No. Mr Elliot-Legacy-Trudeau simply cobbled together an impossible to utilise (beyond Bi-Lateral Changes involving 1 Prov & Feds) Amending Formula and slapped it together with a Condition-ridden Code of Provisional Rights (that we already had stronger versions of in Common Law) and had the UK’s enabling legislation stipulate that the Lords and UK Commons would back-out of all things Canadian ….. but the Office Of Monarch was left unchanged.
Why bother to HAVE a Constitution … if you don’t follow it? -Alta Premier Ralph Klein
Why HAVE a Constitution … if you don’t know what it’s background documents (1763-to now) have say?
& the more well-known Big Ones:
- The Royal Proclamation, 1763.
- The Québec Act, 1774.
- The Constitutional Act, 1791.
- The Union Act, 1840.
As for the As-Amended 1867 BNA & 1982 Canadian Constitution, you can look them up
My reason for posting, as an Intro, may I be bold enough to offer a Visual-Aid –a dline-drawn snapshot of the “observed” Structure of Canadian Govt – ‘what everything THINKS is true’ regardless of the actual Constitution Provisions.
I created these drawings for my 2006 By-Election Campaign in London Ontario as an Independent Candidate.
Compare the above to the As Written & still Legal but ignored and never studied – at our (currently enjoyed) peril
IF the governors won’t follow the written BNA/Constitution – what will they follow?
and what can you ‘manage back to’ — if not to the BNA/Constitution