Retain the Monarchy in Canada?
- Thread starter Pieman
- Start date
Have you read the 11 pages? There is a veritable plethora of suggested changes...Infanteer said:
The Constitutional Monarchy clearly is a different from of goverment from the Americans. Now, you say we live in the information age (which i clearly agree), why do we have to sacrifice tradition and heritage because of this? In my oppinion, we dont. My suggestion is wait. There is no immediate need to remove the sovereign, it is something we should consider if:
- Britain abolishes the monarchy
- Australia and New Zealand abolish the Monarchy
It would be a shame to see a polititian become the head icon of this country.
- Reaction score
- 35
- Points
- 560
We all need to watch Infanteer more closely, so we will be able to take appropriate action when he launches his coup and remodels Canadian society after "Infanteer's Republic" 
I do like the idea of the GG having an elective office, but perhaps there should be more conditions attached to the selection process. Here are a few suggestions:
Nominees should have already demonstrated some exceptional merit. Limit the "Merit List" to Officers of the Order of Canada and Nobel Prize winners.
Since the role of head of state is supposed to be above partisen politics, perhaps the office does not need to be decided by a general election. Canadian senators, for example, might be asked to vote on candidates from the "Merit List".
One other thought. The GG should be "re-fanged", with clearly delimited powers to act as the final arbitrator for certain situations. The "King Byng" affair is unfairly cast as a reason to strip the GG of power, Byng was in fact correct to ask the leader of the opposition to form a new government after King's minorety bungled. ( Her Excelency should be reading up on her history about now...).
I do like the idea of the GG having an elective office, but perhaps there should be more conditions attached to the selection process. Here are a few suggestions:
Nominees should have already demonstrated some exceptional merit. Limit the "Merit List" to Officers of the Order of Canada and Nobel Prize winners.
Since the role of head of state is supposed to be above partisen politics, perhaps the office does not need to be decided by a general election. Canadian senators, for example, might be asked to vote on candidates from the "Merit List".
One other thought. The GG should be "re-fanged", with clearly delimited powers to act as the final arbitrator for certain situations. The "King Byng" affair is unfairly cast as a reason to strip the GG of power, Byng was in fact correct to ask the leader of the opposition to form a new government after King's minorety bungled. ( Her Excelency should be reading up on her history about now...).
To support Canuck_25, the monarchy distinguishes us from the Americans in an important way regardless of the fact that we
"work in Information Age economies, take part in representative democracies, live under the Rule of Law, and are protected by Constitutional arrangements which enshrine the rights of the Individual".
The Canadian monarchy is representative of all Canadians regardless of their particular beliefs, ideologies, or political affiliations. Compare that with the elected US President who as head of state really only represents those Americans that voted for him.
On another note, can anyone imagine the legal complexities involved with abolishing the monarchy? Look at the the disastrous outcomes of the previous attempts at major constitutional reforms (Meech Lake and Charlottetown)!
-Mick
"work in Information Age economies, take part in representative democracies, live under the Rule of Law, and are protected by Constitutional arrangements which enshrine the rights of the Individual".
The Canadian monarchy is representative of all Canadians regardless of their particular beliefs, ideologies, or political affiliations. Compare that with the elected US President who as head of state really only represents those Americans that voted for him.
On another note, can anyone imagine the legal complexities involved with abolishing the monarchy? Look at the the disastrous outcomes of the previous attempts at major constitutional reforms (Meech Lake and Charlottetown)!
-Mick
IMHO, the Governor-General's considerable power is already adequately curbed by existing precedent and tradition. Has the GG's office been embroiled in any major power-struggles since King-Byng?
Out of curiosity, other than Order of Canada and Nobel winners, what merits and qualifications should an elected, or indirectly-elected GG posses?
For the record, I'm all-for the status quo...
Cheers!
-Mick
Out of curiosity, other than Order of Canada and Nobel winners, what merits and qualifications should an elected, or indirectly-elected GG posses?
For the record, I'm all-for the status quo...
Cheers!
-Mick
- Reaction score
- 5,284
- Points
- 1,060
I don't care. As long as she continues to support the CF, and lets the public know what we're doing, on a regular basis, she can fly to Kathmandu daily for all I care.
As to the Monarchy, I fully expect this thread to continue until it becomes a King and then carry on in the same vein.
As to the Monarchy, I fully expect this thread to continue until it becomes a King and then carry on in the same vein.
- Reaction score
- 35
- Points
- 560
I seem to recall that Governor General Ed Schryer was quietly preparing to assert vice regal power during the controversies surrounding the patriation of the constitution, which was beginning to paralize the government of the day.
GG Clarkson should certainly be prepared to dissolve parliament should unambiguous evidence of corruption be turned up in the Adscam inquiry. (Imagine, the president of the Quebec Caucus and serving Minister of Finance completely unaware of the flow of federal funds to Liberal friendly ad agencies for little or no work....If he really WAS that clueless, why should he be PM?)
As for how the Merit list should be created, feel free to choose some sort of parameters which avoid or minimize politics (maybe a random draw: the GG lottery!)
GG Clarkson should certainly be prepared to dissolve parliament should unambiguous evidence of corruption be turned up in the Adscam inquiry. (Imagine, the president of the Quebec Caucus and serving Minister of Finance completely unaware of the flow of federal funds to Liberal friendly ad agencies for little or no work....If he really WAS that clueless, why should he be PM?)
As for how the Merit list should be created, feel free to choose some sort of parameters which avoid or minimize politics (maybe a random draw: the GG lottery!)
- Reaction score
- 5,284
- Points
- 1,060
We could pick a new GG, if needed, by country wide poll. Much faster and more efficiently than the CBC picked the most famous Canadian!
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
I cannot for the life of me fathom why we as a sovereign nation swear allegiance to a foreign monarchy, which, by the way, deeply offends one quarter of our fellow citizens (French). Why this woman's picture is still on our money, why we will one day, swear allegiance to a foreign king who once likened himself to a tampon and his idiot son who recently wore a Nazi uniform to a costume party on the eve of the Auschwitz memorial. Surely to God at this point in time we have outgrown this pact of misfits and do nothings. We have more in common with our neighbors to the south than the Brits. My two cents.
- Reaction score
- 25
- Points
- 430
Why?
Why, because we are members of a larger organization of states called the British Commonwealth, of which she is the head!
GW
Why, because we are members of a larger organization of states called the British Commonwealth, of which she is the head!
GW
D
dutchie
Guest
Jumper said:
1-If the French had defeated the British, we would be swearing allegiance to Mitirand, so count yourself lucky! (Yes, I know, he's not a monarch). That would likely offend 90% of us.
2-That 'idiot son' will never be King...unless he knocks off William, that is.
3-We haven't outgrown the pack of misfits and do-nothings in Ottawa that wear red lapel pins, and they have way more impact on our lives than some blue-bloods in England.
4-We have more in common with the US in regards to contemporary culture, but certainly not in traditions.
MY 2 cents
- Reaction score
- 9,944
- Points
- 1,260
I think Jumper has illustrated the point that many who are dissatisfied with the monarchy are sore with (which I illustrated in my proposal). Again, I feel it is time to repatriate our Head-of-State in the traditional form of The Crown, only now it will be our Crown.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
George Wallace said:
Just because!?!...still doesn't answer my question. Don't you think we've matured enough to strike out on our own, cut the apron strings? Nice to remember where we came from but..... And by the way what has the British Commonweath done for us lately?
- Reaction score
- 25
- Points
- 430
Jumper said:
I could ask what the Organization des Francophonie has done for us too? Or for that fact the UN?
Why should we have our own Queen/King here in Canada? Why should that be an elected position? We have an elected Parliament, with an Upper House of "Appointed Lords" in the Senate (Perhaps soon to become elected too). We have 'Appointed' Lt Governors and the Governor General, all approved by the Monarch as their representative.
If you compare our hierarchy with that of other nations, it is unique. "The Buck Stops Here!" type of problem doesn't arise here, in that Parliament is responsible to a Monarch for the governance of Canada. All Acts of Parliament have to be passed again by the Senate to become law, after they have received Royal Assent. Now, Royal Assent is just a formality in most cases, but I suppose in an extreme case it could be withheld.
When one wants to lay blame for the failings of our government, where does the buck really stop?
Infanteer, I find it unusual that you want to get rid of the Monarchy, and then replace it with our own 'elected' monarchy, as opposed to simply doing away with it altogether. That would remove the top tier of all our Federal and Provincial Governments, and lay the blame for any screwups firmly on our own laps.
Gw
- Reaction score
- 25
- Points
- 430
Absolutely....before he declares a "Benevolent Dictatorship"! ;D
GW
GW
- Reaction score
- 9,944
- Points
- 1,260
George Wallace said:
Not much. None of these organizations based off some sort of heritage or tradition are really effective for the reason that the more removed from current realities they become, the less utility they offer. We are better off being served by more informal groupings with states that have the same background and same goals (The ABCA comes to mind). One should always be careful to ensure that Dogma doesn't replace Tradition.
Why should we have a King/Queen period? You are a citizen within a representative democracy - the thought of being a subject to some "greater" being and their offspring should conflict with that notion.
Don't you want some sort of say in who you want to represent you as your Head-of-State? Or are you going to be content with King Charles III merely because of who his mother is?
Yes. So we're almost there with regards to fully maturing as a completely democratic entity.
Not really, de facto power lies within our Legislative body because they are the only ones that are truly accountable to the body politic - most others lie somewhere between cushy patronage and political shills. Lets bring the other half of our Executive Branch back into political utility.
Us. So lets have a Constitutional arrangement that reflects that. We don't need a foreign King to "wear" our sovereignty, we're more then capable of appointing someone to watch over it on our behalf.
I don't know how it reduce the top tier of all our Federal and Provincial governments?
I am not proposing to merely replace the monarchy with one of our own. Parliamentary Democracy is much more complicated then you make it out to be. It supposes that sovereignty is embodied in the Crown that the Monarch wears and that the sovereign is responsible for preserving and protecting our sovereignty. This is why I put the famous Leviathan image up in my proposal. The loyalty to this body is supposed to supercede partisan political games that exist in Parliament.
However, the modern liberal democratic order means that having our sovereignty in the hands of an unelected, unaccountable, inherited monarchical body (let alone a foreign one) is unacceptable. The outcome: the monarchy really means nothing in a political, constitutional sense. The Queen looks nice on the 20 dollar bill and the Governor-General can wave and do a bang-up job representing us in Finland but in reality, the constitutional arrangement of our inherited tradition of Parliamentary Democracy has gone askew, leaving a system in which the checks-and-balances to curb abuse of power by one branch of the Government have been left at the wayside. The result; the Prime Minister rules by fiat and the "Loyal Opposition" serves no real role at all execept to act as a bunch of howling monkies in Parliament (I guess you could almost stick the rest of the House of Commons there as well - nothing really goes beyond Cabinet).
The options to fix this are three-fold:
1) Maintain the current set-up, which only means that our constitutional arrangement becomes more and more obscure every year.
2) Get rid of the monarchy and move to a Republican model. Such a radical transformation in Constitutional tradition does not sit well with many who reflect on the 300 years of British legal, cultural, and constitutional heritage that Canada has.
3) In the great effort of compromise, move to a system that repatriates our Head-of-State as an acceptable and effective agent of Constitutional duties and responsibilities while at the same time seeking to preserve our tradition of Parliamentary Democracy which advocates loyalty to something above the political body.
Read my proposal carefully, you'll see that my general purpose is not to repatriate the monarchy, but rather the realign our constitutional arrangement into something that should satisfy both the Parliamentary traditionalists and the liberal democrats.
Cheers,
Infanteer
Similar threads
