Equalization, Regional Development, and Political Trust: The Section 36/Atlantic Accords Controversy
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21991/C9WT1PAbstract
The controversy generated by the federal government’s unilateral alteration of the Atlan- tic Accords,1 and the subsequent bitter political standoff between the federal government and the provinces of Nova Scotia and Newfound- land and Labrador, was the initial stimulus for this article. The agreements, the alleged breach of trust involved in their unilateral alteration, and the political fallout, manoeuvrings, and ne- gotiations that followed, raise a number of is- sues about the mechanisms and pathologies of executive federalism in Canada. This episode also provides some insight into a continuing source of misunderstanding and grievance that persists in centre-periphery relations in Canada — the issues of equalization and regional devel- opment. The purpose of this article is to use the controversy as a case study to inquire into these issues, with a view to making an incremental contribution to the critical literature on the in- stitutions of Canadian federalism.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish with Constitutional Forum constitutionnel grant the journal the right of first publication, and agree to license the work under an Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs (CC BY-NC-ND) that allows others to share the work for non-commercial purposes, with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal, as long as no changes are made to the original work. Please use this format to attribute this work to Constitutional Forum constitutionnel:
"First published as: Title of Article, Contributor, Constitutional Forum constitutionnel Volume/Issue, Copyright © [year], Publisher"