The Charlottetown Accord, the Referendum, and the Future of Canada

Agar Adamson is the author of Letters of Agar Adamson, 1914–19 and former chair of the Department of Political Science at Acadia University in Nova Scotia.

This is an important and timely study not only of the difficult years of
constitutional review, ending in 1993, but also of the future
disposition of Canadian federalism. As the editors point out in their
well-written introduction, Canadians do not want to hear “the C
word” again for a long time. This attitude is understandable, though
hardly commendable. As the results of the 1993 federal election
illustrate, the Constitution, like death and taxes, is a part of our
Canadian heritage.

The 20 essays are all authored by reputed experts in their field. The
topics cover the spectrum, from institutional reform to the referendum
itself. “Speculation on a Canada Without Quebec,” by Roger Gibbons,
not only forces the reader to speculate on Quebec separation, but also
deals with the reconstruction of a federation without Quebec. In a way,
this paper (the final one) serves as an introduction to the other
essays, for a Canada without Quebec will be forced to face many
constitutional issues. Also deserving of special mention is Reg
Whitaker’s “Who Killed Asymmetrical Federalism?” Many commentators
are of the view that if only the framers of Charlottetown had listened
to the people, symmetrical federalism would have been an acceptable
compromise in 1993; it may still be the only compromise that will keep
Canada united.

It is unfortunate that this worthwhile study of the Constitution
imbroglio will not receive the wide readership it deserves: Canadians
remain far too comfortable to face the important issues it raises.