Why did the Charlottetown accord rejected among the canadians?

Answer 1

There is not a simple answer to this question as different parts of the country and different segments of society reacted to the proposed Accord in different ways. But some of the reasons are these:

1. In Quebec, there was a belief that some provisions, such as that of the previous Meech Lake Accord's provision that Quebec constituted a "distinct society" within Canada had been watered down. Also, the Charlottetown Accord's provisions for a Triple-E Senate, even the proposed compromise version, did not adequately protect Quebec's distinctiveness going forward.

2. In BC and the West almost the opposite was believed: that the Accord "gave away" too much to Quebec. Even a watered-down "distinct society" provision, tucked away as it was in a broader "Canada Clause" would allow Quebec to expand it's powers at the expense of both the federal government and the other provinces.

The proposed Senate reform, which should have found broad support in BC and the West (as it was their chief issue) was seen as a badly compromise- weakened in power and largely negated by assigning Quebec a set percentage of the seats in an expanded House of Commons.

3, In BC the provisions regarding "aboriginal self-government" were feared. At this time in Canadian history, there were no legislative or judicial rulings providing any guidance to what this entailed. The Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples and the Delgamuukw decision were still years in the future. Consequently these provisions were taking as providing a "blank cheque" towards aboriginals. Given the lack of treaties covering BC, these provisions raised great uncertainty in BC above all other provinces.

4. There was suspicion in many quarters of the apparent consensus supporting the Accord. In addition to all three major political parties (the ruling Progressive Conservatives as well as the opposition Liberals and NDP) virtually all media, business, labor, feminist, aboriginal (and other social activist groups) in English Canada supported the Accord. In Quebec, the support and opposition views were better represented, as the province was, at least initially, even split.

This consensus of various societal and political actors who had never before come together in this way appeared to be an elite formation at the expense of the ordinary Canadian. This suspicion would give rise to new political parties, such as the Reform Party in BC and the West as well as the Bloc Quebecois in Quebec, and discredit those who advocated for the Accord's passage.

5. Opposition came from people that believed the Accord would have dramatically weakened the powers of the federal government vis-a-vis the provinces (mostly outside Quebec) and those that thought it did not give the provinces enough new powers (a view dominant in Quebec.)

6. The chief proponent of the Charlottetown Accord, Prime Minister Brian Mulroney had become deeply unpopular with Canadians across the country (and he would become even more so after the Accord's defeat.) His government had risked much to win a second majority in the 1988 Free Trade election and many of the opponents of free trade had become cemented into their opposition of Mulroney's Progressive Conservative agenda. Mulroney had further angered Canadians with his passage of the GST.

The Meech Lake Accord (precursor to the Charlottetown Accord), which in his first mandate was seen as an agreement between federal and provincial governments had become more closely scrutinized after the 1988 election. With the Meech Lake Accord's defeat in 1990, there was a feeling that Mulroney had picked a scab that was would have been better to have been left alone- that of Quebec's place in Canada. But since Quebec was resentful of the Accord's failure and was threatening a referendum on something in 1992, be it separation or another proposal, which became the Charlottetown Acord, Mulroney began a frenzy of constitutional negotiations.

Finally, when the proposal seemed to be losing support in the lead-up to the referendum, Mulroney offended many when, at a speech in Sherbrooke, Quebec, he held up a ream of paper (symbolizing the Accord itself) and tore it in half, calling those who opposed the accord "enemies of Canada."

7. The structure of the Accord itself became a focal point of opposition. Even supporters recognized that the Accord was flawed, containing provisions that were vague and seemingly contradictory. When pressed, supporters could not, or would not, give satisfactory answers as how to resolve these flaws. Former prime minister Pierre Trudeau captured this sentiment in a speech in Montreal's Maison Egg Roll when he described the Accord as " a big mess that deserves a big no." Trudeau was seen to have great credibility on the constitutional file, having seen the successful Patriation of Constitution from Britain in 1982 and the simultaneous passage of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, so his opposition carried great weight in the court of public opinion.

8. Beyond a profound dislike for Prime Minister Mulroney, his party, the Progressive Conservatives were increasingly disliked. The party was seen to be filled with Mulroney "cronies", suspected to be corrupt (whether or not this was true), divisive, tired and had lost touch with the interests of Canadians. At this time the economy was in recession and many Canadians believed this issue was being given short shrift in favor of a complex constitutional proposal. The party that had given them a divisive Free Trade Election, Meech Lake, the GST and the Oka Crisis produced an deep resentment within the Canadian electorate.

9. The actions of individual politicians served to discredit the proponents of the Accord. One example was the leak of two bureaucrats in the Quebec government who had suggested that Premier Bourassa had "caved-in" to the rest of Canada. This sentiment was later reinforced by BC cabinet minister, Moe Sihota, who said that Bourassa had been "out-gunned" in the negotiations. These statements weakened Bourassa at a critical time, as it made him look incapable of standing up for Quebec.

Another example was that of a young Progressive Conservative cabinet minister who was caught by the media saying one thing to conciliate Quebeckers when speaking in French in that province, and saying contradictory things in speeches given in English in other parts of Canada- his name was Jean Charest, now the Liberal Premier of Quebec.

These are just the most general reasons, each province and territory had their own specific reasons, in addition to these, as to why they voted against the Charlottetown Accord. These event are all matters of record, but even this brief answer cannot communicate the feelings of unease and confusion that reigned across Canada in the lead-up to the Referendum on October 26, 1992. There came to be a real feeling that the country was at stake. But it was unmistakably defeated, and Canada is still here.