Yes, the G7 Matters to Canadians. Here’s Why.
The first G7 summit I attended was in Naples, Italy, in 1994. I was in the middle of my Ph.D. in international relations at the University of Toronto, and John Kirton, my thesis supervisor and director of the school’s G7 Research Group, invited me to come along. I remember having a casual conversation with then-president Bill Clinton as he enjoyed some gelato, and I got to witness the world’s most influential political leaders make decisions—not in theory, but in real time. I left Italy knowing I wanted to research how diplomacy, global governance and accountability intersect.
Since then, I’ve attended most G7s, as well as several G20s. Over the years, one question has been central to my work: do these summits actually matter? To answer it, in 1996, I helped launch a research team at U of T dedicated to tracking G7 (and later G20) results. Each year, we publish reports that assess whether leaders’ promises have translated into concrete outcomes or if their meeting was little more than a political spectacle.
This weekend, the G7 will celebrate its 50th anniversary in Kananaskis, Alberta, a tranquil mountain setting that’s been transformed into a security fortress, with military vehicles, mobile command centres, helicopters and RCMP checkpoints dotting the landscape. The main venue, the Pomeroy Kananaskis Mountain Lodge, has been meticulously prepared; there are multiple media areas, a central discussion table crafted out of Canadian wood and a bar menu with signature cocktails for each participating nation. Even if this pomp and circumstance appears distant from the day-to-day concerns of most Canadians—like the cost of living, housing and health care—what happens in Kananaskis will have significant implications for the country’s global standing and its identity at home.
The impact of G7 diplomacy is far from trivial. For decades, the summit has served as a launchpad for major initiatives on inflation targets, debt relief, energy prices, climate goals, sanctions coordination and counterterrorism frameworks. As a six-time host, Canada has used the G7 platform to advance both international priorities and ones that are important to Canadians, including gender equality, climate action and global health. The 2010 summit is largely remembered for how protestors were policed in Toronto, but it also marked a huge breakthrough in maternal, newborn and child health worldwide. Leaders committed $7.3 billion to Stephen Harper’s flagship initiative, part of which involved providing essential medicines like antibiotics and anti-malarials to pregnant women and children in 10 African countries. The Ocean Plastics Charter, created at the 2018 summit in Charlevoix, Quebec, paved the way for Canada’s ban on the manufacture, import and sale of several categories of single-use plastics four years later. Charlevoix was also where the G7 nations agreed to establish information-sharing networks to counter threats of foreign interference.
For the Kananaskis summit, the stakes are incredibly high. Four newly elected leaders will be at the table: Friedrich Merz of Germany, Shigeru Ishiba of Japan, Keir Starmer of the U.K., and, of course, Mark Carney. Each of the newcomers will be jockeying for influence, but Carney specifically will face plenty of scrutiny on his ability to authoritatively lead discussions on Ukraine and the Middle East, energy security, AI governance, critical mineral supply chains and the impact of wildfires—and especially his posture toward Trump.
Even amid threats to his own country’s independence, Carney will have to lean on his international credentials—and strong relationships with an elite network of high-ranking politicians and central bankers—to build unity and consensus. Donald Trump’s model of leadership rejects multilateralism, embraces power over principle and prioritizes performance over policy. And if his antics at Canada’s last G7 are any indication, this summit could escalate without warning. (Trump left Charlevoix early to meet North Korea’s Kim Jong Un in Singapore, instructed U.S. officials to reject the leaders’ final declaration en route and berated Justin Trudeau from Air Force One over the prime minister’s intent to retaliate against American tariffs on steel and aluminum.) Still, a show of diplomacy matters more than ever at a time when trade relationships, alliances and institutions are being weakened—when the rules-based order is openly unravelling.
The good news is that, in Kananaskis, Carney—a two-time bank governor and former U.N. special envoy for climate action and finance—is returning to a stage he knows well. This positions Canada to guide both the G7’s formal negotiations and crucial diplomacy behind the scenes, where many of the summit’s most important agreements are made. Carney may table issues pertaining to climate finance and green investment, carbon pricing frameworks and debt relief for the global south—areas in which he has deep credibility—and build quiet coalitions with Germany, France, Japan and the U.K., nations whose leaders still value institutional process. Should Trump resurface his “51st state” rhetoric, don’t expect Carney to respond directly. Instead, he’ll take action to demonstrate Canada’s sovereignty, through decisions on trade and climate. Any talk of Trump’s territorial ambitions would appear as a sidebar—or banter at best.
In the event the summit becomes gridlocked, the G7 leaders can still advance their priorities through other bilateral or regional forums, like NATO, the OECD, the World Trade Organization or Indo-Pacific alliances, ensuring progress continues even without American cooperation. This has happened in the past: in the run-up to the Iraq War, France and Germany opposed American-led military action, resulting in a G8 stalemate. (The summit included Russia at the time.) Canada, Italy and the U.K. elected to participate in a NATO mission to train Iraqi security forces, rather than contribute militarily. If Trump continues down his protectionist path in Kananaskis, Canada could still build consensus within the OECD and WTO to push global tax reform, or drive digital trade with other like-minded G7 allies. In short: the success of this summit doesn’t hinge on Washington’s whims.
To remain relevant beyond Kananaskis, this G7 must prove that alliances still matter, and that democratic leadership stays grounded in shared principles—not just ego and power. Leaders will also have to prove they’re connected to the priorities of people worldwide. Back in 2005, the meeting in Gleneagles, Scotland, was initially overshadowed by the London bombings, which occurred mid-summit. Despite the chaos of the terrorist attack, the G7 leaders responded to massive grassroots pressure—including the Live 8 concerts and Bono’s Make Poverty History campaign—and made commitments to African aid and development relief, which included cancelling 100 per cent of the debt owed by 18 of the world’s most heavily indebted countries. Against a backdrop of annexation threats and growing authoritarianism, in Kananaskis, Canada has an opportunity to cut through the noise and take steps to build the future Canadians want to see—one rooted in freedom, fairness and moral leadership.
Ella Kokotsis is the director of accountability for the G7 Research Group at the University of Toronto.
