If I were the next Green Party of Canada Leader, Part 4

Part one includes an introduction to this series, an explanation of the “lost years,” and the apologies the next Green Party of Canada leader should make.

Part two includes my three priorities for the next general election.

Part three tackles the problems with GPC policy.

In part four, I will discuss fixing policy, starting with foreign policy.

How to Fix GPC Policy—Foreign Policy Framework

Since I brought up foreign policy in part three, what should the GPC foreign policy framework be?

First, let’s acknowledge that the GPC has far more influence in the domestic sphere. They are not within an EV’s range of forming power, so let's go heavy on values and light on specifics.


  • Value 1: War is bad because people die.
  • Value 2: All people matter, even if they aren’t Canadian.
  • Value 3: Liberal Democracy isn’t perfect, but it is the best kind of government humans have developed.
  • Value 4: Multilateralism is better than bilateralism, which is better than unilateralism.
  • Value 5: Multi-national corporations should serve people everywhere they operate, not the other way around.


You might be able to see how we can use these values to develop specific positions on any number of foreign policy issues:

Israel Palestine: We want an end to the violence (V1), and we believe that Palestinians deserve the right to self-determination (V3) and that the two peoples must be able to live side-by-side in peace (V2). Therefore we support a two-state solution (V3.)

Russia Ukraine: We want an end to the violence (V1), and Russia’s aggression threatens Ukraine’s sovereignty (V3). We support joining with a broad coalition of allies (V4) to provide humanitarian and military aid to Ukraine to care for displaced Ukrainians (V2) and defend their democracy (V3.)

Trade Agreements: All people deserve economic dignity (V2), and robust trade networks force us out of risky nationalistic enclaves (V1.) Trade agreements should include as many countries as possible (V4.) Trade agreements should contain few industry-specific carve-outs (V5) and instead include minimum standards for labour and the environment (V2) to avoid a “race to the bottom.” Investor-state agreements should take a back seat to each country’s right to self-determination (V3 and V5) and the well-being of all people covered by the agreement (V2 and V5.)


The three examples above show how a value framework can be used to develop consistent positions for the foreign policy issues of the day. This gives the party and the caucus the flexibility to comment on emerging foreign policy issues and keep those new positions consistent with existing positions the GPC has staked out.

Stay tuned for part 5, where I’ll address ranked ballots and proportional representation.