The Federal Republic of Canada

[Tilter]

I want to know what the benefit would be to me and the other 30+million Canadians to switch from having a GG and LG's to President? Because to me the truth is that the Queen is our Queen and Monarchy has been our system in one form or another since the NA was first colonized, thats the truth about our country and society.

And exactly what benefit we have in the German people that sit on the throne in that foreign country, England.

[punked]

What percentage of the Royal Families income is coming from the Government of Canada?

Last report done said we spend 50 million a year, that is the cost of the Monarchy to Canada. That does not take into account how they come every year to Canada and we take on an all expenses paid Vacation.

[Signals.Cpl]

The idea of royalty is & has been "broke" for hundreds of years. The idea there are a certain class of leeches that are entitled to a perpetual free lunch on the "colonies" is too stupid to exist ---- & yet it does. Off with their heads or at least get them off their asses & out to work to earn a living. We need Ears & Horsie about as much as we need the senate or all the Gov/gens & Lute/Govs. we are asses to support them .

What exactly are you going to put in their place? Everyone is throwing around nice suggesting but the lives of everyday Canadians will not be improved, money will not be saved, in fact any money that is saved will end up being used to support a president or another person to do all that the GG does for Canada, and then have the added expense of an election.

They were born in to their position and you weren't, BIG DEAL! You want to remove the monarchy because of jealousy without informing us how replacing monarchy will benefit us in any way shape or form. There is no financial incentive for us to remove Monarchy, thats more then evident because people have been dancing around that issue for some time.

[punked]

What exactly are you going to put in their place? Everyone is throwing around nice suggesting but the lives of everyday Canadians will not be improved, money will not be saved, in fact any money that is saved will end up being used to support a president or another person to do all that the GG does for Canada, and then have the added expense of an election.

They were born in to their position and you weren't, BIG DEAL! You want to remove the monarchy because of jealousy without informing us how replacing monarchy will benefit us in any way shape or form. There is no financial incentive for us to remove Monarchy, thats more then evident because people have been dancing around that issue for some time.

You have no idea what you are talking about. I'll replace the GG with a rubber stamp. No election, no nothing. A 50 cent rubber stamp. It has nothing to do with jealousy their lives look terrible and I would never want to be them. This is about good governance.

How come when anyone wants to change anything Conservatives think it is because people are jealous? I am not jealous of anyone I love my life, I would not trade it for anyone else's. I just want a situation where more people can live a life that is as happy and fulfilling as mine. That isn't jealousy it is empathy, I want a country where anyone and everyone can succeed with a little work. I think wasting 50 million dollars on an archaic tradition for no reason makes just a little bit harder. That 50 million could be given back to the people of Canada in any number of ways that will help them more then this.

Edited June 2, 2012 by punked

[Wild Bill]

You know, as an older guy I can't help but feel insulted by much of this anti-monarchist feeling that comes from people of either recent immigration or of non-British stock.

We WERE very much a British derived nation! We had some communities of folks from other areas but they were expected to adopt OUR values and in the main they did! They were welcomed and appreciated as new Canadians. Culturally, they became the same as the rest of us.

After WWII that began to change. We took in many from war torn Europe. Then in the late 70's we began a deliberate policy of choosing immigrants from non-British or European sources. At the same time, our own prosperity began to decline. By the end of the 80's it was hard to attract people from Europe and Britain. They were much better off staying where they were! So we then started to get massive numbers of new Canadians with no feelings toward our traditional culture.

Times change and countries with them. It would be a separate thread to debate if this is a good thing. Still, one thing is very, very obvious to me. If someone way back before this all began had told me that eventually the newcomers would be demanding we give up our Queen and our original traditions I WOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN SO ACCEPTING OF THE NEW FORMS OF IMMIGRATION!

I believe I am far from the only traditional Canadian to feel this way. It is very much like welcoming strangers into your home to feed, clothe and support them only to have them demand you remodel your home to their liking!

Frankly, when I hear this talk it seems like I'm being hijacked! Kicked in the teeth for my generosity.

[cybercoma]

The idea of royalty is & has been "broke" for hundreds of years. The idea there are a certain class of leeches that are entitled to a perpetual free lunch on the "colonies" is too stupid to exist ---- & yet it does. Off with their heads or at least get them off their asses & out to work to earn a living. We need Ears & Horsie about as much as we need the senate or all the Gov/gens & Lute/Govs. we are asses to support them .

How much taxpayers' money goes to the bank accounts of the monarchy?

[eyeball]

How might she force politicians to tell the truth?

Royal Dissent as opposed to Assent I suppose In the old days she probably could have directed the church to threaten them with excommunication.

As far as wielding power over the laws passed in the legislature, she gives authority to the constitution, which is the benchmark by which we determine the validity of any given legislation.

Yeah right, makes me feel all warm and fuzzy just thinking about it.

[cybercoma]

Last report done said we spend 50 million a year, that is the cost of the Monarchy to Canada. That does not take into account how they come every year to Canada and we take on an all expenses paid Vacation.

And how much does the presidency cost the United States?

[punked]

And how much does the presidency cost the United States?

Don't know and don't care because I am not advocating we have a presidency. There are many Parliamentary republic that exist in the is world. We can create any system we want. We are Canada it is our country. How it is run is up to us. The "It will cost us just as much if not more" argument is red herring our government will cost as much as we want it to. That is the great thing about being a democracy.

Edited June 3, 2012 by punked

[cybercoma]

So you want to change something that isn't a problem with some complete unknown. No thanks.

[Guest Derek L]

So you want to change something that isn't a problem with some complete unknown. No thanks.

Agreed…..Sounds like change for the sake of…….

[punked]

So you want to change something that isn't a problem with some complete unknown. No thanks.

No I want to keep it the exact same but to cut that 50 million the monarchy costs us each year.

[August1991]

After WWII that began to change. We took in many from war torn Europe.

The biggest wave of immigration to Canada occurred between 1890-1910. And it involved people who were neither French nor English speaking. These immigrants assimilated into the English community yet few were Protestants.

Then in the late 70's we began a deliberate policy of choosing immigrants from non-British or European sources. At the same time, our own prosperity began to decline. By the end of the 80's it was hard to attract people from Europe and Britain. They were much better off staying where they were!

In 1976, Trudeau changed the immigration law and simply made it unbiased. We would not favour immigrants of any particular origin.

"our own prosperity began to decline" WTF? European incomes rose to North American levels. Soon, Indians and Chinese will also be as rich as we are.

Wild Bill, is that a bad thing?

If someone way back before this all began had told me that eventually the newcomers would be demanding we give up our Queen and our original traditions I WOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN SO ACCEPTING OF THE NEW FORMS OF IMMIGRATION!

I believe I am far from the only traditional Canadian to feel this way. It is very much like welcoming strangers into your home to feed, clothe and support them only to have them demand you remodel your home to their liking!

Frankly, when I hear this talk it seems like I'm being hijacked! Kicked in the teeth for my generosity.

Canada is a civilized country despite the British monarchy, not because of it. Edited June 3, 2012 by August1991

[Smallc]

No I want to keep it the exact same but to cut that 50 million the monarchy costs us each year.

You cant do that. The system you're talking about exists only in south Africa, and did in Zimbabwe. It hasn't proven superior. Our system is one of the most stable in the world. You can't just yank out a central element and expect everything to continue as is, uninterrupted. There are so many things wrong with your simplistic statement that I can't begin to hash them out n this stupid iPad.

Edited June 3, 2012 by Smallc

[punked]

You cant do that. The system you're talking about exists only in south Africa, and did in Zimbabwe. It hasn't proven superior. Our system is one of the most stable in the world. You can't just yank out a central element and expect everything to continue as is, uninterrupted. There are so many things wrong with your simplistic statement that I can't begin to hash them out n this stupid iPad.

I was thinking more of Switzerland model personally.

[Smallc]

I was thinking more of Switzerland model personally.

You can't just do that though. That would be a fundamental change to our system that would cost so much time, money, and goodwill, what would anyone ever gain?

Edited June 4, 2012 by Smallc

[punked]

You can't just do that though. That would be a fundamental change you our system that would cost so much time, money, and goodwill, what would anyone ever gain?

We can do whatever we want. Do you have real reason for not doing, like actual repercussions besides "it is different"?

[Signals.Cpl]

No I want to keep it the exact same but to cut that 50 million the monarchy costs us each year.

There is a reason for the GG:

Constitutional Responsibilities

Canada is a constitutional monarchy, where the duties of head of State and head of Government are distinct.

Canada’s Parliament consists of three parts: the Queen, represented by the governor general; the Senate; and the House of Commons.

The Letters Patent Constituting the Office of the Governor General and Commander-in-Chief of Canada, 1947 authorize the governor general of Canada to exercise powers and responsibilities belonging to the Sovereign, with the advice of members of the Privy Council. The governor general is non-partisan and non-political.

The Canadian Constitution (Constitution Act, 1867) places executive power in the Queen. However, in practice this power is exercised by the prime minister and his ministers. The governor general acts on the advice of the prime minister and the government, but has the right to advise, to encourage and to warn. As such, the governor general offers valued counsel to them.

One of the governor general’s most important responsibilities is to ensure that Canada always has a prime minister and a government in place that has the confidence of Parliament. In addition, the governor general holds certain reserve powers, which are exercised at his or her own discretion.

The governor general presides over the swearing-in of the prime minister, the chief justice of Canada and cabinet ministers. It is the governor general who summons, prorogues and dissolves Parliament, delivers the Speech from the Throne, and gives Royal Assent to acts of Parliament. The governor general signs official documents and regularly meets with the prime minister.

Just because the crown does not exercise the powers given to it does not mean it does not have any. Just because you think the GG is useless does not mean the position serves no purpose. What you are seeing is $$ that would be saved but ignoring all the things the GG represents and does.

Represent Canada

The governor general promotes Canadian sovereignty at home and represents Canada abroad. At the request of the prime minister, the governor general:

hosts visiting heads of State;

conducts visits abroad;

receives foreign heads of mission (ambassadors and high commissioners); and

signs diplomatic documents.

For most of the last century, and increasingly in recent decades, governors general have played an important role in relations between Canada and other countries by carrying out State visits abroad and by hosting many foreign heads of State on official visits to Canada. These visits allow the governor general to promote Canada, to strengthen existing international relations and to enrich ties in various sectors of Canadian life.

During State visits abroad, the governor general is always accompanied by a delegation of people representing every region of Canada, to give a more comprehensive view of our country to the host countries. The delegates represent various Canadian interests, achievements and expertise.

Good luck to your 50c stamp replacing the GG in all of its duties and responsibilities. Seems to me you have no legitimate argument nor relevant knowledge as to what the GG does therefore all your other arguments are irrelevant because you want to eliminate an important aspect of Canadian politics that guarantees some of the core functions of our government.

[Signals.Cpl]

I was thinking more of Switzerland model personally.

So you want to initiate conscription as well?

[punked]

So you want to initiate conscription as well?

I would love it if we had that as long as we follow the Swiss model and ANY and ALL military action has to go to a referendum of the people first. Sounds like a great idea every one in the country is a solider and thus they all make Military decisions. It is easy for me to send your son or daughter off to war, it becomes much harder when it is my son or daughter as well. I would think you would be against that not me.

Edited June 3, 2012 by punked

[punked]

There is a reason for the GG:

Just because the crown does not exercise the powers given to it does not mean it does not have any. Just because you think the GG is useless does not mean the position serves no purpose. What you are seeing is $$ that would be saved but ignoring all the things the GG represents and does.

Good luck to your 50c stamp replacing the GG in all of its duties and responsibilities. Seems to me you have no legitimate argument nor relevant knowledge as to what the GG does therefore all your other arguments are irrelevant because you want to eliminate an important aspect of Canadian politics that guarantees some of the core functions of our government.

Yah take a look over those responsibilities and tell them they could not be handed off to the PM and his or her ministers (It isn't like with this government there is a shortage of Minsters). Seriously. I don't need luck I just need to use reasoning.

Edited June 3, 2012 by punked

[cybercoma]

No I want to keep it the exact same but to cut that 50 million the monarchy costs us each year.

What does that $50million cover? Do you think keeping it the same is actually going to save you that $50million?

[cybercoma]

We can do whatever we want. Do you have real reason for not doing, like actual repercussions besides "it is different"?

He told you why. Because it would cost a whole bunch of time, money, and goodwill for what end? I'm not sure the benefit is worth the cost to implement it.

[Rick]

What does that $50million cover? Do you think keeping it the same is actually going to save you that $50million?

One in ten Canadians live in poverty...About 3.2 million people now live in low income, including 634,000 children.

That $50 million being wasted on pompous bureaucratic regal bullshit would go a long ways to help feeding them.

[cybercoma]

One in ten Canadians live in poverty...About 3.2 million people now live in low income, including 634,000 children.

That $50 million being wasted on pompous bureaucratic regal bullshit would go a long ways to help feeding them.

What does that $50 million budget cover? The G20 summit cost more than 10x that for a couple days.

Edited June 3, 2012 by cybercoma