[Newsbot]

Title: Prince Charles on the throne could end monarchy in Canada
Category: Misc CDN
Posted By: Hyack
Date: 2009-11-03 21:56:19
Canadian

[martin14]

I think most people want William to be the next king.

Pretty sure the Monarchy wants that too.

[gonavy47]

I think that support for the monarchy, is a lot bigger than their poll suggests. It's easy to manipulate polls.

[PENATRATOR]

I am torn on my views of the monarchy. First as someone whose family members fought and in one instance died for "King and Empire/Country" and as an Anglo male, I like the monarchy as in a sense of historic tradition, however I am not impressed with the price tag we pay as tax payers to have Michelle Jean or whoever is in that position go from regular citizen to "god" (The inside stories I have from first hand accounts of Clarkson and her husbands reign make me shake in outrage).
I am sure that as our country takes in more and more "third world" immigrants which expands our population, their lack of ties to "jolly old England" yet right to vote, makes the monarchy appear less and less relevant to our country. Nice? Yes, Neccessary? Absolutely not.

[BeaverFever]

I dont think the monarchy is relevant now. Even those Canadians who are of British Ancestry see themselves as Canadians, not British. Nobody cares that prince Charles is here, interest in Prince William and Andrew is more related to their celebrity status and their shannanigans rather than what type of monarch they would make.

The only question is: if we ditch the royals, what do we replace it with? A republic? Who would be the Commander in Chief, "President Harper?" Im sure he practices saying that in the mirror when nobodys around, but I really dont think Canadians want to go there. An elected Governor General? This would make what is largely a passive and ceremonial position into an active one.

[herbie]

I propose electing the GG as Canada's Head of State and Representative TO the Crown (not OF the Crown). Even if and all-Party committee of Parliament nominates the Candidates for GG.
Zero new powers for the GG. Tradition of the Monarchy remains in place, but the process begun by the Magna Carta is completed (the Monarch has Zero power as only a Commonwealth figurehead).
The concept of Republic, which I think offends the majority of Canadians is avoided. But we have a defacto Republic and avoid naming it so.

Then we replace the traditional animals an such on all our coins and reserve the crayon art and commemorative abortions on the other side. So we can all tell it's a quarter and not something stamped out in Fiji or Trinidad.

[BeaverFever]

Would citizens and servicemen still have to swear an oath to the monarch in your model? That should go.

[martin14]

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

I dont think the monarchy is relevant now. Even those Canadians who are of British Ancestry see themselves as Canadians, not British. Nobody cares that prince Charles is here, interest in Prince William and Andrew is more related to their celebrity status and their shannanigans rather than what type of monarch they would make.

The only question is: if we ditch the royals, what do we replace it with? A republic? Who would be the Commander in Chief, "President Harper?" Im sure he practices saying that in the mirror when nobodys around, but I really dont think Canadians want to go there. An elected Governor General? This would make what is largely a passive and ceremonial position into an active one.

or for that matter, hows about Generalissimo Trudeau

That is enough reason to keep the monarchy;
being Canadian also means some attachment to the Commonwealth and the
British Royal House.

[commanderkai]

I really, really don't understand why Canadians hate the concept of a Republic. Like it or not. People who hate the idea of a "President Harper" forget that the Governor General, for the most part...is powerless. The only real power the GG has, that I can think of, is dissolving Parliament and calling another election, but this only occurs at the Prime Minster's request.

[ridenrain]

If not Charles, then Ignatieff definately is on record wanting it gone:

$1:

"Enough of this nonsense. The Royal Family is not doing its job."

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/entertainm ... story.html

[Brenda]

Haha, the same discussion is going on in Holland Beatrix is getting old, and her son is f*cking up

[PublicAnimalNo9]

Can someone please tell me why, after almost 30 years of having our own Constitution, we continue to have connections with a bunch of in-bred mucky-mucks?
Their relevancy in this country is non-existent.

[BeaverFever]

martin14 martin14:

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

I dont think the monarchy is relevant now. Even those Canadians who are of British Ancestry see themselves as Canadians, not British. Nobody cares that prince Charles is here, interest in Prince William and Andrew is more related to their celebrity status and their shannanigans rather than what type of monarch they would make.

The only question is: if we ditch the royals, what do we replace it with? A republic? Who would be the Commander in Chief, "President Harper?" Im sure he practices saying that in the mirror when nobodys around, but I really dont think Canadians want to go there. An elected Governor General? This would make what is largely a passive and ceremonial position into an active one.

or for that matter, hows about Generalissimo Trudeau

That is enough reason to keep the monarchy;
being Canadian also means some attachment to the Commonwealth and the
British Royal House.

THere are a few commonwealth countries that severed ties to monarchy, such as India, Malaysia to name just two. Who cares about attachment to the Royal House? Good Riddance to that, when it happens.

$1:

The only real power the GG has, that I can think of, is dissolving Parliament and calling another election, but this only occurs at the Prime Minster's request.

Thats what I thought, until the coalition nonsense came up earlier this year. But also our courts and militiary and several govt institutions operate at 'arms length' from government serve the Crown and not the Prime Minister. Basically, there are a whole set of insitutions that are not directly under the PMs thumb and act accordingly because their mandate is to serve the Queen. From the citizens view, this may seem like mumbo-jumbo because the govt is ultimately the one who makes the rules but it affects the way these organizations and the govt relate to eachother behind closed doors. There is more give and take than most people would think. If we remove the crown, without replacing it, then these insititions could just become extensions of the PMs Office in a number of ways that they currently are not. At least the US has a division of powers between the White House and Congress to offset that, we would essentially have a concentration of powers in our case.

[BartSimpson]

Just my $.02 but if you folks put an end to the monarchy in Canada it may well get the ball rolling with various factions to just put an end to Canada in its entirety.

[coltsrmint2]

I heard the Prince got his H1N1 vacine and didn't have to wait in line. I think that is bull crap, even when he will be King soon.......