The Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology
Final Report On Social Cohesion
Chapter 3
The Effects of Public and Private
Institutions on SocialCohesion in the Era of Globalization: Challenges, Opportunities and
Innovations
Institutions, Legitimacy and
Social Cohesion
Developing
Partnerships and Enhancing Corporate Social Responsibility
Removing Barriers and Improving
Access
Citizen Engagement and Public
Dialogue
Moving
from Unfettered Globalization to Responsible Globalization: International Institutions
The dominant processes underpinning globalization and technological change are likely to be irreversible and thus call for new thinking about policy and institutional arrangements to rebalance economic and social concerns.
We cannot hope to reinvent a sense of "sticking-togetherness" for the new global era by trying to recover some presumed lost state of social harmony. It would be futile to consider a "rollback strategy" and think that we can recreate the more interventionist style of the postwar economy. This would not be a sustainable option in any regard. Nor does the Committee believe the popular notion that government and citizens have no choice other than to follow the dictates of globalization and technology. Rather, this report seeks a middle way that accepts the risks and opportunities of globalization and technology, and is concerned with the mechanisms, approaches and institutional arrangements needed to make economic flexibility more compatible with social cohesion.
Institutions, Legitimacy and Social Cohesion
Globalization is corroding the institutions of civil society, precisely because it undermines community solidarity. Increasing alienation, pervasive personal economic insecurity, growing isolation within communities, and the loss of control over our collective choices are among the symptoms of the deshumanizing impact that globalization has had both in Canada and in other countries. ~ Rev. David Pfrimmer, Chairperson for the Commission on Justice and Peace, Canadian Council of Churches, February 10, 1999, p.1 of brief) |
Early in the hearing process, the Committee decided that special attention should be given to the role of public and private institutions, and to the various ways in which the pressures of globalization and technology influence their effectiveness in building social links among Canadians.
Institutions are important because they provide people with work opportunities, offer social and economic security, resolve conflicts, provide an avenue for co-operation, interaction and participation, and constitute a basis for identity.
All human societies are held together by a variety of forces – shared values, habits, common interests, reasonable levels of affluence, etc. – and these are all fortified through institutions, both formal (such as the state or the church) and informal (regular meetings of neighbors or networks of like-minded people communicating by telephone or Internet).
An analysis of institutions is thus critical for an understanding of social cohesion.
The new global environment has encouraged the growth of some institutions, while resulting in a loss of effectiveness for many others. In the eyes of some witnesses, the weakening of the institutional fabric has been at the root of the intensification of many social ills that currently afflict our society.
Social cohesion is not about social uniformity and homogeneity. It is not about the absence of conflicts. The simple existence of diversity of cultures, identities and life-styles does not constitute a problem for social cohesion. Indeed, pluralism is the hallmark of modern democratic society.(26)
Social cohesion has to do with how well institutions manage diversity and resolve conflicts by finding mutually satisfactory accommodation.(27) A cohesive society is one in which accommodation of conflict is well managed by public and private institutions. In turn, the ability of institutions to manage socio-economic cleavages and conflicts depends on their legitimacy. When the legitimacy of institutions is declining, their capacity to foster social cohesion and build bridges between Canadians is weakened.
As Keith Banting said: "social cohesion is about building bridges across big divisions in a society or building bridges across what are potentially big fractures in a society between rich and poor, between regions in our country, between language groups, or between new Canadians and Canadians who have been here a long time." (Keith Banting, Director, School of Policy Studies Queens University, May 12, 1999)
In her testimony, Professor Jane Jenson from the University of Montreal talked about the "hollowing out of bridges between individuals and governments". "When I say bridges" she said, "I am referring to the institutional bridges. In traditional liberal democracy, we say those bridges are things like political parties, but there are also other groups which bring people together and then speak for them to governments. One of the things that is happening in Canada is the de-legitimating of those bridges. It is not only politicians who are getting de-legitimated, but also other institutions that form the bridges."(Professor Jane Jenson, Department of Political Science, University of Montreal, October 7, 1998)
To a large extent, the "crisis" of social cohesion in Canada is about the legitimacy crisis of many of the institutions and public policies on which was built the postwar social consensus described in Chapter Two. Accordingly, most of what follows in the next pages are examples of initiatives by government, business, union, community leaders, and ordinary women and men aimed at rebuilding the legitimacy of institutions - or creating new ones - as a way to foster social cohesion. Although these initiatives all share the same goal - and therefore share more similarities than differences - they can be divided into four broad categories:
- developing partnerships and enhancing corporate social responsibility;
- removing barriers and improving access to the resources needed for social and economic participation;
- promoting citizen engagement and public dialogue;
- moving from unfettered globalization to responsible globalization through active involvement in international institutions.
"In some sense, we have taken away the institutions that were helping to provide some social cohesion and, in the process, we have adopted a view that the reason people are poor or the reason they are unemployed is that it is their fault, rather than something which is also the responsibility of society. When you have that attitude, then you have a strong tendency to isolate and exclude them [the poor and the unemployed]… To fix it [i.e. social cohesion] you have to get the trust back and put the money in and build up the brick-at-a-time kinds of institutions that were destroyed" ~ Michael McCracken, Chief Executive Officer, Informetrica Limited, October 28, 1998 |
Many Canadians are taking responsibility, showing leadership and imagination. Things are happening, but still on a very experimental basis. Institutional changes come about only through complex interactions between markets, technology, ideology, and social needs and pressures. It is, therefore, difficult to predict what new configuration of institutions will emerge. No doubt many existing institutions will undergo further changes and new ones will arise in response to new challenges and opportunities. This is what the Committee has learned to date:
Developing Partnerships and Enhancing Corporate Social Responsibility
| In recognition that business has a fundamental interest in social cohesion, a group of leading and visionary business managers created in 1995 the European Business Network for Social Cohesion. Members include: Daimler Benz, The Body Shop, Marks & Spencer, Volkswagen, and several other companies. Members of the Network work with government and other social partners to promote social and economic integration and to fight against social exclusion. |
We often hear journalists, academics and other observers of the public scene talking about the decline of legitimacy of political institutions. In his testimony, Professor Brian Tanguay of Wilfrid Laurier University referred to many polls and gave ample evidence to show the low levels of trust that Canadians have vis-à-vis political institutions.
But what we less often hear about, is that businesses in Canada are also suffering from a legitimacy problem. As reported in one study conducted in 1997 by the Business Council on National Issues (BCNI): "Canadians have become highly skeptical about the extent of corporate contributions to the public good". In the past 10 years, with globalization and all the industrial re-structuring and downsizing that took place: "Canadian leading corporations have often been portrayed as villains: pursuing a ‘corporate agenda’ of dismembering government and gutting social programs; persisting in layoffs even as profits recovered from recessionary levels; and using freer trade as an excuse for a race to the global bottom in wages and benefits." (28)
Disturbed by such attitudes, the BCNI issued a paper on the social and economic role of large corporations. It defines one of the key challenges ahead as the need to continue working toward deeper global economic integration "without leading Canada into some of the less desirable features of the American experience such as income polarization and loss of social cohesion."(29)
Clearly, the tradition of most business leaders to shy away from the debate on how to solve social problems is being challenged. In the past 15 years, government policies have helped to overcome many of the impediments business was facing in terms of growth and profitability. Deregulation, privatization and the globalization of markets have all contributed to strengthening businesses. As Federal Minister Pierre Pettigrew recently said, it is now time for businesses to use the new strength that globalization has given them to help government and other social partners in shaping "the future of our communities and determining the economic and social progress of our societies."(30)
Business in general has a fundamental interest in social cohesion because it constitutes an important aspect of a well-functioning society and a stable business environment. One basic argument in this respect is the smooth operation of the legal system including protection of property and confidence in contract and trade agreements. Furthermore, only a stable and prospering society will invest adequately in public infrastructure, e.g. communication, transportation, education and training, health care, etc.
It is in this context that new ideas such as "corporate citizenship" or "corporate social responsibility" have emerged to describe the notion that businesses have societal obligations which transcend their economic functions of producing goods and services, and generating a satisfactory level of profits for their shareholders. According to Courtney Pratt, President of Caldwell Partners, the concept of corporate responsibility means that directors and CEOs have a responsibility not only to shareholders, but also to a broader constituency of stakeholders that include groups like consumers, employees, and the communities in which they operate. "In today’s world if a company does not also focus on a broader constituency of stakeholders, then it will not be able, in the long run, to be successful and create shareholder value. I do not believe it is an either\or situation. I believe it is both." (Courtney Pratt, President, Caldwell Partners, October 27, 1998)
At the federal level, the Department of Human Resources and Development is supporting two projects on corporate social responsibility, one on best practices through the Conference Board, and one on the recognition of companies who act in a socially responsible manner.
Many businesses are beginning to recognize that social problems are a shared responsibility and that the public expects them to do their share. Social partnerships between business, government and the voluntary sector are increasingly being developed throughout the country as a potential answer to the general problem of reconciling the economic and social dimension of human activity.
Essentially, such a partnership is a voluntary, reciprocal commitment to social responsibility among two or more partners.
A sense of social responsibility is creating an emerging interest on the part of business in the concept of social partnership. But other equally important factors include: improved reputation and image (i.e.enhancing legitimacy); and the belief that if the partnership approach does not work, business may be worse off: facing no other options, governments will fall back to regulation and fiscal instruments.
For voluntary organizations, social partnerships with business raise a number of concerns. Some fear being co-opted or think that this can be used by government as a replacement for social policies. Others see this as "working with the enemy"; as mere rhetoric or as a public relation campaign where voluntary organizations are relied upon by business to improve their corporate image.(31)
While there are potential dangers, partnerships are a way of getting the private sector to understand the importance of looking beyond the bottom line. Lack of attention to broader social, economic and environmental issues can be bad for business. Social problems, such as high unemployment, poverty, and homelessness do not make for a vibrant economy or society.
Four characteristics of the partnership approach:
New Partnership for Social Cohesion, International Conference on the Social Commitment of Enterprises, Copenhagen, 16-18 October 1997. |
Some illustrative examples of partnership initiatives and business’ involvement in social affairs include:
- Imagine , an initiative launched in 1988 by the Canadian Centre for Philanthropy, in partnership with business leaders, created the Caring Companies Program which encourages business support for communities. There are now over 400 Imagine Caring Companies. These companies encourage employee volunteering and have made a commitment to donate a minimum of 1% of their pretax profits to community organizations.
- The Career Edge Program , put in place 3 years ago, by a group of businesses in an attempt to assist with the difficulty that a number of graduates have in finding a first job. It started as a private sector funded initiative and it has now evolved to a tripartite partnership between business, the federal government and the voluntary sector. The Program celebrated the 1,000th intern placed in the Spring of 1998. About 85% of those interns are getting their first job either during the internship or within two months of their internship.
- Kraft, a major Canadian food company, recently launched a program called Feeding Families in partnership with the Canadian Association of Food Banks to help the ameliorate the problem of hunger.
- The Canadian Pacific Charitable Foundation established the Violence Prevention Fund in 1997. Administered by the Canadian Women’s Foundation, the Fund provides grants to violence prevention and awareness programs in Canada. It was launched in conjunction with Canadian Pacific Hotels’ Adopt-A-Shelter Program. Twenty-six hotels across the country have each adopted a local women’s shelter, providing used furniture, bedding and household items on an ongoing basis. Many employees have become involved in these programs by volunteering their own time and support.
- Chevron Canada Resources has a policy which allows employees to volunteer for ten hours a year on company time. Several employees at Chevron volunteer in their children’s schools; one employee teaches a math program that she helped develop. Chevron also helped spearhead the Calgary Workplace Voluntary Council founded in 1991 with nine corporate members and the full membership of the Volunteer Centre of Calgary.
- In the mid-1990s, Albert School (in Regina, Saskatchewan) developed a business\education partnership with Wascana Energy, an oil and gas production and marketing company. The partners collaborate on a range of activities: stay-in school initiatives; science and technology awareness and skill development; and student exposure to career possibilities and entrepreneurial skills.
- The Dufferin Mall in Toronto is located within the catchment area of six schools. It had become a meeting place for teens, and there was a growing incidence of crime and more frequent disturbances involving attacks on customers and store break-ins. The mall manager faced a difficult choice: Either he could turn the mall into a fortress with multiple security systems or he could address the problem in a more constructive way. He chose the latter route. The mall management met with the schools in the area as well as the West-End Inter-Agency Network, a group of 12 youth-serving agencies. After discussions about the problem and possible solutions, a one-stop social services centre for youth was set up in the mall. Today, the centre provides individual and family counselling, job training and community outreach. In addition to the youth centre, the mall merchants are involved in various programs which teach work skills to students and provide co-op placements.
These examples do not, of course, provide a statistically significant or representative sample of partnership arrangements. But they illustrate the kind of creative and practical solutions that can be developed when the corporate sector is willing to do its part in addressing complex community problems and promoting economic and social well-being. Partnerships can certainly help to foster social cohesion and enhance the social responsibility of enterprises. But partnerships should not be a substitute for government responsibility. Rather, they should be a supplement, the potential of which has yet to be fully explored in practice.
For a society to develop into a civic society it needs to provide opportunities to all of its citizens for participation in its public institutions. This means that special measures need to be instituted for the most vulnerable to help them access opportunities to help them achieve their potential. The community-based immigrant service sector has been providing a significant portion of the immigrant communities with such opportunities. ~ Mr. Mario Calla, Executive Director, COSTI, March 2, 1999, p.4 of brief |
Removing Barriers and Improving Access
Social cohesion refers to a situation where everyone has access to establishing basic social relationships in society, e.g. work participation, family life, political participation and activities in civil society.
In this sense social cohesion means inclusion and participation. Building social cohesion means removing the different barriers that are blocking the access of certain groups in society to various forms of participation (social, economic, social, political and cultural).
As research indicates and as past parliamentary reports have shown(32), problems of access are, in general, concentrated in certain communities: immigrants, ethno-cultural minorities, women, and Aboriginal people. In this context, the work of organizations who are striving to see ethno-cultural communities and other minorities participate in all aspects of Canadian society is crucial for social cohesion.
At a conference on Social Cohesion Through Social Justice organized in 1997 by the Canadian Jewish Congress, representatives of various ethno-cultural organizations talked about their efforts at removing barriers; at overcoming "unfairness and injustice by building bridges between communities, with government agencies and with private business. This is a dialogue in which everyone gains. Problems can either be avoided or overcome; misunderstandings ironed out. It often happens that when people get together they find out not how different they are but how similar."(33)
In Canada as elsewhere, economic participation (i.e. having a job and being an active participant in the labour market) is the key that gives access to all the other spheres of human or social activities. Unemployment, especially in its long-term form, often leads to social isolation, depression, apathy and exclusion. Marginalization occurs when prolonged unemployment is reinforced by the disintegration of social networks that bind the individual to the community(34). The collapse of social networks severs the communication links between the unemployed person and the structure of employment and creates a vicious circle of decline. In this sense, social exclusion can be viewed as the end point of a downward spiral that develops progressively through time.
Given the centrality of economic participation for social cohesion, it is not surprising that the evidence presented to the Committee by various organizations often focused on removing the barriers to the labor market in the hope that this will help the marginalized become full participants in their society. Here are a number of examples:
- One of the major obstacles that newly arrived immigrants face in accessing jobs is the reluctance of professional regulatory bodies to recognize foreign credentials. In Canada, the number of immigrants who are skilled workers or business immigrants is increasing. "The problem is that Canada’s success in attracting skilled immigrant hits a solid wall when these newcomers try to access jobs for which they have been trained. The result is thousands of disillusioned people whose talents are being squandered and who are not integrating into the social fabric of our society". For instance, in Ontario immigrants who have an engineering degree from their native country must complete one year of work experience in Canada before they can qualify for a license. But the problem is that few employers are willing to hire engineers that do not have a license. Newcomers cannot be licensed without work experience and they cannot get work experience without a license. "In the meantime, this situation has left the vast majority of skilled immigrants working at low paying jobs that have little relevance to their training." (Calla, p.2 of brief) To change this, COSTI launched a joint program with the Humber College of Applied Arts and Technology called the Centre for Foreign Trained Professionals and Tradespeople (CFTPT). Since the CFTPT program was established two years ago, 70% of participants have been finding employment in their area of expertise.
- Technology can help to remove barriers. The provision of Internet-based job banks by the various Employment Resource Centres (established by Human Resources Development Canada) facilitates the job seeking process "immeasurably" (Calla, p.3 of brief). Prior to the existence of Internet-based job banks, job seekers would have to check the job boards at the various employment agencies and government services throughout a region. This was time consuming and none of the job boards had a comprehensive list. Internet-based job banks are much more comprehensive and current, and can be searched by job or by region.
- In Vancouver, Lillian To directs SUCCESS, an organization serving Canadian residents of Chinese descent "whose primary objective is to build bridges between newcomers and Canadian society" (Lillian To, Executive Director, SUCCESS, March 2, 1999, p.2 of brief).There are many barriers that immigrant groups face when they arrive in Canada: lack of language skills, knowledge of the culture, social networks, local work experience, etc. In the past decade, and in partnership with other NGOs and government, SUCCESS has developed several employment training programs that assist immigrants to access the labour market. These programs have demonstrated an over 90% success rate for gainful employment. (To, p.7 of brief)
- With industrial re-structuring and the growing use of contracting-out by businesses and government, there has been a huge increase in the number of self-employed workers in recent years. But unlike other workers, the typical person who is self-employed works alone at home. One of the problems faced by self-employed people is isolation, resulting in a lack of social interaction, absence of professional networks and a lack of support from colleagues and co-workers. This type of isolation represents a significant barrier: self-employed people have no collective voice; they have problems making their concerns known to public and private authorities. In 1996 in Montreal the Network of Self-Employed Workers was created "to encourage self-employed workers to make contact with one another and break out of their isolation" and to "support measures facilitating access to human, financial and physical resources designed to improve the practice of independent work." (Denis Ross, President, Network of Self-Employed Workers of Grand-plateau centre sud, March 3, 1999, p.1 of brief)
- Self-employed people are not the only ones seeking to break the social isolation created by independent work. Unemployment, especially in its long-term form, often leads to solitude, depression, self-depreciation, apathy, and exclusion. In Winnipeg, a group of unemployed people tried to break this vicious cycle by creating six years ago the Canadian Association of the Unemployed (CANE), an organization where unemployed people and welfare recipients support each other; try to regain their self-confidence and dignity. Besides its moral support mission, CANE plays an educational role through a conference it organizes every year. Last year, the theme was How Do You Create a Job? The conference was divided into a number of workshops, including one on "Skill Building". Unions, such as the Canadian Union of Postal Workers, have recently opened up the Workers’ Organizing Resource Centre and are supporting CANE with resources – office space, a photocopier, fax machine, etc. (Joan Johannson, Chairperson, Canadian Association of the Unemployed (CANE), March 3, 1999)
- In Toronto, the Chinese Information and Community Services (CICS) recently introduced the Employment Resources Room to provide assistance and support for job seekers in the community. This initiative provides information on effective resume writing and interview skills, as well as computers with Internet access to allow users to connect with job opportunities. Other services include employment counselling to assist individuals to assess or match their skills with the current demand in the Canadian labor market.
Another important barrier to full participation in economic life is access to credit. Illustrative examples of initiatives by Canadian non-profit and financial institutions include:
- SEDI (Self Employment Development Initiatives), a charitable organization involved in micro-financing, is building bridges with governments, financial institutions and community agencies in an effort to alleviate poverty by providing access to savings and assets for welfare and working poor Canadians. This effort is based on a new concept, the Individual Development Accounts (IDA). The IDA approach is based on the idea that providing the poor with access to savings will alleviate their own (and their children’s) poverty and contribute to their longer term economic self-sufficiency. It is rooted in the notion that savings provide access to the kinds of assets (education, business, job development, housing) that contribute to social and economic cohesion.
- In Winnipeg, the Assiniboine Credit Union is partnering with a church initiative to help develop an IDA program, whereby matching grants and training support would be offered to low-income individuals who establish savings accounts intended to finance housing, business assets or training. (Ross Rothney, Manager, Community and Economic Development, Assiniboine Credit Union, February 16, 1999, p.3 of brief)
- In his testimony, Mr. Jean Vincent, President and CEO of the Native Commercial Credit Corporation, described how most Aboriginal communities in Canada do not have a credit union or a bank branch present on their territory. A very large number of Aboriginal people do not even have an opportunity to conclude a transaction as simple as merely cashing a cheque. In addition to the barriers created by geographic isolation, Aboriginal people involved in business who are looking for capital also face cultural barriers. But a network of Aboriginal financial corporations is emerging. For instance the Toronto Dominion Bank has established the First Nations Bank with the participation of the Federation of Saskatchewan Indian Nations. Such institutions are making it possible to solve some of the problems experienced by Aboriginal entrepreneurs wishing to obtain commercial loans. (Jean Vincent, President and CEO, Native Commercial Credit Corporation, February 16, 1999)
Canadians in many sectors of society are involved in developing innovative ways to remove barriers to economic participation by facilitating access to the labour market, or access to credit and financial services for people on low income and in small businesses. Helping marginalized Canadians to gain access to the resources they need to participate more effectively in the economy is to help them become full citizens. Even if the economy and the world of work are changing, employment is still the social bond par excellence in our societies.
Citizen Engagement and Public Dialogue
As far as the State, they know [Nexus Generation] from their formative years that the state moved from a ‘provide and build’ …to a more deficit cutting strategy. Employment opportunities in government dried up, and so there is no one, not even their friends are working in government anymore, […] and this invisibility of government has created a do-it-yourself attitude, not a me generation, it is a do-it-yourself generation, which is a different thing. [... A] portion of the Nexus Generation has opted out of traditional institutions, including government, voting, family and community […] This generation believes that governments are irrelevant […] They see no option but to do it themselves. [The challenge for the government of Canada is that:] it needs to prove its relevance, to make people feel like they know why there is a government around and what it is doing. It needs to create a compelling vision that they can feel part of, belong to, so that they can rally around. ~ Robert Barnard, President and Founder, d-Code, November |
According to Michael Adams, polls conducted by Environics show that there has been a deep change in Canadian political culture. Deference to authority has declined while the search for personal autonomy and individualism have begun to dominate public attitudes. "Canadians" he says, "are no longer automatically deferential to institutional authority… We are more dedicated than ever to personal autonomy. We want to decide for ourselves… More and more Canadians want to decide and act as individuals or they want to act in concert with others with similar values and interests. They want to create their own networks, their own institutions and do not necessarily want to go through the traditional institutions…They want to see power devolved throughout society." (Adams, October 6, 1998)
This devolution of power has gone hand in hand with higher education levels; and with globalization and technological change. Globalization embodies a fundamental shift in power relationships. Globalization and technology disperse the power of states upward to multilateral institutions, downward to local or regional governments, and outward to non-state actors, especially corporations and, to a lesser extent, civil society organizations.
This diffusion of powers has both negative and positive consequences. For some, globalization – by making capital more mobile - greatly strengthens the bargaining power of businesses vis-à-vis governments and citizens. However, the power of business grows, and as unions become weaker, economic and social inequalities increase. To make matters worse, globalization is making it more difficult for the state to use traditional social policies to cushion these changes or ensure redistribution in conformity with social policy objectives. This, according to the pessimistic view, explains the decline of deference;(35) the loss of faith, trust and confidence in political institutions that is evident in all industrialized countries.
One key reason for this loss of faith is that citizens have the impression – because this is what they often hear from their business and political leaders – that governments are impotent and are no longer able to protect them and to respond to their needs in the face of global economic pressures. As Reverend David Pfrimmer said to the Committee, governments and business "have abdicated their responsibility and told us that globalization is such an inevitable thing that we cannot address the social debts that we have." (Rev. Pfrimmer, February 10, 1999)
As a result, people increasingly feel that they are "on their own". This, in the words of Michael Adams, creates a form of "social darwinism," a rampant individualism, which erodes any sense of belonging or commitment to the collectivity. (Adams, October 6, 1998)
For democracy, this has significant implications, particularly when some sectors of society become completely disengaged from the political process. According to Mr. Robert Barnard from d-Code Inc., this is exactly what is happening in Canada with what he calls the "Nexus Generation", people in their 20s and early 30s.
Just as states have been affected in recent years by globalization and technology, so too have political parties become more diffused and fragmented. As many witnesses have told us, globalization is leading to policy harmonization and convergence. With the end of ideology and the fall of Communism - no matter what the philosophy of the government in power - the economic and social policy ideas of parties are becoming increasingly similar. In his testimony, Professor Tanguay cited one British political economist as saying: "the political choices open to governments these days have been so constricted by those forces of structural change often referred to as ‘globalization’ that the differences that used to distinguish government policies from opposition policies are in the process of disappearing." (Professor Brian Tanguay, Department of Political Science, Wilfrid Laurier University, March 16, 1999, p.7 of brief)
As faith in political parties has declined; as people no longer think that parties can make a difference in their lives and in the life of their country – because everything now seems to be dictated by globalization – a growing number of citizens are using other political vehicles (interest groups, social movements, etc.) to make their voices heard. As a result, numerous organizations have sprung up to challenge the former pre-eminence of parties as institutions linking the individual citizen to the state. The Royal Commission on Electoral Reform and Party Financing (the Lortie Commission) recognized that parties needed to be strengthened in order to sustain the sense of community required for democratic politics. To that end, it proposed reforms that would have reinforced the educational function of parties, and thereby (it was hoped) transform them into something more than the vote-gathering, election winning machines that they have become.
The more positive view asserts that the diffusion of power created by globalization can be good for democracy, for government, citizens, and ultimately, for social cohesion. According to this view, governments increasingly have to share power with other governments, citizens, interest groups, businesses and a host of non-state actors. In the past, government operated on the basis of a system of ‘elite accommodation’ - a system that reflected the penchant for order and compromise and which led to remarkable achievements. But with the shift in values that Michael Adams described; with the change from a culture of deference to authority to personal autonomy and individualism, Canadians increasingly want to decide for themselves. As the former Clerk of the Privy Council recently noted, "Citizens want a direct, substantive and influential role in shaping policies and decisions that affect them. They want to be heard…citizens are reclaiming their place in civil society". Examples of active engagement by civil society in shaping government actions include the work done by NGOs on the land mines treaty and the creation of the new international criminal court.
This shift in values certainly poses important challenges to public institutions, but at the same time it also offers wonderful opportunities to revive the democratic process. More consultation, more interaction, take more time and money, but they also open new opportunities. Participation is an important dimension of social cohesion. According to Rhonda Ferderber of The Society We Want, "It gives Canadians a sense that their voice matters, that someone will listen to their view. This in turn contributes to a sense of belonging to a wider community. And both participation and belonging give the political process and political institutions greater legitimacy in the eyes of voters and citizens." (Rhonda Ferderber, Manager, The Society We Want, February 9, 1999, p.2 of brief)
For the moment, the reality, in terms of the change in power relationships that globalization and technology create, is probably located somewhere between the positive and negative view described above. But what is certain, is that in today’s world, for an important decision to be accepted as legitimate, many more voices need to be taken into account. This requires a more distributed system of governance and new mechanisms for coordination and consultation between government and civil society. Operating this new system will not be easy. It will be complicated, even messy.
Social cohesion is about shared frameworks, or as Steven Rosell says "shared communities of interpretation". In the rapidly changing environment of the Information Age, "social cohesion needs continually to be reconstructed. It depends, fundamentally, on our capacity continually to build shared frameworks within which we can learn together and coordinate our actions"(36). This implies that we need institutions and practices designed to enable people from diverse backgrounds to come together, construct shared frameworks, work through issues, and reach considered public judgements. Here are a number of examples of how such a process can be developed:
- In 1999, the Canadian Council for International Co-operation launched a project called Choices in Common: Communities in Common. The project is intended to test public deliberation as an approach to engage the Canadian public on issues related to globalization. Public deliberation is a way to engage people in considering different approaches to solving a problem. It is an alternative to the "winner-take-all" debates and polarized discussions that often lead to gridlock on complex policy issues. A deliberative dialogue provides a chance to explore approaches, test ideas, and consider ambiguities and grey areas. By working through the conflicts and trade-offs associated with an issue in a structured, non-confrontational way, people come to new understandings of an issue and often find areas of common ground on how to proceed.
- In 1994, the Democracy Education Network, conducted a public consultation project on immigration policy. To do so, the DEN used a new approach known as study circles. Across the country in five cities 1,100 Canadians sat down in 60 study circles with their neighbours to discuss their opinions about immigration in Canada. In addition, 2,200 students discussed immigration issues in their schools. Both processes provided important advice to the government about what citizens think about immigration policies.
- In Quebec, the Carrefour pastoral en monde ouvrier (CAPMO) led by Ms. Vivian Labrie has organized a number of successful initiatives intended to encourage the participation of the poor and socially marginalized in the democratic process. In the summer of 1997, the CAPMO with other social groups organized the Parlement de la rue in Quebec city. The Parlement sat for a month and its goal was to raise the awareness of decision-makers to the problem of poverty in Quebec. Members of the National Assembly and Ministers came to talk to the members of the Parlement de la rue and this eventually led to the establishment of Carrefours du savoir, and to the creation of institutional links between poor people and the Quebec Department of Finance. The CAPMO is also involved in promoting a petition for a Bill on the elimination of poverty and in organizing the Marche mondiale des femmes de l’an 2000.
- In 1996, CPRN launched The Society We Want (TSWW) initiative. The TSWW is a public dialogue tool and partnership process that brings Canadians together and helps them work through social policy choices and identify core values. Between 1996 and 1998, the TSWW initiative brought together 3,000 Canadians who met in 200 groups to discuss five issues: Work, Health, the Social Safety Net, the Role of Government and Our Children.
- In an attempt to reduce the communication gap between the ‘haves’ and the ‘have nots’ and create a space where the ‘losers’ of globalization could speak and make their views known to other Canadians, the Interfaith Social Assistance Reform Coalition organized a series of hearings called the Neighbour to Neighbour Hearings in Ontario in 1997. The goal was to bring to public attention to the problems of social exclusion and marginalization. Many people who participated in these hearings were impoverished people who overcame their fears to reflect on their experiences and communicate their feelings.
- In Alberta, a group of citizens concerned about the lack of attention being paid to the consequences of social policy reform came together in the mid-1990s to talk about the effects. The result was the formation of the Quality of Life Commission. The goal of the Commission was to listen to Albertans in the Edmonton region to discover how the changes and cutbacks have affected people’s lives. From what it heard, the Commission identified six elements to quality of ife: to meet basic necessities, hope, self-determination, health and well-being, security and community.
The rich array of initiatives like these that are springing all over the country are a healthy sign that democracy is alive and well in Canada. The challenge is to build the essential linkages between citizens and the established political institutions.
Moving from Unfettered Globalization to Responsible Globalization: International Institutions
Canada needs to assert its national interest in global institutions, especially the WTO, the IMF, the World Bank and the UN. Not only through participation…but with commitments that help establish order through better rules, and through effective dispute settlement mechanisms governing the exchange of goods and services…The economic turmoil sweeping through emerging markets in recent months clearly signals a need for reform ~ Derek Burney, O.C., Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Bell Canada International, November 18, 1998 |
Markets are a social institution, and their continued existence is predicated on the perception that their processes and outcomes are legitimate. But the international or global market is the only market that is not regulated by an overarching political authority. Consequently, transactions undertaken in the global marketplace carry the least inherent legitimacy. This is an important source of tension between globalization and society. Institutions that do not have legitimacy can not function well in the long term, and markets are no different.
Making globalization more responsible means ensuring that the global market operates according to a certain set of rules and institutions that a majority of people see as being legitimate. It is especially at the international level, in multilateral institutions, that efforts at legitimizing globalization are taking place. This does not mean that nothing can be done here at home. Neither does it mean that the international level – which involves many stakeholders with different and sometimes conflicting interests- should be used as an excuse for policy paralysis.
However, because of our traditional ‘brokering role’ in international relations and diplomatic circles, multilateral institutions are a place where Canadians can make a real difference in trying to make economic globalization more compatible with social cohesion. As former Ambassador to the United States Derek Burney said in his testimony: "Multilateralism is part of Canada’s DNA…We have to use international institutions to develop and establish rules that will help nullify the power imbalance that would be if we were living in a jungle." (Burney, November 18, 1998)
The Asian and Russian financial crises are raising important questions about the adequacy of the governance framework within which nations and non-state actors organize and oversee their activities. The need for institutional reform at the global level is becoming more important. The expansion of international trade relations will increase the number of cross-cutting policy issues and requires a more effective system of global economic governance. It is very much in Canada’s interest that such a system work well. In the past, multilateralism has enabled us to amplify our influence in the world and protect our interests in relationships with countries that are larger and more powerful than Canada.
Following are some examples of innovative approaches and actions to make sure that the global market, does not become, in the words of Mr. Burney "a jungle":
- Concern about the revenue consequences of tax competition recently led the OECD to set up a task force on curbing such competition among its member states. As the OECD statement recognizes, globalization "opens up the risk of competitive bidding between countries for mobile business". The task force’s first task is to examine criteria for distinguishing between fair and harmful tax competition.
- Voluntary organizations, faith groups and unions are leading the struggle for integrating social and core labor standards in international trade agreements. As Mr. Pierre Paquette, former vice-president of the Confederation des Syndicats Nationaux (CSN) in Quebec said, for unions, this represents a major change, from protectionism and opposition to trade liberalization in the early 1980s, to a more pragmatic and constructive approach that seeks to use globalization as way to promote social justice. The ongoing discussion about global standards is a way of saying that the pressures to convergence exercised by globalization do not always have to lead to a "race to the bottom" - there can also be harmonization upward in areas such as social and environmental standards. (Pierre Paquette, Moderator, Télé-Québec, October 27, 1998)
- Canadian NGOs are working to support greater transparency and openness at the WTO and in multilateral institutions generally. Multilateral institutions, especially those involved in global trade, suffer from a "democratic deficit" in terms of non-transparency and un-accountability. For example, at the WTO, the in camera dispute settlement process has been called by Professor Craig Forcese a "Star Chamber."(Professor Craig Forcese, University of Ottawa, March 23, 1999) Yet, it is a system that at the same time focuses increasingly on social values issues, like human rights, public health and safety and others. As a consequence, NGOs are advocating transparency in the dispute settlement process, and pushing both for open dispute settlement hearings and a mechanism allowing interested third parties to make submissions.
- In the House of Commons, MPs from all parties – including Finance Minister Paul Martin - voted in March 1999 in support of a new tax on all transactions in international financial markets (the so-called Tobin tax). Named after economist James Tobin, a Nobel prize winner from the U.S., who proposed over 20 years ago, to apply a tax to every international financial market transaction to slow down such things as currency speculation and capital flight from weak economies. The idea of presenting a motion in the House of Commons on the Tobin tax came from a coalition of social groups working to build a more democratic and equitable global economy. The coalition – known as the Halifax Initiative – is made of representatives of some 45 NGOs, academics, unions and faith groups.
All the examples presented in this chapter suggest that there is a range of ideas and approaches that can be used to do things differently. Voluntary groups, as well as other sectors of Canadian society, are showing strong leadership. Many organizations are demonstrating their creativity and their ability to mobilize individuals and communities to take on many of society’s challenges and many global challenges as well. The work that they are accomplishing augurs well for the social and economic future of Canada.
It is undoubtedly true that globalization encourages greater harmonization or convergence of policies and standards. But convergence is not inevitable. Governments still have the power to do things differently if they wish to. Canada still has some degree of freedom. As Mr. Ed Broadbent said: " a few years ago, I was more pessimistic than I am now. I had believed that there is something called globalization that was rolling right over us and that there was almost nothing we could do. I now do not believe that at all…[From my research, I learned that] in this great world of globalization… there were remarkable differences on how states were coping with this globalization… there was considerable variation in terms of domestic political policy in what they decided to do or not…There is still a lot of scope for political activity in the nation-state if you want to do it." (The Honourable Ed Broadbent, November 4, 1998)