Sustaining a Relationship : Insights from Canada on Linking the Government and Third Sector (Working Paper 1)

The embedding of third sector organisations in the policy world is fraught with tensions. Accountability and autonomy become oppositional forces causing an uneasy relationship. Government agencies are concerned that their equity and efficiency goals and objectives be met when they enter partnerships with the third sector for the delivery of programs and services. Third sector agencies question the impact of accountability mechanisms on their independence and identities. Even if the relationship between government and third sector agencies seems to be based on cooperation, concerns about cooptation (for nonprofits) and capturing (for governments) may linger calling the legitimacy of the partnership into question. Two means of improving the relationship between the governing and third sectors have been proposed recently in Canada by the Panel on Accountability and Governance in the Voluntary Sector (PAGVS) and the Joint Tables sponsored by the Voluntary Sector Task Force (VSTF). The two endeavours represent a historic undertaking in Canada aimed at improving and facilitating the relationship between the federal government and the nonprofit sector. The reports borrow on other country models but offer new insights into mediating the relationship, including new models for a regulatory body and a charity compact for Canada. Do these recommendations adequately address concerns of autonomy, accountability and cooptation or capturing? The Canadian reports do offer new insights into resolving the four tensions inherent in partnerships between the governing and third sector but also raise important questions about the nature of these relationships and the evolution of democracy within the Canadian political system.

Accommodating Muslim Minorities in Secular Societies: Public Education in England, Scotland, Ontario, and Quebec

Abstract This thesis examines one of the most sensitive challenges facing contemporary democracies: the accommodation of Muslim minorities in public institutions and services. It focuses on the field of education, and on two particular issues: the public funding of Islamic schools and the accommodation of Muslim needs in public secular schools. The analysis is based on an examination of outcomes in four jurisdictions that differ significantly in the level of accommodation that has emerged: England, Scotland, Ontario, and Quebec. I seek to explain why such variation in outcomes exists among these four cases. I draw on four bodies of literature to underpin the theoretical framework: historical institutionalism, political mobilization by civil society, political parties, and ideationalism. My argument can be summarized simply; historic church-state settlements, unique in each case, are the most important factor explaining the variation in outcomes in England, Scotland, Ontario, and Quebec. In some cases, the historic church-state template is incrementally adapted to accommodate Muslim minorities. In other cases, relatively little accommodation occurs and the path-dependent trajectory of church-state relations remains entrenched. While the historic church-state template is a necessary factor in the explanation, it does not fully account for the variation. For a more complete picture, I demonstrate that there are several additional key factors that also shape the outcomes: first, national identity and public attitudes towards immigration and immigrants; second, the extent of mobilization by political agents, such as civil society organizations and historic churches; and third, the response of political parties to demands by Muslims for institutional accommodation. Ultimately, I conclude that Muslims in these jurisdictions are receiving some accommodation, but the process is slow and partial. This thesis makes important theoretical and empirical contributions to the discussion of Muslim integration in liberal democratic states. First, a framework has yet to be developed that considers the theoretical implications of institutional accommodation of Muslims; I address this gap. Second, this research demonstrates the utility of historical institutionalism in explaining the adaptation of church-state templates to accommodate Muslims’ demands. Last, this study makes an original contribution by comparing the cases of England, Scotland, Ontario, and Quebec in the accommodation of Muslims in education. A comparison of Canada with the United Kingdom has not yet been done.