DOCSLIB.ORG

7 Confederation Update New Challenges

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
7 Confederation Update New Challenges 091-107 120820 11/1/04 2:43 PM Page 91 Chapter 7 Confederation Update New Challenges Government Takes Steps to Québec Votes: Protect Canadian IdentityOne Nation or Two? Ottawa Must Settle Outstanding More Power for Aboriginal Land Claims Provincial Governments? New Federal Laws to Protect Minority Rights Full Equality for Women Reflecting/Predicting and Men–Canada’s Goal 1. What challenges do these headlines and photo suggest Confederation has faced since 1867? 2. What do you think is the greatest challenge Confederation faces today? 91 091-107 120820 11/1/04 2:43 PM Page 92 92 Unit 1: Confederation A Changing Nation Canada today is not the Canada of 1867. Democratic government always grows and changes as we do. How has Canadian Confederation changed since 1900? Examine the following timeline. 1905 Alberta and Saskatchewan become provinces. 1912 Manitoba, Ontario, and Québec are enlarged to their present- day boundaries. January 1916 Manitoba is the first province to grant its women citizens the vote. 24 May 1918 All women in Canada receive the right to vote in federal elec- tions. (see Chapter 21) 11 December 1931 Statute of Westminster gives Canada complete control over its own affairs. Until this time, some important decisions were still being made in Britain. Canada could not make treaties with other countries, for example. 31 March 1949 Newfoundland joins Confederation. 1960 Registered Indians are granted the right to vote in federal elections. 1965 Canada adopts a new flag—a single red maple leaf with red bars on a white back- ground. 1 July 1967 Canadians celebrate Canada’s 100th birthday. 1969 The Official Languages Act makes French and English the official languages of Canada. All federal government services will be avail- able in both French and English. 1970 The legal voting age for federal elections is lowered to 18 years. 1971 The federal government supports multicul- turalism. It encourages Canadians to take pride in the customs and traditions of varied ethnic backgrounds. 091-107 120820 11/1/04 2:43 PM Page 93 Chapter 7: Confederation Update 93 1980 Parliament recognizes “O Canada” as the national anthem. April 1982 The Constitution Act 1982 gives us the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and a mechanism for amending (chang- ing) our constitution. 1985 The government changes the Indian Act so that Indian women who lost their Indian status through marriage can regain it. June 1987 The House of Commons approves the Meech Lake Accord, a constitutional amendment that recognizes Québec as a distinct society. The agreement fails to pass in the legislatures of Manitoba and Newfoundland. January 1, 1989 The Free Trade Agreement between Canada and the United States comes into effect. August 1992 The Charlottetown Accord proposes constitutional amendments that would recognize Québec as a distinct society and set the groundwork for Aboriginal self-govern- ment and a reformed Senate, along with other proposals. October 1992 In a national referendum, the Charlottetown Accord is rejected by the people of Canada. 1993 In the federal election, two regional parties come second and third behind the Liberals. They are the Bloc Québécois which favours sovereignty for Quebec and the Reform Party which is an Alberta-based conservative party. 1994 The North American Free Trade Agreement is signed with the United States and Mexico. 1995 Québec voters narrowly defeat a referendum calling for independence for Québec. Parliament recognizes Québec’s unique language, culture, and civil law. 1996 Parliament grants 5 regions a veto over changes to the Constitution. The regions are British Columbia, the Prairie Provinces, Ontario, Québec, and the Atlantic Provinces. 1998 The Nisga’a of British Columbia sign a land claims agreement. It gives them land, self-government, resource rights, and cash. 1999 The Northwest Territories is divided into two parts. The eastern Arctic is called Nunavut and has Inuit self- government. 091-107 120820 11/1/04 2:43 PM Page 94 94 Unit 1: Confederation Will Confederation enough seats in Parliament to become the Survive? Official Opposition. In the 1997 federal election, From the beginning, there were groups in the BQ was the third largest party in the House Canada who opposed Confederation. On the of Commons. first birthday of Confederation, the city of In 1995, Québec held another referendum Halifax draped its main street in black to show on independence. Once again the province its opposition to the union. If Macdonald’s voted to remain part of Canada, but by a very promise of a railway had not been kept, British narrow margin. The issue of Québec separatism Columbia may have left Canada. is still very much alive. Separatism in Québec Regional Concerns Since the 1970s, many people feel the strongest Canada is a large and very diverse country. It threat to Confederation has come from has always faced the challenge of uniting separatism in Québec. On 15 November 1976, regions that have very different needs, geogra- the Parti Québécois won an overwhelming phies, peoples, and economies. At the time of victory in the Québec provincial election. Confederation, the various regions had their The Parti Québécois, under its leader René own concerns and interests that led some to Lévesque, believed that Québec should sepa- reject the union. Today, some regions of the rate from the rest of Canada. They believed it country still feel that their interests are often was the only way to preserve their French lan- neglected. They complain that they do not have guage and culture from being overwhelmed by enough real power. This sense of alienation the English majority surrounding them. In 1980, has been particularly strong in the Western and the people of Québec voted in a referendum on Atlantic provinces. They argue that the federal whether or not to leave Canada. Of those who government is controlled too much by central voted, 59.5% wanted Québec to remain a part of Canada. The Reform Party was formed in 1987 Canada. to better represent the concerns of Western In 1990, the Bloc Québécois (BQ) was citizens in the Canadian government. In the formed as a federal party. Its leader was Lucien 1997 federal election, Reform won the second Bouchard. The goal of the BQ was to give largest number of seats in the House of Québec a strong voice in the federal govern- Commons. It became the Official Opposition. ment. In the 1993 federal election, the BQ won Regional Concerns These are some of the issues Canadians in var- ious regions are concerned about: • since most of the country’s population is in • great efforts have been made to keep Ontario and Québec, they elect more rep- Québec in Confederation and protect resentatives to the House of Commons French rights, but concerns in other and have more members in the Senate regions have often been neglected • most government projects seem to go to • Ottawa has done little to help western Ontario or Québec wheat farmers to survive and get a fair • more jobs are created in central Canada price for their crops than in the West or East • Ottawa has not done enough to create • the national budget and banks are con- new jobs in the Atlantic provinces where trolled in central Canada the fishery has been hard hit 091-107 120820 11/1/04 2:43 PM Page 95 Chapter 7: Confederation Update 95 Fast Forward Representatives of the federal and the ten Federal-Provincial Conferences provincial governments meet regularly. They discuss any problems that have arisen between the two levels of government. There are informal day-to-day contacts between offi- cials in Ottawa and the provinces. There are also regular meetings between ministers of the two levels of government. For example, the federal minister of agriculture meets reg- ularly with the agriculture ministers of each of the provinces. However, the most important meeting is the First Ministers’ Conference. It brings together the prime minister and the premiers of the ten provinces along with their advisors. These meetings usually focus on such topics as the constitution, national unity, economic policy, and job creation. The Provinces Versus Ottawa French. They see themselves as “First Another major source of tension within Nations.” They believe they have a right Confederation has been the division of powers to self-government and a claim to their lands between the provinces and Ottawa. As we have as the first inhabitants. Many also believe seen, the Fathers of Confederation believed that the Canadian government has broken that Canada should have a strong central gov- promises made in treaties with their ances- ernment. They thought the federal government tors. Aboriginal groups are challenging the should control important matters concerning Canadian government to honour their rights the whole country. The provincial governments and settle land claims. While some progress should be kept weak. has been made with agreements like the one But Canada has changed since 1867. It is no that gave the Inuit some self-government in longer a 19th-century country of farms and Nunavut, many other issues are still to be forests. It is a highly industrialized nation of resolved. skyscrapers and suburbs. Governments play a much bigger role in the lives of Canadians Women today. Provincial governments are expected to Since Confederation, women have gained the provide many more services such as health right to vote in Canada and to hold political care and education. Therefore, the provinces office. But in areas of business, employment, are demanding more power and a bigger share salaries, and politics, women are still battling of tax money to pay for these services. for equality with men. In many cases, women still have difficulty gaining top positions in Aboriginal Rights businesses and government.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Difficulty of Amending the Constitution of Canada
    Osgoode Hall Law Journal Volume 31 Issue 1 Volume 31, Number 1 (Spring 1993) Symposium: Towards the 21st Century Article 2 Canadian/Australian Legal Perspectives 1-1-1993 The Difficulty of Amending the Constitution of Canada Peter W. Hogg Osgoode Hall Law School of York University Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/ohlj Part of the Constitutional Law Commons Special Issue Article This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License. Citation Information Hogg, Peter W.. "The Difficulty of Amending the Constitution of Canada." Osgoode Hall Law Journal 31.1 (1993) : 41-61. https://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/ohlj/vol31/iss1/2 This Special Issue Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at Osgoode Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Osgoode Hall Law Journal by an authorized editor of Osgoode Digital Commons. The Difficulty of Amending the Constitution of Canada Abstract The Charlottetown Accord of 1992 was a set of proposals for amendments to the Constitution of Canada. These proposals were designed to achieve a national settlement of a variety of constitutional grievances, chiefly those arising from Quebec nationalism, western regionalism, and Aboriginal deprivation. The Accord was defeated in a national referendum. In the case of Quebec, the defeat of the Charlottetown Accord, following as it did on the defeat of the Meech Lake Accord, has made the option of secession relatively more attractive, but there are sound pragmatic reasons to hope that Quebec will not make that choice.
    [Show full text]
  • Charlottetown Accord
    Charlottetown Accord This article was written by a law student for the general public. Following the failure of the Meech Lake Accord in 1990, a series of deliberations took place on the future of Confederation both within and outside of Quebec. In fact, there were four bodies empanelled to engage in these discussions – a parliamentary and an extra-parliamentary body within Quebec and a parliamentary and an extra-parliamentary body nationally. Specifically, within Quebec, there were the Allaire Committee (see Allaire Report) and the Belanger- Campeau Committee; and nationally, there were the Beaudoin- Edwards Committee and the Spicer Commission. These studies led to various reports including the federal documentShaping Canada’s Future Together. Subsequently, the federal government convened a series of five national conferences to discuss various aspects of this document. This, in turn, led to a federal report entitled A Renewed Canada. All of the foregoing culminated in negotiations among the federal government, the provincial governments (including Quebec in the latter stages of negotiations), the territorial governments and representatives from the Assembly of First Nations, the Native Council of Canada, the Inuit Tapirisat of Canada and the Métis National Council. These negotiations resulted in what is now referred to as the ‘Charlottetown Accord’. The Accord dealt with a number of constitutional issues. For example, regarding the division of legislative powers (see division of powers), it provided for exclusive provincial jurisdiction over forestry, mining and some other areas. It also required the federal government to conduct negotiations with the provinces in order to “harmonize” policy in such areas as telecommunications, labour development and training, regional development and immigration.
    [Show full text]
  • CONSTITUTION-MAKING AS INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS a Case Study of the 1980 Canadian Constitutional Negotiations Adam D
    CONSTITUTION-MAKING AS INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS A Case Study of the 1980 Canadian Constitutional Negotiations Adam D. McDonald1, University of Waterloo The Constitution Act, 1982 is a document that profoundly changed the Canadian political landscape. It brought home the highest law of the land; it provided Canadians a mechanism to change their Constitution; it created a Charter of Rights and Freedoms, entrenched within the Constitution, out of the reach of one government. Perhaps its most important legacies, however, are the seemingly permanent isolation of Quebec and the primacy of place in Canadian history it gave Pierre Trudeau. This paper will examine the constitutional history of Canada with a view to determining what made the 1980 negotiating sessions successful when the sessions that led to both the Meech Lake Accord and the Charlottetown Accord were not. It is important, however, to note that the word “successful” is used in the sense that an agreement was reached. Unlike Meech and Charlottetown, the repatriated constitution did not have unanimity among the participants. The question that comes to mind is this: if the governments did not really agree in 1981, why was a Constitution ratified? More importantly, are there lessons that can be drawn from this agreement that can be applied to the failed accords of the Mulroney era? In order to complete this examination, the paper will be divided into two parts. In the first part, Canada’s constitutional story will be told. This is a necessary part of any examination of the constitutional negotiations, for without knowing what the players wanted historically, one cannot see what was changed by the 1980s.
    [Show full text]
  • Discover Canada the Rights and Responsibilities of Citizenship 2 Your Canadian Citizenship Study Guide
    STUDY GUIDE Discover Canada The Rights and Responsibilities of Citizenship 2 Your Canadian Citizenship Study Guide Message to Our Readers The Oath of Citizenship Le serment de citoyenneté Welcome! It took courage to move to a new country. Your decision to apply for citizenship is Je jure (ou j’affirme solennellement) another big step. You are becoming part of a great tradition that was built by generations of pioneers I swear (or affirm) Que je serai fidèle before you. Once you have met all the legal requirements, we hope to welcome you as a new citizen with That I will be faithful Et porterai sincère allégeance all the rights and responsibilities of citizenship. And bear true allegiance à Sa Majesté la Reine Elizabeth Deux To Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second Reine du Canada Queen of Canada À ses héritiers et successeurs Her Heirs and Successors Que j’observerai fidèlement les lois du Canada And that I will faithfully observe Et que je remplirai loyalement mes obligations The laws of Canada de citoyen canadien. And fulfil my duties as a Canadian citizen. Understanding the Oath Canada has welcomed generations of newcomers Immigrants between the ages of 18 and 54 must to our shores to help us build a free, law-abiding have adequate knowledge of English or French In Canada, we profess our loyalty to a person who represents all Canadians and not to a document such and prosperous society. For 400 years, settlers in order to become Canadian citizens. You must as a constitution, a banner such as a flag, or a geopolitical entity such as a country.
    [Show full text]
  • 20-4.4 Canadian National Identity
    20-4.4 Canadian National Identity National Identity 1. Survey your classmates to find out what being Canadian means to them. Fill out the organizer below. Student’s Name What being a Canadian means to him or her: Share your answers with classmates and create a class poster that illustrates what being Canadian means to students in your class. Knowledge and Employability Studio Social Studies 20-4.4 Canadian National Identity ©Alberta Education, April 2019 (www.LearnAlberta.ca) National Identity 1/11 2. Did the people in your class express different points of view on Canadian identity? Your culture and personal experiences may affect your perspective on what it means to be Canadian. Find out how the different types of Canadians below feel about Canadian identity and fill in the diagram with key words that describe their feelings. First Nations French New Canadians Immigrants Canadian Identity Urban Descendants Dwellers of European Settlers Rural Dwellers Knowledge and Employability Studio Social Studies 20-4.4 Canadian National Identity ©Alberta Education, April 2019 (www.LearnAlberta.ca) National Identity 2/11 3. Choose one of the groups from the previous Use these tools: question or another group and conduct a more thorough investigation of how people in that Getting Started with Research group feel about Canadian identity. Create a Recording Information simple presentation of your findings. If possible, include interviews and quotes. 4. To better understand symbols that promote a collective identity in Canada, follow these steps. Step one: Explain the history and importance of the following symbols of Canadian national identity. The Canadian Coat of Arms The Canadian Flag (Maple Leaf) The Canadian National Anthem (O Canada) Step two: Identify 10 Where to Start on the Web other symbols that promote Canadian https://www.canada.ca/en/canadian- identity and what each heritage/services/official-symbols-canada.html represents.
    [Show full text]
  • 5 Confederation Won Celebration!
    063-073 120820 11/1/04 2:34 PM Page 63 Chapter 5 Confederation Won Celebration! With the first dawn of this summer morn- mourning. A likeness of Dr. Tupper is burned ing, we hail the birthday of a new nation. side-by-side with a rat in Nova Scotia. In A united British America takes its place New Brunswick, a newspaper carries a death among the nations of the world. notice on its front page: “Died—at her resi- dence in the city of Fredericton, The Prov- —George Brown ince of New Brunswick, in the 83rd year of her age.” It is 1 July 1867. The church bells start to ring at midnight. Early in the morning guns roar a salute from Halifax in the east to Sarnia in the west. Bonfires and fireworks light up the sky in cities and towns across the new country. It is the birthday of the new Dominion of Canada and the people of Ontario, Québec, New Brunswick, and Nova Scotia are cele- brating. Under blue skies and sunshine, people of all religious faiths gather to offer prayers for the future of the nation. In Toronto, there is a great celebration at the Horticultural Gardens. The gardens are lit with Chinese lanterns. Fresh strawberries and ice cream are served. A concert is followed by dancing. Tickets are 25¢; children’s tickets are 10¢. In another part of the city, a huge ox is roasted and the meat is distributed to the poor. In Québec, boat races on the river, horse races, and a cricket match are held.
    [Show full text]
  • The 1992 Charlottetown Accord & Referendum
    CANADA’S 1992 CHARLOTTETOWN CONSTITUTIONAL ACCORD: TESTING THE LIMITS OF ASYMMETRICAL FEDERALISM By Michael d. Behiels Department of History University of Ottawa Abstract.-Canada‘s 1992 Charlottetown Constitutional Accord represented a dramatic attempt to transform the Canadian federation which is based on formal symmetry, albeit with a limited recognition of some asymmetry, into an asymmetrical federal constitution recognizing Canada‘s three nations, French, British, and Aboriginal. Canadians were called up to embrace multinational federalism, one comprising both stateless and state-based nations exercising self-governance in a multilayered, highly asymmetrical federal system. This paper explores why a majority of Canadians, for a wide variety of very complex reasons, opted in the first-ever constitutional referendum in October 1992 to retain their existing federal system. This paper argues that the rejection of a formalized asymmetrical federation based on the theory of multinational federalism, while contributing to the severe political crisis that fueled the 1995 referendum on Quebec secession, marked the moment when Canadians finally became a fully sovereign people. Palacio de la Aljafería – Calle de los Diputados, s/n– 50004 ZARAGOZA Teléfono 976 28 97 15 - Fax 976 28 96 65 [email protected] INTRODUCTION The Charlottetown Consensus Report, rejected in a landmark constitutional referendum on 26 October 1992, entailed a profound clash between competing models of federalism: symmetrical versus asymmetrical, and bi-national versus multinational. (Cook, 1994, Appendix, 225-249) The Meech Lake Constitutional Accord, 1987-90, pitted two conceptions of a bi-national -- French-Canada and English Canada – federalism against one another. The established conception entailing a pan-Canadian French-English duality was challenged and overtaken by a territorial Quebec/Canada conception of duality.
    [Show full text]
  • Insights from Canada for American Constitutional Federalism Stephen F
    Penn State Law eLibrary Journal Articles Faculty Works 2014 Insights from Canada for American Constitutional Federalism Stephen F. Ross Penn State Law Follow this and additional works at: http://elibrary.law.psu.edu/fac_works Part of the Comparative and Foreign Law Commons, and the Constitutional Law Commons Recommended Citation Stephen F. Ross, Insights from Canada for American Constitutional Federalism, 16 U. Pa. J. Const. L. 891 (2014). This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Works at Penn State Law eLibrary. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal Articles by an authorized administrator of Penn State Law eLibrary. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ARTICLES INSIGHTS FROM CANADA FOR AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL FEDERALISM Stephen F Ross* INTRODUCTION National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius' has again fo- cused widespread public attention on the role of the United States Supreme Court as an active arbiter of the balance of power between the federal government and the states. This has been an important and controversial topic throughout American as well as Canadian constitutional history, raising related questions of constitutional the- ory for a federalist republic: Whatjustifies unelected judges interfer- ing with the ordinary political process with regard to federalism ques- tions? Can courts create judicially manageable doctrines to police federalism, with anything more than the raw policy preferences of five justices as to whether a particular legislative issue is
    [Show full text]
  • Overview of Simulation
    Overview of Simulation Critical As representatives of a British North American colony at a hypothetical 1864 Ottawa Challenge Conference, students decide whether or not to join a proposed Canadian Confederation under the conditions outlined in a draft British North America Act which they have helped to negotiate. Synopsis This 8 - 13 hour simulation can be used as the cornerstone for an entire unit of study on Confederation. Students are assigned to one of six groups, each representing a British North American colony at the time of Confederation. They simulate the negotiations that led to Confederation by participating in a fictitious Ottawa Conference held in 1864. The simulation unfolds in five stages as summarized in the following chart Orientation In the introductory lesson students begin to think about the terms (1.5 - 2.5 hours) of Confederation by considering current difficulties facing Canada and by discussing the idea of re-visiting the original terms of the union of Canada. Students are introduced to the main tasks of the simulation and assigned to represent one of the six colonies that will take part in the conference. Preliminary Based on supplied briefing sheets and independent library research, Proposals each delegation composes a preliminary list of conditions, with (3 - 6 hours) accompanying justifications, for joining the proposed federal union. Students explain and defend their preliminary proposal in a writ- ten submission and a five-minute rehearsed presentation. Other delegations ask the presenting colony one question about a perti- nent issue. Final Each delegation discusses the preliminary proposals from the other Proposals colonies. Individual representatives become experts on one other (2 - 3 hours) colony and then brief fellow delegates on that colony’s needs and issues.
    [Show full text]
  • 209 AMENDING the BRITISH NORTH AMERICA ACT. Every
    209 AMENDING THE BRITISH NORTH AMERICA ACT. Every Canadian should be inspired by the vision of the Fathers of Confederation in their conception of one vast nation of the British Provinces in North America, stretching from sea to sea, and by the ability and courage they displayed in putting their patriotic vision into practical effect. But the B .N.A. Act makes no special provision for its amendment and the suggestion is sometimes made that this point was overlooked. I believe the Fathers of Confederation assumed that any amendments to the Act would, as the occasion arose, be made by the Imperial Parliament . I can find no reference in pre-Confederation speeches to the amendment of the proposed Act, except that in the debates of the Canadian Parliament of 1865 the Hon . D'Arcy McGee said :- "We go to the Imperial Government, the common arbiter of us all, in our true Federal metropolis-we go there to ask for our fundamental Charter. We hope, by having that Charter can that only be amended by the authority that made it, that we will lay the basis of permanency for our future government." -"Canada Confederation Debates", (1865) page 146. There is a very substantial part of the Canadian Constitution outside the B.N.A. Act, which, following British precedent, grows. and develops. The B .N.A. Act, however, can only be amended by statute and, defining as it does the legislative power of the Dominion and provinces respectively, the question as to how it should be amended has of late years become a matter of increasing importance .
    [Show full text]
  • Monday, September 28, 1998
    CANADA VOLUME 135 S NUMBER 127 S 1st SESSION S 36th PARLIAMENT OFFICIAL REPORT (HANSARD) Monday, September 28, 1998 Speaker: The Honourable Gilbert Parent CONTENTS (Table of Contents appears at back of this issue.) All parliamentary publications are available on the ``Parliamentary Internet Parlementaire'' at the following address: http://www.parl.gc.ca 8431 HOUSE OF COMMONS Monday, September 28, 1998 The House met at 11 a.m. how taxpayers feel on certain issues, for example, the credibility of political leaders in negotiating these types of deals. _______________ Even though it is taxpayer money that is used to find out what the taxpayers feel about particular situations, they are not being Prayers told. They are not being given the information. We have some _______________ serious problems with that. This is very reminiscent of what happened with Brian Mulroney in 1992 when the Tories refused to release the taxpayer-funded PRIVATE MEMBERS’ BUSINESS polls on Charlottetown. It begs the question of why this taxpayer money is being spent. Why are these polls being held back? Why D (1100 ) are we not being apprised of the situation? [English] It boils down to a few reasons. One of the things the government likes to say is that somehow this will taint federal-provincial CALGARY DECLARATION relations. That was decided in court by Judge Rothstein. I will get into the quotes in a minute. In that case there was a determination Mr. Rob Anders (Calgary West, Ref.) moved: that the government did not have a legitimate case to deprive the That a Humble Address be presented to His Excellency praying that he will cause public of these documents.
    [Show full text]
  • The Saskatchewan Institute of Public Policy Public Policy Paper Series
    The Saskatchewan Institute of Public Policy Public Policy Paper Series The Death of Deference: National Policy-Making in the Aftermath of the Meech Lake and Charlottetown Accords by Ian Peach September,2004 Public Policy Paper 26 $5.00; ISBN# 0-7731-0493-3 SIPP www.uregina.ca/sipp The Death of Deference: National Policy-Making in the Aftermath of the Meech Lake and Charlottetown Accords SIPP Public Policy Paper No. 26 September 2004 Ian Peach* Saskatchewan Institute of Public Policy Senior Fellow ISBN# 0-7731-0493-3 ISSN# 1702-7802 * This paper is based on presentations given at conferences in Regina and Edinburgh. The author would like to thank all of the staff and Fellows at the Saskatchewan Institute of Public Policy and Tom McIntosh for their helpful comments on earlier drafts of the presentations and the paper, and Ross Macnab of the Constitutional Law Branch of the Saskatchewan Department of Justice for kindly tracking down difficult-to-find case citations. Any errors or omissions that remain are strictly those of the author. It has been suggested that there has been a decline in Canadians’ traditional deference to elites in recent decades, and that the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (the Charter) is either a reflection of the decline in deference or a cause of it.1 Deference, however, seems not merely in decline; it is not “pining for the fjords”, as Monty Python would put it, but is “pushing up the daisies”. It is dead; it was a lingering death, one which lasted between June 1987 and June 1990, and the deathbed was the Meech Lake Accord.
    [Show full text]