What happens when QEII dies?

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Zarley

I'm well aware of the Westminster system. I think you must be confusing the head of government (PM) with the head of state (Sovereign).

No, I'm not. The head of state is at the top. Head of Government below that.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

They have the potential to have more power than anyone in our government. In practice, they don't exercise it, which is maybe what they are getting at? The GG gives royal ascent to every bill. Without the GG's approval, the government can't do anything. Harper had to go to the GG for approval to prorogue Parliament. That could have been denied. Seriously, have you guys not had any education about how our system works?

lol. Is it really necessary to be a condescending jerk about this? Yes. Lots of us have education. Many of us probably have a lot more education than you. In fact it seems obvious from the nature of your posts that you actually have no idea how the Canadian HoS actually operates. Did you seriously get educated in school that our HoS is some supreme leader in Canada? Are you mistaking actual power with ceremonial power? Go Google "governor general power" or similar phrase and you'll get plenty of articles written to a grade 6 level that explain the nature of the position.

If you'd like to educate yourself about our political system, I suggest you read up on the power that the GG actually demonstrates and the power that the GG theoretically has (but never uses and if he/she ever tried to use, we'd put a stop to it pretty damn quick.)

Could the GG turn into some hilarious power hungry position? Sure I guess, but it'll likely never happen, hence why people are talking about getting rid of the monarchy but keeping the GG position similar. That is, pretty much a figurehead ceremonial position with the same duties and theoretical powers, just no link to the Queen or King of England.

On the same token, sure, the legislative part of our government could start to abuse their power to such an extent that the GG may need to exercise some of their power. But once again, it isn't much of an issue and having a GG that has no ties to the Monarchy in England, isn't likely to change that.

[Fuzz]

Technically, yes the HoS is the Supreme leader of Canada. That's how it works. Look, I understand the difference between how the powers are used in practice vs. what is written. But the reality is that the Queen has the final say if she wants. Now, if she started doing that we would obviously have real problems. But the fact is, that is how our system exists. And if we want to undo that, it isn't all that simple.

Sorry for being condescending, I was just a little shocked that people think the Queen has no official power beyond a ceremonial role.

[Zarley]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

No, I'm not. The head of state is at the top. Head of Government below that.

So then you are obviously confused about how power is shared in our constitutional monarchy. While the sovereign enjoys de jure power (meaning in law), de facto (meaning in practice) power rests in the hands of parliament. The head of state only acts on the advice of the federal cabinet and this has been the case since 1834 when William IV was the last monarch to dismiss a prime minister. This fantasy you have about the GG going rogue and acting against centuries of constitutional precedent is foolish and any attempt at such would not be tolerated by parliament nor the Canadian public.

I's advise you to lose the condescending attitude and do some more reading because it's clear that you don't have a good grasp on this subject.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

She gets a huge pile of paperwork from British parliament and other Commonwealth countries every day (the 'Red Box') that she has to read and sign off on.

She hosts receptions for her subjects and visiting dignitaries, and attends all kinds of ceremonies. All told, the royal family carries about 2,000 official engagements a year.

Basically, she serves the role of head of state. Republics like France have them too. I'd be surprised if her duties for most of her reign took much less than 40 hours a week (though she has reduced her workload in recent years).

That doesn't sound like a big deal. It just sounds like a job. I doubt she reads everything personally either. Being able to handle yourself with grace should be expected of anyone regardless of what they do for a living.

I would have no trouble keeping here on some of the money and things like that. I don't have a personal dislike for her as a person, but rather the whole notion of monarchs regardless of whether they have real power. I believe in meritocracy. Sure, it's great when someone is highborn and tries hard to behave, but I don't give them extra credit for that any more so than anyone who acts proper. In fact, acting proper in the face of despair is probably more commendable than for someone who has never had to worry about their livelihood.

[Zarley]

Originally Posted by GGG

This is actually the best reason for leaving the current system as is. If you change it to an elected position we end up in a US style division of powers fight. If you get rid of it entirely you end up with a problem if a Prime Minister decides to not follow our social conventions in place in our democracy.

Having a person that is relatively ceremonial but non political who is the highest authority but who essentially does nothing that could step in if say a prime minister decides not to step down is likely a best of both worlds scenario.

Effectively our elected dictatorship form of government allows for decisive action but our ceremonial positions (that actually have real power) protect us from autocratic rule.

And if the ceremonial position ever tried to act against the government we very quickly have a referendum to get rid of it and wed have a constitutional crisis but there is good incentive for no one to go there.

Which is why the best course of action is to maintain our current system while severing ties with the monarchy. The GG becomes de jure head of state with minimal disruption to day-to-day business.

[Fuzz]

So are you denying that when Harper went to prorogue parliament, their wasn't serious consideration being given by the GG to not allow it due to Harper attempting to save his failing government? That the opposition parties hadn't gone to the GG with a request to form an alternative government? And are you suggesting the GG did not have the power to implement that?

Jean was faced with three possible outcomes as a result of her planned meeting with the prime minister on December 4, 2008: dissolving parliament, proroguing parliament, or asking him to resign and inviting the opposition parties to form a government.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008%E...entary_dispute

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Zarley

Which is why the best course of action is to maintain our current system while severing ties with the monarchy. The GG becomes de jure head of state with minimal disruption to day-to-day business.

Many countries already do this. They have a Prime Minister that is the head of the government and an elected President that looks after foreign and global relationships, and can act as a check and balance if the government isn't working.

The best part about it is that they are elected and not born into the position.

[Zarley]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Many countries already do this. They have a Prime Minister that is the head of the government and an elected President that looks after foreign and global relationships, and can act as a check and balance if the government isn't working.

The best part about it is that they are elected and not born into the position.

Exactly, it's called a parliamentary republic (see former Commonwealth realms of India, Pakistan, South Africa before 1980 etc). In most of these countries, the president is appointed by the PM or elected by parliament. I don't see the need for any change to our system other than giving the GG the title of head of state. The current system works pretty well, I don't see any need to rock the boat too much or add the cost of additional elections.

[jammies]

Originally Posted by pseudoreality

I know I'll get roasted on here for saying this, but I'd rather have a First Nations Chief as our Head of State over the Queen of England. When the Queen travels no one things of her as Canada's Head of State representing Canada.

That's actually a really good idea - maybe not replacing the monarch, but making the Governor-General permanently a FN person.

[Burninator]

Originally Posted by MoneyGuy

I came in here thinking maybe they were going to close the highway.

Pretty special that she took her royal name from the highway between Calgary and Edmonton.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

What exactly does she do other than wave at people?

In the UK, and occasionally elsewhere, the Queen will have a quiet word with a Prime Minister and express her 'concern' about a divisive piece of legislation.

By all accounts Thatcher hated her as she pretty much told her to back the eff off some of her more contentious plans to privatise the NHS and the like.

The Queen represents the last vestige of noblese oblige, the idea that the rich have a responsibility to care for the poor, in some ways she's far more concerned for her subjects than the government, in others hopelessly cut off.

Its a weird system but anything that replaces it will be almost exactly as weird, just different, and would certainly cost more, as any replacement for an existing system costs more when the Feds do it.

[afc wimbledon]

You guys are all aware that Crown Land means literally the Queen owns that land, it would not be an easy task constitutionally, legally if you will, working out how to change that, you think Quebec would allow that to just transfer to a native dude in Ottawa, no they'd want the land given to the Province.

I agree in theory it could be simple and cheap but it would be horrendously complex and expensive in practise.

[Violator]

Wouldn't we have to re write the treaty system if the monarchy ceased control over Canada.

Wouldn't all current land claims be up for debate.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Violator

Wouldn't we have to re write the treaty system if the monarchy ceased control over Canada.

Wouldn't all current land claims be up for debate.

Every treaty would have to be agreed by both parties, again in theory simple, a quick rubber stamp to change some wording, but in practise a complete opening up of every treaty in the country.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

That doesn't sound like a big deal. It just sounds like a job.

A job she has continued doing through her 70s and 80s, long after most people retire.

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

I doubt she reads everything personally either.

The material she reads is confidential, so she is not allowed to share it with her secretary, her husband, or anyone else.

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Being able to handle yourself with grace should be expected of anyone regardless of what they do for a living.

Presumably you don't get out to many official or ceremonial events. I saw plenty when I was a reporter, and presiding over them is way harder than most people think. Being pleasant and dignified and greeting dozens of people a day, every day, week after week after month after year. Sitting attentively through interminable speeches and ceremonies. Formal meals among strangers many times a week. Never getting impatient. Never looking bored. Never saying anything the least bit insensitive or controversial. Never losing your cool. From what I've seen, it's the toughest part of being a civic representative. Most people couldn't hack even being a city councillor for a week.

[GirlySports]

the system is good now, a good balance

republic we could have president trump
monarchy we could have king joffrey

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

lol. Is it really necessary to be a condescending jerk about this? Yes. Lots of us have education. Many of us probably have a lot more education than you. In fact it seems obvious from the nature of your posts that you actually have no idea how the Canadian HoS actually operates. Did you seriously get educated in school that our HoS is some supreme leader in Canada? Are you mistaking actual power with ceremonial power? Go Google "governor general power" or similar phrase and you'll get plenty of articles written to a grade 6 level that explain the nature of the position.

If you'd like to educate yourself about our political system, I suggest you read up on the power that the GG actually demonstrates and the power that the GG theoretically has (but never uses and if he/she ever tried to use, we'd put a stop to it pretty damn quick.)

Could the GG turn into some hilarious power hungry position? Sure I guess, but it'll likely never happen, hence why people are talking about getting rid of the monarchy but keeping the GG position similar. That is, pretty much a figurehead ceremonial position with the same duties and theoretical powers, just no link to the Queen or King of England.

On the same token, sure, the legislative part of our government could start to abuse their power to such an extent that the GG may need to exercise some of their power. But once again, it isn't much of an issue and having a GG that has no ties to the Monarchy in England, isn't likely to change that.

Queen of Canada is the correct term. Our head of state is the Queen of Canada who is also the queen of England, Scotland etc. She happens to live in Great Britain.

[Tron_fdc]

Governer General would be the best job ever.

Attend parties, get loaded, sign off on stuff the public has already OK'd, go back to party and get re-loaded.

Get paid.

[station]

If the crown was no longer our head of state wouldn't it make sense to then have an executive branch with an elected president? Could still be a mostly ceremonial role similar to the GG but avoids any potential issues with the PM naming the head of state. Not sure Canadians have an appetite for that type of change though.