Lately some of the provinces have been talking about a Constitutional change because of various issues (East Cost Fisheries, Kyoto Protocals ect). Chrietien has said that it would be up to the Provinces to gain support for such an action. Remembering the debates of the Trudeau and Mulroney areas should Canada have another round of Constitutional debates. If so what you like to see added/changed/amended?

   

I would like to see the "Right to Bear Arms" included. But I know that'll never happen.

   

I'd like to see all these provincal parochials jump into the sea, off a cliff or otherwise cease and desist.

   

I think we need some mechanism to deal with these things...maybe an appointed body with representatives from every province and territory might work. As it stands right now the provinces push for whatever is the most politically palatable at home. If we could get an apolitical panel to resolve disputes there would be a lot less of this tendency to threaten to leave the country.

   

appointed body....lol

   

The COnstituational debate of the trudeau era was entirely warranted considering the drafting of a new constiution. Mulrone was messing with it in order to appease the provinces plus he's no good example cause he was a bastard and so's that nasty Ben i'm-always-smiling-because-my-dad-owned-you. Moving on... ournd three is entirely unwarranted we don't need to have a constitutional debate everytime some of the rpovinces don't agree. If all the provinces don't agree it shoudln't be happening on the federal level anyways.

   

But all of the provinces will never agree...their interests are too disparate and they are fighting over the same federal money.

   

Being a Newfoundlander, I can certainly agree to the general consensus that Newfoundland has been screwed by Canada ever since we joined. While there have been many benefits, there have also been downsides, like the federal government clawing back pretty much all income Newfoundland gets from its natural resources - that income belongs to us, and it should stay in the province. The fact is, Newfoundlanders generally see the federal government's sole purpose as being to exploit Newfoundland at our expense.

On the fisheries, if the provincial and federal government can't agree on quotas etc, 5 provinces on the Atlantic Coast won't be able to either. It's best to have it in the control of one government - in this case, the federal government. I'm not going to get into the fishing dispute currently happening, mainly since fishing isn't part of my livelihood or of very many people in my hometown - it's just not an issue for me. The most disappointing part of this entire protest by my fellow Newfoundlanders was when some of them burned the Canadian flag (first time it has ever happened in Newfoundland). I was truly appauled at those fishers. Destroying a symbol of the Canadian people, not a symbol of the current federal government, is down right dishonourable and disrespectful. The burning of my flag by the fishers only made me less inclined to listen to their side of the story.

Constitutional debates will not work, unless it is on an issue that affects all provinces. Opening up another meeting on fisheries just won't work - it'll be a waste of money like the Meech Lake and Charlottetown accords. Opening a constitutional debate on who controls the fishery is as ridiculous as opening up a debate on whether or not Quebec deserves to be more special than the rest of Canada (hmm, that would mean we'll probably have to go through the mess we did in the early 1990s, lol).

Just my two cents.