Then on to the bus. Several MPs were on the tour today: John McCallum, Navdeep Bains, Yasmin Ratansi, Gerard Kennedy, and Bonnie Crombie. Former and future MP Karen Redman and candidate Max Khan were also on the bus along with an energetic contingent of young Liberals. MP Albina Guarnieri joined us later.

As the bus drove through Oakville, I could see people waving at the bus or stopping to take a second look.

On the bus, Michael Ignatieff gave a one-on-one interview with the Mississauga News that I happily arranged. I also had a chance to talk with Mr. Ignatieff on the latest issues in Mississauga and the various needs that our city has.

Next stop: The great city of Mississauga.

The Liberal Express’ next destination was MuslimFest, a cultural festival and one of the largest in Ontario.

Our bus was received by a large group of young volunteers chanting enthusiastically welcoming Mr. Ignatieff to Mississauga and Muslimfest. As Mr. Ignatieff got off the bus, I heard a young woman say “I just turned 18 this year and I will be voting for you.” Another young man rushed up and gave Michael Ignatieff a spontaneous and warm hug. Pictures were being taken from every angle and outstretched hands were anxious to shake his hand. It was a tremendous reception.

We started walking towards the festival. Mr. Ignatieff would stop and chat with every person who was there. Throughout our walk, Mr. Ignatieff spoke with a CEO of one of the largest fast-food chains in the country where he listened to the issues facing their business from loans to the cost of food ingredients. He talked with a manager of an aid and development organization and listened to the challenges facing their work due to the Conservatives’ foreign aid policies. He spoke with an entrepreneur in the financial markets where they discussed current regulations and market conditions. He met a senior couple who shared with him their perspective and reality. He engaged a grade 11 student and heard about her dreams and aspirations. He heard from a woman who said she can’t wait to see a Liberal government soon, instead of this current government. I could go on describing the various conversations that took place. The diversity of the conversations were as diverse as the Canadian landscape. It was refreshing.

What a better way to learn about the dreams of Canadians than to engage them in honest and unscripted conversations.

Mr. Ignatieff then spoke to hundreds who gathered around the stage and listened to his every word. He reaffirmed his commitment to a better Canada where every citizen has the opportunity to reach their potential – a society that is only as strong as our least privileged. The crowd reacted enthusiastically to his words and the passion that came with them.

People were excited about his presence and didn’t want to let him go. The summer Liberal Express tour is changing politics and how politicians communicate with their constituents – for the better. The summer tour didn’t start without skeptics – but it only takes a few moments on the bus to realize how people are responding to Mr. Ignatieff’s genuine effort of outreach.

Don’t believe me? Come to one of the many events on the road and decide for yourself!

This blog was also published on the official Liberal Blog

As someone who was born outside of Canada, I have a unique appreciation for what it offers me and my fellow citizens. Many countries around the world deny rights and privileges that we consider basic here in Canada. Governments and their officials are meant to serve their citizens not the other way around.

There are countries where state police agents have a blank cheque to intimidate citizens and trample all over their rights. Places where economic and social opportunities are tied proportionally to who you know instead of merit and abilities.

I have lived in countries where dissent is equated to treason. I have seen governments infringe on the rights of citizens under the guise of security. I have observed governments equating tightening their grip on power with security for their citizens. I grew up hearing that providing minorities their full rights is tantamount to a threat to national unity and mainstream culture.

Such unjust and cruel norms that may be common in other countries are completely rejected in Canada where we have rules that are setup to protect against similar transgressions.

Not only do Canada and Canadian institutions outlaw similar practices but we are frequently reminded to remain sensitive against coming close to crossing such boundaries.

Examining these stark differences between Canada and other countries fills me with pride and confidence. Canada’s fundamental respect for its citizens and their rights are values that we must celebrate and protect passionately.

We also need to refrain from feeling smug or start taking these privileges we have for granted. Canada didn’t achieve what it achieved without sacrifice and vigilance. It didn’t happen easily.

We cannot afford to be complacent otherwise we will squander away our good fortunes and leave our country to future generations in worse shape than the one we inherited.

Think about it. Have you ever imagined that in Canada people and/or organizations would be punished for disagreeing with their government and that some organizations would lose their funding because they were critical of government’s policies? Have you ever imagined that the Prime Minister would shut down Parliament arbitrarily twice within one year denying Parliamentarian the ability to hold him accountable? Have you ever imagined that in Canada one’s citizenship would be questioned if they were born or worked abroad? Have you ever imagined that thoughtful and rational debates about the Middle East would be suppressed in Canada? Have you ever imagined that if people would question our policy in Afghanistan they would be accused of being Taliban sympathizers? Have you ever imagined seeing Canada’s largest city locked down with chain-linked fences and overwhelming presence of armed police officers?

Those developments may have appeared farfetched and unbelievable few years ago, but today they are Canadian reality. We all should be concerned with the direction that our country is moving towards.

I am afraid that we are sleepwalking backwards, and if we don’t stop this slide, one day we will wake up wondering how we got to that point.

It is on the occasion of Canada Day that we need to assess the direction that our country has embarked on and decide if it is in sync with our vision and expectations.

Canadians have deep attachment to our values and institutions. We need to recognize that it is our individual duty to protect and nurture them. Those values and institutions have offered Canadians the opportunity to pursue their aspirations convinced that they will be justly rewarded.

For me personally, Canada has allowed me to dream beyond what I would have ever dared of dreaming on my own. It is my appreciation for Canada that drives my ambition to see Canada do even better.

Canada did not become one of the best countries in the world by accident. It was the result of the hard work of its citizens.

It is now the responsibility of today’s citizens to decide if they support the direction our country is moving towards or if they don’t. Do we care enough to get involved to ensure that our voices are heard?

Happy Canada Day!

He is absolutely right!

The ultimate objective of any government should be the pursuit of improving the quality of life of its citizens. Undoubtedly, economic prosperity and success are essential for enhancing the quality of life but the goal should be to ensure that citizens have a decent quality of life.

It’s true that the quality of life and economic prosperity are co-dependent. You can’t improve quality of life without economic success and you won’t able to achieve economic gains if the quality of life of the labour force is poor. However, we should not confuse which is the eventual objective. It is the citizens’ well being.

That’s exactly why we as Canadians recognize the importance of our accessible healthcare, pension plan, maternity leave pay, children tax allowance, and public facilities like community centres to name a few examples. Those are initiatives that citizens expect their government(s) to maintain a standard of living. We want good education and good careers to maintain a certain standard of living. Everything we do as individuals or families is to improve our quality of life.

So when Stephen Harper says that it’s only the economy that matters and all other aspects of public policy are just noise, he is wrong. What about our aging population? Mounting household debt? Increasing healthcare costs? Retirement security? Integrating new immigrants? Protecting our environment? After all, our economic success depends on all of them.

While it’s crucial that governments promote policies that nurture economic success, let’s not forget why. The pursuit of enhancing the quality of life of our citizens must remain the ultimate objective.

Michael Ignatieff is touring the country visiting different campuses, soliciting input and engagement from citizens. He will be visiting Mississauga this Wednesday where students and community members will get the opportunity to share their frustrations and aspirations.

These type of discussions with Canadians are very valuable. They are helpful for Canadians who may feel disconnected from the political process. They give an opportunity to familiarize Canadians with a human dimension that at times appears absent when talking about politics or politicians. Equally important, such forums will connect politicians to what everyday Canadians outside the political sphere care about.

Some argue that citizen participation in town-hall meetings like these will have very little effect on politicians and political decisions. They try to tap into the cynicism that exist in each of us by telling us that we can’t make a difference and that politicians don’t care.

The truth couldn’t be more different. Yes, there are politicians who may not care or who are motivated by self-interest, but ultimately Canadian citizens are the employer of all politicians. Whether they like it or not, politicians have to be sensitive to Canadians needs and concerns. The ones who are at odds with those needs are counting on traditional apathy towards politics that would let them get away with their unaccountable actions.

Genuine political leaders are the ones who are putting themselves on the line in open and uncensored forums, combating apathy and encouraging Canadians to claim their rightful place in the political process.

Democracy is messy and is a system where different ideas compete. Change doesn’t come easy, but if we abandon fulfilling our role, change will never come. We need leaders who encourage Canadians to participate, not ones who say Canadians don’t care.

Part of Michael Ignatieff listening tour, is the launch of a new website that asks Canadians to submit their ideas for the future of Canada. http://your2017.ca  is an opportunity for every Canadian to offer their input. I hope many Canadians will take few minutes to participate in this exercise and offer their valuable ideas.

In the meantime, I am looking forward to the session with Mr. Ignatieff at UTM on Wednesday. Hope to see you all there.

Messy.  Inconvenient.  Frustrating.  Democracy is all those things.  But as Churchill said, it is better than the alternatives.

A minority Parliament can be messy but it can work if the Prime Minister wants it too.

Last week the Harper government announced the shutting down of Parliament.  The fact that this was done in the media “black hole,” just hours before  New Year’s Eve, says a good deal about Mr. Harper’s motivations.  It’s also a richly ironic statement about a government that was elected on the key plank of increasing transparency and accountability – but that’s another, equally sad, story.

Every newspaper in Canada – including this one – reported that the key factor in Mr. Harper’s decision was the barrage of criticism and tough questions his government has faced in Parliament over its handling – and apparent cover up – of the Afghan detainee torture issue.  Questions about the government’s truthfulness and its care of Canada’s reputation overseas.  Questions that go to the very heart of the government’s respect for democratic institutions and the rule of law.

Even more troubling, this shutting down of Parliament is not a rash or impetuous act.  It is part of a consistent pattern of behaviour on the part of Mr. Harper’s government.  Whenever Stephen Harper gets into political trouble, his first impulse is to steamroll over democratic institutions that get in his way.  Look at the record:

Just over a year ago, he prorogued Parliament just weeks after an election – in order to rescue himself from an unprecedented political and constitutional crisis of his own making.

He has lashed out at public servants – like Richard Colvin, in the case of the detainees – for daring to speak the truth, and cowed others into silence,

He fired Linda Keen, the head of the Nuclear Safety Commission, for blowing the whistle on the repairs needed at Chalk River to ensure the reactor’s safety.

He starved Kevin Page, the Parliamentary Budget Officer, of the necessary resources to do his job because he was critical of the poor management of our public finances under this Conservative government.

He let go the heads of both the RCMP’s Public Complaints Commission and the Military Police Complaints Commission.  Both were competent individuals, doing their job with distinction.  But both had a serious flaw in Stephen Harper’s eye: they were critical of the government.

He cut off public funding for the ecumenical charitable group KAIROS, despite their lauded work and broad public support, because, according to one of his ministers, they held a dissenting views from the government on foreign policy,

This approach to government – intimidating all who stand in its way – can have severe and corrosive consequences.  Look at our nation’s capital today: a cowed and demoralized public service and a constantly bullied national press gallery, both trying to serve a disenchanted public.

The Government’s behaviour speaks to a deep cynicism.  Mr. Harper is gambling that the public doesn’t care how it is governed.  In fact, in many ways it furthers his political interest to fuel public distrust about politics and depress even further voter turnouts in elections, since this strengthens the electoral impact of his “base.”

Last week’s shutting down of Parliament was a key moment.  A turning point?  Too dramatic.  In any case, too early to tell.  More important, it was one of those moments of supreme clarity.  The audacity.  The epic scale of the cynicism.  The arrogance of a regime that thinks it can get away with just about anything.  

What’s to be done about it?  Well, the sooner the House comes back, the better. But between now and then, we have to share our concerns with Canadians.  Mr. Harper may not want to face the public, but we will get out there and meet Canadians in universities, in town hall meetings and other public events from coast to coast to coast.  We will seek their views and exchange ideas.  We will go on doing our job of holding the government to account on the Afghan detainee issue, but also on their failure to act on climate change, on the growing youth employment crisis and retirement security for older Canadians.  

Shutting down Parliament has raised speculation about a spring election.  Certainly, there is no need for an early election.  Three in less than six years is enough for the next while.  In case anyone missed it, I got that message loud and clear from Canadians last fall.  And that message was not only addressed to me.

As I hear them, Canadians are saying:  get back to work in Ottawa, make this Parliament work and do the job we elected you to do.  We are listening.  It is time that Stephen Harper did too.

This gives us an opportunity to reflect on the role of Parliament in our democracy. Some may think that Parliament is a theatre of political posturing and does little to advance the well being of our country. That is exactly the perception that Mr. Harper wants to perpetuates hoping that Canadians would forgive him for shutting it down. That is why it’s important to remind ourselves how valuable Parliament is for Canada.

Members of Parliament get elected by their constituents in Canadian democracy. Governments are only formed based on the makeup of Parliament, making Parliament supreme. Parliament is where the government is held accountable (the prime minister must always maintain the confidence of the House of Commons). It is where new law proposals must be debated, questioned and voted on. It is where Parliamentary committees conduct public hearings on legislations and other important matters. It is where the government must face daily questions held in public on issues of concern to Canadians.

It is true that Parliament has a theatrical side to it that I wish we had less of, but we can’t dismiss the function it serves Canadians. Take just 2009 for example. If it wasn’t for Parliament, the Conservative government was going to ignore the economic crisis and offer no stimulus. It was Parliament that forced the government to improve Employment Insurance access during these difficult times. It was Parliament that helped Canadians abandoned abroad return to Canada despite a reluctant Conservative government. It is Parliament that uncovered inconsistencies in the government’s story in dealing with Afghan detainees. The list goes on. This happened in just one year.

Parliament may seem noisy and occasionally obsessed with political posturing, but if you cut through the noise you can easily see that our Parliament provides an invaluable service to Canadians.

Governments will always claim that Parliament is a distraction because it is easier if there’s less scrutiny. Governments may want us to believe that vigorous debates over issues are pointless, but the opposite is what is true. Competition for policies and oversight are essential components of any self-respecting and meaningful democracy.

While citizens in Iran are risking their lives by protesting in the streets for democracy and while our soldiers are risking their lives so Afghanistan can protect its infant democracy, don’t let Stephen Harper talk you into believing that Canadian democracy is a nuisance or a game.

Here is an example of how Canadians are reclaiming their democracy.

Unmistakably, this guide is a political attempt at capturing the definition of the Canadian identity. It dedicates a lot of space to promote certain values and chooses to conspicuously omit others.

There are fundamental Canadian values that this guide chooses to minimize:

1) Social and cultural Aboriginal contributions to Canadian identity: While the guide discusses the Aboriginal communities role in trade and wars, it dedicates little space to highlight the social and cultural influence on our identity and history. It’s surprising given that one of the recognized contributors to this guide, John Ralston Saul, has just published a book entitled A Fair Country where he argues that Canada is heavily influenced and shaped by aboriginal values and cultures.

2) Social justice is a cornerstone of Canadian identity: As a society, Canadians believe that we are as strong as our least fortunate and that our individual prosperity and success is interlinked to the well being of our society. That is the reason why Canadians are proud of our universal healthcare system and pension for example. The Charter of Rights and Freedoms is another example of our commitment as a nation to protecting social justice. The booklet briefly touches upon some of these initiatives but it completely ignores the social justice concept. To many conservatives, the promotion of social justice ideals means promoting a sense of entitlement rather than responsibilities. That of course is inaccurate. Explaining the concept behind universal healthcare and pension highlights a sense of responsibility to each other. After all, citizens are funding these initiatives and by discussing their importance, it reinforces individual responsibilities towards his/her society.

3) Canadian’s tradition of international multilateralism: Most immigrants when they arrive to Canada know very little about Canada’s history, but they all know of Canada’s international contributions to global peace and multilateralism. This guide glaringly avoids talking about Canada’s historical efforts in promoting international peace. Lester Pearson’s Noble Peace Prize, Canada’s role in banning land mines, the establishment of the International Criminal Court, the concept of the state’s “Responsibility to Protect” its citizens, etc. Canada has a proud record of being a vocal proponent of peace and cooperation internationally and the decision to ignore that history and the values that drive it is perplexing.

4) Immigrants’ success and contributions to Canada’s identity: As the guide briefly mentions, Canada is a land of immigrants, but it dedicates more space to talk about sports than to brag about the contributions of immigrants to Canada’s success. Over the years, immigrants have influenced Canada’s identity economically, culturally, socially and politically. Citing examples of such proud accomplishments would have left the new Canadian reader with a sense of pride and motivation that he/she can also make a mark on our history. While it mentions in passing that Canada’s first prime minister was born outside the country (an immigrant), the booklet doesn’t emphasize that new Canadians have equal access to our political system.

5) Canada’s military history as an expression of our values: The guide dedicates considerable space to outline Canada’s military’s accomplishments. That history is an essential component of our identity, but the booklet argues that our historical military roles defines our identity rather than it being an expression of our identity. As a nation, we must always pay tribute to the sacrifices of our men and women in military and be grateful for their service. Our decision as a country to use our military is guided by our values and priorities rather than the other way around.

6) Getting involved: The guide appears to miss an opportunity to invite new Canadians to getting involved in their communities. Once again, it dedicates more time to discuss sports than to provide inspiration on how to get involved. The encouragement to volunteer deserved more emphasis and space.

The Conservatives are the governing party so they have the power to define citizenship according to their values. That will not end the ongoing debate about the meaning of Canadian identity and its various dimensions.

I have great respect for many of the names acknowledged in helping prepare this guide, but that doesn’t mean that I agree with the direction it took. There are, however, many aspects of the guide that I like and support.

There are competing visions of Canadian values and identity. The Conservative one is stuck in the past and is built on the concept of individuality. The Liberal vision for Canadian identity is built on the responsibility to each other and the concept that we can learn from the history of others but are prepared to make our own.

On a side note: The guide has a table that defines where the responsibilities lie between the various levels of governments. It’s interesting that it declares that health care and natural resources are exclusively provincial files (it does mention that environment, agriculture and immigration are shared between the federal and provincial governments). Someone should notify the federal ministers of health and natural resources.

In speaking with hundreds of students, he explained that politics desperately needs the ingenuity and ideas of Canadian youth to restore purpose and passion to our political system. Mr. Trudeau talked at length about the importance of politics in shaping our future and the future of our country and discouraged the students from letting cynicism deter them from getting involved. He acknowledged that superficial political games could turn people off, but if we really care about dealing with the issues that face our society, issues such as the economy, climate change, poverty, human rights, etc, the youth can and must play a pivotal role in exerting pressure and influencing policies.

Justin, delicately remained above heated partisan rhetoric, but he didn’t shy away from discussing the various competing ideologies among the different political parties. He also spoke passionately about the need for having a conversation with Canadians about a large encompassing vision for the role of government in shaping our society and helping our citizens.

Overall, Justin’s contributions today were inspirational to Mississauga youth. They had a unique opportunity to hear first hand from someone who believes strongly in Canada. Mr. Trudeau’s confidence and passion will hopefully invite many youth to claim their rightful place in defining our priorities and needs as a nation.

It only took me few minutes to find Nigel Hannaford’s views on these subjects:

Climate Change: “Less CO2, less jobs. It’s that simple“.

Canadian military mission in Afghanistan: “To end the mission in 2011 would thus be like Ottawa unilaterally pulling out of the 1939-1945 war in 1943, and leaving the rest of the allies to put the boots to Hitler“.

Multiculturalism: “They erected a shibboleth called multiculturalism, declared all cultures equally valuable, and set about promoting them as part of a so-called Canadian mosaic, lest anyone think we were an American melting pot. But, while all people are equal before the law, all cultures are not equally valuable.”

New Canadians’ right to participate in public policies: “If they feel that that is something that they can’t tolerate and don’t want to live with, then there are other countries that you can emigrate to, I guess, and you won’t have the same problems“.

Canadian Muslims: “So, some 80,000 Muslim Canadians think thuggery is the way to influence politics? That’s not to say they’re about to kill anybody themselves, but there are degrees of support for a cause, ranging from quiet encouragement for the home team, through assistance short of direct action, to full engagement. Frankly, if only one-tenth of one per cent of 700,000 people fall into the extreme category, that’s still 700 people to worry about“.

Those were all excerpts from public conversations; imagine what he says behind closed doors.

To my friends from the Reform movement, if you were worried that Stephen Harper was getting soft, there is no need to worry. He is still the same Harper we have come to know. It’s the majority of Canadians that needs to remain worried.

Bashir Makhtal in Ethopia, Suaad Hagi Mohamud in Kenya, Abousfian Abdelrazik in Sudan, Omar Khadr in Guantanamo Bay, Pavel Kulisek in Mexico and Ronald Smith in the USA are just recent examples of Canadian citizens being abandoned by the government in very difficult situations.

In recent court documents for one of these cases, the Conservative government even argued against assisting Canadians denied due process by saying that “States do not have a duty to protect citizens held by foreign countries.”

This despite the fact that in 2004 Stephen Harper said “The highest duty of government is the protection of its citizens,” when asked about the case of William Sampson who was detained in Saudi Arabia.

This is not a new phenomenon; there were similar stories of Canadians being denied their rights abroad under previous governments. However, one can’t help but notice a significant change in tone and language when dealing with these cases under this government. In the past, a Minister of Foreign Affairs would appeal publicly and diplomatically for the safe return of our citizen.  In cases where mistakes were believed to be made, like in the Maher Arar case, the government would call a public inquiry to investigate and former ministers have publicly acknowledged their errors in not demanding the repatriation of Omar Khadr. 

Sadly the government now demonstrates stubbornness and willingness to fight court orders demanding intervention.

The highlighting of these differences is not for the purpose of saying which government is better;  but it does reveal a dangerous trend in Canadian politics.

The elephant in the room is that some people believe that most of those individuals are what they call “citizens of convenience”.

They think that many of those that are stuck abroad are not committed to Canada and are just taking advantage of our passport privileges. In their minds, these are not “real” citizens and don’t deserve our protection.

This is a problematic attitude and should never be left unchallenged. Politicians and bureaucrats must never be allowed to make arbitrary conclusion on who is a “real” citizen and who is not. This is a very slippery slope that sets dangerous precedent.

The debate over the obligations of citizenship is a healthy one that needs to be explored in detail and in public. This debate could possibly provide legitimate reasons to change our laws or define new responsibilities for all citizens when working abroad.  However we must be careful not to allow this debate to create two tiers of citizenship.  A citizen is a citizen.

There may be few individuals who abuse our citizenship laws, but we have to be cautious not to allow our frustration about these few cases to cast a shadow of guilt over law abiding Canadians.

At any point in time almost 10% of Canadians are out of the country traveling for business or pleasure. Many of them have dual citizenship by birth or choice. If we start doubting their patriotism, we do a disservice not only to ourselves but also to the very meaning of Canadian citizenship.

Traditionally commentators and pundits place responsibilities on citizens to demonstrate their loyalty to Canada. It is vital that we also started debating our government’s responsibilities towards its citizens when traveling abroad.

Canadians expect their government to accept its responsibility towards its citizens just like we expect our citizens to respect their responsibility towards their country. The status-quo, of allowing the government (regardless of its partisan colours) to determine when and how to intervene on behalf of Canadians abroad, is troubling.  Every citizen deserves an honest effort.

If the government continues to refuse to act on behalf of its citizens abroad it might be time to consider new legislation that would independently assess cases and at times compel the government to intervene when its citizens are being denied a due process abroad.

Our democracy functions best when our laws and institutions act as a check on government. Now that it is clear that our government has failed to act in the best interests of its citizens, we need to consider defining its obligation towards them if they are being denied their rights abroad. These could be matters of life and death and we need to remove any room for political manipulation when it comes to the state’s duty to protect its citizens.

Canada has become one of the greatest, if not the greatest, country in the world through the hard work of its resilient people and thoughtful policies. It’s not that Canadians are superior to other people, it’s that we have the right combination of solid institutions and incredibly skilled and diverse human resources. This combination is self-perpetuating: our institutions empower our citizens and create opportunity for participation. This participation allows the citizens, through their skills, to utilize those opportunities to push for the constant evolution and advancement of our institutions, which improves both individual skills and the institutions themselves.

This formula has served Canada and Canadians extremely well. We have been able to progress by identifying weaknesses in our system, and working together to improve them. Canada’s cultural, social, economic and intellectual richness has been a shining example to the rest of the world and even now the Canadian experiment continues to succeed.

In that spirit, this is as good as any time to prepare for the future and confront the challenges that we face now and the ones we will face in the short and long terms. While as a country we have accomplished a great deal, we cannot afford to be complacent and must accept the responsibilities we have to the present and future generations.

Some of the challenges that we are facing in the short term are: our role in Afghanistan, halting climate change and the improving of our environment, addressing seniors and their needs, the fair utilization of the skills immigrants bring with them, the decline in manufacturing jobs, addressing the needs of the cities with respect to growth and infrastructure, curbing gun violence, creating child care spaces and dealing with many issues among the aboriginal population just to name a few.

As for some of the long term challenges, they include some of the following: the Canadian federation and the role of the federal government with provinces and cities, the long term survival of health care, an aging population, improving our education system, ensuring tax fairness, ensuring equality, generating sustainable economic development and prosperity, improving our immigration system, crime prevention, urbanization and rural development, and Canada’s relationship with the US and the rest of the world.

As you can see there is no shortage of opportunities to improve. Complacency is not an option. We must first celebrate our successes to date, but we also must recognize that our work is just beginning. We, starting with politicians, must be ambitious and have a generous vision that will lead to a richer, fairer and greener Canada. Happy birthday, Canada!