Guy Laforest

Canada and Multinational Federalism: From the Spirit of 1982 to Stephen Harper's Open Federalism

Since the end of the Second World War, principles of diversity and multiculturalism have increasingly been codified in international law. The present article takes a closer look at the evolution of Canadas attitude towards the recognition of its multinational character over the past 25 years. The article shows that the more recent idea of “open federalism” put forward by Prime Minister Stephen Harpers government as a recognition of multinationalism closely resembles the monist idea of the state that was promoted by former Prime Minister Pierre Elliot Trudeau. Thus, contrary to what is being portrayed in political discourses, nothing much has changed over the last 25 years. Stephen Harpers “open federalism” remains largely inspired by philosophical elements of monism and does not contribute to making Canada a truly multinational state.

Federalism and Devolution: The UK and Canada

Federalism and devolution are both ways of dividing power territorially. They have long been thought to represent different constitutional options. Federalism divides power constitutionally between two levels while under devolution power is merely lent, with the centre having the right to prevail in the case of difference. In practice, the experience of Canada and the United Kingdom shows that they have much in common. Both countries have undergone similar experiences as centrifugal and centripetal forces have played out. Both are plurinational states in which there are competing claims over legitimacy and the foundations of sovereignty and competing conceptions of the nation. In both Canada and the United Kingdom, the principles of hierarchy and cooperation are played out. Spatial rescaling has altered the basis for the territorial division of power and called into question existing divisions of competences. Cooperative federalism has, to some degree, given way to competitive relations among the units and between centre and the federated or devolved level. At the same time, both are welfare states and the principles of autonomy and competition are in tension with expectations for similar levels of service provision and entitlement across the state. This is manifested in arguments about fiscal equalization and taxation. In both Canada and the United Kingdom, key roles are played by systems of intergovernmental relations and by party politics in reconciling centre and periphery.

L’exil intérieur des Québécois dans le Canada de la Charte

Je vais commencer cet article par une note personnelle. Il y a vingt-cinq ans, au temps de l’entree en vigueur de la Charte canadienne des droits et libertes 1 , je vivais a Montreal et j’etudiais a l’Universite McGill. Parmi mes professeurs, il y avait deux grands intellectuels qui etaient aussi deux grands idealistes, Charles Taylor et James Tully 2 . J’ai beaucoup appris d’eux et avec le temps, ils sont devenus des amis. J’avais d’autres profes- seurs qui m’ont influence, peut-etre moins directe- ment, mais tout aussi durablement, notamment les Blema Steinberg, Daniel Latouche, James Mal- lory et Harold Waller. Leur approche etait teintee de realisme, et elle contrebalancait a merveille celle que je trouvais chez Taylor et Tully. En phi- losophie, l’approche realiste est celle du liberal- isme sans illusions que l’on trouve chez les Judith Shklar, Raymond Aron, Isaiah Berlin et Karl Pop- per, selon laquelle en politique, il faut d’abord et avant tout eviter le pire. Il faut entendre par la la cruaute, l’effroi, la terreur, la violence, tout ce qui peut broyer la personne humaine, l’atteindre dans sa dignite et dans son intimite. A ce titre je part- age le jugement d’Irvin Studin qui ecrivait recem- ment que le Canada est un formidable succes a l’echelle de l’humanite, l’un des pays parmi les plus « pacifiques, justes et civilises » 3 . Un pays ou, pour ajouter ma propre voix, les forts comme les faibles peuvent dormir tranquilles dans un milieu social humain, decent, confortable, sans crain- dre le pire. Tout cela compte pour beaucoup dans l’histoire de l’humanite.

Gouverne et liberté: Foucault et la question du pouvoir

The analysis of the modalities of the governing of conduct, in an individualizing and totalizing modern political rationality, along with the conception of spaces of freedom for concrete human subjects in this environment, are two great preoccupations of Michel Foucaults last works. This article provides an account of the actualization by Foucault of his thought on power which explains the various factors, from problems of historical interpretation to new perspectives, which led him to conceive of power in the categories of the governing of the conduct of others. This study finds anticipations of these changes in Foucaults first historical studies, and demonstrates their relevance in the framework of reflections on freedom.

The Future of Federalism and Devolution in Canada and the United Kingdom

The United Kingdom and Canada have much in common, but there are key differences. These are not just connected with the difference between devolution and federalism but with the trajectory of territorial relations in the two cases. There are also differences due to current politics. After a period of relative neglect of federal relations under the Conservative government of Stephen Harper, the Liberal government of Justin Trudeau has a new commitment to federalism. In the United Kingdom, the crisis of the state-wide party system has put a key mechanism of territorial management in question. Withdrawal from the European Union further destabilizes relations among the constituent nations, given the majority votes in Scotland and Northern Ireland to remain. The cases further have shed light on broader issues of state reconfiguration and territorial rescaling in a changing world.

Trust and Mistrust Between Harper and Québec

I will explore in this paper the complex and evolving relationship of trust and mistrust between Stephen Harper, the current federal Prime Minister of Canada, first elected in 2004 and reconducted in power with a majority government on 2 May 2011, and Quebec. Trust and mistrust are already complex affairs for contemporary Political Science and federalism studies. I will make them even more complex by considering qualitatively and quantitatively different partners in the relationship: one human being, who happens to be the most important political leader of a sophisticated federal democracy, and a geographical entity, which happens to be a distinct national society in this federation. Quebec here, for the purposes of this paper, will encompass the following realities: the province of Quebec, Quebec francophones, Quebec nationalism and Quebec nationalists, and finally, the political leaders of Quebec—I will essentially refer here to the current Premier of Quebec, Mr. Jean Charest, in power since 2003. Although trust is relational, and requires levels of reciprocity, I shall look at this phenomenon mostly from the perspective of Mr. Harper himself, exploring his political and intellectual trajectory. I will altogether not completely ignore the other perspective, which can be glimpsed for instance by the electoral fortunes of Mr. Harper in Quebec at federal elections since 2004, but my focus will remain on the factual, historical, and perceptual elements that, taken together, have shaped Mr. Harper’s cognitive perspective on Quebec, leading over time to various degrees of trust and mistrust.