The Domestic Policies of Diefenbaker and Pearson

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.

When one thinks of Canada, he/she is most likely to stereotypically comment on a subject regarding hockey, beavers, maple syrup, and cold weather. However, not many stop and wonder about how Canada became the peaceful nation it is today. Throughout Canada’s relatively short and brief history, it has managed to flourish into a strong and powerful nation. Canada’s peaceful identity has been formed with meaningful historic events that have occurred throughout our history.It’s identity has been characterized by Lester B. Pearson's role during the suez canal, their involvement in the Vietnam war, and its engagement in peacekeeping missions around the world.

Canada has had many prime ministers that have contributed and held back Canada in shaping Canada’s identity over the past century however nobody has came close to helping as Mackenzie king who protected Canada during world war 2, brought Canada through the great depression with industrialization, and he helped create national unity and independence. Canada would not be the same country it is today without the fine leading of mackenzie king.

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.

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

Fig. 1. Brian Mulroney’s first year in office (1984), he led the first conservative majority government in 26 years.1

As time goes on, some countries become more relevant in the global sphere while others start to fade away. Canada is a country that only becomes more relevant as time goes on. Since being granted full sovereignty, Canada has had a growing role as a major world player. Much of their international growth has to do with its close ties to the United States and the United Kingdom. However, the country has also undergone huge change and refocusing on a domestic level. With influence from both Europe and the United States, Canada has a very unique system of governing. This paper will focus on a few major areas of Canada. It will look into the history of Canada, the structure of its government, its politics, and many of the major issues it faces today.

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.

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

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.

Throughout Canadian history, a plenty of figures appeared to be significant for the time being. However, out from this great number of candidates that may qualify for the most important Canadian in history, William Lyon Mackenzie King prevails. First elected in 1921 after the Borden's Unionist government failed, Mackenzie King served as the longest serving Canadian head of government ever, holding the office of prime minister for 22 years. During his premiership, Canada developed from an attacked British colony to a major international player, building cornerstones for the golden age of Canadian diplomacy. His war policy made Canada an important contributor in the Allied forces during the World War II, giving supports for British and other

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.

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).

‘Domestic policy under Wolsey was a failure’. How far do you agree with this assessment?

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