1. Russell, Peter H., “Overcoming Legal Formalism: The Treatment of the Constitution, the Courts, and Judicial Behaviour in Canadian Political Science,” Canadian Journal of Law and Society 1 (1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

2. Monahan, Patrick, Politics and the Constitution: The Charter, Federalism and the Supreme Court of Canada (Toronto: Carswell Co., 1987)Google Scholar. Political scientists have not been completely silent in this regard. The work of Russell and Morton provide exceptions to this generalization. See in particular, Russell, P.H., “The Supreme Court and Federal-Provincial Relations: The Political Use of Legal Resources,” Canadian Public Policy 11 (1985), no. 2CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Morton, F.L., “The Political Impact of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms,” Canadian Journal of Political Science 20 (1987), no. 1CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

3. Morgentaler, Smoling, and Scott v. The Queen (1988), 37 C.C.C. (3d) 449.

4. We do not know at this point in time if federalism will be an important factor in future instances of Charter review. It is certainly possible that its importance in the abortion issue is exceptional. However, given the likelihood that subjects of joint federal and provincial responsibility will be subject to Charter challenges, my suspicion is that federalism's impact will not be confined to exceptional circumstances.

5. Monahan, , Politics and the Constitution, 9Google Scholar.

6. Ibid., 11-12.

7. Trebilcock, M.J., Prichard, R.S., Hartle, D.G., and Dewees, D.N., The Choice of Governing Instrument (Ottawa: Minister of Supply and Services Canada, 1982)Google Scholar.

8. Doern and Phidd identify the primary policy instruments as: exhortation, expenditure, taxation, regulation and public enterprise. Doern, G. Bruce and Phidd, Richard W., Canadian Public Policy: Ideas, Structure, Process (Toronto: Methuen, 1983), 110Google Scholar.

9. Monahan, , Politics and the Constitution, 227–228Google Scholar.

10. Ibid., 130.

11. Trebilcock, et al. , The Choice of Governing Instrument, 28Google Scholar.

12. Mandel, Michael, The Charter of Rights and the Legalization of Politics in Canada (Toronto: Wall and Thompson, 1989), 287Google Scholar. Another critique of the judicial reasoning in this case is found in L.C. Green, “Abortion, the Foetus and the Supreme Court,” (Address delivered to the Royal Society of Canada, June 8, 1988, mimeo.).

13. Mandel, , The Charter of Rights and the Legalization of Politics in Canada, 278Google Scholar.

14. Green, “Abortion, the Foetus and the Supreme Court.”

15. Monahan, , Politics and the Constitution, 228Google Scholar.

16. It should be stressed that the case involving Chantal Daigle, not the United States Supreme Court's decision in Webster v. Reproductive Health Services, pushed the Federal Government to declare its intention to act. Immediately after the American decision Justice Minister Lewis seemed satisfied with the status quo, a situation where the issue was becoming more important at the provincial level. Less than three weeks later Prime Minister Mulroney announced his government's intention to bring in federal legislation to fill the legislative void. See “U.S. abortion ruling has raised hopes of a Canadian ban,” Globe and Mail, July 5, 1989, A1Google ScholarPubMed and Fraser, Graham “Mulroney promises abortion bill this autumn,” Globe and Mail, July 21, 1989, A1Google Scholar.

17. Quebec's intervention in the Daigle case argued this point more generally. It asserted that the federal and provincial governments share jurisdiction over abortion. In its brief to the Court Quebec argued that, although it agreed with the suggestion that prohibiting abortions was a matter for federal criminal law, provinces may legislate on the civil aspects of abortion if no criminal aspect is involved. See Tison, Marie, “Le Québec défend en Cour suprême les fondements juridiques de la Cour d'appel,” Le Devoir, August 4, 1989, 1Google Scholar.

18. See for example the comments of Doris Anderson of the National Action Committee on the Status of Women in Livingstone, Barb, “Contest abortion stance: feminist,” Calgary Herald, April 24, 1988, B10Google Scholar.

19. Speaking about responsibility in British Columbia for abortion in light of the Supreme Court's decision in Morgentaler, Ron Basford, a former federal Justice Minister, said: “If the Criminal Code is silent on the issue of abortion, then the whole subject is governed under the Medical Professions Act and the Health Act.” See “Abortion could be a provincial matter,” Vancouver Sun, January 28, 1988, A2Google ScholarPubMed. Two constitutional lawyers, Ed Ratushney and Brian Crane, suggested that, while the provinces could not make abortion a criminal offence they could restrict access to abortions through their jurisdiction in regards to health, hospitals, and the medical profession. “Provinces can't revive abortion law: experts,” Calgary Herald, February 1, 1988, A3Google Scholar.

20. Kerr, Kathy and Walker, Robert, “Only approved abortions insured in Alberta,” Calgary Herald, February 2, 1988Google Scholar.

21. Calgary Herald columnist Don Braid suggested that Moore's attempt to maintain the status quo enjoyed the support of “an anti-abortion majority in the Conservative caucus.” Don Braid, , “Moore walks fine line on abortion,” Calgary Herald, February 2, 1988, A11Google Scholar.

22. Livingstone, Barb and Southam, Brenda, “Fight promised over abortion fees,” Calgary Herald, February 3, 1988, A1Google Scholar.

23. Kerr, Kathy, “Minister says abortion committees must go,” Calgary Herald, February 4, 1988, A1Google Scholar.

24. Moore would not force, however, hospitals to disband therapeutic abortion committees. When it was brought to his attention that hospitals in High Prairie and Drumheller still had these committees he declared that, although he felt that they should disband them, he would not order them to do so. Alberta, , Alberta Hansard, 21st Legislature, 3rd Session, no. 5, March 23, 1988, 74Google Scholar.

25. This feature of the Canadian legislation is noted in Mandel, The Charter of Rights and the Legalization of Politics in Canada, 275–276Google Scholar. For a discussion of the modification to Alberta's policy see Kathy Kerr, “Rules to approve abortion altered,” Calgary Herald, February 6, 1988, A1.

26. Geddes, Ashley, “Abortion policy firm, says Moore,” Calgary Herald, February 24, 1988, A2Google Scholar.

27. Geddes, Ashley and Livingstone, Barb, “Abortion: ministers disagree,” Calgary Herald, February 20, 1988, A1Google Scholar.

28. Geddes, Ashley, “Second MD's input needed for abortions,” Calgary Herald, February 18, 1988, A1Google Scholar.

29. “Ready access to abortions will take time, backers say,” Calgary Herald, January 30, 1988, B6Google Scholar. Low fees paid by Saskatchewan medicare for abortions has also been identified as the reason why gynecologists in Regina refuse to perform this service. See “Various provincial regulations set up to replace three-member committees,” Globe and Mail, January 28, 1989, A3Google ScholarPubMed.

30. “Women forced into riskier late abortions,” Calgary Herald, January 31, 1988, A10Google Scholar.

31. Telephone interview, Liz McCord, Planned Parenthood Association of Edmonton, May 11, 1989.

32. Within a week of the Morgentaler decision Ontario announced the abolition of therapeutic abortion committees and that medicare would pay for abortions performed in private clinics.

33. Alberta, , The Alberta Gazette, Part II, 84 (1988), no. 8Google Scholar, Alberta Regulation 98/88; Ontario, , The Ontario Gazette 122–10 (March 11, 1989)Google Scholar, Ontario Regulation 94/89, 1158.

34. “Women forced into riskier late abortions,” A10.

35. Ibid.

36. Ibid.

37. In the Daigle case the Supreme Court has the opportunity to clarify the extent to which the federal and provincial governments have responsibility for abortion.

38. See the exchange over access in the legislature between Moore and Marie Laing of the New Democrats for an example of the Minister's decision to interpret the Court decision narrowly. Alberta, , Alberta Hansard, Twenty-first Legislature, Third session (March 23, 1988), 75Google Scholar.

39. Mandel raises another possible explanation for the conservative response of some provincial governments to the decision, one centring on the issue of the Supreme Court's legitimacy. For him, provincial obstructionism on the scale seen since Morgentaler would not be possible had this policy been the product of federal legislation. See Mandel, , The Charter of Rights and the Legalization of Politics in Canada, 293Google Scholar.

40. Trebilcock, et al. , The Choice of Governing Instrument, 29Google Scholar.

41. Alberta, , Alberta Hansard, 21st Legislature, 3rd Session, no. 77, June 8, 1988, p. 1577Google Scholar. See also Alberta, , Alberta Hansard, 21st Legislature, 3rd Session, no. 78, June 9, 1988, especially 1605–1606Google Scholar; Ed Struzik, , Laghi, Brian, and Thorne, Duncan, “Hug your mother today, Getty tells Albertans,” Edmonton Journal, March 12, 1989, A1Google Scholar.

42. Regarding reproductive health matters, sterilization and the purchase of intra-uterine devices were also dropped from the list of services covered by medical insurance in August 1987 only to be reinstated as insured services in April 1988.

43. “Getty calls early election,” Edmonton Journal, February 21, 1989, A1Google Scholar.

44. “Hug your mother today, Getty tells Albertans”; for a special report on the family issue in the 1989 provincial election see the Edmonton Journal, March 12, 1989, A1–A2Google Scholar.

45. Laghi, Brian, “Family Day holiday unveiled,” Edmonton Journal, June 2, 1989, A3Google Scholar.

46. “Moore blames rise in abortion on indifference,” Calgary Herald, August 6, 1988, A3Google Scholar.

47. Kerr, Kathy, “Split on abortion,” Calgary Herald, May 14, 1988, A5Google Scholar.

48. Only thirty-four percent of this group favoured free-standing abortion clinics. Five percent were unsure. In the Calgary sample fifty-three percent favoured the clinics, forty-one percent were opposed, and five percent were unsure. In Edmonton the results were virtually identical: fifty-five percent would allow these clinics to operate, forty percent were opposed, and four percent were unsure. See Kerr, Kathy, “Split on abortion,” Calgary Herald, May 14, 1988, A3Google Scholar.

49. Tupper, Allan, “The Rebirth of Politics,” NeWest Review 13 (1988), no. 9, 9Google Scholar.

50. “U. S. abortion ruling has raised hopes of a Canadian ban,” Globe and Mail, July 5, 1989, A1Google ScholarPubMed.

51. Makin, Kirk and Delacourt, Susan, “Massive legal battle looms over Daigle abortion case,” Globe and Mail, August 2, 1989, A1Google Scholar. Earlier, Prime Minister Mulroney announced his government's intention to fill the legislative void. See “Mulroney promises abortion bill this autumn.”

52. Cox, Kevin, “Nova Scotia bans abortion clinics,” Globe and Mail, March 17, 1989, A10Google Scholar; Legge, Lois, “N. S. Abortion Law Challenged,” The Chronicle-Herald, May 9, 1989, 1Google Scholar; “Abortion law to get ‘teeth’,” Edmonton Journal, June 7, 1989, A8Google Scholar; Cox, Kevin, “Argument over access to abortion to become full trial in Nova Scotia,” Globe and Mail, August 9, 1989Google Scholar.

53. Doris Anderson recommended that equality be used to challenge Alberta's restrictions. See Livingstone, Barb, “Contest abortion stance: feminist,” Calgary Herald, April 24, 1988, B10Google Scholar.

54. Mandel, , The Charter of Rights and the Legalization of Politics, 298Google Scholar.

55. Morton, F.L., “Compromise could define inarticulate middle ground,” Calgary Herald, February 12, 1988, A5Google Scholar.

56. Green, “Abortion, the Foetus and the Supreme Court,” 7-8.