That is, after all, why they are engaged in diplomacy. Article 3 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of 1961 spells out what a diplomat shall and may do. One point that stands out is “promoting friendly relations.” What Article 3 requires and what Hoekstra delivers are two different worlds.
The American ambassador is called Pete Hoekstra. A man with a reduced acquaintance with diplomacy — and a long trail across two countries.
Canadians are charming, but not easily provoked. Off the ice, they are warm and open. On the ice, a different, more brutal wind blows. Well, with Pete Hoekstra, the wind has shifted. He is to be declared Persona Non Grata and removed from Canada.
Leanne Walker from Calgary wrote a document and turned it into a petition. By the weekend, more than one hundred thousand Canadians had signed the petition since July 21st. The numbers fluctuate between 105,000 and 187,000 signatures.
Green Party MP Elizabeth May is bringing the matter of Pete Hoekstra’s Persona Non Grata status before Parliament. Every electronic petition record in Canada has been broken. Every one. All previous records for electronic petitions in Canada have already been broken. Canadian citizens can still sign the petition until November 18th.
So, what has Pete Hoekstra, in his capacity as U.S. Ambassador to Canada, done to irritate the Canadian public — or parts of it — to this degree? According to Elizabeth May, Pete has been unusually rude and insulting towards Canada as his host country. She compares Hoekstra to former Ambassador David Wilkins under George W. Bush.
In front of a camera, Hoekstra comes across like the drunk uncle at a wedding. Examples? Gladly.
When King Charles delivered his Speech from the Throne in Ottawa, Hoekstra publicly remarked that there were simpler ways to send messages to Washington. An ambassador telling Canada how to make use of its own head of state — that is many things, but it is not diplomacy.
In June 2025, he suggested that the rhetoric around Canada becoming the 51st state should be taken as a compliment. And that Mark Carney saw it the same way. Then, in Halifax in the autumn of 2025: he said he did not care for the “anti-American sentiment” — and liked the chant “Elbows up” even less. The chant with which Canadians had taken their resistance to U.S. policy into the streets.
With considerable bluster, Pete Hoekstra loudly announced that the President and parts of his team found Canada “mean and nasty to deal with” because of the boycotts. B.C. Premier David Eby countered that U.S. leadership had “very little awareness” of how offensive that came across.
Which raises the question — no, not the leg — but what message a diplomat like Pete Hoekstra, as a U.S. citizen, is actually carrying into Canada.
And then there is the backstory of Ambassador Hoekstra in the Netherlands. There he claimed — also as a guest of that country — that there were so-called “no-go zones” where politicians were being burned. When a Dutch journalist raised this claim, Pete replied: “fake news.” All of this on video, against his own video. He had to backpedal — not along a canal, but at his inauguration in The Hague.
What holds me, as a freshly minted Canadian: when Canada truly wakes up, it does not get louder — it gets clearer. The rhetoric does not turn ugly; it turns direct. No filter, no make-up. Neither MP Elizabeth May nor former parliamentarian Charlie Angus puts a maple leaf in front of their mouth when describing Pete and his improper conduct. Their language is direct and plainly understood. Even by Peter Hoekstra.
So, what will or can happen when the petition is presented to Parliament on November 18th? The Canadian government under Mark Carney will then have 45 days to respond officially. In political terms, this amounts to a formal statement.
And what might the outcome be with regard to U.S. Ambassador Pete Hoekstra?
Elizabeth May considers it unlikely that the ambassador will actually be expelled. But Mark Carney could use the petition as a diplomatic pressure point.
This petition has already achieved considerably more than that. The sense of economic and political sovereignty has become more tangible.
And the number stands there: 187,000 names.
Ordinary citizens.
No government, no apparatus.
Just a woman from Calgary and a form.
