FROM WELFARE STATE TO SOCIAL INVESTMENT TO NIGHT WATCHMAN: SHIFTING ROLES OF THE FEDERAL STATE IN CANADAPresentation to the Department of Politics and Public Administration, Ryerson University

Toronto, November 22, 2012

Michael J. Prince

2

INTERPRETING THE STATE AND THE SOCIAL “Listening to and taking seriously discursive constructions and re-

constructions of the role of the state can provide a first indicator of change.” (Jenson and Saint-Martin 2003)

“Indeed, the intellectual evolution of a nation can be traced, in part, by charting the rise and fall of competing interpretations of government.” (Banting 1986)

The state is an assemblage of formal authorities, organizational structures and processes, policy instruments, relations of power, material resources and practices, as well as discursive and symbolic aspects

The social is also multi-faceted conceptually and materially, a dynamic and contested policy space operating within historically specific contexts

3

THE THREE IMAGES AND ROLES Welfare state:

Term emerged in the 1940s Depicts a period of state intervention across a range of

public activities, services, benefits, and human needs A phrase used mainly by academics and activists

Social Investment state: Term popularized in 1990s and early 2000s Reaction to neo-liberal critiques of the welfare state Emphasizes productive aspects of certain social programs Discourse of academics and policy makers in Europe and

North America Night Watchman state:

Oldest of the three conceptions of the state, 19th century Revival in post-9-11 world in some nations Limited discussion to date in policy communities, more so by

some academics

4

SOME QUESTIONS What interpretations of the state are now at play in

Canada?

What is the Harper Conservative’s conception of the federal role in the federation?

How and where is the Harper perspective evident in public policy?

What might this mean materially for social policy, for intergovernmental relations, and for citizenship?

What does it mean conceptually for the study of Canadian politics and public administration?

5

COMPARING THREE IMAGES OF THE STATE

Welfare state

Social investment

Night watchman

Orientation Redistributive Productive Regulative

Notion of security

Compensation and insurance

Early intervention and adaptation

Personal and community protection

Risks Unemployment, old age, sickness, disability, workplace injury

Work-life family balance, aging population, skill deficits in knowledge economy

Bullying, identity theft, human trafficking, immigration fraud, border security

Policy instruments

Taxes and “passive” cash transfers

“Active” services and programs

Legislation and rules, and state facilities

Political age Keynesian, Fordist

Post-industrialism

Anti-terrorism, politics of fear

6

HARPER, FEDERALISM AND SOCIAL POLICY Rhetoric of “open federalism” or classical federalism,

true in some policy areas but no so much in others Open federalism meant cancelled agreements on

child care and early learning and on Aboriginal services

In law and order agenda, more like “obligation federalism” with unilateral federal action and the imposition of considerable spending responsibilities onto provinces

Criminal law power preferred policy instrument rather than federal spending power: legal elements of citizenship

Confining discretion of judges and parole boards while widening discretion of police and immigration officials

7

WAYS OF UNDERSTANDING DEVELOPMENTS IN THE SOCIAL ROLE OF THE STATE

1. A major change forward: Over past decade or so, welfare states are transforming to social investment states ( a change from one state form to another with the substitution of one kind of expenditures for another more active and targeted kind of government spending)

2. A slide back in time: Increasing emphasis on national security and public order indicates a movement from a social state to a night watchman style of governance (a sliding back from one state form to another)

3. A stacking and shifting of roles: Changes in the salience of discourse and in priorities of governments but underlying architecture and activities of state remain a complex and contradictory mix (a stacking of paradigms and discourses and shifting in relative emphasis)

8

IMPLICATIONS FOR STUDENTS OF POLITICS, PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION AND SOCIAL POLICY

Probe behind the latest policy discourse Always the intergovernmental: interdependencies

and externalities even under “open federalism” Look at historical contexts, trace policy legacies,

the circulation of ideas, and path dependencies Continued provincialization of social policy and

programs and variations across the country Activities and focus of social movements and civil

society organizations Examine the substance and the spin: the material

as well as the symbolic, including labour markets and social risks

9

SUMMARY Stephen Harper's perspective on social policy is

generally minimalist, tactical politically, and philosophically Hobbesian

Recent emphasis on criminal law power and making rules on policing, sentencing, corrections

Social investment in Canadian policy is more than a sound bite but less than a new phase in state formation; evident mostly in provincial spheres than at federal level

Changes in the social role of the state involve shifting, resurfacing , and submerging various aspects of government, rather than outright substitution of one role or paradigm for another

Federal and provincial states thus have layered characteristics and sedimentary outcomes

10

THANK YOU

Michael J. Prince

Lansdowne Professor of Social Policy

Faculty of Human and Social Development

University of Victoria

mprince@uvic.ca