News   Mar 28, 2024
 1.4K     3 
News   Mar 28, 2024
 688     2 
News   Mar 28, 2024
 942     0 

Should Canada keep the Monarchy?

Should Canada keep the Monarchy?


  • Total voters
    158
True, it is theoretically possible. Of course, the fact that is has never happened suggests that it is highly unlikely.


Not yet, at least. Regardless, the business of the future is best left to the future.


As to the monarchy being a problem, my own opinion is that it is pointless.
 
Pointless to have a Queen or a King or other form of Royalty in what Europeans once called "the New World," carried now into the twenty-first century.

Probably pointless in the European world of today as well, including Britain itself, based on what I have read from Wales and England of late.

Perhaps those polls that we are compelled to take on this matter, and take a look at - rising and falling in their embrace and then rejection of Monarchy over the years - will become pointless when Monarchy is finally cast aside. Ironically these polls do have a point to-day: in making people aware that the issue has traction among those that do not see a need for Monarchy in the larger Canadian context outside any subset of provinces that continue to hold onto the status quo.

Canada's supplication to Monarchy in any form at this stage is not only anachronistic, it is doomed to fail, sooner or later. I'm all for it happening sooner, because it would express a will rather than a fait accompli. And that will would be the final step in the maturation of this particular democracy on a world stage.
 
I don't think the monarchy is quite like a mole.


The monarchy serves no purpose. The best that it can be described as being is merely decorative.
 
Absolutely. And if you read the leading authority on it, Bagehot's The English Constitution, that it its function.

Zephyr, Canada isn't a supplicant to the monarchy. Nor has Great Britain been since 1689, when the rule was established that the people, through Parliament, not God and certainly not the monarch, decide who the monarch will be. Perhaps you might benefit from reading some history before you start planning the future?
 
Yes Hydrogen, the same words as I would use, "no purpose." That seems to be reinforced when I read the reasoning proposed by some, or just observe the overly emotional reactions that accompany the symbolism.

If individually focused upon, those 'decorative' aspects of the Monarachy may appear outwardly harmless, I submit that the collective litany of them all, have had a decidedly pernicious impact on the maturation of the Canadian identity. I thank Vexil for effectively stating that notion in that one and only post left thus far.

When I was a child here, my father would wax incessantly about how regal this country of his adoption all appeared. It surprised me given how he questioned so many other things in his writings, but not this. Before he died, he finally questioned what he had earlier praised, and went a few steps further. I suspect it had nothing to do with anything his friends, or even members of his family said to him - and we gave him all sorts of arguments both academic and otherwise. But being an intelligent man, he slowly came around to another position in his own stubborn way, as he reflected on the peculiar regal residue working itself into the institutions and psyche of this nation.

A friend of my father, who now lives in Wales, still sends me clippings of some of the disenchantment there with the crown, appending quotes from my father on the margins. Charming asides, throwaways perhaps, but as I travel around and continue to see how it looks both inside and outside the Canadian context I return with deepen conviction that the sooner the Monarchy is gone, in any of its forms, the better it will be for this country.
 
Ah, Wales. Of course, the issues affecting the British Monarchy are completely different than those affecting the Canadian Monarchy, the two being completely separate.
 
Deja Vu in Wales

Only because it mirrors what we are discussing here, I will quote and then reference two items from Wales - a bit of the déjà vu of symbolism and interference (of two types). Enjoy:

  1. The first is from Monarchy Wales in September:

    In a dramatic announcement the Government has revealed that it will stop the Welsh Assembly from legislating on "loony" ideas that seek to harm the United Kingdom. Under the current constitutional arrangements in Wales the Welsh Assembly must "seek permission" from Parliament to create new laws. ...
    SOURCE


  2. The second, from a known blog that often pushes for the final move toward republic

    12 February 2007


    A Welsh Republic ??

    One of the issues that provokes a lot of discussion, is whether an independent Wales should become a republic.

    There are those who believe that Wales should remain in the Commonwealth with the Queen as the head of state – Australia is an independent country with this arrangement, so why not?. On the other hand, there are those who believe that the monarchy is an undemocratic anachronism which should have no part to play in an independent Wales.

    I also once heard a heated discussion as to whether the ‘Prince of Wales’ should be our head of state - but that would just be adding insult to injury! Maybe we should traces the bloodline of Llewelyn the Last and establish a new monarchy????

    My personal opinion is that unelected aristocrats (particularly neighbouring foreign ones) have no place to play in a modern democracy, and we should follow the Irish model with an elected non-political president. The Queen (or King) of England would always be welcome in Wales and would then be treated with the same courtesy as any other visiting head of state.

    But as a believer in democracy, I would trust the people to decide, and this should be a matter for public debate followed by a referendum.​

    SOURCE
 
The Welsh have a long history of being disruptive, which is why Edward I built all those big castles in the first place. They've toned it down a bit over the last seven hundred years, but I think the English are right to keep an eye on them.
 
And Wales is about as indicative of opinion in the United Kingdom as Cape Breton is of opinion in Canada. And a republican blog is nothing more than the ravings of one person, if that.
 
The dreaded peer pressure - the new Australia of Kevin Rudd

Let us not bow to peer pressure. :)

© Copyright 2007 Times Newspapers Ltd.

November 26, 2007

Australia may say farewell to Queen after republican leader wins election

Bernard Lagan in Sydney

Australia will hold a referendum on removing the Queen as head of state after Kevin Rudd, the Labor leader and a staunch republican, swept to power at the weekend, bringing an end to 11 years of Conservative rule.

Mr Rudd, 50, a former diplomat, has promised to hold a plebiscite on severing links with the monarchy. He said yesterday that he would withdraw Australian troops from Iraq and ratify the Kyoto pact on climate change.

With 53 percent of the vote, Mr Rudd brought an emphatic end to the 11-year tenure of John Howard, an avowed monarchist who was set last night to become the first Prime Minister since 1929 to lose his seat at a general election.

During the campaign Mr Rudd, who speaks fluent Mandarin and has lived in China, said: “Can I say, we’re going to consult the people again. We haven’t fixed a time frame for doing that, and I think the time will come before too much longer when we do have an Australian as our head of state,†Mr Howard allowed a referendum on the issue in 1999 but it was roundly rejected despite two thirds of Australian voters saying in successive polls that they wanted a Republic with an Australian head of state.

Critics of the referendum argued that it was rigged in favour of monarchists because it gave voters only the option of having Parliament elect a President and not the direct election of a head of state by the people.

Mr Rudd, who rose from an impoverished childhood in rural Queensland, has promised a plebiscite which is likely to offer a far broader means of choosing an Australian head of state. It is expected that the plebiscite would probably be held in 2010 in conjunction with the next general election.

Adding to the strong likelihood of Australia now becoming a republic was an announcement yesterday that Mr Howard’s Treasurer and heirapparent as leader of the LiberalNational Coalition, Peter Costello, was withdrawing from political life and would not seek to lead the Opposition.

It is now expected that the richest man in the Australian Parliament, a former lawyer and businessman, Malcolm Turnbull, will be elected Opposition leader later this week. Mr Turnbull, 52, is a leading republican and headed the Australian Republic movement at the time of the last referendum.

With polls showing strong support for a republic, Buckingham Palace insists that the issue can only be resolved at the ballot box. “I have always made it clear that the future of the monarchy in Australia is an issue for you, the Australian people, and you alone to decide by democratic and constitutional means. It should not be otherwise,†the Queen said during a State visit to Australia in 2000.

Mr Howard, the last avowed monarchist at the top of Australian public life, was set for an inglorious end to a career in public life by becoming only the second sitting Prime Minister in Australia to lose his seat at a general election.

...
How they stand

45% of Australians are in favour of a republic

36% are in favour of keeping the monarch

19% are uncommitted to either, according to the latest poll conducted by The Australian in January 2007

Source: The Australian

CLICK HERE to see entire article.
 
National Polls do not agree, but they do show a common pattern

More and more for those that want to keep there minds open to another future than that of the Canadian Monarchy.

Citizens for a Canadian Republic perform a breakdown of each poll if you link to the source - they have done a bang-up job. Despite their title you will find that they have tried to be accurate and fair in their analyses. But by all means, check out their references and review the same materials 'independently' to judge matters for yourself.

Obviously the polls don't provide the rationale for change, just a snapshot of where people are leaning outside our UT poll, which appears to be going in the opposite direction.


Republic / Monarchy Opinion Polls in Canada 1993 - 2007

poll_results_1993-2007.gif

Copyright CCR

... Monarchy polls have been conducted by research firms extensively in Canada since the 1950s. As one would expect, Canada's close ties to Britain during World War 2 generally produced heavy pro-monarchy results for the following two decades However, as Canada's sense of identity began to become a national issue throughout the 1960s and 1970s, public opinion began to show increases in republican sentiment. ... [T]his page concentrates strictly on the last two decades. ...

Source
 

Back
Top