Constitutional change in the post-Charlottetown decade: who won? who lost?

Abstract

Since the failure of the Charlottetown Accord, there is a widely accepted assumption that constitutional politics has ended. However, given the intensity of constitutional pressures preceding the Charlottetown Accord, it is unlikely that the actors involved would give up their constitutional ambitions. A more reasonable plausible is that these groups would seek out alternative forums to provide them with similar constitutional resources. As such, while macro-constitutional politics (formal amendments) was abandoned, through the processes of micro-constitutional politics Gudicial litigation) and quiet-constitutional politics (federal-provincial agreements and political conventions), the constitutional landscape of Canada has experienced widespread change. These changes are consistent with demands articulated by constitutional actors in the Charlottetown Accord. The post-Charlottetown decade, therefore, is more accurately characterized as a decade of alternative constitutional politics, rather than a decade without constitutional politics.