Study Guides (238,471)
Canada (115,151)
York University (9,811)
ADMS 1010 (94)

Fall 2010 ADMS 1010 Final Exam.docx

32 Pages
Unlock Document

York University
Administrative Studies
ADMS 1010
Noreen Stuckless

ADMS 1010 FINALEXAM 2010 FALL SEMESTER Triple E Senate The Question on Triple E Senate will pertain to how it is elected/ how the people react to/it’s advantages/disadvantages. The answer is as follows: Senate reform has been a relevant issue since the late 1800s and remains to be one today. Although there have been many proposals presented with different ideas to address the concerns with the current system, there are some general ideas that remain consistent through the majority of them, and that is where the idea of the “Triple E” senate comes in. “Triple E” refers to a type of senate reform based on “equal, elected, and effective”. This essentially means having equal numbers of senators per province, having them being elected by provincial electorates rather than appointed by the Governor General, and to have them possess effective legislator power, at least enough to counteract any initiatives brought forth by the House of Commons that could be considered harmful to the province or regions. Like with any proposal there is usually a case for and against the idea, so both sides will be represented. The first side that will be presented will be the case for senate reform. The first argument in favour of it is that with the current system there is less equality. Provinces like Ontario and Quebec remain much more of a focal point compared to the western provinces, who suffer because of this. Without equal representation of the provinces in the senate the individual needs of each province go unmet. As with the idea of “Triple E”, having an equal number of people representing each province would ensure that this disparity is not present, and a voice to express concerns from each province is heard when decisions are made. This directly coincides with the principle of responsible government that expresses that the government is responsible to be representative of the people. The second argument for this type of reform is that in the current system the upper house is appointed by the Governor General, usually through the Prime Minister’s advice, rather than elected. The seats are usually filled for tactical advantage rather than for proper representation of the people. The senate serves as a last line of thought before a law is to get passed and if they are not elected the seats could be filled by senators appointed only to carry out an agenda. If they were elected then they can at the least stand in the way of something being passed that would be harmful to the provinces they represent. The third argument in favour of senate reform is that it will improve the overall effectiveness of the system itself. Without it the lower house (commons) are able to pass what they wish without much interference or thought, if more power was allocated to the upper house then it will force the house of commons to put more thought into what they hope to pass, and even then they risk facing the scrutiny of the provinces. Distributing the power between the upper and lower house will result in the passing of bills that will benefit more people more often than not. The name of the case itself stands for three reasons as to why senate reform would be beneficial to Canadians but there is another side to the this as well. The second side that will be presented will be the case against amending senate. One argument against it would be that there could be a chance that anything that gets passed will be pushed because of popular opinion rather than because it is the right thing to do. If the upper house is representative of the people they might feel pressure to follow what the population demands, despite the fact that they might night have the necessary knowledge to make an informed opinion on the subject. If the senate does not give into the pressure then that could lead to controversy and disruption among the house, which is something that obviously is not the environment needed when making decisions. A second reason why amending senate may not be a positive thing is because it could lead to less action taking place due to the extra amount of deliberation that naturally comes with senate form. The more voices there are to hear, the more opinions there will be, and with that comes the possibility of constant delays or rejections because it is in fact very hard to please a large group of people all with their own unique needs. Although the intention of senate reform is to improve action there is the possibility that it could lead to inaction because of this. A third argument against the amendment of senate is the uncertainty involved with making drastic changes to something that has generally worked. That is not to say that the way the system currently works is flawless, but subtle changes might be more effective than complete reform. The element of uncertainty it brings may not be worth disrupting Canada’s political system. George E., and Diane Jurkowski. Between Public and Private: Readings and Cases on Canada's Mixed Economy. Concord, Ont.: Captus, 2003. Print. Arguments For And Against: According to Howard McConnell, Triple E senate: Refers to a reformed upper house which is “equal, elected, and effective,” having the same number of senators from each province, elected by the provincial electorates, and possessing effective legislative powers to offset, at least temporarily, initiatives by the House of Commons deemed harmful to the provinces or regions. (Jurkowski & Eaton p. 177) Therefore with an equal senate representation the interest of Canadians would be most effectively represented. For: The first major argument for a senate reform is to confer equal power to all provinces. Currently the majority of seats are in the provinces of Ontario and Québec, each has 24; the Western provinces and Newfoundland/Labrador all have 6; New Brunswick and Nova Scotia has 10 each; PEI has 4 and Northwest Territories, Nunavut and Yukon all have 1 each (The Senate Chamber). McConnell affirms that “would not the better course be to assign all the provinces an equal quotient of seats, since population density is already taken into account in the lower house, and the upper house should give the provinces equal representation so that valid provincial concerns will not simply be overwhelmed by numbers” (Jurkowski & Eaton p. 180). Secondly, it is reported that instead of being nominated by the Governor General on recommendation of the Prime Minister, to instill democracy senators should be elected. In Canada, “appointments to the upper house are the virtually unfettered gift of the incumbent prime minister. Those to whom political debts are owed have a greater claim on the appointing authority’s beneficence than those who have achieved distinction in various areas of national life” (Jurkowski & Eaton p. 179). Needless to say this nepotism exhibits inequity and injustice. Thirdly, to be effective the upper house needs to have real power. “And to be truly effective, the new Senate should have not merely a delaying power, or “suspensive veto,” but a real veto on virtually all laws emanating from the lower house” (Jurkowski & Eaton p.187). Only then would the lower house be limited in their authority. Against: Those opposed to the Senate reform insists that “in a properly balanced federal system the weight of population should not be felt in both houses, since that would tend towards an overcentralized national rather than a balanced federal polity” (Jurkowski & Eaton p.186). The population is represented by the lower house and the state is represented by the upper house, whilst both houses will debate on the same laws and polices each will convey different interests. Another argument against amending Senate is that by giving power to the upper house, the lower house now has a potential opponent that will restrict its actions. Moreover, electing senate members will be time consuming and will create anxiety for the senators. We also have to consider the chance of losing long-term experience and knowledge if senators are to be elected and are limited to serve a 9 year term. Hence, radical changes in the upper house could prove inefficient for Canada. Jurkowski, D., Eaton, G., "Cultivating Cash- How to Grow a Farming Business in Canada." Between Public and Private: Readings and Cases on Canada's Mixed Economy. Concord: Captus Press Inc, 2003. pp.176-188. Answer #3: From the related articles, the main reason to amend senate may be the equity of the seats in senate. The aim of amending senate is to protect the minority viewpoint and slove conflict between conservative and liberism, and conflict between low populated provinces and high populated provinces. ("Triple E" case, Between Public and Private) Combined all the viewpoints, there is one argument: whether it is valuable to amend senate. Three points will be liste for each side: For amending senate:  As mentioned before, the reconstituted senate would be more effectively to advance provincial points of view. Specifically, there would be an authentic central legislative organ in Ottawa to articulate local interests that are not now adequately put forward. ("Triple E" case, Between Public and Private)  Incompetence and a lack of fairness on service equity can be the driver of amending senate. Not all public service are viewed equally. Public service, which are from different federal, provincial and municipal, are ranked significantly different, one from the other, in terms of perceived service quality. For example, in the Canadian Centre for Management Development (CCMD), fire department received a 86 percent level of satisfaction, whilc road maintenance has only 45 percent approval rating. (B. Marson, 1999) Reconstituted senate would through vote represent all the provinces providing one standard.  Reconstituted senate would not only benefit small provinces, it would also achieve greater political regitimacy at the same time. According to Hware McConnell, while senate can't be a substitute for inter-government consultation, in areas of contral-regional conflict it would perform a more effective role in putting forwaed provincial and regional points of views. The reconstituted could confirm prospective federally-appointed judges and senior government officals. It performed a more effective role to solve federal-provincial responsibiyies. For not amending senate:  The main point for not amending senate is because it would take guge amount of money and time to restructure and reform. Most Canadians have lost patience with public service reform. There have been at least 28 major proposals for constitutional Senate reform since the early 1970s, and all have failed. Government has waned because of 10 years or more of formal restructing and reforms. (D. Wayne Taylor, 1999)  The legislative branch of the government of Canada is comprised principally of two bodies- the house of commons and senate. (David, Between Public and Private) A commercial market research reported only three of Canadian had a lot of confidence in their government. (D. Zussman, 1997) Since the role of government is decreasing, the need of amending senate is not essential. The intervation of senate is oppsed by that the advices given under the oversight of political heads and ministers of govern could overruled if political consideration are deemed more important. (Between Public and Private)  Whether amending or not is also related to which the element of control is emphasized. There is one argument: the public sector is nothing more than alternative market that ends up distoring private economic behaviour, reducing individual freedom, and impending economic efficiency. (George E, Bwteen Public and Private) The goals of upper house and population are often mutually exclusive with each other. The intervation of senate on some elements could run contrary to the domiant human motivation of self-interest. Answer #4: A Representative & Responsible Government An expression of a representative and responsible government is one that is based on the rule: government to the people, for the people and by the people. In this article, “The Case for a ‘Triple E’ Senate” by Howard McConnell, the author is giving possible amendments to the Senate in power, to improve on the way in which the Canadian government operates its legislative powers. The author states that “A ‘Triple E’ Senate refers to a reformed upper house which is ‘equal, elected and effective.’ ” (p: 177) First of all there is a lower house called the House of Commons and the upper house called the Senate and the way the seats are distributed are by the population density of each province/region. That meant provinces like Ontario and Quebec had more senators than the western & Atlantic Provinces and the northern territories. Trudeau made a reform by increasing the amount of senators for each region, “Ontario and Quebec would retain its present complement of 24 senators, while four western provinces would be enlarged form six to 12 each, Newfoundland, Nova Scotia, and New Brunswick also being increased to 12 and Prince Edward Island advancing from four to six. Instead of their single senator, as at present, the Yukon would receive two and the Northwest Territories four.” (p: 180) Although this change allowed for a more equality it still didn’t give enough power to the other provinces and territories. If we were to make each of the provinces get an equal amount of seats in the Senate this could offset the imbalance the lower house creates because “population density is already taken into account” (p: 180) Trudeau had made a proposal in 1978 to change the upper house in the Bill C-90. The Senate is usually “appointed by governor-general on the recommendation of the prime minister.” (p: 181) The bill Trudeau propose that instead of 104 members be chosen by the governor general half of 118 of the new Senators be chosen from the last proceeding election so that people can have some say in whom is in power in the Senate. This represents a government which is to the people, for the people and by the people. Although again this method alone can be described as unequal because “*T+here would be some increase in seats for the Atlantic Provinces and the West in the new body, with Ontario and Quebec retaining their present number, representation would be equal.” (p: 181) The author proposes that in order to have a responsible and representative government we must take into account the equal representation of the provinces and the length of term the senators hold. He also states that, “In a properly balanced federal system the weight of population should not be felt in both houses, since that would tend toward an over centralized national rather than a balanced federal polity.” (p: 186) He states that the length should be “a six year term for senators, with one-third of the body being elected at two-year intervals.”(p: 186) With limiting the length a senator may remain in power, balancing the effect the House of Commons population density idea with the Senate giving equal power to all the provinces/territories and using the Bill C-90 we can achieve the representative and responsible government. Bibliography Eaton, George and Diane Jurkowski Ed. Between Public and Private: Readings and Cases on Canada’s Mixed Economy. (Captus Press, Toronto: 2003) Answer 2: Case Study 4 The following discourse leads to the conclusion that a “Triple E” senate should be pushed through and not only that, but also to review its function which is more of a symbol than anything else, which is a problem design. Most of the arguments here leads to a misrepresented upper house or Senate. Several reforms geared towards this objective also were not effective. Various controversies arose since the upper house does not have proper representation. Power play is at the forefront of each provincial and regional policies. Check and balance are not present in the present legislative setup because of the sheer number of seats, as well as the nature of how the senators were put in their positions just because of “debt of gratitude” of the Prime Minister with respect to election support. Further study on how to reform the upper house should be done to reach a more desirable governance and that which is for the people and by the people. The upper house should also be given more power and not just a “delaying power” or “suspensive veto”. Their term should also be checked so as to keep the value gained in terms of the skills and more experience possessed by longer serving senators. The Lower House’s powers as to unclear restrictions and constitutional amendments should also be studied as well, if it also affect the purpose in which the upper house should serve. Before we go on, let us see the setup of the Canadian legislative. The legislative branch of the government of Canada is comprised principally of two bodies - The House of Commons or "lower house" and the Senate or "upper house". In theory, this is the branch of our government where ultimate power lies. The executive branch cannot do anything that the legislative branch has not empowered it to do, and the judicial branch exists only to enforce and interpret the decisions of the legislative branch. (Barrows and Wesson: 201). A piece of legislation called bills originate in the House of Commons sometimes in the Senate when it does not entail public expediture. Passage of a bill in the House of Commons requires that three votes be held. Each vote is called a reading. The first reading is merely designed to allow the Cabinet minister involed to introduce the bill to the House. If the opposition wish to defeat a bill, they will usually try to do so at the second reading. It is at this stage that major debate on the bill takes place. The opposition can often force the government to amend or withdraw a piece of legislation. When a bill passes it second reading it can be considered to have been approved in principle; it is then referred to a legislative committee, which may recommend amendments to the bill based on its members' more detailed knowledge of the area the legislation covers. After the legislative committee has finished its discussion on the bill, the bill goes to the House for the third and final reading, along with any amendments recommended. The third reading seldom produces serious debate, except possibly on amendments. After approval by the House of Commons, a bill is passed on to the Senate - Canada's so-called "house of sober second thought". Because most Senators realize that the Senate lacks legitimacy as an institution, bills are rarely held up by the senate. The final stage in approval of a piece of legislation is royal assent (Barrows and Wesson:199-201). A “Triple E” senate refers to a reformed upper house which is “equal, elected, and effective,” having the same number of senators from each province, elected by the provincial electorates, and possessing effective legislative powers to offset, at least temporarily, initiatives by the House of Commons deemed harmful to the provinces or regions. It seeks to provide a countervailing regional voice in a lower house having 282 members, 180 of which (or just under 2/3 of the total) represent the two large central provinces (McConnell:177). From its inception in 1867, the Canadian Senate possessed only very modest powers; it did not, as did its American and Australian parallels, represent the constituent federal units equally, nor was it effective, having no popular constituency to appeal to; in any confrontation with the elected lower house it could do little more than delay unwanted initiatives for a limited time. Its weakness arose not through inadvertence but by design (McConnell:179). The Senate only have a delaying power, or ‘suspensive veto” , they should have a real veto on virtually all laws emanating from the lower house, except for constitutional amendments, and for the not always clear restrictions circumscribing the action of the upper house where the “spending power” is concerned The Canadian Senate was really the old British colonial legislative council under a new name. Besides, it did not represent separate provinces or states, as in the American system, but sections; Ontario and Quebec each had twenty-four members, and Nova Scotia and New Brunswick twenty-four together. This ‘section’ principle as continued as new provinces were added to the Dominion (McConnell:179). Appointments to the upper house are the virtually unfettered gift of the incumbent prime minister. Those to whom political debts are owned have a greater claim on the appointing authority’s beneficence than those who have achieved distinction in various areas of national life. (McConnell:179). Several reform plans came into being namely: Trudeau administration’s 1984 reform proposal that recommended the future election of senators, representing major “regions” of the country as well as minority groups (Canada Special Joint Committee). The present chamber would be expanded to 144 seats to provide additional representation for the smaller Atlantic and western provinces. (McConnell:180). However, these reform also resulted in uneven allocation of seats to the various provinces and territories with respect to population density. This reform also limited the senators to a single nine-year term, with incumbents not eligible for a second term. Though it relieves them the political pressures for periodic re-election it would result in the loss of valuable experience accumulated by long-serving members. The Bill C-60 (Constitutional Amendment Bill), establish a new upper house along lines radically different from the present Senate. Rather than the existing 104-member Senater appointed by the governor-general on the recommendation of the prime minister, a 118-member House of Federation was to be elected indirectly, with half of its membership being contingent, respectively, on the relative proportion of votes received by the various parties in the last preceding elections for the provincial legislatures and the House of Commons. This reform also resulted in unequal representation. Unequal representation lead to several controversies such as the awarding of the CF-18 maintenance contract to Canadair of Montreal rather than to Bristol Aerospace of Winnipeg, due largely to the strong 75 Quebec’s seats compared to Manitoba’s 14 seats in the House of Commons. The sheer voice of number won and not the real viewpoints. Several other contentions arised such as the following, the Privy Council’s 1881 ruling on trade and commerce (Citizens Insurance), and its 1937 decision in the International Labour Organization (ILO) case on the treaty-implemeting power power (Labour Conventions), Donald S. MacDonald, a strong proponent of free trade, puts the federal argument in its most uncompromising form: “A federal statute, therefore, assuring the nationals of a foreign state freedom from discriminatory trade barriers would take precedence over provincial trade restrictions, and so it should” (McConnell:183-184). Here Ottawa was empowered to set prices for wine in its liquor stores which constitute a discriminatory trade barrier and falling under provincial jurisdiction. Such issues should have been debated in a reformed upper house. Several other contemporary issues arised such as the disagreement between Alberta and Ottawa over the taxation and regulation of energy; the controversies between British Columbia and Ottawa and between Newfoundland (and some other Atlantic provinces) and Ottawa, over the ownership and control of mineral rights in the sub-soil under territorial waters and in the adjacent continental shelf (McConnell:184) among others. McConnell, Howard. Bibliography: Jurkowsi, Diane and Eaton, George. “The Case for a ‘Triple E’ Senate.” Between Public and Private. Captus Press, 2003. 176-188. Wesson,Tom. "The Changing Role of the Public Sector", Canada and the New World Economic Order, third edition.Captus Press, 2007. Cultivating Cash The Question of cultivating clash shall be one that requires the Stanbury& Moore Model to be implemented or a General Model of Government Model of Intervention. The Stanbury and Moore model will be as follows: The question will be something along the lines of: Using William Stanbury and Sean Moore’s article entitled “Role of Interest Groups in Influencing Public Policy in Canada”, describe and explain one interest group that is presented in “Cultivating Cash”. Identify and explain the type of interest group and its lobbying. The three sorts of possibilities/answers are as follows: Case Study 5 “Institutional organizations are characterized as having organizational continuity, cohesion, extensive knowledge of areas of government relevant to members, easy communication…and organization imperative” (Stanbury, Moore, 229). In the article “Cultivating Cash”, by Andrew Sutherland, the main interest group is Ontario Federation of Agriculture(OFA) which is an institutional organization that is dedicated to improving the social and economic well being of farmers (Sutherland, 407). OFA is a strong institutional organization that uses direct lobbying and other approaches to influence public policy. Ontario Federation of Farmers has a formal structure, democratically organized with rules governing the behavior of members, leaders and procedures for implementing decisions (Sutherland, 408). The OFA has 31 members and affiliates and keeps in touch with them through regular emails (Sutherland, 408). Moreover, OFA directly engages government at levels providing timely and important information. On the other hand, the government is also active in contacting OFA to help in developing public policy. For instance, the Walkerton disaster, imitated the government to launch a joint research program to guarantee quality water for Ontario citizens (Sutherland, 408). “OFA’s role is to mobilize members and develop lobbying tactics through a strategically organized association.” (Sutherland, 408). The OFA engages in direct lobbying by bringing organizational representatives in direct contact with public officials to directly persuade them to adopt their position (Stanbury, Moore 237). Direct lobbying can be done in numerous ways such as testimony before parliament, meeting with the persons to be influenced, telephone calls or contacts at social events. The OFA organized a rally in Queen’s Park, and took part in a mass phone, email and fax campaign towards the government representatives (Sutherland, 408). Moreover, volunteers posted ads in rural areas and farm supply stores to notify about their efforts. In addition, emails, letters and faxes were sent out to members to notify them about attending the rally and instructions on how to contact the officials. This was a very successful event, resulting in government immediately giving in to the farmer’s requests. Direct lobbying efforts by the OFA have resulted successful in resolving many issues for farmers. Successful lobbying efforts of the OFA include the reduction of the retail sales tax, eliminating and reducing municipal development charges on agricultural outbuildings, electricity development rates reduced, and increase in Ontario’s core safety net funding (Sutherland, 409). Theses improvements are beneficial for society and the farmers. The OFA is an active interest group that has influenced public policy in many ways. OFA has directly engaged with government officials in creating programs, and partnered with affiliates in lobbying efforts to strengthen the farm voice by unifying it (Sutherland, 407). Moreover, it continues to work towards greater achievements for the future. Stanbury, W.T and Moore, Sean "Role of Interest Groups in Influencing Public Policy in Canada." Between Public and Private: Readings and cases on Canada's Mixed Economy. ED. Eaton, George, and Jurkowski, Diane Concord:Captus Press Inc. 2003 217-266 Sutherland, Andrew "Cultivating Cash, How to grow a farming business in Canada." Between Public and Private: Readings and cases on Canada's Mixed Economy. ED. Eaton, George, and Jurkowski, Diane Concord: Captus Press Inc. 2003 397-428 Best Answer 2 Case Study 5 By using the article entitled “Role of Interest Groups in Influencing Public Policy in Canada,” authored by W.T. Stanbury and Sean Moore, to conduct a theoretical analysis of the Western Canadian Wheat Growers Association (WCWGA), the resulting conclusion is that it can be defined as an institutional interest group with direct and indirect lobbying behaviours. Stanbury and Moore define an institutional interest group as one that has “organizational continuity and cohesion, extensive knowledge of areas of government relevant to members, easy communication, stable membership, concrete and immediate operational objectives, and organizational imperatives that are more important than any particular objective.” (Stanbury and Moore, 229) There is no mention of the organizational structure of the WCWGA. But, as Stanbury and Moore go on to prove, interest groups with high degrees of organization are “more likely to be successful.” (Stanbury and Moore, 229) Due to wide ranging success of this interest group, a case can be made that the WCWGA is a highly structured organization. The WCWGA also has extensive knowledge of government that is helpful to its members as it helped to create the Net Income Stabilization Account (NISA) and the Pesticide Management Regulatory Policy. The WCWGA has easy communication between members because it is the largest interest group in western Canada and it also has stable membership as it charges an annual membership fee of $150. The WCWGA wishes to further the “independence of government regulation and marketing to keep all profits in farmers’ hands.” (Sutherland, 410) This example displays their operational objectives and is concrete and immediate. Stanbury and Moore define direct approaches to lobbying as consisting of “bringing organizational representatives into direct contact with public officials.” (Stanbury and Moore, 237) One way that the WCWGA uses direct methods is through direct lobbying. As stated earlier, the WCWGA worked with the government to develop the NISA and the Pesticide Management Regulatory Policy. They provided technical knowledge to the government to develop these policies as consultants. They also continue to formally address policy issues that disagree with the interests they represent. Through these examples of direct lobbying, the WCWGA is able to exhibit their “heavy influence over government policy” (Sutherland, 410) Stanbury and Moore go on to define indirect approaches to lobbying as consisting of “more circuitous methods of influencing policy makers.” (Stanbury and Moore, 237) One way that the WCWGA uses indirect methods is through advocacy advertising. They are at the “forefront” in developing marketing plans designed to influence public policy in favour of the interests they represent. (Sutherland, 410) To conclude, based on theoretical analysis of the Western Canadian Wheat Growers Association interest group it can be determined that it is an institutional group that employs direct and indirect lobbying to influence public policy decisions Best Answer 3: Case Study 5 After reading the article “Role of Interest Groups in Influencing Public Policy in Canada” by Moore and Stanbury, and applying it to the “Cultivating Cash” case study, we can see that the OFA is deemed to be the core interest group, who has utilized coalition, and direct action lobbying in order to reach their goal to better the circumstances, aiding, funding, support from government parties for farmers, and the agricultural sector as a whole. This type of institutional interest group has used a variety of methods in order to raise awareness of the crucial issues that affect farmers across Canada. Interest groups on broader terms work towards implementing their opinions, views and necessities through influencing public policy through government interventions, such as modifying the regulations and statues that may already exist, creating new statues that are placed by the legislature, or even direct financial support from the government through loans and grants, etc. These are only an example of the various ways interest groups may influence the government in order to reach their goal. In this particular case, the OFA consists of a institutional interest group which is, “ characterized by having organizational continuity and cohesion, extensive knowledge of areas of government relevant to members easy communication, stable membership, concrete and immediate operational objectives, and organizational imperatives...incorporating at least several people- a hierarchy; a clear definition of roles...rules governing the behaviour of members and leaders, and procedures for reaching implemented decisions.” (Stanbury and Moore: 229). These characteristics of an institutional interest group can be applied to the OFA since it is a corporation that has the main goal of improving the circumstances, both economically and socially, for farmers, alongside other rural groups. Clearly, the unison of several groups and parties is a significant characteristic in interest groups, in which the OFA includes 49 county and district federations with 43,000 operators, which includes the membership fee of $150 annually. Moreover, the OFA cooperates with the government in order to help implement and develop public policy, such as when the Walkerton issue occurred, the government commenced a joint program in order to ameliorate the quality of the water. This example illustrates how interest groups are avid to support campaigns, candidates, policies, etc, in order to receive support and awareness for their particular cause and goal. Lobbying consists of the activities that representatives of the interest groups have organized in order to greatly influence the public policy. This may consist of a “negotiating process” in which both sides try to reach a cooperative agreement or solution to the particular issues the interest group advocates. In this case, the OFA may implement policies in their programs, and relay that policy to a national level, being the CFA, then onto an International level being the IFA, which brings more attention and power to the issues addresses by the OFA. Therefore, there is that element of negotiation that is required in order to help the farmers have more protected and resourceful environments through the support on higher levels of their organization. Direct action lobbying consists of the activity that these interest groups include in their campaign to reach their goals, which is a way of expressing themselves. This may involve, rallying, public protests, or more expressive forms such as blockades of transportation or even boycotting particular products. This concept was applied by the OFA when they organized a rally in Queen’s Park, and included a mass phone email and fax campaigns in order to target the governments and their representatives. In addition, the campaign was prolonged through posted advertisements to other parties who would be interested (i.e. farmers) Moreover, “letters, emails and faxes were sent out to members with instructions about how to contact officials and attend the downtown rally.” (Sutherland: 408). Furthermore, in addition to the busy phone lines of the government by the members of the OFA and volunteers, the OFA’s rally was able to shut down Queen’s Park and shut down highways through the plethora of protesting farmers and their tractors. Through public awareness, and also attention from the media, the OFA’s lobbying resulted in more awareness, change and support. As a result, the successful direct action lobbying from the OFA has result in reducing the Retail Sales Tax that are due from farmers, working with country federations to reduce the developmental charges on agricultural outbuildings, and also receiving equity based regulation for federal safety, which has bettered the safety of farmers overall. Clearly, the OFA has implemented efficient and resourceful tactics when working towards their goal – the protection and support of farmers. Through their various means of lobbying and targeting the government in an efficient, influential and organized manner, they have succeeded in reach their goals, as they continue to work towards even greater achievements. Stanbury, W.T. and Sean Moore. “Role of Interest Groups in Influencing Public Policy in Canada.” Between Public and Private. Captus Press, 2003. 217-266. Sutherland, Andrew. “Cultivating Cash.” Between Public and Private. Captus Press, 2003. 397-428. The General Model of Government Intervention for Cultivating Cash will be as follows: 1. The Goal – the goal is ultimately to have the agriculture industry “…supported and regulated to maintain employment, global trade, high food quality and environmental stability (398).” (Jurkowski, 2003) 2. Intervention –An intervention that is put in place is Farm Credit Canada or FCC which is a Crown corporation (Jurkowski, 2003). The objective of the FCC is to provide opportunity for growth and development in rural Canada, by assisting with business and financial solutions to better the Canadian Farming families as while as the agricultural corporations (Jurkowski, 2003). In doing so, the FCC offers a transition program in which retiring farmers sell their property to new farmers in a hope to maintain employment and stability in the agricultural industry (Jurkowski, 2003). 3. The intervention in this particular case is indirect. At A the invention is the Farm Credit Canada providing financial and business solutions for Canadian farmers (Jurkowski, 2003). However, there follows B, C, D etc as there must be farmers who are ready and willing to retire and sell their land (Jurkowski, 2003). Subsequently, there must be new entrepreneurs or university graduates that are striving for and willing to take on the agricultural industry (Jurkowski, 2003). i) The goal which is ultimately to have the agriculture industry “…supported and regulated to maintain employment, global trade, high food quality and environmental stability (398)” is satisfied as there are farmers who are willing to retire and new entrepreneurs ready to assume the responsibilities of supplying high quality food for Canadians (Jurkowski, 2003).As well, with the transition of farmers it ensures that the employment of farmers and those in the food and beverage industry maintain their jobs (Jurkowski, 2003). ii) The intended result of providing financial and business solution for farmers is reached. The FCC states, that there are 44,000 farmers who are borrowing approximately $7.7 billion to add value, training and knowledge to improve the industry and maintain employment (Jurkowski, 2003). iii) The new state of equilibrium is established by the FCC initiating a policy that encourages young entrepreneurs to acquire a loan at 10% down whereas most other loans require 25% down; allowing for the opportunity for new farmers to take over the agricultural industry and keep the industry going (Jurkowski, 2003). In conclusion, the intervention is indirect and the FCC does in fact satisfy the goal. In conjunction, the intended results are reached as is a new state of equilibrium. C) The intervention of the Farm Credit Canada is a voluntary dimension. None of the farmers are forced or coerced into participating in the FCC program. The FCC program is formed to provide business training as well as market information; the farmers are able to choose whether or not they wish to participate in the programs the FCC has established. D) There were multiple issues the FCC was looking to fix. On the strategic – reactive continuum the FCC would be positioned here S__________/_R illustrating a more reactive intervention. The intervention of the FCC was to help farmers develop rural Canada (Jurkowski, 2003). FCC intervenes to provide business and financial solutions to help better farmers (Jurkowski, 2003). There is also a lack of training and diversification in the agricultural industry; once again FCC intervention was to improve these down falls (Jurkowski, 2003). Another issue explored was the inability farmers had selling their land as many young entrepreneurs are unable to purchase the farms (Jurkowski, 2003). E) There are five qualities of determinants: accuracy, precision, efficiency, time delay and environmental effect of private sector, the following determinants are related to the effectiveness of the intervention. Accuracy: According to Hoffman, the accuracy of an intervention is simply the degree to which the intended or stated goals are satisfied, when all effects and interaction are complete or have reached a state of equilibrium (pg. 310). would be defined as less in consideration with this case. Being both an indirect and voluntary intervention farmers have the ability to participate in the programs offered by the FCC. It is not a forced program so farmers are able to examine their business state and from there determine if they need to participate in some programs offered by the FCC or not. Precision : --- Precision is the degree to which the effect of the intervention is limited to only the intended goals. Precision will also be determined as less, since the intervention is more reactive and indirect. Once again the farmers have a choice to participate in the programs therefore the goal may not be satisfied as all farmers may not participate. Efficiency: Efficiency measures the difference or ratio between the resources or utilities created and those expended. is as well illustrated as less. Efficiency demonstrates the costs and benefits of the intervention. As the FCC helps the farmers by loaning them money, the cost and benefit derived from the money loaned and interest acquired. Time delay: Time delay is the period of time between implementation of an intervention and the accomplishment of the desire goals. is greater since the intervention is both indirect and voluntary. The farmers have the ability to determine when they need to participate in the programs offered by the FCC or if they never want to partake. Environmental effect: It accounts who or which sector has government targeted for change and what will be its response. of private sector is considered more deleterious. The private sector in conjunction with FCC, funds programs related to helping farms which in turn, provides the private sector with acquired interest and allows them to have position in decision making. Eaton, George E., and Diane Jurkowski. "Cultivating Cash." Between public and private: readings and cases on Canada's mixed economy. Concord, Ont.: Captus Press, 2003. 397-426. Case Study - The Medical Centre GOAL - To better manage the Canadian health care delivery system. (given in question) INTERVENTION - To promote healthy living (Jurkowski & Eaton, 2003, p. 351). DIMENSIONS OF THE MODEL DIRECT/INDIRECT DIMENSION - This intervention is indirect At A: The government is promoting healthy living by things like advertisement. For example, all the cigarette packages contain an add that explains how smoking is bad for the smoker and people around the smoker. At B, C, D, and E: The things like advertisement by government will hopefully make people realize that they are shortening their life by living an unhealthy lifestyle and hopefully change their lifestyle to healthy ones, which will help people depend and/or seek less health care services. The goal is not satisfied because even though we see that there are more fast-food that are more health conscious such as real fruit juice over pop, it does not seem to help people use the health care service less, because for one, our population is aging, which means people will naturally need more health care services and secondly, it will probably be a long-time effect where just because people suddenly choose healthier lifestyle will not cause people to use the services less but in the long run, maybe the next generation will be healthier and end up using the services less than the current generation, which if it happens, the goal will be satisfied. The intended result is achieved because people are being more health conscious and many fast-food restaurants now have healthier food such as salads where people can choose between healthy salads over fried food and more people now do choose fresh fruit juices over pops when they look for things to drink and other things. The new state of equilibrium is not established as the waiting lists are still long and the costs are still very high, which make people unhappy with the health care system and puts burden on government to make the system better by spending more on it or provide services more efficiently to cut down waiting time, etc. This intervention is indirect because by promoting healthy living, government is hoping that this will make people need health care less which means government will be able to better manage the health care system because of lower costs and there will be less shortage or resources for people, which will help make people happier as well with less waiting time and better services. COERCIVE/VOLUNTARY DIMENSION - The intervention is voluntary because there is no forcing people to follow a healthier lifestyle. Therefore people do not have to try a healthier lifestyle just bec
More Less

Related notes for ADMS 1010

Log In


Don't have an account?

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.