No description available.

Divided government in Canada refers to the common situation when the federal and provincial governments are held by different political parties. The study of divided government can aid in the understanding of voter behaviour. The thesis reviews the relevant literature on divided government, split-ticket voting and party identification in Canada and the United States. From the literature several voter strategies are extracted that describe the possible individual level processes that result in the aggregate outcome of divided government. This linkage, between individual decisions and collective outcomes, is crucial to understanding divided election outcomes and it is to the exploration of this concept that the thesis contributes. Using a dataset of party vote shares in provincial and federal elections from 1904 to 2003, the thesis looks for aggregate effects of the individual level strategies that it identifies. The thesis argues that divided government in Canada is a result of staggered election timing and policy learning across levels which combine to produce a cyclical effect in election results.

This thesis attempts to develop our understanding of the ultimate interprovincial rupture at the signing of the Social Union Framework Agreement (the SUFA) on February 4, 1999. Questioning the widely accepted "money talk" explanation, which argues that increased federal transfers motivated the ROC provinces to go along with the federal government at the expense of an interprovincial common front with Quebec, this thesis suggests analyzing the dynamics of the SUFA negotiation process with special attention to the visions of Canadian federalism to which the ROC provinces, Quebec, and the federal government had subscribed respectively. This analysis demonstrates that the final split between the ROC provinces and Quebec resulted from their discord over the question whether or not Canada is a mononational federation or a multinational federation.

The introduction of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms has affected many elements of the constitutional system in Canada. This dissertation explores the Charter's relationship with liberal constitutionalism and Canadian federalism, and considers whether judicial review on Charter grounds has seen a progression, or a regression, from parliamentary to constitutional to judicial supremacy. Further, this dissertation considers whether Charter review has reduced provincial autonomy by imposing national values in provincial areas of jurisdiction when Charter review nullifies provincial statutes. Through a complex process referred to as the rebalancing of liberal constitutionalism, this study argues that a changed Charter jurisprudence by the Supreme Court of Canada and a changed policy process within the administrative state at the federal level have reduced the negative implications of Charter review for liberal constitutionalism and Canadian federalism. To advance this argument, the concept of Charter activism is introduced to demonstrate that the rebalancing of liberal constitutionalism is the product of the shifting equilibrium within two distinct elements that comprise Charter activism---judicial activism and bureaucratic activism. This study pursues three themes to demonstrate that the decline of judicial activism and the emergence of bureaucratic activism now converge at a point within Charter politics that facilitate the rebalancing of liberal constitutionalism and ensure that Charter review advances constitutional and not judicial supremacy. The first theme investigates the Supreme Court of Canada as a policy actor during Charter review, and analyzes Charter decisions between 1982 and 1997. The second theme considers the impact of Charter review on Canadian federalism and whether the Charter has centralized Canadian federalism and reduced provincial autonomy. The final theme investigates bureaucratic activism and the changes within the policy process at the fe

Divided government in Canada refers to the common situation when the federal and provincial governments are held by different political parties. The study of divided government can aid in the understanding of voter behaviour. The thesis reviews the relevant literature on divided government, split-ticket voting and party identification in Canada and the United States. From the literature several voter strategies are extracted that describe the possible individual level processes that result in the aggregate outcome of divided government. This linkage, between individual decisions and collective outcomes, is crucial to understanding divided election outcomes and it is to the exploration of this concept that the thesis contributes. Using a dataset of party vote shares in provincial and federal elections from 1904 to 2003, the thesis looks for aggregate effects of the individual level strategies that it identifies. The thesis argues that divided government in Canada is a result of staggered election timing and policy learning across levels which combine to produce a cyclical effect in election results. / Arts, Faculty of / Political Science, Department of / Graduate

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

Can states formally recognize cultural diversity and, at the same time, preserve their political and social unity and provide the main public goods of modern citizenship? Is such conciliation feasible? Is it morally desirable? In the current context of unprecedented expression and politicization of cultural identities, especially in democratic countries, such questions are more and more crucial. To answer these questions, the present study considers the contribution of the modern federal tradition. Within this tradition, I analyze four federal responses to the unity-diversity dilemma. The first two---the Belgian and Canadian federations---are practical. Each embodies one of the two dominant contemporary models of federalism: classical liberal individualist, and multinational. I study the experience of each country over the past thirty years to compare the effects of the two models on citizenship. The potential of the modern federal tradition is further assessed through an examination of two theoretical and normative reflections, those of Tocqueville and Proudhon. / The central thesis is twofold. First, I contend that in a context of increasing cultural diversity, unity and diversity have an equal value and are both essential to citizenship. This is true both from a moral and from a practical point of view. Second, I argue that the dominant conceptions of federalism are unable to satisfactorily conciliate unity and diversity. Such task requires the development of what I call an intercultural federalism, one centered on the good of identity pluralization or complexitication. From a strictly practical point of view, only an intercultural federalism can prevent identity fragmentation and the political and social fragmentation which come with it. From a moral perspective, intercultural federalism promises not only to protect, but also to maximize the primary goods which are the most affected by identity fragmentation---political liberty and social solidarity---while also promoting individual liberty. Intercultural federalism rests on three principles which summarize the teachings of the modern federal tradition with regard to the establishment of just citizenship institutions in a context of diversity. Such institutions are just in that they protect and maximize the primary goods of citizenship for all citizens. The three principles are: (1) mutual recognition; (2) intercultural dialogue; (3) multi-varied asymmetrical institutionalization.

No description available.