Canada prepares for outcome of U.S. vote

The Canadian government has begun a wide-ranging exercise to plan for the potential effects of the American election, including the possibility of a President Donald Trump threatening to scrap the North American Free Trade Agreement.

The government is mapping out a complex array of outcomes for various results including a Democratic presidency; a Republican presidency; and either a Congress where both parties split power, or one dominates.

The process involves the embassy in Washington, Canada’s dozen consulates in the U.S., numerous federal departments, and is being co-ordinated by the ministers on the cabinet committee for Canada-U.S. relations.

“If I tried to show you an organizational chart it would take up an entire wall,” Canada’s ambassador to the U.S., David MacNaughton, said during an interview.

In trips to Colorado, Massachusetts and California, MacNaughton is spreading the word about the nine million U.S. jobs he says rely on trade with Canada. He cites agriculture as an example, with that industry’s $25 billion a year in exports to Canada.

He’s also listing the implications of different election results for important files. Some issues will be deeply affected — the ones where U.S. parties disagree.

Climate change is an obvious example. A Trump win might end some joint climate projects; on the other hand, it could spell a new start for the Keystone XL pipeline, which he favours. Other issues aren’t partisan. For instance, the election is less likely to affect pilot projects to reform border-crossing.

“We have to be well-prepared for any eventuality,” MacNaughton said.

Looming over everything is the continental trade deal.

Both presidential candidates favour revising NAFTA. Only one, however, has explicitly threatened to rip it up if he doesn’t get what he wants: “A total renegotiation,” Trump said last week.

“And if we don’t get a better deal, we will walk away.”

The government is considering the potential results of:

NAFTA being renegotiated. MacNaughton avoided being pinned down on Canada’s willingness to talk. No document is eternal, and improvements are always possible, he said, but added: “Is a renegotiation a renegotiation? Because if a renegotiation is a real renegotiation, (that) means it’s give and take on both sides.”

NAFTA being cancelled. It’s unclear if the original 1987 Canada-U.S. free-trade agreement would snap back into place. MacNaughton said he’s attempted to get that question answered five times — and received five different answers.

NAFTA being a non-issue. It wouldn’t be the first time NAFTA got discussed during an election, then ignored.

“Let’s wait until after the election and see how much of the rhetoric is rhetoric and how much is serious,” MacNaughton said.

“In the meantime, we have to prepare for any eventuality and do our homework.”

A Toronto trade lawyer agreed that cancelling NAFTA would be confusing. He cited different ways it might end up in court: “This election and Brexit are keeping trade lawyers on our toes,” Mark Warner said.

NAFTA is now part of web of trade and tariff rules that would be difficult to disentangle, he said. Warner said the U.S. president could certainly withdraw from it, therefore ending its disputesettlement panels.

However, the road to 270 electoral votes — the threshold to clinch the presidency — increasingly looks to be a series of uphill climbs and dead ends for Trump in the usual collection of most competitive states.

Stops this past week in Michigan and Pennsylvania suggest he’s looking at the industrial heartland states on the Great Lakes. It’s a part of the country where he has said he can compete with Democrat Hillary Clinton.

With three months to go until the Nov. 8 vote, the map for Trump is foreboding.

Early voting will not begin until next month, giving people ample opportunity to change their minds. But Clinton has a clear advantage in national and state polls at a critical moment in the campaign — after the conventions and as voters start paying attention to the race.

If Clinton claims states such as Colorado, Virginia and North Carolina, where recent polls suggest she has a significant lead, Trump would need to win most of the states bordering one of the Great Lakes to have any chance at reaching 270.

That’s provided he wins in Florida. A loss there, and he’ll need to sweep all but Illinois and New York, states firmly in Clinton’s column.