This article is written in Canadian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, centre, travelled, realize, analyze) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Countries, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of countries on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CountriesWikipedia:WikiProject CountriesTemplate:WikiProject Countriescountry
This article is within the scope of WikiProject North America, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of North America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.North AmericaWikipedia:WikiProject North AmericaTemplate:WikiProject North AmericaNorth America
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles that are spoken on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Spoken WikipediaWikipedia:WikiProject Spoken WikipediaTemplate:WikiProject Spoken WikipediaSpoken Wikipedia
This article has been viewed enough times to make it onto the all-time Top 100 list. It has had 106 million views since December 2007.
This article has been viewed enough times in a single year to make it into the Top 50 Report annual list. This happened in 2008, 2009, and 2010.
Please read before contributing The Canada article is already too long (oversized) and should serve only as an introduction for topics on Canada in general. To keep this overview article concise, please consider adding information instead to one of the many "main" articles about individual topics that link from this article, e.g. History of Canada, Culture of Canada, Canadian football etc. See Index of Canada-related articles for a complete listing of topics. Why? see Wikipedia:Article size.
In the Government and politics section of this article, the opening text states that "an implied bill of rights" is a "founding principle of the Canadian government", with a link to this page for further reading. However, that page states the exact opposite: this theory was never taken seriously by the courts, and was in fact explicitly rejected by the Supreme Court of Canada.
Not sure how to reword this to be more clear....lets first look at how some sources word this....or we can swap out sources to the one below that are more extensive?
McLachlin, Beverly (Jun 30, 2014). "Human Rights Protection in Canada". Chief justice of Canada. Canada's experience with human rights. Canada's experience can be divided into three phases: 1) Judicially implied rights; 2) Legislatively protected rights; and 3) Constitutionally protected human rights. Before human rights legislation and the Charter, courts in Canada relied on the theory of an "implied bill of rights" to protect traditional civil liberties such as freedom of speech and association. The theoretical foundation for these rights was the importance of free political speech and discussion in a democracy.
Jonathon W Penney, Ivan Rand's Ancient Constitutionalism, 2010 34-1&2 Manitoba Law Journal 43, 2010 CanLIIDocs 229, Even today, the judicial work of (Ivan Rand) “one of the greatest— if not the greatest— jurists in Canadian history” 2 remains required reading in law schools; and many of his most important decisions retain a central place in the minds of judges and legal commentators. For example, his judgments in the so-called “Implied Bill of Rights” cases were called the Supreme Court of Canada’s “most distinguished achievements,” 3 “the ‘golden’ moments of the civil liberties decade” 4 and the theory of implied rights described as “valuable”, 5 “one of the most original and provocative contributions ever made to Canadian constitutional law
Eric H Cline et al, Case Comments: Whither the Implied Bill of Rights? - A.G. Canada and Dupond v. The City of Montreal, Saskatchewan Law Review 137, 1980 CanLIIDocs 227,Much of the concern has focused on the court's changing approach to the Bill of Rights, but the Bill or Rights is not the only protection for civil liberties which has been recognized by the Supreme Court. Switzmann v. Elbing,1 and Saumur v. Attorney General for Quebec2, the leading civil liberties decisions of the 1950's, rested in part on a doctrine created by the court itself: the implied Bill of Rights.
Since few people know what an "implied bill of rights" is, it should be explained if it is included at all. The way the paragraph combines different claims about the country is implicit synthesis and should be re-written. It might make more sense to describe the situation as it stood at confederation, then describe the current one.
Maybe say something like although Canadian confederation did not provide a bill of rights, Canadians were assumed to have the rights traditionally recognized by courts in England. On the other hand, some have argued that peace, order and good government was a defining principle of the new confederation.
It should be noted that Canada does have (and had at the time) a literal “Bill of Rights”. I point this out as the language should reflect this fact (or not lose sight of it via good faith wording) 142.127.4.14 (talk) 12:25, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The founding fathers also believed in the supremacy of the British constitution, which they believed guaranteed certain rights such such as the right to own weapons. TFD (talk) 16:49, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not done. See talk page archives for extensive discussion on this topic and the consensus is it not any longer considered by anyone other than old documentation to be the official name of the country. Canterbury Tailtalk18:50, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
Update Canadian population from 41,012,563 (2024 Q2) to 41,288,599 (2024 Q3). It's from the same source, whic has been updated (Population estimates, quarterly). ZeusMinerva25 (talk) 13:40, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The current clause "Canada's economic integration with the United States has increased significantly since the Second World War." I think reads better as "Canada's economic cooperation with the United States has increased significantly since the Second World War." How is Canada integrated?
I as a born American cannot simply waddle to Canada without a passport. If I step across the border at a non-port of entry I would be fined. Canada is a separate legal and tax system. As-in I have to declare certain things at the Canadian border. How is Canada integrated into the United States? US Virgin Islands or Puerto Rico are "integrated" into the United States as I can hop on any plane going there and don't need any passport as a U.S. citizen. I don't lose my right to vote. I don't even have to declare a bank account in USVI or PR but I would have to if I have one in Canada.
Now as it stands- Trump says there's an offer (of sorts) for Canada to become the 51st state of the United States.(ref 1, ref 2) If that were agreed to I would think that was when 'integration' has begun (subject to the terms agreed to). But for the topic of tariffs removal Trump says as soon as he gets in he's slapping huge tariffs on Canada and Mexico. But there's no plans for the borders or even on-boarding of Canada's government into the United States jurisdiction. Persons born in Canada still must apply to move to the USA unless they have a U.S. parent. I think Canada just cooperates you're not integrated with here. Not like other parts of USA are actually "integrated" and there's no signs more measures are being implemented to make this easier. CaribDigita (talk) 06:18, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
level-3 vital article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
