HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #61  
Old Posted Nov 28, 2019, 2:39 PM
Acajack's Avatar
Acajack Acajack is offline
Unapologetic Occidental
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Province 2, Canadian Empire
Posts: 67,773
Quote:
Originally Posted by kwoldtimer View Post
Britain's Parliament can, akaik, decide who will be Monarch. I can imagine any reason why they'd tinker with the existing line of succession, however. Charle's "issues" and popularity are irrelevant, istm.
Charles' "issues" are for the most part behind him at this point, are they not?

It seems to me that he's become a fairly well-respected individual both domestically and internationally. Though obviously not as much as the Queen, but that's probably impossible to achieve.

And I say all of this as someone who is a staunch non-monarchist BTW. (Just being fair.)
__________________
Amber alerts welcome at any time
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #62  
Old Posted Nov 28, 2019, 2:43 PM
kwoldtimer kwoldtimer is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: La vraie capitale
Posts: 23,490
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acajack View Post
Charles' "issues" are for the most part behind him at this point, are they not?

It seems to me that he's become a fairly well-respected individual both domestically and internationally. Though obviously not as much as the Queen, but that's probably impossible to achieve.

And I say all of this as someone who is a staunch non-monarchist BTW. (Just being fair.)
I never saw them as "issues", for the most part. On matters architectural, urbanistic, and environmental, he was just ahead of his time. Certainly nothing to prevent him from inheriting the Throne.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #63  
Old Posted Nov 28, 2019, 2:44 PM
Acajack's Avatar
Acajack Acajack is offline
Unapologetic Occidental
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Province 2, Canadian Empire
Posts: 67,773
Quote:
Originally Posted by kwoldtimer View Post
I never saw them as "issues". On matters architectural, urbanistic, and environmental, he was just ahead of his time. Certainly nothing to prevent him from inheriting the Throne.
What I actually had in mind was stuff like him wanting to be a tampon.

(Now of course I can't get that image out of my mind. )
__________________
Amber alerts welcome at any time
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #64  
Old Posted Nov 28, 2019, 2:46 PM
kwoldtimer kwoldtimer is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: La vraie capitale
Posts: 23,490
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acajack View Post
What I actually had in mind was stuff like him wanting to be a tampon.

(Now of course I can't get that image out of my mind. )
Yeah, because no reigning monarchs have ever had "quirks" ....
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #65  
Old Posted Nov 28, 2019, 2:57 PM
TorontoDrew's Avatar
TorontoDrew TorontoDrew is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 9,775
I'm a monarchist simply because I like how our government is set up and that we enjoy being part of the commonwealth. We are also in a club that U.S isn't any many American's are secretly envious of our ties. That said I think if and when Charles becomes king that will be the end of the Monarchy as we know it with many if not all commonwealth countries dropping their ties. If they were smart they would skip right over Charles and make it King William and Queen Kate rule. It would be nice to remain in the commonwealth without having the sovereign as head of state.

It's not as though it costs Canada any money other then when the Queen visits. Canadians do not pay any money to the Queen or any other member of the Royal Family, either towards personal income or to support royal residences outside of Canada.

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #66  
Old Posted Nov 28, 2019, 3:01 PM
Acajack's Avatar
Acajack Acajack is offline
Unapologetic Occidental
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Province 2, Canadian Empire
Posts: 67,773
Quote:
Originally Posted by kwoldtimer View Post
Yeah, because no reigning monarchs have ever had "quirks" ....
Although probably an exceptional case, his mum was virtually perfect in this respect.

A tough act to follow.
__________________
Amber alerts welcome at any time

Last edited by Acajack; Nov 28, 2019 at 3:17 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #67  
Old Posted Nov 28, 2019, 3:05 PM
TorontoDrew's Avatar
TorontoDrew TorontoDrew is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 9,775
Imagine Diana was still alive and that her and Charles were still together. I bet peoples views of the monarchy would be much more positive.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #68  
Old Posted Nov 28, 2019, 3:07 PM
milomilo milomilo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Calgary
Posts: 10,499
Quote:
Originally Posted by kwoldtimer View Post
OK, a President with the title "Governor General" and a PM then.
is it possible to explain why we even need a queen, or a president, or a governor general? What would be the harm in just having an elected prime minister, and that's it? If it's just about rubber stamping bills, fine have a GG or some lawyers do that, but then the hysteria about having to have a president is fabricated. Unless there is something I'm missing?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #69  
Old Posted Nov 28, 2019, 3:08 PM
kwoldtimer kwoldtimer is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: La vraie capitale
Posts: 23,490
Quote:
Originally Posted by TorontoDrew View Post
I'm a monarchist simply because I like how our government is set up and that we enjoy being part of the commonwealth. We are also in a club that U.S isn't any many American's are secretly envious of our ties. That said I think if and when Charles becomes king that will be the end of the Monarchy as we know it with many if not all commonwealth countries dropping their ties. If they were smart they would skip right over Charles and make it King William and Queen Kate rule. It would be nice to remain in the commonwealth without having the sovereign as head of state.

It's not as though it costs Canada any money other then when the Queen visits. Canadians do not pay any money to the Queen or any other member of the Royal Family, either towards personal income or to support royal residences outside of Canada.

Our membership in the Commonwealth doesn't cost much either. I suspect it's less than we spend to belong to the Organization of American States and not much more than we spend to belong to the Francophonie.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #70  
Old Posted Nov 28, 2019, 3:10 PM
kool maudit's Avatar
kool maudit kool maudit is offline
video et taceo
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Stockholm
Posts: 13,867
At this point, our Loyalism gives nothing save more pedantically cherished points of difference to our southern neighbour.

Maybe one day the view from Canada will contain more than [ourself + reigning Anglo superpower].

I gotta say, it makes me feel a little strange that the idea of boosting domestic industry is either meaningless, futile or Nazi-esque while allegiance to these ludicrous, decadent fossils is an ordinary point of healthy patriotism.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #71  
Old Posted Nov 28, 2019, 3:12 PM
kwoldtimer kwoldtimer is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: La vraie capitale
Posts: 23,490
Quote:
Originally Posted by milomilo View Post
is it possible to explain why we even need a queen, or a president, or a governor general? What would be the harm in just having an elected prime minister, and that's it? If it's just about rubber stamping bills, fine have a GG or some lawyers do that, but then the hysteria about having to have a president is fabricated. Unless there is something I'm missing?
I guess one could have a discussion of "need", but here's the GofC's 101

https://www.canada.ca/en/canadian-he...wn-canada.html
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #72  
Old Posted Nov 28, 2019, 3:14 PM
kwoldtimer kwoldtimer is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: La vraie capitale
Posts: 23,490
Quote:
Originally Posted by kool maudit View Post
At this point, our Loyalism gives nothing save more pedantically cherished points of difference to our southern neighbour.

Maybe one day the view from Canada will contain more than [ourself + reigning Anglo superpower].

I gotta say, it makes me feel a little strange that the idea of boosting domestic industry is either meaningless, futile or Nazi-esque while allegiance to these ludicrous, decadent fossils is an ordinary point of healthy patriotism.
Well, there is also the matter of a relatively successful system of government ....
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #73  
Old Posted Nov 28, 2019, 3:15 PM
TorontoDrew's Avatar
TorontoDrew TorontoDrew is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 9,775
Quote:
Originally Posted by kwoldtimer View Post
Well, there is also the matter of a relatively successful system of government ....

This was my main point!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #74  
Old Posted Nov 28, 2019, 3:15 PM
kool maudit's Avatar
kool maudit kool maudit is offline
video et taceo
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Stockholm
Posts: 13,867
Agreed, but this doesn't really require these people beyond a fairly nominal point. GG at the top, whatever. I'm not suggesting we go full republic and build another fake Rome on a swamp.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #75  
Old Posted Nov 28, 2019, 3:18 PM
JHikka's Avatar
JHikka JHikka is offline
ハルウララ
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 12,853
Support for the monarchy will more or less plummet once QEII leaves us. We're so used to seeing her around, on our currency as one example, that seeing someone else will be a reminder that we're still apart of monarchy and that moving on from QEII will prompt serious discussion over why we're still under their thumb, legally-speaking. Nobody really gives the Queen a second thought when she's so visible in our day-to-day life but I imagine the discussion is different when it's literally anyone else.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #76  
Old Posted Nov 28, 2019, 3:20 PM
kwoldtimer kwoldtimer is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: La vraie capitale
Posts: 23,490
Quote:
Originally Posted by JHikka View Post
Support for the monarchy will more or less plummet once QEII leaves us. We're so used to seeing her around, on our currency as one example, that seeing someone else will be a reminder that we're still apart of monarchy and that moving on from QEII will prompt serious discussion over why we're still under their thumb, legally-speaking. Nobody really gives the Queen a second thought when she's so visible in our day-to-day life but I imagine the discussion is different when it's literally anyone else.
Not since 1953, legally speaking. The "Crown" is Canadian.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #77  
Old Posted Nov 28, 2019, 3:21 PM
TorontoDrew's Avatar
TorontoDrew TorontoDrew is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 9,775
It's a tradition that goes back to the very start of our Nation, so to just blow it off is not so cut and dry. We are a relatively new nation with so few old traditions we've hung on to. This is one of our peculiar ones that really doesn't cost us a thing to hang onto. It is also part of who we are, and yes it's one of those things that we as a collective have done differently then those south of the border. It's a funny little quirk that we have lived with since the start of our nation that has not hindered our success.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #78  
Old Posted Nov 28, 2019, 3:21 PM
Acajack's Avatar
Acajack Acajack is offline
Unapologetic Occidental
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Province 2, Canadian Empire
Posts: 67,773
Quote:
Originally Posted by TorontoDrew View Post
. That said I think if and when Charles becomes king that will be the end of the Monarchy as we know it with many if not all commonwealth countries dropping their ties. If they were smart they would skip right over Charles and make it King William and Queen Kate rule. It would be nice to remain in the commonwealth without having the sovereign as head of state.
It's entirely possible to be a Commonwealth member and not have the London-based Queen/King as your head of state.

That said, I am not aware of what the constitutions are like in the other countries where the British monarch is the head of state, so no idea if it's an easy change to make.

In Canada's case though it is virtually impossible to make this change. The monarchy as currently enshrined is effectively padlocked. You'd need the unanimous consent of all of the provinces plus the federal government to get rid of it.
__________________
Amber alerts welcome at any time
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #79  
Old Posted Nov 28, 2019, 3:23 PM
JHikka's Avatar
JHikka JHikka is offline
ハルウララ
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 12,853
Quote:
Originally Posted by kwoldtimer View Post
Not since 1953, legally speaking. The "Crown" is Canadian.
Regardless, QEII still remains the Head of State, our system still includes the GG/LG, and we still have the wonderful Senate. It would be no great loss to remove most of these.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #80  
Old Posted Nov 28, 2019, 3:26 PM
kwoldtimer kwoldtimer is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: La vraie capitale
Posts: 23,490
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acajack View Post
It's entirely possible to be a Commonwealth member and not have the London-based Queen/King as your head of state.

That said, I am not aware of what the constitutions are like in the other countries where the British monarch is the head of state, so no idea if it's an easy change to make.

In Canada's case though it is virtually impossible to make this change. The monarchy as currently enshrined is effectively padlocked. You'd need the unanimous consent of all of the provinces plus the federal government to get rid of it.
Is that true after the Harper government changed the rules of succession without the consent of the provinces? I thought that had been upheld by the courts, specifically rejecting the argument that provincial consent was required. If so, who personifies the "Crown" is just a matter for the Parliament of Canada, no?
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 1:07 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.