POLI 319 Lecture Notes - Lecture 10: Middle Power, Aisle, Party System
13 May 2018
School
Department
Course
Professor
POLI 342
03.16.2018
OVERVIEW FROM LAST LECTURE
1. Party system evolution
2. MPs limited capacity to constrain foreign policy
decisions
3. Use different tools and means to influence
4. senate investigations
5. House debates, enquiries draw attention
6. What side of the aisle? In governing policy or
opposition?
7. Democratization of Canadian foreign policy process
seeks to increase parliamentary involvement
PARTY AFFILIATION AND
PARTISANSHIP
Nossal et al : believe parties have not been very
influential on Canadian foreign policy throughout history.
There is broad consensus between the two parties.
Bow & Black: Others believe there are disagreements
that do exist; different behaviour creates different
rhetorics, and different styles which could eventually have
impacts on foreign policy.
Difference in how they approach foreign policy
challenges (as opposed to overall agendas). These
differences could be smaller than they appear though.
•even if there is shifts in the way foreign policy is made,
most of it is just because of the everyday challenges
•ex. 9/11 forced our foreign policy to change,
introduced new constraints.
•wasn’t on the agenda, just appeared
Reason for changes from one party to another:
1. Party Politics in Canada
•First past the post system: absence of coherent
ideological worldview, lots of competition
•creates intensity → campaigns tailored just to gain
the most votes in all the areas of Canada, lacks
coherency
•calculations, what will attract the most people?
•tiptoeing, “hallmark projects” over real positions
•Foreign policy is not core to electoral debates
•Canada as a middle power, different global constraints
•PM cannot change that
•Canadians want status quo
•we’re comfortable, not a super power, more niche
•we don’t want to be controversial
2. Nature of Canada’s foreign policy challenges
•Canada benefits from relative security and prosperity
of 1 3
Document Summary
In governing policy or opposition: democratization of canadian foreign policy process seeks to increase parliamentary involvement. Nossal et al : believe parties have not been very in uential on canadian foreign policy throughout history. There is broad consensus between the two parties. Bow & black: others believe there are disagreements that do exist; different behaviour creates different rhetorics, and different styles which could eventually have impacts on foreign policy. Difference in how they approach foreign policy challenges (as opposed to overall agendas). These differences could be smaller than they appear though: even if there is shifts in the way foreign policy is made, most of it is just because of the everyday challenges, ex. 9/11 forced our foreign policy to change, introduced new constraints: wasn"t on the agenda, just appeared. 3: we are functional power, work via niche diplomacy, the big elephant: we bene t from our relationship with, the paris agreement had all the provinces, for comparison.
