Building a pro-public movement in Canada

Abstract

The global “antiprivatization” movement has been remarkably successful at challenging, and even reversing, the threat of privatization, but it has not yet established an equally effective “pro-public” counterpart. In many cases, the default position has been to protect the status quo rather than propose new models of public service delivery. This article discusses the potential for building such a pro-public movement in Canada, exploring opportunities for change and the challenges ahead, using the international experience as a reference point.

Keywords:

• Canada
• privatization
• pro-public movement
• public services

Notes

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Notes

1 See Dower and Markevich, “A History of Resistance,” 855–73; Kingstone et al., “Resistance to Privatization,” 93–116; Robinson, Contested Water; Sarker, “Neoliberal State,” 416–40.

2 Graham et al., “Water Wars,” 115–41; Kalen-Sukra, “Beating the Corporate Campaign,” 4–7; Kingsnorth, One No, Many Yeses; Loomis, “The Global Water Crisis,” 189–95.

3 Basen, “Municipal Socialism in the United States,” 31–4; Booth, “Municipal Socialism and City Government Reform,” 51–74; Crofts, Municipal Socialism; Dogliani, “European Municipalism,” 580.

4 MacKillop, “The Los Angeles ‘Oligarchy’,” 23–34; Leopold and McDonald, “Municipal Socialism Then and Now,” 1837–53.

5 See Newman and Clarke, “Publics, Politics and Power” for a discussion of the UK experience in this regard.

6 Pigott, Air Canada; Wiseman, "The Direction of Public Enterprise in Canada," 72–88; Fossum, Oil, the State, and Federalism; MacAvoy et al., Privatization and State-Owned Enterprises.

7 Savas, Privatization and Public-Private Partnerships; Osborne, Public-Private Partnerships.

8 For example, Boardman and Vining, “A Review and Assessment.”

9 Swyngedouw et al., “Neoliberal Urbanization,” 542–77; Castro, “Poverty and Citizenship,” 756–71; ITPI, A Guide to Evaluating Public Asset Privatization; Loxley, “Public-Private Partnerships,” 7–38.

10 For example, Carey, “Most Canadians Oppose”; Ladurantaye, “Majority of Canadians”; Martin and Dhalla, “Privatizing Health Care.”

11 CCPA, Privatization Nation; Boardman and Vining, “A Review and Assessment”; Whiteside, Purchase for Profit; Bakker, Eau Canada; Glauser, “Private Clinics Continue Explosive Growth,” E437-E438; Loxley, “Public-Private Partnerships,” 7–38.

12 Campion-Smith, “Liberals’ Drive to Privatize”; Parkin, “Without Any Mandate.”

13 Sanger, “Creating a Canadian Infrastructure Bank.”

14 Fried et al., “Corporatization,” 567–84; Bilodeau et al., “Choice of Organizational Form,” 119–47; Meyer, “The New Managerialism,” 534–51; Nelson and Nikolakis, “How Does Corporatization Improve?,” 364–91; Oum et al., “Privatization, Corporatization, Ownership Forms,” 109–21; Preker and Harding, Innovations in Health Service Delivery; Sumsion, “The Corporatization of Australian Childcare,” 99–120; Zatti, “New Organizational Models,” 533–59.

15 Hood, “A Public Management for All Seasons?,” 3–19; Moynihan, “Ambiguity in Policy Lessons,” 1029–50; Osborne and Gaebler, Reinventing Government; Shirley, “Bureaucrats in Business,” 115–36.

16 Engler, “Manitoba Hydro's Privatization.”

17 OTPP, “Teachers’ Increases Stakes.”

18 http://giia.net/.

19 De Clerq, “Suez Targets.”

20 Kerr, Between Caring & Counting, 191.

21 Jomo et al., “Public-Private Partnerships”; Bel et al., “Private Production,” 553–77; Estache et al., “Infrastructure Performance and Reform”; Estrin et al., Effects of Privatization.

22 Reynolds et al., Back in House.

23 Ross, “Varieties of Social Unionism,” 16–34.

24 Auriol and Blanc, “Capture and Corruption,” 203–16; Boubakri et al., “Privatization and Globalization,” 1898–914; Friedman and Parenti, Capitalist Punishment; Hahn et al., “Effects of Alcohol Retail Privatization,” 418–27; Narsiah and Ahmed, “The Neoliberalization of the Water and Energy Sectors,” 679–94.

25 Cornwall and Coelho, Spaces for Change?; Fontan et al., “Community Organizations,” 832–57.

26 Lobina, “Calling for Progressive Water Policies,” 6–18.

27 Bao and Fang, “Water Resources Flows,” 531–52; Bremmer, “Capitalism Comes of Age,” 40–55; Teo, “Water Services,” 37–46.

28 Da Costa et al., Successful Experiences; Spronk et al., “Modernization,” 107–35; Tankha and Fuller, “Getting Things Done,” 84–103; Warner and Hefetz, “In-Sourcing and Outsourcing,” 313–27.

29 Spronk and Webber, “Struggles Against,” 31–47; Terhorst et al., “Social Movements,” 55–69.

30 Driessen, “Collective Management,” 89–95; Gorostiza et al., “Servicing Customers,” 908–25; Marston, “Autonomy in a Post-neoliberal Era,” 246–56.

31 Bakker, “The Ambiguity of Community,” 236–52; Barraqué, “Development of Water Services in Europe,” 234–46; Beveridge et al., “From Post-politics,” 66–74; de Gouvello and Scott, “Has Water Privatization Peaked?,” 87–90; González-Gómez et al., “Beyond the Public–Private Controversy,” 1–9; Grant, “Water Privatization Overview,” 167–309; Heller et al., Successful Experiences; Valdovinos, “The Remunicipalization,” 107–20; Wainwright, “Transformative Resistance,” 71–98; Driessen, “Collective Management,” 89–95; Laurie and Crespo, “Deconstructing,” 841–54; Marin et al., Corporatizing a Water Utility.

32 Reynolds et al., Back in House.

33 Kishimoto and Petitjean, Reclaiming Public Services.

34 Galabuzi, Canada's Economic Apartheid; Smylie and Anderson, “Understanding the Health of Indigenous Peoples,” 602–05.

35 McDonald and Ruiters, “Weighing the Options,” 31–48; McDonald, Making Public.

36 McDonald and Ruiters, “Weighing the Options,” 31–48.

37 Smeltzer and Cantillon, “Scholar-Activist Terrain,” 7–17; Couture, “Activist Scholarship,” 143–47.

38 Wilson, “Indigenous Water Governance,” 1–11.

39 Pigeon, “Une eau publique,” 24–39.

40 Sánchez, “Reversing the Tide.”

41 Bönker et al., “Remunicipalisation Revisited,” 79.

42 Morris and Jungjohann, Energy Democracy.

43 Spronk et al., “Modernization,” 107–35.

44 Bieler, “Sic Vos Non Vobis.”

45 Perera, “Engaged Universals,” 197–215.

46 EPSU, “Right to Energy.”

47 Dumontier et al., “Work of the Ants,” 21–42.

48 Bönker et al., “Remunicipalisation Revisited,” 82.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

David A. McDonald

David A. McDonald is a Professor in the Department of Global Development Studies at Queen’s University in Kingston, Ontario, Canada.