Skip to main content
The Globe and Mail
Support Quality Journalism
The Globe and Mail
First Access to Latest
Investment News
Collection of curated
e-books and guides
Inform your decisions via
Globe Investor Tools
Just$1.99
per week
for first 24 weeks

Enjoy unlimited digital access
Enjoy Unlimited Digital Access
Get full access to globeandmail.com
Just $1.99 per week for the first 24 weeks
Just $1.99 per week for the first 24 weeks
var select={root:".js-sub-pencil",control:".js-sub-pencil-control",open:"o-sub-pencil--open",closed:"o-sub-pencil--closed"},dom={},allowExpand=!0;function pencilInit(o){var e=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]&&arguments[1];select.root=o,dom.root=document.querySelector(select.root),dom.root&&(dom.control=document.querySelector(select.control),dom.control.addEventListener("click",onToggleClicked),setPanelState(e),window.addEventListener("scroll",onWindowScroll),dom.root.removeAttribute("hidden"))}function isPanelOpen(){return dom.root.classList.contains(select.open)}function setPanelState(o){dom.root.classList[o?"add":"remove"](select.open),dom.root.classList[o?"remove":"add"](select.closed),dom.control.setAttribute("aria-expanded",o)}function onToggleClicked(){var l=!isPanelOpen();setPanelState(l)}function onWindowScroll(){window.requestAnimationFrame(function() {var l=isPanelOpen(),n=0===(document.body.scrollTop||document.documentElement.scrollTop);n||l||!allowExpand?n&&l&&(allowExpand=!0,setPanelState(!1)):(allowExpand=!1,setPanelState(!0))});}pencilInit(".js-sub-pencil",!1); // via darwin-bg var slideIndex = 0; carousel(); function carousel() { var i; var x = document.getElementsByClassName("subs_valueprop"); for (i = 0; i < x.length; i++) { x[i].style.display = "none"; } slideIndex++; if (slideIndex> x.length) { slideIndex = 1; } x[slideIndex - 1].style.display = "block"; setTimeout(carousel, 2500); }

"Two things can wipe us out," George Shultz, former cabinet secretary in the Nixon and Reagan administrations, said in an interview last week. "One is nuclear weapons and the other is climate change."

Mr. Shultz, the highly respected American statesman, better not try that one on Scott Pruitt. Mr. Pruitt heads up what, under his stewardship, is the amusingly titled Environmental Protection Agency.

The former Oklahoma attorney-general, who sued the EPA 14 times while in that post, was appointed by U.S. President Donald Trump to essentially gut the agency. He has proceeded accordingly. He's turning it into an oil, gas and coal promotion vehicle. Rather than a regulator, Mr. Pruitt is a smokestack facilitator. The titans of industry love the guy, as does Mr. Trump who, in accordance with Mr. Pruitt's wishes, withdrew from the Paris climate accord.

Story continues below advertisement

You don't hear much about Mr. Pruitt because he operates in secrecy, surrounded by bodyguards, and because in a government of so many outrages, his scorched-earth approach to ecology doesn't even make the highlight reel.

His environmental-destruction agency comes to mind now because negotiations to modernize NAFTA are beginning and on the list of Canadian priorities is one straight out of you've-got-to-be-kidding territory. Namely, to have Trumpites suddenly flip the switch and agree to high environmental standards including fully supporting efforts to address climate change.

Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland, who put forward this objective Monday, says she is "deeply optimistic" going into the NAFTA talks. In many respects, she has reason to be.

The Canadian side has already dodged the big bullets. What had Ms. Freeland and company very frightened was the Washington threat to unilaterally impose a border adjustment tax on imports. That plan, supported by House Speaker Paul Ryan, would have touched off a brutal trade war. But Mr. Trump fortunately abandoned the idea.

This was after he fortunately abandoned the idea of scrapping NAFTA altogether. More recently, he has threatened to curb steel imports, a move that would hit the Canadian industry hard. But Mr. Trump hasn't moved on that either, at least not yet.

So far, he's been more blather than bite.

But in respect to the environment, Canadian negotiators' hopes are far-fetched. They're not dealing with the green-washed Obama administration any more. They're dealing with renegades in power.

Story continues below advertisement

Putting new environmental standards on their demand list has the look of a ploy, something you know won't cut it but that can be tossed away as a concession to the other side in the hopes of getting something in return.

Canadian officials, while recognizing what one called the huge chasm between the Obama and Trump administrations, maintain however that it isn't a hopeless cause. There's the Mexico angle to be considered. Environmental standards are so much lower in Mexico than in the United States that by adopting new benchmarks in the renegotiation, Washington will force Mexico onto a more level playing field that would mean less bleeding of U.S. jobs. But any new standards could still be well below what Ottawa wants.

Green Party Leader Elizabeth May, as we might imagine, is abhorred by what Washington has been doing. "Pruitt wants to kill all air-quality regulations. He wants to kill water-quality regulations."

But, Ms. May adds, while Ms. Freeland's demand "may be unrealistic, that does not mean she is wrong to try." She wonders, though, whether "the Trudeau Liberals are prepared to accept environmental improvements to NAFTA themselves?"

The game is in the posturing phase and there is much more posturing to come. But if Ottawa doesn't get the environmental protections it wants, it won't be a deal breaker. Nor, for that matter, is Washington's demand to drop the current dispute settlement mechanism. A compromise form of arbitration can be found.

The run-up to the negotiations has worked out well for the Trudeau Liberals, thanks in part to their intense lobbying effort across the United States. All they have to worry about now is that an erratic President, tempestuous on trade, will veer off the rails. Which is a lot to worry about.

Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed.

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

To view this site properly, enable cookies in your browser. Read our privacy policy to learn more.
How to enable cookies