| INDEX →→ I. The Founders → II. The Settlers → III. The New Nation → IV. Appendix →→ TERMS OF USE © Northern Blue Publishing. A licence is required for institutional or commercial use of any material in these pages. Please read the Terms of Use. |
1. The Mulroney Mandate 1984-93
From Canadian History Portal - HCO
| D. Global Challenges - 1984-Present →→ 1. The Mulroney Mandate 1984-93 → 2. The Chrétien Years 1993-2003 → 3. Canada in the New Millennium →→ E. Aboriginal People and First Nations Today |
| The Mulroney Mandate - Gallery | Stories & Texts | Web Links | Milestones | Student Activities | Student Projects |
Brian Mulroney Comes to Power
Contents |
On September 4, 1984, the Progressive Conservatives led by Brian Mulroney defeated John Turner's Liberals and Ed Broadbent's NDP in a landslide. Mulroney’s PC Party won a record 212 of 282 seats, to 40 Liberal; 30 NDP; 1 other, in the biggest majority (seat total) ever won by a federal party in Canadian history. He also took 58 of 75 seats in his home province after promising to reintegrate Québec into the Canadian family 'with honour and enthusiasm'; John Turner suffered a crushing defeat nationally, but won his own seat in Vancouver Quadra.
In many ways it reflected the end of a long Liberal reign in Ottawa. Prime Minister Trudeau, after his resignation, was the most ‘hated’ prime minister in Canadian history. This dubious title is given to the prime minister with the lowest opinion poll ratings. At 25%, Trudeau was not well liked by many Canadians. John Turner, Trudeau’s successor, inherited a difficult situation. Quebec was alienated, the economy was going through hard times, and the federal deficit (its annual short fall) and the national debt (what Canada owes in total) was at the highest point in the country’s history. Brian Mulroney’s PC Party won not only because of his charisma and policies, but because there was a certain amount of fatigue amongst Canadians with Liberal governments.
Conservatives and Trade Policy
When Brian Mulroney was a leadership candidate for the PC Party he told the members of the party that he was opposed to free trade with the United States. Mulroney stated that free trade "affects Canadian sovereignty, and we'll have none of it, not during leadership campaigns, nor at any other times."
Politicians often say one thing when they are seeking leadership, but do the opposite once they are in power. When Mulroney became prime minister of Canada his government set about trying to liberalize trade in Canada in a manner not seen since Prime Minister Laurier tried to implement free trade in 1911.
One of the first things the Mulroney government did was shut down a government agency known as the Foreign Investment Review Agency (FIRA). Formed in 1973 to review all foreign investment in Canada, FIRA was a response to Canadian fears about foreign control of the Canadian economy. Under Mulroney's minister of industrial expansion, Sinclair Stevens, FIRA's mandate was changed. Its job now was to encourage foreign investment in Canada.
The change was largely symbolic. FIRA did very little too actually block foreign, largely US, investment in Canada. US investors owned approximately 25% of all the shares in Canadian companies when FIRA was created, and this remained unchanged when Mulroney altered its mandate in the early 1980s. It was, however, symbolic of where the Conservative government was headed on trade policy.
Free Trade with the United States
In 1985 Mulroney, a former opponent of free trade, achieved something no other Canadian prime minister had accomplished: free trade with the US. Why did Mulroney's government adopt this policy? There are a number of reasons.
More than 75% of Canada's trade was with the United States, and the Canada-US Auto-Pact was already a free trade deal in one sector of the economy. But Mulroney saw the possibility of increased US tariffs on other Canadian goods, leading to job losses and poor economic performance in Canada as a result. A preferential trade deal between Canada and the United States seemed to be the best solution to this potential problem.
Advice and reports also convinced the new government that a trade deal was a good idea. The previous Liberal government had set up a royal commission to investigate trade relations between Canada and the United States. In 1985 it finally reported back: it supported the idea of free trade. This report, combined with pressure from leading Canadian industries and business people, pushed Mulroney's Conservative government to open negotiations.
The 1980s was the right time for proposing this kind of deal with the United States. Previous US presidents had been protectionists: they wanted to protect the US economy from foreign imports by imposing tariffs on incoming products and natural resources. However, Ronald Reagan was now the Republican president of the United States. He was a strong believer in free trade. In addition, the US was growing increasingly nervous about the possibility of cutoffs of foreign oil imports, and wanted some guarantees of access to Canadian energy at a stable price. Perhaps a free trade deal was the way to get that access.
In 1986 the Mulroney government announced the start of formal negotiations between Canada and the United States for a free trade deal. Critics of the Conservative government saw this as an example of the Prime Minister Mulroney's willingness to give in to US demands. Other critics thought that Mulroney was too close to Canada's big business interests in light of his previous career as president of the Iron Ore Company of Canada.
The Canada-US Free Trade Agreement (FTA)
Simon Reisman was appointed Canada's chief trade negotiator. Reisman had a wealth of experience. He helped negotiate the Auto-Pact between Canada and the United States in 1965. On his recommendation the Canadian government created the Department of Industry, and appointed him its first deputy-minister.
Talks progressed slowly. Some witnesses to these talks recall now that Reisman, well known for his temper and willingness to make his arguments aggressively, almost killed the talks. Theatrics were not out of the ordinary. In September, 1987, Reisman walked out on the talks stating the American negotiators were not willing to compromise on key issues. He later returned, and less than one month later an agreement in principle was signed. The final Canada-US Free Trade Agreement (FTA) was signed on January 2, 1988.
This type of rhetoric only increased once the free trade agreement was signed. Many Canadian artists thought that free trade would dilute Canada's national identity. This debate became even more heated when noted author Mordecai Richler said in testimony before a Parliamentary Committee that Canadian writers are full of self-pity and are overstating their case that the deal will kill Canadian culture. Some Canadian business leaders thought that the deal would hurt Canada's economy while others welcomed it. Canadians had many questions: would Canada's government health care system be considered an unfair trade advantage under the proposed deal? Would the deal result in Canada losing control of its energy sector? Would they lose their jobs as American branch plants closed?
All Canadians had their say on free trade. The November 21, 1988 federal election was fought largely on this single issue. During a heated exchange during the leaders' debate John Turner, leader of the Liberal Party, accused Mulroney of selling out Canada. The arguments and passion of both men reflected the nature of the debate that existed across the country.
In the end, Brian Mulroney's Progressive Conservative party won another majority government. Free trade came into effect on January 1, 1989.
The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA)
As with free trade, there were vocal supporters and opponents of NAFTA. Opponents said that Mexico's low wages, lax environmental laws and corruption would lure Canadian businesses south. The result, they argued, would be the loss of jobs. They wanted any deal to include standards for workers, pollution and other criteria that the US, Canada and Mexico would have to adhere to.
The deal passed quickly, and awaited ratification by all three governments. Even though the US underwent a change in administration (Republican President George Bush Senior was replaced by the Democratic Bill Clinton in 1993), President Clinton made it a priority to have NAFTA passed by Congress. In January 1994, Canada, the United States and Mexico signed the North American Free Trade Agreement. It created the world's largest free trade area.
NAFTA has had critics ever since it was implemented. Canada has had ongoing difficulties with the US over the importation of Canadian softwood lumber. US duty on softwood lumber of over 20% made it difficult for Canadian companies to export to the US. Canada appealed to the dispute mechanism allowed for under NAFTA. This is to be a neutral examination by both Canadian and US officials of the problem, and a binding ruling on both parties. This panel has twice ruled that Canada's softwood lumber is not subsidized by the Canadian government, and the US duties are improper. The US has consistently ignored these rulings.
There has also been a loss of textile jobs in Canada. Whether this is due to NAFTA or changes in the world economy is difficult to say. Much of the clothing in Canada is produced overseas, often in Asia but also in Mexico.
Marc Garneau the First Canadian in Space
Canada’s history of space exploration is not as exciting as that of the United States and the Soviet Union (now Russia). There was no space race for Canada (although as an ally of the United States, Canada did have an interest in this competition between the two super powers). Canada, however, has made numerous contributions to the United States’ space program particularly since the start of the Space Shuttle missions in 1980. The Canadarm, the robotic arm on the space shuttle, is a key piece of equipment on the craft. Canada’s other proud moment can on October 5, 1984, when Canadian astronaut Marc Garneau became the First Canadian in Space. Garneau flew on board the Space Shuttle Challenger Flight STS-41G from Kennedy Space Center at Cape Canaveral, Florida.
During the eight day mission Garneau travelled a total of 3.4 million miles around the Earth in 133 orbits.
Garneau carried a package of Canadian experiments (Canex). The crew deployed the Earth Radiation Budget Satellite, conducted scientific observations of the earth with the OSTA-3 pallet and Large Format (IMAX) Camera (LFC), and demonstrated potential satellite refueling with an EVA and associated hydrazine transfer.
Mission duration was 197 hours 23 minutes.
Constitutional Talks: The Meech Lake Accord
Canada's Constitutional Act, 1982 suffered from one weakness: Quebec never accepted it. It is, in many ways, an ambiguous situation. Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms, part of Canada's constitution, applies in Quebec. However, the failure to bring Quebec into the constitutional fold in 1982 was a glaring inadequacy in Confederation.
Origins of the Meech Lake Round
Mulroney believed he could find a way to bring Quebec into the constitution. Some historians argue that Mulroney wanted to do this to show up former Prime Minister Trudeau. Historian Michael Bliss believes that the Meech Lake Accord was the product of male ego: eleven powerful politicians who wanted to succeed where Trudeau had failed. Other scholars, notably political scientist Peter Russell of the University of Toronto, see more concrete political reasons why the Meech Lake constitutional talks were necessary.
There were certainly failures in the 1982 constitution. First, although section 35 gave Aboriginal peoples recognition of their treaty and aboriginal rights it did not address one of their key concerns: self-government. Many First Nations believed they had never given up their right to govern themselves (indeed, this is not mentioned in any treaties between Britain/Canada and Native peoples). After the repatriation of the constitution, several conferences were held between the governments of Canada, the provinces and territories and numerous First Nations’ leaders (in 1983, 1984, 1985 and 1987). No agreement could be reached on self-government.
There was also the problem of Quebec, a province with the largest concentration of Canada's French population, refusing to sign on to the constitution. Critics of Mulroney said later that the failure of the Meech Lake Accord only alienated Quebec further. However, as Peter Russell notes, if the effort had not been made would Quebec have fallen further into the separatist fold? Pierre Trudeau believed this would not happen. Polling after the repatriation of the constitution showed that a majority of the Quebec population agreed with the new constitution.
Background Negotiations to Meech Lake
Meech Lake, like the earlier constitutional talks in 1980, were an example of elite accommodation. This means that politicians, their advisors, lawyers and other people with a vested interest in the constitution talk amongst themselves. Canadians are not involved in the negotiations, which are kept secret, and they have no say in what is finally agreed to.
Brian Mulroney perhaps owed something to the Quebec wing of the Progressive Conservative Party. All political parties are composed of different groups that represent certain regions of Canada and certain points of view. Within all parties, as a result, is a range of opinions on key national issues. A skilled politician, Mulroney had brought together the social/fiscal conservative wing of the PC Party with the Quebec wing of the party. To do this Mulroney made promises to Quebec nationalists who wanted greater recognition of Quebec within the constitution. During the 1984 election a number of PC candidates in Quebec had strong nationalist beliefs.
There was also constitutional movement within Quebec. Réné Lévesque had stepped down as premier, and the Quebec Liberal Party had won the 1985 provincial election under Robert Bourassa. Bourassa's Liberals had their own constitutional plan, called Mastering Our Future. This formed the basis of the early negotiations.
Five conditions were put forth in Mastering Our Future for Quebec to sign the constitution. These were:
- Recognizing Quebec, within the constitution, as a distinct society within Canada
- Stronger powers for Quebec over immigration to the province
- A role in the selection of three of the nine Supreme Court judges (three judges are traditionally chosen from Quebec)
- Quebec can opt out of federal programs, but receive its share of the federal funding to set up its own matching program administered by the Quebec government
- Quebec would have a veto on any constitutional changes that affected it.
These conditions had the blessing of Brian Mulroney who wanted to succeed where Trudeau had failed: bringing Quebec into constitution. Other politicians also did not consider these demands to be extreme. In 1986 all of the provincial premiers met in Edmonton, Alberta, and issued the Edmonton Declaration. It stated that they agreed to Quebec’s five conditions.
The Failure of Meech, Part One
The Meech Lake Accord failed. It also died a strange death. Meech seemed dead, was revived by the federal government, and then finally expired. Why did this happen. There are a number of reasons why.
Under the constitution’s amending formula (i.e.: how it is changed) you only need the agreement of seven provinces that constitute 50% or more of the national population to change the constitution. Within this context, Meech would have passed. However, the premiers wanted unanimous provincial consent to pass Meech Lake. This would give the deal a great deal of legitimacy.
Meech Lake could not be changed by any of the provincial legislatures. Once the premier’s reached a deal it could not be undone. This angered some provincial politicians who dislike elements of the Meech Lake Accord, and refused to support it. After being created, three provincial governments lost elections and new premiers came to power. These new premiers were largely opposed to Meech Lake.
Quebec’s legislature approved (or ratified) Meech Lake in October, 1987. However, within English Canada there was more resistance. Many English Canadians disliked the distinct society clause. Others did not like the option Quebec (and the other provinces) had to opt out of federal programs. They thought this weakened the federal government.
Some in English Canada disliked how the Meech Lake Accord was negotiated: behind closed doors between politicians and their advisors. Canadian citizens had no input into the process. This, however, was exactly how the 1980 Constitution was negotiated and it raised few concerns.
English Canada’s dislike of Meech strengthened on May 27, 1987, when Pierre Trudeau wrote an article published in both Montreal’s La Presse and the Toronto Star. Trudeau said that the Meech Lake Accord weakened the federal government too much. It gave the province’s too much power. He questioned why Quebec needed distinct society status. In his interview with Barbara Frum on the CBC, Trudeau repeated his concerns.
It did not help that Robert Bourassa invoked the notwithstanding clause in 1988 to deny Quebec businesses the right to put up English only signs. The Supreme Court of Canada had ruled that Quebec’s Bill 101, which prohibited unilingual English signs in Quebec, was unconstitutional because it violated the Charter of Rights. Faced with mounting nationalist pressure to protect the French language, Bourassa used that part of the constitution that allowed governments to ignore Supreme Court rulings. If this was Quebec’s distinct society, English Canada wanted nothing to do with it.
Reaction in English Canada to Bourassa’s actions was swift. Gary Filmon, premier of Manitoba, withdrew Meech Lake from the provincial legislature. He started province wide public consultations on the Meech Lake Accord. New Brunswick also started consultations about Meech. Eventually both provinces recommended changes to the accord.
The Accord, however, ran into difficulty. Liberal leader Clyde Wells became premier of Newfoundland in April, 1989. Wells was an opponent of Meech Lake. He openly debated with Mulroney about Meech Lake. He wanted substantial changes to the accord that could not be made. Wells argued that all provinces had to be equal within Confederation, and distinct status for Quebec ran contrary to this. Equality is a powerful argument, and many English Canadians agreed with Wells. As a result, the Newfoundland Legislature withdrew its support of Meech Lake.
It seemed as if Meech Lake was dead unless something extraordinary was done.
Failure of Meech Lake, Part Two
Brian Mulroney was not about to let Meech die so easily. He asked one of his ministers, Jean Charest, to chair a committee to address Newfoundland’s concerns, and some other issues raised by New Brunswick.
The Charest Report, issued on 16 May 1990, recommended taking away Quebec’s veto over Senate reform. Changing the way the Canada’s Senate operated was a key demand of the western provinces (particularly Alberta). This recommendation angered Lucien Bouchard, Mulroney’s key minister in Quebec: Lucien Bouchard. He resigned from the federal cabinet, and eventually formed a separatist party called the Bloc Quebecois. Other Progressive Conservative and Liberal MPs from Quebec ultimately quit their parties and joined the Bloc Quebecois.
Mulroney had one more chance: he called a First Ministers’ Conference. All of the provincial premiers, including some opposition leaders from the provinces, assembled in Ottawa to find a way to salvage the Meech Lake Accord. After days of virtually non-stop negotiation a deal was reached.
Two factors ended the Meech Lake Accord. First, a Manitoba MLA, Elijah Harper, stood up and said “no” to Meech Lake. Manitoba premier Gary Filmon had asked for unanimous consent in the legislature to consider the revised Meech Lake deal. Mr. Harper, as an Ojibwa, resented the failure of the premiers and the federal government to include Aboriginal peoples in the Meech Lake negotiations. Many Aboriginal leaders felt the same way. They had been overlooked yet again by provincial and federal leaders. Harper stopped Manitoba from ratifying the Meech Lake deal.
In Newfoundland Premier Wells allowed for a free vote in the legislature. MLA’s could vote their conscience about Meech Lake. However, under incredible pressure from the federal government, Wells refused to hold even this vote. On June 23, 1990, the deadline for ratifying Meech Lake passed. The deal died.
With the death of Meech Lake feelings in Quebec ran high. Many Quebec nationalists felt that their demands in Meech Lake were not extreme. English Canada, in their views, rejected these minimal demands. Within English Canada there was a strong feeling that Quebec could not be satisfied.
The Goods and Services Tax
The proposal was an instant controversy; a large proportion of the Canadian population was irritated and disapproved of the tax. Some saw the GST as a tax grab. Even though the tax was lower (it was 7%) compared to the MST (which was 11%), it was applied to more goods than the MST was. Government tax revenue from the GST would be higher than the old tax revenue from the MST. Despite protests from the other parties, and even members of Mulroney's own caucus, the GST was introduced on January 1, 1991. The political ramifications of the GST were severe. It contributed to the Mulroney government becoming one of the least popular in Canadian history.
The Air India Disaster
On June 23, 1985, what was likely a suitcase bomb exploded in the forward cargo hold of Air India Flight 182 as it approached the coast of Ireland. The explosion cut the plane's controls, and it plunged 31,000 feet into the sea. Three hundred and twenty-nine people were killed, 82 of them children. Most victims of the crash were Canadian citizens of Indian origin who lived in the Toronto area. On the same day, two baggage handlers at Tokyo's Narita Airport died from another luggage bomb. Both had been put on flights originating at Vancouver airport.
Later that year, the British Columbia RCMP arrested Sikh militant Talwinder Singh Palmar for the bombings, but he was released for lack of evidence. Palmar was leader of the Babbar Khalsa sect, a group committed to the violent establishment of Khalistan, an independent Sikh homeland, in the Indian state of Punjab. Like many Sikhs around the world, Parmar was furious over the Indian government's 1984 assault on the Golden Temple at Amritsar, Sikhism's holiest shrine.
In 1991, Inderjit Singh Reyat, a Canadian-British citizen, pleaded guilty to manslaughter in the Narita Airport bombing, after he was linked to bomb making equipment. He was sentenced to 10 years in jail.
Matters surrounding the Air Indian investigation were always complicated. Some key suspects were killed before they could be arrested. For example, on October 15, 1992, in New Delhi, India, Sikh militant Palmar was killed in a gun battle with Indian police.
The investigation and prosecution of the accused was the costliest in Canadian history, estimated at about $130 million.
On March 16, 2005, the Supreme Court of British Columbia acquitted Ripudaman Singh Malik and Ajaib Singh Bagri on eight charges related to the bombing, shocking relatives of the victims. This acquittal received wide spread media coverage. It prompted the federal government to appoint former Ontario Premier Bob Rae to investigate the bombing incident. Rae was to recommend whether a royal commission into the Air India bombing was necessary. On May 1, 2006 the Harper government set up a commission led by retired Supreme Court Justice John Major to look into the bombing.
During Major’s investigation a number of facts came to light. First, James Bartleman, who by that time was a former lieutenant-governor of Ontario, noted that he had received intelligence reports that an Air Indian flight leaving Canada might be bombed. Bartleman used to be the head of intelligence for Foreign Affairs’ Canada. Bartleman stated in his testimony that he notified people in his department, but obviously nothing was done with this information. It was also learned that the baggage that was put on to Air Indian Flight 182 was never checked by security despite the existence of warnings about a possible terrorist attack.
Many disturbing facts about Air India and how Canada’s security services handled its investigation have come to light in the last few years. For example, Canada’s Security and Intelligence Service (CSIS) erased wiretap tapes it took before the bombing. Even after the RCMP had arrested suspects it continued to erase these tapes even though they may have been needed as evidence in court. Some key witnesses were murdered before they could testify. In an interview with the CBC, Reid Mordan, the head of CSIS, said that Canadian intelligence had failed with its handling of the Air India case.
The École Polytechnique Massacre
Lépine was born Gamil Rodrigue Gharbi, to Algerian immigrant Liess Gharbi and former nun Monique Lépine. He and his mother and sister had endured years of beatings at the hands of his father, and Marc had recently been refused entry to the Canadian Army and the Université de Montréal.
Lépine’s attack on these students is the worst instance of mass murder in Canadian history. For some, it showed that violence against women was a systemic problem in Canadian society. Lépine had deliberately targeted women and spared the male students. Others saw Lépine’s attack as the actions of a single, crazed individual.
Lépine’s assault led many people to pressure the federal government for much stricter gun laws. Some called for a complete ban on all firearms. Eventually the federal government set up the Long Gun Registry. However, this program soon came under criticism. Few rifles were registered. Many people, especially those living in rural areas, resented registering a firearm they only used for hunting. Law enforcement officials gave mixed opinions about the registry. Some said the registry would help them in their work. Others, such as the former heads of the RCMP and the Metropolitan Toronto Police Force, said that the money spent on the registry was a waste of funds that could be better spent in other ways to prevent violent crimes.
Canada’s Auditor-General, Sheila Fraser, noted in a 2006 report that the registry was far more expensive than originally planned. Contracts to set up the registry ran far over budget, and there was no accountability for how money was spent.
Today, a black granite plaque on the outside of the engineering building bears each victim's name: Genevieve Bergeron, 21: Helène Colgan, 23; Nathalie Croteau, 23; Barbara Daigneault, 22; Anne-Marie Edward, 21; Maud Haviernick, 29; Barbara Maria Klucznik, 31; Maryse Laganière, 25; Maryse Leclair, 23; Anne-Marie Lemay, 22; Sonia Pelletier, 28; Michèle Richard, 21; Annie St-Arneault, 23; Annie Turcotte, 21.
December 6 has been established as Canada's National Day of Remembrance and Action on Violence Against Women. This day was established in 1991 by the Parliament of Canada.
The Oka Crisis
This event started from a simple act: the expansion of a golf course. However, the land the course wanted to expand on to was wrapped up in centuries of history and lay at the centre of a contentious Mohawk land claim. Mohawks from the Kanesetake First Nation, which borders on the golf course in the Quebec town of Oka, contended that this land was sacred. Grave sites were there, and they claimed that the land legally belonged to their community.
The town of Oka, and the owners of the golf course, refused to listen to Mohawk requests not to expand the course. Finally, on March 11, 1990, the Mohawks set up a blockade on the construction road and all other roads leading on to the disputed land. For some weeks the stand off continued. It received some news coverage, but for the most part Canadians considered it a small local event in Quebec.
The Oka Crisis has a history much longer than many Canadians realized. In 1977, the Mohawks of Kanesetake filed a land claim on the land. It was sent to the Department of Indian Affairs. In 1986, Indian Affairs rejected the land claim stating that it did not meet the criteria of a land claim. However, Kanesetake is in a special situation from other First Nations reserve. The Mohawk of Kanesetake are descendants of Iroquois who relocated to the Montreal area in the late 1600s. In 1721 they moved to the land at Oka. It was land that was part of a government grant to the Sulpician Order of Catholic priests. However, the Mohawk claim that the land was given to them by the government and that the Church wrongly assumed control over it.
Matters at the barricades became more heated on July 11, 1990. Oka’s mayor sent the Sûreté du Québec to enforce an injunction from the Quebec superior court. A Quebec judge had issued an injunction stating that the blockade was illegal. In early July, 100 police officers moved on the Mohawk barricades. They had concussion grenades and tear gas. Shots were fired, and one police officer was killed. Police spokespeople stated that the Mohawk fired on the police first. Mohawks claimed that the police fired at them to kill them. Police spokespeople contended that the officers only fired into the air. Television news crews, allowed behind the barricades, broadcast images of trees with bullets holes in them. The holes were at the head and chest height of an adult.
Ciaccia continued to negotiate with leaders behind the barricades. Finally, on July 15, 1990, an agreement was reached. The Mohawks wanted the Quebec police withdrawn from the region, and they wanted an amnesty for all Mohawks involved in the previous clash with the police. The police wanted charges laid for murder.
Matters, however, only became worse. Mohawks from the nearby community of Kahnawake First Nation (Caughnawaga) erected a blockade on the Mercier Bridge. This bridge was a crucial commuter link between the south shore of the St. Lawrence and the city of Montreal. It also crossed directly through the Kahnawake First Nation. What had once been a commute of thirty to forty minutes became a commute of several hours. After a month of the blockade, tempers were flaring.
Finally, on August 14, 1990, Québec Premier Robert Bourassa asked Ottawa to send in the Canadian military. Once this was done matters slowly began to diffuse. Two weeks later the Kahnawake Mohawks took down their barricades on the bridge. The next day the military took control of the roads leading into Kanesetake. All talk of expanding the golf course ended. By the end of September the Mohawks at the Oka barricades gave themselves up to the military.
The Oka Crisis was not the first time that violence flared around an Aboriginal issue. Unfortunately, Canadians have short memories. However, the Oka Crisis did show many non-Aboriginal Canadians that a more militant brand of Aboriginal politics was emerging in Canada. First Nations communities and leaders were becoming increasingly tired of drawn out negotiations over land claims. Small claims, known as specific claims, took more than twenty-five years to settle. Former head of the Assembly of First Nations, George Erasmus, once warned viewers on CBC news that the next generation of Aboriginal leaders might be more willing to take up a gun or erect a barricade to get what they want. Oka proved that Mr. Erasmus’ warning should be heeded.
Canada and the Gulf War (1991)
On August 1, 1990, the Middle Eastern state of Iraq invaded the neighbouring nation of Kuwait. The Gulf War had begun. It was an action that led to world wide condemnation. United States’ President George Bush Senior, through the United Nations, received a mandate to put together a multi-national force to expel Iraqi forces from Kuwait.
The ships left Halifax on August 24, 1990 with 934 crew. As the US began moving hundreds of thousands of troops into Saudi Arabia, Canada also offered a CF18 squadron with 450 personnel. On November 29, the UN agreed to the use of any force necessary to force Iraq to withdraw by January 15, 1991. Saddam did not comply and air attacks began on Iraq’s military installations, with Canada providing air cover and engaging targets on the ground. A Canadian field hospital with 530 personnel was also set up to handle the heavy casualties expected when the ground assault, called Desert Storm, began on February 24, but the Iraqis began surrendering and a ceasefire was called 3 days later.
Some elements of the war were later criticized. Propaganda was used to portray the Iraqi as blood thirsty soldiers. One Kuwati woman appeared before the United Nations stating that Iraqi soldiers took incubators from Kuwati hospitals, and threw the babies inside on to the floor. This was later proved to be false, and the woman was employed by the Kuwati government. Some critics think the United States lost an ideal chance to remove Saddam Hussein in 1991. However, the UN mandate was only to liberate Kuwait not to overthrow the Iraqi government.
The Charlottetown Accord
In 1990 the Meech Lake Accord failed. Prime Minister Mulroney, however, was not prepared to give up his goal of bringing Quebec into the constitution. In August, 1992 Prime Minister Mulroney, the provincial premiers, and First Nations leaders agreed on the Charlottetown Accord. Like the Meech Lake Accord, the Charlottetown agreement was a wide-ranging package of constitutional amendments on subjects such as a Canada Clause, Senate reform, aboriginal self-government and the division of powers between the federal government and the provinces.
Unlike the Meech Lake Accord, however, the premiers and the prime minister would not seek unanimous provincial consent to pass the new amendments. Instead, everyone agreed to put the agreement to the people of Canada in a nationwide referendum.
Background to the Charlottetown Accord
Even before the Meech Lake Accord failed, the Quebec government was considering holding hearings into the constitution. Two of these committees were formed shortly after the failure of Meech: the Allaire Committee and the Bélanger-Campeau Committee. At the same time the federal government formed the Beaudoin-Edwards Committee and the Spicer Commission to investigate the constitution. Prime Minister Mulroney also created a new cabinet position: Minister of Constitutional Affairs. Former Prime Minister Joe Clark assumed this new role in the Mulroney government.
Both of the Quebec committees recommended expanded powers for Quebec. The name of the report issued by the Allaire Committee was A Quebec Free to Choose. The title alone indicated how many Quebecois felt: the province was deciding whether it should remain in Canada or not. Some of these recommendations were in areas that provincial governments already had authority in: education, welfare, and health care. These were areas, however, that the federal government often started programs in. In general, what both committees wanted was complete autonomy for Quebec in social policy and economic development. The Bélanger-Campeau Committee made similar comments.
On 24 September 1991, the federal government issued its own set of proposals. It was called Shaping Canada’s Future Together. From these various documents a new set of constitutional proposals was put forward.
Final negotiations produced the Charlottetown Accord on August 28, 1992, so named because the meeting took place in Charlottetown, Prince Edward Island the site of the original constitutional talks in the 1860s. The name is not particularly fitting in light of all of the consultations and meetings that took place across Canada. However, it was an agreement that the federal, provincial, and territorial governments, and representatives from the Assembly of First Nations, the Native Council of Canada, the Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami|Inuit Tapirisat of Canada, and the Métis National Council agreed to.
The Accord Proposals
What was agreed to in the Charlottetown Accord. It was a daring set of proposals. Some of the more contentious and important elements are outlined here.
First, there was a “Canada Clause.” This would be at the beginning of the constitution that would outline who Canadians are as a people. This clause also contained recognition of Quebec as a distinct society within Canada. Distinct society status was further recognized in the Charter of Rights. Charlottetown proposed including this in the Charter to give it greater force within the constitution. This would protect Quebec’s cultural heritage. For some English Canadians this was contentious. Anger of Bill 101 in Quebec was still fresh in their minds. If Quebec’s distinctiveness was in the Charter how would courts rule in the future if the Quebec government tried to limit the language rights of English-speaking Quebecois in the future?
Another important change was made to the Charter of Rights. Property rights were inserted as a right for all Canadians. Currently there are no charter rights to private property in Canada. The notwithstanding clause was also changed. For a provincial government to use this clause it needed 60% of its legislature to support it.
Western Canada’s demand for Senate reform was also included. Senators would now be elected, not appointed by the federal government. The powers of the Senate, as a result, were changed. It could not affect any financial legislation from the House of Commons (such as the federal budget), and its veto powers were changed. The Senate could, however, pass bills to create new laws.
Provinces and territories were given input into how Supreme Court judges would be chosen. They would submit lists of five nominees to the federal government. The Prime Minister would choose replacement judges based on these lists.
A Council of the Federation was also proposed. This council would handle economic and inter-provincial relations. The Council could not pass new laws. It would work to make sure provincial and federal monetary policies were better integrated. When the Council made a ruling, the provinces would have to agree. Seven provinces with 50% or more of the population would be needed to make a Council ruling binding on all of Canada.
Lastly, the Charlottetown Accord included Aboriginal self-government. What self-government would be, and how it would fit into the existing political landscape, was not defined. If the Charlottetown Accord passed there would be an additional ten years of negotiations to work out the details of Aboriginal self-government.
It was a vast array of changes. This is not even a complete list. There were other changes to be made to the constitution. Provincial/federal control over certain areas (such as tourism, manpower training and mining) would be changed: the provinces would have greater control and the federal government would withdraw.
The Referendum on Charlottetown
During the Meech Lake round, the proposed constitution required the assent of all the provinces and the federal government. This time, the Charlottetown Accord would be sent to the people of Canada in a referendum. Several provinces had already passed legislation stating that any constitutional changes would be put to a referendum: British Columbia, Alberta, and Quebec. In the case of Quebec, Premier Robert Bourassa had made a public pledge that he would bring a referendum to the people of Quebec either on Quebec independence or a new constitutional deal.
There was some pressure within Canadian society as a whole for a referendum. During the 1980 constitutional talks and even more so during the Meech Lake round, Canadians wanted a voice in how their country was being shaped. Closed door negotiations, and politicians emerging to tell the people what had been done, did not appeal to many Canadians.
The “Yes” and “No” Sides
Political groups came together during the Charlottetown Referendum that, over almost any other political issue, would have opposed each other. First, on the Yes Side, were all of the political parties both federal and provincial. Federally, the NDP, Liberals and Progressive Conservative Party supported the accord. Many First Nations leaders also supported the accord. Ovide Mecredi, leader of the Assembly of First Nations, campaigned in favour of Charlottetown because of the Aboriginal self-government clause. Some women’s and business groups also supported the accord. In the English media, almost all opinion pieces were in favour.
On the No side were groups with varying political agendas. Preston Manning, leader of the small western political party known as the Reform Party, campaigned hard against Charlottetown. So too did a number of women’s groups. Also, on the No side, was Pierre Trudeau. On October 2, 1992, Pierre Trudeau gave a speech at La Maison Egg Roll, a Chinese restaurant in Montreal. As with Meech Lake, Trudeau attacked the Charlottetown Accord for granting too much power and autonomy to the provinces at the expense of the federal government. “This mess deserves a ‘no’,” said Trudeau.
Also opposed to the accord were the two leaders of the separatist movement in Quebec, Jacques Parizeau, leader of the Parti Québécois, and Lucien Bouchard leader of the newly formed Bloc Québécois. They did not think the accord went far enough. For Parizeau and Bouchard the only course for Quebec was full independence from Canada. Any deal that sought to keep Quebec in Canada would never satisfy them.
When the referendum campaign began in the early autumn of 1992 it seemed as if English Canada would vote in favour of the accord. Within Quebec the Yes and No sides were roughly equal in their public support. For a number of weeks people for both sides criss-crossed Canada, gave speeches, wrote articles and letters to newspapers, and produced television, print and radio ads trying to convince Canadians to either vote for or against the Charlottetown Accord.
Over the course of the campaign momentum slowly moved against Charlottetown supporters. Many political observers believe that Mulroney made a key mistake right at the beginning. Speaking to an audience he held up a copy of the Charlottetown Accord, and ripped it in half. Canada would fall apart, he said, if the referendum was lost to the no side.
Peter Russell, political scientist at University of Toronto, notes that no one likes to vote with a threat hanging over their heads. The accord was also very complicated. Sixty amendments were in the accord. Many of these were still left open to future negotiation.
It’s also important to note that the Mulroney government was deeply unpopular with the Canadian public by 1992. Their popularity in the polls had fallen to 11%, the lowest of any federal government in Canadian history. People who voted against Charlottetown may have been venting their dislike of Mulroney.
Referendum Results
|
There were also mistakes and leaks on the Yes side as well. For example, Quebec’s deputy minister of intergovernmental affairs, Diane Whilhelmy, said in a telephone conversation with a colleague that Bourassa had “caved in” on Charlottetown. Transcripts of this phone conversation were leaked to the media. Many in English Canada interpreted this comment one way: once Charlottetown was over Quebec would only demand more. Opponents to Charlottetown within Quebec also used this to their advantage: they argued that Whilhelmy’s comments proved that Quebec was not getting the best deal it could from the federal government and the rest of Canada. Further hurting Charlottetown supporters was a comment by British Columbia’s Constitutional Affairs’ minister Moe Sihota that Premier Bourassa has been “outgunned” during the Charlottetown negotiations. On October 26, 1992, two referendums, the Quebec government's referendum in Quebec, and the federal government's referendum in all other provinces and territories, were put to the voters. The Question was: "Do you agree that the Constitution of Canada should be renewed on the basis of the agreement reached on August 28, 1992?" The result nationally was No: 54.3% and Yes: 45.7% |
|
The Kim Campbell Interlude
Faced with the failure of the Charlottetown Accord, and his own popularity and that of his party at historic lows, Brian Mulroney left federal politics in 1993. A leadership convention was called, and in June, 1993, 'Kim Campbell was chosen as his successor over Jean Charest.
Kim Campbell was Canada’s first female prime minister, and the first female leader of the PC Party of Canada. She had limited experience in federal politics, compared to Jean Charest. A lawyer by training, she won her first federal election in 1988. She was quickly brought into Cabinet by Brian Mulroney eventually rising to the position of Minister of Justice.
Campbell enacted important reforms of Canada’s Criminal Code. For example, she had new sexual assault laws brought into the Criminal Code. It defined what sexual assault is in the law. During her tenure as justice minister she also brought in the rape shield law. It states that a woman’s sexual past cannot be brought into evidence during a sexual assault trial.
The 1993 Election
It is questionable if Kim Campbell could have resurrected the fortunes of the PC Party during the 1993 federal election. One Canadian writer, Will Ferguson noted in his book “Bastards and Boneheads” that "taking over the party leadership from Brian (Mulroney) was a lot like taking over the controls of a 747 just before it plunges into the Rockies."[2] During the summer before the election the party’s popularity rose until it was only slightly behind the Liberals. Campbell also responded to concerns that the federal government was becoming bloated and expensive. She cut the size of the federal cabinet from 75 cabinet ministers to only 23.
However, the election went badly. At times she was overly honest with reporters. In one instance she told reporters that the federal government’s annual deficit could not be much reduced before the year 2000. When a reporter asked her about federal social policies she responded that a complete analysis of the government’s policies was impossible in an election that only lasted 47 days. This comment was taken by the media, and shortened to “an election is no time to discuss serious issues.” Campbell did say this, but the quotation was taken out of context.
Fearing a loss the Campbell election team engaged in negative advertising. This backfired quickly. One ad showed a picture of Jean Chrétien with his mouth twisted into an awkward position. As a young boy Chrétien was afflicted with polio. This disease caused some facial paralysis. Many Canadians thought the ad was not only unfair but mean spirited. While Campbell ordered the ad pulled from television she did not apologize for it being run on TV.
The final results for the election were worse than anyone could have imagined. The Progressive Conservatives won only two seats. Mulroney’s lingering unpopularity certainly did not help the PC Party. However, other factors also led to their defeat. In Quebec the newly formed Bloc Québécois won 54 seats. Many voters in Quebec who would have voted for the PC Party voted instead for the Bloc Québécois. In western Canada the Reform Party stole many ridings that traditionally voted Progressive Conservative, 52 seats in total. In Ontario, where some Reform Party candidates ran, the conservative vote was split while the Liberals scooped up the left of centre vote. Jean Chrétien also ran on a promise to "scrap the GST."
It seemed as if the grand old party of Sir John A. Macdonald was dead. Jean Charest, the only cabinet minister to win his seat, took control of the PC Party. A separatist leader, Lucien Bouchard, became the head of the official opposition in Ottawa. Those left within the PC Party knew that many years of rebuilding was ahead of them. Starting with the greatest majority victory in Canadian history in 1983 the PC Party finished their two terms in power with the worst electoral defeat in Canadian history.
Notes
- ↑ Québec's results were tabulated by the Directeur général des élections du Québec, not by the federal Chief Electoral Officer as in other provinces.
- ↑ Will Ferguson, Bastards and Boneheads: Canada's Glorious Leaders Past and Present (Vancouver/Toronto: Douglas & McIntyre, 1999), p. 284.
| The Mulroney Mandate - Gallery | Stories & Texts | Web Links | Milestones | Student Activities | Student Projects |
| D. Global Challenges - 1984-Present →→ 1. The Mulroney Mandate 1984-93 → 2. The Chrétien Years 1993-2003 → 3. Canada in the New Millennium →→ E. Aboriginal People and First Nations Today |
del.icio.us
digg
facebook
googlebookmark
reddit
stumbleupon
yahoo
