06.06.2026
jamil jivani — CA news
Jamil Jivani's recent trade trip to Washington D.C. has ignited discussions about the Conservative Party's role in Canada-U.S. trade relations.

“In the end there is one negotiator for Canada, and that is the government of Canada,” said Mark Carney, reflecting on the recent trade trip by Jamil Jivani to Washington D.C.

Jivani, a Conservative MP, made his second trip to Washington this year, hoping to bolster Canada-U.S. trade relations amidst ongoing negotiations. His first visit occurred in February, where he met with significant figures such as U.S. Vice-President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

This latest trip included a meeting with U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer, who emphasized that “America First is policy, not just a slogan.” Greer’s comments highlight the complexities of current trade negotiations, particularly concerning energy collaboration between the two nations.

During his discussions, Greer cautioned that Canada should avoid using its energy resources as leverage in these negotiations. This advice comes at a time when both countries are navigating a landscape marked by tariff-free trade agreements and shifting energy policies.

Jivani responded to Carney’s dismissal of his efforts by stating, “We’re all on the same team, and we don’t need to be fighting with each other.” His remarks underline the tension within the Conservative Party regarding their approach to international diplomacy and trade.

The backdrop of these discussions reveals a growing concern among Conservative MPs about their influence on U.S.-Canada relations. With trade negotiations ongoing, many are questioning whether their trips yield any substantial benefits or insights.

As these dialogues continue, it remains crucial for Canadian officials to present a united front in negotiations with their American counterparts. The next steps in these discussions could shape not only economic policies but also the broader relationship between Canada and the U.S.

While Jivani’s efforts may seem overshadowed by Carney’s criticisms, they reflect a deeper struggle within Canadian politics regarding how best to engage with one of its most vital partners.