Media types in Canada were thrilled this weekend by breaking news that Maxime Bernier left something at his ex-girlfriend’s house last month. But not just any something - a top secret classified folder something. And not just any ex-girlfriend, but the very attractive former lover of not one but two Hell’s Angels Julie Couillard. Hurray for having a young woman involved in Canadian politics again for even a brief moment. Now we have something to fill that gap left by Belinda Stronach, whose presence suddenly made it okay to speculate on MP’s romantic lives in a way we would never have found acceptable otherwise.

Much as everyone would like this story to be about the beautiful woman and her cleavage, it really is not. The less sexy but truer version of Maxime Bernier’s failure as a foreign minister dates back to his appointment to a post he was clearly not competent to fill. This is the part that is still more mysterious than Julie Couillard’s biker chick past: why was someone who was so obviously unsuited for the role of Foreign Minister given this extremely high profile position? It’s been suggested that it was intended to curry favour in Quebec, but surely Stéphane Dion has made it clear to everyone that simply being from the province doesn’t mean you will be well liked or improve your party’s chances there.

Another possibility seems worth considering, and worrying to anyone concerned about Canada abroad: that this government, like many others, deliberately filled the post with a weak personality, one that would not ensure a high level of respect for the Department of Foreign Affairs in Canada…or much competition with the Prime Minister’s Office…or, most importantly, an inspired role for Canada in the world.

Other funny or insightful rundowns of media coverage of the (non) event can be found at A BCer in Toronto or at Maisonneuve Magazine’s Media Scout blog.

I’m asked to blog about the power of cities, one of the topics listed in the Canada’s World discussion guide. Let’s start with a basic question. Much of the argument for the power of cities rests on their position in a global economy, in other words their economic importance.

However, any newspaper reader will attest that much of Canada’s economic strength rests on commodities: oil, hydroelectric power, lumber, minerals, agricultural produce. Are these not produced in rural areas? Of course they are. There’s no question, therefore, that rural production is critical to Canada’s economy.

To get at the importance of cities, we have to ask, not where commodities are produced, but where the control lies, and where the ideas were developed without which they could not exist. Almost always, the answer is cities. For example, Canada’s largest source of oil is the Alberta Tar Sands, which were originally developed - and a substantial share of which is still owned - by the corporation that today is called Suncor Energy Inc. Its headquarters are in Calgary.

The earliest version of the process that allows allows bitumen, or tar, to be converted into oil was developed by Dr. Karl Clark of the University of Alberta in Edmonton. Similarly, agricultural commodities are usually produced in rural areas, but agricultural research stations are generally in cities, as are the companies that control marketing and processing.

More fundamentally, although urban-rural rivalries are easily generated and lovingly cultivated, by both city dwellers and aficionados of rural life, they serve no practical purpose. Cities are generally the centres of decision-making and invention, and they are also major producers of goods. The fact that they usually exercise control does not take away from their reliance on the products that come from the countryside, and the importance of rural production, but it does underline the salience of the phrase “the power of cities”.

Cities are our primary generators of ideas, our centres of economic control, and of much important production, even in an economy driven by commodities. The prosperity of us all, even those of us who work in rural areas, depends on the prosperity of our cities. As surely as all Canadians rely on commodity production, we rely on the health of our cities, and of the networks of infrastructure and services that keep them viable.

For a darker picture of the position of communities in a globalizing world, take a look at The Age of Community.

~ Christopher Leo

Conflict is changing: While the Disaster Assistance Response Team (DART) impatiently waits in Thailand, hoping to be allowed into Burma to help with humanitarian aid after Cyclone Nargis, Prime Minister Stephen Harper unveils his “Canada First” defence strategy. Major components of the plan involve automatic increases in defence spending, a commitment to Arctic sovereignty, improvements in Canadian Forces infrastructure, and adding 5,000 troops to the regular force (bringing it to 70,000) as well as 6,000 reservists. The CBC and Globe and Mail both observe that most of these commitments have been made before, but quote Prime Minister Harper that this represents a “long-term plan” rather than a piecemeal approach.

The Toronto Star claims the lack of detail in the plan will generate skepticism among critics - and they may be right. Bloggers over at The Torch call the “Canada First” defence policy a complete disappointment, criticizing it as lacking substance. The National Post, however, quotes a reservist who claims the policy might be enough to convince him to join the regular forces.

In the five-page document outlining the policy, there’s no mention of specific goals or initiatives, though at the press conference the Prime Minister did say that defending the country and protecting Canadians at home are the main priorities - hence “Canada First”. How would this type of thinking play into decisions about, say, what to do with the DART if it’s not allowed into Burma? And what would a “Canada’s World First” defence strategy look like? Let us know in a comment on our blog, or on the forums on our website.

Conflict is changing - Last Sunday the Navy commemorated the Battle of the North Atlantic - the fight for control of shipping routes between North America and Britain that killed over 4,000 Canadians and left us with a Navy of 110,000 personnel, the third largest Allied Navy in the world. Compare that to today, when we have a Navy of 9,000 sailors. While looking back, the Canadian military also looked forward this weekend: the Army wants to buy new armoured minesweeping vehicles. Makes sense, since most of the 82 soldiers killed in Afghanistan were victims of roadside bombs

Inégalité mondiale - Le Canada verse 50 millions de dollars de plus au Programme alimentaire mondial (PAM) pour lutter contre la crise alimentaire. 10 de ces 50 millions de dollars seront consacrés directement à Haïti, et 100% de l’aide sera “déliée“; c’est-à-dire, l’aide ne sera pas liée à l’achat des denrées Canadiennes, ce qui rentabilise au maximum l’argent destiné au pays bénéficiaire. Néanmoins, Vision Mondiale Canada croit que le Canada peut faire plus, particulièrement des investissements additionels dans les solutions à long terme.

Climate change - Canada Pension Plan money is being invested in a controversial electricity project in Chile. Environmentalists are ticked off, while residents of the affected region of Chile are divided, since jobs and investment are always desired in these less developed parts of the world. Making decisions in these cases is a challenge for anyone - but might be less difficult for those influenced by the 10,000 brochures sent out to Canadian schoolchildren by climate change skeptics in the US, which deny that human activity is affecting global temperatures.

Photo of the Aysen region of Chile by flickr user CIbustos