Red Carpets and Divisions

People woke up a couple of days ago to discover that access to the Prime Minister by industry groups, oil companies, and many of the country’s chief executives has proved to be something of a revolving door – in and out at will.  Records kept by the Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying revealed that the PM, cabinet ministers and chief bureaucrats have had pretty full dance cards with the most powerful influences in the land.I’m fairly sure it’s always been that way, whatever the brand of government, but new rules have now brought the frequency of such lobbying activities out into the open.  We now learn that 70% of lobbying activity targeted towards the PM is from representatives of industry.  Suncor (of oil sands fame notoriety) had more access than other oil groups.None of us is surprised to learn that groups lobbying on the “softer” vital issues of the day, such as healthcare, climate change, or international development, experienced far frostier receptions and less frequent access.  According to the PMO, such regular admission to the highest office holder in Canada was only natural, given the turbulence of world economies in the last two years.  There is likely some truth to this, but anyone in Ottawa will tell you that these privileged groups have always received red carpet treatment.All of this might be acceptable if there was something to show for it.  We all recognize the importance of corporate and business activity in Canada; we have advanced in part due to this country’s propensity to generate growth and provide employment.  Yet for all that prosperity – and the exclusive access to the PM – there is increasing concern that over the last couple of decades something is amiss.  With all that access, where is the social dividend?  Why such little action on the environment, or poverty, or increasingly high costs of education and healthcare?  For all our wealth, we seem to have displayed little public wisdom.  Our soldiers aren’t getting their full health benefits; seniors can’t afford their prescriptions; the planet can’t survive our waste; employment is no longer secure; and public trust in our institutions is at an all time low.It’s this last point that is perhaps the most disturbing.  The more the industrial and corporate barons fail to invest in the “people” structure of this land, the more those same leaders get away with their lack of attention by placing the blame on government.  That’s not too difficult to comprehend, since they see government and its power to regulate as obstacles to their greater pursuit – profits.  It prefers to envision consumers as the new citizens who can do more with their salaries than they can with their votes.  Their success can easily be measured by the degree to which the functions of government have been hollowed out.  Mysteriously through that process, they have convinced citizens that the free market is their best defense against authority, while at the same time such an outlook actually strips us of our moral capacity as citizens to band together to solve our greatest problems.And the greatest offshoot of all this isn’t prosperity but inequality.  As much as the corporate world states its independence from this development, it is nevertheless complicit in it.  The present state of inequality in Canada is not incidental to the new corporatism but is its very premise.  For it to flourish it requires more consumers, not better citizens.  If citizens permitted their ethics and consciences to impact their spending choices, Canada would be a far different place, and corporate Canada would work in partnership with citizens to enhance the public good.  What we have instead are two societies – angry and divided.  One emphasizes profit above all, the other puts its priority on service and responsibility.  These two worlds are now more apart than they have been in recent memory.  Until the red carpet is rolled out for the environmental stewards, nurses, seniors, the underprivileged, educators, researchers, students, and so many others like them who constitute “human” society, discovering a balanced approach to our future is likely a long way off.