BP-453E
LINGUISTIC AND CULTURAL
DIVERSITY IN THE
CONTEXT OF ECONOMIC INTEGRATION OF THE AMERICAS
Prepared by:
René Lemieux, Michel Rossignol
Political and Social Affairs Division
August 1997
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SUMMARY
INTRODUCTION
ACTION TAKEN BY CANADA TO
MAINTAIN AND PROMOTE
LINGUISTIC
DIVERSITY
A. Legislative
Measures
B. Agencies
ACTION TAKEN BY CANADA TO
MAINTAIN AND PROMOTE
CULTURAL
DIVERSITY
A.
Canadian Multicultural Policy
B. Canadian
Cultural Policy
FTA AND NAFTA CLAUSES INTENDED TO
MAINTAIN
AND PROMOTE LINGUISTIC AND
CULTURAL DIVERSITY
ROLES OF PARLIAMENTARIANS
A. As Representatives
B. As Legislators
C. In Interparliamentary Organizations
CONCLUSION
LINGUISTIC AND CULTURAL
DIVERSITY IN THE
CONTEXT OF ECONOMIC INTEGRATION OF THE AMERICAS*
SUMMARY
The interpenetration of cultures through
communications networks and freer trade presents Canada with both risks and opportunities.
The strong cultural presence of the United State in Canada has always set us a challenge,
one that we have met by taking linguistic multicultural and cultural measures that have
contributed to the preservation of our linguistic and cultural diversity.
In addition to such domestic action,
Canada has also looked beyond its borders; when the time came to create broader
international trading blocs, it made sure the Canada-United States Free Trade Agreement
and the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) contained clauses exempting its
cultural industries from certain of their provisions.
Canadas experience in defending and
promoting its linguistic and cultural diversity, both domestically and internationally,
has made it a key player in the expansion of NAFTA and the creation of a pan-American free
trade zone.
Parliamentarians are taking part in
efforts to maintain this diversity, and certainly have a role to play in studying the
repercussions of hemispheric economic integration on the rights of linguistic groups and
Canadas cultural identity. As citizens representatives in their ridings and as
legislators, parliamentarians champion citizens claims and take part in policy
development in these areas. Moreover, through their participation in the work of
interparliamentary organizations, they can inform their colleagues in other countries of
the kind of problems facing Canada and compare notes on solutions to common problems.
On the occasion of the Parliamentary
Conference of the Americas, Canadian parliamentarians will have the opportunity to
exchange views on many subjects with their colleagues from a number of other countries in
the hemisphere and to consider setting up a parliamentary network that could serve as a
framework for discussions at the level of the Americas as a whole.
The interpenetration of cultures through
communications networks has always been a risk and an opportunity. [Translation]
Armand Mattelart(1)
INTRODUCTION
There are those who believe that the
elimination of trade barriers between the various countries of the Americas, together with
the limited access some of these countries have to communications technologies, bring
risks to the language and culture of certain states or communities. These persons hold
that the interpenetration of economies leads to the interpenetration of languages and
cultures and threatens to swallow up specific cultural traits.
Parliamentarians taking part in the
workshops on culture, language and communication at the Parliamentary Conference of the
Americas will be invited to discuss ways and means of ensuring the preservation of
linguistic and cultural diversity in the context of economic integration of the Americas;
among other things, they will be particularly called upon to examine protection measures
such as the inclusion of cultural exemption clauses in hemispheric economic agreements,
and to reflect on the role they themselves may play in this regard.
Canada is a country with two official
languages, numerous cultural traditions and an aboriginal population whose cultural
backgrounds are very varied. Though such diversity may today be a source of tensions among
Canadas various political stakeholders, and may even have resulted in a national
identity crisis, paradoxically it remains a potent force in the fight against the strong
linguistic and cultural pressures exercised by our omnipresent American neighbour. It is
imperative, therefore, for Canada to ensure that its linguistic and cultural diversity is
preserved and remains vital.
Above all, the state must take action
domestically if it hopes to maintain and promote its populations linguistic and
cultural diversity. It would be futile to try to maintain this diversity in the context of
hemispheric or indeed global economic integration if nothing was done to protect it at
home.
The defense and promotion of linguistic
and cultural diversity is an integral part of the Canadian governments policies, as
is clear from Acts and regulations and the various institutions, programs and activities
that have been created, as will be briefly described below. These measures are intended to
imbue Canadians with a sense of belonging and of having a distinct identity, thereby
strengthening national unity.
This philosophy was expressed during the
negotiations leading to the international trade liberalization agreements and, at the
signing of these, particularly the Canada-United States Free Trade Agreement (FTA) and the
North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the agreements sponsored by the World
Trade Organization. Indications are that Canada will follow this model once again when the
time comes to hold negotiations for the expansion of NAFTA and the creation of a
pan-American free trade zone.
ACTION TAKEN BY CANADA TO MAINTAIN
AND PROMOTE
LINGUISTIC
DIVERSITY
Canadas linguistic diversity
results from the fact that it has two official languages English and French
as well as a multitude of indigenous languages and the various "heritage"
languages with which successive generations of immigrants from many countries have
enriched our linguistic tapestry. Almost a quarter of all Canadians, 24.3% to be precise,
have French as their mother tongue, making it the most commonly spoken language after
English. Though the majority of Canadas francophone population is concentrated
geographically within the province of Quebec, there are francophone minorities from one
end of Canada to the other. The francophone majority in Quebec and the francophone
minorities elsewhere in Canada therefore constitute a linguistic minority within all North
America, where the vast majority are anglophone. Paradoxically, Quebec anglophones find
themselves in the minority in that province even though they belong to the linguistic
majority in Canada and on the North American continent.
A. Legislative
Measures
In Canada, the Canadian Charter of
Rights and Freedoms, passed by Parliament in 1982, re-states and refines elements of
the Constitution Act of 1867 with respect to official languages. French and English
are stated to be Canadas two official languages, possessing equal status, rights and
privileges in their use before the courts and in the institutions of the Parliament and
Government of Canada and the Government of New Brunswick. The Charter also guarantees
that, where numbers warrant, public funds shall be used to provide education in their
mother tongue for official language minorities.
These two pieces of legislation are
supplemented by the Official Languages Act of 1988, which grants equal status to
French and English before the courts, in Parliament and throughout areas of federal
jurisdiction. It spells out the federal governments commitment to supporting and
fostering the flourishing of official language minorities and encouraging progress toward
equal status and use of the French and English languages within Canadian society.
In addition to these Acts, the Canadian
Human Rights Act which is more general in its scope, also provides a safeguard for
human rights. It is intended to ensure equal opportunity for all and to eliminate
discrimination in areas of federal jurisdiction. The Act outlaws all discrimination based
on age, sex, race or any other of the enumerated factors. It gives protection against such
discrimination to anyone living in Canada, whether the discrimination is exercised in or
by federal government departments, agencies or Crown corporations, by federally regulated
organizations, or by industries, such as chartered banks, airlines, radio and television
broadcasters, and interprovincial telephone and telecommunications companies.
B. Agencies
The Office of the Commissioner of Official
Languages is a federal office whose mandate is to ensure respect for the linguistic rights
of all Canadians, including those who make up the countrys official language
minorities, as stipulated in the Official Languages Act and the Canadian Charter
of Rights and Freedoms. The Commissioner reports regularly to Parliament on what
progress, if any, has been made in that regard and on the investigations he has carried
out into complaints received. His role is at once that of an ombudsman, an auditor and a
promoter of linguistic equality. His main duties are directly concerned with the promotion
of linguistic and cultural diversity, as indicated in his Annual Report:
[...] the chief quality of the Office: the
capacity to stimulate, to accelerate and to foster progress while promoting open dialogue,
accommodation and mutual respect between our two language communities, whether they live
in majority or minority settings.(2)
The Minister of Canadian Heritage has such
responsibilities as fostering progress toward equal status and use for French and English
and encouraging the promotion and development of official language minorities across the
country. To that end, the Department of Canadian Heritage administers assistance programs,
in particular the Official Languages in Education Program under which the Canadian
government refunds to provincial and territorial governments part of the expenditures they
incur for the education of linguistic minorities.
ACTION TAKEN BY CANADA TO MAINTAIN AND
PROMOTE
CULTURAL
DIVERSITY
In Canada, action taken to maintain
and promote cultural diversity may be considered under two headings: multicultural policy
and cultural policy.
A.
Canadian Multicultural Policy
Even though it is still true that most of
the population are descended from the two European nations that colonized and founded
Canada, today, thanks to our active immigration policy, 31% of Canadians are of neither
British nor French descent. This multicultural diversity ultimately gave rise to a
Canadian multicultural policy as reflected in section 27 of the Canadian Charter of
Rights and Freedoms, which states:
This Charter shall be interpreted in a
manner consistent with the preservation and enhancement of the multicultural heritage of
Canadians.
Canadas policy is based on the goals
of the Multiculturalism Act; namely, to preserve and enhance multiculturalism in
Canada, to facilitate the preservation of culture and language, to fight against
discrimination, to foster awareness and comprehension of cultures and to promote
institutional changes at the federal level that will reflect the multicultural dimension.
Responsibility for enforcement of the Act
lies with the Minister of Canadian Heritage and Secretary of State for Multiculturalism
and the Status of Women. A number of programs are charged with carrying out this
responsibility, for example Race Relations and Cross-cultural Understanding, Community
Support and Participation, and Heritage Cultures and Languages.
B. Canadian
Cultural Policy
Feelings of belonging and cultural
identity are in many ways the result of familiarity with the special characteristics of
ones own community and those around it. Canadas internal cultural cohesiveness
has long been threatened by a wide range of factors, especially the omnipresent foreign
cultural products of the United States.
The Canadian population is small compared
to the size of the country and is, in addition, concentrated in a narrow 5,514-kilometre
corridor along the U.S. border, with relatively easy access to U.S. culture. On the other
hand, Canadian cultural products must contend with the problems created by the distance
between communities, the division of the market into two linguistic groups, and tension
between economic and cultural imperatives. The challenge for government is to provide
choices that allow for access to Canadian culture without in any way limiting access to
foreign cultural products.
In such a context, Canadian culture would
scarcely have been able to develop without direct or indirect government support. Since
the early days of cinema and radio, the Canadian government has had to intervene to ensure
that Canadians had the opportunity to hear, see, read and communicate with one another.
This development with respect to culture was only an extension of government policies
already well established in other sectors, intended to encourage exchanges between the
east and the west of the country.
Such nationalist policies were responsible
for such things as creation of the countrys main means of transportation and
communicationrailroads, telegraph lines, road transportation, shipping routes,
airlines and, finally, land-based and satellite communications. Government support for
todays most advanced technology, the information highway, is grounded in the same
philosophy of enabling Canadians from coast to coast to use Canadian infrastructures,
ensuring access to Canadian products through these infrastructures and promoting the
Canadian products themselves.
Today, Canada has a huge arsenal of Acts,
regulations, institutions, programs and activities created by the federal government,
including established public services and institutions, such as the Canadian Broadcasting
Corporation, direct funding, financial initiatives and investment incentives, tariffs,
restrictions on Canadian ownership, Canadian content requirements, statutory rights and
international trade agreements. They are intended to ensure Canadian cultural production
by supporting creators and producers, facilitating public access to the resulting
products, strengthening domestic distribution infrastructures and preserving cultural
heritage for future generations.
In addition to the above-mentioned
Department of Canadian Heritage, the main government institutions supporting, protecting
or preserving Canadian culture are: the Canada Council for the Arts, the National Arts
Centre, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, the National Film Board, Telefilm Canada,
the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, the National Gallery of
Canada, the Canadian Museum of Civilization, the Canadian Museum of Nature, the National
Museum of Science and Technology, the National Archives of Canada and the National Library
of Canada.
Some of the laws that play a leading role
in linguistic and multicultural policy have already been mentioned. Because of its key
role on the cultural scene, the Broadcasting Act should be added Its objectives
with regard to Canadian content on radio and television have enabled the Canadian
Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission to establish regulations that guarantee
Canadians access to Canadian programming. These measures have led to the emergence of
Canadian radio, video and television services and a domestic production industry of high
quality. They have also provided air time for hundreds of Canadian artists, some of whom
have gone on to earn international reputations.
The measures taken by Canada to ensure its
cultural sovereignty are threatened in a variety of ways. Television programs from outside
the country enter Canada and today the Internet, a new arrival on the telecommunications
scene that is taking over the world with its astonishing capabilities and the amazing
speed with which it transmits audio-visual data, is increasingly present in Canadian
businesses, government institutions and homes. As in other fields in earlier times, Canada
has reacted quickly to this new phenomenon in order to ensure Canadian content and
infrastructure without limiting access to foreign content. Today Canada has a highly
developed information highway strategy which recognizes the importance of
telecommunications in the transmission of culture by taking as one of its three
objectives, "to reinforce Canadian sovereignty and cultural identity."(3)
FTA AND NAFTA CLAUSES INTENDED TO
MAINTAIN
AND PROMOTE LINGUISTIC AND CULTURAL
DIVERSITY
At a time when vast international
economic blocs are being created, the importance of culture in international trade, the
dominance of U.S. culture in Canada and the leading role played by culture as a means of
expression are all turning the governments attention to cultural activities.
During the past decade, Canada has joined
other countries in reaching a number of international agreements on trade liberalization.
In the context of increased economic interdependence, the promotion of linguistic and
cultural diversity assumes even greater importance in that it enables Canadians to better
define themselves and allows Canada to distinguish itself from other countries.
Since the Canadian government had
established domestic policies to promote linguistic and cultural diversity well before the
international agreements were reached, it was natural to continue this approach in the
international arena by ensuring that the agreements contained clauses to protect Canadian
cultural industries and the fundamental cultural interests of all Canadians.
In the American hemisphere, Canada signed
two free trade agreements, the Canada-United States Free Trade Agreement (FTA) and the
North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), both of which contain a clause(4) exempting Canadian cultural industries(5) from the provisions of these agreements. The United States, however,
has protected itself by inserting a notwithstanding clause that would allow it to take
reprisals with an equivalent trade effect should Canada use its exemption.
The cultural exemptions under the FTA and
NAFTA have not yet been invoked by either party, and there is thus no way of predicting
whether they will be sufficient to enable Canada to create new cultural measures or
maintain those that exist. Canada has cause for concern, however, since it was recently
involved in a bitter dispute in this area.
In response to a challenge brought by the
United States to the World Trade Organization (WTO), which is responsible for agreements
such as the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trades (GATT), two decisions were reached in
1997 overruling four measures taken by Canada in support of Canadian magazines. Although
these decisions do not cast any doubt on the ability of Canada, or any other WTO member
nation, to take action to protect its cultural identity, the fact remains that Canada must
now seek other methods of attaining its cultural objectives while complying with WTO
regulations.
Yet Canada had tried to ensure protection
for its cultural industries under GATT. Could a similar situation arise under the North
American free trade agreements? In this context, how should Canada view its participation
in the ongoing discussions on expanding NAFTA and creating a pan-American free trade zone?
ROLES OF
PARLIAMENTARIANS
Parliamentarians can play several roles in
helping to maintain linguistic and cultural diversity in a context of economic
integration. In fact, in a democratic system of government, whether it is the Westminster
model used in Canada or some other type, parliamentarians act as both representatives of
the people and as legislators; both roles put them in a position to contribute to the
debate and also have input into decision-making on linguistic and cultural issues.
A. As Representatives
As representatives of the citizenry,
parliamentarians act in various capacities within their ridings; one study identifies half
a dozen roles.(6) First, they provide a safety valve,
inasmuch as voters can pour out on them their frustrations with various policies or policy
vacuums; in this capacity parliamentarians give the government more time to respond
appropriately. Further, they act as a conduit for information by relaying
constituents concerns to the government and explaining government initiatives to the
voters. They can also act as their constituents voice with the government and
promote the interests of their constituents and of the region. Lastly, parliamentarians
can become powerful advocates, smoothing their constituents dealings with
governmental and business organizations, and acting as benefactors through ensuring that
the social services, businesses and community groups in their ridings get their fair share
of the loans, grants and other benefits disbursed by government.
In these various constituency roles,
parliamentarians can be a major force behind efforts to maintain linguistic and cultural
diversity. As advocates for their constituents and promoters of the latters
interests, they are in a position to make known needs in this area; in addition to
explaining the importance of diversity to their colleagues and to civil servants, they can
acquaint them with public support for language and cultural policies. In their role as
safety valve, parliamentarians can help the government retain public confidence while it
studies the often conflicting claims emanating from different constituencies.
Indeed, in a country like Canada, with two
official languages and many others in widespread use, the needs of various linguistic
groups may vary enormously from one riding to another. Before establishing policy, then,
governments often have to seek a consensus, if only to avoid upsetting one linguistic
group while meeting the demands of another. Similar problems arise in the realm of
cultural policy, where differences of opinion may exist not only among language groups but
among regions or social classes with respect to how much government should spend on
promoting the arts and protecting cultural industries.
Given the complexity of this situation,
government policy can be slow to evolve; this may exasperate constituents, who are fully
cognizant of their own needs but not necessarily aware of all the other considerations
that the government has to weigh. Parliamentarians can explain to their constituents the
complexity of the issues and the claims of other linguistic groups or of cultural
industries, while at the same time acknowledging their constituents own frustrations
and relaying them to the government. In this way, parliamentarians can serve as a source
of information on language and cultural policy for voters. To do this, however, they need
to understand the situation themselves, something that calls for research and
communication with the representatives of various linguistic and cultural groups and with
the civil servants operating in these areas.
To fulfil their role as advocates and
benefactors, parliamentarians must be thoroughly conversant with the various governmental
and business organizations charged with studying constituents claims in linguistic
and cultural matters and empowered to allocate the financial or technical assistance
needed. Citizens are often confused by the complexity of the regulations governing
linguistic groups and cultural industries and activities; they sometimes have trouble in
understanding how powers are allocated among the different levels of government (federal,
provincial and municipal), let alone the consequences of market globalization. Here,
parliamentarians can smooth the way for citizens seeking to file claims or complaints. For
example, they can direct citizens with complaints about television shows to the Canadian
Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC), one of whose jobs is to ensure
that programming is of good quality and contains a high proportion of Canadian material.
B. As Legislators
As lawmakers, parliamentarians fill
another role with respect to language and cultural policy; they have a hand in the
legislative process whereby administrative bodies are constituted and their mandates
defined. In the case of the CRTC, for instance, the Canadian Parliament passed the Canadian
Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission Act in 1976 and, over the years,
has passed and amended the Broadcasting Act, which governs policy in this area. In
the course of the legislative process, parliamentarians also help determine needs, for
example, for the creation of new agencies or the updating of regulations, in addition to
reviewing bills tabled by the government and passing Acts. They can speak out in debates
in the House of Commons and Senate and in committees.
Bills with a bearing on language and
cultural policy are referred to committees whose job is to study the issues in depth. In
committee, parliamentarians can apprise their colleagues of their constituents
concerns with respect to the bill and have the opportunity to hear not just the opinions
of their colleagues constituents but also those of representatives of linguistic
groups and cultural industries. Committees have the power to amend bills to reflect briefs
from various groups and to study the consequences of the proposed legislation.
Legislators also oversee implementation of
the laws they pass. Thus, the Department of Canadian Heritage and public bodies like the
CRTC, the Canada Council and the CBC, all established under laws passed by the
legislators, report to Parliament. Members of Parliament can examine the reports for
themselves or study them in committee proceedings. The Standing Committee on Canadian
Heritage of the House of Commons, for example, reviews all issues arising from the
mandate, management and operations of the Department of Canadian Heritage and the public
institutions reporting to Parliament through that Department. Studying the annual reports
and estimates of the Department and other public bodies gives parliamentarians a chance
not just to ensure that policy complies with the constituent Acts of the institutions
concerned, but also to decide on changes to policy or amendments to the legislation itself
in response to evolving needs.
The Canadian Heritage Standing Committee
is also responsible for monitoring implementation of federal multiculturalism policy. In
language matters, the Joint House of Commons and Senate Committee on Official Languages
oversees the application of the Official Languages Act. Parliamentarians can use
committee proceedings to press officials and representatives of linguistic and cultural
interest groups for the information they need to fulfil their role as sources of
information, and act as the voters safety valve and advocate.
Linguistic and cultural issues in Canada
are not immune to influences such as globalization of markets, interpenetration of
languages and cultures and the development of new communications technologies, which are
planetary in scope; thus, parliamentarians cannot afford to neglect the opportunities for
discussion presented by their participation in interparliamentary organizations that bring
together legislators from many lands.
C. In Interparliamentary Organizations
Attending meetings and deliberations of
interparliamentary organizations like the AIPLF (International Assembly of French-speaking
Parliamentarians) and the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association (CPA) affords Canadian
legislators opportunities to meet their colleagues from other countries. Notwithstanding
the distances separating countries and differences in cultural and social traditions,
parliamentarians who participate generally find that they face very similar problems,
whether as citizens representatives or as lawmakers. By comparing notes on their
approaches to problems, they may discover new ways of working, or learn to improve those
they already use, so that they can serve their constituents better. The work of
interparliamentary organizations can also benefit language and cultural policy.
Every country in the world is affected by
the interpenetration of languages and cultures and by market globalization;
parliamentarians can exchange ideas on how to deal with the problems arising from this
situation. When linguistic and cultural groups from various countries are confronted by
similar problems in these areas, they seek to find common solutions in the framework of
the deliberations of inter-parliamentary organizations. When national positions diverge,
with some countries favouring protection of cultural industries while others advocate
elimination of all barriers to trade, meetings among parliamentarians may foster a better
mutual understanding. Even where meetings produce no immediate solutions, they may ease
tensions while a compromise is negotiated.
Interparliamentary organizations have an
even more meaningful role to play with respect to linguistic or regional issues. The
AIPLF, for example, is of major importance to the francophone minority in the
overwhelmingly anglophone North American continent. This organizations objective is
to promote the spread of the French language and defend and demonstrate French culture.
Besides representing the worldwide French-speaking community, the AIPLF, through its
Americas section, in which Canada, Prince Edward Island, Manitoba, New Brunswick, Nova
Scotia, Ontario and Quebec are represented, gives French-speaking parliamentarians and
those interested in the French-language community a forum in which to discuss language and
cultural problems in the context of Canada and the Americas.
In their regional meetings, members of the
Americas section become acquainted with the problems and needs of neighbouring francophone
communities and pass these on to other regions. As a recognized advisory assembly at the
summits of French-speaking Heads of State and Government, the AIPLF has a significant role
in developing policies and enacting measures to protect the language rights of francophone
communities and promote the growth of their cultural industries.
AIPLF deliberations are not confined to
language issues, however; worldwide trends such as market globalization and regional
economic integration have an impact not just on language rights and cultural identity, but
on other aspects of the lives of the citizens whom AIPLF members represent. In fact,
within the AIPLF, as in the CPA and other interparliamentary bodies, there is more and
more discussion of the fallout from economic integration, which several regions of the
world have already gone some way towards. Differing levels of integration from one region
to another may create trade problems, for instance where one more highly integrated region
protects its cultural industries to the detriment of those of another region.
Parliamentarians have to be concerned with this issue, especially where the cultural
industries affected are crucial to the vitality of a linguistic group.
For the time being, discussions of these
issues between Canadian parliamentarians and their colleagues from other parts of the
Americas do not extend beyond the Americas sections of AIPLF and CPA, general meetings,
and some bilateral forum. The economic integration process in various parts of the
Americas has spawned a number of international parliamentary institutions such as the
Central American Parliament and the Mercosur Joint Parliamentary Commission; however,
there is still no special Americas parliamentary network bringing together legislators
from all over the hemisphere.
The possible creation of such a network is
one of the questions on the agenda for the Parliamentary Conference of the Americas in
September 1997. The advantages of discussions among parliamentarians from different
countries are well known, but the role of interparliamentary institutions in matters of
economic integration is only now beginning to take shape. In those parts of the continent
where free-trade agreements have been concluded, commitment to economic and, especially,
to political integration varies from one region to another, something the hypothetical
hemispheric network would need to take into account. Moreover, hemispheric economic
integration is still in its infancy and it remains to be seen how far it will go and
whether it will lead to political integration. If a pan-American parliamentary network
does come into being, its members will have to make sure that they give high priority to
maintaining linguistic and cultural diversity in their deliberations, for hemispheric
economic integration will inevitably have serious consequences in this area.
CONCLUSION
To echo and expand on André
Mattelarts remarks quoted in the Summary, cultural interpenetration through
communications networks and freer trade presents Canada with both risks and opportunities.
In terms of risks, the English-speaking
Canadians are bombarded with U.S. cultural products in their own language, while
French-speaking Canadians are inundated with North American output in a language not their
own. Communications networks have contributed a great deal to this and there is every
reason to expect the burgeoning of satellite communications, the Internet and other
communications technologies to accentuate this cultural interpenetration.
Through its language, multicultural and
cultural policies, Canada has thus far succeeded in showing that cultural interpenetration
can be overcome, provided it is properly understood and firmly and constantly taken into
consideration by all governments. Of course, this interpenetration has appreciable
positive aspects, among them the provision of wider horizons, enhanced social and
commercial contacts, and, one day perhaps, even world peace.
Canadas acquired experience in
defending and promoting its linguistic and cultural diversity both within and beyond its
borders gives it a leading role in expanding the North American Free Trade Agreement and
creating a pan-American free trade area.
* This paper
was originally prepared for the Delegation from the Parliament of Canada to the
Parliamentary Conference of the Americas, September 1997, Quebec City.
(1)
André Mattelart, La Nouvelle Idéologie globalitaire in La Mondialisation au
delà des mythes, Éditions La Découverte et Syros, Les Dossiers de létat du
monde, Paris, 1997, p. 89.
(2)
Commissioner of Official Languages, Annual Report, Ottawa, 1995, p. 1.
(3)
Industry Canada, The Canadian Information Highway: Building Canadas Information
and Communications Infrastructure, Department of Supply and Services, Ottawa, April
1994.
(4) FTA,
section 2005; NAFTA, section 2106.
(5)
Cultural industries are defined in section 2012 of the FTA.
(6) See
Philip Norton, "The Growth of the Constituency Role of the MP," Parliamentary
Affairs - A Journal of Comparative Politics, Vol. 47, No. 4, October 1994, p.
705.
|