g_bambino Posted October 27, 2009 Report Share Posted October 27, 2009 But it will likely be.I suspect some people will do whatever to get their issues entrenched in the Constitution and block everyone else's. No kidding. Could anyone imagine trying to convince Quebec to accept a president elected by a majority Anglophone population? Or the majority Anglophone population accepting two- or three-for-one votes for Quebec? Envision the wrangling over how to choose provincial presidents; how to transfer First Nations treaties from the Crown to... Well, who to transfer First Nations treaties to; how to fill the Senate; how to choose judges; and on, and on, and on, and.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted October 27, 2009 Report Share Posted October 27, 2009 Easy solution: an omnibus bill by a Tory majority to eliminate both the Queen/Crown and the CBC. Secret Agenda! And watch it get hammered by the provinces where it covers their jurisdiction constitutionally. A Tory majority could certainly eliminate the CBC but they certainly could get a boot in the balls for it as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadBrother Posted October 27, 2009 Report Share Posted October 27, 2009 And watch it get hammered by the provinces where it covers their jurisdiction constitutionally.A Tory majority could certainly eliminate the CBC but they certainly could get a boot in the balls for it as well. It's odd, but I don't recall any of the amending formulas for the Constitution being "The Prime Minister wins a vote in the House." It's a good deal more comprehensive than that. If Mulroney couldn't get it passed muster, and he was in a substantially better position than Harper is right now, then I'm not exactly going to hold my breath. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadBrother Posted October 27, 2009 Report Share Posted October 27, 2009 Easy solution: an omnibus bill by a Tory majority to eliminate both the Queen/Crown and the CBC. Secret Agenda!The monetary comparisons of costs to the British and Canadian purses for the monarchy are misleading. In the UK, the very existence of the Crown also generates tons of revenue, tourists do pay to see the pomp and ceremony, royal activities and sites are a huge draw. Not so in Canada, nobody comes here to see the GG or her properties or ceremonies. We could have something like that if, rather than whoever the PM decides should have a few years in Rideau Hall, we took in one of the distaff members of the Royal Family. Believe me, if Prince Harry were to be made GG, you'd have the world press hanging out at Rideau Hall. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g_bambino Posted October 31, 2009 Report Share Posted October 31, 2009 And, as somehow usual, we now have another poll showing completely different results: Six in 10 Canadians support Prince Charles as future king. This pattern of contradictory tallies has been repeating itself since polling on the monarchy began; why, then, do we keep it up? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted October 31, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 31, 2009 Good question. I think something positive will come out of this though. The Palace is apparently about to shift there Canadian strategy. We may see much more of the Crown and it's embodiments in the coming weeks and months. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted October 31, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 31, 2009 It's funny how much polls within polls contradict each other. People have no idea what they want. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g_bambino Posted October 31, 2009 Report Share Posted October 31, 2009 The Palace is apparently about to shift there Canadian strategy. From where do you get this tantalising information, Smallc? Too bad the Queen's Canadian household can't shift its Canadian strategy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted October 31, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 31, 2009 I think it was on Tuesday's National I believe (the one that followed the one with the poll). Unfortunately, they don't keep entire episodes on file, so I can't find it. The reporter said that insiders had told him the palace was aware of the report and that they were deeply troubled by it. He went on to say something to the effect of shifting their Canadian strategy so that their profile will be increased. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted October 31, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 31, 2009 Too bad the Queen's Canadian household can't shift its Canadian strategy. Perhaps that's part of the plan. It is after all her house and her representative. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pliny Posted October 31, 2009 Report Share Posted October 31, 2009 Our government does represent the crown of course. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted October 31, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 31, 2009 I think he more thinking of Rideau Hall than the government. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g_bambino Posted October 31, 2009 Report Share Posted October 31, 2009 I think he more thinking of Rideau Hall than the government. Yes, that's right. The place needs purged of the bigoted and republican civil servants who have accreted there over the past couple of decades. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted October 31, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 31, 2009 (edited) You know, looking through this list and this list, it makes me wonder why anyone would want to change our system to a republic. More than half of the top 20 countries are kingdoms as are half (19 of the 38) developed countries. Nearly half of the worlds monarchies are developed countries. Edited October 31, 2009 by Smallc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlkenny Posted October 31, 2009 Report Share Posted October 31, 2009 That's true...and probably good in its own way. Makes no difference really, the GG does his job. Getting rid of him would be nothing more than symbolic and most people don't even understand the role of the monarchy in Canadian government anyway. It would be a waste of good money that could be spent on much better causes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g_bambino Posted November 1, 2009 Report Share Posted November 1, 2009 the GG does his job. Getting rid of him would be nothing more than symbolic and most people don't even understand the role of the monarchy in Canadian government anyway. It would be a waste of good money that could be spent on much better causes. I agree that it would be a waste of money. But, it would hardly be about mere symbolism; the entire constitution is built around the monarchy. Pull out that kingpin and something has to be put in its place, else the entire system spins apart. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted November 6, 2009 Author Report Share Posted November 6, 2009 I just wanted to say that the Prince and the Duchess are doing an excellent job of representing the Crown in Canada and reacquainting Canadians with this very important institution. I would expect that a poll taken after the visit would reflect an increase in support for the Crown and for Charles. I must say that I have been very impressed with him as a person and a future leader on this trip. It seems that he may make a good leader when the time comes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadBrother Posted November 6, 2009 Report Share Posted November 6, 2009 It's funny how much polls within polls contradict each other. People have no idea what they want. The popularity of the Monarchy in Britain and Canada shifts over time. Everyone will be like "meh" until the Queen shows up, and all of a sudden you've got streets filled with people and little children giving flowers, and you realize that polls on the popularity of the Monarchy are probably quite pointless. I remember after Charles and Dianna got married and they made their first trip here. If there were any Republicans around, they were being drowned out by cheers. Of course, the bloom came off the rose, but because the institution itself is not a political one, it has proven much more adept at surviving momentary crises than that of the politicians that server the Crown. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadBrother Posted November 6, 2009 Report Share Posted November 6, 2009 (edited) You know, looking through this list and this list, it makes me wonder why anyone would want to change our system to a republic. More than half of the top 20 countries are kingdoms as are half (19 of the 38) developed countries. Nearly half of the worlds monarchies are developed countries. I'm relatively ambivalent myself. I can understand some pro-republican viewpoints, particularly the egalitarian notion, that elevating a particular person and their family to a position when they are no better or no worse than the subjects they ostensibly rule in some ways flies in the face of fundamental equality. At the same time, I feel quite envious of Great Britain. The Prime Minister over there have a woman who has spent half a century advising their predecessors, probably knows more of Her constitutional role and the role of Parliament than anyone else. She has seen international crises (and remember, she is regularly updated on even state secrets, diplomatic missions, etc.), great moments in history and has as often as not been the steady hand over the tumultuous second half of the 20th century. Over here, Her vice-regal representative is essentially a patronage position, decided by the Prime Minister, and so never sits for a sufficient length of time to gain any such expertise. I honestly think that, if we are to retain the Monarchy, we should pick the Heir to the Throne as our GG until he or she is coronated. I think it would be good for Canada, and it would be good for the Crown. It would further lift the office from any kind of political meddling, and it would stop it from being the ultimate patronage position. Edited November 6, 2009 by ToadBrother Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g_bambino Posted November 7, 2009 Report Share Posted November 7, 2009 I just wanted to say that the Prince and the Duchess are doing an excellent job of representing the Crown in Canada and reacquainting Canadians with this very important institution. I would expect that a poll taken after the visit would reflect an increase in support for the Crown and for Charles. I must say that I have been very impressed with him as a person and a future leader on this trip. It seems that he may make a good leader when the time comes. I would agree. However, some of the media coverage - especially that of the CBC - has been appalling. All they seem to do is measure the success of an event by the number of gawkers, and continually seek out "royal watchers" to interview rather than monarchists. Is the American imaging firm the CBC must have hired to guide their revamp pushing for manufactured controversy? Its gross. I particularly liked that in NL (at 2:40 in the video). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted November 7, 2009 Author Report Share Posted November 7, 2009 CTV has had excellent coverage of the visit. CBC usually is better at the news, but not this time. Either way, I'm very impressed with their trip. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g_bambino Posted November 7, 2009 Report Share Posted November 7, 2009 CTV has had excellent coverage of the visit. CBC usually is better at the news, but not this time. Either way, I'm very impressed with their trip. I think anyone could be better than CBC at this given time; even Rex Murphy was uncharacteristically cynical. The National Post has been quite good at coverage, too. Not sycophantic, but respectful and close to neutral. I've never heard of him before now, but the Post has Steve Murray covering the tour, and some of his stuff's pretty damn funny. This video of TRH at Dundurn Castle had me LOLing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted November 11, 2009 Author Report Share Posted November 11, 2009 (edited) I find it interesting that CBC focused on the few protesters that came to greet the Prince and Duchess. I'm not sure about them after the change. I like some things, but I would say the quality of their journalism has gone down from what was quite excellent. I suppose it's over to CTV for me. Edited November 11, 2009 by Smallc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted November 11, 2009 Report Share Posted November 11, 2009 I find it interesting that CBC focused on the few protesters that came to greet the Prince and Duchess. I'm not sure about them after the change. I like some things, but I would say the quality of their journalism has gone down from what was quite excellent. I suppose it's over to CTV for me. I liked how the "Have Cameras? Will Demo" crowd were waving palestinian flags....just goes to show.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted November 11, 2009 Author Report Share Posted November 11, 2009 Spoke too soon. CTV did it too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.