Yes. It was part of the last amendment submission as that was the only way to make it apply to Quebec. If the current procedure was used, Quebec could bail out of the amendment and the Charter would apply to Quebec provincially.
If the current procedure was used, Quebec could bail out of the amendment and the Charter would apply to Quebec provincially.
Did you mean to write "...the Charter would not apply to Quebec provincially"? That would seem the logical outcome, if Quebec could bail out on an amendment that created the Charter.
Anything interesting to report from an evening of nerding out?
Strangely, I agreed with Enoch Powell. He suggested that Westminster confine itself to giving Canada the amendment power and leaving all other changes such as the Charter for us to do through the new, patriated amendment process,
Which actually makes sense.
I remember my dad picking me up at the swimming pool, and the news on the radio discussing the debate in London over the repatriation.
I assume that, contra Powell's idea, the Charter was added to the Constitution before it was officially repatriated?
Not really before but as part of the patriation. The Charter is the first 34 sections of the Constitution Act 1982. The constitution was patriated by the UK Canada Act 1982 which enacted the Constitution Act 1982 and gave up the UK’s ability to enact further legislation in Canada.
The Constitution is extremely difficult to amend. If the Charter had to be enacted by amendment it probably never would have happened (as I would guess Powell probably foresaw and intended…).
The Constitution is extremely difficult to amend. If the Charter had to be enacted by amendment it probably never would have happened (as I would guess Powell probably foresaw and intended…).
Assuming that Powell was giving any serious thought to principles, I wonder if he was trying to thwart the implementation of a Charter Of Rights because he disliked the idea, or if he just thought "They're not our colony anymore, it's up to them to do what they want."
(My understanding of Powell's post-imperial views is that, having accepted the loss of the colonies, he was bitterly unsentimental about them, which jived with his views on Commonwealth immigration.)
I was really just guessing, but if he didn’t care one way or the other why would he raise it at all?
Googling "Enoch Powell Canadian constitution" gets you straight to the hansard in question. A cursory glance seems to indicate he argued that on principle Canada should be the one to amend its own constitution.
Ah I see. He seems to be talking about the entire Constitution Act 1982 and not just the Charter, which is what had me confused. I can’t tell from this excerpt precisely what his position is but on the assumption that the UK Parliament would have to legislate a constitutional act for Canada to patriate the amending formula it’s hard to understand why they couldn’t do what we asked them and enact the rest of the Constitution Act 1982 as well.
They considered us as already defacto independent and that we could and should do the tinkering ourselves, given the tools. The fact that they had to do this was essentially an embarassment. We really should have been like Australia who had always been able to amend their own constitution from its inception.
They considered us as already defacto independent and that we could and should do the tinkering ourselves, given the tools. The fact that they had to do this was essentially an embarassment. We really should have been like Australia who had always been able to amend their own constitution from its inception.
Not disagreeing with your last sentence but AIUI until 1982 we didn’t actually have that power. So they needed to do something.
I sort of wonder if the amending formula was the elephant in the room here. From Trudeau’s perspective there probably wasn’t much point in patriating the Constitution unless it could be modernized at the same time - with the Charter of course but also other stuff. But the amending formula is a challenge and as you pointed out (somewhat to my surprise actually) it’s actually pretty much impossible to force a province to accept a constitutional amendment it doesn’t want. So there’s a real possibility we would have own amending formula but then basically nothing ever gets amended…
Of course depending on your politics this could be a good thing or a bad thing but it’s certainly not what the government wanted.
Essentially, JT resigning and Trump playing the tariff game changed the ballot question. PP had a very good strategy for defeating JT. That strategy is in essence dead. PP also pales in comparison to MC when it comes to credentials, grownup behaviour and gravitas. Take the security clearance issue for example.
I wonder what the chances are the CPC will learn anything from this…
In fairness, since at least Mulroney's first term, voters have associated Canada's Conservatives with the US Republicans, so there probably wasn't alot Poilievre could do to break that connection when Trump went bonkers.
Granted, Doug Ford has managed to avoid the taint, but I think that's partly 'cuz he's actually in office, and so can engage in real action against the tariffs, which makes the news in a way that Poilievre's speeches do not.
Trudeau has been systematically destroying what was historically Canadian, because he hates what we were.
'Hate' is a strong word in any discussion. Can you tell us why you think it is the right description here? It doesn't seem right, or even close to it, from my perspective.
I spent a fair bit of the evening reading UK Parliament Handard on the debates on the passage of the British North America Act, 1867 and the Canada Act, 1982.
I wonder what the chances are the CPC will learn anything from this…
In fairness, since at least Mulroney's first term, voters have associated Canada's Conservatives with the US Republicans, so there probably wasn't alot Poilievre could do to break that connection when Trump went bonkers.
I’m sure there are voters who associate the CPC with the Republicans, either positively (on the more ideological right), or negatively (on the left), but I think this is probably not the swing vote that’s swinging Liberal at the moment. I suspect this may have more to do with MOTR voters rethinking the concept of making a dilettante populist prime minister of Canada out of pique at the Liberals at a time when it actually matters.
And of course the fact the JT is no longer in the picture. Has anyone at Liberal HQ turned their mind to writing Freeland a thank you card for pulling the plug on Trudeau? If they haven’t yet, they should.
In my limited circle (all circles are limited after COVID) most of the swing voters were moving from anything-but-Justin to anything-but-Pierre. In a way disappointing fans of ideological purity, almost all of my nationalist acquaintances are moving from the Bloc to Carney's Liberals (disclaimer: 5 our of 6 polled does not constitute a scientific survey). My NDP friends are switching off all channels other than the elect-Joel-Harden-in-Ottawa-Centre network.
But Her Excellency has not yet dissolved Parliament, and election roller coasters are not unknown in Canada.
This is encouraging. It seems that most other leaders can hardly wait to rush to Washington to kiss trump on all four cheeks at the earliest opportunity.
This is encouraging. It seems that most other leaders can hardly wait to rush to Washington to kiss trump on all four cheeks at the earliest opportunity.
Surely you are not referring to the Premier of Alberta?
This is encouraging. It seems that most other leaders can hardly wait to rush to Washington to kiss trump on all four cheeks at the earliest opportunity.
Surely you are not referring to the Premier of Alberta?
She now claims to be doing the "good cop" as part of some policier procedural, but I'm pretty skeptical myself.
Despite being an NDP member, I will be voting Liberal, once again, in our riding.
I'm still undecided. I can't remember how long it's been since I've voted anything other than NDP -- decades, probably -- but I live in a newly-redrawn riding where our Liberal MP has resigned, so everyone on the ballot will be new. My inclination will still be to vote NDP, but it will depend on who the candidates are - ultimately, whoever has the best chance of beating the CPC candidate will probably get my vote, since keeping the Conservatives out of office as long as PP is leader is my top priority at the moment.
Trump disavows the mistaken notion that Pierre is pro-MAGA.
"The conservative that's running is, stupidly, no friend of mine. I don't know him, but he said negative things," he said.
Trump is a bully, and he thinks he can railroad the Liberals easier than he can the Conservatives.
Frankly I think this is deliberate disinformation, orchestrated by someone who is smarter than Trump is.
I actually don’t think Poilievre is a fervent Trumpist but the concept that he would navigate Trumpism better than Carney is beyond bizarre.
What are you saying is misinformation here?
I didn’t say that anything was misinformation. I did say that I thought Trump conveying that he would prefer a Liberal government was deliberate disinformation. Although to be fair, more on the basis of gut instinct than anything else.
Trump disavows the mistaken notion that Pierre is pro-MAGA.
"The conservative that's running is, stupidly, no friend of mine. I don't know him, but he said negative things," he said.
Trump is a bully, and he thinks he can railroad the Liberals easier than he can the Conservatives.
Frankly I think this is deliberate disinformation, orchestrated by someone who is smarter than Trump is.
I actually don’t think Poilievre is a fervent Trumpist but the concept that he would navigate Trumpism better than Carney is beyond bizarre.
What are you saying is misinformation here?
I didn’t say that anything was misinformation. I did say that I thought Trump conveying that he would prefer a Liberal government was deliberate disinformation. Although to be fair, more on the basis of gut instinct than anything else.
Sorry, "disinformation".
And you meant Trump himself was deliberately spreading disinformation. Maybe, though I suspect he doesn't really care about the ideological orientation of Canada's government, and was just trying to emphasize his indifference to the Conservatives by casually exaggerating his affection for the Liberals(*).
(*) Like an atheist with no belief in the supernatural yelling "Satan rules!" and flashing devil-horns when some street preacher tries to hand him a tract.
The problem with the Trump administration (one of the many…) is that it’s often hard to know whether something is calculated evil or just Trump randomly mouthing off. My initial instinct was the former but the latter is also very possible…
The problem with the Trump administration (one of the many…) is that it’s often hard to know whether something is calculated evil or just Trump randomly mouthing off. My initial instinct was the former but the latter is also very possible…
His recent "Commonwealth" musings provide some support for the latter. Pretty sure he wasn't sitting in the Oval Office drawing up detailed plans for infiltrating the Commonwealth. Rather, he just saw a Fleet Street headline of sketchy authenticity, thought "Cool!!", and tweeted the sentiment out.
(That being said, I expect Canada's Defense and Global Affairs ministries to assume the worst-case scenarios when evaluating Trump's musings about invading Canada.)
The problem with the Trump administration (one of the many…) is that it’s often hard to know whether something is calculated evil or just Trump randomly mouthing off. My initial instinct was the former but the latter is also very possible…
I generally go for the randomly mouthing off option first, until evidence suggests the former.
Carney is reported to be running in the riding Nepean in Ottawa. Interestingly that means is riding is next door to Pierre Poilievre's in Carleton.
This means that they can pal up for drives from their ridings to Parliament Hill--- both get official cars and drivers, so perhaps some sort of arrangement can save the taxpayer some money.
Such goodwill is not without precedent. In the 1945 Spadina election, George Hees used to give his Labour-Progressive rival a ride in his automobile. TVO's Political Blind Date series (www.tvo.org/programs/political-blind-date) tells us that this practice is not without its benefits.
Carney is reported to be running in the riding Nepean in Ottawa. Interestingly that means is riding is next door to Pierre Poilievre's in Carleton.
This means that they can pal up for drives from their ridings to Parliament Hill--- both get official cars and drivers, so perhaps some sort of arrangement can save the taxpayer some money.
Such goodwill is not without precedent. In the 1945 Spadina election, George Hees used to give his Labour-Progressive rival a ride in his automobile. TVO's Political Blind Date series (www.tvo.org/programs/political-blind-date) tells us that this practice is not without its benefits.
I assume Hees thought that the Labour-Progressive candidate would siphon votes away from the Liberals?
Carney is reported to be running in the riding Nepean in Ottawa. Interestingly that means is riding is next door to Pierre Poilievre's in Carleton.
This means that they can pal up for drives from their ridings to Parliament Hill--- both get official cars and drivers, so perhaps some sort of arrangement can save the taxpayer some money.
Such goodwill is not without precedent. In the 1945 Spadina election, George Hees used to give his Labour-Progressive rival a ride in his automobile. TVO's Political Blind Date series (www.tvo.org/programs/political-blind-date) tells us that this practice is not without its benefits.
I assume Hees thought that the Labour-Progressive candidate would siphon votes away from the Liberals?
It's quite possible, although the 1945 results tell us that the Liberal candidate (David Croll) was well ahead and the Progressive Conservatives and the Labour-Progressives ran even with about 10,000 votes each. A quick look at a biography of David Croll suggests that his strategy was to secure CCF votes as part of an anti-Communist front-- there was a lot of activist bitterness over CPC work (enforcement) in the garment unions-- this was years before Spadina became a graduate student paradise with takeout sushi.
However, as Mr Hees explained it to me at a lunch (a mere 40+ years ago), Mr Carr lived nearby and he thought it was a neighbourly gesture-- in those days, not everyone had an automobile and people would frequently give lifts. Mr Hees later ran into some grief for his generosity as the Labour-Progressives were a CPC front, but played back his service on the Scheldt delta as proof of his loyalty.
It was a different world. The streetcar was a then substantial 10c for a fare and candidates had to take care of their own expenses.
Ah yes, Gorgeous George. He represented Northumberland (the Ontario one) for years. The father of one my old friends collected him from Montreal for his first run.
Interesting. I see he was a member for Broadview (now Broadview Danforth) back in the 1950s. Says something about both the riding and the party that their chances there now are basically nonexistent.
Ah yes, Gorgeous George. He represented Northumberland (the Ontario one) for years. The father of one my old friends collected him from Montreal for his first run.
A Toronto friend is a near relation of his and when she heard that I would be moving to Ottawa, she called him and arranged a lunch for me, as she thought it would be really intersting for me. It was-- two hours of raconteuring and wicked comments. When I returned to my office, well-lubricated and cheery, I was accused of leaking secrets in his direction-- I replied that I didn't get a word in edgewise.
This began years of listening to stories from retired politicians, clerics, and bureaucrats. All pure gold.
Comments
Did you mean to write "...the Charter would not apply to Quebec provincially"? That would seem the logical outcome, if Quebec could bail out on an amendment that created the Charter.
Not really before but as part of the patriation. The Charter is the first 34 sections of the Constitution Act 1982. The constitution was patriated by the UK Canada Act 1982 which enacted the Constitution Act 1982 and gave up the UK’s ability to enact further legislation in Canada.
The Constitution is extremely difficult to amend. If the Charter had to be enacted by amendment it probably never would have happened (as I would guess Powell probably foresaw and intended…).
Assuming that Powell was giving any serious thought to principles, I wonder if he was trying to thwart the implementation of a Charter Of Rights because he disliked the idea, or if he just thought "They're not our colony anymore, it's up to them to do what they want."
(My understanding of Powell's post-imperial views is that, having accepted the loss of the colonies, he was bitterly unsentimental about them, which jived with his views on Commonwealth immigration.)
Googling "Enoch Powell Canadian constitution" gets you straight to the hansard in question. A cursory glance seems to indicate he argued that on principle Canada should be the one to amend its own constitution.
Not disagreeing with your last sentence but AIUI until 1982 we didn’t actually have that power. So they needed to do something.
I sort of wonder if the amending formula was the elephant in the room here. From Trudeau’s perspective there probably wasn’t much point in patriating the Constitution unless it could be modernized at the same time - with the Charter of course but also other stuff. But the amending formula is a challenge and as you pointed out (somewhat to my surprise actually) it’s actually pretty much impossible to force a province to accept a constitutional amendment it doesn’t want. So there’s a real possibility we would have own amending formula but then basically nothing ever gets amended…
Of course depending on your politics this could be a good thing or a bad thing but it’s certainly not what the government wanted.
God, Poilievre must absolutely hate Trump.
In fairness, since at least Mulroney's first term, voters have associated Canada's Conservatives with the US Republicans, so there probably wasn't alot Poilievre could do to break that connection when Trump went bonkers.
Granted, Doug Ford has managed to avoid the taint, but I think that's partly 'cuz he's actually in office, and so can engage in real action against the tariffs, which makes the news in a way that Poilievre's speeches do not.
This is one discussion of the comments Trudeau has made.
I used to read Canada's Hansard almost daily.
I’m sure there are voters who associate the CPC with the Republicans, either positively (on the more ideological right), or negatively (on the left), but I think this is probably not the swing vote that’s swinging Liberal at the moment. I suspect this may have more to do with MOTR voters rethinking the concept of making a dilettante populist prime minister of Canada out of pique at the Liberals at a time when it actually matters.
And of course the fact the JT is no longer in the picture. Has anyone at Liberal HQ turned their mind to writing Freeland a thank you card for pulling the plug on Trudeau? If they haven’t yet, they should.
ETA: Carney is expected to visit the G-G on Sunday.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/carney-to-call-election-this-sunday-1.7488444
But Her Excellency has not yet dissolved Parliament, and election roller coasters are not unknown in Canada.
Look for that to be a Conservative talking point, though I'm pretty sure Trump doesn't really care about the ideological hue of his counterparts.
This is encouraging. It seems that most other leaders can hardly wait to rush to Washington to kiss trump on all four cheeks at the earliest opportunity.
Surely you are not referring to the Premier of Alberta?
This is true. I was at Joel's campaign launch on Tuesday evening.
We are also hopeful for Josh Bizjak in Ottawa West--Nepean, a seat held provincially by the NDP.
She now claims to be doing the "good cop" as part of some policier procedural, but I'm pretty skeptical myself.
I'm still undecided. I can't remember how long it's been since I've voted anything other than NDP -- decades, probably -- but I live in a newly-redrawn riding where our Liberal MP has resigned, so everyone on the ballot will be new. My inclination will still be to vote NDP, but it will depend on who the candidates are - ultimately, whoever has the best chance of beating the CPC candidate will probably get my vote, since keeping the Conservatives out of office as long as PP is leader is my top priority at the moment.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/trump-canada-politics-1.7487289
I wonder why?
Trump disavows the mistaken notion that Pierre is pro-MAGA.
"The conservative that's running is, stupidly, no friend of mine. I don't know him, but he said negative things," he said.
Trump is a bully, and he thinks he can railroad the Liberals easier than he can the Conservatives.
Frankly I think this is deliberate disinformation, orchestrated by someone who is smarter than Trump is.
I actually don’t think Poilievre is a fervent Trumpist but the concept that he would navigate Trumpism better than Carney is beyond bizarre.
What are you saying is misinformation here?
I didn’t say that anything was misinformation. I did say that I thought Trump conveying that he would prefer a Liberal government was deliberate disinformation. Although to be fair, more on the basis of gut instinct than anything else.
Sorry, "disinformation".
And you meant Trump himself was deliberately spreading disinformation. Maybe, though I suspect he doesn't really care about the ideological orientation of Canada's government, and was just trying to emphasize his indifference to the Conservatives by casually exaggerating his affection for the Liberals(*).
(*) Like an atheist with no belief in the supernatural yelling "Satan rules!" and flashing devil-horns when some street preacher tries to hand him a tract.
His recent "Commonwealth" musings provide some support for the latter. Pretty sure he wasn't sitting in the Oval Office drawing up detailed plans for infiltrating the Commonwealth. Rather, he just saw a Fleet Street headline of sketchy authenticity, thought "Cool!!", and tweeted the sentiment out.
(That being said, I expect Canada's Defense and Global Affairs ministries to assume the worst-case scenarios when evaluating Trump's musings about invading Canada.)
I generally go for the randomly mouthing off option first, until evidence suggests the former.
This means that they can pal up for drives from their ridings to Parliament Hill--- both get official cars and drivers, so perhaps some sort of arrangement can save the taxpayer some money.
Such goodwill is not without precedent. In the 1945 Spadina election, George Hees used to give his Labour-Progressive rival a ride in his automobile. TVO's Political Blind Date series (www.tvo.org/programs/political-blind-date) tells us that this practice is not without its benefits.
I assume Hees thought that the Labour-Progressive candidate would siphon votes away from the Liberals?
It's quite possible, although the 1945 results tell us that the Liberal candidate (David Croll) was well ahead and the Progressive Conservatives and the Labour-Progressives ran even with about 10,000 votes each. A quick look at a biography of David Croll suggests that his strategy was to secure CCF votes as part of an anti-Communist front-- there was a lot of activist bitterness over CPC work (enforcement) in the garment unions-- this was years before Spadina became a graduate student paradise with takeout sushi.
However, as Mr Hees explained it to me at a lunch (a mere 40+ years ago), Mr Carr lived nearby and he thought it was a neighbourly gesture-- in those days, not everyone had an automobile and people would frequently give lifts. Mr Hees later ran into some grief for his generosity as the Labour-Progressives were a CPC front, but played back his service on the Scheldt delta as proof of his loyalty.
It was a different world. The streetcar was a then substantial 10c for a fare and candidates had to take care of their own expenses.
A Toronto friend is a near relation of his and when she heard that I would be moving to Ottawa, she called him and arranged a lunch for me, as she thought it would be really intersting for me. It was-- two hours of raconteuring and wicked comments. When I returned to my office, well-lubricated and cheery, I was accused of leaking secrets in his direction-- I replied that I didn't get a word in edgewise.
This began years of listening to stories from retired politicians, clerics, and bureaucrats. All pure gold.