STOPPING OUTSIDE INFLUENCE
Foreign entities, which can currently spend up to $500 to influence elections, would not be permitted to spend anything on Canadian elections, and organizations selling ad space would not be allowed to knowingly accept advertisements from foreign entities.

ONE LOOPHOLE FOR ANOTHER
C-76 will require political parties to provide receipts for the millions taxpayers spend on election reimbursements. But the bill leaves a new loophole in its wake. A foreign entity could get around the ban on election spending by giving money to one Canadian organization, which could then pass it along to a second Canadian organization that would use the money for political purposes.

SPENDING LIMITS
A new pre-election period, beginning on June 30 of an election year, would cap the spending limit for partisan advertising and election surveys at $1.5 million.

MORE PROTECTIONS FOR PRIVATE DATA?
C-76 will require each political party to create a publicly available privacy policy that defines each party’s standards for the protection of Canadians’ personal data. In testimony given in June, Canada’s Federal Privacy Commissioner Daniel Therrien criticized the requirement as inadequate and noted that C-76 wouldn’t limit how much personal information is collected by political parties or the disclosure of personal information to others. Nor would it allow individuals access to their personal information, or require parties to seek consent before collecting information.

VOTER ACCESSIBILITY
In a bid to get more Canadians to the polls, C-76 would allow voter information cards to be used as identification, increase the number of hours advance polls are open, and reimburse political parties for accommodating persons with disabilities.

A TICKING CLOCK
Elections Canada has begun preparing for the bill’s changes, although it is uncertain if Parliament, which resumes in September, will pass C-76 quickly enough for the new measures to apply during the 2019 election.

Thousands of federal offenders are serving life sentences in Canada’s justice system, and critics say they aren’t getting the rehabilitative support they need.

“A life sentence is quite different from a traditional sentence,” explains Anita Desai, executive director of the St. Leonard’s Society of Canada. People serving life sentences, or “lifers,” often grapple with a greater sense of hopelessness than other inmates, she says, and they require targeted supports to help them work through that.

That support used to be given through a federally funded program called LifeLine, which helped lifers envision, and then prepare for, a future outside of prison. The federal government scrapped the program’s funding in 2012 as part of massive cuts amid Stephen Harper’s tough-on-crime agenda. Advocates want the funding reinstated, but the current government doesn’t appear interested in the program either.

From 1991 to 2012, LifeLine paired prisoners with mentors who themselves served life sentences and then successfully reintegrated into the community. The mentors guided mentees on adapting to life in prison, helped them prepare for life on the outside, and supported them once they were paroled.

LifeLine won multiple international awards while it was running, and correctional systems in other countries have emulated the program. Before it lost funding, LifeLine was employing as many as 26 in-reach workers to provide services to over 2,200 lifers. The program was not only effective, it was relatively inexpensive as well, costing just $2 million a year.

When LifeLine’s funding was cut, a coalition of community groups raised money to run a stripped-down version of the program. That funding ran out in March 2018, further jeopardizing the future of LifeLine.

Desai and other advocates for prison reform say it’s time for the federal government to fund the program again. Ivan Zinger, Canada’s federal prison ombudsman, agrees. In his 2016/2017 annual report, Zinger called on the Liberals to do just that.

But a spokesperson from Correctional Services Canada (CSC) says the government isn’t considering reinstating funding for LifeLine at this time. The CSC says LifeLine has been replaced by the Lifer Resource Strategy—a set of materials in binders available for prisoners in their libraries.

Desai says the Lifer Resource Strategy isn’t adequate. She compares it to giving a student a textbook but no teacher. “Ultimately,” Desai says, “a life sentence is handed out by the government, and it should be the responsibility of the government to fund a program that’s demonstrated to support this specific population.”

The residence at 24 Sussex has been vacant since the Harpers moved out in October 2015, with the Trudeaus in no apparent hurry to move into the house deemed in “urgent” need of repairs. In fact, the auditor general pegged renovation costs at $10 million back in 2008, and nearly a decade on, there’s reason to believe that price tag has ballooned. Though renovations have scarcely begun, Canadians have been ponying up for maintenance and consultation fees, as they brace for a doozy of a repair tab.

UP UNTIL NOW:

$36,000
Monthly cost for basic upkeep of 24 Sussex

$113,000
Amount the National Capital Commission has spent on outside contracts linked to the residence since January 2016, including:

– $79,185
Spent on “advisory services on project costing” by UK-based construction and project management company Turner and Townsend CM2R Inc.

– $15,000
Security services from a private firm hired to escort contactors onto the grounds (a job typically handled by the RCMP)

– $11,892
Fee for engineering consultants EXP Services Inc., hired in January to investigate mould on the premises

Meanwhile, Rideau Cottage—last renovated in 2013—also saw upgrades at the PM’s request. The Trudeaus now enjoy new light dimmers, window screens, flower arrangements, and an unspecified electrical cable that cost a whopping $15,000, plus security upgrades for another $2 million.

RENOVATION SCENARIOS:

The PMO has yet to accept one of the possible reno options the NCC proposed, but the expected cost is in the $40 to $100 million range. The choices are:

$38 million
The cost for “Site Services & General Civil Work, Demolition and Abatement, Main Building, Annex Building (including pool), and Grounds Rehabilitation,” in the cheapest scenario. Changes to the main building would be the biggest expense at $13.49 million, including a whole new electrical system, exterior windows and doors, and a sunroom.

$55.5 million
With a two-year timeline, this option includes an upgrade to the pool house and $31.8 million for a security perimeter around the property.

$89 million
The cost of a new building annex with a new pool and $32.7 million for security upgrades, finished over four years.

$96.5 million
What the public would pay to get a structure they can actually use. The new building would be open for tours and include a concrete and steel structure to protect the residence from explosions and major attacks.

SOME FEATURES INCLUDE:

$12 million
New 7,500-square-foot private residence; the main building can be used for state functions

$3 million
Landscaping

$1.5 million
Fire protection, new plumbing, heating, and air conditioning

$11,800
Oven/steamer

$7,200
Dry pantry

$6,000
Walk-in cooler

$3,500
China cabinet

Illustration by Emile Compion.

Dear Europeans,

Listen, we Canadians are fond of you. And sometimes you Europeans can even find our country on a map. We like the way you keep it post-colonial.

But we have to have a chat about Prime Minister Trudeau. The new one, Justin. Not Disco Trudeau—that was Trudeau 2.0’s dad. I’m talking about Yoga Trudeau, the guy with the tight pants. From Vogue. Yes, him, the underwear model. Gosh, you have not paid us this much attention since we blessed your airwaves with the “Safety Dance.” We’d be lying if we said we’re immune to flattery (Justin sure isn’t).

But, still… Oh, how to begin?

You know how China sends out adorable panda bears as love ambassadors? Justin Trudeau is our panda bear, if panda bears cared about their abs. We send him abroad and you take his picture and you, being well trained in monarchical reasoning, think that if the head of the country is that good looking, it must follow, à la Elizabethan Great Chain of Being, that Canada is also in fine shape. As above, so below.

Your questions about our Prime Beef Minister betray not only your adorably antique cogitating but also your own aspirations. How hard, you wonder, would it be to find a Trudeau for Europe? Not so hard. You have beer commercial casting agents in Europe, no? They sell men’s underwear on the continent, yes?

The thing is, he ain’t all that, politically speaking. I personally would not kick him out of bed for eating (likely gluten-free) crackers, but I might smother him with a pillow if he started talking policy—what little of it he has to brag about.

And since you will keep asking about him, here are the answers you don’t want.

How is our forward-thinking PM protecting Canada’s fragile environment from the ravages of global warming? By negotiating bad trade deals with the EU (that would be you lot, who are still buying coal from Russia) and by reviving cooperation on the Keystone XL pipeline with President Trump, which is a bit like driving a truck full of beer up to the gangway of an off-duty frigate and tossing the captain a bottle opener. It’s going to get messy very, very fast.

To be fair, the prime minister has become a true friend to the poor, the marginalized, and to Canada’s growing underclass. Whenever he meets with the disenfranchised, he wears denim. Denim and novelty socks.

And, yes, Trudeau’s dedication to democratic reform is indeed admirable—if you live in Belarus. To date, he has said the words “democratic” and “reform” out loud, in public, and highlighted each utterance with a look of athletic (by which I mean less-than-mindful) determination. But when you are building a film franchise… erm, rather, a political legacy, you don’t put all the good stuff in the first movie term. Justin Trudeau 2: Back to the Senate is being pre-marketed as a cross between A Few Good Men and one of those French movies with almost no dialogue. Because words, words are so, so empty.

That’s our sexy PM: snug trousers, same old ill-fitting policies. Canadians call this situation the “Canadian Compromise.” It’s how we comfort ourselves when we realize we’ve once again settled for the status quo in better tailoring.

Remember the weird “clear” trend in the 1990s, when everything from Coca Cola to Palmolive dish soap was manufactured without colouring? The marketers thought they could draw in buyers with the promise of literal transparency. Except the Coke still tasted like Coke and, to our wonder, so did the Palmolive. We got the bottles mixed up.

Justin Trudeau is clear cola: He looks as fresh and healthy as river water, and he’s full of crap.

Trudeau and Finance Minister Bill Morneau pose on budget day in 2016. Photo courtesy of CBC.

Trudeau’s majority win in 2015 promised many things, among them a strong economy and a happy middle class. Early on he revealed the party’s plans to run a “modest short-term” deficit of no more than $10 billion a year to achieve this, and hit the ground running with campaign promises of better infrastructure, innovation spending, and greener communities. Citing the need to jump-start the economy with these investments, the Liberals vowed to balance the budget by 2019–20.

On March 22, Finance Minister Bill Morneau blew through that promise in the 2017 federal budget, announcing a planned deficit of approximately $28.5 billion in the coming year, set to decline “gradually” to $18.8 billion in 2021–22. Long-term fiscal projections are now anticipating deficits until 2050, leaving Canadians wondering how the government ever plans to get back on track.

While Trudeau’s plans were praised by International Monetary Fund managing director Christine Lagarde last year, a number this large is atypical. Governments may run large deficits to stimulate a struggling economy. But despite some quarters that have experienced slower growth, the Canadian economy is currently growing. That means if there’s a sudden downturn, the Trudeau administration would have to plunge even further into the red.

In keeping in line with his campaign promises, Trudeau also promised in the C-44 budget bill to spend $187 billion on infrastructure over 12 years, including a $35 billion Infrastructure Bank. The bank would include the private sector to provide low-cost financing for new projects—a possible way to boost the economy and get much-needed transit projects off the ground. There are high expectations for the results of such spending, and success will largely depend on execution and choosing the right projects.

Trudeau was forced to push himself out of the worst economic decade since the Second World War, and after a sluggish start, Canada’s economy has indeed picked up. It grew by more than two percent in the last quarter, while unemployment in July hit 6.3 percent—the lowest level since the October 2008 recession.

But few of these happy stats may be attributed to Trudeau’s planning.

Much growth in Canada is rooted in consumer spending, which has picked up the slack from declining growth from the resource sector. Low interest rates have allowed consumers to carry the economy for a while, but have also let them rack up a fair bit of debt—making Canadians increasingly vulnerable to sudden rate hikes. On the bright side, Trudeau has set aside $6.6 billion to support skills and innovation, and has been pushing for a European Union free trade deal (spearheaded by the Harper government) to help improve exports.

For some, the irony of the 2015 anti-Trudeau campaign smear that our PM thinks “the budget will balance itself” is sinking in. Meanwhile, other Canadians are basking in the current steady economic climate—whether Trudeau is to thank for that or not. Ottawa hasn’t been shy throughout their planning phase and over the next two years Canadians will watch as they juggle their multiple projects in the air, waiting for results and all the while hoping against hope that we aren’t forced to send the bland old economist back in.

Grade: B

Trudeau marches in the 2017 Toronto Pride parade. Photo courtesy of Pride Toronto.

Three women stand in the main reception area of Mississauga, Ont.’s city hall, desperately looking over a crowd holding their phones above their heads. They share a giddiness that’s palpable, even contagious. All three are visible minorities—women of colour with black hair and brown skin. One of them wears a bright blue hijab. All three of them carry white pieces of paper, held as straight as possible as they lean above, beyond, and to the side of the crowd to get a glimpse at him. Just one glimpse.

“WE” reads one sign in the same blue as the woman’s hijab. “<3 U” reads the second paper in a pinky-red, the heart imperfectly coloured. “J.T.” reads the third in purple ink.

It’s the photo that captured how many minorities feel when Prime Minister Justin Trudeau enters a room. There’s swooning, elation, even relief. We have a leader that actively participates with, celebrates, and endorses the existence of minority communities and religion. He was the first sitting Canadian prime minister to attend a Pride parade. During Canada 150 festivities, he entered a First Nations teepee. He declared himself a feminist when he became PM. He was the first to wear socks that said “Eid Mubarak.”

But great photos, socks, and smiles cannot build a foundation for any minority group to survive and prosper on. As Trudeau’s second year in power comes to an eventful end, there have begun signs of trepidation, a hint of hesitancy, and a lot of skepticism.

A closer look at the context behind the photo-ops and colourful socks shows a bleak reality. While Trudeau selected “a cabinet that looks like Canada” with gender parity, there was no one of Chinese or Filipino origin, and no Arab ministers at the time of publication. The PM may support Muslim communities wholeheartedly, yet hate crimes against this community are at the highest they have ever been. Local calls for protection for mosques, after a fatal Quebec City shooting, haven’t been heeded either. But, “Eid Mubarak” socks have gone viral.

In the same spirit, while Trudeau’s attendance of Canada’s Pride parades continues to wow the world, we’re still waiting for his concrete steps of action that strengthen the rights of LGBTQ communities. Later this year, for instance, the Liberal government is expected to introduce legislation to erase past convictions for sexual activity with a same-sex partner. This has aided the discussion surrounding LGBTQ issues, but they’re all still just verbal plans—ideas without an engine.

And then there are the Indigenous and Black populations of Canada, who seem to be a complicated side-thought in Trudeau’s agenda. The police-related deaths of Andrew Loku, Jermaine Carby, and Abdirahman Abdi—all men of colour—have not warranted official word or action. Nor have those serving long immigration detentions. While Trudeau assures Canadians that he respects Indigenous communities of Canada, there is yet to be any official intervention into the lagging inquiry into murdered and missing Indigenous women and girls or the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s 94 calls to action.

We’re not used to a leader who will take off his shoes and walk into a mosque or a teepee, sit with us, and tell us, “You belong here.” But, with only two years left to go, it’s time for more concrete policy that addresses the underlying issues and fears of these minority communities.

Pull up your socks J.T. There’s a lot of work to be done if Canada is going to become the country you say it is.

Grade: B-

CORRECTION: The print version of this story, which appears in our September/October issue, incorrectly states that Trudeau did not have an LGBTQ-identifying minister in his cabinet at the time of publication. This regrets the error.

Trudeau inside a ceremonial teepee on Parliament Hill during Canada Day 2017. Photo courtesy of Russ Diabo.

Just last year, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said: “No relationship is more important to our government and to Canada than the one with Indigenous peoples.” He promised a renewed nation-to-nation relationship—one that would uphold the treaties and constitutionally protected rights of Indigenous people while fixing the many socioeconomic crises that often plague Indigenous communities. He also promised to implement all 94 calls to action urged by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. But so far, Trudeau has failed to deliver.

After his election victory in October 2015, Trudeau vowed to put an end to the two percent funding cap that was imposed by Jean Chrétien’s Liberal government in 1996. For almost 20 years, funding for First Nations programs and services could only increase by two percent each year—a policy that doesn’t take into consideration rising inflation and a growing First Nations population. But in the 2016 budget, which promised Indigenous communities $8.4 billion over five years, and in the 2017 budget, offering an additional $3.4 billion over another five years, the funding cap remains in place. A policy such as this one not only diminishes the humanity of Indigenous people, it places a stranglehold on communities that already lack the most basic services.

The next big promise was a national inquiry into missing and murdered Indigenous women and girls. Trudeau made good on his promise, launching the inquiry in September 2016. But its commission has come under intense scrutiny for its lack of progress and poor communication with families. As of March 2017, there were only 122 family members in the commission’s database, despite being halfway through its two-year mandate. To make matters worse, several senior staffers, including the director of operations, have already left the commission.

Trudeau’s Liberals also promised to end the water crisis on roughly 90 reserves experiencing drinking water advisories, which have persisted for decades in some cases. The 2016 budget included investments of $1.8 billion in clean drinking water and wastewater systems in Indigenous communities over five years. While this sounds promising, Human Rights Watch reported that this financial commitment will not solve operation and maintenance costs that come up to an extra $419 million per year. An additional 2011 report from Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada found that $4.7 billion over 10 years would be needed to bring water systems up to a sustainable standard.

On a brighter note, Trudeau fulfilled his promise of new funding for the preservation of Indigenous languages and cultures. The 2016 budget included $76.9 million to support cultural initiatives on reserves over a two-year period. The majority of Canada’s Indigenous languages are endangered due to Canada’s history of colonization and oppression, so this could be great step toward revitalization. Another promise to develop a Métis Nation economic development strategy has been upheld; the 2016 budget provided $25 million over five years to support the nation.

But these positive developments have been undermined and overshadowed by Trudeau’s approval of Kinder Morgan’s Trans Mountain pipeline expansion project, the Keystone XL pipeline, Pacific NorthWest LNG project, and the Site C dam. All four projects shatter any type of nation-to-nation relationship Trudeau had in mind. The Site C dam in British Columbia’s Peace River Valley will flood First Nations territory. Elsewhere, other First Nations worry about oil spills that could cause food and water contamination. Trudeau’s unwavering approval of these projects also contradicts the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, adopted by the Canadian government last year and requiring that the government obtain the free and informed consent of Indigenous people prior to any project affecting their lands.

Meanwhile, the Trudeau government continues to racially discriminate against Indigenous youth by underfunding their child welfare services. Last January, the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal ordered the Trudeau government to take immediate action, but four non-compliance orders later, they continue to break the law.

Trudeau can no longer scrape by with prime ministerial tweets and tokenistic gestures in the hopes that they might somehow solve the problems at hand. Indigenous people, and upcoming generations, want more than “a place to store their canoes and paddles so they can connect back out on the land,” as Trudeau said back in January. At least Stephen Harper was up front about his assimilationist agenda. Trudeau promised us hope and then turned his back on us.

Grade: F

Justin Trudeau has reached the midway point of his term as prime minister. But after two years in power, how much change has he truly made? In this special report, we grade Trudeau’s performance—and our PM has some serious work to do.

TRUDEAU’S MEDIA PRESENCE: C-

“When American news is dominated by a president with no filter, it’s hard to not be enraptured by our self-proclaimed feminist hunk prime minister…. It’s hard to see when we should be genuinely applauding him and when we’re just swooning over a Ken doll with half-decent politics—because our leader seems so much better than the alternative.”

Read more

TRUDEAU ON INDIGENOUS RIGHTS: F

“Trudeau can no longer scrape by with prime ministerial tweets and tokenistic gestures in the hopes that they might somehow solve the problems at hand. Indigenous people, and upcoming generations, want more than ‘a place to store their canoes and paddles so they can connect back out on the land.'”

Read more

TRUDEAU ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS: D

“This is the Liberals’ diplomacy under Trudeau in a nutshell: They are a bulwark of the worst impulses of liberalism and capitalism, and effect superficial dedication to social justice issues in an effort to mask their less-than-savoury endeavours.”

Read more

TRUDEAU ON SOCIAL ISSUES: B-

“We’re not used to a leader who will take off his shoes and walk into a mosque or a teepee, sit with us, and tell us, ‘You belong here.’ But, with only two years left to go, it’s time for more concrete policy that addresses the underlying issues and fears of these minority communities.”

Read more

TRUDEAU ON THE ECONOMY: B

“Trudeau was forced to push himself out of the worst economic decade since the Second World War, and after a sluggish start, Canada’s economy has indeed picked up.”

Read more

Trudeau jogs past Vancouver promgoers. Photo courtesy of Adam Scotti.

When American news is dominated by a president with no filter, it’s hard to not be enraptured by our self-proclaimed feminist hunk prime minister. Many Canadians have spent the last year or so consumed by a dizzying high of how lucky we are, how special we are, how unbelievably progressive we are. While the United States is publicly imploding on the world stage thanks to a president with several sexual assault allegations against him, our PM walks through Toronto’s Pride parade in the blazing sun, in a pink button up and charming multicolour socks that say “Eid Mubarak.”

It’s been less of a media circus around Trudeau, and more of a media celebration. It’s hard to see when we should be genuinely applauding him and when we’re just swooning over a Ken doll with half-decent politics—because our leader seems so much better than the alternative.

“When you’re as photogenic as Justin Trudeau, the camera seems to find you,” reads one Montreal Gazette article on the PM’s latest photobomb. It features a running Trudeau with a group of promgoers in Vancouver.

Except, the camera didn’t just seem to find him. The photo in question was taken by Trudeau’s personal photographer Adam Scotti as part of a project to document the runs the pair go on and people they see throughout.

Despite all of this, the photo of bright, young, smiling—and mostly white—faces with our too-handsome-to-hate PM has circulated both in Canadian and international media, receiving plenty of awws. In fact, it’s easy to say that coverage of Trudeau’s many photobombs—like the one taken at a B.C. couple’s beach wedding, shirtless and all—is more widespread than coverage of his failed promises.

Then there are the photo-ops at Pride parades, 2015 coverage of an old clip of Trudeau’s Bhangra dancing skills, and Vanity Fair photo shoots. Though it’s hard to resist smiling—after all, the feel-good news about Trudeau feels really good in comparison to all the disappointing and scary news coming from our neighbours to the south—the need to be critical remains as important as ever in Canada. The publicity stunts are just that: publicity stunts.

From a PR perspective, Trudeau should get an A for his clever and subtle ways of seizing every possible photo opportunity. But the photobombing and cute close-ups of his progressive fashion choice are getting old. Trudeau’s media presence gets a C-minus. Step your game up, Prime Minister: You’re running a country, not an Instagram account.

Justin Trumpdeau. Photo courtesy of Twitter (@JustinTrumpdeau).

On July 1, President Donald Trump posted a tweet congratulating Canada on its 150th anniversary and referred to the prime minister as “my new found friend @JustinTrudeau.” This might seem odd, especially in light of recent disagreements between the two leaders over the Paris climate accord and Trump’s threats to ditch the 20-year-old North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). But despite their differences it seems a summer bromance is in full bloom.

While not quite at the stage of strolling together through a flowery garden path along the ocean—as Trudeau did with French President Emanuel Macron in May—Trump’s tweet did hint to some serious sparks. Far from genuine closeness, what Twitter is calling #TrumpDeau is instead the product of a well-thought-out tactic to lull the erratic president into letting Canada sit on his good side—at least for a while.

Following through with his “America First” campaign battle cry, over the last few months Trump has repeatedly attacked the U.S.-Canada trade relationship, particularly on softwood lumber, dairy, and most recently, steel. In April, Trump threatened to pull out of NAFTA, calling it a “catastrophe.” He later backtracked and said he is willing to renegotiate (though he might change his mind once more if they can’t reach a deal that is “fair for all”). Trudeau has weathered these hurdles with grace, and has yet to appear too worried.

He put it quite simply in a public event hosted by the New York Times this June in Toronto, when Trudeau was interviewed by Times journalists Peter Baker and Canadian correspondent Catherine Porter. He loosely quoted a former prime minister—he couldn’t remember which one—likening Canada’s proximity to the U.S. to sleeping beside an elephant: “No matter how even-tempered the beast, you’re affected by every twitch and grunt.” (In fact, the man behind the famous quote was none other than his own father, the charming and much-loved former Pierre Trudeau, in whose steps our current PM seems destined to follow.)

This elephant is now far larger, grumpier, and prone to shuffle around than any of his predecessors. As the protectionist rumblings of the new American president are turned to the north, Canada seems to be facing a shakedown as the government carefully balances friend and foe.

The Trudeau administration has been preparing for these uncertain times since Trump was inaugurated in January. Nearly three-quarters of Canada’s exports head to the States, and the real threat of losing NAFTA has the administration switching strategies. “He decided to take a diplomatic approach,” says Baker, who credits the PM’s tactics. “He’s going to smooth over the differences as much as he possibly can, but that doesn’t mean he’s not finding ways to advance his own agenda.”

But what that agenda is, exactly, remains uncomfortably vague. In last month’s Times event, Trudeau was quick to admit the policy differences between the two. Yet when asked about NAFTA renegotiations he stuck to his reasoning that no leader in their right mind would call off such a lucrative trade agreement with so much at stake. When pressed further about his backup plan should the renegotiations in August go bad he insisted, “There’s no need for a plan B,” later saying he was 100 percent confident in the existence of NAFTA in a year’s time.

From a diplomacy perspective, being chummy with Trump isn’t a bad place to be, and so far Trudeau has scored a position with the president that other leaders have not (cue Macron awkwardly clamouring his way to Trump’s side for G20 family portrait). But despite the eagerness of the Canadian government to insist upon its importance to its southern neighbour, the U.S. just simply isn’t as reliant on trade with Canada. A recent study by the University of Calgary has shown that in only two states—Vermont and Michigan—trade with Canada contributes to more than 10 percent of its annual economic output. Canada’s provinces, on the other hand, are far more reliant, with 49 percent of Ontario’s GDP and 31 percent of Alberta’s GDP depending on U.S. trade. This has produced a lopsided trade relationship, putting Canada in a precarious spot.

But Trump is not like any other United States president. Trudeau himself labelled the president a businessman and a dealmaker. “He knows how to interact socially on a very effective level,” he said, acknowledging that Ottawa has had to react likewise. “We realized we had to get connected with the folks who were coming in to government for the next four years.” Trudeau’s government has wisely noted Trump’s considerable value in personal relationships—he’s the kind of guy where a strong handshake goes a long way in his decision-making process. So how does one approach trade with businessman? Baker says it seems the prime minister has calculated that personal chemistry and connections matter to the new president. “While they’re going to disagree, he’s not going to do it in a way that makes President Trump angry or hostile in a direct way,” he says. “He thinks that will benefit Canada.”

Trudeau has made it clear that he believes any attempt to stiffen the border will negatively impact both sides of the deal, and in what Times columnist Max Fisher described as a “donut strategy,” Trudeau has enlisted multiple layers of government to go around him. Canadian officials are appealing directly to American mayors, governors, and small businesses to establish relations outside the boundaries of the White House—a move that Barker describes as successful. “Where Trump and he don’t agree he’s going to find other partners in America,” says Baker. “That’s clearly a way for him to avoid open conflict with the president, but in the end a president matters and he’s going to find a way to manage that relationship.”

Mimicking Trump’s own political strategy, the prime minister has used personal connections and past political ties to solidify a holistic working relationship with separate states. Former Canadian PM Brian Mulroney—who has personal connections to many U.S. officials, including Trumps commerce secretary, Wilbur Ross—was called back from retirement to act as Trudeau’s unofficial advisor. Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne has been in communication with North Carolina Governor Roy Cooper, building ties against more “buy American” efforts, while other premiers are apparently making similar connections to cultivate access.

So what will happen if renegotiations go sour? If the deal is scrapped, it’s likely Canada and the U.S. will go back to a similar version of the previous U.S.-Canada Free Trade Agreement, or draft a new one altogether. In this event, things are likely to get messy with support for NAFTA divided across the United States. Millions of jobs rely on the free trade pact, especially in midwestern states where agriculture producers rely on exports to Mexico and therefore have more to lose, according to the Midwest media group Harvest Public Media. 

As the summer draws to an anxious end, Canadians are forced to trust Trudeau and his government in their noble quest to secure a sturdy personal and trade relationship with the U.S. president. Undeterred by the unstable ground he seems to be standing on, Trudeau continues to hold his head. “What I’ve found from this president is that he will listen to arguments,” he said. “And that’s something we can definitely work with.”

If you say so, Prime Minister. Over to you.