What kind of Canada?

Editorial

Prime Minister Paul Martin has been criticized for his Liberal party's campaign theme, which asks us to choose the kind of Canada we want. While it is true that the theme does have a whiff of patriotic exclusivity to it, the criticism is largely unfair. Monday's election is about choosing the kind of Canada we want. Every election is.

And despite the too-often repeated aspersion against politicians that "they're all the same," there are, in fact, very significant choices being presented by the parties and their leaders.

It is a coincidence, we suppose, that this election comes a mere three days before we celebrate Canada Day. (We assume the prime minister didn't figure that into the delicate equation of when to schedule the election.) But in the week that we mark the country's founding with barbecues and maybe a noontime rendition of the national anthem, it is noteworthy that we are also being asked to cast what may be the most significant ballots of our lives.

Canadians in general – and Jewish voters too, if our unscientific survey (Bulletin Cover, June 25, 2004) is representative – have rarely been so undecided this late in a campaign. If, as the national polls suggest, Monday's vote results in a minority Parliament, the future of this country will likely be very different indeed. The choices between the incumbent Liberals and the new Conservative party are more than superficial. They represent, in some instances, starkly divergent ideas about the philosophy of the Canadian federation. On issues like federal-provincial relations, group rights-versus-individual rights, bilingualism and multiculturalism, the definition of marriage and the role of the courts, the two parties could steer the country in very different directions.

But a minority government could alter the very way we choose our government in future. The New Democrats have said they will demand, as a chip in negotiating any formal support for a minority government's agenda, a national referendum on proportional representation. This is an exciting and revolutionary suggestion, one that comes at the same time a citizen's assembly in the province of British Columbia is discussing radical and novel ways to elect our provincial legislators.
If Canadians were to adopt proportional representation, we would face a future of almost constant minority governments. Some people view minority governments as inherently weak and undesirable. Others see them as more representative of the diversity of voter opinion. Either way, such a change to our system would dramatically alter the governance of Canada.

A minority government dependent on the Bloc Quebecois for its survival would present a whole other range of unforeseen options toward federal-provincial relations and to a variety of other issues as well.

For Jewish voters, some additional considerations often come into play. Canada's tradition of multiculturalism and tolerance for diversity has made this one of the safest and most comfortable societies Jewish civilization has ever experienced. Yet recent incidents and rising hate-crime statistics suggest that, while far from a crisis situation, the tolerant fabric of this country may be fraying around the edges. At the same time, our Jewish sisters and brothers in Israel are being subjected to an ongoing pogrom that is the modern incarnation of the long history of anti-Semitic hatred and violence. When we hear Canadians, including some of our elected officials, obfuscate on naming and condemning that hatred, we feel isolated and threatened, even here in relatively tolerant Canada.

These issues figure, in various ways, into our perspectives and our choices. But they have not coalesced into an overall consensus. With all the voter indecision, the answer to the question of what sort of Canada we want remains uncertain. While this election should have answered this question, it appears we won't get a firm response one way or another. Barring an unforeseen surge in support for one of the parties, we face a period of contending ideas in a minority Parliament. During that time, we can analyze even more closely the ideas, values and dependability of the various parties – we will also almost certainly have a new election before the traditional four-year term is up. Maybe by then we'll have a stronger consensus on the kind of Canada we want.

^TOP