5

Introduction

This year marks the 150th anniversary of the package of constitutional changes that would creation of . It also marks the 35th anni- patriate the Constitution to Canada. During versary of the patriation of the Constitution a crucial period in early October of 1980, the from Great Britain that completed the process of parties in the House of Commons, and the gov- creating a sovereign state. Much has been writ- ernments of the provinces, grew divided on the ten about the Constitution of Canada and, in basis of being for or against unilateral action by particular, the events leading up to patriation in the federal government. For the Trudeau initia- 1982. Indeed, there are several excellent books tive to succeed, it was critical that he have sup- on the negotiations which led to our final con- port from at least one other party in the House stitutional disentanglement from Great Britain. of Commons and at least one provincial govern- Hundreds of articles have also been written on ment in all regions of the country. Unfortunately, the impact of this event. Is there anything more the Liberal party was very weak in Western Can- to be written? Are there events as yet uncovered ada. By contrast, the of and unknown about the players and events of the Canada (NDP) had a large number of MPs from period from 1980 to 1982? The answer is, quite the region; and, the government of Saskatchewan simply, “yes.” was headed by , a New Democrat. The federal government calculated that, if the This special issue of the Constitutional Forum initiative was to succeed, they would require the publishes, for the first time, several articles and support of both the Government of Saskatche- documents which have hitherto not been avail- wan and the federal NDP. able or discussed in detail. In particular, it exam- ines several events occurring between October In the early days after Trudeau’s announce- 1980 and October 1981 from new perspectives. ment of his intentions for the Constitution, the These perspectives come from participants who Prime Minister received fortunate news: the were either less well-known or not perceived head of the New Democratic Party of Canada, to have been central or critical to the direction Ed Broadbent, stated that he could support the of negotiations during this period of time. The initiative if some specific changes were made to articles in this special issue collectively argue the package of proposals. There remained only that these “other” participants were important to bring the government of Saskatchewan on in their own right, and the shape of patriation board. In early October, after telephone calls — if it had occurred at all — would have been between Premier Blakeney and Prime Minister considerably different had these individuals not Trudeau, talks were initiated in between been involved. Jean Chretien, Minister of Justice for the federal government, and Roy Romanow, Minister of The first article, “Round One: Saskatche- Intergovernmental Affairs for the government wan-Canada Negotiations”, examines the period of Saskatchewan. As it turned out, the failure of immediately after the First Ministers Confer- these talks proved to be critical to the momen- ence on the Constitution in September of 1980. tum of the project. This article draws upon my Shortly after that conference failed to achieve its private notes and papers to provide a full account objectives, Prime Minister Trudeau announced of these important negotiations. In particular, that he would be going to Great Britain with a this article and its archival sources outline in

Constitutional Forum constitutionnel 5 6

detail why the talks failed. The result was that the in an agreement, had not gone well. The initial whole process of patriation became increasingly package had been bargained and agreed to prior problematic and delayed. to the re-election of the Parti Québecois govern- ment headed by René Lévesque. After his re- The second article, “NDP Negotiations on election, the Premier of Québec was adamant Patriation”, deals with many of the same partici- that changes to the package must be made. In pants who were involved in the October negotia- short, given his new political mandate, Premier tions. The failure of the government of Saskatch- Lévesque thought that he had considerably more ewan to agree with the federal government on its leverage in these negotiations and could force the patriation project meant that the federal NDP other seven provinces to make some significant was split on the issue. On one side, the federal changes to the agreement. He was successful, NDP, together with some of the provincial sec- but it led many of the provincial governments to tions, supported the federal government initia- wonder if perhaps they were simply being used tive. On the other side, the NDP government of by the separatist government in Québec. Saskatchewan, and some other provincial sec- tions, were in opposition. What started out as a Therefore, in June of 1981, Ministers of minor disagreement grew into a full-fledged rup- Intergovernmental Affairs met in Winnipeg ture. In February of 1981, in a secret meeting at a to further discuss strategies and actions prior hotel in Calgary, the leaders of the NDP in Mani- to the judgment of the Supreme Court on the toba, Saskatchewan, and Alberta met with the constitutionality of the federal initiative. This federal leader of the party, Ed Broadbent, to try judgment was expected to come during the and find some common ground that would bring summer. While such a ministerial discussion was the various sections of the party back together. not expected to be crucial, it turned out that the The meeting was a failure. The result was a party attitude of Claude Morin, Minister of Intergov- that suffered internal disarray and bad feelings ernmental Affairs for Québec, was instrumen- for several years after these events. tal in changing the attitudes of the other seven provinces about the usefulness and wisdom of The NDP Negotiations on Patriation article remaining in partnership with the government provides a transcript of these detailed discus- of Québec. His misunderstanding of the goals sions. It is based on the handwritten notes that I and objectives of the other seven members of the took at the time. They provide detail on the vari- Gang of Eight, and his failure to understand that ous positions and arguments of the participants, these objectives were different than those of Qué- illustrating how and why the sections of the party bec proved fatal to his strategy of confrontation became so estranged from one another over this with the federal Liberals. In short, this meeting issue. None of this material has been made pub- was crucial in developing a sense of ownership lic until now, and the supporting documents are of the project among those seven provincial gov- included in this issue. ernments that were in opposition and eventually among the nine provinces that came together to The third article, “Beginning of the End of finally agree with the federal government on the the Gang of Eight”, deals with a group that has patriation package. become known as the “Gang of Eight”, consist- ing of the Ministers of Justice and Intergovern- The article contains minutes and documents mental Affairs for the eight provinces that were which have never been made public. It relies on opposing the federal initiative. These ministers the handwritten notes I took during the meeting took part in a meeting in June of 1981 that is as well as the subsequent briefing notes which now largely unknown or forgotten. This meet- were provided for the government of Saskatch- ing took place after the eight First Ministers had ewan. In my opinion, this was a watershed meet- gathered in Ottawa to sign a document called ing in the whole patriation process. the Ottawa Accord, an alternative to the Trudeau government’s patriation package. The meet- The last article, “The Four Lenses of Patria- ing among First Ministers, although it resulted tion”, is interpretive rather than descriptive. It

6 Volume 26, Number 2, 2017 7

deals specifically with how historians, academ- peoples, immigrants, as well as people who were ics, policy-makers, and the general public have excluded because of sexual orientation, race, and come to view patriation. It suggests that there economic disenfranchisement.” Through this are four lenses through which it can be viewed. lens, patriation is viewed as a beginning, albeit These lenses depend on our view of the outcomes a flawed one, which has led to some gains by the and the participants in the project. less powerful groups within our society. The first lens, described as the federalist Finally, a fourth lens considers patriation lens, views the patriation project as a largely from an entirely different point of view. It pro- triumphant federalist project which, I suggest, poses that the constitutional settlement that brought us a broader and more inclusive pan- was ultimately accepted was largely an initiative Canadian identity, involving mainly the Charter of the nine provincial governments, achieved of Rights and Freedoms and the patriation of the mainly through the work of the governments Constitution to Canada. of , Alberta, and Saskatchewan. More importantly, it asserts that without their efforts The second lens views patriation as a betrayal there would never have been an agreement and of the founding compact between the English and that the forces of dissolution in Canada would French peoples of Canada, a unilateral action by have continued to gather steam. In other words, the English-speaking peoples of Canada that has the provinces saved Canada from Trudeau and significantly diminished the role of the govern- Lévesque. ment of Québec and the Francophone popula- tion of Canada. For large numbers of Quebec- Finally, this special issue contains two ers, it remains an unfinished project referred to supporting documents that are annotated notes colloquially as “The Night of the Long Knives.” I took in the meetings referred to in these special issue articles. Some of these have been A lesser-known third lens involves individu- made public in the past, but are nonetheless fas- als and groups that, prior to patriation, had been cinating, and some have never before been made largely powerless in our society. As I argue in the public and should be interesting to those who article, this interpretation views patriation as, study in this area. “the last gasp of a society dominated by privileged white men, seeking to maintain their own power As stated at the outset, I hope that you will and exclude rising groups of women, indigenous find this special issue interesting and informa- tive, and I hope that it will shed yet more light on the constitutional history of Canada.

Constitutional Forum constitutionnel 7 8

8 Volume 26, Number 2, 2017