About a month before parliament returns in mid-September each year, Canada’s premiers have an end-of-summer get-together to complain about Ottawa and its stinginess.
Meeting under the fancy title of the Council of the Federation, the premiers’ meeting this year was no different in that regard.
But there were some extra features at this year’s premiers meeting. They agreed to do some things themselves without Ottawa – such as agree to set up a national energy strategy. A big part of that strategy will be carbon reduction through a carbon tax, cap-and-trade or by other means.
The current federal government hates the idea of a national energy strategy and, apparently, all things connected to carbon reduction.
Prince Edward Island Premier Robert Ghiz, chairman of the premiers’ meeting, said a lot about health care and an aging population – also topics the Harper government doesn’t like to talk about much.
The premiers also were united in wanting to see the federal government take an active role in discussions about missing and murdered First Nations women.
That’s not quite the inquiry many premiers had been calling for, but it seemed to have forced the feds into entering into a compromise. There have been several signals from Ottawa that the federal government is willing to participate in some sort of roundtable on the missing and murdered women.
Overall, the premiers seem to be trying to force issues onto Ottawa’s agenda heading into the next federal election and, of course, force Prime Minister Stephen Harper to sit down and talk to them now and again.
The premiers have been feeling very neglected – and for good reason. The Harper government seems to want to return federalism to the 1867 era, when the federal and provincial levels of government each had their designated powers, which they wielded independently of each other.
The 19th-century model had the provinces making most of the policy decisions that affected most Canadians; the feds retained the greater capacity to raise revenue. So, each level of government had one without the other, making fertile grounds for bartering and deal-making. Quite a paradox.
Canadians might be surprised by how much the country has become dependent on healthy intergovernmental relations – out of necessity. Programs such as health care would not be possible if Ottawa didn’t underwrite that service, which constitutionally belongs mostly to the provinces and territories.
As a recent paper published by Canada 2020, an Ottawa-based think tank, notes, the 19th-century division of powers has forced Canadian governments to rely upon continuous consultation and negotiation for Canadian federalism to function in the 21st century. Interactions among the levels of government are required to address the complex problems Canadians face today, says Jennifer Wallner, the University of Ottawa assistant professor who authored the paper.
This is why the Harper government’s standing refusal to meet with the premiers as a group has serious implications. It is also why a federal government that imposes programs on the provinces and territories can live to regret its action.
A case in point is the job-retraining program the feds tried to shove down the throats of the provinces in 2013. An important social program wound up being stuck in limbo for more than a year while 13 governments quarrelled.
When the federal government wants to, it can work with the provinces to great effect, as the Canada 2020 paper notes. For example, the 2009 Economic Action Plan put $52 billion in federal, provincial and territorial money funds into a national economy that needed stimulus.
Canadians should be looking beyond the squabbling between Ottawa and the premiers to consider what really is at stake: the ability of our country to function in an effective way, based on both the examples of history and future needs.
And Ottawa and the premiers should be looking to repair a badly needed relationship.
Constitutional reform is not required here.
Just common sense.
© 2014 Investment Executive. All rights reserved.
Quebec to drop withdrawal limit for LIFs in 2025
Move will give clients more flexibility for retirement income and tax planning