Does Canada Now Have a New (Haitian) Head of State?

[g_bambino]

In most constitutional monarchies, veto power is very largely hypothetical; it's a Reserve Power that could, under vaguely defined circumstances, be used, but it's hard to foresee in the normal course of governance how it would ever be used.

That's quite untrue. It's commonly recognised that the sovereign - and thus, for us, her viceroy - retains the reserve power for drastic circumstances, which are of course undefined: they're as of yet unforseen. But some have almost presented themselves; regard the situation in Ottawa at the end of last December.

The logical solution is to emulate the American model, treating the Provinces as sovereign or semi-sovereign units for the purposes of remodeling into a Republic. I wonder what the Australian republicans have in mind, as they are in the same boat.

That's hardly logical. The American federation is constructed in a wholly different manner than the Canadian; it is far more centralised and the states have little free sovereignty (that particular matter was settled on the battlefields of their Civil War). The republicans in Australia - no surprise - never openly addressed the matter; the head of Canada's only republican organization has called the Lieutenant Governors redundant, thereby revealing his belief that the provinces should be under full federal control.

_[c/e]

Edited October 14, 2009 by g_bambino

[Smallc]

And that is the check on the power of the Prime Minister and the federal government in Canada....The provinces.

[g_bambino]

And that is the check on the power of the Prime Minister and the federal government in Canada....The provinces.

One of them, yes (partly through the Senate; but, that's another matter... ). This is why this head of state business is about more than mere semantics; it's a revelation that Rideau Hall - either with the support of or indifference from successive Cabinets - has been gradually vandalising the constitution, elevating the Governor General to a position higher than that of her own employer. As one person put it, it's like a Microsoft spokesperson claiming he's Bill Gates.

Dan Gardner put it well in the Ottawa Citizen:

Look, I know most people think this is all about toasts at Rideau Hall and whose face goes on the coins. But it's much more than that. This is about Canadian history and heritage, yes, but fundamentally it's about the constitution: The Crown is the cornerstone of our legal order and the head of state is its guarantor, possessing emergency powers in the event of impasse or breakdown. Even the staunchest republican should agree that it is absurd that these changes can be made without the slightest popular discussion or consent.

A Very Canadian Coup

[Smallc]

One of them, yes (partly through the Senate; but, that's another matter...

Yes, them too....but the people don't seem to like them as much.

[JB Globe]

I think the reason Monarchists got so angry about this is because they're pissed off in general that no one under 40 cares about Canada's Monarchist tradition anymore - and (in my opinion) for good reason.

[Smallc]

Yes, I as a 20 year old prove your point.

[g_bambino]

Yes, I as a 20 year old prove your point.

Note, the ones pushing for republicanism are generally neo-nationalist, iconoclastic products of the baby-boomer generation, like that old hack Randall White, who uses the head of state question as a lame launch for his republican agenda. It's always the same old maple leaf-thin ramblings about foreign and oppressive queens, republican values being Canadian values, full equality in utopian republics, republics being the pinnacle of evolution, dwindling old monarchists, arrogant superiority, great revolutions of enlightenment, blah, blah, blah. As with most other institutions, the monarchy will be fine once the most selfish group of compeers in human history is gone from our midst.