News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 9.7K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 41K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.5K     0 

Admiral Beez said:
If there was a tsumani that devastated the GTA do you think it would make much press in Indonesia or Thailand? I think not.
Click to expand...
I would expect wall to wall global coverage if somehow a tsunami arose from Lake Ontario and destroyed the GTA!
 
Prince Philip is dead. I assume this will weigh on the issue of the monarchy and its role in Canada as many have said in the past we should be done with it once QE2 dies, and this is a reminder of her very advanced age.
In any case, expect this to be the big story of the day for whatever reason. Almost all the networks have already flipped over to live breaking news coverage; there will be Trudeau live statements, Biden live statements, etc... all of them repeating the exact same remarks they had prepared for this event years ago, but, hey, live statements are free content!

https://twitter.com/x/status/1380475865323212800


Bonus points go to whichever TV talking head or newspaper columnist is the first to write a story with the headline "Will Harry and Meghan attend the funeral?"
 
Jonny5 said:
Prince Philip is dead. I assume this will weigh on the issue of the monarchy and its role in Canada as many have said in the past we should be done with it once QE2 dies, and this is a reminder of her very advanced age.
In any case, expect this to be the big story of the day for whatever reason. Almost all the networks have already flipped over to live breaking news coverage; there will be Trudeau live statements, Biden live statements, etc... all of them repeating the exact same remarks they had prepared for this event years ago, but, hey, live statements are free content!

https://twitter.com/x/status/1380475865323212800


Bonus points go to whichever TV talking head or newspaper columnist is the first to write a story with the headline "Will Harry and Meghan attend the funeral?"
Click to expand...
IMO this should have come from the GG, oh yeah, we don't have one at the moment.

IMO the monarchy will live on in Canada through King Charles and into William's reign. Why? Because Canadians will be unable to decide on its replacement, likely fracturing across regional and linguistic lines. If you thought Meech Lake was contentious, this would be much worse. The only way we got the 1982 Constitution was through PET's use of the NWC, and his son is made of lessor stuff.

If we're changing anything in the governance of Canada it should be the unelected and useless Senate that gets the attention before the symbolic monarchy.
Soop said:
One of the morons from Fox and Friends has blamed the Sussexes for his death
Click to expand...
Jeez. Phillip was killed by that same thing that kills all of us that die naturally, the clock.
 
Canada can't just remove the monarch as the head of state overnight, when QE2 dies. It's a bit like Brexit--we would need to come up with a replacement mechanism, update the constitution, update countless laws. This is a project that would take a decade. So, we would also have her successor as our monarch for a good period of time as well.
 
afransen said:
Canada can't just remove the monarch as the head of state overnight, when QE2 dies. It's a bit like Brexit--we would need to come up with a replacement mechanism, update the constitution, update countless laws. This is a project that would take a decade. So, we would also have her successor as our monarch for a good period of time as well.
Click to expand...

Other than general symbolism, the monarchy is almost irrelevant on a day-to-day basis to the governing of this country (can't say the same for Meech Lake or even reforming/removing the vestigial Senate). I can't imagine anyone spending any political capital to deal with it until it truly becomes an issue that nobody cares about and have no passions over.

re: GG - did anyone miss not having one? (not the slightest AFAIK).

AoD
 
Last edited:
afransen said:
Canada can't just remove the monarch as the head of state overnight
Click to expand...
I'm not even sure what the head of state would look like. Would it be purely symbolic like the GG, or have powers like the presidents of France and Germany? If the latter, it would have to be an elected position, one where it would be one equally weighted vote for each Canadian, unlike today where a single PEI vote has far more power than a single Ontarian voter. It would be refreshing to direct vote for someone.
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
Other than general symbolism, the monarchy is almost irrelevant on a day-to-day basis to the governing of this country (can't say the same for Meech Lake or even reforming/removing the vestigial Senate). I can't imagine anyone spending any political capital to deal with it until it truly becomes an issue that nobody cares about and have no passions over.

re: GG - did anyone miss not having one? (not the slightest AFAIK).

AoD
Click to expand...
For the day-to-day business, yes; but any system has to structured for all of the various contingencies. The UK 'mother of parliaments' system doesn't involve the Head of State on a regular basis either. But in a parliamentary system that operates on the foundation of 'the confidence of the House' to govern, there needs to be a mechanism to make that call in situations where it is contentious. You can do that either through reserve powers (Head of State) founded on precedence or a basket full of very neutral, and legally baked-in procedures. No system of governance has the secret sauce of perfection, certainly not the republican system to our south, as we repeatedly observe.

As the Admiral observes, any change would be massively disruptive and contentious and I'm not sure what we would gained at the end of it all. The Monarchy in our system costs us nothing, unless someone envisions a Head of State that works pro bono and we put up at the Minto.
 
lenaitch said:
For the day-to-day business, yes; but any system has to structured for all of the various contingencies. The UK 'mother of parliaments' system doesn't involve the Head of State on a regular basis either. But in a parliamentary system that operates on the foundation of 'the confidence of the House' to govern, there needs to be a mechanism to make that call in situations where it is contentious. You can do that either through reserve powers (Head of State) founded on precedence or a basket full of very neutral, and legally baked-in procedures. No system of governance has the secret sauce of perfection, certainly not the republican system to our south, as we repeatedly observe.

As the Admiral observes, any change would be massively disruptive and contentious and I'm not sure what we would gained at the end of it all. The Monarchy in our system costs us nothing, unless someone envisions a Head of State that works pro bono and we put up at the Minto.
Click to expand...

What I meant is - however one feel about the current system of having a monarch as the head of state, it's an issue of so little import to day-to-day operations (even the contingency functions are really handled by individuals that are put forward by our government and then symbolically sanctioned as a matter of fact). That "symbolic sanction" by our monarch is like having a stamp of approval that always says yes.

AoD
 
Admiral Beez said:
I'm not even sure what the head of state would look like. Would it be purely symbolic like the GG, or have powers like the presidents of France and Germany? If the latter, it would have to be an elected position, one where it would be one equally weighted vote for each Canadian, unlike today where a single PEI vote has far more power than a single Ontarian voter. It would be refreshing to direct vote for someone.
Click to expand...

And that would be part of the challenge. If 'power', then it would have to be laid out in a revised Constitution (and we historically do that really well!). If elected, then you get into partisanship and run the risk of either the State of Government being a lame duck position depending on how the powers are distributed and what the issue of the day is.
 
lenaitch said:
And that would be part of the challenge. If 'power', then it would have to be laid out in a revised Constitution (and we historically do that really well!). If elected, then you get into partisanship and run the risk of either the State of Government being a lame duck position depending on how the powers are distributed and what the issue of the day is.
Click to expand...

Definitely not warm on the notion of having an elected head of state - their most important role is serving as the guardian of the constitutional process, not as a winner of a popularity contest - they must be able to make the right but unpopular choices if and when - heaven forbid - that function need to be called upon.

AoD
 
Admiral Beez said:
Then might as well make the lead of the SCC the head of state. That's what we have now anyway, with the Chief Justice of Canada serving as the Administrator. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Administrator_of_the_Government_of_Canada
Click to expand...

I actually thought about how the guardian function resembled that of the SCC - but at a fundamental level it should also be separate. Perhaps ex-SCC justices can serve as the pool, and the choice could (should) be random out of that pool? Way above my paygrade.

AoD
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top