By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on May 29, 2023.

OTTAWA—The China interference story is a political scandal with legs, but no body.

Opposition leaders did not like the outcome of David Johnston’s inquiry into the issue. They obviously prefer a two- or three-year process that would keep the issue percolating in public consciousness.

According to March polling by the Angus Reid Institute, the majority of Canadians believe that China likely interfered with the last election.

Canadians may not be convinced by Johnston, whose report makes it clear that the government did not have knowledge of any Chinese interference, but a public inquiry is not likely to provide any more clarity.

It will simply keep the questions in the public domain, promoting the stench of a scandal without evidence.

Another poll by Nanos released earlier this month shows the Liberals have been lagging seven points behind the Conservatives since the allegations on Chinese interference first surfaced.

So, it stands to reason that opposition parties would like to keep the issue front and centre.

It also stands to reason that if the majority of information sources gathered by security and intelligence services in Canada is classified as top secret, there would not be much use in having a public inquiry into state secrets.

That was why Johnston offered a top-secret briefing to each of the opposition leaders. The only one to take him up on his offer was New Democratic Leader Jagmeet Singh.

Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre not only refuse the briefing, he also attacked Johnston personally, and characterized his findings as fake, a reaction that provoked a rebuke even in Tory circles.

Conservative pundit Tim Powers pulled no punches in his column for The Hill Times in which he accuses Poilievre of taking “the built-in cantankerous critic role of his job to new dimensions. …Poilievre basically suggested Johnston, a fine man, was some kind of partisan dirtbag political trougher.” Powers went on to say that “he has cultivated a persona for himself that projects a nasty ruthlessness.”

Powers decries the approach and basically says that everyone loses when our leaders hike up the nasty quotient in politics.

Poilievre certainly displayed that quotient when he attacked Johnston’s character as the former governor general has nobly served both the Liberals and the previous Conservative government of which Poilievre was a minister.

When the public is focussed on foreign interference allegations, the opposition wins.

It matters not that the first person to resign based on those allegations was Ontario Progressive Conservative MPP Vincent Ke at Queen’s Park.

Media attention has primarily focused on the Liberal government in Ottawa.

In a minority situation, the Conservatives want to issue a summons to force Johnston to the standing committee on procedure and House affairs for a grilling about the contents of his report and his refusal to recommend a public inquiry.

The governing Liberals do not want to issue a summons as Johnston has already agreed to voluntarily appear at the committee.

Opposition parties collectively penned a letter in which they called Johnston’s decision “a slap in the face to diaspora groups who are subject to abuse and intimidation by hostile foreign governments.”

Johnston is calling for public hearings instead of a public inquiry. The public may not understand the nuances of difference between inquiry and hearings, but political parties certainly do.

A public inquiry would likely drag on for a couple of years, with multiple in-camera hearings as information leaks out.

Public hearings in different regions of the country would allow those involved in local riding election to have their say, but would likely not shed much light on specific foreign strategies to influence elections.

Every foreign embassy has a direct interest in Canadian elections. In many communities across the country, differing diaspora interests play a role in electing representatives who share their policy objectives.

On the ground, nomination battles can be aggressive between mainland Chinese and Taiwanese supporters, between Tamils and other Indian subgroups, and between two different groups of Sikhs.

In the olden days, the battlegrounds were religious. Today, they are based on the differing diaspora populations in political constituencies.

All foreign governments follow nomination battles closely in communities where their former citizens are populous.

This is not just a Chinese challenge. It is a foreign government challenge.

Johnston’s report makes several recommendations, including better communications between politicians and secret service agencies when any threat is linked to a foreign government.

But the request for a public inquiry is more about political damage than solutions.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.

Foreign interference allegations are not limited to China. Recent reports of Russian interference have also surfaced. Politics is always a messy business. With identity politics, it will get even messier.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on March 20, 2023.

OTTAWA—Surprise, surprise: the first political casualty of the Chinese interference allegations was an Ontario Progressive Conservative MPP. Vincent Ke resigned last week from the PC caucus, despite characterizing the allegations as “false and defamatory.”

Ke tweeted his departure. “While the Global News allegations about me are false and defamatory, I do not want to be a distraction to the government and take away from the good work Premier Ford is doing for the province of Ontario.”

Global has been at the forefront of leaked stories about financial links between the Chinese government and Chinese-Canadian members of parliament.

Leaks are reported to be coming from inside the Canadian Security Intelligence Service.

The RCMP has been investigating the leak’s source, according to other news reports.

During last year’s provincial election, the Ontario Provincial Police was asked by the Liberal Party of Ontario to investigate the incorporation of 15 companies or associations associated with Ke.

Ke established the corporations after his election to the legislature in 2018.

At the time, Ontario Premier Doug Ford defended Ke, saying that several incorporations included non-profit cultural associations.

Ford defended his MPP’s exit last week in a statement. “Not proven, they [allegations] are serious and deserve his full and undivided attention as he works to clear his name.”

Identity politics will also take centre stage in upcoming federal investigations into electoral foreign interference.

By choosing former governor-general David Johnston to head a probe into foreign meddling, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has managed to secure an individual with impeccable credentials.

Appointed governor general by then-prime minister Stephen Harper, Johnston managed to secure broad public support during his seven-year tenure.

However, his nomination was criticized by the Conservatives because, after retirement, he volunteered for the Trudeau Foundation.

Johnston has his work cut out for him. Foreign interference allegations are not limited to China.

Recent reports of Russian interference have also surfaced.

Politics is always a messy business.

With identity politics, it will get even messier.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.

To suggest a Chinese-Canadian politician is a mouthpiece for Beijing displays a gross misunderstanding of our political system. Every politician in the country has to be aware of international politics.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on March 6, 2023.

OTTAWA—Foreign politics seems to be dominating the domestic agenda these days.

Whether it is questions about Chinese or German intervention in Canadian politics, the news of the week is focused on how other countries are trying to influence the Canadian agenda.

In the Liberals’ case, someone from the Canadian Security Intelligence Service is convinced that Chinese-Canadian Members of Parliament are agents of the Chinese government.

Evidence is being leaked in drips and drabs to link the Chinese government to Canadian political influence. The latest reports including co-opting the Trudeau Foundation with donations designed to build stronger relationships between the two countries.

Years ago, CSIS was convinced that many Muslims in my Hamilton, Ont., riding were agents of foreign governments. Muslims got more visits from security agents and were automatically questioned because many had relationships with their home countries.

In a constituency with a large immigrant population, many expats retain ties with home.

The Ukrainian Canadian Congress works very closely with the Ukrainian government, and even funds an internship program on Parliament Hill.

Their intention is to encourage the Canadian government to build strong links and friendships with their home country.

Multiple business associations in Canada have links with their homelands. In the case of Italians, they actually elect individuals from the North American diaspora to serve in the Italian Parliament.

Most Canadians MPs join international friendship associations with the express purpose of developing links with home countries or like-minded democracies.

The Canada-Israel Committee has a strong presence on Parliament Hill. Its intention is to influence Canadian public policy in support of the state of Israel.

Somehow, CSIS does not view these links as worthy of investigation.

Surprise, surprise: the Chinese government is trying to influence Canadian public policy.

Welcome to the world of diplomacy. Every ambassador in Ottawa is trying to make the Canadian government see the world through their lens.

And they could all be accused of taking a direct interest in Canadian domestic politics.

To suggest that a Chinese-Canadian politician is a mouthpiece for Beijing displays a gross misunderstanding of our political system.

Every politician in the country has to be aware of international politics.

When I was a Member of Parliament, I came out in favour of Croatia’s decision to leave Yugoslavia.

My boss was not very happy that I weighed into international separation politics. My southern Ontario constituency included almost equal numbers of Croatians and Serbians.

Of course, my decision cost me thousands of Serbian votes.

I was a Canadian politician who took a position. Would CSIS have investigated me if I had a Yugoslavian background? Probably.

As CSIS continues to point the finger at a Liberal relationship with the Chinese, Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre is being criticized for not kicking out three caucus members who consorted with a racist European parliamentarian.

The three claimed they did not know the origins of the person they were having dinner with.

That claim rings false because when European MP Christine Anderson called Trudeau a “disgrace” because of his pro-vaccine policy, she was quoted by Tory MPs in the House of Commons.

Members of Parliament do not spend their precious time going to dinner with people they do not know. They ration their agendas and assiduously review every invitation they receive.

So, the Tories knew full well that their comrade-in-arms espoused racist policies that no Canadian party could support.

Instead of kicking them out of the caucus, Poilievre issued a statement to a friendly journalist at the Toronto Sun, decrying the meeting and offering up a collective apology.

But there was absolutely no repercussion for any of the recalcitrants, and the leader did not even publish an apology in his party’s organ.

It was, at best, a nudge-nudge, wink-wink attempt to separate his party from Anderson, who was in Canada to meet with truckers and others in the F-Trudeau movement.

So neither main party did well this week when it came to foreign policy.

The Liberals are going to have to tread very carefully on their handling of the leaked CSIS allegations.

The Tories will need to do more to separate themselves from right-wing parties that can’t get any support in Europe.

The upcoming months will be focused on politics in Canada as we move toward a possible election.

But any vote in Canadian, especially in the country’s urban areas, involves a position on international politics.

To win, any Canadian politician worth their salt needs to understand multiple ethnicities in their ridings.

That includes Chinese-Canadians.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.

Foreign trips usually build a politician up. When they don’t, the Prime Minister’s Office needs to know why. Justin Trudeau’s international planners should hit the reset button. 

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on November 21, 2022.

OTTAWA—Foreign travel is usually an opportunity for political leaders to escape the daily partisan political attacks that dog them.

On the international scene, hobnobbing with other leaders to entertain issues of global importance usually lifts a leader’s spirits and poll numbers. 

A lengthy international tour can also be the sign of a long goodbye. 

If a leader knows they won’t be running again, the automatic post-travel criticism of budget items and hotel room costs doesn’t really matter. In the case of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, he has already told his caucus that he has no intention of leaving.

So recent international travel should have been an opportunity to improve his domestic standing in the polls.

Instead, it seems the more he travels, the more negative media is generated.

Just examine the latest political kerfuffle involving a staged, public prime ministerial rebuke by Chinese leader Xi Jinping.

Canadian diplomats and foreign policy experts were quick to parse the dressing-down in the margins of the G-20 Bali meeting. They saw it as a sign of China’s disregard for Canada’s role on the world scene. 

It was testing ground for the Chinese leader. He has already managed to assume complete control in his own country. There is no doubt he possesses a certain authoritarian streak.

Will that streak be extended to Chinese international relations?

A hit on Canada is a quick place to start. Former Canadian diplomat Charles Burton told the CBC that the Chinese leader would never have spoken to American president Joe Biden in that way.

He characterized the Chinese comments as “dismissive and threatening.”

Burton may think that the Chinese president would never treat Biden like that.  

But look at the recent public embarrassment reserved for his immediate predecessor former Chinese president Hu Jintao at the closing ceremony of the 20th National Congress of the Communist Party of China last month.

Chinese news reports said the former president was helped from his seat for health reasons.

But video footage, and subsequent lip reading published in a Japanese newspaper, provided a different version of events. 

Allegedly the former president was tussling over a red folder of documents which included the names of the top party officials. The former leader’s chief protégé was not among them. 

Instead, Xi Jinping replaced Hu supporters with his own loyalists.

When Hu was escorted from the meeting, not a single one of the 37 people he passed even acknowledged him.

If that kind of public repudiation can be delivered openly at a party meeting, why would anyone expect something different in the international context?

As China experiences increased international economic power and influence, their leader will be emboldened.

Chinese diplomats have subsequently issued a statement denying the Trudeau dressing-down. But the video footage is as clear there as it was at the party’s five-year gathering. 

Just as one picture is worth a thousand words, one film clip is worth a dozen verbal denials. 

While Canadian coverage of Trudeau’s international visit is focused on the dressing down, the bigger story is the increased foreign influence that China is experiencing. 

But Trudeau’s foreign travel seems to be beset with problems.

The most famous foray that still dogs him is the trip to India in 2018, where he and his family were photographed in multiple examples of unique Indian vestments. 

Many Canadians might roll their eyes when they see the photos, but for millions of Indo-Canadians, the clothing shows respect for their culture. 

The bottom line is that his foreign trip planners should have limited the multiple photo opportunities in different garb on the India trip.

His recent voyage to the United Kingdom was beset with problems that started in a piano bar where famous Quebec crooner Gregory Charles led a prime ministerial group in singing Queen’s Bohemian Rhapsody. 

Trudeau was once again caught on camera, joining in the levity, which made embarrassing fodder for the British tabloids on the eve of Queen Elizabeth’s national funeral. 

Trudeau should have understood that hanging in a hotel bar on the eve of the burial of the world’s most famous monarch is a political non-starter. 

As a politician, the buck stops with him. 

But his travel organizers must bear some responsibility for putting him in these embarrassing situations. If anything, a private gathering with a piano in his suite would have prevented the problem. 

Foreign trips usually build a politician up. When they don’t, the Prime Minister’s Office needs to know why.

Trudeau’s international planners should hit the reset button. 

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.

Our failing grade on international aid and peacekeeping were part of the reason that Canada did not succeed. The other part had to do with strategy.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on June 22, 2020.

OTTAWA—The bad news is that Canada lost its second bid for a seat on the United Nations Security Council.

The good news is that most Canadians don’t really care.

In autopsying the defeat, a journalist said that had the seat been secured, the discussion would have been around the irrelevance of the win.

Ordinary Canadians do not lose any sleep worrying about Canada’s world status. We have a mildly misplaced belief in Canada’s role in peacekeeping and international aid.

But last week’s defeat should force us to take another look at how Canada has slipped so badly on the world stage.

It is not enough to tell the world that Canada matters. Canadian politicians need to convince Canadians that the world matters.

Our failing grade on international aid and peacekeeping were part of the reason that Canada did not succeed.

The other part had to do with strategy.

The key negotiator for Canada was named to the United Nations at the very moment that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau signalled his intention to pull out all the stops in his campaign for a temporary seat.

United Nations Permanent Representative Marc-Andre Blanchard has impeccable Canadian credentials. As chair and CEO of McCarthy Tetrault, he has been named among the 25 most influential lawyers in Canada. He also served as a former president of the Quebec Liberal Party.

He knew the province intimately, but his international bona fides were less evident. So, he needed the help of heavy hitters.

According to press reports, Blanchard recruited two retired politicians for the campaign.

Former Quebec premier Jean Charest and former prime minister Joe Clark both travelled the world in support of Canada’s bid last year.

These political figures are well-known in Canada but their influence on the international scene is less apparent. Charest is also a partner in Blanchard’s former law firm.

Noticeably absent from the list of eminence grise political elders were names like Jean Chrétien, Brian Mulroney, and Lloyd Axworthy.

During his three majority governments, prime minister Chrétien established deep and strong relationships with a number of countries, including China. After he left politics, Chrétien also chaired the InterAction Council, a group comprised of former world leaders who advise the United Nations on issues like climate change.

As for former prime minister Mulroney, his relationships with political leaders in the United States and La Francophonie would have been very helpful. As Barrick International Advisory Board chair, his influence in Africa and Oceania is clear.

On the Security Council seat, China’s robust international aid program was reported to influence up to 50 votes. Canada was not the beneficiary of that influence. Nor were we in good standing with our American neighbours.

As for Axworthy, he served as president of the United Nations Security Council back in 1999-2000. He was also nominated for a Nobel Peace prize for his work in banning land mines.

The trio share robust international relationships across five continents which could have made a difference in the outcome.

Attracting five votes away from either Norway or Ireland would have forced the process into a second ballot, which could have yielded a different result.

It is certainly possible that there was an attempt to enlist the trio. If they turned down the invitation, that also speaks volumes.

Successful politicians usually try to avoid being at the head of losing campaigns. Both Ireland and Norway had entered the race years before Canada.

And Canada has also had almost double the prior Security Council participation rate of either competitor.

Trudeau was obviously very invested in the campaign, but being so personally committed also comes with its own risks.

Having made more than 50 calls to other world leaders, he obviously believed the seat was worth the effort.

The bruising his reputation will take is likely only an international blemish, not a domestic disaster.

But on the home front, the government really needs to undertake a major review of our foreign policy.

Questions around military deployment for peacekeeping need to be answered. So does the time frame for Canada’s commitment to increasing our international aid envelope.

The growing influence of China in the world, and Canada’s Huawei conundrum are also major reasons for the Security Council loss.

Chrétien offered his help on that file at the very beginning of the Canada-China downward spiral.

His offer was spurned, by way of an aggressive public rebuttal by then Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland.

Maybe all-hands-on deck should be the new watchword for Canada’s foreign policy.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.

Courageous, when she told the country that successive governments had neglected their responsibilities by not investing in pandemic preparation. Dangerous, because at the end of the day, Canadians will blame current governments when things go wrong.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on April 6, 2020.

OTTAWA—Health Minister Patty Hadju made a courageous and dangerous statement last week.

Courageous, when she told the country that successive governments had neglected their responsibilities by not investing in pandemic preparation.

Dangerous, because at the end of the day, Canadians will blame current governments when things go wrong.

The general strategy in politics is never complain, and never explain. That is based on the belief that the more information is out there, the more it can be twisted by political opponents to become disinformation.

The general rule of thumb in communication is that less is better.

But these are no ordinary times.

And Hajdu is no ordinary politician. In the daily briefings she is clear, concise, informed and not overly verbose. Like Dr. Theresa Tam, Hajdu transmits an aura of believability.

The Hajdu admission may be out of step with her political colleagues but it reflects what is happening out there in the real world of hospitals, nursing homes and health delivery across the country.

The overreaction to Hajdu’s admission also underscores why governments hesitate to publish modelling projections of worst-case scenarios. Those projections have not been available in all parts of Canada.

Ontario and British Columbia have promised or delivered modelling projections. Some other provinces have not. And the federal government is trying to synthesize disparate data from different provinces, as some experienced the virus onset earlier than others.

According to the premier of New Brunswick, all provinces should be collating the same information, but that is apparently not the current case.

Canada’s chief public health officer suggests that building projects too far in advance is not useful because it is simply not accurate.

Information is vital in the fight to engage all Canadians, but too much information could cause panic or complacency.

American President Donald Trump went from claiming we should all be out celebrating at Easter to suggesting that a quarter of a million Americans may die because of the virus. The American newscasts reported last week that their military has been tasked with securing 100,000 body bags for the dead.

The United States is also claiming that statistics from other countries, specifically China, have been underreported.

Hajdu debunked that claim during a press conference last week, saying that the World Health Organization is gathering all the pertinent data from multiple jurisdictions, and there is no evidence that China understated its deaths. According to Hajdu, the current numbers in that country are actually less than what was originally reported.

But each country is doing its best to reassure its own citizens and position its response to the pandemic as in keeping or superior to that of other jurisdictions.

For the past several weeks, Canadian politicians from all levels of government having been reassuring the country that we have enough supplies of masks, gowns, and ventilators to meet the upcoming crush facing hospital emergency departments.

Front-line workers are living a whole different situation.

A hospital in Ottawa recently told their medical staff that protective material would not be available in the delivery ward as the normal protective devices were being repurposed to fight the COVID-19 battle.

The federal and provincial governments have been pulling out all the stops to secure protective supplies for the medical front lines. With a $2-billion purchase order, Ottawa is locking down supplies, and provinces are even sending planes to secure materials that have been ordered from international sources.

Their efforts include public bulk purchasing and financial support for Canadian companies to replace their normal lines of business with COVID-19-fighting materials to join this war on the coronavirus.

Irving is retooling operations to make hand sanitizers. Bauer is switching from hockey masks to hospital masks.

Stanfields is making medical gowns and protective apparel where the company usually focuses on underwear.   Canada Goose has moved away from their iconic down filled jackets to medical gowns.

Canadian medical suppliers are partnering with auto companies to speed up production of desperately needed life-saving ventilators.

Transformations take time. Frontline workers are scrambling to protect themselves by recycling materials and seeking out any sources they can. Some make their own protective masks, and others are trying to source protective equipment in whatever way they can.

But they also face a race against time and a global hunt for similar products. The issue of supply is not just a Canadian problem.

“Many governments around the world are going to be reflecting on this issue,” Trudeau admitted last week.

Pandemic reflection yes, but flattening the virus comes first.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is getting an early shot at the new form of communication. Self-isolation has not prevented him from getting his message out.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on March 23, 2020.

OTTAWA—Social distancing to a politician is akin to a hand sanitizer ban for germaphobes.

Politicians thrive on contact with people.

But in the new normal, public figures may have to learn to campaign in a germ-free bubble.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is getting an early shot at the new form of communication. Self-isolation has not prevented him from getting his message out.

His government’s handling of the situation to date has the potential to enhance his political capital.

Daily press availability and the major national stimulus package could calm the growing fears of worried Canadians.

Trudeau’s new beard has been graying quickly, given the nature of the stresses he must be feeling at his wife’s side while she manages her infection. The graying has added a hint of gravitas to what is obviously a very grave situation.

I was a latecomer to the panic room. But I could not responsibly ignore the appeal of Canada’s foreign minister to get back home.

Last week, I was hoping to continue plans for a two-week anniversary cruise, but the request by the Canadian government to get back home could not be ignored.

My husband and I managed to get wait-listed on one of the last international flights still landing in Ottawa, and after traveling for two days, arrived to a ghost town last Tuesday.

It is worth mentioning that Canadian border officials appear a lot more prepared to manage this crisis than our American counterparts.

En route to Canada, we transited through two American airports, landing first in San Francisco and next in Washington.

In neither airport was there a single reference, verbal or written, to the coronavirus. We were not asked whether we had experienced a cough, or any symptoms. Nor were we warned to self-isolate when we reached our final destination.

It was a totally different story when we arrived in Canada. We were questioned at the border about health symptoms and travel history, and then given an information sheet with all of the contact numbers for reporting any potential infection.

We were asked to undertake a voluntary 14-day self-isolation plan, and signed a form agreeing to do so.

The Canadian message is clear. In order to stem the flow of the virus, we all need to limit social contact as much as possible. But the same warnings do not seem to have made their way to some parts of the United States.

An American friend just underwent a mastectomy operation in Houston and she actually went out to celebrate the surgery at an Irish bar with her family on St. Patrick’s Day. She seemed oblivious to the notion that her own health could be at risk by gathering in a bar.

Most Canadian bars and restaurants are closed but it seems to be business as usual in some parts of the United States.

An aggressive Canadian lockdown may limit the spread here, but the laissez-faire approach of some American states could have a negative rebound effect on our country. As of last Thursday, there were 736 confirmed cases of the coronavirus in Canada, while in the United States, the reported number of infections surpassed 11,000.

The difference in infection rate may be partially explained by the capacity of a public health system to respond in a coordinated fashion. Many Americans have no health care, and they are obviously at risk when it comes to curbing the transmission curve.

China is now in recovery mode but, according to media reports, hospitals across the United States have been asking health professionals to reuse single-use masks.

Beaches in Florida are still packed with young people who appear to be generally ignoring the warning to stay home. And bars in New York are still operating, with state governor Andrew Cuomo stating publicly that he will not exercise his legal options to keep people home.

At home, the prime minister is considering all options, including the implementation of a War Measures Act to ensure compliance with social distancing requests.

The thought of spending months in isolation is not something anyone looks forward to.

Netflix has been bending under the weight of millions of downloaders. The strain on their system has been so great that they just eliminated high definition transmission in favour of preserving bandwidth. Being restricted in close quarters can also be a challenge for families.

Puzzles and games have been flying off store shelves, purchased by harried parents looking to keep their children busy.

Isolation is the new normal.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.

By Sheila Copps

First published in The Hill Times on November 19, 2018.

OTTAWA—Brexit boiling over should be no surprise to anyone.

The decision to leave the European Union was based on a simplistic, nostalgic notion that an exit vote would restore the greatness of Great Britain.

Brexiters enjoy many parallels with the “Make America Great Again” campaign of Donald Trump.

Candidate Trump himself travelled to his mother’s homeland of Scotland to urge citizens to vote in favour of Brexit.

He made common cause with chief exit architect and U.K. Independence Party Leader Nigel Farage, subsequently inviting Farage to join his presidential campaign.

Both Trump and Farage based their successful messages on the notion of taking their respective countries back to the future.

They harkened back to a time when good-paying jobs were plentiful and not too many foreigners were there to grab them up.

But neither country wants to abandon the benefits that global economic integration has conferred.

The United Kingdom expected to hold all the cards in the negotiation of their exit from the European Union.

Instead, the country has been forced to sign an agreement which appears to put most of the power back in the hands of Europe.

Prime Minister Theresa May is hanging by a thread. It looks highly unlikely that May will even muster the support of her own Parliament, which was highly skeptical about the benefits of her negotiated agreement. She is also facing a Conservative non-confidence motion which could cost her the prime minister’s position.

Some politicians are so dissatisfied with the Brexit agreement that they are calling for the prime minister’s head in a non-confidence motion.

Others want a new vote, claiming that the negative impact of leaving the European Union was not understood at the time of their national referendum.

Without a negotiated settlement, the United Kingdom would lose the right to sell goods freely into the European market. Movement of people, including Brits residing in Europe, and Europeans living in England, will also be blocked at the British border.

If the fragile deal fractures, which looks increasingly likely, the United Kingdom will face a European divorce next March with absolutely no backstops.

The same dream that Farage sold in the United Kingdom is the one that has Trump supporters rallying around the American president .

They believe Americans can withdraw from international agreements with absolutely no consequences.

Like the Brexiters, they believe that walls will return America to the standard of living and global glory it used to enjoy.

What neither country seems to realize is that neither the United States, nor the United Kingdom is the centre of their respective universes. Their empires have been displaced by powerful new economic and political forces.

The emergence of China as a world superpower is undeniable.

But China is not the only player changing the new world order. The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) hosted a summit in Singapore last week that underscored the growing political muscle in that part of the world.

Trump sent his No. 2, but Prime Minister Justin Trudeau was there in person. His presence reflected an understanding that Canada’s future prosperity depends on diversifying our economic links.

What better place to start than in the ASEAN, with a rapidly-emerging middle class who could be great customers for Canadian goods and services.

The economic and political organization is a 10-country block comprising the third largest labour force in the world. In numbers, ASEAN is eclipsed by only China and India. Home to more than 600 million people, the association represents the seventh-largest economy in the world, with a combined GDP of $2.4-trillion in 2013. By 2050, it is expected to become the fourth largest world economy. Like the European Union, ASEAN has been working toward economic and political integration.

Unlike the United Kingdom and the United States, ASEAN sees the future in promoting multi-state partnerships, not ending them. The collective economy of these 10 member states is growing exponentially. Sixty per cent of internal growth has come through productivity gains.

The ASEAN block, combined with China and India, are eclipsing the United States and Europe as the economic powerhouses of the future. Those who expect the Asia-Pacific to revert to twentieth-century serfdom are simply wrong.

For Canada to invest time and political capital in our relationship with ASEAN partners makes sense. The result of those relationships will bring economic benefits and much-needed diversification.

ASEAN can use its political muscle to pressure the United States on international trade agreements.

With or without Trump and May, Asia is the way of the future.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.

By SHEILA COPPS

Published on Monday, September 18, 2017 in The Hill Times.

OTTAWA—Imagine a public arts policy where bureaucrats choose the art.

No, we are not talking China. The City of Calgary has recently been debating a motion to freeze public art investment, because some councillors are not happy with controversial art installations.

Calgary councillor Shane Keating recently spoke to the media about the motion to freeze the public art policy until changes are made.

His comments in explaining the freeze left arts supporters shaking their heads.

“I think we need to move away from the concept the artist gets to decide what it looks like,” Keating told the media.

“The taxpayers are actually commissioning the artwork and they should have a very large say in what the final piece should actually look like rather than the artist’s interpretation.”

On the contrary, the concept of artistic freedom is designed to ensure that creative interpretation is not ruined by bureaucratic meddling.

On this political discussion, Calgary could actually learn something from China.

I have just returned from the 5th Canada-China Cultural Dialogue held in Dunhuang, on the edge of the Silk Road.

The dialogue focused on ‘Innovation and Ingenuity,’ and included professional presentations from museum and gallery leaders from both countries.

John McAvity, chief executive officer of the Canadian Museums Association, was one of the participants.

He underscored the important opportunity for our museums and galleries prompted by a 400 per cent increase in Chinese tourism to Canada.

The Canadian delegation included almost two dozen creative professionals and museum leaders from Victoria, Vancouver, Calgary, Ottawa, and Montreal. The CMA board president, who hails from the Timmins Museum in Ontario, also joined the group.

The brains behind the ongoing dialogue, started nine years ago, is Dr. Nelly Ng, a Canadian physician from Scarborough. She has committed a lifetime of volunteer effort to the preservation of her Chinese heritage.

Ng initiated the dialogue almost a decade ago, after having spent the previous 10 years establishing the Canadian Foundation for the Preservation of Chinese Cultural Heritage.

Ng’s passion led to the creation of a not-for-profit organization which seeks to link museum directors and artistic leaders from both countries.

Thus far, there have been five exchanges, involving more than 200 artistic professionals from both countries. The dialogues have actually led to the opportunity for Canadian and Chinese artistic professionals to share work experiences.

In some instances, Canadian conservation professionals have worked in Chinese museums and galleries, and their Chinese counterparts have come to Canada for similar exchanges.

The relationship is so strong that at the recent September meeting, the Chinese proposed the establishment of a bilateral memorandum of understanding between Canadian and Chinese museums.

If the MOU negotiations are successful, both organizations are hoping to have the agreement signed next April when the Canadian Museums Association hosts its next annual meeting in Vancouver.

Ng, whose personal mission has been the inspiration for this strong relationship, is motivated by her love for the deep history of Chinese cultural heritage.

She singlehandedly spearheaded the Canadian Fund for International understanding through culture to reinforce her deep connection with Chinese heritage. It’s short name is Can4Culture, and the organization includes Governor General of Canada David Johnston as honorary patron.

According to Ng, the mandate of Can4Culture is to “support cultural exchange, student exchange and … cultural heritage, art, literature, drama, music science and history.”

At the meeting in Gansu province, Canadian visitors got the chance to witness firsthand cultural treasures that date back more than 2000 years.

The Mogao Caves and grottoes were carved by Buddhist worshippers along the original Silk Road at the edge of the Gobi desert. The creations are a Chinese treasure that has been recognized as a UNESCO world heritage site.

Dunhuang, located in the heart of Gansu province, was teaming with tourists.

However, most of them were Chinese. With a population of more than 1.2 billion people, Chinese heritage sites’ first mission is to encourage local participation.

In addition, the local, provincial and national governments invest heavily in research and interpretation support.

The Mogao destination is stunning. The work involved in grotto interpretation involves dozens of arts professionals whose sole aim is to promote research and education about the artists and worshippers who created and protected the site.

This stunning Silk Road site is a treasure trove of artistic creation.

For lovers of history and heritage, Mogao is a must see on anyone’s bucket list.

Unlike Calgary, there is absolutely no disagreement in Dunhuang about the right of artists to protect and preserve their creations.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.

By SHEILA COPPS

First published on Monday, June 5, 2017 in The Hill Times.

U.S. President Donald Trump just hammered another nail in the American coffin.

In his petulant conversations about pulling out of the global climate change consensus, he is labouring under the misimpression that his withdrawal would influence the agreement.

Instead, he is reinforcing the impression that his leadership is leading the United States down the wrong road.

At a time when other potential global players are emerging to challenge American hegemony, the president seems bound on taking his country backwards.

It all started with his slogan, “Make America great again.”

In reality, old America may have welcomed a certain demographic, but not everyone. Equality for women and minorities, still more myth than reality, is much closer today than it was in the last century.

Income inequality and racial tension prompted the civil rights and women’s liberation movements.

Times were pretty good for white men who headed traditional families with no pesky questions about who ruled the roost.

Ask a gay or transgender person how happy things were in the good old days and their response will be different. Today’s equality, with all the ensuing challenges of integration, is far preferable to going back to the good old days.

And the same is true for climate change.

The world has collectively come to the conclusion that Mother Nature needs help.

From floods to fires, from extreme weather to desertification, the environment around us in changing in a way that needs a global response.

That means changing the way we live, including weaning ourselves off our dependence on non-renewable fuels.

That train has left the station, and while it is possible for the United States to bolt, it will be that country, not the world, that is left behind.

China, battling a pollution problem of epic proportions in its’ own major cities, is tackling national environmental challenges with gusto. It has rolled out a 10-year green plan and is currently in the process of electrifying its complete transportation system.

Its government’s edicts have also spawned a thriving alternative-energy industry, with almost every neighbourhood in the country sporting solar panels on the rooftops of most households.

China is also working actively in countries around the world promoting sustainable infrastructure with its Silk Road investment fund.

Meanwhile, Trump is closing off his country and making the United States a less attractive destination for innovation and investment.

The European Union is embracing green solutions, driven by a combination of necessity and invention. The emergence of the Green Party movement as a force in politics accelerated the European appetite for embracing climate-change solutions.

The new coalition government in British Columbia will also promote the appetite for alternative energy solutions.

And with those solutions come business opportunities.

As Environment Minister Catherine McKenna tweeted last week, “No matter what the U.S. decides today, the world is going to keep marching on. The momentum is irreversible. And we have only one planet.” She went on to tweet that the climate-change movement makes good business sense.

By exiting, Trump may claim that he is working to save jobs in the rust belt and elsewhere. But instead, he is simply setting up an exodus for the jobs of the future.

If China gets it, and America doesn’t, the axis of influence that has been gently shifting for years will be accelerated.

When president Bill Clinton pushed hard for international climate-change progress during his time in government, American influence was a key factor in getting the world on board.

At this point, an American withdrawal will have little influence on the rest of the world. Instead, the decision will be perceived as what it really is: a ham-handed climate denial by a president who daily grows more out of touch with reality.

Given Trump’s close relationship with Russia, he may be able to enlist President Vladimir Putin in his back-to-future vision.

But the rest of the world is already moving. Canada is starting to invest heavily in rapid-transit infrastructure, provinces are committed to real political action to reduce carbon dependence, and the world is rapidly waking up to the real cost of doing nothing.

In the end, the future of areas like the American rust belt depend on attracting innovative companies, including those who are developing sustainable energy alternatives.

There is a huge market opening up for renewable design and the new economy, a market that will not be attracted to a country that refuses to even recognize the problem.

Trump’s decision could hurt America. But the world isn’t listening.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.