An analysis of constitutional change, Canada, 1980–82

Conclusion

I have tried to develop a simple point, namely that without trust, governing is more difficult, because it requires greater use of force. I have suggested that in a heterogeneous federal state the conditions for trust accumulation are more difficult to devise with regard to the national government. On the whole, I have noted that most provincial governments in Canada were satisfied with a status quo that gave them a veto on any change and in which Parliamentary supremacy was the paramount doctrine.

The Agreement of November 1981 was the outcome of a titanic struggle between “federalist” and “separatist” views held by Quebecers about the role of Ottawa in the governance of their affairs. The “victory” of the “federalist” forces, well demonstrated by the increased potential role of the national government in the collective affairs of Francophones, will help those same Francophones to have more trust in the national government. Much remains to be done.