To the editor:
I would just like to say thank-you to Jack Bradcoe for his letter—Constitution Act of 1982 Has No Lawful Power Within It For The People Or The Government, Capital News March 14 edition.
I realize I am one of the very, very few people to have read even just a little bit of the Canadian Constitution (a very long, very boring read) and as such am in total agreement with his statements.
Sadly, very sadly, the vast majority of Canadians know absolutely nothing about their Constitution. They assume a lot of things, mostly what they’ve seen in the movies about the American Constitution, but absolutely nothing about their own—or lack thereof. And we all know what assuming does, don’t we.
Years ago you could get a hard copy of the BNA Act simply by request it—for free. Then they started charging a fee which escalated dramatically over time—the plan was to make it as inaccessible as possible for your average Joe Blow because too many people were starting to ask questions.
But then along came the Internet—you don’t have an excuse anymore. The read is very long and very boring so few even bother trying, but you might want to look, like I did, regarding income tax, if nothing else. You will find that even if the Canadian Constitution was legal (which it isn’t) our government(s) is (are) not following it—they are breaking their own laws every second of every minute of every hour of every day.
The trouble is—what do you do?
I mean jeesus, we’re talking about the functioning of the whole country—nobody even wants to go there; can you imagine.
At the same time, how do you get anybody to even seriously examine the situation?
I mean, no media outlet would touch it with a 10 foot pole—no investigative report as these guys have to contend with everything government (CRTC, Revenue Canada, etc.) [throws in the way]—they would be putting their operating licenses at risk, they would be inviting the feds in for an audit, bank accounts could get frozen and then how do you operate?
On and on it goes, so nobody looks, nobody dares say anything, nobody wants to even consider or let alone believe it possible. Even judges strike down any court challenges; after all, if it turned out to be true then they would be part of a lie and breaking the very laws they are supposedly enforcing—can’t have that now can we.
Your letter might not do much Jack, but if even one person bothers to make the effort to look at what you have laid out, then one more person knows.
Way to go my friend.
John B. Collinson,