Reviews/Comptes rendus
Public Attitudes Towards Education in Ontario
1998: The Twelfth OISE/UT Survey
by D.W. Livingstone, D. Hart and L.E. Davie. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1999. Pp. xii,
103. $14.95.
For what is actually the twelfth in a soberly presented series of survey reports on public opinion
about education in Ontario, the resulting product
resonates with more interest than I had expected.
Frankly, the reason for this heightened feeling of
interest is “Mike” Harris, Ontario’s premier.
Many of the questions are quite salient to Harris’
quest for a revolution, common sense or otherwise,
based on privatization and entrepreneurialism. Many
of those polled (asked of a randomly selected sample of 1,007 aged 18 and over and presented in 49
tables) do not seem inclined to support their premier-revolutionary when it comes to education. One
question found that 44 percent of respondents felt
that recent provincial changes had worsened the
school system in recent years, compared to 24 percent who felt it had been improved (p. 18). Seventyone percent felt that maintaining educational and
health services was the “most important task for the
Ontario government” with only 6 percent choosing
cutting taxes (p. 23); and 59 percent opposed profitmaking private business operating public schools
compared to 22 percent supporting such an idea
(p. 31). Almost half the public feels that the provincial government has “too much control over how
schools operate” (48 percent) compared to “too little” 20 percent or to “about the right amount” (23
percent) (p. 34). When it came to the goals of public policy, if governments did decide to spend more
tax money on education, “keep(ing) university fees
from going up” topped nine other laudable projects
including several not related to the university sector (p. 27).
So the public wants public schools maintained,
is not too happy with Mr. Harris’ watch when it
comes to education and has decided that enough is
enough when it comes to university tuition. Gener-
113
ally speaking, the responses are of a “red Tory” or
at least “pink Tory” hue but one wonders if any of
that endangered species survives among Harris’
polyester revolutionaries.
While Mike Harris may not be cheered by the
responses, some on the left or connected to social
movements will also find their beliefs contradicted
by public opinion. Most respondents feel that
women and men get “an equal opportunity” for
higher education (p. 44) and only 37 percent feel
that Aboriginals have a worse chance than whites
for a higher education (29 percent actually feel they
have a better chance). However, traditional socialists may be cheered that class (still) tells, to quote a
book title, as 68 percent do feel that low-income
families have a worse chance than the better-off for
a higher education (p. 43). Support for a public-only
educational system seems to be declining (26 percent) after somewhat higher levels in the early and mid1990s but, on the other hand, only 39 percent actually
support the system as it is at present (public funding
for public and Catholic schools only) (p. 29).
There is much more in this book and it is a bit
like Forrest Gump’s box of chocolates, with different ones appealing to different tastes. Interpretation
is fairly minimal, although at the end the authors do
allow themselves some leeway, for example. “There
are ... no compelling candidates for a second ‘revolution’” (p. 85) or “In the public mind, the Ontario
provincial government is firmly in the driver’s seat
when it comes to schooling, and a great many people
are not happy with the ride” (p. 84).
No doubt one might relate the red or pink Tory
hue of the responses to the (apparently) improving
economy with jobless rates below 7 percent. In this
climate of economic improvement, confidence in the
usefulness and affordability of public spending
seems to be waxing and concern with debts, deficits, and tax cutting seems somewhat muted. However, as long as the three-way split in political parties
continues, this may not reflect in the practice of this
government as the “pro-social expenditure” posture
CANADIAN PUBLIC POLICY – ANALYSE DE P OLITIQUES,
VOL . XXVII, NO . 1 2001
114 Reviews/Comptes rendus
of the majority gets swept under the carpet by neoconservative Tories who resent the public sector.
The three authors have all been associated with
these surveys for many years, in fact back to 1984.
Livingstone and Hart were associated with earlier
surveys in 1979, 1980, and 1982; and Livingstone
started it all in 1978. Livingstone is particularly well
CANADIAN PUBLIC POLICY – ANALYSE DE POLITIQUES,
known as a sociologist of education and, in fact, was
a recent winner of the Porter Prize, the Canadian
Sociology and Anthropology Association’s award
for distinction in publication (see The EducationJobs Gap).
DAVID A. NOCK, Department of Sociology, Lakehead
University
VOL. XXVII , NO . 1 2001
Reviews/Comptes rendus
Code Blue: Reviving Canada’s Health Care
System
by David Gratzer. Toronto: ECW Press, 1999.
David Gratzer’s new book, Code Blue: Reviving
Canada’s Health Care System, is a provoking indictment of what is wrong with one of the country’s
most cherished institution. The author, a medical
student and regular contributor to the National Post,
captures the reader’s attention by depicting personal
tragedies of Canadians unable to attain expedient
specialized medical attention. The book contains
numerous public complaints found in the popular
media about long waiting lists due to bed closures
and out-dated technological equipment. Gratzer also
presents stories about nursing shortages, disgruntled physicians closing their shops to the public, as
well as Angus Reid and other opinion polls reporting on Canadians’ fear that their health-care system
is in serious jeopardy. Such mainstream information sources are used as evidence that Canada’s system currently fails ordinary and not-so-ordinary folk
(senators, physicians, etc.), and that the system is
“deeply-flawed” and in need of a major overhaul.
Code Blue maintains that both the experts and
the politicians have it wrong when they state that
Canada has the “best health care system in the
world.” As Gratzer puts it (p. 28), “despite the vigour with which experts and politicians defend the
present system, there is a significant body of anecdotal evidence that medicare is seriously troubled.”
Politicians of all stripes are found adhering to the
same old defensive line that the five fundamental
principles of Medicare and the Canada Health Act
are sacred and non-negotiable. Gratzer also criticizes
the academic experts — including health economists, policy analysts, and sociologists — who are
said to speak from a similar hollow “health care
script” when they maintain, for example, that the
waiting list problem is greatly exaggerated and frequently distorted or that it is the “political theatre,”
as health economist Robert Evans puts it, of public
health-care systems at home and abroad (p. 27).
Gratzer argues that the simplistic strategies proposed
115
by politicians and academics, including pumping
more government dollars into the system, fall short
of what is needed to get the Canadian health-care
system truly revived: “minor funding increases, politically motivated national standards, and meaningless guarantees aren’t going to help much”(p. 62).
So what is the way forward? Gratzer suggests that
we take a close look at recent developments in the
United States and the Far East: China and Singapore. Gratzer proposes that Canada revamp its current system, characterized by disempowered
consumers, bloated government bureaucracies and
discontented physicians, and opt instead for a system that provides both “choice and freedom,” that
is, medical savings accounts (MSAs). Established
on the principle that consumers rather than governments spend money on health-care services, MSAs
involve (a) the establishment of fixed individual
“savings accounts” from which patients would draw
money to pay directly for their health expenses; and
(b) a mandatory insurance for catastrophic illness
that would kick in only after a certain deductible
had been reached. Any health-care expenses that are
in surplus of the amount left in the individual’s savings account and yet are below the threshold when
the high-deductible insurance kicks in would be paid
out of pocket by the individual patient. Gratzer
asserts that there are many advantages to the MSA
option, not least of all that it will restore the doctorpatient relationship. This is because “patients would
be financially accountable for their decisions ... [and
the physician] would receive compensation from
patients, not a provincial government. The doctorpatient relationship would be reinvigorated with financial ties” (p. 196).
While medical savings accounts may indeed be
economically advantageous for physicians and at the
same time encourage consumers to utilize more preventive care options not currently covered under
many provincial plans, a downside is that MSAs
discourage the truly sick from seeking care at an
early stage of their illness because they do not want
to use up the money remaining in their medical
CANADIAN PUBLIC POLICY – ANALYSE DE P OLITIQUES,
VOL . XXVII, NO . 1 2001
116 Reviews/Comptes rendus
savings account. This is especially likely to be the
case for people who are unable to meet out-of-pocket
expenses that are incurred beyond the ceiling of their
account and the high deductible. The author maintains that the poor will not be done badly by MSAs,
however, because they will be able to access preventive health-care services (crutches, optometrists’
visits, etc.) that they currently have to pay directly
for anyway, and also because the MSAs provide a
more viable long-range solution for the poor than
Canada’s existing inadequate public health-care
system.
Given its search for a “capitalization” solution
to health-care financing in Canada, it is hardly surprising that Code Blue spends little time discussing
alternative publicly-funded organizational models.
Proposals to place physicians, similar to other health
CANADIAN PUBLIC POLICY – ANALYSE DE POLITIQUES,
workers, on salary are seen as “unproductive”
(p. 197) and the idea of having community health
clinics as the first point of contact for patients is
not even mentioned by Gratzer. I would argue that
fee-for-service physicians who put in 60 hours per
week (not uncommon for fee-for-service practitioners) are not only overworked but also run the risk of
placing the public’s health at risk. Shorter
workweeks for salaried doctors, and greater teamwork with nurse practitioners and other non-medical
providers, might go a long way to refocus health
care in Canada upstream, from an illness- to a healthoriented system that is both cost-effective and equitable for all.
CECILIA BENOIT, Department of Sociology, University of Victoria
VOL. XXVII , NO . 1 2001
Reviews/Comptes rendus
The Ugly Canadian: The Rise and Fall of a
Caring Society
by Barbara Murphy. Winnipeg: J. Gordon Shillingford
Publishing, 1999. Pp. 149. $17.95.
Barbara Murphy undertakes a detailed historical
analysis of the building and partial dismantling of
the Canadian social welfare system. From the archives of political speeches and newspaper editorials she pieces together the slow, agonizing struggle
toward what became a world-class system of rationalized benefits that partially corrected the unequal
distribution of wealth in Canada. Her knowledge of
these events is impressive and there is little reason
to doubt the accuracy with which she reconstructs
the legislative activities associated with the building of the Canadian welfare state. In particular, she
documents the struggle to develop the old age pension, the unemployment insurance system, family
allowances, and universal health care.
As readers will know, this story does not have a
pleasant ending. For the last two decades, the Canadian system of social benefits has been
“deindexed, dismantled, and devalued.” Murphy
explains this by arguing that neither politicians nor
big business are responsible for changes to the welfare system, but rather “Canadians in general” are.
In her view, she “provides compelling evidence” that
“Canadians” have lost their sense of compassion for
the less fortunate.
Murphy thinks that it was ordinary Canadians
who developed the humane and generous policies
of the welfare system, so they are to blame for its
dismantling. She believes this perspective of personal responsibility of the masses rescues us from a
sense of powerlessness in dealing with political and
economic sources of problems.
117
is no accurate way of assessing public opinion in
the first half of the twentieth century, the period
during which much of the building of the foundation of the welfare system was accomplished. Instead, she relies almost entirely on newspaper
editorials and political speeches. But even from the
public opinions polls of the second half of the twentieth century, the meagre evidence she produces is
unconvincing and even contradictory. The result is
the portrayal of the mythical “Canadian” who went
from being compassionate to uncompassionate for
no apparent reason. It is far more plausible to argue
that the right-wing agenda influenced many, but not
all, Canadians over the last 20 years and the growing legitimacy of the right-wing movement was responsible for the dismantling of the welfare system.
To blame all Canadians for the activities and opinions of the uncompassionate right-wing is not only
to miss the mark, but is to engage in the very victim
blaming the author seems to be attempting to avoid.
What is missing is a consideration of alternate
explanations for why the Canadian welfare system
has been restructured and why there is now less public support for a more generous system. These alternate explanations include Chomsky’s “manufacture of
consent” and Lasch’s “revolt of the elites.” Indeed,
Murphy’s “Canadian” apparently drives a $40,000
SUV (p. 133) and complains about the homeless
getting in their way at shopping malls. This suggests that her reference group is the upper middleclass who have embraced right-wing politics and
have “taken the money and run,” as Lasch argues. If
this is the case, she should stop calling Canadians
“ugly,” and speak more directly to her affluent, conservative colleagues who actually influence the political economy of Canada.
JAMES CÔTÉ, Department of Sociology, University
of Western Ontario
Unfortunately, Murphy presents no compelling
evidence for this thesis. As she acknowledges, there
CANADIAN PUBLIC POLICY – ANALYSE DE P OLITIQUES,
VOL . XXVII, NO . 1 2001
118 Reviews/Comptes rendus
The Struggle for Quebec: From Referendum to
Referendum?
by Robert A. Young. Montreal and Kingston:
McGill-Queen’s University Press, 1999. Pp. 210.
$55.00.
The first sentence of this book asserts that “The biggest threat to the integrity of the Canadian state and
the well-being of all Canadians is the possible secession of Quebec.” Why is this the case? What are
the most significant variables in this debate? How
do these variables interact with each other? How are
they perceived by the policymakers and the potential voters in another referendum in Quebec or in
the Rest of Canada? Given all these possibilities,
what are some possible “post-yes” scenarios? This
book tries not to answer, but at least to consider all
these questions, a gargantuan task indeed, and to no
one’s surprise, it does not pretend to predict what
will happen to the integrity of the Canadian state.
The analysis of all the variables is excellent. It is
historical, clear, comprehensive and it is done at a
level of analysis that allows for a valuable understanding of the very complex situation faced by the
Canadian population. Yet, even such a thorough
analysis cannot lead to any prediction on this situation. In fact, this whole book reflects the theory of
“spontaneous order” advanced by Friedrich A.
Hayek, the Austrian economist and philosopher. This
theory is not only applicable to the role of the market, it explains how there is a spontaneous order that
evolves in every society. Even the best explanation
CANADIAN PUBLIC POLICY – ANALYSE DE POLITIQUES,
and understanding of the most significant variables
in the evolution of this Quebec situation cannot tell
us precisely what to do and what the outcome of
any of our actions will be. As Hayek explains it,
“(Such) attempts to intervene in spontaneous order
rarely result in anything closely corresponding to
men’s wishes, since these orders are determined by
more particular facts than any such intervening
agency can know.” So, both the federalists and the
separatists will not find “their” best way to proceed
from this book. They will, however, on both sides
of this issue, find an excellent evaluation of the
problem and some possibly disquieting consequences for what they choose to recommend.
Depending on one’s bias or original assessment
of the situation of Quebec in Canada, one may find
the book’s conclusion, at least some of the potential scenarios, somewhat alarming and unrealistic.
One would even hope that some of these possible
scenarios were unrealistic, but in the end the author
is right, “it is in the political arena that the outcome
will be determined” (p. 129), both before and after
a “yes” vote. Moreover, all the possibilities of such
a vote “should give pause to any rational voter”
(p. 144), but unfortunately “rationality” in voting
behaviour is not a very reliable attribute, even if
every voter could read, and perhaps should read, this
very valuable and realistic book.
Y VAN G AGNON , Department of Political Science,
Royal Military College of Canada
VOL. XXVII , NO . 1 2001
Reviews/Comptes rendus
Security, Strategy and the Global Economics of
Defence Production
edited by David G. Haglund and S. Neil MacFarlane.
Montreal and Kingston: McGill-Queen’s University
Press, 1999. Pp. xvi, 144. $24.95.
It should be noted at the outset that the material focuses much more upon Anglo-Canadian relations
than it does on global issues — hence perhaps
“transatlantic” should replace “global” in the title
to help direct readers. That being said, with 13 chapters, including the introduction and conclusion, in
144 pages, this clearly is a compact, if not compressed, study of an interesting and complex subject. The immediate question to address, therefore,
is whether the text can do justice to its subject matter in such a format.
119
limited, commentaries. The weakest chapter is by
Sir Geoffrey Pattie — a disappointment especially
since the author is Chairman of GEC Marconi, and
therefore in a position to give an excellent inside
player’s perspective. Unfortunately his contribution
is too brief at only seven pages, and fails to do more
than touch on surface issues. Other chapters, however, succeed in encapsulating debates and presenting a critical evaluation: the chapters by Gongora
and Haglund struck interesting notes, not otherwise
familiar, from reading in this area of study.
As Denis Stairs observes in the concluding chapter, the book comprises the proceedings of a “meeting of cognoscenti” in a special colloquium held in
late 1998. It is not a comprehensive study of any of
the individual topics listed in its title, nor does it
pretend to be one, rather it is an exchange of ideas
and opinions which assumes that the reader already
possesses a relatively deep background in the
material.
Examining the text in late 2000, the main concern is an unavoidable one when dealing with writing on this topic; namely, that the material has
become overtaken by events. The chapters refer to
the world of defence production and trade in 1998,
and into early 1999, but agreements reached by European states since then in areas of defence policy
and industrial cooperation have rendered moot some
of the speculation given here. Congnoscenti, therefore, will find the chapters interesting as an exercise in comparing what was thought then with how
the subject has developed subsequently, as much as
or more than they will find it a contribution to understanding the present state of affairs in defence
production.
If this is the intended audience, then the text
presents a range of well-informed, but inevitably
ALISTAIR D. EDGAR, Department of Political Science,
Wilfrid Laurier University
CANADIAN PUBLIC POLICY – ANALYSE DE P OLITIQUES,
VOL . XXVII, NO . 1 2001
120 Reviews/Comptes rendus
Stretching the Federation: The Art of the State
in Canada
edited by Robert Young. Kingston: Institute of Intergovernmental Relations, Queen’s University, 1999.
Pp. xiv, 255. $19.95.
This collection arises from a conference held in
1997. The delay in publication seems like a lifetime
in a dynamic federal system where major events such
as the Social Union Framework Agreement have
since transpired. The editor acknowledges the problem, but insists that the papers and commentaries
provide insights into perennial issues and informed
speculation that is still ahead of events. I agree.
There are six major papers, one or two commentaries on each, an introduction from the editor and a
brief report from the rapporteur at the conference.
If there is a single focal point for the volume, it
is probably the work of the prolific and provocative
economist Thomas J. Courchene, who for some
years now has been calling for a stricter, more decentralized approach to federal-provincial relations.
Courchene is, in fact, one of an impressive lineup
of contributors to this volume. His paper analyzes
the pros and cons of a separate personal income tax
for Ontario and he concludes that, on balance, such
a move would promote competition and innovation,
while also providing the provincial government with
leverage on other fiscal issues with Ottawa. What is
good for Ontario, of course, may not be good for
other provincial governments, some of whom have
benefited over the years from the integrated tax system and the fiscal capacity it has provided to support federal transfer payments.
Other contributions to the volume are similarly
informative and challenging. Michael Keating examines on a comparative basis the challenges to federalism arising from the shifts in power occurring
under globalization. His sophisticated and nuanced
analysis of the connections and contradictory trends
in terms of the interplay of territory, function, and
political power is intriguing. Contrary to the popular wisdom that territory is becoming irrelevant, he
CANADIAN PUBLIC POLICY – ANALYSE DE POLITIQUES,
argues persuasively that it will remain relevant for
functional, political, and normative reasons.
In an interesting approach to theory development
regarding overlap and redundancy in federal-provincial relations, Evert Lindquist uses four case studies of recent policy initiatives to develop a life-cycle
approach to analyzing how governments interact
within complicated, interdependent, and dynamic
governance networks. There is further work to be
done to refine this fledgling model, but it avoids simplistic talk about complete disentanglement of different orders of government, international actors,
and elements of civil society.
Decentralization in health policy is the focus of
Antonia Maioni’s chapter. Through a series of questions she examines the implications of Courchene’s
influential Access (1996) paper for the long-term direction of health-care policy. She is dubious of the
claim that the principles of the Canada Health Act
would survive Courchene’s decentralist option which
would put the provincial governments in control. To
some extent, the paper by Alain Noël contradicts
Maioni’s position by arguing that a more decentralized, flexible federal system will not necessarily block
innovation or lead to regressive social policies. In any
case, federalism implies experimentation and by empowering local communities, more progressive welfare policies, better suited to distinctive provincial
circumstances and values, could emerge.
The commentators on the papers and the rapporteur for the conference are all distinguished analysts,
who are all familiar with the practical realities of
Canadian federalism. Their contributions are often
critical, but always constructive. In summary, this
collection represents an excellent contribution toward the development of what I would call “practical theory.” It will be a valuable source for
practitioners, academics, and their senior students.
PAUL G. THOMAS, Duff Roblin Professor of Government, St. John’s College, University of Manitoba
VOL. XXVII , NO . 1 2001
Reviews/Comptes rendus
121
Canadian Tax Policy, Third Edition: Canadian
Tax Paper No. 103
edited by Robin W. Boadway and Harry M. Kitchen.
Toronto: Canadian Tax Foundation, 1999. Pp. xiv,
504. $40.00.
as the issues that could lead to reform proposals.
Chapter 9 brings together various tax reform issues
that have been discussed earlier in the book and a
summary of the major tax reforms of the 1980s and
1990s.
Boadway and Kitchen have presented an account of
the various taxes and transfers of federal, provincial,
and municipal governments in Canada, including an
analysis of their economic effects. Chapter 1 begins
with a discussion of the tax policy issues the authors believe to be most important for Canada at the
millennium. They also present their views concerning the broader forces driving these policy issues,
such as the opening up of the international economy,
tax reforms in other countries, and changes in industry structure. The authors then turn in Chapter 2
to an overview of the principles of taxation, as a
background for the later evaluation of each tax. Together with traditional principles — equity, efficiency, economic growth, and administrative
costs — they discuss the choice of a personal tax
base, the impacts of inflation and indexation, the
flat-rate tax proposals, and tax expenditures.
Boadway and Kitchen have written a reference
book, rather than a presentation of original research,
although each author has contributed significantly
to this literature over many years. With each subject, they have included a brief discussion of existing publications. The footnotes are important and
useful, suggesting where the reader can find additional information and insights. Hence this book will
play a helpful role in many university courses, and
will be interesting for the layperson wanting to
understand taxes and transfers. However, in view of
the wide range of subjects covered and the considerable uncertainties about the economic effects of
various taxes and transfers, this book is not an easy
read. Furthermore, the mix of elementary and sophisticated analyses, the extensive literature references, and the focus on policy issues in both
Chapters 1 and 9 as well as in commentaries
throughout the text, create a somewhat fragmented
presentation.
The bulk of the book examines each type of tax,
indicating the structure and current provisions. For
each tax, the authors also include both an analysis
of the tax and a discussion of the issues that might
lead to reforms. Chapters 3 to 7 focus on each of
the personal income tax, the corporate income tax,
commodity taxes, payroll taxation, and property and
local taxation.
Chapter 8 examines transfers to individuals, with
a discussion of each federal program, as well as provincial and local programs. Here again, the authors
include an evaluation of existing programs as well
The authors have expressed their objective of reducing the communications gap between economists
and others, and they have achieved this insofar as they
have provided a comprehensive guide to the literature.
Furthermore, they have presented the arguments for
and against various potential reforms in taxes and transfer programs, so that the reader can develop his or her
own position on these important issues.
DAVID C ONKLIN, Richard Ivey School of Business,
University of Western Ontario
CANADIAN PUBLIC POLICY – ANALYSE DE P OLITIQUES,
VOL . XXVII, NO . 1 2001
122 Reviews/Comptes rendus
The Charter Revolution and the Court Party
by F.L. Morton and Rainer Knopff. Peterborough,
ON: Broadview Press, 2000. Pp. 227. $22.95.
electoral process, and they therefore have turned
their attention to sympathetic judges and administrators (p. 79).
This is a polemical book — informed, informative,
challenging. It echoes criticisms of the idea of a
charter of rights for Canada first voiced in the late
1960s and publicly debated in 1980-81: essentially,
that judicial decision-making tends to destroy desirable policy compromises entailed by and achieved
through parliamentary democracy. However, Morton
and Knopff go further than this. They elaborate and
extend those earlier arguments, in part through an
insightful discussion of the significance of the legislative override clause in the Charter (section 33),
and they expound a novel explanation of the
judicialization of Canadian politics, which is the
essence of “the Charter revolution.” The explanation will offend, but the research supporting it will
have to be refuted if the allegations made by Morton
and Knopff are to be effectively answered.
Morton and Knopff argue that the state has played
a key role in fostering the growth of Court Party
groups through public funding. Under the guidance
of their bureaucrats the federal minister of justice
and provincial attorneys-general have failed adequately to defend challenged legislation, in consequence of which “the Supreme Court acts as [the
federal government’s] agent in support of issues and
clientele groups that Ottawa supports” (p. 128).
Moreover, publicly funded law schools have gained
independence from the legal profession and have
infused the legal curriculum with postmodernist
ideas, playing a key role not only in the education
of a new generation of lawyers, but in the
socialization of judges as well.
For Morton and Knopff, the most important of
the factors contributing to the Charter revolution has
been (although they do not put it quite this way) a
change in Canadian political culture that has brought
about the emergence of a “Court Party.” This diverse
group is a composite of social movements — official minority language groups, civil libertarians,
equality seekers, and other “social engineers” —
whose members have become partisans of the judiciary as a policy-making institution. Citing Mark
Silverstein, for whom “political power is inevitably
a function of constituency,” the authors insist (p. 25)
that judicial power is, in this respect, no different.
Judges, they claim, are a more important cause of
the Charter revolution than the Charter itself (p. 59),
but “an even more significant cause is the Court
Party,” in which “all of the principal postmaterialist
groups — feminists, racial minorities, environmentalists, criminal law reformers, and antinuclear/
peace groups” — (p. 78) are prominent. Although
these are the fastest-growing kinds of interest groups
in both Canada and the United States, they are unable to further their goals effectively through the
CANADIAN PUBLIC POLICY – ANALYSE DE POLITIQUES,
The authors conclude that, abetted by the ascendancy of the Court Party, the Charter revolution is
“deeply and fundamentally undemocratic, not just
in the simple and obvious sense of being antimajoritarian, but also in the more serious sense of
eroding the habits and temperament of representative (or liberal) democracy” (p. 149). This is because, under liberal democracy, ruling majorities are
temporary coalitions of minorities, and partisan
opponents may become future allies.
“Representative institutions facilitate this fundamental democratic disposition; judicial power undermines it,” which is why “courtroom politics” are
authoritarian in process and spirit (p. 149). Litigation on rights issues erodes the middle ground, occupied by “an unstable and unorganized majority
or plurality opinion, bracketed by two opposing activist minorities” (p. 163). Inevitably, a judicial ruling supports one of those minority positions over
the other, an outcome that cannot be obviated by
invoking section 33 of the Charter, because legislative override can only snatch victory from one polar minority (which won in the courts) and award it
to the other; it cannot restore a fuzzily-defined policy
VOL. XXVII , NO . 1 2001
Reviews/Comptes rendus
status quo. Thus, “As the morality of rights replaces
the morality of consent, the politics of coercion replaces the politics of persuasion” (p. 166), embittering politics and devaluing political opponents as
fellow citizens.
Morton and Knopff incur the risk, in consequence
of their tone and style, that readers will dismiss their
research as lightweight. Ironically, the adversarial
style that they decry in public life is one they have
adopted themselves for a review of issues deserving balanced scholarly appraisal. The style makes
for lively reading, but also makes it easy to treat the
book as a political tract. It would be unfortunate if
the book were discredited in this way; its findings
deserve serious challenge on the basis of counterevidence and counter-argument. In my opinion, an
effective challenge would necessarily involve a reappraisal of the authors’ allegations that the Canadian state — not the judiciary alone — has become
biased toward those they describe as composing a
“Court Party.” However, I suspect that full refutation
of their thesis would require doing one of two things.
123
The first would be to abjure the conception of
democracy that underlies the book, arguing that democracy has less to do with political process than
with social outcomes: equality and justice as substantive values into which the legal profession and
the judiciary have special insight. Faced with adversaries of this persuasion, Morton and Knopff
would be happy warriors. They might be more discomfited by a different argument, or a second line
of criticism: that the Canadian judiciary has shown
its commitment to procedural democratic values, and
has sought to reconcile them with a principled adherence to Charter rights. It is not at all clear that
the Supreme Court has actually shown the degree
of judicial restraint that its justices would apparently
wish one to perceive in their more obviously political judgements. Have they done so? That is an issue
that Morton and Knopff have, unfortunately, chosen not to address.
P ETER L ESLIE , Department of Political Studies,
Queen’s University
CANADIAN PUBLIC POLICY – ANALYSE DE P OLITIQUES,
VOL . XXVII, NO . 1 2001
124 Reviews/Comptes rendus
Citizenship, Diversity, and Pluralism:
Canadian and Comparative Perspectives
edited by Alan C. Cairns, John C. Courtney, Peter
Mackinnon, Hans J. Michelmann and David E.
Smith. Montreal and Kingston: McGill-Queen’s
University Press, 1999. Pp. xi, 288. $65.00.
The book Citizenship, Diversity, and Pluralism:
Canadian and Comparative Perspectives brings together a set of papers presented at a conference at
the University of Saskatchewan held in the autumn
of 1997. The conference was sponsored jointly by
the Department of Political Studies and the College
of Law and inspired, according to the editors of the
volume, by “the familiar dictum that political science without constitutional law is blind, and constitutional law without political science is empty”
(p. vii). In this light, the organizers invited papers
from both law professors and political scientists and
this book investigates several aspects of citizenship
from these two major perspectives. As such, it broadens the debate over the proper meaning of the concept of “citizenship,” challenges readers to reflect
on accepted assumptions and new questions, and
suffers from some of the same faults as other collections of this type.
One major difficulty in putting together a book
such as this is that the editors have little choice but
to accept the papers as presented. Thus, while each
of the papers may be excellent in its own right, together they may not always bear much relationship
to the central theme or to each other. This problem
may be alleviated somewhat by the inclusion of a
concluding chapter which attempts to tie the book’s
many threads together. Unfortunately, this book does
not contain such a chapter and is weakened by the
omission. As the 12 chapters in the book point out
dramatically, the concept of citizenship is not only
multidimensional but also these many aspects can
be approached from several perspectives and an analytic and interpretive conclusion would have added
considerably to the value of the book.
CANADIAN PUBLIC POLICY – ANALYSE DE POLITIQUES,
That being said, the book raises a host of important questions that deserve discussion as we enter a
new millennium. For example, in the context of the
central theme of citizenship, several authors direct
attention to issues such as the ever-present conflict
between individual and group rights, the proper role
of the state in a new age, the meaning of representation, the current lack of concern for the “common”
good, and the need to develop a sense of collectivity
which fosters acceptance of majority rule. Of especial interest to Canadians are the chapters that deal
with issues of current concern: in particular, Birch’s
“Reflections on Ethnic Politics,” Webber’s “Just
How Civic is Civic Nationalism in Quebec?”
Banting’s “Social Citizenship and the Multicultural
Welfare State,” and Leary’s “Citizenship, Human
Rights, and Diversity.” In the first, the author notes
the increasing claims of cultural minorities for “special” treatment and reminds us that in the world of
today no group can be self-governing in all respects.
In the second, Webber points out the ethnocentric
and linguistic foundations of Quebec nationalism
and how they led inevitably to the denial of
anglophone and Aboriginal rights. In the third,
Banting draws attention to the integrating aspects
of social welfare programs and shows how the philosophy of neo-conservatism weakens not only such
programs but also the sense of national identity
based on them. In the fourth, Leary reminds us of
the oft-forgotten premise that citizenship confers not
only rights but responsibilities. Canadian citizenship should mean that immigrants contribute only
the best of their cultures to the Canadian mosaic and
that the worst aspects must be left behind. Finally,
the book in its entirety forces the reader to consider
“citizenship” in the context of the current trend to
globalization, whether the rights of people based on
their nationality will continue to have any real meaning in an era of “universal rights” and, further,
whether these universal rights will have much meaning in a world dominated by international capitalism.
VOL. XXVII , NO . 1 2001
Reviews/Comptes rendus
In sum, despite its one lamentable shortcoming,
Citizenship, Diversity, and Pluralism is an interesting and worthwhile pursuit for anyone concerned
with some of the more important questions of our
time. Although the focus of the book is on “citizen-
125
ship,” its several authors raise issues far beyond the
traditionally limited scope of the term.
PATRICK KYBA, Department of Political Science, University of Guelph
CANADIAN PUBLIC POLICY – ANALYSE DE P OLITIQUES,
VOL . XXVII, NO . 1 2001