With respect to those who suggest we henceforth do without the British Monarchy, there wouldn't be a Canada without the British Monarchy. This trumps everything as regards this debate.
"Propter eos autem."
Is this the way to show ourselves properly grateful to those who at first allowed us, then protected us, later promoted us and then freely and willingly gave us our independence -- with no revolution necessary Historically speaking, how common is that?
I'm not saying this arcane debate shouldn't occur. Rather, such debate is fitting for hallowed universities of sterling reputation and in the properly respectful and hushed tones reserved for impeccably credentialed constitutional professors.
I'm certain a debate on the subject between such distinguished profs would result in the following joint statement being issued: "We would show ourselves ungrateful in the extreme were we to cast off our historic promoters, protectors, and guarantors of nationhood." Harrumph!
The question then, is this: With the limited time MP's have available to them while the House of Commons is in session, should they spend time on removing the British monarchy from Canada's Constitution or should we have them spend time on the following?
Jobs, Attawapiskat, the health and well-being of citizens, the economy, world peace concomitant with our country's peace-keeping efforts around the globe, rebuilding our tattered transportation infrastructure -- you may recall recent media reports about the condition of the Champlain Bridge for just one example -- and the military defence of our sovereign territory. Other pressing, important matters also await the government's attention.
All of the things above are more important than taking time out of our MP's schedules to disrespect the British Monarchy and the very ideals of our democracy.
We have real problems in Canada at the moment -- and the British Monarchy isn't one of them.
"A-riding in a storm-toss'd ship, 'tis not the time to inspect the maker's frescoes."
To read why the Queen doesn't matter, click here. For an excerpt from Sally Bedell Smith's biography: Elizabeth The Queen: The Life of a Modern Monarch click here.
Follow John Brian Shannon on Twitter: www.twitter.com/@JBSCanada
Keith Beardsley: Is it Time For a Referendum on the Monarchy?
The Monarchy in Canada | Mapleleafweb.com
Canada's constitutional monarchy - Canada - CBC News
Why the monarchy (sigh) still survives in Canada - The Globe and Mail
I for one, am proud to be a citizen of a country which, since it's founding has promoted democratic rights and freedoms for individualÂs. We inherited much from the founding nations of Canada - Great Britain and France. Our "Father" and "Mother" if you will allow me use of the expressionÂ.
Our entire legal system is a carefully crafted mix of British criminal law and French 'tort' or civil law. We simply couldn't have successfulÂly made the transition to a modern nation-staÂte without the benevolent assistance of our founding nations - of which our Monarchy was and remains a part.
Because we don't depend on either country (or the Monarchy) on a day-to-day basis anymore (quite unlike our early days) should we speak abusively of them and try to minimize their many contributiÂons?
Just because your Mother is getting old and you no longer need her assistance daily, should you just toss her into the nearest dumpster on your way to work?
Ungrateful in the extreme.
Apparently, the Monarchy costs each Canadian $1.53 per year. The Queen and other Royals are our biggest boosters who look for opportunities to promote our national interests. Why? Because we are part of the Commonwealth family. Our success is their success!
Finally, for those who prefer the republican model of government, the U.S. beckons. We wish you well! Bon voyage!
On balance, one must also factor-in what we receive in the way of benefits from the Monarchy.
Many citizens may not be aware of the many ways we Canadians benefit and have historically benefited from the Monarchy and our overall relationship with the UK.
Once I have collected sufficient (up-to-date) data, I will post a blog on the subject. I can already tell you, the 50 million we spend to support the Monarchy when they visit Canada is paltry compared to the benefits we receive now and have received over the decades, economically and otherwise.
You've brought up a good point - and one which may, in actual fact, help to prove the case for keeping our attachments to the Royal Family.
Thank you for your comment.
John Brian Shannon
The older I get I like that safe guard that belongs to the GG.
However we generally have even more aversion to our own preening politicians trying to look "historical" at prolonged constitutional conferences. That and more pressing concerns rather than adulation for a sometimes dysfunctional family 3000 miles away has kept the status quo. To suggest that monarchies have anything to do with promotion of democracies is also historically pure hogwash. Democracies exist because previous generations going all the way back to 1215 "disrespected" the British Monarchy of their day and set increasing limits on the inherited and not necessarily merited power of the crown. Each attempt to limit royal power power was strongly resisted at the time. By 1642 the disenchantment with the Monarch led to a civil war and the demise of Charles 1st in 1649. Were the puritan protectorate less obnoxious there would have been little interest in restoring the monarchy or later infusing it with House of Orange, Hanover, or Saxe-Coburg off-spring. Democracy is maintained by constitutions which insist that royals butt out of politics. As to debates occurring - in REAL democracies ordinary citizens, not just self appointed elites enjoy the freedom to examine traditions and if they want to chuck off vestiges of a colonial past, risk being called "ingrates", and create new traditions of their own so be it.
whether or not we should keep the Monarchy or not,
I will pass on this issue.
The one thing I will comment on though is that we (our
Government) does have more important issues to deal with
right now for the people of this great country.
---------------------------------
What the American Revolution gave the world was a fantastic idea and an amazing set of documents, not the least of which was the Bill of Rights. I don't know why we should have developed into such a ruthless, profit focused place, (De Toqueville did say that his impression was that all America cared about was mercantilism...) but the point is, maybe there is something non- specific that identity with England gives you. And you will set loose unpredictable and unwanted things by breaking so throughly with the continuity of history.
It's not that I admire this unpleasant royal family--but I would not be so quick to tamper with what you've got---the most civilized nation in the Northern Hemisphere.
I've spent quite a bit of time in the states and I must say that America's greatest strength is the American people. We are fortunate to have you as neighbours.
It appears you may be a reader of Professor Paul Krugman. I offer a link to an excellent NYT piece published recently by Krugman - many thoughtful comments there: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/16/opinion/krugman-how-fares-the-dream.html?smid=tw-NytimesKrugman&seid=auto
My comment and a link to Prof. Krugman's article appears at:
http://jbsnews.wordpress.com/
America will triumph over recent mis-steps. The American people will see to that - as they have historically and continuously done since the U.S. became a nation.
Thank you for your comment
John Brian Shannon
The country is really becoming ungovernable. The South has power far in excess of its actual numbers and is dangerously retrograde. We have, in essence, an ongoing political and moral civil war (still) underway.
I think we can't "triumph" as you say because we have too much atoning to do for the Iraq/Afghan wars (Empire) and for allowing corporatism to overtake our experiment in democracy.
Yes---I admire and learn from Krugman.
Best of luck to our Northern neighbors.
Well, perhaps, your country can pull it off and not lose something intangible and really vital.
Your country gives me hope.
If you have some thoughts on this, perhaps you could submit a blog of your own on this important topic. If you would prefer a co-writer to work with you, I would be very pleased to assist (your name would be placed with the article alongside my name) please advise.
Thanks for your comment.
John Brian Shannon
It should be no surprise that Gandhi is one of my personal heroes.
And why are we spending more per capita on the monarchy as the Brits are? $1.53 versus $1.32?
Over just the last 10 years, the per capita bill for supporting the monarchist framework— including expenses incurred by the royal clan on Canadian soil, as well as the cost of running the offices of the Governor General and our 10 provincial lieutenant-governors—has more than doubled.
Total waste of money.
I think, if we abolish the monarchy, it would like ripping out a part of our history. We need to have the monarchy present, it gives our history more significance, and that history becomes much more relevant, interesting, and real when our institutions, money ect... represent said history.
I'm glad the federal Liberals reaffirmed their support for our Monarchy.
F&F for you.
JBS
once a british subject always a british subject ?????-------you would do well in india with the caste system