The Conservative government’s moves to re-imagine Canadian identity could end up creating national tensions, experts speaking a the annual State of the Federation conference in Kingston warned this weekend.

Tracey Raney of Ryerson University and Tim Nieguth from Laurentian University study what enables government to shape national identity and what the implications of this might be. Their central argument is that the Conservative government is rebranding its role and attempting to rebrand Canadian national identity.

But their research, and the research of other experts attending the State of the Federation conference, suggest these efforts don’t reflect the values Canadians hold.

Specific policies, such as the federal seat redistribution bill that will add 30 MPs to the House of Commons, are part of the government’s rebranding, Raney and Nieguth said. Bill C-20 will give Ontario 15 seats, Alberta and B.C. six seats each and Quebec only three seats. They contend that if the results of the last election were transposed over top of the new ridings, this would create a new regional realignment, giving more weight to Ontario and the west and less weight to Quebec, that would benefit the Conservative party.

And it’s not just in policy where we can see these shifts, Raney and Nieguth said. There are also symbolic dimensions.

They point out certain themes that have emerged at the federal level in recent years. The Harper government is emphasizing the military, the War of 1812, the Queen, security and law and order and deemphasizing things like the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and a strong national healthcare system.

“The politics of memory and commemoration are crucial to building a sense of national identity,” Nieguth said. “Overall, what this project does is to heavily emphasize, not exclusively, but heavily emphasize Canada’s military… and at the same time it downplays some of the key events and symbols that are commonly linked to rival divisions of the Canadian nation, previous generations and previous governments.”

In his work at EKOS Research, Frank Graves sees fundamental changes in the goals, identities and values of Canadians and some of these changes stand in stark contrast to the federal government’s efforts in rebranding.

Graves said security and safety, traditional family values and respect for authority – things Raney and Nieguth noted the government has highlighted in one way or another – aren’t as important as they used to be, particularly among younger Canadians.

He also said Canadians have become more skeptical of the “minimal, bumper sticker, lower taxes” approach to government.

“The whole sense that will yield a more prosperous, secure society seems to be in disarray with the public,” he said. “While the government is decidedly blue, there’s little evidence to suggest that society is shifting to the right. In fact all these indicators suggest is that there’s a movement away … from social conservative values.

“Now that doesn’t mean that people are moving to the progressive, left side of the equation. There’s no evidence of that. It’s more a defection, particularly with younger people in Canada, university educated in Canada, away from those values.”

Nieguth added that the government’s exercise in reshaping national identity could have significant implications.

A Canadian national identity that emphasizes things like military and monarchy but deemphasizes certain social values might be a tough sell in different parts of the country, such as Quebec, Nieguth said.“So it has the potential to foster another national unity crisis.”

And changing identities, policies and instituions that have tied Canadians together in the past, redefines the relationship citizens have with each other, “where it’s less about solidarity and equality, and more about state protection. It shifts our idea of citizenship,” Nieguth said.