Why Jamil Jivani thinks there's 'a lot of goodwill' for Canada after meeting Trump

OTTAWA — Conservative MP Jamil Jivani says he stands ready to help Prime Minister Mark Carney’s government when it comes to navigating the upcoming review of the Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement (CUSMA), after returning from Washington, D.C. last week where he met with senior officials within U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration, including Vice-President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer.

He also met with senators from Wisconsin, Montana and Ohio, as well as General Motors, the National Association of Manufacturers and the American Automotive Policy Council.

Jivani spoke to Intergovernmental Affairs Minister Dominic LeBlanc about his recent trip earlier this week.

National Post requested an interview with Jivani and his office agreed to a question-and-answer transcript. This interview has been edited for clarity and length.

How did your interaction with the president come up?

Well, JD took me on like a tour of the White House. We went into the Oval Office, and the president had just finished doing an interview, I think it was with NBC News, so he was in like a side office connected to the Oval Office, and he was kind of seated in the middle of a meeting, so we just kind of briefly interrupted it. Introduced myself, you know, he had some things to share with me, including that he wanted me to pass on that he loves Canadians, and I did that, and then I kind of let him continue on his meeting.

What else did he have to share with you?

Well, that was the gist of it. I mean, he’s a high octane guy, so he packs a lot into a short period of time. But that was the most important message, I think, for me to kind of get across is, I think his hope is that just as we may separate our opinions of a government from the people of a country, that Canadians might know that about him too, that whatever issues he may have with our government, he still thinks highly of the people here.

He asked you to share a message on his behalf to Canadians. Did you share anything with him on behalf of Canadians?

I told him that I was here because I’m concerned about CUSMA and that thought it was important for people in Washington to know how the uncertainty around the trade issues are affecting workers and businesses in the country. So I kind of passed that on, and hopefully I get a chance to talk to him again with more length. But I thought it was it was very important for me in all my conversations there to try to convey a sense of urgency of wanting to get things done. There’s been a three-and-a-half month lag, I would say, between dialogue between the two countries, dating back to sort of the end of October, so I kind of expressed that.

What did administration officials share with you when it came to their perspective on CUSMA?

Well, a lot of our conversation around CUSMA went into Mexico and sort of helping me better understand the progress that has been made between Mexico and the United States …While I was there, Mexico and the U.S. announced a critical minerals action plan. The week before I got there, Mexico and the U.S. announced formal talks around CUSMA reforms.

It became kind of clear to me that we’re behind, if our objective is to meet the July 1 timetable, which is when the CUSMA review is supposed to be completed. There’s certain progress being made between two of the three countries in this trilateral arrangement, far more progress than what’s happening as relates to Canada. So that was a big part of me just kind of better understanding what’s going on from their point of view, which is, there is work being done, and we we’re just not part of it at the moment, and so that was I think one of my major takeaways is that I think, I hope, we don’t wind up being kind of so far behind that really important parts of this are being resolved without us participating. But that feels like it may be — it’s a risk that we have to confront right now, because we are behind.

What did you flesh out to (LeBlanc?)

I don’t want to talk too much about my meeting with him because my hope is that some of the things we discussed are things that we can work on together. But I just sort of gave him my perspective, which is that this is very important. I am very concerned that we are going to get closer to the July 1 deadline without progress, and what implications it has for our economy could be enormous, given how many of our exports are covered under this agreement, and how many businesses rely on this agreement to be a framework for their operations ….The other point that I made is that like I do think that the relational side of this is really important, and I think that if we continue to move forward in a way where these are essentially parallel conversations, instead of us being able to work together, that I think we’re we’re not putting our best foot forward.

I think I had a series of meetings in Washington that gave me a valuable perspective to offer his government in terms of future decisions they might make, in terms of future meetings we might be able to have together, which would be my preference. What they want to do with that, I don’t know, but I made it as clear as I possibly could that like, I’m not here to fight with you. I believe we should have the exact same objectives.

Have you briefed the prime minister yet?

I have not had a chance to speak to the prime minister. I would welcome the opportunity, but I haven’t had it.

I’m sure you know what the prime minister said when he was asked about your trip. He said that he that his government has extensive and constant contacts with the U.S. administration, that you were not the trade critic for your party, nor the minister of international trade, and pointing to journalists, he also said, “I think it might have something to do with all of you.” So what does that tell you about how seriously the prime minister takes what it is that you’re doing?

I think the prime minister was wrong in his response. I would hope if he’s asked again, he will have a different answer, and I think that my conduct and quality of conversations I’ve had since the prime minister gave those comments would indicate that if this was a publicity stunt, I could have gotten a lot more publicity.

You can look — I have not been on a single TV show, and I could have been on every single one of them every day for the last week.

I can appreciate that the prime minister, not knowing me, and not having had the chance to speak with me, may have made assumptions about my intentions, or what I intend to do. But I think whatever concerns he may have had should have been alleviated by what’s happened over the last week, and the fact that I sat down for an hour with his minister and had a very candid conversation, and have shown the two of them and their government nothing but respect, despite a whole heap of things being said about me and names being thrown at me. So that’s my hope.

It seems like your goal going down was for improvement of the Canada-U.S. relationship, concerns over CUSMA. What difference if any, do you think your trip made for those goals?

There are a number of people who made time, in some cases, were very generous with their time to hear me out, who probably would not have made that same time for just anybody else.

In the spirit of trying to affirm that this is a non-partisan issue, I think me going down there and being very clear with my intention to want to be useful to the Carney government in getting this done. I think that we’ve made clear that Conservatives are not against the Liberals on this issue, that our objectives really should be the exact same.

I also think that in terms of future dialogue, I think I laid a lot of very good foundation, and I think the fruits of that will be clear as time goes on.

Did administration officials, I think about the U.S. Trade Representative, lay out to you what they would like to see from Canada next when it comes to CUSMA talks?

They have a lot of public documents shared about some of the terms, or let’s say reforms, that they want to talk to Canada about …having the chance to just talk with them about some of that was helpful in understanding when we do, hopefully, God willing, get to a point where this is just about term sheets. I think I have a better understanding of what that part of the process would look like. But we’re not there yet, right …There’s a relationship breakdown here, and I think that’s the main thing that I want to be able to communicate in this conversation with you is that, like, we have a relationship breakdown, and people can point fingers about that and all they want, but at the end of the day, I think our responsibility is to try to overcome that and fix it. That’s what I’m trying to do.

Did you get the sense that they’re on the same page as the Carney government of wanting to even get a renewal to CUSMA?

Some of these details are things I want to … leave that in my conversation with the minister.

Have you briefed or had a conversation with (Conservative Leader Pierre) Poilievre about your trip?

Yeah. We spent quite a bit of time together this week talking about the trip. I shared with him some (of) the same takeaways I shared with with Minister LeBlanc.

Have you made an offer that you could help set some meetings up with him when it comes to the administration officials you met with?

I think he knows I’m happy to do whatever he would like to do, and I kind of leave that with him to decide what’s the right move for him.

What’s your read on why you have gone down there and had these meetings, yet he has not done that?

You’d have to ask him. Like, I know I did what I did. I don’t know why — I can’t tell you why he’s made the decisions he’s made.

Do you think that your trip has potentially ruffled any feathers among your colleagues?

That may be the case, you’d have to ask people to give you their perspective. I mean, we’re a strong team here, and I think people trust me to conduct myself in a way that is in the best interest of our party. I think if you look at the last week, you know, we were very conscious of everything I said, everything I did. We were not reckless in any way with how we operated while there was so much attention on us. And I hope that, if there is anybody who has concerns about that, that we earned their confidence over the last week.

What’s next for you on this issue?

That’s a question for Minister LeBlanc. If it were up to me, you know, the next steps would be planned along with him. I’d like to be able to kind of lay out with him what helpful follow-ups would look like, how I can be useful in getting this done. I certainly come back here with a sense of urgency on wanting a positive deal.

Was there anything that surprised you in your conversations?

One thing that really stood out to me was, you know, there is a lot of goodwill toward our country, despite, I think, how things come across sometimes … I think sometimes the last year has often felt like a bit of an emotional roller coaster with Canada-U.S. stuff, depending on what’s in the news at a given moment. But I’m a believer that like pragmatism can succeed here, that reason over emotion will work out for the good.

National Post

• Jivani conveys message from Trump after meeting with JD Vance
• Why this Conservative MP wants to help Carney navigate Canada-U.S relations

Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here.