Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
As others have stated, Canada did not suddenly gain independence. Canadian independence evolved. I had a look at some correspondence I had with a Canadian constitutional law expert back in 2006 on the question of the significance of the Statute of Westminster, and while his answer is Statute-oriented, it does help to explain how Canadian independence evolved. I'm sure he won't mind if I repeat his words (redactions by me to preserve the anonymity of each of us):
So will I.
As an aside, I'll say that it was kind of fun looking back over that correspondence. It was a good refresher in constitutional law. I'm still in touch with that expert, by the way; maybe I should send him over here to put paid to all the silly questions we get about Canada's constitution and its provisions. Well, those I cannot answer, anyway.
Thanks for including that, it's an excellent summary.
Personally I consider Canada to have achieved full independence and equality with the British during the years immediately following WWII. Not only did Canada achieve independence militarily and make more progress politically, but Canadian society underwent a profound change that is evident in the adoption of bilingualism and multiculturalism as state policies. During WWI and to a lesser extent WWII, the identity of English Canadians was one that was intrinsically tied to the British Empire; by 1965 this identity had changed into something uniquely Canadian. I would like to call this a social revolution, much like the Quiet Revolution that took place in Quebec. Like most social revolutions, those in the midst of it are unaware of it's until they look back. As for 1867 being signifying the birth or a country, I don't see it as playing this role much more than the Act of Union of 1840. But I digress. There are many ways to interpret this, and this is only one man's opinion.
So you think. If ever there is a true crisis the monarch's "ceremonial role" becomes very significant. The monarch's "ceremonial role" will always ensure that our governance is always imbued with a relative amount of fairness and balance and moderateness (?). This is why republicans and "socialists" in general are intent on overthrowing the current system. One would hope that if Canada really went off-track (eg. electing a Communist government) the current monarch wouldn't sanction it, and intervene in any "revolutionary" activity or violence that would result (ie. send the British army and contingents from the Commonwealth to reinforce our Army).
Quote:
Originally Posted by fusion2
The Queen in her position as H.O.S of Canada is simply referred to as the Queen of Canada. It has nothing to do with the UK.. When she is in Australia she is the Queen of Australia. When she is in NZ she is the Queen of NZ.. In each of those capacities - one has nothing to do with the other. Its largely a ceremonial role and has about as practical an impact on our daily life as god does (I'm agnostic)....
So you think. If ever there is a true crisis the monarch's "ceremonial role" becomes very significant. The monarch's "ceremonial role" will always ensure that our governance is always imbued with a relative amount of fairness and balance and moderateness (?). This is why republicans and "socialists" in general are intent on overthrowing the current system. One would hope that if Canada really went off-track (eg. electing a Communist government) the current monarch wouldn't sanction it, and intervene in any "revolutionary" activity or violence that would result (ie. send the British army and contingents from the Commonwealth to reinforce our Army).
Seriously?
Under Canada's current constitutional principles, the monarch would sanction a Communist government, if it was elected by a free electorate. She must, in accordance with the principles of a constitutional monarchy.
Under current Canadian constitutional law, if the Communist Party was elected, and if they voted on dumping the Queen, and if all ten provinces agreed and assented, then it would happen, under Charter s. 41. She would go, without any armies needed.
Gosh, people. Am I the only one here who studies Canadian constitutional law? Hell, am I the only one who has read Canada's constitution?
Last edited by ChevySpoons; 01-05-2015 at 12:32 AM..
Under Canada's current constitutional principles, the monarch would sanction a Communist government, if it was elected by a free electorate. She must, in accordance with the principles of a constitutional monarchy.
Under current Canadian constitutional law, if the Communist Party was elected, and if they voted on dumping the Queen, and if all ten provinces agreed and assented, then it would happen, under Charter s. 41. She would go, without any armies needed.
Right on. The situation in Australia is quite analogous to that of Canada, and 10-20 years ago they held a referendum on abolishing the monarchy and becoming a republic. The proposed change was defeated, but had it been accepted, the Queen, the "Crown" and the UK would not have stood in the way of the will of Australians.
Is Queen Elizabeth a Canadian citizen simply by virtue of her "office" or did she have to apply for citizenship?
She's actually not a citizen of any of the countries that she's the monarch of, and although her birth nationality is British she's not even a citizen of England (since nationality and citizenship are not the same thing). She's the monarch - not a citizen - and as monarch she's above all citizens. Also, as monarch she can't have any say in elections or vote in any of the countries that's she's monarch of.
Technically, she could apply for citizenship in any country that she's not a monarch of, or she might be granted honorary citizenship of any city or any country that she's not the monarch of. But not in any of the countries that she is monarch of.
For example - during her tour of USA for America's bi-centennial celebrations, on July 9, 1976, Queen Elizebeth II visited and was granted Honorary Citizenship of the City of New York and was further honoured with a Native American Peace Pipe making her an Honorary Citizen of the Native American nations.
Edited to add that she can also grant Honorary Citizenship in any of the countries that she is monarch of.
Under Canada's current constitutional principles, the monarch would sanction a Communist government, if it was elected by a free electorate. She must, in accordance with the principles of a constitutional monarchy.
Under current Canadian constitutional law, if the Communist Party was elected, and if they voted on dumping the Queen, and if all ten provinces agreed and assented, then it would happen, under Charter s. 41. She would go, without any armies needed.
Gosh, people. Am I the only one here who studies Canadian constitutional law? Hell, am I the only one who has read Canada's constitution?
You probably are the only one who has studied constitutional law on this forum, but even if I haven't I do understand the principles and basic rules regarding the monarchy and Canada.
Ken S. sounds very confused if he thinks the Queen has any real power.
She's actually not a citizen of any of the countries that she's the monarch of, and although her birth nationality is British she's not even a citizen of England (since nationality and citizenship are not the same thing). She's the monarch - not a citizen - and as monarch she's above all citizens. Also, as monarch she can't have any say in elections or vote in any of the countries that's she's monarch of.
Technically, she could apply for citizenship in any country that she's not a monarch of, or she might be granted honorary citizenship of any city or any country that she's not the monarch of. But not in any of the countries that she is monarch of.
For example - during her tour of USA for America's bi-centennial celebrations, on July 9, 1976, Queen Elizebeth II visited and was granted Honorary Citizenship of the City of New York and was further honoured with a Native American Peace Pipe making her an Honorary Citizen of the Native American nations.
Edited to add that she can also grant Honorary Citizenship in any of the countries that she is monarch of.
.
Very true. It must be kind of weird in a way..but then she knows nothing else.
In this clip, it's quite odd, that she states " that I was not only among friends, but fellow citizens.."
She says this starting at around 45 seconds. The speech was given in 2007 in Toronto. I guess it was the speech writers way of trying to make the audience relate to her...a hard thing to do really.
As Constitutional Monarch she has more power than people realize. She has Royal Prerogative. The Royal Prerogative includes the powers to summon and prorogue Parliament, to appoint and dismiss ministers, regulate the civil service, issue passports, declare war, make peace, direct the actions of the military, and negotiate and ratify treaties, alliances, and international agreements.
As Constitutional Monarch she has more power than people realize. She has Royal Prerogative. The Royal Prerogative includes the powers to summon and prorogue Parliament, to appoint and dismiss ministers, regulate the civil service, issue passports, declare war, make peace, direct the actions of the military, and negotiate and ratify treaties, alliances, and international agreements.
.
When has she ever utilized these powers.. Do you have any examples? I'm really curious to know.. I think in practical terms probably they have not been used.. Sure the argument could be made that she 'could' but than what would the general Canadian reaction be if the Queen declared war against Venezuela on behalf of Canada without that decision first made in Canada by the Federal Goverment in power.. So in practice I think her powers are extremely neutered.. I think of every example that you've given - it has been Canadians deciding our own fate with the Sovereign merely rubber stamping if required... She knows she has to be remote in order to maintain this system..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
