The British Royalty: How come this never seems to come up in Federal e

[Uncle 3 dogs]

I am curious how come we keep printing the Queen on our money and our soldiers have to swear loyalty to her, how she must approve the Governor General.

I understand legal tradition and all that, but surely we could get rid of these things if we wanted to. Do most people just not feel it is wrong or important enough to mess with?

For me it's like, the question is how come we don't change that? I don't see the point in it at all.

You nailed it.

most people just not feel it is wrong or important enough to mess with

[Bryan]

I think the tradition is important, and I doubt a very large percentage of Canadians would want to completely change our system to eliminate the monarchy altogether.

I would like to put it into law that the Monarchy is strictly ceremonial though.

[Guest American Woman]

And, of course, Columbus "discovered" America in 1492. Do they still teach that in US history class?

The cost of national myth is rather immaterial wouldn't you say?

I have no idea what you are talking about .........

[Guest American Woman]

From the latest polls/surveys (excerpts):

In May 2010, a poll by Angus Reid found that more than two-thirds of Canadians, a 69% majority, would like to see a Canadian serving as Canada's head of state, and a 52% majority of Canadians support reopening the constitutional debate to discuss replacing the monarchy with an elected head of state, [...]When asked who they would prefer as a monarch after Queen Elizabeth II, three-in-ten Canadians responded by saying there should be no monarch after her. 31% of Canadians also want members of the Royal Family to stop visiting Canada.

Also in May 2010, an online poll by Leger Marketing for QMI Agency found that majority 59% of Canadians said that they had little or no interest in the Queen's visit to Canada, while 39% did. The poll found that only 32% of 18 to 34 year-olds had an attachment to the crown. In the 65-and-over group, 46% reported an attachment. One fifth of Canadians said the Queen should stay home, and that furthermore, "Canada should sever its ties with the British Crown".

In June 2010, a national poll by the Association for Canadian Studies found decidedly lukewarm feelings about the concept of monarchy. The survey found that 49% of Canadians had a negative reaction to the word "monarchy", compared to just 41% with a positive reaction. In the Maritimes, where the Queen would begin her Canadian visit, the majority 60% registered a negative opinion of monarchy, compared to only 37% positive. (The poll did not refer to the Canadian monarchy or to the Queen specifically, but to the concept of monarchy.)

A poll by Ipsos-Reid, also in June 2010, found that the majority two-in-three Canadians agree the royal family should not have any formal role in Canadian society, and reported growing sentiment that Elizabeth II should be Canada's last monarch.

A fifth poll, conducted by Harris-Decima for The Canadian Press a few days ahead of the Queen's nine-day visit to Canada in June, found that nearly half of Canadians, 48%, consider the monarchy to be "a relic of our colonial past that has no place in Canada today."

An Angus Reid poll just after the Queen's visit found that 36% of Canadians want Canada to remain a monarchy, 30% prefer having an elected head of state, and 21% felt it made no difference to them.

[PIK]

From the latest polls/surveys (excerpts):

In May 2010, a poll by Angus Reid found that more than two-thirds of Canadians, a 69% majority, would like to see a Canadian serving as Canada's head of state, and a 52% majority of Canadians support reopening the constitutional debate to discuss replacing the monarchy with an elected head of state, [...]When asked who they would prefer as a monarch after Queen Elizabeth II, three-in-ten Canadians responded by saying there should be no monarch after her. 31% of Canadians also want members of the Royal Family to stop visiting Canada.

Also in May 2010, an online poll by Leger Marketing for QMI Agency found that majority 59% of Canadians said that they had little or no interest in the Queen's visit to Canada, while 39% did. The poll found that only 32% of 18 to 34 year-olds had an attachment to the crown. In the 65-and-over group, 46% reported an attachment. One fifth of Canadians said the Queen should stay home, and that furthermore, "Canada should sever its ties with the British Crown".

In June 2010, a national poll by the Association for Canadian Studies found decidedly lukewarm feelings about the concept of monarchy. The survey found that 49% of Canadians had a negative reaction to the word "monarchy", compared to just 41% with a positive reaction. In the Maritimes, where the Queen would begin her Canadian visit, the majority 60% registered a negative opinion of monarchy, compared to only 37% positive. (The poll did not refer to the Canadian monarchy or to the Queen specifically, but to the concept of monarchy.)

A poll by Ipsos-Reid, also in June 2010, found that the majority two-in-three Canadians agree the royal family should not have any formal role in Canadian society, and reported growing sentiment that Elizabeth II should be Canada's last monarch.

A fifth poll, conducted by Harris-Decima for The Canadian Press a few days ahead of the Queen's nine-day visit to Canada in June, found that nearly half of Canadians, 48%, consider the monarchy to be "a relic of our colonial past that has no place in Canada today."

An Angus Reid poll just after the Queen's visit found that 36% of Canadians want Canada to remain a monarchy, 30% prefer having an elected head of state, and 21% felt it made no difference to them.

Lets have a poll of real canadians not new canadians, the numbers will be different.

[Guest American Woman]

Lets have a poll of real canadians not new canadians, the numbers will be different.

You don't agree with them, so you've decided that they aren't "real Canadians?" -- Where does it say all the polls conducted involved "new Canadians?"

[scouterjim]

Lets have a poll of real canadians not new canadians, the numbers will be different.

I'm a "real Canadian". I was born here, as was my father. My vote is "get rid of the monarchy!!"

[RNG]

Lets have a poll of real canadians not new canadians, the numbers will be different.

Are you talking WASP's?

[g_bambino]

Lets have a poll of real canadians not new canadians, the numbers will be different.

It doesn't matter whether they're new Canadians or old Canadians or "real" Canadians or not (though, just what the Hell a "real" Canadian is remains a mystery). It's educated Canadians who should be polled using unbiased questions. What's the sense in asking a Canadian who's concept of civics is based mostly on a diet starved of Canadian history and rich with American and lazy Canadian media (which itself is full of works bought from French and American media conglomorates) about whether or not the "British" monarch should have anything to do with Canada? Have Canadians comprehend the role of the Crown in our system, and that the Crown in our system is not British, and then the poll results are likely to change.

[c/e]

Edited May 14, 2011 by g_bambino

[g_bambino]

I would like to put it into law that the Monarchy is strictly ceremonial though.

Which undermines its purpose in governance and upsets the entire system. Why would anyone want to do that? Even in Japan, where the emperor is probably just about the most ceremonial head of state in the world, he still has a role in government.

[Smallc]

I would like to put it into law that the Monarchy is strictly ceremonial though.

By doing that, you'd make the monarchy utterly useless. There's a reason that it isn't purely ceremonial, the same as a president in parliamentary republic isn't purely ceremonial.

Edit: I should have know that bambino would beat me to the punch.

Edited May 14, 2011 by Smallc

[Smallc]

It doesn't matter whether they're new Canadians or old Canadians or "real" Canadians or not (though, just what the Hell a "real" Canadian is remains a mystery). It's educated Canadians who should be polled using unbiased questions.

Or we could ask the same idiots who participated in this poll, including a rough estimation of the costs (of which there are many) and potential benefits (of which there are none) of the change.

[g_bambino]

Or we could... includ[e] a rough estimation of the costs (of which there are many) and potential benefits (of which there are none) of the change.

As everyone probably already knows, the results of a poll will depend quite a lot on the question. Even in the Wikipedia article AW linked to, it says:

Such polls on the institution have been accused of using "inconsistent and sometimes ambiguous wording." Some have referred in their questions to British monarchy or called the British monarch Canada's head of state. This terminology is at odds with the contemporary situation in Canada, wherein the monarchy is a Canadian institution separate from that of the United Kingdom, being called the Canadian Crown and Canadian monarchy by the government and constitutional scholars, and the monarch is uniquely titled as Queen of Canada. The government of Saskatchewan has stated it is incorrect to denote the Canadian Royal Family as the British Royal Family.

Debate on the monarchy in Canada

It goes on to say:

It has been noted, and confirmed by polls, that Canadians are not well educated about the monarchy and its role. In 2002, the majority polled thought the prime minister was head of state, only 5% knowing it was the Queen. Both republicans and monarchists in Canada have noted this fact in relation to polls on the monarchy.

It's a wonder how these polls are given any serious attention. I guess the media loves to stir up controversy, no matter how stupid the means by which they do it.

But, yes, I imagine the result of a poll on this subject would also be affected if the question included the facts about what it would take to make a change and what the result of the change would likely be. "Do you support or oppose an amendment to the constitution that will replace the monarch in the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of government, in the federal and ten provincial jurisdictions, with [yet to be determined], which will require the approval of a majority in each of the provincial legislatures, the House of Commons, and the Senate, and the net result to you personally will be [yet to be determined]?"

[sp]

Edited May 15, 2011 by g_bambino

[Guest American Woman]

It doesn't matter whether they're new Canadians or old Canadians or "real" Canadians or not (though, just what the Hell a "real" Canadian is remains a mystery). It's educated Canadians who should be polled using unbiased questions. What's the sense in asking a Canadian who's concept of civics is based mostly on a diet starved of Canadian history and rich with American and lazy Canadian media (which itself is full of works bought from French and American media conglomorates) about whether or not the "British" monarch should have anything to do with Canada? Have Canadians comprehend the role of the Crown in our system, and that the Crown in our system is not British, and then the poll results are likely to change.

Only the "educated Canadians" should be allowed to vote in political elections, too. Forget the "new Canadians," the "old Canadians," and the "real Canadians." The only opinions that should ever matter, that should ever count, are the opinions of the "educated Canadians." And no American media for them!

[RNG]

" And no American media for them!

Oh, no worry, A.M. The holier than all of us CRTC will police that with great vigor.

[g_bambino]

The holier than all of us CRTC will police that with great vigor.

I'd rather schools got the facts out and Canadian media outlets kept the facts right.

[August1991]

Why would a system where the people elect the head of state not be possible? Why shouldn't the citizen's of Canada choose who does those things?

Canadians are comfortable with a parliamentary system and a ceremonial head of state. It makes sense to choose the president through an electoral college of representatives. (BTW, that's how the US president is elected too.)

The German and Indian situations correspond to the political landscape of Canada.

Lets have a poll of real canadians not new canadians, the numbers will be different.

PIK, that's ridiculous. A citizen is a citizen is a citizen. You sound like some of the crazy people in the PQ who want to limit who can vote in a referendum.

Anyway, taking your idea to its logical conclusion, how far back do you want to go?

... 69% of Francophones, 65% of Quebeckers, 49% of those in the higher income brackets, 51% of professionals and 53% of University graduates were more likely to want the monarchy to be abolished.

Leger

Except that nobody knows who the President of Germany is; typically, he's just one more low-level politician chosen from banal candidates put forward by Germany's political parties in the hopes that they may have more influence over the executive without seeing a personality in the presidential office that outshines the Chancellor. That is, unless it's a president who starts making public calls for more power for his office, vetoing laws he doesn't agree with, publicly criticising the cabinet, and then has to resign.

[c/e]

So what.

[Bryan]

Which undermines its purpose in governance and upsets the entire system. Why would anyone want to do that?

So that the person actually in charge is the elected official, rather than someone who was fortunate enough to have been born into the right family.

[g_bambino]

So what.

You can't defend your inane proposal seems to be what.

[g_bambino]

So that the person actually in charge is the elected official, rather than someone who was fortunate enough to have been born into the right family.

I get the feeling you don't understand our system.

[Smallc]

I get the feeling you don't understand our system.

You're just getting that feeling now? This is the person that thinks the PM tells MPs who to vote for as Speaker of the House.

Edited May 15, 2011 by Smallc

[g_bambino]

You're just getting that feeling now? This is the person that thinks the PM tells MPs who to vote for as Speaker of the House.

Oh... Oh dear.

[Smallc]

Oh... Oh dear.

Yes. According to Bryan, the Speaker is simply a figure head under the control of the PM....and so is the GG.

Edited May 15, 2011 by Smallc

[jbg]

Every democratic government in the world either has a monarch or a president who is head of state and seperate from the leadership of the government. The role of the president is often the same as the GG in Canada (i.e. ceremonial but with reserve powers intended to settle disputes and resolve crises).

Except for the United States, Mexico, Brazil, Peru, Chile, and Afghanistan.

[Smallc]

Except for the United States, Mexico, Brazil, Peru, Chile, and Afghanistan.

Quite a few more, actually. There are all of the Presidential republics and South Africa.