Given how high the NDP is in the polls and that that party is most in favour of abolishing the senate, reforming election laws and voting systems, and seems to be the most open to opening the Constitution, promote more centralization, etc., constitutional reform is almost inevitable under an NDP government, even a minority one.
Even if it should be only lukewarm to opening the Constitution, its commitment to senate reform would pretty well force the NDP to open the Constitution, and its being open to it would mean the NDP would welcome it if it happened.
This means that even if a local candidate in the 2015 election should oppose opening the Constitution, you will still want to know what reforms he might propose should constitutional reform be forced upon him.
It's all well that an MP might not want to open the Constitution, but whether to open the Constitution might also not be his decision to make; and if it is opened, you will want to know what reforms he might propose if any.
Remember that if the Constitution is opened, Quebec will want its say. There will inevitably be debate on senate reform, the separate school system (already criticized by the UN for violating an international covenant to which Canada is a signatory), the division of powers between federal, provincial, and territorial governments, official bilingualism (many Quebecers and many Conservatives support a regional-bilingualism model of only French where French is predominant, only English where English is predominant, and official bilingualism only where both English and French are spoken by a significant percentage of the population; and indigenous and deaf Canadians will likely want their say on Official bilingualism too), and including reasonable private property rights in the Constitution (something many Conservatives and supporters of the UDHR support), among who knows how many other possible proposals.
How important will it be come next election for even those candidates who oppose opening the Constitution to reveal what kind of reforms they might propose should Constitutional discussion be forced on them?
Even if it should be only lukewarm to opening the Constitution, its commitment to senate reform would pretty well force the NDP to open the Constitution, and its being open to it would mean the NDP would welcome it if it happened.
This means that even if a local candidate in the 2015 election should oppose opening the Constitution, you will still want to know what reforms he might propose should constitutional reform be forced upon him.
It's all well that an MP might not want to open the Constitution, but whether to open the Constitution might also not be his decision to make; and if it is opened, you will want to know what reforms he might propose if any.
Remember that if the Constitution is opened, Quebec will want its say. There will inevitably be debate on senate reform, the separate school system (already criticized by the UN for violating an international covenant to which Canada is a signatory), the division of powers between federal, provincial, and territorial governments, official bilingualism (many Quebecers and many Conservatives support a regional-bilingualism model of only French where French is predominant, only English where English is predominant, and official bilingualism only where both English and French are spoken by a significant percentage of the population; and indigenous and deaf Canadians will likely want their say on Official bilingualism too), and including reasonable private property rights in the Constitution (something many Conservatives and supporters of the UDHR support), among who knows how many other possible proposals.
How important will it be come next election for even those candidates who oppose opening the Constitution to reveal what kind of reforms they might propose should Constitutional discussion be forced on them?
