The Canadian child welfare system has been characterized as being in crisis for over a decade; the number of children in care (and dying in care) has increased dramatically, straining an overburdened system. Physical or sexual abuse is not the reason most children are removed from their homes; rather, the state deems them lacking the necessities of life, usually because their family is impoverished. Because the majority of children in care are Indigenous, the child welfare system is described as the new version of residential schools. Using the lens of historical institutionalism, this study argues that the current child welfare system reflects colonial and neoliberal assumptions that some parents are incapable of sound decision making by virtue of their race or socio-economic situation. Canada's child welfare system is both a product and contributor to the institutions and policies that reinforce intergenerational poverty, a key determinant of removing children from their families.

This article examines the failure of Canadian public policy in addressing racial economic inequality directly. Our analysis contends that Canada's key policy regimes were established in the postwar era, when approximately 96 per cent of Canadians were of European descent. As a result, the frameworks, problem definitions and policy tools inherited from that era were never intended to mitigate racial economic inequality. Moreover, this policy inheritance was deeply shaped by liberal universalism, which rejected racial distinctions in law and policy. These norms were carried forward into the more racially diverse Canada of today, where they have steered attention away from the use of racial categories in policy design. As a result, racial inequality was not a central priority during major policy reforms to core policy regimes in recent decades. In theoretical terms, our analysis contributes to Canadian Political Development through a sustained consideration of the intersecting roles of ideational frameworks, path dependency and policy inertia.

Cet article vise à expliquer les motifs pour lesquels le Québec finance les écoles privées alors que la province voisine, l'Ontario, ne leur apporte aucune aide directe. L'auteure avance que ces politiques sont liées à la configuration religieuse des provinces au moment de l’établissement de leur système d’éducation. Au Québec, où la religion catholique était dominante, l'autorité de l'État sur l'éducation a été contestée jusqu'au milieu du 20e siècle par l’Église catholique. En revanche, en Ontario, les églises protestantes, qui étaient majoritaires, ne sont pas opposées au développement des écoles publiques. L'État s'est alors rapidement imposé comme l'autorité suprême en matière d'éducation. Au 20e siècle, les politiques des gouvernements des deux provinces ont été influencées par l'héritage des décisions prises un siècle plus tôt.