As Thomas O. Hueglin puts it on the very first page of this book: “The story of Canadian federalism can be told in many different ways. . . . All authors bring to this story their personal experiences, opinions, and biases and the way in which they read and understand the literature before them” (1). Usually, one needs to ask around and do bio-bibliographical research to properly understand an author's background and intellectual influences. In this book, which can be considered Hueglin's overall appraisal of Canadian federalism after teaching the subject for more than three decades, the Wilfrid Laurier University Professor submits his own recollection of his own formative influences. Offering insights into his postdoctoral fellowship at the Institute of Intergovernmental Relations at Queen's University in the 1980s—where Richard Simeon, David Elkins and others insisted he travel across the country and meet scholars from all provinces to understand Canada's political and cultural landscape—the prologue provides readers with a roadmap to comprehend the author's intellectual path in his attempt to make sense of Canadian federalism.
In Federalism in Canada: Contested Concepts and Uneasy Balances, Hueglin pursues three objectives. First, he wishes “to get students interested in the big questions of Canadian federalism again” by combining “systematic inquiry with historical anecdote and, to invite discussion, judgmental commentary” (13). Second, the book is intended to “give more attention to Quebec's view of Canadian federalism than is usually the case in the English literature” (13). Finally, “there had to be a serious and systematic Indigenous perspective” (13). Without a doubt, all three objectives have been met.
In addition to the prologue and epilogue, the book is divided into nine chapters. While Hueglin privileges a thematic account to Canadian federalism over a chronological presentation, he avoids unnecessary repetition. In interpreting the impact of key events in the Canadian odyssey, Hueglin embraces a perspective rooted in political economy, as suggested by the title of chapter 5 (“Mostly Fiscal Relations”). Nevertheless, he also makes use of political theory, constitutional studies and political sociology. In that sense, the book provides a welcome “all-around” standpoint that students and scholars from all subfields will greatly appreciate.
Chapters 1 and 2 offer a general introduction to the theory of federalism and how this materialized in Canada with the advent of the British North America Act, 1867. Hueglin's story of Canadian federalism then turns (chapter 3) to an examination of the many “division of power disputes, which lie at the heart of the constitutional federal compact” (84). Chapters 4 and 5 present Hueglin's general thesis for interpreting Canadian federalism, where he insists on the impact of the crash of the New York Stock Exchange in October 1929 on the subsequent evolution of power relations in the Federation. Then, chapters 6 to 9 offer a critical discussion of contemporary issues and “unresolved conflicts”: Quebec nationalism and secession, Western alienation, Eastern dependencies, regionalism, charter politics and, of course, Indigenous land rights and treaty federalism. In discussing these heated issues, Hueglin for the most part avoids falling into either of these two traps: (1) presenting concurrent points of view by using the “straw-man strategy” and (2) not defending specific arguments to circumvent hurting anyone's sensitivity. By taking positions, but also by taking seriously opposing arguments, he ensures that the chapters are engaging and stimulating.
Nevertheless, I believe Hueglin does fall into the “straw-man strategy” on one issue: that of multinational federalism. After announcing in the prologue that “multinationalism . . . is ultimately not a helpful concept” (23), his critique in chapter 9 falls short of expectations. In a nutshell, Hueglin suggests that “federalism cannot accommodate nationalism if nationalism is to be understood, as John Stuart Mill recognized early on, as a collective ‘identity of race and descent’” (289). While there are plenty of contemporary Canadian scholars that provided nuanced reflections on nationalism and multinational federalism, such as Charles Taylor, James Tully and Will Kymlicka (who are not cited in the book), it is oddly surprising that Hueglin chose to rely on Mill's loose theoretical account of nationalism to make his point. It rather appears that the author relies on a definition that best suits the purpose of his critique, while he could have engaged more seriously with the most convincing perspectives of contemporary scholars.
In the end, I highly recommend this book to all students of federalism interested in understanding how the Canadian federal system came to be and how it evolved over the past century and a half. It is a textbook example of a contribution that is perfectly balanced between advancing knowledge and making scholarly research accessible to the public.
