Relationships Over Rhetoric
in Agriculture

I agree with Cam Dahl, General Manager of the Manitoba Pork Council, in a recent Op-ed that relationships matter. Too often, we see leaders and stakeholders resort to grandstanding—offering muffled threats, striking clever poses for the cameras, and chasing quick brownie points. The question we need to ask is simple: With whom? Who benefits from the showmanship? Because when politics or industry turns into performance, farmers and rural communities rarely see the gain.
Dahl said on September 17, the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) opened a 45-day public comment period on the effectiveness and impact of the Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement (CUSMA). Public hearings will follow in the US this November. The review of Canada’s most important trade agreement has started, and the tone set in Washington will matter for farmers here at home.
I agree with Dahl that trade works best when countries focus on trust and relationships, not posturing. Canada must show up ready to work with allies, especially in agriculture, where access and stability make or break markets. The US will measure how CUSMA performs, and Canada needs to make it clear that we value partnership, not politics.
Dahl said our relationships with partners, customers, and suppliers in the US matter more than ever. Manitoba Pork joined Manitoba Agriculture Minister Ron Kostyshyn on a mission to Iowa, where they met farm leaders and politicians to stress the value of an integrated market. The reception was warm, and US counterparts showed a strong understanding of the trading relationship. Dahl noted that while the USTR and Congress may not give much weight to comments from Canadian agriculture, they will listen closely to the Governor of Iowa and Iowa’s elected representatives.
Dahl warned that while pouring out whiskey distilled in Manitoba or threatening to shut off power to American states might look good on social media, this is not how strong relationships develop. He said genuine partnerships grow when Canadians show up at state fairs as friends and neighbours. Canada cannot afford to alienate potential allies in the US and Mexico with aggressive rhetoric. What we need is partnership, not posturing.
Dahl said outreach must be the top priority for Canadian agriculture, especially since 90 percent of Canadian farmers rely on international markets for price discovery and sales. Diversifying matters, but we cannot replace the US as a destination. Manitoba alone ships more than three million live pigs south each year for US producers to finish. Those exports depend on the protection of CUSMA. If that protection weakens, or if integration between US and Canadian producers falters, those animals have no alternative markets—and communities across Manitoba would feel the economic hit. And if we think Canadian agriculture can survive and flourish without the US, we have another thing coming.
Dahl noted that Canada’s federal, provincial, and territorial agriculture ministers met in Winnipeg the second week of September. He said he is hopeful they discussed a strategic outreach plan with US partners. Not every minister needs to visit every state capitol in the lower 48, but Canada should have a plan to ensure at least one agricultural delegation reaches most of them before the 45-day CUSMA comment period expires.
Dahl closed by pointing out that the US has already launched public consultations on the effectiveness of CUSMA. He asked the obvious question: when will Canada begin its own consultations? The best time to build a pan-Canadian agricultural position on CUSMA’s key elements was 18 months ago. The second-best time is today. If Canada delays, both industry and governments risk entering the critical phase of the CUSMA review divided. That mistake could carry far-reaching consequences for farmers from coast to coast.
Dahl said the overall goal for agriculture in the CUSMA review must be to preserve and expand the integrated North American market for commodities and food. For farmers, processors, and consumers, that means actively targeting the removal of tariff and non-tariff trade barriers. Canada must tackle regulatory misalignment with the US, resist new country-of-origin labelling rules, and push back against state-level regulations that restrict trade inside North America.
I agree with Dahl that relationships matter far more than grandstanding. Our strategic discussions with CUSMA partners must also recognize that, in today’s unstable international trading environment, secure trade within North America for agricultural commodities and food strengthens the national security of all three signatories. It also ensures a reliable, safe food supply for consumers across the continent.
We cannot short-change our producers, the people who work in the industry, and, last but not least, those who depend on Canadian production to feed people around the world. •