The challenge was summarized as follows:
In the coming months and years, Canadians will determine whether and how to renew Canada in a world that is changing rapidly and fundamentally — economically, socially and politically. Yet, in spite of the massive global changes which face us all, the current debate in Canada remains largely trapped in issues and concepts from another age. At times, we appear to be sleepwalking into a future that few of us want. Much of this discussion is devoted to constitutional changes, but constitutions can only be remade when they reflect broadly shared agreements in a society. That agreement does not appear to be present in Canada today. We need to move from a focus on the past, to a more strategic conversation about how we can achieve a preferred future that we define together. This orientation to the future is what a strategic conversation is all about. It is something urgently required in all societies, but particularly in Canada. If we are to be successful in this changing world, we need to frame the issues and the possibilities in a new way, to build a different basis on which we can work together to thrive in today's world. In doing so, we need to develop a deeper knowledge of each other, and a shared understanding of the challenges we face, and of the choices before us. This project is a modest effort, funded to date by more than ninety individuals and private organizations. But we hope it can make a genuine contribution to developing the sort of dialogue about our future that we so urgently require. We invite your participation in that dialogue.

Working with the original convening group, Meridian then organized a project that brought together 30 leaders from across Canada to engage in intensive dialogue and construct a set of scenarios of different possible futures facing the northern half of the North American continent. The project was funded entirely by private donations, and brought together a diverse group of Canadians who came from different regions, cultural communities and social sectors, and from very different political perspectives, including both strong federalists and strong Quebec nationalists/sovereignists.

The project members met five times (for three or four days each time) over a period of seven months. They first identified key areas of uncertainty, and then met with a range of Canadian and international authorities to learn more about those areas, and to explore alternative perspectives (to try to break out of the usual mental boxes, the usual frameworks). A selection of readings supplemented the seminars. Next, they constructed four scenarios for how Canada might develop over the next fifteen years, and explored some of the implications of those scenarios for a range of decisions and issues Canada now faces. In that process, they sought to re-perceive those issues, and to reframe the current debate, in the context of longer-term opportunities and threats.

This diverse group succeeded in forming a new understanding of Canada's future possibilities, and a shared map of the choices ahead. The scenarios they constructed have now been made public and can be viewed at: www.scenarios.ca.

At a number of workshops across Canada, the four scenarios have been used to promote and structure a wider dialogue about Canada's future. At the 1998 Couchiching Conference on "Canada in the 21st Century", three members of the first roundtable engaged participants in a novel dialogue on the four scenarios. The detailed record of this dialogue is available from:

Daniel Coates
Scenarios For the Future
PO Box 7,000 Almonte, Ontario, Canada K0A 1A0
Tel: (613) 256-4350

The Need for Public Dialogue:

It once was the case in most systems of governance, and certainly in Canada, that a relatively small elite group (who shared the same belief systems, similar upbringing, the same social class and so on), could meet and reach an agreement that would usually be accepted by the larger society as legitimate and, as such, could be acted on effectively. Most of our governance systems are still designed to operate in this manner. Our existing governing institutions provide too few opportunities and too few places for genuine public engagement and dialogue.

Today, for an important decision to be accepted by the public as legitimate, many more voices need to be taken into account and to share, in some degree, in making that decision. But we have too few institutions and meeting places designed to enable people from diverse communities to come together, set their own agendas, and work through issues to reach a considered public judgment. This project is intended to provide one such forum.