May 20, 2012|
Comments Off
U.S. versus ThemThe stories out of the U.S. of late, those of a broke Treasury, a stymied Congress, and a waning relevance are all too tantalizingly easy for Canadians to believe. The Harper Government in particular appears to be taking some glee in the glum news. Unfortunately, it is at Canada’s peril. The Prime Minister was so quick to look to China after Obama’s innocuous, lame-duck Keystone rebuke that it smacked more of petty one-upmanship than of sound energy policy. Well positioned between two looming superpowers, Harper has framed the issue as one or the other. He has chosen to forgo securing a closer and more advantageous energy alliance with our dear friend and neighbor and instead to forge ties with an unproven, comparative flash-in-the-pan a half a world away. In the words of the Grail Knight, he chose poorly. |
There is a void in space. On Thursday, the Space Shuttle will land in Florida and quietly roll into a museum. NASA will then begin a search not for new worlds, new technologies or new adventures, but for itself. For the first time in 50 years, the U.S. space program is without a mission or a mandate. And with the country’s intractable budget problems, NASA’s inertia will not easily be overcome. While it has long been accepted that future space exploration will require a joint international effort, it is now also clear that any such effort cannot rely on the U.S.’s laboring oar. Canada, having played an integral role in space since day one, is now ready and able to take the lead.
The CRTC has proposed amendments to broadcast regulations which would effectively remove the current ban on reporting “false and misleading news.” Nearly twenty years ago, Canada’s Supreme Court struck down a similarly worded criminal statute on free speech grounds and the current CRTC provision does appear to conflict with that ruling. However, the proposed amendments are a serious misstep for the Harper Government (the driving force behind the CRTC’s proposal) because: (1) they are not necessary; (2) they represent a poorly timed rejection of the uniquely Canadian tradition of civil discourse; and (3) they highlight Harper’s misplaced and blind belief that emulating U.S.-style politics and practice is the way to bring about increased global recognition for Canada.
2010 was the year that Canada proved to the world that it is ready for its close up. Whether it was the Winter Olympics in Vancouver, the G7 summit in Nunavut, the G8 summit in Muskoga, or the G20 summit in Toronto, throughout the year, Canada stood confidently front and center on the world stage. Coming as it did during critical shifts in the geo-political order, Canada’s face time gave Canada a global gravitas that will serve the country well as it transitions to the role of world leader.

“We must populate or perish.” So said John Diefenbaker in 1958. The former Prime Minister was a staunch advocate of a Canadian Century and believed the only thing Canada lacked was enough Canadians. Certainly, he relished Canada’s geographic advantage. Canada’s size and its location on the map practically scream superpower. Also, even back then, the richness of Canada’s natural resources portended a leading role for Canada. Still, Diefenbaker worried that Canada’s vast territory and all it contained would be for naught if we remained merely a sparse population strung along the U.S. border. 

California is the birthplace of trends. Countless innovations and ideas got their start in the Golden State and quickly gained hold across the U.S. and elsewhere. Popular political trends are no exception. Property tax revolts. Gay marriage. Medical marijuana. Ronald Reagan. Many a national political movement began in California. 