The Value of a "Coyne": The Diefenbaker Government and the 1961 Coyne Affair.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study explores the political aspects of the 1961 Coyne Affair, which saw the Governor of the Bank of Canada, James Coyne, promote restrictionist economic policies that were at odds with the expansionist monetary approach of the Diefenbaker government. The situation was complicated by unclear governmental responsibilities regarding the Bank and a contentious pension issue, leading to the Progressive Conservative cabinet’s request for the governor’s resignation, a demand he refused. The Affair became a public controversy involving opposition parties and the Canadian media, and personal animosities clouded the judgment of both the Tory government, led by Prime Minister John Diefenbaker and Minister of Finance Donald Fleming, and Coyne. However, the Progressive Conservative’s attempt to force Coyne’s resignation was ultimately justified due to his contrary economic policies and the extent to which he overstepped his position as governor and engaged in political machinations. The Coyne Affair led to the restructuring of the relationship between the Bank and the federal government and contributed to the fall of the Diefenbaker government, Senate reform, and economic nationalism.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.046 | 0.037 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".