Apprehending a Republic in Canada (instead of Prince Charles)

Mr Gunter,

cc NatPost et al

 

Re: Your article in Dec 23/10 NatPost "It’s time for Canada to break ties with the British"

Notwithstanding the cited "awkwardness" of Prince Charles the person, the idea of discontinuing the Monarchy in Canada is a pipedream of impracticality and a pandora's box of unintended consequences.

 

I believe the unintended consequences far out-distances any perceived problems with dear ol' Prince Charles.

 

Please consider who/what would replace the many functions and responsibilities of "The Crown" in a future 'republic':

- The Crown owns all the land (oh yes we have a 'fee simple' interest in land, but not allodial title by any stretch - look up escheat);

- the citizen/subjects all swear loyalty to the Crown;

- the MPP/MLA's, the MP's, Privy Councillors, Judges, Police EVERYBODY's sworn allegiance is to the Crown (another point why we cannot be NOW-considered a democracy);

- the Crown's local representative is given veto power (+ delaying power) over all Legislation (ss.55-57 & s.90)

- the UK's Crown (while the "in Council" aspect is now officially defunct -see EndNote 80 of 1982-) can Disallow any Canadian Legislation within 2 yrs (ss.55-57 again)

 

The American Revolutionaries substituted "the flag and constitution" would that be anyone's choice here?

 

Given that while most Canadians are acclimatized to our new flag, the EXISTING BNA/Constitution would have to be wholly re-vamped, requiring umpteen criss-cross compromises, trade-offs and just-plain-dumb-stuff (witness Meech, Charlottetown).

 

I daresay, who of us would swear allegiance to that kind of mish-mash?

 

AND (the greatest reason yet) Wm L M King's 1940 wholly un-constitutional Revenge-for-the-King-Byng affair "cat" would have to be let out of the "bag" - ie the usurpation by the Legislative Order of the Executive Order's Privy Council (s.11-12-13).

 

What future Prime Minister would let go of the Executive powers of the Privy Council? and what fully-informed Canadian would continue to allow a PM to retain such never-intended power?

 

Further it's an open question as to whether every law proclaimed since, say 1950, is valid and further, whether every judgment promulgated by any Judge who a) was not aware of the central gov't's defiance of the BNA/Constitution or b) knowingly allowed it to continue unchallenged is worthy of respect by law-abiding subject/citizens.

 

All things analysed, I believe most Canadians would decide that the ramifications of trifling with the BNA/Constitution Acts out-weigh any perceived problems with dear ol' Prince Charles.

 

rce

 

 

 

Backgrounder

 

Many Canadian "republicans" and anti-monarchists are blithely unaware that the Corporation Sole that is 'our' Monarchy -Her Majesty the Queen in Right Of Canada, is inextricably woven into the governance system created stage-by-stage in 1763, 1774. 1791, (1840), 1867, 1931, (1940), 1947, 1982 and continuously amended in ad hoc fashion since then (a la surreptitiously re-writing s.51 through Bill C-12)

 

Our system is "similar in principle" to the UK system but, the details of difference - vive la difference - make it our Uniquely Canadian Crown superior and fabulously -appropriate for our sea-to-sea-to-sea agglomeration of 10+3+33 million solitudes.

 

IMHO the foresight of the 1867 and planning within the 1867 BNA Act is astounding - as noteworthy as C.D. Howe's Dollar/Yr Men's pre-planned peace-time strategy for Canada as an integral part of their War-Time transformation of the country.

 

Preface to Plain Language Version of BNA/Constitution