Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T22:52:15.798Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Problems of the Canadian Federation1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 November 2014

W. A. Carrothers*
Affiliation:
Victoria
Get access

Extract

The unusual stresses and strains of the depression during the last four years have drawn attention more definitely to certain weaknesses in the financial structure of the Canadian federation. The province of Nova Scotia has performed a very valuable service in initiating an economic inquiry into Dominion-provincial relations as affecting that province. An inquiry such as this removes the problem from the realm of speculation and political expediency and relates it to the actual facts of the situation. It would be of great value if similar investigations were made by the other provinces into their own peculiar problems, followed by an examination of the whole question by an impartial body from the point of view of the Dominion as a whole. Investigations along this line have been carried out in the Commonwealth of Australia and a Commission appointed which has reported on the applications made by the states of South Australia, Western Australia, and Tasmania for financial assistance from the Commonwealth, based on certain disabilities affecting these states as a result of Commonwealth policy.

The financial arrangements made between the Dominion and the provinces at the time of Confederation were essentially in the nature of a compromise and designed to meet the situation as it then existed. This appears to have been more or less the situation in the original financial arrangements of practically all existing federations. Apparently, however, it was considered at the time of the Canadian Confederation that these arrangements would be of a somewhat permanent character. This optimistic view was early shown to be wrong when within two years it was necessary to make adjustments. Further, it was not anticipated at that time that there would be any change in the accepted functions of government. The prevailing idea was that the fewer functions surrendered by the individual to the government, the better. John Stuart Mill was still the authority, and his ideas with regard to the limitation of government marked the general line of thought. While there were those who took a wider view of the functions of government and who anticipated the collectivist movement of the last quarter of the century, the echo of this was at that time scarcely heard in Canada. There was no thought that many of the services now rendered to the community by governments would become necessary. Consequently, the division of authority, both political and financial, in the British North America Act, was based on a form of society and an idea of government which no longer exists.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Political Science Association 1935

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.)

Footnotes

1

The Principles and Problems of Federal Finance. By Bhalchandra P. Adarkar. With a foreword by Sir Cecil H. Kisch. London: P. S. King and Son. 1933. Pp. xviii, 301. (12s. 6d.)

A Submission on Dominion-Provincial Relations and the Fiscal Disabilities of Nova Scotia within the Canadian Federation. Presented by Norman McLean Rogers. (Royal Commission Economic Inquiry.) Halifax: [King's Printer. 1934.] Pp. iv, 263.

Province of Nova Scotia, Report of the Royal Commission: Provincial Economic Inquiry. Halifax: King's Printer. 1934. Pp. 238.

References

2 B. P. Adarkar, op. cit., p. 51.

3 Papers and Proceedings of the Canadian Political Science Association, vol. VI, 1934, p. 158.Google Scholar

4 The report of the Nova Scotia Royal Commission Provincial Economic Inquiry (1934) is in two sections. The main report is signed by two of the commissioners, Professor J. H. Jones and Dr. A. S. Johnston. The third commissioner, Professor Harold A. Innis, submits a complementary report with similar conclusions and recommendations, which adds considerably to the background of information on which the main report is based. Professor Innis finds (p. 131) the main justification for a separate report “in the difference in the method of approach and in the emphasis on the national policy in the broad sense rather than in the narrow fiscal sense”.

5 Canada Year Book, 1933, p. 821.

6 The increase in the cost of government since 1913 is not peculiar to Canada, but is characteristic of the whole civilized world. For example, in Great Britain, the total national expenditure on public social services in the year 1909-10 for England, Scotland, and Wales, was only £63,000,000. In 1929-30 it had risen to the enormous total of £468,000,000, and in 1931-2, in the worst year of the depression, it was £490,000,000. That is, expenditure on social services had increased eight times in terms of nominal values, or between five and six times on the basis of real values. This tendency to the increase in the cost of government reflects the change which has taken place in the public mind as to the function of government.

7 Is a Revision of Taxation Powers Necessary?” (Proceedings of the Canadian Political Science Association, vol. III, 1931, p. 199).Google Scholar