Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-05T02:33:15.376Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Nested Federalism in Arctic Quebec: A Comparative Perspective

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 March 2008

Gary N. Wilson
Gary N. Wilson
Affiliation:
University of Northern British Columbia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Abstract. The creation of an autonomous region of Nunavik within the province of Quebec would constitute a new phase in the development of Canadian federalism. Although there is no existing domestic model for such a political arrangement, the system of nested federalism in the Russian Federation offers a useful comparative tool for examining the internal and external features of the emerging system of government in Nunavik, as well as the challenges of operationalizing and embedding such a system within the Canadian federal structure. This article outlines the basic principles of nested federalism and considers them in light of recent developments in the region of Nunavik, including the initialing of an “Agreement in Principle concerning the amalgamation of certain public institutions and the creation of the Nunavik Regional Government” between the regional, provincial and federal governments in August 2007. The article concludes that although the Agreement in Principle does not entrench the types of intergovernmental mechanisms and jurisdictional powers that were recommended by the 2001 Report of the Nunavik Commission and that are necessary to the proper functioning of a nested federal arrangement, the political amalgamation outlined in this document represents a significant step forward in terms of creating an institutional framework for an autonomous, nested region in Nunavik.

Résumé. La création d'une région autonome du Nunavik à l'intérieur de la province du Québec constituerait une nouvelle phase dans le développement du fédéralisme canadien. Bien qu'il n'y ait aucun modèle domestique existant d'un tel arrangement politique le système de fédéralisme “encastré” dans la Fédération Russe offre un outil comparatif utile pour examiner les caractéristiques internes et externes du système de gouvernement émergeant au Nunavik. L'exemple russe démontre aussi les défis fonctionnels liés à l'établissement d'un tel système à l'intérieur de la structure fédérale existante au Canada. Cet article développe les principes de base d'un “fédéralisme encastré” et les considère en vue des développements récents dans la région du Nunavik, incluant les négociations pour un “Entente de principe sur la fusion de certaines institutions publiques et la création du gouvernement régional du Nunavik” entre les différents gouvernements régional, provincial et fédéral en août 2007. L'article conclut que bien que l'Accord de Principe n'inclut pas les types de mécanismes intergouvernementaux et les pouvoirs juridictionnels qui étaient recommandés dans le Rapport de 2001 de la Commission de Nunavik et qui sont nécessaires au bon fonctionnement d'un arrangement fédéral “encastré,” le fusionnement politique développé dans ce document représente un pas en avant significatif dans la construction institutionnelle d'un Nunavik autonome à l'intérieur du Québec.

Type
Research Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Political Science/Revue canadienne de science politique , Volume 41 , Issue 1 , March 2008 , pp. 71 - 92
Copyright
© 2008 Canadian Political Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aatami, Pita, Mark Gordon, Larry Watt, Tikile Kleist, Lucy Grey and Harry Tulugak. 2003. “The History and Current Activities of Makivik Corporation.” In Arctic Economic Development and Self-Government, ed. Gerard Duhaime and Nick Bernard. Quebec QC: GETIC.
Abele, Frances and Michael J. Prince. 2003. “Aboriginal Governance and Canadian Federalism: A To-Do List for Canada.” In New Trends in Canadian Federalism, ed. Francois Rocher and Miriam Smith. Peterborough: Broadview Press.
Agreement in Principle concerning the amalgamation of certain public institutions and creation of the Nunavik Regional Government. August 2007.
Amiqqaaluta—Let Us Share. Mapping the Road Toward a Government for Nunavik. Report of the Nunavik Commission, March 2001.
Bache, Ian, and Matthew Flinders. 2004. “Themes and Issues in Multi-level Governance.” In Multi-level Governance, ed. Ian Bache and Matthew Flinders. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Canada Economic Development for Quebec Regions. [Date Published: 2002/06/13, Date Last Revised: 2006/05/23] http://www.dec-ced.gc.ca/asp/ProgrammesServices/situation_economique_11.asp?LANG=EN (April 27, 2007).
Catt, Helena and Michael Murphy. 2002. Sub-State Nationalism. A Comparative Analysis of Institutional Design. London: Routledge.
Constitution of the Russian Federation. The Russian Constitution was ratified on Dec. 12 1993. http://www.departments.bucknell.edu/russian/const/constit.html (April 27, 2007).
Curry, Bill. 2007. “Quebec Inuit to Sign Historic Self-Governance Agreement.” Globe and Mail, August 13.
Dufour, Jules and Marc-Adelard Tremblay. 2001. The Nunavik Commission—Lessons from a Unique and Extraordinary Experience, December.
George, Jane. 1999. “Nunavik Commission Officially Named.” Nunatsiaq News, December 30.
George, Jane. 2000. “Nunavik Commission Begins Consultation Work.” Nunatsiaq News, January 31
George, Jane. 2001. “Binette Goes Public With Nunavik Commission Beefs.” Nunatsiaq News. July 6.
George, Jane. 2004. “Court Gives All-Clear on Self-Rule Talks.” Nunatsiaq News, February 13.
George, Jane. 2007. “Opposition Leader Backs Nunavik Plans.” Nunatsiaq News, August 31.
Indian and Northern Affairs Canada. 1998. Nisga'a Final Agreement Act. British Columbia Ministry of Aboriginal Affairs. Federal Treaty Negotiation Office.
James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement and Complementary Agreements. 1998. Sainte-Foy, QC: Les Publications du Quebec.
Ladner, Kiera L. 2003. “Treaty Federalism: An Indigenous Vision of Canadian Federalisms.” In New Trends in Canadian Federalism, ed. Francois Rocher and Miriam Smith. Peterborough: Broadview Press, 2003.
Makivik Corporation. http://www.makivik.org/eng/index.asp (April 27, 2007).
Negotiation Framework Agreement on the amalgamation of certain institutions and the creation of a new form of government in Nunavik. June 2003.
Nelson, Odile. 2003. “No Federal Seat for Nunavik.” Nunatsiaq News. April 18.
Nunatsiavut Kavamanga—Nunatsiavut Government. http://www.nunatsiavut.com/en/indexe.php (September 15, 2007).
Nunavik. Premiere Issue: Our Land, Our Future. 01/2001. St. Laurent, QC: Makivik Corporation.
Nunavik. The Road to the AIP. 05/2005. St. Laurent, QC: Makivik Corporation.
Nunavik. Implementation Strategy. 06/2005. St. Laurent, QC: Makivik Corporation.
Papillon, Martin. 2008. “Canadian Federalism and the Emerging Mosaic of Aboriginal Multilevel Governance.” In Canadian Federalism: Performance, Effectiveness, and Legitimacy, ed. Herman Bakvis and Grace Skogstad. Don Mills: Oxford University Press.
Political Accord between the Nunavik party, the government of Quebec and the federal government for the examination of a form of government in Nunavik through the establishment of a Nunavik Commission. 1999. Montreal QC. November 5.
Remington, Thomas F. 2008. Politics in Russia. New York: Pearson Longman.
Smiley, Donald V. and Ronald L. Watts. 1985. Intrastate Federalism in Canada. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Tully, James. 1994. “Multirow Federalism and the Charter.” In Protecting Rights and Freedoms, ed. Philip Bryden, Steven Davis and John Russell. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Umbrella Final Agreement between the Government of Canada, the Council for Yukon Indians and the Government of the Yukon. 1993. Ottawa: Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development.
Vick-Westgate, Ann. 2002. Nunavik: Inuit Controlled Education in Arctic Quebec. Calgary: University of Calgary Press.
Watts, Ronald L. 1999. Comparing Federal Systems. Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press.
Wheare, K.C. 1953. Federal Government. London: Oxford University Press.
Wilson, Gary N. 2001. “Matryoshka Federalism and the Case of the Khanty Mansiysk Autonomous Okrug.” Post-Soviet Affairs, 17: 167–94.Google Scholar
Wilson, Gary N. 2003. “Abandoning the Nest: Regional Mergers and their Impact on the Russian North.” Polar Geography, 26: 197–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, Gary N. 2005. “Nested Federalism and Aboriginal Sovereignty in Russia and Canada.” In Recrafting Federalism in Russia and Canada: Power, Budgets and Indigenous Governance, ed. Peter H. Solomon, Jr. Toronto: Centre for Russian and East European Studies.
Youngblood Henderson, James. 1994. “Empowering Treaty Federalism.” Saskatchewan Law Review, 58: 241–329.Google Scholar