From Social Investment to the night watchman: shifting roles of the federal state in Canada

1. Presentation at the Annual Conference of the Canadian Political Science Association and of the Canadian Historical Association Panel on“Political Realignment and the Restructuring of the Canadian Social Contract” 4thJune 2013 From Social Investment to the night watchman: shifting roles of the federal state in Canada

2. Some Questions • Historically, what has been the social role of the state in Canada? • What is the federal state today as a form of governance and policy making? • Are we witnessing a paradigm shift in Canadian social policy? • What are the characteristics of social investment and night watchman states? • What does it mean for federalism and social citizenship?

3. Historical overview

4. Social Investment State • Popularized in 1990s and early 2000s (with roots in 1940s and 1960s) • Discourse of academics and policy makers in Europe and North America • Related terms: productive policies, springboard • Reaction to neo-liberal policies and other critiques of the Keynesian welfare state • Emphasizes “active” aspects of social programs • Spending and services as investments with dividends in the future

5. Night Watchman State • One of the older conceptions of the modern state, circa 19th century • Related terms: nanny state, Leviathan, surveillance or security state • Limited discussion to date in policy communities, more so by some academics • Unlike social investment state, tends to be viewed more critically • Temporal focus is on the here-and-now of social affairs • Legislation and rules, and state facilities

6. State images in context • Constraints on social investment: • Vested neo-liberal ideas and interests • Traditional gender norms and practices • Path dependency of many KWS programs • Economic recession and budgetary austerity • Revival of the night watchman: • Post-9-11 politics of fear and terrorism • Defeat of Liberals nationally in 2006 • Harper’s political philosophy of moral fervor, social conservatism, and open federalism

7. The Shift: in priorities or paradigms? • Change in political regimes at the national level in Canada from Liberal to Conservative has resulted in a notable change in social policy discourse, goals, and priorities • Under Harper, criminal law power overshadows the federal spending power as a preferred policy instrument for social issues • However, not every shift in the state’s social role is a paradigm shift in public policy and practice • Harper’s government is a hybrid state with elements of Keynesian, neo-liberal, social investment, joined with heightened salience of the night watchman

8. On Federalism and Social Rights • Intergovernmental relations under the Harper government operate on a combination of classical or “open” federalism, unilateralism by Ottawa, and the downloading of costs onto provinces • Decisions and inactions by recent federal governments have involved redesigning the content of social citizenship - the bundle of rights and duties based on membership in the community • Canadian citizens in most matters of social policy are increasingly provincial citizens • Looking at restructuring welfare arrangements or social contracts can be a form of theorizing the state, comparing welfare regimes, and doing history

9. Thank you Michael J. Prince Lansdowne Professor of Social Policy Faculty of Human and Social Development University of Victoria mprince@uvic.ca