Should Canada keep the Monarchy?
- Thread starter B00Mer
- Start date
Our laws and our the way our government works, is a legacy of England. The Crown and it's rulers have been a great portion of that history. Would anyone choose the US system of government? Mostly we vote for those in our own ridings and what they will attempt to do for their constituents. It is a legacy that most Canadians if they think at all value.
The British Empire in it's time united a good portion of the world, unlike many other systems that were and still are divisive. Personally, while our country's history is and was not exactly pristine, it is, as is many of the British ex-colonies less warlike and forward looking than many other places that were not civilized by their legacy.
Royalty cost us nothing and it generally does try to set a peaceful and higher aim than what many other countries have had access to. They are like the best and worst of us, they make mistakes and have tragedies like the average citizens here. They do somehow strive to put the best face on how to handle such events to celebrate and those to mourn.
So why not have something to celebrate?? We are part of system called the commonwealth, all that were once part of the British
Empire and now claim the benefits of the feeling of commonality with other members of that system.
The British Empire in it's time united a good portion of the world, unlike many other systems that were and still are divisive. Personally, while our country's history is and was not exactly pristine, it is, as is many of the British ex-colonies less warlike and forward looking than many other places that were not civilized by their legacy.
Royalty cost us nothing and it generally does try to set a peaceful and higher aim than what many other countries have had access to. They are like the best and worst of us, they make mistakes and have tragedies like the average citizens here. They do somehow strive to put the best face on how to handle such events to celebrate and those to mourn.
So why not have something to celebrate?? We are part of system called the commonwealth, all that were once part of the British
Empire and now claim the benefits of the feeling of commonality with other members of that system.
Last edited:
There are a number of different models that can be used to replace the monarchy. Choosing the US model is one option. It shares some features of our present system. The biggest being the two houses - their Senate (our Senate) and the Congress (our HofC).
Having the monarchy does indeed cost Canadian taxpayers money. I posted this information earlier in the thread. It is from 20 yrs ago howeer, and does not include costs borne by other federal departments like the RCMP. In 1999, it cost close to $20 million per annum. Since then, inflation has increased the total. I suspect it is over $100 million now. See the breakdown and ref. for the GG and LGs earlier in this thread.
Change for change sake is not always a good thing, but Canada is no longer dependent on Britain for anything. It's time to recognize that we must stand squarely on our own. We don't need a big brother any longer. As a nation, we have matured and stand as a full partner on the world stage.
It is alright to recognize Britain as part of our past, but we have been evolving away from them since the end of WWI. It's time to finish the job and cut the cord.
We could do that. I'm partial to "Grand High Exalted Mystic Ruler".
I think Mystic Imperial Poobah would also work.
Last edited:
From the same source you chose to quote "As shown in the latest triennial study of the cost of the Canadian Crown, each Canadian contributes about $1.63 a year (a total of a little over $50 million) towards our form of governance. However, the great majority of these costs stem from: a) maintaining the historic buildings (Government Houses) occupied by vice-regal representatives; and b) from honouring Canadians who have performed outstanding acts or given a lifetime of service to the country.
Whether a republic or monarchy, Canadians would maintain these heritage buildings and recognize achievements through an honours system. A president would likely be more expensive—look at the proportional costs of the White House and Elysée Palace! There may be arguments for a republic, but cost-saving is not one of them."
If the President or head of any other country came to visit, we would of course pay the RCMP to protect them. It seems to me to deny our relationship with the commonwealth and the monarchy would in the end cost more than we currently pay. More important, we would not have the freedom we now enjoy when visiting other commonwealth countries as a member.
Personally, I feel we would be giving up a great deal of our past and heritage. But hey, I feel knowing the past prevents making the same mistakes in the future, then that is an extremely good reason for keeping it and teaching our young about their roots and what makes us a unique nation of people.
We have not been dependent on the British for a long time, in fact it has been the other way around. Should we not have entered WWI or WWII?
Last edited:
The $1.63 quote was from 2012 and actually totalled $57 million for that year. Based on the two figures, the cost increased by about 2.8 million a year from 1999. If that continues to be the case, the present cost is $68 million.
Not all the buildings used by the GG and the various LGs would be declared heritage sites . We do not know which bldgs would be kept and which could be sold off. I do not know what the maintenance costs would be for any remaining buildings/office space, but they will drop. By how much is unknown.
WRT Heritage buildings and maintenance, the federal government does not always provide funds to maintain heritage sites.
Case in point is one hangar at CFB Borden. It was used by Billy Bishop and members of the CAP in WWII. It was declared a heritage building in 1989, but according to the PAO at Borden, no money has ever been dispensed for upkeep/restoration in 27 years. There is black mold, and it is in dire need of protection from further rot by weather. With that in mind, there is no guarantee that maintenance dollars would continue for LG/GG residences or other declared heritage sites.
Whether we entered either war is not really pertinent to the discussion. Since you wish to bring it up again, I will repeat what I said earlier: The Statute of Westminster (1931) officially declared that Canada and other dominions of the time were no longer bound by the parliamentary decisions of Britain. Hence, we joined WWII because the Canadian parliament approved our participation. In other words, we entered the war of our own free will, not because we were told by Britain.)
As I said earlier, we would continue to recognize our past. I am not suggesting that we ignore it. This severance would be a modernization of the older monarchical concept. What started in 1867 as a change from colony to self governing dominion, continues. We have been taking baby steps toward severing the monarchy throughout the 20th century. Westminster (1931) is often quoted as an example, but there are others.
After WWII (1949), the various members of what was called "the British Commonwealth" saw a change to the "Commonwealth of Nations". An association of dominions that keep meeting and share some common goals stemming from their close association with Britain. This change further distanced Britain from the political affairs of the members of the Commonwealth of Nations. Best that you read up on this one separately.
It is likely that we will evolve into a parliamentary republic like India. They employ a parliamentary system, and have a president and a PM.
In 1982, we saw the BNA (the British North America Act) repatriated (a transfer of control) from British Parliament to us - our parliament and provinces. We also got a Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
These have been a series of baby steps which will see us attain complete Independence.
Edited to add: Here is a video showing the differences between the US and UK systems of government. Canada's parliament is very close to the UK model, but there are differences.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=4quK60FUvkY
Not all the buildings used by the GG and the various LGs would be declared heritage sites . We do not know which bldgs would be kept and which could be sold off. I do not know what the maintenance costs would be for any remaining buildings/office space, but they will drop. By how much is unknown.
WRT Heritage buildings and maintenance, the federal government does not always provide funds to maintain heritage sites.
Case in point is one hangar at CFB Borden. It was used by Billy Bishop and members of the CAP in WWII. It was declared a heritage building in 1989, but according to the PAO at Borden, no money has ever been dispensed for upkeep/restoration in 27 years. There is black mold, and it is in dire need of protection from further rot by weather. With that in mind, there is no guarantee that maintenance dollars would continue for LG/GG residences or other declared heritage sites.
Whether we entered either war is not really pertinent to the discussion. Since you wish to bring it up again, I will repeat what I said earlier: The Statute of Westminster (1931) officially declared that Canada and other dominions of the time were no longer bound by the parliamentary decisions of Britain. Hence, we joined WWII because the Canadian parliament approved our participation. In other words, we entered the war of our own free will, not because we were told by Britain.)
As I said earlier, we would continue to recognize our past. I am not suggesting that we ignore it. This severance would be a modernization of the older monarchical concept. What started in 1867 as a change from colony to self governing dominion, continues. We have been taking baby steps toward severing the monarchy throughout the 20th century. Westminster (1931) is often quoted as an example, but there are others.
After WWII (1949), the various members of what was called "the British Commonwealth" saw a change to the "Commonwealth of Nations". An association of dominions that keep meeting and share some common goals stemming from their close association with Britain. This change further distanced Britain from the political affairs of the members of the Commonwealth of Nations. Best that you read up on this one separately.
It is likely that we will evolve into a parliamentary republic like India. They employ a parliamentary system, and have a president and a PM.
In 1982, we saw the BNA (the British North America Act) repatriated (a transfer of control) from British Parliament to us - our parliament and provinces. We also got a Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
These have been a series of baby steps which will see us attain complete Independence.
Edited to add: Here is a video showing the differences between the US and UK systems of government. Canada's parliament is very close to the UK model, but there are differences.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=4quK60FUvkY
Last edited:
Should Canada keep the Monarchy?
Turf 'em
I've heard all the excuses, and none of them have won my heart over to the monarchist camp.
1. "It's our heritage" - no, it's British heritage
2. "It's what distinguishes us from Americans" - no, if that's what you think really separates us from them, then you have a piss-poor idea of what a Canadian really is. Besides, if we insist on distinguishing ourselves from Americans based on meaningless trivialities, we might as well do something totally useful, like converting entirely to the metric system, etc.
3. "Keeping them saves a few bucks. The Queen is free" This is the worst one. This is the part of the Canadian psyche I don't like: when we think of money before substance. The price tag doesn't matter, what matters is the ability to unleash ourselves from years of cultural servitude. Even if you think it's benign and harmless, I have to stare at the Queen's mug everyday on my twenty dollar bills and coins reminding myself that we are still not entirely masters of our own house.
Your thoughts?
OMFG. Not this **** again? Bored today Boomer?
From 1983. Letters to the Editor - The Nugget Newspaper Group
This letter to be kept because 'repatriating the Constitution' somehow became 'repaving the constellations'.
Biff (J. Suggs Biffy IV, publisher)
---
The Nugget Community News
Access for all is a cornerstone of The Nugget's founder, J. Suggs Biffy. It has guided our editorial policy since 1891. In keeping with 'One community, many voices', this week's guest columnist is INCO employee Cletus Sludge.
Repaving the Constellations
by Cletus Sludge (of the Hanmer Sludges)
Dear Mr. Editor,
My brother just told me that the politicians in Ottawa want to repave some constellations. Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't constellations in space somewhere?
I never graduated high school, but I understand about paving, and the high cost of it. I worked two summers resurfacing Highway 69, north of Parry Sound.
Here's what I figure. Those government people all went to university, so they don't understand about hard work, paving, or who has to pay for stuff like education or asphalt. Them politicians come from well to do families. Their daddys probably give them the money to go to Law school and that.
My brother says that people are upset with Trudeau (Pierre - murphy.) trying to repave the constellations. Apparently, it's complicated and expensive. Duh! Constellations are far away from earth, somewhere in outer space. Launching all that paving equipment up there, and moving it so far from home is gonna be complicated! Damn straight! And expensive? Hell, yes! How come we gotta pay to pave something that far away and don't even belong to us?
The way I figure it, if the people that live on them constellations what theirs paved, they can do it themselves. What a stupid idea to be helping aliens, millions of miles away!
Apparently, Quebec was gonna separate over it. Ontario was tore up over the cost. The Altantic provinces didn't care too much, except they was worried for a bit about maybe not getting their unemployment cheques. I guess the only people that was happy were in Alberta. I guess they figured to make a bundle selling oil to Ottawa. You need a lot of fuel to fly from Manitoba to a constellation.
Anyway, I just thought I'd write and say repaving the constellations is a stupid idea.
Cletus Sludge
Minnow Lake (Sudbury), Ontario
P.S. I knew it was expensive when my brother showed me pictures of the Queen in Ottawa. She was signing a paper or something. Probably co-signing for the Liberals because of the cost! They sure love to spend money!
This letter to be kept because 'repatriating the Constitution' somehow became 'repaving the constellations'.
Biff (J. Suggs Biffy IV, publisher)
---
The Nugget Community News
Access for all is a cornerstone of The Nugget's founder, J. Suggs Biffy. It has guided our editorial policy since 1891. In keeping with 'One community, many voices', this week's guest columnist is INCO employee Cletus Sludge.
Repaving the Constellations
by Cletus Sludge (of the Hanmer Sludges)
Dear Mr. Editor,
My brother just told me that the politicians in Ottawa want to repave some constellations. Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't constellations in space somewhere?
I never graduated high school, but I understand about paving, and the high cost of it. I worked two summers resurfacing Highway 69, north of Parry Sound.
Here's what I figure. Those government people all went to university, so they don't understand about hard work, paving, or who has to pay for stuff like education or asphalt. Them politicians come from well to do families. Their daddys probably give them the money to go to Law school and that.
My brother says that people are upset with Trudeau (Pierre - murphy.) trying to repave the constellations. Apparently, it's complicated and expensive. Duh! Constellations are far away from earth, somewhere in outer space. Launching all that paving equipment up there, and moving it so far from home is gonna be complicated! Damn straight! And expensive? Hell, yes! How come we gotta pay to pave something that far away and don't even belong to us?
The way I figure it, if the people that live on them constellations what theirs paved, they can do it themselves. What a stupid idea to be helping aliens, millions of miles away!
Apparently, Quebec was gonna separate over it. Ontario was tore up over the cost. The Altantic provinces didn't care too much, except they was worried for a bit about maybe not getting their unemployment cheques. I guess the only people that was happy were in Alberta. I guess they figured to make a bundle selling oil to Ottawa. You need a lot of fuel to fly from Manitoba to a constellation.
Anyway, I just thought I'd write and say repaving the constellations is a stupid idea.
Cletus Sludge
Minnow Lake (Sudbury), Ontario
P.S. I knew it was expensive when my brother showed me pictures of the Queen in Ottawa. She was signing a paper or something. Probably co-signing for the Liberals because of the cost! They sure love to spend money!
Exactly!! When Canada declared war, it was not because we had to. If we had waited like a few countries had perhaps we could be worrying about learning Germain instead of French.
Time for a Canadexit from the monarchy?
Republican groups sure think so
By Anthony Furey, Postmedia Network
First posted: Wednesday, June 29, 2016 03:31 PM EDT | Updated: Wednesday, June 29, 2016 03:50 PM EDT
It's time to Canadexit from the British monarchy, a republican advocacy group is arguing.
Republic Now, a national organization based out of Toronto, has announced it's halfway through an online fundraising campaign to buy anti-monarchy ads on public transit.
The ad shows a $20 bill featuring the face of Prince Charles. "Canada doesn't need a king. Democracy, not monarchy!" the ad reads.
The group has so far raised $10,000.
"While Canada is an independent, democratic land, our highest office is neither," a statement reads. "We look to a palace in a foreign country to fill the position based on birthright, alone."
Republic Now is not the only such group in Canada. "Brexit shows time has come for Canada to have its own head of state," Citizens for a Canadian Republic posted on social media following the vote in the United Kingdom.
Polls have shown that while Canadians still somewhat favour the Queen remaining as the head of state, support for the monarchy drops when a successor's name, such as heir-to-the-throne Prince Charles, is thrown into the mix.
Time for a Canadexit from the monarchy? Republican groups sure think so | Canada
Republican groups sure think so
By Anthony Furey, Postmedia Network
First posted: Wednesday, June 29, 2016 03:31 PM EDT | Updated: Wednesday, June 29, 2016 03:50 PM EDT
It's time to Canadexit from the British monarchy, a republican advocacy group is arguing.
Republic Now, a national organization based out of Toronto, has announced it's halfway through an online fundraising campaign to buy anti-monarchy ads on public transit.
The ad shows a $20 bill featuring the face of Prince Charles. "Canada doesn't need a king. Democracy, not monarchy!" the ad reads.
The group has so far raised $10,000.
"While Canada is an independent, democratic land, our highest office is neither," a statement reads. "We look to a palace in a foreign country to fill the position based on birthright, alone."
Republic Now is not the only such group in Canada. "Brexit shows time has come for Canada to have its own head of state," Citizens for a Canadian Republic posted on social media following the vote in the United Kingdom.
Polls have shown that while Canadians still somewhat favour the Queen remaining as the head of state, support for the monarchy drops when a successor's name, such as heir-to-the-throne Prince Charles, is thrown into the mix.
Time for a Canadexit from the monarchy? Republican groups sure think so | Canada
Nah, a monarch should be the epitome of wisdom! Having said that I don't think it quite time for us to give up the Monarchy. I think David Johnson is about as good of a representative as a country could have.
The prospect of President Trudeau would likely make the royalist side win easily in any referendum on whether Canada should be a republic.
Yeah, you don't want to be impolite and point at her with the same finger you pick your a$$ with.
I'm a small government conservative. Parliament has three component parts. 2 of which don't have much practical function: the monarchy and the senate. In order to stay true to conservative small government principles, we should cut the fat and remove those 2 non-practical levels.
And yet we're told we have to tolerate and accept backwards bullsh*t simply because it's religious. Go figure.
"We are here to create a new world, not conform to this backwards bull****." — Gavin Nascimento