Volume 9, Number 4
December 2000

[Previous] [Contents] [Next]

Pierre Trudeau's Legacy

by Fred McMahon, Director of the Social Affairs Centre, The Fraser Institute

Pierre Elliott Trudeau was a great man. Few leaders, through dint of their own will, are able to change a nation's historical path. Margaret Thatcher did it in Britain. Ronald Reagan did it in the United States. Pierre Trudeau did it in Canada.

In Britain, Labour essentially adopted Thatcherite policies to get elected. Democrats in the United States adopted Reagan's policies. Similarly, the Conservative government of Brian Mulroney hardly touched the government and constitutional structure left by Pierre Trudeau.

When Trudeau became Prime Minister, Canada's vaunted post-war social programs—the Canadian Pension Plan and Medicare—were already in place. Yet Canadians had about the same level of taxes as the United States. Our standard of living was as high or higher than that in the US. The national debt built up in the war years had almost been erased. Unemployment was as low in Canada as it was in the United States. The Canadian dollar was usually stronger than the US greenback.

Under Trudeau, Canadian taxes exploded. Despite all the extra taxes, the national debt soared. Since Trudeau did not launch new innovative social programs, where did all the money go?

Trudeau took more and more money out of the private sector for a potpourri of wild schemes. Government planners decided they could do better than the private sector. Economic development schemes flourished, crown corporations grew, economic planning intensified.

But the government planners weren't able to do better. Canadian unemployment, for the first time in history, became substantially and consistently greater than US unemployment. Canadian economic growth, for the first time in history, began substantially and consistently to lag behind US growth.

The economic planning and social engineering were most intense in Atlantic Canada, and the region suffered the most from Trudeau's policies. When Trudeau came to power, Atlantic Canadian economic growth exceeded the national average. Unemployment in the Maritimes was little more than in the rest of Canada. Within a few years, Atlantic Canadian growth had crashed below the national average and unemployment was skyrocketing.

Economic development programs politicized the economy, giving rewards to those who were the best connected politically, not those who were most successful in the marketplace. Unemployment insurance reforms directed people away from full-time work in growing industries into dead-end seasonal industries. The corruption of the fisheries into a political tool, with no regard for ecological concerns, directly lead to the environmental, economic, and human disaster which later befell the industry.

Neither Trudeau nor his successors undertook urgently needed reforms. CPP and Medicare are essentially unchanged since the 1960s. Medicare and the CPP need reform to give people greater control over their medical care and pension plans. Yet, federal governments— particularly Trudeau's—have maintained an old-time paternalistic attitude.

Not all bad things happened on Trudeau's watch. It takes a long time to weaken a dynamic economy. But Trudeau-style policies were responsible. Brian Mulroney neither returned Canada to its historical pre-Trudeau economic path nor did he adopt the Thatcher or Reagan revolution. Taxes increased under Mulroney and the politicization of the economy continued unabated. Only on free trade did the Mulroney government differ substantially from the Trudeau government on economic policy, though economic intervention did lessen.

It's hardly surprising that Trudeau privately praised Mulroney as a worthy successor, at least until Mulroney tried to bring Quebec into the constitution. Trudeau had left a lingering constitutional sore when, quite literally, in the dead of night behind Quebec's back, he formed a cabal with English premiers to bring the constitution to Canada without Quebec's approval.

This has been the source of our costly constitutional squabbles ever since. When Mulroney tried to bring Quebec into the constitution by offering a more flexible federalism, Trudeau and his allies successfully battled against the agreement.

When Trudeau first became Prime Minister, Quebec separatists were a fringe party. The growth of separatism under Trudeau hardly justifies the common idea that Trudeau, in his own words, "wrestled separatism to the ground." Separatism might never have become a threat under Robert Stanfield's more flexible approach to federalism.

None of this makes Trudeau a bad man. He was brilliant, astonishingly charming, and unquestionably courageous. He was neither cruel nor particularly vindictive. He wanted to do right for Canada. Most importantly, he had the deep affection, loyalty, and love of those closest to him. That may be the best mark of a man, but it's not a reason to maintain a legacy of failed policies.

[Previous] [Contents] [Next]

info@fraserinstitute.ca You can contact us at the above email address for any comments or information requests. Please report any dead links or technical problems.