Abstract
This paper examines the arguments for and against the use of the referendum as a political tool in Canada against the backdrop of the October 26, 1992 referendum on the Charlottetown Accord. After presenting a brief history of the use of referenda in Canada and the attitudes of various Canadian political leaders to this practice, the paper analyzes in depth the objections that have been raised by detractors, rebutting the objections with evidence from the October 26, 1992 referendum as well as from the experience of other countries that have used referenda successfully. The paper concludes that the referendum has a distinct role to play in the democratic system of government and can be used to good effect in ensuring that the people's voice is heard.

From the Paper
"On October 26, 1992, Canada held an historic nation-wide referendum to determine if there was a public consensus on the Charlottetown Accord. It was historic for several reasons: it was the first all-Canada referendum in half a century since the plebiscite of 1942 (on the issue of conscription ); it was the first-ever direct vote on a constitutional matter; it showed that the Canadian public had a mind of its own-that is, Canadians could think and act independently of their government; and it led to the downfall of the Conservative Party. Most important of all, it sparked a renewed interest in and a lively discussion on the role of the referendum in the political process in Canada."

Tags:charlottetown, electoral, mandate, mulroney, parliament, plebiscite

Abstract
The paper relates that during the constitutional reform discussions that led up to the Charlottetown Accord, various government-funded aboriginal organizations were invited to participate in the debate. The paper notes that unfortunately, the Native Women's Association of Canada (NWAC) was not invited to participate in this debate. The paper discusses how in the view of the aforementioned group, its exclusion from direct funding and from direct participation in the constitutional discussions of the day was a threat to the equality of aboriginal women. The paper notes that in particular, NWAC was troubled at the prospect that the proposals being bandied about with regards to constitutional amendments might very well result in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms not applying to aboriginal self-government. The paper discusses how NWAC went to court to prevent any further provisioning of monies to other aboriginal organizations until NWAC was provided with equal funding as well.

From the Paper
"During the constitutional reform discussions that led up to the Charlottetown Accord, various government-funded aboriginal organizations were invited to participate in the debate. Unfortunately, the Native Women's Association of Canada (NWAC) was not invited to participate in this debate. In the view of the aforementioned group, its exclusion from direct funding and from direct participation in the constitutional discussions of the day was a threat to the equality of aboriginal women. In particular, NWAC was troubled at the prospect that the proposals being bandied about with regards to constitutional amendments might very well..."

Tags:native, women, government

Abstract
This paper examines the issue of senate reform in Canada, a major topic of political concern for a long while. The paper maintains that, despite various attempts, such as in Meech Lake and Charlottetown, there has yet to be any substantial improvements to the Senate of Canada. It argues that the Canadian Senate must be reformed to increase its effectiveness. The paper concludes that, although Prime Minister Stephen Harper can be seen to be pushing for improvements, Canada also look to other nations with similar governments as examples on how to effectively alter the Senate.

From the Paper
"A brief history of the Canadian Senate is necessary to fully comprehend the issues affecting it. The Senate became an official component of the Parliament of Canada in 1867 with the passing of the British North America Act. As Canada's system of governance is based on the British Westminster model, so was the Senate modeled after the elitist British House of Lords. John A. MacDonald referred to the Senate as a place of "sober second thought", intended to represent the interests of the people in various Canadian regions. Unfortunately, throughout the decades this has not occurred, and personal and party interests frequently override regional ones. Ordinarily the Senate consists of 105 members, although currently there are 93 sitting Senators . These members are chosen by the Governor General on the advice of the current Prime Minister . Once appointed, a Senator may serve until the age of seventy five years. Seats are assigned on a regional basis with each region supposedly receiving the representation of 24 Senators (Refer to Appendix 1). As is obvious in the chart, many parts of Canada are under- represented, an issue which will be tackled later in this paper. Those fortunate enough to obtain a position within the Upper House, receive a basic sessional salary of $122,700 (2006) . In addition to this salary, many senators receive additional salaries for various duties and a vehicle and residence allowance for certain Senators."

Tags:government, parliament, change