🤑Silicon Valley & Washington: A History of Power, Wealth, and Selective Memory

Last week, I had the pleasure of attending “U.S. Politics and Big Tech Power: Past, Present, and Future,” hosted by the Innovation Policy Lab at the University of Toronto’s Munk School of Global Affairs & Public Policy.

The conversation—led by Margaret O’Mara (University of Washington) and Tom Kemeny (Munk School)—took us deep into the origin story of Silicon Valley, its relationship with Washington, and the consequences of that alignment (and misalignment) today.

It also surfaced an uncomfortable but essential question:

How did Big Tech become so dominant—economically, politically, even philosophically—while convincing itself it stands apart from the institutions that built it?

Subscribe now

🛠️ Built by Government, Branded as Rebellion

Silicon Valley has always told a story of garage-born innovation, lone genius, and private ingenuity. But the historical record is less romantic—and far more entangled with the state.

• In the 1940s, HP thrived on Pentagon defense contracts.

• Fairchild Semiconductor—the original startup—built the chip industry off NASA space contracts.

• The internet itself was a Pentagon invention, not a startup story. Please note the debate between my dear friend Ruth Woolmer and I who are each rooting for a different origin story. Read hers & mine.

• In the 1980s, Steve Jobs lobbied Congress to bring Macs into classrooms.

• The 2023 SVB bailout was just the latest reminder: when the system falters, tech turns to the state.

From infrastructure to procurement to regulation, the U.S. government has been fundamental to Silicon Valley’s rise.

And yet, many of these same companies have built their brands—and worldviews—on anti-government sentiment:
“Government is broken. We move fast. They slow us down.”

The result is a kind of cognitive dissonance:
An industry that thrives on public infrastructure and political access, while promoting a philosophy of radical individualism and free-market absolutism.

🤖 Techno-Libertarianism, from Counterculture to Corporate

In the post-Vietnam era, a new ethos took hold in the Valley:
small government, big tools for individual empowerment.

This worldview shaped the Whole Earth Catalog, the personal computing movement, and eventually, techno-libertarianism:

• Steve Jobs described the computer as “a bicycle for the mind.”

• John Perry Barlow’s “Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace” cast governments as obsolete.

• Many tech founders saw Washington not as a partner, but as the establishment to be disrupted.

This philosophy celebrated hyper-individualism, decentralization, and the idea that innovation should be unshackled from bureaucracy.

But as tech companies grew—and as their political power increased—those values became increasingly inconvenient.

🏛️ The Long History of Lobbying

Despite the rhetoric, Big Tech has never stayed out of politics.

• In the 1980s, as Japan challenged U.S. tech dominance, Silicon Valley lobbied Reagan for 100% tariffs.

• Steve Jobs campaigned in D.C. to shape education policy.

• Obama held fireside chats with Zuckerberg. His administration became a revolving door with the Valley.

• And in 2025, for the first time, tech billionaires wrote $1M+ checks to the presidential inauguration committee.

This isn’t new. It’s just more visible now.

Today, tech CEOs are not just company leaders—they’re political actors, policy influencers, and in some cases, philosopher-kings of a new digital order.

⚠️ What Happens When Tech Questions Democracy?

A lot of the most provocative moments in the event came from the audience—noting the growing distance between tech’s philosophical leanings and democratic ideals.

Some tech leaders now flirt with “dark enlightenment”—a belief system that questions democracy itself. Think:

• No elections

• No consensus-building

• A CEO-led governance model for society

• A suspicion that democratic institutions are too slow, too compromised, or simply obsolete

The implications are chilling. And yet they echo in corners of the industry.

In AI. In crypto. In space.

Platforms like OpenAI, Blue Origin, and SpaceX are now shaping global trajectories—but often without public input or democratic guardrails.

💸 Supersizing of Power & Wealth

The concentration of wealth in tech is unprecedented:

• In 2020, Bezos and Musk alone gained $200B+ in net worth, more than the GDP of 139 countries.

• Tech CEOs have reached celebrity-political hybrid status—with massive social and geopolitical influence.

• Antitrust enforcement remains underused, despite having mechanisms in place.

SVB’s collapse and government bailout was a perfect case study:
Socialize the risks, privatize the rewards. And all under the banner of “disruption.”

We’ve entered a moment where tech is not just an industry. It’s a parallel governance structure—but with fewer checks and balances.

🧭 What Now?

Tech likes to position itself as building “the future.” But whose future, and who gets a say?

As we navigate this next chapter of AI, digital platforms, and space colonization, we have to ask:

• Can democracy keep up with the pace—and scale—of tech?

• Can we rein in monopolies and still innovate?

• What’s the right relationship between public policy and private power?

Because at the end of the day:
Democracy isn’t a bug in the system. It’s the operating system.

Let’s remember that—and build accordingly.

Would love to hear your thoughts.
👉 Where do you see the relationship between Big Tech and government going from here?

#bigtech #democracy #publicpolicy #AI #innovation #siliconvalley #techpower #geopolitics #ethicsintech

Peggy Van de Plassche is a seasoned advisor with over 20 years of experience in financial services, healthcare, and technology. She specializes in guiding boards and C-suite executives through transformational change, leveraging technology and capital allocation to drive growth and innovation. A founding board member of Invest in Canada, Peggy also brings unique expertise in navigating complex issues and fostering public-private partnerships—key elements in shaping the Future of Business. Her skill set includes strategic leadership, capital allocation, transaction advisory, technology integration, and governance. Notable clients include BMO, CI Financial, HOOPP, OMERS, GreenShield Canada, Nicola Wealth, and Power Financial. For more information, visit peggyvandeplassche.com.

🤝Cooperation in Conflictual Times: Can We Reimagine a Different Way Forward?

Can Cooperation Outperform Competition? 💪

We are living in an era of increasing polarization. From political turmoil to economic uncertainty, from social divides to ideological clashes, the dominant narrative of our time is conflict. The rise of extremist parties, culture wars, corporate greed, and the growing disconnect between governments and citizens all contribute to a world that feels more adversarial than ever.

But is there another way?

Professor Bernard E. Harcourt explored this question at a recent event at the Munk School, drawing from his latest book, Cooperation: A Political, Economic, and Social Theory. His argument: we have built our political and economic systems on competition—but what if we shifted our focus to cooperation?

Harcourt proposes a radical alternative to capitalism and hierarchical governance—a cooperative model where democracy, economic production, and social relations are restructured around collaboration rather than competition. His work isn’t abstract theory—it’s rooted in historical precedents and current realities, from worker cooperatives to mutual aid networks to decentralized governance experiments.

This idea is not new, but its relevance today is undeniable. If we are serious about solving systemic inequality, economic instability, and political dysfunction, we need to rethink the very foundation of our institutions.

🛠 The Cooperatist Model: A Different Political Economy

At the core of Cooperatism is a shift away from punitive, reactionary systems toward preventive, community-driven solutions.

🔹 Current System: The Punitive Paradigm

• Low investment in prevention (education, healthcare, social mobility).

• High spending on reactionary measures (policing, incarceration, emergency medical care).

🔹 The Cooperative Alternative

• Democratic self-governance across all areas of life.

• Worker cooperatives, banking co-ops, and decentralized governance models.

• An economic system that prioritizes long-term collective well-being over short-term individual gains.

This isn’t just theoretical—it’s already happening in pockets around the world:

✅ Mondragon Corporation (Spain) – A worker-owned conglomerate where the CEO-to-worker pay ratio is 4:1 (compared to 3,100:1 at McDonald’s).
✅ Jackson, Mississippi – Community-driven development projects reshaping local economies.
✅ Black Panther Party’s Community Programs – Free breakfast programs, healthcare clinics, legal services—microcosms of cooperation in response to systemic neglect.
✅ Financial Cooperatives – Models such as Crédit Mutuel (France), Mutual Farm (USA), and Desjardins (Canada) demonstrate how finance can function within a cooperative framework, emphasizing member ownership and long-term stability.

Harcourt argues that before dismantling failing systems, we must first build viable alternatives. But how do we do that when existing institutions actively resist change?

Share

⚖️ Gandhi, the Black Panthers, and the Limits of Nonviolence

During the event, I asked Bernard about how Gandhi’s philosophy of nonviolent resistance fits within the cooperatist model. The Black Panthers, as Harcourt had highlighted, combined cooperative principles with self-defense and strategic opposition to state oppression—a contrast to Gandhi’s strict commitment to nonviolence.

We later followed up via email, discussing a quote from Gandhi that encapsulates the dilemma:

“Where choice is set between cowardice and violence, I would advise violence.”

Harcourt expanded on this in an essay, reflecting on Gandhi’s concept of Satyagraha, which he describes as exceptionally demanding—requiring a level of fortitude that not everyone possesses. What happens when cooperation alone isn’t enough? Harcourt admitted that he, too, questions whether he would always have the strength to adhere to nonviolence. I know I would not have the fortitude required by Gandhi’s concept of Satyagraha. The level of sacrifice, patience, and resilience it demands is beyond my reach.

This led me to reflect: Is a purely cooperative system truly sustainable if it lacks mechanisms for protection and resistance? Even if cooperation is the goal, history shows that systems built on mutual aid are often dismantled precisely because they threaten established power structures.

So where do we draw the line? When does cooperation demand confrontation?

🛑 The Limits of Cooperatism: My Thoughts on Where It Breaks Down

While Harcourt’s vision is compelling, I see several challenges that could hinder the establishment of a cooperative-based system. Nonetheless I believe some of these challenges could be addressed with the right incentives and we could live the rest…no system is perfect, ever!

🚧 How do you fund parallel systems?

If we want to shift from a punitive to a cooperative paradigm, we can’t simply dismantle existing structures overnight.

• But running two systems simultaneously (e.g., current “sickcare” vs. preventive healthcare) would be prohibitively expensive and face extreme political pushback.

• Who funds the transition, and how do we ensure its sustainability?

🚧 How do you prevent free-riders?

• If everyone contributes equally, how do you ensure some don’t take advantage of the system while giving nothing back?

• I personally embody this challenge growing up in France—where the government invested heavily in my education, healthcare, and opportunities—only for me to leave for Canada. France took the cost, Canada reaped the benefits.

• This state of affairs didn’t prevent multiple people (even some supposedly educated and informed) from telling me to go back to France. Visibly for some geniuses, immigrants are not allowed to question the system even if they are participating in it and funding it 😉. Pay up and shut up! is visibly what is expected from us.

🚧 Does cooperatism reduce mobility?

Would a worker cooperative or a mutualist governance model function like a business partnership—where members are locked in and leaving is costly?

• How do you prevent people from extracting resources and then abandoning the system?

• Would cooperative systems restrict individual freedom in ways we don’t yet fully understand?

🚧 What happens when cooperation isn’t enough?

The Black Panthers mastered cooperative structures—yet still faced brutal government suppression.

• As Gandhi’s quote suggests, is it better to resist violently than to be complicit in oppression?

• How do we balance cooperation with self-defense in an inherently conflict-driven world?

💡 Final Thoughts: Can We Make This Work?

My background is in finance, and since the 2008 financial crisis, I’ve been pondering our economic system, which I see as anchored in the mutualization of costs and the privatization of profits—while neglecting the benefits of prevention in favor of after-the-fact care.

The food and healthcare industries are prime examples of this dynamic:

🍟 Step 1: Corporations sell ultra-processed, unhealthy food (privatization of profits by food companies + low/no investment in health promotion/prevention by the medical-industrial complex).
🏥 Step 2: People get sick (privatization of profits by the medical-industrial complex, healthcare financed by taxpayers—mutualization of costs).
🧠 Step 3: Poor nutrition impacts cognitive function and decision-making, making populations easier to manipulate and get addicted to unhealthy lifestyle—a perfectly self-reinforcing cycle.

You can expand this cycle to the financial services and technology industry very easily:

• Tech companies want cheap labor to preserve their margins and fuel their growth, countries attract loads of immigrants, tech companies & institutional investors thrive (privatization of profits combined with tax optimization schemes), overall population supports the costs of infrastructure (mutualization of costs). Cherry on the pie: Immigrants and governments are blamed.

• Financial institutions offer exotic high margins products, they thrive (privatization of profits combined with tax optimization schemes), system collapses after being pushed to the limits by corporates and individuals’ greed, overall population picks up the check (mutualization of costs).

This is why I’ve always been intrigued by financial cooperatives and union-based financial models. Unlike shareholder-driven banks, where short-term gains dominate decision-making, cooperative banks (like Desjardins, Crédit Mutuel) prioritize long-term stability, ethics, and members well-being.

But even in financial services, incentives and power dynamics favor extractive models over cooperative ones.

So, the question remains:

✔ Can cooperatism be scaled effectively, or will it remain a niche alternative?
✔ Can prevention-focused models gain enough traction when they don’t produce immediate ROI?
✔ How do we prevent the exploitation or co-optation of cooperative systems?

I don’t have the answers. But I do know that staying on our current path is not sustainable.

💬 What do you think?

Let’s continue the conversation.

Until next time,
Peggy

Peggy Van de Plassche is a seasoned advisor with over 20 years of experience in financial services, healthcare, and technology. She specializes in guiding boards and C-suite executives through transformational change, leveraging technology and capital allocation to drive growth and innovation. A founding board member of Invest in Canada, Peggy also brings unique expertise in navigating complex issues and fostering public-private partnerships—key elements in shaping the Future of Business. Her skill set includes strategic leadership, capital allocation, transaction advisory, technology integration, and governance. Notable clients include BMO, CI Financial, HOOPP, OMERS, GreenShield Canada, Nicola Wealth, and Power Financial. For more information, visit peggyvandeplassche.com.

#democracy #economy #Cooperation #conflicts

💸 Billions & Jobs Lost: Why Are Canadian Pension Funds Hiring Foreign Money Managers?

A few weeks ago, I wrote about a big, uncomfortable question:

📌 Why don’t Canada’s pension funds have a mandate to support provincial and national economic growth?
📌 Why do they invest billions in direct investments abroad while overlooking opportunities in our own companies and infrastructure projects?

But direct investments are only part of the story.

💡 What about indirect investments?

Every year, Canadian pension funds deploy billions into public equity, private equity, and debt markets—but instead of channeling these assets through Canadian money managers, a substantial portion goes to foreign firms.

Why?

Why are we outsourcing capital management when we have some of the best money managers in the world right here at home?

It’s time for Canada to rethink who manages our money.

(Missed my last piece? Read it here)

📢 The UK Just Shifted Billions—But Not to Its Own Money Managers

Recently, The People's Pension, one of the UK's largest pension funds, shifted £28 billion (approximately CAD $47.6 billion) from State Street (U.S.) to Amundi (France) and Invesco (U.S.), citing a stronger alignment with ESG principles. (ft.com)

👉 A move made for ESG alignment, but it raises an important question:

💡 Why do pension funds consistently overlook their own country’s top-tier investment professionals?

And it’s not just the UK.

Canada does the same.

🍁Canada’s Pension Paradox: We Have the Talent, But They’re Not Always the First Choice

Canadian pension funds control over CAD $2.5 trillion in assets—yes, trillion with a T. (fitchratings.com)

Yet, a substantial portion of these assets is managed by foreign firms instead of homegrown investment powerhouses.

👉 So, while Canadian fund managers are flying overseas pitching their expertise to international investors, our own institutions aren’t always giving them a fair shot.

Does that make sense? Nope. Is it costing us billions in potential job creation, tax revenues, and economic growth? Absolutely.

Share

📉 What Happens When We Don’t Invest in Our Own People?

Every dollar sent to a foreign money manager is a dollar not supporting Canadian economic growth. When we don’t prioritize our own investment talent:

❌ We miss out on job creation. The asset management industry is a massive employer, and growing it at home could mean thousands of high-paying finance and tech jobs.

❌ We shrink our tax base. Canadian money managers pay taxes here. Foreign firms? Not so much.

❌ We are not building an even stronger financial services industry. A thriving domestic asset management sector benefits pension funds, institutional investors, and the broader economy, ensuring Canada remains a global leader in financial services.

🍁Canada First Doesn’t Mean Canada Only—But It Should Mean Canada More

This is not about shutting out global investment firms—it’s about making sure Canadian money managers get a fair shot at managing Canadian capital.

📌 Keeping more of our capital management industry at home means more high-value jobs in Canada.

📌 It strengthens our financial sector, which in turn benefits institutional investors and pensioners.

📌 It ensures that Canadian money is working for Canada, not just fueling financial growth abroad.

And with a federal election on the horizon, this is a key topic that deserves attention.

Share

📢 It’s Time to Have This Conversation

This isn’t just about finance—it’s about jobs, economic growth, and Canada’s financial future.

If we don’t take action now, we risk becoming a country that produces world-class investment talent—only to have them take their expertise elsewhere.

Let’s talk about it.

Drop your thoughts below. Let’s make some noise on this. 🚀

Peggy Van de Plassche is a seasoned advisor with over 20 years of experience in financial services, healthcare, and technology. She specializes in guiding boards and C-suite executives through transformational change, leveraging technology and capital allocation to drive growth and innovation. A founding board member of Invest in Canada, Peggy also brings unique expertise in navigating complex issues and fostering public-private partnerships—key elements in shaping the Future of Business. Her skill set includes strategic leadership, capital allocation, transaction advisory, technology integration, and governance. Notable clients include BMO, CI Financial, HOOPP, OMERS, GreenShield Canada, Nicola Wealth, and Power Financial. For more information, visit peggyvandeplassche.com.

#CapitalAllocation #InstitutionalInvestment #PensionFunds #FinancialStrategy #PublicPolicy #CanadianEconomy #InvestmentStrategy #AssetManagement

🎯 The Art of Dodging Tariffs: Strategic Moves for Smart Businesses

If you've been following my newsletters, you know I’ve covered the importance of lobbying, navigating business uncertainty, pension funds investing locally, and lowering trade barriers within countries like Canada. All of these are critical pieces of the puzzle when it comes to creating a stable and profitable business environment. But today, we’re diving into another high-stakes issue: tariffs—how companies are working around them, and what strategies actually work (because let’s be honest, bending the rules—legally—is a time-honored tradition in business).

Tariffs have been a business headache for centuries. In 1881, American customs officials caught a sugar importer altering the color of their product to game the tariff system—an act the Supreme Court ultimately ruled legal. Fast forward to today, and companies are still playing chess with trade regulations to stay competitive. With Donald Trump threatening new duties on imports, businesses must get creative to protect their bottom lines.

🔍 Navigating the Tariff Minefield

Tariffs are more than just taxes—they’re tools of economic warfare. Companies face two choices: absorb the cost (hurting profits) or find legal ways to sidestep them. And given that $4 billion was spent on lobbying in the U.S. in 2023, it’s clear that businesses are actively shaping trade policies to their advantage. But what if you don’t have a team of lobbyists on speed dial? Here’s what smart companies are doing instead (hint: they’re not just rolling over and paying up).

💡 1. Tariff Engineering: Redesigning to Reclassify

One of the most effective strategies is tweaking product designs to fall into a lower tariff category. Consider:
🔹 Converse, which altered its Chuck Taylor shoes by adding a thin layer of fabric under the insole—cutting tariffs from 48% to 7.5%.
🔹 Columbia Sportswear, which strategically added pockets below the waist to reclassify shirts and blouses into lower-taxed categories.
🔹 Spanish exporters who shifted to product varieties that were exempt from tariffs (Minondo, 2023a, 2023b).
🔹 Lu and Hsu (2021) identified six product design strategies for Chinese home appliance firms to legally reduce tariff costs.

Don’t forget that the U.S. is the only nation in the world that has gendered based tariffs. They are higher on womenswear than on menswear…a golden opportunity for products reclassification.

🔁 2. Country of Origin Maneuvering

Shifting production entirely to a tariff-friendly country is costly, but partial production relocation, supplier diversification, and contract manufacturing can be game-changers.
🔹 Hyundai’s cable harnesses are technically manufactured in China, but final assembly and packaging happen in South Korea—allowing the company to benefit from South Korea’s preferential trade agreements with the U.S.
🔹 Many firms shift parts of their supply chains to Vietnam, Thailand, or Malaysia—but beware, Trump has floated the idea of expanding tariffs to these regions (so the game of whack-a-mole continues).
🔹 Supplier Diversification: Switching suppliers to avoid regions hit by high tariffs. Gereffi et al. (2021) found that firms actively swap suppliers to circumvent trade restrictions. Spanish exporters neutralized tariff increases by substituting products from unaffected countries (Minondo, 2023a, 2023b).
🔹 Manufacturing Location Shifts: Instead of moving entire production lines, some businesses shift only critical portions of their supply chain. Saiz and Uribetxebarria (2012) showed that shifting assembly from China to Brazil significantly reduced tariff burdens.

📦 3. Leveraging “First-Sale” Pricing

A little-known court ruling from 1988 allows importers to pay tariffs based on the manufacturer’s price, not the higher retail price charged by middlemen. This tactic works especially well for brands that source from multiple suppliers before selling finished goods.

⏳ 4. Delaying Duties with Bonded Warehouses & Temporary Bonds

Cash flow is king. Companies are increasingly using:
🔹 Bonded warehouses, where goods can be stored tariff-free until sold.
🔹 Temporary import bonds, which defer duties on products set to be re-exported.

📊 5. Operational Tactics

Companies also adjust their logistics and operations to minimize tariff impacts:
🔹 Inventory Management: Research by Muris et al. (2023) found that a 30% tariff leads to a 65% reduction in inventory-sales ratios. Firms adjust stock levels to weather tariff changes.
🔹 Order Timing Optimization: Johnson and Haug (2021) found that businesses pre-order goods before new tariffs take effect, reducing exposure.

🚀 The Future: Tariff Loopholes & Government Crackdowns

The ingenuity of businesses to navigate tariffs is undeniable—but so is the government’s ability to tighten the noose. In 2008, U.S. customs attempted to scrap the “first-sale” rule, only for trade lawyers to fight back successfully. If Trump (or any future president) clamps down on existing workarounds, expect businesses to find new and creative solutions.

At the end of the day, demand always wins. As one trade lawyer put it, “People want stuff, and they’ll get it one way or another.”

💬 What’s your strategy for navigating tariffs? Are you playing defense or getting ahead of the game? Let’s discuss.

Peggy Van de Plassche is a seasoned advisor with over 20 years of experience in financial services, healthcare, and technology. She specializes in guiding boards and C-suite executives through transformational change, leveraging technology and capital allocation to drive growth and innovation. A founding board member of Invest in Canada, Peggy also brings unique expertise in navigating complex issues and fostering public-private partnerships—key elements in shaping the Future of Business. Her skill set includes strategic leadership, capital allocation, transaction advisory, technology integration, and governance. Notable clients include BMO, CI Financial, HOOPP, OMERS, GreenShield Canada, Nicola Wealth, and Power Financial. For more information, visit peggyvandeplassche.com.

#CapitalAllocation #InstitutionalInvestment #PensionFunds #FinancialStrategy #PublicPolicy #CanadianEconomy #InvestmentStrategy #AssetManagement

💼The Business of Politics: Why Lobbying is a Power Play, Not a Dirty Word

If you think politics is just about governance, think again. Politics is marketing—branding, positioning, and influence. And in today’s world, if you’re running a business, navigating politics isn’t optional; it’s a survival skill.

I recently attended Intersection of Business and Politics: Insights for Leaders, led by Dr. Ken Chan, Partner at Optimus SBR. This event laid bare the realities of corporate lobbying and why even governments themselves hire lobbyists. The key takeaway? If you’re not at the table, you’re on the menu.

💼 Lobbying: A Legitimate Business Strategy

Lobbying isn’t a shadowy backroom deal—it’s a structured, strategic process that connects businesses with policymakers. Done right, it contributes positively to both business performance and public policy. Consider these stats:

• $4 billion spent on lobbying in the U.S. in 2023.

• 12,000 lobbyists registered in the EU.

• 7,000 lobbyists registered in Canada.

Corporations that engage in lobbying see tangible business advantages—reduced risks, competitive edges, and a seat at the policymaking table.

🌍 Why Businesses Need to Master the Political Landscape

The event made one thing crystal clear: business and politics are deeply intertwined. Whether you’re a multinational or a startup, you need to understand and leverage government relations. Key reasons include:

• Aligning with government priorities: If your business goals and policy trends don’t align, you’re already behind.

• Regulatory navigation: Governments create the rules of the game. Smart businesses work to shape those rules.

• Risk mitigation: Policy shifts can make or break industries overnight. Engaging early reduces exposure to sudden regulatory risks.

Share

🔥 The Evolution of Lobbying: The Trump Effect

In response to my question after the event, Dr. Chan pointed out that traditional lobbying playbooks are being thrown into chaos under Trump 2.0. His unpredictable approach to policymaking is disrupting conventional lobbying tactics, leaving firms scrambling to adapt. This uncertainty continues to reshape how lobbying is done today.

📖 The Lobbying Playbook: How to Do It Right

Dr. Chan’s research, based on 65 elite interviews with business leaders and policymakers, provides a clear roadmap for effective lobbying:

1. In-House vs. Outsourced Lobbying

   • Companies with in-house government relations teams often still hire external lobbyists. Why? External experts provide political intelligence, validation, and access to key networks.

   • Lesson: Even governments hire lobbyists to navigate their own bureaucracy. You should too.

2. Trade Associations as a Collective Voice

   • Businesses can wield more influence when they advocate together.

   • Lesson: If you can’t lobby alone, join forces with industry associations that can amplify your message.

3. Understanding How Policymakers Think

   • Ministers and advisors prioritize ethical engagement, a deep understanding of government processes, and solutions that align with public interest.

   • Lesson: Building credibility is key. Political staffers remember who plays fair—and who doesn’t.

🍻 The Best Hiring Tip in Government Relations? Head to the Bar.

A lighthearted but valuable insight: If you’re serious about building political influence, hire young former political staffers. Where do you find them? The bars near government offices. These are the people who know the inner workings of policymaking and can be your best asset in navigating government relations.

🎯 Non-Market Strategy: A Critical Business Lever

Unlike traditional competitive strategies that focus on pricing, branding, or innovation, non-market strategy refers to how businesses engage with governments, regulators, and the public to shape the business environment. Lobbying is one of the most effective non-market strategies—helping businesses shape policies that directly impact their industries.

🏆 Final Thought: If You’re Not in the Game, You’re Losing

Lobbying isn’t just for Fortune 500 companies. It’s a tool for any business serious about long-term success. In an era of regulatory uncertainty, global interconnectivity, and policy-driven market shifts, staying politically savvy isn’t optional—it’s a business imperative.

If your business isn’t engaging with politics, it’s time to rethink your strategy. Because whether you like it or not, politics is marketing, and the most powerful brands know how to play the game.

Let’s discuss: How is your business navigating the political landscape?

Peggy Van de Plassche is a seasoned advisor with over 20 years of experience in financial services, healthcare, and technology. She specializes in guiding boards and C-suite executives through transformational change, leveraging technology and capital allocation to drive growth and innovation. A founding board member of Invest in Canada, Peggy also brings unique expertise in navigating complex issues and fostering public-private partnerships—key elements in shaping the Future of Business. Her skill set includes strategic leadership, capital allocation, transaction advisory, technology integration, and governance. Notable clients include BMO, CI Financial, HOOPP, OMERS, GreenShield Canada, Nicola Wealth, and Power Financial. For more information, visit peggyvandeplassche.com.

#Lobbying #Politics #PublicPolicy #BusinessStrategy

💪It’s Time for Canada to Leverage Its Own Investment Power

For 15 years, I’ve been asking the same question:

👉 Why don’t Canada’s pension funds have a mandate to support provincial and national economic growth?

And for 15 years, I’ve been given the same answer:
❌ “It’s not in the mandate.”

To which my response has always been:
Well, why not change the mandate?

It seems so obvious, yet nothing changes. Meanwhile, our largest trading partner—the United States—is increasingly turning from an ally to a strategic threat. Tariffs, Buy American policies, and now even expansionist rhetoric signal a future where Canada’s economic independence is at risk.

Yet, while the U.S. is doubling down on economic nationalism, we’re not even using the tools at our disposal to strengthen our own economy.

This is one of the reasons I recently applied for the role of Chief Investment Officer at the Ontario Pension Board (OPB). If we want change, we need people in leadership who will push for policies that prioritize both strong returns and economic resilience. And this is an issue where I would love to move the needle.

The Power of Investment: A Wasted Opportunity

Canadian pension funds control $2.5 trillion in assets. That’s more than Canada’s entire GDP ($2.4 trillion in 2023). These funds are some of the most sophisticated investors in the world, backing infrastructure, private equity, and real estate across Europe, Asia, and the U.S.

Yet, most of them don’t have a mandate to prioritize investments that benefit Canada.

There’s one exception: Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec (CDPQ).

CDPQ actively invests in Québec businesses and infrastructure while still delivering strong returns. If they can do it, why can’t other funds?

📌 Why do our pension funds build highways in Texas but not in Ontario?
📌 Why do we back private equity in Europe but underfund manufacturing in Canada?
📌 Why do we finance energy projects abroad but hesitate to support our own industries?

The answer? Because "it’s not in the mandate.”

It’s time for that to change.

Share

Economic Resilience in an Uncertain World

Canada’s economic dependence on the U.S. is staggering:
📦 63% of our trade is with the U.S.
💰 $3.6 billion in goods and services cross the border daily.
⚡ The U.S. is our largest investor, but also our biggest competitor.

The risks of this dependence have never been clearer. The U.S. is prioritizing its own industries, tightening trade restrictions, and making it harder for Canadian businesses to compete.

If we don’t act now to mobilize our investment and purchasing power, we risk becoming even more vulnerable.

✅ A New Mandate for Canada’s Pension Funds Pension funds are meant to maximize returns for beneficiaries. But long-term, sustainable returns depend on a strong, independent Canadian economy.

It’s time to update investment mandates to:
🔹 Prioritize Canadian infrastructure, innovation, and industries—just like CDPQ does for Québec.
🔹 Support national and provincial economic resilience in key sectors like manufacturing, energy, and technology.
🔹 Ensure our capital is working for us—not just for foreign economies.

This isn’t about protectionism—it’s about economic survival. The U.S. is playing the long game. Canada needs to start doing the same.

Share

Final Thought: The Question We Need to Answer

If CDPQ can invest in Québec while still delivering competitive returns, why can’t the rest of Canada’s pension funds do the same for their provinces and the country?

The mandate excuse no longer holds.

The real question is:
Do we have the political will to change it?

Let’s discuss. 🚀

Peggy Van de Plassche is a seasoned advisor with over 20 years of experience in financial services, healthcare, and technology. She specializes in guiding boards and C-suite executives through transformational change, leveraging technology and capital allocation to drive growth and innovation. A founding board member of Invest in Canada, Peggy also brings unique expertise in navigating complex issues and fostering public-private partnerships—key elements in shaping the Future of Business. Her skill set includes strategic leadership, capital allocation, transaction advisory, technology integration, and governance. Notable clients include BMO, CI Financial, HOOPP, OMERS, GreenShield Canada, Nicola Wealth, and Power Financial. For more information, visit peggyvandeplassche.com.

#Canada #Economy #Investment #PublicPolicy #PensionFunds

🧑‍🔧The Upside of Trump: Improving Business and Trade Within Canada

One unexpected consequence of the Trump Administration’s trade policies was that it forced Canadian policymakers to take a hard look at the country’s own internal trade barriers. While much attention is given to external trade relationships, Canada’s internal trade barriers are a major drag on economic growth, costing businesses billions in inefficiencies and lost opportunities.

Studies estimate that trade restrictions between provinces increase the cost of goods by an average of 30%, with some regions—particularly in the North—seeing trade costs exceeding 60% due to regulatory fragmentation, infrastructure deficits, and geographic obstacles (Tombe & Winter, 2013; Alvarez et al., 2019).

Eliminating these barriers could boost GDP per capita by 4% and improve business competitiveness, according to economic analyses (Albrecht & Tombe, 2016). Yet, internal trade remains largely overlooked in Canada’s broader economic strategy, even as the country faces increasing global protectionism and shifting trade dynamics with its largest trading partner, the United States.

🚨The Urgency of Strengthening Internal Trade in a Protectionist Era

Canada’s reliance on the United States for trade is staggering:
📦 $3.6 billion worth of goods and services cross the border daily
🌎 Over 63% of Canada’s total trade is with the U.S.
💰 The U.S. is both Canada’s largest investor and top export destination

While this deep integration benefits both economies, Canada’s economic resilience is at risk as U.S. trade policy becomes increasingly protectionist. With policies such as Buy American, tariffs, subsidies from the Inflation Reduction Act, and shifting energy security strategies, Canada must reduce internal inefficiencies and create a stronger domestic trade network to mitigate external shocks.

Interprovincial trade reform is not just an economic opportunity—it’s a national security and resilience strategy in a world where global trade alliances are shifting rapidly.

Subscribe now

🔧How to Fix Interprovincial Trade in Canada

1. Streamline Provincial Regulations
One of the biggest barriers to internal trade is regulatory misalignment, where businesses must comply with different rules for the same goods and services in different provinces. This adds costs, delays, and administrative burdens.
✅ Solution: Implement mutual recognition agreements, allowing provinces to accept each other’s certifications and regulatory standards instead of duplicating them.

2. Invest in Critical Infrastructure
Trade costs are disproportionately high in remote regions, where lack of roads, rail, and digital connectivity drives up transportation and logistics costs. In Nunavut, for example, trade costs exceed 60% of the value of goods.
✅ Solution: Build a Northern Transportation Corridor to connect resource-rich and isolated provinces to national and international markets, ensuring more cost-efficient supply chains and economic inclusion.

3. Strengthen Provincial Trade Agreements
While agreements like the Canadian Free Trade Agreement (CFTA) have reduced some barriers, they lack strong enforcement mechanisms. Some provinces continue to impose protectionist policies, particularly in sectors like energy, construction, and alcohol distribution.
✅ Solution: Expand sector-specific trade liberalization, focusing on industries that are highly interconnected across provincial borders, such as manufacturing, clean energy, and professional services.

4. Increase Federal-Provincial Coordination
Canadian provinces often act independently, prioritizing local industries over national economic efficiency. This weakens Canada’s ability to negotiate from a position of strength globally.
✅ Solution: Establish a Federal-Provincial Task Force on Trade Resilience, ensuring nationally aligned economic strategies that reduce provincial competition and inefficiencies.

5. Enable a Data-Driven Approach to Trade Policy
Despite its economic importance, there is limited real-time data on interprovincial trade flows and regulatory impacts. This lack of transparency makes it difficult to implement evidence-based reforms.
✅ Solution: Create a national trade data hub, tracking internal trade trends, barriers, and economic performance, similar to what exists for international trade.

Share

🔮The Future of Trade: A Stronger, More Resilient Canada

By eliminating internal trade inefficiencies, Canada can:
🚀 Increase productivity and GDP growth
📈 Strengthen economic resilience amid U.S. and global protectionism
🌍 Enhance competitiveness in North American and global markets

The research is clear: A Canada without internal trade barriers is a more prosperous, resilient, and competitive nation. The real question is, will policymakers act?

👉 What do you think? Which internal trade barriers do you see as the biggest obstacles to Canada’s economic success? Let’s discuss. 🚀

Subscribe now

Sources Cited:

• Albrecht & Tombe (2016) – Internal Trade, Productivity, and Interconnected Industries

• Alvarez et al. (2019) – Internal Trade Barriers and Economic Impact

• Beaulieu & Zaman (2019) – Provincial Trade Agreements and Trade Flow

• Bemrose et al. (2020) – Provincial Non-Tariff Trade Barriers and Border Effects

• Fellows & Tombe (2018) – Trade Costs in Canada’s Northern Territories

• Tombe & Winter (2013) – Impact of Internal Trade Barriers on Productivity

Peggy Van de Plassche is a seasoned advisor with over 20 years of experience in financial services, healthcare, and technology. She specializes in guiding boards and C-suite executives through transformational change, leveraging technology and capital allocation to drive growth and innovation. A founding board member of Invest in Canada, Peggy also brings unique expertise in navigating complex issues and fostering public-private partnerships—key elements in shaping the Future of Business. Her skill set includes strategic leadership, capital allocation, transaction advisory, technology integration, and governance. Notable clients include BMO, CI Financial, HOOPP, OMERS, GreenShield Canada, Nicola Wealth, and Power Financial. For more information, visit peggyvandeplassche.com.

🦜Dishing in D.C.: Kentucky Colonel Honors, Diplomacy Gossip, and Canada as the 51st State?

Spending a few days in Washington was a privilege, especially to celebrate my friend Nikhil Palli, who was awarded the title of Kentucky Colonel—a recognition of goodwill and service that places him among luminaries like Abraham Lincoln, Winston Churchill, Ronald Reagan, and Bill Clinton. It’s no small feat, and I couldn’t be prouder.

The trip was an incredible mix of reconnecting with the city after years away, meeting remarkable individuals, and taking the pulse of Washington during these “interesting” times.

As a founding board member of Invest in Canada—a Government of Canada organization dedicated to promoting and attracting foreign direct investment—and as a French immigrant, I am no stranger to interacting with diplomats. However, this time felt different. There was a noticeable hesitance to share perspectives, more than in similar past encounters. So, what was I still able to uncover? Read on to find ou

🏢Washington: A City of Contrasts

Washington has always reminded me of Ottawa: somewhat sleepy, with a subdued energy. This trip only reinforced that perception. The abundance of early dinner spots (hello, 4 PM reservations!) speaks to that quiet vibe, and even locals confirmed it.

But on the bright side, the museums remain stunning—and free (!). A highlight was our private tour to the Organization of American States (OAS), a forum I’d never encountered before. It’s an underappreciated gem that deserves more visibility, although perhaps that’s wishful thinking considering looming budget cuts across the federal board.

Nikhil Palli & Peggy Van de Plassche at the OAS

The celebration of Nikhil’s commission at The Army and Navy Club was a highlight, filled with engaging conversations with bright minds in diplomacy, academia, and entrepreneurship.

😶The One We Don’t Name

During my visit, I was struck by how little direct discussion there was about the Trump administration in general, and President Trump in particular. People seemed to tread carefully, unsure of each other’s views.

In Georgetown, I overheard older diners referring to Donald Trump (without ever saying his name) as a “dictator” lacking empathy—a sharp contrast to Reagan, who they felt had at least a shred of it. Comparisons to Putin cropped up more than once. At another table, the conversation turned to China, with predictions that it will overtake the U.S.

🪓Politics and Federal Cuts

The aggressive federal budget cuts were a sensitive subject, particularly among civil servants. While many publicly downplayed their concerns, their tone and body language revealed unease.

The decision to gut the USAID seemed incomprehensible to most, with cuts and tariffs being dismissed as “stupid” by some. Most civil servants appeared to be in wait and see mode—hoping the courts and unions would intervene.

Share

❓Canada: The 51st State?

An interesting takeaway was how Americans viewed Canada’s political and economic landscape. The idea of Canada as the U.S.’s 51st state didn’t seem shocking (or insulting) to most, and some even considered it an opportunity for Canadians.

This sentiment mirrored what a friend experienced at an alternative assets conference in Florida a couple of weeks ago, where attendees thought Canadians should feel lucky about such a “generous offer.”

🍁Canada’s Political Landscape

There was little antagonism towards Canada, even regarding tariffs retaliation. I am not gonna lie I had taken my French passport with me just in case, but even the border agents were lovely. Justin Trudeau’s stance on the matter seemed well-received. Chrystia Freeland was praised for her competence during Trump’s first presidency and seen as a solid successor to the Prime Minister.

Mark Carney, while less known, was perceived positively. Pierre Poilievre, on the other hand, was entirely off the radar—his name was literally unknown.

Share

👎Perceptions of Canada’s State of Affairs

The overall perception of Canada wasn’t rosy. There were concerns about rising crime rates (surprising many when I noted Toronto’s crime rates were far lower than Chicago’s), a struggling healthcare system, and a “catastrophic” immigration situation.

This pessimistic outlook may explain why the idea of Canada as a 51st state was not met with outrage.

🧳Immigration: Mismanagement and Disenchantment

Immigration was a recurring topic, with two dominant narratives, that are not mutually exclusive but rather 2 sides of the same coin:

1. Mismanagement of Immigration

   • Canada’s vetting process is seen as too lenient, with reports of fake documentation slipping through.

   • Infrastructure hasn’t kept up with the influx of immigrants, creating strain on healthcare, education, and housing.

   • Immigrants often struggle due to the lack of recognition of their diplomas and experience, leading to underemployment.

2. Disenchantment Among Immigrants

   • Middle-class Indians, for example, are reportedly less interested in moving to Canada, as the promised opportunities don’t align with reality.

   • Many feel “baited” by programs that advertise a utopian vision of Canada, only to face challenges like high living costs, career stagnation, and a stretched healthcare system.

Share

↪️Final Thoughts

This trip was a fascinating window into Washington’s current climate and how the world perceives Canada. While these observations are anecdotal, they reflect a diverse array of perspectives—from diplomats and entrepreneurs to lawyers and drivers, hailing from countries like India, the U.K., Colombia, Pakistan, and the U.S.

Washington may not have changed my perception of its sleepy energy, but it reminded me of the importance of staying connected, curious, and open to dialogue. Whether through celebrating a friend’s achievements or hearing candid views on pressing issues, it was a trip full of learning and reflection.

Until next time, Washington!

Peggy Van de Plassche is a seasoned advisor with over 20 years of experience in financial services, healthcare, and technology. She specializes in guiding boards and C-suite executives through transformational change, leveraging technology and capital allocation to drive growth and innovation. A founding board member of Invest in Canada, Peggy also brings unique expertise in navigating complex issues and fostering public-private partnerships—key elements in shaping the Future of Business. Her skill set includes strategic leadership, capital allocation, transaction advisory, technology integration, and governance. Notable clients include BMO, CI Financial, HOOPP, OMERS, GreenShield Canada, Nicola Wealth, and Power Financial. For more information, visit peggyvandeplassche.com.