A few years ago, the government was taken to task over the
appointment of Ted Menzies as a Parliamentary Secretary to then Cabinet
Minister Josee Verner. The criticism had nothing to do with Mr. Menzies’ per se, but was made because his role
made him a ‘back up’ to a Minister whose portfolio included the job of
‘Minister of State for la Francophonie’. For some, the idea of an Alberta
Anglophone answering on behalf of the Francophonie Minister seemed inappropriate.
The one thing that the critics could not ask, however, was how many of us would feel if a Quebec francophone had been named as the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of State for the Commonwealth. For that to happen, the federal government would first need to name a Commonwealth Minister – something that no Prime Minister has done in the more than two decades since the Francophonie portfolio came into being.
Canada’s support for the Francophonie has been significant and substantial. With the election of Michaelle Jean as its Secretary-General, that support has only increased in stature. Having a member of Cabinet whose job, in part, is to focus on Francophonie issues sends the signal that Canada considers the organization, and the community of nations it represents, as a priority. I would be the last person to argue with that view.
On the other hand, we are also prominent members of the Commonwealth – an organization that encompasses significantly more jurisdictions and a higher portion of the world’s population than la Francophonie. Outside of the United States and France, all of the most important military and economic allies Canada has are Commonwealth jurisdictions. Based on population, GDP, and the distribution of regional and global power, the Commonwealth is a far larger presence on the world stage.
The Commonwealth comprises 54 jurisdictions that hold one-third of the world’s population. Together, they account for 13 of the world’s fastest growing economies and almost a quarter of the world’s economic output. It includes every continent and region, as well as India, which is emerging as a global economic power in its own right. With Britain, Australia and New Zealand, it also includes the nations outside of the US who are our closest allies.
It all begs the obvious question - if the Francophonie merits a seat at the Cabinet table, why is the Commonwealth not even present in the room?
In fairness to the present government, the appointment of then-Senator Hugh Segal as a ‘Special Envoy to the Commonwealth’ was the most attention any Canadian government had afforded the organization since the appointment of Arnold Smith as its Secretary-General fifty years ago.
I would also acknowledge that the Commonwealth has its share of challenges, from the effectiveness of the Secretariat to the governance issues and human rights concerns within member jurisdictions. The problem with using this as an excuse for non-engagement is the fact that the same complaints could be made about la Francophonie. In many cases, it fares no better.
Canadian objections to the Commonwealth of late were primarily due to human rights concerns in Sri Lanka. This issue appeared to be the impetus for the withdrawal of Canadian support for the Commonwealth Secretariat. If one considers this action to be principled and legitimate, then one would need to ask why the current situation in Egypt has not brought about a similar reaction toward the Francophonie? In the former case, we downgraded our support while in the latter we have maintained our commitment and lobbied to have a former Governor-General lead the organization.
Canada’s neglect of the Commonwealth has been long standing, and the remedy will not be found in a quick fix. It could, however, turn the corner with a simple act – the naming of a Minister of State for the Commonwealth.
The advantages of such an appointment are numerous. They would act as a reference point in dealings with the Secretariat, yet be able to work with officials and organizations in member states directly. They would also demonstrate to Canadians and to the rest of the Commonwealth that this nation does value our relationships. At a time when nearly fifty percent of immigrants to Canada come from Commonwealth jurisdictions, this importance cannot be overstated.
It would be naïve to presume that the Commonwealth could not benefit from reform, but Canada’s disengagement will do nothing to remedy the situation. Indeed, by applying a different standard to our involvement in la Francophonie, we create a perception that our stance on issues of principle are purely situational.
The logic behind Canada’s support for la Francophonie is understandable. The lack of equal regard for the Commonwealth is not. Naming a Commonwealth Minister would be a tangible step in the right direction.
The one thing that the critics could not ask, however, was how many of us would feel if a Quebec francophone had been named as the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of State for the Commonwealth. For that to happen, the federal government would first need to name a Commonwealth Minister – something that no Prime Minister has done in the more than two decades since the Francophonie portfolio came into being.
Canada’s support for the Francophonie has been significant and substantial. With the election of Michaelle Jean as its Secretary-General, that support has only increased in stature. Having a member of Cabinet whose job, in part, is to focus on Francophonie issues sends the signal that Canada considers the organization, and the community of nations it represents, as a priority. I would be the last person to argue with that view.
On the other hand, we are also prominent members of the Commonwealth – an organization that encompasses significantly more jurisdictions and a higher portion of the world’s population than la Francophonie. Outside of the United States and France, all of the most important military and economic allies Canada has are Commonwealth jurisdictions. Based on population, GDP, and the distribution of regional and global power, the Commonwealth is a far larger presence on the world stage.
The Commonwealth comprises 54 jurisdictions that hold one-third of the world’s population. Together, they account for 13 of the world’s fastest growing economies and almost a quarter of the world’s economic output. It includes every continent and region, as well as India, which is emerging as a global economic power in its own right. With Britain, Australia and New Zealand, it also includes the nations outside of the US who are our closest allies.
It all begs the obvious question - if the Francophonie merits a seat at the Cabinet table, why is the Commonwealth not even present in the room?
In fairness to the present government, the appointment of then-Senator Hugh Segal as a ‘Special Envoy to the Commonwealth’ was the most attention any Canadian government had afforded the organization since the appointment of Arnold Smith as its Secretary-General fifty years ago.
I would also acknowledge that the Commonwealth has its share of challenges, from the effectiveness of the Secretariat to the governance issues and human rights concerns within member jurisdictions. The problem with using this as an excuse for non-engagement is the fact that the same complaints could be made about la Francophonie. In many cases, it fares no better.
Canadian objections to the Commonwealth of late were primarily due to human rights concerns in Sri Lanka. This issue appeared to be the impetus for the withdrawal of Canadian support for the Commonwealth Secretariat. If one considers this action to be principled and legitimate, then one would need to ask why the current situation in Egypt has not brought about a similar reaction toward the Francophonie? In the former case, we downgraded our support while in the latter we have maintained our commitment and lobbied to have a former Governor-General lead the organization.
Canada’s neglect of the Commonwealth has been long standing, and the remedy will not be found in a quick fix. It could, however, turn the corner with a simple act – the naming of a Minister of State for the Commonwealth.
The advantages of such an appointment are numerous. They would act as a reference point in dealings with the Secretariat, yet be able to work with officials and organizations in member states directly. They would also demonstrate to Canadians and to the rest of the Commonwealth that this nation does value our relationships. At a time when nearly fifty percent of immigrants to Canada come from Commonwealth jurisdictions, this importance cannot be overstated.
It would be naïve to presume that the Commonwealth could not benefit from reform, but Canada’s disengagement will do nothing to remedy the situation. Indeed, by applying a different standard to our involvement in la Francophonie, we create a perception that our stance on issues of principle are purely situational.
The logic behind Canada’s support for la Francophonie is understandable. The lack of equal regard for the Commonwealth is not. Naming a Commonwealth Minister would be a tangible step in the right direction.
