{"id":267527,"date":"2020-09-03T03:53:40","date_gmt":"2020-09-03T07:53:40","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/?p=267527"},"modified":"2020-09-03T03:53:40","modified_gmt":"2020-09-03T07:53:40","slug":"40-years-later-a-look-back-at-the-pierre-trudeau-speech-that-defined-canada","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/2020\/09\/03\/40-years-later-a-look-back-at-the-pierre-trudeau-speech-that-defined-canada\/","title":{"rendered":"40 years later: A look back at the Pierre Trudeau speech that defined Canada"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"\"<\/a>
FILE: Pierre Trudeau speaking at a fundraising meeting for the Liberal Party at the Queen Elizabeth Hotel in Montr\u00e9al, Qu\u00e9bec. (Photo By Chiloa – Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0<\/a>)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

National party conventions<\/a> in the United States<\/a>, the Conservative leadership<\/a> convention in Canada, the recent prorogation<\/a> and a likely confidence vote in Parliament later this month<\/a> have caused renewed reflection on the relationship between political leadership and the effectiveness and legitimacy of public government.<\/p>\n

We judge governments by their leadership, whether it\u2019s a matter of integrity and inclusion or rational and intelligent choice of policies. It\u2019s also the values that leaders express, the programs they initiate and the administration they control that determine the population\u2019s satisfaction.<\/p>\n

A nation\u2019s international influence is also shaped by the quality of political leadership.<\/p>\n

Forty years ago, Canada experienced a clash of values among its political leaders so profound that it shaped our nation. It pitted two starkly different ideas of the national interest against each other.<\/p>\n

First ministers\u2019 meeting<\/h2>\n

During the second week of September 1980, Canada\u2019s political leaders \u2014 Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau and the provincial premiers \u2014 met in Ottawa to seek agreement on a reformed constitutional order<\/a>.<\/p>\n

This meeting followed the first Qu\u00e9bec referendum on separation<\/a> in which the provincial government sought popular approval for beginning a process to secede from Canada. Although Qu\u00e9bec did not receive the mandate it wished, that experience made clear that Canada\u2019s Constitution needed attention and revision.<\/p>\n

The meeting, broadcast nationally, began on the morning of Sept. 8, with statements from the 10 premiers. The statements had a common theme \u2014 Canada and its people would be better served if a long list of federal powers were handed to the provinces. This plan would bring about a Canadian state that functioned significantly differently.<\/p>\n

After the premiers had spoken, Trudeau delivered his remarks to the meeting and to the nation. It was a long, impassioned speech<\/a> setting out his agenda for meeting Canada\u2019s true constitutional needs. It was one of the most important political speeches in Canadian history.<\/p>\n

\u2018Vestige of colonialism\u2019<\/h2>\n

He began by asking premiers to agree to patriate Canada\u2019s constitution from the British Parliament and remove an embarrassing \u201cvestige of colonialism.\u201d<\/p>\n

He admitted that Canada was facing a constitutional crisis, but that the better response to this challenge was to urge the adoption of measures that would make Canada modern, effective and just. He recognized that premiers believed that giving the provinces greater powers over economic and social regulation would make Canada stronger, but he disagreed that Canada would become a more effective nation through weakening the national government.<\/p>\n

For the next 30 minutes he addressed Canadians, setting out his ideas on what was required for Canada to attain effective nationhood, meet the demands of a changing world, be respectful of Canada\u2019s diverse peoples, be efficient and serve Canadians\u2019 social needs better.<\/p>\n

He wanted to create respect for Canada so it could be more effective on the international stage. He reiterated his lifelong commitment to fundamental rights and freedoms and urged their constitutional protection. He rejected any concept of provincial citizenship rather than a single citizenship for all Canadians.<\/p>\n

There are two views of Canada, he said, speaking to Canadians through their television sets. The one, held by the premiers,<\/a> was that the national common good can best emerge through \u201ceach province acting with greater independence and greater ability to maximize its own self-interest.\u201d<\/p>\n

The other was that there is a national interest that, when pursued nationally, makes Canada \u201cmore than the sum of its parts, more than the sum of 10 provinces.\u201d Canadians want \u201cnational institutions and a national government capable of acting on behalf of all of them \u2026 with the power to speak for all Canadian people.\u201d<\/p>\n

He returned to the theme that the essence of strong nationhood is the ability to protect the fundamental rights of its people. Rights are sacred, he told the premiers, and \u201cnone of us here should have jurisdiction \u2026 to infringe those rights.\u201d He said a constitution \u201cexpresses the will of the people. It is the basic authority in this country [and] \u2026 it must say that and ensure that, in some way, our actions reflect that.\u201d<\/p>\n

Not successful<\/h2>\n

That September conference<\/a> ended in failure. Ten months later, after Trudeau\u2019s threat to proceed with constitutional change without provincial consent \u2014 followed by successful court challenges and, then, further negotiations \u2014 Trudeau and nine premiers, absent Qu\u00e9bec\u2019s Ren\u00e9 Levesque,<\/a> found a compromise for a new Canadian Constitution that embodied the ideals of diversity, equality and basic freedoms and rights.<\/p>\n

\n


\n
\nRead more:
\nThe history of the notwithstanding clause<\/a>
\n<\/strong>
\n<\/em><\/p>\n

\n

In the months that followed Trudeau\u2019s constitutional triumph<\/a>, his popularity dipped to levels rarely seen by sitting prime ministers. Nevertheless, his ideal of Canada, based on guaranteed bilingualism, multiculturalism and rights and freedoms, is now well-established and defines Canada\u2019s national identity.<\/p>\n

Pierre Trudeau\u2019s contribution to the remaking of Canada cannot be questioned. Throughout the 1980 to 1982 constitutional debates, and in his September 1980 speech, he reminded Canadians that their national achievement as a country is built every day on basic values.\"The<\/p>\n

Raymond B. Blake<\/a>, Professor of History and Associate Dean Research and Graduate Studies, Faculty of Arts, University of Regina<\/a><\/em> and John Donaldson Whyte<\/a>, Professor Emeritus, Politics and International Studies, University of Regina<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n

This article is republished from The Conversation<\/a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

National party conventions in the United States, the Conservative leadership convention in Canada, the recent prorogation and a likely confidence …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":44,"featured_media":218934,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[18,16],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-267527","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-news-ca","category-news","mauthors-raymond-b-blake-university-of-regina","mauthors-john-donaldson-whyte-university-of-regina","mauthors-the-conversation"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/267527","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/44"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=267527"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/267527\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":267529,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/267527\/revisions\/267529"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/218934"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=267527"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=267527"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=267527"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}