Join the new world

(This exchange between the Freeholder Press and Zanalan took place before the events of day 448 and the threat of a strike by the Food Industry)

Freeholder Press: First of all congratulations on a second term victory.

Zanalan: Thank you. I feel gratified that Canadians have seen fit to approve of the work we have started, and are willing to work toward the goals of strengthening our country.

FP: The presidential campaign had started with a bite but by the end it appeared to be a relatively bloodless affair. How would you describe your experience of this particular campaign?

Z: I am quite disappointed by the tone that this election took. I believe that Canadians want to know the issues and the candidates' positions. Unfortunately, other felt that the best way to run the election was through attacks, rumours and, in some cases, outright lies. Fortunately, the voting public was able to look beyond the attacks and look at the issues.

FP: Canada is being shaped right now by two striking events. The first is the baby boom that preceded the February 5th election and the second is the apparent influx of PEACE agents that characterized it. Instead of energizing Canadians it appears to have destabilized them. Would you say that these issues have now become the most important to citizens of this nation or do they constitute distractions to the real business of governance?

Z: These two events are actually on opposite ends of the governance spectrum. On the one hand, the introduction of the Boomers has made us start a greater emphasis on forward thinking. Our administration need to start developing plans to help these new citizens in the short term, and plan for their integration in the longer term. In all, the Boomers represent one of the most positive developments for eCanada. We have started to see some rising stars in the group, and I expect to see more very soon.

The apparent influx of PEACE agents on Election Day has become a distraction as much as a call for action. There is, unfortunately, a huge gap between what we know and what certain segments of the politicians are claiming. What we know is that a number of PEACE agents were in Canada on Election Day. What people seem to forget is that that is all we know. We do not know if they voted. If they did vote, we do not know whom they voted for. In either case, we do not know their motivation for being in Canada. That is the first thing we need to determine.

FP: Is there a PEACE plot against Canada? Do you think Canada should seek to engage PEACE nations in dialogue?

Z: Is there a PEACE plot against Canada specifically? I would say no. Is there a PEACE plot against ATLANTIS nations? I think that answer would have to be yes. In the last Presidential election, there was a clear attempt by PEACE to takeover Norway. Fortunately, the ATLANTIS alliance was able to lend enough support to the "real" Norwegian candidate to ensure the coup failed.

Should we engage PEACE in a dialogue? Not at this time. The ATLANTIS Secretary-General tried to engage them in a dialogue. What they brought to the table were a series of demands that would have effectively neutered our alliance. Obviously, we walked away from those discussions. As a result, we will be showing PEACE the collective might and the collective resolve of ATLANTIS. We will be ready to respond to any hostile actions that they make. We will work to bring freedom to nations under the thumb of PEACE. The next time they come to the table, they will be asking, not demanding.

FP: You are now a two term president, you have maintained the CSD advantage in Congress, you have moved Canada forward and yet you are constantly portrayed and perceived as a weak leader. How do you respond to this?

Z: This is another example of a small subsection politicians trying to create doubt. Once again, the majority of Canadians seem to see through the claims. However, I am willing to address some of those concerns again.

Zanalan never posts on the eCanada forum. In some ways that is correct, but it is a matter of interpretation. I have made it clear that I have no interest in making "Me too" and "I agree" posts. All these do is add clutter. If I have something to add to a discussion then I will add it. Likewise, I am not an active poster in the various Off Topic threads. I would rather concentrate on the issues of governance rather than take part in the various polls and fluff threads. I do not feel the need to have the greatest number of posts on the forum: I do feel the need to have effective posts on the forum.

Zanalan lets the Cabinet make the decisions. This one is absolutely true. That is my management style. I believe that when someone is placed in Cabinet, they should have the authority to make decisions. I want them to share those decisions before implementation so I can comment on them, but Cabinet needs the freedom to show initiative. If I have to tell each Minister what to do on every issue then they might as well not be there.

Zanalan is never on IRC. This one was true. I have made an effort to be on the IRC every evening, and at random times throughout the day.

FP: Do you ever feel undermined by the people you have set in positions of responsibility and power to help you lead us more effectively?

Z: Recently, no, but in the past, I have had the feeling. As I said before, I like to have the ability to comment on a Ministers proposal before implementation. There have been cases, in the past mandate, where this consultation did not happen. I was not happy about it, and I dealt with it--privately!

FP: When the talks does not focus on the capacity of Canada to attract and retain new immigrants, our collective desire to be a world power or our fears of PEACE take overs, it seems the talk is always about unfair taxing system that penalizes Canadian companies in favour of foreign imports and free markets. All major parties agree to the Rearden doctrine on the economy, or so their platforms and proposed cabinets suggests, but is it time to re-analyse the approach we take with our markets?

Z: There is no hard, right answer to this. I have made no secret of my belief that taxes should be higher. The mechanics for the game force expenses on to the government coffers. The only way for us to keep money available is through taxes.

At the same time, I think that we need to be very cautious in how we approach these increases. We need to balance the right of a business owner to make a *reasonable* profit against the needs of the average citizen to purchase goods. All of our business owners would love to make a 50% profit on every unit sold; what is the impact on the consumer? Most citizens would love to purchase food for $0.01 CAD; what is the impact on the business owner? Somewhere between these two extremes is the proper middle ground. We need to find that point and make the adjustments to reach that point.

FP: Both the political elements and economic issues really speak to the deep down desire of most citizens to matter on the world stage and to be recognized as a power. Would you say it is realistic for Canada to have such aspirations? Are we a power, whether political, military or economic? In the end, do these aspirations serve us realistically?

Z: All of these aspirations are reasonable, but they are not achievable overnight. Our military continues to grow in numbers and strength. The re-launch of the war module will help us continue to grow in this area. Politically, we are growing every day. One only needs to look at the number of new embassies that have been opened to see this growth. We also continue to be active on the ATLANTIS forum. Every good idea we post there adds to our recognition internationally. Our economic power is actually behind where it should be. This is largely due to the lack of skilled workers (welcome to the Boomers!) and an over abundance of Canadian companies. Fortunately, both of these issues will resolve themselves in time. Once they are resolved, we can start to build on our economic power.

Again, we will get there, but people need to be patient.

FP: Finally the pressure of leading nation can be substantial, as we know many past Canadians have decided to turn their back and walk away at this stage of their careers. Do you feel that impulse? Will Zanalan walk away and let his detractors man the controls?

Z: NO! The Canadian people have hired me to do a job. As long as I have their confidence, I will continue to do the job. If, in the next election, I am defeated, I will still be here to act as the voice of the opposition. Canada need committed individual to share their opinions on the issues. That is how democracy works. I am a committed supporter of the democratic process.

FP: Thank you for your time Zanalan.

Z: Thank you for asking the question. It is this type of dialogue that is important in a strong society.