Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Will Canada Ever Become A Republic?  
User currently offlineQFA380 From Australia, joined Jul 2005, 2062 posts, RR: 1
Posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 6346 times:

The other day I was thinking about Australia and what will probably be our inevitable change to a republic within the next 25 years or so. It got me thinking about Canada and what they will likely do. I've never heard any talk of Canada becoming a republic, but will it happen soon? In roughly the same time period as Australia's move to a republic? How deep into the Canadian social and political structure is the Monarchy? Would the French have anything to say about this?

Would be greatly thankful if Canadians or any other interest parties could comment.

14 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineNeilYYZ From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 6341 times:



Quoting QFA380 (Thread starter):
How deep into the Canadian social and political structure is the Monarchy?

Socially I don't think most young Canadians give a crap about the British Monarchy (No offense Brits!). But seriously, my view of the British monarchy is that their good for an occasional laugh in the tabloids. I have nothing against them, I just don't really care one way or the other, I personally feel absolutely no connection to them whatsoever.

Canada uses the Governor General who is the "Queen's representative" but that's a largely symbolic role. The Governor General is also recommended by the PM.

Canada has officially cut ties with Britain, however, for some reason the Queen's mug is still on the back of our coins, which I can't understand, it's time we put our own history on the coins, not England's, but I use this largely as an example of the symbolic ties we still have to Britain.

Quoting QFA380 (Thread starter):
Would the French have anything to say about this?

French Canadians or French as in people from France?

The people from France have no connection, and they couldn't say a thing. And I have a feeling given the fact that many French Canadians want to cut ties with the rest of Canada that they wouldn't care either.


User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12135 posts, RR: 51
Reply 2, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 6336 times:



Quoting NeilYYZ (Reply 1):
French Canadians or French as in people from France?

The people from France have no connection, and they couldn't say a thing. And I have a feeling given the fact that many French Canadians want to cut ties with the rest of Canada that they wouldn't care either.

I'm not sure about that, they are still French. If Quebec should ever really go through the process of seceeding from the rest of Canada, they would ecentially become like the Cajin French of New Orleans are. French people seperated from France, but not wanting to join her.


User currently offlineNeilYYZ From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 6318 times:



Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 2):
I'm not sure about that, they are still French. If Quebec should ever really go through the process of seceeding from the rest of Canada, they would ecentially become like the Cajin French of New Orleans are. French people seperated from France, but not wanting to join her.

That's true. The only unfortunate part about Quebec seceding from Canada is that it would cut off the eastern provinces. There is nothing more comical in my mind than having seats in Federal Parliament represented by that wants to secede from the rest of the country.

That being said, if it came down to a referendum again, I doubt they have the balls to leave this time.


User currently offlineRonglimeng From Canada, joined Oct 2006, 625 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 6272 times:

I'm not sure if you are equating getting rid of the monarchy with becoming a republic?

I think the monarchy will continue to become less and less important to modern Canadians. It is really a fiction to think that those people in the House of Windsor with their funny accents have any real connection to Canada and Canadians. We'll probably go to the position of appointing a Governor-General as the actual Head of State.

I don't see us changing our style of government away from parliamentary democracy towards a republican system like the Americans have, where the Head of Government and Head of State are one person.

Our Canadian parliamentary democracy works pretty well, except for the occasional sweeping of things under the carpet.


User currently offlineWrenchBender From Canada, joined Feb 2004, 1779 posts, RR: 9
Reply 5, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 6231 times:



Quoting NeilYYZ (Reply 1):
Canada has officially cut ties with Britain

The repatriation of the constitution did not cut ties with Britain it changed the way we do business here in Canada. Queen Elizabeth II is still the Queen of Canada, we still have HMCS before all ship names in our Navy, her crown adorns all Air force Squadron Badges, The Army regiments carry 2 Colours, the Unit and the Queen's. Yes she is on our money (we seem to be the only country that has actually aged her) but so are many of our past PM's. As to the selection of the GG, the PM recommends the Queen still has final approval (I can't ever see her saying no).
Our entire Military history is tied to the british system and therefore the monarchy, remember the discussions over which flag was to fly at the 90th anniversary of Vimy Ridge? Even if we move further and further from the monarchy i doubt we will drop it altogether. As to a republic, why screw up what is already working?

Quoting Ronglimeng (Reply 4):
Our Canadian parliamentary democracy works pretty well, except for the occasional sweeping of things under the carpet.

 checkmark   checkmark 

WrenchBender



Silly Pilot, Tricks are for kids.......
User currently offlinePhotopilot From Canada, joined Jul 2002, 2731 posts, RR: 18
Reply 6, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 6222 times:

King Chuck..... Queen Camilla.... hardly!!!

Frankly as a proud Canadian, I think we need to stay a Parliamentary system, but sever all ties with the Monarchy. Coronation Street is a comedy, not the way we want to run our country.

Considering that as a percentage of population, British heritage is dying out, I think that Canada is politically mature enough that we don't need Her Nibs permission to hold Parliament in session.

The very sight of our Prime Minister having to "ask" permission from the Govenor General to disolve Parliament is sickening. It's all a rubber stamp formality, pomp and ceremony anyway.

Republic... no, but for heaven's sake, dump the Monarchy.


User currently offlinePlobax From France, joined Jan 2008, 116 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 6211 times:

I could imagine to see a kingdom of Quebec with Chateau Frontenac remodeled as the King's Palace. I am sure they would find someone in the Belle Province with some kind of (french) royal blood.

User currently offlineYOWza From Canada, joined Jul 2005, 4878 posts, RR: 15
Reply 8, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 6194 times:



Quoting WrenchBender (Reply 5):
As to a republic, why screw up what is already working?

I don't really know if it is  Smile

Quoting Photopilot (Reply 6):
Frankly as a proud Canadian, I think we need to stay a Parliamentary system, but sever all ties with the Monarchy. Coronation Street is a comedy, not the way we want to run our country.

Considering that as a percentage of population, British heritage is dying out, I think that Canada is politically mature enough that we don't need Her Nibs permission to hold Parliament in session.

The very sight of our Prime Minister having to "ask" permission from the Govenor General to disolve Parliament is sickening. It's all a rubber stamp formality, pomp and ceremony anyway.

Republic... no, but for heaven's sake, dump the Monarchy.

 checkmark 

YOWza



12A whenever possible.
User currently offlineAvek00 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 4369 posts, RR: 19
Reply 9, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 6180 times:

Any effort make any amendment to the governing structure will invariably open up the Quebec issues once again, and not for the better.


Live life to the fullest.
User currently offlineNeilYYZ From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 6151 times:



Quoting WrenchBender (Reply 5):

That is a good point. Other than being kept for symbolic purposes I suppose, we have effectively dropped the monarchy. I'm just all in favor of dropping the symbolism all together.

And I agree, I wouldn't change out system of government too much either. Although I'd like an elected senate, that's for another thread on another day.


User currently offlineTheCol From Canada, joined Jan 2007, 2039 posts, RR: 6
Reply 11, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 6117 times:



Quoting QFA380 (Thread starter):
How deep into the Canadian social and political structure is the Monarchy?

Deep.

Our entire political and legal system is based on the monarchy. Not only would a change be extremely time consuming, it would take billions of $ to review and revamp the legal system and the laws within it. To much waste for my liking.

Quoting QFA380 (Thread starter):
Would the French have anything to say about this?

The French would take that opportunity to try and create their own republic as well.

Quoting Ronglimeng (Reply 4):
I don't see us changing our style of government away from parliamentary democracy towards a republican system like the Americans have, where the Head of Government and Head of State are one person.

Our Canadian parliamentary democracy works pretty well, except for the occasional sweeping of things under the carpet.

 checkmark 

Quoting WrenchBender (Reply 5):
The repatriation of the constitution did not cut ties with Britain it changed the way we do business here in Canada. Queen Elizabeth II is still the Queen of Canada, we still have HMCS before all ship names in our Navy, her crown adorns all Air force Squadron Badges, The Army regiments carry 2 Colours, the Unit and the Queen's. Yes she is on our money (we seem to be the only country that has actually aged her) but so are many of our past PM's. As to the selection of the GG, the PM recommends the Queen still has final approval (I can't ever see her saying no).
Our entire Military history is tied to the british system and therefore the monarchy, remember the discussions over which flag was to fly at the 90th anniversary of Vimy Ridge? Even if we move further and further from the monarchy i doubt we will drop it altogether. As to a republic, why screw up what is already working?

Exactly. The British monarchy is a part of our heritage, why reject it?



No matter how random things may appear, there's always a plan.
User currently offlineYyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16248 posts, RR: 56
Reply 12, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 6086 times:



Quoting Photopilot (Reply 6):
Considering that as a percentage of population, British heritage is dying out,

Not exactly. British-Canadians remain by far the largest "ethnic" group of Canadians with over 50% of Cdns having some British blood. That we are considered the "old stock" anglo Canadians in no way diminoishes the absolute central role that British-Canadians play in daily Canadian life.

Quoting Photopilot (Reply 6):
The very sight of our Prime Minister having to "ask" permission from the Govenor General to disolve Parliament is sickening.

It's merely a formality based on tradition. The GG always says yes, but she (or he) does have the authority to ask an opposition party to rule instead (if, in the case of a minority parliament, the 2nd largest party can govern with more stability). This promotes stability. Anyway, if the Monarchy is eliminated, this role (with the same responsibilities) will likely transfer to an elected President with likely some loyalty to one political party or another. This will create MORE problems.

Quoting Photopilot (Reply 6):
Republic... no, but for heaven's sake, dump the Monarchy.

Oh, for Heaven's sake, why? How does having a government based on a constitutional Monarchy affect you negatively? Clearly, it doesn't. Most of Canada was settled by Brits with funding from the British crown. This created a stable, modern country that you and your ancestors continue to benefit from today.

Quoting TheCol (Reply 11):
Our entire political and legal system is based on the monarchy. Not only would a change be extremely time consuming, it would take billions of $ to review and revamp the legal system and the laws within it. To much waste for my liking.

Agreed. A separate referendum would be need in each province with each result needing a solid majority to pass. This will cost in excess of $1B. Even then, there is no mechanism to dissolve our current form of government and replace it with a republican form replacing the GG with a President, or passing more powers on to a Prime Minister. This itself will take up an inordinate amount of time and federal $. No thanks.

A government based on a Constitutional Monarchy provided a level of governing stability that benefits Canada, and is one major national characteristic that differs us from Americans. It works, and there is no need to change it. It is also part of our history and tradition.



Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
User currently offlineJamincan From Canada, joined Aug 2006, 775 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 6021 times:

I always thinking that these periodic debates about abolishing the monarchy or reforming the Senate are just redherrings for the real problem, the House of Commons. If we're going to spend money changing the governing structure, we should be spending it in the House.

As for abolishing the monarchy, I think the chances are slim to none. There isn't any serious republican or anti-monarch movement in Canada, and in general, Canadians' attitude towards the monarchy are too apathetic for such a movement to gain any momentum. I think Canadians will stick with what makes them most happy, the status quo.


User currently offlineCzbbflier From Canada, joined Jul 2006, 973 posts, RR: 2
Reply 14, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 5975 times:

There are a number of reasons behind this. Constitutionally, politically, historically, geographically, socially, and pragmatically, there is little reason to believe that Canada will follow in the footsteps of Australia. Indeed, Canada will never abandon the Monarchy- at least Canada in its current form.

First, constitutionally, it would open way too many cans of worms. Quebeckers (The French as you have put it, QFA380), have a strong case for not only eliminating the Monarchy, but many also feel that they ought to be independent of Canada. If the ROC (Rest of Canada) were to start tinkering with the Monarchy, Quebec separatism would complicate the issue immensely. The complications would be greater still, once you factor in the desires for self-government of the First Nations peoples (Canada's Aboriginals) in the face of their long-standing grievances and claims against the Crown. The upheaval for those who benefit from the status quo would be just too great.

As a generality, I agree with the above post that explains that we accept as a good thing the fact that the Head of State and the Head of government are two different people occupying two different offices. It's good to know that while the government is, for all intents and purposes, responsible to us citizens, there is a single individual that is responsible for ensuring that fact where that person can, although Constitutionally dangerous as it ought to be, intervene in the case of an emergency or in the face of perceived abuse of power- just as the Governor General did in 1926 in the King-Byng Affair in Canada, or in 1975 in Australia between Kerr and Whitlam.

Second, politically, Canada has gone through a couple of gut-wrenching, angst-ridden attempts at Constitutional change since the 1980s and both times the economy went to Hell in a hand-basket while the government's eye was on the constitutional ball. The bickering between the provinces and the federal government dominated the newspapers not just for days and weeks, but for months and years. The last attempt- the Charlottetown Accord was soundly defeated in a referendum by Canadians despite being supported by all corners of the political establishment- again after months of wrangling and horse-trading. Constitutional change in Canada is messy and unpleasant. And every dirty dark Canadian secret gets drawn into the debate- and our secrets are as shameful as South Africa's under Apartheid.

Guaranteed, even the thought of more constitutional talk will send the most reserved, quiet and happiest of Canadians into fits of under-breath explicatives and cursing that would make the most seasoned sailors blush. Because of this, even the most outspoken politicians, the fools that they are who rush in where angels fear to tread, give this one a wide berth. So far, the most we've seen at re-inventing our institutions in latter years has been a recent proposal to reform the Senate (our version of the House of Lords) where members might only sit for seven years, instead of a life-time until they're 75. But even that's not radical change. Senators will still be appointed by the prime minister from a 'suggested' list of nominees.

Thirdly, historically Canada's creation was a reaction to the expansionist aspirations of the revolutionary republic to the South, namely the USA. Those loyal to the King in the revolution headed North and as such there is still a very strong undercurrent of loyalty to the crown in certain pockets of the population. Given the vast distances in Canada, we tend to be somewhat parochial in our thinking and these loyalists hold a lot of sway in their respective spheres of influence. Additionally, the presence of the Monarchy underlies the differences (few but significant) that exist between Canadians and Americans. We as Canadians often define ourselves by what we are not; how we differ from Americans (this is often seen in the non-av forums).

Another historic fact, as discussed by others in this thread, concerns the fact that Canada has evolved with the Monarchy front and centre. We have the Hudson's Bay Company. The Royal Canadian Mounted Police. When Britain declared war on Germany in the First World War, Canada, like Australia, was automatically at war too, Canada earned its foreign policy independence on the battlefields of France, fighting for the British Empire.

Fourthly, with this historic background, the geography and demography that Canada finds itself is very different from that of Australia. First, it shares the longest supposedly undefended border with the strongest, most boisterous, internationally activist yet isolationist republic in the world. As a collective, we are somewhere between tacitly complacent to jubilantly 'North Americans' and as such, independently-minded and isolated from the rest of the world. Because of that proximity- something no other country gets to have except Mexico and there's hardly a parallel there, we get special consideration in Washington D.C. as continental brothers so we get to play at being "American" without being Americans- a status Canadians cherish whether they'll admit it or not. Whether there's real benefit for either side in that relationship is perhaps for another thread at another time.

But we also have our roots to the Commonwealth and the historic stability that comes with the Monarchy. While very insecure about ourselves about a lot of things, Canadians are quite comfortable with it all. We see ourselves as having an egalitarian society so Class is not so much an issue- all the Class baggage that exists under 'She who Reigns Over Us' simply doesn't make it across the Atlantic. At least in the initial stages, Canada was not a penal colony (sorry but that is the truth)... it was always a promised land for those who wanted a fresh start but who still wanted to stay within the British sphere of influence in the Americas.

Fifth, social references have been made in this thread and often elsewhere that the Queen is a lovely old lady who drops in for a visit every so often to cut ribbons and has her portrait on our coins. She represents a concept in Canada rather than a Dynasty as her lineage hasn't been present in Canada since the 1950s when Vincent Massey was made Canada's first Canadian Governor General.

Unlike in Australia (or so I believe), there is no schizophrenic relationship with Britain here in Canada. We drive on the right like the contientals and Americans. We have our own flag. There are no pilgrimages to the Old Country any more. Importantly, Royal titles cannot be held by Canadians. Most recently, Conrad Black, Lord Black of Crossharbour, had to renounce his Canadian birthright and citizenship to sit as a member of the House of Lords. We don't represent 'civilization' in a distant part of the world nor clamour to do so. We don't see ourselves as breaking away from the stodgy old family as we are quite comfortably a part of that family. We are still close enough to Britain physically to actually share in its own growth and evolution.

Finally, as a pragmatic people, simply the cost is too prohibitive. Until something else comes along that will provide the same benefits at less cost (which is impossible since there are only 11 offices to support- one Governor General and 10 Lieutenant Governors, one for each province). Check this page out for a break-down. Given that the British public pays the entire bill to maintain the Royal Family in the style to which It has become accustomed, we actually get all the pomp and circumstance, as well as the hidden benefit of 'Peace, Order and Good Government' without the cost. Unlike Canadians, Australians apparently don't see that as a saving grace.

So to conclude, it will many years before Canadians drop the Monarchy- if ever. Constitutionally it would be too difficult in the face of widespread opposition to any constitutional tinkering. Historically, Canada's institutions and polity are borne of the Monarchy in reaction to the republic to the south and as such it is very deeply engrained in our society. The Monarchy, as a concept, has served us well. Geographically, we are at once equally North American and global thanks to our close relationship to the United States and historic ties (without the apron strings) to Britain. And finally, we're cheap and for a Canadian, if it affects the pocketbook negatively, you can work on the assumption that it won't happen.

As a footnote, that day might come should we have a reformed Senate. Given that in Australia your Senate is also elected (something that ours never shall be as its just too plummy a patronage appointment for any current government to abandon), there is no institutional inertia or reason to keep on with the tried-and-true. You have cast off that brake in Canberra (heck- you even invented a post-British Empire capital city!- something unthinkable in Canada) and now unfettered you are looking about for a stronger sign of independence and severing ties with the Monarchy is a logical step.

Possibly, with a reformed senate there will come a day in Canada when there is a parliamentary move to abolish the Crown but that day, I'd say QFA380, won't happen even in your lifetime.

Just my $2.50 worth.


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Will Road Pricing Become A Reality? posted Fri Dec 1 2006 18:16:09 by 9V
Hockey: Will It Ever Come Back? posted Thu Mar 9 2006 04:02:02 by AerospaceFan
Billie-Jo. Will We Ever Know The Truth? posted Fri Feb 17 2006 19:50:42 by Cosec59
Will Canada Phase Out Public Health Care? posted Tue Jan 24 2006 20:47:32 by AerospaceFan
Will It Ever Stop Raining! posted Wed Jan 18 2006 16:45:51 by Gladave
Australia Must Become A Republic posted Fri Sep 9 2005 14:29:39 by QANTASforever
Will They Ever Learn? posted Mon Nov 1 2004 13:27:43 by Whitehatter
Will Smith Ever Be President posted Mon Aug 23 2004 15:27:59 by TwinPioneer
Will We Ever Be At Code Blue Or Green? posted Tue Dec 30 2003 18:26:51 by N6376m
Will There Ever Be A Serious Inquiry Into The War? posted Tue Sep 16 2003 16:29:19 by Alpha 1
Will Humans Ever Time Travel? posted Tue Jan 5 2010 01:40:28 by MadameConcorde
Will Australia Ever Have Nationwide Freeways? posted Wed Jul 29 2009 10:43:31 by Travelin man
Will Road Pricing Become A Reality? posted Fri Dec 1 2006 18:16:09 by 9V
Hockey: Will It Ever Come Back? posted Thu Mar 9 2006 04:02:02 by AerospaceFan
Billie-Jo. Will We Ever Know The Truth? posted Fri Feb 17 2006 19:50:42 by Cosec59
Will Canada Phase Out Public Health Care? posted Tue Jan 24 2006 20:47:32 by AerospaceFan
Will It Ever Stop Raining! posted Wed Jan 18 2006 16:45:51 by Gladave