Canadian political scientists have often taken a normative approach to political institutions like the constitution, the electoral system, and Parliament. An assumption that institutional reform can itself be a solution to political problems is also reflected in general public commentary and at times has been openly encouraged and supported by the Canadian state itself. This approach has many strengths but also deficiencies, particularly the degree to which it replicates existing understandings of the state, focused on the distribution of power among white men. The study of political institutions in Canada must continue growing to incorporate and integrate a greater diversity of perspectives, including interrogating and challenging their very foundations.

This article concerns the second round of consultations on the drafting of the 2002 Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations. In this context, it explores the nature of the “communication space” within which regulatory authorities and interest groups interact with each other. The authors analyse the extent to which the consultations met their main goal of remedying the lack of democratic legitimacy in the process of drafting the regulations. Both discourse analysis and analysis of the concrete results of the consultations reveal that the “communication space“ is shaped by certain pre-established rules. The authors codify and compare the arguments put forward by interest groups in their proposals for modifications as well as the justifications offered by Citizenship and Immigration Canada. They conclude that issues capable of calling into question the soundness of regulatory interventions, having already been dealt with during the first round of consultations, are seldom raised during the second round. The authors also assert that the relationship between state and non-state actors is complementary and interdependent rather than antagonistic, noting that interventions by interest groups have a real impact on the regulations. Consultation is at the root of plurality of modes of production of law within the legal order of the state. The article highlights the complementary nature of the norms produced by state and other sources of normativity and draws attention to the importance of the cooperation between state and civil society actors.