[Canada] Canadian Politics Redux

[crazy canuck]

The Elder Trudeau probably would have wanted to have that kind of control, and he was the first one who started the PMO down this path.  But in his day parliamentary norms would never have permitted it to occur.

It was a gradual process.
Trudeau created it.  Mulroney reinforce the role a bit.
Chrétien was a big fan of the tool and the power it gave him, especially in a centralized Canada.
Harper went further.
And then Trudeau Jr.

I think that is accurate.  But many have commented that the change from Harper to the current PMO is extreme.

[Barrister]

I can not speak of English Canada's mood at the time, my political awakening came later.

Mulroney won seats in BC that had been NDP strongholds.  His success was not just an anti-Liberal sentiment.  The country really did get swept with his optimistic view of the future.  And he was instrumental in creating and implementing policies to help usher in that brighter future.  Free Trade with the US being the most important.  The world can also thank him for convincing both Reagan and Thatcher to lean into ending apartheid in South Africa.

He was very popular until it all came crashing down when the Reformers cut him off at the knees.

What a crazy revisionist view of history!

I'll give Mulroney lots of credit.  He ended the National Energy Program.  He brought in Free Trade.  He did lean in to trying to end apartheid (though I don't think he got any political credit for that).  He privatized Air Canada, and helped pass important environmental legislation.

But Mulroney wasn't popular!  There's a reason why, as I pointed out, the NDP was leading the polls in 1987.  There's a reason they got demolished in 1993 (only two seats across the country).  His approval rating at that point was amongst the lowest ever recorded.  His handling of the constitutional file brought us within a hair's breadth of Quebec leaving.

The Quebec angle is interesting, and not one I'm the best to describe.  Mulroney formed a kind-of alliance with the PQ/sovereignists, who otherwise had no formal voice in federal politics.  This no doubt helped him form that enormous 1984 majority.  But it also famously fractured, leading to Lucien Bouchard (Mulroney's lieutenant) forming the BQ which has lasted until the modern day.

Maybe Mulroney was genuinely positively viewed in Quebec in 1984, and not just seen as "thank God he's not Trudeau!".  As I said I'm not the best one to say.  But my view from afar was that it was much more an alliance of convenience.

And there's nothing wrong with "thank God he's not the other guy!".  As I said before - governments typically defeat themselves, not that oppositions elect themselves.  Obama was, maybe!, the only time I've seen the opposite - but even there that was after the Iraq war and a global financial crisis, so there was enormous headwind going against McCain in 2008.

And then finally - the whole "Reformers cut him off at the knees comment"?

Leaders aren't owed the loyalty of their voters.  Loyalty is earned.  If millions of former PC voters decided to vote Reform in 1993 - is that the fault of the voters, or the PC Party?  I would strongly suggest the later.

It's a lesson the Conservative Party has learned.  I may not agree with every position the party takes - but they clearly do not want Bernier's PPC to heavily out-flank them on the right.

[crazy canuck]

There's a reason they got demolished in 1993 (only two seats across the country). 

One word - read this using the this hour has 22 minutes voice - R-E-F-O-R-M

[Barrister]

There's a reason they got demolished in 1993 (only two seats across the country). 

One word - read this using the this hour has 22 minutes voice - R-E-F-O-R-M

What a compelling rebuttal to all the points I made CC.



I think I've said this before.  You don't owe me any kind of response.  It's a free country.  But if you want to actually discuss things with me I think you could do better.

Bye.

[crazy canuck]

Sorry, I could not read past your assertion that Mulroney was not popular.  For a not popular guy he did well to win the largest majority in Canadian history!

It is true that his popularity waned.  He had a revolt both in his Quebec wing and of course the Reformers in the West.

If you can think of a party that could survive that let me know.

[Grey Fox]

I mentioned it often before, my grandfather was a MP under Mulroney's. I don't remember 1984 or 1988 but what I remember of my family pictures, the parties were grand and Brian was extremely popular in Quebec until the Meech betrayal.

[Barrister]

I mentioned it often before, my grandfather was a MP under Mulroney's. I don't remember 1984 or 1988 but what I remember of my family pictures, the parties were grand and Brian was extremely popular in Quebec until the Meech betrayal.

I don't remember you mentioning it before, but cool story! (meant unironically!)

In what way was/is Meech Lake seen as a "betrayal" in Quebec though?  As I recall Mulroney came to unanimous agreement amongst the provinces during Meech lake - but as various provincial elections were held different parties came into power which led to Manitoba, Newfoundland and New Brunswick not approving of Meech.

I appreciate if you can't answer - my memories of that era are as a child / teen (albeit one who later on was keenly interested in politics), and I know you're maybe 10 years younger than I am.

[crazy canuck]

I mentioned it often before, my grandfather was a MP under Mulroney's. I don't remember 1984 or 1988 but what I remember of my family pictures, the parties were grand and Brian was extremely popular in Quebec until the Meech betrayal.

I don't remember you mentioning it before, but cool story! (meant unironically!)

In what way was/is Meech Lake seen as a "betrayal" in Quebec though?  As I recall Mulroney came to unanimous agreement amongst the provinces during Meech lake - but as various provincial elections were held different parties came into power which led to Manitoba, Newfoundland and New Brunswick not approving of Meech.

I appreciate if you can't answer - my memories of that era are as a child / teen (albeit one who later on was keenly interested in politics), and I know you're maybe 10 years younger than I am.

Bouchard thought the process was flawed, and later disclosures of cabinet documents showed he was not wrong. Mulroney put too much faith in Wells.  Bouchard of course became convinced that Quebec's grievances could not be dealt with through a Federal process and the PQ was born after that.

[Grey Fox]

I mentioned it often before, my grandfather was a MP under Mulroney's. I don't remember 1984 or 1988 but what I remember of my family pictures, the parties were grand and Brian was extremely popular in Quebec until the Meech betrayal.

I don't remember you mentioning it before, but cool story! (meant unironically!)

In what way was/is Meech Lake seen as a "betrayal" in Quebec though?  As I recall Mulroney came to unanimous agreement amongst the provinces during Meech lake - but as various provincial elections were held different parties came into power which led to Manitoba, Newfoundland and New Brunswick not approving of Meech.

I appreciate if you can't answer - my memories of that era are as a child / teen (albeit one who later on was keenly interested in politics), and I know you're maybe 10 years younger than I am.

I wish I would have asked him about his time in politics while he was still alive but my mother (her dad) was estranged from him for most of life and he moved away in his later life.

I do not have a first hand account, I was 5 years old in the 1st half of 1990.

My understanding of the 1980-90 decade is that for us, Quebecois, it is a long succession of small & bigger betrayals by RoC politicians. From the original project of patriation to both the Charlottetown & Meech lake accords it ended with us learning the hard way, that while we can never be you, we can never be ourselves within this federation. Everyone negotiated in good faith and came to understanding that pleased, in some ways, everyone. Until a RoC politician couldn't fathom that we would been seen has equal instead of subjects and sank the whole thing. Thrice.


@CC BQ

[Barrister]

I mentioned it often before, my grandfather was a MP under Mulroney's. I don't remember 1984 or 1988 but what I remember of my family pictures, the parties were grand and Brian was extremely popular in Quebec until the Meech betrayal.

I don't remember you mentioning it before, but cool story! (meant unironically!)

In what way was/is Meech Lake seen as a "betrayal" in Quebec though?  As I recall Mulroney came to unanimous agreement amongst the provinces during Meech lake - but as various provincial elections were held different parties came into power which led to Manitoba, Newfoundland and New Brunswick not approving of Meech.

I appreciate if you can't answer - my memories of that era are as a child / teen (albeit one who later on was keenly interested in politics), and I know you're maybe 10 years younger than I am.

I wish I would have asked him about his time in politics while he was still alive but my mother (her dad) was estranged from him for most of life and he moved away in his later life.

I do not have a first hand account, I was 5 years old in the 1st half of 1990.

My understanding of the 1980-90 decade is that for us, Quebecois, it is a long succession of small & bigger betrayals by RoC politicians. From the original project of patriation to both the Charlottetown & Meech lake accords it ended with us learning the hard way, that while we can never be you, we can never be ourselves within this federation. Everyone negotiated in good faith and came to understanding that pleased, in some ways, everyone. Until a RoC politician couldn't fathom that we would been seen has equal instead of subjects and sank the whole thing. Thrice.


@CC BQ

So I mean I just profoundly disagree with this reading of history, but like and respect you that I don't want to get into a pissing match about it.

[Barrister]

So City of Edmonton employees went on strike today.

It's - interesting to see what is seen an essential, but what isn't.

So you know my life - a lot of it is hockey.  Apparently hockey rink employees (most rinks are owned by the City) are not covered by this particular union.  So hockey rinks are still open.  But who is covered?  The people who do rink bookings.  So as of today you can not book any ice time in Edmonton.

But apparently one thing that is impacted is serving subpoenas.  Which is kind of a big deal in my world.  Edmonton Police are not the union on strike (and honestly I don't know if legally they can go on strike).  So the police will serve subpoenas for important cases (think homicides and on down) but lesser cases - I guess they just won't serve them?

[Grey Fox]

So I mean I just profoundly disagree with this reading of history, but like and respect you that I don't want to get into a pissing match about it.

I understand, it's a lose-lose situation.

a) You'll channel Viper into writing 5000 words on this.
b) It will, inevitably, descend into Quebec bashing.

plus, you already have CC to have pissing matches with.

Here a link to a text that can explain this better than I. Original and a google translation.

https://www.ledevoir.com/politique/canada/581884/meech-une-histoire-de-trahisons

https://www-ledevoir-com.translate.goog/politique/canada/581884/meech-une-histoire-de-trahisons?_x_tr_sl=fr&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=fr&_x_tr_pto=wapp

[Barrister]

plus, you already have CC to have pissing matches with.

I otherwise like CC and don't understand why he responds the way he does to me, which is why I mostly try to avoid him.

(I sometimes fail in this - the fault is mine, not CC's - he is who he is)

[Jacob]

For what it's worth, the Quebecois Languish posters have brought me around to their point of view over the years.

[crazy canuck]

@CC BQ

Merci