1. The Courts and Canadian Federalism: From Watertight Compartment to Shared Responsibility

2. Purpose Introduction Exclusive compartments –POGG –Trade and Commerce The modern era – sharing of responsibility

3. Introduction CA, 1867 - “all conflict of jurisdiction had been avoided”, Sir John A Macdonald CA, 1867 – turned out to be ambiguous and open-ended in practice Expansion of government role in social and economic policy – unheard of in 1867 CA, 1867 – failed to address the division of the newly emerging responsibilities

4. Exclusive Compartments view JCPC interpreted s. 91 and s. 92 as mutually exclusive Broad interpretation of Property and Civil Rights in s. 92 signifying moment in constitutional history. Narrowed federal powers to avoid overlap – specifically, POGG and Trade and Commerce

5. Current State: Intergovernmental Relations Concurrent responsibilities Complex mix of cooperation, coordination An informal process: institutions and procedures not set out in law or constitution First Ministers, Ministers, and officials meetings and councils Intergovernmental agreements set out shared priorities and clarify roles and responsibilities, but have no legal status

6. Your thoughts… What are the benefits of concurrent responsibility? What are the concerns of concurrent responsibility?

7. Current Issues of Shared Responsibility Benefits: -no reason for not taking action, the defense of “lacking jurisdiction” doesn’t exist -promotes co-operation and coordination -a mechanism that allows greater flexibility and adaptability for addressing emerging issues Concerns: -shared responsibility  diluted accountability? -democratic deficit decision making behind closed doors -little public participation -lacks transparency