This is part one of a four-part series that outlines the crisis of confidence in national governance, and the urgent need for Canada to develop clear long-term national goals for which our federal government is directly accountable. Part one focuses on Canada's need to break out of election-cycle thinking and transform our approach to national governance and public finances.
Unnoticed in the heat of an all-too-short Canadian summer, with Parliament shuttered for an extended recess, the business of the nation quietly continues under the radar. Occasionally, a first ministers' conference or a crisis of some sort will merit enough media attention to register fleetingly in our collective psyche. But, for the most part, billions of dollars of national revenue steadily flow out of Ottawa each month, channeled to individual Canadians and to other levels of government (provincial, municipal, Aboriginal) with little or no direct accountability with respect to even the most basic national goals or objectives.
Despite a modest increase in the transparency of public affairs in recent years, the lack of meaningful oversight of intergovernmental transfers provides a poignant example of how unanswerable our federal politicians are to issues of national concern. While Ottawa transfers huge sums for a wide range of initiatives that may be justifiable in isolation, we are left with a serious lack of national coherence on the very issues these payments are meant to address. Indeed, if we measure the effectiveness of these expenditures against clear long-term national goals such as building and maintaining high-quality infrastructure, making Canada a leading green energy power, or eliminating third-world living conditions among Aboriginal Canadians, the collective impact of the spending falls well short.
Regrettably, bold, visionary national leadership that governs for the long term has been absent in Canada for a long time. Our national government rarely conveys any sense of public purpose or narrative other than winning the next election. Public action is diverted to expanding short-term opportunities for superficial consumption rather than fostering long-term opportunities for valuable investments, greater employment, and sustainable living across the country.
Not surprisingly, a growing number of Canadians are disillusioned and cynical about the prospects for good national governance and constructive public action. Our public finances appear to be constantly mismanaged, and our politicians seem incapable of looking beyond their political self-interest and re-election to respond to the national interest. Most Canadians, all too painfully aware of our new age of austerity and the need to deleverage and get out from under suffocating debt, believe that governments should do the same thing. A growing number of Canadians now support the more specific proposition that the national government should be substantially trimmed and money returned to us through lower taxes so that we can pursue private-sector alternatives to dysfunctional public services.
The great danger now emerging is that if Canadians can no longer be persuaded of the legitimacy of national action -- if we become indifferent to having a national government with the capacity to deal with matters of national concern on behalf of all of us -- our collective ability to build on what we have in common will gradually, but inevitably, disintegrate.
Once we no longer believe in the value of bold national governance -- that we are stronger when we act together to advance national ideals and goals -- we will lose all sense of joint responsibility, shared sacrifice, and national purpose. Social bonds will crumble and generational bonds will attenuate.
As we increasingly depend on provincial and local governments for action on everything from pensions and health care to infrastructure and environmental standards, disparities in both public and private investment and services will grow from province-to-province and municipality-to-municipality, leading to greater inequities and uneven opportunities across the country. Canada will be much-diminished, with an increasingly blurred and ineffective presence in global affairs, known more for the exploitation of our natural resources to the benefit of the emerging economic powers than for the talents of our innovative, globally connected population.
Surely Canada's destiny should not be to fade away as a national presence in this exciting age of instant communications and open borders? Canada's incredible diversity of geography and human and natural resources means it has enormous potential to be a significant 21st-century nation. But we will not come close to realizing this potential if we no longer recognize that only our national government, representing all Canadians, can ensure that we act coherently and responsibly as a nation.
What is urgently needed is nothing less than a transformation of our approach to national governance, and, in particular, of the management of public finances to focus on substantial long-term investments required to protect and promote the interests and aspirations of present and future Canadians. At the same time, we have an unprecedented opportunity to use the new tools of transparency - the internet, social media, etc. -- to improve accountability of public action and encourage much broader public understanding and participation in shaping our collective future.
We must start thinking outside the box and articulate firm long-term national objectives -- not just the usual empty rhetoric about Canada as an energy superpower and a compassionate and tolerant country. We must demand bold national leadership that establishes specific collective goals that engage all Canadians -- regardless of residence -- and that asks us to think beyond the horizon on behalf of the Canadians of the future. We must acknowledge the failure of our current governance models, and the widespread public cynicism with national affairs, and commit to restoring meaningful legislative oversight of government action and building new institutional frameworks that rise above regional, and other, divisions, and that hold our federal politicians accountable for the pursuit of clear national commitments.
In subsequent articles in this series, I will offer some outside-the-box thinking on the development of ambitious national objectives. I will suggest concrete examples of the kinds of institutional frameworks we need to ensure that our national leaders are held accountable. This series will focus on three areas in particular: building and maintaining our national infrastructure to the highest, most-advanced standards; making Canada a leader in green energy and sustainable living; and eliminating third-world conditions among Aboriginal Canadians.
Follow Deborah Coyne on Twitter: www.twitter.com/cdnwithoutbrdrs
Josh D. Scheinert: Jason Kenney vs. Amnesty International: When the Critics Hit Home
No doubt we will suffer further for this. Canadians don't stand up or protest much. We don't have a culture of that. We've have dedicated professionals, of different political stripes, manage the accounts for a long time. Thus we will suffer for not taking a stand nor making our voices heard. Now more than ever.
Another nail in my country. It could have been really great.
It is definitely not a time to make grandiose future plans, in the form of quote "the pursuit of clear national commitments" including expensive , and as yet unproven solar and wind technologies.
It is, instead, a time to be cautious and flexible, to meet an uncertain future.
But having said that, things seem to be going sort-of, kind-of, more-or-leÂss okay in Canada. Plenty of problems, sure, but then we've never been short of those. I have lived through many times that were vastly worse. And compared to other countries, things are positively glowing in Canada.
I really don't see this huge crisis in confidenceÂ, apart from the usual griping when one's favourite party is not in power.
First, the census wasn't canceled.
Second, I never said or implied that the census decision was a great idea.
Third, the census debate has little to do with how things are going in general. People have a broader perspective on things than that.
We do not have elected dog catchers, police chiefs and most civil servants are not elected...
Don't worry, when your boy is placed as the new CRTC chairman who retires soon, I'm quite sure you'll get your wish. I realize it's important for ignorant power hungry people to control the airwaves with hate and lies so that there is no accountability. That's the only way to ensure tyranny instead of dealing with issues or uncomfortable questions. I'd imagine it won't be shut down but merely become the puppet show of the ruling party like Russian TV. Mansbridge gave it up when he didn't press Harper during an interview during the election anyway. It's been dead a long time, but that was a poignant reminder of where the tide is turning, and turning quickly.
.. The US has their NPR+Public radio...
As a progressive Canadian who admired Layton, while not always happy about his 'compromising' (shades of Obama!) I was oddly shocked by the announcement of his death, although during his last press conference he looked so thin and frail that I was sure he wouldn't make it.
To have come so far, and not have Layton to lead us to the ultimate goal, a majority government, seems so wrong, so unfair..but i cannot see his death as anything but galvanizing for the centre and the left in our country, and hope that your words of warning are not only heeded, but acted upon and that a new spirit of activism prevails in Canada..we'll need all the voices we can muster to counteract the forces of the Cons next time...the last thing that any progressive wants is a cult of personality surrounding any individual leader. We need to grieve, and move on, as callous as that sounds, or we are in danger of giving in to the forces which would continue to erode our progressive national aspirations.
Our constitution is a sham, our political system a dinosaur inhabited by dinosaurs - and real-life cavemen. If you're going to be talking about what "institutional improvements" are needed, top of the list should be an overhaul of the way the country is organized and governed; including a dismantling of the power of the first ministers at the top of the list.
I would doubt that Canada can solve its confidence crisis without major redefinition. Now I am no anarchist, please understand. I am however saying that many modern institutions are in truth outdated and the modern world requires very major change to the nature of finance and politics, not anarchy.
It is why people in Australia and the USA and England and South Africa and Japan can all be losing faith in very different politicians and systems. All these places do share many assumptions about ownership and trading and banking and education, democracy and environment that frankly belong to 1872 rather than 2012.
The relationship between work and taxes and housing is one such change specific. Canada is not dealing with this nor is the European Union. The redefinition is too big too fundamental a change for status quo politics anywhere. Canadians can give themselves a break and not think it is a unique failing of Canada. The problems remain though, if Canadian only or worldwide.
We really have no need for government, but its hard for people indoctrinated in the system to see this. Look up the Venus Project and watch the Zeitgeist movies (especially Addendum and Moving Forward) for some truly "outside the box" thinking.
I think people are just waking up to the realization government is not interested in improving society. All they are interested in is maintaining the status quo of control through our irrelevant institutions.