After 12 attempts in 37 years, the country could finally be about to change its national anthem to make it more inclusive

In 2011, Canadian senator Nicole Eaton launched a campaign to get rid of one of her country’s main symbols. The beaver had to be dumped as the national animal, she said. It’s a “dentally defective rat” that does little more than “wreak havoc on farmlands, roads, lakes, streams and tree plantations”. Tradition be damned; the polar bear should be Canada’s symbol.

Today, in contrast, Eaton is the main barrier to changing another of Canada’s beloved symbols: its national anthem. Last year, a bill was put forward to change two words of the English version of O Canada so it would include women as well as men. Under the plan, a line that says “in all thy sons command” would become “in all of us command”.

Canada’s parliament approved the move last year, but the Senate still needs a say. A vote is due imminently. Unless, that is, Eaton manages to stop it.

“We have things that give women protection and equality,” she says. “We believe strongly in that. So why don’t we let history be history, and move on?”

Eaton is far from alone in opposing the move. Some literature professors point out that the change will make the anthem grammatically incorrect. The original poet’s descendants say you should not meddle with his creation. Chris Champion, editor of history magazine the Dorchester Review, told senators that the phrase “in all of us” appears nowhere else in literature except Kurt Cobain’s suicide note – and that is hardly a good comparison for a national anthem.

But Frances Lankin, the senator leading the call for change, says things have got silly. “Some of the arguments [against it] are like a comedy routine,” she says. “There have been 12 bills since 1980 trying to do this.

“It’s a small change that could have a large impact on the youth of our country,” she adds. “Singing the anthem with the words as they are now raises questions for kids: ‘Mommy, why is it just ‘sons’?’ A lot of us have no answer to that other than: ‘Well, it’s an old song.’

“I appreciate those who argue ‘heritage’, but I think the time has come,” she says. “Let’s vote.”