Published on Americas Quarterly on April 21
Canada, the United States and Mexico share two important characteristics outside of their common membership to the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) – they are democracies and each has a federal system of government. We can argue about how each conducts its brand of democracy and federalism, but no one can dispute that sub-national governments in a federal state have real power. What distinguishes the nature of these three federal states depends on how the sub-national entities choose to exercise their power within their jurisdiction and beyond.
Having examined how sub-national governments function in the three countries, I have concluded that there is no common pattern of behavior. However, the province of Québec can be cited as an example of autonomy and innovation in how it conducts itself as a federated state. This year, Québec is celebrating the 50th anniversary of its so-called “Quiet Revolution,” which was the product of an extensive transformation in how the province decided to conduct its governance and how it exercised its sovereign powers within the Canadian constitution. Since then, Québec has stood out as a modern, innovative state dedicated to exercise the highest degree of provincial autonomy. Whether it was in education, health, culture and economy, Québec gave itself the tools to carve a specific and distinct personality among the Canadian provinces.
Granted, this was not done without tension and confrontation. The reforms began in the 1960’s and were nurtured and expanded in the following decades by successive governments, some dedicated to reforming Canadian federalism and others to turning Québec into a sovereign state apart from Canada. Yet, despite these tensions, Québec’s appetite to fully exercise its jurisdictions has never receded. Today, some observers call it the Québec model – a strong affirmation of Québec’s French speaking identity combined with a social democratic approach to governance, and a mixture of public and private initiatives in the management of its economy.
Where Québec may have innovated most has been in the area of its international personality. In the mid-sixties, Québec’s intergovernmental affairs minister, Paul Gérin-Lajoie, affirmed solemnly that Québec had a duty to promote economic development, natural resources, education, health and culture both within Canada and beyond its borders. This was a novel and unique idea to bring an international expression to what had emerged in the Quiet Revolution at the domestic level.
Since the heady days of what came to be known as the Gérin-Lajoie doctrine where international engagement and affirmation was the leitmotiv, Québec has gone beyond promoting its sovereign powers to playing an international role in advancing its policies in areas of shared jurisdiction with the federal government. These have included the environment, culture and immigration.
Today, the Québec government has an autonomous network of offices and participates in varying degrees in the work of three multilateral international organizations (Organization of American States, UNESCO and the International Organisation of La Francophonie). This network collaborates closely with Canadian embassies and consulates around the world. Through perseverance and advocacy, Québec has become a model for any federated state wishing to play on the international stage. It is fair to add that the Canadian federal system has displayed inherent flexibility in accommodating this model.
True, not all federated states wish to pursue such an international profile. Even in the United States, only some states like California and New York have higher international profiles. The Québec approach is, therefore, not a “one-size fits all” exercise. But it has served it well in advancing its interests in free trade, exercising its leadership in clean energy initiatives and the environment, asserting its commitment to security issues, promoting its cultural creativity and talent, and sharing expertise in the research and education world.
In doing so, Québec has given a new expression to how a federated state can reach beyond and tap into its potential. Fifty years after the Quiet Revolution, Québec emerges stronger and more confident as a polity because it chose to embrace a course that enhances its international profile.
April 26, 2011
April 21, 2011
Québec’s Friend in the North Country
Garry Douglas is the president of the North Country Chamber of Commerce. He has done much to put Plattsburgh, NY back on the map after a difficult recession in the early 90’s saw many jobs disappeared from the manufacturing sector. Politicians of both parties value his opinion and actively seek out his support. Then-Senator Hillary Clinton would seek his input on issues relating to the northern part of the state. The man is engaged in just about every subject that leads to economic development and job creation in the region. Just recently, he was part of Andrew Cuomo’s transition team. That says a lot about his clout and credibility.
Garry is beyond partisan politics. Sure, he is a fiscal conservative and you can tell by his office, which is full of paraphernalia about Ronald Reagan. But above all, he is the Chamber’s president and it is a real passion for him. Under his stewardship, Québec companies have settled in the North Country. Novabus and Bombardier acknowledge readily that Douglas is their best friend. The same could be said of Plattsburgh International Airport. Thinning the border, investing in better security, encouraging the development of new technology and bringing jobs to the North Country round out Garry’s list of priorities and achievements.
Just recently, I participated in his annual “North Country Day” in Washington with Chamber members and associates as well as the Canadian Consul General in Buffalo, Marta Moszczenska. Here I saw up close the Douglas treatment. We met with Senators Kirsten Gillibrand and Charles Schumer, Representative Bill Owens and newly elected members of the House from the Tea Party. We spoke about border security and efficiency, high speed rail and energy needs. The meetings were formal, yet had an intimate touch. Garry sets the tone, never hogs the meeting and ultimately, gets his point across. We felt we had engaged listeners. From a Québec perspective, I was able, with Garry pitching alongside, to push for Senator Schumer’s endorsement of pre-clearance at Montréal’s Central Station as part of our efforts to be part of the Northeast high speed rail corridor. A week later, Senator Schumer came out in favour of pre-clearance.
Garry says that Plattsburgh is Montréal’s American suburb and Québec Premier Jean Charest says Garry is Québec’s best friend in New York State. Well, there is a lot of truth in both these statements. Most of all, in every encounter in my time as Delegate General, I have seen in Garry a man of deep sincerity and passion, relentlessly fighting for his beliefs. Proud to say Garry is Québec’s friend.
Garry is beyond partisan politics. Sure, he is a fiscal conservative and you can tell by his office, which is full of paraphernalia about Ronald Reagan. But above all, he is the Chamber’s president and it is a real passion for him. Under his stewardship, Québec companies have settled in the North Country. Novabus and Bombardier acknowledge readily that Douglas is their best friend. The same could be said of Plattsburgh International Airport. Thinning the border, investing in better security, encouraging the development of new technology and bringing jobs to the North Country round out Garry’s list of priorities and achievements.
Just recently, I participated in his annual “North Country Day” in Washington with Chamber members and associates as well as the Canadian Consul General in Buffalo, Marta Moszczenska. Here I saw up close the Douglas treatment. We met with Senators Kirsten Gillibrand and Charles Schumer, Representative Bill Owens and newly elected members of the House from the Tea Party. We spoke about border security and efficiency, high speed rail and energy needs. The meetings were formal, yet had an intimate touch. Garry sets the tone, never hogs the meeting and ultimately, gets his point across. We felt we had engaged listeners. From a Québec perspective, I was able, with Garry pitching alongside, to push for Senator Schumer’s endorsement of pre-clearance at Montréal’s Central Station as part of our efforts to be part of the Northeast high speed rail corridor. A week later, Senator Schumer came out in favour of pre-clearance.
Garry says that Plattsburgh is Montréal’s American suburb and Québec Premier Jean Charest says Garry is Québec’s best friend in New York State. Well, there is a lot of truth in both these statements. Most of all, in every encounter in my time as Delegate General, I have seen in Garry a man of deep sincerity and passion, relentlessly fighting for his beliefs. Proud to say Garry is Québec’s friend.
April 12, 2011
Gazing into the Crystal Ball
Last week I had an opportunity to speak at the Crystal Ball Conference in Montréal. Conducted under the leadership of the Centre de recherche informatique de Montréal (CRIM), an applied research centre in the information technologies based in Montréal, its goal was to tackle the top tech issues of the future. Sponsors included IBM, Oracle, Telus, Amazon, YPG, and an array of international business-oriented enterprises.
The two-day conference dealt with digital healthcare, web semantics 3.0, mobility and cloud computing. Leaders from all over the globe talked about business opportunities and solutions. IBM's super computer Watson, which rose to fame in February after it participated in three Jeopardy shows, even made a cameo appearance (the chips that lie within Watson were assembled at the IBM's Québec facility.)
My role at the conference was to describe Québec's relationship with the U.S. and how it remains the most important for business and trade in general, and information technology in particular. In 2010, Québec exported $40 billion in goods and services south of the border. This figure, while lower than a decade ago, remains significant when compared with those to the U.K., Germany, France and China where the total exported to all those countries was $6 billion.
I was also able to emphasize the high level of integration of both economies and the fact that over 200 Québec companies, including 25 IT firms - CGI, OneBigPlanet and Optosecurity to name just a few - have facilities in the Mid-Atlantic region.
I also outlined the potential of doing business in emerging information technology sectors such as healthcare, defence, and energy. The U.S. economy is projected to grow by a little over 3% in the current year, but technology growth is expected to be over 7%, much of it in the private sector.
I also outlined the potential of doing business in emerging information technology sectors such as healthcare, defence, and energy. The U.S. economy is projected to grow by a little over 3% in the current year, but technology growth is expected to be over 7%, much of it in the private sector.
I closed by reiterating our engagement to enhance the U.S.-Québec trade relationship, assist our companies to develop greater business opportunity and advance Québec as a solution partner in areas such as energy, transport, and security.
The future looks good indeed.
April 11, 2011
Energy Talk and Federated States
President Obama just recently outlined his new energy vision following two years of setbacks in the Congress. The goals remain the same as in his campaign and in the policy rhetoric of the past: reduce energy dependence on foreign oil and increase the use of renewable energy sources. The politics are, however, more complicated.
When Obama won his election back in November 2008, much of the energy talk centered around climate change. The legislation that came out of the House of Representatives had to do with Renewable Energy Standards and the adoption of a cap and trade system. The Senate, however, was unable to pass a bill for the President’s signature.
The conversation has since changed with Obama’s party, the Democrats, no longer in charge of the House. The economy, while recovering, has not rebounded and this has brought us back to the win-lose dynamic about economic development and environmental protection.
Special interests groups have seen this as an opportunity and whatever emerging consensus that existed in 2008 has given way to confrontation. The election of the Tea Party in Congress, along with the fact that 23 Democrats out of 33 will have to defend their seats in the 2012 election, has led to a lowering of expectations on Capitol Hill. Few believe a bill will surface in the Congress for the President to sign.
A couple of disasters, off shore drilling in the Gulf of Mexico and the on-going nuclear crisis in Japan, have furthered muddled the discussion. It is becoming obvious that no source of energy will be without shortcomings or critics. Any federal legislation coming out of Washington before the election of 2012 will have to come to grips with reality.
The Senate Energy Committee chaired by New Mexico Senator, Jeff Bingaman (D) and ranking member Alaska Senator Lisa Murkowski (R) has made a valiant attempt to be more focussed and change the vocabulary. They are hoping to have a bill come out of their Committee dealing with Clean Energy Standards and are appearing to leave all energy options on the table. It is too early to predict the outcome, but at least, there is an effort to deal with the goals stated by the President.
This brings me to the role of federated states dealing with energy issues. It seems that the states and provinces along the Canada- US border may be doing more to push the conversation further. It appears that good sense has prevailed over politics in those jurisdictions.
Both Canada and the United States are federations with energy and environment seen as shared jurisdictions between the central government and the federated states. Some states have already acted on their own. The Regional Green House Gas Initiative (RGGI) was created as the first market-based regulatory program in the U.S. to reduce GHG’s. It is made up of 10 States in the Northeast and in Mid- Atlantic states. It is the first U.S. cap and trade system and it seems to be working.
The Western Climate Initiative began in 2009 to develop regional targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and it includes a mix of states and Canadian Provinces. Québec, Manitoba, British Columbia and Ontario are partners with Saskatchewan. New Brunswick and Nova Scotia acting as observers. It is an example of formal collaboration between Canada and the United States in dealing with climate change.
Québec and the Northeastern part of the U.S. (New York and the New England states) have long been energy partners and subscribe to climate change goals in their respective jurisdictions. The energy dialogue within those jurisdictions remains as strong as ever. With hydropower along with wind and solar very much a part of their conversation, and with leadership being exercised at the level of the federated states, we can be encouraged that the vision expressed for developing clean energy will not be solely at the discretion of the power that be in Washington.
When Obama won his election back in November 2008, much of the energy talk centered around climate change. The legislation that came out of the House of Representatives had to do with Renewable Energy Standards and the adoption of a cap and trade system. The Senate, however, was unable to pass a bill for the President’s signature.
The conversation has since changed with Obama’s party, the Democrats, no longer in charge of the House. The economy, while recovering, has not rebounded and this has brought us back to the win-lose dynamic about economic development and environmental protection.
Special interests groups have seen this as an opportunity and whatever emerging consensus that existed in 2008 has given way to confrontation. The election of the Tea Party in Congress, along with the fact that 23 Democrats out of 33 will have to defend their seats in the 2012 election, has led to a lowering of expectations on Capitol Hill. Few believe a bill will surface in the Congress for the President to sign.
A couple of disasters, off shore drilling in the Gulf of Mexico and the on-going nuclear crisis in Japan, have furthered muddled the discussion. It is becoming obvious that no source of energy will be without shortcomings or critics. Any federal legislation coming out of Washington before the election of 2012 will have to come to grips with reality.
The Senate Energy Committee chaired by New Mexico Senator, Jeff Bingaman (D) and ranking member Alaska Senator Lisa Murkowski (R) has made a valiant attempt to be more focussed and change the vocabulary. They are hoping to have a bill come out of their Committee dealing with Clean Energy Standards and are appearing to leave all energy options on the table. It is too early to predict the outcome, but at least, there is an effort to deal with the goals stated by the President.
This brings me to the role of federated states dealing with energy issues. It seems that the states and provinces along the Canada- US border may be doing more to push the conversation further. It appears that good sense has prevailed over politics in those jurisdictions.
Both Canada and the United States are federations with energy and environment seen as shared jurisdictions between the central government and the federated states. Some states have already acted on their own. The Regional Green House Gas Initiative (RGGI) was created as the first market-based regulatory program in the U.S. to reduce GHG’s. It is made up of 10 States in the Northeast and in Mid- Atlantic states. It is the first U.S. cap and trade system and it seems to be working.
The Western Climate Initiative began in 2009 to develop regional targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and it includes a mix of states and Canadian Provinces. Québec, Manitoba, British Columbia and Ontario are partners with Saskatchewan. New Brunswick and Nova Scotia acting as observers. It is an example of formal collaboration between Canada and the United States in dealing with climate change.
Québec and the Northeastern part of the U.S. (New York and the New England states) have long been energy partners and subscribe to climate change goals in their respective jurisdictions. The energy dialogue within those jurisdictions remains as strong as ever. With hydropower along with wind and solar very much a part of their conversation, and with leadership being exercised at the level of the federated states, we can be encouraged that the vision expressed for developing clean energy will not be solely at the discretion of the power that be in Washington.
April 6, 2011
Demonstrating Leadership Through Fiscal Responsibility
Posted at Americas Quarterly on April 6, 2011
Now is the season when governments of Canada and the United States present their budgets and outline their fiscal objectives as they pursue their respective economic recoveries. It seems long ago now, but I recall September 15, 2008 when the potential of an economic and financial horror descended on Western economies and threatened to unleash another global depression.
We all remember how the U.S. economy was well on its way to losing close to 15 million jobs. The world’s biggest economy had to bail out its financial sector through the Troubled Asset Recovery Program (TARP) in the midst of a presidential election. Now, developed economies are recovering slowly but surely—and the emphasis is not only on creating jobs but also restoring fiscal health following the recession.
In Canada, the path to fiscal responsibility began in the 1990s and culminated later that decade with balanced or surplus budgets at both the federal and the provincial levels. Canada resisted the deregulation bug of the financial sector, giving it an advantage when the worst recession since the 1930s hit. Deficits have returned but Canada’s financial sector did not need a bailout.
In the U.S., a robust job market in the 1990s aided measures undertaken to bring about fiscal health. At the end of the Clinton years, the country had balanced budgets and surpluses—allowing it to pare down the debt. Then 9/11 occurred, and fiscal restraint was to be tested severely.
President George W. Bush was elected and brought in the biggest tax cut for middle to high income earners in history. But wars in Iraq and Afghanistan compromised his good intentions and resulted in the highest deficit and debt in history by the end of his presidency.
President Obama, once elected, continued TARP to prevent financial collapse and brought in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA). While the U.S. economy has created over 1.8 million jobs in 13 months, the recovery remains modest. The Tea Party’s ascendance has accelerated the political conversation, now dominated by fiscal issues.
States are engaged in drastic cuts to maintain solvency, sometimes confronting with labor unions about their collective bargaining rights. Canadian provinces have had to once again begin severe austerity programs to restore fiscal health. The recession, not being as deep as in the U.S., has given the provinces an edge—but not a pass.
In the past two weeks, I have seen how two jurisdictions (Québec and New York) have handled their fiscal challenges.
Québec is now on schedule to eliminate its annual deficit in two years by balancing a mixture of significant cuts and raising targeted revenue. New York State has essentially balanced its budget on time by making significant cuts, while respecting an electoral promise not to raise taxes.
On April 8, it is possible that the U.S. federal government will shut down because of an impasse between the White House and House of Representatives. The accomplishments in Québec and New York could serve as models amid this showdown. Both the U.S. executive and legislative branches will have to examine both their spending and revenue measures. Exercising fiscal responsibility can be the path to leadership.
True, this process is not always easy—and certainly not devoid of passionate argument. But in the cases of New York and Québec, leadership requires tackling the problem and acting with courage to begin to restore fiscal health. This is what voters, who make choices every month to balance their own personal budgets, expect—and it works in the long run.
Now is the season when governments of Canada and the United States present their budgets and outline their fiscal objectives as they pursue their respective economic recoveries. It seems long ago now, but I recall September 15, 2008 when the potential of an economic and financial horror descended on Western economies and threatened to unleash another global depression.
We all remember how the U.S. economy was well on its way to losing close to 15 million jobs. The world’s biggest economy had to bail out its financial sector through the Troubled Asset Recovery Program (TARP) in the midst of a presidential election. Now, developed economies are recovering slowly but surely—and the emphasis is not only on creating jobs but also restoring fiscal health following the recession.
In Canada, the path to fiscal responsibility began in the 1990s and culminated later that decade with balanced or surplus budgets at both the federal and the provincial levels. Canada resisted the deregulation bug of the financial sector, giving it an advantage when the worst recession since the 1930s hit. Deficits have returned but Canada’s financial sector did not need a bailout.
In the U.S., a robust job market in the 1990s aided measures undertaken to bring about fiscal health. At the end of the Clinton years, the country had balanced budgets and surpluses—allowing it to pare down the debt. Then 9/11 occurred, and fiscal restraint was to be tested severely.
President George W. Bush was elected and brought in the biggest tax cut for middle to high income earners in history. But wars in Iraq and Afghanistan compromised his good intentions and resulted in the highest deficit and debt in history by the end of his presidency.
President Obama, once elected, continued TARP to prevent financial collapse and brought in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA). While the U.S. economy has created over 1.8 million jobs in 13 months, the recovery remains modest. The Tea Party’s ascendance has accelerated the political conversation, now dominated by fiscal issues.
States are engaged in drastic cuts to maintain solvency, sometimes confronting with labor unions about their collective bargaining rights. Canadian provinces have had to once again begin severe austerity programs to restore fiscal health. The recession, not being as deep as in the U.S., has given the provinces an edge—but not a pass.
In the past two weeks, I have seen how two jurisdictions (Québec and New York) have handled their fiscal challenges.
Québec is now on schedule to eliminate its annual deficit in two years by balancing a mixture of significant cuts and raising targeted revenue. New York State has essentially balanced its budget on time by making significant cuts, while respecting an electoral promise not to raise taxes.
On April 8, it is possible that the U.S. federal government will shut down because of an impasse between the White House and House of Representatives. The accomplishments in Québec and New York could serve as models amid this showdown. Both the U.S. executive and legislative branches will have to examine both their spending and revenue measures. Exercising fiscal responsibility can be the path to leadership.
True, this process is not always easy—and certainly not devoid of passionate argument. But in the cases of New York and Québec, leadership requires tackling the problem and acting with courage to begin to restore fiscal health. This is what voters, who make choices every month to balance their own personal budgets, expect—and it works in the long run.
Keeping the Best Teachers
In recent months, we have seen emerging a debate in the realm of education that seems to transcend all conventional discussions. Collective bargaining rights, the need to compete globally, the presence of technology in the classroom, and the need to invest more in education have dominated much of the discussion. The showdown in Wisconsin and New Jersey over collective bargaining rights, the Obama “Race to the TOP” initiative, Mayor Bloomberg’s rhetoric about investing and improving the education output as well as my own Québec government’s budget measures on education are cases in point and have opened the way to a much needed conversation about what is essential to education, namely the actual importance of teaching.
I have spent over a decade teaching in a classroom, most of it at the public high school level and some at the university level. What really concerns policy makers and the public debate these days is the public sector system from kindergarten to high school. Here is where the appetite for learning, or lack of it, is played out and how the love of teaching becomes so vital for long term success.
Teaching is conveying knowledge, encouraging curiosity, provoking learning, nurturing positive values, and inspiring discovery. To succeed as a teacher, you must love what you do and need to remain in a learning phase and be open to change and innovation in how to communicate the subject matter. Communication in the classroom is essential to learning and to engagement by students. High dropout rates can be attributed to a number of factors, but the teacher and student relationship has to remain the central focal point of education.
True, we must invest in the best equipment, hire the best teachers, develop the best curriculum and graduate students able to fulfil their potential and be able to compete in a complex and interrelated world. This is what all interested parties assert in the conversation. But to succeed, we must go beyond the talk.
Interested parties including policy makers, administrators, parents and unions all have a stake and a point of view about the current state of education and the need to reform. Unions often wish to protect the hard earned collective bargaining gains such as seniority and teacher tenure. That is their raison d’etre. The hope is that they are also open to thinking outside the box and taking into consideration long-term benefits for all. As for parents, they only want what is best for their children and policy makers want to have a labor force able to compete with the top graduates in the world. The politicians must factor in all these ingredients in their decision making.
The problem that is becoming the central point in the debate, however, is how to reconcile hard earned labor gains for teachers and keeping the best teachers in the classroom, irrespective of seniority and tenure. Teachers’ salaries in North America remain low and uncompetitive in much of the western world. The profession itself often fails to be recognized as vital to the economic lifeblood of a nation. When do we hear from the lips of politicians positive words about the importance of teaching in our society? Why should a teacher’s salary be so uncompetitive with that of a lawyer or a construction worker for instance? I know we have to have a sense of realism and perspective but this current conversation must lead to real change or we weaken ourselves for the future.
In a recent exposé by Secretary of Education Arne Duncan at the annual winter’s National Governors Association forum, the discussion centered on how to recruit top talent for the classroom and keep them in the profession. The outcome of this conversation will be a determining one for the future and the quality of education. Much of the Western world, feeling the growing competitive advantage of the educational systems in Asia, will have to engage for real in this conversation if we are to keep the best teachers. And the emerging debate in some parts of the U.S. is one to watch and hopefully will soon have repercussions beyond.
I have spent over a decade teaching in a classroom, most of it at the public high school level and some at the university level. What really concerns policy makers and the public debate these days is the public sector system from kindergarten to high school. Here is where the appetite for learning, or lack of it, is played out and how the love of teaching becomes so vital for long term success.
Teaching is conveying knowledge, encouraging curiosity, provoking learning, nurturing positive values, and inspiring discovery. To succeed as a teacher, you must love what you do and need to remain in a learning phase and be open to change and innovation in how to communicate the subject matter. Communication in the classroom is essential to learning and to engagement by students. High dropout rates can be attributed to a number of factors, but the teacher and student relationship has to remain the central focal point of education.
True, we must invest in the best equipment, hire the best teachers, develop the best curriculum and graduate students able to fulfil their potential and be able to compete in a complex and interrelated world. This is what all interested parties assert in the conversation. But to succeed, we must go beyond the talk.
Interested parties including policy makers, administrators, parents and unions all have a stake and a point of view about the current state of education and the need to reform. Unions often wish to protect the hard earned collective bargaining gains such as seniority and teacher tenure. That is their raison d’etre. The hope is that they are also open to thinking outside the box and taking into consideration long-term benefits for all. As for parents, they only want what is best for their children and policy makers want to have a labor force able to compete with the top graduates in the world. The politicians must factor in all these ingredients in their decision making.
The problem that is becoming the central point in the debate, however, is how to reconcile hard earned labor gains for teachers and keeping the best teachers in the classroom, irrespective of seniority and tenure. Teachers’ salaries in North America remain low and uncompetitive in much of the western world. The profession itself often fails to be recognized as vital to the economic lifeblood of a nation. When do we hear from the lips of politicians positive words about the importance of teaching in our society? Why should a teacher’s salary be so uncompetitive with that of a lawyer or a construction worker for instance? I know we have to have a sense of realism and perspective but this current conversation must lead to real change or we weaken ourselves for the future.
In a recent exposé by Secretary of Education Arne Duncan at the annual winter’s National Governors Association forum, the discussion centered on how to recruit top talent for the classroom and keep them in the profession. The outcome of this conversation will be a determining one for the future and the quality of education. Much of the Western world, feeling the growing competitive advantage of the educational systems in Asia, will have to engage for real in this conversation if we are to keep the best teachers. And the emerging debate in some parts of the U.S. is one to watch and hopefully will soon have repercussions beyond.
April 1, 2011
Ambassadors in Action
Just recently, I wrote about how culture was a winning proposition for Québec’s international presence. In fact, this year we are celebrating the 50th anniversary of Québec’s Ministry of Culture. And last week, I saw once again first hand how culture is often the best calling card for Québec.
On March 24, the Montréal Chamber Music Festival held a concert at my residence featuring the distinguished cellist and artistic and executive director of the Festival, Denis Brott, along with winner of the Prix d'Europe, Marie-Ève Poupart, and Canada's award-winning Afiara String Quartet. The artistry and the choice of music were, quite frankly, breathtaking. The guests were mostly New Yorkers and the event was organized by my colleagues at Québec Government Office, in collaboration with the Festival’s partners, Bombardier and TD Bank. Representatives from the public and private sectors together with artists hailing from Québec and other regions of Canada showed that culture transcends boundaries, mobilizes support and inspires the best in all of us.
The following nights, March 25 and 26, I attended the New Directors/New Films Festival at MoMA where two Québec films and directors were featured - Denis Villeneuve’s Oscar nominated film, Incendies, and Denis Côté’s Curling, in its first festival screening in New York City. The screenings were well attended and both Villeneuve and Côté displayed great insight and wit as they fielded questions from the audience. Their work was inspiring and their talent so very promising for greater international acclaim that is certain to come soon. Again, Québec culture is seen to be expanding beyond its borders.
Our artists are indeed true ambassadors in action. In recent decades, with film directors such as Denys Arcand and Xavier Dolan, pop stars like Céline Dion, classical musicians like Yannick Nézet-Séguin, circus arts innovators such as Cirque du Soleil, and stage and multimedia visionaries like Robert Lepage, Québec’s record on the international cultural stage is one of accomplishment and even greater promise. At the end of the day, culture is clearly a winning proposition and the world is better for it.
On March 24, the Montréal Chamber Music Festival held a concert at my residence featuring the distinguished cellist and artistic and executive director of the Festival, Denis Brott, along with winner of the Prix d'Europe, Marie-Ève Poupart, and Canada's award-winning Afiara String Quartet. The artistry and the choice of music were, quite frankly, breathtaking. The guests were mostly New Yorkers and the event was organized by my colleagues at Québec Government Office, in collaboration with the Festival’s partners, Bombardier and TD Bank. Representatives from the public and private sectors together with artists hailing from Québec and other regions of Canada showed that culture transcends boundaries, mobilizes support and inspires the best in all of us.
The following nights, March 25 and 26, I attended the New Directors/New Films Festival at MoMA where two Québec films and directors were featured - Denis Villeneuve’s Oscar nominated film, Incendies, and Denis Côté’s Curling, in its first festival screening in New York City. The screenings were well attended and both Villeneuve and Côté displayed great insight and wit as they fielded questions from the audience. Their work was inspiring and their talent so very promising for greater international acclaim that is certain to come soon. Again, Québec culture is seen to be expanding beyond its borders.
Our artists are indeed true ambassadors in action. In recent decades, with film directors such as Denys Arcand and Xavier Dolan, pop stars like Céline Dion, classical musicians like Yannick Nézet-Séguin, circus arts innovators such as Cirque du Soleil, and stage and multimedia visionaries like Robert Lepage, Québec’s record on the international cultural stage is one of accomplishment and even greater promise. At the end of the day, culture is clearly a winning proposition and the world is better for it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
