October 9, 1999
After-dinner remarks by
Sir John Daniel
UK co-chairman
It is a pleasure to make a few remarks as the new United Kingdom co-chair of BNAC.
It is now thirty years since the British North American Committee was established. I shall not try go back to 1969 and recall our history because, as Timothy Leary aptly said, “If you can remember the 1960s, you weren't really there”.
Suffice it to say that for thirty years a congenial group of people from Canada, the UK and the USA has been meeting for fellowship with friends, for conversation about contemporary concerns and concepts, and for discussion of the directions the world is taking.
Of course, those who observe us going off to these meetings in pleasant settings like Vancouver sometimes ask questions. Like ‘what is the difference between a BNAC member and a camel?’ They answer that a camel can work for a weekend without drinking whereas a BNAC member can drink for a weekend without working. But we know that is an outrageously unfair way to describe our meetings.
Most of us have both personal and professional reasons for valuing BNAC and I plead guilty on both counts. I hold the citizenship of two of our countries, Kristin holds the citizenship of the third and our children hold all three. We have family members living in each country.
Professionally the 23 Atlantic crossings I have made so far this year are evidence, I hope, of my commitment to the North Atlantic relationship. I am particularly proud that the United States Open University, which we have just created, will offer courses from the UK and Canada as well as home grown US programmes.
This is why I count it a great privilege to have been asked to succeed Mike Bett as the UK co-chair of BNAC. I truly believe in the purposes that BNAC tries to pursue.
I have some nervousness, of course, that as a university president among business people and trade unionists I will sometimes lack the expertise in business economics to follow some presentations in detail – or at the speed of David Hale’s impressive presentation yesterday. However, I shall take comfort by remembering Lyndon Johnson’s remark that “making speeches about economics is like peeing down your leg, it feels hot to you but not to anyone else”.
University presidents live in the non-profit sector that one of our working groups talked about yesterday. We have the bittersweet advantage of living in a somewhat less respectful environment than the rest of you. As James Ham, a former president of the University of Toronto put it:
‘A university president is like the centre post in a washing machine. You're often in hot water, there's lots of agitation, you deal with much dirty linen, much of the output goes down the drain before you throw in the towel.’
In these difficult circumstances you will appreciate that there are two important qualities that a successful university president must strive for, a head of white hair to give dignity and haemorrhoids to give an air of concern.
So I’m not there yet.
The last year has seen changes in each of the organisations that supports BNAC. The CSIS now supports us in Washington and we welcome Jack Mintz as president of the C.D.Howe Institute. Philip Connelly has taken over at BNARA where Norma Findlay will be leaving us at the end of the year. The UK group will pay its own tribute to Norma at the appropriate time but I am sure you would all like to acknowledge her dedicated work on BNAC’s behalf.
For myself I pledge to work with Bob Rogers, and with the support of Philip Connelly, Robin Niblett and Bill Robson to ensure that BNAC continues to achieve its important goals.
Those goals evolve. Thirty years ago a key purpose was to keep the trans-Atlantic relationship strong and to show solidarity at a time of cold war. The relationship continues to be strong. We felt proud last year when BNAC’s Internet survey showed that the young people of our three countries value the links between Canada, the UK and the USA just as much as the older generation.
But today one of the protagonists in the cold war has left the battlefield. We only have one superpower. That suggests we should use our modest influence to encourage the United States not to become the bully in the playground. Not to take the fly swatter to international bodies that may occasionally be inconvenient but to follow its better instincts.
As Winston Churchill said: “America will always do the right thing - after having exhausted all other possibilities”. Maybe discussions at BNAC can help to exhaust those other possibilities more quickly.
Two important events have taken place since we came to Vancouver. On Thursday Adrienne Clarkson was installed as Governor General of Canada. I did not see the TV broadcast of the event, but even reading her speech brought tears to my eyes. I think Canada is fortunate that the local symbol of its statehood is neither elected nor hereditary but someone like Adrienne Clarkson, chosen in a non-partisan manner to represent the diversity and the values of the people. Peter Godsoe expressed eloquently in his country report some of the admirable qualities of Canadian civilisation that the new Governor General evoked.
The second event was President Clinton’s visit yesterday to a conference in Quebec on federalism. For years the British delegates to BNAC have been rather bemused by the frequent references to federalism by our Canadian and American friends. But now this is a game we are all playing, although, as Nigel Horne told us yesterday, Britain is playing it rather ineptly so far. We too are embarked on the pleasures of much greater regional consciousness.
We shall soon have our own versions some of the adages we hear. One popular out here in Western Canada is: Canada is like an old cow. The west feeds it, Ontario milks it, and I won't say what it does in the Maritimes
But seriously, Britain can now learn much from Canada and the USA. If you get it right, federalism is a superior form of government to a unitary state. The challenge for the UK is to get it right. When you come to London in May you will see one manifestation of our new devolution of power in the election of a Mayor for London. This has already created plenty of grief for the two major political parties as they have tried to head off the two more flamboyant characters who would like the job. We shall have an excellent program in London and I urge you to come.
To conclude, I have two pleasant duties. The first is to thank my predecessor, Mike Bett for his distinguished service as the UK co-chair of BNAC. Mike is an extraordinary person who is equally at ease in business, the public sector and the non-profit arena. This year he has chaired an enquiry into the pay and personnel policies of universities.
Since universities are, in Clark Kerr’s words, a federation of academic entrepreneurs united only by a common grievance over parking, this was a very altruistic gesture on Mike’s part. Indeed, for sheer public spiritedness it ranks alongside the work that Senator Mitchell and General John De Chastelan are doing in support of what we optimistically call the ‘peace process’ in Northern Ireland.
The Bett report is now out, so ‘what are you doing about Bett’ is one of the questions we ask each other when British university heads meet. But what I’m doing about Bett this evening is to thank Mike and Christine for the time they have given to BNAC during his co-chairmanship. Mike has been an approachable and witty co-host of our meetings and Christine is always a lively and friendly participant. Please join me in thanking them both as I make a small presentation to each of them.
My second pleasant duty is to thank all those who contributed to the organisation and running of this meeting in Vancouver. We have had excellent sessions and productive discussions. I look forward to seeing you all in London in the new millennium.