Canadian Federalism in Design and Practice: The Mechanics of a Permanently Provisional Constitution

This paper examines the interaction between constitutional design and practice through a case study of Canadian federalism. Focusing on the federal architecture of the Canadian Constitution, the paper examines how subnational units in Canada actually compete with the central government, emphasizing...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Gardner James A.
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Centre for Studies on Federalism 2017-12-01
Series:Perspectives on Federalism
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.degruyter.com/view/j/pof.2017.9.issue-3/pof-2017-0018/pof-2017-0018.xml?format=INT
id doaj-8504e904b04e40c1b2c6fd76672060df
record_format Article
spelling doaj-8504e904b04e40c1b2c6fd76672060df2021-04-02T10:53:35ZengCentre for Studies on FederalismPerspectives on Federalism2036-54382017-12-0193E-1E-3110.1515/pof-2017-0018pof-2017-0018Canadian Federalism in Design and Practice: The Mechanics of a Permanently Provisional ConstitutionGardner James A.0Bridget and Thomas Black SUNY Distinguished Professor, University at Buffalo School of Law, State University of New York.This paper examines the interaction between constitutional design and practice through a case study of Canadian federalism. Focusing on the federal architecture of the Canadian Constitution, the paper examines how subnational units in Canada actually compete with the central government, emphasizing the concrete strategies and tactics they most commonly employ to get their way in confrontations with central authority. The evidence affirms that constitutional design and structure make an important difference in the tactics and tools available to subnational units in a federal system, but that design is not fully constraining: there is considerable evidence of extraconstitutional innovation and improvisation by governments. Furthermore, changes in practice initiated by Canadian subnational actors have produced changes in the allocation of national and subnational authority that are plausibly characterized as constitutional in magnitude. The paper concludes that the design of the Canadian federal system may inadvertently undermine its capacity to stabilize itself at any particular point of constitutional evolution, making it ‘permanently provisional.’http://www.degruyter.com/view/j/pof.2017.9.issue-3/pof-2017-0018/pof-2017-0018.xml?format=INTfederalismCanadaconstitutional lawconstitutional design
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Gardner James A.
spellingShingle Gardner James A.
Canadian Federalism in Design and Practice: The Mechanics of a Permanently Provisional Constitution
Perspectives on Federalism
federalism
Canada
constitutional law
constitutional design
author_facet Gardner James A.
author_sort Gardner James A.
title Canadian Federalism in Design and Practice: The Mechanics of a Permanently Provisional Constitution
title_short Canadian Federalism in Design and Practice: The Mechanics of a Permanently Provisional Constitution
title_full Canadian Federalism in Design and Practice: The Mechanics of a Permanently Provisional Constitution
title_fullStr Canadian Federalism in Design and Practice: The Mechanics of a Permanently Provisional Constitution
title_full_unstemmed Canadian Federalism in Design and Practice: The Mechanics of a Permanently Provisional Constitution
title_sort canadian federalism in design and practice: the mechanics of a permanently provisional constitution
publisher Centre for Studies on Federalism
series Perspectives on Federalism
issn 2036-5438
publishDate 2017-12-01
description This paper examines the interaction between constitutional design and practice through a case study of Canadian federalism. Focusing on the federal architecture of the Canadian Constitution, the paper examines how subnational units in Canada actually compete with the central government, emphasizing the concrete strategies and tactics they most commonly employ to get their way in confrontations with central authority. The evidence affirms that constitutional design and structure make an important difference in the tactics and tools available to subnational units in a federal system, but that design is not fully constraining: there is considerable evidence of extraconstitutional innovation and improvisation by governments. Furthermore, changes in practice initiated by Canadian subnational actors have produced changes in the allocation of national and subnational authority that are plausibly characterized as constitutional in magnitude. The paper concludes that the design of the Canadian federal system may inadvertently undermine its capacity to stabilize itself at any particular point of constitutional evolution, making it ‘permanently provisional.’
topic federalism
Canada
constitutional law
constitutional design
url http://www.degruyter.com/view/j/pof.2017.9.issue-3/pof-2017-0018/pof-2017-0018.xml?format=INT
work_keys_str_mv AT gardnerjamesa canadianfederalismindesignandpracticethemechanicsofapermanentlyprovisionalconstitution
_version_ 1724166447801827328