Season 2: #1The Democracy Toolkit

If we know what we want Canada to be like in 75 years, we can plan how to get there. Canada has the tools to build peace, order and good government. They must be sharpened, and used in the fight for survival. Elbows up!

Transcript

1          The Democracy Toolkit

 Lewis Carroll, author of Alice in Wonderland, said that "If you don't know where you are going, any road will get you there." This simple observation applies to politics, as it does to much of life.   Politically, the first challenge for Canada is to imagine where we want the country to be in fifty or seventy five years. With this as the destination, can we work backwards and figure out which road will get us there.

Another way of describing the dilemma is to quote baseball manager Yogi Berra: “If you don't know where you're going, you'll end up someplace else.”  

There is no simple paved highway to the destination. Bridges are down. Climate change and a new Cold War will make the road nearly impassable. Population trends and humanitarian crises will cause congestion. Yet for all this, it remains critical that we select a destination, and plan accordingly. The first step, along with planning, is to ensure the government is running well.  Without good government, all is lost.

Happily, we have at our disposal a big toolkit.  That is, tools that help us think about problems in a way that is useful, practical. Tools that help plan. Tools that help make adjustments on the road.

In looking at a different future for Canada, I will rely on three tools in particular. This may seem wonky, but I will be brief.

The first is performance management, also called Results Based Management, or RBM. It is a tool used by bureaucracies, and misused by politicians. The idea is that you to define the ultimate outcome that you want to achieve.  You develop a plan, and invest money and staff.  You address the risks that might get in the way of success. You measure performance as you go, knowing that outputs are not results.  If things are not on track, you adjust. Performance management, done right, is a key to good government. It lets you know if it is efficient and effective.

A second tool is military strategy. Like performance management, you first define success. But in this case, you contend with adversaries. A Grand Strategy gives guidance on how to engage enemies in such a manner that after you win the war, you get the peace you want. A successful Grand Strategy will ensure that a democratic Canada survives and thrives as we navigate the turmoil ahead.

The third tool is Constitutional renovation. This is the “in case of fire, break glass” tool. It usually takes a massive crisis to convince the nation that constitutional change is necessary.  This said, if a crisis is real, then renovation of the Constitution may be essential.

These tools are not new. You hear politicians promise results, but they deliver spending. RBM comes across as bureaucratic bafflegab to the average citizen.  It is nerdy, wonky.  Public servants often hate it, because it is done wrong. But done right, these tools have the potential to solve problems in a way that does not fit the simplistic spectrum of left and right. This is practical common sense. 

Ahead, I will use these tools to assess where Canada stands a quarter of the way into this new century. Based on this, I will offer specific policies designed to achieve the ultimate outcome we seek for future generations.  

The starting point is to define a vision of what Canada should look like at the end of this century. That is, we define the ultimate outcome. Canada has a starting point for this already partially built into the Constitution. “Peace, order and good government” is the phrase used since 1867.

Canada’s trio of values implies an avoidance of war, rule by law, and the efficient and effective use of taxpayer money. It is the counterpart to the American Declaration of Independence which extolls “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” 

Peace is normally addressed by a national defense strategy. Clearly, however, Donald Trump is forcing Canada to reassess priorities. The enemy is in the living room. More on this ahead.

Order is largely based on the rule of law. While legal issues and disputes are constant, Canada can be proud that our legal system works. Corruption is minimal. When politicians fail to solve a problem, courts try to act in a fair manner. We see disputes over the rights of First Nations or the interpretation of environmental laws.  Agree or not with court decisions, our courts are not corrupt. Slow, yes, but generally they aspire to be just.

The most contentious issue is good government.  Every flaw in government is seen by the opposition as horrendous, a firing offense. A more sensible approach would be to simply fix the problem. That takes cooperation, which is hard. Good government is a work in progress, and improvements are always needed. Good government should mean Canadians get what they want, most of the time, in return for paying taxes.  If an elected government is not delivering enough, fair elections let voters change the priorities. 

The question of whether elections are really fair is an ongoing concern. In Canada, elections are semi-fair. The information ecosystem is in serious danger, and the “first past the post” voting system leaves many voters unrepresented. 

Canadians value both good government and individual freedom.  Therese values should not be in conflict with each other.

This is in contrast to the current American culture which promotes distrust, and has a Constitution that gives everyone the right to buy guns to act on their fear. A paranoid, straight, white, gun-toting Christian minority has taken control of Washington, aided by techno-oligarchs.  Democracy is trampled by the winners in a dysfunctional electoral system. Trump went so far as to pardon the January 6th insurrectionists who attacked the police. He promised supporters that if they re-elected him, they may never have to vote again. The civil war in the United States is only getting started. Good government in Washington is now a distant dream.

One thing very clear as Canadians watch the United States is that our own good government cannot be taken for granted. Laws, regulations, taxes: all were created through a messy democratic process. All laws, all regulations, respond to a need, even when they miss the mark. Good government must be efficient and effective if it is to retain public trust. Excessive red tape is inefficient and obnoxious. Democracy must offer a way to make improvements peacefully.

Canadians understand that good government and personal freedom are not mutually exclusive.  Our human rights have evolved for centuries under British traditions. When Canada’s Constitution was amended in 1982, a Charter of Rights and Freedoms was added to make this clear. It entrenched existing laws and traditions.

Lawyers in Canada, naturally, disagree over what exactly is meant by peace, order and good government.  This is evident in disputes between Ottawa and the provinces. That is normal. Times change, and the law struggles to remain relevant. It is not easy to ensure peace, order and good government in a contemporary world.  Whatever the dispute, however, the conclusion Canadian politicians studiously avoid is this: What if the Constitution itself makes good government impossible?   

This is a question that must be asked. Good government in 2025 requires a totally new set of voter demands from what existed in 1867. Public health, education, tax and trade policy, global security, technology and artificial intelligence: government services today are totally different from what was offered in remote British colonies in the 1860s.  Yet the Constitution has not fundamentally changed.

There is also a new wild card: climate change.  There is a 100% certainty that catastrophic climate change will occur. Given this, the 1867 version of peace, order, good government is no longer enough. These three ideals are too narrow. A modern version of Canada’s desired result must include reference to a sustainable planet as part of the ultimate outcome.  

In recent years, conservative politicians began to claim that government itself is the problem, and less government is the solution.  Politicians like Trump and Poilievre therefore promise to cut government. That philosophy can be traced politically to Ronald Reagan, and economically to Milton Friedman and the Chicago School. The idea of less taxes sounds nice, since nobody likes to part with hard earned money. The problem is, it has failed for the past four decades. The rich are richer, the poor poorer, and the environment less sustainable.  

Canada is currently distracted by Donald Trump. I use the word distracted not because his impact is not real, but because the power to distract is a weapon unto itself.  Americans, too, are distracted. They put their faith in a con-man, and will soon learn to regret their choice.

America is in a slow civil war that will likely continue for decades. Trump acts like an agent of Vladimir Putin, playing golf while democracy burns.  Around the world, America’s enemies add fuel to the bonfire, and take glee in the demise of the western alliance. Neo-Nazis in Europe are marching in the streets. Russia and China are emboldened.  The Middle East smolders.  Through it all, climate change will worsen, with storms, droughts, civil conflict, refugees and disease.  

The bonfire in the United States will last at least four years, and Canada will get singed. The tariff war is just a start. Canada as a sovereign country is in danger.  Canadian politicians are struggling, trying to develop reasonable responses to absurd demands.  The notion of an actual invasion cannot be dismissed as unthinkable.

Too often, Canadian leaders miss the point.  Trump intentionally “floods the zone” with distractions so that a coherent response is impossible. Canadian politicians, well intentioned, are stuck dealing with the event of the day or even the hour. They cannot see beyond the flood zone. 

To respond to this complicated mix of insane threats, Canada needs a “Grand Strategy” that ensures success for the distant future, and not just for the immediate battle.  That is to say, a vision.

This is not a new idea. A Pyrrhic victory is the term used to describe how, while winning a battle, you may lose a war. A Grand Strategy ensures that after victory, the fruits of peace can be enjoyed. A case in point: there would be no true winners from a nuclear war. 

A Grand Strategy must have an ultimate outcome. Canada has a desired outcome already embedded in the mantra of peace, order, and good government, but we have to add to that a sustainable planet. 

The idea of an ultimate outcome is not new.  After World War II, the western alliance started with the 1941 "Atlantic Charter". Winston Churchill and Franklin Roosevelt established principles of peace, self-determination, economic cooperation, free trade and an end to territorial expansion.

Canada was part of this. America led. Europe and Japan were rebuilt as democracies. NATO became the military deterrence. Trade agreements and a variety of treaties were set up.  The United Nations, World Bank and other institutions were established.  In all this, Canada played a role. Now, however, under Trump, the foundation of this entire structure is upended.

It is not as if everything was perfect. Every single one of those building blocks of the old Pax Americana naturally had weaknesses, problems, corruption, and embarrassments.  Imperfection is the nature of human enterprise. Good government at any level is always a work in progress. But the desired outcome of international institutions… peace and economic growth… was the common ideal. The western allies built a system with a shared understanding that global security requires cooperation and deterrence. No country can stand alone in a world which has the capacity for self-annihilation.  

For Canada, a Grand Strategy to survive these turbulent times would offer guidance on how to engage with both adversaries and enemies, and there is a difference. Canada has, as a strategy, a long-standing policy of joining alliances and agreements with members who mostly play by the rules.  The problem is that some countries join, and then ignore rules they do not like.  China, Russia, India and other nations cheat all the time.  Companies that invest there do so at their own risk. Many countries twist rules, creating tax havens or allowing ships to fly flags of convenience. Even the United States has a long history of using economic strength to bully Canada on issues like softwood lumber

Trump, however, has rejected the entire premise of the seventy-five-year alliance for democracy.  It is betrayal, the act of an enemy.

A Grand Strategy gives guidance on how to respond to all these situations.  The British military theorist Basil Liddell Hart, an expert on Grand Strategy, advised that when possible direct confrontation be avoided.  He favoured an indirect approach. The idea is to maintain deterrence, and to flank and distract the opponent while holding your ground. This tactic of indirect action applies to war, trade, politics, diplomacy and other fields of dispute.

As Canada tries to achieve an ultimate outcome, there are several major trends that demand special consideration. 

The first, at the risk of repetition, is climate change. Short of a nuclear war, there is no issue as dire as global warming. Civilization cannot survive unless the current trend is reversed. This is something that all countries are aware of, including China and India and Russia. Some people, and some countries, say that their impact on climate is so small that personal sacrifice is not worth the pain.  That is short-sighted. Climate action is an issue where opponents should find common ground.  That potential for cooperation opens the door to hope.

A second major factor that impacts a Grand Strategy is population. It is said that “demography is destiny”. If we look at global security through the lens of demography, some interesting predictions come into focus. Population trends will shape events. 

The world today has over seven billion people. It is expected to reach nine billion by 2050, and ten billion by 2100. China and India each have about 1.4 billion people. Canada, at 38 million, is a very small country. Hidden within these big numbers, however, several contradictory demographic trends are underway.

In poor countries, especially in Africa, a demographic time-bomb is ticking. Ninety per cent of global population growth in the coming decades will be in the poorest areas of the poorest countries. It is projected that in another decade there may be more people of working age in Africa than in the entire rest of the world. To this, add climate crises, soul-destroying poverty, and a host of social and economic problems, and catastrophe is inevitable. The poorest nations face a world of hurt. 

The poorest countries can't build schools, health care, or other services fast enough to keep pace with population growth. If they are lucky, their leaders have good intentions. Too often, politicians act like crime bosses or warlords.  Equally often, religious leaders tout extreme beliefs that fill the void of the hopeless future that so many humans face.  

Nigeria, for example, is on path to major breakdown. Its population will pass that of India by the end of this century. Development efforts cannot keep pace. A humanitarian and ecological disaster will lead to masses of refugees, all of them innocents in search of hope. It is not alone. 

Sudan is already a catastrophe for the same predictable reasons. It has the additional misfortune of being rich in gold. To get access to the gold, Russia, Iran, China and the United Arab Emirates are all involved in arming and supporting some of the most cruel terrorists on earth. Starvation in Darfur is a weapon of war, as tribal and religious hatred fuel the brutality.

Many sub-Saharan countries already face a dire humanitarian crisis. In Somalia, Niger, Congo, the much of the Arab world, we can see a humanitarian and ecological nightmare in slow motion. Climate change brings droughts and floods, and the growing population can’t survive on shrinking resources. Refugee camps proliferate, filled with disease, despair, and frustration. They’re breeding grounds for terrorists. Masses of innocents try to escape to safety and hope, only to find more misery and blocked borders.

The brutal truth is that this is not going to change. It is only going to get worse. Millions will die. If a new pandemic hits in these conditions, the toll may be in the hundreds of millions. Development assistance could slowly turn the tide. But greed, stupidity, religion, and other obstacles get in the way. One of the few things that could help, access to free family planning, is blocked by radical American Christian fundamentalists, and yes by the Catholic Church.  Recently, Trump eliminated all American foreign aid. It will be catastrophic.

Fortunately, other parts of the world are better set up to build a sustainable economy and a stable population. In these places, governments still struggle to pay for services like health and education. But around the world, the quality of life rises when women control the number of children they have. Family planning is a key to preserving democracy, and to a healthy economy.

In India, family planning is encouraged, and the population is leveling off. Throughout Asia, the population is peaking as women control their own bodies. Even in Latin American, the population will peak around mid-century. The pressure of population there will abate.

Most developed countries now have an actual decline in population. This is true in North America, Europe, Japan, even in Russia and Brazil. A population decline has economic implications. With more elderly, and fewer young workers, a balanced work force is impossible.  Some countries like Canada can compensate through immigration. But not all. Technology and robots can do more, but not everything.

Some rich nations accept refugees and immigrants, not simply for humanitarian reasons. They need people to fill jobs, both skilled and unskilled. The arrival of too many immigrants can lead to a cultural backlash, and to the rise of populism.  It is a tricky balance, as Canadians and Europeans have learned.

Russia has a plummeting birth rate, but is not an attractive destination for refugees. This partially explains why Russia kidnapped and adopted large numbers of Ukrainian children during that war.  They need more young people.

Japan has long resisted immigrants, and saw the birth rate decline much earlier than most other countries. This has forced the Japanese economy to adapt differently. It is no wonder that Japan is a world leader in areas like robotics.

Then there is the unique case of China, which is powerful and ambitious, and a key to global peace. The leader, Xi Jinping, aspires to replace the United States as the dominant global power. The Chinese see themselves as the center of the earth, heirs to an incredible civilization that goes back thousands of years. This ambition, however, is already tempered by the population dilemma of too many elderly, and too few workers to support them. It was recently reported that the population of China has dropped for three straight years. In a country which does not welcome immigrants, this is a huge problem.

What does all this mean for Canada? It simply says that a successful Canadian Grand Strategy must take all these factors into account. National security is not as simple as spending 2% of GDP to buy more American weapons, especially if Washington is antagonistic and can remotely control those Canadian military ships and planes. The Trump dumpster-fire, military threats, political turmoil, economic challenges, and population trends must all be addressed in a seamless manner.  To survive the age of Trump, Canada must look beyond Trump and not be distracted. 

But above all, Grand Strategy demands that we never take our eyes off the greatest long-term threat of all: climate change.