When it comes to certain qualities and attributes of the United States of America and Canada, many people residing elsewhere fail to tell the difference. The accents of people from certain parts of both countries, for instance, are so incredibly indistinguishable that they baffle any and everyone. Besides this one factor, they even share some comparable cultural characteristics, such as driving on the right side of the road and cherishing the same basic human rights to the utmost importance. Likewise, there are several similarities between multiple aspects of the countries’ respective governments, including within their individual established frameworks, political systems, and their divisions of authorities and duties. These could potentially point out a reason as to why Canada and the United States are immensely successful in their particular objectives, and are on their paths to achieving their long-term goals with difficult to accomplish, yet beneficial visions. After all, they are both either on the way to becoming or currently are two of world’s leading superpowers (Financial Post). However, there is not just one particular infallible way to rule a country and push it to further advancement simultaneously. In fact, each country works and functions differently, which is primarily due to individual background and history. Ultimately, although Canada and the United States of America are both nations that share similarities in various parts of their Constitutions, political
idea of turning Canada back to its original roots. He compares Harper's government system with Pierre Trudeau’s. Arguing about the struggles and failures of
Not only did Canada’s acceptance show their motive to lessen the war and desire for peace, it also outlined that this country was no longer under the strings of the U.S. who (at the time) was considered a superpower and had great military power. To be more specific, 20 000 American draft-dodgers and 12 000 army deserters from their military service in Vietnam were welcomed and found refuge in Canada . The ‘draft dodgers’ event proves that Canada stepped away from the big, violent idea of “Communism vs Capitalism” and walked towards peace and responsible choices. In fact, Canada was capable of over-looking the United States’ desire and their dependent relationship for peace and
‘Domestic policy under Wolsey was a failure’. How far do you agree with this assessment?
As Pierre Elliot Trudeau strived to patriate the Constitution, the opposition was a huge threat. “The Statute of Westminster (1931) and the Second World War (1939-1945) secured Canada 's independence. However, Canada continued to retain its links to Great Britain, since its Constitution could only be modified by the British Parliament” (Roch). Trudeau wanted to put an end to British control by modifying the Constitution. In the last few weeks of the 1979 election campaign, Trudeau was struggling and decided it was time to present his plan. As he put it in a Toronto speech, “a Constitution made in Canada, by Canadians, for Canadians” (Lewis 16). The idea was not popular among Canadians and Conservative leader Joe Clark became the youngest Prime Minister in Canadian history. This did not last very long though as a vote of non-confidence occurred after the government proposed tax increases. “As a result of his government 's defeat, Clark called a general election for Feb. 18, 1980. Trudeau led the Liberals in the campaign. He climaxed an
Pierre Elliot Trudeau was the 15th Prime Minister of Canada. He served as Prime Minister from April 1968 to June 1984. During his time in office, Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau introduced many new policies. Pierre Trudeau’s policies on the economy, the environment and multiculturalism greatly benefitted Canada.
As the 20th century comes to an end, Canada is a transcontinental nation whose interests and representatives span the face of the globe and extend into every sphere of human behaviour. However this was not always the case. When the four colonies of British North America united to create Canada on July 1, 1867, the new country's future was by no means secure. Canada was a small country, with unsettled borders, vast empty spaces, and a large powerful neighbour, the United States. Confronting these challenges was difficult for the young country. Though Canada was independent in domestic matters, Britain retained control over its foreign policy. Over the next fifty or so years, Canada's leaders and its
Pierre Elliot Trudeau and Martin Brian Mulroney were both greatly renowned Canadian prime ministers for their time. Trudeau being the ladies man and Mulroney being the strait arrow ,they were both complete opposites. Mulroney was as conservative as Trudeau was a liberal.
“The choice, however, is as clear now for nations as it was once for the individual: peace or extinction. ” 1 and Lester B. Pearson was definitely a man of peace. To those who don’t know who Lester B. Pearson is, he’s the fourteenth Prime Minister of Canada, that served from April 22. 1963 - April 20. 1968 2. During his time as Prime Minister, he’s accomplished many things, and that’s why I believe that Lester B. Pearson is the greatest Canadian.
The assessment of Canada’s housing policy is based more upon the need of its citizen versus the right. Over the years, homelessness has developed in size and complication in Canada (Gaetz, Tarasuk, Dachner, & Kirkpatrick, 2006). Originally, the homeless crisis was a major concern of urban centers like Montreal, Laval, Vancouver, Edmonton, Calgary, and Toronto, but rising frequency of homelessness in the suburbs is compelling an immediate response (Laird, 2007). In response to the surmounting homelessness that Canada is facing, the Federal Government of Canada proposed $120 million annually from April 2014 until April 2019 with $700 million in new funding to renew its Homelessness Partnering Strategy (HPS) in Action Plan 2011(Government of Canada, 2016). The response to the surmounting threat of homelessness is comparable to the response the United States taken with the PATH policy. Similar to the United States’ policy, Canada’s response is community-based to the need of the citizen afflicted. However, there are key differences in policy such as the PATH policy offers outreach services, screening and diagnostic treatment services, and case management services that are more individual intensive (Benefits.Gov, 2016).
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
He was in charge for putting into action a universal healthcare system for all of Canada. “Canadians must have equal access to state-provided medical services. Parliament passed the Medical Care Act in 1966 but financial exigencies postponed its operation for a year”(English, 2005). This form of social welfare was different for the time compared to other countries. With the system that he implemented this has given Canadians a lot of freedom financially. This has changed Canadian citizens in a way where
Fig. 1. Brian Mulroney’s first year in office (1984), he led the first conservative majority government in 26 years.1
John Diefenbaker was the last “old Tory” to be the Prime Minister of Canada. He was a member of the Conservative Party with deep values as well as being a British loyalist who supported the Queen. Diefenbaker was also a man that was well known for not supporting anything he thought was anti- British. This sentiment was most evident when Diefenbaker criticized the Liberal’s refusal to support Britain in the Suez Canal crisis and sided with the Americans. This loyalty the Diefenbaker had to the British Commonwealth would not serve him well as Prime Minister of Canada. In 1958, Diefenbaker would win the largest majority government in Canadian history upsetting the new leader of the Liberal Party, Lester B. Pearson, who had taken over for St.
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.