|
COPYRIGHT 2005 Canada & the World
In a 2005 paper, the Royal Society of Canada said: "Put simply--no doubt too simply--we have had a continuing tug of war between a vision of a more decentralized federation (in which provincial autonomy is intact but with less commitment to national sharing), and more centralization (in which the federal government develops and determines national norms and redistributes income). Between the two, and often in a very uneasy compromise, has been asymmetrical federalism."
James Travers is a senior Ottawa columnist. In August 2005 he wrote that "... Understanding federalism is not a national strength. While gamely picking up all the bills, taxpayers rarely know who is responsible for what in a country that in 1867 divided powers to meet the needs of a world that soon began disappearing."
And, understanding who does what in Canada has become increasingly difficult recently. Provincial premiers have taken to going off on international trade missions, an area that used to be the exclusive preserve of the federal government. Meanwhile, Ottawa has been organizing funding for cities and a national childcare program, both issues that the provinces are supposed to deal with.
What is happening more and more is that Ottawa is designing a program and setting national standards. The provinces are then left to run the program in their own localities in the way in which they see fit.
So, the loose federation that is Canada is becoming looser still. Writing in The Globe and Mail, columnist John Ibbitson says this will please neither those who favour a strong central government nor those who champion strong provinces. Mr. Ibbitson, however, likes the change. "It gives Ottawa an appropriate and meaningful role in establishing and monitoring national standards in areas of vital...
Read the full article for free courtesy of your local library.
|
Bookmark this article
Print this article
Link to this article
Email this article
Digg It!
Add to del.icio.us
RSS
