The Monarchist 1.0
Defending the British Crown Commonwealth and the English-Speaking Peoples
[+] HONOURING OUR PATRON, SIR WINSTON CHURCHILL, VICTOR OF THE ENGLISH-SPEAKING PEOPLES
[+] HONOURING OUR QUEEN, ELIZABETH THE SECOND, ON THE 80TH YEAR OF HER BIRTH (1926 - 2006)
[+] HONOURING OUR KING, SAINT EDWARD THE CONFESSOR, ON THE 1000TH YEAR OF HIS BIRTH (1005 - 2005)
[+] HONOURING OUR HERO, LORD NELSON, ON THE BICENTENNIAL OF THE BATTLE OF TRAFALGAR (1805 - 2005)
[+] HONOURING OUR SONS, THE QUEEN'S COMMONWEALTH SOLDIERS KILLED IN THE 'WAR ON TERROR'
Chief Warrant Officer Robert Girouard, 46, Royal Canadian Regiment, Nov 27, 2006 (Afstan)
Staff Sergeant Sharron Elliott, 34, Intelligence Corps, Nov 12, 2006 (Iraq)
Private Jacob B. Kovco, 25, Royal Australian Regiment, April 21, 2006
[+] HONOURING OUR VETS ON THE 150TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE VICTORIA CROSS (1856 - 2006)
Tuesday, April 11, 2006
Canadian Prime Ministers from Best to Worst
I've always wanted to do this, so here it is. This ranking will be followed in time by one for British PMs, American Presidents and Anglo Sovereigns. I think we non-experts can quite easily rate the political success of statesmen if we understand that a leader's tenure first falls under one of the three Ts: transformational, transactional or transitional. A transformative leader, for better or worse, makes a substantial impact on the national progress of his country. A transactional leader is a caretaker of sorts, one who may know how to win power, but not what to do with it. Such a leader is more famous for his personality and style, than for any meaningful accomplishment while in office. And transitional leaders have the briefest of tenures (under 2 years), who are noticeably inadequate and found wanting in some regard. Equally inconsequential, this group can only be differentiated and ranked according to the number of days, weeks or months in power. That out of the way, here then, in my opinion, are the Prime Ministers of Canada rated from historically best to worst:
Transformational Prime Ministers (measured by substance)
1. Sir John A. MacDonald, Con (Confederation)
2. William Lyon McKenzie-King, Lib (WW2)
3. Sir Wilfred Laurier, Lib (Development & Expansion)
4. Sir Robert Borden, Con (Great War)
5. Brian Mulroney, Con (Free Trade)
6. Pierre Trudeau, Lib (Constitution & Charter)
7. Lester Pearson, Lib (Flag, Healthcare, Peacekeeping)
Transactional Prime Ministers (measured by style)
8. John Diefenbaker, Con (Traditionalist/Populist)
9. Louis St. Laurent, Lib (Sound/Sensible/Dutiful)
10. Jean Chretien, Lib (Folksy/Low Expectations)
11. Alexander McKenzie, Lib (Honest/Unimaginative)
12. Richard Bennett, Con (Impersonal)
13. Arthur Meighen, Con (Eloquent/Principled)
14. Sir John Thompson, Con (Loyal)
Transitional Prime Ministers (measured by spell)
15. John Abbott, Con (1 year, 5 months)
16. Sir MacKenzie Bowell, Con (1 year, 4 months)
17. Paul Martin, Lib (1 year, 2 months)
18. Joe Clark, Con (8 months, 26 days)
19. Kim Campbell, Con (4 months, 12 days)
20. John Turner, Lib (79 days)
21. Sir Charles Tupper, Con (69 days)
Full disclosure: I’m a diehard Tory and a staunch traditionalist, so you are entitled to read into any bias that you believe might have affected my choice of ranking. Note though that I did struggle on a number of fronts. For example, it is debatable whether Trudeau should rank higher or lower than Mulroney. They both had a major impact - perhaps it would have been fairer to place Trudeau higher, particularly on the unity front. But Mulroney was much stronger on the economy and foreign affairs. Similarly, Laurier and King. Personally, I much prefer Arthur Meighen over King, but all the eloquence in the world couldn’t win Meighen lasting power. Some may feel Chretien should rank higher, given his three consecutive majorities. But what did he do, other than almost lose the country? It was especially painful to rank Pearson ahead of Diefenbaker, because Pearson more than anyone vandalized our heritage and institutions (Red Ensign, RCN, RCAF), whereas the Chief upheld the greatest respect. However, Pearson gave Canada its modern character, and reality requires that we recognize the impact this had, however insidious.
All that being said, watch for Harper over the next dozen or so years to eventually move into the number 2 spot. Remember, you heard it here first.
Fun fact: Sir John Thompson, while PM of Canada, died in Windsor Castle after receiving a knighthood from Queen Victoria. He was 49.
POSTED BY: The Monarchist AT 11:41 p.m. | LINKS |
I've always wanted to do this, so here it is. This ranking will be followed in time by one for British PMs, American Presidents and Anglo Sovereigns. I think we non-experts can quite easily rate the political success of statesmen if we understand that a leader's tenure first falls under one of the three Ts: transformational, transactional or transitional. A transformative leader, for better or worse, makes a substantial impact on the national progress of his country. A transactional leader is a caretaker of sorts, one who may know how to win power, but not what to do with it. Such a leader is more famous for his personality and style, than for any meaningful accomplishment while in office. And transitional leaders have the briefest of tenures (under 2 years), who are noticeably inadequate and found wanting in some regard. Equally inconsequential, this group can only be differentiated and ranked according to the number of days, weeks or months in power. That out of the way, here then, in my opinion, are the Prime Ministers of Canada rated from historically best to worst:
Transformational Prime Ministers (measured by substance)1. Sir John A. MacDonald, Con (Confederation)
2. William Lyon McKenzie-King, Lib (WW2)
3. Sir Wilfred Laurier, Lib (Development & Expansion)
4. Sir Robert Borden, Con (Great War)
5. Brian Mulroney, Con (Free Trade)
6. Pierre Trudeau, Lib (Constitution & Charter)
7. Lester Pearson, Lib (Flag, Healthcare, Peacekeeping)
Transactional Prime Ministers (measured by style)
8. John Diefenbaker, Con (Traditionalist/Populist)
9. Louis St. Laurent, Lib (Sound/Sensible/Dutiful)
10. Jean Chretien, Lib (Folksy/Low Expectations)
11. Alexander McKenzie, Lib (Honest/Unimaginative)
12. Richard Bennett, Con (Impersonal)
13. Arthur Meighen, Con (Eloquent/Principled)
14. Sir John Thompson, Con (Loyal)
Transitional Prime Ministers (measured by spell)
15. John Abbott, Con (1 year, 5 months)
16. Sir MacKenzie Bowell, Con (1 year, 4 months)
17. Paul Martin, Lib (1 year, 2 months)
18. Joe Clark, Con (8 months, 26 days)
19. Kim Campbell, Con (4 months, 12 days)
20. John Turner, Lib (79 days)
21. Sir Charles Tupper, Con (69 days)
Full disclosure: I’m a diehard Tory and a staunch traditionalist, so you are entitled to read into any bias that you believe might have affected my choice of ranking. Note though that I did struggle on a number of fronts. For example, it is debatable whether Trudeau should rank higher or lower than Mulroney. They both had a major impact - perhaps it would have been fairer to place Trudeau higher, particularly on the unity front. But Mulroney was much stronger on the economy and foreign affairs. Similarly, Laurier and King. Personally, I much prefer Arthur Meighen over King, but all the eloquence in the world couldn’t win Meighen lasting power. Some may feel Chretien should rank higher, given his three consecutive majorities. But what did he do, other than almost lose the country? It was especially painful to rank Pearson ahead of Diefenbaker, because Pearson more than anyone vandalized our heritage and institutions (Red Ensign, RCN, RCAF), whereas the Chief upheld the greatest respect. However, Pearson gave Canada its modern character, and reality requires that we recognize the impact this had, however insidious.
All that being said, watch for Harper over the next dozen or so years to eventually move into the number 2 spot. Remember, you heard it here first.
Fun fact: Sir John Thompson, while PM of Canada, died in Windsor Castle after receiving a knighthood from Queen Victoria. He was 49.
POSTED BY: The Monarchist AT 11:41 p.m. | LINKS |
Comments:
Can't see the comments?If you are unable to see the comments, your browser may have javascript turned off or may not support javascript. Check your security settings. Otherwise you can click here to access to comments in regular HTML from the TheirSay! Comment Server.
.gif){kind=small}
.gif){kind=small}
