Search

The article discusses the papers regarding the constitutional crisis after the collapse of the Meech Lake Accord in Canada. The authors who were strong supporters of the Accord look into its substance, process and the intergovernmental policy that surrounds its negotiation to be able to come up with the lessons from its failure. The authors cite the option of asymmetrical federalism that calls for the decentralized special status of Quebec. One of the author argues that the Accord failed due to the attempt of the elitist politicians to amend the constitution illegitimately without consultation.

This paper argues that public policy and legislation have significant influence in fostering or hindering co-operative development. Factors that influence co-operative development, such as financial mechanisms, technical assistance, and sector support infrastructure, are often treated separately in the literature without sufficiently focusing on the importance and role of public policy and legislation to establish the necessary mechanisms to effectively promote co-operative development. This paper argues that while the aforementioned factors are relevant, without grounding in a comprehensive public policy strategy, they paint only a partial picture of the co-operative development phenomenon. Public policy can create all the formerly mentioned mechanisms to develop co-operative organizations more effectively. By learning from Canadian and international co-operative experiences, this paper offers insights into enabling co-operative policy mechanisms that can benefit the Canadian social economy sector. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper reports on research exploring the contribution to social policy of social economy organizations (SEOs) in Atlantic Canada. Of particular interest is whether SEOs and government are engaged in what we have termed 'reciprocal relationships,' through inclusive, cross-sector alliances linked to improved policy planning and decision-making. Initial findings suggest that reciprocity of relationships between government and SEOs to enhance policy solutions and service provision is not yet fully realized and that SEOs remain structurally marginalized in the design and implementation of policy. The paper points to investment in appropriate support mechanisms to make government-SEO alliances meaningful and more durable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In-depth interviews with government officials are a critical research method for the study of government. Historical and institutional factors, and particularly the informal internal dynamics that influence policy, require a depth of understanding that is often best investigated through such interview methods. At the federal level in Canada we see many trends that point to the increasing centralization and control of government information. There has been political interference in Access to Information Requests; the outcomes of scientific research have been suppressed; and media access to politicians has become highly constrained. This led us to ask whether tightening controls on information have also affected access to research interviews with government officials. This paper explores this issue by interviewing both academics and public servants in the Canadian federal government. We ask is there evidence of a tightening grip on access to governmental research interviews and, if so, is this affecting how and what we research? [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Canadian Public Policy is the property of University of Toronto Press and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Canadian Public Policy is the property of University of Toronto Press and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Canadian Public Policy is the property of University of Toronto Press and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Canadian Public Policy is the property of University of Toronto Press and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Canadian Public Policy is the property of University of Toronto Press and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Canadian Public Policy is the property of University of Toronto Press and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Canadian Public Policy is the property of University of Toronto Press and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

We analyze the expected impact of the new Canada Health Transfer (CHT) on the capacity of Canadian provinces to provide universal Medicare coverage. We found the new CHT formula, recently redesigned by the federal government, fails to address the differing capacity of provinces to provide Medicare coverage due to the unavoidably higher costs imposed by the population's age structure and geographical dispersion. We propose a modified capitation formula that adjusts for these 'unavoidable' cost factors. The redistributive impact on the provinces is examined as well as the extent to which the proposed CHT fits with other federal transfer, especially Equalization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Canadian Public Policy is the property of University of Toronto Press and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation is the property of University of Toronto Press and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

In Canada, advocates of universal child-care often point to policies implemented in Quebec as providing a model for early education and care policies in other provinces. While these policies have proven to be highly popular among citizens, initial evaluations of access to these programs indicated they led to a multitude of undesirable child developmental, health, and family outcomes. These research findings ignited substantial controversy and criticism. In this study, we show the robustness of the initial analyses to 1) concerns over whether negative outcomes would vanish over time as suppliers gained experience providing child-care; 2)concerns regarding multiple testing; and 3) concerns that the original estimates measured the causal impact of child-care availability and not child-care attendance. A notable exception is that despite estimated effects stemming from the policy indicating declines in motor-social development scores in Quebec relative to the rest of Canada, our analyses imply that on average attending child-care in Canada leads to a significant increase in this test score. However, our analysis reveals substantial heterogeneity in program impacts that occur in response to the Quebec policies and indicates that most of the negative impacts reported in earlier research are driven by children from families who only attended child-care in response to the implementation of this policy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Canadian Public Policy is the property of University of Toronto Press and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Canadian Public Policy is the property of University of Toronto Press and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Canadian Public Policy is the property of University of Toronto Press and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Elaborates the observations of a legal academic named John Willis during the transition of the constitutional culture in Canada. Contrast in the views of eighteenth-century lawyer's values and the new administrative state; Factors affecting the changes in constitutional culture; Citation of important connections between constitutional principles observed by Willis during the minor revolution in constitutional law.

Focuses on the assessment of the historical development of the delegated legislation in parliamentary government systems in Canada. Significance of the passage of the miniature Acts of Parliament and the works of Lord Hewart on the changes made on the political system; Insights on the parliamentary powers of government departments; Details of the reforms made by virtue of the Donoughmore Committee reports with regards to delegation of legislation, sub-delegation, and parliamentary scrutiny.

Focuses on the evaluation and assessment of the Ontario Royal Commission Inquiry into Civil Rights or the McRuer Commission under Willis V. McRuer regarding the evolution of the Ontario administrative law and the eventual formulation of the Canadian administrative law. Identification of the faults and flaws in the McRuer Commission; Significance of the creation of administrative discretions by legislature; Recommendations of McRuer on the need to establish a legislative committee in charge of scrutinizing all subordinate legislation enacted by the province; Scope of the judicial review of McRuer; Terms and provisions of the Judicial Review Procedure Act and statutory procedural codes.