Trump will require more tact and diplomacy than ever before. He returns to office with the advantage of foreknowledge—he knows precisely who stands with and against him. Unfortunately, the Canadian media could be our worst enemy in building bridges, as they may be more inclined to ignite fires than burn bridges.
If we attempt to challenge Trump with the equivalent of a .22-calibre rifle (which may be all we have in our arsenal), we should expect a response akin to cannon fire in return.
Ultimately, it’s about understanding who depends on whom more. Canada needs America more than America needs us. •