Domestic Access to Government in the Canadian Foreign Policy Process 1968–1982
| Published date | 01 March 1984 |
| Date | 01 March 1984 |
| DOI | 10.1177/002070208403900104 |
| Author | John Kirton,Blair Dimock |
| Subject Matter | Domestic Sources of Canada's Foreign Policy |
JOHN
KIRTON
&
BLAIR DIMOCK
Domestic
access
to
government
in
the
Canadian
foreign
policy
process
1968-1982
Access
to
the centres
of
government
power
is
a
problem
for
those
domestic
groups
which
do not
have
it.
It
is
also
a
prob-
lem
for
those
that
do.
For
those
that
do
not
have
access,
whether
from
inexperience,
lack
of
resources,
or
the
peculiar
character
of
the
views
they
express,
the
overwhelming
diffi-
culty
is
merely
to
get
harried
ministers,
officials,
and
members
of
parliament
in
Ottawa
to
listen
to
their
case.
But
even
for
groups
which
have
broken
the
attention
barrier,
three
further
and
more
formidable
problems
arise.
One
is
to
ensure
that
the
points
and
types
of
access
they are
granted
by
the
prevailing
traditions and
institutions
of
parliamentary
democracy
and
cabinet
government
are
effective
channels
for
taking
their
messages to
the
individuals
with
the
power
to
respond
to
their
specific
demands.
Beyond
lies
the
difficulty
of
ensuring
that
these
individuals
listen with
a
sympathetic
ear,
possess
an
understanding
of
the
environment
in
which
the
demandeur
operates, and,
preferably, share
a
commitment
to
the
values
on
which
the
domestic
group
bases
its
demands.
Yet
even
when
the
passionate
commitment
of
the
right
people
is
trium-
phantly secured,
there
remains
the
ever
present
danger
of
co-
option, the
complex
but
inevitable
question
of
who
is
really
using whom.
JOHN
KIRTON
is
an
Associate
Professor
of
Political Science
at
the
University of
Toronto,
an
Associate
Director
of
Research
at
the
Canadian
Institute
of
Interna-
tional Affairs,
and co-author
of
Canada
as
a
Principal
Power
(John
Wiley
and
Sons
1983).
BLAIR DIMOCK
is
a
doctoral
candidate
in
political science
at
the
University
of
Toronto.
DOMESTIC
ACCESS
TO
GOVERNMENT
1968-1982
69
All
of
these
obstacles
are
particularly acute
in
the
field
of
foreign
policy.
In Canada,
perhaps
more
so
than
elsewhere,
foreign
policy
remains
the
preserve
of
the
state
and
its
con-
stitutionally
embedded
competitors, Parliament
and
the prov-
inces,
rather
than
of
actors
within
society
itself.'
Within
the
state
effective
control
over
foreign
policy
is
highly
concen-
trated,
even when
allowance
is
made
for
the
myriad
of
federal
departments
and
institutions
involved
in
the
full
range
of
Canadian
political,
economic,
and
functional relations
abroad.
2
Moreoever, those
at
the
centre
have
long
come
from
a
distinc-
tive,
indeed
rarified,
set
of
clerical,
academic,
and
civil
servant
backgrounds,
which makes
it
difficult for
them
to
convince
out-
siders
of
both
a
counter-consensual
and
capitalist
character that
their
concerns are
properly
understood.
3
And,
even
if
the
interchange
is
free,
frank,
and
fruitful,
there
are
empirical
grounds
for
emphasizing
the
capacity
of
the
state to
control
its
societal
clients
and
giving
preference
to
the
normative
values
which
a
predominant
state
is
able
to
impose.
4
Indeed
it
is
possible
that
the
controlling
position
of
the
state
in
the foreign
policy
process
is
even
more
predominant
and
pervasive
than
is
generally
recognized.
5
For
the
state has
the
i
James
Eayrs,
The
Art
of
the
Possible
(Toronto:
University
of
Toronto
Press
1961)
and
F.J.C.
Griffiths,
'Opening
up
the
policy
process,'
in
Stephen
Clarkson,
ed,
An
Independent
Foreign
Policy
for
Canada?
(Toronto:
McClelland
and
Stewart
1968),
llO-18.
2
John
Kirton,
'Foreign
policy
decision-making
in
the
Trudeau
government:
prom-
ise
and
performance,'
International
Journal
33(spring
1978),
287-311.
3
Cranford
Pratt,
'Canadian foreign
policy:
bias
to
business,'
International
Perspectives
(November/December
1982),
3-6,
and
James
Gillies,
Where
Business
Fails
(Mon-
treal:
Institute
for
Research
on
Public
Policy
1981).
4
Denis
Stairs,
'Publics
and
policy-makers:
the
domestic
environment
of
the
foreign
policy
community,' International
Journal
26(winter
1970-1),
221-48,
'Public
opinion
and external
affairs: reflections on
the
domestication
of
Canadian foreign
policy,'
International
Journal
33(winter
1977-8),
128-49,
and
'Responsible
government
and
foreign
policy,'
International
Perspectives
(May/June
1978),
26-9.
5
Compare the
basic
sources
on
domestic
determinants
of
Canadian foreign
policy
in
the
recent
literature,
notably:
'Opinion
and
policy,'
International
journal
33(winter
1977-8).
See also
Donald
Page, 'Public
influence
on
foreign
policy,'
International
Perspectives
(May/June
1980),
21-5;
W.A.
Wilson,
'Foreign
affairs
sur-
vey
reflects
Canadian
regionalism,'
International
Perspectives
(May/June
198o),
i
i-
14;
John
Clark, 'Canadian
Labour
Congress
as
an
international
actor,'
International
To continue reading
Request your trial