Prime Ministers of Change: Lester Pearson vs John Diefenbaker
Gandhi once said, “We must be the change we wish to see in the world.” Lester Pearson and John Diefenbaker are two of countless individuals who have put this advice to action. These two influential Prime Ministers have made multiple important changes to Canada and the world. Despite having different goals and priorities, both Prime Ministers have improved the lives of many and are considered important in Canadian history. Though John Diefenbaker has made numerous contributions that benefited the country, Lester Pearson made extensive and constructive changes that not only bettered Canada, but that also shaped our future and our identity, making him the more significant Prime Minister.
…show more content…
He was known for his catchphrase, “One Canada, for all Canadians,”(Boutin 46) which sums up his goal to create a united Canada where Canadians, no matter race or nationality, are treated equally. Though he made numerous improvements to Canada, Diefenbaker was chiefly known for creating the Bill of Rights, a statement that recognizes and protects the human rights of individuals. After WWII, due to the internment of Japanese Canadians, the issue of defending human rights arose and in response, Diefenbaker introduced the Bill in 1960. The Bill identifies the rights of individuals to Huynh 2 life, liberty, personal security, and property, and protects freedoms of speech, religion, assembly, and association. It also assures legal rights including the right to counsel and fair hearing. This was an important accomplishment because it lead to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms …show more content…
One of Pearson’s goal was to strengthen relationships between French and English Canadians. On April 21 1963 when Quebec separatists placed a bomb in a Canadian army recruiting office killing a janitor, Pearson called for a royal commission to investigate bilingualism and biculturalism in Canada. From the recommendations made during the royal commission, Pearson created the Official Languages Act, which states that federal services such as federal courts and government ministries, must be offered in both English and French. This makes him significant, because bilingualism in Canada still exists today and is still an important part of our culture. On the other hand, Diefenbaker’s Bill of Rights got replaced in 1984, and none of his contributions reflect Canada’s culture or identity the way Pearson’s does. Though Canada is often regarded as the United States’ “little brother”, one thing that differentiates Canada from the US is their free health care system. Medicare, Canada’s universal health insurance, is only one of the changes Pearson introduced to Canada’s welfare state. Pearson also established the Canada Pension Plan in 1966 to support retired citizens, as well as the Canada Assistance Plan which funded welfare programs for the disabled and injured. At the time, Canada had a strong economy, making additions such as the Canada Student Loans Program and increased funding for university research possible. Not only did
Pierre Trudeau first brought out the official language act of Canada in 1969. He presented the Canadian population with the beliefs that Canada should have
This paper will discuss the Canadian healthcare system compared to the United States healthcare system. Although they’re close in proximity, these two nations have very different health care systems. Each healthcare system has its own difficulties, and is currently trying to find ways to improve. Canada currently uses the Universal Health Care system; which provides healthcare coverage to all Canadian citizens (Canadian Health Care, 2007). The services are executed on both a territorial and provincial basis, by staying within the guidelines that have been enforced by the federal government (Canadian Health Care, 2007).
The entrenchment of rights in the Canadian Constitution comes after long experience with a system of parliamentary supremacy. The American judicial tradition of treating the written constitution as fundamental law cannot have an instant Canadian counterpart. Thus, it does not follow that the Canadian courts will necessarily claim a role comparable to that of courts in the United States, nor is it clear that the representative bodies in Canada would tolerate such a judicial assertion of power. Opposition by government bodies to the Charter have already occurred in Canada, where the Parti Quebecois government of Quebec invoked the “notwithstanding the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms” clause for the purpose of protecting their language laws from attack under the charter. This report will attempt to note some of the common and distinctive features of the text of the two constitutions as well as to how they differ.
When asked to describe what makes Canada unique compared to other countries, many outsiders might yell out “Hockey!” “Cold Weather!” or “Free Health Care!.” Health care is definitely one of Canada’s most noticeable trademarks when compared to the United States, but the reality is that our health care services are not what they are made out to be. Canadians tend to take pride in the fact that they have a Government funded health care system, but the system is failing at a rapid pace. One can gage the quality of health care in our country while at the emergency ward in any hospital, where most Canadians realize its downsides. The Government spends most of its budget towards health care but Canadians are not feeling an improvement. Waiting
It protects five of the most basic liberties which are freedom of speech, freedom of press, freedom of religion, freedom of assembly and freedom to petition the government to right wrongs.
In todays world Canadians help each other fund money to help those in need; Canadians help so much that most medical services are funded public sources. Many of us would not even bother to help those in need, but Lester B. Pearson changed that part of us. He made health care such a big issue that it can not hide anywhere in this world. Lester B. Pearson, the man that gave Canada Universal Medicare also created the United Nations Peacekeeping Force.
The Canadian Charter of Rights has been entrenched in the Constitution Act of 1982 since 1982 and affected the lives of countless Canadians ever since it was passed, with most if not all of the effects being positive. This can be proven by the fact that the act that the act has only faced two amendments in the 35 years it has been in effect. Furthermore, the Charter of Rights and Freedoms has five components; Fundamental Freedoms, Democratic Rights, Mobility Rights, Legal Rights, and Equality Rights. All of these were designed to make sure that Canadians face no discrimination, and are not denied any basic rights. This can be seen by seeing how much the quality of life for Canadians has increased over the time the Charter has been embedded in the Constitution, by how much the Charter actually does protect the rights of Canadians.
Pierre Trudeau is one of Canada’s most renowned Prime Ministers. He was in office April 20, 1968, to June 4, 1979, and later on March 3, 1980, to June 30, 1984,.¹ An event that Pierre Trudeau is well known for is the enactment of the War Measures Act during the October Crisis. This decision to invoke the War Measures Act during the October Crisis has led to a great deal of controversy on whether the act was justified. The October Crisis was a series of events in October 1970, these events began with the kidnappings of James Cross and later Pierre Laporte by the group known as the FLQ (Front de libération du Québec) the group’s main goals were to create an independent Quebec.2 The group resorted to terrorist acts in order to achieve those goals, this later led to Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau invoking the War Measures Act. The War Measures Act was a federal statute adopted by parliament during WWI and has been used 3 times; during WWI, WWII and during the October Crisis. The act gives major power to the Canadian government to uphold security during times of great distress.3 Pierre Trudeau was justified in enacting the War Measures Act during the October Crisis. One reason that Pierre Trudeau was justified in invoking the War Measures Act is that the FLQ was essentially a terrorist organization responsible for the deaths and injuries of countless people. Since the group was formed in the early 1960’s, the terrorist group’s acts had only worsened from mailbox bombings to
Pierre Trudeau is the greatest Canadian of the twentieth century due to the fact that he declared Canada’s independence from Great Britain, he abolished the death penalty, and he created the Official Languages Act, making our nation entirely bilingual.
In October 1970, Canada faced a pressing terrorist attack in Montreal, Quebec by a group known as the Front de Liberation du Quebec, or the FLQ for short. The group committed multiple attacks starting in 1963 that slowly escalated until the October Crisis, where they kidnapped two government officials and proceeded to murder one of them. The Canadian government responded harshly and rapidly. The prime minister of Canada, Pierre Trudeau, issued the War Measures Act which along with various things allowed the police and military full reign to arrest people and hold them with no explanation. The Canadian population was highly supportive of the government’s action believing that this extreme state repression would bring a finish to the October
Pierre Elliot Trudeau was arguably one of the most vivacious and charismatic Prime Ministers Canada has ever seen. He wore capes, dated celebrities and always wore a red rose boutonniere. He looked like a superhero, and often acted like one too. Some of the landmark occurrences in Canadian history all happened during the Trudeau era, such as patriating the constitution, creating the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the 1980 Quebec Referendum. However, it is Trudeau’s 1969 “white paper” and the Calder legal challenge which many consider to be one of his most influential contributions to Canadian history.
Canada experienced several internal and external changes during the time period of 1945-1982; these changes were political, social and cultural. Firstly, a major internal political change occurred when Prime Minister John Diefenbaker introduced the first Bill of Rights to protect people’s equality before and under the law. A significant external political change occurred when the Canadian government signed the Autopact, which was a Canada-U.S. automotive products agreement that included conditional free-trade, creating a single North American market for automobiles and car parts. This agreement caused a huge shift in car sales and by 1968 40% of cars purchased in Canada were made in the U.S. An additional internal political change of major
In the midst of the October Crisis Pierre Trudeau handled the time of terrorism well. In this essay one will see how Trudeau handled the crisis excellently by examining the first domestic use of the War Measures Act which led to improvements on the Act, ensuring that Quebec did not become its own independent country, and how Canada stood behind and supported Quebec and Pierre Trudeau through the acts of violence led by the FLQ.
Canada’s healthcare system started in 1946 and is made up of a group of socialized health insurance plans that provides coverage to all Canadian citizens. It is publicly funded and administered on a provincial or territorial basis with in the rules set by their federal government. Since the late 1960’s Canada essential has had a universal health insurance system covering all services provided by physicians and hospitals. In 1966 Lester B Pearson’s government subsequently expanded a policy of the universal healthcare with the medical care act. Canada’s healthcare system is the subject of political controversy and debate in the country. While healthcare in America began in the late 1800’s but was truly born in 1929 when Justin Kimball
Opposing the belief that a dominating leader is running Canada, Barker brings up several key realities of the Canadian government. He gives examples of several “… instances of other ministers taking action that reveal the limits prime-ministerial power,” (Barker 178). Barker conveys the fact that Canada is not bound by a dictatorial government, “…it seems that the prime minister cannot really control his individual ministers. At times, they will pursue agendas that are inconsistent with the prime minister’s actions,” (Barker 181). Both inside and outside government are a part of Canada and they can remind the prime minister that “…politics is a game of survival for all players,” (Barker 188). Barker refutes the misinterpretation of the Canadian government by acknowledging that a prime-ministerial government existing in Canada is an overstatement.