saggio

I'm not sure you know what exactly the Statue of Westminster really meant for Canada. Aside from the obvious (giving equal representation and standing to all Commonwealth Realms within the Empire), it also was supposed to give each realm an amending formula. Australia and New Zealand were among the participants that were able to agree on an amending formula for their respective constitutions; Canada was not. However, the Statue allowed a decision to be made regarding what sort of amending formula Canada would implement at a later date. Which is exactly what happened in 1984, with the passage of the Canada Act in the British House of Commons, in Westminster. The Act removed a number of legacy house keeping things (I seem to remember something about appeals to the Judicial Office of the Privy Council, but that may have been earlier...), but also gave the Canadian government 5 different ways in which the constitution could be amended. Now, as you certainly know, the government of Quebec refused to sign the newly repatriated Constitution - however, due to the plethora of amending formulas established and codified in the Canada Act (and subsequent enactments in the Constitution Act 1984) this was determined to not affect the legal standing of the Constitution. It remains legitimate and binding on all citizens, including residents of Quebec. There is nothing in the amending formulas that we have regarding the constitution that compels Her Majesty's government to use a referendum - it is done merely by convention, as was established by the attempted passage of the Charolettetown Accord. You'll notice that the previous attempt at constitutional reform (the Meech Lake Accord) did not require or use a referendum - it didn't need to, as there is nothing in the constitution that mandates a need for a referendum.