REGINA, Sask. — It has been a whirlwind of week for Saskatchewan elected officials as they responded to news that trade talks between Canada and U.S. officials had broken down late Friday night, Aug. 21.
The next day, Premier Scott Moe was in a First Ministers meeting with other Premiers as well as Prime Minister Mark Carney. At that time, Moe expressed support for Canada’s plan to match U.S. tariffs dollar for dollar.
“Saskatchewan supports Canada's response,” Moe said.
As the week unfolded, on Tuesday the federal government announced details of counter-measures of 15, 25 and 50 per cent on products drawn from those targeted by President Donald Trump's tariffs under U.S. Section 338 and Section 232, with the rate for each product matching the corresponding U.S. rate. The Feds also announced a $7.5-billion support package.
Premier Moe welcomed the response, saying the "federal government has taken a focused and targeted approach in its counter tariffs on US imports announced today. Saskatchewan supports this approach."
Moe announced Saskatchewan’s own response on Wednesday afternoon in Prince Albert. At that news conference, Moe said the province would bring in a reciprocal levy of 50 per cent per cent on U.S. alcohol.
But Moe stopped short of removing U.S. liquor from store shelves — something the opposition New Democrats had been calling for in the days following the collapse of trade talks.
“This is the time to fight back – starting with immediately removing American alcohol from Saskatchewan shelves,” Opposition Leader Carla Beck had said on Aug. 22 in a news release.
Not surprisingly, Moe's decision to keep stocking U.S. liquor was met by disappointment from the NDP Wednesday. After hearing Moe’s plan to impose levies on U.S. alcohol, NDP trade critic Kim Breckner ridiculed his announcement, calling his plan “really dumb.”
Opposition Finance critic Trent Wotherspoon accused Moe of a weak response to Trump.
“We've been calling on this Premier to step up and be a full partner as part of Team Canada, and to enact measures like pulling U.S. booze off the shelf,” Wotherspoon said Thursday.
“We haven't seen that. He's been slow to respond, weak in his response… They haven't stepped up as a full member of Team Canada and they haven't taken steps like other provinces have that can send a message and have some impact, which would be taking booze off the shelves. Instead, we see inconsistent actions, slow responses and half measures like this.”
But Premier Moe defended the decision to keep the liquor on Saskatchewan store shelves, saying that allowing Saskatchewan people to make their own choice was “very important core value" for the government.
Moe pushes back against export taxes
While most news outlets were focused on the province’s plans regarding U.S. liquor, what flew under the radar was the major pushback by Moe against recent commentary that Canada should impose export taxes on oil and gas and potash to the United States as a retaliatory measure.
Those same concerns were repeated soon after by Alberta Premier Danielle Smith in an address later that day, warning of devastating consequences for the Canadian economy if export taxes went ahead — a sure sign that both Moe and Smith were feeling growing political pressure on that issue.
For his part, Moe made clear that export taxes were not something he thought the federal government was contemplating.
“I never heard the federal government raise anything in the way of export tariffs so I have no reason to believe that to be moving forward with it,” Moe told reporters in Prince Albert.
“I have heard that through your media sources and others from across Canada, and I just want to make sure that Canadians understand the full impact of what they’re asking — for the full impact of an export tariff on a product like oil is higher gasoline prices throughout the eastern part of our nation.
“That’s not a positive impact for Canadians. It’s not a positive impact for anyone in North America, so we should be very careful with respect to policies that maybe make us feel good at the moment, and policies that actually work towards getting back to that negotiating table and getting us to a strong trade agreement moving forward.”
When pressed again by reporters about what it would take to use oil and gas or potash as leverage in the future, Moe said it was “not possible.”
“Why would you put Canadians out of work with a flawed policy?” said Moe.
“That would be my question… Canadians would immediately lose their jobs, we would immediately lose market share, immediately we would lose those trade relations moving forward, and we would lose a potential investment that’s coming into our natural resource sector — the very sector that is driving the economic growth of our nation as we speak. That would be a flawed policy that would build on a flawed policy that this nation had enacted over the course of the last decade, which is not putting us in an energy secured position today.”
Moe reiterated the need to get back to the negotiating table, and to put aside the emotions of the moment.
“We need to set aside all too often what the emotion of the day is or answering what the latest rhetoric that is coming out of the White House is, and we need to focus solely on how we get to that trade certainty with our largest trading partner, and ultimately how we are getting to trade certainty around the world, “ said Moe.
Moe called this “what Canada First is all about.”
Efforts to persuade U.S. lawmakers go on
As for Saskatchewan’s own efforts in trying to sway U.S. officials, the immediate indication is that more is coming. At the news conference in Prince Albert, Agriculture Minister David Marit said a delegation of six MLAs from Saskatchewan would be heading to Minnesota for the Midwestern Legislative Conference, which is now under way and runs to Sept. 2.
That would provide Saskatchewan MLAs an opportunity to interact with lawmakers from 11 midwestern U.S. states. Saskatoon hosted the last conference in 2025.
Marit also pointed to his own discussions he has had previously. The minister indicated there was considerable support at the state level for trade between the two countries.
“I was just in Madison, Wisconsin here in July talking to my state counterparts,” said Marit.
“There were 15 state Ag commissioners there at that one, and we talked very openly about the trade agreement, and every one of them was very supportive of USMCA, or CUSMA as we call it, and to continue on that path. So I would say that from an agriculture perspective, a lot of the states are on side, and on the Ag side we deal with 27 different states in the United States.”
