Shaping Nations: Constitutionalism and Society in Australia and Canada

15. Innovations in Governance in Canada

15 Innovations in Governance in Canada1 GILLES PAQUET "Our Canadianism... is a baffling, illogical but compulsive athleticism - a fence-leaping which is also, and necessarily, a fence-keeping".2 To avoid any misunderstanding, let me start with three forewarnings: First forewarning. Canadians are a people characterized by prudence. ThosewhohavepsychoanalyzedCanadiansmost aptlyascribe this "characteristicprudence" to the fact that "to remain apeople at allwe have had to think before we speak, even to think before we think." This is why we are sometimes called "the people of the second thought".3 Second forewarning. In Canada, our "natural mode" is not compromisebut irony.Often, what issaid ismeantto expressits opposite. So,despite much denial and much obfuscation by officials, Canada has lived through achangeofitsgovernanceregimeoverthelast two decades, and this tectonic change has generated innovations in the last five years. But we must guard against "the pretense that every step backward or sideways marks ten steps forward".4 Third forewarning. When trying to communicate effectively a sense of the sort of discontinuity that Canada is slouching through, we mustof necessity simplify somewhat a complex back-and-forth process. I have used ideal types to get my point across. Flats and sharps may be added later. 232 SHAPING NATIONS In the next two sections, I give a broad presentation of Canada's two-stage evolution since 1980 and sketch in stark terms the broad features ofwhat the Canadian governance regimeisbecoming. Iuse afew cases to illustrate both the breadth and scope of these changes but also their essential ambiguity. I refer to four types of innovations: mere retooling, interesting restructuring, major refraining and fundamental moral recontracting. All along I underline that all this was accomplished by fits and starts, most inelegantly, and that it was brought forth by a cacophonous forum marred by much cognitive dissonance, an immense amount of disinformation and strong ideological, political and bureaucratic resistance to the new governance. Canada Over the Last 7,000 Days Canada, like most other advanced economies, has been subjected to a variety ofpressures over the last 20years as a result ofdramatic changes in its environment. These pressures have been mainly ascribable to globalization and accelerated technical change. As a result of these changes, the environment hasbecome morecomplex and more turbulent, and concerns from the private, public and civic sectors have been forced to acquire a greater capacity to transform and to develop a philosophy of continuous improvement and innovation in order to survive. In the face of the "new competition," these concerns have had to become "learning organizations".5 Learning organizations must be capable of defining new goals and new means as they proceed throughtapping knowledge andinformation that other agents and groups possess, that is, through co-operation with other stakeholders and social learning. This has triggered a drift in the governance process. Thegovernancepattern evolved from moreexclusive, hierarchical and paternalistic forms in the 1970s, toward more inclusive, horizontal,distributed and participativeforms in the 1990s,from a pattern where the national leader was in charge to what would appear to be a game without a master. To be effective, the new distributed governance through social learning requires not only a new regime in its interactions with the restof the world but also new structures (more modular and network-like), new strategies (based on dynamic efficiency and learning) and new forms of co-ordination (more decentralized and more dependent on moral contracts). INNOVATIONS IN GOVERANCE IN CANADA 293 Canada's International Circumstances At the international level, this meant a major rethinking of Canada's role in the world economy and the negotiation of its entry and participation into an evolving economic bloc intended on one day encompassing all of the Americas. Already by the mid-1980s, it had become clear both for academics and practitioners that globalization could not be resisted but had to be embraced. However, Canada did not proceed with a careful, throughdull and serene debate as a way to prepare the entry in the Free Trade Agreement (FTA) in 1989 or the North American Agreement (NAFTA) including Mexico in 1993. It slouched into it despite a vibrant opposition from anationalist phalanx and apartisanparliament. At a time of growing economic dependence ontheU.S.marketand ofgrowing fear of unilateral protectionist action from the U.S. government, it was felt that new rules were needed that might protect Canada's interests somewhat better. There was a national debate, but it was not very illuminating: the academic contributions were not enlightening...