4.3. Ethnic Cleavages Scholars largely debate cultural diversity as a cause of decentralization. “The provincial governments are strong in Canada because Canadians have distinctive needs and interests that cannot be accommodated within a single national government, and also because of Canadians actually want strong provincial governments and a relatively weak federal one” (Stevenson, “Federalism and Intergovernmental Relations” 90). This argument was strategically counter argued by sociologist John Porter in The Vertical Mosaic. “Even if it were true, it would not necessarily explain the power exercised by provincial governments” (Stevenson, “Federalism and Intergovernmental Relations, 91). 4.4. Quebec Nationalism Quebec nationalism has played an important role in strengthening centrifugal forces of Canadian federalism. “Quebec’s example has encouraged other provinces to challenge federal authority, using some of the same arguments and tactics developed by Quebec” (Stevenson, “Federalism and Intergovernmental Relations” 91). Federal initiatives, such as the promotion of francophones into public office, created an anti-federal and anti-Quebec backlash. This backlash has been advantageous to the campaign of other provincial politicians who favour a decentralized government. Contemporary federal governments “have tried to appease Quebec nationalism by transferring federal powers and responsibilities not just to Quebec, but to all of the provinces” (Stevenson, “Federalism and Intergovernmental Relations” 91). 4.5. Uneven Economic Development An official ranking of interprovincial disparities of wealth and income hardly changed since the 1920s. The importance of natural resources to the Canadian economy reinforced the power of provinc... ... middle of paper ... ... Lazar, Harvey. “The Spending Power and the Harper Government.” HeinOnline. 34 Queen's L.J. 125 2008-2009 Mallory, J.R.. 1965. “The Five Faces of Federalism.” In P.A. Crepeau and C.B. Macpherson (eds.) The Future of Canadian Federalism. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. "Prime Minister Promotes Open Federalism." Prime Minister of Canada. N.p., 21 Apr. 2006. Web. 15 July 2014. . Stevenson, Garth. "Canadian Federalism: The Myth of the Status Quo." Reinventing Canada: Politics of the 21st Century. Ed. M. Janine Brodie and Linda Trimble. Toronto: Prentice Hall, 2003. 204-14. Print. Stevenson, Garth. "Federalism and Intergovernmental Relations." Canadian Politics in the 21st Century. Ed. Michael S. Whittington and Glen Williams. Scarborough, Ont.: Nelson Thomson Learning, 2000. 85-1
The Meech Lake accord was a set of constitutional amendments that were designed to persuade Quebec Province to accept the Canadian Constitution Act of 1982 (Brooks 152). This accord derives its name from the Meech Lake, where these negotiations were held by Mulroney Brian, the Canadian Prime Minister, and the ten premiers of the ten Canadian Provinces (Brooks 211). By the time the Canadian constitution was being implemented, Quebec was the only province that had not consented to it. Somehow, the partition of the constitution in 1982 was carried out without Quebec’s agreement, but it was still bound by the same law. Attempts were made to persuade this province to sign the constitution, which it agreed to do but only after its five demands are fulfilled by the Canadian government. Unfortunately, these demands were not met and this accord failed in 1990, when two provincial premiers failed to approve it. This paper answers the question whether Quebec asked for too much during the Meech Lake Accord negotiations.
Pierre Elliot Trudeau was arguably one of the most vivacious and charismatic Prime Ministers Canada has ever seen. He wore capes, dated celebrities and always wore a red rose boutonniere. He looked like a superhero, and often acted like one too. Some of the landmark occurrences in Canadian history all happened during the Trudeau era, such as patriating the constitution, creating the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the 1980 Quebec Referendum. However, it is Trudeau’s 1969 “white paper” and the Calder legal challenge which many consider to be one of his most influential contributions to Canadian history.
Tencer, Daniel. "Income Inequality: Canada Does Surprisingly Little To Reduce Wage Gap. “The Huffington Post. The Huffington Post, Winter 2013. Web. 02 Apr. 2014.
Pierre Elliot Trudeau Published in 1968, Federalism and the French Canadians is an ideological anthology featuring a series of essays written by Pierre Elliot Trudeau during his time spent with the Federal Liberal party of Canada. The emphasis of the book deals with the problems and conflicts facing the country during the Duplessis regime in Quebec. While Trudeau stresses his adamant convictions on Anglophone/Francophone relations and struggles for equality in a confederated land, he also elaborates on his own ideological views pertaining to Federalism and Nationalism. The reader is introduced to several essays that discuss Provincial legislature and conflict (Quebec and the Constitutional Problem, A Constitutional Declaration of Rights) while other compositions deal with impending and contemporary Federal predicaments (Federal Grants to Universities, The Practice and Theory of Federalism, Separatist Counter-Revolutionaries). Throughout all these documented personal accounts and critiques, the reader learns that Trudeau is a sharp critic of contemporary Quebec nationalism and that his prime political conviction (or thesis) is sporadically reflected in each essay: Federalism is the only possible system of government that breeds and sustains equality in a multicultural country such as Canada.
The Founding Fathers and Canada’s Founders both faced many obstacles and concerns when working towards creating the best possible form of government for their respectable nations. The Federalist Papers seek to counter the Articles of Confederation whereas Canada’s Founding Debates is a discussion between supporters and opponents of Confederation. Between the Founding Fathers and Canada’s Founders in the Founding Papers chapter Federal Union, there are many common concerns about the future of the country. When there is a change in how a country is structured, it brings concern over group rights and interest being ignored for the common good, and it is very
Canada is known by outsiders to be a very peaceful country. But if you ask any Canadian they well tell you that is unfortunately not the case. For there is a large ongoing conflict between Canadians. The conflict is between the French and the English, or more specifically between Quebec and the rest of Canada. As a result of this conflict, along with some wrongdoing and propaganda. Quebec has considered and has gone as far to hold referendums over Separatism (Surette,2014). Separatism is that the province of Quebec separates from the rest of Canada to form its own country. Which would have immense effects on indubitably Quebec but also the rest of Canada (Martin, 2014). This report will focus on the root causes and origin of Quebec Separatism, the current state of Quebec Separatism and finally how we as a society can act towards Quebec Separatism.
Despite there being various actors who contributed to Quebec’s journey to nationalism, I would consider Rene Levesque to be one of the leading advocates for Quebec nationalism. He was viewed as an outspoken leader for Quebec’s independence and later formed the new provincial party in Canada – the Parti Quebecois (Tangelder, 1995). The purpose of the party was to essentially achieve Quebec sovereignty or independence by means of majority vote. Levesque used his platform to ultimately shed light to some of the root issues that were occurring in Quebec, specifically issues that negatively targeted French Canadians. One issue was regarding the concerns of how the majority of businesses (80%) were owned by Anglophones, which limited the chances of opportunity for French Canadians to progress in the business world (Fitzmaurice,
Regionalism is a political ideology based on a collective sense of place or attachment, and is discussed in terms of Canadian society, culture, economy and politics (Westfall, 3). Canada is known internationally as a nation incorporating several multiregional interests and identities into its unification of culture. Its diverse population is comprised of numerous ethnicities, religions, sexual orientations and traditions; and all resides under one federal government. Ever since the founding of Canada, it has developed into regional cleavages and identities, based on various geographical topologies, lifestyles and economic interests (Westfall, 6). It is these characteristics which make it problematic for the federal government to represent all demands of its people on a national level. Regionalism is thus an issue within regards to political proficiency in the Federal government.
1. Howe, Paul & David Northrup. Policy Matters Strengthening Canadian Democracy: The Views of Canadians vol.1 no.5. July, 2000
Cody, Howard. "Minority Government in Canada: The Stephen Harper Experience." In American Review of Canadian Studies, Vol. 38, Issue 1. 27-42. Routledge, 2008.
Thompson, John Herd, and Mark Paul Richard. "Canadian History in North American Context." In Canadian studies in the new millennium. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2008. 37-64.
Pierce, J. C. (2000). Political culture and public policy in Canada and the United States: only a border apart?. Lewiston, NY: Edwin Mellen Press.
She reiterates that decentralization and province building are the two mechanisms responsible for the federalization process in Canada between 1990 and 2010. She further claims that there are two types of explanations involving the federalization movement; province-centered and federal centered explanations. However, both have their weaknesses as the province-centered accounts do not focus enough on the driving factors of federal interests and the federal-centered accounts fail to incorporate the provinces when addressing national activity. The author then proceeds to more clearly define the term mechanisms, as it is an acting force that brings about federalization within the immigration realm of the Canadian government. Paquet uses Derek Beach and Rasmus Brun Pedersen’s definition which defines mechanisms as a “theorized system that produces outcomes through the interaction of a series of parts that transmit casual forces from X to
Canada’s parliamentary system is designed to preclude the formation of absolute power. Critics and followers of Canadian politics argue that the Prime Minister of Canada stands alone from the rest of the government. The powers vested in the prime minister, along with the persistent media attention given to the position, reinforce the Prime Minister of Canada’s superior role both in the House of Commons and in the public. The result has led to concerns regarding the power of the prime minister. Hugh Mellon argues that the prime minister of Canada is indeed too powerful. Mellon refers to the prime minister’s control over Canada a prime-ministerial government, where the prime minister encounters few constraints on the usage of his powers. Contrary to Mellon’s view, Paul Barker disagrees with the idea of a prime-ministerial government in Canada. Both perspectives bring up solid points, but the idea of a prime-ministerial government leading to too much power in the hands of the prime minister is an exaggeration. Canada is a country that is too large and complex to be dominated by a single individual. The reality is, the Prime Minister of Canada has limitations from several venues. The Canadian Prime Minister is restricted internally by his other ministers, externally by the other levels of government, the media and globalization.
To conclude, in the present Canadians are seeing change in PSE funding policies begin to come from the provinces. Due to the fact that “when Ottawa went against the grain and launched the Millennium Scholarship programs, provincial feathers, especially Quebec’s, were immediately ruffled,” provinces such as Quebec and British Columbia, among others, were motivated to “set up their own research funding agencies with the view to [maximize] the likelihood of obtaining funds from Ottawa,” (Bakvis 216). As for the legitimacy of cooperative federalism in Canada today, it seems as though executive federalism itself is turning largely paternalistic – at least in the sense of PSE. More often than not, in PSE funding, the federal government has taken the initiative while “one set of executives – those from provincial governments – was largely absent,” (Bakvis 218).