Canada: National-building in a federal welfare state

In Canada, three distinct models of federalism govern different social programmes: classical federalism, with programmes run exclusively by one level of government; shared costs federalism, with the federal government financially supporting provincial programmes; and joint-decision federalism, where formal approval by both levels of government is mandatory before any action can take place. Each of these models creates different decision rules, altering the mix of governments and ideologies at the bargaining table, redistributing power among those who have a seat at the table, and requiring different levels of consensus for action. The result has been three separate kinds of interactions between institutions and policy during the postwar era of welfare state expansion. As in the era of expansion, the new politics of social policy in the 'silver age' had to flow through the three distinctive institutional filters created by federal institutions, helping to explain the uneven impact of retrenchment in Canada. Exclusively federal programmes were unprotected by intergovernmental relations and fully exposed to shifts in national politics, with dramatic cuts especially in unemployment benefits. In contrast, joint-decision federalism helped protect contributory pensions from radical restructuring; while sharedcost federalism made it possible to preserve the basic model of the health care system, at least in respect of hospital, physician and diagnostic services, if not always in respect of the generosity of funding.