No, it's not, not in my opinion. I should provide a more complicated answer.
The UN is in deep need of reform, and I say this as someone with incredible faith in the multilateral process and in multilateral institutions. However, I can believe in multilateral institutions and processes while simultaneously stating that they need to be reformed.
I'm sure that the P5 architecture worked very well in 1949 with the inclusion of the five permanent members, but today, in 2018, it absolutely does not reflect a multipolar world. With Canada now wanting, for example, the two-year, non-permanent Security Council seat, that's fine. I understand that's the structure we're working with now. That's the only vehicle we have, so I understand why Canada's trying to get on to the Security Council. We haven't been on it for 20 years, if I remember rightly. I understand that, but it's like asking for a seat at a table rather than asking for the table itself to be reformed. That does trouble me.
At the same time, I understand that we operate in smaller, shorter frames of time. Yes, we are making a bid for 2021 to 2023, and I'm perhaps okay with that, but I think that we should still be able to ask for reform while being cognizant of the fact that there is a push for that seat.