-on the other hand:
-a sep. gov’t in Quebec could never agree to constitutional
renewal.
-Public opinion strongly in support of Charter
-academic critics seem to be out of touch with views
of most Canadians. J.R. Saul: academics tend to suffer from
“holier than thou” attitude.
-Constitutional crisis of 1982 seems to have been
resolved informally
-Quebec secession reference
-“clarity” bill; act regarding constitutional amendments
-Has the Charter advanced respect for human rights?
-Human rights are based on the idea of mutual respect;
we have an equal right to respect, and we have a duty of respect.
-Are we now more respectful and tolerant of each
other?
-Are governments more respectful?
-Are we more free than before?
-Are we more equal than before?
-Are procedural (legal) rights better protected?
-are democratic rights better protected? (vote,
run for office, participation)
-Charter applies to public officials, not just laws
-are public officials (politicians, public servants)
more rights conscious?
-Does policy process respect HR better than before?
-How have the judges done?
-How have the lawyers done?
-Was it worth all the trouble?
-Agenda for reform
-Lawyers
-legal ethics
-social science & historical
research
-Judges
-do they need a better background
in public policy analysis?
-Public servants
-are they well enough educated
about HR?
-Legislatures & cabinets
-should s. 33 be repealed?
-Should legislative committees
keep a watch on HR issues, including court decisions?
-Should legislatures consider
enacting interpretive resolutions?
-The public
-how aware are members of
the public about HR issues?
-Impact of Charter depends
on
-integrity of those applying (most important)
-procedures in application, and
-(lastly) the wording of Charter itself