This year marks the 25^th anniversary of when Canada, Mexico and the United States gathered to sign the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA)—a policy that allowed the three countries to increase the movement of imports and exports between their borders by limiting tariffs.

In the fall of 1992, the leaders of the signatory nations addressed the press as they stood side-by-side each behind their own podium. The outdoor ceremony took place in San Antonio, Texas. It marked the symbolic agreement between the nations before their respective governments would go on to pass formal legislation enacting the largest free trade agreement at the time.

Before NAFTA, the nation’s free trade agreement with the U.S. had only been in place since 1989. Canada was experiencing tough economic times under this policy so the public was weary of expanding the trade agreement to include Mexico.

Former Prime Minister Brian Mulroney can be found in archival CBC footage saying, “…everyone said you can’t sell free trade to the Canadian people. No? You just watch and see.” His defensive attitude reflects the mounting disapproval his leadership was facing.

http://www.cbc.ca/player/play/812408899915/
NAFTA deal reached in 1992, CBC Archival Footage

The Canadian think tank, Centre for International Governance Innovation analyzed the last couple decades of NAFTA in a report written by Hugo Perezcano, a legal expert in international trade and negotiations. He says each country’s goal was to generate economic growth by increasing the flow of trade and investment. Meanwhile, Canada’s specific goal was to improve its pre-existing trade deal with the U.S. by gaining direct access to the Mexican market.

Experts like Perezcano say there’s no doubt Canada achieved its goal of increasing trade and investment flows. According to the 2015 report, imports into Mexico increased almost 407 per cent, going from $78.2 billion to $396.5 billion.

Mulroney credits the two trade agreements ushered in by his government for “much of the prosperity and many of the jobs Canada has enjoyed over the last 25 years.” In a video posted last February from FarmTech, an annual farming conference held in Edmonton, the former Conservative Party leader continued by saying, “it’s been the foundational policy of Canada’s economy and it has reoriented the economy internationally.”

Mulroney being interviewed at FarmTech, February 2017

His present-day sentiments can amount to a political “I told you so.” During his time as leader he was unable to gain public after the massive failure of the Charlottetown accord in the summer of 1992. A few months after the San Antonio ceremony that fall, a Gallup poll revealed that a combined 43 per cent of Canadians felt he was either the worst or one of the worst prime ministers. Eventually, he’d step down as leader before the next election took place.

Although NAFTA has seen success, the government lists “increased border security and delays at the border as one of the most challenging aspects of Canadian trade policy” in a preliminary trade and economic analysis report. The challenges of border security are echoed in Perezcano’s report.

The current issue facing NAFTA members is how they will move beyond their 1994 deal to accommodate their modern challenges. While Perezcano’s report details the extensive gains each country has made it also points out the 25-year-old agreement is due for an update.

U.S. president Donald Trump has raised eyebrows and speculation by his advocacy of NAFTA renegotiations. It’s unclear what terms he is trying to change. However, considering his hostility with the Mexican president it’s unlikely that all three leaders will be found standing side-by-side at a podium in celebration anytime soon.

Documentation Notes:

https://www.cigionline.org/sites/default/files/cigi_paper_68_0.pdf
-This is the report on NAFTA by the Centre for International Governance Innovation. I found it on the organization’s website. It’s where I drew the information for most of my expert analysis and stats.

http://www.international.gc.ca/economist-economiste/analysis-analyse/research-recherche/10_pre.aspx?lang=eng

-This is a report by the government of Canada. I found it through as an archived site through a google search. It provided information on how tightening U.S. border security was negatively effecting the Canadian economy.

http://www.cbc.ca/archives/entry/nafta-deal-reached-in-1992

-This archival CBC news coverage of NAFTA from 1992 helped form an understanding of how Canadians viewed NAFTA at the time. It also provided the context for Mulroney’s defensiveness on gaining public support. I found it on the web through a google video search of NAFTA 1992.

https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4543970/nafta
-This video of the ceremony celebrating the NAFTA agreement provided the context for the anniversary portion of the article. I found it on the web through a google video search of NAFTA 1992.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6DmEMlPbDSQ

-This current CBC current affairs coverage helped provide a Canadian perspective on Trump’s comments regarding NAFTA. I found it on YouTube through a search on NAFTA.

FarmTech-Canada’s premier crop production and farm management conference. Jan 31-Feb 2 in Edmonton, Alberta:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eJg9bFY9ikQ  –

-This video helped me get this clip on Mulroney’s current perspective on NAFTA. It’s from a farming conference that took place earlier this year I found it on the web through a YouTube search of Mulroney 2017.
“Free trade agreements have been responsible for much of prosperity and many of the jobs Canada has enjoyed over the last 25 years. It’s been the foundational policy of Canada’s economy and it has reoriented the economy internationally.”- Brian Mulroney

On June 5th, 1992 – a summer’s day in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, the international Convention on Biological Diversity received its first signature. Canada was the first country to put pen to paper and commit to national conservation of biodiversity, soon followed by 168 other countries. It has been 25 years since then and Canada’s National Targets are due for achievement in 2020.

The Convention text outlines the importance of international “conservation of biological diversity, the sustainable use of its components and the fair and equitable sharing of the benefits”. From this, each country developed their own national goals by creating action plans that address their specific environments and how to conserve them.

Canada’s National Targets are broken down into four categories (A through D) with sub-goals for each. First and foremost, Canada aims to plan and manage all land and water ecosystems in a means that supports conservation, at all levels of government.
Second, to reduce direct and indirect pressures on biodiversity through sustainable production and consumption of resources.
Third, to supply and disseminate education about biodiversity and ecosystems, including the promotion and respect of “aboriginal traditional knowledge”.
And finally, to inform Canadians about the value of nature and encourage active engagement in its stewardship.

Every four years a National Report on progress is submitted, the most recent was in 2014. It outlines 22 key findings followed by 100 pages that go further in-depth. Most of the key findings are positive, including 95% of aqua culture harvesting practices meeting sustainability criteria, an overall decrease in pollution in Canadian waters, the return of many bird populations that were previously on the decline, deforestation reduction and the conversion of 1000 square km into forest land.

However, many issues remain. Including the rapid ‘greening’ of Arctic tundra ecosystems, lake acidification across the country, 23% of the 70,000 known species in Canada still considered ‘at Risk’ or ‘Sensitive’, marine litter posing threat to aquatic life, and the rise of species-specific diseases such as White-Nose Syndrome in bat populations.

Given there are so many aspects to the Convention and its goals, it is difficult to discern what is perhaps of utmost concern. David Currie, an Ottawa University Biology Professor and co-author of 12 academic publications about biodiversity, explains what the important goals are and why they deserve particular attention.

“We need to rationalize the fact that one of the fundamental assumptions of our economy is not consistent with the fact that the earth is finite. We can’t grow forever in use of resources.” Currie said.

President Bush spoke to this during his 1992 address after returning from the Biodiversity Convention in Brazil. He said, “a growing economy creates the resources necessary for environmental protection and environmental protection makes growth sustainable over the long term.”

Economic growth is of particular importance in the current age of globalization, however it is imperative to have an understanding of the limitations of our natural planet in order to sustain growth. This balance can only be achieved through widespread education.

Of the 22 key points made in the 2014 National Report, education went unmentioned. Although the introduction of Environmental Studies and Sustainability degrees over the past 25 years indicates an increased incorporation of environmental education into our national curriculum, Currie says there is still important work to be done.

“When we think about human development, we should always be asking what will the impact be on the environment and what will we leave for our children? We are within sight of irreparable damage to the planet in many ways. And we have to have people know that this is something we need to pay attention to,” Currie said.

Documentation:

1. 2014 National Report, found online, outlined Canada’s progress.
https://www.cbd.int/doc/world/ca/ca-nr-05-en.pdf

2. Canadian Biodiversity National Targets, found online, explicated Canadian biodiversity goals.
https://www.cbd.int/countries/targets/?country=ca

3. 1995 Canadian Biodiversity Strategy, found online, original document outlining Canada’s approach to biodiversity.
http://www.biodivcanada.ca/560ED58E-0A7A-43D8-8754-C7DD12761EFA/CBS_e.pdf

Twenty-five years after the town itself was bulldozed out of existence, former residents of Cassiar, B.C. keep their community alive online.

Cassiar’s asbestos mine opened in 1953, and the town grew around it. Located just off the Stuart Cassiar Highway in northern B.C., it was always a company town. Cassiar Mining Corp. provided electricity, sewage and infrastructure.

Asbestos mining maintained a bustling community for 40 years, but when the company went bankrupt in 1992, just over a thousand people had to abandon the little town tucked among the mountains.

Cassiarites dispersed around the world, some never to be heard from again, but others stayed in contact through letter writing, reunions, and now, social media.

The Facebook group, “Cassiar…do you remember?”, has just over 1100 members and almost daily former residents post memories, pictures, or videos.

There are class pictures from a schoolhouse no longer there, tributes to the deceased, and more recent pictures of the defunct mine. A string of comments follows each post as friends quibble over fading memories.

Herb Daum began the group in September 2007, and remains an administrator.

Daum, a born and raised Cassiarite, also runs a website completely dedicated to commemorating the community. He took over the site from its creator in 2000, and has since spent thousands of hours curating its historical information, photographs, and most importantly, connecting old friends.

Daum maintains an “address book” on the website, which can only be accessed by providing one’s own name and address. Daum says that there are hundreds and hundreds of names in the address book, though Facebook is a somewhat more convenient for communicating these days.

Former Cassiarites have also thrown several reunions.

Most notably, in 2001 there was a reunion near Vernon B.C. More than 800 people attended and residents from all periods of the town’s 40 year history gathered for a weekend.

“It was amazing…it was such an emotional high I didn’t sleep for three days,” said Daum of the reunion.

Loving Memories Live on for Long Gone Cassiar Former Residents of the Northern B C Asbestos Mining Town Are Planning a Reunion With the Help of Modern Technology (Text)

Above is a news clipping from the reunion held in 2001. I found it through a news database search and it helped confirm the number of people at the reunion that I had heard from a few sources.

Christel Travnik is Daum’s sister and lived in the town for 33 years. She also remembers the reunion with fondness, “It was non-stop, giving someone a hug and seeing the next person you were going to hug,” she said.

Despite the beauty of Cassiar and the fondness its former residents hold for the town, asbestos, the product they were mining, is a known carcinogen.

Margery Loverin lived off and on in Cassiar between 1962 and 1988. Her husband had asbestosis, a chronic lung disease caused by inhaling the fibrous mineral, before he passed away in 2011. Loverin suffers from a lung disease herself, which doctors say could be caused from exposure.

Daum tries to remain positive, “I have this sword hanging over my head by a horsehair,  I think we all do,” he says, “but hey, I choose to focus on the blessings.” He laughs, “I’m healthy now.”

On Facebook, sometimes former residents share advice and resources for asbestos exposure, but many try and look with hope to the future.

Drone footage from 2014 shows that Cassiar is flattened. There’s little left but a bunkhouse and piles of rubble. The houses were sold off and bulldozed. The rec centre collapsed almost a decade ago under the weight of snow, the church  did the same within the past couple of years.

Above is drone footage from Gordon Loverin, a former resident of Cassiar. It shows the townsite in 2014 and helps give an idea of what the area looks like today. I found it on Daum’s website.
Travnik made the trip to Cassiar in 2008. “It was almost like a funeral,” she said. The trees and houses she’d grown up knowing were all gone.

Loverin however, is looking forward to a 25^th anniversary reunion of the mine’s close in July, to be held at the townsite. Amidst the festivities there will be a wedding, as two Cassiarites start their new future in the town where they met, and connected.

It has been 50 years since a once-small, independent publishing company began to make its mark in Toronto. House of Anansi Press has promoted new Canadian authors since 1967—a time when individuals were questioning what Canadian literature even was.

House of Anansi Press was co-founded by University of Toronto graduates Dennis Lee and David Godfrey. The two of them were young writers, frustrated over the lack of Canadian content on bookshelves at the time.

In an interview with a literary magazine called Canadian Forum, Godfrey guessed that only about 2 per cent of books in stores were actually Canadian. He believed that new voices in fiction were still missing in Canada.

“The real need is in fiction for parti-pris novels,” said Godfrey. “First novels of young people who have a different way of seeing things or putting it down or something interesting to say.”

The year 1967 marked the 10th anniversary of the Canada Council for the Arts—a council created to fund and promote Canadian art. In Canada’s centennial year, the Council began to focus on publishing, giving House of Anansi enough funds to kick-start their press.

In their first year, they managed to publish four collections of poetry. One of those collections was a re-issue of budding writer, Margaret Atwood’s The Circle Game. The company continued to publish what they could out of Godfrey’s downtown Toronto home. By 1969 the press published one-third of all Canadian novels that year.

Atwood and her then-husband Jim Polk joined the press in 1970. Polk became the new editor while the two co-founders left to pursue other interests. With House of Anansi, Atwood published her first book on literary criticism called Survival: A Thematic Guide to Canadian Literature. This book went on to be taught in schools as it shaped the way Canadians viewed themselves culturally.

Margaret Atwood discusses her book, Survival: A Thematic Guide to Canadian Literature, in a 1972 interview with Adrienne Clarkson on CBC’s program, Take 30. Credit: CBC Digital Archives.

In a 1973 interview on the CBC program Impressions, Atwood discussed her book and how Canadian literature was struggling to survive. She metaphorically said that “Canadian literature is about a guy hanging on a bridge trying to climb up.” Atwood also commented on the interconnections between literature and culture.

“I don’t think literature exists within an ivory tower,” said Atwood. “But literature is produced by a culture, it exists within a culture.”

Margaret Atwood’s 1973 Interview with Ramsay Cook on CBC’s Impressions. Credit: CBC Digital Archives.

The publishing company landed in the hands of philanthropist and businessman Scott Griffin in 2002. About 35 years after its inception, House of Anansi began to grow significantly, publishing books that won big awards like the Scotiabank Giller Prize and the Griffin Poetry Prize.

Jody Mason is a professor of Canadian literature at Carleton University who researches institutions of literature in Canada. She believes that while House of Anansi’s role in publishing has changed, it is still committed to publishing unique, Canadian voices.

“I think that at the time it was on the edge of publishing, taking incredible risks with young writers who were involved in the press in a very intimate way,” says Mason. “Now if you look at the Anansi webpage you see that it has most certainly become associated with the big novels…and that’s how it’s been able to retain its place.”

Mason says that right now, the Canadian publishing market is dominated by a multinational one but House of Anansi is one of the few exceptions to that rule. She believes it serves as an inspiration to young writers who are also interested in small-press publishing.

Today, House of Anansi publishes in both print and e-book editions. The company has eight different imprints and 224 award-winning books listed on their website.

In a blog post on House of Anansi’s 50th celebration website, a preface written by Margaret Atwood for her book, Survival, is posted. She wrote it five years ago, in celebration of Anansi’s 45th anniversary.

“It’s incredible that the House of Anansi has itself survived for forty-five years,” wrote Atwood. “I hope it will persist for another forty-five years…and that reading of books will still take place then, and that readers will continue to find such reading an enjoyable and meaningful way to spend time. For if so, the human race will also have survived.”

Descriptions of sources can be found here.

It looked like just another routine scrum at Parliament Hill’s Centre Block. But as microphones huddled in front of a young Pierre Elliott Trudeau, he uttered words that would change the course of LGBT rights in Canada:

“There’s no place for the state in the bedrooms of the nation,” he declared. It was 1967. Soon enough, his words would become immortalized in collective Canadian memory.

As the Minister of Justice in Lester B. Pearson’s cabinet, Trudeau’s statement was in response to a controversial omnibus bill he’d just proposed. It would, among other things, decriminalize private homosexual acts between consenting adults over the age of 21.

“I think for a lot of gay people it felt like he was speaking directly to them,” says Sky Gilbert, an associate professor at the University of Guelph specializing in gay politics. The statement, he says, is made more significant by the fact that it was even before the Stonewall Riots, a famous protest in 1969 against police raids of a gay New York City club.

While Trudeau’s statement and the bill were a great step, Gilbert says it’s important not to spread the myth that “gaining civil liberties solves the problem.”

Gary Kinsman, a sociology professor at Laurentian University and a long time gay rights activist, agrees. He says it’s often forgotten that the ‘homosexual acts’ portion of the bill was proposed mainly in response to the controversial Everett Klippert case.

Klippert was a Saskatchewan man convicted of ‘gross indecency’ after admitting to police that he had sexual encounters with other men. He was sentenced to life in prison after being deemed a ‘dangerous sexual offender’. His case reached the Supreme Court, where judges ruled against him in a 3-2 decision, which was met with protest from the gay community. The news made its way to parliament, influencing Trudeau’s drafting of that section of the bill. (Klippert was released from prison four years later).

Evidently, the bill emerged in a context of widespread institutional homophobia, says Kinsman – and this didn’t just disappear when it eventually became law in 1969. He says many don’t realize that after this, arrests of people participating in ‘homosexual acts’ actually rose.

This was because police had clearer legal guidelines for what was considered an offense – which, according to the bill, meant any ‘public’ homosexual acts. Kinsman points to police attempts to shut down gay clubs in Montreal before the 1976 Olympics, and the 1981 Toronto bath house raids, as examples.

“People begin to seize more and more social space,” Kinsman explains, “But by the mid ‘70s, it’s actually leading to the police organizing major clampdowns on public visibility, for gay men in particular.”

These are problems that arise when the state attempts to regulate sexuality, even if the intention may be to expand people’s rights, says Kinsman. Even some of the biggest ‘wins’ since, such as the inclusion of sexual orientation in the Charter, don’t fully address the scope of homophobia, he says.

“Most of the rights that have been won have a very formal character to them,” Kinsman says, “And what we really need is substantive rights and substantive equality.”

Still, both Gilbert and Kinsman agree the magnitude of Trudeau’s statement can’t be discounted, a sentiment echoed by voices from the past.

The day after the bill’s proposal, a lesbian woman told the Globe and Mail she was appreciative of the signal to a shift in attitude.

“It would be nice to be able to get married legally if you wanted to,” she said, “But I don’t think we’ll ever make the grade there. You can’t win them all.”

In nearly four decades, the passing of the same-sex marriage law would prove her wrong. And in years to come, the LGBT rights movement in Canada would continue its fight to ensure the state stays out of the bedrooms of the nation.

Source documentation:

Source 1: CBC Archives Video

I found this video of the scrum with Pierre Trudeau online, through CBC Archives footage. It was helpful because it provided better context as to what the omnibus bill was targeting, the questions the public raised about it, and the attitude and rhetoric behind it.

Source 2: Globe and Mail article

I found this article – and many others related to this topic – through a Pages of the Past search with the Carleton Library. It was useful because it helped bring a voice from the time into my story, and helped reflect societal views and attitudes in 1967.