Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-wbk2r Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-18T22:25:28.188Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Processes of Reorganizing Local Government in Canada

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 November 2009

Donald Higgins
Donald Higgins
Affiliation:
Saint Mary's University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Of all the levels of the state or government in Canada, the local one is the most often subjected to structural change or reorganization. The processes by which that change occurs—or by which it is postponed or avoided—are the focus of this article. In particular, the consequences of choosing one process of change rather than another are explored. After developing a framework to define and explore the processes of change, the article proceeds to analyze 81 instances between 1953 and 1983 in which reorganization of local government in Canada either actually occurred or was merely proposed.

Résumé

De tous les niveaux du pouvoir gouvernemental au Canada, c'est celui de la politique locale qui est le plus fréquemment susceptible de changements de structure ou de réorganisation. Les precédés grâce auxquels ces changements sont effectués—ou en vertu desquels ils sont renvoyés à plus tard sinon entièrement écartés—constituent le sujet principal du présent article. On y précise les conséquences du choix d'un precédé de préférence aux autres. Ayant esquissé un cadre pouvant servir à définir et à étudier les processus de changements, I'soumet à l'analyse 81 cas, tirés des années 1953 à 1983. où la réorganisation du gouvernement au niveau local a soit eu lieu ou au moins a été envisagée.

Type
Research Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Political Science/Revue canadienne de science politique , Volume 19 , Issue 2 , June 1986 , pp. 219 - 242
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Political Science Association (l'Association canadienne de science politique) and/et la Société québécoise de science politique 1986

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 For example, Warren Magnusson, “The Structure and Functions of the Local State,” paper delivered at the annual meeting of the Canadian Political Science Association, Guelph, 1984.

2 For example, Dupré, J. S.. Intergovernmental Finance in Ontario: A Provincial-Local Perspective (Toronto: Queen's Printer, 1968);Google ScholarFeldman, Lionel D. and Graham, Katherine A., Bargaining for Cities: Municipalities and Intergovernmental Relations, An Assessment (Montreal: Institute for Research on Public Policy, 1979);Google ScholarHiggins, Donald, Local and Urban Politics in Canada (Toronto: Gage, 1986);Google Scholar and Tindal, C. R., Structural Change in Local Government: Government for Urban Regions (Toronto: Institute of Public Administration of Canada, 1977).Google Scholar

3 I am indebted to Louise Quesnel of Laval University and Patrick Dunleavy of the London School of Economics and Political Science for stimulating the identification of these interests.

4 Rhodes, R. A. W., Control and Power in Central-Local Relations (Farnborough: Gower, 1981), 115.Google Scholar

5 This conceptual schema was developed in collaboration with L. J. Sharpe.of Nuffield College, Oxford University.

6 See Higgins, further, Local and Urban Politics in Canada, chaps. 2 and 3.Google Scholar

7 See, for example, Feldman, and Graham, , Bargaining for Cities.Google Scholar

8 Graham, Katherine A., “Local Government in the Northwest Territories: The National Political Imperative versus Grassroots Survival,” paper delivered at the annual meeting of the Canadian Political Science Association. Ottawa. 1982.Google Scholar

9 See, for example, McKenna, Brian and Purcell, Susan, Drapeau (Toronto: Clarke Irwin, 1980);Google Scholar and Colton, Timothy J., Big Daddy: Frederick G. Gardiner and the Building of Metropolitan Toronto (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1980).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

10 See Richmond, Dale E., “Provincial-Municipal Tax and Revenue Sharing: Reforms Accomplished, 1978 Compared with 1971,” in Feldman, Lionel D. (ed.), Politics and Government of Urban Canada: Selected Readings (4th ed.; Toronto: Methuen, 1981), 162–201;Google Scholar and Higgins, , Local and Urban Politics in Canada, chap. 3.Google Scholar

11 Higgins, Donald J. H., “Canada: New Brunswick and Nova Scotia,” in Rowat, Donald C. (ed.), International Handbook on Local Goverment Reorganization: Contemporary Developments (Westport: Greenwood, 1980), 215–31.Google Scholar

12 See further, Masson, Jack K. and Anderson, James D. (eds.). Emerging Party Politics in Urban Canada (Toronto: McClelland and Stewart, 1972):Google Scholar and Higgins. Local and Urban Politics in Canada, chap. 8.

13 See further, . Bureau of Municipal Research, Parties to Change: The Introduction of Political Parties in the 1969 Toronto Municipal Election (Toronto: Bureau of Municipal Research, 1971):Google Scholar and Clarkson, Stephen, City Lib: Parties and Reform (Toronto: Hakkert, 1972).Google Scholar

14 See Joycefurther, J. G. further, J. G. and Hossé, H. A., Civic Parties in Canada (Ottawa: Canadian Federation of Mayors and Municipalities/Federation of Canadian Municipalities, 1970).Google Scholar

15 See, for example, Fyfe, Stewart, “Provincial-Municipal Relations and Local Government Boundaries,” paper delivered at the annual meeting of the Canadian Political Science Association, Ottawa. 1982. 25–39.Google Scholar

16 For example, Clokie, Hugh McDowall and Robinson, J. William, Royal Commissions of Inquiry (New York: Octagon. 1964), 217.Google Scholar

17 A complete list of the 81 cases is available from the author.

18 See Plunkett, further T. J. and Lightbody, James, “Tribunals, Politics, and the Public Interest: The Edmonton Annexation Case,” Canadian Public Policy 8 (1982), 207–21;CrossRefGoogle ScholarPlunkett, T. J. and Lightbody, James, “A Rebuttal,” Canadian Public Policy 8 (1982). 371–73;CrossRefGoogle ScholarFeldman, Lionel D., “Tribunals. Politics, and the Public Interest: The Edmonton Annexation Case. A Response,” Canadian Public Policy 8 (1982), 367–71:CrossRefGoogle Scholar and Masson, Jack K., “Edmonton: The Unsettled Issues of Expansion, Governmental Reform and Provincial Economic Diversification.” in Feldman, (ed.). Politics and Government of Urban Canada, 431–47.Google Scholar

19 The Whalen and Graham royal commissions' reports are described here as ill-fated because their respective packages of changes were not accepted by the respective provincial governments. However, both reports were influential in that they did establish directions for change which the Newfoundland and Nova Scotian governments have implemented partially and incrementally.

20 See Wilson, John, “The Georgian Bay Archipelago Elections: A Preliminary Report.” paper delivered to the annual meeting of the Canadian Political Science Association. Montreal, 1980.Google Scholar