Press Room

Madam Lieutenant Governor of British Columbia

Chief Leonard George of the Tsleil-Waututh Nation

Madam President of IPAC

Ladies and Gentlemen:

I am delighted to be here in Vancouver today for the 2004 national conference of the Institute of Public Administration of Canada. I can safely say that this city’s spectacular beauty and the hospitality of its residents are a source of pride for all Canadians, even those who hail from other parts of the country.

First, I would like to thank you for inviting me here today. As Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, I feel that your discussions of the challenges of the 21^st century, as viewed through the lens of a renewed intergovernmental Canada, are of direct concern to me. I am especially happy that you chose this theme, as it addresses a concern of our governments: how can we work together to renew intergovernmental relations and adopt in this area a new approach, for the good of our citizens?

The fruits of your deliberations on these questions will prove useful in many ways. And it is by acting together that we can rise to the challenge I have just alluded to.

[The foundation of human success: Canada]

When we look toward the future, it is essential to consider first and foremost the foundation of Canada’s experience. Our Canadian identity rests on a series of values that have earned us a more than enviable reputation on the international scene. By values, I refer in particular to the primacy of rights and freedoms, tolerance, equal opportunity, democracy, social justice, the respect for difference and diversity, all of which are at the very heart of a national human success: Canada. These values are the very source of our collective spirit, and pluralism forms the very bedrock of our country.

From its infancy, Canada has appealed to the solidarity of citizens coming from a wide diversity of cultural, linguistic, geographic and religious backgrounds, whose arrival in Canada has enriched our Canadian identity. The birth of our federation was in response to this pluralism, contrary to those countries that chose uniformity through the creation of a unitary State. Thus, the federal system that was put in place had two main thrusts: on the one hand, merging into a unified current a shared desire to achieve national objectives; and on the other hand, ensuring that the distinctiveness of each of the federation’s cultures and regions is allowed to shine. Right from the beginning, the relations among our governments have reflected this balance. In addition, it highlights a key requirement: deep respect for provincial realities. This constitutes an inescapable fact of our political landscape. The choice of a federal union meant that the success of this new country would be closely linked to the capacity of the different levels of government to work together in pursuit of common objectives and the prosperity of Canadians. Over the years, this dynamic has transcended our journey and remains every bit as meaningful for us here and now in 2004.

[Learning from our experiences: a few examples]

Our past and ongoing experiences are there to pave the way to the future. Our successes and our failures have influenced the current state of our intergovernmental relations.

Naturally, depending on people’s perspectives, some might have a slightly different take on these events than others, but one thing is certain: Canadian federalism is neither static nor fossilized and, as a result, we must continue to work together. Canadian history has taught us that a country represents more than the sum of its parts. Nothing can better highlight what cements the spirit of solidarity that must nourish the country. We have much to learn from one another to change what must be changed, out of a shared desire to modernize our manner of governance.

One of the times we did so was February 4, 1999, when the Social Union Framework Agreement, or SUFA, was concluded. Under the Agreement, the federal, provincial and territorial governments agreed to work together better in order to strengthen our health care system, remove obstacles to mobility, involve Canadians in the development of social programs and policies, and consolidate the partnership among governments. What’s more, these commitments had the effect of making each level of government more accountable to citizens by measuring the results of those programs.

SUFA did not mark the end of a process, but rather the beginning of a more effective collaboration among governments in the areas of health, child care, post-secondary education and the other social programs. In this regard, I would like to point out that, although this represents an intergovernmental success, we need to nurture this desire to do better and redouble our efforts to improve the way we do things, since Quebec has yet to sign on to the Agreement.

Another example of successful cooperation was the introduction in July 1998 of the National Child Benefit Program, a partnership between the federal government, the provinces, the territories and the First Nations aimed at preventing and reducing child poverty, helping parents join the labour market and reducing overlap and duplication in government programs.

We can also talk about our labour markets agreements, reached since 1997 with all the provinces except for Ontario. Under these agreements, the provinces have taken over responsibility for implementing active employment measures funded from the Employment Insurance Account. Each agreement is designed to respond to the specific needs of the labour market in each partner province.

The Internal Trade Agreement, signed with the provinces in 1995, has reduced trade barriers inside Canada and has facilitated worker mobility between the provinces and territories, but we can still do better. There is room to improve this agreement, since many questions remain unresolved. The provinces and territories have already begun working on this issue through the Council of the Federation. The Canadian government is pleased by our partners’ desire to increase internal trade, which constitutes one of the essential conditions for job creation and for our collective prosperity.

In short, one thing is obvious: Canada is stronger when its governments work together to make it a better country. The federation’s partners cannot act in isolation. Each is invited to contribute to a collaborative effort that will translate, in concrete terms, into improved living conditions for our citizens.

[Challenges of a new environment and a new citizen-focused approach to cooperation]

When it comes time for historians to examine the period that Canada is currently living through, they will no doubt be struck by all the changes that have marked the turn of the century – not only within our country, but also throughout the world understood globally. This reality cannot help but colour to some extent the way we look at intergovernmental relations.

Let us look at the new environment influencing our day-to-day lives. The omnipresence of communications, the emergence of the Internet as a window on the world, and a better-educated population mean that Canadians are now more aware than before of the realities surrounding them, and the expectations they place on their representatives are all the greater for it. So how do we adjust our actions to be in tune with these new expectations? How do we get citizens more involved in developing government policy and how do we become more accountable to them for our actions?

We also know that all the communities in Canada, in particular Aboriginal communities, also want to participate more actively in our nation’s affairs. How do we develop mechanisms of governance and cooperation that enable them to take better advantage of our prosperity?

More and more of our constituents live in urban areas, needs and expectations are growing, and governments are handing over more and more responsibilities to municipalities. Mindful of this reality, our government has made it a priority to redefine its relationship with Canada’s cities. The cities, for their part, are looking for a new deal that would give them a seat at the national table and deliver stable, long-term and sustainable funding. From an intergovernmental perspective, this question poses quite a challenge! How to respect provincial jurisdiction while at the same time responding to municipalities’ pressing needs? The Government of Canada has already set out to meet this challenge. Indeed, the federal government’s commitment in its 2004 Budget to rebate the GST to the municipalities respects an area of provincial jurisdiction while helping out the municipalities financially. The federal government is looking at other initiatives of this type, and an example being: the idea of shared federal gas tax with the municipalities.

On the international front, the opening up of borders, globalization, labour issues and Canada’s growing role in the world are creating a new dynamic. This too has an impact on our citizens and on intergovernmental relations because of the many sectors affected by this wave of change. In fact, while international affairs continue to influence such sectors as defence, security and international trade, their evolution has meant that other aspects of our lives, previously sheltered from international realities, are now directly affected by this redefinition of interactions between countries and continents. I am referring specifically to cultural, educational and environmental questions that, in whole or in part, come under provincial jurisdiction. How, then, do we achieve a consensus with the provinces on these issues so that we can speak with one voice, a strong voice, on the world stage?

Another challenge, and no less daunting: how to deal with the financial and fiscal pressures brought to bear on our governments, while maintaining the fundamental principle of equal opportunity in this country? We have developed a variety of mechanisms that today make up a complex fiscal regime. At the base, the equalization system was designed precisely to allow the federal government to pool revenues from all Canadians in order to redistribute them to the provinces in order to equalize their capacity to serve their citizens. This is so representative of the values dear to Canadians that the underlying principle was entrenched in the Constitution to ensure its permanence. In addition, there are specific transfers contributing to well-defined national objectives, such as the health transfer. All these instruments have evolved over the years. As for equalization, many questions are currently being asked, not about its existence or objective, but about its calculation methods, what should or should not be taken into account, the repercussions of economic cycles on equalization payments, and so on and so forth. These questions demand our attention, because the stakes are high for provinces that have a reduced fiscal capacity, and whose citizens nevertheless have the same needs as those of Canadians living in the more well-off provinces.

The questions I have raised take in the scope of the challenges facing us. It has become common place to call for changes in intergovernmental relations in order to face these issues. A consensus is needed around the fact that these changes must be politically feasible, which means taking into account the millions of existing interests throughout the country. But before reaching our destination, before even beginning the journey, we must approach the exercise differently. We must break free of the system’s immediate constraints, change our outlook, let our imagination look beyond the many obstacles, and consider the most fundamental aspect of Canada’s intergovernmental dynamic: the needs of our citizens. Despite the difficulties underlying these challenges, one solution jumps out right away: we must centre our action on our citizens, on their needs and aspirations. Citizens are the ones who must guide the development and implementation of the policies of the governments with which they are asked to deal. What my government is proposing is a new approach: citizen-focused cooperation.

In creating the Council of the Federation, last December, the provinces and territories gave themselves a forum in response to this need for change. This initiative deserves recognition. Our government is always ready to look at ways of improving intergovernmental relations and the dialogue among the various levels of government for the benefit of Canadians.

[Conclusion: the challenge of success]

In this context, the First Ministers’ Meeting, which will begin on September 13, carries an importance that we cannot ignore. This meeting is first and foremost an opportunity to pursue our efforts to bring about a sustainable, innovative and flexible health system. But it is much more than that. In my eyes, this meeting offers us an opportunity to regain Canadians’ trust in the health system. For the governments, it is also an opportunity to engage in a common undertaking, to go beyond their legitimate – if sometimes narrow – interests, in order to place Canadians’ interests first, and to look for a new era of cooperation. It is in that spirit that I encourage all my colleagues to prepare for the First Ministers’ Meeting and ensure follow-up. For we must recognize that the evolution of the health system and of our system of intergovernmental relations always remains on the agenda of Canada’s governments.

We must restore citizens’ trust in the governments of this country. This is no time for obstinate attitudes, unproductive shows of force or pointless quarrels. Canadians won’t accept it. The First Ministers’ Meeting provides us a golden opportunity to help one another out, to work side by side in pursuit of common objectives, to head in the same direction... in a nutshell, to implement a new approach: citizen-focused cooperation.

First ministers invariably represent different political parties and different political imperatives. In a federation, it is perfectly normal, and even healthy, to have disagreements and differing viewpoints, but what’s important is that in matters of national interest – where the interests of the citizens are involved – all of our governments must be able to move beyond these differences, and the first ministers must support one another in order to achieve our common objectives while demonstrating enough flexibility to accommodate the diversity that characterizes our country. We are stronger together. We are stronger when we demonstrate respect for one another. We are stronger when we focus on Canadians.

I hope you have a very productive conference and I thank you once again for your kind invitation.