It may still be too early for engagement rings, but the flowers-and-candlelit-dinners season is in full swing. On Wednesday, most lawmakers backed deeper EU–Canada ties (even as they questioned the need for formalising them as such).

The European Union and Canada need each other. MEP Kathleen Van Brempt (S&D/BEL) put it best: “In a world filled with Trumps, Europe needs stable and reliable partners. (…) Canada is such a partner.” Not everybody was 100 per cent on board at Wednesday’s debate in Strasbourg, but the plenary mood was, by and large, rather honeymooney.

EU international partnerships commissioner Jozef Síkela outlined the plan for the 21st EU–Canada summit in Montreal on 29–30 October, even as he added a caution. “Nothing is done until it’s done and one week is still a long time,” he said. So what is cooking?

We do not need new institutional labels for Canada. We need to deliver on the agreements that we already have signed. — MEP Rihards Kols (ECR/LVA)

Mr Síkela’s boss, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, wants to move from CETA (a free-trade agreement between the two entities) to an ‘alliance for the future’. It has three strands — integrated supply chains, a trusted digital and technology space, and coordinated economic security policies. She also opened the door for Canada to become the first associate member of the EU, whatever it may mean in real-life terms.

Canada has already become the first non-EU participant in the Security Action for Europe instrument (SAFE) through a bilateral arrangement in December 2025. The Parliament is moving too. Vice-President Younous Omarjee (The Left/FRA), who chaired the debate, said the parliamentary Bureau has decided to open an office in Canada.

Labels and content

MEP Jörgen Warborn (EPP/SWE) spoke for his group. He backed an alliance with concrete economic and geopolitical benefits. He called for a digital trade agreement, open procurement markets, and EU demand to boost Canadian supply of critical raw materials. “Let’s now be pragmatic, flexible and open to try new ways forward with less focus on labels and more focus on content,” said Mr Warborn.

Ms Van Brempt, speaking on behalf of her group, said she wanted real results on energy, security, defence, trade, and critical minerals. Others concurred. “We can together defend democracy, resist coercion and uphold international law,” said MEP Ville Niinistö (Greens/EFA/FIN). He also urged joint work on Arctic cooperation, including support for indigenous-led conservation.

But not even supporters of the heralded ‘deepening of ties’ with Canada agreed on how to go about it. MEP Rihards Kols (ECR/LVA) said on behalf of his group that EU mineral imports from Canada stand at just €3.3bn. Canada holds deposits of over 34 types of critical minerals—among them lithium, cobalt, and nickel—and ranks among the top producers of the 10 most essential for the energy transition.

Mr Kols said SAFE has so far produced one contract, for tactical radios for Poland. He drew a straightforward conclusion: “We do not need new institutional labels for Canada. We need to deliver on the agreements that we already have signed.” His fellow conservative, MEP Veronika Vrecionová (ECR/CZE), agreed. “This EU–Canada summit shouldn’t just be an opportunity for a group photo or a whole list of promises,” she said. She wants trade barriers removed and Arctic security strengthened.

The ratification problem

MEP Brando Benifei (S&D/ITA) raised a legal problem. “We’ve been paralysed by too many proposals which have never seen the light of day,” he said. He argued that associate status would require an amendment to Article 49 of the Union treaty and a specific protocol.

Mr Síkela then put forward the status quo. Nine member states still need to ratify CETA, Mr Síkela said. Slovenia did so recently. Three more must ratify the Strategic Partnership Agreement. He urged MEPs from those countries to press for ratification at home. MEP Stefan Köhler (EPP/DEU) called the delay damaging. “Some people talk about CETA 2.0, but the problem is that CETA 1.0 hasn’t been ratified in quite a number of member states. This is a bad signal to send to your friends,” he noted.

In a world filled with Trumps, Europe needs stable and reliable partners. (…) Canada is such a partner. — MEP Kathleen Van Brempt (S&D/BEL)

MEP Javier Moreno Sánchez (S&D/ESP) chairs Parliament’s Canada delegation. “For years now, I’ve been saying that Canada is the most European country outside Europe,” he said. He called Canada an associate member de facto. He also urged colleagues to lobby national parliaments.

Others tried to cherry-pick from the agreement. MEP Lynn Boylan (The Left/IRL) backed cooperation on climate and trade, but rejected investor courts, including those in CETA. “Investor courts represent a direct corporate attack on the sovereignty of states and undermine climate action and the delivery of strong public services,” she went out on a limb.

Associate membership, defined

MEP Tobias Cremer (S&D/DEU) offered a definition of what the much-vaunted ‘associate membership’ might be. “Associate membership must mean the closest possible partnership that the EU can offer to a non-European country,” he said. He wants Canada invited to relevant Council meetings and a formal parliamentary partnership assembly (probably to take some edge off the Parliament’s famed incisiveness).

The entire honeymoon process started when Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney set the agenda for MEPs on 17 September. “Canadian membership of the next generation of Horizon would allow us to pool resources, cooperate on frontier technologies, and leverage our world-class research institutes and universities,” he said. A 2025 AI memorandum already created a Digital Partnership Council.

History also featured. MEP Wouter Beke (EPP/BEL) recalled the First World War. “More than 100 years ago, Canadian soldiers came to the fields of Flanders to defend our freedom,” he said. MEP Stéphanie Yon-Courtin (Renew/FRA) added: “Nobody in Normandy has forgotten the role they played there.” In contrast, MEP Dariusz Joński (EPP/POL) looked ahead. “Together, we can build this world order not on dominance, not on blackmail, but on law, cooperation and mutual trust,” he said with an admirable degree of optimism.

Dissent in the chamber

Not everyone agreed. MEP Angéline Furet (PfE/FRA) said CETA ruins agriculture. She argued that buying North American arms would expose Europe to blackmail. “We would be funding our own conversion into vassal status,” she said. She did so without offering an alternative.

MEP Christine Anderson (ESN/DEU) attacked Ms von der Leyen. The Commission president, in her fellow German’s view, is “no longer content with merely terrorising the peoples in the EU with her insane regulations, bureaucracy and cronyism. No, she is looking for yet another people whose industry she can wipe out, whose prosperity she can destroy, whose speech she can censor and whose countries she can flood with even more illegal migrants, thus turning Canada into a living hell”. She suggested Mr Carney should “do right by the Canadian people and tell Ursula von der Leyen to bugger off”.

Let’s now be pragmatic, flexible and open to try new ways forward with less focus on labels and more focus on content. — MEP Jörgen Warborn (EPP/SWE)

Mr Omarjee later reminded members that Canada’s prime minister is a head of government. “We shall show him respect in this assembly,” he said, without a mention of the insults hurled Ms von der Leyen’s way.

Such minor hiccups were not enough to bar Commissioner Síkela from ending on a confident note. “Let us look ahead to next week’s summit with big optimism,” he said. He thanked MEPs for what he called strong support for deeper EU–Canada relations.