Austerity Governance and the Welfare Crisis in Montreal Pierre Hamel1
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Austerity Governance and the Welfare Crisis in Montreal | 165 Austerity Governance and the Welfare Crisis in Montreal Pierre Hamel1 and Grégoire Autin2 Introduction In Montreal, the challenge of austerity is modulated by the way the local state is undergoing a process of restructuring3. The divisions of power between federal, provincial and local components in the Canadian federal system, subject to the Constitution, leave municipalities with few options outside of finding acceptable compromises with the provincial government. This is because “municipalities in Canada have no autonomous, local and democratic constitutional standing. They have a constitutional position within the realm of the provincial omnicompetence” (Lightbody 2006: 39). As a consequence, collaborative governance at the local level is not something new. Even though a stark division between the different tiers of the state regarding the emergence of an austerity regime prevails, a varied picture of it is given by social and economic actors. But why do opponents have difficulty in organizing against governmental policies and discriminatory measures around the neoliberal ideology of austerity? On a general theoretical level, the hypothesis we would like to explore is the following: based on a Weberian understanding of capitalism described as “slavery without a 1 Pierre Hamel is a Professor in the Department of Sociology at the Université de Montréal. His current work focuses on public debate and deliberative democracy, as well as social movements and collective action. Email: [email protected] 2 Grégoire Autin is a PhD student at the Department of Sociology at the Université de Montréal. He works on social movements, alternative practices and prefigurative politics. Email: [email protected] 3 The research from which this publication derives is funded by the UK Economic and Social Research Council (Ref: ES/L012898/1) - Collaborative Governance under Austerity: An Eight-case Comparative Study. The authors would like to thank Jonathan Davies who is the principal investigator of this research. See http://www.dmu.ac.uk/ESRCAusterity. 166 | Austerity Urbanism and the Social Economy master”, one should not forget that “from an ethical standpoint, it [capitalism] can be contested only as an institution, not on the level of economic actors' personal behaviour” (Löwy 2013: 107). We think that this can help understanding why opponents of the neoliberal ideology of austerity, as elaborated by the Quebec Liberal party, have difficulties in organizing for blocking governmental policies and discriminatory measures coming from austerity policies. Based on a series of interviews,4 this article highlights the difficulty of combatting austerity measures implemented by the Liberals since their return to power in 2014 at the provincial level. This difficulty pertains mainly to what austerity really is, how blurry its consequences really are, and how fragmented the different actors are in challenging austerity among themselves. Austerity is before all an ideology. If the practical and negative consequences of it are mentioned, most of the time, the assessment of its consequences are most difficult to grasp. However, this remark should not erase the divisions between, on the one hand, actors directly related to the management of public infrastructures and/or the promotion of the business milieu – including government officials – and on the other hand those coming from the voluntary sector, community organizations and the labour movement. In Montreal, the position taken by the local authority has been driven by ‘opportunism’, reflecting the configuration of power relations among the actors having a say in local politics. These circumstances must be reconciled with what has been going on at the two upper tiers of the state. On one hand, the recent Federal election of October 2015 brought Justin Trudeau and the Liberal Party of Canada to power, introducing a major shift in federal policy about public debt and public spending. The 4 Between October and December 2015 we did 11 interviews with public sector community workers and activists, trade unionists, public managers, one elected official and a representative of a pressure group linked to the business milieu. We also followed the political debate around austerity issues in Canada. This debate has taken a new orientation since the federal election with the coming to power of the Liberal Party defending a pro-Keynesian type of approach. Austerity Governance and the Welfare Crisis in Montreal | 167 newly elected government thus replaced the Conservative Party who had been in power for almost ten years (from February 6, 2006 to November 4, 2015) with the mandate of restraining growth in public expenditures and pursuing a policy of austerity, and instead adopted a Keynesian approach. On the other hand, at the provincial level, the Québec Liberal Party, in power since April 2014, has set as its task reducing the provincial budget deficit. Once in power, Premier Philippe Couillard decided to implement drastic measures for cutting expenses in health care and education systems, welfare programs and salaries of government employees. Instead of qualifying his policy as one of austerity, he preferred to say that his approach was characterized by “rigour” (rigueur in French). The meaning and impact of austerity thus largely depends on which tier is implementing those policies. This makes it even more difficult to appraise the effective consequences of public austerity measures, especially if we go beyond narratives and representations, and pay attention to effective policies, programs and projects. In that respect, local representatives, as it may happen in other federal systems (but to what extent?), have to play one upper tier of the state against the other or, when possible, collaborate with both of them despite the presence of conflicting dominant ideological beliefs. Meanings of Austerity Austerity is a notion with an abundance of meanings, even though it is fraught with a strong neoliberal connotation. Everyone was well aware of this reality among our respondents. Beyond this, a majority of them expressed a real concern when it comes to the repercussions of policy measures adopted in the name of austerity towards the poor and/or households with low paying jobs. In the case of trade union representatives, austerity is an occasion to continue the fight against those who are well positioned in the economic system. Thus, a trade union representative did not hesitate to combine it with the deterioration of public services, but also with the slogan coined by the Occupy 168 | Austerity Urbanism and the Social Economy movement in reference to the one percent. In that respect, it is necessary to combat austerity: “(…) Of course I see this as a necessary struggle to put an end to this, this type of politics, so that we can aim for the well-being, the common well-being, instead of enriching a single community” (Montreal-TU1-F). Several respondents shared this principle. Even if they do not agree from the outset about the most efficient strategy to overcome the negative repercussions of austerity measures, they nonetheless express similar concerns about its main issue. There is no doubt, not only on the side of the more vociferous left but more largely on the political spectrum, that austerity coincides with a conservative vision of society. In that respect, according to a planner working at the city-regional scale: “Austerity, it’s (…) a conservative approach which aims at reducing public administrations’ costs (…) and justifies an economic context or using an economic context as a pretext to impose this kind of public policies. But it is a choice. It’s wrong to say it is objective. It’s a political choice. Fundamentally, it’s a conservative political choice” (Montreal-PM3-M). Nonetheless, in that respect, austerity needs to be contextualized. As a community worker recalled, talking in terms of austerity when facing major government deficit and debt ratios is one thing, and much different from the one encountered in Quebec. What is at stake here is clearly the promotion of a different vision of the state, in comparison, for example, to the “Quebec model” – a social model of development – elaborated during the so-called ‘Quiet Revolution’. Ultimately, what should the state look like? “If you ask me what is, for me, austerity, relating to my culture, my background, it’s a different vision from that of the State. We want more space for the private sector. We want to change things. We want to reduce the size of the State, but this is not because of an economic crisis Austerity Governance and the Welfare Crisis in Montreal | 169 situation or in front of some urgency (…). We really have a different vision of what the State should be. What should social politics be?” (Montreal-VSE2-M). The idea or the project of reforming the state is not recent. In fact, it has been observed in most Western countries since the middle of the 1970s. At that time, the legitimacy given to the state for the regulation of modern societies seemed already functionally inadequate or unable either to fulfill expectations of social mobility or to meet successfully a number of social demands. The first signs of shortness of breath of a “state- centred” model of governance were already occurring (Hamel & Jouve 2006). But those were only the first steps of a long journey for state restructuring, one that has not been completely achieved. The current situation – the one prevailing since the Quebec election of the Liberal government of Philippe Couillard – is the continuation of a tradition of liberal influence, carrying out a reading that the state is oversized, while overtaxed citizens are at risk of being attracted to a populist discourse. This is the thesis elaborated by the economists Micklethwait and Wooldridge (2015) who wrote The Fourth Revolution. The Global Race to Reinvent the State. Inspired by their thesis, Couillard came to power with a mission to reinvent the Quebec state.