Monarchy Rebuttal

About our white paper recommendation regarding Monarchy, Mr David Steventon writes:

Interesting editorial. Seems like one requirement is missing. That the new monarch be a past employee of CBC.

That's how stupid the concept is. Heck we have trouble finding sufficient statesmen. (Thinks, do we have any?) So how are we going to find an individual to inspire our nation, including Quebec?

And who would appoint this nation inspiring monarch? The Prime Minister? What an opportunity for a patronage appointment. Considering the wealth of qualified people for the position of Governor General, the past two have left a lot to be desired. And of course who could forget Jean Sauvé, who thought of herself as royalty, by banning the streaming masses from Rideau Hall.

Come on, you have a great web site here. Don't waste time and effort on such trivialities.

David Steventon

Thanks for the comment. Allow me to respond.

First, the onus is on you, Mr Steventon, to defend the relevance of the House of Windsor in 21st century Canada. Given that our Prime Minister has declared the Quebecois a nation, what relevance has the Queen to them?

Ask yourself: where is the Queen physically right now?

Second, in our proposal, we would not be appointing a new Monarch. This person would be our head of state, but no monarch. We would be abolishing the Monarchy from Canada.

We left open the options for appointment of the officer. It doesn’t matter terribly to us, as we’re satisfied as long as there is no election, there is also no republic.

I do not consider it trivial at all that we have this middle age vestige still at the centre of our governmental structure. That, coupled with the sheer irrelevance of the Monarchy to Canadians of non-British descent, make a strong case for reform.

The new Australian PM just announced they will have a go at a Republic; I'm suggesting we have a go at reform in our own way, too.

graham at uni dot ca