The problem, of course, is that the British parliamentary system, which is the basis of our governance structure, is grounded in the philosophy of the "supremacy of parliament." This isn't an insignificant consideration. We've overlaid our governance structure with the Charter, which is an American-style attempt to balance the division of powers, and in particular to give much more power to the judiciary than was previously the case in Canada. Is this is good development? Personally, I think it's generally worked, however, the notwithstanding clause does serve to provide a means to enforce the public interest and the public good. Without it, Quebec would probably have left the federation. And more recently, Saskatchewan has talked about using it to protect the interests of students to attend Catholic schools where rural public schools shut down and the available alternatives are distant. The basis for using the clause should always be the demonstrable protection of the public interest.