| Introducing Inroads | |
Inroads: A Second Introduction | ||
|
In introducing this journal last Fall, we dedicated ourselves to making inroads into the intellectual solitudes that divide this country. In surveying the constitutional debate, Inroads #1 spanned a number of geographically and ideologically self-contained discourses. A few days after going to press the Charlottetown Accord was struck. From a journalistic point of view, that was bad luck; it immediately rendered obsolete some of our speculations. We consoled ourselves that the only printed medium consistently up-to-date on the constitutional debate last year was the latest copy from a fax machine. Defeat of the Accord in the October referendum is perhaps the most definitive confirmation of the existence of intellectual solitudes within this country. A majority of Quebeckers rejected it, believing that the "distinct society" clause had been qualified into meaninglessness and that the powers transferred to Quebec City were too few and too conditional. A majority in the rest-of-Canada also rejected it — but for entirely different reasons. Many subscribed to Pierre Trudeau's tirade about the hypothetical threat posed by the Accord to individual rights ensconced in the Charter. Trudeau catalyzed opposition among those who thought Quebec got too much. A focal point of controversy became the proposed guarantee to Quebec of a 25 per cent minimum of MPs in the House of Commons. The referendum debate revealed more than the as anglophone-francophone solitudes. A majority of chiefs in the Assembly of First Nations concluded that the Accord did not go far enough in recognizing an Aboriginal right to self-government. Many Canadians thought it went to far. Incidentally, a majority of non-status Indians, Metis and Inuit supported the Accord. Supporters of a Triple-E Senate thought the Accord's Senate proposal was too watered down, while opponents harboured misgivings that, however diluted, the proposed Senate would unduly weaken the power of the Commons and transform Ottawa into a US style congressional government. Supporters of a justiciable social charter considered the non- justiciable social charter in the Accord to be a sop. And so it went. No one wanted to compromise; everyone put the worst possible interpretation on the Accord's ambiguities. After defeat of the Accord, a majority of Canadians claimed acute "constitutional fatigue" and turned to other matters. So far "fatigue" has sufficed to keep constitutional matters off the political stage, but we are deluding ourselves if we believer that Canada can survive as a country under the constitutional status quo. In this issue of Inroads, our only reminder of these unresolved constitutional solitudes is Robin Philpot's discussion of the sharply different portrayals of the Quebec-Aboriginal relationship inside and outside Quebec. English Canada, we noted last Fall, is characterized by its own two solitudes. The world of ideas is split down the middle by a seemingly unbridgeable gap between the socially-concerned intellectuals and activists and the hard-nosed businessmen and women. The theme in this issue is precisely these economic solitudes. The polarization of the economic policy debate, we suggested, helps explain the low rates of growth over the last two decades of per capita Canadian incomes relative to most other industrial countries — and our high unemployment. Canada seems less able than other countries to adapt to changes in the world's economic order. One virtue of "constitutional fatigue" is that the current Canadian political debate is concentrating on economic policy. And, as readers of this issue will discover, the debate has produced some consensus on what the problems are, if not on how to solve them. In his introduction to the thematic section, guest editor Robert Campbell draws out the main themes on which there is agreement: if Canada is to remain among the wealthiest countries, it has to catch up to a world economy where human rather than natural resources are the basis of prosperity. There are two related obstacles: first our education and training system is inadequate compared to that of the Europeans and Japanese; second, unlike in these countries, our social partners — business, labour and government — do not recognize the broad areas in which they must act as social partners and not as antagonists. Paul Stothard takes a critical look at how these obstacles undermine Canadian competitiveness. An even more pessimistic outlook emerges from Frank Koller's penetrating interview with Singapore's Lee Kuan Yew, who, in effect, tells Canadians that they have been spoiled by our natural resource wealth. Quebeckers have tried harder than elsewhere in Canada to overcome the second obstacle and explore the elements of feasible social partnership. Diane-Gabrielle Tremblay and Alain Noel survey the "Quebec Model," while Louis Fournier writes of one specific success, the Solidarity Fund, the union-sponsored investment fund. David Levi, head of an equivalent fund in British Columbia, makes a strong case that such funds can improve the overall productivity in the Canadian economy. Obviously, getting together to talk is not enough. Quebec continues to have the highest school drop-out rate among the Canadian provinces, and the Montreal unemployment rate (13.6 in March) is far higher than in either Toronto (10.1 per cent) or Vancouver (9.2 per cent). Andrew Sharpe emphasizes the unemployment cost of abandoning macroeconomic policy to John Crow's draconian "monetarism" at the Bank of Canada. we are still in the depths of depression. He considers the structural unemployment arising from the mismatch between labour skills and labour demand to be largely irrelevant given the inadequate aggregate demand in the economy. Bob White, President of the Canadian Labour Congress, goes even further, arguing that unless there is full employment, training policy can achieve little. Jock Finlayson, vice-president of the Business Council On National Issues, provides a thorough analysis of the issues from a business perspective. Predictably, he opposes any new training taxes on business. He argues that such taxes raise the cost of hiring labour, and interprets unemployment insurance premiums as, in effect, a form training tax that firms and employees are already paying. The editors of Inroads also contribute. John Richards takes the NDP to task for muddle-headed hypocrisy on trade liberalization, supporting both the principles of GATT and increased protection. To be fair, we have reprinted the trade chapter from the NDP's policy document. Henry Milner updates his account in Inroads #1 of the difficulties faced by the Scandinavians in steering their famous middle course in a post-Communist world, reporting on the "crisis deal" reached last Fall in Sweden between the Conservative-led government and the Social Democrats. Inroads #2 is not limited to a single, economic theme. We also address the Canadian malaise of polarized unresolved policy debates. Why is it that Canadians are coming to better understand the problems facing them — yet still fail to make progress at addressing them? Maybe the problem lies in our institutions. André Blais and Henry Milner examine the way we elect our governments and the effects this has on the effectiveness of their legislative outputs. Milner is especially critical, arguing that the electoral system creates a legislative myth that the government has a mandate to act in the name of the majority, rather than, as in Europe, being there to negotiate compromises among the various groups that together represent the real will of the majority. Illustrating the failure of our political institutions is Paul Mooney's critical assessment of Canada's contradictory defense posture compared to that of other middle powers. We delude into thinking we can help make peace in this increasingly dangerous world, but not have to pay for it. Finally, in his guest editorial, Ken MacFarlane goes further, tracing our problems to being so preoccupied with constitutions and institutions that we have failed to have developed a common national ethos. |
 |
 Return to Contents To see if copies of this issue are available, go to the Back Issue page |
