Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T20:42:31.790Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Quebec and Canadian Fiscal Federalism: From Tremblay to Séguin and Beyond

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 May 2014

Hubert Rioux Ouimet
Hubert Rioux Ouimet*
Affiliation:
McMaster University
*
Department of Political Science, McMaster University, Kenneth Taylor Hall 527, Hamilton, Ontario, L8S 4M4. Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Sixty years ago, in late 1953, Quebec launched the hearings of the Royal Commission on Constitutional Problems—or Tremblay commission. Commenting the publication of its report, political scientist Alexander Brady boldly argued in this journal that Quebec had been, until the late 1950s, the “guarantor” of Canada's fiscal system's flexibility (1959: 270). Emphasizing the system's evolution since the 1950s “constitutional problems,” some specialists now contend, as the economist Robin Boadway does, that Canada became the “textbook best-practice of fiscal federalism” (2007: 99). The Tremblay commission's sixtieth anniversary and the termination, in 2014, of the current agreement on federal transfers, provide an opportunity to reassess this evolution and question the validity of this kind of statement.

Résumé

Il y a soixante ans, à la fin 1953, le Québec lançait les audiences de la Commission royale d'enquête sur les problèmes constitutionnels – ou «  Commission Tremblay ». Commentant la publication de son rapport, le politologue Alexander Brady a audacieusement soutenu dans cette revue que le Québec avait été, jusqu'à la fin des années 1950, garant de la souplesse du système fiscal canadien (1959 : 270). Se référant à l'évolution du système depuis les « problèmes constitutionnels » des années 1950, certains spécialistes tel que l'économiste Robin Boadway prétendent aujourd'hui que le Canada est devenu « exemplaire dans sa pratique du fédéralisme fiscal » (2007 : 99). Le soixantième anniversaire de la Commission Tremblay, de même que l'échéance, en 2014, du présent programme de transferts fédéraux fournissent l'opportunité de réexaminer cette évolution et de questionner la validité de ce type d'assertion.

Type
Research Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Political Science/Revue canadienne de science politique , Volume 47 , Issue 1 , March 2014 , pp. 47 - 69
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Political Science Association (l'Association canadienne de science politique) and/et la Société québécoise de science politique 2014 

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

Adam, Marc-Antoine. 2009. “Fiscal Federalism and the Future of Canada: Can Section 94 of the Constitution Act, 1867, Be an Alternative to the Spending Power?” In Canada: The State of the Federation 2006/07. Transitions: Fiscal and Political Federalism in an Era of Change, ed. Allan, John R., Courchene, Thomas J. and Leuprecht, Christian. Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press.Google Scholar
Beauchemin, Jacques, Bourque, Gilles and Duchastel, Jules. 1995. “Du providentialisme au néolibéralisme : de Marsh à Axworthy. Un nouveau discours de légitimation de la régulation sociale.” Cahiers de recherche sociologique 24: 15–47.Google Scholar
Bird, Richard M. and Chen, Duan-jie. 1998. “Federal finance and fiscal federalism: The two world of Canadian public finance.” Canadian Public Administration 41 (1): 51–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boadway, Robin. 2007. “Canada.” In A Global Dialogue on Federalism. The Practice of Fiscal Federalism: Comparative Perspectives, ed. Shah, Anwar. Montreal: McGill- Queen's University Press.Google Scholar
Boadway, Robin and Shaw, Anwar. 2009. Fiscal Federalism. Principles and Practice of Multiorder Governance. New-York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boismenu, Gérard. 2007. “Politique constitutionnelle et fédéralisme canadien: la vision de la Commission Tremblay.” Bulletin d'Histoire Politique 16 (1): 17–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brady, Alexander. 1959. “Quebec and Canadian Federalism.” Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science 25 (3): 259–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Canada. 1867. British North America Act. http://lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/Const/page-1.html (February 23, 2013).Google Scholar
Canada. 1992. Charlottetown Accord. http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/articles/charlottetown-accord-document (February 23, 2013).Google Scholar
Canada, Council of the Federation. Advisory Panel on Fiscal Imbalance. 2006. “Reconciling the Irreconcilable: Addressing Canada's Fiscal Imbalance.” http://www.councilofthefederation.ca/pdfs/Report_Fiscalim_Mar3106.pdf (February 23, 2013).Google Scholar
Canada, Department of Finance. 2006. “Restoring Fiscal Balance in Canada: Focusing on Priorities.” http://www.fin.gc.ca/budget06/pdf/fp2006e.pdf (February 23, 2013).Google Scholar
Canada. 1990. Meech Lake Accord. http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/articles/meech-lake-accord-document (February 23, 2013).Google Scholar
Courchene, Thomas J. and Meredith, Tyler. 2012. “The Budget and the Provinces: Toward a National Blueprint.” Policy Options 33 (5): 23–27.Google Scholar
Courchene, Thomas J. 2008. “Reflections on the Federal Spending Power: Practices, Principles, Perspectives.” IRPP Working Paper Series 2008–01.Google Scholar
Dion, Stéphane. 2005. “Fiscal Balance in Canada.” In Canadian Fiscal Arrangements: What Works, What Might Work Better, ed. Lazar, Harvey. Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press.Google Scholar
Dunn, Christopher. 2010. “The Federal Spending Power.” In The Handbook of Canadian Public Administration, ed. Dunn, Christopher. Toronto: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Foisy-Geoffroy, Dominique. 2007a. “Le Rapport de la Commission Tremblay (1953–1956), testament politique de la pensée traditionaliste canadienne-française.” Revue d'histoire de l'Amérique française 60 (3): 257–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foisy-Geoffroy, Dominique. 2007b. “Les sources intellectuelles du Rapport Tremblay.” Bulletin d'Histoire Politique 16 (1): 31–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fortin, Sarah. 2009. “From the Canadian Social Union to the Federal Social Union of Canada, 1990–2006.” In Contemporary Canadian Federalism, ed. Gagnon, Alain-G.. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Gagnon, Alain-G. 2008. La Raison du plus fort. Plaidoyer pour le fédéralisme multinational. Montréal: Québec Amérique.Google Scholar
Godbout, Luc. 2007. “Rétablir l'équilibre fiscal: au-delà de l'argent, des principes.” Policy Options 28 (3): 48–53.Google Scholar
Good, David A. 2007. The Politics of Public Money: Spenders, Guardians, Priority Setters, and Financial Watchdogs inside the Canadian Government. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Graefe, Peter. 2008. “The Spending Power and Federal Social Policy Leadership: A Prospective View.” IRPP Policy Matters 9 (3): 54–106.Google Scholar
Harmes, Adam. 2007. “The Political Economy of Open Federalism.” Canadian Journal of Political Science 40 (2): 417–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joanis, Marcelin. 2010. “Péréquation: les plaques tectoniques du déséquilibre fiscal sont en movement.” Options politiques 31 (5): 41–45.Google Scholar
Kwavnick, David. 1973. The Tremblay Report. Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lajoie, Andrée. 1988. “L'impact des Accords du Lac Meech sur le pouvoir de dépenser.” In L'adhésion du Québec à l'Accord du Lac Meech: points de vue juridiques et politiques. Montréal: Thémis.Google Scholar
Lazar, Harvey. 2008. “Fiscal Federalism: An Unlikely Bridge between the West and Quebec.” The Canadian Political Science Review 2 (3): 51–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lecours, André and Béland, Daniel. 2009. “Federalism and Fiscal Policy: The Politics of Equalization in Canada.” Publius 40 (4): 569–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
List, Friedrich. 1998 [1841]. Système national d'économie politique. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
MacKinnon, Janice. 2009. “Equalization: Its Problems and the 2007 Federal Budget.” In Canada: The State of the Federation 2006/07. Transitions: Fiscal and Political Federalism in an Era of Change, ed. Allan, John R., Courchene, Thomas J. and Leuprecht, Christian. Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press.Google Scholar
Marissal, Vincent. 2007. “Les milliards d'Harper, l'hypothèque de Charest.” La Presse (Montreal), October 31, A9.Google Scholar
McRoberts, Kenneth. 1997. Misconceiving Canada: The Struggle for National Unity. Toronto: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Noël, Alain. 2000. “Without Quebec: Collaborative Federalism with a Footnote?” Policy Matters 1 (2).Google Scholar
Noël, Alain. 2001. “Power and Purpose in Intergovernmental Relations.” Policy Matters 2 (6).Google Scholar
Noël, Alain. 2005. “A Report that Almost No One Has Discussed: Early Responses to Quebec's Commission on Fiscal Imbalance.” In Canadian Fiscal Arrangements: What Works, What Might Work Better, ed. Lazar, Harvey. Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press.Google Scholar
Noël, Alain. 2007a. “L'héritage de la Commission Tremblay : penser l'autonomie dans un cadre fédéral rigide.” Bulletin d'Histoire Politique 16 (1): 105–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Noël, Alain. 2007b. “L'union sociale revisitée.” Options politiques 28 (3): 10.Google Scholar
Noël, Alain. 2009a. “Balance and Imbalance in the Division of Financial Resources.” In Contemporary Canadian Federalism, ed. Gagnon, Alain-G.. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Noël, Alain. 2009b. “Feu le fédéralisme d'ouverture.” Options politiques 30 (3): 68.Google Scholar
Noël, Alain. 2012. “How Do You Limit a Power That Does Not Exist?” In Canada: The State of the Federation 2008. Open Federalism and the Spending Power, ed. Allan, John R., Courchene, Thomas J. and Leuprecht, Christian. Kingston: Institute of Intergovernmental Relations.Google Scholar
Oates, Wallace E. 2011 [1972]. Fiscal Federalism. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.Google Scholar
Perry, David B. 1997. Financing the Canadian Federation, 1867 to 1995: Setting the Stage for Change. Toronto: Canadian Tax Foundation.Google Scholar
Petter, Andrew. 1989. “Federalism and the Myth of the Federal Spending Power.” The Canadian Bar Review 68: 448–79.Google Scholar
Québec. Ministère des Finances. 2012. Un gouvernement pour tous. http://www.budget.finances.gouv.qc.ca/Budget/2013-2014/fr/documents/Discours.pdf (February 23, 2013).Google Scholar
Québec. Commission sur le déséquilibre fiscal. 2002. Pour un nouveau partage des moyens financiers au Canada. http://www.groupes.finances.gouv.qc.ca/desequilibrefiscal/fr/pdf/rapport_fr.pdf (February 23, 2013).Google Scholar
Rocher, François. 2009. “The Quebec-Canada Dynamic or the Negation of the Ideal of Federalism.” In Contemporary Canadian Federalism, ed. Gagnon, Alain-G.. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Rocher, François and Rouillard, Christian. 1998. “Décentralisation, subsidiarité et néo- libéralisme au Canada: lorsque l'arbre cache la forêt.” Canadian Public Policy 24 (2): 233–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rodden, Jonathan A. 2006. Hamilton's Paradox: The Promise and Peril of Fiscal Federalism. New-York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ruggeri, Joe. 2005. “The Evolution of Provincial Responsibility.” In Canadian Fiscal Arrangements: What Works, What Might Work Better, ed. Lazar, Harvey. Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press.Google Scholar
Rumilly, Robert. 1978. Maurice Duplessis et son temps. Tome II. Montréal: Fidès. Smiley, Donald V. “The Rowell–Sirois Report, Provincial Autonomy, and Post-war Canadian Federalism.” The Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science 28 (1): 54–69.Google Scholar
St-Hilaire, France. 2006. “The Fiscal Imbalance: Cutting to the Chase.” Policy Options 27 (7): 27 24.Google Scholar
Smith, Andrew. 2008. “Toryism, Classical Liberalism, and Capitalism: The Politics of Taxation and the Struggle for Canadian Confederation.” Canadian Historical Review 89 (1): 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, Peter J. 1995. “The Ideological Origins of Canadian Confederation.” In Canada's Origins: Liberal, Tory or Republican? ed. Ajzenstat, Janet and Smith, Peter J.. Ottawa: Carleton University Press.Google ScholarPubMed
Shah, Anwar. 2007. “Introduction: Principles of Fiscal Federalism.” In A Global Dialogue on Federalism. The Practice of Fiscal Federalism: Comparative Perspectives, ed. Shah, Anwar. Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stevenson, Garth. 2009a. Unfulfilled Union: Canadian Federalism and National Unity. Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stevenson, Garth. 2009b. “Fiscal Federalism and the Burden of History.” In Canada: The State of the Federation 2006/07. Transitions: Fiscal and Political Federalism in an Era of Change, ed. Allan, John R., Courchene, Thomas J. and Leuprecht, Christian. Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press.Google Scholar
Telford, Hamish. 2003. “The Federal Spending Power in Canada: Nation-Building or Nation-Destroying?” Publius: The Journal of Federalism 33 (1): 23–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tremblay, André. 2000. “Federal Spending Power.” In The Canadian Social Union without Quebec: 8 Critical Analyses, ed. Gagnon, Alain-G. and Segal, Hugh. Montreal: Institute for Research on Public Policy.Google Scholar
Watts, Ronald L. 2002. Comparaison des régimes fédéraux. Montréal: McGill-Queen's University Press.Google Scholar
Wheare, Kenneth C. 1963. Federal Government. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar