The current COVID-19 crisis is unprecedented in recent history. On April 1, 2020, the Secretary-General of the United Nations, Antonio Guterres, warned that the world was facing the most challenging crisis since World War II (Associated Press, 2020). With the pandemic taking on an unprecedented magnitude in the twenty-first century, it quickly monopolized media attention. As of early April, Radar+'s large dataset showed that about 65 per cent of headlines on major Canadian media websites were related to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Since the COVID-19 outbreak, a gradual loosening of linguistic obligations in public institutions and governments has been observed in various jurisdictions in Canada. This article argues that in addition to legal requirements to provide minority language services, it is not justifiable for governments to suspend or curtail such services in an emergency situation, for reasons pertaining to public safety and public health. After performing a survey and analysis of government actions against their constitutional, legislative, and policy language obligations to highlight best practices and deficiencies, we discuss the policy implications of these actions. In conclusion, the article considers how governments could better uphold their language obligations in times of emergency.

The COVID-19 disease was first identified in Wuhan, China, in December 2019, having since spread rapidly across the world. The infection and mortality rates of the disease have forced governments to implement a wave of public health measures. Depending on the context, these range from the implementation of simple hygienic rules to measures such as social distancing or lockdowns that cause major disruptions in citizens’ daily lives. The success of these crucial public health measures rests on the public's willingness to comply. However, individual differences in following the official public health recommendations for stopping the spread of COVID-19 have not yet to our knowledge been assessed. This study aims to fill this gap by assessing the sociodemographic and psychological correlates of implementing public health recommendations that aim to halt the COVID-19 pandemic. We investigate these associations in the context of France, one of the countries that has been most severely affected by the pandemic, and which ended up under a nationwide lockdown on March 17. In the next sections we describe our theoretical expectations over the associations between sociodemographics, personality, ideology, and emotions with abiding by the COVID-19 public health measures. We then test these hypotheses using data from the French Election Study.

The COVID-19 crisis could trigger a critical juncture for several institutional arrangements in Canada, potentially leading to notable changes in fiscal federalism. This research note combines insights from historical institutionalism with recent economic and fiscal projections to explore avenues for reform in response to the COVID-19 crisis. Given the magnitude of the crisis, provincial governments may be unable to absorb the fiscal costs on their own. But vast differences in fiscal and economic circumstances across provinces make federal arrangements difficult to design. We argue that intergovernmental power dynamics and the principle of provincial autonomy are particularly important considerations in thinking about fiscal federalism post–COVID-19.

The COVID-19 pandemic requires an effort to coordinate the actions of government and society in a way unmatched in recent history. Individual citizens need to voluntarily sacrifice economic and social activity for an indefinite period of time to protect others. At the same time, we know that public opinion tends to become polarized on highly salient issues, except when political elites are in consensus (Berinsky, 2009; Zaller, 1992). Avoiding elite and public polarization is thus essential for an effective societal response to the pandemic. In the United States, there appears to be elite and public polarization on the severity of the pandemic (Gadarian et al., 2020). Other evidence suggests that polarization is undermining compliance with social distancing (Cornelson and Miloucheva, 2020). Using a multimethod approach, we show that Canadian political elites and the public are in a unique period of cross-partisan consensus on important questions related to the COVID-19 pandemic, such as its seriousness and the necessity of social distancing.

The SARS-CoV-2 virus was first identified in Wuhan, China, in late December 2019, and it quickly spread to many countries. By March 2020, the virus had triggered a global pandemic (World Health Organization, 2020). In response to this crisis, governments have implemented unprecedented public health measures. The success of these policies will largely depend on the public's willingness to comply with new rules. A key factor in citizens’ willingness to comply is their understanding of the data that motivate government action. In this study, we examine how different ways of presenting these data visually can affect citizen's perceptions, attitudes and support for public policy.

Federations increasingly face complex policy challenges, from managing climate change to mass migration. COVID-19 is a prime example of this emerging type of problem. This research note introduces the concept of complex intergovernmental problems (CIPs) to better understand these types of challenges.

This research note examines the undefined meaning of the government's obligations to ensure “continuity of constitutional government” (CCG) as provided for in section 4(l) of the Emergency Management Act, S.C. 2007, c. 15 (Canada, 2007). Specifically, that section gives the minister of public safety and emergency preparedness the responsibility for “establishing the necessary arrangements for the continuity of constitutional government in the event of an emergency,” but the term is itself undefined. The article will canvass the origin of the term and its relationship to other so-called continuity of government (COG) concepts, along with some legal written opinion on what the term might in practice mean, should the minister ever be charged with discharging this responsibility. It will conclude with some final thoughts on the relevance of the CCG concept to the current pandemic. Given that the COVID-19 virus has infected Sophie Grégoire Trudeau, the prime minister's wife, forced a drastically reduced and possibly “virtual” federal Parliament, placed the British prime minister in intensive care and led to the self-isolation of many world leaders, the topic is relevant to Canada in 2020.

Federal and provincial policy responses to the COVID-19 pandemic raise a host of constitutional issues that decision makers must pay heed to or risk serious violations of individual rights under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. This research note will examine a number of policy challenges as they relate to mobility rights (s. 6), legal rights (ss. 7 through 14), and equality rights (s. 15) and will articulate the factors that policy makers should consider in design and implementation. Other important constitutional questions, such as those relating to the division of powers, emergency powers and the relationship between the executive and Parliament, have also emerged in Canada but are beyond the scope of this note.

Since the 1990s, Canada's francophone minority communities (FMCs) have become increasingly involved in francophone immigration governance, and this trend has coincided with the wider neoliberalization of immigration in Canada. This article analyzes the implications of the growing influence of a neoliberal immigration policy and the narrative of an ideal immigrant on Canada's FMCs by focussing on the francophone Acadian community in New Brunswick, Canada's only constitutionally bilingual province. Making use of three types of sources—semistructured interviews, debates in the Legislative Assembly of New Brunswick, and official and archival documents—the article argues that francophone and Acadian organizations have adopted the federal, neoliberal perspective on immigration, placing greater emphasis on economic integration and the creation of a bilingual workforce. Changes in the type of immigrant selected and role of the community in the lives of francophone immigrants create new challenges for minority language communities that define and identify themselves through language use and belonging.

This article investigates how Canadian voters react to a perceived lack of quality provided by their most preferred parties and how the anticipated election outcome conditions the reactions. The central argument is that a lack of quality motivates voters to signal their discontent by voting insincerely—that is, they cast a protest vote. The effect is expected to be moderated by the anticipated constituency result. The arguments are tested with two-wave panel survey data from the 2015 Canadian federal election, collected by the Making Electoral Democracy Work (MEDW) project. The results support the central argument but remain inconclusive about the expected moderating effects.

Canada, like all representative democracies, apportions representation to individuals; also, like all federal states, it accords polity-based representation to federal subunits. But Canada is additionally a consociational state, comprising three constitutionally recognized “national groups”: anglophones, francophones and Indigenous peoples. These groups share power and bear rights beyond the bounds of the federal system. In recent decades, Indigenous peoples and francophones have appealed for representation as “national groups,” leading to constitutional challenges. Courts have either failed to address the constitutionality of “national group” representation or have rejected it as irreconcilable with individual voting rights. I suggest the former is unnecessary and the latter procedurally illogical. Drawing on the liberal principles of individualism, egalitarianism and universalism, I develop a framework contextualizing such representation within liberal theory. I then deploy this framework to analyze recent Canadian case law. I show that appeals for “national group” representation should be approached not through the lens of individual rights, but rather through the “constitutionally prior” lens of universalism.

In this article I use new archival and elite interview data to improve our knowledge of how the Canadian Multiculturalism Act came into existence. I show why some Canadians began to seek such an act, why political parties promised an act and how this act was created. The evidence in this article will also correct claims that scholars often make about this act and the policy of multiculturalism that it contains. This evidence also improves our knowledge of why the policy of multiculturalism in this legislation does what few scholars would expect. This is because scholars often claim that policies of multiculturalism are used to “repudiate” and remove understandings of a country. But my evidence helps to show why the policy of multiculturalism in this act promotes understandings of a country. Scholars also claim that policies of multiculturalism can be divisive if they are unaccompanied by nation-building policies. But my evidence helps to show why the policy of multiculturalism in this legislation was designed to be a nation-building policy.