Key Takeaways:
- The United States’ National Security Strategy has raised concerns for Canada, with the Trump administration’s "Trump Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine" aiming to deny non-Hemispheric competitors access to strategically vital assets in the Hemisphere.
- Canada’s Minister of Energy and Natural Resources, Tim Hodgson, has expressed concerns about the US’s intentions and the need for Canada to respond to the changing global landscape.
- Canada needs to focus on building its own infrastructure and economy, rather than relying on the US or other countries, and to promote a culture of investment in physical and human capital.
- The Canadian government has been criticized for its lack of planning and investment in infrastructure, with a national infrastructure assessment being released five years after it was promised.
- There are examples of Canadian cities and towns investing in ambitious projects, such as the expansion of the port in Goderich, Ontario, and the development of a downtown cultural campus in Calgary.
Introduction to the US National Security Strategy
The recent interview of Minister of Energy and Natural Resources Tim Hodgson with La Presse has brought attention to the United States’ National Security Strategy and its implications for Canada. Hodgson expressed concerns about the Trump administration’s intentions, particularly with regards to the "Trump Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine," which aims to deny non-Hemispheric competitors access to strategically vital assets in the Hemisphere. This doctrine has raised concerns about the US’s plans for the region and its potential impact on Canada’s sovereignty and economy.
Canada’s Response to the US National Security Strategy
Hodgson’s comments highlight the need for Canada to respond to the changing global landscape and to prioritize its own interests. This includes building its own infrastructure and economy, rather than relying on the US or other countries. However, Canada’s lack of investment in infrastructure and its over-reliance on foreign capital have hindered its ability to respond effectively to the challenges posed by the US National Security Strategy. As Hodgson noted, "We live in a world where we are regularly told we should be the fifty-first state. It is a world where Denmark is being asked to relinquish its territorial sovereignty. We live in a world where authoritarian leaders believe they can change Ukraine’s borders by force."
The Need for Investment in Infrastructure
The Canadian government has been criticized for its lack of planning and investment in infrastructure. A national infrastructure assessment was promised five years ago, but it was only recently released. The assessment highlights the need for significant investment in infrastructure, including housing, transportation, and water management. However, the government’s approach to infrastructure development has been ad hoc and lacking in coherence, with multiple orders of government working at cross-purposes and contributing to a complex regulatory environment. As the Infrastructure Council noted, "We consistently heard that infrastructure planning and delivery in Canada has become incredibly, unnecessarily, complex, and is failing to respond to the needs of Canadians."
Examples of Ambitious Projects
Despite the challenges, there are examples of Canadian cities and towns investing in ambitious projects. For instance, the town of Goderich, Ontario, is planning to quadruple the size of its port to expand lake-borne transport. Calgary is investing half a billion dollars in a downtown cultural campus, having already doubled the size of its convention centre. These projects demonstrate that it is possible for Canada to think big and invest in its own infrastructure and economy. As Paul Wells notes, "Building things is so hard, there’s less time for tribes." By focusing on building and investing in physical and human capital, Canada can create a more cohesive and ambitious society.
The Importance of a Culture of Investment
The lack of investment in infrastructure and the over-reliance on foreign capital are symptoms of a broader cultural problem in Canada. The country has a profligacy that is cultural, with a society that spends most of its time debating income support versus tax cuts and mistrusts investment in physical and human capital. To address this, Canada needs to promote a culture of investment and ambition, where building things and creating value are valued and encouraged. This requires a mindset shift, where Canadians prioritize quality and ambition in both public and private investment. As Wells notes, "It’s time, at last, for Canadians to become Canada’s designer and builder of livable cities." By doing so, Canada can create a more prosperous and sustainable future for itself.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the US National Security Strategy has raised concerns for Canada, and the country needs to respond by building its own infrastructure and economy. The lack of investment in infrastructure and the over-reliance on foreign capital have hindered Canada’s ability to respond effectively to the challenges posed by the US National Security Strategy. However, there are examples of Canadian cities and towns investing in ambitious projects, and the country needs to promote a culture of investment and ambition to create a more cohesive and prosperous society. As the world becomes increasingly complex and uncertain, Canada needs to prioritize its own interests and invest in its own future. By doing so, Canada can create a brighter future for itself and become a more significant player on the global stage.