The departure of Marc Lalonde marks the end of an era, that of great constitutional debates, clashes between heavyweights who have time to master their cases and who do not shrink from controversy.
To symbolize the rise to power of Francophones in Ottawa, we refer to the three doves: Pierre Elliott Trudeau, Jean Marchand and Gérard Pelletier. But we must add to this list Marc Lalonde. He was Mr. Trudeau’s chief of staff during his first term. A force that worked in the shadows. Everyone who spoke to him knew it: he had the confidence of the Prime Minister, who never doubted the intellect and rigor of his right arm.
Mr. Lalonde was not exactly what is called a man of the field. In 1968, he was a strategist as Trudeaumania descended on Canada. “Mr. Lalonde told me about this campaign. The Liberal leader was a real rock star, but his team also contributed to it, it was not entirely spontaneous when young women threw themselves on him, ”recalls Rémi Bujold, former MP and president of the Liberal caucus of Canada.
Mr. Lalonde was comfortable in his initial role as advisor. He liked to argue, but he didn’t stoop to please. He didn’t tell people what they wanted to hear. Controversy did not frighten him. For this reason, Prime Minister Trudeau entrusted him with tough files. Its list of ministries impresses: Finance, Health, Energy, Justice and Relations with the provinces, among others.
All his life, he will have maintained that the federal government had done what was necessary during the October crisis. He also weathered the storm with the national energy policy that angered Albertans. Each time, he did so with one conviction: Canada is a vast and complex country and unpopular compromises are required to ensure its unity.
He always defended his heritage. For example, in 2020, he still maintained that it was the global fall in the price of a barrel of oil, even more than his policy, which explained the miseries experienced by Alberta at the time.
The member for Outremont was a man of principle. Whether or not we share his convictions, one thing is undeniable: he took the time to think, and when it was necessary to act, he did not blink. This made him impatient with those whose profession is to criticize without ever getting their hands dirty.
This was before social media, before politicians were asked about a piece of news within minutes of learning it, before a 17-second answer was deemed long.
In 1979, the Liberals lost. Barely 10 months later, the Conservatives were overthrown and Mr. Trudeau returned to power. André Pratte was then a journalist. “On election night, I asked him what he remembered from this year. He answered me: ‟it is easy to be in the opposition, and it is difficult to be in the government…””
Politics could be very harsh. Despite everything, a certain mutual respect sometimes existed between rivals.
“Everything opposed him to Jacques Parizeau. But when they were both finance ministers and renegotiated tax transfers together, they developed an unlikely complicity because of their common mastery of the file. It was fascinating to see,” recalls André Pratte.
Despite his intimate relationship with Pierre Elliott Trudeau, he always referred to him, with deference, as “Mr. Prime Minister.” Those who spoke to him knew it: he was the kind of man who could untie the knots. Mr. Bujold attributes to him, among other things, a decisive role in the creation of the Maurice-Lamontagne Institute, where cutting-edge research on oceanography is done in French in Rimouski.
During Trudeau’s last term, from 1980 to 1984, he had the difficult task of maintaining cohesion in the Quebec caucus – the Liberals had won no less than 74 of the province’s 75 seats. During the negotiations to repatriate the Constitution, it was not easy. If he dedicated himself to it, it was because it was not just a job for him.
Shortly after his defeat in 1984, he founded the Laurier club to collect donations for his party. And even if he will then work as a lawyer and administrator in addition to serving as an adviser for developing countries, he will always remain interested in political debates.
I wonder what he would think of the evolution of politics, the insane speed at which subjects are discussed, emptied and then forgotten today. With him goes out a certain way of doing politics. Rough, sometimes ruthless, but never thoughtless or innocent.