Document Information

Date: 1978-10-30
By: Sterling Lyon
Citation: Federal-Provincial Conference of First Ministers, Speaking Notes for the Honourable Sterling Lyon, Doc 800-8/034 (Ottawa: 30 October-1 November 1978).
Other formats: Click here to view the original document (PDF).

DOCUMENT 800-8/034

FEDERAL-PROVINCIAL CONFERENCE
OF
FIRST MINISTERS

MANITOBA

Speaking Notes
For the
Honourable Sterling Lyon

Ottawa
October 30-November 1, 1978

PRIME MINISTER:

AS I WAS PREPARING FOR THIS MEETING …
I COULD NOT HELP BUT REMEMBER ANOTHER, EARLIER MEETING
THAT BOTH YOU AND I ATTENDED … ALTHOUGH OUR TITLES
AND RESPONSIBILITIES WERE SOMEWHAT DIFFERENT THEN.

I AM SPEAKING OF THE HISTORIC “CONFERENCE
ON THE CONSTITUTION” HELD HERE IN OTTAWA IN FEBRUARY,
1968.

YOU ATTENDED THAT MEETING AS CANADA’S MINISTER
OF JUSTICE. I WAS THERE AS ATTORNEY-GENERAL FOR MANITOBA.
AND OF THE 11 FIRST MINISTERS HERE TODAY … I BELIEVE ONLY YOU AND
I AND THE FIRST MINISTER OF ONTARIO ATTENDED THAT MEETING
IN AN ELECTED CAPACITY.

AND IN REMEMBERING THAT EARLIER MEETING … I
COULD NOT HELP BUT ASK: ARE WE REALLY ANY FURTHER ALONG
AFTER 10 YEARS? HAVE WE REALLY PROGRESSED IN THE MATTER
OF OUR CONSTITUTION?

IT IS DIFFICULT TO ANSWER THOSE QUESTIONS IN
THE AFFIRMATIVE, PRIME MINISTER.

IT IS DIFFICULT To ESCAPE THE FEELING THAT WE
HAVE TODAY A LESS PROMISING CLIMATE IN WHICH TO DELIBERATE
ON OUR CONSTITUTION …AND THAT THE ATTITUDES SURROUNDING
THIS IMPORTANT QUESTION HAVE HARDENED.

THERE ARE SOME PARALLELS BETWEEN THAT
CONFERENCE IN 1968 AND THIS ONE … PARALLELS THAT I
BELIEVE WE CAN BENEFIT FROM EXAMINING.

ONE OF THE MAJOR PROPOSALS PUT BEFORE THAT
EARLIER MEETING BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAS THAT CANADA
SHOULD ESTABLISH A “CHARTER OF HUMAN RIGHTS” — A WRITTEN
BILL OF RIGHTS SUCH AS ONE FINDS IN MANY COUNTRIES, INCLUDING,
IT SHOULD BE NOTED, MANY COUNTRIES IN WHICH HUMAN RIGHTS
ARE NOT MUCH RESPECTED IN PRACTICE — AND THAT THE CHARTER
SHOULD BE ENSHRINED IN THE CONSTITUTION TO PROTECT A LIST
OF SO-CALLED “FUNDAMENTAL” RIGHTS FOR ALL TIME.

AND WHEN I RECALL PROVINCIAL RESPONSES OF NEARLY
UNANIMOUS OPPOSITION TO THAT PROPOSAL … I CANNOT HELP BUT
FEEL A SENSE OF DEJA VU. THOSE RESPONSES WERE SIMILAR, IN
SPIRIT AND IN CONTENT, TO THE RESPONSES EVOKED BY THE RENEWAL
OF THAT PROPOSAL AND TO MUCH OF BILL C-60.

IT WAS SAID CLEARLY THAT THERE WAS NO ONE IN
THAT CONFERENCE ROOM … AS THERE IS NO ONE IN THIS
CONFERENCE ROOM … WHO WAS OPPOSED TO THE MAINTENANCE OF
HUMAN RIGHTS IN OUR SOCIETY.

AND IT HAS SAID EOUALLY CLEARLY — BY THE
THEN PREMIER OF ALBERTA, SENATOR ERNEST MANNING, AMONG
OTHERS — THAT THE PEOPLE OF CANADA ALREADY ENJOYED AND
HERE ASSURED OF MORE RIGHTS THAN COULD BE ENCOMPASSED IN
ANY LIST.

THERE HAS A SENSE IN THAT CONFERENCE ROOM
IN 1968 … PRIME MINISTER … THAT HOWEVER CHARMING
OR FASHIONABLE SOME SORT OF CHARTER OF RIGHTS MIGHT
BE … THAT IT ADDRESSED NONE OF OUR URGENT PROBLEMS OR
OPPORTUNITIES IN CANADA … THAT IT HAD ESSENTIALLY NOTHING
TO DO WITH US OR WITH OUR HISTORY AS A NATION – AND INDEED
THAT IT SUBVERTED THE FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE OF THE SUPREMACY
OF PARLIAMENT. AT THIS STAGE IN OUR SUCCESSFUL HISTORY OF
PARLIAMENTARY DEMOCRACY, 10 YEARS LATER IS IT NOT EQUALLY
APPARENT THAT TO TRANSFER, EVEN PARTIALLY, OUR TRADITIONAL
LAW-MAKING FUNCTION FROM THE PEOPLE TO THE APPOINTED WOULD
BE IRRATIONAL?

… THAT CURIOUS, MECHANISTIC,
LEGALISTIC HABIT OF THOUGHT THAT LED THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
TO SUGGEST A CHARTER OF RIGHTS IN 1968 RATHER THAN A
SUBSTANTIVE RESPONSE TO ANY OF OUR PROBLEMS IS BORN AGAIN
. . IN BILL C-60.

AND … IN THE SUMMARY PAPER OF “A TIME FOR
ACTION” … OUR CURRENT CONSTITUTION IS DISMISSED BECAUSE
… AND I QUOTE … “IT HAS LITTLE EDUCATIVE VALUE AND
CANADIANS FIND IN IT LITTLE WHICH INSPIRES PATRIOTISM”.
ONE WONDERS WHAT KIND OF STERILE MIND OBLIVIOUS TO AND
UNREPRESENTATIVE OF CANADIAN ACHIEVEMENTS – CONCOCTED .
SUCH AN OBSERVATION. IN THE FACE OF SUCH DISTORTIONS
OF OUR PAST AND PRESENT, I FEEL OBLIGED TO SPEAK FOR
A MOMENT, PRIME MINISTER, TO THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN
OUR HISTORY AND OUR INSTITUTIONS IN CANADA.

IT IS IMPORTANT AS NEVER BEFORE FOR US TO
LOOK LONG AND HARD AT WHERE WE HAVE BEEN AS WE WORK TO
DECIDE WHERE WE OUGHT TO GO NEXT.

WHEN OUR COUNTRY HAS FOUNDED IN THE 1860’s
… THERE HAS A CONSCIOUS EFFORT BY THOSE INSPIRED CANADIANS
… THE FATHERS OF CONFEDERATION … TO INCORPORATE INTO
THE VERY FIBRE OF THE NEW NATION ATTITUDES AND INSTITUTIONS
WHICH HAD PROVEN THEMSELVES ABLE TO CONTRIBUTE TO THE
ORDER AND PROSPERITY OF THE COMMUNITY … TO OFFER
EFFECTIVE PROTECTIONS FOR THE RIGHTS OF INDIVIDUALS …
AND TO ATTRACT AND SUSTAIN THE LOYALTY OF THE PEOPLE WHO
MAKE UP OUR NATION.

THESE INSTITUTIONS BEGAN WITH A CONSTITUTIONAL
MONARCHY WHICH HAS VIEWED AS THE FOUNT OF HONOUR AS WELL
AS THE FOCUS OF CONTINUITY AND LOYALTY FOR CANADIANS. THEY
ENCOMPASSED THE COURTS AND THE COMMON LAW. IN QUEBEC …
WHERE THERE HAS AN UNBROKEN TRADITION OF CIVIL LAW
JURISDICTION … THE FATHERS OF CONFEDERATION WISELY SAW
NO VIRTUE IN DISCONTINUITY … AND SO THE CIVIL LAW REMAINS.

THE TRADITIONAL CABINET SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT
WAS ADAPTED – SUCCESSFULLY – TO THE CANADIAN ENVIRONMENT.
WE EVOLVED CERTAIN PECULIARLY CANADIAN CONVENTIONS TO
ASSURE A BALANCED REPRESENTATION OF GEOGRAPHIC AND LINGUISTIC
GROUPS IN THE FEDERAL CABINET.

AND FOR THE MORE THAN A CENTURY THAT OUR
COUNTRY HAS EXISTED, THOSE INSTITUTIONS HAVE SERVED US
WELL.

THAT SET OF PRACTISES AND INSTITUTIONS WHICH …
ACCORDING TO THE SUMMARY PAPER … “HAS LITTLE EDUCATIVE
VALUE” AND “LITTLE WHICH INSPIRES PATRIOTISM” … PROVIDED US
WITH THE FRAMEWORK THAT SAW OUR COUNTRY AND OUR PEOPLE
THROUGH THE THO GREAT MARS OF THIS CENTURY IN WHICH LITERALLY
HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF OUR MEN AND WOMEN FOUGHT AND RISKED
AND SUFFERED.

ALTHOUGH THE BUREAUCRATS WHO WROTE THE
SUMMARY MAY SEE LITTLE HERE TO INSPIRE PATRIOTISM …
THOSE PEOPLE WHO SERVED CANADA IN TWO WORLD WARS BELIEVED
THEY DID SO TO PRESERVE DEMOCRATIC FREEDOM IN THIS COUNTRY.
SURELY THEY HAVE EARNED THE GRATITUDE AND RESPECT OF CANADA
AND ITS GOVERNMENT. THEY HAVE CERTAINLY EARNED AN INTERNATIONAL
REPUTATION FOR STEADFAST COURAGE IN THE FACE OF SUFFERING
AND DEATH.

I WOULD SAY, PRIME MINISTER, THAT IT WOULD BE
BETTER IF THOSE WHO WROTE THE SUMMARIES HERE CAUSED TO
LEARN SOMETHING OF THE HISTORY OF OUR NATION AND OF THE
SACRIFICES THAT THOUSANDS HAVE MADE FOR IT, TO SAY NOTHING
OF THOSE SENTIMENTS AND LOYALTIES WHICH ANIMATE ORDINARY
PEOPLE IN CANADA TODAY.

AND I WOULD SAY TO YOU THAT WE HAVE HAD IN CANADA
A PROUD TRADITION … EVOLVED FROM THE MOTHER COUNTRIES
OF OUR TWO FOUNDING RACES … ENRICHED BY ADDITIONS BROUGHT
BY OTHER PEOPLES WHO HAVE COME TO JOIN US.

WE HAVE AN EFFECTIVE AND ADMIRED SET OF INSTITUTIONS.
WE HAVE PROUD RECORDS OF ACHIEVEMENT IN BOTH PEACE AND WAR.

BUT THE CURRENT PROPOSALS OFFERED BY THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT SEEM TO IMPLY THAT THESE TRADITIONS ARE NOTHING
MORE THAN TIRESOME ENCUMBRANCES THAT MUST BE REMOVED TO
PERMIT US TO ESTABLISH SOMETHING “DISTINCTIVELY CANADIAN”.
I WOULD SUGGEST THAT AFTER 100 YEARS AND MORE OF SHARED
EXPERIENCE IN THIS COUNTRY … WE HAVE MADE OF OUR INSTITUTIONS
SOMETHING DISTINCTIVELY OUR OWN.

PRIME MINISTER … THERE IS NO ONE AT THIS TABLE
WHO DOES NOT AGREE: IT IS URGENT THAT HE IMPROVE OUR
CONSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS IN CANADA.

BUT I SUSPECT THAT THERE IS NO ONE AT THIS TABLE
WHO HOULD SAY THAT BILL C-60 MAKES ANY SIGNIFICANT
CONTRIBUTION TO THAT END.

SPEAKING FOR MANITOBA, PRIME MINISTER, WE DO
NOT PERCEIVE ANY WAY THAT THE “HOUSE OF THE FEDERATION” WILL
DEAL HITH THE CRITICAL QUESTION OF DISTRIBUTION OF POWERS.
WE DO NOT SEE THAT CHANGING THE HISTORIC AND ACCEPTABLE
NAME OF THE PRIVY COUNCIL WILL BRING US CLOSER TO AN
ACCEPTABLE AMENDING FORMULA FOR OUR CONSTITUTION. WE
CAN SEE NO CONNECTION BETWEEN THE PROPOSED TINKERING
WITH THE MONARCH’S ROLE AND THE CRITICAL QUESTIONS OF
TAXATION IN CANADA.

AND HE SEE NO WAY IN WHICH ESTABLISHING THE
CHARTER OF RIGHTS AS A FEDERAL PRE-CONDITION TO
CONSTITUTIONAL CHANGE IS IN THE LEAST HELPFUL IN ACHIEVING
A GENUINE CONSENSUS. INDEED IF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
WOULD ABANDON THAT IRRELEVANT CONDITION — NOW AT THIS TABLE —
IT WOULD DO MUCH TO CREATE A BETTER ATMOSPHERE FOR CONSENSUS.
AND IN ABANDONING THE CONCEPT OF THE CHARTER, HE WOULD THEN
BE ABLE TO CONSIDER WHAT AMENDMENTS ARE APPROPRIATE TO
S. 133 TO REFLECT THE REALITY OF LANGUAGE RIGHTS IN CANADA
TODAY.

I SAY THIS BECAUSE … I BELIEVE THAT HE HAVE
THE CAPACITY TO MAKE AN EFFECTIVE NEW BEGINNING IN THAT
IMPORTANT PROCESS AT THIS MEETING.

THERE IS NO SHORTAGE OF SUGGESTIONS FOR CHANGE …
EMANATING FROM THE FEDERAL AND PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENTS
OVER THE LAST 20 YEARS. WHILE THESE SUGGESTIONS AND OTHERS
WHICH WILL EMERGE ARE HELPFUL, WHAT WE MOST NEED NOW IS
A CONSENSUS AS TO THE PRIORITY OF THE ITEMS WE OUGHT TO
DEAL WITH AND THE MECHANICS OF THE PROCESS WE SHOULD FOLLOW
IN DEALING WITH THEM.

IN 1976 THE PREMIERS REACHED A NUMBER OF AGREEMENTS
ABOUT ELEMENTS OF CONSTITUTIONAL IMPROVEMENT. THOSE MIGHT SERVE
AS ONE STARTING POINT FOR THE PROCESS.

BUT IT SEEMS TO ME IT IS CRITICAL TO SET FORTH
OUR PRIORITIES PLAINLY … AND IT ALSO SEEMS TO ME THAT
THE PRIORITIES WE OUGHT TO FOLLOW ARE RELATIVELY CLEAR.

OF FIRST PRIORITY SHOULD BE QUESTIONS OF THE
REDISTRIBUTION OF POWERS … AND OF AN ACCEPTABLE AMENDING
FORMULA. AS I MENTIONED … THE PREMIERS WERE ABLE TO REACH
SUBSTANTIAL AGREEMENT — EVEN ON MANY OF THE DIFFICULT
ISSUES … AND I BELIEVE THAT IF WE ARE SERIOUS ABOUT MAKING
PROGRESS … WE HAVE NO CHOICE BUT TO BEGIN TO ADDRESS THOSE
ISSUES.

AND WE HAVE NO CHOICE BUT TO DO SO RECOGNIZING
SOME BASIC PRINCIPLES THAT MUST APPLY.

THE FIRST OF THESE MUST BE THAT THERE IS NO
PLACE IN THIS PROCESS FOR UNILATERALLY ESTABLISHED DEADLINES.
WE ARE AS MINDFUL AS YOU, PRIME MINISTER, THAT OUR COLLEAGUE
THE PREMIER OF QUEBEC, IS PLANNING TO HOLD HIS REFERENDUM IN
THE RELATIYELY NEAR FUTURE. WE ARE AS DETERMINED AS YOU TO
SHOW EVIDENCE OF PROGRESS AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE.

BUT THE TIME IS PAST … IF EVER IT EXISTED IN
THIS COUNTRY … WHERE THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT COULD
UNILATERALLY DIRECT THE CONTENT OR SCHEDULE OF CONSTITUTIONAL
CHANGE. THERE IS NO MAGIC IN THE DATE OF JULY 1, 1979 THAT
MANITOBANS ARE AWARE OF.

AND I THINK WE MUST RECOGNIZE THAT THIS PROCESS WILL
NOT RESULT IN INSTANT ANSWERS. OUR EXPECTATIONS OF AND OUR
CLAIMS ABOUT THE PROCESS MUST BE REALISTIC. WE ARE ALL
AWARE THAT AS THE END OF A PARLIAMENT OR LEGISLATURE DRAWS
NEAR, THE AUTHORITY OF ANY GOVERNMENT TO TAKE NEW OR RADICAL
INITIATIVES DIMINISHES PERCEPTIBLY.

SECONDLY … AS A MATTER OF PRINCIPLE … WE MUST
UNDERSTAND THAT THE TRADITIONS OF THIS COUNTRY CANNOT BE
IGNORED OR DENIGRATED IN THE PROCESS.

FINALLY, PRIME MINISTER, I THINK WE SHOULD BE
GUIDED BY THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THE CONSTITUTIONAL
ARRANGEMENTS WE ARE WORKING TO IMPROVE HAVE, IN WORLD TERMS,
BEEN QUITE SUCCESSFUL IN PRACTICE. I WOULD SUGGEST
THAT THERE MUST BE A VERY HEAVY ONUS ON THOSE WHO ADVOCATE
CHANGE TO JUSTIFY IT.

LET ME SUMMARIZE.

I AM SUGGESTING THAT THERE ARE 5 BASIC STEPS
THAT WE SHOULD TAKE TO PUT THIS APPROACH TO THE PROBLEM OF
CONSTITUTIONAL IMPROVEMENT ON A SOUND AND PROMISING BASIS.

FIRST — LET US AGREE THAT THE EXERCISE WE ARE
BEGINNING AGAIN AT THIS CONFERENCE IS NOT AN EXERCISE IN
REPLACING A CONSTITUTION. IT IS AN EXERCISE IN IMPROVING
A CONSTITUTION — A CONSTITUTION THAT HAS PROVEN OVER 100 YEARS
AND MORE THAT IT WORKS AND WORKS WELL.

SECONDLY — LET US BEGIN REASONABLY BY DECIDING
HERE AT THIS CONFERENCE WHICH AREAS OF THAT BASICALLY SOUND
AND SUCCESSFUL CONSTITUTION REQUIRE CHANGE OR IMPROVEMENT
URGENTLY. LET US PICK THOSE MATTERS THAT WE CAN AGREE MUST
BE CHANGED.

THIRDLY — HAVING SELECTED THESE PRIORITIES … LET
US GO THROUGH THE GREAT MASS OF SUGGESTIONS THAT HAVE
ACCUMULATED OVER THE PAST 20 YEARS … AND LET US … SEPARATE
THE WHEAT FROM THE CHAFF … AND LET US SEE WHAT CAN APPLY
OR CAN BE ADAPTED TO APPLY TO OUR CURRENT PROBLEMS AND
OUR CURRENT ASPIRATIONS.

FOURTHLY — LET US REMEMBER THAT … UNTIL WE HAVE
AGREED ON A PROCEDURE FOR THE AMENDMENT OF OUR CONSTITUTION
… WE CAN DO NOTHING. LET US ENSURE THAT THAT IS TREATED
AS A CONCURRENT PRIORITY IN THE PROCESS.

FIFTHLY — AND FINALLY — LET US AGREE THAT WE
WILL PUT ASIDE ITEMS WHICH DO NOT MEET THE TEST OF URGENCY
OR OF GENERAL CONSENSUS AND SUPPORT.

THAT SIMPLE SERIES OF STEPS, PRIME MINISTER, CAN
BE ACHIEVED HERE AT THIS CONFERENCE. AND IF WE DO ACHIEVE
THAT … IF WE DO SET OUR PRIORITIES … IF WE IDENTIFY
THE GENERAL AREAS WHERE AGREEMENT MAY ALREADY HAVE BEEN
INDICATED … IF WE ESTABLISH MOMENTUM TOWARDS AN
AMENDING PROCESS … AND IF WE AGREE NOT TO PROCEED ON
PERIPHERAL OR SECONDARY ISSUES THAT CAN ONLY SERVE TO
DIVIDE US … IF WE CAN DO THIS WITH A SENSE OF THE
VALUE OF THE CONSTITUTION WE ARE STRIVING TO IMPROVE … I
BELIEVE WE SHALL HAVE TAKEN A FIRMER AND MORE SUBSTANTIAL
STEP TOWARDS SUCCESS THAN CANADIANS ARE USED TO SEEING FROM
GATHERINGS OF THIS SORT.

AND I WOULD SAY THAT ONLY WE CAN SET THE
PRIORITIES. THESE ARE MATTERS THAT MUST BE DECIDED — NOT
BY OFFICIALS OR EXPERTS T BUT BY THE PEOPLE CANADIANS HAVE
ELECTED TO RUN THEIR PUBLIC AFFAIRS. AFTER WE HAVE TAKEN
THESE PRELIMINARY STEPS … THEN THE REST OF THE MECHANISMS —
THE MEETINGS OF MINISTERS AND OF OFFICIALS … THE RESEARCH
AND THE ANALYSIS … THE DETAILED APPRAISALS OF ALL FEDERAL
AND PROVINCIAL PROPOSALS — THOSE CAN ALL GO FORWARD.

BUT AS LEADERS OF OUR GOVERNMENTS … WE ARE THE
ONLY ONES WHO CAN TAKE THESE FIRST STEPS.

PRIME MINISTER, WE WILL PROVIDE YOU WITH SOME
SPECIFIC COMMENTS ON THE MATTERS RAISED IN BILL C-60 DURING
THIS CONFERENCE.

BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY … I WOULD SAY TO YOU THAT
MANITOBA IS READY TO RENEW OUR OWN PARTICIPATION IN THE
SERIOUS PROCESS WE HAVE BEEN DISCUSSING. WE ARE PREPARED
TO BEGIN AGAIN TO WORK TO FIND ANSWERS FOR THE GREATEST
AND MOST URGENT PROBLEMS THAT FACE US. WE BRING … AND
WE SENSE AMONG OUR PEOPLE … A RESERVOIR OF
GOOD WILL TOWARD ALL OTHER CANADIANS. ON THE BASIS OF THAT
GOOD WILL … I BELIEVE WE CAN BE SUCCESSFUL.

AT THIS GATHERING WE WILL LISTEN CAREFULLY TO ANY
NEW PROPOSALS YOU MAY HAVE. WE WILL LISTEN CAREFULLY TO
THE DETAILED SUBMISSIONS THAT SOME OF OUR SISTER PROVINCES
WILL BE PUTTING FORWARD. WE UNDERTAKE TO BRING THAT
INFORMATION BACK TO MANITOBA AND TO ASSURE ITS FULL AND
COMPLETE DISCUSSION IN OUR OWN LEGISLATURE. WE WILL
PARTICIPATE FULLY IN THESE DISCUSSIONS AND IN THOSE THAT
WE HOPE WILL FOLLOW.

I WOULD STRESS THAT THE GOVERNMENT AND PEOPLE
OF MANITOBA ARE AS VITALLY INTERESTED AS I KNOW YOU AND
YOUR GOVERNMENT ARE IN MAINTAINING THE UNITY OF OUR COUNTRY.
WE WILL HAVE DIFFERENCES OF OPINION ON VARIOUS PRIORITIES
AND ON MATTERS OF SUBSTANCE. BUT THOSE DIFFERENCES SHOULD
NOT BE CONSTRUED AS DETRACTING IN ANY WAY FROM OUR FUNDAMENTAL
AIM OF WORKING OUT A SOUND CONSENSUS AMONG THE ELEVEN
GOVERNMENTS AT THIS TABLE … AND OF ACHIEVING THE KIND OF
CONSTITUTIONAL EVOLUTION NECESSARY TO OUR CONTINUED
UNITY.

I BEGAN BY SPEAKING OF THAT 1968 CONFERENCE THAT
YOU AND I BOTH ATTENDED. AND THERE IS ONE
OTHER THING ABOUT THAT CONFERENCE THAT I THINK WE CAN
USEFULLY RECALL. I THINK IT IS WORTH REMEMBERING THE
GENERAL MOOD AND ATTITUDE OF THAT CONFERENCE AND OF OUR
COUNTRY IN THAT YEAR T THE YEAR FOLLOWING OUR CENTENNIAL
CELEBRATION. IT WAS A MOOD OF OPTIMISM AND CONFIDENCE.

AND THE GENERAL ATMOSPHERE AT THAT CONFERENCE WAS
ONE OF MUTUAL TRUST AMONG THE GOVERNMENTS REPRESENTED
THERE.

AT THIS CONFERENCE … AND IN THE CONTINUING
PROCESS THAT I HOPE WILL ARISE FROM THIS CONFERENCE … WE
MUST STRIVE TO RECAPTURE THAT MOOD OF CONFIDENCE AND
OPTIMISM. WE MUST WORK TO REBUILD THAT SENSE OF TRUST
AMONG OUR GOVERNMENTS IN CANADA.

AND WE MUST DEMONSTRATE OUR UNDERSTANDING OF THE
FACT THAT CONSTITUTIONS AND CONSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS ARE
ONLY A MEANS TO THE END OF MAINTAINING A STABLE, ORDERED,
PROSPEROUS AND FREE SOCIETY.

WE WILL MEET IN ABOUT ONE MONTH’S TIME TO DISCUSS
THE ECONOMY OF CANADA AND I WOULD SUGGEST TO YOU
PRIME MINISTER THAT THESE TWO CONFERENCES ARE CLOSELY RELATED.
INDEED IN THE MINDS OF MOST CANADIANS, THE PROBLEMS OF OUR
ECONOMY — OF RISING INFLATION AND UNEMPLOYMENT — TAKE PRECEDENCE
OVER MOST OF WHAT WE ARE DISCUSSING TODAY.

THE INSTITUTIONS OF CANADA ARE LIVING INSTITUTIONS.
THE CONSTITUTIONAL RULES WE SPEAK OF CHANGING HAVE PROVIDED
US WITH THE FRAMEWORK WITHIN WHICH WE HAVE EVOLVED A
REMARKABLY SUCCESSFUL NATION … AND A REMARKABLY RESILIENT
COMMUNITY.

IN THE PROCESS THAT I HOPE WILL GROW FROM THIS
CONFERENCE … WE HAVE A STRONG FOUNDATION UPON WHICH
TO BUILD. I AM CONFIDENT THAT WE CAN ACHIEVE THE KINDS OF
IMPROVEMENTS THAT ARE NEEDED TO PRESERVE AND ENHANCE OUR
UNITY AND THE GENERAL WELFARE OF OUR NATIONAL COMMUNITY.