UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Canadian public opinion and free trade Mayer, Michael Allan 1988

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1988_A8 M32_9.pdf [ 3.91MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0097745.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0097745-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0097745-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0097745-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0097745-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0097745-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0097745-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0097745-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0097745.ris

Full Text

CANADIAN PUBLIC OPINION AND FREE TRADE By MICHAEL ALLAN MAYER B.A., Western Washington.University,  1987  A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES Department o f P o l i t i c a l Science'  We accept t h i s t h e s i s as conforming to the r e q u i r e d standard  THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA August 1988 © M i c h a e l A l l a n Mayer, 1988  In  presenting  degree freely  at  this  the  thesis  in  partial  University  of  British  available for  copying  of  department publication  this or of  reference  thesis by  this  for  his thesis  scholarly  or for  her  The University of British C o l u m b i a 1956 Main Mall Vancouver, Canada V6T 1Y3  DE-6(3/81)  I further  purposes  the  requirements that  agree  may  representatives.  financial  of  of  Columbia, I agree  and study.  permission.  Department  fulfilment  It  gain shall not  be  the  for  Library  that permission granted  is  by  understood be  allowed  the  an  advanced  shall make for  extensive  head  that without  it  of  my  copying  or  my  written  ABSTRACT  T h i s t h e s i s begins with a review  of the e l i t e  over f r e e t r a d e with the U n i t e d S t a t e s . three-fold how  debate  I t then uses a  t h e o r e t i c a l framework t o formulate p r e d i c t i o n s of  mass o p i n i o n should  l i n e up.  I t then a n a l y z e s  o p i n i o n d a t a on f r e e t r a d e through  public  the use of  crosstabulations. Using a theory of changing t r a d e upon domestic  political  exposure to i n t e r n a t i o n a l  c l e a v a g e s formulated by Ronald  Rogowski, i t p r e d i c t s t h a t labour w i l l  oppose f r e e  trade  because i t i s a s c a r c e f a c t o r o f p r o d u c t i o n , and c a p i t a l will  support  i t because i t i s an abundant f a c t o r of  production. I t next uses work by, p r e d i c t t h a t respondents  among o t h e r s , W.A. Mackintosh t o  i n the " i n d u s t r i a l h e a r t l a n d "  r e g i o n s o f Canada--Quebec and O n t a r i o - - w i l l oppose f r e e t r a d e because i t t h r e a t e n s t o remove the p r o t e c t i v e  tariff  t h a t rewards import  replacement  i n d u s t r i e s concentrated i n  those two r e g i o n s .  In c o n t r a s t , r e s i d e n t s o f the "resource  e x t r a c t i n g and p r o c e s s i n g h i n t e r l a n d " r e g i o n s — B r i t i s h Columbia, the P r a i r i e s and the A t l a n t i c — w i l l , support  f r e e trade because i t promises  on balance,  t o improve  their  export performance. The  t h e s i s then p r e d i c t s t h a t women and lower  Canadians w i l l  oppose f r e e t r a d e .  Women because many of the  s e r v i c e s t h a t they c o n s u m e — h e a l t h and day c a r e , example—will  become more d i f f i c u l t  income  for  to o b t a i n under a f r e e  trade may  regime.  Women w i l l  be t h r e a t e n  hold.  a l s o oppose  f r e e trade  the s e r v i c e s e c t o r j o b s that many women now  Lower income Canadians should oppose  because o f the p o s s i b l e d e l e t e r i o u s on the market  because i t  free  trade  e f f e c t s greater  t o a l l o c a t e s o c i a l s e r v i c e s could  reliance  have on  p o o r e r Canadians. Finally, Canadians w i l l the  the t h e s i s p r e d i c t s that oppose  "core-values"  United  f r e e trade  because  o f Canadian s o c i e t y :  remarkably b a l a n c e d . union and nonunion Regionally,  independence  from the  however, that o p i n i o n i s  F o r example,  the d i f f e r e n c e between  respondents i s only  the l a r g e s t d i f f e r e n c e s  five  percent.  i n support f o r f r e e  i s between B r i t i s h Columbia and O n t a r i o ,  amounts to l i t t l e  income appears to p l a y  opinion  but i t  more than a twenty percent d i f f e r e n c e .  Women a r e s l i g h t l y more l i k e l y t o oppose men;  i t t h r e a t e n s one of  States.  Data a n a l y s i s r e v e a l s ,  trade  better-educated  on f r e e t r a d e .  little  f r e e trade  than  r o l e i n the formation of  Last, d i f f e r e n c e s  in opinion  between  a r t i c u l a t e and l e s s w e l l educated Canadians a l s o appears to be  insignificant.  iv  page Abstract  ii  List  v  of T a b l e s  Acknowledgements Chapter One:  A Review of the E l i t e  xi Debate  1  Chapter Two : Theory  32  Chapter Three: A n a l y s i s  52  Chapter Four: C o n c l u s i o n  66  Bibliography  73  V  LIST OF TABLES  page Table  1: O v e r a l l Opinion by Union Membership  T a b l e 2: O v e r a l l Opinion by Region  ...54 55  T a b l e 3: O v e r a l l Opinion by Union Membership by Region...57 T a b l e 4: O v e r a l l Opinion by Gender  59  T a b l e 5: O v e r a l l Opinion by Income  60  T a b l e 6: O v e r a l l Opinion by Income by Region  61  T a b l e 7: O v e r a l l Opinion by E d u c a t i o n  63  vi ACKOWLEDGEMENTS I thank R i c h a r d Johnston f o r h i s i n v a l u a b l e advice on and o f f the S o f t b a l l diamond.  both  I am g r a t e f u l to Mike D r e a j e r f o r h i s help i n the use of the SPSS programme—he i s the sine qua non of t h i s thesis.  1  Chapter  One  A„.M¥IFJ_QE.J^  Much has been w r i t t e n about the Canada-US Free Trade Agreement(FTA), how to  but l i t t l e  or no a n a l y s i s i s a v a i l a b l e on  the Canadian p u b l i c sees the d e a l . fill  t h i s r e s e a r c h gap.  on f r e e t r a d e , s i f t  T h i s t h e s i s begins  I t w i l l d i s c u s s the e l i t e  debate  from t h i s debate and from the models and  t h e o r e t i c a l e x p e c t a t i o n s on the domestic p o l i t i c s of i n t e r n a t i o n a l trade hypotheses on mass o p i n i o n about the i s s u e , and then a n a l y z e d a t a from an August  1987 p o l l  on  f r e e trade to see i f mass p u b l i c a t t i t u d e s are as suggested or  assumed by the e l i t e debate. The FTA r e p r e s e n t s one of the most comprehensive  t r a d e p a c t s ever n e g o t i a t e d . of  the agreement  Couple the f a r - r e a c h i n g nature  w i t h the h i s t o r i c s u s p i c i o n many Canadians  have of American motives, and one can see why been overwhelming  free  support f o r the FTA.  t h e r e has not  The debate i n Canada  over f r e e t r a d e w i t h the U n i t e d S t a t e s i n the past years r e f l e c t s a robust p o l i t i c a l  three  environment wherein both  2 opponents and of  s u p p o r t e r s b a t t l e each other f o r the  support  the Canadian p u b l i c .  &AGKSBQIIHQ The and  Mulroney-Reagan FTA  the United  relationship. southern  The  Canadian i n t e r e s t  neighbour dates  Britain,  a convenient  i m p e r i a l market. r e c i p r o c i t y was otherwise  economic  i n f r e e t r a d e with i t s  and  if full  a n n e x a t i o n — w h i c h would  i r r e s i s t i b l e support  American fishermen  as a s o l u t i o n avoided."  who  had gained  t h i s caused between the United had  and  a t t i t u d e of i n and  because of  S t a t e s and  been p r e s s i n g f o r a t a r i f f  to  1  r i g h t s to f i s h  around Newfoundland and Labrador i n 1818,  who  lost  Some went as f a r "as to argue t h a t  Because of the i n c r e a s i n g l y b e l l i g e r e n t  "those  States  l a r g e replacement f o r the  Canada's economic problems--was to be  friction  the  which e l i m i n a t e d the o l d system  For Canada the United  essential  gather  time Canada  as f a r back as the r e p e a l of  c o l o n i a l preference.  offered  the f i r s t  S t a t e s have forged a new  Corn Laws i n Great of  i s not  the  Britain,  agreement (between  the United S t a t e s and  Canada) saw  the two  B r i t i s h and Canadian r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s  questions."  2  s u c c e s s f u l l y negotiated  the o p p o r t u n i t y to combine  a r e c i p r o c i t y t r e a t y with Washington  T h e P o l i t i c s of Canada's Economic R e l a t i o n s h i p with U n i t e d S t a t e s : An I n t r o d u c t i o n . " I.h.e.JPja^  l u  Ejcjojnjmij^^ 2  .  the  Denis S t a i r s  and G i l b e r t Winham, eds. (Toronto: U n i v e r s i t y of P r e s s , 1985.) p. 2 K e n n e t h McNaught, Xh.e__..P^ P e l i c a n Books, 1982) p. 107.  Toronto (London:  3 by c o n v i n c i n g Southern s e n a t o r s  t h a t an economic agreement  of t h i s scope would make the Canadian economy s t r o n g enough to r e s i s t  annexationist pressures  therefore preventing to the United The 1866  the a d d i t i o n of " f r e e - s o i l "  territory  States.  Americans abrogated the 1854 R e c i p r o c i t y T r e a t y i n  f o r two major reasons.  "startled  of Northern s t a t e s ,  First,  the United  to r e a l i z e t h a t i n some years  from Canada than i t was s e l l i n g . "  3  S t a t e s was  i t was buying more  Second, B r i t a i n ' s  a s s i s t a n c e to the C o n f e d e r a t e s t a t e s d u r i n g the American C i v i l W a r — t h e use, f o r example, of Canadian t e r r i t o r y by r e b e l r a i d e r s i n t o the N o r t h — c o u p l e d with complaints of e f f e c t e d economic i n t e r e s t s on both s i d e s of the border a l l helped  lead the Americans to c a n c e l the t r e a t y .  The negotiate  e a r l y governments of Canada worked hard to a new agreement.  Even though Prime M i n i s t e r  Macdonald f i n a l l y gave up and c r e a t e d he s t i l l  argued t h a t the new t a r i f f  e n t i c e the United  the " N a t i o n a l P o l i c y , "  s t r u c t u r e would  States into bargaining  r e c i p r o c i t y agreement.  Thus, o n l y  probably  f o r another  l a t e r d i d the l i n k  between the t a r i f f w a l l and the s u r v i v a l of Canada as a d i s t i n c t i v e p o l i t i c a l u n i t come to be s t r e s s e d a t the governmental l e v e l . "  4  F o r example, the C o n s e r v a t i v e s  s u c c e s s f u l l y campaigned a g a i n s t the L i b e r a l p o s i t i o n i n the 1891 3  4  e l e c t i o n equating  u n r e s t r i c t e d r e c i p r o c i t y with a  J . L . G r a n a t s t e i n , "Free Trade Between Canada and the United S t a t e s : The Issue That W i l l Not Go Away," i n S t a i r s and Winham, op. c i t . , p. 14 S t a i r s and Winham, op. c i t . , p. 2  4  b e t r a y a l of Canada's  independence and of the B r i t i s h  connection. The L i b e r a l m a j o r i t y i n 1896 brought l i t t l e d i s m a n t l i n g Macdonald's N a t i o n a l P o l i c y .  interest in  But by  1911 Prime  M i n i s t e r L a u r i e r n e g o t i a t e d a r e c i p r o c i t y agreement, was c o n f i n e d mainly to n a t u r a l p r o d u c t s . ratify  which  P a r l i a m e n t d i d not  the d e a l f o r f e a r of American a n n e x a t i o n , and 5  because Robert Borden's C o n s e r v a t i v e s s u c c e s s f u l l y the i s s u e by a l l y i n g  the p a r t y w i t h the b u s i n e s s and  manufacturing i n t e r e s t s of c e n t r a l Canada. interests believed  exploited  the agreement  would  These b u s i n e s s  lead to the  abandonment of t a r i f f s on manufactured goods as w e l l . In s p i t e of t h i s ,  the volume of trade between Canada  and the United S t a t e s grew apace.  Under  the impetus of the  Great D e p r e s s i o n , the two c o u n t r i e s n e g o t i a t e d again  i n 1938, t a r i f f  r e d u c t i o n s on s e l e c t e d  i n 1935, and  products.  These r e d u c t i o n s d i d not c a r r y the emotional baggage of the 1911 pact because they were seen as simply a r e n e g o t i a t i o n of the t a r i f f moving  s c h e d u l e and an attempt to g e t the economy  and c r e a t e j o b s .  I t was not c o n s i d e r e d to be a move .  to s e l l Canada out to the Americans. Economic War.  i n t e g r a t i o n continued through the Second World  Indeed, i f Mackenzie King had supported a  comprehensive economic 5  agreement—which  would  have c r e a t e d a  T h e legendary statement of Speaker of the House "Champ" C l a r k who "hoped to see the day when the American f l a g w i l l f l o a t over every square f o o t of the B r i t i s h - N o r t h American p o s s e s s i o n s c l e a r to the North P o l e , " i s now f a m i l i a r to any educated Canadian.  customs  union--hammered  hfaYe gone even  further.  Canadian- i n d e p e n d e n c e , remembered  out  Americans.".  The  1965  agreement Pact  Canadian  now  the  late  investment  control was this  policies  policy  economic  American  patterns  that  result sought  he  f o r most  a major  to d i v e r t  O p t i o n was  years.  Automotive  exports  seven p e r c e n t o f  6  capital  party  sought  f o r example,  push from  The  reduce  1972  toward  e x p e r i e n c e d by  autarky.  Option" Briefly,  States a  the s t a r t .  the  w i t h the  American  t o t h e EEC  from  to  trumpeted  "Third  the U n i t e d  trade  worry  i n Canada.  as a means t o d e a l  doomed  reason and  about  economy.  of t h i s  performance  market  Auto  efficiency  t h o u g h t would  amount o f C a n a d i a n  Third  The  improved  W a l t e r Gordon,  of the C a n a d i a n  significant  6  problem.  a direct  The  make up  Canada  economic  States.  i n the p a r l i a m e n t a r y L i b e r a l  change Canada's t r a d e  economic  twenty  "sold  1960s many C a n a d i a n s began t o  the i n f l u e n c e - o f  Nationalists  who  i t has been  gross domestic product.  But by  w o r r i e d about  minister  the U n i t e d  industry's  would  i n h i s t o r y - - h e d i d not  a c c e s s t o t h e U.S.  exports i n the p a s t States  integration  t h e n e x t major  a u t o m o t i v e p r o d u c t s and  the U n i t e d  about  the prime  P a c t was  auto  this  his place  between C a n a d a and  the Canadian  rising to  as  provides duty-free  Canadian for  Auto  i n 1948,  K i n g , however, was and  want t o be to the  out  and  Asia.  The  poor  industrialized  P a u l W o n n a c o t t , "The A u t o P a c t : P l u s or M i n u s ? " i n John C r i s p o , ed. F r e e T r a d e : The R e a l S t o r y . ( T o r o n t o : Gage P u b l i s h i n g , 1988) p. 54.  6 nations  soon a f t e r the p o l i c y ' s announcement  destroyed a strategy prosperous e r a . "  that might have worked  was  i n a more  The 1973 o i l shock promised  7  ahead f o r the i n t e r n a t i o n a l economy. be sure,  "simply  a t a n g i b l e consequence  troubles  The energy c r i s i s , of the i n c r e a s i n g  i n t e g r a t i o n and interdependence of the world economy. Canada,  i t exposed the weaknesses  o t h e r words,  the o p t i o n  to  For  of the T h i r d O p t i o n .  In  was:  ...fundamentally i n e r r o r from the s t a r t . The d i r e c t i o n i t t r i e d to s e t f o r Canada was wrong because the democracies were moving...not toward g r e a t e r n a t i o n a l independence but toward the acceptance, o f t e n r e l u c t a n t l y , to the r e a l i t y of interdependence and the consequent l i m i t a t i o n s on sovereignty.... 8  Canadians f e l t  the r a m i f i c a t i o n s of the f a i l u r e of the  T h i r d O p t i o n — w h i c h never achieved anyway--during  the r e c e s s i o n  of the e a r l y 1980s.  response, the Trudeau government t a l k s w i t h the Americans. administration  i t s ambitious g o a l s In  sought s e c t o r a l f r e e - t r a d e  However, the Reagan  showed l i t t l e  i n t e r e s t i n s t a r t i n g such  negotiations. The f e a r t h a t p r o t e c t i o n i s t sentiment on C a p i t o l H i l l would soon become u n c o n t r o l l a b l e f e a t u r e of the immediate government's  c o n s t i t u t e s the major  background  to the Mulroney  d e c i s i o n to pursue b i l a t e r a l  w i t h the United  States.  Canada b e l i e v e d  f r e e trade  that i t would  the most d e t r i m e n t a l l y a f f e c t e d of a l l American Anthony Westell, I.n..t.ej£^^ eibid. 7  "Economic  talks be  trading  I n t e g r a t i o n with the USA." November/December 1984. p. 5  7 p a r t n e r s i f i t d i d not a c h i e v e some l e v e l of exemption any American  discriminatory practices.  Canada r e a l i z e d  that  this,  i t was the o n l y i n d u s t r i a l i z e d  t h a t had unguaranteed million.  Along w i t h  from  country  access to a market of at l e a s t 100  In a d d i t i o n ,  the Macdonald Royal Commission's  recommendation of f r e e t r a d e w i t h the U n i t e d S t a t e s p r o v i d e d intellectual  support f o r the p o l i c y .  B r i a n Mulroney their  and Ronald  respective  9  On January  1, 1988  Reagan s i g n e d c o p i e s of the FTA i n  capitals.  The b a s i c f e a t u r e s of a f r e e - t r a d e agreement such as the one under study here should now be made c l e a r . dictates  It  that:  member c o u n t r i e s r e t a i n the power to f i x t h e i r own s e p a r a t e t a r i f f s on imports from the r e s t of the world; and second, the a r e a i s equipped with r u l e s of o r i g i n , designed to c o n f i n e i n t r a - a r e a f r e e t r a d e to p r o d u c t s o r i g i n a t i n g i n , or mainly produced i n , the a r e a . 1 0  Main elements  of the Mulroney-Reagan Free Trade  Agreement a r e , b r i e f l y : a)tariffs will On average,  tariffs  f o r America's exports. items l i k e a  be phased  out over ten years from 1989.  a r e a l r e a d y t i n y - - l e s s than one percent  imports and l e s s than f i v e p e r c e n t f o r i t s  The averages, however, "obscure h i g h t a r i f f s on timber and c l o t h e s . "  1 1  T h e commission generated a t h r e e volume r e p o r t which, among o t h e r t h i n g s , s p e l l e d out the j u s t i f i c a t i o n s f o r f r e e trade w i t h the U n i t e d S t a t e s . The commision a l s o sponsored seventy-two volumes o f r e s e a r c h under the r u b r i c s of economics, p o l i t i c s and i n s t i t u t i o n s of government, and law and c o n s t i t u t i o n a l i s s u e s . °Pe t e r Robson , Ihe__.E.c.Q.n-Q^^ • (London: George A l l e n & Unwin, 1980.) p. 30. T_h.e._.E.c_o.n_ojDLiat., F e b r u a r y 6, 1988.  1  11  8 b) investment r e g u l a t i o n s w i l l be l i b e r a l i z e d . R e s t r i c t i o n s on e s t a b l i s h i n g new f i r m s w i l l be reduced; United  States w i l l  direct  investments of " f i f t y b i l l i o n  l i k e l y be the b e n e f i c i a r y ; i t s f i r m s had  v a s t l y overshadowing the eighteen other  way."  The  i n Canada i n 1986,  billion  t h a t went the  lz  c) n a t i o n a l p r e f e r e n c e  on a l l government c o n t r a c t s worth  more than $25,000 w i l l be e l i m i n a t e d . d) many a g r i c u l t u r a l quotas w i l l be l i f t e d ; on  trade  restrictions  i n energy w i l l end.  e) trade d i s p u t e s  w i l l be s e t t l e d under the a p p r o p r i a t e  n a t i o n a l law; appeals w i l l be heard by a p a n e l  to ensure  t h a t n a t i o n a l laws are f a i r l y a p p l i e d .  Both s i d e s of the contemporary debate on f r e e have generated v a s t amounts of l i t e r a t u r e .  trade  Most of the  d i s c u s s i o n has been c a r r i e d out i n the o p i n i o n  and e d i t o r i a l  pages of major Canadian newspapers such as T.hfi._.Gl.ob_e„anjl M_a.ll, M.a_cJ.ejin_3. and The.JllnsJlslsJ^J^si,. representative  and popular  Two of the most  books devoted to a debate on f r e e  t r a d e has been a volume e d i t e d by Duncan Cameron i n 1986 e n t i t l e d The Free Trade P a p e r s trade e d i t o r i a l s t a n c e .  —it  adopted an a n t i - f r e e  On the pro s i d e of the argument i s  "Ibid . D u n c a n Cameron, ed. Th.e.„i^^ Lorimer and Co., 1986) 13  1 3  (Toronto:  9 John C r i s p o ' s t h i n n e r and  l e s s ambtious 1988  Er.e.e„..Jxadj&i_jrjb.B.  Rej3Ll._S..t_o.r_X..  14  In many ways, the d i s c u s s i o n r e f l e c t s themes popular i n Canada f o r g e n e r a t i o n s . concern  For i n s t a n c e , there i s s t i l l  a  about the asymmetry of the Canadian-American  relationship,  the s o - c a l l e d  "elephant  and mouse"  c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n of the r e l a t i o n s h i p coined by P i e r r e Trudeau; t h e r e i s an uneasiness, twenty years ago, investment f o r an  although not as s t r o n g as  about the l e v e l s of f o r e i g n d i r e c t  i n Canada;  today  as y e s t e r d a y  " i n d u s t r i a l s t r a t e g y " to prevent  there are  calls  Canadians from  f o r e v e r being hewers of wood and drawers of water. There are, however, some important past. out  d i f f e r e n c e s with  the  Most i m p o r t a n t l y , d i a l o g u e on the i s s u e i s c a r r i e d  i n a m i l i e u i n f l u e n c e d by the r a p i d  the i n t e r n a t i o n a l economic system.  That  p a r t i c i p a n t s accept  t h a t Canada can not  economic sphere  expect  standard  and  of l i v i n g .  t r a n s f o r m a t i o n of  to maintain  i s , almost a l l "go  i t alone" i n the  or improve i t s high  In other words, Canada i s an i n t e g r a t e d  member of a l a r g e r economic whole t h a t i s c h a r a c t e r i z e d by the m o b i l i t y of c a p i t a l , The  labour and  ideas.  e l i m i n a t i o n of the g o l d standard  of f l o a t i n g exchange r a t e s has caused  and  another  the  adoption  change i n the  debate over Canada's economic r e l a t i o n s h i p with the United States. dollar  In f a c t ,  t h i s concern  f o r the value of the Canadian  i s a f u r t h e r r e s u l t of a r e c o g n i t i o n that the r e s t of  " J o h n C r i s p o , ed. Gage P u b l i s h i n g ,  Free.Jxadej..^ 1988)  (Toronto:  10 the world  impinges on Canada's economic d e c i s i o n s .  P l a z a Agreement by the f i v e Japan, the United was  largest  The  industrialized  S t a t e s , West Germany, B r i t a i n  1985  nations—  and  France-  c a l c u l a t e d to make American e x p o r t s more a t t r a c t i v e i n  the r i c h e r n a t i o n s i n order to reduce the American deficit.  Canada was  ignored d u r i n g the c l a n d e s t i n e  n e g o t i a t i o n s l e a d i n g up  to the arrangement, d e s p i t e the  t h a t such an a c t i o n c o u l d have a g r e a t Canadian economy. Canadian d o l l a r  trade  The  impact on  the  r e l a t i v e l y cheap value of  the  in relation  a t r a d i n g advantage--it  to the American one  makes Canadian exports  fact  g i v e s Canada t h a t much  more a t t r a c t i v e to the American market. A kh + ^d diffvwvn&v  i s fehafe fehe United  Sfeafeew bass  i n c r e a s i n g l y become Canada's l a r g e s t consumer of Canadian exports. percent One  In 1986,  the US  accounted f o r almost e i g h t y  of Canada's t r a d e — a value of over C$93  upshot of t h i s c o n c e n t r a t i o n  the American economy, only a d r a s t i c  intertwined'with  r e s t r u c t u r i n g of  Canada's economy c o u l d change p r e s e n t  trade p a t t e r n s .  dependence, as s t a t e d above, makes Canadian  in  the United Still  another  reported  exporters  p r o t e c t i o n i s t measure adopted  i n f l u e n c e on the f r e e trade debate i s the investment  elsewhere c o n t r o l l e d by Canadians. As  This  States.  amount of f o r e i g n d i r e c t  1 5  1 5  i s t h a t the Canadian  economy has become so dependent upon and  p a r t i c u l a r l y v u l n e r a b l e to any  billion.  i n the United Between 1975  i n TJl^FdJ..Qjjjojai.s.t., October 10,  1987.  States and  and  1986,  11 the value of Canadian d i r e c t  investment i n the U n i t e d S t a t e s  (the t a r g e t of w e l l over h a l f of Canada's f o r e i g n investment) soared from C$5.6 b i l l i o n Canadian  a s s e t s i n America now  H a r r i s Bankcorp Illinois),  (the t h i r d  and  to C$39.9 b i l l i o n .  include  Bloomingdale's,  l a r g e s t bank h o l d i n g f i r m i n  twenty-three p e r c e n t of Dupont.  d a i r y producer i n New  direct  York,  The  the l a r g e s t j e w e l l e r y  leading  retailer  i n the U n i t e d S t a t e s , and the l a r g e s t school-bus o p e r a t o r i n North America  are a l l C a n a d i a n - c o n t r o l l e d .  every Canadian now The tariff  On  average,  owns a square f o o t of Manhattan.  f i n a l difference  b a r r i e r s (NTB)  States.  1 8  i s the new  t h r e a t of the  non-  to t r a d e between Canada and the U n i t e d  The GATT's success i n promoting t r a d e  liberalization  has induced c o u n t r i e s to s e a r c h f o r  a l t e r n a t i v e ways to impede t r a d e among n a t i o n s . NTBs i n c l u d e such t h i n g s as o u t r i g h t p r o h i b i t i o n , quotas, v o l u n t a r y export r e s t r a i n t s and r e s t r i c t i o n s ,  a l l o s t e n s i b l y put i n  p l a c e f o r reasons of h e a l t h , s a f e t y and other r e g u l a t i o n s . Increased NTB Canadian  a c t i v i t y was  interest  a l s o another major reason f o r  i n a comprehensive  In summary, the the contemporary  FTA. e l i t e debate over the  d i r e c t i o n of Canada's economic r e l a t i o n s h i p with the U n i t e d S t a t e s i n g e n e r a l , and over the 1988  FTA  in p a r t i c u l a r , i s  c o n d i t i o n e d by the r e c o g n i t i o n t h a t Canada's economy has become an i n t e g r a t e d member of an i n t e r n a t i o n a l system which 1 8  trading  i s c h a r a c t e r i z e d by the m o b i l i t y of c a p i t a l ,  T h e Economist,  J u l y 16,  1988.  12  labour and i d e a s .  The best way to approach  this  interdependence i s the crux of the argument between the s u p p o r t e r s and opponents  of the FTA.  Canadians have always  had to pay a p r i c e f o r m a i n t a i n i n g t h e i r the  United S t a t e s .  independence  But the FTA's p o s s i b l e  from  ramifications  upon Canada's s o c i e t y and economy generate the d i s p u t e s over the  Mulroney government's  initiative.  The r e s t of t h i s chapter w i l l on the FTA. politics, It the  review the e l i t e  debate  I t w i l l use the headings of economics,  s o c i e t y and c u l t u r e to s t r u c t u r e the d i s c u s s i o n .  i s beyond  the scope of t h i s c h a p t e r to pass judgment  m e r i t s of the v a r i o u s arguments  on  made, or to c o l l e c t  evidence to support or r e f u t e the c l a i m s made by the protagonists.  Rather, the purpose of t h i s review i s to  d e s c r i b e the p o i n t s made i n order to make hypotheses on mass opinion.  THE_ECONQMia AXES Economists have long trumpeted e l i m i n a t i n g market the  r e s t r i c t i o n s and d i s t o r t i o n s .  Indeed,  i d e a that n a t i o n s b e n e f i t from f r e e trade i s as o l d as  economics. the  the b e n e f i t s of  I t i s no more than an i n t e r n a t i o n a l e x t e n s i o n of  p r i n c i p l e s of comparative advantage.  p r o d u c e r s , whether by s p e c i a l i z i n g  That i s ,  they are f i r m s or c o u n t r i e s w i l l  profit  i n the areas which they have the b i g g e s t  advantage, or the s m a l l e s t d i s a d v a n t a g e over t h e i r  competitors.  The r o l e today  of t r a d e i n d e t e r m i n i n g the  comparative advantage of a f i r m or c o u n t r y  i s summed up by  r e c e n t KQ.0j7.0jn.ls_t l e a d e r : Trade means c o m p e t i t i o n . Competition means g r e a t e r e f f i c i e n c y and higher l i v i n g s t a n d a r d s . I n t e r n a t i o n a l c o m p e t i t i o n i s o f t e n the only c o m p e t i t i o n there can be between today's l a r g e s t companies: domestic economies p r o v i d e too s m a l l a marketplace.... 17  But  the new t w i s t on the o l d saw t h a t f r e e t r a d e  i n c r e a s e s e f f i c i e n c y and incomes i s the p r e d i c t i o n will  also create jobs.  that i t  Economists are d i v i d e d over the  FTA's e f f e c t s upon employment: there have been r e p o r t s t h a t the FTA w i l l  e i t h e r c r e a t e or d e s t r o y thousands of j o b s .  Supporters autarky—given  of the FTA c o n s i d e r f o o l i s h any move toward the g l o b a l i z a t i o n  of the world's economy.  Complex l i n k s among the i n d u s t r i a l i z e d independence a c o s t l y v e n t u r e . t h i s f a c t of l i f e with  the United  potential policy.  s t a t e s make economic  Canadians should  and pursue g r e a t e r economic  realize  integration  S t a t e s , to p r o t e c t themselves from the  shocks of any American d i s c r i m i n a t o r y t r a d e Supporters  of the FTA, i n f a c t ,  argue t h a t  along  w i t h exemption from p r o t e c t i o n i s t measures, e l i m i n a t i n g t r a d e b a r r i e r s between Canada and the United S t a t e s b r i n g at l e a s t  t h r e e t a n g i b l e b e n e f i t s t o the Canadian  economy.  1 7  will  T h e Economist, June 4 1988.  14  First,  i t will  industries.  improve the e f f i c i e n c y of Canada's  Supporters assume t h a t the  t a r i f f b a r r i e r s i s too g r e a t promotes an  inefficient  T a r i f f s protect  c o s t of  maintaining  because, among other  secondary manufacturing  i n d u s t r i e s from exposure to  things, i t  sector.  competitive  i n t e r n a t i o n a l market f o r c e s , which tends to b e n e f i t only owners and  employers of p r o t e c t e d  promoting i n d u s t r i e s t h a t can  sectors  compete world wide.  t r a d e r s p o i n t to a p r o d u c t i v i t y gap percent  "between Canadian and  suggest that  i t can  best  be  Canadian market i n t o the U.S. Second, the FTA i n Canada. argument.  This  of twenty to  of Free twenty-five  American manufacturers  c l o s e d by  and  i n t e g r a t i n g the  market."  18  reduce the number of branch p l a n t s  i s c l o s e l y r e l a t e d to the  efficiency  P r o t e c t i v e p o l i c i e s sustain a branch-plant  organization f i f t y percent designed  will  instead  the  of the  economy.  These branch p l a n t s  of Canadian manufacturing, and  to s e r v i c e the Canadian market, not  markets abroad.  This  i n turn adds c o s t s and  problems f o r managerial and  research  and  they  control are  seek a d d i t i o n a l creates  development  skills  in the Canadian work f o r c e . Related  to t h i s argument i s the p r e d i c t i o n t h a t the  w i l l bring gains Lipsey  and  through heightened c o m p e t i t i o n .  Robert York argue t h a t :  the FTA w i l l help u n l e a s h c o m p e t i t i v e that improve the economy's dynamism.  18  Richard  D u n c a n Cameron, " I n t r o d u c t i o n , "  op.  forces Competition  c i t . , p.  xxxi.  FTA  15 induces the use of the most c o s t - e f f e c t i v e and p r o d u c t i o n p r o c e s s e s .  inputs  1 8  Presumably, L i p s e y and York expect  i n d u s t r i e s to be able to  move i n t o new economic s e c t o r s and out of o l d ones more q u i c k l y than  they are able to now with t a r i f f and other  forms of p r o t e c t i o n . T h i r d , there w i l l  be fewer i n s t a n c e s of r e t a l i a t i o n .  T a r i f f w a l l s and a r t i f i c i a l b a r r i e r s can serve r e c i p r o c a l American a c t i o n .  Retaliation  to encourage  could weaken the  economic r e l a t i o n s h i p between the two c o u n t r i e s and hinder Canadian access of  to the a l l - i m p o r t a n t American market.  the p r o v i s i o n s of the FTA reduces the chance t h a t  will  happen.  "sideswipe"  Canada has gained  One this  exemption from the s o - c a l l e d  problem--US p r o t e c t i o n i s t or r e t a l i a t o r y  measures aimed at other u n f a i r t r a d e r s being a p p l i e d to Canada as w e l l . Supporters  2 0  a l s o argue t h a t the FTA extends and confirms  the r u l e s of the GATT to the Canadian-American a s s o c i a t i o n . GATT r u l e s i n c o r p o r a t e the p r i n c i p l e of n o n - d i s c r i m i n a t i o n which ensures t h a t c o u n t r i e s t r e a t a l l t h e i r t r a d i n g partners  alike.  One of the arguments made a g a i n s t the FTA i s t h a t i t v i o l a t e s the s p i r i t of the GATT t r e a t y .  R e l i a n c e on the  GATT to s o l v e Canada-US t r a d e problems i s , however, by s u p p o r t e r s  of the FTA.  Article  24 of the GATT  f r e e t r a d e agreements as long as they cover  permits  a substantial  R i c h a r d L i p s e y and Robert York, " T a r i f f s and Other Border Measures," i n John C r i s p o , op. c i t . , p. 27. ° I b i d , p.  i e  2  scorned  16 p o r t i o n (around e i g h t y p e r c e n t ) of a t r a d i n g r e l a t i o n s h i p . GATT i s c o n s i d e r e d  to be a cumbersome and u n p r e d i c t a b l e  o p t i o n ; n e g o t i a t i n g rounds can l a s t anywhere from f i v e to twenty y e a r s . replace  Frank Stone argues t h a t the FTA " w i l l not  the GATT as a trade agreement between the two  c o u n t r i e s , nor can i t be viewed as an a l t e r n a t i v e to the GATT. " 21 So,  given  the urgency of many North American  i s s u e s , and g i v e n  the assumption t h a t there  t h a t Canadian g r i e v a n c e s GATT there  trade  is little  chance  w i l l be e f f e c t i v e l y handled v i a  are c a l l s f o r a b i l a t e r a l d e a l .  t h r e a t to i n t e r n a t i o n a l trade  Again, the new  i n r e c e n t years  i s not the  t a r i f f but the n o n - t a r i f f b a r r i e r (NTB), something which the GATT i s i l l  prepared to d e a l with.  I t i s believed  that  r e l i a n c e on the GATT o p t i o n w i l l b r i n g about a s c e n a r i o i n which Canadian i n t e r e s t s c o u l d be hurt by p r o t e c t i o n i s t legislation on.  from C a p i t o l H i l l  while  GATT n e g o t i a t i o n s  B e t t e r to s t r i k e a b i l a t e r a l d e a l now than to s u f f e r  the p o s s i b l e r a m i f i c a t i o n s of an unprotected r e l a t i o n s h i p with  trading  America.  Supporters a l s o r e j e c t the n o t i o n reduce Canadian trade  t h a t the FTA w i l l  t i e s with other n a t i o n s .  They say  t h a t the f e d e r a l government does not want to e l i m i n a t e with  drag  other p a r t n e r s ,  access  but r a t h e r hopes simply  trade  to guarantee  t o Canada's preeminent market.  2 i F r a n k Stone, " R e l a t i o n s h i p to the GATT," i n John C r i s p o , ed . , op. c i t . , p. 171.  One belief  of the primary arguments a g a i n s t  that  i t will  increase  investment i n Canada. ameliorate  the FTA  i s the  the amount of f o r e i g n d i r e c t  This w i l l ,  i n t u r n , do n o t h i n g  economic problems i n four areas of the  entrepreneurship,  research  performance, and  miniature  Opponents of the FTA  and  to  economy:  development, export  replica  effect.  b e l i e v e the p e r v a s i v e n e s s of  foreign-owned s u b s i d i a r i e s i n the Canadian economy leads a reduced e n t r e p r e n e u r i a l FJ,ep..h^ tariffs,  H.  Pope argues i n  that Canadian p o l i c i e s such tax  laws f a v o u r i n g  c a p i t a l gains  the  l a c k of  self-reinforcing effects  Canadian e n t r e p r e n e u r s h i p  American e n t r e p r e n e u r s h i p  The  as  f o r e i g n investment and  taxes have "had  of d i s c o u r a g i n g  elite  W.  spirit.  to  and  within Canada."  22  encouraging The  corporate  are seen by opponents of f u r t h e r economic i n t e g r a t i o n  as d o i n g l i t t l e head o f f i c e s  more than c a r r y i n g out  located outside  orders  of the country.  of a s u c c e s s f u l e n t r e p r e n e u r i a l  issued The  from  existence  c l a s s i s e s s e n t i a l to  achievement of the n a t i o n a l i s t g o a l of i n c r e a s e d  the  domestic  c o n t r o l of the Canadian economy. Opponents a l s o contend t h a t the p r e v a l e n c e of f o r e i g n owned s u b s i d i a r i e s has of r e s e a r c h  and  a detrimental  impact upon the amount  development c a r r i e d out  Baranson b e l i e v e s that  i n Canada.  Jack  "under f r e e market f o r c e s , where  l e a s t - c o s t procurement r u l e s would p r e v a i l . . . r e s e a r c h 2 2  W . H. Pope, TJbLe__El.eBJm^ M c C l e l l a n d and Stewart, 1971.) p.  14.  (Toronto:  and  18 development e n g i n e e r i n g disappear."  2 3  operations  will  f a c i l i t i e s would dwindle  Corporations concentrate  company headquarters.  research  development at  have the  e f f e c t of  an  increasing  i s done, moreover, with a market  than the Canadian one  i n mind.  i n t e r e s t s of Canadians.  born r e s e a r c h  and  neglect  the  In t u r n ,  foreign  i n h i b i t s the o p p o r t u n i t i e s  i n d u s t r y to ever take r o o t .  l i m i t e d number of j o b s w i l l  tastes  i n c e n t i v e to f o s t e r a n a t i v e -  development s e c t o r .  based r e s e a r c h  home-grown R & D  T h i s can  other  Furthermore, r e a d i l y a v a i l a b l e  f o r e i g n t e c h n o l o g y reduces the  owned and  and  costs.  Much r e s e a r c h  and  to r a t i o n a l i z e t h e i r  Canadians consequently depend on  e x t e r n a l source which can overhead  seeking  and  for a  Finally,  a  be a v a i l a b l e to Canadians  l o o k i n g f o r employment i n the  research  and  development  field. Another argument a g a i n s t via  the FTA  i s that  performance. constrained  i t will  investment  a f f e c t Canada's export  by  the nature of t h e i r s u b s e r v i e n t export-related  multi-national corporations  t h e i r operations t h e i r own  foreign  Branch p l a n t s of f o r e i g n c o r p o r a t i o n s  from engaging i n v i g o r o u s again,  increased  will  relationship  performance.  commonly seek to avoid  competition  Since  in  most m u l t i -  i n Canada are American owned, i t  stands to reason t h a t a Canadian s u b s i d i a r y w i l l 2 3  Here  wishing to r a t i o n a l i z e  market from t h e i r s u b s i d i a r y .  national corporations  are  J a c k Baranson, "What Happens to Branch P l a n t s ? " Duncan Cameron, ed., op. c i t . , p. 113.  be in  19 frustrated  i n i t s attempt to break i n t o and  t h r i v e i n the  American market. Still  another  argument a g a i n s t the FTA  i n c r e a s e d f o r e i g n investment miniature  and  the  i t w i l l b r i n g concerns  the  r e p l i c a s t r u c t u r e of the Canadian economy.  Opponents say the b r a n c h - p l a n t  o r g a n i z a t i o n of the Canadian  economy encourages too many manufacturers of a product the s i z e of the Canadian market.  The  result  for  i s increased  c o s t s to Canadian consumers. Those a g a i n s t the FTA alternative First,  propose at l e a s t  three  policies. they want Canada to improve trade l i n k s  with a l l p a r t n e r s — n o t  j u s t the United S t a t e s .  fear that a b i l a t e r a l deal w i l l discourage t r a d e t i e s between Canada and Canada's t r a d e  Opponents  or even e l i m i n a t e  other s t a t e s , thereby  reducing  options.  Second, opponents suggest international  with  liberalized  t h a t Canada promote  trade by means of the GATT.  Canadian t r a d e r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s p r e s e n t l y at work at  the  Uruguay rounds of GATT n e g o t i a t i o n s should  to push  for t a r i f f  continue  r e d u c t i o n s on a world-wide b a s i s .  Canada  has  been s u c c e s s f u l i n the past u s i n g t h i s method, and  should  not  may  reject  i t now  f o r the s h o r t term g a i n s the FTA  bring. The  final  a l t e r n a t i v e proposal  i s t h a t Canada open up  s e c t o r a l f r e e t r a d e t a l k s with Washington.  T h i s means that  Canada's t r a d e with America w i l l be of a "managed" nature,  much l i k e the 1965 Auto Pact manages the amount and direction above,  of t r a d e i n the auto i n d u s t r y .  As  mentioned  however, the Trudeau government attempted to reach  s e c t o r a l d e a l s i n the e a r l y 1980s, but the Reagan a d m i n i s t r a t i o n showed no i n t e r e s t  in s t a r t i n g  negotiations  of t h i s type.  CULTJJLBE The FTA's r a m i f i c a t i o n upon Canada's c u l t u r e i s p r o b a b l y the most d i f f i c u l t understand.  aspect of the d e a l to  T h i s i s because there i s no  accepted d e f i n i t i o n  universally  or any r e a d i l y a v a i l a b l e standards of  " c u l t u r e " by which to judge the statements made i n the c u l t u r a l debate.  Implicit  i n many of the arguments  i s that,  on the one hand, Canadians should do what they can to r e s i s t the c r e e p i n g i n t r u s i o n of America's more l i b e r a l and  dynamic  c u l t u r e on Canada's more t r a d i t i o n a l and c o n s e r v a t i v e  one.  But, on the o t h e r hand, some argue that there i s l i t t l e Canadians can do to stem the t i d e of a l l t h i n g s  American--  from books to p o l i t i c a l p h i l o s o p h i e s - - t h a t pours over the border each y e a r .  ARGUMENTS EQR;_CJllLTUBE It  is difficult  f o r s u p p o r t e r s of the FTA to counter  many of the c u l t u r a l arguments who  takes the p o s i t i o n  c u l t u r e or i t s c u l t u r a l  a g a i n s t the FTA because  that the FTA w i l l not a f f e c t i n d u s t r y can appear  one  Canadian  unpatriotic.  21 Opponents thus occupy the moral and p o l i t i c a l high ground. Notwithstanding,  s u p p o r t e r s of the FTA i n s i s t  that closer  economic i n t e g r a t i o n , assuming i t b r i n g s added economic b e n e f i t s to Canada, would i n the end a l l o w Canadians to strengthen  t h e i r c u l t u r e , not weaken i t . Increased  wealth  w i l l permit Canada to have a more robust s u b s i d y programme for  artists,  c u l t u r a l events,  such as the CBC.  and other c u l t u r a l s e r v i c e s  In a d d i t i o n , s u p p o r t e r s  insist  that  " c u l t u r e " has been b r o a d l y d e f i n e d i n the FTA and has been t o t a l l y exempted from the n a t i o n a l treatment o b l i g a t i o n s imposed on o t h e r s e c t o r s of the economy.  24  Some s u p p o r t e r s of the d e a l even go as f a r as to r e j e c t the i d e a t h a t economic p o l i c y  influences social policy.  In  o t h e r words, t h e r e a r e those who assume t h a t on© can d i f f e r e n t i a t e between what occurs political  sphere.  i n the economic and the  Thus, the i d e a t h a t economic  factors  determine the c u l t u r e of a n a t i o n i s anathema to many s u p p o r t e r s of the FTA. Fundamental to s u p p o r t e r s arguments under the c u l t u r a l a x i s i s the a s s e r t i o n t h a t Canadians are not alone t r e n d toward and a f f i n i t y g l o b a l phenomenon.  f o r a l l t h i n g s American.  i n the It is a  Some s u p p o r t e r s even argue that s i n c e  Canadians have d e a l t , w i t h American encroachment on c u l t u r a l s o v e r e i g n t y longer than most other c o u n t r i e s , they are w e l l positioned  to to d e a l with any f u r t h e r e r o s i o n of Canadian  c u l t u r e — a growing c h a l l e n g e f o r every country as the world 2 4  R i c h a r d L i p s e y and Robert  York, op. c i t . , p. 154.  22 c o n t i n u e s to s h r i n k .  Canadians, i n other words, have an  advantage over o t h e r c o u n t r i e s who  are o n l y b e g i n n i n g to  g r a p p l e w i t h the homogenization of Western  culture.  Thus,  Canadians should not worry about the f u t u r e of t h e i r c u l t u r e under the FTA.  Opponents of the FTA f e a r t h a t i n c r e a s e d  economic  i n t e g r a t i o n w i t h the United S t a t e s w i l l o b s t r u c t the development  of a d i s t i n c t Canadian c u l t u r e .  o b s t a c l e s on the way  The two primary  to a unique Canadian c u l t u r e are  " b r a n c h - p l a n t m e n t a l i t y " and  "Americanization."  Opponents argue that b r a n c h - p l a n t m e n t a l i t y p e r p e t u a t e s a s i t u a t i o n wherein Canadians c o n s t a n t l y  look to the U n i t e d  S t a t e s f o r s t a n d a r d s of e x c e l l e n c e i n a l l f i e l d s of human endeavour. Thus,  T h i s p r o p e n s i t y dampens n a t i o n a l  the emergence of an unique n a t i o n a l  originality.  i d e n t i t y that  not look elsewhere f o r s t a n d a r d s by which to judge becomes v i r t u a l l y  impossible.  does  itself  The Canadian Conference o f t h e  A r t s argues that f r e e trade w i t h the United S t a t e s  will  compound the: degree of f o r e i g n p e n e t r a t i o n i n the ownership of the means of p r o d u c t i o n and d i s t r i b u t i o n of c u l t u r a l p r o d u c t s as w e l l as the preponderance of f o r e i g n c u l t u r a l p r o d u c t s on the Canadian m a r k e t . . . ( t h e r e f o r e ) we can o n l y f e a r the worse i n terms of the l o s s of our s p i r i t and i d e n t i t y .  2 5  2 5  C a n a d i a n Conference of the A r t s , "As Canadian as P o s s i b l e , under the C i r c u m s t a n c e s , " i n Duncan Cameron, ed., op. c i t . , p. 173.  23 Americanization, mentality,  i s recognized  Nevertheless, between the US it  while  to  branch-plant  as a world-wide phenomenon.  opponents b e l i e v e t h a t even f u r t h e r l i n k s and  Canada w i l l  w i l l become i n e x o r a b l e .  Scotland  similar  a c c e l e r a t e t h i s process  Canada w i l l soon become  until  "the  of North America."  E O L I T I C S  The pressure  p o s s i b l e impact on Canadian s o v e r e i g n t y  and  to harmonize Canadian s o c i a l programmes with  of the United impact of the  S t a t e s dominates the debate over the  sovereignty  reduces Canadian s o v e r e i g n t y  Canadians have had  a higher  standards  t r a d e n e g o t i a t o r s and  l e g i s l a t o r s o f t e n do not  Americans have d i f f e r e n t  But  to a  Nevertheless,  Canada's s e n s i t i v i t y over s o v e r e i g n t y .  American  understand  T h i s i s because i n t e r e s t s and  define  differently.  Americans d e f i n e i t narrowly: they d e f i n i t i o n s out of i n t e r n a t i o n a l sovereignty  of l i v i n g .  to compromise t h e i r s o v e r e i g n t y  degree unknown by most other s t a t e s .  the concept  is  However, almost a l l c o u n t r i e s g i v e up some  to achieve  Canadians and  political  FTA.  That s i g n i n g the FTA beyond doubt.  those  law.  r e l y p r i m a r i l y on Canadians t h i n k of  i n broad t e r m s — a consequence of having  a  sparse  population  s t r e t c h e d out along a huge land mass.  illustrate  the d i f f e r e n c e , any move by the Americans to  v i o l a t e Canadian s o v e r e i g n t y  To  as d e f i n e d by Canadians (moving  24 through the Northwest Passage without Canadian  permission,  for  contrast,  instance)  mistrust  upsets Canadians.  the Canadian d e s i r e to c r e a t e  settlement  One  a trade  t r i b u n a l capable of making b i n d i n g  independent of Congress. violation  Americans, by  of  dispute decisions  T h i s , Americans say,  sovereignty.  of the arguments i n o p p o s i t i o n  to the FTA  more complex economic l i n k a g e s with the United mean t h a t the Canadian government w i l l be other  i s a true  things,  to pursue an  i s that  States  will  l e s s a b l e , among  independent f o r e i g n p o l i c y .  R.  A. Young says " f r e e trade w i l l undermine (Canada's) credibility diplomacy."  as an honest broker i n i n t e r n a t i o n a l T h i s means,for example, that such moves as  2 6  the d i p l o m a t i c  r e c o g n i t i o n of the Peoples's Republic  China, or the removal of Canada's troops  of  from Western Europe  would be more d i f f i c u l t to accomplish f o r f e a r of American economic r e t a l i a t i o n in  i n response to Canadian r e c a l c i t r a n c e  international relations. The  possible invoking  "extraterritoriality"  by the United  i s a related issue.  States  of  Opponents b e l i e v e  t h a t t h i s c o n s t i t u t e s ipso f a c t o a v i o l a t i o n of Canadian sovereignty. Canadian one  Opponents a s s e r t t h a t no government but should  Canadian s o i l do 2e  Th§.^ls>&J^Ml±Ji3d.±,  the  u l t i m a t e l y d e c i d e what companies on  or do not do. March 9,  No  resident firms  1985.  should  25 become the d i r e c t  i n s t r u m e n t a l i t i e s of another  f o r e i g n p o l i c y thus d i m i n i s h i n g Canadian  country's  sovereignty.  MQIIMJSilIS_.FI3B jL.iOJ.IJICS Supporters sovereignty  of the FTA  issue.  tend  to be  indifferent  to  They b e l i e v e that attempts to  achieve  i n c r e a s e d Canadian s o v e r e i g n t y would e n t a i l d r a s t i c in the course  of economic and  underscore the and  ask  how  pressure  interdependence of the  can Canadians — or even why  towards g l o b a l i z a t i o n and  r e s t r i c t i o n s on  to best d e a l with  e x t r a t e r r i t o r i a l i t y by  They  industrialized  l a t e r a l agreements and 2 7  reach d i f f e r e n t the  conclusions  i n v o k i n g of  the American government.  They f i g u r e  not by meeting p r o v o c a t i o n  Supporters  under the a u s p i c e s  see no  reason  of American c o r p o r a t e  Canadian i n t e r e s t s are not  why  law  with  be  "means that are  2 8  will  Canada's f o r e i g n p o l i c y o p t i o n s , s u p p o r t e r s Canadians f o r not  2 8  or m u l t i -  the presence of  taken i n t o account or  In r e p l y to the charge t h a t the FTA  2 7  the  i t s concomitant  l a r g e m u l t i - n a t i o n a l f i r m s i n Canada which may  minimized?"  nations  should — r e s i s t  t h a t "the best approach... i s to a c t by b i l a t e r a l  provocation.  changes  sovereignty.  In a d d i t i o n , s u p p o r t e r s about how  social policies.  the  reduce  criticize  r e a l i z i n g t h a t they have more power than  A . E . S a f a r i a n , "Some Myths About F o r e i g n Investment i n Canada." JjojtirjrLaL 1969. p. Ibid.  they  are w i l l i n g to  satisfying  the  no t h r e a t would  to  have  security  satisfy  we a r e p r e p a r e d t o serve  of  the  Beyond  of  the  level  "can do a g r e a t . d e a l ,  c l e a r l y of  Canada  United States—which  manipulate the  areas  with.  requirement that  regardless  integration—Canadians  have- t o  themselves  non-negotiable  the  to  credit  powers  Canada  of especially  and p o l i c i e s  national  pose  interest."  if  we now  2 0  SOCIAL POLICY Supporters additional social far  pressure  policies  in  and how deep  threatened? use  and o p p o n e n t s  the  the  Will  subsidies  to  both agree  harmonize Canadian wake of  pressure  the  that  will  federal  and g r a n t s  to  the  FTA. be.  government  reduce  there  will  be  and A m e r i c a n The rub i s  Will  m e d i c a r e be  still  regional  o v e r how  be a b l e  to  economic  d ispar i t ies?  ARGUMENTS AGAINST: SOCIAL POLICY The n e c e s s i t y policies the  to  for  some  keep C a n a d i a n  sharpest  a r r o w i n the  opponents'  r e s e a r c h d i r e c t o r of  Party,  has  he b e l i e v e s First, Canadian  zsibid.  will the  be  at  in Canada's s o c i a l  industry competitive  former  identified  change  the  least  affected  "payment of  quiver.  constitutes James  Laxer,  n a t i o n a l New D e m o c r a t i c four s o c i a l  p o l i c y areas  by t h e F T A . unemployment  w o r k e r s c o u l d be b a r r e d  as  insurance  to  an e x p o r t - s u p p o r t  that  27  measure." that t h i s  30  i s an u n f a i r subsidy  fishermen.  New  employed and insurance  Laxer b e l i e v e s that the Americans w i l l to, f o r example,  England fishermen  argue  Atlantic  are c o n s i d e r e d  to be  self-  are t h e r e f o r e i n e l i g i b l e f o r unemployment  d u r i n g the  off-season.  Next, Laxer says t h a t a FTA governments cannot use  " w i l l mean t h a t Canadian  any d i r e c t means to C a n a d i a n i z e  ownership of i n d u s t r i e s . "  3 1  T h i s has been a long held  of many economic n a t i o n a l i s t s ,  e s p e c i a l l y by those  Canada to adopt s o c i a l i s t p r i n c i p l e s . for forced "Canadianization"  the  In e f f e c t ,  of Canadian  Laxer's t h i r d c r i t i c i s m of an FTA  who he  goal want  calls  industry.  i s more g e n e r a l .  He  thinks that: Canada's more expensive s o c i a l programmes c o u l d w i t h e r , under the c e a s e l e s s p r e s s u r e to keep our economy c o m p e t i t i v e with r e g i o n s to the south where such programmes are not in p l a c e . 3 2  Laxer b e l i e v e s t h a t Canadian i n d u s t r y and to go and  through e x t e n s i v e  compete with  society w i l l  r e s t r u c t u r i n g i n order  have  to keep up  the more e f f i c i e n t American economy.  Laxer's f i n a l p o i n t i s t h a t he f o r e s e e s a s i t u a t i o n wherein "employers... c o u l d move t h e i r o p e r a t i o n s j u r i s d i c t i o n s with  l e s s expensive programmes."  south  33  assumes t h a t Canadian i n d u s t r i e s w i l l always seek cheapest labour and  t h a t , indeed,  labour and  3  This the  capital  mobile enough to take advantage of the p r o s p e c t i v e  to  are  savings  ° J a m e s Laxer, Le_ap.....Qf_.£a.i__ii.. (Edmonton: H u r t i g P u b l i s h e r s , 1986.) p. 96. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid.  3 1  3 2 3 3  i n overhead  p r o v i d e d by cheaper  s o c i a l programmes and higher  p r o d u c t i v i t y a v a i l a b l e south of the border. Opponents a l s o argue  that women w i l l bear the brunt of  the j o b l o s s e s t h a t are sure to occur as a r e s u l t of the r e s t r u c t u r i n g p r o c e s s post-FTA. matter because  i s a social policy  many women now work to supplement a spouse's  income or even, They argue,  This  i n i n c r e a s i n g numbers, to support a f a m i l y .  furthermore, t h a t as a r e s u l t of the FTA many of  the s e r v i c e - s e c t o r j o b s women now hold w i l l be e l i m i n a t e d . This  i s because  they a r e the s o r t of j o b s - - d a t a  f i n a n c i a l s e r v i c e s , communications, i n d u s t r i e s , and the l i k e — w h i c h for  national  processing,  transportation, cultural  can be done without regard  boundaries.  Related to t h i s i s the argument that the FTA's n a t i o n a l treatment p r i n c i p l e s w i l l  have an impact upon the p r o v i s i o n  of s e r v i c e s women predominantly consume, such as daycare and health services.  Marjorie  Cohen s t a t e s that as a r e s u l t of  a FTA, "there w i l l be s t r o n g  f o r c e s which w i l l  s e r v i c e s to be i n c r e a s i n g l y p r i v a t i z e d . " in t u r n , w i l l services.  a f f e c t the a v a i l a b i l i t y  It will  a l s o a f f e c t working  3 4  compel those  Privatization,  of many of these conditions  of those  employed i n these i n d u s t r i e s .  3 4  Marjorie (Ottawa: P. 82.  Cohen, Er e.e..._ir ad^ l.Qm.en..l3.._.M.firk. Canadian Centre f o r P o l i c y A l t e r n a t i v e s , 1987.)  29 Supporters social  of the FTA respond to the c r i t i c i s m s  p o l i c y by a s s e r t i n g t h a t there  specific  social  is little  programmes such as unemployment  w i l l be i n danger.  They p o i n t t o the f a c t  S t a t e s ' trade o f f i c i a l s  that  about  chance t h a t insurance United  have never  r u l e d t h a t s o c i a l programmes g i v e Canadian b u s i n e s s an u n f a i r advantage... under US trade law government programmes t h a t are u n i v e r s a l i n nature and not aimed a t a s p e c i f i c i n d u s t r y are not c o n s i d e r e d to be u n f a i r . 3 5  In a d d i t i o n , s u p p o r t e r s has  a l s o u n d e r l i n e that even the GATT  ruled that "generally a v a i l a b l e s o c i a l  programmes are not c o u n t e r v a i l a b l e . " all  welfare  That i s , as long as  unemployed workers are e l i g i b l e f o r unemployment  insurance—or  any other g e n e r a l l y a v a i l a b l e s o c i a l  such as m e d i c a r e — a p e t i t i o n e r cannot l e g a l l y social  programme i s an u n f a i r s u b s i d y  sufficient  reason  offending  country.  Supporters without  are q u i c k  argue t h a t the  and t h e r e f o r e  on goods coming from an  t o p o i n t out, moreover,  that.even  a b i l a t e r a l d e a l such as the FTA, there w i l l  be p r e s s u r e social  t o impose t a r i f f s  service  still  to r e s t r u c t u r e and harmonize some of Canada's  policies.  Richard  Gwyn, f o r example, has w r i t t e n  t h a t Canada a l r e a d y : has no- c h o i c e but to s o c i a l . . . p o l i c i e s to U n i t e d S t a t e s , as i n and f l a t r a t e income  r e c a l i b r a t e many of i t s those i n i t i a t e d i n the the i n s t a n c e s of d e r e g u l a t i o n tax. 3 6  !.u£.._.y_an^ March 15, 1988. R i c h a r d Gwyn, The.-49Jt.h.-PJir.ad.QX. (Toronto: Stewart, 1985.) p. 295.  35  3 8  M c C l e l l a n d and  Canada has f o r y e a r s a l s o been unable to peg i n t e r e s t r a t e s i n d e p e n d e n t l y o f the F e d e r a l has  e f f e c t i v e l y eliminated  Reserve i n Washington.  another " q u a s i "  This  social policy:  the Bank of Canada cannot r e l a x i n t e r e s t r a t e s t o i n c r e a s e the a v a i l a b i l i t y of c r e d i t , consequently generate more consumption, and ( i t i s hoped) c r e a t e more j o b s . Finally, supporters  i n contrast  t o opponents of the FTA,  a s s e r t t h a t women w i l l  i n f a c t be "winners" under  the new economic r e l a t i o n s h i p with the United Macmillan, f o r i n s t a n c e ,  States.  s t a t e s that f r e e trade w i l l  Katie bring  s u b s t a n t i a l b e n e f i t s to Canadian women both as consumers and wage-earners. and  She b e l i e v e s that the e l i m i n a t i o n of t a r i f f  non-tariff barriers will  consumer goods.  to reduce the c o s t of  T h i s w i l l help women because they  " g e n e r a l l y spend a g r e a t e r necessities."  help  share of t h e i r  incomes on b a s i c  3 7  CQMCLUSIDS T h i s chapter has b r i e f l y o u t l i n e d and d e s c r i b e d the major themes of the contemporary e l i t e debate over the direction States  of Canada's economic r e l a t i o n s h i p with the United  i n general  and the 1988 FTA i n p a r t i c u l a r .  It is  c l e a r that many of the p o i n t s made i n the debate have been around f o r g e n e r a t i o n s .  What makes the debate that  rages  today unique i s t h a t economic interdependence has become an irremovable c o n s t r a i n t on the freedom of v i r t u a l l y 3 7  every  K a t i e Macmillan, "Women and Free Trade," i n John C r i s p o , ed., op. c i t . (Toronto: Gage P u b l i s h i n g , 1988) p. 118.  31 government, but e s p e c i a l l y the Canadian governments cannot pursue  independent  one.  As a r e s u l t ,  macro-economic  p o l i c i e s f o r more than a few y e a r s without p a y i n g a high price.  The next chapter w i l l d i s c u s s t h e o r i e s on how  expect o p i n i o n on f r e e t r a d e to look.  we  can  32  Chapter  2  THEORY  How does mass o p i n i o n l i r i e - u p ?  The three r u b r i c s under  which theory on mass p r e f e r e n c e toward f r e e trade w i l l be presented  i n t h i s chapter  are economic, c u l t u r a l and s o c i a l  policy. The  economic a x i s has both a " v e r t i c a l "  "horizontal"  prediction.  The v e r t i c a l p r e d i c t i o n  a c a p i t a l versus" labour o r i e n t a t i o n . c e r t a i n groups of respondents  will  labour w i l l  that  or oppose the  on how they b e l i e v e i t  a f f e c t t h e i r p e r s o n a l economic i n t e r e s t s .  speaking,  r e f e r s to  I t i s expected  support  f r e e trade agreement based p r i m a r i l y will  and a  Broadly  r e j e c t f r e e trade because i t stands to  l o s e from l i b e r a l i z e d t r a d e , and c a p i t a l w i l l because i t w i l l g a i n from f r e e t r a d e .  support i t  Reasons why t h i s i s  so w i l l be e x p l a i n e d below. The  horizontal  comparative  prediction  r e f e r s to d i f f e r e n t i a l s i n  advantage among the r e g i o n s of Canada.  r e g i o n s of Canada stand to g a i n more from a  Some  tariff-free  33 r e l a t i o n s h i p with the United  States  than o t h e r s .  Theory  holds that,  f o r reasons t h a t w i l l become c l e a r below, the  "industrial  h e a r t l a n d " - - O r i t a r i o and Quebec--shouId oppose  f r e e trade  more than the "resource e x t r a c t i n g and  processing  h i n t e r l a n d " - - B r i t i s h Columbia, the P r a i r i e s and the Atlantic. The  c u l t u r a l a x i s argues f o r d i f f e r e n c e s i n l e v e l s of  education p r i m a r i l y . respondent  I t i s assumed t h a t the more educated a  i s the more l i k e l y  economic and p o l i t i c a l  he i s to oppose f u r t h e r  i n t e g r a t i o n with the United  because i t w i l l v i o l a t e one of the " c o r e - v a l u e s " culture.  Work by Richard  The  polls  t h i s tendency; he s t a t e s , f o r  " u n i v e r s i t y educated respondents are  r e l a t i v e l y unsympathetic to f r e e t r a d e . . . w i t h States."  of Canadian  Johnston on s e v e r a l G a l l u p  over many y e a r s i l l u s t r a t e s example, t h a t  States  the United  1  s o c i a l p o l i c y a x i s argues t h a t c e r t a i n demographic  groups w i t h i n Canadian s o c i e t y w i l l because of the p r e d i c t e d  deleterious  oppose f r e e  e f f e c t s the FTA may  have on some Canadian s o c i a l programmes. accordingly,  a n a l y z e the o p i n i o n  trade  We  will,  of women and lower income  Canadians. The first  s t r u c t u r e of chapter two i s as f o l l o w s .  o u t l i n e the " v e r t i c a l "  economic a x i s , u s i n g  It will a model of  i R i c h a r d Johnston, Public Opinion .a.o.d..._.E.u.bl.i.c.„PjpJLi_Q.y_._An. Canada. ( T o r o n t o : U n i v e r s i t y of Toronto Press, 1985.) p. 115.  34 political will  c l e a v a g e s c r e a t e d by Ronald Rogowski.  look a t the " h o r i z o n t a l " economic  axis.  2  Then, we  F o r the  h o r i z o n t a l a x i s i t w i l l be n e c e s s a r y to review some of the u n d e r l y i n g reasons why c e r t a i n r e g i o n s should support or oppose  free trade.  T h i s w i l l be done v i a work on the  r e g i o n a l impact o f Canadian r e s t r i c t i v e  international  trade  p o l i c i e s by W. A. M a c k i n t o s h , John W h a l l e y , James M e l v i n 3  4  5  and Ronald S h e a r e r . A review of t h e o r i e s by Ronald Rogowski 6  and M i c h a e l W a l l e r s t e i n , with a minor r e l a x a t i o n f o r 7  l o g i c a l completeness, on the e f f e c t s of exposure to i n t e r n a t i o n a l trade on s p a t i a l c l e a v a g e s f o l l o w s .  A brief  look a t reasons f o r the e x i s t e n c e and s t r e n g t h of regionalism  i n Canada w i l l  then be reviewed.  Following  t h i s , p r e d i c t i o n s of mass p r e f e r e n c e on s o c i a l p o l i c y i s presented.  L a s t i s theory on the c u l t u r a l axis--we  discuss  what Johnston's c o n c l u s i o n s about e d u c a t i o n and o p i n i o n portend f o r mass p r e f e r e n c e s towards the FTA.  R o n a l d Rogowski, " P o l i t i c a l Cleavages and Changing Exposure to Trade." Aj_ejdLcan P o l i t i c a l Science Review. • December 1987. p. 1121-1138. W. A. Mackintosh, T.he.._E.c.Q.no.mi.c._.Backg.E.Q.urji.d of. Qom.ini.Qjri -Ex.oyincXaL-RjeXat-lans„• ( T o r o n t o : Macmillan of Canada, 1978.) J o h n Whalley, "Regional C o n s i d e r a t i o n s and Canadian Trade P o l i c y , " John Whalley, C.an.ad.a.-.Ujc^ . ( T o r o n t o : U n i v e r s i t y of Toronto P r e s s , 1985.) pp. 295-310. James M e l v i n , "The R e g i o n a l Impact of T a r i f f s , " i n John Whalley, op. c i t . , pp. 313-324. R o n a l d Shearer, op. c i t . , pp. 325-366. M i c h a e l W a l l e r s t e i n , "Unemployment, C o l l e c t i v e B a r g a i n i n g , and the Demand f o r P r o t e c t i o n . " Me.oc.an....jQ.UXn.sl......Qf. P_oJJJJj£al_£aijBJU^. November 1987. p. 729-752.  2  3  4  5  6  7  35 THE  VERTICAL AXIS Rogowski seeks to d i s c o v e r how  t r a d e c r e a t e s or exacerbates industrialized proof  society.  He  changing  exposure to  p o l i t i c a l cleavages  i n an  combines Stolper-Samuelson  (the  t h a t p r o t e c t i o n b e n e f i t s a f a c t o r of p r o d u c t i o n  that  i s s c a r c e ) with a model of p o l i t i c s d e r i v e d from B e c k e r  8  theory of c o m p e t i t i o n  among p r e s s u r e groups f o r p o l i t i c a l  i n f l u e n c e ) to suggest  the r e l e v a n c e of a f a c t o r t h a t  u n t i l now  been w i d e l y n e g l e c t e d : e x t e r n a l l y induced  i n exposure to i n t e r n a t i o n a l  (a  has changes  trade.  Rogowski argues t h a t b a s i c r e s u l t s of the theory of international c o s t and affect  trade  t h a t i n c r e a s e s or decreases  d i f f i c u l t y of i n t e r n a t i o n a l  "domestic p o l i t i c a l cleavages  differently,  to put  any  country's  whether i t s l a n d - l a b o u r  3 ) c a p i t a l poor,  ratio  s  land r i c h ,  land poor and  different  of f o u r  i s high or low. l)capital  rich,  land poor, and  and  He  allows  cells  1 0  only  labour  labour poor; or  labour r i c h .  2)  land r i c h ,  and  rich;  4)capital  Canada i s c o n s i d e r e d  an advanced—mean i n g c a p i t a l - a b u n d a n t - - l a n d - r i c h  G a r y S. Becker, "A Theory of Competition Among Groups f o r P o l i t i c a l I n f l u e n c e . " <=Ma£JL^^^ E_c.0JQi2mi_c_3.. August 1983, pp. 371-400. R o n a l d Rogowski, op. c i t . , p. 1122. I b i d , p. 1123.  1 0  so  i t i s advanced or backward or  labour poor; 2 ) c a p i t a l r i c h ,  8  should do  economy i n t o one  r e c o g n i z e s economies t h a t are  be  and  i n the  powerfully  H i s model of f a c t o r endowment  8  a c c o r d i n g to l)whether  poor,  trade should  but p r e d i c t a b l y , i n c o u n t r i e s with  f a c t o r endowments." him  imply  to  economy;  Pressure  36 it  thus f i t s under the f i r s t  cell  of Rogowski's model.  He  p r e d i c t s t h a t under c o n d i t i o n s i n which: both land and c a p i t a l are abundant, c a p i t a l i s t s , c a p i t a l - i n t e n s i v e i n d u s t r i e s and a g r i c u l t u r e w i l l a l l b e n e f i t from, and w i l l endorse, f r e e t r a d e ; l a b o r b e i n g s c a r c e , workers i n l a b o r - i n t e n s i v e i n d u s t r i e s w i l l embrace p r o t e c t i o n and ( i f need be) i m p e r i a l i s m . The b e n e f i t e d s e c t o r w i l l seek to expand t h e i r p o l i t i c a l power, i f not by d i s e n f r a n c h i s e m e n t then by c u r t a i l m e n t of workers' economic p r e r o g a t i v e s and s u p p r e s s i o n of t h e i r organizations. 1 1  Rogowski uses h i s t o r i c a l examples to support predictions.  In 19th  century  his  l a n d - r i c h but c a p i t a l  and  labour poor " f r o n t i e r " economies such as Canada's, "expanding t r a d e b e n e f i t s and  strengthens  land owners  farmers a g a i n s t p r o t e c t i o n i s t c a p i t a l i s t s and T h i s helps e x p l a i n the outcome of the O n t a r i o manufacturing i n t e r e s t s a l l i e d Conservative  1911  workers."  1 2  election.  themselves with  party against a L i b e r a l negotiated  t r e a t y , the scope of which was  and  the  reciprocity  c o n f i n e d mainly to n a t u r a l  products. During  the Depression,  between theory by  and  t h i s time was  Rogowski i n s i s t s t h a t the f i t  r e a l i t y seems even more s t r o n g .  an advanced, l a n d - r i c h economy.  Canada Labour  b e n e f i t e d from s h r i n k i n g i n t e r n a t i o n a l trade because i t was the o n l y s c a r c e f a c t o r : workers became more m i l i t a n t policy shifted  to the l e f t . The  power which culminated introduced " I b i d , p. I b i d , p. 1 2  in progressive  i n the f o r t i e s and 1124 1129.  r e s u l t was  burgeoning  labour  i n the years  and union  legislation  hence.  The  long  37 process  of improving the q u a l i t y of l i f e  workers thus began under the power.  Of  course,  best p a i d and  f o r Canadian  impetus of i n c r e a s e d  today Canadian wage labour  most p r o d u c t i v e  i n the  labour  i s among the  world.  Under post-war American hegemony, c a p i t a l and  land  rich  economies such as Canada's expanded as never  before.  Rogowski p r e d i c t s t h a t these economies w i l l ,  as they become  i n c r e a s i n g l y exposed to i n t e r n a t i o n a l t r a d e : experience c l a s s c o n f l i c t and a c o n s i d e r a b l e s u p p r e s s i o n of l a b o r . C a p i t a l and land w i l l f o r the most p a r t u n i t e i n support of the f r e e trade t h a t b e n e f i t s them; l a b o r , as a l o c a l l y s c a r c e f a c t o r , w i l l f a v o r p r o t e c t i o n and imperialism. 1 3  Rogowski's model d i c t a t e s t h a t the v e r t i c a l p r e d i c t i o n of o p i n i o n  on  Canada should  f r e e trade between the United look  like  AGAINST  1. owners of c a p i t a l ; capitalists 2. landowners 3. owners and employees of c a p i t a l i n t e n s i v e i n d u s t r i e s , eg, banks The  1. owners of labor 2. labour unions 3. l a b o u r - i n t e n s i v e i n d u s t r i e s ; eg, foodprocessing  means by which t h i s c a p i t a l versus  tested  labelled  i s by  l o o k i n g at data  on  labour  themselves "union" or "nonunion."  not  ignore  that there  who  do not belong to unions but do  p.  1130  will  who  I t i s assumed T h i s does  i s w i t h i n the survey p o p u l a t i o n  those  i n f a c t work in j o b s  have many of the t r a d i t i o n a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of a 3  axis  those respondents  t h a t union means labour; nonunion means c a p i t a l .  i Ibid,  and  this:  FOR  be  States  labour  that  38 c l a s s occupation. are blue  considered collar,  Several  service sector jobs,  white c o l l a r but  manual labour  However, i t would be  look more l i k e  or f a c t o r y  preferences. not  live  lead him  occupations.  or to l i v e and  own  work i n a  to adopt a n t i - l a b o u r mass  S i m i l a r l y , a nonunion respondent w i l l  i n an environment t h a t w i l l  reinforce anti-capitalist  THE  traditional  r a r e f o r a union member to  l a r g e enough amounts of c a p i t a l , c i r c l e that w i l l  f o r example,  help  him  probably  adopt and  then  opinions.  HORIZONTAL AXIS The  uneven economic development of Canada i s another  potential  i n f l u e n c e upon o p i n i o n  i r r e g u l a r pattern things,  on f r e e t r a d e .  This  of i n d u s t r i a l i z a t i o n means, among  t h a t the d i f f e r e n t r e g i o n s  economic i n t e r e s t s to advance and  other  of Canada have separate protect.  Thus, there  are  s e v e r a l economic bases f o r r e g i o n a l c o n f l i c t : o i l producing v e r s u s o i l consuming r e g i o n s , areas,  a g r i c u l t u r a l versus  r e s o u r c e - r i c h versus poorer p r o v i n c e s ,  Regionalism i s d e f i n e d  and  here as having one  dimension: d i f f e r e n c e s i n economic s t r u c t u r e . r e f e r simply  to d i s p a r i t i e s  rather  on.  main T h i s does not  the r o l e of d i f f e r e n t n a t u r a l  the n a t u r e of f o r e i g n ownership, and  so on,  to d i f f e r e n c e s i n comparative r e l i a n c e on  e x p o r t s to f u e l a p r o v i n c e ' s  so  in wealth, the r e l i a n c e on  primary or secondary i n d u s t r y , resources,  industrial  economic p r o s p e r i t y .  but  imports  and  39 Some argue t h a t past r e s t r i c t i v e  trade p o l i c i e s ,  as the N a t i o n a l P o l i c y — t h e c r e a t i o n of high t a r i f f have helped exacerbate country.  virtually  economic d i s p a r i t i e s a c r o s s the  at l e a s t among the e l i t e s ,  the b e g i n n i n g of P r a i r i e s e t t l e m e n t .  t r a d e p o l i c i e s , many b e l i e v e , have reduced for  walls—  To be sure, t a r i f f p o l i c y has been another  of r e g i o n a l c o n f l i c t ,  the h i n t e r l a n d  such  staple  from Mercantilist  the o p p o r t u n i t y  r e g i o n s to move away from  resource  e x t r a c t i o n and toward i n c r e a s e d i n d u s t r i a l i z a t i o n .  In 1938,  the government of B r i t i s h Columbia put i t s economic p o s i t i o n in C o n f e d e r a t i o n c l e a r l y . p o l i c i e s makes i t n e c e s s a r y market and s e l l  Canada's r e s t r i c t i v e  f o r B. C. to "buy i n a p r o t e c t e d  i n an unprotected market, o r , i n other  words, to buy i n the d e a r e s t market and s e l l cheapest."  trade  i n the  1 4  F i f t y years ago, W. A. Mackintosh  wrote t h a t the  p r o t e c t i v e t a r i f f has: imposed a "burden" on the export r e g i o n s of the country i n t h a t the aggregate r e a l incomes of p o p u l a t i o n s of the r e g i o n s have been l e s s than they would have been i n the absence of the protective t a r i f f ; 1 5  Recent work c o n f i r m s and updates conclusion.  Ronald  Shearer  Mackintosh's  asserts,  f o r example, t h a t the  long-run b e n e f i t s of f r e e trade w i l l  "accrue to the owners  of immobile r e s o u r c e s and...to p r o v i n c i a l governments who  Q u o t a t i o n taken from Ronald Shearer, W. A. Macintosh, op. c i t . , p. 146.  1 4 15  op. c i t . ,  p. 357.  40 own  land and  resources...."  perspective,  From a  1 8  Fergus Chambers claims  historical  that:  resource-abundant r e g i o n s have been more i n t e r e s t e d in f r e e r b i l a t e r a l t r a d e . . . t h a n i n d u s t r i a l r e g i o n s because they depend more on exports and r e l y h e a v i l y on access to the American m a r k e t . 1 7  Shearer, i n f a c t ,  r e i n f o r c e s Chambers' argument  s t a t i n g t h a t Canada's r e s t r i c t i v e general,  create  trade  policies,  by  in  a s i t u a t i o n wherein "Canadian producers of  s u b s t i t u t e s f o r imports are rewarded and...and producers of e x p o r t a b l e goods and illustrated that  i n 1983  to pay  eastern  This  1 8  Ontario  received  imports.  r o u g h l y the  a s u b s i d y per person of C$56  The  A t l a n t i c and  industry.  Rogowski a l s o helps e x p l a i n to f r e e trade  i n the  seeks, as s t a t e d  Western  how  f i v e regions  above, to e x p l a i n  political  should why  allegiances  look.  Rogowski  countries  endowed  contrasting  approaches to f r e e t r a d e .  Wallerstein  s t a t e t h a t the Stolper-Samuelson  p r o o f that p r o t e c t i o n b e n e f i t s  intensive 1 6  1 7  1 8 l s  He  and  will  have  Michael theorem—the  the owners of a f a c t o r of  with which a country i s p o o r l y  " l a b o r w i l l b e n e f i t and  of  1 9  with d i f f e r i n g amounts of a f a c t o r of p r o d u c t i o n  that  provinces  same amount f o r the p r o t e c t i o n  Canada's manufacturing  production  is  by Canada West Foundation s t a t i s t i c s which show  from t a r i f f s on had  s e r v i c e s are p e n a l i z e d . "  capital will  i n d u s t r i e s are p r o t e c t e d  and  endowed—dictates l o s e when  labor-  v i c e - v e r s a when  R o n a l d Shearer, op. c i t . , p. 297. F e r g u s Chambers, as quoted i n John Whalley, op. 299. R o n a l d Shearer, op. c i t . , p. 340. R e p o r t e d i n TiLe^JLcoBjamisi., February 15, 1986.  c i t . , p.  41 capital-intensive  i n d u s t r i e s are p r o t e c t e d . "  assumes t h a t e x p o r t i n g products lobby  and  Wallerstein  2 0  i n d u s t r i e s t h a t consume imported  are v u l n e r a b l e  to f o r e i g n r e t a l i a t i o n  may  well  for free trade. Rogowski i s p r i m a r i l y i n t e r e s t e d i n the e f f e c t  exposure to i n t e r n a t i o n a l trade on a country's cleavages;  so,  i f we  domestic  s u b s t i t u t e "countries" for "regions,"  h i s model can be adapted with ease to Canada. o r i e n t a t i o n s to f r e e trade can u s i n g the d i f f e r e n t  of  regional  then be p a r t l y p r e d i c t e d  l e v e l s of f a c t o r of  endowments a r e g i o n has  The  production  as a b a s i s f o r the p r e d i c t i o n .  In  other words, the h o r i z o n t a l p r e d i c t i o n of o p i n i o n on f r e e trade  i n Canada can be based i n p a r t on the r a t i o s of lartd,  labour and  capital  c a p i t a l and  i n the p r o v i n c e s .  land are abundant w i l l  A region  i n which  trumpet f r e e  trade  because i t i s i n t h e i r economic i n t e r e s t to do so. r e g i o n t h a t has production  a s c a r c e and  such as l a b o u r  f o r the same economic The  tariff  m i s t r u s t and role.  i s not,  conflict.  will  resist  a  f a c t o r of  liberalized  trade  reason. however, the o n l y source The  of r e g i o n a l  s i z e of Canada a l s o p l a y s a  Huge d i s t a n c e s between urban c e n t r e s make i t  difficult  and  expensive to move about the country.  the a d d i t i o n a l f a c t 2  2 1  p o l i t i c a l l y powerful  But  There i s  t h a t u n l i k e most other Western  °Michael W a l l e r s t e i n , op. c i t . p. 733. S e e the GJLob.e„..jan.d M.a.iX!..s..._B.ejoQx..t o n Business. August 3, 1988. I t i s r e p o r t e d t h a t "Ontario has shortages i n at l e a s t 159 s k i l l e d o c c u p a t i o n s " and t h a t "compounding the problem of d w i n d l i n g labour supply i s i n c r e a s e d demand."  2 1  42 societies,  t h e r e i s a s e r i e s of " c o r e / p e r i p h e r y "  r e l a t i o n s h i p s t h a t d i v i d e Canada i n t o more-or-less contained  self-  r e g i o n s and communications networks.  F e d e r a l i s m compounds these f a c t o r s .  That i s ,  r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s a r e d i v i d e d between the f e d e r a l and p r o v i n c i a l governments and r e g i o n a l i n t e r e s t s are p r i m a r i l y articulated  by p r o v i n c i a l governments i n c o m p e t i t i o n  each other or w i t h the f e d e r a l government. t h i s competition exaggerate and  with  Some argue t h a t  encourages p r o v i n c i a l governments to  and encourage the n o t i o n of d i f f e r e n c e s between  among the r e g i o n s of Canada.  Richard Simeon has argued  t h a t the p r o v i n c i a l governments have a "vested  interest in  m a i n t a i n i n g and s t r e n g t h e n i n g the s a l i e n c e of the r e g i o n a l dimension...."; "accentuate  each one, t h e r e f o r e , i s motivated to  the degree of i n t e r n a l u n i t y , and to exaggerate  the extent of the d i f f e r e n c e s with O t t a w a . . . . " C l i m a t e s of o p i n i o n i n the respondent's t h e r e f o r e undoubtedly p l a y a r o l e free trade.  22  region  will  i n i n f l u e n c i n g o p i n i o n on  The economic s e c t o r w i t h i n which a  respondent  works should not be assumed to be the only purchase on opinion.  Region of r e s i d e n c e a l s o has an  P r o v i n c i a l governments attempt to generate for  f o r t h e i r p o s i t i o n s on p o l i t i c a l  endevours operate,  2 2  impact. opinion  issues.  support  These  i n t u r n , on r e s i d e n t s of a r e g i o n as an  R i c h a r d Simeon, "Regionalism and Canadian P o l i t i c a l I n s t i t u t i o n s , " i n J.P. Meekison, ed., Canadian_...F.ed.ecali.sm: ttyJ_Jl_Qf_BflflliJtLZ, 3d e d i t i o n (Toronto: Methuen, 1977) p. 301-302.  43 a l t e r n a t e to economic s e l f - i n t e r e s t preferences For  toward an  instance,  as an  an A l b e r t a r e s i d e n t employed as f o r a l l appearances  oppose f r e e t r a d e — b e c a u s e of i t s p o s s i b l e e f f e c t s upon labour  on  issue.  roughneck on an o i l r i g , who  milieu within  influence  an  should  detrimental  i n Canada—may i n f a c t support i t .  which he  l i v e s constantly  The  r e i n f o r c e s support  f o r f r e e t r a d e because the consensus i s that i t w i l l  be  advantageous f o r A l b e r t a . I p r e d i c t t h a t , on balance, r e g i o n a l o p i n i o n trade w i l l  l i n e up  (considered  here to be O n t a r i o  to l i b e r a l i z e d it  i n t h i s manner: the  P r a i r i e s and  Quebec) w i l l be  processing  Canadian market.  regions  opposed benefits  The  resource  ( B r i t i s h Columbia,  the A t l a n t i c ) w i l l support f r e e trade  their  l a r g e s t export market coupled with lower t a r i f f s on c a p i t a l should  bring.  these  regions  are aware of t h e i r economic i n t e r e s t s and  opinion  will reflect  THE  imported  I m p l i c i t in these  p r e d i c t i o n s i s the assumption t h a t r e s i d e n t s of  this  the  because  of the economic advantages t h a t enhanced access to  goods and  free  heartland  trade because i t stands to l o s e the  accrues from a p r o t e c t e d  e x t r a c t i o n and  and  industrial  on  that  there  recognition.  SOCIAL POLICY AXIS Chapter one  impact of the FTA  o u t l i n e d the major arguments concerning upon Canada's s o c i a l programmes.  g e n e r a l l y accepted that  increased  r e l i a n c e on market  the  It is forces  44 could  lead to harmonization of Canadian and American  policy.  social  Many Canadians f e a r that t h i s means that some of  Canada's s u p e r i o r  and more g e n e r a l l y a v a i l a b l e s o c i a l  programmes such as medicare and unemployment insurance are in danger.  Other Canadians argue that there  i s p r e s s u r e to  harmonize s o c i a l programmes with or without a FTA, case of d e r e g u l a t i o n .  as i n the  Both camps g e n e r a l l y agree, however,  t h a t women and lower income Canadians should  expect to  e x p e r i e n c e changes i n t h e i r economic p o s i t i o n to a g r e a t e r degree than most other Marjorie  groups i n Canadian s o c i e t y .  Cohen s t a t e s that women are v u l n e r a b l e  under  f r e e trade because they are more l i k e l y than men t o have service sector o c c u p a t i o n s — d a t a processing, processing,  communications, t r a n s p o r t a t i o n ,  financial cultural  i n d u s t r i e s and the l i k e — that can be e a s i l y done without regard  to n a t i o n a l b o u n d a r i e s .  2 3  Cohen has s t a t e d  women who work as these s o r t s of j o b s are  immigrants and most have l i t t l e  other  j o b s when these d i s a p p e a r . "  addition,  2 4  that  "tend to be poor, many  l i k e l i h o o d of f i n d i n g She b e l i e v e s , i n  that:  c o n s i d e r i n g the c u r r e n t s t r u c t u r e of the Canadian economy and the i n d u s t r i e s that w i l l be a d v e r s e l y a f f e c t e d by f r e e trade, women w i l l be the major l o s e r s i n a b i - l a t e r a l f r e e trade d e a l with the United S t a t e s . 2 5  Cohen t h i n k s t h a t a FTA which enforces  the concept of  n a t i o n a l treatment w i l l a l s o have an impact upon the manner M a r j or i e Cohen , Er_ejj!.._.I.m itoxk. (Ottawa: Canadian Centre of P o l i c y A l t e r n a t i v e s , 1987.) T.h..e_.GJLQ^^^ June 3, 1985. I b i d , p. 13.  2 3  24  2 5  in  which  certain  services,  services,  are provided.  s u c h as d a y c a r e and h e a l t h  Women a r e t h e p r e p o n d e r a n t  consumers o f t h e s e s e r v i c e s . be  strong  forces  which  will  Cohen a r g u e s compel  increasingly  privatized,"  availability  o f many s e r v i c e s  conditions The  from and role a  will  American  I free  Ibid.  by f r e e  Canadians  them  to survive  therefore  will,  income  that  by f r e e  degree  t r a d e comes  by p r e s s u r e t o r e d u c e t h e inexorably  lead to  t o h e l p the poor.  income C a n a d i a n s  will  think  that  that  t h e market  services.  the " s o c i a l  w i l l be  Poorer safety  should  Canadians net" that  n o t be removed.  that  women w i l l ,  t h a n men.  on b a l a n c e , oppose  Furthermore,  on b a l a n c e , oppose f r e e  Canadians.  income  trade with the United States i s  will  predict  lower  harmonization of Canadian  lower  of s o c i a l  t o ensure  to a larger  higher  2 6  that  i n the i n d u s t r i e s .  programmes d e s i g n e d that  t o be  women consume and t h e  affected  caused  will  a f f e c t the  for believing  policy  the a l l o c a t i o n  Canadians  which  i n t h e economy w i l l  affected  be u n a b l e  allows  will  increased  i n t h e argument  belief  govern  that  o f many s o c i a l  adversely  will  social  of the s t a t e  Implicit  the  basis  be a d v e r s e l y  the assumption  loss  which  "there  those s e r v i c e s  o f work f o r t h o s e employed  theoretical  Canadians  2 6  that  lower  income  t r a d e more than  46 THE  CULTURAL AXIS Chapter one s t a t e s  Canada's c u l t u r e difficult part  that  f r e e t r a d e ' s e f f e c t s upon  and n a t i o n a l i t y a r e probably the most  aspect of the debate to understand.  because " c u l t u r e "  i s an a b s t r a c t  This  concept.  i s in  In many  ways, someone t r y i n g to d i s t i n g u i s h "Canadian" from "American" c u l t u r e  i s c o n f r o n t e d with as s i m i l a r a problem  as U.S. Supreme Court j u s t i c e Harry Blackmum was when he sought to i d e n t i f y pornography.  He, of course, had to  f i n a l l y r e s o r t to the u n s a t i s f a c t o r y :  "I know i t when I see  it." Opponents of f r e e trade say they know Canadian  culture  when they see i t ; however, they f e a r that under f r e e t h e r e soon w i l l be none l e f t belief  that  to r e c o g n i z e .  There i s a  f r e e trade w i l l p e r p e t u a t e a b r a n c h - p l a n t  mentality  and speed-up A m e r i c a n i z a t i o n .  contrast,  repeatedly  Canada to c u r t a i l that,  trade  point  out that  Supporters, by  i t i s impossible f o r  the homogenization of Western c u l t u r e , and  at any r a t e , Canadian c u l t u r a l i n d u s t r i e s have been  exempted from the fre.e trade Culture  can be d e f i n e d  deal. as the sum t o t a l of ways of  l i v i n g b u i l t up by a group of human beings and from one g e n e r a t i o n to another.  Similarly, nationality  "grows out of prolonged s o c i a l and p o l i t i c a l among a people s h a r i n g laws, r e s p e c t i n g  transmitted  cooperation  a common homeland, obeying the same  the same customs and c h e r i s h i n g  the same  47 values."  One upshot  2 7  of t h i s s h a r i n g i s the e v o l u t i o n and  acceptance of c e r t a i n " c o r e - v a l u e s . " A core v a l u e of Canadian to remain  s o c i e t y i s the d e t e r m i n a t i o n  s e p a r a t e from the American  republic.  George Grant  d e s c r i b e s the 19th c e n t u r y quest f o r a new n a t i o n i n B r i t i s h North America  as a m a n i f e s t a t i o n of a c o n s e r v a t i v e d e s i r e ,  transported  here by B r i t i s h o f f i c i a l s ,  immigrants,  to b u i l d  L o y a l i s t s and  " i n these c o l d and f o r b i d d i n g r e g i o n s ,  a s o c i e t y with a g r e a t e r sense of p r o p r i e t y than the United States."  2 8  Grant t a l k s about an " i n h e r i t e d d e t e r m i n a t i o n  not to be A m e r i c a n s "  28  h a l f of North America. certain British and  i n the e a r l y s e t t l e r s of the n o r t h e r n The a d o p t i o n , furthermore, of  institutions,  such as r e s p o n s i b l e government  l o y a l t y to the Crown, i s seen by Grant to have been a  way of " p r e s e r v i n g at every l e v e l of our l i f e . . . c e r t a i n forms  of e x i s t e n c e t h a t d i s t i n g u i s h us from the U n i t e d  States."  3 0  S i m i l a r l y , Alexander Brady s t a t e s that one of  the p r i n c i p a l reasons f o r C o n f e d e r a t i o n "was simply a means f o r . . . the preempting expansion."  3 1  of h a l f a c o n t i n e n t from  French Canada had s i m i l a r  reasons f o r wanting a l s o saw banding  American  "anti-American"  to j o i n C o n f e d e r a t i o n .  But the French  t o g e t h e r with the B r i t i s h North  American  p o s s e s s i o n s as a means to to p r o t e c t and m a i n t a i n a A l e x a n d e r Brady, "The Meaning of Canadian N a t i o n a l i s m . " I.aLexna..t,i.Q^ Summer 1964. p. 348. G e o r g e Grant, Lament f o r ...a. NaJtion. • (Toronto: M c C l e l l a n d and Stewart, 1965. p. 69. Ibid ° I b i d , p. 70. A l e x a n d e r Brady, op. c i t . , p. 349  2 7  2 8  2 8 3  3 1  48 traditional, saxon,  ultramontane  French speaking s o c i e t y i n anglo-  P r o t e s t a n t North America.  "Quebecois"  way  The d e s i r e to perpetuate a  of l i f e c o n s t i t u t e s the core value of that  society. One  of the means by which Canadians  achieve a sense of  group i d e n t i t y and cohesion, however tenuous i t may through  education.  Herbert McClosky and A l i d a B r i l l  t h a t "a g r e a t d e a l of the s o c i a l  say  l e a r n i n g most of us  e x p e r i e n c e , of course, d e r i v e s from e d u c a t i o n . " course, one  be, i s  Of  3 2  of the most g e n e r a l l y accepted ways of  d i s t i n g u i s h i n g between the mass and  the e l i t e of a s o c i e t y  i s by l o o k i n g at l e v e l s of e d u c a t i o n .  McClosky and  Brill  say t h a t " f o r some people a good education w i l l c a r r y them as f a r as they are ever l i k e l y to go toward the and  adoption ( o f s o c i a l n o r m s ) . "  33  recognition  They conclude,  in f a c t ,  that e l i t e s i n a s o c i e t y "experience a g r e a t e r measure of social  learning...."  3 4  S o c i a l l e a r n i n g i s l i k e l y to be  g r e a t e r among the e l i t e s of a s o c i e t y than among the mass public. Although McClosky and B r i l l  are concerned  with what  they c o n s i d e r to be the predominant " s o c i a l norm" i n the United S t a t e s — c i v i l  libertarian  use t h e i r model of s o c i a l  3 2  3 3  3 4  v a l u e s — w e can use  still  l e a r n i n g f o r the Canadian  case.  H e r b e r t McClosky and A l i d a B r i l l , .Dim.e.n.sijQ.n.s.....o.f. To!er.an.C.fi.• (New York: R u s s e l l Sage Foundation, 1983) p. 238. I b i d . In the o r i g i n a l , the p a r e n t h e s i z e d words are " l i b e r t a r i a n values." Ibid.  49 In Canada the p r e v a i l i n g s o c i a l n o r m — o r core v a l u e - - i n c o u n t r y i s , f o r l a c k of a b e t t e r term, Marketable s k i l l s and  "anti-Americanism."  are a common by-product of e d u c a t i o n ,  the economic rewards may  learning expectations.  work to counter our  In most i n d u s t r i a l i z e d  h i g h l e v e l s of e d u c a t i o n and/or  training  chances of f i n d i n g and keeping a j o b . shifts  social  societies,  i n c r e a s e the  In the event of  i n the labour market, w e l l educated members of a  s o c i e t y are l e s s unemployment.  l i k e l y to e x p e r i e n c e a l e n g t h y p e r i o d of  They are more l i k e l y  and be happy i n t h e i r o c c u p a t i o n s . a l s o among the most mobile group less l i k e l y  t h i n g s , a r t i c u l a t e Canadian  The w e l l - e d u c a t e d are  change.  " u n i v e r s i t y educated unsympathetic  l i g h t on, among other  o p i n i o n toward  f r e e t r a d e w i t h the U n i t e d S t a t e s .  tariff policy  relatively  to f r e e trade with...the United S t a t e s . " and  1967  and  Johnston d i s c o v e r e d that  respondents are  H i s a n a l y s i s of the 1959  Gallup p o l l s reveals  3 5  that  survey u n i v e r s i t y educated respondents were more  i n f a v o u r of the r e l a t e d  i s s u e of American  investment  were l e s s w e l l educated respondents, but "by 1967 d i f f e r e n c e had d i s a p p e a r e d .  O p i n i o n on investment  homogeneously negaitive . "  The  3 6  reason why  R i c h a r d Johnston, op. c i t . , I b i d , p. 79.  p.  115.  than  that i s simply  university  educated respondents seem to be unsympathetic 3 6  incomes,  i n a g i v e n s o c i e t y , and are  Work by R i c h a r d Johnston sheds  i n the 1959  to have h i g h e r  to r e s i s t change and, c o n v e r s e l y , are more  l i k e l y to embrace i n n o v a t i o n and  3 5  this  to f r e e trade  and of  American investment evidence  i s puzzling especially  t h a t p o i n t s to an a f f i n i t y  cosmopolitanism. contradiction.  Johnston addresses  i n the f a c e  amongst Canadians f o r  this  apparent  He p o s t u l a t e s t h a t i n Canada among educated  Canadians "there seems to be a r e s i s t a n c e to xenophobic appeals,  except  The  when they  i n v o l v e the United  States."  above d i s c u s s i o n on c u l t u r e and e d u c a t i o n  3 7  leads to  the p r e d i c t i o n t h a t a r t i c u l a t e Canadians w i l l , on balance, oppose f u r t h e r economic i n t e g r a t i o n with the United  States  because i n t e g r a t i o n v i o l a t e s one of the c o r e - v a l u e s of Canadian s o c i e t y : r e s i s t a n c e to a b s o r p t i o n republic.  Educated Canadians, i t i s a s s e r t e d , have adopted  or understand than  i n t o the American  t h i s p a r t i c u l a r s o c i a l norm more  the average Canadian, and w i l l  most l i k e l y  thoroughly  t h e r e f o r e be the ones  to agree with or adopt t h i s core v a l u e .  McClosky and B r i l l  state "social  g r e a t e r among the i n f l u e n t i a l s among the mass p u b l i c . "  learning i s l i k e l y  As to be  ( e l i t e s ) of the s o c i e t y than  3 8  SUHHARY T h i s chapter  has presented  o p i n i o n on f r e e trade i n Canada. Canada w i l l of  four theories  concerning  I p r e d i c t e d that labour i n  oppose f r e e trade because i t i s a s c a r c e  production;  capital  i n Canada w i l l favour f r e e trade  because i t i s an abundant f a c t o r of p r o d u c t i o n . predicted 3 7 3 8  t h a t the " i n d u s t r i a l h e a r t l a n d  I b i d , p. 115. M c C l o s k y and B r i l l ,  factor  op. c i t . , p. 233.  I also  regions"--Ontario  51  and  Quebec--will  restrictive industries.  oppose l i b e r a l i z e d  trade because the  trade p o l i c i e s reward import  replacement  The "resource e x t r a c t i o n and p r o c e s s i n g  r e g i o n s " - - B r i t i s h Columbia, the P r a i r i e s , will  and the A t l a n t i c - -  favour f r e e trade because they w i l l b e n e f i t from  enhanced access and i n c r e a s e d trade with t h e i r export market.  largest  I then p r e d i c t e d t h a t a gender a n a l y s i s of  o p i n i o n should r e v e a l t h a t women oppose f r e e t r a d e to a g r e a t e r degree than men because of the impact  a FTA should  have on c e r t a i n s o c i a l s e r v i c e s which women consume, and because of the r a m i f i c a t i o n s the FTA may have upon the j o b s many women have. lower  An income a n a l y s i s should a l s o show t h a t  income Canadians are, on balance,  liberalized  more a g a i n s t  t r a d e with the U n i t e d S t a t e s than are higher  income Canadians. Canadians w i l l  Finally,  I predicted that  articulate  oppose f r e e trade because i t v i o l a t e s a core  v a l u e i n Canadian s o c i e t y .  Chapter  3 will  turn to the f r e e  t r a d e survey d a t a and t e s t the hypotheses d e l i n e a t e d i n t h i s chapter.  52  Chapter  3  ANALYSIS  The discover  most important  i n t e n t of t h i s chapter  i f d i v i s i o n s on mass o p i n i o n  correspond  on f r e e  to the p r e d i c t i o n s made i n chapter  the e l i t e p o s i t i o n s reviewed does the o p p o s i t i o n  i n chapter  one.  i s to trade two, and to For example,  to f r e e trade by Canada's major union  l e a d e r s t r a n s l a t e i n t o o p p o s i t i o n by the rank and f i l e ? support  f o r f r e e trade g r e a t e s t  to g a i n  the most from f r e e  The  i n those r e g i o n s  that  Is  stand  trade?  survey (Decima #2377) was conducted by Decima  Research L i m i t e d between May 27 and June 7, 1987 f o r the Department of E x t e r n a l A f f a i r s .  To f a c i l i t a t e  p r o v i n c i a l comparisons, Decima i n t e r v i e w e d hundred respondents i n each p r o v i n c e . 1  f  inter-  a minimum of one  The most  t h i n g t h a t a p r e l i m i n a r y a n a l y s i s of the data  striking  reveals i s  i A l l f i g u r e s i n the t a b l e s have been weighted, however. The w e i g h t i n g i s f r a c t i o n a l ; the 1500 raw cases are downweighted to 1161. The reader should t h e r e f o r e i n f l a t e numbers by a f a c t o r of about 30%.  53 balanced  opinion.  F r e q u e n t l y the numbers show t h a t no  position  emerges from the data.  At times,  clear  o p i n i o n i s 50/50,  as, f o r example, a look at u n i v e r s i t y graduate  preferences  show. The chapter  a n a l y s i s undertaken here two.  "vertical"  Accordingly, i t w i l l  economic a x i s — w h a t  c a p i t a l versus  income a n a l y s i s .  axis.  first  look at the  has otherwise  labour p r e d i c t i o n .  economic, or r e g i o n a l ,  f o l l o w s the p a t t e r n of  been termed  Next i s the  "horizontal"  F o l l o w i n g t h i s i s a gender  L a s t , chapter  the  and  three turns to a look at the  c u l t u r a l p r e d i c t i o n on f r e e trade o p i n i o n .  THE VERTICAL AXIS: ANALYSIS Data i n t a b l e 1 show t h a t i g n o r i n g r e g i o n , there i s little  difference,  on balance,  nonunion r e s p o n d e n t s . union  2  The  i n o p i n i o n between union  q u e s t i o n c r o s s t a b u l a t e d with  or nonunion membership i s : " o v e r a l l ,  would you  say i t  would be a very good i d e a , a good i d e a , a bad  i d e a , or a  v e r y bad  trade  i d e a f o r Canada to e n t e r i n t o a f r e e  agreement with the U n i t e d S t a t e s . "  Unsurprisingly, s l i g h t l y  more nonunion members than union members support Still,  the d i f f e r e n c e s between the two  t h a t one  2  and  free trade.  groups are so s m a l l  would be f o o l i s h to read too much i n t o them.  F o r purposes of s i m p l i c i t y and c l a r i t y , "union members" are c o n s i d e r e d to be "labour" as t h a t f a c t o r of p r o d u c t i o n i s t r e a t e d by Rogowski.  TABLE 1 - OVERALL OPINION by UNION MEMBERSHIP (% SUPPORT) UNION  NONUNION  50.8  55.6  (392)  (676)  CHI-SQUARE: 3.91 P= 0.27, The opinion  n.s  s m a l l d i f f e r e n c e s between union and  nonunion  i s the most s t r i k i n g r e v e l a t i o n of t a b l e  Contrary  to our  t h e o r e t i c a l expectations,  and  the review of  the e l i t e debate, the c o n t r a s t between union and opinion be  i s almost  refuted.  to be s l i g h t l y  p o l i c y that w i l l b e n e f i t c a p i t a l . confident  t h a t Table  1 confirms  because the c h i - s q u a r e  One  in favour  this conclusion, p r i m a r i l y  shows t h a t , with  boundaries of not  would be unwise to make any  of a  cannot, however, be  three degrees of  freedom, the r e s u l t s come no where near being acceptable  nonunion  Rogowski a l s o appears to  imperceptible.  Labour looks  1.  within  o c c u r r i n g by chance. d e f i n i t e conclusions  Thus i t based  oh  this crosstabulation.  THE  HORIZONTAL AXIS: ANALYSIS Table  2 shows o v e r a l l o p i n i o n  of r e s i d e n c e . strongest  B r i t i s h Columbians are, on balance,  supporters  support i v e .  on f r e e trade by  of f r e e t r a d e ; Ontarians  are  region the  the  least  55 TABLE 2 - OVERALL OPINION BY PROVINCE (% SUPPORT) B..J1-. PRAIRIES 64.2 (86)  ONTARIO  57.0 (116)  44.2 (137)  CHI-SQUARE: P= The  chi-square  relationship for  i n t h i s Table  i s considered  54. (165)  shows that the  to be  anticipated  statistically  Quebec — should  e x t r a c t i n g and P r a i r i e s and trade with  can  see  industrial  heartland  history.  province."  by least  restrictive  trade p o l i c i e s  replacement  industries,  and  the  l a r g e s t consumer of i t s e x p o r t s .  In the past, B.C. In the  1911  the C o n s e r v a t i v e  Yankees."  3  the  promote f r e e  has  belies,  i n some ways,  not been a " f r e e trade  f e d e r a l e l e c t i o n not  one  c o n s t i t u e n c y moved a g a i n s t the p r o v i n c e wide norm of for  that  resource  p r o c e s s i n g r e g i o n s - - B r i t i s h Columbia, seek and  We  regions--0ntario  favour  B r i t i s h Columbia's s t r o n g support its  level.  t h a t o p i n i o n , at  the A t l a n t i c — should  the  significant  seems to conform to our p r e d i c t i o n s .  t h a t the  reward import  observed  to the models on r e g i o n a l o p i n i o n  Mackintosh, e t . a l . , we superficially,  58.4 (75)  7  24.10 0.02  twelve degrees of freedom at the 0.05 According  and  QUEBEC ATLANTIC  p l a t f o r m of "no  That i t i s now  support  t r u c k or trade with  the most s u p p o r t i v e  the  of a l l the  r e g i o n s says something about B r i t i s h Columbia's changing  3  S e e Johnston and Percy, " R e c i p r o c i t y , I m p e r i a l Sentiment and P a r t y P o l i t i c s i n the 1 9 1 1 E l e c t i o n . " C a n a d i a n J_QUjrja.a.l af....P_Qlit.i_s..aJL_i5...c_ieii..c.e.. December 1 9 8 0 . pp. 7 1 1 - 7 2 9 .  56 r o l e as an i n t e r n a t i o n a l e x p o r t e r of goods to many p a r t s of the  world. Why  Quebec i s d i s s i m i l a r  Perhaps the burgeoning  to O n t a r i o  is puzzling.  corporate c l a s s , a f t e r generations  of  eschewing commerce, have come to c o n s i d e r f r e e trade as a means by which Quebec companies can break i n t o and in a new, resist  l u c r a t i v e market.  The  prosper  bonus of being able to  the homogenization p r e s s u r e s that may  come with  i n c r e a s e d b u s i n e s s c o n t a c t s between Quebec and E n g l i s h Canadian f i r m s  may  a l s o i n f l u e n c e Quebec to be  less .like  Ontario. D i f f e r e n c e s between Quebec and O n t a r i o may caused  by  Robert  Bourassa  the two  leadership.  supports  opposes f r e e t r a d e ;  i t . The d i s p a r a t e stands  p r o v i d e cues f o r respondents  taken  by  these  p r o v i n c e s ; moreover, the l e g i t i m a c y of the o p i n i o n s of  these  men  may  Peterson  from  two  premiers  David  a l s o be  on f r e e t r a d e have, undoubtedly, l e g i t i m a c y due  to  t h e i r p o s i t i o n s in society.  UNION-NONUNION BY REGION Region and  union may  be o f f s e t t i n g v a r i a b l e s .  The  e m p i r i c a l f i n d i n g s thus f a r d i c t a t e a f u r t h e r breakdown of opinion.  C o n t r o l l i n g f o r r e g i o n may  d i f f e r e n c e s between union  show g r e a t e r  and nonunion  respondents.  Table 3 shows t h a t B r i t i s h Columbia's non-union respondents  are the most s u p p o r t i v e of f r e e t r a d e ,  non-union respondents  from O n t a r i o are the l e a s t  while  supportive.  57  B r i t i s h Columbia's nonunion o p i n i o n confirms Rogowski and Mackintosh. if  O n t a r i o ' s non-union o p i n i o n looks, however, as  i t r e f u t e s Rogowski, but i s c o n s i s t e n t with  Mackintosh.  TABLE 3 - OVERALL OPINION by UNION MEMBERSHIP by REGION (% SUPPORT)  MIPN BRITISH COLUMBIA  NONUNION.  56.8  68.6  (29)  (58)  CHI-SQUARE: 3.28 P= 0.35 53.5  PRAIRIES  59.1  (31)  (85)  CHI-SQUARE: .1.21 P= 0.75 43.9  ONTARIO  44.5  (47)  (88)  CHI-SQUARE: 2.35 P= 0.50 48.1  QUEBEC  (62)  59.6 (103)  CHI-SQUARE: 4.73788 P= 0.19 ATLANTIC  63.6  55.2  (30)  (44)  CHI-SQUARE: 0.90444 P= 0.82 The  chi-squares reveal a large p o s s i b i l i t y  d i f f e r e n c e s c o u l d have been generated cannot  Thus, we  makes much d i f f e r e n c e on o p i n i o n .  N e v e r t h e l e s s , union membership appears  ten  by chance.  these  c o n f i d e n t l y say, on balance, that being a union or  nonunion respondent  effect  that  on o p i n i o n i n B r i t i s h Columbia  to have the l a r g e s t and Quebec.  More than  p o i n t s s e p a r a t e union and nonunion o p i n i o n i n these two  regions.  The a n t i - f r e e trade message may be g e t t i n g  through  58 to union respondents i n B r i t i s h Columbia  and Quebec, the  two  p r o v i n c e s w i t h the l a r g e s t percentage of u n i o n i z e d workers i n the c o u n t r y . Canadian  unions are f a i r l y  homogeneous and they p r o v i d e  some i n s u l a t i o n a g a i n s t r e g i o n a l c l i m a t e s of o p i n i o n . Unions can g i v e a respondent c l u e s about how  he should  respond  nonunion  to an i s s u e such as f r e e t r a d e .  The  c a t e g o r y , however, i s much more e c l e c t i c .  It includes  e v e r y t h i n g from chambers of commerce p r e s i d e n t s to s t u d e n t s . These respondents have much l e s s reason to look at f r e e t r a d e i n a c e r t a i n way. more l i k e l y We  Nonunion respondents are p r o b a b l y  to f o l l o w the r e g i o n a l c l i m a t e of o p i n i o n .  expect that O n t a r i o and Quebec would approach  t r a d e with the U n i t e d S t a t e s from v i r t u a l l y perspective. nonunion  free  the same  Thus the d i s s i m i l a r i t y of both union and  response i n O n t a r i o and Quebec i s i n t e r e s t i n g .  Why  t h e r e seems to be such a d i v e r g e n c e of o p i n i o n i n the i n d u s t r i a l heartland  i s d e s e r v i n g of f u r t h e r thought  and  study. The s m a l l d i f f e r e n c e s i n o p i n i o n among the r e g i o n s and between union and nonunion  respondents could  lead one to  conclude that t h e r e are other e q u a l l y important on o p i n i o n o t h e r than the simple c a l c u l a t i o n self-interest.  influences  of economic  That i s , i t i s p o s s i b l e that t h e r e are other  important environmental and s o c i a l i z i n g f a c t o r s at work g i v i n g cues to a respondent. knowledge about  For i n s t a n c e , a respondent's  the i s s u e of f r e e trade, a t t i t u d e s  toward  59  unions and union power, the past,  present  and p o s s i b l e  f u t u r e economic performance of the economic s e c t o r a respondent  i n which  i s employed, and r e g i o n a l p r i d e and l o y a l t y .  A  p a r o c h i a l attachment to and d e s i r e f o r improvement of a respondent's r e g i o n may c r e a t e  a belief  that  regional  i n t e r e s t s may be more important that s e l f - i n t e r e s t s .  A  respondent may not p e r s o n a l l y b e n e f i t from f r e e trade but his region w i l l ,  THE  i n other  words.  SOCIAL POLICY AXIS: ANALYSIS Chapter two o u t l i n e d the e x p e c t a t i o n  lower income Canadians should,  that women and  on balance, oppose f r e e  trade  i n p a r t because of the FTA's p o t e n t i a l impact upon the economic and s o c i a l p o s i t i o n of women and poorer  residents  of Canada. Table 4 r e v e a l s that there  i s more than a ten p o i n t  d i f f e r e n c e between men and women when we perform a breakdown of o v e r a l l o p i n i o n  on f r e e trade by gender.  shows, i n a d d i t i o n , that there  is little  The chi-square  possibility  these numbers were generated by chance. TABLE 4 - OVERALL OPINION BY GENDER (% SUPPORT) MEN 59.2  (324)  WOMEN 48. O  (254)  CHI-SQUARE: 13.01 P= 0.0003  that  60 C l e a r l y there  i s some reason to b e l i e v e that there  chance t h a t women and trade.  Press  expectation  men  disagree  on  the m e r i t s  is a  of f r e e  r e p o r t s t h a t f r e q u e n t l y r e i n f o r c e an  t h a t women can  changes caused by  expect to bear the brunt  f r e e trade may  of  help generate these gender  differences. Table  5 shows l i t t l e  of i n t e r e s t concerning  of income on n a t i o n a l f r e e trade  opinion.  There i s  v i r t u a l l y no d i f f e r e n c e between those who $29,999 and statistics  those who  earn l e s s than  earn more than t h a t .  r e v e a l t h a t there  chance t h a t t a b l e 5 was  In  i s almost a one  generated by  the power  fact,  hundred  percent  chance.  TABLE 5 - OVERALL OPINION BY ANNUAL HOUSEHOLD INCOME (% SUPPORT) u n d e r $30,000  $30,000 and  54.3 (324)  over  48.0 (254)  CHI-SQUARE: 13.01 P= 0.0003  Because of the s m a l l d i f f e r e n c e s between the groups, and  because of the  impact r e g i o n of r e s i d e n c e  income—British  Columbia and  r i c h e s t regions  of the country,  it  i s worthwhile to analyze For  the  Ontario  the A t l a n t i c the  income by  lower h a l f of the  the  among the f i v e r e g i o n s .  least supportive  has  on  are c o n s i s t e n t l y the poorest-  region.  income s c a l e , t a b l e 6 r e v e a l s  t h a t B r i t i s h Columbians are the s t r o n g e s t trade  two  supporters  of f r e e  Less wealthy O n t a r i a n s  of f r e e t r a d e .  The  same r e g i o n a l  are  61 pattern  holds f o r those respondents that are i n the top h a l f  of the income s c a l e . are  That i s , wealthy B r i t i s h  the most s u p p o r t i v e ,  Columbians  wealthy O n t a r i a n s the l e a s t .  TABLE 6 - OVERALL OPINION BY ANNUAL INCOME BY REGION (% SUPPORT) under $30,000  $30,000 and over  BRITISH COLUMBIA  60.0 68.5 (24) (50) CHI-SQUARE: 1.03 P= 0.30  PRAIRIES  57.1 57.7 (57) (54) CHI-SQUARE: 0.005 P= 0.93  ONTARIO  46.1 44.4 (59) (75) CHI-SQUARE: 0.08 P= 0.76  QUEBEC  56.6 51.5 (94) (68) CHI-SQUARE: 0.77 P= 0.37  ATLANTIC  46.1 44.4 (59) (75) CHI-SQUARE: 0.08 P= 0.76  The  chi-squares  show that the o n l y r e g i o n s  come c l o s e to b e i n g  a true r e f l e c t i o n  Columbia and Quebec. perversely  small.  f o r which f i g u r e s  of o p i n i o n  is British  The Quebec d i f f e r e n c e i s , of course,  But even i n those r e g i o n s  the c h i - s q u a r e  r e v e a l s that the f i g u r e s do not come c l o s e to a c h i e v i n g acceptable  l e v e l s of s i g n i f i c a n c e .  In f a c t ,  differences  between the two income groups i s so i n s i g n i f i c a n t tempting to conclude that opinion.  income p l a y s  little  that  i t is  i f any r o l e i n  62  THE  CULTURAL AXIS: ANALYSIS This f i n a l  s e c t i o n looks at the purchase of  on o p i n i o n toward f r e e t r a d e . the p r e v i o u s chapter educated  The  education  t h e o r e t i c a l discussion in  leads to a p r e d i c t i o n  that b e t t e r  Canadians would oppose f r e e trade because i t  t h r e a t e n s one  of the c o r e - v a l u e s of Canadian  culture:  r e s i s t a n c e to the i n f l u e n c e of the United S t a t e s . A r t i c u l a t e Canadians should be the group t h a t has been most imbued--primarily affinity  through  high l e v e l s of e d u c a t i o n - - w i t h  f o r or understanding  Canadians are a l s o expected between the p o l i t i c a l United S t a t e s .  and  They w i l l  of t h i s core v a l u e .  Educated  to be b e t t e r able to d i s t i n g u i s h  s o c i a l systems of Canada and be more able to understand  these d i f f e r e n c e s mean f o r the p a s t , present and the s o c i e t y i n which we  an  live,  and  to understand  the  what  f u t u r e of what the  r a m i f i c a t i o n s of f r e e trade upon Canadian c o r e - v a l u e s  may  be. Table 7 p r e s e n t s what appears, of  d i v i d e d support  education any  f o r f r e e trade r e g a r d l e s s of the l e v e l of  a t t a i n e d by a respondent.  e d u c a t i o n group emerges.  No  c l e a r consensus i n  Indeed, only among  w i t h "some high s c h o o l " does support percent.  however, to be a p a t t e r n  respondents  come c l o s e to s i x t y  63 TABLE 7 - OVERALL SUPPORT by EDUCATION (X SUPPORT)  X-8 IBS SOME HS ES (IMP VO-IECH SOME UNI STUDENT UNI gJRAD. 49.3 (48)  58.5 (125)  55.4 (166)  52.1 (69)  49.4 (32)  52.3 (38)  50.9 (94)  CHI-SQUARE: 4.32765 P= 0.74 Once a g a i n , the c h i - s q u a r e shows that the d i f f e r e n c e s in  t a b l e 7 c o u l d have e a s i l y been generated  by chance.  T h e r e f o r e , as b e f o r e , we should be c a r e f u l about the c o n c l u s i o n s we reach from t h i s Post-secondary evenly s p l i t  over  table.  s t u d e n t s and u n i v e r s i t y graduates are  free trade.  But t h i s  case whatever l e v e l of education course,  "some high s c h o o l . "  seems to be the  a t t a i n e d , except, of  Thus, there appears to be no  l i n e a r r e l a t i o n s h i p between e d u c a t i o n  and o p i n i o n .  This  r e f u t e s the t h e o r e t i c a l e x p e c t a t i o n s of the p r e v i o u s chapter.  I t i s not the case  are more or l e s s l i k e l y But,  again,  t h a t more educated  to support  could  or oppose f r e e t r a d e .  i t i s c l e a r that the c h i - s q u a r e  shows t h a t there i s good reason have been generated  respondents  figure  to b e l i e v e t h a t the r e s u l t s  by chance. Thus, i t appears that  once again one c o u l d argue t h a t the r e s u l t s could have been generated  by chance.  SUMMARY T h i s chapter  has looked at s e v e r a l p r e d i c t i o n s on  Canadian p r e f e r e n c e toward f r e e t r a d e .  Generally, opinion  on  almost a l l q u e s t i o n s  under study  e l i c i t weak d i f f e r e n c e s  No c l e a r or overwhelming consensus of o p i n i o n apparent.  i s readily  4  Even so, t e n t a t i v e c o n c l u s i o n s  can be drawn.  For  i n s t a n c e , Rogowski's model does not hold t r u e i n Canada f o r the c a p i t a l - l a b o u r cleavage, union-nonunion c o n t r a s t . respondents support  at l e a s t as represented  A bare m a j o r i t y of union  f r e e trade with  the United  S t a t e s , and  the union-nonunion d i f f e r e n c e i s v a n i s h i n g l y s m a l l . s t r o n g e s t union-nonunion cleavage and  by the  The  appears to be i n Quebec  B r i t i s h Columbia, the two p r o v i n c e s  with the h i g h e s t  percentage of u n i o n i z a t i o n i n Canada. Rogowski's model does seem to hold true f o r the horizontal prediction. exports  Regions which r e l y p r i m a r i l y on  to f u e l t h e i r economic p r o s p e r i t y - - B r i t i s h  the P r a i r i e s and the A t l a n t i c - - d o i n f a c t  favour  Columbia  free  trade  One r e g i o n which i n the past has been rewarded by the tariff,  Ontario,  on balance  opposes f r e e t r a d e .  other such r e g i o n , Quebec, on balance  favours  But the  free trade.  Most r e g i o n a l o p i n i o n on f r e e trade appears to be congruent with  the p r e d i c t i o n s on the r o l e of the t a r i f f by  Mackintosh, Whalley, Melvin  4  and Shearer.  But r e g i o n a l  B e c a u s e of the weak d i f f e r e n c e s i n o p i n i o n i n the face of t h e o r e t i c a l e x p e c t a t i o n s to the c o n t r a r y , a r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s i s of support f o r f r e e trade by region — p a r t i c u l a r l y Quebec and B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a — a n d u n i v e r s i t y education was performed. No d i f f e r e n c e s with the c r o s s t a b s of note were discovered.  65 d i f f e r e n c e s are not  l a r g e , and  Quebec stands out as an  anomaly. Women are more l i k e l y to oppose f r e e trade than But  men.  income has no d i s c e r n i b l e e f f e c t on f r e e trade o p i n i o n .  C o n t r o l s f o r r e g i o n of r e s i d e n c e do not e f f e c t the impact  estimated  of income.  Finally,  e d u c a t i o n does not appear to have i t s  predicted  impact.  education  and  No  l i n e a r r e l a t i o n s h i p appeared between  p r e f e r e n c e s toward f r e e t r a d e .  c o n c l u s i o n s about education chapter's  findings.  are unsupportable  Johnston's by  this  66  Chapter  4  CONCLUSION  T h i s t h e s i s began with the task of f i n d i n g out who does or does not support simple  f r e e trade with the United  answer i s n e a r l y i m p o s s i b l e .  opinion  i s , at b e s t , balanced,  t h e o r e t i c a l expectations Canadian s o c i e t y should  States.  A  A n a l y s i s shows, that  notwithstanding  some s t r o n g  t h a t d i s t i n c t groups w i t h i n approach f r e e trade from p r e d i c t a b l e  perspect ives. Regional  o p i n i o n on f r e e trade does seem to conform to  Mackintosh's model of r e g i o n a l a n i m o s i t y the t a r i f f  toward the r o l e of  i n the economic development of Canada but  d i f f e r e n c e s a r e unexpectedly  small.  The p o s i t i o n of Quebec  i s anomalous from an economic p o i n t of view. vertical  For the  economic p r e d i c t i o n of o p i n i o n , i t was a n t i c i p a t e d  t h a t labour would oppose f r e e trade and c a p i t a l would support  it.  S u r p r i s i n g l y , we d i s c o v e r e d  m a j o r i t y of union  respondents,  t h a t a bare  on balance,  back f r e e trade  with the USA, and that the union/nonunion d i f f e r e n c e i s very  67 small.  Other d i f f e r e n c e s i n o p i n i o n confirm  this  general  pattern. There are s e v e r a l p o s s i b l e reasons f o r the First,  there may  be measurement problems.  o n l y as good as the q u e s t i o n s " survey  researchers.  results.  "The  i s a popular  results  adage among  I t r e f l e c t s the r e s e a r c h e r ' s d e s i r e to  prevent  personal  content  of the survey  or i n s t i t u t i o n a l b i a s e s c r e e p i n g and  a f f e c t i n g the  i n t o the  data.  A second i n f l u e n c e could be what are termed factors."  are  "contextual  Other i s s u e s were competing f o r a respondent's  a t t e n t i o n at the time as w e l l .  In a l l p r o v i n c e s ,  other  i s s u e s competed f o r a respondent's a t t e n t i o n , and undoubtedly generated as much i f not more i n t e r e s t trade.  In O n t a r i o ,  for instance, a p r o v i n c i a l  campaign was  soon to begin.  Conservative  p a r t i e s took opposing stands--the  a g a i n s t , the C o n s e r v a t i v e s f r e e t r a d e was  anything  The  election  provincial Liberal  f o r - - b u t few  but  than f r e e  and  Liberals  would argue t h a t  a p e r i p h e r a l i s s u e out on  the  hustings. The  unpopularity  the mass l e v e l may man  had  of John Turner and  be another c o n t e x t u a l  B r i a n Mulroney at factor.  a l a r g e , l o y a l f o l l o w i n g independent of t h e i r  or r o l e as p a r t y l e a d e r .  pronouncements.  and  respect for t h e i r  The  policy  T h i s i s because there seems to be a l a r g e  amount of s k e p t i c i s m d i r e c t e d toward both Mr. Turner.  party  In other words, n e i t h e r could  a u t o m a t i c a l l y expect support  Mr.  Neither  prime m i n i s t e r had  Mulroney  the advantage of  and  the  68 l e g i t i m a t i z i n g f u n c t i o n s of e x e c u t i v e of the the p a r l i a m e n t a r y  alia,  handling  timetable  inter  and a g e n d a — b u t h i s  of i s s u e s such as patronage and the honesty of  s e v e r a l Government m i n s t e r s canceled  power--control,  c o u l d have overshadowed or  the impact of h i s announcements on f r e e t r a d e .  Mulroney's chances of s u c c e s s f u l l y m a n i p u l a t i n g  Mr.  o p i n i o n were  thus reduced. John Turner had s i m i l a r problems.  A former Bay S t r e e t  lawyer and m i n i s t e r of f i n a n c e who p r e v i o u s l y supported trade,  (indeed,  free  he leads the p a r t y t h a t has h i s t o r i c a l l y  been the champion i n Canada of l i b e r a l i z e d i n t e r n a t i o n a l t r a d e ) he may appear to Canadians to be opposing what the Government proposes i n order p o i n t s , or to f u l f i l l of the O p p o s i t i o n .  Mr. Turner's  c r i t i c i s m may seem  impression.  another p o s s i b l e e x p l a n a t i o n  f o r our unexpected  i s a l a c k of respondent knowledge about f r e e  or a f e e l i n g of apathy toward the i s s u e . simply  political  h i s statements a g a i n s t f r e e t r a d e  may not leave the intended  results,  to score  h i s c o n s t i t u t i o n a l r o l e as the leader  i n s i n c e r e ; consequently,  Yet  simply  not have had s u f f i c i e n t  information  Respondents may to hand to make  wise or c o n s i s t e n t c h o i c e s d u r i n g the i n t e r v i e w The  f r e e trade n e g o t i a t i o n s took p l a c e  and  Washington.  refused  trade  process.  i n s e c r e t i n Ottawa  Canadian and American n e g o t i a t i n g teams  to r e v e a l t h e i r p o s i t i o n s or e x p e c t a t i o n s  d u r i n g the d i s c u s s i o n s ; t h e r e f o r e , l i t t l e  publicly  information  the d e a l reached the p u b l i c at the mass l e v e l .  about  F e d e r a l and  69 p r o v i n c i a l governments were b r i e f e d  about what was  shape,  know the d e t a i l s of the  but at no time d i d Canadians  taking  what had been d e c i d e d . The  l e n g t h of the survey, moreover, may  survey p o p u l a t i o n ennui simply may believed  w i t h the s u b j e c t .  not c a r e about  to be s e n s i b l e answers without  systems  This  may  logically  have n e g l e c t e d coherent  i s the " n o n - a t t i t u d e " argument about  i n mass p u b l i c s advanced  Converse  reflecting  Respondents  take the n e c e s s a r y time to form  answers.  Many respondents  f r e e t r a d e and g i v e what they  a d e q u a t e l y upon a q u e s t i o n . to  have caused  by P h i l i p  Converse.  found t h a t o p i n i o n s on d i f f e r e n t ,  ideologically consistent, relationships.  He  found  belief 1  but  i s s u e s showed o n l y weak e m p i r i c a l i n a t h r e e wave panel survey t h a t  responses by the same i n d i v i d u a l s to the same q u e s t i o n s over a two-year  i n t e r v a l were v e r y u n s t a b l e .  He  also discovered  t h a t the weak c o r r e l a t i o n s d i d not become any weaker over a f o u r year i n t e r v a l . mean t h a t First,  Converse  took h i s r e s e a r c h r e s u l t s to  survey p o p u l a t i o n s f a l l  i n t o two main camps.  t h e r e are respondents w i t h r e a l  a t t i t u d e s never changed.  The  second  people w i t h no a t t i t u d e s - - t h e i r  attitudes;  these  real  camp c o n s i s t e d of  responses could  a d v e n t i t i o u s l y appear  s t a b l e , but a l l change, as measured,  was  concluded from t h i s t h a t  random.  Converse  should not impute  systems  of b e l i e f  analysts  to mass p u b l i c s .  i P h i l i p Converse, "The Nature of B e l i e f Systems i n Mass P u b l i c s . " In Ideology... and D...is..C..Q.O..t.e.I»..fc., e d i t e d by D. Apter. (New York: Wiley, 1964) pp. 206-257.  70 Converse b e l i e v e d that most people most of the time do not  t h i n k about p o l i t i c s ,  were.not connected with each It  and  simply  such thoughts as they  other.  i s tempting to use Converse's c o n c l u s i o n s  to e x p l a i n  away the amorphous o p i n i o n on f r e e trade under study Both the  l a c k of i n f o r m a t i o n  the survey may  population,  e x p l a i n why  there  three y e a r s ,  and  here.  and  i d e o l o g i c a l c o n s t r a i n t upon  which was  taken from the mass p u b l i c ,  i s such s m a l l group d i f f e r e n c e s i n  o p i n i o n , d e s p i t e both the v i t r i o l i c debate c a r r i e d Canada at the e l i t e  had  out i n  l e v e l over f r e e trade d u r i n g the  the economic and  social  past  theories outlined  here which d i c t a t e d that Canadians should e x h i b i t p r e d i c t a b l e p o s i t i o n s on f r e e trade with Converse emphasizes the the formation  the United  States.  importance of i n f o r m a t i o n  of i d e o l o g i c a l c o n s t r a i n t .  He  b e l i e v e s that  the s t r e n g t h of c o n s t r a i n t i n b e l i e f systems d e c l i n e s decreasing little  political  information  information.  dichotomy between mass and explained  elite  by d i f f e r e n c e s i n type  the survey  He b e l i e v e s t h a t ,  t r i c k l e s down very f a r . "  and  in part  amount of  with "very  Perhaps  2  o p i n i o n can  in  the be  information  population  had  on f r e e t r a d e .  Those respondents  at the mass l e v e l may  not  have the same p e r s p e c t i v e on f r e e  t r a d e as the e l i t e s because they e i t h e r d i d not take  the time to be as informed  e l i t e s are.  2  Ibid.  about f r e e trade as  I d e o l o g i c a l c o n s t r a i n t s are present  e l i t e s at the top of p o l i t i c a l  or could  not  the  among the  systems but d i s a p p e a r  rather  r a p i d l y as one moves downward i n t o the mass p u b l i c . members of the mass p u b l i c simply information  that w i l l  of i d e o l o g y ; "  that  "fundamental why of p o l i t i c s - - i t s  base."  to "absorb  enable them to d e s c r i b e  the b a s i c a b s t r a c t i o n s the  fail  Most  contextual  positions in  i s , few  explore  i s s u e or i d e o l o g i c a l  I f t h i s i s so, we can then conclude that the  3  survey p o p u l a t i o n  under study here i s a l s o unable to g i v e  t h e o r e t i c a l l y consistent  responses to a complicated  t h a t had j u s t r e c e n t l y a r r i v e d on the Canadian  issue  political  agenda. The opinion  political  r a m i f i c a t i o n s of vague and c o n t r a d i c t o r y  may portend d i f f i c u l t i e s  national p a r t i e s during  f o r the three  major  the next f e d e r a l e l e c t i o n campaign.  Both the L i b e r a l s and the New Democrats w i l l  spend  time  emphasizing the "emotional" aspects of the d e a l - - t h e p o t e n t i a l changes i n the Canadian n a t i o n a l psyche and identity. voters;  T h i s means t h a t they w i l l  implicit  underlying thought.  appeal to n a t i o n a l i s t  i n the campaign w i l l  be an address to the  anti-American nature of Canadian L i b e r a l and New Democratic P a r t y  doubt b e l i e v e that such i s s u e s s e l l  political s t r a t e g i s t s no  b e t t e r than  s c h e d u l e s or the economic t h e o r i e s that j u s t i f y to f r e e  Conservatives,  in contrast,  will  trumpet the  economic b e n e f i t s of f r e e trade with the United They w i l l Ibid.  opposition  trade.  The  3  tariff  s t r e s s that these b e n e f i t s w i l l  States.  outweigh the  72 supposed  costs  to n a t i o n a l u n i t y or job  restructuring  of the  themselves  the  as  economy.  party  C a n a d a an o p p o r t u n i t y and p r o s p e r  through  free  and t h e  most  strategy  one  w o r l d ' s most  W e s t e r n and  T o r o n t o from t a k i n g t h i s  tap  regional  Canada's  present Atlantic economies  largest The  t r a d e c a m p a i g n may be  "anti-Ontario"  to prevent  by a  l u c r a t i v e market.  during a free  They s h o u l d urge C a n a d i a n s  you . "  brought  trade with  in which Conservatives  caused  Conservatives w i l l  to d i v e r s i f y t h e i r  trading partner successful  that  losses  sentiment.  "Bay S t r e e t  economic o p p o r t u n i t y  and  away f r o m  73  BIBLIOGRAPHY Books  and  Journal  Articles  Becker, Gary S. "A Theory of Competition Among P r e s s u r e Groups f o r P o l i t i c a l P r e s s u r e . " The. Quarterly. J..Q.u.r.n.a.l.....o_f. i.c_Qfl.Q.iic.s. August 1983. B i j u r , Peter. "Free Trade and D e r e g u l a t i o n . " Qp.ti.Qns EQ..li..ti..gue.s.. January 1988.  Pjo_l.i..c.y  B l a i r , R.S. and McLoed, J.T. The Canadian P o l i t i c a l Tradition..: Basic B..e.ad..ing.s.. (Toronto: Metheun, 1987.) Blumenthal, W. M i c h a e l . T e c h n o l o g i c a l Change." 66, no. 3  "The World Economy and Foreign Affairs.. S p r i n g 1988 v o l .  Brady, Alexander. "The Meaning of Canadian lnt..e.r.na.t.i.Q.nal J.QUrnal - Summer 1964.  Nationalism,"  Bromke, Adam and N o s s a l , Kim R i c h a r d . "A T u r n i n g P o i n t i n US-Canadian R e l a t i o n s . " Eoxeign A f f a i r s . . F a l l 1987, v o l . 66, no. 1. Cameron, Duncan. 1 be.. E r. e.e.... £r ad e Eap e..r s . Lorimer, 1986 . )  (Toronto: James  Canadian Labour Congress. Our Canada or Theirs.;. Workers. Con.front t h e... Co r p Q r at e Blue, pr i n t - Document 1 9 , 1 6 t h C o n s t i t u t i o n a l Convention. Ottawa, 1986. Cohen, M a r j o r i e . Ex.e..e Trade. .and. the....Fut.ure of Women.Is Work. (Ottawa: Canadian Centre f o r P o l i c y A l t e r n a t i v e s . 1987) C o r n e l l , Peter. " S e c u r i t y , Not S e l l o u t . " P o l i c y Options. e..Qli.tiau.e.s. March 1988. C r i s p o , John, ed . Er.ee I.r.ad ejP u b l i s h i n g , 1988.)  I be R.e..al. S..t.o.r.y (Toronto: Gage  E a s t e r b r o o k , W.T. and Watkins, M.H. Approaches to Canadian. E..Q.Qn..Q.mi..c.-.Hi.S.t..Qr.y. (Toronto: Macmillan of Canada, 1978.) E l k i n s , David. Email W o.ri.d.s.:. Proyirxces. and.....£arties C.a.o.ad..ian.-P.QLi.fcica.L...L.if.e.. (Toronto: Metheun, 1980.) Eorsign JPJLxiasJL^ (Ottawa: 1972.)  in.....Canada.  "The  Grey  in.  Report."  Gordon, R. C. "Towards a New N a t i o n a l i s m : Canada and Free Trade," unpublished Master's t h e s i s , U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1987.  74  G r a n a t s t e i n , J . L., "Free Trade Between Canada and the United S t a t e s : The Issue That W i l l Not Go Away," i n S t a i r s and Win ham, ed . The Politics... of Canada Is Economic Relationship with......t.h.e U n i t e d SJt..a.te.s.. (Toronto: U n i v e r s i t y of Toronto P r e s s , 1985. Grant, George. Lam.e.n.i...f.Q.r..a.....N.a.ti..Qn.. and Stewart, 1965. Gwyn, R i c h a r d . The. 4.9.t.h. E.arad..Q.x. • Stewart, L t d . , 1985.)  (Toronto: M c C l e l l a n d (Toronto: M c C l e l l a n d and  Hamilton, C o l l e e n and Whalley, John. "Regional C o n s i d e r a t i o n s and Canadian Trade P o l i c i e s , " i n John Whalley Can.ad.a-Uiii.t..e d. St.a.t..e.5.....Er .ee.....Txa .d.e. (Toronto: U n i v e r s i t y of Toronto P r e s s , 1985.) H u r t i g , Mel. Cammed (Edmonton: C o u n c i l of Canadians, Johnston, Can.ad..a.  .  1986.)  R i c h a r d . Public Qfiinion...and ...Public...Policy in. (Toronto: U n i v e r s i t y of Toronto P r e s s , 1985.)  and Percy, M i c h a e l . "Reciprocity, I m p e r i a l Sentiment, and P a r t y P o l i t i c s i n the 1911 Election." CjaiLa.d.i.an.....J..o.u.r.n.al Q.f„...£jD.l.Ltl.c..a..LS.c..i.e.nQ..e . December 1980. Kierans, E r i c . January 1988. Laxer, James. 1986.)  "A C r u e l Joke." P„.Q.li.cy......Qp.^ L.e.ap......Q..f„..F.ai.tJb,.  (Edmonton: H u r t i g P u b l i s h e r s ,  Levitt, Kari. Si.le.n.t_.._S.urx.en..d.e.x.. Canada, 1972.)  (Toronto: Macmillan of  Lumsden, Ian . C. i.Q.se.......fch .e. 4.9.t.h Parallel.,, .e..t.c..,....;. The. America ^ . (Toronto: U n i v e r s i t y of Toronto, 1970.) a  Mackintosh, W. A. l.h.e...E.c..Q.n..Q.ro.i.c Background .of.._.DQ.iminiQn. -Pr.QYi.n.Qi.a.L....R..e.la.fci.Q.n.s.. (Toronto: Macmillan of Canada, 1978) Macmillan, K a t i e . ed. op. c i t .  "Women and Free Trade,"  i n John C r i s p o ,  Manheim, J a r o l B. and Rich, Richard C. , Empirical Pcllfcical Analysis...;^ in P o l i t i c a l Science. (Englewood C l i f f s , NJ: P r e n t i c e - H a l l , 1980.)  McClosky, Herbert and B r i l l , A l i d a . Dimensions of. To 1 era n c e: What Americans B e l i e v e About C..i.yJLl L i b e r t i e s . . (New York: R u s s e l l Sage Foundation, 1983.) McNaught, Kenneth. P e l i c a n , 1982. )  The Ee.liean..._.His..tQ..r.y of ...Canada.  Meekison, J . P., ed. Canadian..J!._^ ( T o r o n t o : Methuen, 1977)  (London  Reality..  M e l v i n , James. "The R e g i o n a l Impact of T a r i f f s , " i n John Whalley Canada.-Unit.e.d_S..t...at.e.s„ .Free Trade ( T o r o n t o : U n i v e r s i t y of Toronto P r e s s , 1985. N o s s a l , K. R. , The P o l i t i c s o.£ Canadian Foreign Policy.. (Scarborough: P r e n t i c e - H a l l Canada, 1985) Percy, M.B., N o r r i e , K.H. and Johnston, R i c h a r d . " R e c i p r o c i t y and the Canadian G e n e r a l E l e c t i o n of 1911." Explorations in .Ej&pjnu?j>ic HisJtojcx. v. 19 1982. P e r l i n , George. Party....D.emQ.cra.c.y..i.n Canada. P r e n t i c e - H a l l Canada, 1988)  (Scarborough:  Robson , P e t e r . The Economics of. International (London: George A l l e n & Unwin, 1980.  Int..eg ration..  Rogowski, Ronald. " P o l i t i c a l Cleavages and Changing Exposure to Trade." Ame.ri.c„an_.JP..Q.lit_i.Q.al S..C.ie.n.ce...Review.. December 1987. S a f a r i a n , A.E. Jjoju.rji.a.l_.M^  " F o r e i g n Investment i n Canada: Some Myths." August 1971.  Shearer, Ronald. "Regionalism and I n t e r n a t i o n a l Trade P o l i c i e s , " i n John Whalley Canada.-United .States Free Trade. ( T o r o n t o : U n i v e r s i t y of Toronto P r e s s , 1985.) Simeon, R i c h a r d . "Regionalism and Canadian P o l i t i c a l I n s t i t u t i o n s " i n Meekison, J.P., ed. Q an ..ad lan_. Fed era .1.1 s.m. : Mxt.h..j_r_.._Rj?_a.llty.. ( T o r o n t o : Methuen, 1977.) S t a i r s , Denis.  "A P i g i n a Poke." Policy Options.  P0li.tlj3u.es.. • January 1988. and Winham, G i l b e r t . The BoHties. of Canada.Is EQ.Q.nom.i.c..R.eiat.i..Qnshi.p_wi.t.h the. U.ni.t.ed.....S..ta.t..e.s.. (Toronto: U n i v e r s i t y of Toronto P r e s s , 1985.) Stewart, M i c h a e l . C Qnt.ro. l l i n g.. th e EQ Q n o mic.... F.u t.u..r.e . (London: Wheatsheaf Books, 1983.)  S t o t h a r t , Paul. January 1988.  "Bad Deal." Policy. Options Polltiaues..  76  Wallerstein, Michael. "Unemployment, C o l l e c t i v e B a r g a i n i n g , and the Demand f o r P r o t e c t i o n . " American. Journal of. P o l i t i c a l Science.. November 1987. Watkins, M e l v i l l e .  "A S t a p l e s Theory of Economic  Growth."  Ca n ad.i an..... J. Q u.rnja. 1... of.. ..E.c o n Q mlcs and-.. P o l i.t .i.c.a.1 S c ie n.c e. May 1963.  W e s t e l l , Anthony. "Economic I n t e g r a t i o n with the United States." In.tarnation a l E.er.s.p..ec..t.iY.e.s... November/December 1984. Whalley, John, ed. Canada-.United States Er.ee T.r.ade. • (Toronto: U n i v e r s i t y of Toronto P r e s s , 1985.)  . Canadian Trade Policies and the World E..C..Qn ..o.my.. ( T o r o n t o : U n i v e r s i t y of Toronto P r e s s , 1985) Wonnacott, P a u l . "The Auto Pact: P l u s of Minus," C r i s p o , ed. op. c i t .  i n John  Young, R.A., "Breaking the Free Trade C o i l s . " Eol.icy_.Opinions. PQli.tigu.es... March 1988. PEEIDD.ICALS.JJ_DEX (0QMESTIC1 MACLEANS 1M5 A p r i l 22: 36 September  16: 24-28, 30-31, 34-35 30: 52, 16, 18  October 21: 18 November 11: 14 December 16: 13-14 iaas January 6: 34-36, 38 20: 40 February 17: 17 March  17: 44  77 April  28: 10-11  May 5: 10-12 12: 20 June, 2: 8-9 30: 11 September 29: 12 October 27: 16 November 3: 18 17: 29 1381 January 5: 38-39, 42 26: 2, 12, 14 February 9: 18 March 16: 24-25 30: 16, 33 April  6: 4, 10-12, 17, 18-19, 20  June 1: 40, 42 22: 7a-7d 29: 30-31 J u l y 20: 8-9 August 3: 30-31 10: 22-23 17: 34 September 7: 13 21: 36-38 October 5: 18-20, 22, 39 19: 13, 14-17, 16, 20-22, 23, 42 26: 26-27, 64 November 2: 41 9: 10-12 December  14 21 28  6, 18-19 18-19 36-37  1888 January 4: 42-43 11: 15 February 1: 9 15: 18-20, 20 29: 9 March 7: 24  EIMHCJAl POST 1985 April May  20: 10, 11 27: 21  4:9 11: 5 25: 8  J u l y 6: 8 20: 9 August 3: 8 31: 6 September 28: 6 October  9: 8 19: 55  November 2: 1 ,23: 97 December 14: 8 21: 1, 3, 8, 9 £986 January 4: 22 11: 7, 9 February  1: 8 8: 15-16 15: 19  March 29: 6  April  12: 38 19: 8  May 3: 9 10: 9 24: 8, 50, 53+ June 7: 9 14: 9, 10 21: 9 August 2: 7 23: 8 September 20: 8, 16 27: 8 November 1: 15 December 1: 6 1981 January 12: 8 19: 3 February 2: 10 March 2: 1, 7 9: 8, 10 16: 3 23: 4, 7, 8, 9, 12 30: 9 April  6: 1, 4, 8 13: 9 20: 11  May 4: 10 11: 9 25: 1-2 June 1: 9 15: 9 29: 8 J u l y 6: 6 13: 8 27: 3  80 August 3: 8 10: 3, 8, 9 24: 1, 3, 5, 6, 8 31: 1-2, 5, 10, 11 September 7: 1-2, 4 14: 4, 5, 10 21: 1-2, 4, 5, 10 28: 1, 4, 10, 11, 16, 38, 41, 45, 37-48 October 5: 1, 4, 10, 11, 14 12: 1, 3, 4, 10, 11, 35, 36, 38, 39, 40 19: 4, 5, 14, 15 26: 5, 14, 18, 19 November 2: 19 9: 3, 7, 18, 19 16: 17, 32, 33 23: 4, 19 30: 5, 14, 15 December  1:6 7: 3, 14, 15 14: 1, 6, 14, 15 21: 18, 19 28: 21 1988  January 4: 1-2, 12, 13 11: 14, 15 18: 3, 10, 12, 14 25: 1-2, 5, 38 February 1: 6, 7, 13, 14, 17 6: 17 13: 32 22: 18, 19, 47 March 5: 1-2, 4, 29 QWM  MR-MAIL 1985  January 17: 14 21: 1, 5 30: BI, BIO  February 16 : 18: 23: 28:  5 7 8 10  March 5: 1 6: 11 13: 8, 12 19: 1, 5 21: 12 23: BI, B3 25: 5 27: B4 April  2: B24 8: 1, 12 19: 11 25: 5 27: B4  May 4 : 2 6: M5 9: 7 13 6 14 5 16 8, 21 B l l June 3: M7 4: 6 26: 6, 28: 7 29: 4  B14  J u l y 2: 7 8: 5 13: 3 16: 5 18: 5, 11 23: 8 24: 4 25: E6, 5 27: BI 29: 4 August 8: 3 9: B4 15 B2 17 4 20 4, 8 23 1, B2 24 1, 6 26 7, B l l 28 B4  82  3: 5: 6: 7: 13 14 17 18 19 23 24 25 27 28 30 1 2 5 7 8 9 11 14 15 19 22 23 28 29 30 31  5 1 1, 6, 10, 18 3 14 5, 7, BI 8, B2 6 1 1, 4 8, T8 1, 3, 6, 20 3, B3 4  A5, B2 B2 A3, A15 A13 A15 A14 Al A2 A3 A8 A12 A10 A6 A l , A3 A6, B4 B4  November 6 A l , C7 8 A4 9 Al 11 A3, A6 13 A l 14 : A l B7 15 A5 16 : G8 18 A6 A8 19 : A l A3 21 : A2 26 : A3 28 : A10 29 : A3, A7 ;  2: A5, A16 3: A5 4 : A3 5: A l , A3 6: A13  12, 20  7: A6, A8 9: A2 10: A17 11: A10 12: A l , A5 17: A7 19: A l 23: A l 28: A14, DI, 30: A7  D4 19M6  January 4 : 36 7: A5 8: A8 9: A8 10: A8 11: A4 21: A8 22: A l 23: A4, A5 24: A l , B2 25: A4 27: A4, C16 28: A5 29: A4 31: A5 February 3: A4, A7 4: A l 5: A3 6: A5 7: A4 8: A l l 12: A l 13: A7, A8 14: A5, A15 17: A9 18: A8, B l l 19: A5, A7 20: B2 21: A12 22: A12 26: A8 27: A7 28: A l l  March 6: A10 15: A5, 17: BI, 18: BI 19: BI, ,22: A l , 24: A4 27: A7 28: A3 April  May  7: A5 9: A4 11: A7 12: A l 15: A3 16: A5, 18: A4 19: A l 21: A3, 22: A l , 23: A l , 24: A l , 25: A6 26: A6, 28: A12 29: A l ,  BI, B4 B2 B5 A2,  A12  BI A5 A5, A12 A4 A10, A14,  B8  A13 A8, A13, BI  3: A l l 5: A l , BI, B12 6: A5 7: A3 9: A4 10: A5 13: A l l 15: A19 16: A l 19: B6 20: A5 22: A l 23: A l , A4 26: A8, A14 27: BI, B4 28: A7 30: A4  June 2: C9 3: A l , A2 4: A l , A2, A4 5: A5, A9 6: A4 9: A10 10: A8 11: A8 13: A l , A5  14: .17: 18: 19: 20: 27:  A8 A4 A l , A4 Al A5 A8  J u l y 1: A7 2: A l , A4 3: A l , A2, A4 8: A4 10: B4 18: A4, A l l , B12 25: A7 30: A9 31: A5 August 1: A4 6: A l l 8: A8 14: A5 15: A3 18: A3 19: A3 September 3: 5: 10: 12: 13: 15: 16: 17: 18: 22: 24: 25: 26: 29: October 1: 17: 18: 20: 21: 23: 25: 30:  A5 A4 B2 Al, D5 BI, A3 Al, B5 A3 Al, A7 A4 A3  A9 Al, Al, Al, A8 Al, A3 Al,  A2,  A3  B3 A10 A2  A2 A2, DI, A2, B3 A2 A13  November 4: A18 7: A4 8: A l , A2 12: A8 17: A l , A2  D2  86 18 20 21 24  A5 A14 B3 B3  December 9: A12 10 A7 12 A5 16 A8 17 B8 19 B3 20 Al,  A2 .1987  January 6: 7: 14: 15: 16: 17: 19: 22: 23: 26: 28: 29: 30: 31:  A7 A7 Al, A4, Al, B5 Al, Al, A4 A4 A4 A4 A4, D3  A2, A7 A2  B4  A2 A2  A7  F e b r u a r y 4: A8 . 5: A l , 7 : D7 9: A9 12: B7 20: A5 26: A l , A2 March 2: A2 9: A l , A8 16: A l , A2, 19: A l , A2 20: A4, A13 24: BIO A p r i l 4: DI, D8 6: A l , A2 10: A5 14: B2 15: A5 16: A8 21: A l , A2 22: B5  A10  27: A5 . 28: A5 May  2: D3 5: B6 8: B2 15: B16 19: A l , 20: A l , 21: A3, 22: A5 25: A l , 26: A5  June 10: 11: 15: 17: 18: 23: 30: July  A2 A2 A7,  B5  A2  A l , A2 A4 A8 A2, B4 A7, B3 A5 A3  1: B7 3: A l , A2, A5 6: A5 7 : A3 8: B3 9: A l , A2, A5 10: A l , A3, A2 14: A5 17: A5 18: D2 21: A5 24:. A l , A2 25: A8 29: B8  August 6: A3 12: A4, 13: Al. 15: A4 18: B8 19: A5 24: A l , 25: A l , 26: A l , 28: A8 29: A l ,  B3  A2 A2, A5, A8, B5  A10  A2  September 3: B3 5: DI, D5 10: A5, A14 15: A l , A4, BIO 16: A l , A4  88 18: 19: 21: 23: 24: 25: 26: 28: 29:  A7 A l , A2 A l , A2, A5 A12, B8 A l , A18, BI, B2 A l , A5 A l , A2, DI, D8 A3, A7 A l , A2, B7  October 3: A l , A4, A5 5: A l , A2, A3, A5, A8 6: A l , A2, A4, A5, BI, B4, B5, B6 7: A8, A9, B6 9: A l , A2, A5, A7 10: A l , A5 12: A l , A2, A7 13: A3 .14: A3 15: A9 16: A12, B4 19: A8 20: A4 21: A l , A2, A4 22: A4, B12 24 : D2 26: A l , A2, A5 27: A l , A2, A5, A7 28: B4 30: A5, B6 31: A7 November 3 B5 4 A l , A2 5 A l , A2, A7 6 A l , A5 7 A3, A12, C15 9 A8, A15 10: A l , A2, A5, A7 12: A l , A2, A7 13: A3 14: A3 15: A9 16: A12, B4 19: A8 20: A4 21: A l , A2, A5 22: A4, B12 24: D2 26: A l , A2, A5 27: A l , A2, A5, A7 28: A l , A2, A6, A7 30: A l , A8, A12  89 December 1: A12 2: A l , A8 3: A16 4 : A5, A15 7 :.A5, B6 8: A l , A7, A9, A19, BI, B2, B l l 9: A9 10 A7, A10, B3, B5 11 A l , A2 14 A l , A2, A5 15 A3, A4, B5 16 A5 17 A4, B6, B l l 18 A l , A2, A3 19 A4, A5 22 A8 24 A4 26 A l , A2 1988  January (ROB) 11, 95 4 A l , A2, A8 5 A l , A2, A9 6 A3 7 A l , A2, A4 8 A3, A14 9 A l l , D2 11 A l , A2, A4 12 A4, A6, BI B2 13 A l , A2, A4 14 B8 15 A5 A7 16: A l , A2, A5, B6, B16 20: A9 B8 21: A5, B2 22: B2 25: A5 26 B5 28: A8 B38 1 A5, C3 2 B9, B13 4 A7 5 A4 6 A5 8 A12 9 A7 10 • B18 11 : A10 12 : A4, A7 19 : A l , A8  22 23 24 26 27 29  BI, B4 A5, A7, B7 B16 C9 A5, B3  1: B9 3: B3 7: B7 10 : BI 11 : B3 12 : B5 16 : B7 17 : A5 18 : A5 21 : BI, 22 : A7 23 : BI, 24 : B8 26 : B3 29 : BI, 31 : B7  TJHJELIGQHDMSX  1986 February 15  1981 September 26 October  10 1B88  February 6 March 19 April July  30 16  

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0097745/manifest

Comment

Related Items