Canadians: boot out the monarchy?

[sysyphus]

Yes. We don't them any more; they are just a useless relic of our past.

BTW, parliamentary republic unusually have a president instead of a monarch. The German Chancellor is a Prime Minister; there is a German president as head of state.

I see a Canadian president with subordinate provincial governors replacing the current system.

Oops, got my terms wrong.

Still, I like the term Governor General for the HoS over President. I wouldn't give the GG such a level of power that most Presidents have anyway.

 

[Babbler]

Oops, got my terms wrong.

Still, I like the term Governor General for the HoS over President. I wouldn't give the GG such a level of power that most Presidents have anyway.

Well, that was the topic at my Parliamentary versus Presidential thread. And I agree with you.

Question for Canadian republicans (* insert jokes about Tories and US Republican Party here *): how would the new head of state be selected? By Prime Ministerial appointment, election of the senate/house, direct election or something else entirely? How would "governors" of provinces be selected?

 

[Desmond Hawkins]

Meh, you can keep the same system for all I care, with the exception that all connections to "royalty" and the monarchy in Britain are severed.

Just a governor general who does all the ceremonial work that would keep the real leader (prime minister) away from more important work.

 

[ComradeDavo]

I'm British and I say 'yes!' to this proposal.

 

[Yuri2356]

Question for Canadian republicans (* insert jokes about Tories and US Republican Party here *): how would the new head of state be selected? By Prime Ministerial appointment, election of the senate/house, direct election or something else entirely? How would "governors" of provinces be selected?

Table Hockey - Best of Five.

 

[SuperBeaverInc.]

I don't have any real opinion on the monarchy. If Canada were to eliminate it, I would want to at least wait until after the reign of Queen Elizabeth II, but I would have no objections. If Canada were to keep it, I would have no objections. But definitely reduce the GG's money spending powers.

Birds? Mountains? Weapons? Factories? Shipyards? Labourers? Any of those would do fine.

Isn't the answer obvious? Beavers!

 

[Babbler]

Isn't the answer obvious? Beavers!

But that's on the nickel!

Okay, for the new Canadian head of state. The position could be called governor, with deference to the (general) continuity of Canadian history. I like there to be no direct elections for the head of state. I like our heads of state to have concrete political ties.

 

[SuperBeaverInc.]

But that's on the nickel!

Then you could eliminate the nickel and penny. There, problem solved.

Okay, for the new Canadian head of state. The position could be called governor, with deference to the (general) continuity of Canadian history. I like there to be no direct elections for the head of state. I like our heads of state to have concrete political ties.

Perhaps something a little more original than governor? Perhaps something more uniquely Canadian?

 

[sysyphus]

I'm British and I say 'yes!' to this proposal.

I assume this is largely because to desire the same for Britain?

Question for Canadian republicans (* insert jokes about Tories and US Republican Party here *): how would the new head of state be selected? By Prime Ministerial appointment, election of the senate/house, direct election or something else entirely? How would "governors" of provinces be selected?

GG should be elected by the people in a separate election from Parliament (election at a regular interval or by recall). GG has the power to dissolve Parliament, or refuse to allow dissolution Parliament in the case of a non-confidence vote, my logic being that since the GG is elected that will provide protection from spurious decisions on these matters. I like the idea of the GG refusing a dissolution so that in the case of minority Parliments, non-confidence votes can't be milked for a well timed election on part of the party in power.

GG represents Canada at all summits and meetings with other Heads of States and actually writes their own speech from the throne.

 

[ComradeDavo]

I assume this is largely because to desire the same for Britain?

Maybe

 

[Scuffer]

I'd personally prefer to have a head of state that was basically little more than a ceremonial figurehead and someone to send on state visitors without any political issues than a president.

A prime minister can't do much without parliment, and parliment is ever mindful of voters. A pres however, is the queen with legislative powers. Mind you, Canada can do what the hell it wants.

 

[JonnyB]

I assume this is largely because to desire the same for Britain?



GG should be elected by the people in a separate election from Parliament (election at a regular interval or by recall). GG has the power to dissolve Parliament, or refuse to allow dissolution Parliament in the case of a non-confidence vote, my logic being that since the GG is elected that will provide protection from spurious decisions on these matters. I like the idea of the GG refusing a dissolution so that in the case of minority Parliments, non-confidence votes can't be milked for a well timed election on part of the party in power.

GG represents Canada at all summits and meetings with other Heads of States and actually writes their own speech from the throne.

I don't want more Elections! How about we establish certain criteria about who can qualify as GG and then let the provincial premiers choose the GG.

 

[sysyphus]

True, having more elections is a pain, but we could elect the GG every 5 years perhaps. I'm looking for a more than ceremonial role, but it would be limited to warrant a long period.

I'd prefer to have a Head of State that is directly accountable to the people rather than indirectly through the Premiers. Besides, we've seen how disagreeable Premiers can be.

 

[QuoVadisNation]

But without a king, who would lead the calvary to victory?




In short, they're about as pointless as Communist parties in America. But they'll probably stay around anyway because enough people think they're a symbol of national identity.

 

[Shadylookin]

well it worked quite well for us you may as well give it a try. and get rid of that governnor general as well and just make the prime minister head of state it would make life simplier for you

 

[Irish Caesar]

Is there any benefit to keeping the Crown around?

Or is it just a tradition that isn't worth the trouble of getting rid of it?

 

[JonnyB]

True, having more elections is a pain, but we could elect the GG every 5 years perhaps. I'm looking for a more than ceremonial role, but it would be limited to warrant a long period.

I'd prefer to have a Head of State that is directly accountable to the people rather than indirectly through the Premiers. Besides, we've seen how disagreeable Premiers can be.

It's true that the premiers can never agree on anything, I just thought it might give the provinces a small amount of power at the federal level. I don't like the idea of potential GG's campaigning against each other for the job, we know how ugly that can get. Based on the traditional role and duties of the GG I prefer a system where the job is filled quietly and without a lot of arguments and debating.

 

[Pasi Nurminen]

Is there any benefit to keeping the Crown around?

Or is it just a tradition that isn't worth the trouble of getting rid of it?

There is no benefit. The only people who actively want the monarchy to stay in Canada are a bunch of old-style royalists who are in love with the queen and all her useless institutions.

 

[Taliesin]

There is no benefit. The only people who actively want the monarchy to stay in Canada are a bunch of old-style royalists who are in love with the queen and all her useless institutions.

Luckily, we still form a majority.

 

[Pasi Nurminen]

Luckily, we still form a majority.

Actually, I'd say the apathetic form the majority.