Alberta and Saskatchewan Premiers Reject Retaliatory Tariffs Against U.S.

On Wednesday, Alberta Premier Danielle Smith and Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe held separate press conferences where they declined to impose retaliatory tariffs on natural resources from the United States, pushing back against Prime Minister Mark Carney’s apparent trade war approach.

Both leaders stated they had no qualms about matching U.S. tariffs, but they firmly opposed Carney’s suggestion to heighten the trade conflict by levying punitive tariffs on essential resources in their provinces, including oil and potash.

“As a province, we cannot and will not support any type of export tariff on our natural resources,” Moe articulated. Meanwhile, Smith shared her concerns, saying, “I can’t think of a more devastating policy than imposing taxes on Alberta’s oil exports to the U.S. It would absolutely wreck the Canadian economy.”

During his address, Moe mentioned plans to match a 50-percent tariff on Canadian spirits imposed by the U.S., while Smith said she was not yet ready to fully commit to such measures. She advocated for increased diplomatic efforts with the U.S. and suggested that citizens from both nations could encourage their leaders to return to negotiations.

Smith expressed her view, saying, “It’s about being more Canadian—too friendly, kind, and helpful to resist.” She noted that Canada does not possess the same strategic oil reserves as the U.S., warning that heavy tariffs on Canadian oil would “bring Ontario and Quebec’s economies to a standstill.”

“Canada won’t triumph in this struggle through sheer force,” she reasoned. “We’ll succeed by being smarter, strategic, agile, and leveraging our reputation and relationship with the American populace to have these tariffs overturned.”

Additionally, Smith is facing the challenge of an Alberta independence referendum set for October 19. While she has resisted calls to cancel the vote amid the U.S. trade conflict, she has expressed her desire for Alberta to stay within Canada.

“It’s crucial we recognize the benefits of being part of Canada,” she remarked on Wednesday. “That’s the stance I’ve taken. That’s why I’ll be voting to remain.”

“I feel we’re gaining real momentum as a country, collaborating, and I aim to persuade as many people as possible to vote alongside me,” she added.

Columnist Cory Morgan of Rebel News took a contrary stance on Wednesday, suggesting that the trade disagreement might actually bolster the independence movement in Alberta instead of undermining it. He asserted, “What we’re witnessing underscores the federation’s failure to forge an effective trading bloc. This only reinforces the argument for Alberta’s independence.”

He commented that the trade downturn does not contradict Alberta’s independence case but rather showcases it. “Ottawa couldn’t clinch a deal, and now other provinces wish to treat Alberta’s oil as a weapon. Those who would suffer first are not in Toronto or Ottawa,” he observed.

He continued, “Alberta’s energy resources are deemed national assets when it suits the narrative and a political headache when they don’t. You can’t spend years blocking pipelines and criticizing the oil industry and then expect that Alberta crude is suddenly the federation’s strategic reserve when Washington turns hostile.”

Canada’s Federal Industry Minister, Melanie Joly, did not address questions regarding whether the national government would attempt to coerce provincial governments into aligning with its trade strategies.

“We don’t discuss negotiations publicly. We’ve already made significant decisions regarding countermeasures,” Joly stated.

The Conservative Party of Canada urged Carney’s administration to disclose the entire text of the U.S. trade proposal that Canadian negotiators rejected last week, insinuating that Carney and his team may not have been fully transparent about its contents and reasons for rejection.

“Canadians deserve to know what the proposed deal was that the prime minister initially aimed to accept and then decided to reject. They deserve to see what was on the table so we all understand what we’re advocating for and fighting against,” Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre said on Tuesday.

In response, Liberals and their supporters cautioned that revealing such details could undermine Canada’s position in future trade discussions.

“We may indeed be negotiating with the Americans in the future, and having a backdrop of political maneuvering surrounding trade papers could be detrimental,” advised trade lawyer and C.D. Howe Institute senior fellow Lawrence Herman.

The Conservatives expressed their frustration with the U.S. stance on the trade issues. Poilievre remarked that he was “disappointed” with the U.S. imposing further unjustified tariffs on Canada.

“Canadians need to unite to defend our nation against these unfair assaults on our jobs and businesses. Canada cannot accept one-sided tariffs that threaten to deindustrialize us. We must keep fighting for tariff-free trade,” he stressed.

He added, “Conservatives support measures to protect Canadians and our industries targeted by these inequitable U.S. tariffs.”

Poilievre also criticized Carney’s economic policies, calling for “urgent economic reforms to stimulate growth, safeguard jobs, and rejuvenate our industry.”

“This must involve abolishing the industrial carbon tax, repealing anti-development regulations, fast-tracking the 500 economic projects awaiting federal approval, and implementing significant tax reforms to reinvest in our country, reward labor, and rejuvenate our economy,” he elaborated.

Despite mounting pressure due to the looming U.S. tariffs on Canadian businesses, Carney has remained steadfast in rejecting calls to eliminate the carbon tax.