Securing Canadian sovereignty in a POST-COVID world
Ifollowed with interest over the last week as Canada’s chief public health officer, Dr. Theresa Tam, came under scrutiny for her role in the country’s tepid response to COVID-19, as it developed through January. Largely having to rely upon information from the World Health Organization, itself using questionable Chinese data about the origins and number of cases of the virus, Tam parroted the UN agency’s position and resisted calls for a mandatory quarantine of people coming into Canada. Regardless of how one might feel about the risk associated with the COVID-19 virus and the efficacy of the Canadian response to date, I was sympathetic to Tam, since Canada clearly lacks the means to deliver an independent assessment for decision- makers to rely upon.
Following a 33- year career in the Royal Canadian Air Force ( RCAF), I have come to deeply appreciate the concept of sovereignty. According to veteran pollster John Bright, who has undertaken numerous polls on this issue, sovereignty is a priority for Canadians — whether Canada has the means to act independently or sovereignly, however, is generally not well understood. Oxford defines sovereignty as “the complete power to govern a country.” Thus, to be sovereign, the government unquestionably requires the means to act decisively and independently across a broad range of contingencies. Unfortunately for Tam, the inability of the government to independently assess the nascent crisis likely put Canadians at greater risk. And I wonder what the implications of this is on Canada’s political leadership.
And what of our domestic supply chains? In an era of globalization, what key parts of Canadian industry need to be independent of outside influence to ensure our sovereignty? Hearing the news that Canadian aircraft are returning empty from China is troubling. Learning that we were reliant on China for critical personal protective equipment ( PPE) was shocking, if not galling, given the present status of the relationship between our two countries. I find it difficult to understand why Canada is outsourcing the production of this life- saving equipment when we should have learned our lesson following the 2003 SARS epidemic. Add to this the fact that much of the PPE we did manage to procure from China was defective, it beggars the question of our nation’s ability to ensure the production and quality of critical front- line equipment, which is an essential element of any sovereign nation.
What about Canadian food security? While it would at one time have been unfathomable that the largest unprotected border in the world between Canada and the United States could be closed, now it is a stark reality. And while the transport of food goods across the border remains one of the few exceptions to the closure, it lays bare our complete reliance on the cross- border flow of goods for everyday life to continue in this country. Should we not have invested in key parts of our food production supply chain to ensure we are self-sufficient?
From my vantage point and experience, sovereignty comes with a cost — and it is a cost that must be paid up front to be effective. As commander of the RCAF, I argued that in order for Canada’s Air Force to remain the guarantor of Canadian
LEARNING THAT WE WERE RELIANT ON CHINA FOR CRITICAL ... (PPE) WAS SHOCKING.
sovereignty — meaning that we had the independent means to deter and, if required, use deadly force to protect Canada and Canadians — procuring a modern fighter jet with the ability to defeat potential adversaries was paramount.
Having the ability to act independently and protect Canadians during national disasters or pandemics is equally as important as the country’s national defence. It is ironic that the upfront cost of being prepared so that we have sovereign choices when presented with a crisis will undoubtedly prove to be relatively minor in comparison with the cost of the complete shutdown of the Canadian economy.