THE ADVOCATE 135
VOL. 80 PART 1 JANUARY 2022
By D. Michael Bain,Q.C.
A REPORT FROM YOUR
CORRESPONDENT IN LONDON:
CONSTITUTIONAL UPROAR 1980–82*
By Richard H. Vogel, Q.C.†
On reflection, I would like to recount one of the most interesting
things I’ve been involved with in my 55 years in the law.
I was then a lot younger, had a good job and possessed a good
deal more confidence than I ought.
The drama started in the spring of 1981. I was on my second trip to London
on the “Constitutional File” and I telephoned a series of then important
people to meet with them. I expected, despite the rule that imperial public
servants did not meet with provincial public servants on public business in
the absence of federal representatives, that they would see me and hear my
The people I called were those I calculated were my equivalents (I was
then the Deputy Attorney General of British Columbia) in the three bureaucracies
that shared the responsibility of giving legal advice to the Attorney
*† I am very indebted to my daughter, Aynsley, who gave me a lot of help with this paper. The paper was first presented at
a meeting of the 20 Club.