THE future of Canada-U.S. trade issues is clearer in the wake of last week’s American election. George Bush is back for a second term as president, Democratic Senate minority leader and agriculture committee member Tom Daschle was defeated and the Republicans dominate Congress.
For Canadian farmers, the results should lead to a business environment no worse than it was before the election.
That seems faint praise, but it is positive. A John Kerry presidency would have been worse for agricultural trade.
Surveys showed most Canadians favoured Kerry as president because he promised a more nuanced and consultative approach to international relations and the response to terrorism.
Read Also

Agriculture needs to prepare for government spending cuts
As government makes necessary cuts to spending, what can be reduced or restructured in the budgets for agriculture?
But on trade issues, his campaign was decidedly protectionist. In beef, the Democrat contender sided with Daschle who argued that reopening the border to Canadian cattle was premature. Indeed, he preferred no trade until country of origin labelling was introduced.
At the least, cattle trade would have been delayed months while a new Kerry administration reviewed the situation.
With Bush still in the White House, the administration’s timetable is clear, but subject to disruption by protectionist groups like R-Calf.
Bush’s re-election has provided another element of certainty, a ballooning deficit, that might also benefit Canadian farmers. The United States posted a record deficit of $413 billion US in fiscal 2004. Since Bush took office, the debt has risen 40 percent to $7.4 trillion. The president and Congress must address the deficit or risk alienating the investment community. With Republicans controlling the White House and Congress, tax increases are not in the cards.
Spending cuts are the only alternative and the billions spent on the farm bill will be a tempting target. Deficit fighting might help level the subsidy playing field for Canadian farmers.
That said, the next four years of Canadian-American relations are likely to be fractious. With Washington focused on Iraq and terrorism, Canada will need a robust and inventive strategy to draw positive attention to its concerns.
It must be part of a principled, consistent foreign policy that is clearly enunciated and backed with resources., including more diplomatic forces in America focused on Congress, from where the majority of our trade problems emanate.
Canadian legislators must act and speak responsibly. The few given to childish name calling should be censured. And while the enormity of cross border trade must be given its due, it must also be conceded that the concentration on the U.S. market has made Canada’s economy dependent and vulnerable to disruption.
Trade opportunities abound around the world but Canada has not been as nimble or determined as other countries in pursuing them. A more diversified list of trade relationships would make the question of who resides in the White House less important for Canadians.