This collection of essays by prominent Canadian political scientists and philosophers examines why the Charlottetown Accord failed to resolve Canada’s constitutional problems and explains the design and fate of the Accord as reflected in the theories and political forces that framed it. Canada’s fifth effort at "mega-constitutional politics" was a period of popular discussion and leadership negotiation, that ran from the defeat in 1990 of the Meech Lake Accord through to the Charlottetown Accord and the referendum of 26 October 1992. "Constitutional Predicament" explores the referendum in relation to the democratic process; nationalism (Canadian, Aboriginal, Quebecois) and pluralism; principles of constitutionalism, constitution-making, and popular participation in constitution-making; the role of the Charter and Supreme Court; future constitutional efforts; and worldwide trends. The contributors agree that Canadian voters rejected the Charlottetown proposals because they disapproved of both their content and the procedure by which they were drawn up. They conclude that, while Quebec remains the chief problem for the Canadian constitution, Quebec was not the sole constitutional issue or the sole issue which determined how Canadians voted.
