Free download. Book file PDF easily for everyone and every device. You can download and read online Federalism in Canada and Australia: The Early Years file PDF Book only if you are registered here. And also you can download or read online all Book PDF file that related with Federalism in Canada and Australia: The Early Years book. Happy reading Federalism in Canada and Australia: The Early Years Bookeveryone. Download file Free Book PDF Federalism in Canada and Australia: The Early Years at Complete PDF Library. This Book have some digital formats such us :paperbook, ebook, kindle, epub, fb2 and another formats. Here is The CompletePDF Book Library. It's free to register here to get Book file PDF Federalism in Canada and Australia: The Early Years Pocket Guide.

Given these critical issues in federalism and education, this volume examines ongoing challenges and policy strategies in ten countries, namely Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Germany, Italy, Spain, Switzerland, United Kingdom, and the United States. These chapters and the introductory overview aim to examine how countries with federal systems of government design, govern, finance, and assure quality in their educational systems spanning from early childhood to secondary school graduation. Particular attention is given to functional division between governmental layers of the federal system as well as mechanisms of intergovernmental cooperation both vertically and horizontally.


  • ARCHIVED Federalism in Canada.
  • Analytic Framework?
  • Serial Information;

The chapters aim to draw out comparative lessons and experiences in an area of great importance to not only federal countries but also countries that are emerging toward a federal system. Front matter in epub format 0. Publius 43 1 —43 CrossRef Google Scholar. Corry JA The federal dilemma. Davis SR The federal principle: a journey through time in quest of a meaning.

Reward Yourself

Dicey AV Introduction to the study of the law of the constitution, 8th edn. Duchacek ID Comparative federalism: the territorial dimension of politics.

Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke Google Scholar. Elazar DJ Exploring federalism. Elazar DJ Cooperative federalism. Erk J Austria: a federation without federalism. Publius 34 1 :1—20 CrossRef Google Scholar. Erk J Iron houses in the tropical heat: decentralization reforms in Africa and their consequences. Fenna A The malaise of federalism: comparative reflections on Commonwealth—state relations.

Fenna A Federalism and intergovernmental coordination. Finegold K The United States: federalism and its counter-factuals. Forsyth M Unions of states: the theory and practice of confederation. Freeman E History of federal government from the foundation of the Achaian league to the disruption of the United States, vol 1.


  • Scavengers (Posadas County #1) (Posadas County Mysteries Book 11);
  • The Easy Way to Train Your Retail Team. Train Your Team on the floor On the Job. On the GO.
  • Federalism, Australian Style: Federal-state financial socialism | Cayman Financial Review!
  • Common menu bar.
  • Chinese Dreams (Kindle Single).

Freeman EA Comparative politics, 2nd edn. Gerring J What is a case study and what is it good for? Greer SL How does decentralisation affect the welfare state? Territorial politics and the welfare state in the UK and US. In: Courchene J, Allan R eds Canada: the state of the federation — carbon pricing and environmental federalism.

Hicks U Federalism: failure and success, a comparative study. Hueglin TO Comparing federalisms: variations or distinct models? Hueglin T, Fenna A Comparative federalism: a systematic inquiry, 2nd edn. Karch A Democratic laboratories: policy diffusion among the American states.

Contact information of Oxford University Press

Kens P Lochner v. New York: economic regulation on trial. Kincaid J Confederal federalism and citizen representation in the European Union. Krane D The evolutionary patterns of federal states. Laski H The obsolescence of federalism. New Republic 98 — Google Scholar. Lemco J Political stability in federal governments. Praeger, New York Google Scholar. Lenaerts K Constitutionalism and the many faces of federalism.

Greenwood Press, Westport Google Scholar. Greenwood, Westport Google Scholar. Livingston WS A note on the nature of federalism. Markovic M The federal experience in Yugoslavia. Ethnopolitics 8 1 :5—25 CrossRef Google Scholar. The inclusion of these words as the "final standard of justification for limits on rights and freedoms" 66 refers courts to the reason that the Charter was entrenched in the Constitution: to ensure that Canadian society remains free and democratic. Bijuralism And Bilingualism Canada is one of the few countries in the world that operates under both the common law and the civil law.

Canada also enacts legislation in its two official languages, English and French. This combined duality has had a significant impact on Canada's brand of federalism, which has been shaped, and continues to be shaped, by the related concepts of bijuralism and bilingualism. Bijuralism refers to the existence of two legal systems within a single country. The origins of Canada's legal duality date back more than two centuries.

After the Conquest, the British introduced the common law and equity. However, local attachment to French private law led the British Parliament to pass the Quebec Act in , which restored French laws and customs, with the exception of criminal and penal matters. Canada's two legal systems were officially entrenched in the Constitution Act, under section 92 13 which provided for exclusive provincial jurisdiction over property and civil rights.

Due to this provision, the province of Quebec has been able to make the Civil Code of Quebec the framework of its private law, while the rest of Canada is governed by the common law. The duality of Canada's legal system is also reflected in the composition of the Supreme Court of Canada: under the Supreme Court Act, three of its nine judges must be chosen from Quebec. When combined with bilingualism, bijuralism presents a major challenge to the legislative drafter. In effect, the legislator is drafting for four audiences: civil law Francophones, common law Francophones, civil law Anglophones, and common law Anglophones.

This harmonization involved reviewing all federal statutes and regulations whose application relied on provincial private law and then harmonizing their contents to incorporate the notions and vocabulary of Quebec civil law. Bijural states such as Canada provide valuable examples of the way in which legal systems can co-exist in harmony. In Canada today, official legal culture is neither French nor English, neither civil law nor common law; instead, it is all these together, with all the ambiguity that such complexity implies. In Canada, anglophones represent about seventy-five percent of the population and with francophones accounting for the remaining quarter.

The majority of francophones are concentrated in the province of Quebec, although more than one million francophones make their homes in other provinces, especially New Brunswick, Ontario, and Manitoba. Parliament is required by section of the Constitution Act , to use both English and French in its proceedings and publications. Any member of the public therefore has a constitutional right to communicate with and receive services from any institution of the Parliament or government of Canada in English or in French.

Federalism - Wikipedia

The equal status of French and English was recognized in by section 18 of the Charter, which provides that both language versions of statutes are equally authoritative. These constitutional provisions require Canada to enact legislation in French and English at the federal level, and, in some cases, at the provincial level as well.

Several other countries legislate in two or more languages.

In some bilingual jurisdictions, such as Ireland and South Africa, the constitution, or a statute, provides that one language version is to precedence over the other. In other jurisdictions, such as Hong Kong and Wales, both language versions are equally authentic. When the two versions of the statute contradict each other, as will inevitably happen from time to time, legislative drafters being only human, after all, courts employ the "shared meaning rule" to determine which meaning should prevail.

Where there is an overlap in the meaning between the two language versions that are otherwise at variance, the meaning that is shared by both versions is the one to be used, unless it so for some reason unacceptable. The adoption of statutes in both languages enhances the clarity of legal drafting. Bilingual drafting and legal translation frequently highlight ambiguities in the first language, allowing revisions to be made before final adoption of the statute. Two versions of a statute can also be of great assistance when a court is asked to interpret its terms "because there is then an additional tool to determine the true legislative intent.

The Official Languages Act, 84 adopted first in and amended in , is a legislative measure taken to fulfil the constitutional obligation of governmental bilingualism in Canada.

ARCHIVED Federalism in Canada

The Act's preamble underlines the equal status of English and French in institutions of the Parliament and government of Canada as well as the guarantee of full and equal access in both languages to Parliament, to the laws of Canada, and to the courts. The objectives of the Official Languages Act include ensuring respect, equality of status, and equal rights regarding the use of English and French as the official languages of Canada, particularly with respect to their use in parliamentary proceedings, legislation, administration of justice, and in the work of federal institutions.

In addition, the Act supports the development of English and French linguistic minority communities and promotes the equality of status and use of both languages within Canadian society. In fact, the objectives and values embodied in the Official Languages Act have given it a special place in the Canadian legal framework. This status was recognized by the Federal Court of Appeal in when it held that the Act was not an ordinary statute, but rather one that belonged to the privileged category of quasi-constitutional legislation which reflected "certain basic goals of our society.