Could Canada ‘Trump’ the USA when it comes to tourism?

Would you swap your trip to the USA with Canada?

Over five million of us Brits went to the USA on holiday in 2023 compared to 730,000 travelling to Canada. But are things about to swing? Some tour operators are seeing booking trends that suggest ‘Uncle Sam’ will lose a chunk of tourists to somewhere President Trump thinks would make a nice 51st state. The irony.

Perhaps some people just don’t want to visit ‘Trump Town’. I don’t know who I would prefer to swerve the most, the orange inhabitant of The White House or that vice president, JD Vance who makes me feel nauseous anytime I see him on television, but particularly when he speaks. What a highly unlikeable man he is.

Trump and Vance may be enjoying their power trip as they bully the rest of the world, but where does that leave America when it comes to tourism? A poll on The Sunday Times website asked, ‘Where would you most like to go now, Canada or the US?’ 95% of respondents said Canada.

Certainly, I’ve never enjoyed immigration when visiting the USA, but it’s always been worth it when you get to the other side. From what I hear and read, the process is not improving under the current administration. It is a wonderful country to explore, but while Donald is in the Oval Office alongside his mate JD, perhaps other destinations will be more appealing. Canada is definitely a great option if you fancy North America any time soon.

I’ve done Toronto (fantastic) but could be sorely tempted to arrange a holiday to other parts. Trump might want to ‘make America great again’, but he’d better make it welcoming to tourists otherwise the trade tariffs won’t make up for the losses the tourism industry in the USA will suffer.

No liberty, no statue

I used to love kicking a football about when I was a lad. But often the owner of the ball would get disgruntled if they were losing and simply decide to sulk off home with the ball under their arm. The ultimate petty reaction and an end to our game. Of course, the caveat was that we were all still of school age and had a lot of growing up to do. Such excuses are not available to politicians and world leaders who continue to astound me with their words and actions.

There was a cracking little story recently about a French politician and a member of the European Parliament who told America to “give us back the Statue of Liberty.” Raphaël Glucksmann said that as Trump and co seem to be siding with tyrants, and dismissing liberty, the famous statue, gifted to the USA by France 140 years ago, should be returned. The White House press secretary said that France should remain “grateful” for America coming to their aid in World War Two. A fair point, but also kind of childish. This is the type of rhetoric we are all becoming used to. I am sure when they all retreat to their cots at night there are toys all over the bedroom floor.

GLT is 30? Where does the time go?

The last issue of Group Leisure & Travel saw it reach the ripe old age of 30. I didn’t think 1995 seemed that long ago but then I considered: it’s a world before the mind-numbing Spice Girls (I’ll tell you what I want…), when the millennium bug was striking fear, and Manchester City were a rubbish football team with no money. In lots of ways it was a simpler time; no one other than the ‘yuppies’ used a mobile phone, the internet was basic and in its infancy, and if you wanted to communicate you actually picked up the phone and talked to someone.

There was no hiding behind your email inbox, no trolls and silly ranting on social media… I’m becoming misty eyed so I’d better stop. I know you think I’m a hypocrite because I do love technology (when it works and I understand it); it’s helped no end when it comes to organising my trips and holidays. But would you describe the here and now as simpler times? No, neither would I. But when it comes to time, GLT has stood the test, moved with it and given us the ideas and help to have the most important thing of all - a good time.

_{The views expressed in this column are not necessarily the views of the publisher.}