what is the difference between Lester Pearson and Pierre Trudeau in terms of how they governed Canada?

Answer 1

The first major difference is that Pearson never had a majority government, and Trudeau had several. This was integral to their histories.

Elected after the debacle of the Diefenbaker Conservatives, Lester Pearson required the support of either the New Democrats or the Creditistes to carry any motion. At any time they and the Conservatives could defeat the government and force an election.

Pearson, who was on the left side of the Liberal Party, was more in step with the mildly socialist NDP than with the Quebec Social Credit Party. The deal he struck with Tommy Douglas gave him that support in exchange for the Canada Health Act. Pearson was one of the key figures in the fight to create Israel at the UN in 1948, and won the Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts to contain the 1956 Suez Crisis, but his greatest contribution to Canada was simply agreeing with Tommy Douglas.

According to Judy LaMarsh, Pearson preferred the collegial approach to cabinet. He worked to get a consensus within cabinet before acting in public, and was a bit weak when pushed. She states that Pearson promised Finance Minister Walter Gordon his full support for a budget that attempted to arrest foreign purchase of Canadian businesses, and then caved in to pressure from Paul Hellyer and Paul Martin, Senior (two powerful members of his cabinet) and replaced Gordon instead.

LaMarsh said, "To know Mike Pearson a little was to love him. To know him better was very disappointing, because then you knew how truly gutless he was."

Pearson wanted to remain as prime Minister through Canada's centennial year in 1967, and stepped down the following summer. He hand picked Pierre Trudeau as his successor because he felt that Hellyer and Martin would move the government to the right, but that Trudeau would continue his work. Trudeau won a close convention fight, shortly afterwards carried a General Election with a huge majority.

Since he had a majority he did not need to work closely with the opposition parties. Trudeau could afford to act unilaterally, because he had the votes in the Commons. This led to more legislation than before, but less consultation. He was justly accused of arrogance.

While Pearson was collegial within cabinet, and had to contend with powerful influences like John Turner, Paul Winter, LaMarsh, Gordon, Hellyer and Martin, Trudeau was more authoritative. Few if any of the above were in his cabinet, which did what it was told. Trudeau was the boss.

Neither man was perfect, but they were both giants in their fashion. Pearson built the framework Trudeau continued, and their long tenure did more to shape today's Canada than today's Canadians realize.

Answer 2

Lester Pearson introduced universal health care, student loans, the Canada Pension Plan and Canada's flag. During his tenure, Prime Minister Pearson also convened the Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism. With these accomplishments, together with his groundbreaking work at the United Nations, and in international diplomacy, Pearson can safely be regarded as one of the most influential Canadians of the twentieth century.

Pierre Trudeau espoused participatory democracy as a means of making Canada a "Just Society." He defended vigorously the newly implemented universal health care and regional development programs as means of making society more just.

Answer 3

hi Bobby, i'm hoping you already know that immigration is at the instant closed by way of huge backlog of purposes that would desire to be processed. which ability your genuine subject for the 2d isn't what style of social transformations exist between the US and Canada yet no rely in case you will even qualify to stay with to immigrate as quickly as issues re-open. regulation is an fantastically extensive subject rely and Yahoo!solutions merely isn't the region to do your question any justice (pun partly meant). For the checklist, nevertheless, Canadians and individuals are not too distinctive in some factors. we've our honest share of religious zealots. weight problems is a great project right here, too and we've extra desirable than sufficient staunch capitalists who look to think of that having issues is extra considerable than the rest interior the international. So, formerly you %. your bags and bypass working off to Vancouver and questioning you are able to stay, you will choose to take the subsequent year or 2 to enhance your skills, guidance and paintings journey formerly you think approximately making use of to immigrate. Canada isn't an trouble-free u . s . a . to immigrate to. Oh, and formerly absolutely everyone else says it, wellness care isn't unfastened in Canada. We pay extreme taxes to conceal trouble-free wellness care expenditures so because it incredibly is a definite distinction ultimate there.