Canadian identity, eh?

Preston Manning has an excellent article in the Globe & Mail on what it means to be Canadian. Using the winning entry (as a benchmark) from the late Peter Gzowski's Country in the Morning quiz "As Canadian as possible, under the circumstances", Manning attempts to find out just what "the circumstances" are where we define ourselves as most Canadian. Through discussions with both peers and colleagues, [Manning] concludes that, unlike our American counterparts who are required to be American, we only become unqualified Canadians when outside the country;

Over the past year, I have heard three individuals - a recent university graduate, a former premier and a former federal cabinet minister - all address this question. And although the backgrounds of each were very different, all three had come to roughly the same conclusion.

The McGill graduate, Nicholas Gafuik, who is now director of program planning for the Manning Centre, puts it this way: "I never feel more Canadian than when I'm out of the country. My sense of Canadian identity becomes stronger the farther and longer I am away."

Former Manitoba premier Gary Filmon told me something similar. He observed that Canada's premiers, who find it so hard to speak with one voice or to find common purpose when they are assembled at federal-provincial or premiers conferences at home, had little difficulty doing so when they were abroad together as part of the Team Canada trade missions.

And just recently I heard former foreign affairs minister Pierre Pettigrew say the same thing in an even more graphic way. "When I am in Quebec, I'm from Quebec City; when I'm in Toronto, I'm from Quebec; but when I'm in London or Tokyo, I'm from Canada."

Very interesting indeed. Moreover, Gary Filmon's observation reminds me of something former senior advisor and Chretien chief-of-staff Eddie Goldenberg said in his book The Way It Works about how the bonding factor of being "a Canadian" on a trade mission not only helped ease the domestic political tensions between premiers, it also produced policy results:

Students of federal-provincial relations in Canada, who are accustomed to acrimonious public posturing at televised meetings between the federal prime minister and provincial premiers, would be surprised to learn that crucial talks in 1997 between the federal government and Ontario about solvency of Canada's public pension system took place in a hotel lobby in Seoul, South Korea; that early decisions on the amount of money to invest in the National Child Benefit were the products of discussions with provincial premiers on a sightseeing boat on the Chao Phraya River in Bangkok, Thailand; and that the Romanow Commission on Health Care first saw the light of day in conversations on a bus in Beijing, China. This was not the result of globalization creeping into federal-provincial relations; instead it was the product of a deliberate policy not to conduct federal-provincial relations in formal high-stakes settings in Ottawa.

Now I know that PM Stephen Harper likes to meet individually with premiers and stakeholders at 24 Sussex drive, however, here's hoping that he takes advantage of the so-called strong Canadian identity factor which, according to Manning and others, exists more prominently the further and longer Canadians are away from their country. Hey, maybe PMSH could even invite CTF president John Williamson and Finance Minister Jim Flaherty on his next trip out of the country so that they can seriously discuss implementing broadbased tax relief in the next budget (just as long as it's within the parameters of their perspective budgets). Not to mention, while the PMO is at it, why not invite premier Danny Williams and Rodney Macdonald to tag along for the ride. I mean, let's be honest, it couldn't help but repair the diplomacy deficit which currently exist between both sides.