Mark Carney’s government is preparing to unveil a new Canada-U. S. advisory council at a moment when the country’s trade relationship with Washington is entering a more uncertain phase. The inclusion of Erin O’toole in the wider political conversation around this file underscores how seriously Ottawa is treating the coming USMCA review. The move is not just administrative. It suggests the government wants broader advice, more political cover, and a faster read on how to handle pressure from the United States as the agreement’s next decision point draws closer.
Why the new council matters now
The announcement is expected Tuesday, and the timing is crucial. The council is being assembled as a potentially rocky review of the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement gets under way. Carney’s team is clearly trying to build an advisory structure that can respond quickly if trade tensions intensify.
This council will resemble the Prime Minister’s Council on Canada-U. S. Relations, created in mid-January 2025 by then-prime minister Justin Trudeau. That earlier group later met with Carney after he took office in March that year. The continuity matters: Ottawa appears to be preserving the idea that Canada needs a standing forum for trade strategy, even as the political leadership changes. The presence of Erin O’toole in the discussion around leadership and membership signals the breadth of experience the government may be seeking.
What Carney is building on
The previous council included about 20 members and brought together former Quebec premier Jean Charest, Canada’s then-ambassador to the United States Kirsten Hillman, former Canadian envoy David MacNaughton and former chief trade negotiator Steve Verheul. It also included business leaders Linda Hasenfratz, executive chair of the board of Linamar Corp., and Flavio Volpe, president of the Automotive Parts Manufacturers’ Association.
The new version is expected to draw on similarly high-level expertise. Dominic LeBlanc, the federal minister for Canada-U. S. trade relations, may play a leadership role, while Janice Charette, Canada’s Chief Trade Negotiator to the United States, and Michael Sabia, Clerk of the Privy Council, are likely to take part in some capacity. The composition points to a council built not only for symbolism, but for practical coordination across trade, diplomacy and central government.
That matters because Ottawa is facing a compressed timeline. United States Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said earlier this month that negotiations on the USMCA are not expected to be resolved by July 1. Under the deal, that date gives the partners the option to renew the agreement for 16 years. If they do not, they move into annual reviews for 10 years before the agreement can lapse. The structure itself creates leverage, but also uncertainty.
Erin O’toole and the political message behind the council
Carney’s Sunday video address added a sharper political tone. He said Canada’s close ties to the United States have become “weaknesses” that must be corrected. He did not name Donald Trump, but he said the United States “has changed and we must respond. ” He also warned that Canada cannot “bet our future in the hope that it will suddenly stop. ”
That language suggests the new council is meant to do more than manage paperwork. It is part of a broader effort to reframe Canada’s posture ahead of a difficult round of talks. In that sense, Erin O’toole sits within a larger advisory logic: Ottawa seems to want voices that can help it navigate Washington’s hardening tone while still preserving room for negotiation.
Signals from Washington
The pressure is not coming from one corner. Two days before Carney’s video, U. S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick called the current North American trade agreement a “bad deal” for Americans that may be allowed to “lapse” this summer. He also criticized Carney for trying to reduce Canada’s dependence on the United States by pursuing trade ties with China, and questioned the decision to allow Chinese automakers to sell electric vehicles in Canada.
Those remarks matter because they show the debate is no longer limited to technical trade provisions. The U. S. side is linking trade policy to strategic choices about supply chains, industrial policy and geopolitical alignment. For Canada, that raises the stakes of the advisory council: it will need to advise on economics while reading the political mood in Washington.
Regional and global implications
The implications extend beyond bilateral trade. A more contested USMCA process could affect manufacturing, auto parts, investment planning and cross-border supply chains across North America. The previous council’s business-heavy makeup reflected how deeply the agreement touches private-sector confidence. The new council appears designed to preserve that link between government and industry while adding more direct trade and cabinet-level oversight.
For Mexico, the review also matters, since the agreement is trilateral and any move toward annual reviews would reshape expectations for all three economies. The outcome could influence how companies plan production, where they source inputs and how governments manage economic resilience. That is why the council’s mandate carries significance far beyond Ottawa’s internal policy machinery.
In the end, the council is a signal that Canada is preparing for a harder, more unpredictable phase of North American trade politics. Whether it can provide the kind of strategic clarity Ottawa wants will depend on how much room remains for compromise once the USMCA review reaches its decisive stage. And if the pressure continues to build, how much influence will Erin O’toole and the rest of the council truly have over Canada’s next move?
