Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of figures and tables
- Notes on contributors
- Editors’ introduction to the series
- One Policy analysis in Canada: an introduction
- Part I The profession of policy analysis in Canada
- Part II Policy analysis at different levels of Canadian governments
- Part III Policy analysis in the executive and legislative branches of Canadian government
- Part IV Policy analysis outside government: parties, interest groups and the media
- Part V Pedagogy and policy analysis in the Canadian university system
- Part VI Conclusion
- Index
Twelve - The policy capacity of political parties in Canada
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 19 April 2022
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of figures and tables
- Notes on contributors
- Editors’ introduction to the series
- One Policy analysis in Canada: an introduction
- Part I The profession of policy analysis in Canada
- Part II Policy analysis at different levels of Canadian governments
- Part III Policy analysis in the executive and legislative branches of Canadian government
- Part IV Policy analysis outside government: parties, interest groups and the media
- Part V Pedagogy and policy analysis in the Canadian university system
- Part VI Conclusion
- Index
Summary
The 1988 federal election is notable for its referendum-like focus on the proposed free trade agreement between Canada and the United States that was supported by the governing Progressive Conservatives and opposed by the Liberals and New Democrats. However, the events in Parliament leading up to and immediately following the 1988 federal election further highlight the democratic potential and importance of that and other election campaigns in relation to the policy roles that political parties and elections play in Canada and other parliamentary democracies. During the course of the passage of the bill to implement the free trade agreement negotiated with the United States, John Turner, the leader of the Official Opposition Liberals, announced that he had instructed the Liberal majority in the Senate to refuse to pass the bill into law prior to a general election on the agreement. In the absence of parliamentary approval of the legislation by the end of 1988 or an agreement by the governments of Canada and the United States to extend the deadline beyond the end of the year, the agreement would not take effect. In short, Mr Turner required that the free trade agreement be subject to approval by the Canadian public through an election campaign that would focus, in whole or in part, on the issue.
Assailed for interfering with the democratic will of the electorate as expressed by the elected House of Commons, Mr Turner countered that Mr Mulroney and the Progressive Conservatives did not have a mandate from the electorate to pursue a free trade agreement with the United States. In doing so, Mr Turner made explicit reference to the policy proposals put forward by the Progressive Conservatives during the course of the 1984 election campaign, including the lack of any specific commitment to pursue such an agreement. In effect, he argued that the actions of the Mulroney government were undemocratic due to lack of public approval and he dared Mr Mulroney to fight an election campaign on the agreement. With no other options available to him as a result of the Liberal majority in the Senate, Mr Mulroney took up the challenge and had an election called in the autumn of 1988.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Policy Analysis in Canada , pp. 257 - 274Publisher: Bristol University PressPrint publication year: 2018