Search Results Heading

MBRLSearchResults

mbrl.module.common.modules.added.book.to.shelf
Title added to your shelf!
View what I already have on My Shelf.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to add the title to your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
    Done
    Filters
    Reset
  • Discipline
      Discipline
      Clear All
      Discipline
  • Is Peer Reviewed
      Is Peer Reviewed
      Clear All
      Is Peer Reviewed
  • Series Title
      Series Title
      Clear All
      Series Title
  • Reading Level
      Reading Level
      Clear All
      Reading Level
  • Year
      Year
      Clear All
      From:
      -
      To:
  • More Filters
      More Filters
      Clear All
      More Filters
      Content Type
    • Item Type
    • Is Full-Text Available
    • Subject
    • Country Of Publication
    • Publisher
    • Source
    • Target Audience
    • Donor
    • Language
    • Place of Publication
    • Contributors
    • Location
53,636 result(s) for "Mulroney, Brian"
Sort by:
Democratic Leadership Revisited
Political theorists such as James MacGregor Burns (1978/2010), J. Ronald Pennock (1979), and Eric Beerbohm (2015) have argued that democratic leaders, to be democratic, must forge joint commitments with their followers before they act. But what happens when leaders act without doing so? Does this make them undemocratic? In this article, I challenge this standard, stepwise model of democratic leadership. I outline alternative models of democratic leadership that do not require leaders to forge joint commitments with their followers before they act. Democratic leaders must provide justifications for their actions, and they must be held accountable for them, but they might nevertheless act before they forge joint commitments with followers. In a trust‐based model of democratic leadership, for example, trust functions as a temporary stand‐in for justification, giving democratic leaders leeway to make decisions without first consulting their publics or forging joint commitments with them. In the hindsight model of democratic leadership, the consequences of actions can take the place of—or supplement—the justifications leaders provide. I argue that these alternative models of democratic leadership are more consistent with practices of leadership in the real world of politics. I illustrate the theory with two examples: The first focuses on Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney’s decision to introduce the Goods and Services Tax in 1991; the second examines German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s leadership during the European “migrant crisis” in 2015.
A marathon, not a sprint
In 2020, Canada does not maintain diplomatic ties with Iran or Saudi Arabia partly owing to their human rights violations—a choice which has eroded its capacity to act meaningfully in these countries. Thirty years ago, the Brian Mulroney government was faced with a similar decision: to sever relations with the white minority regime in South Africa or use its limited but real influence to contribute constructively to an end to apartheid. This article examines how Canada “punched above its weight” on an issue seemingly peripheral to its national interests from 1987 to 1990. It was during these oft-overlooked years—South Africa’s “darkest days”—that Canada engaged through multilateral fora, bilaterally, and its embassy to sustain global pressure and attention on apartheid. In so doing, the Mulroney government became a diplomatic battleground between its major allies, Pretoria, and its African Commonwealth partners. Such efforts were not without costs, but Canada’s “advanced middling” role helped to bring about a peaceful transition towards majority rule in South Africa and thus holds contemporary lessons for policymakers.
Transforming the Nation
In Transforming the Nation, leading Canadian politicians and scholars reflect on the major policy debates of the period and offer new and surprising interpretations of Brian Mulroney. Mulroney had a tremendous impact on Canada, charting a new direction for the country through his decisions on a variety of public-policy issues - free trade with the United States, social-security reform, foreign policy, and Canada's North. The Mulroney government represented a dramatic break with Canada's past.
CANADA'S JOURNEY FROM PROTECTIVE PARTNERSHIP ON THE 'AMERICAN ROAD' TO FEAR, CONTEMPT AND CHAOS IN THE AGE OF DONALD TRUMP
Both eventually became enthusiastic supporters of Donald Trump with Gretzky - a Mar-A-Lago hanger-on - gaining Trump's nomination to be the first governor when Canada when it becomes America's 51st state. [...]came Brian Mulroney in 1984 pledging to open Canada for business again, serenading President Ronald Reagan on Canadian soil, and successfully winning an election in 1988 on the issue of free trade with the United States. [...]King, unlike Mulroney, privately and publicly maintained a distance from the United States and rejected a possible free trade pact in 1948. At the last minute before the deal was announced, King recoiled and told senior official and future prime minister Lester Pearson, who was persistent in his arguments for an agreement, that \"he would never cease to be a Liberal or a British citizen and if I thought there was a danger of Canada being placed at the mercy of powerful financial interests in the United States, and if that was being done by my own party, I would get out and oppose them openly.\" [...]around Mar-A-Lago, where Brian Mulroney serenaded Trump in 2017 with When Irish Eyes are Smiling, as he had Reagan in 1985, there are four million Canadians vacationing each winter, with some having bumper stickers proclaiming \"My Canada Includes Florida.\"
Historic Breaks in Canadian Welfare as Expressions of Internal Crisis and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's Efforts to Address Them
Este artículo tiene como objetivo analizar la descomposición gradual que han venido sufriendo los tradicionales bastiones sociales canadienses a lo largo de décadas previas: educación, salud y vivienda, los cuales hicieron de Canadá una potencia moral internacional en el siglo xx y un paradigma de justicia social. Aquí se enfatizará que esta desarticulación de los pilares del Estado benefactor se ha dado bajo la administración de gobiernos conservadores y liberales sin distingo partidista, y en la actualidad, a partir de la pandemia de la Covid-19, los efectos de dicha descomposición resultaron ineludibles para el gobierno federal del liberal Justin Trudeau, quien se vio obligado a enfrentar la crisis para buscar salidas emergentes. Sin embargo, la gravedad de la situación refuerza nuestra hipótesis de que esta crisis representa un quiebre histórico en Canadá, mismo que vino gestándose desde, al menos, mediados de los años ochenta, cuando el Estado decidió disminuir los recursos para redirigirlos a otras áreas productivas y así estimular la llegada de inversión privada en áreas sociales estratégicas. De esta manera, se expondrán algunos de los costos sociales derivados de estas decisiones.
Lucien Bouchard. Le pragmatisme politique
Il retrace le cheminement politique de Bouchard de maniere â illustrer que, pour cet homme, la souveraineté n'a jamais été une fin en soi, mais plutôt une solution parmi d'autres pour obtenir de nouveaux pouvoirs susceptibles de permettre â la nation québécoise d'etre libre de ses choix. Cela explique le fait qu'il ait pu s'associer au Parti conservateur de Brian Mulroney â l'époque du Beau risque, tout comme le fait qu'il ait choisi de démissionner de ses fonctions de ministre et de député lorsque l'Accord du lac Meech fut édulcoré dans la foulée de la publication du rapport Charest. Malgré ces lacunes, il n'en demeure pas moins que cet essai réussit a tracer un bilan concis du passage en politique fédérale et provinciale de Lucien Bouchard et que, par sa simplicité, il est accessible a un large public.