Legislative Activity in the Canadian House of Commons: Does Majority or Minority Government Matter?
This study assesses the impact of majority and minority governments on legislative activity in the Canadian House of Commons. The quantitative analysis spans the 22nd to the 40th Parliaments (1953–2009) and examines legislative productivity and success by government type. The analysis of descriptive data confirms that minority governments are somewhat less productive and successful than their majority counterparts. However, the analysis emphasizes significant variation for majority governments. Neither governing context guarantees success or failure as contextual factors largely condition legislative activity.
Interest Groups, Representation and Conflict Management in the Standing Committees of the House of Commons
Abstract Proposals to strengthen regional representation in national institutions are premised on the assumption that representation of (regional) interests and accommodation of conflicts between competing interests are compatible roles, and most likely when national decision makers represent all contending interests. The article argues that the two roles are not necessarily compatible. The behaviour of MPs on the agriculture and transport committees in debating three bills during the 32nd Parliament shows considerable efforts at representation but much less at conflict management. The emergence of specialist interest groups promotes representational efforts by MPs but often at the expense of conflict management. Other factors affecting the joint occurrence of interest representation and interest accommodation include the individual and collective characteristics of members, their partisan incentives, and the diversity of the goals of their client groups. Résumé Les propositions visant à renforcer la représentation régionale dans les institutions fédérales découlent de l'hypothése que la représentation des intérêts (régionaux) et la résolution des conflits entre intérêts divergents sont des rôles compatibles et plus probables quand les autorités politiques fédérales représent tous les intérêts en cause. Cet article tend à démontrer que ces deux rôles ne sont pas nécessairement compatibles. Le comportement des députés sur le comité de l'Agriculture et celui des Transports au cours du débat de trois projets de lois pendant le 32e Parlement démontre que des efforts beaucoup plus considérables ont été mis sur la représentation que sur la résolution des conflits. L'émergence des groupes d'intérêt spécialisés conduit les députés a privilégier l'aspect « représentation » au détriment de la résolution des conflits. Parmi les autres facteurs qui influencent les rapports entre la représentation et la résolution des conflits, on remarque les traits individuels et collectifs des députés, leur motivations partisanes et la diversité des objectifs de leurs clientèles.
Analysis: The Agenda 2007 Proposals: Evolution or Revolution?
On 10 February 2004 the Commission published its proposal for the financial perspective 2007-2013. A week later it adopted the third report on economic and social cohesion. These two documents form the basis of the so-called ‘Agenda 2007 reforms’. They will be the greatest challenge for the enlarged EU after the intergovernmental conference, since they will determine the financial basis for EU policy-making until the middle of the next decade. The Agenda 2007 proposals certainly hint at courageous reforms, because they place a previously unheard-of emphasis on performance and quality. Under the proposals, structural operations should generate value for money, and the funds should focus on projects which generate added value at a European level. Overall the Commission’s proposals point in the right direction, because they balance, on the one hand, solidarity for the new Member States and weak regions in the old Member States with, on the other hand, investments in future tasks. Moreover, they constitute a paradigm shift. For the first time, the Common Agricultural Policy will not be the dominant expenditure category. Now it is up to the Member States to examine the proposals politically and find a compromise between sometimes very divergent interests. It is to be hoped that, during the debate over expenditure limits and division of funds, national interests do not outweigh European interests.