Remaking Government in Canada: Dares, Resilience, and Civility in Westminster Systems

In: Governance: an international journal of policy and administration, Band 29, Heft 4, S. 553-571

Abstract

By 2015 concern had emerged about the trajectory of Canada's Westminster model and the state of democratic governance under successive Harper governments, particularly with respect to transparency and relationships with public servants, which among other things led to the election of the Trudeau government in October 2015. This article compares these developments with the wholesale reform experiences in Australia, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom. We consider not only the evolving bargains between prime ministers and their ministers, political advisors, top officials, and legislatures, but also between party leaders and political parties, and between governments and civil society. Second, we characterize far‐reaching reforms as "dares," intended to change the trajectory of Westminster systems, which carry political risks. Third, we consider the resilience of Westminster systems in the face of significant change and inaction. The Harper reforms were not nearly as dramatic as those of the United Kingdom, New Zealand, and Australia during the late 1980s but did change the bargain with civil society, foundational to Westminster systems.
The essential principles of responsible government have stood up well to the test of experience, and will serve as well tomorrow as they have in the past. However, parliamentary government is an inherently evolutionary form of government. Task Force on Public Service Values and Ethics (, 17)