Home
Canada 1892: Portrait of a Promised Land
With the Quebec referendum nigh, and the constitution talks in high gear, former Maclean's editor Peter Newman of Deep Cove has produced an extensively illustrated history, Canada 1892: Portrait of a Promised Land ($50 M&S/Penguin), to shed light on the nature of Canada as a whole. "The bad news," says Newman, "is that Canada has had the same problems for 100 years. The good news is we're still talking about them." In 1892 the Bank of Montreal was essentially Scottish. Western premiers were complaining about exorbitant freight rates. Maritimers wanted higher fishing quotas. (Nova Scotia once voted in favour of secession). And free trade was hotly debated as an antidote to recessionary woes. Bigotry was common. Former Quebec premier Pierre Chavreau observed, "English and French, we climb by a double flight of stairs towards destinies reserved for us on this continent, without knowing each other, without meeting each other, and without even seeing each other except on the landing of politics." Newman's account a joint venture between McClelland & Stewart ("The Canadian Publishers") and Penguin Canada (a branch plant) has been lavishly packaged by Madison Press to enliven a population still too young to appreciate its own complexity. "This, after all, is a country only four memories old," Newman writes, "and history is nothing more, and nothing less, than those memories refined.";If we care to listen, we ran still hear the faint echoes of the people who walked our streets, worked our farms and fished our waters a hundred years ago."
BCBW: Pierre Berton's definition of a Canadian is someone who knows how to make love in a canoe. What's yours?
NEWMAN: Mine is, 'You can always tell a Canadian because when he comes into any room he always picks the most uncomfortable chair.'
BCBW: (laughter) Canadians are still essentially Scottish then?
NEWMAN: Yes. The Scottish ethic has been the dominant ethic of Canada a hard day's work well done and that's still there. The bankers still control our lives. The other important Canadian characteristic is our deference to authority. That, in my view, comes from the Hudson's Bay Company. The forts were all company towns and you had to defer to the authority of the company.
BCBW: "Never shoot your customers and never challenge authority."
NEWMAN: That's it. Whereas the Americans did challenge authority.
BCBW: Of all the definitions of Canada in your book, I think Dave Broadfoot's comes closest...
NEWMAN: "The world needs Canada because if it wasn't there, the Chinese could sail right across and invade Denmark."
BCBW: (laughter) Meanwhile the Quebec referendum is coming arid we can't escape from that.
NEWMAN: It will be a decisive moment in Canadian history. If they say they want to separate, then the process starts. So we've got ourselves into this trap.
BCBW: A lot of people want to blame Brian Mulroney for the constitutional mess. Is that fair?
NEWMAN: No, you can't put all the blame for the constitutional problems on Mulroney. It's important to note that Mulroney has been bound hand-and foot by his predecessor. It was Trudeau who put in the notwithstanding clause that allowed Bourassa to put in the sign law. It Was Trudeau who put in the unanimity law that killed Meech Lake. It was Trudeau who ran up the deficit so Mulroney had no money to spend which he might have used to bring the provinces together. And don't forget it was Trudeau who promised Quebec that if they voted no on the referendum, he would bring them into the constitutional family and do all sorts of wonderful things for them.
BCBW: We started out as an English/French nation. But these days it seems Quebec doesn't realize its partner has changed.
NEWMAN: That's right. There are no longer two founding nations. WASPs have become a visible minority and roast beef is an ethnic dish. But no Quebec politician can get elected unless he supports the notion that Quebec is special. Never mind the legal expression of it. It's an emotional issue. And people like Getty, Filmon and Wells just can't get that through their heads. They don't know enough Canadian history.
BCBW: So you're sympathetic to Bourassa's plight as a leader?
NEWMAN: Very much so. Bourassa has made a lot of tactical mistakes by not being at the conference, by not having a voice. But there is some historical justification for Quebec's position and I think it has to be taken into account. Before Confederation, French Canadians were the majority in Upper and Lower Canada. Quebec must have some recognition as an original partner in Confederation.
BCBW: As someone writing a book on Brian Mulroney, do you think he has enough historical knowledge and sophistication to get us through?
NEWMAN: He's no deep thinker. Neither is he an original thinker. But it's probably unfair to expect a prime minister to suddenly become a philosopher. After all, John Diefenbaker was a prosecuting attorney from the Prairies. Pearson acted like a diplomat. And Trudeau was a constitutional lawyer. They brought with them their respective methodologies. Brian Mulroney is no different. He was a labour negotiator. Now he just wants to get the factory gates open.
BCBW: But if a prime minister isn't a deep thinker, he should have the modesty or common sense to recognize he's in dangerous waters and get some navigators on board. Just to tell him where the reefs are.
NEWMAN: That's right. One problem with Mulroney is that he hasn't surrounded himself with superior intellects although, to be fair, very few prime ministers do. The other thing Mulroney has never understood is that a good leader has to be respected not liked. And you don't get that by ingratiating yourself to the people.
BCBW: What do you respect about him?
NEWMAN: He's a leader. It doesn't necessarily mean you're going to get the people to follow you - but in many ways he's a very radical prime minister in the dictionary sense of radicalism. You go to the root of things and change them. Whether it's free trade, or GST, Mexican trade or the constitution. All these things are very radical initiatives. I happen to totally disagree with U.S. free trade and Mexican free trade. I've written against them many times. But still it's leadership.
BCBW: What will your book about Mulroney explore?
NEWMAN: The main theme will be what a difficult country this is to govern, especially in the 1990s because of television. People immediately respond in their living rooms to their perception of events.
BCBW: One perception I have in my living room is that people are starving in Somalia, there's strife in Bosnia... It makes me impatient with these guys in their suits who can't figure out which end of the egg to split when we live in the most fortunate place on earth.
NEWMAN: Yes, even in Canadian terms it's obscene. Here we have the greatest economic emergency since the Great Depression arid the government is totally paralysed by the constitution. That's a crime.
BCBW: You've said that Canada is the first. nation in history to choose to go backwards from an industrialized state to Third World status.
NEWMAN: Absolutely. That's where we're at going from a branch plant economy to a warehouse economy. When Walter Gordon, Abe Rotstein and I founded the Committee for an Independent Canada, we were fighting against the damn branch plants. Well, it turns out the branch plants were terrific! At least they were making things here, doing research here. With free trade, the branch plants are going and all we have left is warehouses.
0-670-84575-2
[BCBW, Autumn, 1992]
BCBW: Pierre Berton's definition of a Canadian is someone who knows how to make love in a canoe. What's yours?
NEWMAN: Mine is, 'You can always tell a Canadian because when he comes into any room he always picks the most uncomfortable chair.'
BCBW: (laughter) Canadians are still essentially Scottish then?
NEWMAN: Yes. The Scottish ethic has been the dominant ethic of Canada a hard day's work well done and that's still there. The bankers still control our lives. The other important Canadian characteristic is our deference to authority. That, in my view, comes from the Hudson's Bay Company. The forts were all company towns and you had to defer to the authority of the company.
BCBW: "Never shoot your customers and never challenge authority."
NEWMAN: That's it. Whereas the Americans did challenge authority.
BCBW: Of all the definitions of Canada in your book, I think Dave Broadfoot's comes closest...
NEWMAN: "The world needs Canada because if it wasn't there, the Chinese could sail right across and invade Denmark."
BCBW: (laughter) Meanwhile the Quebec referendum is coming arid we can't escape from that.
NEWMAN: It will be a decisive moment in Canadian history. If they say they want to separate, then the process starts. So we've got ourselves into this trap.
BCBW: A lot of people want to blame Brian Mulroney for the constitutional mess. Is that fair?
NEWMAN: No, you can't put all the blame for the constitutional problems on Mulroney. It's important to note that Mulroney has been bound hand-and foot by his predecessor. It was Trudeau who put in the notwithstanding clause that allowed Bourassa to put in the sign law. It Was Trudeau who put in the unanimity law that killed Meech Lake. It was Trudeau who ran up the deficit so Mulroney had no money to spend which he might have used to bring the provinces together. And don't forget it was Trudeau who promised Quebec that if they voted no on the referendum, he would bring them into the constitutional family and do all sorts of wonderful things for them.
BCBW: We started out as an English/French nation. But these days it seems Quebec doesn't realize its partner has changed.
NEWMAN: That's right. There are no longer two founding nations. WASPs have become a visible minority and roast beef is an ethnic dish. But no Quebec politician can get elected unless he supports the notion that Quebec is special. Never mind the legal expression of it. It's an emotional issue. And people like Getty, Filmon and Wells just can't get that through their heads. They don't know enough Canadian history.
BCBW: So you're sympathetic to Bourassa's plight as a leader?
NEWMAN: Very much so. Bourassa has made a lot of tactical mistakes by not being at the conference, by not having a voice. But there is some historical justification for Quebec's position and I think it has to be taken into account. Before Confederation, French Canadians were the majority in Upper and Lower Canada. Quebec must have some recognition as an original partner in Confederation.
BCBW: As someone writing a book on Brian Mulroney, do you think he has enough historical knowledge and sophistication to get us through?
NEWMAN: He's no deep thinker. Neither is he an original thinker. But it's probably unfair to expect a prime minister to suddenly become a philosopher. After all, John Diefenbaker was a prosecuting attorney from the Prairies. Pearson acted like a diplomat. And Trudeau was a constitutional lawyer. They brought with them their respective methodologies. Brian Mulroney is no different. He was a labour negotiator. Now he just wants to get the factory gates open.
BCBW: But if a prime minister isn't a deep thinker, he should have the modesty or common sense to recognize he's in dangerous waters and get some navigators on board. Just to tell him where the reefs are.
NEWMAN: That's right. One problem with Mulroney is that he hasn't surrounded himself with superior intellects although, to be fair, very few prime ministers do. The other thing Mulroney has never understood is that a good leader has to be respected not liked. And you don't get that by ingratiating yourself to the people.
BCBW: What do you respect about him?
NEWMAN: He's a leader. It doesn't necessarily mean you're going to get the people to follow you - but in many ways he's a very radical prime minister in the dictionary sense of radicalism. You go to the root of things and change them. Whether it's free trade, or GST, Mexican trade or the constitution. All these things are very radical initiatives. I happen to totally disagree with U.S. free trade and Mexican free trade. I've written against them many times. But still it's leadership.
BCBW: What will your book about Mulroney explore?
NEWMAN: The main theme will be what a difficult country this is to govern, especially in the 1990s because of television. People immediately respond in their living rooms to their perception of events.
BCBW: One perception I have in my living room is that people are starving in Somalia, there's strife in Bosnia... It makes me impatient with these guys in their suits who can't figure out which end of the egg to split when we live in the most fortunate place on earth.
NEWMAN: Yes, even in Canadian terms it's obscene. Here we have the greatest economic emergency since the Great Depression arid the government is totally paralysed by the constitution. That's a crime.
BCBW: You've said that Canada is the first. nation in history to choose to go backwards from an industrialized state to Third World status.
NEWMAN: Absolutely. That's where we're at going from a branch plant economy to a warehouse economy. When Walter Gordon, Abe Rotstein and I founded the Committee for an Independent Canada, we were fighting against the damn branch plants. Well, it turns out the branch plants were terrific! At least they were making things here, doing research here. With free trade, the branch plants are going and all we have left is warehouses.
0-670-84575-2
[BCBW, Autumn, 1992]
Submitted on November 16, 2004 in By David.
