
Français		Home		Contact Us		Help		Search		canada.gc.ca		Canada International

Home > Media Room

Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada

Canadian Offices Abroad

Services for Canadian Travellers

Services for Business

Canada in the World

About the Department

SPEECHES

2007 - 2006 - 2005 - 2004 - 2003 - 2002 - 2001 - 2000 - 1999 - 1998 - 1997 - 1996

Print friendly version - Printing Tips

<html> <head> <meta name="generator" content="Corel WordPerfect 11"> <meta http-equiv="content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"> <style> p { margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 1px } body { font-family: "Arial", sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; font-weight: normal; font-style: normal } </style> </head> <body> 2004/33 CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY NOTES FOR AN ADDRESS BY THE HONOURABLE PIERRE PETTIGREW, MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS, AT THE 2004 SCOTIABANK - AUCC  AWARDS FOR EXCELLENCE IN INTERNATIONALIZATION "PLAYING TO OUR STRENGTH: DIVERSITY AND CANADIAN FOREIGN POLICY" GATINEAU, Quebec October 27, 2004 I would like to thank the Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada [AUCC] for allowing me to speak to you tonight on a subject that is dear to me, but that is also crucial for the future of this country. Canada's foreign policy As many of you know, we are conducting a major review of our international policies. For obvious reasons, I cannot get into many details now. Instead, I would like to speak tonight about how I, as a Canadian, see foreign policy. I would then like to say a few words about how we intend to draw on the enormous resources we have in this country, including the people in this room and the institutions you represent, to help us in our pursuit of Canada's interests abroad. Let me begin as clearly as I can: foreign policy, more than any other area of government activity, expresses the personality of a country. It is not just a matter of what we do—it is, even more importantly, a matter of who we are. And when I think of who we are, I think of the Canadian exception, of the two features that are at the heart of Canada's identity. First, Canada is truly original in that we long ago rejected the traditional nation-state model, which bases its citizenship on a common ethnicity or language. The second exceptional feature of Canada is that we have developed among our citizens a strong sense of solidarity and cooperation. These two features are at the heart of small-l liberal ideology and have shaped Canada since its inception. Canada made a conscious choice to chart a different path from other nations of the time, a choice that is particularly pertinent to this era of globalization and increased mobility. I see its founding moment in the early 1840s, when Lafontaine and Baldwin's "golden handshake" showed their determination to ignore Lord Durham's Report, which recommended a form of assimilation of the "inferior" French population. Our unique choice was reinforced in 1867 with the passage of the British North America Act, which indicated that, in the process of adopting federalism, Canada would further accommodate the French minority, which formed a majority in Quebec. We were not proposing to be a solely English-speaking state, nor a solely French-speaking state. Instead of having the traditional nation-state—with one language, one religion, one legal system and one culture—we created a country with two languages, many cultures and religions, and two legal systems, represented in both common law and the civil code. As a result, waves of immigrants have found a very different, diverse and welcoming kind of country, where they were encouraged to celebrate their own roots. These immigrants have contributed to forming the original mosaic that Canada has become over the years. Our founders determined that citizenship in Canada would not be based on language or other traditional trappings of the nation-state. Instead, we created a political citizenship that incites our citizens to abide by certain fundamental values, including respect for the individual, a common sense of justice and a sense of moderation in the use of power. I believe that is the heart of liberalism. We did not strive for a melting pot in which identities are blended to create a new identity, but rather a mosaic. Your groups, your personalities and where you come from were, and still are, regarded as assets to the country. This great Canadian mosaic, a non-nation-state, makes for a country that, in my view, reflects many of our liberal values. In avoiding the traditional nation-state model, we have built a country exactly the contrary. Canada offers an identity built on political citizenship rather than ethnic citizenship. By rejecting outright policies of "forced" assimilation of minorities and the elimination of differences, and by encouraging people to keep the cultures and traditions from their country of origin, Canada has become rich in diversity and tolerance, a modern country that, as a result, is well-prepared for the post-modern era of polarization and globalization. In that regard, you may recall Stephen Harper's desire to hold a debate about transforming our federalist approach to one based on language and geography: this is precisely the opposite of what we should be doing. For 150 years, this federalist approach has made the country of exception I am so deeply attached to. Canada's hope to have a greater influence on the world stage lies in our values and the importance we place on diversity. It is what makes us truly Canadian, being who we are and doing what we do best. And I intend to bring these values to the forefront of our foreign policy. The second characteristic of the Canadian identity that contributes to our exceptionalism—i.e. solidarity and cooperation—stems from the fact that we are truly northerners. Indeed, solidarity is at the heart of our identity as much as winter is. When it is minus 25 degrees, and minus 35 degrees with the wind-chill factor, even the strongest, most independent individuals learn very quickly that to survive requires solidarity. Our commitment to solidarity has led to a passion for balance, reflected in our discomfort with radical ideologies and our active concern to ensure our institutions play a key role in helping to correct imbalances. For Canadians, prosperity without fairness has no meaning, cohabitation without solidarity has no meaning, power with no counterweight has no meaning, wealth without generosity has no meaning, diversity without sharing has no meaning. We see our commitment to political citizenship, solidarity and balance as important factors driving our foreign policy. Let me just mention three examples: economic management, sustainability and the global commons. Economic management   First, there is Canada's approach to finding the right mix between the role of the state and the role of the market in the international economy, particularly as it affects the economies of developing countries. The state-market relationship is a dynamic one and, in my view, we are just as wrong to want to eliminate government intervention in favour of market forces, as were those in the communist countries who suggested that governments alone should make all the decisions. Here, more than anywhere, a search for balance is indispensable. As an abstract entity, the state has as its essential goal legitimacy, that is, the deliberate quest for that which is fair, reasonable and equitable. Its time horizon is the long term, by means of laws and constitutions. The state makes privileged use of constraint. This is the universe of conscience. As for the market, it needs to respond as well and as quickly as possible to the consumption and production needs of societies. The market has as its essential objectives: efficiency and profit. Closer to instinct and desire, it does not share the time horizon of the state: its horizon is the imperious one of immediacy. This is the universe of confidence. For confidence to continue to be the engine of progress, we have to make sure that there is an ethic of conscience that balances it. The two must go hand in hand. As one very concrete example, Canada has joined other developed countries in opening our markets to exports from the world's least developed countries. But our initiative is the most comprehensive by eliminating all tariffs and quotas on the export of all products from these countries, except for products in our supply managed agricultural sectors. In addition, Canada has put in place a particularly innovative measure in this area: under our system, developing countries can export their textile products to the least developed countries, where they can be made into clothing for the Canadian market. This encourages trade and investment within the developing world—something that developing countries themselves have long called for but have found difficult to implement. We have been encouraging other wealthy countries to follow our lead and go that extra step to improve their existing systems. In adopting these policies on clothing, the government did not abandon our own industries. It established an adjustment program for the Canadian textiles and apparel industry to enable them to remain competitive in international markets. One other example of our desire to balance commercial and social objectives is our new law, passed last spring, which will allow Canadian generic drug companies to produce low-cost anti-HIV/AIDS medicines for Africa. All Canadians can be proud that we were the first Western country to pass such legislation. We could have waited for other countries to move in step with us, but we didn't; instead, we saw the need and took decisive action. Sustainability The second example is Canada's approach to finding the right mix between growth and consumption on the one hand, and economic and environmental sustainability on the other. In a way, it comes down to finding the right balance between short-term and long-term perspectives. Modernity, of course, has been a great success for those who have had the privilege to experience it. Consider that we have vanquished many of the epidemics that killed millions of citizens around the world for centuries, and we have substantially reduced infant mortality rates. Indeed, our progress through modernity has had an effect on our size. Whereas there were one billion human beings on the planet in 1850, there were three billion when I was born in 1951. Today, we are six billion, and estimates are that there will be around 10 billion people on the earth by the end of this century. If we look at the culture of excess that some of our consumption has spawned, we are in deep trouble. While it is true that the "limits" of the planet have not yet been reached, our planet's resources are not infinite. As our population grows to 10 billion, and as prosperity spreads through the developing world, we will have a critical problem if consumption continues at the same rate and with the same pattern as it has over the past 150 years. I want to make sure that we do not just have sustainable development but also sustainable prosperity. Modern society's culture of excess—spurred by the confidence of the past—must give way to allow us to achieve this goal. Building wealth is an objective all nations can share, but this process needs to be undertaken with a conscience if it is to bring truly sustainable prosperity. The Kyoto Accord is an example of how complex it can be to find the right balance. We are committed to Kyoto, and are working hard with the provinces and business to reduce greenhouse gas emissions while also promoting stable economic growth. As difficult as this is, it is complicated even more by the fact that Canada is both a major producer and consumer of energy. Some see our efforts on Kyoto as a brake on the economy, but we disagree. We have to make some tough adjustments, but the countries that come through the process with new and efficient green technologies will have a very strong head start on the competition in the decades to come. The government wants to make sure that Canadian businesses and researchers are at the head of the global pack. Global commons The third example is the need to look after the global commons—the oceans and air and outer space that are the common heritage of all humankind. There is such a thing as a "tragedy of the global commons"—a lack of care for the resources that no one country controls and yet every country needs to survive in the future. No one country can fix the problems on its own; only concerted world action has any chance of success. We have to think beyond narrow national interests, and see the global commons on ethical terms. We need an ethic of consideration and care. The high seas are a case in point. We are stripping the seas of one of the great resources of the planet—our fish stocks. We in Canada have seen the damage overfishing can cause. But depletion of fish stocks is not only a problem on our East Coast—it is also a global challenge that must be addressed urgently by the international community. Canada is working to galvanize political will in support of a global effort to address overfishing. During his recent trip to Europe, the Prime Minister found strong support from the leaders he met for his commitment to find a global solution to the fisheries crisis. Last week in Ottawa, the Prime Minister and I met with European leaders, and we discussed getting our fisheries relations back on a positive path, notably through an initiative to address global overfishing. We agreed that it is our collective responsibility to end the cycle of overfishing and ecosystem destruction in our oceans. In related examples, we are producing more food, but cannot prevent one part of the world from suffering from famine and the other from obesity, cholesterol-related cardiovascular disease and so forth. We have refined water-treatment technologies, but one part of the world still lives in drought zones, while another wastes water without even thinking about it while brushing their teeth, preparing food or maintaining a golf course in a desert region. Without question, reason has enabled us to achieve some remarkable feats; however, it cannot be divorced from responsibilities, from the demands of conscience. When we look at Canada's foreign policy this way—at how we are promoting the kinds of balances—we see that we are well beyond the traditional domain of power politics as played out between states. We are talking as much about public attitudes as we are about government initiatives, and that requires us to think in new ways, to see things fresh. Increasingly, international policy is about people: their rights, security and prosperity; their behaviour in response to global challenges that affect all of us; and their cultures, values and sense of identity. In many cases, there is a clear need to work directly and effectively with people in other countries. We want to influence public attitudes, to move people to act in ways that serve our broad security, economic and social objectives. As soon as we talk about "influence," however, another major change in the international environment becomes clear. Put simply, the capacity of governments to influence events beyond our borders has been changing over the last few decades. There are many reasons we can point to, such as the emergence of new states and the rise of new centres of power like China, Brazil and India. But there are also profound developments outside of government that contribute to the changing nature of international influence, including the rise of private and non-governmental players in the international arena, fuelled in no small measure by revolutions in transportation and communications technologies. The plain truth is that the Canadian government, like governments everywhere, exerts influence over narrower spheres of international affairs than was the case a generation ago. But there is another important side to this story, and it is this: Canadians today are probably more influential around the world than ever before—in multilateral institutions, in business, in sciences, in education, in the arts. The extraordinary blossoming of Canadian talent and innovation in recent years has raised Canada's profile internationally and heightened our impact on international affairs. And that is an extraordinarily important development for this country because, looking around the world, international engagement is increasingly done by people outside government: artists performing, volunteers teaching, students learning, young people travelling, ordinary people in dialogue with others abroad, strangers connecting through the Internet, business and professional people working in other countries and on-line, immigrants and expatriates talking to their families back home. Canadians are active participants in many of the formal and informal networks that are developing across the world, in virtually every sphere of human activity. Our universities are working with their counterparts around the world in research consortia devoted not only to exploring the frontiers of science, but also to working on solutions to global threats to health, security, prosperity, human rights and the environment. Our citizens, who come from every corner of the world, enable us to reach out to other countries and cultures to explain the principles of tolerance, pluralism and the celebration of differences that have made Canada a unique and fortunate country. Whether face to face or in cyberspace, Canadians are working with people around the world to harness their expertise in order to meet international challenges. "Whole of Canada" approach Our International Policy Review will make this a central feature of our approach. From now on, we will be talking about a "whole of Canada" approach that seeks to leverage our ability to promote Canadian values and interests by marshalling all the assets available to us. We believe our provincial and municipal governments have real contributions to make, as do private Canadians from every walk of life. We have announced the establishment of a Canada Corps to provide a central focus for our efforts to help other countries build up their own systems of governance and public institutions. The Canada Corps will provide common services to organizations involved in institution and capacity building, for instance by linking individual Canadians who want to help with Canadian NGOs that work in these areas. The Canada Corps will draw upon three broad categories of people: experts in various levels of the public and private sectors; people working in the voluntary sector, in organizations like Canadian Executive Service Overseas; and Canadian youth. It will include experts from a wide range of fields, from the business school graduate to the retired cop, from the constitutional expert to the nutritionist to the school teacher. In some cases, where the needs are long term as in Haiti, we expect individual Canadians will be able to make a contribution and then see their work carried on by others. In other cases, the work will be intense but relatively short in duration, such as the elections in Mongolia and Georgia that were monitored by Canadian experts. Our universities and colleges are critically important players in this "whole of Canada" approach. The world needs all of the different things you can do. We need teachers who help give students the tools for critical analysis and debate. We need educators who can draw on the wisdom of the past to help prepare us for the challenges of the future. Education and lifelong learning are essential to participation in a modern economy. We have to remain competitive, and that means we have to be open to the world. International research collaboration not only adds to our knowledge; it also expands our commercial opportunities. It is no wonder that education is the fastest-growing service industry in the world and that there is such tough, worldwide competition for international students. We need to encourage our students and young people to know the world better, to travel and study abroad, to do volunteer work, to learn foreign languages, to be Canadians in the world. And here, I come back to where I began. If our young people are to be citizens of the world, they must first of all be Canadians, aware of their country's history, literature, traditions, values, peoples and problems. It is no paradox to say that internationalization must be based on a firm foundation of Canadian studies—on knowing ourselves and having confidence in who we are, what we have achieved and what we have to offer. The partnership between universities, colleges and government in international education, and in international policy generally, will be broad and deep. And it will be part of a wide network of partnerships that will develop as we increasingly engage private Canadians in our international agenda—as we become, in the best possible sense, Canadians in the world. Thank you. </body> </html>

2007 - 2006 - 2005 - 2004 - 2003 - 2002 - 2001 - 2000 - 1999 - 1998 - 1997 - 1996

Print friendly version - Printing Tips



Last Updated: 2006-10-30	Top of Page	Important Notices