Brian Mulroney | prime minister of Canada | Britannica.com prime minister of Canada Alternative Title: Martin Brian Mulroney Brian Mulroney Brian Mulroney, in full Martin Brian Mulroney (born March 20, 1939, Baie-Comeau , Quebec , Canada), Canadian politician, leader of the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada (1983–93), and prime minister of Canada from 1984 to 1993. Brian Mulroney, 1993. Rick Friedman/Black Star Born the son of an electrician in a paper-and-pulp town northeast of Quebec city, Mulroney grew up bilingual in English and French and received a B.A. (1959) from Saint Francis Xavier University, Antigonish, Nova Scotia , and a law degree (1962) from Laval University , Quebec city. In 1965 he began practicing law in Montreal , becoming a labour specialist. In 1974 he gained local celebrity as a member of the Cliche Commission investigating crime in Quebec’s construction industry.

Always active in politics, he made a bid in 1976 for the leadership of the Progressive Conservatives but lost to Joe Clark . In 1977 he was chosen president of the Iron Ore Co. of Canada. When Mulroney won election as leader of the Progressive Conservative Party at its convention in June 1983, he had never run for or been elected to public office, but he offered the public a new face from French-speaking Quebec, where the Tories had traditionally been weak. He became prime minister in 1984 in a landslide victory of the Progressive Conservatives over the Liberals and was reelected in 1988. As prime minister, Mulroney sought closer cooperation with the United States on such bilateral issues as trade policies and measures to deal with acid rain in North America . During the early years of his administration Canada’s economic growth was strong, job creation was high, and inflation was kept under control. His government pursued deregulation of key industries and reform of the tax structure, though a steep federal tax on goods and services introduced in 1991 was widely unpopular.

Mulroney’s political success was in part forged by his creation of what turned out to be a short-term coalition of Quebec nationalists and western conservatives, and his terms were marked by his continuing efforts to unify the country while recognizing Quebec’s status as a “distinct society.” In 1987 he negotiated the Meech Lake accord on constitutional revision, but he was unable to obtain ratification from all 10 provinces before the deadline expired in 1990. A second attempt resulted in the Charlottetown accord of 1992; these were accepted by all the provincial premiers but were defeated in a popular referendum later that year. Mulroney negotiated the North American Free Trade Agreement with U.S. Pres. George Bush and Mexican Pres. Carlos Salinas de Gortari ; the three reached a preliminary agreement in August 1992, and it was signed on December 17. Early in 1993 Mulroney announced his retirement from politics; he was succeeded as party leader and prime minister by Kim Campbell that June. (From left to right, standing) Mexican Pres. Carlos Salinas de Gortari, U.S. Pres. George H.W.

… Dirck Halstead—Time Life Pictures/Getty Images Britannica Stories Brian Mulroney - Prime Minister of Canada 1984 to 1993 Updated: 12/11/2013 About Brian Mulroney Brian Mulroney believed that the Progressive Conservatives must win Quebec to win the country and proved it by coming to power in 1984 with the largest majority government in Canadian history. By the time Mulroney retired as Prime Minister of Canada in 1993, his personal popularity was lower than that of any other Prime Minister in Canadian history, and the Progressive Conservative Party was faced with a struggle to maintain its existence. One goal Brian Mulroney had as Prime Minister of Canada was to bring Quebec into the Canadian constitution, and he came close. In the end, both the Meech Lake Accord in 1987 and the Charlottetown Accord in 1992 were defeated, and Canadians had grown tired of constitutional wrangling.

Prime Minister of Canada Charlevoix 1988-93 Political Career of Brian Mulroney In his first bid for the leadership of the Progressive Conservative Party Brian Mulroney was defeated by Joe Clark in 1976. Brian Mulroney was elected Leader of the Progressive Conservative Party in 1983. He won a seat in the House of Commons later in 1983. Brian Mulroney was Leader of the Opposition from 1983 to 1984. In the general election of 1984 Brian Mulroney led the Progressive Conservatives to the largest majority in Canadian history. Brian Mulroney was sworn in as Prime Minister in 1984. The Progressive Conservatives won a second majority government in 1988 campaigning for free trade with the United States. Brian Mulroney resigned in 1993 and returned to Montreal to practice law. Kim Campbell became the next prime minister of Canada.

The Prime Ministers of Canada - Brian Mulroney Issues TRANSCRIPT: Brian Mulroney's Conservatives promised to make Canada "open for business again." They vowed to dismantle Liberal policies which they argued discouraged foreign investment, to improve relations with the provinces, to cut government spending, and to restore economic confidence. They carried out some of this program, though they could never slash government spending and, in fact, ran up 300 billion dollars of new debt. Mulroney came to believe that free trade with the US was vital in a world that seemed destined to be dominated by regional economic blocs and in order to protect Canada from harsh US trading policies. The negotiation of the agreement was hard, and Canada had to compromise often. Mulroney's critics said that he had failed to get the assured access to the US market he promised. Some said it marked the beginning of the end of Canadian sovereignty and identity. If it was a revolution, the nature of that revolution remained unclear. Narrated by Mary Lou Finlay TRANSCRIPT: During the 1984 election, Mulroney promised Québeckers that he would produce a new constitutional arrangement that Quï¿½bec could endorse.

In 1987, at the government retreat of Meech Lake near Ottawa, Mulroney and the ten provincial premiers thought they had reached agreement. It would recognize Quï¿½bec as a distinct society, give each province a veto over constitutional change, and transfer certain powers to the provinces. But what Mulroney hoped would be the triumph of his career turned into a political nightmare as Canadian opinion gradually turned against Meech Lake. The Accord went down to humiliating defeat in 1990, embarrassing the prime minister and angering Quï¿½bec. A second attempt at a broader constitutional agreement led to the Charlottetown Accord of 1992. This time, the politicians knew that they would have to win approval from the voters, but the Accord was decisively rejected by Canadians. The traditional Canadian "unity" issue, harmonizing English and French, had taken on several new dimensions as Canada had become a much more pluralistic, complex society. Narrated by Mary Lou Finlay TRANSCRIPT: Mulroney was probably the first prime minister of Canada who did not see the United States as a threat to Canadian nationhood.

At the "Shamrock Summit" of 1985 in Quï¿½bec City, Brian and Mila Mulroney joined US president Ronald Reagan and his wife Nancy in singing "When Irish Eyes are Smiling." It was meant to symbolize a new era of Canadian-American harmony after years of Liberal prickliness. Polls taken during the 1984 election showed that Canadians wanted Mulroney to achieve that harmony. But public opinion is fickle, and many Canadians were soon registering their opposition to Mulroney's pro-Americanism, which was all too easily interpreted as subservient or worse. Cruel cartoons depicted Mulroney as an American stooge. Mulroney did work hard to make the country a good world citizen: carrying on the peacekeeping tradition, urging international cooperation, fighting apartheid in South Africa, even sending a token force to the Gulf War in 1991. He became a respected international figure, one probably more at ease abroad than at home, where his deep personal unpopularity soured his government's policies and prospects. Narrated by Mary Lou Finlay Brian Mulroney | Uncyclopedia | Fandom powered by Wikia “Oh, Brian was great.

Those Canadians just couldn't understand government by irony.” ~ Oscar Wilde on Brian Mulroney “The power was nice, but frankly, I could have used more power.” ~ Brian Mulroney on being Prime Minister “I have decided that instead of GST, the title of the new tax will be the Cooperate-Or-Nobody-Gets-Hurt Tax of Conservative Satanism...” ~ Brian Mulroney on being Prime Minister Brian "DickChin" Mulroney , aka Lyin' Brian, Chinocchio, Byron Muldoon, Ben, The Right Honourable Big Chin, That God Damned Sleaze Bag, and, That SOB Who created GST, best known for being the father of Ben Mulroney , was also the Prime Minister of Canada for 8 years. It seemed like 50, but it really was only 8. Brian Mulroney [ show ] edit The Phantom Menance Mulroney claimed, and continues to claim, a human birth despite obvious alien physical features, and the absence of telltale signs of human personality such as warmth and compassion. Most experts now believe he is the biological "son" of Margaret Thatcher and Richard Nixon , created during a secret experiment in 1983.

Naturally, he entered into lawyering —most evil of the dark arts—and later became leader of the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada . Nobody thought of it much then, since everyone suspected that the PC's were the spawn of Satan himself. But even Satan had to admit "My bad" at the horror that was unleashed on an unsuspecting nation. edit Reign of Terror Mulroney raised taxes, cut services, increased the national deficit, plunged the country into economic chaos, signed away the country's independance, blew two constitutional accords, and lied. Then, on his second day in office, he appointed all his cronies to every government position there was, and made up a few new ones for good measure. By day three, even the mild mannered Canadians had had enough, and the windows of the Legislature Building were smashed in by an angry mob armed brandishing hockey sticks. Mulroney was quite taken aback. When an old woman said to him, "You're a liar, Charlie Brown," Mulroney, ever the clever bastard, responded by conscripting her into the Canadian Armed Forces. "Stop your complaining!

At least I'm not Ronald Reagan !" Luckily for him, his only elections were in 1984 and 1988, and his only opposition was John Turner (whose entire personality can be summarized by the fact that his middle name was Napier), and Ed Broadbent (Leader of the only party Canadians hate more than the Liberals and Conservatives). Still, like black plague and re-runs of Simon & Schuster, all evil disappears eventually. After a grassroots campaign began plans to send a voter delegation to Ottawa with rifles and plans to separate Brian's bigger-then-Leno chin from his exorbiantly overpriced Italian suit, Mulroney stepped down. He gave control of what was left of the country to Kim Campbell , appointing her to ensure he would only go down as the second-worst Prime Minister of all time. Mulroney's ultimately devious plot to discredit the female gender succeded. He trashed the government, country and his political party, resigned and left the mess to Kim Campbell.

As he described, "All in a day's work." Later, in 1994, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police raided Mulroney's home and made the shocking discovery that he was very closely associated with the asshole, Michael Jackson, through his political career. Upon further investigation, they also discovered that Mulroney and MJ scored crack off of Ronald Reagan in 1987 and while taking it, molested small children. It was also discovered through Mulroney's personal ZIP disk's that he soon thereafter sent the children to work for the North American Free Trade Agreements secret slave sector. edit After The Fall "I only destroyed Canada thisssssss much!" After leaving office, Mulroney escaped the burning wreckage of his policies with the many millions he stole. He went underground, once more become an active lawyer and holding down the fort in Westmount . He has spent much of the passing years trying to recover from his completely trashed reputation. His reputation for being an asshole has lost some of its esteem as the leader of Canada eventually became Stephen Harper. He raises his 4 children: War, Famine, Death and Pestilence.

All four visit the many towns and cities around Canada (mainly the ones where the permiers who voted down the Meech Lake and Charlottetown Accords reside) and bring what their names are upon the unsuspecting people. He has been admitted into hospital many times for broken ribs and poisoning caused by disgruntled Canadians against heavy personal purchase taxation. edit Legacy While many " academic " sources try to find good things he did (for balance purposes) Mulroney's only real accomplishment was the successful promotion of Canadian Unity. The nation was united in that everyone hated his guts and just wanted to shoot him. Most younger Canadians know Mr. Mulroney as either: That Person Mom and Dad swear about whenever they have to pay the GST, or, As Canadian Idol host Ben Mulroney's Dad. ed Note: His son Ben's chin is just as big as his fathers, and a number of major Canadian churches hold regular vigils, praying he doesn't go into politics. As Prime Minister, Mulroney left quite a legacy. His historic changes in government policy and the way Canada worked included: Clean, sanitary bathrooms for the Progressive Conservatives and outhouses for the Liberals and NDP. The recognition of Manitoba as an actual province.

Being the first and only prime minister to cut the ribbon to open the Toronto SkyDome (the one that leaks). A precedent that every future prime minister must bend down and kiss the ass of the President of the United States. Being that guy who implemented the Meech Lake Accord, some act to make Quebec more powerful yet whiny than it already is, yet nobody knows what it's about. Mulroney was widely agreed by historians to be the worst Prime Minister ever. Then Jean Chretien became Prime Minister and he didn't seem so bad anymore. When Paul Martin became Prime Minister, he started to look very good indeed. When Stephen Harper became Prime Minister, there were riots in the streets demanding Mulroney's return, except for in Alberta and Kandahar , Saskatchewan , those were the only parts of the country with Harper supporters. blaaa blaa edit Daughter/Son Mulroney left office when the media got wind that his daughter Benita was having sexual reassignment surgery on the taxpayers tab. The result was one of the ugliest men in the world Ben "Dover" Mulroney. Not wanting to be wasteful the Mulroney family saved Benita's breast tissue for implantation into Mila. Brian reportedly said ...

'Now that is more than a handful'. edit Where Are They Now?™ In 2005, Mulroney accidentally revealed his secret plans to Peter C. Newman , author of infamous and unauthorized biography Brian Mulroney is a Stupid, Arrogant Jackass and Other Truths. Murloney responded to the revelation that he has a habit for Tarantino-level profanity by telling Newman " Go fuck yourself ." Preceded by: Mulroney says Energy East 'a nation-building opportunity' for Trudeau Dario Balca, CTVNews.ca Published Sunday, April 24, 2016 10:39AM EDT Former prime minister Brian Mulroney says pipeline development is an opportunity for Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to bring Canadians together by creating jobs across the country. “It’s a big challenge and there’s nothing guaranteed, but that’s what leadership is all about,” the former PM told CTV’s Question Period.

Mulroney said that while Trudeau isn’t to blame for what he calls “the last 15 years of inaction” regarding pipelines, it is up to him to bring Aboriginal, environmental and provincial stakeholders into agreement “to proceed with a nation-building exercise of moving our vast natural resources to the west and east coasts to provide employment and wealth for all Canadians.” So far, the Trudeau government has remained undecided on its support for expanded oil production and future pipelines. On Friday, Canada joined some 175 countries in signing the Paris Agreement— a non-binding United Nations accord setting ambitious climate change reduction targets. But the prime minster said that does not mean abandoning pipeline projects in Canada. In January, Natural Resources Minister Jim Carr and Environment Minister Catherine McKenna said the government would take more time to study the environmental effects of the Energy East and Trans Mountain pipelines before approving either project.

But Mulroney said properly expanding Canada’s oil production would be “a big-ticket item going right into the history book.” He added that TransCanada’s Energy East pipeline is the place to start, saying the project “seems to be most advanced for the moment.” That pipeline would bring 1.1 million barrels of bitumen a day from Alberta and Saskatchewan to Quebec and New Brunswick for shipping to overseas trade partners. Environmentalists say the project would increase Canada's greenhouse gas emissions, preventing the country from meeting its climate change goals. But proponents say expanding Alberta's oil sands is necessary for Canada to grow its wealth before the country can transition to a lower-carbon economy. “We cannot keep 174 billion barrels of oil in Alberta locked in the land and do nothing about it,” Mulroney said. “This is wealth that was God-given to Canada.” So far, the pipeline has faced its most significant opposition in Quebec. In March, a Quebec Superior Court denied an environmental law group’s request for an injunction against Energy East, folding those legal proceedings into a similar court action launched by the provincial government. On Friday, TransCanada heeded the Quebec’s government request of more information regarding environment risks of Energy East.

Under Quebec’s Environment Quality Act, TransCanada will have to produce a study on the impact of the project by June 6. The Kinder Morgan pipeline, which would connect the Alberta oilsands to the suburbs of Vancouver, is pending federal approval while the Northern Gateway pipeline, which would carry oil further north through British Columbia, is facing many regulatory hurdles. With files from CTV’s Question Period and The Canadian Press Related Stories Don Martin talks to people and players who dominate the political scene. Facebook Former PM Brian Mulroney appeals for fearless leadership on resource agenda You are using an older browser version. Please use a supported version for the best MSN experience. Former PM Brian Mulroney appeals for fearless leadership on resource agenda Canadian Press 2014-04-09 Jennifer Ditchburn, The Canadian Press OTTAWA - Brian Mulroney says the country needs risk-taking leadership to get domestic oil and gas moving overseas, as well as a plan to work co-operatively and bring Canadians onside. The former Tory prime minister's speech Tuesday, organized by the progressive think-tank Canada 2020, comes as major pipeline projects languish in limbo.

They have been stymied largely by opposition from First Nations, environmentalists and ordinary Canadians concerned with the impact on their communities. "Prime ministers are not chosen to seek popularity. They are chosen to provide leadership," Mulroney told a rapt crowd that included politicians of all stripes. "Leadership is the process, not only of foreseeing the need for change, but of making the case for change. Leadership does not consist of imposing unpopular ideas on the public but of making unpopular ideas acceptable to the nation." Stephen Harper's Conservative government has faced criticism for not doing enough to create consensus and allay environmental concerns at home and in Washington. Environmentalists have been referred to as "radical groups," and the official Opposition as "treacherous" and "clowns." Mulroney pointedly urged a more collaborative approach to resource development, saying there needs to be agreement of all the players including the First Nations, the provinces and environmental groups. "Canada is a vibrant federation. We are not a unitary state," Mulroney said.

"The Government of Canada cannot act unilaterally to resolve this matter." Mulroney noted the need for Canada and the United States to work collaboratively on both energy security and the environment, to "set a new gold standard on environmental performance." "I can envisage a new North American Accord on Carbon Emissions, one that invokes the spirit of what we did successfully together to combat acid rain...and to clean up the Great Lakes, huge environmental achievements," said Mulroney, noting he had once been honoured as the greenest prime minister in history. Earlier in the day, Washington's new ambassador to Canada, Bruce Heyman, also called for more collaboration on the environment. "Today you can be pro-economy and pro-energy and considerate of the environment," Heyman told reporters. Mulroney addressed Heyman directly in his speech at one point, telling him that Canada fully expects the United States approve the Keystone XL pipeline, and live up to its obligations under NAFTA. "I know you're not going to approve it sir, but when you're talking to President Obama, send him my love," Mulroney said wryly.

Mulroney is suggesting that the government form a Resource Development Office drawing expertise from across the country, and led by a high-profile person with the "absolute confidence and persistent attention of the prime minister." He likened such a body to the Trade Negotiations Office that his government formed to smooth the free-trade talks with the U.S. The government already has a Major Projects Management Office, which is supposed to see resource projects to fruition. Mulroney pointed to the lack of a "concrete action plan and an enhanced spirit of partnership" in the Ring of Fire mining project in northern Ontario. Plans to develop the massive chromite deposit are on ice for now as First Nations, the provincial government and the federal government struggle to figure out how to develop the region, who should pay for infrastructure and how the benefits of the resource should be shared. Mulroney's speech drew a wide variety of politicians. High-profile members of the federal cabinet in attendance included Defence Minister Peter MacKay, Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird and Immigration Minister Chris Alexander. The relationship between Harper and Mulroney has hit some serious rough patches over the years. In 2007, Harper called for a probe of Mulroney's dealings with shady German businessman Karlheinz Schreiber.

The inquiry eventually found that Mulroney had acted in an inappropriate way when he accepted cash-stuffed envelopes from Schreiber to do internal lobbying after he left office. Mulroney said it was an error in judgment. At one point in 2009, figures around Harper even tried to suggest Mulroney was no longer a party member — a move that provoked a backlash inside the caucus where Mulroney still has his fans. The former prime minister complimented the Harper government a handful of times, most notably on its approach to "the lawless takeover of Crimea" by Russia. But Mulroney struck a largely non-partisan tone, and spoke about how governments of different stripes have acted in the national interest and continued the policy work of their predecessors. He pointed to the presence in the room of Green party Leader Elizabeth May, who had once worked for him, and also to former NDP leader Ed Broadbent.

"The essential continuity of governments from Mulroney through Chretien and Martin to Harper explains a great deal of what is right about Canada today." Speech: Brian Mulroney on “The Next Big Thing” for Canada - Canada 2020 Speech: Brian Mulroney on “The Next Big Thing” for Canada Notes for an address at Canada 2020 by the Rt. Hon. Brian Mulroney by Rt. Hon. Brian Mulroney. Posted April 9, 2014 Thank you, John, for your most generous remarks. Let me also congratulate you and your Government for the forthright position you are taking on the lawless takeover of Crimea. The principles and values we cherish in Canada should be the constant rudder for actions we take on foreign policy. History teaches us eloquently what happens when violations of international law and national sovereignty are ignored in the interest of expediency. As the first G7 country to recognize the newly independent Ukraine in 1991, Canada should be in the vanguard of those safe-guarding its fundamental freedoms and staunchly supporting those seeking to reinforce that independence. Your invitation tonight presents a great challenge : What is “the next big thing” for Canada?

In Prime Minister Pearson’s time, the answer might have been the Canadian Flag, the Auto Pact and the creation of the Canada Pension Plan. Prime Minister Trudeau will always be known for the Charter for Rights and Freedoms and Patriation. My terms in office will probably be remembered for the Canada-U.S. Free Trade Agreement, and NAFTA and the GST, initiatives that – like those of my predecessors – transformed Canada. But these big measures could not have been contrived. There had to have been a need for them, so as to ensure that Canada emerged from those great debates and elections as a more sovereign, independent and prosperous nation. This is a new world – different from that of Mssrs. Pearson, Trudeau or myself – complex, and challenging, but one with enormous promise for Canada. As we look to the future, Canada has many reasons for optimism. At the last G-8 our government stood tall, a beacon of fiscal rectitude in a turbulent world with one of, if not the strongest economies in the industrialized world by most objective criteria. How did this happen? Well, it did not happen overnight nor under one government or one political party.

It happened because, for the better part of almost thirty years, four governments of different political stripes followed similar economic policies that generated stable economic growth, solid job creation, sensible public financing and a more confident national fabric. Foundational initiatives by my government such as the Canada – U.S. FTA and NAFTA, along with a wave of privatizations, extensive deregulation, historic tax reform and a low inflation policy dramatically reduced program spending while trimming the deficit, laid the basis for growth and enabled Canada to compete vigorously in a rapidly globalizing world. Jean Chrétien had very important decisions to make when he formed the government in 1993. He could have repudiated our trade agreements and tax reform because he had campaigned vigorously against each. Instead, Mr. Chrétien put campaign rhetoric aside and sustained both the trade and tax initiatives as pillars of record prosperity for Canada. To his credit, Mr. Chrétien, aided by Finance Minister Martin, used the great economic benefits from free trade and the proceeds of the GST to eliminate the deficit over time and begin the process of paying down the debt in an orderly fashion.

By acting as he did, while slashing government spending and making large investments in university research and significant advances in R&D generally and searching out new avenues for international trade, Mr. Chrétien ensured the continuity of policies that were neither Tory nor Grit, Liberal nor Conservative. They were Canadian, designed to serve our national interest and strengthen our national sovereignty. This was followed by important measures by the Martin Government and by the present Harper Government with their sound and impressive management of the economy, along with beneficial changes to corporate and personal taxes introduced by Finance Minister Flaherty. All of which strengthened our public finances and allowed us to withstand better than most the ravages of the recent economic crisis. Prime Ministers are not perfect. Mistakes are made. I certainly made my share. But it was this continuum of sensible and effective policies under four different governments led by Prime Ministers of different political stripes – avoiding the erratic policy lurches of the past – that changed Canadian attitudes and provided the solid economic foundation on which Prime Minister Harper was able to stand when he welcomed world leaders to Canada a few years ago. The essential continuity of governments from Mulroney through Chretien and Martin to Harper explains a great deal of what is right about Canada today.

No one should underestimate the value of this continuity. Serious public policy can only be conceived and practised over decades – not four-year terms. We have had the great good fortune to see governments of different stripes “pass and accept the torch” over the past 30 years, rather than stop, and then try to start a new game based on discredited ideologies or personal agendas. Only a prophet, or a fool, would predict the future. The management guru Peter Drucker once said “the best way to predict the future is to create it.” We live in a world where the events of the moment – whether in Crimea or Syria or Afghanistan – signal unrelenting pressures of instability, where the U.S. inclination and capacity to assert global leadership is on the wane and where the principles of multilateralism so helpful for the last half of the last century are now under assault. It is easy to be pessimistic, easier still to want to turn inwards. It is a world that, as Ian Bremmer describes, will be increasingly “every nation for itself”. National interests will be paramount.

The good news is that Canada is better positioned than many to take advantage of the fluid state of global affairs, provided – and this is a big if – we can get our act together to accentuate our strengths – notably our resource base and our energy capabilities in particular – to deliver prosperity and employment for Canadians for decades to come. And that is the big idea I want to discuss with you tonight. We have enormous potential – the third largest supply of crude oil in the world – 174 billion barrels – much of which lie in the oil sands. More importantly, what we have in Canada represents more than half of the global oil reserves that are open to the private sector for development. Can there be any better magnet for investors? Just think of this as well: Canada ranks first in the world in potash and titanium, second in uranium, third in natural gas and aluminum, fourth in diamonds and fifth in nickel. We are also a significant source for iron ore. We are the world’s third largest producer of hydroelectricity and have the potential to more than double our current capacity. And it is important to recognize that the natural resource sector generates a disproportionate share of Canada’s wealth.

In 2011, this sector directly accounted for 15 per cent of nominal gross domestic product (GDP) and nearly 800,000 jobs. An additional 800,000 jobs in other sectors were supported by the purchase of goods and services by the resource sector. All of which is to say is that many of you and I would likely be out of a job were it not for the abundance of natural resources in Canada. Bear in mind, too, that extractive industries are also some of the most innovative and productive sectors of the economy, now being driven by space age technology and computers. A study by the prestigious US-based RAND corporation, for example, found that Canadian mining companies were far more productive and innovative than even their US counterparts. The key reason for higher levels of productivity in Canada versus the US had to do with the focus of Canadian mining companies on “breakthrough” as opposed to “incremental” innovations and a much higher tolerance for risk. Most Canadians are unaware that fracking and horizontal drilling technology for extracting non-conventional oil and gas reserves, which have revolutionized this sector worldwide and dramatically changed the United States’ own energy fortunes, were pioneered in Canada.

However, we cannot rest on our laurels. Global competition to sell resources in the world market is intensifying as low cost producers in Africa, Central Asia, and elsewhere emerge on the world stage. Demand is also shifting to non-OECD countries, especially in sectors like energy. The Chinese and other offtakers in emerging markets also want product at the highest quality and the lowest price. That is one reason, for example, why Kazakhstan today is now the number one producer of uranium and we have fallen into second place with Australia, our traditional competitor, in third. It is one thing to have an idea or a bold objective, quite another to deliver. As Thomas Edison once observed “vision without execution is hallucination” Northern Ontario’s “Ring of Fire” is a classic example of our potential and our problem. It has been described as “the most promising mining opportunity in Canada in a century”. And yet, despite its unparalleled potential, the project has been hamstrung for years by uncertainties about aboriginal concerns, by infrastructure limitations and environmental challenges. If properly developed, significant deposits of copper, zinc, nickel, platinum, vanadium and gold could contribute more than $25 billion in economic activity and almost $ 7 billion in government revenues.

What is desperately needed is a concrete action plan and an enhanced spirit of partnership to bring that promise to life. The “Ring of Fire is in a very real sense a microcosm of our broader challenge. The biggest challenge is uncertainty. The resource sector has hugely capital intensive projects with a long life. But these projects cannot go forward if they become captives of seemingly endless processes and reviews. Public policy has a critical role to play in reducing some of that uncertainty and promoting the Canadian resource sector in emerging markets. We cannot allow our regulatory regime to be gamed by those who simply want to disrupt any form of development. There are clear lessons from history on this tendency. We need sensible environmental policies, of course, because Canadians are justifiably proud of our pristine environment. My government earned plaudits for our action on the environment, which was an important priority for us in all of our initiatives. I was greatly honored to have been voted Canada’s Greenest Prime Minister in history, by leading environmental groups. But we were always conscious of the need for balance between sustainability and growth. Trade agreements are vital to access and to prosperity and I commend the government for its success on the negotiating front but you cannot sell what you cannot ship.

Nor can you do it without the investments, the talent and a shared commitment from all who would be affected. Put simply, we cannot market our resources globally if we do not have the infrastructure – political and industrial – to deliver them to market. That is precisely why we need a strong national commitment to build the infrastructure that will enable us to bring our abundance of natural resources – our most vital comparative advantage – to global markets, notably to the dynamic Asian economies where much of global growth is occurring. We need pipelines to carry our crude oil to our west and east coasts. And we definitely need to see the Keystone XL pipeline approved. A negative verdict by the U.S. government would contravene a major tenet of NAFTA under which the U.S. was guaranteed unfettered supply in exchange for unfettered access by Canadian exporters to its market. We also need urgently to quicken the pace to build pipelines and refining facilities on the west coast enabling us to ship LNG to markets that need supply. Australia and the US are already beating us to the punch. The former is experiencing a surge in LNG exports boosted by rising demand and prices in Asia.

Forecasts show that Australia’s gas output will jump to about 100 million metric tons by 2018, or about as much as Japan and Taiwan together consume in a single year. The US is also seizing opportunity in the Asia market with big LNG importers such as Korea Gas and Japan’s Osaka Gas signing long-term agreements with US terminals. We have to understand that, while demand for much of what we have is strong, we operate in a highly competitive global market. We cannot sit back, contemplating our collective navel and expect customers to knock on our door. We have to demonstrate convincingly that we are capable of doing what is required to earn their confidence that we are a reliable, efficient source of supply. (Regrettably, that is not the reputation we have today.) The U.S. will continue to be our most important market but one lesson we have learned from the hassle over Keystone is that we cannot rely exclusively on the U.S. for any export. Just imagine though, a positive verdict on Keystone that could be a catalyst for broader cooperation on energy between Canada and the U.S.

If we decide first to get our own house in order, we could engage the Americans from a position of strength and relevance, making energy independence in North America a near term reality and generating significant capacity for influence in world affairs. The biggest beneficiaries would be our two economies. We both need energy to support industrial expansion. While we will be competitors in some global markets that should not preclude deeper integration. Our combined energy potential could actually be harnessed to help change the geopolitical dynamic in Europe, Asia and the Middle East . We have an abundance of resources that is second to none. We have the capacity for technological innovation that will enable us to ensure both energy security and environmental responsibility. I can envisage a new North American Accord on Carbon Emissions, one that invokes the spirit of what we did successfully together to combat acid rain and to clean up the Great Lakes, huge environmental achievements. We could agree on identical goals but use prescriptions for carbon reductions that recognize the distinct nature of our respective resource assets and do not discriminate unfairly against one another with standards that are essentially protectionism dressed up in an environmental cloak.

Our mutual objective should be to establish the world’s most efficient and reliable infrastructure for the production and transmission of all forms of energy while we set a new gold standard on environmental performance. Ramping up LNG exports can facilitate a reduction in the number of coal-fired plants in China and Asia – unquestionably the major menace today in terms of carbon emissions. As a welcome bonus, increased supplies of natural gas in North America may also help wean the U.S. off its heavy reliance on coal for power. North America working together as a dynamic, coherent player would be much stronger engaging with China and the rest of the world. Energy sufficiency gives us greater independence to chart our own course and can be a source of real leverage with others. Standing together, North America can lead the world, but only with vision and real leadership from the top. Never forget that, to get attention in Washington, you need to be relevant to America’s own agenda – domestic and global. Canada’s best asset and our best leverage in Washington should be our energy resources, not just because of what it can contribute to the U.S.’ economic prospects but also because of the heft it can give us with America’s global challenges and our own.

As with any major bilateral initiative, Canada will have to do its homework thoroughly and then take the lead – as we did with the FTA and the Acid Rain Accord. The indispensable ingredient for success will be mutual respect and firm resolve at the top but it starts with a clear vision of what can be done. The question is not “why” but rather “why not”? As with free trade, this will not in any way diminish Canadian sovereignty. It will only increase Canadian prosperity. Wayne Gretzky’s exceptional hockey talent was knowing where the puck was going to be, not where it was. We should follow the Gretzky technique with a trade diversification strategy that focuses like a laser on where the future growth will be, especially in Asia and also here in our own hemisphere, in Latin America. By 2035 China’s energy consumption is expected to rise 60% surpassing that of the U.S. In India, demand will more than double. In the next four years alone the GDP of Asia is estimated to grow from $22 trillion to almost $ 29 trillion or 32%. The National Intelligence Council of the U.S.

predicts that by 2030 “Asia will have surpassed North America and Europe combined in terms of global power based on GDP, population size, military power and technology investment.” We ignore that trend at our peril. There are days frankly when we seem to be like the fellow who was born on third base and thinks he hit a triple. We take too much of what we have for granted believing mistakenly that our vast resources will generate prosperity just by being there. There will be no powerful explosion of development in our entire energy sector unless there is agreement among the major players and interests. And who are they? The affected provinces that control the resources The stewards of our environment Without their active involvement and enthusiastic cooperation, our natural resources will remain in the ground. Dead as a doornail. Canada is a vibrant federation. We are not a unitary state. The Government of Canada cannot act unilaterally to resolve this matter. The Federal Government must urgently initiate avenues of cooperation with all stakeholders to ensure that we move forward in the national interest.

A vigorous national commitment to develop the resources and build the necessary infrastructure must be complemented by three essential undertakings: 1) a principled partnership with First Nations and the provinces that moves beyond grievances from the past to opportunities for the future; 2) a realistic plan, using new technologies first and foremost, to reduce carbon emissions. I say “realistic” deliberately because, while Canada clearly can and should do more, we are a relatively small part of the global problem. We can and should, however, contribute commensurate with our share; and 3) a coherent plan to ensure that we are training people to harness the potential of our resource base. The Canada Job Grant program devised and led by Minister Jason Kenney is one very important step in that direction. But our education and training systems more generally need a major overhaul if we expect to have people with the right skills to exploit the huge potential of our resource rich economy. So how would we move the ball forward on a project of this magnitude?

When faced with a similar challenge on the launch of Free Trade negotiations almost three decades ago, my government recognized that it required a unique organizational structure, a genuine partnership with the provinces and the private sector and persistent political oversight by the Prime Minister himself, aimed at a clear objective. For that purpose, we created a Trade Negotiations Office in Ottawa, primarily to command support and cut through roadblocks from individual departments and to consult systematically with the provinces. We formed a similarly special structure for dialogue with stakeholders from all relevant sectors. The TNO was led by a very brilliant and determined Simon Reisman, included many of the ‘best and brightest’ from Ottawa and reported regularly to a special cabinet committee which I chaired as Prime Minister of Canada. It worked. The blend is what shaped success in those transformative negotiations and, also helped us implement the agreement. And, what happened? The statistics alone speak to the success of the FTA. Trade volumes more than tripled in less than twenty years – from $235 Billion to $743 Billion. Trade exploded into the largest bilateral exchanges between any 2 countries in the history of the world.

In the two hours or so that we will be together this evening, more than $200 million in goods and services will be exchanged by Canada and the U.S. That is more than $1 million every minute of every hour of every day. Almost $2 billion in total, each and every day of every week of every month of every year. Since implementation of the Free Trade Agreement, Canada’s GDP has more than doubled to $1.8 trillion, and the Canadian economy has created 4.6 million new jobs. As successful as free trade has been, I take the most satisfaction from the changed mindset of Canadians. We’re a much more confident, outward-looking people. We know that if we can compete successfully throughout North America, we can make it anywhere. But now, it’s time for our next big step. I suggest that what we now need for an exceptional, cohesive effort to make the most from our resource base is a similarly clear commitment from the top, a unique, high quality organizational structure drawing expertise from across Canada, and a genuine partnership that will spearhead expansion of our resources, expedite infrastructure construction and bolster a broader diversification of our exports.

What might be called the Resource Development Office (RDO) that would have special power to counter interdepartmental turf squabbles, set clear priorities, streamline regulatory reviews and move beyond a chronic penchant to ‘boil the ocean’ with analyses and consultations. To lead this enterprise, we would need someone with the tenacity of Simon Reisman and the sensitivity of a Bob Rae or a Jim Prentice. Someone who has the absolute confidence and persistent attention of the Prime Minister Any volunteers? It will not happen by osmosis and is much more than a task for governments. The biggest obstacles to success are complacency and chronic inertia. The best tonic for both is a cohesive plan of action enabling decisions and commitments that can be articulated as confidently as they can be implemented. When my government decided to negotiate the Atlantic Accord for offshore energy development and then took dramatic investment action to launch Hibernia, Newfoundland and Labrador was a have not province – and had been since joining Confederation in 1949. Today – because of these decisions – Newfoundland and Labrador is a have province exploding with wealth and promise, while paying into equalization that benefits provinces like Ontario and Quebec.

Just imagine, the epochal impact, on our entire nation, of the initiative that I have outlined tonight. It will make Canada one of the wealthiest and most influential countries on earth, while vastly strengthening our sovereignty and our capacity for good and effective leadership in the world. This Canadian energy and resource agenda under the Prime Minister’s personal direction would provide hundreds billions of dollars in new investments, millions of new jobs, bring West and East much closer together, and be as transformational and beneficial to the country as any major policy initiative undertaken in Canada in the last 70 years. Infometrica has estimated that planned investments in major resource projects could generate a $1.4 Trillion cumulative increase in GDP with dividends for all regions of Canada and more than 6 million jobs. No other sector of our economy has comparable potential for our future prosperity. The most essential ingredient for any “Big Idea”, however, is leadership. Leadership that not only anticipates the need for change but is determined to implement change. Not in pursuit of popularity but to serve the national interest. The test of true leadership hinges on judgements between risk and reward. Change of any kind requires risk, political risk. It can and will generate unpopularity from those who oppose change.

The choice for Canada in a fast-changing global environment is either to adapt quickly and take advantage of the changes happening or watch from the sidelines. If we truly deliver, we will not only enhance our economic prospects but I am confident will also enable Canada to play a more relevant and effective role on geopolitical issues of the moment. We can truly ‘walk the talk’ of a resource super power. Thomas D’Arcy McGee, the most eloquent Father of Confederation, in his last speech in the House of Commons before his assassination, 146 years ago yesterday, famously said: “He who seeks after popularity builds upon a shifting sand.” Prime ministers are not chosen to seek popularity. They are chosen to provide leadership. As President Clinton once said: “Leadership is the capacity to look around the corner of history, just a little bit.” Leadership is the process, not only of foreseeing the need for change, but of making the case for change. Leadership does not consist of imposing unpopular ideas on the public, but of making unpopular ideas acceptable to the nation. This requires a very solid argument for change, and a very strong ability to make the argument, over and over and over again.

The impact of significant public policy decisions is often unclear in the early years. It sometimes takes a considerable period – frequently decades – before the full consequences of an important initiative become apparent. As Reinhold Niebuhr reminded us: “nothing worth doing is completed in our life time; therefore we must be saved by hope. Nothing fine or beautiful or good makes complete sense in any immediate context of history; therefore, we must be saved by faith”. It is in this perspective that great and controversial questions of public policy must be considered. History tends to focus on the builders, the deciders, the leaders – because they are the men and women whose contributions have shaped the destiny of their nations. From Confederation to the present day, our country has been blessed with strong leaders. I am confident that it will always be so in a Canada that is united, prosperous and strong. May the blessings of providence always be upon our beloved country and upon all of you. Thank you very much. Project MUSE - Transforming the Nation: Canada and Brian Mulroney (review) Jessica van Horssen Blake, Raymond B. (ed.) —Transforming the Nation: Canada and Brian Mulroney.

Montreal and Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press, 2007. Pp. 456. In Transforming the Nation: Canada and Brian Mulroney, J. Frank Strain states that his essay "is likely to contain something to offend everyone" (p. 42), an apt description of the entire collection, which gets at the heart of Brian Mulroney's historical character and legacy. Edited by Raymond B. Blake, the wide-ranging opinions and analyses found in the 18 essays of the book cannot help but inspire strong reactions from readers because of the controversy that continues to surround Mulroney, and this is the beauty of the collection. In his introduction to Transforming the Nation, Blake expresses his wonder over why a comprehensive study of Mulroney, "one of the most significant and important prime ministers Canada has ever had" (p. 14), has not been done before. The contributors quickly make up for lost time, each offering a comprehensive analysis of a different facet of his time in office. The collection is well constructed with three informal sections: the legacy of Mulroney's policies, his interactions with Canada's increasingly vocal and conflicting minority groups, and his personal approach to politics.

A central theme throughout each of these essays, especially in the first section concerned with his legacy, is the question of revolution. Mulroney was prime minister during a period in which Canada and the rest of the world were changing rapidly. In some cases, he used this transitional period to his advantage, especially on the campaign trail, when he was able to control the media in ways contributor Christopher Waddell states could never be possible under the scrutiny of the 24 hour news networks of today (p. 36). In other cases, these massive social, economic, and political changes were the reason for Mulroney's downfall, as he not only encouraged them, but believed he could use them to his, and the country's, overall advantage. The problem with this approach to governing, Blake argues, is that Canadians simply do not like change (p. 5), and many continue to blame Mulroney for being the messenger, if not the instigator, of these transformations. The middle section of Transforming the Nation is by far the strongest, with excellent essays by Robert Wardhaugh and Michael D. Behiels, each offering a detailed analysis of how Mulroney tried to balance regional differences and [End Page 225] desires.

In wanting to pacify everyone, including those in the West and in Quebec, Mulroney pleased no one with his attempts at policy revisions and constitutional negotiations. The discussion by Gina Cosentino and Paul L. A. H Chartrand of Aboriginal policy and politics during the Mulroney years also follows this pattern of excellent analysis. One of the strongest pieces in the collection appears in this middle section. In her examination of how women's movements and issues changed while Mulroney was prime minister, Ann Porter provides a much larger story of how Canadian society and politics were radically discussed, debated, and transformed during this time. The collection concludes with a series of essays by those who worked directly with Mulroney during his time in office. Some of these, such as the piece by Bob Rae, invite the reader into the heart of the former prime minister, which is often excluded in analyses of his two terms in office. During his time as New Democrat premier of Ontario, Rae observed Mulroney as a man with two personas: one public and one private. In public, the prime minister was often formal and reserved, while in private he "was funny, personal, and often profane" (p. 417). Essays by former MP John C.

Crosbie and speech writer L. Ian MacDonald follow much the same line as Rae's piece, each offering sincere and balanced insight to the prime minister's character. The weakest article in the collection appears in this last section. Elizabeth May writes an account of her time as an environmental advisor to the Mulroney government, and her flattery of the prime minister and his cabinet makes for a thin analysis and a somewhat embarrassing read. During his time in office, Mulroney, "Canada's Greenest Prime Minister" (p. 381), made significant advancements in environmental policy that should be applauded, but within the historical context, not in the context of self-congratulation and awe. These pieces as a group are valuable additions to the collection because of Mulroney's controversial historical image. To remember that he was neither a monster nor a superhero, but a man with a private self to which the public was not often privy, is important because it contextualizes his actions and decisions and challenges our assumptions about who he was and why he made the choices he did.

Each essay in the collection was designed to stand alone, and for the most part they do, which is excellent for those looking for more nuanced analyses of the key political, economic, and social changes Mulroney orchestrated during his two terms in office. However, the greatest strength of Transforming the Nation is the collection itself. Brian Mulroney was not just the Free Trade Agreement or the GST: he was prime minister of Canada during a period of intense national and global change, and his actions and policy need to be understood together. While Michael Hart describes Mulroney as a "Faustian" character who bargained with the devil in his first term in office and paid the price for it in his second (p. 61), after reading Transforming the Nation, I found he appears to have more in common with Arthur Miller's tragic hero, Willy Loman, grasping for and losing control of a new Canadian Dream. Mulroney did what he thought was best for the nation despite his downward spiral in the polls, resulting [End Page 226] in an approval rating of 11 per cent at the end of his tenure.

While many believe Mulroney's Canadian Dream was more like a nightmare, Transforming the Nation goes to great lengths to help readers understand, if not sympathize with, the former prime minister within the context of his time and place. Jessica van Horssen

Question: Brian Mulroney was the prime minister of which country?
Answer: Canada