Bouchard's Argument Analysis

Social movements are one of the primary means through which the public is able to collectively express their concerns about the rights and wellbeing of themselves and others. Under the proper conditions, social movements not only shed light on issues and open large scale public discourse, but they can also serve as a means of eliciting expedited societal change and progress. Due to their potential impact, studying the characteristics of both failed and successful social movements is important in order to ensure that issues between the public and the government are resolved to limit injustices and maintain societal progress.

What most surprised me this week was just how similar, by the 1980s, the Progressive-Conservatives and the Liberals when it came to government policy. It is also an interesting commentary on the historical narrative when comparing how Pierre Trudeau and Brian Mulroney in contemporary historiography.

The relationship between the Canadian government and Quebec has been in constant turmoil for years. This paper will discuss and critique Quebec’s five demands made in 1986 by the Liberal government and their current implications. Reasonable demands are ones in which a limited amount of asymmetrical federalism grants provincial sovereignty. Currently all provinces have certain guaranteed rights, however Quebec’s rights provide more autonomy. Quebec, though home to the largest population of French speaking Canadians, have asked too much of the Government of Canada. This is evident Quebec’s increased control over immigration, Supreme Court Justices appointment, and their veto on future constitutional negotiations. Conversely, the demand of recognizing Quebec as a distinct society is however reasonable and has been accommodated into Canadian society, and the ability to restrict federal spending power keeps the federal power in check. In this essay, I will discuss each demand, and argue whether or not it is reasonable.

At a glance, the Liberal and Conservative party may look like they occupy opposite sides of the Canadian political spectrum. However, when examined closely one can find many similarities between both parties. Marland and Wesley define brokerage parties as “shock absorbers” because they aim to confide regional conflicts. For example, The Conservatives in 2006, under Stephen harper aimed to reach power through various promises that aimed to appeal to different regions and/or different groups of people. For example:

In recent elections, the separatist parties in Quebec have seen crushing defeats, raising questions about their relevance in modern day Canada. Support for Quebec separatism has diminished in the past several decades, with the rise of the NDP in the 2011 federal election and the more recent provincial Liberal victory in April of 2014. In the 2011 federal election, specifically, the Bloc Quebecois was reduced to only four seats in the House of Commons, while the NDP took the majority of Quebec’s seats. The provincial Parti Quebecois (PQ) has also been faltering, losing more often than not to the Liberal Party of Quebec (PLQ). Indeed, over the past decade, the PLQ has only lost one election, and has held majorities in many. The most recent election put them back into power after a short PQ minority government that began in 2012. These recent elections may point to a future in which the separatist movement in Quebec may be silenced. Since the late 1950s, the question of Quebec separatism has existed, with levels of support varying throughout the following decades, leading up the referendums of 1980 and 1995. The defeats suffered by the separatist parties in recent elections demonstrate that the separatist movement may be close to being over in Quebec.

Trudeau’s three-phased Senate reforms give minority group leaders an opportunity to represent their communities. The reforms attempt to shift the focus from gaining support for the Liberal party, to a collection of different and diverse minds within the Senate. The first phase of the reforms focused on the “[removal of] all senators from the national Liberal caucus”, which inherently suggested that “senators [no longer] have formal or organic ties with the Liberal caucus, nor do they have any organizational, financial or other formal responsibilities within the Liberal Party” (Dion, 2015, para. 5). Going from there, the “[creation of] a new, nonpartisan, merit-based, broad and diverse process to advise the prime minister on Senate appointments” was the second item on the agenda (Dion, 2015, para. 6). Finally, the third phase targeted the inclusion of marginalized groups, such as women and minorities, in the Senate (Dion, 2015). Therefore, Trudeau’s appointments are changing the direction of the Senate to include historically-oppressed minorities and their representatives.

The recent 2015 federal election saw a dramatic change in the Canadian political landscape. The Conservative party, the governing party of Canada for the past decade, was thoroughly defeated with the Liberals, who had, in relation to seats, been in third place, gaining a majority and subsequently forming government. The reasons for this defeat are examined in the editorial: Why the Conservatives lost, and how they can win again.

How can the Canadian government be dominated by one ruler when it has democratic elections with many competing parties? Mellon believes that Canadian elections have low voter turnouts and even lower public interest. Canadian elections are essentially sporadic. Finally, Mellon also believes that prime ministers “…are supported by a growing circle of advisors, pollsters, and spin doctors that help protect their position,” (Hugh 175). The main focus of Mellon’s argument is this idea of a prime-ministerial government.

The legislative branch of the Canadian government is divided between an upper house, the Senate, and a lower house, the House of Commons. This system is known as a bicameral legislature, and is a feature of many governments. In Canada, much of the legislative and executive power lies in the House of Commons, and by extension the Prime Minister. The Senate, however, exists in its current form primarily for the purpose of legislative review. Despite the Senate’s seemingly negligible role, or perhaps because of it, it is the “most criticized institution of government in Canada” (Franks, 1988). While it has remained largely unchanged, movements aimed at either Senate reform or abolition, have been essential to Canadian politics for much of recent

This research paper hopes to be an exploration of the similarities of Pierre Trudeau and Justin Trudeau’s electoral platforms and policies in the topics of culture, foreign policy and affairs, and equality and answer the question of how both Trudeau platforms have worked, or will work towards similar goals. Policies by Pierre Trudeau in this paper will have been carried out, whereas policies by Justin Trudeau will be those that have been carried out, or those that were included in his relatively recent electoral platform that have not been started or finished.

Furthermore, populism plays an imperative role in Alberta’s political culture. In fact, Stewart and Archer (2000) maintain that “Alberta politics is leadership politics… encouraging direct, populist links between the leader and the public (pg 172-173). Hence, Prentice’s decision to receive Wildrose floor-crossers, as well as make hazardous public statements may have annulled the possibility of a populist link between Albertans and his leadership. Furthermore, it is important to note that while positive perceptions of Prentice were faltering amongst Albertan voters, the Progressive Conservative’s campaign strategy was to portray the party leader as front and centre. This was despite the growing disaffection of Albertan voters towards Prentice. Therefore, the strategy undertaken by the Progressive Conservatives’ jeopardized their party’s support, and contributed to the election’s drastic

Intergovernmental relations play a vital role in the successful governing of our Canadian federation. Due to the various forms and levels of governments, the ability for all those in power to be able to communicate, collaborate, consult, negotiate and support the needs and beliefs of Canadians is invaluable. Each province is made up by many sub-divided regions and people, each with their own problems and needs which may act to contradict the needs and problems of others within a neighboring region. This leaves each province under pressure, forced to decide which position will provide the greatest benefit to their constituents. Alliances and coalitions are created amongst provinces and interest groups to help sway the federal government to

At this point in time a new proposition has been offered by those within Upper Canada, a new idea meant to divide Canada even further. Upper Canada has gone on to show their intentions to divide the government according to the areas of Upper and Lower Canada. A government should be a unifying presence, yet many wouldn’t be too opposed to this as a government meant to focus on the affairs of the different conditions would sound rather beneficial, yet, this is where the problem lies.

It’s about time! Growing up as a female in today’s society is unforgiving. As women, we have learned to accept the norm of what a female body should look like. Female bodies have been scrutinized by men, and for once the men of our current generation are starting to feel the effects of what is feels like to be treated like a piece of meat. To be looked at by others constantly and having to “Deal with It”, is something I am not ok with.

Canada is one of the largest and most culturally diverse countries in the world. These characteristics make the democratic governing of the country a difficult task. A democratic model is needed that respects the fundamental rights and freedoms of various diverse cultures, and unites these cultures over a huge land mass as Canadians. To do this the Canadian government is one which is pluralist. Pluralism is the ideology that groups, (in Canada's case political parties), should rule in government. These parties help protect the fundamental rights and freedoms of everyone living in Canada, regardless of their ethnicity, or religious beliefs. The role political parties play in Canada is vital for