TIMMINS: Despite the buzz about a new federal government as 1973 opened, Quebec’s attention was entirely on provincial politics. The National Assembly would resume sitting in February, whereupon Bill 209 would be given second and third reading. It was also budget time, with little new to announce compared to the previous fiscal year. Cardinal planned to unveil his secret plan to begin phasing out residential schools, which apart from being overdue policy was excellent politics. It was a way to outflank the Liberals from the left, which was the only time I have ever seen such a feat attempted by Unionists. Laporte had not even given that issue much thought. Rene Levesque had given serious thought to aboriginal issues as a minister and in opposition, and informed us of his complete support for such legislation. With regards to federal issues, Stanfield informed Cardinal that he would begin negotiations over an immigration and manpower agreement once the budget was passed. Its basis would be Quebec gaining powers to select its own immigrants, something which provincial governments had been demanding for a decade. To Cardinal, a new federal government was a better negotiating partner than its predecessor, nothing more. In private with his federalist ministers, he referred to Tories as “your people.”
MULRONEY: I attended the opening of Parliament on Jan. 25, a magnificent sight if there ever was one in our politics. Bob’s plan was to pass the Throne Speech and budget while implementing as many platform planks as possible before another election could be held. With the Grits leaderless, it was Lewis who became our main opponent in those first few months. Bob joked that he could get used to that, as could I. The Liberal contest was between Turner and MacEachen, and despite Turner being the heir apparent I thought MacEachen had a good shot. Grit operatives knew that they had lost progressives in BC and Ontario, for which Turner was not a good fit ideologically or personally. Conversely, Turner was well-versed in Quebec issues, spoke fluent French, and had been one of the ministers to try and break the deadlock between both governments. Moreover his ideological and personal distance from Trudeau among swing voters would be assets. Bob was prepared to face both, but preferred MacEachen since he was an easier target and lessened our Quebec workload. The Socreds quietly assured us of support on supply and confidence matters, so our first budget and an infrastructure bill could pass immediately. Another major piece of legislation was our ban on essential services strikes, which would infuriate our Grit and Dipper friends. Bob was always careful to inform Caouette of our plans and be entirely respectful, a contrast with Dief when he was in opposition to Pearson.
BEAULIEU: The winter sitting began Feb. 6, when Paul [Dozois] delivered his budget speech and announced our intention to begin closing the residential school system. In an otherwise unremarkable budget, that announcement went off like a bomb, with both opposition parties supporting us nonetheless. At that time we did not know just how widespread the horrors were, but we knew enough to realize that the inhumane system must be eliminated. Yves Gabias would begin a dialogue with aboriginal leaders about a replacement which would combine localism and accountability, something which was elusive then and to some extent even now. The Church was outraged but they no longer had a vote. As with language, there would be dialogue but no negotiation. Replacing that system would be a long and arduous process, so our announcement was not much more than one of intent. We were more concerned about an increasingly slow economy than medium-term educational policy, needless to say. At that rate we’d be back in the red within 2 fiscal years, perhaps earlier if the downturn continued. Given the divisions on economic policy within Cabinet, we essentially agreed to stay the course. This would be Paul’s penultimate budget before retiring, and we all hoped he would eventually be seen as one of this province’s best finance ministers.
PAULSON: Stanfield’s first budget implemented most of their campaign promises: a 4% reduction in personal income tax, eliminating the 11% tax on building materials, indexing tax and pension brackets, and mandating foreign-owned companies to have a Canadian majority on their board of directors. There was also a ban on essential services strikes. While the platform had called for “increased discipline in government spending” while giving the Auditor General more powers, in practice it was the Auditor General’s powers part of that promise which was fully implemented. Stanfield wanted to reduce and eventually eliminate the deficit but not at all costs. While Lambert and Mazankowski were more open to their right-wing colleagues’ economic ideas, Stanfield and a majority of the Cabinet were not. Unionist green-eyeshade economic policies were anathema to Stanfield, a sentiment which was fully reciprocated in Quebec City. Stanfield also had major procurement plans for the Canadian Forces, plans that he wanted to keep under wraps so long as he was in a minority situation. Cautious by nature, he wanted to prove that Conservatives could form a stable, competent government after the Diefenbaker disaster. The budget went a long way towards establishing that pattern, and contentious issues were always precleared with Caouette, who did not want an early election for his own reasons. With the Liberals in a leadership race, Stanfield had a clear field to set his priorities and slowly convince Canadians he could be trusted with a majority.
SAUVÉ: On March 18, Bill 209 passed on third reading and received royal assent a few days later. Our French Language Charter had established a comprehensive language regime, as we prepared for the inevitable economic dislocations. This was a point I made repeatedly: such dislocations were long inevitable and only their tempo was affected. Combining the Lesage era with the country’s economic centre of gravity moving westward for decades, most of those businesses would have died or moved anyways. One of our central policy goals was accomplished, while another [residential schools] had been initiated. After that, Maurice and I encouraged Jean-Guy to reduce Assembly sittings since we had no major policy proposals to table before the next election. He refused on both timing and principle, which I found absurd but as the most junior minister I had no say in the matter. In my mind the Assembly should not be kept open for its own sake. Jean-Guy, academic that he was, took a rather different view than we did. Our polling showed PQ support down to 6-7%, which would push them down to 1 seat but not quite out of the Assembly. Voters strongly approved of the Charter and we were all confident that with time, Anglophones would eventually come around and fully participate in the new, francized public sphere.
MULRONEY: I attended the opening of Parliament on Jan. 25, a magnificent sight if there ever was one in our politics. Bob’s plan was to pass the Throne Speech and budget while implementing as many platform planks as possible before another election could be held. With the Grits leaderless, it was Lewis who became our main opponent in those first few months. Bob joked that he could get used to that, as could I. The Liberal contest was between Turner and MacEachen, and despite Turner being the heir apparent I thought MacEachen had a good shot. Grit operatives knew that they had lost progressives in BC and Ontario, for which Turner was not a good fit ideologically or personally. Conversely, Turner was well-versed in Quebec issues, spoke fluent French, and had been one of the ministers to try and break the deadlock between both governments. Moreover his ideological and personal distance from Trudeau among swing voters would be assets. Bob was prepared to face both, but preferred MacEachen since he was an easier target and lessened our Quebec workload. The Socreds quietly assured us of support on supply and confidence matters, so our first budget and an infrastructure bill could pass immediately. Another major piece of legislation was our ban on essential services strikes, which would infuriate our Grit and Dipper friends. Bob was always careful to inform Caouette of our plans and be entirely respectful, a contrast with Dief when he was in opposition to Pearson.
BEAULIEU: The winter sitting began Feb. 6, when Paul [Dozois] delivered his budget speech and announced our intention to begin closing the residential school system. In an otherwise unremarkable budget, that announcement went off like a bomb, with both opposition parties supporting us nonetheless. At that time we did not know just how widespread the horrors were, but we knew enough to realize that the inhumane system must be eliminated. Yves Gabias would begin a dialogue with aboriginal leaders about a replacement which would combine localism and accountability, something which was elusive then and to some extent even now. The Church was outraged but they no longer had a vote. As with language, there would be dialogue but no negotiation. Replacing that system would be a long and arduous process, so our announcement was not much more than one of intent. We were more concerned about an increasingly slow economy than medium-term educational policy, needless to say. At that rate we’d be back in the red within 2 fiscal years, perhaps earlier if the downturn continued. Given the divisions on economic policy within Cabinet, we essentially agreed to stay the course. This would be Paul’s penultimate budget before retiring, and we all hoped he would eventually be seen as one of this province’s best finance ministers.
PAULSON: Stanfield’s first budget implemented most of their campaign promises: a 4% reduction in personal income tax, eliminating the 11% tax on building materials, indexing tax and pension brackets, and mandating foreign-owned companies to have a Canadian majority on their board of directors. There was also a ban on essential services strikes. While the platform had called for “increased discipline in government spending” while giving the Auditor General more powers, in practice it was the Auditor General’s powers part of that promise which was fully implemented. Stanfield wanted to reduce and eventually eliminate the deficit but not at all costs. While Lambert and Mazankowski were more open to their right-wing colleagues’ economic ideas, Stanfield and a majority of the Cabinet were not. Unionist green-eyeshade economic policies were anathema to Stanfield, a sentiment which was fully reciprocated in Quebec City. Stanfield also had major procurement plans for the Canadian Forces, plans that he wanted to keep under wraps so long as he was in a minority situation. Cautious by nature, he wanted to prove that Conservatives could form a stable, competent government after the Diefenbaker disaster. The budget went a long way towards establishing that pattern, and contentious issues were always precleared with Caouette, who did not want an early election for his own reasons. With the Liberals in a leadership race, Stanfield had a clear field to set his priorities and slowly convince Canadians he could be trusted with a majority.
SAUVÉ: On March 18, Bill 209 passed on third reading and received royal assent a few days later. Our French Language Charter had established a comprehensive language regime, as we prepared for the inevitable economic dislocations. This was a point I made repeatedly: such dislocations were long inevitable and only their tempo was affected. Combining the Lesage era with the country’s economic centre of gravity moving westward for decades, most of those businesses would have died or moved anyways. One of our central policy goals was accomplished, while another [residential schools] had been initiated. After that, Maurice and I encouraged Jean-Guy to reduce Assembly sittings since we had no major policy proposals to table before the next election. He refused on both timing and principle, which I found absurd but as the most junior minister I had no say in the matter. In my mind the Assembly should not be kept open for its own sake. Jean-Guy, academic that he was, took a rather different view than we did. Our polling showed PQ support down to 6-7%, which would push them down to 1 seat but not quite out of the Assembly. Voters strongly approved of the Charter and we were all confident that with time, Anglophones would eventually come around and fully participate in the new, francized public sphere.