|
"COLLABORATIVE FEDERALISM IN AN
ERA OF GLOBALIZATION"
NOTES FOR AN ADDRESS TO
THE INSTITUTE OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION OF CANADA
OTTAWA, ONTARIO
APRIL 22, 1999
I have been a member of your association ever
since I was a graduate student, and have had the honour, in my other life as a
political science professor, of preparing presentations for your national
conferences, without ever having the pleasure of going myself, owing to a lack
of funding!
Who knows, perhaps one of my subconscious
motivations for getting into politics three years ago was to snag a free
invitation? In any event, it’s worked: this is the second time in three years
that I have the pleasure of speaking to you.
I am especially pleased to have been invited
today, considering the quality of the speakers and the topic of the Conference.
You are examining the Canadian style of governance, and I have been asked to
look at it from the angle of how our federation works, in other words, in terms
of intergovernmental relations, which is somewhat my bailiwick.
As I understand it, the main hypothesis which
guides your work is that governance is evolving toward less hierarchical forms,
based more on cooperation and mutual trust. You can see such trends within
governmental institutions, in relations between governments and the private and
voluntary sectors and also in relations among governments themselves.
It is interesting that the Auditor General notes
the same trend in the report he has just tabled: "Collaborative
arrangements, also called partnering, are increasingly being used in federal
program and service delivery as a management tool and to share power and
authority with the government’s partners in making decisions. In our view,
they have the potential to be an innovative, cost-effective and efficient way of
delivering programs and services."
I share this point of view. Our federation is
evolving toward greater cooperation and consensus-building, while respecting the
constitutional jurisdictions of each order of government, rather than toward
extensive centralization in favour of the federal government or extensive
decentralization in favour of the provincial governments.
And Canadians want this greater intergovernmental
cooperation. According to an EKOS poll conducted in November 1997, an absolute
majority of Canadians (58%) prefer closer cooperation between governments
without major transfers of power, compared with 25% who would like to see a
major decentralization to provincial governments and 15% who want a major shift
of activities to the federal government. Even in Quebec, supporters of
intergovernmental cooperation (50%) outnumber supporters of either
decentralization (39%) or centralization (7%).
I must tell you, however, that your position in
favour of cooperation, which I share and which, as we have just seen, is popular
among Canadians, is being challenged. It is being challenged, for example, by
the proponents of centralization, by those who believe that the Government of
Canada ought to regain a greater role in a number of areas that are now in the
hands of the provincial governments.
After briefly reviewing these arguments in favour
of centralization, I will show how the Government of Canada is not following
this course of action. Its approach, in fact, is cooperation and consultation
with the provincial and territorial governments. I will be looking at this issue
from four angles: a) budgetary policy, b) new policies introduced by the federal
government in recent years, c) the social union framework agreement, and d)
foreign policy.
1. Is the federation too decentralized?
It has long been said that Canada is too
decentralized, that the power of the provincial governments is excessive and is
a barrier to rational governance. This criticism of the decentralized nature of
our federation is adapted to the flavour of the month, to the concepts in
fashion in the market of ideas, but it is always there, its presence is always
felt.
In the 1960s, in the heyday of the Keynesian
movement, it was said that provincial autonomy was preventing Canada from
adopting rational economic planning.
Today, the concept currently in fashion is
globalization, meaning the internationalization of markets, the importance of
international agreements, supranational management. The proponents of
centralization are now saying that the commercial, cultural and environmental
issues currently being negotiated on the international scene are playing an
increasingly extensive and important role, and are increasingly cutting across
provincial jurisdictions. In this context, the Canadian government is seemingly
between a rock and a hard place: it must centralize, which means taking over
responsibilities now under provincial jurisdiction.
To illustrate this theory, I could refer to a
federalist author who advocates centralization, but instead, I will use a more
paradoxical case, that of former Quebec Premier Jacques Parizeau.
Unlike other spokespersons of the independence
movement, Mr. Parizeau does not subscribe to the untenable thesis that Canada is
supposedly of a centralized nature. He acknowledges that Canada is
decentralized. In his statement of February 28, 1999, for example, he
affirmed that: [TRANSLATION] "Canadian federalism is about the most
decentralized in the world, along with Switzerland." It seems to me
that on a few occasions I’ve said much the same thing myself...
Mr. Parizeau, however, maintains that Canada must
become centralized, because decentralization is a form of governance that has
become irrational and ineffective, ill-adapted to modern constraints. He has
been defending that idea since the late 1960s. It was in his famous speech in
Banff on October 17, 1967, that he brought it up for the first time.
At that time, he described Canada as having
turned into a "blind alley" because decentralization had "in
any case gone much too far." The excessive power of the provinces was
preventing the federal government from enforcing "rational planning":
"A country should not be allowed to balkanize decision-making to the
extent that exists now."
One can thus see a striking parallel between this
advocate of Quebec independence and the pro-Canada advocates of centralization,
who mistakenly see the strength of our provincial governments as a hindrance to
rational governance.
In 1967, the idea in fashion that supposedly made
centralization such an urgent necessity was economic planning. Three decades
later, it is quite clear that events have proved this prophecy wrong: Canada did
not centralize, yet it continued to perform strongly.
Because if Canada is a country that doesn’t
work, I’d like to see a country that does! Of course we have serious problems
to solve: poverty, pollution, economic weaknesses in some sectors. But let us
compare. Canada is currently ranked first in the world by the UN human
development index, third in terms of business climate by the Economist
Intelligence Unit, fifth in terms of economic competitiveness by the World
Economic Forum, fifth in terms of government efficiency by the National Bureau
of Economic Research, and sixth in terms of honesty of commercial and
governmental practices by Transparency International. Not bad for a federation
doomed to deadlock because of decentralization!
But this won’t last, the centralizers keep
telling us. Centralization is coming, this time for good, driven by
globalization. Here once again is Mr. Parizeau, who very recently repeated in
almost the same words his bleak diagnosis of 1967. This time, however, he tied
it to globalization rather than economic planning when he said:
[TRANSLATION] "If the federal government
is to be able to retain the powers of a genuine government and to set policies,
it is imperative that it centralize what is an extraordinarily decentralized
federation." (28-02-99)
Canada will either centralize or it will whither.
Such is the message of the prophets of centralization, which has remained
unchanged and unchanging for decades, albeit adapted to the flavour of the
month. It will be proved as wrong in the future as it has been in the past. In
fact, the ability of our governments to work together will be enhanced. Our
decentralized federation, based on solidarity of its citizens and cooperation
among its governments, is perfectly equipped to take on the issues of what we
refer to as globalization.
2. The budgetary policy
The Government of Canada believes in the virtues
of our decentralized federation. In the last two Martin budgets, its first
targets for reinvestment have been transfers to the provincial governments.
Thirty-eight per cent of new spending in the 1998-1999 budget was allocated
directly to the provinces, as was 68% of the 1999-2000 budget.
In fact, during the period of cuts, from
1993-1994 to 1998-1999, the Finance Minister made smaller reductions to cash and
tax point transfers to the provinces (7.4%) than to direct spending by the
federal government (10.8%). Equalization payments were spared any reduction,
which helped the less wealthy provinces.
Rather than centralization, the evolution of our
budgetary federalism reflects the will of the Government of Canada to provide
the provincial and territorial governments with financial assistance so that
they can enhance their capacity to take action and implement their own policies.
3. The new policies put in place by the
federal government
The federal government is determined to implement
flexible policies that make it possible to pursue Canada-wide objectives, while
taking into account the diversity of the country. The Infrastructure Program has
thus been a model of federal-provincial-municipal cooperation. The National
Child Benefit was designed to allow the federal government to help the
provincial governments design different policies, rather than forcing them all
to do the same thing. The new, more stringent measures regarding young offenders
set out in the Act in respect of criminal justice for young persons will
be optional, available to those attorneys general who wish to use them. The
legislation on electronic commerce and the protection of personal information
will complement, rather than replace, the provincial laws in provinces where
similar legislation will be passed, as is the case today in Quebec.
The framework for negotiating job training
agreements allows the provincial governments to choose between co-management
models and more extensive autonomy. The environmental harmonization agreement
promotes cooperation in a sector where both orders of government have very
weighty responsibilities.
Even the much-discussed Millennium Scholarships
program cannot be described as a measure toward centralization. The
Government of Canada has long been helping Canadians financially so as to give
them better access to provincial educational institutions, without interfering
in education in any way. Mr. Mulroney’s government, for example, of which
Mr. Bouchard was a member, introduced the Canada Scholarships. In the
United States, 75% of public student assistance comes from the federal
government, and in Germany it is 65%.
The important thing is to avoid any unnecessary
duplication, in a spirit of consensus-building. The Prime Minister of Canada has
said that he is willing to work in accordance with the method proposed
unanimously by Quebec’s National Assembly.
4. The social union framework agreement
The social union framework agreement reflects the
need for the two orders of government to work together, while respecting their
constitutional jurisdictions. It should facilitate the establishment of common
objectives for health, postsecondary education and social services, while
building on the diversity of experiences.
The agreement commits governments to working
together to eliminate harmful or unreasonable barriers to the mobility of
Canadians throughout Canada. Governments will exchange knowledge so as to learn
more from one another. They will consult one another on their respective
priorities and opportunities for cooperation. They will notify one another
before implementing major changes, and will strive to avoid duplication while
clarifying their roles and responsibilities. They will use a dispute prevention
and resolution mechanism based on joint negotiations and the participation of
third parties to determine the facts or obtain the services of mediators. They
are also committed to cooperating more effectively with Aboriginal peoples
throughout Canada.
The framework agreement places new requirements
for cooperation and consultation on the federal government in exercising its
spending power. Canada, the federation where the federal spending power is
already used the least and the resulting transfers to provinces have the fewest
conditions, is developing unprecedented mechanisms so as to base that spending
power on cooperation among governments.
So how does all of that fit in with predictions
of centralization brought about by globalization? On the contrary, it represents
a new and promising way to manage interdependence.
5. Foreign policy and intergovernmental
consultation
Our provincial, federal and territorial
governments cooperate very actively in matters of foreign policy. In all
international negotiations, the Government of Canada always ensures that Canada’s
negotiating positions reflect the expressed interests of the provincial
governments. Mechanisms for consultation with the provincial governments have
been in place for many years, work in an exemplary fashion, and may rightly be
envied by the members of other federations.
For a number of years now, when meetings deal
with issues under their jurisdiction, representatives of the provincial
governments have been invited regularly to participate in the Canadian
delegations at UN meetings (on the environment, the status of women, and social
development, for example), at OECD sectoral meetings, or at general and sectoral
UNESCO conferences.
This Canadian intergovernmental cooperation has
yielded excellent results on the international scene. Throughout the Uruguay
Round negotiations which led to the creation of the World Trade Organization,
the Canadian negotiators kept provincial representatives fully informed and
consulted them on Canada’s negotiating positions. This cooperative, pragmatic
approach enabled our negotiators to secure effective protection for cultural
industries under the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS).
That same intergovernmental cooperation has
allowed Canada to negotiate a host of rights and obligations under the
Canada-United States Free Trade Agreement, NAFTA, and the Canada-Chile Free
Trade Agreement, including cultural exemptions that allow the federal and
provincial governments to maintain or adopt policies to promote our cultural
industries.
Conclusion
I am not claiming that everything is perfect in
our federation, far from it. We still need to try to improve the way our
governments work together, both at home and on the international scene.
All I am saying is that the way Canada manages to
express its rich diversity with a single voice is the winning formula as we face
what we refer to as globalization.
I am saying that few countries are better
positioned than ours to take on this global world. Canada is a country which is
respected, with an excellent reputation based on the quality of its diplomats
and its vast network of embassies. It is a country which has successfully
combined cohesion as a whole with extensive diversity. It comprises provinces
and territories with complementary strengths, two official languages that are
international languages, and two legal systems, common law and civil law, which
enables it to speak the legal language of the vast majority of countries. It has
access to Europe, the Americas and Asia, with a multicultural population that
opens up opportunities in every corner of the world.
I am saying that we must not reject the
decentralized nature of our federation. On the contrary, we must build on our
exceptional capacity to pursue common objectives, at home and abroad,
strengthened by the diversity of our experiences.
It is true that our federation sometimes produces
friction between governments, and headaches for federal and provincial
politicians and bureaucrats. In the long run, however, it produces a synergy
which allows us to more effectively promote the economic, cultural and other
interests of all Canadians, within Canada and around the world.
Globalization is yet another argument in favour
of cooperation between governments, in favour of governance the Canadian way.
Check against delivery.
|
