1. What is the difference between a. and a. As Prime Minister of Canada, my guiding ideological compass would be right-libertarianism, drawing from classical liberalism and libertarian principles. This ideology places a strong emphasis on individual liberty, limited government interference in both the economy and society, and a commitment to free-market principles. Under my leadership, these principles would shape policies aimed at enhancing personal freedoms, fostering economic prosperity, and minimizing government intervention. One of the core principles of right libertarianism is the protection of individual rights and freedoms. As Prime Minister, I would champion policies that safeguard civil liberties, including freedom of speech, expression, …show more content…
While recognizing the importance of protecting the environment for future generations, I think the market-based solutions are the most effective way to address environmental challenges. Instead of imposing heavy-handed regulations, I would advocate for policies that incentivize innovation and sustainable practices through mechanisms such as carbon pricing and tax incentives for renewable energy development. These measures would encourage businesses to adopt environmentally friendly practices while stimulating economic growth. In terms of foreign policy, I would prioritize principles of non-interventionism and diplomacy. While maintaining strong alliances and partnerships with other nations, I would refrain from unnecessary military interventions and focus on promoting peace, trade, and mutual cooperation. Additionally, I would advocate for free trade agreements that expand market access for Canadian businesses and consumers, leading to greater economic prosperity and global integration. Overall, right-libertarian ideology would lead me to pursuing policies that prioritize individual freedom, economic prosperity, and limited government intervention to foster a business-friendly environment, empowering individuals through choice and competition, and promoting market-based solutions to societal
Sir Henri Charles Wilfrid Laurier, commonly known as Wilfrid Laurie, the seventh Prime Minister of Canada from 11 July 1896 to 6 October 1911, was Canada's first francophone prime minister. He is often considered one of the country's greatest statesmen. He is well known for his policies of conciliation, expanding of the Confederation, and compromise between French and English Canada. His policies and actions helped Canada in various areas, including culture, diplomatic, and economic. He is well known for his policies of conciliation, expanding of Confederation, and compromise between French and English Canada. His vision for Canada was a land of individual liberty and decentralized federalism.
Canada’s parliamentary system is designed to preclude the formation of absolute power. Critics and followers of Canadian politics argue that the Prime Minister of Canada stands alone from the rest of the government. The powers vested in the prime minister, along with the persistent media attention given to the position, reinforce the Prime Minister of Canada’s superior role both in the House of Commons and in the public. The result has led to concerns regarding the power of the prime minister. Hugh Mellon argues that the prime minister of Canada is indeed too powerful. Mellon refers to the prime minister’s control over Canada a prime-ministerial government, where the prime minister encounters few constraints on the usage of his powers. Contrary to Mellon’s view, Paul Barker disagrees with the idea of a prime-ministerial government in Canada. Both perspectives bring up solid points, but the idea of a prime-ministerial government leading to too much power in the hands of the prime minister is an exaggeration. Canada is a country that is too large and complex to be dominated by a single individual. The reality is, the Prime Minister of Canada has limitations from several venues. The Canadian Prime Minister is restricted internally by his other ministers, externally by the other levels of government, the media and globalization.
The Prime Minister in Canada is the head of government and is appointed by the Governor General. Canada is the northern neighbor to the United States, and the Queen of England is its head of state. These powerful countries being so closely tied to Canada makes it a major player on the world stage, and gives considerable power to its Prime Ministers.There have been twenty-two Prime Ministers, with John Diefenbaker being the thirteenth, serving from 1957-1963, and Pierre Trudeau the fifteenth, who served 1968-1979 and again 1980-1984. Diefenbaker was a progressive conservative, a right-center group associated with British imperialism. Trudeau was part of the Liberal party of Canada, one that focused on individual freedom, ironic considering Trudeau was the only Prime Minister to enact the War Measures Act during peacetime. Domestically, these two Prime Ministers have done much in terms of protecting and growing a modern Canada. There are many ways these leaders' domestic policies were similar, such as helping to create an equality among Canadians, and many ways in which they had opposing policies, such as their policies regarding French-Canada.
"It is what we prevent, rather than what we do that counts most in Government." (Mackenzie King august 26, 1936) This statement sums up the best secrets of Mackenzie King's success as prime minister, and perhaps, the key to governing Canada effectively. King's record of prime minister is sometimes difficult to judge. He had no uninteresting images, he gave no repetitive speeches, and he champions no drastic stage. He is remembered for his easygoing, passive compromise and conciliation (Gregory, page 267). Yet Mackenzie King led Canada for a total of twenty-two years, through half the Depression and all of the Second World War. Like every other prime minister, he had to possess ambition, endurance and determination to become prime minister and, in spite if appearances, his accomplishments in that role required political acuity, decisiveness and faultless judgment.
If I were the prime minister of Canada, I would strive to accomplish and strengthen three major things. First, I would make sure that our educational system maintains strong and will make others succeed in life, second, I would make sure that everyone has equal and fair treatment in our society, and lastly, I would make sure every Canadian family can live happily by reducing tax.
Lazar, Harvey. “The Spending Power and the Harper Government.” HeinOnline. 34 Queen's L.J. 125 2008-2009
In conclusion, the main philosophy of the National Policy was to make Canada a true country and strengthen it’s economy so it did not have to rely as heavily on the United States and it ended up being very successful. The goal to raise tariffs helped greatly with the economy, especially in central Canada. The second goal of building the railway connected Canada and made it feel more like a country and more independent. The third goal of settlement in the west made Canada’s population go up and also helped the
Humans are natural philosophers; it is in human nature to pose questions about the unknown. If humans were indifferent to issues, questions, the sort, then religion would not exist; for, what does religion do other than attempt to give people explanations for phenomena that science cannot explain. There are few people, however, that fall into the category of ‘good philosophers’ because to be a good philosopher, one must be able to accept the truth, no matter what emotions it crosses. Pierre Elliott Trudeau, once known as the Canadian ‘Philosopher King’, was a philosopher that was able to do just that. He is used as an example of a person who revolutionized Canada, and is studied for his philosophical ways of thought. The many changes he made to this country have given it the identity Canada has today; it was his theory of a just society that keeps his name alive. In order to understand Pierre Trudeau’s theory of a just society, however, one must first examine who Trudeau was, what his philosophy was, and what the positive and negative impacts of his ideas were on Canada.
The government has truly been molding Canada into the wonderful country that it is today. Whether the changes have been good or bad, the government has always been trying their best to solve problems such as takes high income, racism, and making sure that Canada is seen as the cleanest and economically friendly place that it is today. However, Pierre Elliot Trudeau was unique and impacted Canadians in a positive way. He was an intelligent, and strategic man, when dealing with many different types of crisis’s, such as the economic crisis. Always put his citizens before himself, and felt that everyone should be treated equally with their own individual rights. Obviously, without Pierre Trudeau,
6. Scheueneman, Tom. "A Carbon Tax is More Viable than Cap and Trade." RSS. 26 July 2012. The Energy Collective. 11 Mar. 2014 .
...s National Policy and Wilfred Laurier accomplished it in his time in office, the period known as the Laurier Boom. This goes to show that the different political parties do not vary so much in their ideas, but more so in the ways of which they execute them. These two men exemplify their political parties; although both parties are equally motivated, when executing their practices, conservatives tend to be more laid back and behind the scenes and liberals are more diligent and in the forefront. For example, MacDonald came up with and outlined the policy, and Laurier took the policy into application. Although their approaches are different, the ideas and actions of these two men together are the reason for the development of Canada as a nation. Therefore, with this in mind, both the Laurier government and the MacDonald government created the nation of Canada.
Pierre Elliot Trudeau is perhaps one of the mostly widely recognized Canadian Prime Ministers. His contributions to the growth and progress of Canada stands forever engraved in the minds of all Canadians. Yet, in spite of his many contributions, Canadians share contrasting opinions of Trudeau. Frum (2011) says of Trudeau that “as a political wrecker, he was truly world class.” On the other hand, the results of a poll commissioned by the Harper government in 2013-2014 ranked Trudeau number one on the list of most inspirational Canadians . In this essay, I will provide an analysis comprised of three perspectives to support the argument that Pierre Trudeau’s impact on Canada was overwhelmingly positive because his legacy transcended politics.
The Prime Minister of Canada is given much power and much responsibility. This could potentially create a dangerous situation if the government held a majority and was able to pass any legislation, luckily this is not the case. This paper will argue that there are many limitations, which the power of the prime minister is subject too. Three of the main limitations, which the Prime Minister is affected by, are; first, federalism, second the governor general and third, the charter of rights and freedoms. I will support this argument by analyzing two different types of federalism and how they impact the power of the Prime Minister. Next I will look at three of the Governor Generals Powers and further analyze one of them. Last I will look at the impact of the charter from the larger participation the public can have in government, and how it increased the power of the courts.
The Prime Minister of Canada has an integral role within the Canadian parliament. In the political Parliamentary system of Canada, the Prime Minister wields the executive responsibility. He is accountable for an assortment of administrative, managerial, and supervisory decisions in effect across the country. The executive role is the branch of government that is generally responsible for creating laws, and enforcing the regulations to ensure these laws are observed.
The two policy options I will consider are the continuation of the current stimulus package or the introduction of a carbon tax. Both policies would be effective in achieving the President's aim of reducing negative effects on the environment and growing the economy, although through different mechanisms. There are other policy options such as cap and trade schemes, reliance on the market and government-sponsored research programs (Frank, Jennings & Bernanke 2009 pp 328-329) ...