Stronger At Home – Leverage Abroad

The following is a transcript of the Hon. Pierre Poilievre’s remarks from February 26, 2026. These remarks have been edited for clarity. Check against delivery.

Toronto, ON – Merci beaucoup. Thank you very much to Michael and Shelby, two critical members of our Conservative team, to deliver a stronger Canada at home so we have unbreakable leverage abroad. Nearly two thousand years ago, Marcus Aurelius delivered a timeless truth:

You have power over your mind – not outside events. Realize this, and you will find strength.

That idea is not only true for people, but also for countries. Canada cannot control decisions made by foreign leaders or words by foreign presidents. We cannot control what global shocks and volatility might happen, but we do control what we do in our own country.

We can control whether our economy is solid or fragile, whether it is dependent or self-reliant, whether we drift or whether we build. And the lesson of this moment is simple: The path to sovereignty is focusing relentlessly on what is within our power.

Canada itself was born from this insight. Ours is a country not built by accident. Confederation was a conscious act of national self-determination – a decision by scattered provinces to unite, to build, and to govern themselves rather than to be swallowed up by American annexation.

And it wasn’t all talk. Yes, the founders met.  Yes, they debated.  Yes, they agreed. But above all else: they got things done.

Le Canada ne peut pas contrôler ce que font les présidents des autres pays. Mais une chose est certaine : le Canada peut contrôler sa propre destinée pour renforcer notre souveraineté et être vraiment « maître chez nous », on doit contrôler ce qu’on peut contrôler. C’est pour être « maître chez nous » que le Canada a fondé son pays. Oui, la Confédération, c’était un geste d’affirmation nationale, une décision prise par les provinces et des citoyens pour s’unir, pour résister ensemble à l’annexion américaine. Et comme George-Étienne Cartier et John A. Macdonald ont fait, ils se sont concentrés sur les résultats et le travail à faire. C’est comme ça que nous sommes devenus « maître chez nous » et un pays qui est resté indépendant des États-Unis.

The interesting thing when you read the British North America Act is this: There are no grand ideals. There are not big extractions like you find in so many constitutional texts around the world. It’s actually an instruction manual. 

It sets out responsibilities. It’s a “who does what” document. It basically says, “You do this, and you do that, and together we’ll get it done.” And that’s how they got it done. They cleared the way for a railway. They opened up the Prairie fields to feed the nation. They built canals and opened a nation to free commerce, something that was laid out in our original constitutional text, even if it’s not respected to this day. 

Now, that history of practical getting things done is more relevant now than ever. Conservatives are the party of Sir John A. Macdonald, the party of Confederation, the party of Canada. Macdonald and the founders did not build this country by reacting emotionally to every external disturbance. They did not define Canada by grievance or anxiety. 

They defined it by strengthening what lay within their control: building, doing, and completing. We drove a steel railway across the Rockies in four and a half years. Later, we carved the St. Lawrence Seaway, and we did that in five years. We built the CN Tower – then the tallest free-standing structure in the world – in three years in the 1970s. That is how we built an unbreakable country.

That spirit is again necessary as we move towards the CUSMA review starting this summer. Now, let’s be clear with who we’re dealing with. Pierre Elliott Trudeau, if my Conservative friends will forgive me for quoting him, said, “living next to the United States was like sleeping next to an elephant. No matter how friendly and even-tempered the beast, one is affected by every twitch and grunt.”

In the last few years, there’s been a lot of movement from the beast next door. A lot of movement, maybe a little bit more than usual, and there will be more to come. So what do we do?

How we got here

As conservatives, we like to look back in order to see forward. How did we get here?

For more than three quarters of a century after the Second World War, we lived probably in the most secure geopolitical environment the world has ever seen, right next door to the United States, which became the biggest economy and military in the history of our planet. The United States was not just a neighbour, it was the gravitational center of the global economic system. 

For Canada, this reality produced a deep sense of security. For the most part, the arrangement served Canada and the US extraordinarily well.

The result was massive buildups of North-South infrastructure: roads, bridges, railways, pipelines, transmission lines. Our two countries built the St. Lawrence Seaway, which became an H2O highway from Duluth and Thunder Bay all the way to Europe. We built a free trade system and seamlessly integrated our economy. We enjoyed the longest undefended border the world has ever seen. We sided with each other in major conflicts, although our relationship was punctuated by the occasional squabble. 

Supply chains totally integrated, investment accelerated, living standards rose, but a long period of risk-free living presents a new risk of its own: complacency. And let’s be honest, we – and they – became complacent. We underinvested in our military. Bureaucracies grew and blocked in our resources. Politicians indulged in performative ideological grandstanding because they thought that they could afford to. We made ourselves unnecessarily dependent. 

China’s rise

At the same time, the global landscape was changing, and an overly complacent America was missing what was happening. 

China’s economic expansion was one of the most extraordinary phenomena in the history of the world. This country went from having 80 per cent of its citizens living on less than $1 a day to the second biggest economy in the world in one generation.

While American capitalism had earlier buried clunky Soviet communism, a new authoritarian powerhouse quietly and rapidly snuck up on the US. All the economic enrichment came without the expected political liberalization and, one day, America awoke and realized that its entire industrial base had been hollowed out. Whole towns vanished to job outsourcing. And their economy was reliant on a country that was, at best, a serious rival and, at worst, a hostile threat.

There was a backlash. Americans went from driving globalization to believing they were its victim. Zero-sum mercantilism came roaring back to life. President Trump has sought to overturn the trading system that previous American Presidents had championed and even created. Now, some of this correction, in fairness, was overdue, but it missed the target by going after countries like Canada, which were not the problem. 

What President Trump says about Canada is wrong. Our trade surplus does not represent exploitation by Canada of the United States of America. 

Quite the opposite, in fact, it is the result of us selling very good and very well-priced – in fact, below market price – raw materials, which America then upgrades and turns into massive profits for its economy. Ironically, US workers gain six-figure salaries turning our raw material into profit for their country, and they owe a big debt of gratitude to politicians and bureaucrats in Canada who have blocked us from building the necessary infrastructure to take those resources to world markets. 

He is also wrong to ignore the sacrifices Canada has made for the United States. Canadians fought and died alongside Americans in Afghanistan, and let’s be clear, we did that exclusively in response to an attack on our American neighbours. We also fought and bled alongside America, not just in the trenches of Western Europe, but in Alaska’s Aleutian Islands, defending American territory in the Second World War.

And of course, we joined rapidly to fight communism in Korea. In countless other ways, our cooperation – whether it’s NORAD or our efforts to secure the Arctic – have been beneficial to both countries. 

And let’s be clear about another thing: the President’s talk of 51st statehood, whether it is a joke or not, is unacceptable. It goes without saying there is zero chance of Canada ever being a part of the United States. We love our country. We love our country just as Americans, understandably and justifiably, love their country too. 

Perspective on US volatility

That’s why so many Canadians are upset by the President’s comments and trade actions, especially considering that Canada and the United States will always be neighbours. Geography is the most permanent factor in international relations. No country can call a realtor and relocate.

And the truth is, we wouldn’t want to. Canada and the United States have built probably the greatest partnership any two countries have ever built in the history of the world. That partnership remains profoundly in the interests of both our peoples and both our countries.  

It’s important to distinguish between governments and people. Politicians come and go; people remain. The miner in Appalachia, the energy worker in Texas, the engineer in California, they do not wake up every day asking how they can stick it to the Canadians. That’s just the reality. The American people are not our adversaries. In fact, survey results demonstrate that Americans overwhelmingly have a favourable view of Canada and consider our two nations to be friends. 

That goodwill, by the way, may be our most important strategic strength going into these talks. As President Kennedy, when he was addressing the Canadian Parliament:

“Geography has made us neighbours. History has made us friends. Economics has made us partners. And necessity has made us allies. Those whom nature hath so joined together, let no man put asunder.” 

That insight captures a reality deeper than any temporary dispute. Canada’s prosperity and security are inseparable from a stable relationship with the United States.

China and diversification

That is why we should not declare a permanent rupture with our biggest customer and closest neighbour in favour of a strategic partnership for a new world order with Beijing – a regime the Prime Minister himself said was the biggest threat to Canada just a year ago.

We seek no fight with China or its people, who make up a brilliant and extraordinary civilization. But its government and its proxies have kidnapped our citizens, stolen our technology, interfered in our elections, and pushed fentanyl onto our streets. Canada should talk and trade where prudent, but never make the mistake of confusing engagement with dependency.

China is not a substitute for the United States of America.

Canada should pursue diversified trade and global engagement. Conservatives stand in favour of a free trade agreement with India and deeper ties with other countries. But diversification must be grounded in realism; not all partners are interchangeable.

The Prime Minister proclaimed in the Davos Speech that he wanted a new middle power alliance. Actually, there’s nothing new about it at all. We already have that. We’ve had it for years. In fact, Canada already has free trade with over 50 other countries, and most of them are middle powers. We should look to deepen those relationships, but their markets are already open to us. 

Here’s the problem and here’s the irony. The problem is not that these countries block our products from coming in. It’s that our own government blocks our products from getting out. That is the major trade barrier. Signing meaningless communiques or more stagecraft masquerading as statecraft won’t fix that reality.

In fact, some of the worst tariffs imposed on Canada today are those imposed by the government here. Slow permits, changing rules, high taxes, outright bans on shipping oil off our Northwest BC coast. We have the second-slowest building permits in the OECD. It now takes 19 years to get a mine approved. None of that has changed in the last year.

On doit retirer les tarifs qu’on s’impose à nous-mêmes, les permis trop lents, les règlements trop compliqués et les impôts trop élevés. On a le deuxième plus lent délai d’attente pour les permis de construction dans l’OCDE. Ça prend 20 ans pour approuver une mine. Rien de tout ça n’a changé depuis l’élection. Comme Stephen Harper a dit : la question pour le Canada n’est pas de savoir ce qu’on ressent par rapport aux États-Unis. La question c’est : comment est-ce qu’on peut s’adapter ? On ne peut pas contrôler le président Trump. On peut contrôler nos réglementations, nos taxes et nos temps d’attente pour des permis. On peut contrôler nos dépenses militaires. On peut contrôler comment on développe nos ressources et en contrôlant ce que nous pouvons contrôler, on peut devenir véritablement « maître chez nous ».

Unfortunately, the federal government caused many of these obstacles. Fortunately, it can reverse them. By unblocking resources and unleashing our economy, we can become affordable and autonomous and build the unbreakable leverage we need to fight for tariff-free access to the United States.

But we must divide the problem into what we control and what we do not control. Most important of all, we cannot allow others to control us. We cannot allow President Trump to distract us from the work we need to do here at home. 

As Prime Minister Harper recently said, “the question for Canada is not how we feel about what the US is doing. It is: how will we adapt?” The most effective response to uncertainty is not outrage; it is results. The encouraging reality is that the two biggest pressures facing Canada today, affordability and autonomy, have the same solutions: abundant, low-cost energy, unlocking resource development and home building, a strong military and digital sovereignty.

These four pillars form our plan to make Canada stronger at home so that we can have unbreakable leverage abroad.

La bonne nouvelle, c’est que les mêmes solutions peuvent nous permettre de régler nos deux principaux problèmes : l’autonomie et l’abordabilité. Nos solutions, c’est de l’énergie abondante et abordable, de libérer nos ressources et accélérer la construction de maisons, une armée forte et une souveraineté numérique. Ce sont les quatre solutions de notre plan « maître chez nous » pour renforcer notre souveraineté. Ça va nous permettre d’être vraiment en contrôle de notre avenir et d’être en position de force à l’avenir.

Abundant low-cost energy

For energy to be affordable, we should eliminate all carbon taxes, not just the visible ones, but all of them. Permit rapid oil and gas, and electricity development to boost our dollar by selling our resources to the world and increasing the purchasing power of our people. We should cancel EV rebates that subsidize foreign automobile production, instead take sales tax off of vehicles made here in Canada. 

Pour avoir de l’énergie abordable, on doit éliminer toutes les taxes carbone. On doit nous permettre de réaliser rapidement nos projets de ressources naturelles avec des permis rapides. On doit aussi annuler les crédits pour les véhicules électriques, qui subventionnent la production de voitures à l’extérieur de notre pays. Et il faut éliminer la taxe sur les ventes des voitures faites ici au Canada.

Unblocking resources and homes

We must unlock the most tariff-proof industry we have in Canada: home building. Nobody can tariff a home built in Canada. It’s our materials, our land and our workers. We need to remove all red tape and taxes so homes can be built, our forestry sector can come roaring back, and our 100,000 unemployed construction workers can get back into the job market. 

No foreign government can stop us from doing that. We need to expand the supply so that there’s more affordability here at home. Canada does not lack workers or capital. What we lack are permits. We need the government to rapidly grant them. 

The federal government should grant six-month maximum delays to deliver permits, repeal anti-development laws, and adopt a one-project, one-rule system, so that we can get projects done like Prime Minister Harper did when he took from concept to completion 23,500 projects without a single environmental problem or public safety concern. That is what we can do again when we eliminate bureaucracy. 

We should use the special powers contained in Bill C-5 to rapidly permit a new pipeline to the Pacific and carry $30 billion of oil per year. For context, that one pipeline would increase our overseas exports more than the total exports that we have to the People’s Republic of China today. It would be the single biggest increase in overseas exports of any project in Canadian history, but we need the government to get out of the way and let it happen.

All of these things will be bundled together in the Conservatives’ proposed Sovereignty Act that will allow us to take back control of our economic destiny and have unbreakable leverage abroad. 

Using our resources as strategic leverage

When we’ve unlocked our resources though, we’re not done. We need to maximize the political leverage that comes from those. Guaranteed access to critical minerals is about more than economics; it’s about power and security. Canada has 10 of the 12 NATO-defined defence minerals right here under our feet. We possess one of the greatest energy endowments in the world. 

No modern economy or military can function without those materials and that energy. That is why Conservatives are proposing today the creation of a new Strategic Energy and Mineral Reserve that would store up and stockpile these necessary materials so that we would have them in abundance in the event of a war, a crisis, or a supply disruption.

Such reserves would strengthen Canada’s resilience and our negotiating position, giving us more unbreakable leverage while they remain sovereign assets that belong to us.

Le Canada doit mettre en place une réserve stratégique d’énergie et de minéraux sous contrôle des Canadiens pour protéger notre pays et nos alliés pendant les guerres, les crises et les problèmes d’approvisionnement. Cette réserve, uniquement sous le contrôle des Canadiens, va nous permettre de renforcer notre pouvoir de négociation.

Strong military

We also have to build up our defence. We have to be capable of defending every square inch of our sea, skies and soil, and I’m sad to say we have got a long way to go.

Almost half of our military equipment is not in a usable state today. One in three fighter jet positions is vacant. We only have 300 full-time troops in Canada’s Arctic, an area the size of the European Union. That means one soldier for every 15,000 square kilometres. Our industrial capacity is so weak right now that it takes us a month to produce enough artillery shells for one day of war.

We must build faster. Modern warfare evolves at an almost unimaginable speed. 

Ukraine has shown just how rapidly things change. Technologies are designed, adapted, and put into use in mere days. The Ukrainians modified their systems on the spot. In fact, some of their best platforms are actually made in the garages of Ukrainians on 3D printers, they are turned around at incredibly low costs, and, by the way, these systems deliver 80 per cent of the casualties in the war with Russia today. 

Now, we’re not going to build our drones in garages or basements like the Ukrainians, but we have to stop thinking less like bureaucrats and more like MacGyver. Defence procurement must be fast, agile, inventive, and now; not slow and bureaucratic. Rebuilding our reporters will require serious investment, but let’s be clear, spending is not the objective. It is a means to an end. 

We must convert every dollar into maximum operational strength by reducing administrative delays, by giving new powers to military leaders to purchase the goods they need with accountability, but without bureaucratic micromanaging from above. They must be able to buy technologies that don’t yet even exist. 

History shows us how. When the United States procured its first fighter plane in 1907, it did it with an RFP that was three pages long. The Wright Brothers delivered that flying machine, not because there was an elaborate process filled with committees and bureaucrats and paperwork, but because they had a clearly defined outcome and they were paid when they delivered the result. We must do the same. 

We must also reassert our control and our dominance over the Canadian Arctic. We will take back our North and ensure that no foreign power ever threatens our security. 

• New bases are needed in Iqaluit, Churchill, and Inuvik.
• Four new icebreakers, not two icebreakers, must be built and deployed.
• Accelerated procurement of submarines, tactical helicopters, satellite ground stations and over-the-top radar.
• Rapid deployment of drone capabilities that cover our vast territory at low cost and limited risk to Canadian lives.
• Expanded recruitment that is based on merit and performance, not political correctness.

And we must stand by our veterans and make sure that they are treated as the very best we have.

Digital sovereignty

Finally, if we want to be truly sovereign, we have to control our technologies. Dependence on externally-controlled systems is a serious risk to our country in the event of pandemics, wars, or other crises, we can’t count on others to deliver the technology that makes modern life go on. Canada must never assume that foreign powers will maintain, service or even permit the continued operation of critical technologies.

Right now, we’re getting the worst of all worlds when it comes to technological ownership. Too often, Canadians bear the costs and foreigners get the benefit of developing technology. Subsidies make Canada an excellent place to lose money. Taxes make it a terrible place to make money. 

The result is predictable: firms invent here, then they commercialize, and they move the ownership and the profits elsewhere. Canada absorbs the cost, others reap the benefit. We are inventive. We spend massively on R&D.

Now we must retain the benefits in Canada. Canada needs a full overhaul of subsidies, tax policy, IP frameworks and investment review laws with a goal of increasing the commercialization of Canadian-developed technologies by at least 50 per cent over the next decade, and ensure that Canadian technology remains in Canadian hands, on Canadian soil.

That means:

• Requiring anyone who offshores IP that was developed with Canadian tax dollars, pay those tax dollars back;
• Allowing venture capitalists to roll over their capital gains into the development of new technologies and commercialization of those here in Canada; and
• Banning foreign takeovers of sensitive intellectual property, data, weapon systems, cryptography, and other vital tools of modern crises.

On peut seulement être « maître chez nous » si on contrôle la souveraineté numérique. On ne peut pas dépendre entièrement des autres pays. C’est pour ça qu’il faut obliger le remboursement des subventions publiques pour ceux et celles qui vendent nos technologies outre-mer. Toute personne qui déplace la propriété intellectuelle à l’étranger devrait rembourser les contributions des contribuables. Il faut permettre aux investisseurs de réinvestir leurs gains sans impôts pour développer la technologie et interdire aux étrangers d’acheter ou de prendre le contrôle de nos systèmes de technologie.

All of these steps – bolstering technological, resource, and military sovereignty to this country – is an effort to make Canada stronger at home so that we have unbreakable leverage abroad, including in our negotiations as we face the review of CUSMA.

Dealing with the US and CUSMA

More leverage puts us in a stronger position to negotiate. Canada has leverage, and we can create more if we make the right moves. What is our leverage? 

• We are already America’s second-biggest market.
• We control the biggest share of the hemisphere’s airspace and northern approaches. 
• We will have, under our plan, a strategic reserve of energy and critical minerals, hosted in Canada under Canadian control, so we can sign an agreement with our American friends that would give them access to those minerals only at commercial prices and only if they keep our relationship tariff-free. 
• We can spend hundreds of billions of dollars on defence and directly link the amount of that money that goes to American firms to continued tariff-free access to the American market for the Canadian economy, paid in installments, installments that only continue as long as the tariffs remain off.
• We will secure every inch of our Arctic so that we strengthen our position within NORAD – more leverage – an alliance that both of us need for our operational overlapping and our shared threats. 
• Finally, we should leverage our relationship with the American people. We should all be reaching out to American business, unions, media, governors, investors, mayors, civic leaders, and the administration itself, as we work to fight for tariff-free trade and security cooperation. 

All these steps, all of them, will make us stronger at home so that we have unbreakable leverage in negotiating the CUSMA review so we can get what we want. 

So, what do we want?

Tariff-free trade.

In the course of negotiating the deal, we will aggressively defend our forestry workers, auto workers, steel and aluminum workers, and the farmers that feed our country and the world. Specifically, we will seek an end to steel, aluminum and auto tariffs, as well as an end to the softwood lumber tariffs.

And today, I am proposing that Conservatives will fight for a tariff-free Auto Pact with the United States with shared protections against Chinese imports. In short, here’s the deal: we should agree to keep Chinese vehicles out if Americans agree to let Canadian vehicles in. A full exemption to Buy America rules so that our companies can compete on construction projects, and a relaunch of the Keystone XL Pipeline.

C’est important et c’est possible de devenir « maître chez nous » si on négocie avec une position de force et des leviers face aux Américains. Ce qu’on veut, c’est la fin des tarifs et le retour du libre-échange. Plus concrètement, on veut la fin des tarifs sur l’acier, l’aluminium, l’auto et le bois. De plus, on veut un nouveau pacte automobile sans tarifs, qui protège le marché nord-américain contre les voitures chinoises. Une exemption complète aux règles de « Buy America » et une relance du pipeline Keystone XL.

And we should lock all these commitments into law so that it’s more difficult for future administrations to change the rules in the middle of the game. 

The best leverage we have, though, is to be united here at home. All political parties love Canada. New Democrats, Conservatives, and Liberals love it a little differently than the Bloc Québécois, but even they want the best for their constituents. The best way for us to become unbreakable in our negotiations and our discussions with other countries is to work to be united here at home. 

That is why Conservatives are proposing an all-party committee: a team, a task force that will work together as part of an effort to defend and fight for Canada in the CUSMA review. We will put forward members to that team that will act in good faith for the benefit of Canada above the benefit of party.

Let’s be clear though, cooperation cannot mean silence. The Official Opposition has a constitutional and patriotic duty to scrutinize the government and to hold it to account. Abandoning this responsibility would not strengthen Canada; it would weaken it. We will work together where we can. We will oppose where we must. Because Loyal Opposition is not just our job title, it is in our national interest.

Devenir « maître chez nous », c’est la souveraineté qui devient réalité. On doit s’adapter et rebâtir notre pays avec détermination. Avec ceux qui comprennent que le destin du Canada ne sera jamais décidé par Washington ni Pékin ni ailleurs. Mon ambition, c’est que le destin de notre pays soit déterminé par les Canadiens qui travaillent ensemble pour être « maître chez nous ».

Friends, history will not judge us by the disruptions we faced, but by how we responded. By whether we surrendered to events – or mastered what lay within our power. By whether we blamed others – or strengthened ourselves. By whether we fixated on what we could not control – or built what we could. By whether we became stronger at home, so we had unbreakable leverage abroad. 

Because economic strength is national strength. Energy security is national security. Self-reliance is sovereignty made real, and sovereignty is not declared; it is built – decisively, deliberately, and without excuses. Built by a country that refuses distractions, delay, and surrendering control over its own future.

Built by people who understand that Canada’s destiny will never be written in Washington, Beijing, or anywhere else – but by Canadians here at home. By a country that stands on its own feet; that is master in its own home; that bows before no nation; a country that is unbreakable. 

My friends, my ambition – and I believe the ambition of all Canadians – is for Canada to be that country. 

Thank you very much.

Merci beaucoup.