In a speech that has captured global attention, Carney said “nostalgia is not a strategy”, urging middle-sized powers who have previously benefited from the stability of US economic dominance to recognise that a new reality had set in.
More than 75% of all Canadian exports go to the United States and the country remains uniquely vulnerable to Trump’s protectionism.
Macklem said Canadian growth remains stunted by US policy.
Trump’s global sectoral tariffs have hit Canada’s auto, steel, aluminum and lumber industries hard.
But the most severe disruptions may be yet to come, Macklem stressed.
Trump has so far broadly adhered to the existing North American free trade agreement, which he signed and praised during his first term.
With the United States‑Mexico‑Canada Agreement (USMCA) still holding, more than 85% of all bilateral trade has remained tariff‑free.
But talks on updating that deal are set for this year and the Trump administration has indicated it could seek major changes, or may move to scrap the pact entirely, an outcome that would upend the Canadian economy.
“The upcoming review of the [USMCA] is an important risk,” Macklem said.
US Fed independence
Macklem also took aim at Trump’s apparent efforts to exert political influence on the US Federal Reserve.
“The US Federal Reserve is the biggest, most important central bank in the world and we all need it to work well,” Macklem said.
“A loss of independence of the Fed would affect us all,” he warned, but stressed that for Canada, the consequences of a politically influenced Federal Reserve would likely be far-reaching, given the integrated nature of the neighbouring economies.
An independent Federal Reserve is “good for America,” Macklem said.
Trump has been seeking to oust Fed Governor Lisa Cook over mortgage fraud allegations. He has also spoken out on the administration’s investigation into chairman Jerome Powell over the bank’s headquarters renovation.
In a rare rebuke this month, Powell criticised the threat of criminal charges against him, saying this was about whether monetary policy would be “directed by political pressure or intimidation”.
-Agence France-Presse