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.
Stepping Stone, Halfway House or Road to Nowhere? Green Support of Minority Government in Sweden, New Zealand and Australia
Abstract Whilst much has been written about the opportunities and perils of Green participation in national coalition governments, analysis of Greens supporting minority governments is less common and has not focused on comparative-historical trends as this article does. We look beyond single case studies of Green-supported minority governments in order to establish historical party trajectories and policy impact over time in three countries with different political systems. The extent of the comparative work here has never previously been undertaken and establishes that repeat instances of such support can provide the basis for more stable and effective future interparty governing relationships. However, we argue that, whilst trust can build between parties to minority government arrangements over decades, it is not assured, and, whilst Green parties may achieve ministerial control after repeat instances of supporting minority governments, the benefits of doing so are not guaranteed.
The Farm Products Marketing Agencies Act: A Case Study of Agricultural Policy
The Farm Products Marketing Agencies Act (FPMAA), passed by Parliament in 1972, was a compromise on the original bill introduced by Bud Olson two years earlier. The nature of the issue at stake nationalmarketing boards with supply management authority; the policy process surrounding the FPMAA; and the interests, resources, goals and tactics of the participants involved all affected the compromise outcome. So, too, did broader ideological, institutional and environmental factors. The FPMAA case indicates that the Canadian Department of Agriculture is less likely to realize its policy goals when those goals require provincial consensus and/or conflict with the aims of regionally organized interests able to secure provincial governments' alliances than in crisis situations when its policy objectives are not opposed by provincial governments, and indeed are sought by Quebec and Ontario and the largest farm organizations.