Canada, dump the crown and become a republic? (poll)

Should Canada become a republic?

  • Yes

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Undecided

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    1

Said1

Hubba Hubba
Apr 18, 2005
5,338
70
48
52
Das Kapital
Re: RE: Canada, dump the crown and become a republic? (poll)

Finder said:
[
I'm Telling Jack. :cry:

Oh, please don't. Mini Jackiesan packs a powerful punch.

 

Daz_Hockey

Council Member
Nov 21, 2005
1,927
7
38
Re: RE: Canada, dump the crown and become a republic? (poll)

Finder said:
Said1 said:
Yep. Evil and conniving can come any many different packages. :lol:

I'm Telling Jack. :cry:




Daz... I don't know if we love the Queen the most. New Zealand I may think? I think we just tolerate the monarchy the most. But out of the commonwealth isn't England the most monarchist?

I honestly dont know about that, I think the word "tolerate" is ideal here, the royal family generally are not of english decent anyway, I would expect quite a number of Canadian families could trace their tree's back further to england than that of the house of Mountbatten/Battenburg/Winsor/Saxe-Coburg-Gotha/whatever

Frankly both the queen and her mother regarded themselves as scottish. I think if there was a "better option" most of England would take it.

I mean England at the moment, despite Blackleaf's ranting is feeling very unrepresented at the moment, the conservatives have stated that their next leader will "definatly" not be scottish, as to not offend the only state in the union without it's own assembly.

In reality, if England didnt have all tht history and a slate was wiped clean, virtually no-one would want the royal family, so in all honesty, to suggest England is the most loyal is a bit of a misanoma, it's like suggesting the fella from New York was the biggest New Yorker, it's not cus he likes new york, it's just where he was born, same with the royal family here.

Besides which the REAL King of the UK and head of the Commonwealth of nations is an Australian by the name of Harold Hastings......FACT.

But I suppose the difference is here family arnt in canada all the time and most of you choose to accept them, in England it's a bit different.
 

Daz_Hockey

Council Member
Nov 21, 2005
1,927
7
38
RE: Canada, dump the crow

Well the queen mother's family was of scottish decent, Thaine of Glams no less (if you've read McBeth you'll be familiar with the title) and the queen was born in scotland, thats why she at least considers herself scottish.

But yeah, on her Dad's and husband's side they are all generally German's, but when the family were passed other all those centuries ago it was the norm, but now it's not.

But there's definatly a bit of a groundswell at the moment, Camilla hasnt helped....but of course, when it comes down to it the English people like always will bow down and do whatever the government tell them.
 

Daz_Hockey

Council Member
Nov 21, 2005
1,927
7
38
RE: Canada, dump the crow

a Quote from the queen's Scottish mother:

"In later years Elizabeth was quoted as saying, "Canada was the making of us," and she returned frequently both on official tours and privately.

In Canada she was extensively quoted throughout her life as to her reported immediate response on landing in 1939: a World War I veteran asked, during one of the earliest of the royal couple's repeated encounters with the crowds, "Are you Scotch or English?" "I'm Canadian!""

- from wikipedia
 

Finder

House Member
Dec 18, 2005
3,786
0
36
Toronto
www.mytimenow.net
Well I'm not sure how Canada will re-act when the Queen dies as I do not think even very many monarchists have a lot of respect for all the royal family. BUT they say the Queen most likely has inherited longevity gene from her mother.
 

I think not

Hall of Fame Member
Apr 12, 2005
10,506
33
48
The Evil Empire
You guys still debating as to whether or not to dump the crow? ....er...I mean crown?

Oh well, at least Elizabeth does have some class, I'll wait and see what happens when dumbo takes charge, see the reactions.
 

Colpy

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 5, 2005
21,887
848
113
70
Saint John, N.B.
I think not said:
You guys still debating as to whether or not to dump the crow? ....er...I mean crown?

Oh well, at least Elizabeth does have some class, I'll wait and see what happens when dumbo takes charge, see the reactions.

Your Yankee roots are showing..............my ancestors, on both sides, left the USA as either refugees or soldiers being retired after the American Revolutionary War.........Loyal to the Crown all.

Geez, I'd be haunted if I were a republican.

And my mother, the monarchist of all monarchists, would disown me. :D

I can remember her going to meetings of the IODE..........Imperial Order of Daughters of the Empire, no less!

Although my good friend the history professer claims I am the perfect example of a United Empire Loyalist............loyal to the Crown, but whose ideals of democratic society are more American than British in Nature.............
 

I think not

Hall of Fame Member
Apr 12, 2005
10,506
33
48
The Evil Empire
Colpy

I can never understand or even begin to comprehend why anybody wants a monarch.

BUT, I respect the fact that there are people who want it. And apparently Canadians want it, otherwise the monarchy wouldn't be around.

On occassion, allow me to bust your chops :D
 

tamarin

House Member
Jun 12, 2006
3,197
22
38
Oshawa ON
At least in the monarchy, we have someone we can respect. Look up to, be thankful for and maybe even feel a bit awed by. When was the last time you could say that about a Canadian prime minister?
 

s_lone

Council Member
Feb 16, 2005
2,233
30
48
43
Montreal
Re: RE: Canada, dump the crown and become a republic? (poll)

tamarin said:
At least in the monarchy, we have someone we can respect. Look up to, be thankful for and maybe even feel a bit awed by. When was the last time you could say that about a Canadian prime minister?

Oh mon Dieu, voici la reine, notre souveraine! Vive la reine!

VIVE LA REINE D'ANGLETERRE!!!
 

Blackleaf

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 9, 2004
49,633
1,865
113


Monarchy is the oldest form of government in the United Kingdom.

In a monarchy a king or queen is Head of State. The British monarchy is known as a constitutional monarchy. This means that, while The Queen is Head of State, the ability to make and pass legislation resides with an elected Parliament. Although the British Sovereign no longer has a political or executive role, he or she continues to play an important part in the life of the nation.

As Head of State, The Queen undertakes constitutional and representational duties which have developed over one thousand years of history. In addition to these State duties, The Queen has a less formal role as 'Head of Nation'. She acts as a focus for national identity, unity and pride; gives a sense of stability and continuity; officially recognises success and excellence; and supports the ideal of public and voluntary service.

In all these roles The Queen is supported by members of her immediate family.
*******************************************************************

What is a Constitutional Monarchy?


King John (r. 1199-1216) was forced by his barons to sign a treaty called Magna Carta which limited Royal powers and guaranteed a number of rights for themselves
© The Royal Collection © 2006, Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II


As a system of government, constitutional monarchy has many strengths (probably more than any other form of governance). One is that it separates out the ceremonial and official duties of the Head of State from party politics. Another is that it provides stability and continuity, since the Head of State remains the same even as governments come and go.

Constitutional monarchy is a form of government in which a king or queen acts as Head of State, while the ability to make and pass legislation resides with an ELECTED Parliament.

The Sovereign governs according to the constitution - that is, according to rules, rather than according to his or her own free will (King Charles I tried to rule by his own free will - and lost his head).

Although the United Kingdom does not have a written constitution which sets out the rights and duties of the Sovereign, they are established by conventions. These are non-statutory rules which can bind just as much as formal constitutional rules.

As a constitutional monarch, The Queen cannot make or pass legislation, and must remain politically neutral. On almost all matters The Queen acts on the advice of ministers.

However, the Sovereign retains an important political role as Head of State, formally appointing prime ministers, approving certain legislation and bestowing honours.

The Queen also has official roles to play in other organisations, such as the Armed Forces and the Church of England.

The origins of constitutional monarchy in Britain go back a long way. Until the end of the seventeenth century, British monarchs were executive monarchs, which means that they had the right to make and pass legislation.

But even in early times there were occasions when the Sovereign had to act in accordance with the law and take into account the will of his people.

With the signing of the Magna Carta in 1215, for example, the leading noblemen of England succeeded in forcing King John to accept that they and other freemen had rights against the Crown.

In the seventeenth century, the Stuart kings propagated the theory of the divine right of kings, claiming that the Sovereign was subject only to God and not to the law.

Widespread unrest against their rule led to civil war in the second half of the seventeenth century. In 1688-9 Parliamentarians drew up a Bill of Rights, which established basic tenets such as the supremacy of Parliament.

The constitutional monarchy we know today really developed in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, as day-to-day power came to be exercised by Ministers in Cabinet, and by Parliaments elected by a steadily-widening electorate.

One of the most important writers on the subject of constitutional monarchy was a Victorian economist and writer called Walter Bagehot (1826-77).

His book, 'The English Constitution', first published in 1867, provided an analysis of the role of monarchy which remains relevant today.

For example, Bagehot describes the way in which monarchy symbolises the unity of the national community.


The Queen receives Government papers each day, but acts on the advice of her ministers
© Press Association


He wrote: "The nation is divided into parties, but the crown is of no party. Its apparent separation from business is that which removes it both from enmities and from desecration, which preserves its mystery, which enables it to combine the affection of conflicting parties ...."

Bagehot also noticed the importance of the Royal Family. "A family on the throne is an interesting idea also. It brings down the pride of sovereignty to the level of petty life."

From the point of view of political power, according to Bagehot, the main influence of the Sovereign was during a political ministry, for the Sovereign had three rights: "the right to be consulted, the right to encourage, the right to warn".

According to Bagehot, a Sovereign would, over the course of a long reign, accumulate far more knowledge and experience than any minister.

Bagehot's views of how monarchy works proved influential, and by the reign of King George V, the principle of constitutional monarchy was firmly established in Britain.

Bill of Rights factfile

The Bill of Rights Act of 1689 set out the foundations of constitutional monarchy.

Rights obtained by Parliament included:


Freedom from Royal interference with the law;

Freedom from taxation by Royal prerogative;

Freedom to petition the King;

Freedom to elect members of Parliament without interference from the Sovereign.

**************************************************************

By means of regular visits through every part of the United Kingdom, The Queen is able to act as a focus for national unity and identity. Through her engagements and walkabouts, The Queen is able to meet people from every walk of life.

The British Sovereign can be seen as having two roles: Head of State, and 'Head of the Nation'.

As Head of State, The Queen undertakes constitutional and representational duties which have developed over one thousand years of history.

There are inward duties, with The Queen playing a part in State functions in Britain. Parliament must be opened, Orders in Council have to be approved, Acts of Parliament must be signed, and meetings with the Prime Minister must be held.

There are also outward duties of State, when The Queen represents Britain to the rest of the world. For example, The Queen receives foreign ambassadors and high commissioners, entertains visiting Heads of State, and makes State visits overseas to other countries, in support of diplomatic and economic relations.

As 'Head of Nation', The Queen's role is less formal, but no less important for the social and cultural functions it fulfils.

These include: providing a focus for national identity, unity and pride; giving a sense of stability and continuity; recognising success, achievement and excellence; and supporting service to others, particularly through public service and the voluntary sector.

These roles are performed through different types of engagement.

By means of regular visits through every part of the United Kingdom, The Queen is able to act as a focus for national unity and identity.

Through her engagements and walkabouts, The Queen is able to meet people from every walk of life. The Queen's unifying role as Sovereign is also shown in her special relationships with the devolved assemblies in Scotland and Wales.

In addition, at times of national celebration or tragedy, The Queen publicly represents the nation's mood - for example, at annual commemoration of the war dead on Remembrance Sunday, or at celebrations for a national sporting victory.

The Queen also has an essential role in providing a sense of stability and continuity in times of political and social change. The system of constitutional monarchy bridges the discontinuity of party politics.

While political parties change constantly, the Sovereign continues as Head of State, providing a stable framework within which a government can introduce wide-ranging reforms.

With more than five decades of reading State papers, meeting Heads of State and ambassadors and holding a weekly audience with the Prime Minister, The Queen has an unequalled store of experience upon which successive Prime Ministers have been able to draw.

The Queen is able to recognise success and achievement in a personal way. These include honours, awards, visits, patronage and sponsorship. At Investitures, for example, The Queen honours individuals for public service or outstanding achievement.


The Queen visits a victim of the bombs of 7 July 2005
© Press Association


She also hosts garden parties to which guests from all backgrounds are invited, most of whom are nominated by charities or public sector organisations for their service to their communities.

And in the thousands of messages sent by The Queen each year to people celebrating their 100th birthdays or diamond weddings, The Queen is able to give special and personal recognition of remarkable individuals.

The Queen also supports service to others, through close relationships with the voluntary and charitable sector. About 3,000 organisations list a member of the Royal Family as patron or president. The Queen has over 600 patronages and The Duke of Edinburgh over 700.

In all these roles, The Queen is supported by members of the Royal Family, who carry out many of the engagements which The Queen cannot undertake in person.



The Queen's role is to:

Perform the ceremonial and official duties of Head of State, including
representing Britain to the rest of the world;

Provide a focus for national identity and unity;

Provide stability and continuity in times of change;

Recognise achievement and excellence;

Encourage public and voluntary service.

**************************************************************

Queen and State



The Queen is Head of State in the United Kingdom. Her official title in the UK is "Elizabeth the Second, by the Grace of God of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of Her other Realms and Territories Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith".

As a constitutional monarch, The Queen does not 'rule' the country, but fulfils important ceremonial and formal roles with respect to the Parliament of the United Kingdom, and the devolved assemblies of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

The Queen is also Fount of Justice, from whom justice in the United Kingdom derives, and has important relationships with the Armed Forces and the established Churches of England and Scotland.

In addition to her role in the United Kingdom, The Queen has a special role to play in the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man, which are dependent territories of the English Crown.
*********************************************************************
History

The history of the English Crown up to the Union of the Crowns (in which the English Crown unified with the Scottish Crown to form the British Crown as it is today) in 1603 is long and eventful.

The concept of a single ruler unifying different tribes based in England developed in the eighth and ninth centuries in figures such as Offa and Alfred the Great, who began to create centralised systems of government.

Following the Norman Conquest, the machinery of government developed further, producing long-lived national institutions including Parliament.

The Middle Ages saw several fierce contests for the Crown, culminating in the Wars of the Roses, which lasted for nearly a century. The conflict was finally ended with the advent of the Tudors, the dynasty which produced some of England's most successful rulers and a flourishing cultural Renaissance.

The end of the Tudor line with the death of the 'Virgin Queen' in 1603 brought about the Union of the Crowns with Scotland.

Until 1603 the English and Scottish Crowns were separate, although links between the two were always close - members of the two Royal families intermarried on many occasions. Following the Accession of King James VI of Scotland (I of England) to the English Throne, a single monarch reigned in the United Kingdom.

The last four hundred years have seen many changes in the nature of the Monarchy in the United Kingdom. From the end of the 17th century, monarchs lost executive power and they increasingly became subject to Parliament, resulting in today's democratic constitutional Monarchy.



http://www.royal.gov.uk/output/Page1.asp
 

Blackleaf

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 9, 2004
49,633
1,865
113
I think not said:
You guys still debating as to whether or not to dump the crow? ....er...I mean crown?

Oh well, at least Elizabeth does have some class, I'll wait and see what happens when dumbo takes charge, see the reactions.

He can't be any worse than Bush.

Charles, unlike Bush, has intelligence, and doesn't need Blair with him to point out countries to him on the map.
 

tamarin

House Member
Jun 12, 2006
3,197
22
38
Oshawa ON
Charles is fine. A little flaky but most people are. He seems genuine and he's shown he's up to the grand tedium of the job. Wouldn't want it but Charles has accepted the limitations of being a member of the royal family, and being an essential worker: a caretaker of history and heritage.
 

FiveParadox

Governor General
Dec 20, 2005
5,875
43
48
Vancouver, BC
Re: The Monarchy–Republic Debate

It should be no secret that I am not the biggest fan of His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales; however, I acknowledge that he has done a good deal of work to better our world, and I would hope that he is going to continue to do so—and in fact, to step-up his efforts—once he assumes the Crown of Canada some many years from now. Given the conduct and popularity of Her Majesty the Queen of Canada, the Prince is going to have big shoes to fill.
 

Finder

House Member
Dec 18, 2005
3,786
0
36
Toronto
www.mytimenow.net
Re: The Monarchy–Republic Debate

FiveParadox said:
It should be no secret that I am not the biggest fan of His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales; however, I acknowledge that he has done a good deal of work to better our world, and I would hope that he is going to continue to do so—and in fact, to step-up his efforts—once he assumes the Crown of Canada some many years from now. Given the conduct and popularity of Her Majesty the Queen of Canada, the Prince is going to have big shoes to fill.

Maybe they will clone the Queen, just so we don't have a big debate when she dies. lol.

Well I'm hoping once the Queen dies, which I do hope isn't any time soon, that Canada does become a republic inside the british common wealth.
 

FiveParadox

Governor General
Dec 20, 2005
5,875
43
48
Vancouver, BC
Re: The Monarchy–Republic Debate

[i said:
Finder[/i]]Well I'm hoping once the Queen dies, which I do hope isn't any time soon, that Canada does become a republic inside the british common wealth.
I think that it would be a shame if we were to refuse to recognize the next Sovereign as the head of state of Canada; doing so would terminate our right to be a Commonwealth Realm. We could stay in the Commonwealth, of course, but our status as a Realm would end, and I would like to see us continue as a Realm into the future.

In any case, it is unclear as to whether Canada could become a republic by simply failing to proclaim a new monarch; there are some experts who contend that if the Queen's Privy Council for Canada were to refuse to pass a resolution to proclaim the next monarch, then Canada would be a republic. However, this would require changes to the Constitution Acts, 1867–1982 that would require the unanimous consent of the Provinces of Canada, and I can't see this happening at present.
 

iARTthere4iam

Electoral Member
Jul 23, 2006
533
3
18
Pointy Rocks
The monarchy will likely continue to atrophy and eventually decay. Canadians aren't ready to reform our entire system of government. At some point in the future we may well decide to do away with the crown, but to dump a funcioning governmental system now and risk chaos is silly. Besides the british monarchy may well fold on itself and die.
 

FiveParadox

Governor General
Dec 20, 2005
5,875
43
48
Vancouver, BC
One mustn't dismiss the option that one day we may just amend our line of succession to make the Crown resident to Canada, instead. That way we could make on quick non-constitutional amendment and our constitution could stay in-tact. :) It wouldn't be so messy.
 

Finder

House Member
Dec 18, 2005
3,786
0
36
Toronto
www.mytimenow.net
Re: RE: Canada, dump the crown and become a republic? (poll)

FiveParadox said:
One mustn't dismiss the option that one day we may just amend our line of succession to make the Crown resident to Canada, instead. That way we could make on quick non-constitutional amendment and our constitution could stay in-tact. :) It wouldn't be so messy.

God I hope not. Man Paradox!

FiveParadox, you have to get on the queens Xmas card list... You are like her biggest fan or something. lol. :D