TA: Dylan Dilks
Prof: Jonathan Malloy September 30th, 2014
In the year of 1987 there was a prevailing sentiment of uneasiness amongst Canadians because of Quebec's exclusion from the constitution. Quebec would also refuse to join in constitutional reforms making it difficult to progress with Aboriginal rights and the government was forced to grant Ontario a defacto vote on constitutional changes, (Parkinson, 2007). The Meech Lake Accord was a document drafted in response to this as to bring Quebec back into the constitutional framework by outlining the five demands made by then Quebec Premier, Robert Bourassa. The document was contentious for both its substance and the procedure of them being negotiated on behind closed doors by the then, First Ministers.
Though the argument can be well debated by supporters of the document that open consensus is likely to have been more time consuming, costly and perhaps less chaotic than hard bargaining, it is a much more difficult task altogether to prove that hard bargaining is more democratic.
As a matter of democratic principle, the hard bargaining displayed in the negotiations of Meech Lake Accord in 1987 or in modern day have no place in Canadian politics.
The Meech Lake Accord was executed as the infamous, behind-the-scenes gathering of eleven white men in suits for one simple reason: because that's how it was always done, (Cochrane & Dyck, 2013). The very constitution the Accord was created to have Quebec sign was drafted in this same manner and any other means of application would have likely been conceived as atypical initially, but this was not the case for long. The Constitution and the entrenchment of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms brought along what Glen Clark and Chris Harris of the British Columbia Legislative Assembly dubbed...