Challenging English-Canadian Orthodoxy on Democracy and Constitutional Change

I. INTRODUCTION For several days in June 1990 dozens of Canadians gathered outside the old railway station in downtown Ottawa which, some years before, had been converted into a conference centre. (1) They gathered to bear witness to efforts by the Canadian prime minister and the provincial premiers and territorial leaders, the so-called "first ministers," to come to an agreement on changes to the Meech Lake Accord, a package of amendments to the Canadian constitution. (2) In the face of fundamental disagreement over critical issues, most importantly, the implications of a proposed interpretative clause recognizing Quebec as a distinct society, the meetings were repeatedly extended in an effort to forge a consensus. Rather than meet publicly to ratify an agreement, first ministers met in private to allow for hard bargaining. As the meetings, originally envisaged to last a few days, dragged on and on, citizen interest and concern became increasingly apparent. Not only did crowds gather outside the conference centre, but letters, faxes, and telephone messages poured in with offers of support, assistance, advice, and of course, criticism. While Canadians were divided on what it is they wanted from the meetings--the merits of the accord were hotly debated--the simple fact that curious citizens gathered to witness the constitutional deliberations demonstrated in a very tangible way that a significant and vocal minority of the Canadian public wanted to play a part in the process of debating the constitution. This somewhat spontaneous gathering of Canadians located on the outside of constitutional negotiations signalled, in a tangible way, a major challenge to the traditional style of constitutional negotiation. What some have called constitutional change by elite accommodation was once again under attack in favour of an approach to constitutional change that directly involved Canadians. (3) In fact, within a few years it became clear that the process chosen to achieve major constitutional change would require a major role for citizens including ratification by means of referendum.