Ideas in Action, Essays in Honour of Peter Russell ed. by Joseph F. Fletcher (review)

humanities 287 Poloni, Phillipe. Olivo, Oliva. Trans David Homel. Stoddart. 198. $19.99 Primeau, Marguerite-A. Savage Rose. Trans Margaret A. Wilson. Ekstasis. 146. $16.95 Ricard, François. Gabrielle Roy: A Life. Trans Patricia Claxton. McClelland and Stewart. xvi, 600. $39.99 Salvatore, Filippo. Ancient Memories, Modern Identities. Trans Domenic Cusmano. Guernica. 188. $20.00 The Schemers and Viga-Glum: Two Sagas of Icelanders. Trans George Johnston. Porcupine=s Quill. 196. $16.95 Théoret, France. Laurence. Trans Gail Scott. Mercury. 206. $18.95 Tisseyre, Michelle. Divided Passions. Self-translated. Key Porter. 352. $19.95 Tremblay, Michel. The City in the Egg. Trans Michael Bullock. Ronsdale. 160. $15.95 B The Duchesse and the Commoner. Trans Sheila Fischman. Talon. 254. $18.95 Ubersfeld, Anne. Reading Theatre. Trans Frank Collins; ed Paul Perron and Patrick Debbèche. University of Toronto Press. xxiv, 220. $50.00, $21.95 Zink, Michel. The Invention of Literary Subjectivity. Trans Davis Sices. Johns Hopkins University Press. xii, 264. US $36.00 Humanities Joseph F. Fletcher, editor. Ideas in Action, Essays in Honour of Peter Russell University of Toronto Press. viii, 318. $60.00; $24.95 These seventeen essays were presented at a 1996 conference to honour Peter Russell on the occasion of his retirement from the University of Toronto. The five parts treat five areas of Canadian public life on which Russell continues to exert a singular influence: Constitutional Politics, Aboriginal Peoples, Security Intelligence, Law and the Courts, and Rights and the Charter. As Joseph Fletcher says in his general introduction, Russell is the model of the engaged scholar, and `his influence on governments and students of government spans an astonishing range of issues.' An exemplary festschrift! Readers get a lively sense of Russell's impact and his position on controversies that continue to animate key areas of Canadian public policy. Each part begins with a description of Russell's contributions: books and articles, policy initiatives, reports, service on public commissions of inquiry and directorships. Essays by colleagues in the public sector come next, followed by the reflections of associates in the ivory tower. The watchword of Russell's career has been the `accommodation' of 288 letters in canada 1999 opposing arguments. He represents tolerance, justice, a statesmanlike appreciation of what is owed to all sides in a controversy. Every papergiver acknowledges his influence, and it is very often his role as moderator for which they are most grateful. Yet there are disagreements. The best way to understand the diversity of opinion is to see it as evidence of Russell's power to encourage the exploration of issues that is characteristic of democratic life at its best. Thus Rainer Knopff and F.L. Morton would seem to be following in Russell's footsteps when they denounce the policy-making role of the courts under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms because it `leads to a dangerous inflation of ordinary policy claims and replacement of parliamentary debate with coercion by the courts.' Russell argued in the 1970s that entrenching a constitutional bill of rights would detract from the democratic ideal of representative government. But in contrast to Knopff and Morton, though still pursuing Russell's democratic ideal, Justice Rosalie Abella defends the courts' policy role, describing it precisely as a way to revitalize democracy. Abella claims to have learned from Russell that society is `necessarily fluid' and that the `institutions in it are not necessarily necessary.' James Tully's opposition to `fixed [constitutional] contracts' resembles Abella's insistence on fluidity of institutions, and like Abella he claims to be taking a leaf from Russell's book. Constitutional principles must remain open to democratic demand. But Katherine Swinton, `hitting a very Russellian point' in the editor's view, suggests that policy debates are impoverished when played out in constitutional terms. We may need more democracy in our day-to-day politics, but it is not obvious that we will get it by embracing a democratic process of constitution making. Ronald G. Atkey says of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service that Russell must be `proud of his baby.' Russell was director of the Royal Commission that led to the creation of the CSIS. In contrast, Reg Whitaker argues...