Power and the Federal State in Canada
| Date | 01 March 1998 |
| Published date | 01 March 1998 |
| Author | Peter W. B. Phillips |
| DOI | 10.1177/002070209805300103 |
| Subject Matter | Comment & Opinion |
PETER
W.B.
PHILLIPS
Power
and
the
federal
state
in
Canada
Is
it
being
hollowed
out?
Tere
are
differing
views
about
the
power
of
the
nation-state
as
we
face
the
millennium.
Some academics,
journalists,
and
other
policy
critics
suggest
nation-states
have
become
so
powerless
that
in
the
21st centu-
ry
they
will
be
replaced
by
regional
or
global
authorities
or,
alterna-
tively,
anarchy.
According
to
this
argument,
the
power
of
the
nation-
state
has
been hollowed
out
by
globalization
and
liberalization
of
mar-
kets. Since polls
indicate
that
the
public
expects
less
from
the
nation-
state
in
coming
years,
it
would
appear
that
they
have
bought
the argu-
ment.
The
key
concern
is
that
power
is
moving
away
from
the
nation-
state,
which
is
accountable
through
elections,
and
towards
actors
who
are
not
accountable
in
any
effective
way.
My
own
view
is
different:
although
the
Canadian
government
has
lost
some power
and
has
to
share
power
with
others,
it
can
still
exert
significant
power when
it
needs
or
wants
to
do
so.
WHAT
THE
CRITICS
SAY
After
the
mid-1600s,
the nation-state
gradually
became
the
dominant
actor
in
the
international
economy and
in
international
relations
and
Van
Viet
Chair
Professor
in
the
Agricultural
Economics
facult4
University
of
Saskatchewan,
and
Adjunct
Professor
ofAdministration,
University
of
Regina.
INTERNATIONAL
JOURNAL Winter
1997-8
Peter
W.B.
Phillips
the
prime
mover
in
the development
and
management
of
people's
eco-
nomic
and
social
life.
This
role
grew
during
the
18th
and
19th
cen-
turies
as
European
powers colonized America,
Asia,
and
Africa.
With
multipolar
political
structures
and
wide-open
development
opportu-
nities, the
state
and
market
clearly
shared
the
field
-
neither
dominat-
ed, except
in
localized
circumstances.
It
can
be
argued
that
the
role of
the state
reached
its
zenith
in
the
years
after the
Second
World
War,
when
the
bipolar
cold-war
era
dominated
the
international
agenda
and
markets
frequently
took
a
back
seat to
the
geopolitical
concerns
of
one
of
the
superpowers
or their
surrogate
states.
When
cold-war
politics
began
to
thaw
and
finally
melted
away
with
the
weakening
and
ultimate
collapse
of
the
Soviet
empire
in
the 1980s,
the
dominant
position
of
states
in
international
affairs
seemed
to
dis-
appear.
Now
they
share
their
ability
to
set
and
influence
the agenda
with
business,
non-governmental
organizations,
and
many other
actors in
the
economy.
HAVE
NATION-STATES
OUTLIVED
THEIR
USEFULNESS?
Kenichi
Ohmae,
a
former
senior
partner
in
Japan
of
the
global
consul-
tancy
McKinsey
&
Company,
argues
that
the
internationalization
of
the four
'Is'
-
investment, industry,
information
technology,
and
indi-
viduals
-
has
undercut
the
power
of
the
state.
He
sees
regional
economies
as
the
new
sources
of
power
and
growth in
the
world
econ-
omy and
society.'
Susan
Strange,
the
leading
developer
of
the
discipline
of
international
political economy
in
Britain,
says
power
has
shifted
sideways
to
other
national
governments
and
the
market
has
shifted
upwards
to
international
entities
and
nowhere.
2
The
editors
of
the
Economist
disagree
with
both
and
contend
that,
far
from
withering
away,
nation-states
and
governments
remain
large
and dominant
actors.
3
Despite the
varying
views
in
the literature
and
in
the
public
mind,
there
clearly
has
been
change.
Although
politicians
of
all
stripes
promise
to
do
much
once
the
levers
of
power
are
in
their
hands,
the
i
Kenichi
Ohmae,
The
End
of
the National
State:
The
Rise
of
Regional
Economies
(Toronto:
Free
Press
1995).
2
Susan
Strange,
The
Retreat
of
the
State:
The
Diffusion
of
Powerin
the
World
Econ-
omy
(New
York: Cambridge
University
Press
1996).
3
'The
visible
hand,'
and
'A
survey
of
the
world
economy,'
Economist,
20-26
Sep-
tember
1997,
17-18,
and
special
supplement.
58
INTERNATIONAL
JOURNAL
Winter
1997-8
To continue reading
Request your trial