Western Alienation in Canadian Politics - Essay Example

Western Alienation in Canadian Politics Western alienation refers to a phenomenon occurring in Canadian politics. It is founded on the belief that the interests of western provinces: Alberta, British Columbia, Saskatchewan and Manitoba are not served by the Canadian political climate. Quebec and Ontario, central provinces, are fully represented in the senate and the House of Commons because they have a large population and hence vote rich (Alberta 2000, 39). This situation causes the western Canadians to feel disenfranchised and alienated from the main political process. The history of western alienation dates back to the forming of the dominion of Canada and Canada confederation in the year 1867. The conservative party prime minister J. Macdonald implemented a national policy with regard to manufactured goods and trade policies. In doing this, he was responding to the high tariffs that were in the United States. The western farmers were forced to compete with international markets when trading grains (Surhone and Miriam2010, 53). This created dissatisfaction. Western provinces thought the tariffs were freight rates were discriminatory and favored the central provinces. Western Canadian politics and culture are extremely pervaded by sentiments of an asymmetrical relationship between the two central provinces and the West (Ferguson and Simon 2009, 70-74). The feeling of being exploited is not limited to westerners. Many Canadians in Atlantic Provinces feel the same alienation (Mackenzie 1984, 29). Western alienation is both a regional and political ideology in with regard to discontent. Western alienation represents a common and shared set of political beliefs. It is viewed as both intellectual articulation and cultural expression. The alienation has a recognized constituency and history. It is got representatives and hence fundamental element of the western political culture. For many years now, Western alienation has been a vital component in the Canadian political field. The emotion and attitudes behind the term can be traced back to mid 1800s. This is pre World War I period. The term western alienation is relatively recent. Many believe Canadian political system is the main cause of this phenomenon. The federal political system is dysfunctional and unrepresentative according to many western Canadians (Alberta 2000, 41). A large portion of the literature reveals western alienation revolves around political concerns. The federal political system is accused of alienating the western provinces in Canada. The alienation has caused ongoing struggles to defend the interest of the western Canadians (Ibbitson 2012, 2). The oil discovery in the province of Alberta, in the year 1947, led to a conflict between the province and the federal government of Canada. The premier of Alberta, Lougheed, said the province should utilize the profits from oil to propel its economy. There was a threefold agenda to complete a transcontinental railway, to create a manufacturing base and to settle prairies. The manufacturing base was to be in eastern Canada. According to J. Macdonald, this would be the solution to the problem of uniting Canada both economically and geographically. In contrast, the national policy ended up becoming a source of significant western discontent. This policy left a legacy of discriminatory freight rates. To the western Canada, the policy enhanced a resource based economy that propelled the growth of financial and manufacturing sectors in the central Canada (Mackenzie 1984, 29). It should be noted the last half of the 20th century has witnessed enormous growth and change in western Canada. The provinces of British Columbia and Alberta have been impacted tremendously. The discovery of oil in Leduc, Alberta in 1947 changed the economy of the province although it created increasing conflict with Ottawa. The federal government intended to use the oil to subsidize the price of gas nationally while the province of Alberta wanted to use proceedings from oil to fund its economic diversity (Ibbitson 2012, 2). The economic issues evolving from the semi colonial relationship between the west’s federal government and the two populous central provinces have a long history. Politicians felt indebted to the populous provinces because they were rich in votes. In particular, the west was opposed to Quebec domination of the Canadian scene. This domination was seen through multiple concessions made to meet the demands from Quebec politicians (Ferguson and Simon 2009, 70-74). Western alienation is fueled by the discontent arising from political trends, economic struggles and the opposition to Quebec political concessions (Lawson 2005, 145). One of the outstanding issues that need to be addressed is the interstate division of power. These challenges had started before the World War I occurred. Many democratic countries prefer federal government as their political system. Federalism is a constitutional organization uniting a number of political units into a unitary state. This set up retains the autonomy of political actions in matters, which are perceived to be of regional concern. Like in many places where this for m of government is practiced, there is no clear jurisdiction between the central and regional governments. Most of the problems came from effort to resolve inter- state federalism framework (Ibbitson 2012, 2). While the constitution stated certain domains fell under the control of the federal government, the list was neither exclusive nor exhaustive. This gap lead to a feeling of insecurity of western Canadians who witnessed politicians exploit these legal gaps to push from their personal agenda (Alberta 2000, 20). In some areas both the regional and federal governments were seen playing roles, e.g. agriculture. In such area, the federal government took precedence in case a conflict occurred. However, the emerging economic fronts remained unaddressed. The discovery of oil set up a conflict between the two regional governments. Upcoming areas such as internet and electronic communications are not mentioned in the constitution. The majority of Canadians think the federal government should be involved in these emerging areas. However, some Quebec residents support greater regional control over the internet in the province because of language concerns. Even before the First World War, the tow levels of government were in frequent contests over jurisdiction. According to G. Stevenson, there are two types of federalism: centre-dominated /centripetal and province-dominated or centrifugal federalism (Lawson 2005, 145). Canadian federal government tends to move towards province-dominated federalism. That notwithstanding, one of the important triggers of western alienation is the semi-colonial association linking the west with the centralized administration. Since confederation, the federal government retained automatic control over provincial governments by having the power to disallow provincial legislation even when such legislation can be fully handled by the province or falls within the provincial legislative authority. This is the relationship that has fueled animosity between the two governments and has been a constant source of irritation in the west. The Prairie Provinces have been struggling to control their own natural resources for more than a century. This has been a painful reminder of their position in the confederation. A suitable casing point is Alberta and Saskatchewan provinces (Surhone and Miriam2010, 53). They because provinces in 1905 but could not control their own resources until 1930. The rationale behind the denial of power to control their own resources was to make sure the resources from the three provinces were to be used to develop Canada as a nation (Alberta 2000, 39). This position provoked both sentiments of colonialisation and introduced the idea of national interest, which continues to be a crucial issue in Canada (Ferguson and Simon 2009, 70-74). This rationale is most controversial when the regional interests conflict with the national interests. The national energy policy and Canadian pacific railway had been argued by the federal government to act in the interest of the nation. This included practicing fair discrimination (Ferguson and Simon 2009, 70-74). The politicians from the west have constantly expressed their disapproval of the federal government’s definition of national interest and what is acceptable for the country. According to A. Blakeney, Saskatchewan premier in 1977, the federal government’s definition of national interest was heavily biased against the western provinces but in favor of the populous central provinces. The mantle of defending regional interests among western provinces has been passed from generation to generation with increasing vigor (Surhone and Miriam2010, 53). This is partly because it gives them electron advantages besides defending the jurisdiction of the region. Province building concept has continued to gather momentum over the last three decades (Ferguson and Simon 2009, 70-74). This is a process where the provincial elites expand their sphere of influence into the federal system at the expense of their federal government counterparts. According to Cairns, federal and provincial governments are not reflecting mirrors, but aggressive actors determined to extend their regulation, tentacles of power and control while manipulating the society. There lacks a clear sense of responsibility between the two levels of government making the situation extremely problematic. The federal political elites, both unelected and elected, seek to seek to the extent their influence at the expense of their regional counterparts. They do this in the name of national interest. This sets a perfect state for power struggles between the two forms of governments. According to Gibbs, the ongoing power struggles continue to increase the sentiments of western alienation. The sharing of power between the federal and provincial governments coupled by the competition in the system serves to increase the western alienation felt by west Canadians. The Canadian political system was established in 1867 and has not evolved as the rest of Canada continued to evolve. The shifting cultural composition of the Canadian society has not been coupled by structural change (Surhone and Miriam2010, 53). The institutional framework of Canada namely: monarchial institutions, bicameralism, responsible government and federalism had experienced little change since 1867. The original intention of Canada’s institution is significantly different from the current functions. The population has grown the country moved from being predominantly rural to urban, but the constitutional order remains unchanged (Francis and Howard 1987, 42). As a result, the interaction between a network of old institutions and an evolving Canadian society has permanently transformed their meaning. In other words, while Canada has changed a vast deal since it was born, its institutions have not. Many western Canadians view the Canadian political system as mired in its unwillingness to change, ignoring its deficiencies and inefficient. As this continues to happen, the western Canadians continue to feel alienated from the central government. The problem of western alienation can also be termed as arising from institutional stubbornness (Ferguson and Simon 2009, 70-74). Therefore, the root of the problem of western alienation is in the policies that were employed in the mid 1800s and how they continue to affect the current political set up in Canada. According to Arrison, the western Canadians are engaged in a political system that essentially does not support effective and fair representation of provincial interests. This political system was established in the period before the First World War. The members of parliament are limited to party discipline and party interests boil down to the federal government interests (Surhone and Miriam2010, 53). This has weakened the ability of intra- state federalism to resolve regional problems. The senate is ineffective in dealing either regional issue although it has significant powers. This is because of how senators are selected and the fact that they are, loyal to parties, not to the Canadian people. For instance, Senator A. Thompson had to be thrown out of the liberal caucus because of absenteeism while he continued to receive his paycheck. The distribution of senatorial seats tends to be against the west. This is that case in the House of Commons. Out of the 105 current senators, 56 per cent are liberal, and 44 per cent are form Ontario or Quebec while 29 per cent is from Atlantic Provinces. Only 22 per cent is from the western provinces. Scholars argue that the Canadian senate pales when compared to the American senate in terms of territorial representation. The reforms that have been introduced are met with by the opposition and reluctance from politician as, but the Canadian population supports the idea of reforms according to a recent survey. The pre world war policies and system of government favored political interests at the expense of fair representation of people. The old policies have also affected the distribution of wealth and power with regard to senate and House of Commons. Senate is not viewed as a solution to the western alienation (Lawson 2005, 145). The Canadian parliament campaigns of the premise of short term promises which are not quite substantial. It becomes hard to implement the radical reforms needed to have a rebrand of the Canadian institutions. Clearly, the political system is the method by which the central provinces perpetrate the quasi-colonial roles of the west in the Canadian confederation (Surhone and Miriam2010, 53). Westerners, who complain of being alienated view these political, system injustices, are definers of the rules of engagement while dealing with central provinces. The intentional refusal by politicians to reform the institutions and define the question of power distribution adds to the frustrations experienced by the western Canadians (Lawson 2005, 145). It is increasingly becoming clears that institutions established in the mid 1800s are inefficient and redundant. However, these institutions favor the ruling political elite. The cry from the four western provinces has been long and consistent but can become loud as populations grow. Many believe this is an inherent pre World War I problem which needs to be addressed with modern solutions (Mackenzie 1984, 29). There exists as perceived linkage between the economic challenges facing the western Canadians and the political system. This perception has increasingly become complex in the recent years (Francis and Howard 1987, 42). The argument has been the crux of the issues raised by western Canadians for many years. It is clear the Canadian system is ill equipped to deal with the challenge of provincial concern and in particular, western alienation. Western Canadians have had to stand the pain of alienation from pre world war period to the modern times. The politicians from western provinces use the challenge as a tool for political survival (Surhone and Miriam2010, 53). They are rarely committed to addressing the historic sentiments expressed by the western Canadians. The federal government uses political machinery, and constitutional loopholes to propagate agenda with minimum attention to the four Prairie Provinces (Alberta 2000, 39). The power struggles between the regional and federal government tend to be political theatrics whose results is rarely felt by the ordinary Canadians. The centre-periphery framework and approach instigated by the founding fathers of the Canadian confederation to develop the political institutions was entirely to blame. This framework has dictated the economic and political policies from mid 1800s. According to Swainson, the confederation was introduced with an aim of increasing wealth in central Canada. Many of the policies cited as western alienation were put established with a view to address national interest at the expense of relevant regional interest (Alberta 2000, 39). These policies were put in place in the 1800s, but their impact continues to be felt. During the pre world war period, polices to do with the control of natural and land resources was introduced. Tariff polices and the national energy programs were also established (Surhone and Miriam2010, 54). The pricing and development of the national railway was determined, and the transportation policies were also put in place. The procurements and spending by the federal government together with issues to do with national debt and budgetary deficits were among the economic policies that were instigated. All these issues have served to promote division between the federal government and western provinces (Mackenzie 1984, 29). The issue of tariffs, transportation policies and natural resources gave rise to other complains after decades of neglect and absent political will to address them. These factors have contributed to the feeling that the west is always shortchanged. When Saskatchewan, Manitoba and Alberta joined the confederation, they did not secure control over their natural resources giving birth to the view that they were nothing more than colonies of the central provinces (Mackenzie 1984, 29). According to White, the federal government argued that, for the initial stages of the provinces’ growth, it had the exclusive right to mobiles all the resources. According to Elton, this was done to facilitate the smooth flow of immigration into the western region. These provinces had to wait until 1930. This is different from what happened between British Columbia and the confederation in 1871 (Francis and Howard 1987, 42). BC had control over all its resources as the four other provinces (LLC 2010, 51). The crowns land was to be used for the purposes of dominion as declared by the Manitoba act in 1870. Saskatchewan and Alberta joined the confederation in 1905 and Ottawa came up with the same explanation. Alberta, Manitoba and Saskatchewan were granted control over their resources in 1930 by the federal government. According to Mann, this was due to the progressive party success in 1921. The federal government never relinquished control over the Prairie Provinces in total. By retaining control over land resources in the Prairie Provinces, the federal government was able to build a railroad across the provinces. However, the westerners were offended after Canadian pacific railway gained virtual monopoly over the railway line and overcharged them (Mackenzie 1984, 29). The fury was the federation used their western provinces resources to fund the construction. For instance, in western Canada, the CPR charged 50 per cent above the rates charged by the grand trunk railway in central Canada in the year 1883. According to Phillips, the tariff forcing the western Canadians to purchase goods from eastern Canada, guaranteeing traffic, resulted in the railway line initiate. In the absence of such a national policy, the CPR could never have been economical. The implementation of these policies remains to be a source of unpleasant feelings and a source of western alienation (Surhone and Miriam2010, 53). Lack of provincial depiction within the national administration reinforced the separatists’ claims (Mackenzie 1984, 29). In 1984, progressive party members were elected on the promise that they would eliminate NEP. However, most westerners gave up after it took PC’s 2 years to remove NEP at the expense of Alberta residents. According to Manning, most Albertans believed that no matter who takes the office, west was not their utmost concern. The west continued to feel it was contributing into the national government a lot but was not gaining many benefits. According to McCormick, western interests were at best a minor component causing the western Canadians to complain they received no benefits from the confederation which are by far outweighed by the cost the confederation imposed on western Canada. In conclusion, the western alienation requires redress and consideration. This alienation was fundamentally caused by the policies that were put in place by the founding fathers of Canadian confederation in mid 1800s. The political will to change the system to address the concerns of western Canadians have been lacking. The politicians for many years have downplayed the sentiments expressed by the Prairie Provinces. However, a policy that shall be inclusive and fair to all is needed. The challenges of western Canadians are of a historic nature and are deeply rooted in the pre-world war I developments. Bibliography Alberta, Calgary. Revisiting Western Alienation: Towards a better understanding of political alienating western Canada and political behavior in western Canada, 1st ed. The University of Calgary, 2000. Ferguson, Barry, and Simon Langlois. "Social cohesion in Canada." The Tocqueville Review 30, no. 2 (2009): 69-101. Francis, R., and Howard Palmer. Prairie West: Historical Readings, 2nd ed. University of Alberta, 1987. General Books LLC. Politics of Western Canada: Western Canada Concept, Western Alienation, Western Canada Independence Party, Western Independence Party, 1st ed. General Books LLC, 2010. Ibbitson, John. "Western Canada's dream of elected Senate is bound to push East." the globe and mail. Last modified 2012. Accessed November 5, 2012. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/. Lawson, Robert J. "Understanding Alienation in Western Canada: Is "Western Alienation" the Problem? Is Senate Reform the Cure?." Journal of Canadian Studies 39, no. 2 (2005): 127-155. McKenzie, Helen. Western Alienation in Canada, 1st ed. Library of Parliament, Research Branch, 1984. Surhone, Lambert M., and Miriam T. Timpledon,. Western Canada Concept, 1st ed. VDM Publishing, 2010. Read More