Public policy is embedded into the day-to-day lives of Canadian citizens. Although some may not be actively aware of the multitude of policies, they do determine every aspect of the Canadian society. There are policies that govern air, water, food, transportation, technology, taxes, health and immigration. But this is not an exclusive list of Canadian public polices. Two domains of public policy are domestic and foreign. Internal rules and regulations that govern within a nations border are known as domestic policies (Gale, 2008). Foreign polices are diametric in that they consist of international relations that take place outside a nation’s border (Elman, XXXX, p. X). When take together on a global scale, they can be described as global public policies. Globalization can be defined by “homogenized culture, a global economy, and a borderless world” (McBride, 2011, p. 10). To fully understand globalization one should consider all aspects such as, social, culture, technology, economic and political. Globalization has mainly impacted foreign policy, but it has also had an effect on domestic policies. Both policies are not only influenced by globalization, there are various other factors that contribute to the formation of public policies. Often times it can prove difficult to separate the effects that impact both forms of public policy because they are intertwined. Need thesis statement – what are you arguing or exploring in this paper. Also, should there be definitions in your intro? Maybe consider breaking the intro into 2 paragraphs.

Governmental policies in Canada today continue to change and evolve along with the needs of people and the consequences of globalization. More recently were the creation of polices that resulted from the terrorist attacks of 9/11. The aftermath of this event caused a significant shift in politics all around the world. One of the most detrimental and profound impacts has been on public policy regarding human security. Put definition of globalization here?

The events of September 11, 2001 (9/11) have strongly influenced Canadian domestic and foreign policy. Before 9/11 the term terrorism did not elicit the type of response that it has since the event. While terrorism was certainly not born on 9/11, it can be redefined as being a ‘new’ wave of horror requiring ‘new’ counterterrorism measures. In December of 2001, three months after 9/11, Canada’s federal government passed the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA). This emergency legislation amended the Criminal Code giving “large powers to the police forces and security agencies fighting against terrorism” (Coutu &ump; Giroux, 2006, p. 314). Although this was the Canada’s first anti-terrorism legislation, there were more amendments to follow. In April of 2004 Prime Minister Paul Martin introduced the new policy for national security (Donneur &ump; Chirica, 2005, p. 10). “Securing an Open Society: Canada’s National Security Policy is a strategic framework and action plan designed to ensure that Canada is prepared for and can respond to current and future threats” (Public Safety Canada, 2004).

United Nations (UN) has deemed terrorism a global challenge; therefore, it requires a global strategic response (UN, 2008). However, it has also changed domestic policy with regards to the responsibilities of police. With the passing of ATA, police have been granted wide sweeping powers to act on suspected acts of terrorism. It has proven difficult to balance the nation’s security threats with individual human rights. Civil liberties “entail rights that humans derive by virtue of their humanity” (Khan, 2006, p. 139). These are the same civil liberties that are most cherished in our society: our privacy, freedom of expression, freedom of movement and association, freedom from unwarranted search and seizure, and freedom of religion.

The paradigm shift in these public policies can be attributed to the consequences of terrorism, which were intensified by globalization. The interconnectedness and interdependence of the world has made it impossible for Canada to isolate itself from the issues that have stemmed from the globalized world. Personal security, national security, and international security have all been meshed into one plan of action (Public Safety Canada, 2004). The threats that Canada faces are not limited to terrorism even though they may all be intertwined.

Canada’s ever changing ethnic composition has also had an effect on public policy (Riddell-Dixon, xxxx, p. 5). The rapid increase in Canada’s population… Connect this to globalization why is immigration part of globalization? Historically, the majority of Canada’s immigrants arrived from Europe as where today most come from other geographic regions around the world. Since Canada promotes this cultural mosaic, in which individuals have the right to ascribe to whichever culture they chose, it must also provide multicultural development (McBride, 2011, p. 41). The diversity of Canada’s population has made it difficult to integrate such a wide variety of cultural norms and values in domestic and international policies. Some of the specific internal areas of concern are education and labor. External issues relate to the main policies of immigration, which are governed by immigration laws themselves, but fail to address emerging issues of multiculturalism.

Canada is connected to the world so it receives immigrants from all over the global. The mobility of humans to Canada is managed by categorizing immigrants into different classes. Evidence has shown that a greater priority is given to business [and professional] immigrants, as opposed to family immigrants (Riddell-Dixon, xxxx, p. 6). These classes of people have been strategically targeted, in order to create conditions conducive to capital growth and accumulation (McBride, 2011, p. 36). But this is also internally driven, because Canada needs laborers for population growth, which can mainly be achieved by international migration (Statistics Canada, 2010). This is due to negative population growth (NPG) that Canada is currently experiencing in which the population is ageing rapidly and there are not enough natural births.

“A further [immigration] concern is Canada’s failure to recognize credentials earned abroad, which often results in immigrants and refugees having to pursue further training in Canada, which can be expensive and time consuming” (Riddell-Dixon, xxxx, p. 6). Many of these immigrants are not able to pursue educational endeavors because they have families to support, whether in Canada or their native countries. Who would be left to carry out blue-collar labor if not for the immigrants? As shown here, globalization dominates the national, as in foreign polices, as well as the local, as in domestic policies.

It has also been argued that the changes to refugee and immigration in more recent years are a direct result of the 9/11 (Donneur &ump; Chirica, 2005, pp. 9-12). More specifically, that the United States (US) has asserted pressure on Canada to tighten its border regulation policies. Accordingly, Canada’s bilateral relationship with the US has resulted in Canada’s border regulation policies to be aligned with American policies. Considering that the US is a hegemon, it would not be inaccurate to propose such a claim. It is not always that Canada has retained this image as a satellite of the US (McBride, 2005, p. 42), they demonstrated principal power when refusing to participate in the US led war against Iraq (McBride, 2005, p. 141). Regardless of various images, Canada does have the world living within its borders and globalization has allowed for this to happen.

Once individuals migrate to Canada the progression of technology from globalization has enabled them to stay connected to their country of origin. Although technology has eliminated many barriers between people, there have been many negative outcomes with this shift to ‘information revolution’ from the ‘industrial revolution’ age (McBride, 2011, p. 72). There has been a shift from quality of goods to quantity of goods. No longer are standardized goods massively produced, the focus has shifted to maximizing profit with little regards for environment, resources, and conservation (McBride, 2011, p. 71). Canada’s immigration policy is partly about remaining competitive in the new global economy, by attracting immigrants with knowledge, extensive entrepreneurial background, and laborers. This quantitative goal has affected workers’ rights, labor relations, and increased inequality. Canada’s experience with North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) has not reduced the level of inequality (McBride, 2011, p. 76). In Fact, research has actually suggested the opposite, that free markets have not increased economic growth but it has accelerated poverty and inequality (Wade, 2007, pp. 6-11).

Global climate change has begun to influence Canadian policy in the last 20 years. The main sources of climate change in Canada are human influence and technology. “Climate change is by definition an internationalized environmental issue, even though both its causes and effects – socioeconomic, ecological, and political – are local and regional in character” (Litfin, 200, p. 237). The accumulation of greenhouse gases (GHG) emissions has had an effect on: rising sea levels, shift in agriculture and forest patterns, global warming, sever and extreme weather. Immigration increased Canada’s population, which in turn increased human activity that has created instability in the environment. Subsequently, this has placed a higher demand on industrial activity that our modern civilization depends on. People have become more dependent on cars, energy use in the home, air travel, and everything in between. For example, furniture, clothes and computers, which are made in other parts of the world, like China, can be found in homes of Canadians.

These issues have led Canada to develop and explore climate change policies, which can be interpreted from two different perspectives. First, climate change as a global issue with domestic impacts as described above. Although it is a global issue not everyone is equally responsible for causing it. Industrialized nations account for about 90% of the worlds green house gas emissions but they only make up for 20% of the world’s population (Hallman, 2002). Second, it can be understood as economic globalization. Liftin (2000) has argued that, “the shift that Canada has taken from being an activist of climate change to a more cautious position can in part be explained by economic globalization” (p. 237).

There are many impacts of this economic globalization. Proponents would argue that globalization enhances economic prosperity as it leads to resources being allocated around the world (XXXX). As a result, output of products and resources has become greater and more efficient. With this, employment and standard of living has also increased. Critics, on the other hand, contend that this category of globalization has had negative impacts primarily as it relates outsourcing of jobs (XXXX). It has been argued that not only does this deprive the Canadian people of employment it also leads to exploitation of developing nations. One example can be seen with transnational corporations moving operations to developing nations in order to avoid the stricter environmental regulations of their origin country (Hallman, 2002). Free trade agreements have facilitated and fostered this type of practice. How?

The willingness of countries to adopt and cooperate in the negotiation of treaties that addresses issues if global climate change also depends on the ideologies of the political parties that are in place. The Kyoto Protocol is an international agreement that was initially implemented in December of 1997. Since its development, many signatories have continued to ratify the protocol. Under this agreement countries have committed themselves to reducing their levels of GHG. Essentially, it is an international framework that provides domestic responses to climate change (Bernstein, 2002, p. 203). Canada being one of the world’s largest contributors to GHG was one of the first countries to sign the agreement in April of 1998. During this time it was the Liberal government that had this on their agenda. However, when the Conservative part ousted the Liberal government in 2006 they decided to scrap the Canada’s Kyoto Agreement (Corbett, 2008, p. 607). This demonstrates that the trends in public policies are not exclusive to the effects of globalization and that other factors play a significant role. In this case, the differing political ideologies between the Liberals and Conservatives determined domestic and foreign policy goals. As a result, these political interests supersede global agreements.

Social, cultural, technological, and environmental factors driven by globalization are not the only contributors to foreign and domestic policy. A point of focus needs to be directed towards economics and politics. Not only as they relate to globalization, but also as standalone internal determinants. Or is it possible to separate factors driven by globalization and from those that are not? Because all relations are in fact determined by globalization, which is governed by the hegemon US.

The theoretical foundation of neoliberalism was initially developed at the domestic level (McBride, 2011, p. 27). The emphasis was on internal government deregulation, which was motivated by the displacement of the Keynesian institution. It also “involved political action that [was] aimed at reducing or removing impediments to market forces, including global market forces” (McBride, 2005, p. 99). Neoliberal ideologies have since shifted the trend from a restricted oriented-market, to one that is free. The rationale of neoliberal economic theory is not supported by public choice theory. Their logic extends to the analysis of politics, in that governments are self-interested who seek to maximize power and as a result they will not satisfy “public interests” (McBride, 2011, p. 30). It logically follows then that these theorists proclaim that the driving force behind policy agendas are special interests and not the people (or globalization).

The paradigm shift from domestic to foreign policies succeeded from the paradigm shift in ideologies. This led to international changes where states no longer managed national economic systems (McBride, 2005, p. 8). As trade and investment spheres grew rapidly, Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney agreed to start negotiating free trade agreements. In 1989 the Canada-US Free Trade Agreement (FTA) came into effect. By 1994 the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) was implemented but it was originally signed in 1993.