Reflective Journal-The Constitution

About one month ago I finished reading The Trouble with Canada...Still! by William Gairdner. I am almost totally convinced of his analysis of the problems with the constitution of this country and I came to class these past two lectures wanting to burst, my head swimming as it was with the problems of Canada, as I see them, at least.

Perhaps the what burned in my mind the most are all the unanswered questions I have about Canada's messy constitution. If I had the luxury of having a private lecture with Professor Alexander here are a few of the questions I'd ask:

• How exactly does the constitution allow for Civil Law (Quebec) and Common Law (R.O.C.)? (Yes, I know the text talks about this but I'm not satisfied with the answer.)
• To what extent was Trudeau predicting the future when he said the British Common Law System "must be welcomed as a valuable tool which permits dynamic parties to plant socialist governments in certain provinces, from which the seeds of radicalism can slowly spread."?
• Does the fact that no popular consent is required to make constituional change leave us at the mercy of judicial activists?

I could go on and on and on. But I won't. I guess I'm beginning to appreciate that if a constitution is merely a "living roots" document, we can't really control exactly how the tree will grow.