Federal-Provincial Relations and Conservatism in the Canadian West

Regionalism has been a prominent feature of Western Canadian political culture even prior to Alberta and Saskatchewan joining confederation in 1905. One manifestation of this regionalism is through intergovernmental conflict, particularly jurisdictional disputes between the provincial and federal governments. These disputes have generally seen provincial governments of various ideological leanings cooperate, and yet decentralization–or expansion of provincial jurisdiction–is a position that has largely been advanced by conservatives in recent decade.1Is there an ideological connection between expansion of provincial jurisdiction and conservatism? This essay contends that the conservative ideology particular to Western Canada was uniquely influenced by the dynamic of federal-provincial relations in Canada because of particular features of the region’s brand of conservatism. This essay will demonstrate that ongoing disputes between western provinces–Alberta in particular–and the federal government, particularly over natural resource issues, have reinforced a dynamic of regionalism within Western Canadian conservatism, leading it to become the perennial feature of conservative policy, federally and provincially, that it is today.[...]

The Institutional Politics of Territorial Redistribution: Federalism and Equalization Policy in Australia and Canada

A key challenge for comparative politics is to explain the varying degrees of political conflict triggered by the territorial redistribution of financial resources. Federal systems pose this question particularly acutely since they typically operate equalization programs that generate different levels and patterns of intergovernmental conflict. For instance, in Canada equalization has generated serious conflict between federal and provincial governments whereas in Australia it has only led to low-level grumblings on the part of some states which have taken shots at others. This article sheds light on the causes for conflict around the territorial redistribution of financial resources by explaining why equalization has produced more severe intergovernmental conflict in Canada than in Australia. It argues that institutional factors linked to the governance structures of equalization and the nature of federalism are at the heart of the cross-national difference. More specifically, the presence of an arms-length agency administrating equalization in Australia compared to executive discretion over the program in Canada and the weaker status and lesser power of states in comparison to Canadian provinces means that equalization policy is more subject to political challenges in Australia than in Canada.Résumé.Une question majeure pour la politique comparée contemporaine, et plus particulièrement le fédéralisme comparé, est celle des conflits politiques et intergouvernementaux générés par la distribution territoriale des ressources fiscales. Au Canada, au cours de la dernière décennie, le programme de péréquation a suscité des conflits importants entre le gouvernement fédéral et les provinces, tandis qu'en Australie la péréquation ne provoque qu'un mécontentement épisodique entre les états fédérés. Cet article cherche à expliquer cette différence. Il suggère que des facteurs institutionnels liés à la gouvernance de la péréquation et à la nature des systèmes fédéraux sont au centre de l'explication. Plus précisément, l'article suggère que la présence d'une agence quasi-indépendante pour administrer la péréquation en Australie et son absence au Canada ainsi que la faiblesse relative des états australiens par rapport aux provinces canadiennes font que la péréquation au Canada est plus sujette aux attaques politiques qu'en Australie.