{"id":175,"date":"2013-10-18T05:11:47","date_gmt":"2013-10-18T05:11:47","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.legitimacy.dev\/?page_id=175"},"modified":"2026-05-16T06:16:18","modified_gmt":"2026-05-16T06:16:18","slug":"3-27","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/patriationandlegitimacy.com\/english\/3-27\/","title":{"rendered":"3-27"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>positions, and to raise some questions as to what we might learn from this experience about the nature of our political system.&nbsp; I would hope this might enable us to speculate more intelligently about the path of future constitutional amendments.&nbsp; In making this examination, I am applying an essentially pragmatic test&nbsp;&#8212; namely, which approaches to political legitimacy seem to work in our country?&nbsp; This, after all, is the test I defined for myself in my first lecture.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"wpsdc-drop-cap\">F<\/span>irst, I suppose it is natural to ask whether the result of all this effort, the Canada Act, 1982, is politically legitimate.&nbsp; I can only point out certain indicators.&nbsp; Obviously, the federal government and the nine provincial governments which signed the accord last November regard their work as politically legitimate.&nbsp; So, obviously, do the Senate and the House of Commons which adopted the Joint Address.&nbsp; So, probably, do the legislatures of the consenting nine provinces, as I have not heard of any of those legislatures defeating their governments on this issue.&nbsp; To the extent that one can judge such matters, it also appears that a majority of Canadians accepts the new constitution.&nbsp; According to a Gallup poll taken in May, 1982, nationally some 57% thought the new constitution was a good thing, only 14% thought it was not a good thing, and 30% didn&#8217;t know.&nbsp; Although the degree of enthusiasm varied from one part of the country to another, there was no region, not even Quebec, in which a majority were opposed to the new constitution.<sup>9<\/sup>&nbsp; On the other hand, the Government of Quebec and a majority of its National Assembly obviously do not regard any constitutional change as politically legitimate without the consent of the Government of Quebec.&nbsp; That Government placed before its Court of Appeal the question of whether an amendment made over the veto of Quebec is consistent with constitutional convention; in doing this, it was asking if such an amendment is politically legitimate.&nbsp; The Quebec Court of Appeal answered in the affirmative and this decision was appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada, which has not yet rendered its decision.<sup>10<\/sup><\/p>\n<p>Throughout this whole agonizing process, differing attitudes were displayed towards the authority with which various bodies, groups, or persons can make decisions about the constitution.&nbsp; I think these attitudes reveal certain views, some articulate and some inarticulate, as to the sources of political legitimacy for our constitution, and I wish to look at several of those possible sources.<\/p>\n<hr size\"1\" noshade width=\"120\">\n<p><span style='font-size:10pt;'>9.&nbsp; &#8220;Close to one third of Canadians unsure if new constitution good&#8221; <em>Ottawa Citizen<\/em>, June 19, 1982, p. 4.<\/span><br \/>\n<span style='font-size:10pt;'>10.&nbsp; Since these lectures, on December 6, 1982, the Supreme Court held that Quebec had no conventional right of veto:&nbsp; <em>A.G. of Quebec v. A.G. of Canada<\/em> (1982) 45 N.R. 317.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/patriationandlegitimacy.com\/english\/3-28\/\"><img decoding=\"async\" loading=\"lazy\" src=\"https:\/\/patriationandlegitimacy.com\/english\/wp-content\/uploads\/Next-Page-Patriation-and-Legitimacy.png\" alt=\"Next Paget Patriation and Legitimacy\" width=\"182\" height=\"37\" class=\"alignright size-full wp-image-1215\" \/><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>positions, and to raise some questions as to what we might learn from this experience about the nature of our political system.&nbsp; I would&#46;&#46;&#46;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"menu_order":31,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/patriationandlegitimacy.com\/english\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/175"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/patriationandlegitimacy.com\/english\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/patriationandlegitimacy.com\/english\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/patriationandlegitimacy.com\/english\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/patriationandlegitimacy.com\/english\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=175"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/patriationandlegitimacy.com\/english\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/175\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2576,"href":"https:\/\/patriationandlegitimacy.com\/english\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/175\/revisions\/2576"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/patriationandlegitimacy.com\/english\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=175"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}