Anoush F. Terjanian has published a call for a Cabadian democracy initiative in the Hill Times.

Canada needs a co-ordinated democracy strategy

I admit I do not have a subscription to get past the paywall. I plead forgiveness from the HT editors and Anoush. I still offer the following observations.

‘Canada needs a co-ordinated democracy strategy.’ To address democratic frailties—abroad and at home, symbiotically—we ought to leverage an approach which coordinates researchers in a shared mission with the constellation of productive actors and diverse knowledge-creators already at work for democracy within, and outside, Canada. My two cents for The Hill Times :

Canada supports democracy abroad through the Parliamentary Centre, GAC funding to agencies such as IDEA, some CIDA projects, Elections Canada trainers, and CANADEM. To keep things in perspective, The US Government through USAID, the NED and its agencies, the Dept of State is easily spending north of $1 billion annually on democracy. It is a core national mandate. The research component is breathtaking in it’s scope and depth. Proposals exist for Canada to have it’s own version of NED. The US Summit of Democracies may have overshadowed the imperative, perhaps. Canada has signed on to a list of deliverables which, if completed, would put Canada in the lead among participating nations. Electoral reform comes to mind. Canada’s system is remarkable and more suited to the democratizing nations than the US’s. There is a Canadian desire to go abroad and preach the evils of populism. It would prove more useful to focus on bread and butter issues of electoral integrity, parliamentary effectiveness, and the problem with the internet, and it probably bears repeating liars use it.

What may not be obvious is Canada’s management of political parties within the government-opposition framework. Canada’s party system is a model of performance without violence, excessive litigation, and high costs.