Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-09T16:30:18.682Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Ideas, Executive Federalism and Institutional Change: Explaining Territorial Inclusion in Canadian First Ministers' Conferences

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 May 2013

Christopher Alcantara
Christopher Alcantara*
Affiliation:
Wilfrid Laurier University
*
Christopher Alcantara, Department of Political Science, Wilfrid Laurier University, Waterloo ON N2L 3C5; email: [email protected].
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Abstract. Official participation in Canadian First Ministers' Conferences has long been exclusive to federal and provincial first ministers. In March 1992, however, the membership of this intergovernmental arena was expanded permanently to include territorial premiers. Using the tools of historical institutionalism and drawing upon relevant literature and eleven elite interviews with former first ministers and senior civil servants, this paper seeks to explain why this instance of incremental institutional change occurred. It finds that significant friction between the institutional and ideational layers of the Canadian federation during a period of mega-constitutional reform allowed federal, provincial and territorial actors to draw upon ideas about democracy and the political and constitutional maturation of the territorial North to expand permanently the membership of First Ministers' Conferences.

Résumé. Pendant longtemps, seuls les premiers ministres fédéral et provinciaux étaient admis officiellement à la conférence des premiers ministres du Canada. Toutefois, en mars 1992, ce sommet intergouvernemental était élargi en permanence de façon à accueillir les premiers ministres des territoires. À l'aide des outils de l'institutionnalisme historique, et en tirant parti de la documentation pertinente ainsi que de 11 entrevues menées auprès d'un groupe sélect d'ex-premiers ministres et de hauts fonctionnaires, cet article tente d'expliquer pourquoi nous avons assisté à un tel degré de changement constitutionnel. Nous en concluons que d'importantes frictions entre les niveaux institutionnel et idéationnel de la fédération canadienne au cours d'une période de réforme mégaconstitutionnelle ont permis aux acteurs fédéraux, provinciaux et territoriaux de s'inspirer d'idées portant sur la démocratie et sur le processus de maturation politique et constitutionnel du Nord territorial afin d'accroître en permanence le nombre de participants aux conférences des premiers ministres.

Type
Research Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Political Science/Revue canadienne de science politique , Volume 46 , Issue 1 , March 2013 , pp. 27 - 48
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Political Science Association 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alcantara, Christopher. 2013. “Preferences, Perceptions, and Veto Players: Explaining Devolution Negotiation Outcomes in the Canadian Territorial North.” Polar Record 49 (2): 167–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alcantara, Christopher, Cameron, Kirk and Kennedy, Steven. 2012. “Assessing Devolution in the Canadian North: A Case Study of the Yukon Territory.” Arctic 65 (3): 328–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ajzenstat, Janet. 2007. The Canadian Founding: John Locke and Parliament. Montreal and Kingston: McGill–Queen's University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ajzenstat, Janet, Romney, Paul, Gentles, Ian and Gairdner, William D., eds. 2003. Canada's Founding Debates. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baier, Gerald. 2006. Courts and Federalism: Judicial Doctrine in the United States, Australia, and Canada. Vancouver: UBC Press.Google Scholar
Baker, Dennis. 2010. Not Quite Supreme: The Courts and Coordinate Constitutional Interpretation. Montreal and Kingston: McGill–Queen's University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bakvis, Herman. 1994. “Intrastate Federalism in Australia.” Australian Journal of Political Science 29: 259–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bakvis, Herman. 2000. “Prime Minister and Cabinet in Canada: An Autocracy in Need of Reform?” Journal of Canadian Studies 35 (4): 60–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bakvis, Herman, Baier, Gerald and Brown, Douglas. 2009. Contested Federalism: Certainty and Ambiguity in the Canadian Federation. Toronto: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Béland, Daniel. 2009. “Ideas, Institutions, and Policy Change.” Journal of European Public Policy 16 (5): 701–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Béland, Daniel and Cox, Robert Henry. 2010. “Introduction.” In Ideas and Politics in Social Science Research, ed. Béland, Daniel and Cox, Robert Henry. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernier, Luc, Brownsey, Keith and Howlett, Michael, eds. 2005. Executive Styles in Canada: Cabinet Structures and Leadership Practices in Canadian Government. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brock, Kathy. 1991. “The Politics of Process.” In Canada: The State of the Federation, ed. Brown, Douglas M.. Kingston: Institute of Intergovernmental Relations.Google Scholar
Brock, Kathy. 1995. “The End of Executive Federalism?” In New Trends in Canadian Federalism, ed. Rocher, Francois and Smith, Miriam. Peterborough: Broadview Press.Google Scholar
Brock, Kathy. 2008. “The Politics of Asymmetrical Federalism: Reconsidering the Role and Responsibilities of Ottawa.” Canadian Public Policy 34 (2): 143–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broschek, Jorg. 2010. “Federalism and Political Change: Canada and Germany in Historical-Institutionalist Perspective.” Canadian Journal of Political Science 43 (1): 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cairns, Alan. 1995. “The Constitutional World We Have Lost.” In Reconfigurations: Canadian Citizenship and Constitutional Change: Selected Essays by Alan C. Cairns, ed. Cairns, Alan and Williams, Douglas E.. Toronto: McClelland and Stewart.Google Scholar
Canadian Intergovernmental Conference Secretariat (CICS). n.d.First Ministers' Conferences 1906–2004. Ottawa: Canadian Intergovernmental Conference Secretariat.Google Scholar
Dupré, Stefan. 1985. “The Workability of Executive Federalism.” In Intergovernmental Relations, ed. Simeon, Richard. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Erk, Jan and Koning, Edward. 2010. “New Structuralism and Institutional Change: Federalism between Centralization and Decentralization.” Comparative Political Studies 43 (3): 353–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Falleti, Tulia and Lynch, Julia. 2009. “Context and Causation in Political Analysis.” Comparative Political Studies 42 (9): 1143–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harrison, Kathryn. 1996. Passing the Buck: Federalism and Canadian Environmental Policy. Vancouver: UBC Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hueglin, Thomas and Fenna, Alan. 2006. Comparative Federalism: A Systematic Inquiry. Peterborough: Broadview Press.Google Scholar
Kingdon, John. 2003. Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies. New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Liebermann, Robert. 2002. “Ideas, Institutions, and Political Order: Explaining Political Change.” American Political Science Review 96 (4): 697–712.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meekison, Peter, Telford, Hamish and Lazar, Harvey. 2004. “The Institutions of Executive Federalism: Myths and Realities.” In Canada: The State of the Federation. Reconsidering the Institutions of Canadian Federalism, ed. Meekison, Peter J., Telford, Hamish and Lazar, Harvey. Kingston: Institute of Intergovernmental Relations.Google Scholar
Milne, David. 1992. “Innovative Constitutional Processes: Renewal of Canada Conferences, January-March 1992.” In Canada: The State of the Federation ed. Brown, Douglas and Young, Robert, eds. Kingston: Institute of Intergovernmental Relations.Google Scholar
Montpetit, Eric. 2008. “Easing Dissatisfaction with Canadian Federalism? The Promise of Disjointed Incrementalism.” Canadian Political Science Review 2 (3): 12–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nevitte, Neil. 1996. Decline of Deference. Peterborough: Broadview Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Orren, Karen and Skowronek, Stephen. 1994. “Beyond the Iconography of Order: Notes for a ‘New’ Institutionalism.” In The Dynamics of American Politics, ed. Dodd, L.C. and Jillson, C.. Boulder CO: Westview.Google Scholar
Papillon, Martin and Simeon, Richard. 2004. “The Weakest Link? First Ministers' Conferences in Canadian Intergovernmental Relations.” In Canada: The State of the Federation. Reconsidering the Institutions of Canadian Federalism, ed. Meekison, Peter J., Telford, Hamish and Lazar, Harvey. Kingston: Institute of Intergovernmental Relations.Google Scholar
Pierson, Paul. 1996. “The Path to European Integration: A Historical Institutionalist Analysis.” Comparative Political Studies 29 (2): 123–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Russell, Peter. 2004. Constitutional Odyssey: Can Canadians Become a Sovereign People? Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Savoie, Donald. 1999. Governing From the Centre: The Concentration of Power in Canadian Politics. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Savoie, Donald. 2009. “Power at the Apex: Executive Dominance.” In Canadian Politics, ed. Bickerton, James and Gagnon, Alain-G.. Toronto: University of Toronto Higher Education.Google Scholar
Sayers, Anthony and Banfield, Andrew. 2010. “The Dispersal of Power in Federal States: Canada and Australia.” Paper presented at the Canadian Political Science Association annual general meeting, Concordia University, Montreal.Google Scholar
Scharpf, Fritz. 1988. “The Joint Decision Trap: Lessons from German Federalism and European Integration.” Public Administration 66 (2): 239–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmidt, Vivien A. 2010. “Taking Ideas and Discourse Seriously: Explaining Change through Discursive Institutionalism as the Fourth ‘New Institutionalism.’” European Political Science Review 2 (1): 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simeon, Richard. 1990. “Why Did the Meech Lake Accord Fail?” In Canada: The State of the Federation, ed. Watts, Ronald and Brown, Douglas M.. Kingston: Institute of Intergovernmental Relations.Google Scholar
Simeon, Richard. 2006. Federal–Provincial Diplomacy: The Making of Recent Policy in Canada. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simeon, Richard and Robinson, Ian. 1990. State, Society, and the Development of Canadian Federalism. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Smiley, Donald. 1974. “Federal-Provincial Conflict in Canada.” In Canadian Federalism: From Crisis to Constitution, ed. Waller, Harold, Sabetti, Filippo, and Elazar, Daniel J.. Lanham MD: University Press of America.Google Scholar
Smiley, Donald. 1976. Canada in Question: Federalism in the Seventies. Toronto: McGraw-Hill Ryerson.Google Scholar
Smiley, Donald. 1987. The Federal Condition in Canada. Toronto: McGraw-Hill Ryerson.Google Scholar
Smith, Jennifer. 1984. “Intrastate Federalism and Confederation.” In Political Thought in Canada: Contemporary Perspectives, ed. Brooks, Stephen. Toronto: IrwinGoogle Scholar
Smith, Jennifer. 2004. Federalism. Vancouver: UBC Press.Google Scholar
Statistics Canada. 2010. Population by year, by province and territory. Ottawa: Statistics Canada. http://www40.statcan.gc.ca/l01/cst01/demo02a-eng.htm (accessed November 20, 2010).Google Scholar
Stein, Michael. 1993. “Tensions in the Canadian Constitutional Process: Elite Negotiations, Referendums and Interest Group Consultations, 1980–1992.” In Canada: The State of the Federation 1993, ed. Watts, Ron and Brown, Douglas. Kingston: Institute of Intergovernmental Relations.Google Scholar
Steinmo, Sven. 1993. Taxation and Democracy: Swedish, British and American Approaches to Financing the Modern State. New Haven CN: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Steinmo, Sven. 2001. “The New Institutionalism.” In The Encyclopedia of Democratic Thought, ed. Clark, Barry and Foweraker, Joe. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Stevenson, Garth. 1993. Ex Uno Plures: Federal-Provincial Relations in Canada, 1867–1896. Montreal and Kingston: McGill–Queen's University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tanguay, Brian. 2009. “Reforming Representative Democracy: Taming the ‘Democratic Deficit.’” In Canadian Politics, ed. Bickerton, James and Gagnon, Alain-G.. Toronto: University of Toronto Higher Education.Google Scholar
Thelen, Kathleen. 1993. “European Labour in Transition: Sweden and Germany Compared.” World Politics 46 (1): 23–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thelen, Kathleen. 1999. “Historical Institutionalism in Comparative Politics.” Annual Review of Political Science 2: 269–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thelen, Kathleen. 2004. How Institutions Evolve. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watts, Ronald. 1989. Executive Federalism: A Comparative Analysis. Kingston: Institute of Intergovernmental Relations.Google Scholar
Watts, Ronald. 1999. Comparing Federal Systems. Kingston: Institute of Intergovernmental Relations.Google Scholar
Weir, Margaret. 1992. Politics and Jobs: The Boundaries of Employment Policy in the United States. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
White, Graham. 2005. Cabinet and First Ministers. Vancouver: UBC Press.Google Scholar