The market for political status

Comparative Politics

Volumn 28, Issue 3, 1996, Pages 267-271

  Brodie, Ian ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 24944555481     PISSN: 00104159     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2307/422207     Document Type: Article

References (69)

1. Neil Nevitte and Charles Kennedy, "The Analysis of Policies of Ethnic Preference in Developing States," in Neil Nevitte and Charles Kennedy, eds., Ethnic Preference and Public Policy in Developing States (Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 1986), p. 1.
2. Ted Robert Gurr et al., Minorities at Risk: A Global View of Ethnopolitical Conflict (Washington, D.C.: United States Institute for Peace Press, 1993), p. 305-313.
3. Donald Rothchild, "State and Ethnicity in Africa: A Policy Perspective," in Nevitte and Kennedy, eds., pp. 15-62.
4. Arend Lijphart, The Politics of Accommodation: Pluralism and Democracy in the Netherlands (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1968);
5. Jürg Steiner, Amicable Agreement versus Majority Rules: Conflict Resolution in Switzerland (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1974);
6. Ian Lustick, "Stability in Deeply Divided Societies: Consociationalism versus Control," World Politics, 31 (April 1979), 325-344;
7. Brian Barry, "The Consociational Model and Its Dangers," European Journal of Political Research, 3 (December 1975), 393-411.
8. Philippe C. Schmitter, "Still the Century of Corporatism?," Review of Politics, 36 (January 1974), 85-131;
9. Gerhard Lehmbruch, "Liberal Corporatism and Party Government," Comparative Political Studies, 10 (April 1977), 91-126.
10. Martin Shapiro and Alec Stone, "The New Constitutional Politics of Europe," Comparative Political Studies, 26 (January 1994), 417.
11. Kenneth McRae, "Consociationalism and the Canadian Political System," and S. J. R. Noel, "Consociational Democracy and Canadian Federalism," in Kenneth McRae, ed., Political Accommodation in Segmented Societies (Ottawa: Carleton University Press, 1974), both apply the model to Canada.
12. Kenneth McRae, "Consociationalism and the Canadian Political System," and S. J. R. Noel, "Consociational Democracy and Canadian Federalism," in Kenneth McRae, ed., Political Accommodation in Segmented Societies (Ottawa: Carleton University Press, 1974), both apply the model to Canada.
13. A recent work on the problems of consociational theory in Canada is Michael Lusztig, "Constitutional Paralysis: Why Canadian Constitutional Initiatives Are Doomed to Fail," Canadian Journal of Political Science, 27 (December 1994), 747-771.
14. The leading legal textbook on the Charter is Peter W. Hoog, Constitutional Law of Canada (Scarborough: Carswell, 1993). There are several comprehensive descriptions of the Charter and the debates over the 1982 constitutional amendments from a political science perspective.
15. See Rainer Knopff and F. L. Morton, Charter Politics (Toronto: Nelson, 1992);
16. Christopher P. Manfredi, Judicial Power and the Charter: Canada and the Paradox of Liberal Constitutionalism (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1993). Some Canadian political scientists acclaim Alan Cairns' analysis of the Charter's impact on Canadian politics, but his position has been criticized recently.
17. See Alan Cairns, Disruptions: Constitutional Struggles from the Charter to Meech Lake (Toronto: McClelland and Stewart, 1991);
18. Ian Brodie and Neil Nevitte, "Evaluating the Citizens' Constitution Theory," Canadian Journal of Political Science, 26 (June 1993), 235-259.
19. Section 15, subsection (1) reads: "Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability." Section 15 (2) exempts affirmative action programs from the operation of subsection (1). For the history of section 15, see Rainer Knopff, Human Rights and Social Technology: The New War on Discrimination (Ottawa: Carleton University Press, 1989), ch. 2.
20. Ian Brodie, "The Court Challenges Program," in F. L. Morton, ed., Law, Politics and the Judicial Process in Canada (Calgary: University of Calgary Press, 1992). Although the program was killed in 1992 budget cuts, the next Canadian government revived it in late 1994.
21. The original October 1980 text of section 15 (1) read: "Everyone has the right to equality before the law and to the equal protection of the law without discrimination because of race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, age or sex."
22. Knopff, Human Rights, p. 28.
23. A good account of feminist efforts is Sherene Razack, Canadian Feminism and the Law: The Women's Legal Education and Action Fund and the Pursuit of Equality (Toronto: Second Story Press, 1991), p. 32.
24. The 1960 Bill of Rights was a statute of the Canadian parliament and not a constitutional provision. The Canadian judiciary's restrained approach to the Bill of Rights is documented in Manfredi, pp. 32-34.
25. Andrews v. Law Society of British Columbia, [1989] 1 S.C.R. 143, and R. V. Turpin, [1989] 1 S.C.R. 1296. See Manfredi, pp. 142-153.
26. Andrews v. Law Society of British Columbia.
27. In Haig and Birch v. Canada, 57 (1992) O.A.C. 272, the Canadian government conceded that homosexuals deserve the protection of section 15, and the Ontario Court of Appeal therefore extended protected status to them.
28. Walker and Robertson v. P.E.I., 101 (1992) Nfld. & P.E.I.R, 303; appeal at Walker v. P.E.I., (1993) 107 D.L.R. (4th) 69. Walker and Robertson's equal rights claim was denied at trial, and the remainder of their arguments were rejected on appeal. I thank Mary Eberts, counsel for Walker and Robertson, for her help in locating the documents relating to this case.
29. Knopff and Morton, Charter Politics, p. 82.
30. Charter Politics, Ibid., p. 82.
31. See Thomas C. Schelling, Micromotives and Macrobehaviour (Toronto: George J. McLeod, 1978).
32. The classic treatment is Robert Axelrod, The Evolution of Cooperation (New York: Basic Books, 1984).
33. This outcome is the equilibrium in a one time situation. If the situation occurs an infinite number of times, there may be conditions under which "keep quiet" is the equilibrium. See Axelrod, pp. 12-24.
34. Schelling does not speak of a v-point. The term comes from Dennis Chong, Collective Action and the Civil Rights Movement (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1991), p. 110.
35. Court Challenges Program, Equality Rights Panel, Annual Report: 1987-88, Annual Report: 1988-89, and Annual Report 1989-90 (Toronto: Canadian Council on Social Development, 1988, 1989, 1990).
36. Sean Fine, "Activists Tackle Shackles of Poor," Globe & Mail, Nov. 25, 1992.
37. F. L. Morton, "The Charter Revolution and the Court Party," Osgoode Hall Law Journal, 30 (Fall 1992), 627-653; and Razack, p. 37. Academic legal commentary has a similar legitimizing influence in France.
38. See Alec Stone, The Birth of Judicial Politics in France: The Constitutional Council in Comparative Perspective (New York: Oxford University Press, 1992), pp. 93-104.
39. On the role of the equal rights provision in the policymaking process, see Manfredi, ch. 5.
40. Knopff and Morton, Charter Politics, pp. 87-88.
41. Also, if section 15 had been limited in size in 1980 and 1981, the groups with status probably would not have formed a winning coalition on such issues as getting help to pay for their litigation through government programs such as the court challenges program.
42. William H. Riker, The Theory of Political Coalitions (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1962).
43. Brodsky and Day express the fear that section 15 status might be extended to some inappropriate groups. Gwen Brodsky and Shelagh Day, Canadian Charter Equality Rights for Women: One Step Forward or Two Steps Back? (Ottawa: Canadian Advisory Council on Status of Women, 1989).
44. Brodie, "The Court Challenges Program."
45. Steven Percy, Disability, Civil Rights, and Public Policy: The Politics of Implementation (Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press, 1989). Similarly, status as a constitutionally protected group in the U.S. is clearly still valuable, since so many feminist groups pursued the ratification of the equal rights amendment.
46. R. Brian Howe, "The Evolution of Human Rights Policy in Canada," Canadian Journal of Political Science, 24 (December 1991), 783-802;
47. Judith Keene, Human Rights in Ontario (Toronto: Carswell, 1992);
48. Knopff, Human Rights;
49. Herbert A. Sohn, Human Rights Legislation in Ontario: A Study of Social Action (Ph.D. diss., University of Toronto, 1975).
50. Fair Employment Practices Act, S.O. 1951, c. 24,
51. Fair Accommodation Practices Act., S.O. 1954, c. 28. See Howe, p. 791.
52. Thomas Flanagan, "The Manufacture of Minorities," in Neil Nevitte and Allan Kornberg, eds., Minorities and the Canadian State (Oakville: Mosaic, 1985).
53. Minorities and the Canadian State Ibid., p. 121.
54. Howe, pp. 786-7.
55. In other words, the code now covers instances of disparate impact. Minimum height and weight requirements for jobs were not impugned by the original code since they discriminated only against short or underweight people, but they disproportionately exclude women from jobs so are now subject to review under the code. See Knopff, Human Rights, pp. 45-59.
56. Howe, p. 791.
57. Ibid., p. 793.
58. The 1981 code also generally replaced "nationality" with "ethnic origin" as a ground of discrimination. Discrimination on the basis of record of offenses was outlawed in employment but not in the provision of services, goods, and facilities. Discrimination on the basis of age was limited to people of eighteen years or more and less than sixty-five in the case of employment.
59. See Equality Rights Statute Law, S.O. 1986, c. 64, s. 18.
60. A 1986 project to make all Ontario laws comply with section 15 of the Charter added sexual orientation to the code. The C for sexual orientation was probably reduced because of the general revision project.
61. Pay Equity Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.7.
62. Charles Kennedy, "Policies of Redistributional Preference in Pakistan," in Nevitte and Kennedy, eds., Ethnic Preference, pp. 63-94.
63. A Canadian legislature can set aside judicial interpretation of most Charter guarantees under the Charter's section 33. Since judicial interpretation of section 28 can not be set aside at all, it is a form of constitutional "superstatus." Section 28 reads: "Notwithstanding anything in this Charter, the rights and freedoms referred to in it are guaranteed equally to male and female persons."
64. On Canada's recent constitutional politics, see Stephane Dion, "The Quebec Challenge to Canadian Unity," PS: Political Science and Politics, 26 (March 1993), 38-43;
65. Peter Russell, "The End of Mega Constitutional Politics in Canada?," PS: Political Science & Politics, 26 (March 1993), 33-38;
66. R. Kent Weaver, The Collapse of Canada? (Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution, 1992).
67. Réjean Landry, "Interest Groups and the Political Economy of the Constitutional Debates in Canada," Business and the Contemporary World, 5 (Winter 1993), 116-129,
68. is a rational choice model of some recent problems. Lusztig, "Constitutional Paralysis," and Michael Lusztig and Patrick James, "Constitutional Reform and the Free Trade Agreement in Canada: Political Entrepreneurship and the Quest for Partisan Realignment," presented to the annual meetings of the Canadian Political Science Association, Calgary, June 1994, are particularly accessible sources.
69. is a rational choice model of some recent problems. Lusztig, "Constitutional Paralysis," and Michael Lusztig and Patrick James, "Constitutional Reform and the Free Trade Agreement in Canada: Political Entrepreneurship and the Quest for Partisan Realignment," presented to the annual meetings of the Canadian Political Science Association, Calgary, June 1994, are particularly accessible sources.