Should Canada still see the British Monarch as its own?

[Wigs]

Good riddance to the Queen and the fake monarchy. I look forward to her being removed from our money and being replaced with a prominent Canadian

[thurmas]

if we can keep our system of fptp westminster style of governance and get rid of the monarchy i am for it. the monarchy no longer boosts commonwealth morale, is a waste of money and are the same level as the kardashians now.

[Proof Sheet]

There are a lot of twists and turn in the Prince Harry/Megan Markle vs the Royal Family saga. Lots of inconsistencies in their story, especially hers. I can't believe she had no knowledge of Prince Harry or details of the Royal Family before she met him/got married etc.

She has a history of discarding people no longer of use to her. A grifter of ultimate proportions.

Having said that, I'd get rid of the Royal Family in Canada in a heartbeat. When I buy stamps at the Post Office I ask for any stamp except ones with the Queen's head on it. Canada should be freed of the shackles of the Monarchy.

[thurmas]

I don't care about Harry the worst thing is no one mentions right now is the Queen is protecting and harboring her son Andrew from the law as he is a rapist!

[someone123]

One of the arguments for keeping the monarchy is that it's an outlet for all of the ceremonial aggrandizement that tends to accrue to presidents in republics and can contribute to a cult of personality.

This is a good example of a benefit that can emerge from a system that might be somewhat difficult to predict ahead of time, but turns out to work well in the real world given how human interaction works. I think Canada should keep the monarchy, and we should keep grumbling about how silly it is.

[Hecate]

Canada could never easily rid itself of the monarchy. The country is built up of multiple treaties between the crown and the original landowners. Do you think indigenous people will give up their rights and claims for your sake? Lol.

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by Hecate

Canada could never easily rid itself of the monarchy. The country is built up of multiple treaties between the crown and the original landowners. Do you think indigenous people will give up their rights and claims for your sake? Lol.

Treaties would not be affected. Canada in whatever legal form would become the successor state of the Crown.

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by someone123

One of the arguments for keeping the monarchy is that it's an outlet for all of the ceremonial aggrandizement that tends to accrue to presidents in republics and can contribute to a cult of personality.

I'm not convinced that it's even true. It's an interesting hypothesis, but is there any evidence that a charismatic demagogue is less effective in the position of a prime minister or other "head of government" rather than as head of state? I mean Trump, probably the most famous one of recent memory, mostly gained his following before he even held any political office, while many other heads of state, both ceremonial and functional, fail to gain any such status.

[ShavedParmesanCheese]

For whatever it's worth, I prefer the monarchy to the downstairs neighbours' presidential system because it limits the power of the executive branch by splitting it between 2 people, one of which is easily removable, and the other seldom uses her power, excepting in extraordinary circumstances. Of course, that doesn't mean it's gaurentee-able, acting in good faith is not easily legislated. I am now of the position that once Her Majesty passes, this process can begin. It does raise a problem though. How to do it? When have we as a nation, EVER been good at constitutional reform?

As of now, we functionally have an elected monarchy. In some bizarre circumstance where I had the ability to decide, I would alter the current system. The election of the Governor General, as our official head of state, would need to be installed not on the preference of the Prime Minister. Set it to a parliamentary vote, perhaps? It would need to be non-partisan.

If nothing else, I prefer the Westminster Parliament in which our laws are put through to the alternative congressional system down south.

[VANRIDERFAN]

Originally Posted by ShavedParmesanCheese

For whatever it's worth, I prefer the monarchy to the downstairs neighbours' presidential system because it limits the power of the executive branch by splitting it between 2 people, one of which is easily removable, and the other seldom uses her power, excepting in extraordinary circumstances. Of course, that doesn't mean it's gaurentee-able, acting in good faith is not easily legislated. I am now of the position that once Her Majesty passes, this process can begin. It does raise a problem though. How to do it? When have we as a nation, EVER been good at constitutional reform?

As of now, we functionally have an elected monarchy. In some bizarre circumstance where I had the ability to decide, I would alter the current system. The election of the Governor General, as our official head of state, would need to be installed not on the preference of the Prime Minister. Set it to a parliamentary vote, perhaps? It would need to be non-partisan.

If nothing else, I prefer the Westminster Parliament in which our laws are put through to the alternative congressional system down south.

Well PM Harper installed a non-partisan committee to vet a select list of persons for the GG office. We got David Johnston from that committee. The current PM tossed out that committee and we now have nothing.

[kevinbottawa]

Originally Posted by Jaws

Time to kick the royals to the curb, and I come from a long line of monarchists. No longer relevant in any sense.

That being said, a formalized severing of ties would be expensive and painful so it’s easier to just let them become more irrelevant.

Same here. I come from a family that loves the Royal Family. Ten years ago I was strongly against getting rid of the Queen as our head of state. Now I'm all for it. We don't need them. We've outgrown that relationship. My family is from Barbados and they're about to remove the Queen as head of state and become a republic. If a tiny country like Barbados can do it (and Trinidad & Tobago did back in 1976), why not a large country like Canada? I think it would take Australia making that move for Canada to actually do it.

[ShavedParmesanCheese]

Originally Posted by VANRIDERFAN

Well PM Harper installed a non-partisan committee to vet a select list of persons for the GG office. We got David Johnston from that committee. The current PM tossed out that committee and we now have nothing.

My god, is this the first time I've found myself somewhat agreeing with Harper? Incredible.

Really, it doesn't matter however the Governor General+ is elected, i just don't want it to be a national vote. Because that involves campaigning. Making plans for what to do differently in office. It's the same reason I would never want to elect a judge. It should be the one constant in government, not another partisan ploy.

[Architype]

Originally Posted by ShavedParmesanCheese

...

As of now, we functionally have an elected monarchy. In some bizarre circumstance where I had the ability to decide, I would alter the current system. The election of the Governor General, as our official head of state, would need to be installed not on the preference of the Prime Minister. Set it to a parliamentary vote, perhaps? It would need to be non-partisan.

If nothing else, I prefer the Westminster Parliament in which our laws are put through to the alternative congressional system down south.

Or we might end up with a version of "monarchist" party(s) vs "non-monarchist" party(s) for awhile, as these issues typically evolve into bipolar partisan politics.

[ShavedParmesanCheese]

Originally Posted by Architype

Or we might end up with a version of "monarchist" party(s) vs "non-monarchist" party(s) for awhile, as these issues typically evolve into bipolar partisan politics.

This is a messy issue, isn't it. Like I said, we as a nation aren't very good with constitutional reform it'll have to be a gradual process, one to begin once Her Majesty passes.

[Hecate]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

Treaties would not be affected. Canada in whatever legal form would become the successor state of the Crown.

It wouldn’t be that easy. Only if the stakeholders of the treaties agree to entertain a continued partnership with the republic of Canada, which they’d have very little reason to, would that happen. You’d definitely see a push for sovereignty amongst many indigenous nations. You’d see the breakup of Canada.

[Razor]

Do any of our tax dollars get funneled directly to them? I hope not!
In my version of a just world they would get rid of the monarchy, liquidate all of their assets, and give back the proceeds to British tax payers..Really, all their wealth is accumulated blood and tax money if you go back just a few centuries and beyond..I get the tradition and all + The Queen and the Royals do a lot of good work with charities, but the whole birthright thing and crazy wealth bothers me. Especially, knowing that it's old blood money collected from peasants..I feel the same way about the Catholic Church and all it's riches btw.

[Acajack]

AFAIK we only pay for royal visits when they come to Canada.

[acottawa]

First of all, there is zero percent chance of this happening. A constitutional amendment would be required and requires unanimity, which has never happened in Canadian history for anything.

Second of all, Republican movements usually run into a brick wall when coming up with a plan to replace the monarchy. There is no revolutionary or decolonization fervour that would give such a plan momentum.

Third, what is not working with the current system that would be better with a different system?

[MonctonRad]

God Save the Queen (and Chuck, and Wills and then little George).

Long may they reign!

[memememe76]

Is there a reason why the Monarchy must be tied to our current parliamentary system? What is there to replace? I just want the Monarchy out.