Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Name
Lecturer
Course
Date
Federalism in Canada
Federalism is a political system where the powers of state are shared between the national
and the sub national governments. The system must have at least two levels of government, and
the citizens therefore have obligation to all the levels. Federalism helps to curb the excesses of
the executive by according some authority to the lower units of government, and effectively
remove ant twilight zone that may bring conflicts in carrying out governmental functions.
basically deals with matters which are not of direct and immediate consequence to the people at
the grass roots. This means, it deals on matters of general application, across board, matters
which affect the whole country. Issues of foreign policy, national defense and international trade
are it competencies. The rationale here is, foreign policy has to be standard across the board,
because the autonomous sub national units are not recognized by instruments of international law
as to warrant them transact any deal. This explains why, for instance, Québécoise cannot
determine how they relate with the outside world. The way a country relates to another is a
government. The military and national intelligence are therefore centrally coordinated. The local
governments would deal with the other issues which impact directly of the people on the ground.
Surname 2
Matters of shelter among other welfare affairs are concerns of the sub national governments,
For an effective federation, there has to be factors that bring the different aspects of the
communities to federate. Any entity must therefore have a purpose for federating, one that has
the support of the entire population. The citizenry must have an overarching loyalty to both the
federation and the federal units, be it a federation of formerly fully sovereign states or a
federation within a sovereign state (Franck 1968). Often spoken drive for federation include
shared culture, ethnicity, history and practices (Kymlicka 1995). This aspect was lacking in the
former Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, leading to its disintegration in early 90s under
Gorbachev. The territory was so large, and had remarkable differences, on ethnic loyalty, and
some small other cultural differences. Former leaders had used force to compel compliance.
There are two conceptions of a federal system of government, depending on the scale and
form taken. One is the kind of federation involving two or more sovereign states, and this has an
international bearing. Cases here include the European Union and the East African Community,
if at all they will come together as the plans currently indicate. The other concerns a sovereign
state being divided into smaller semi-autonomous regions, each with its constitutional sphere of
influence and competence. The functions of each level have to be well demarcated to avoid cases
of duplication and conflict in terms of operation. Such case is in the United States, Nigeria,
There is however a form of federalism, the con-federal system, where the states are
loosely attached to the center. These sub units are the ones issuing the pecking order, and the
center is just ceremonial. This was adopted in the United States before the current federal system
Surname 3
was brought into bearing, but was a terrible failure, as the individuals states were not in
agreement on several issues. The system is what is being championed by the French-speaking
population in Canada. The reasons favoring a federal system are varied. First, it is a system
where defense will be strongly coordinated, thus averting threats from foreign aggression.
Economic progress is also at an advantage as the system would provide for removal of
trade barriers, thus creating economies of scale through established trade agreements. Also, the
sheer population of a federated unit is strong enough to earn it influence in the international
arena.
A federal unit would help in protection of the rights of the minority. In a democracy, the
principle is always that that the majority would make a decision. The fact is that the majority are
not always right. The federal unit would therefore try to consider the wishes of the minority in a
particular area, because the purpose of a federation is to provide local leadership to the local
people, bringing the leadership closer to the people and widening the social contacts of different
talents. Entrusting the center with some limited authority to intervene in the affairs of the local
unit, the local units would be compelled to protect the rights of the minority.
In a federal system sovereignty may not be misused to infringe on the rights of the
minority or political opposites as the smaller units may authoritatively raise a finger. The cases of
crimes against humanity and genocide would be as low as possible, due to the diversity of
cultures, sweeping away prospects of an absolute majority population of any given ethnic,
In a federal arrangement, the political influence of former weak sovereign states may be
achieved. Such states may have some form of veto power, where they can now influence
A federal system plays a vital role in the promotion of justice in society. It would create a
system of positive competition within units. A federal unit is paused with a challenge, and
The small teething problems affecting a particular country may be put to rest in case a
federal system is adopted. In Europe, the insurgency that has become a thorn in the Spanish
government’s flesh may be smoked out with the inception of a Brussels’ European Government,
for instance.
A federal system within a sovereign state, as a form of internal governance, would help
emancipate the minority from the dictatorship of the majority. The central government may not
be allowed to influence policies which are unpopular with the masses, which may constitute the
minority at the national level. A society with mixed cultures is a strong one, and a source of
making forums. The government will have to establish offices around its area of jurisdiction, to
make deliberations on matters affecting the local population (Mill 1863 Cap 15). In the United
States, Congressional districts usually come up with legislations on matters affecting the citizens
In a federation, the preferences of the masses are considered in the policy agenda of the
government. This would sound prominently for the economy, where economic development
Surname 5
would be shaped as per the efficient preferences of the majority. The benefits of a federation in
this case will be far less the same as the benefits that would accrue to a decentralized system of
government, like the case in Britain where the executive authority lies at the center but the local
Individuals who feel competent in the production of specific products would move to the
autonomous region specializing in the preferred line of production. This would then create an
environment where people with the same economies and developmental ideologies are at the
A federal system allows for people’s power to make decisions in society. The people
would unite for a common purpose but remain separate in terms of their cultural orientations. It
provides for a unity of purpose, where diversity is acknowledged in a united society. Canada is
divided into two autonomous governments, the central or federal government, and the provincial
governments. These two levels are autonomous to each other in operation assuring the equality
of both the French speaking Quebecois and the English speaking population..
Canada’s federal system is unique from other federal units as it embraces a federation,
Britain, leads to a strong government, unitary in structure with the centre controlling all aspects
of government. Actually the Prime Minister is in charge of the whole government, from top to
bottom. This is contrary to a federal system which involves the formation of sub national levels,
with autonomy in operation. The two may therefore not work concurrently. David Milne argues
that Canada has failed to enforce a strong sense of national identity, probably due to its system of
Surname 6
federalism which is a cause of division. Some blame this lack of national cohesion to the system,
The federal status of Canada is one of the three constitutional pillars, the other two being
a responsible government and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The federal status means the
country, under the monarch of the United Kingdom has authority elaborately shared between the
central government and the lower governments. The idea for this form of government came as a
need arose to have the distinction between the Quebec, who are French speakers of Lower
Canada, and the English speakers of Ontario, Upper Canada. The Constitution of Canada itself
was as a result of the Constitutional Act, 1867 with amendments in the British North American
The Act granted each province powers to be in charge of the provision of basic services.
Legislative control of the provinces was also assured in the document. The basic services include
hospitals, charities, asylums, municipal institutions, among others. It was therefore an exclusive
jurisdictional power for the provincial governments in areas of prisons, and also property and
civil rights. Section 93, for instance, granted exclusive rights on educational legislation to
provincial governments. There are however some areas where powers are shared and that
legislation can be done by both the provincial and the federal government, like in the area of
agriculture and immigration. This is termed as concurrent powers, meaning that both levels of
The federal parliament of Canada has a defined scope of power in all legislation matters.
The Constitution Act of 1867 has all these in Sections 91 through 95. The provisions have
however been blamed for ambiguities which have been solved by the Supreme Court and,
Surname 7
initially before 1949, by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. Section 91 provides for the
peace, order and good government, and the same constitution provides for a broad provincial
interpretation have thus occurred in these areas, thus creating a conflict between the national and
the provincial government. Where as the Constitution in Section 91 (27) apportions exclusive
jurisdiction over criminal law and procedure to the federal government, Section 92(14)
apportions the provincial government with jurisdiction over the administration of justice, in
The Canadian political system, being a vague combination of a parliamentary system and
a federation, has not been without controversies. The political tensions have led to debates on
asymmetrical federalism and open federalism, after the repeated Quebec referendums. In April
2006, Prime Minister Stephen Harper admitted before a Montreal audience that it was time to
establish open, honest and respectful relationship with the provinces (Uniting Canada).
The Canadian federalism is said to be poorly aligned with the current challenges in the
highly globalizing world. The federation should be rethought from an economic perspective to
face the challenges present challenges. There is need for a deviation from the past where policy
was on the social sphere, not economic. At independence, there was a split between the
Anglophone founders and the francophone founders of Canada, where the Anglophones opted
for a unitary parliamentary system while their opposite number went for a federal government
where they would have their cultures defended by their community, and not by the central
government. They therefore favored a system of a nation within a nation, so as to maintain their
identity (La Minerve). The arguments could only lead to a compromise, which came up with a
Surname 8
weak establishment. Their common point of meeting was that they were not Americans, and that
they did not want an annexation of their territory by America. Otherwise, the other aspects of
bringing any nation together were conspicuously lacking, including a shared history, culture,
language, and national goals. This is not the unity in diversity advocated by a federal set up, it is
with the provinces operating within their jurisdiction in relation to the federal government. It was
the war years that changed the balance, when the federal government usurped so much power to
be able to fight its wars and mend the post economy. The national government levied taxes;
personal and corporate. It imposed wages and controlled commodity prices. Strikes were
subsequently banned for effective control of the government from the center. This was the
beginning of a totalitarian center, in a newly forming unitary regime. After World War II the
federal government was unwilling to surrender back the provincial powers it had taken prior to
the war as was the case just after the World War I. The federal government imposed nationwide
policies on economy and social welfare, thus rendering the provincial governments
The objection to the state of affairs was resisted by Quebec elites who demanded a
special relationship between the Center and the Provincial governments. Their intent was to
regain their tax sources and revenues and to have a reduced influence of the federal government
provincialisation forces (Smiley, D.). The federal officials were worried with the enthusiasm of
Surname 9
the provinces, fearing that the center may loose its influence. The center therefore came up with
policies to lure some constituencies to its side. Prime Minister Trudeau formulated a favorable
national energy policy for central Canadians in an effort to get them on the centralist side of the
political debate. He also came up with a Charter of Rights intended to act as an instrument
limiting the provincialization of Canadian society, as stressed by the Quebecoise (Cairns, A).
They argue the Charter was for the intention of national unity, and nothing political.
For a federal system, Canadians must realize and recognize the existence, and hence
acknowledged of the different cultures within the society. A federal system has to appreciate the
diversity in society and endeavor to keep these diverse opinions together. It is definite that an
idea cannot be forced into a society by judicial means. The charter by the Trudeau government
may be fatal should its intention be found to be judicializing politics. This would be a detriment
to national unity and cohesion. The base here is that Canada is one nation, inhabited by two
founding peoples, a people who should live and coexist as they have done.
Surname 1
0
Works cited
Acton, Lord, (1907), "Nationality." in J. N. Figgis, (ed.), The History of Freedom and Other
Dion, Stéphane et al. The Collapse of Canada? Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.
(1992). P2.
Federalism. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2006. Retrieved July 28th, 2008 from
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/federalism/#ReaForFed
Franck, Thomas M., ed., 1968, Why Federations Fail: An Inquiry into the Requisites for
Hueglin, T.O. Compounded Federal Democracy, 2002. Comparative Federalism Retrieved July
Kymlicka, Will, and Wayne Norman, eds., 2000, Citizenship in Diverse Societies. Oxford:
Makarenko, Jay. Federalism in Canada: Basic Framework and Operation. Mapleleafweb January
http://www.mapleleafweb.com/features/federalism-canada-basic-framework-and
operation#introduction
Mill, John Stuart, 1861, Considerations on Representative Government. 1958, New York:Liberal
Sibley, Robert Why Those Charting Canada's Future Cannot Forget the Past, The Ottawa Citizen
http://www.uni.ca/opinions/fed_history_e.php
Surname 11
Tiebout, Charles M., 1956, "A Pure Theory of Local Expenditures." Journal of Political