Thomas Hueglin

Federalism in Canada tells the turbulent story of shared sovereignty and divided governance from Confederation to the present time with three main objectives in mind. The first objective is to convince readers that federalism is the primary animating force in Canadian politics, and that it is therefore worth engaging with its complex nature and dynamic. The second objective is to bring into closer focus the contested concepts about the meaning and operation of federalism that are at the root of the divide between English Canada and Quebec in particular. The third objective is to give recognition to the trajectory of Canada’s Indigenous peoples in the context of Canadian federalism, from years of abusive neglect to belated efforts of inclusion. The book focuses on the constitution with its ambiguous allocation of divided powers, the pivotal role of the courts in balancing these powers, and the political leaders whose interactions oscillate between intergovernmental conflict and cooperation. This focus on executive leadership and judicial supervision is framed by considerations of Canada’s regionalized political economy and cultural diversity, giving students a compelling and nuanced view of federalism in Canada.

Federalism in Canada tells the turbulent story of shared sovereignty and divided governance from Confederation to the present time with three main objectives in mind. The first objective is to convince readers that federalism is the primary animating force in Canadian politics, and that it is therefore worth engaging with its complex nature and dynamic. The second objective is to bring into closer focus the contested concepts about the meaning and operation of federalism that are at the root of the divide between English Canada and Quebec in particular. The third objective is to give recognition to the trajectory of Canada’s Indigenous peoples in the context of Canadian federalism, from years of abusive neglect to belated efforts of inclusion. The book focuses on the constitution with its ambiguous allocation of divided powers, the pivotal role of the courts in balancing these powers, and the political leaders whose interactions oscillate between intergovernmental conflict and cooperation. This focus on executive leadership and judicial supervision is framed by considerations of Canada’s regionalized political economy and cultural diversity, giving students a compelling and nuanced view of federalism in Canada.

Comparative Federalism: A Systematic Inquiry, Second Edition is a uniquely comprehensive, analytic, and genuinely comparative introduction to the principles and practices, as well as the institutional compromises, of federalism. Hueglin and Fenna draw from their diverse research on federal systems to focus on four main models-America, Canada, Germany, and the European Union-but also to range widely over other cases. At the heart of the book is careful analysis of the relationship between constitutional design and amendment, fiscal relations, institutional structures, intergovernmental relations, and judicial review. Such analysis serves the dual role of helping the reader understand federalism and providing a comparative framework from which to assess the record of federal systems. The second edition has been extensively revised and updated, taking into account new developments in federal systems and incorporating insights from the growing body of literature in the field. It includes two new chapters, "Fiscal Federalism" and "The Limits of Federalism."

Classical Debates for the 21st Century distinctively reconsiders the canon of political thought, in the context of current world events, by presenting debates between the ideas of classical theorists. It is through these debates that Thomas O. Hueglin argues that exclusive state sovereignty, individual citizenship, and majority rule have become questionable categories of political theory and practice in a globalizing world. To a large extent, the classical canon of political thought has been constructed in order to give legitimacy to these categories, but it is time to rethink the validity of that canon, and to search for alternative voices and traditions that emphasize plurality, shared sovereignty, and complex patterns of representation and decision-making. This does not mean that the familiar names in the classical canon have to disappear. But they should be examined more critically for their continued importance, and additional theorists thus far neglected should complement them. Each chapteris organized as a debate between two theorists with contrasting views and approaches. At the end of each chapter, there is a critical evaluation of these political theorists' continued or renewed relevance.