A question about our constitution

MHz

Time Out
Mar 16, 2007
41,030
43
48
Red Deer AB
I have never been able to find an answer to if there was ever a vote by the people of Canada that confirmed that a country called Canada has ever taken place. Based on the reference linked below that had to take place before the Provinces and Terrotories could form a 'legal' country.

Any idea if the below is valid or not?
http://www.detaxcanada.org/kuhl.htm
(in part)
"Provinces Completely Sovereign
Since the condition of sovereignty and independence must be enjoyed by the Provinces before they can federate, it was necessary that the British government relinquish its authority over them. This was done through the enactment of the Statute of Westminster on December 11, 1931. By section 7, paragraph 2, of this statute, the Provinces of Canada were made sovereign, free and independent in order that they might consummate the federal union which they wished to create in 1867, but were not permitted to do so.
Since December 11, 1931, the Provinces of Canada have not acted on their newly acquired status; they have not signed any agreement, they have not adopted a constitution, and the people of Canada have not ratified a constitution. Such action should have been taken immediately upon the enactment of the Statute of Westminster. It is by reason of the failure of the Provinces and of the people of Canada to take this action that all the anomalies in our present position exist. We have been trying since 1931 to govern ourselves federally, under an instrument which was nothing more than an act of the Imperial Parliament for the purpose of governing a colonial possession.
Not only has this anomalous condition obtained since 1931, but it has done so without any reference whatsoever having been made to the Canadian people. They have not been consulted on anything pertaining to constitutional matters. Before there can be a federal union in Canada and a federal government, the Provinces of Canada must be free and independent to consummate such a union. They have been free to do so since December 11, 1931, but they have not done so."


"

HOW CAN YOU BE DIVORCED IF YOU HAVE NEVER BEEN MARRIED?
In other words, ever since the enactment of the Statute of Westminster in 1931, by the British Govemment, each of the provinces of Canada has been a completely sovereign and independent state, and because the provinces have signed nothing since then constituting a Federal Union and a Federal Government, and because no such treaty has been ratified by the people of Canada, the provinces still enjoy the status of sovereignty and are privileged to use it in any way they see fit.
As you will observe from the enclosed addresses, I quote eminent Canadian constitutional authorities as suggesting that the only and logical solution to the existing constitutional circumstances is the drafting and the adoption of a proper federal constitution in which the provinces can reserve for themselves any and all powers necessary to enable them to govern their provinces successfully.
I am sure you can appreciate that if this were done, you could solve your economic and other problems in Quebec without resorting to separation. I feel sure that having the ability to solve your problems and still remain constitutionally part of the country of Canada, would be much more satisfactory to your supporters as well as to others within your province.
The following is a summary of the reasons for the things I have just stated:
  • 1. At the time of Confederation movement in Canada, the Provinces of Canada, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick desired to form a Federal Union. 2. The Quebec Resolutions of 1864 provided for a Federal Union.
    3. The Bill drafted by the Canadian degates at the London Conference in 1866 also provided for a Federal Union.
    4. The Colonial Office of the Imperial Parliament was not disposed to grant the Provinces of Canada their request for a Federal Union.
    5. The British North America Act enacted by the Imperial Parliament carried out neither the spirit nor the terms of the Quebec Resolutions.
    6. Canada did not become a Federal Union or a Confederation under the British North America Act, but rather a United Colony. The privilege of federation, therefore, was still a future privilege for the provinces of Canada.
    7. The Parliament of Canada did not become the government of Canada, much less a federal government; it became merely the central legislature of a United Colony, a legislative body whose only power was that of aiding and advising the Governor-General as agent of the Imperial Parliament.
    8. The British North America Act, as enacted by the Imperial Parliament, was not a constitution but merely an act of the Imperial Parliament which united four colonies in Canada into one colony, with the supreme authority still remaining in the hands of the British government.
    9. The privilege of federating became realizable for the provinces of Canada, only through the enactment of the Statute of Westminster on December 11, 1931. Through this statute, the Imperial Parliament relinquished to the people of Canada their sovereign rights, and through them to their Provincial governments as their most direct agents.
    10. Since December 11, 1931, the Provinces of Canada have not acted on their newly acquired status in the forming of a Federal Union, nor have the people of Canada ratified a constitution. Therefore, the original proposition, namely: that all power to govern in Canada resides at the moment, with the Provinces of Canada; and, that all power legally remains there until such time as the Provinces sign an agreement and ratify a constitution whereby they may delegate such powers as they wish to a central government of their own creation. In the meantime, Canada exists as ten political units without a political superior."


    This site has a list of things done after 1931 but they don't mention the people ever voting on the issue.


    http://www.solon.org/Constitutions/Canada/English/


    So, any insight into this issue?
 

TenPenny

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 9, 2004
17,466
138
63
Location, Location
I have never been able to find an answer to if there was ever a vote by the people of Canada that confirmed that a country called Canada has ever taken place. Based on the reference linked below that had to take place before the Provinces and Terrotories could form a 'legal' country.

If that is a reflection on your research skills, god help you. Of course there was not a vote by the "people of Canada" to create the country.

I'm not aware of too many countries that were created that way.
 

MHz

Time Out
Mar 16, 2007
41,030
43
48
Red Deer AB
If that is a reflection on your research skills, god help you. Of course there was not a vote by the "people of Canada" to create the country.

I'm not aware of too many countries that were created that way.
Thanks for not answering the question.
Without a vote on that issue the Provinces and Territories remanun soverign endities.
What I posted was what lead to the question, obviously you already know where the answer is, so please post a link.

Australia did it properly.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Constitution
"The Constitution of Australia is the law under which the government of Australia operates. It consists of several documents. The most important is the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Australia. The Constitution was approved in referenda held over 1898 - 1900 by the people of the Australian colonies, and the approved draft was enacted as a section of the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 (Imp), an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. The Constitution came into force on 1 January 1901. Even though the Constitution was originally given legal force by an Act of the United Kingdom parliament, as Australia is now an independent country, the United Kingdom parliament has no power to change the Constitution, and only the Australian people can amend it (by referendum). Letters patent issued by the Crown, on the advice of Australian ministers, are also part of the Constitution of Australia."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Referendum
"A referendum (plurals: 'referendums' or 'referenda') or plebiscite (from Latin plebiscita, originally a decree of the Concilium Plebis) is a direct vote in which an entire electorate is asked to either accept or reject a particular proposal. This may be the adoption of a new constitution, a constitutional amendment, a law, the recall of an elected official or simply a specific government policy. The referendum or plebiscite is a form of direct democracy."

This also impacts any union into any agreement that affects the constitution, such as a Noth American Union, it can't be made into effect without a vote by the people. Ottawa can sign anything they want to, or as many things as they want to. Without the people voting to accept any changes they are null and void.
 

Dexter Sinister

Unspecified Specialist
Oct 1, 2004
10,168
536
113
Regina, SK
I have never been able to find an answer to if there was ever a vote by the people of Canada that confirmed that a country called Canada has ever taken place. Based on the reference linked below that had to take place before the Provinces and Terrotories could form a 'legal' country.
No, no such vote has ever taken place, there's no need for it to ever take place, and the loon who runs that site you cited offers a badly distorted interpretation of both the British North America Act and the Statute of Westminster in order to justify his claim that nobody, especially himself, should have to pay income tax.

His understanding of the Statute of Westminster in particular has nothing to do with reality. Section 7 paragraph 2 that he claims gives sovereignty to the provinces actually says this: "The provisions of section two of this Act shall extend to laws made by any of the provinces of Canada and to the powers of the legislatures of such Provinces." The section two that sentence refers to merely states that the Colonial Laws Validity Act no longer applies to the Dominions, and no statute of a Dominion shall be deemed "void or inoperative" just for being inconsistent with any present or future law of England. In other words, the British Parliament can't make laws for us anymore. That's all it says.

And if you still believe that loon, try filing income tax returns the way he tells you to and see what happens to you.
 

tamarin

House Member
Jun 12, 2006
3,197
22
38
Oshawa ON
Reminds me of the EU's continued strivings to be a legitimate organization. To be ratified by the people of those states it wishes to comprise. The French have rejected the EU constitution by an actual personal vote. Indeed, the EU recognizes that the people of countries involved in exercises as important as a constitution must have real, grassroots representation. My hat is off to the organization for that. Canadians deserve no less. The public has every right here to ask why the 1982 patriation was not done respectfully and why similar moments in their past not similarly completed.
 

RomSpaceKnight

Council Member
Oct 30, 2006
1,384
23
38
61
London, Ont. Canada
Canada is a confederaion of provinces each a sovereign body in it's own right. The states fought their civil war over some states wishing to be a confederaion not a federated republic.
 

tamarin

House Member
Jun 12, 2006
3,197
22
38
Oshawa ON
Each a sovereign body in it's (sic) own right...

That should be good news for all those provinces that are suspicious of the motives of the larger confederation itself.
 

MHz

Time Out
Mar 16, 2007
41,030
43
48
Red Deer AB
No, no such vote has ever taken place, there's no need for it to ever take place, and the loon who runs that site you cited offers a badly distorted interpretation of both the British North America Act and the Statute of Westminster in order to justify his claim that nobody, especially himself, should have to pay income tax.

His understanding of the Statute of Westminster in particular has nothing to do with reality. Section 7 paragraph 2 that he claims gives sovereignty to the provinces actually says this: "The provisions of section two of this Act shall extend to laws made by any of the provinces of Canada and to the powers of the legislatures of such Provinces." The section two that sentence refers to merely states that the Colonial Laws Validity Act no longer applies to the Dominions, and no statute of a Dominion shall be deemed "void or inoperative" just for being inconsistent with any present or future law of England. In other words, the British Parliament can't make laws for us anymore. That's all it says.

And if you still believe that loon, try filing income tax returns the way he tells you to and see what happens to you.

Whoever runs that site didn't pen the article I quoted from, the quotes were from this person, nor does Mr. Kuhl speak of taxes. The link was the first that came up on a search of many places that carry that same article. Surely you are not calling Mr. Kuhl a 'loon',

[SIZE=+2]A Factual Examination Of
The Constitutional Problem
[/SIZE]

[SIZE=+2]By
Walter F. Kuhl
Member Of Parliament
Jasper-Edson 1935-1949
[/SIZE]



Here is another link that says the same thing.
http://www.truemantuck.ca/Columns/Column10.htm

Another source is the book by Elmer Knutson, that one your locl library should be able to get for you.