| Background
Presently, Canada is a
constitutional monarchy. It shares its unelected, hereditary
head of state, Queen Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom, with
that country and fourteen other former British colonies. In Canada,
the Governor General is the representative of the Queen and acts
in her name on the advice of Parliament. Therefore, in practice,
the Queen is Canada's 'official' head of state, while the
Governor General is our 'acting' head of state.
The Prime Minister is
the head of government.
By definition, a republic is a
government without a monarch as head of state.
Our Goals
As the representative
organization of Canada's republican movement, Citizens for a Canadian
Republic’s broader objective is to promote discussion and awareness of the
advantages of amending the Constitution to allow for a
democratically-selected head of state independent of the British
monarchy.
Specifically however, the
following represents our core beliefs and objectives:
A Canadianized head of state should be the embodiment of
Canadian sovereignty, diversity and pride. At present, no
Canadian citizen can ever aspire to be head of state of our
own country.
Our head of state should be a true representative of the
People of Canada. Presently, the
Queen does not represent Canada when she travels abroad, she
represents the United Kingdom.
The act of attaining full-fledged status as a democratic
republic within the Commonwealth would be the completion of
a process of independence that began over a century ago.
Canada’s head of state should conform to Canadian laws of
religious equality. Presently, the rules
governing succession in the royal family constitutionally bind Canada to
a process that specifically discriminates against members of
the Roman Catholic faith. The monarch is also required to
hold the position of Supreme Governor of The Church of England,
thereby also preventing, Jews, Hindus, Muslims or anyone not a member of
that Protestant denomination from becoming Canada’s head of state.
Section 15(1) of
Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms expressly forbids
discrimination on the basis of "race, national or
ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or
physical disability".
Canadians increasingly want to address the so-called "democratic
deficit" that’s prevalent in Canada’s political
system. In every good democracy, there’s a solid framework
of checks and balances to ensure against the proliferation
of abuses. One way to address that would be to have an
effective and democratically-selected head of state (either by the public, parliament or
other such body), not an appointed Governor General
who is simply the deputy of a distant monarch, chosen
personally by the Prime Minister.
Inherited rights in government, symbolic or
otherwise, is a concept incompatible with Canadian
values of egalitarianism.
In an opinion poll taken during the height of the
Golden Jubilee and Royal Visit in 2002, a majority of Canadians saw
the Queen and the Royal Family simply as celebrity figures
who should not have any formal role in Canadian society¹ and
the monarchy as an outmoded and regressive
institution that has no real relevance to most Canadians
today².
New Canadians should not be subjected to swearing an oath to
a monarch who not only isn’t a Canadian citizen herself,
but also, in some cases, represents many aspects of what
prospective citizens are trying to leave behind. They’re coming to
Canada to embrace a way of life that emphasizes equality and
the rights of the individual, not peerage, royalty and
classism.
Presently, we have an unfair constitutional
amending formula on matters related to the head of state.
Prior to 1982, amendments to the constitution related to the
monarchy fell under the 7/50
amending procedure, requiring resolutions of the Senate,
House of Commons and seven provincial legislatures
representing at least fifty percent of the Canadian
population. Due to heavy monarchist lobbying during the
constitution patriation talks, amending Canada's monarchial
status now requires the unanimous consent of all
federal and provincial legislatures. This new formula is outrageously unfair.
We believe that by attempting to put a padlock on our constitution and
throw away the key, it inhibits Canada's
natural evolution as a nation. Therefore, Citizens for a
Canadian Republic believes a priority for any
future discussion on the head of state must include
addressing this imbalance.
¹ Ipsos-Reid -
Oct. 3, 2002
² EKOS
Research Associates - May 29, 2002
The Challenge
Even though polls consistently
show a significant number of Canadians support fully Canadianizing the
head of state, many are resigned to the continuation of the
monarchy for two main reasons:
1) the perceived difficulties
in altering the constitution to replace it and
2) the perceived lack of a credible
replacement formula.
Citizens for a Canadian
Republic acknowledges these obstacles. Canadianizing the head
of state will definitely require changing the constitution, a
feat made difficult by an unfair amending formula. Compounding these difficulties
is the subject of how Canadians should
choose their new head of state and what role it would play in
the federal system. This dilemma is what cost Australian
republicans a victory in their 1999 referendum. Many chose the
status quo rather than accept a selection process they felt was no better
politically than what they had.
However, the time is fast approaching when the present
monarch’s reign will end. With poll results indicating that
only 18 percent of Canadians oppose replacing Queen Elizabeth II
with a Canadian head of state when she dies³, this is a subject
that needs discussing now. This is advisable not just to avoid
having to rush into constitutional negotiations at the last
minute, but also to avoid the insensitivity of raising the issue
when the Queen is in poor health or worse, when the world is
grieving her loss.
ª Pollara - Dec
2, 1997
A Solution
Ideally, the issue of the
monarchy should be dealt with immediately. Citizens for a Canadian Republic will
continue to work toward that objective. However, Canadian republicans have to
be realistic. Many Canadians do feel a close attachment to the Queen herself but very little for
her successor or, for that matter, the monarchy itself as an
institution. Therefore, one would assume that any practical
goal to fully Canadianize our head of state, outside of any unusual
circumstance, would have to be based on the likelihood of it
being implemented at the end of the current Queen’s reign.
One also has to acknowledge
the lessons learned from the Australian referendum of 1999 in
which a split occurred in the result, dashing years of hard work
by the Australian Republican Movement. In that effort,
Australians were divided on whether a replacement head of state
should be elected by popular vote or by the proposed two-thirds
majority of both houses of parliament. A new referendum and
formula is planned for the future but had the formula been
resolved first and a plebiscite held on the simple act of
making the head of state an Australian, Australia would be a
republic today.
We must also take our cue from
Canadians who are telling our parliamentarians and prime
minister how important they believe honesty, democratic values
and accountability of our government officials are to them.
So it is with this
understanding that Canadian republicans must proceed with a plan
for our future. Without surrendering a desire for an immediate
change to a Canadian republic, it has to be recognized that the
work we do today, will, for all intents, be for a result gained
in ten or perhaps fifteen years. And in examining the progress in
Australia, we must put it in the Canadian context and see how we
can apply it here.
One possible way to proceed is
to first of all engage now, while the Queen is healthy, in a
process of democratizing the office of the governor general and
redefining his or her role in government. In effect, we could
have a parliamentary or even a direct popular election for the
Governor-General, which, unlike the decision on who is our head
of state, is one that does not require a constitutional
amendment to implement. The name of this democratically chosen
candidate for governor general would then be submitted to the
Prime Minister as his or her nominee to the Queen.
This process is not without
precedent. Canadian senators are normally appointed by the
governor general on the advice of the Prime Minister. In 1990
however, Stan Waters, Canada's first democratically
elected Senator, was appointed to the Senate by then Prime Minister
Brian Mulroney after receiving 43% of over 620,000 votes cast by
Alberta voters.
The real benefit to applying
this procedure to the Governor General’s position now is that it
eliminates the
main obstacle to a republican success in a national referendum
on the head of state - namely, what do you replace it with.
Approval by the provinces would still have to take place, but
with all of the divisive issues already
resolved, only a simple referendum on just who our head of state
should be would remain.
Again, we have to look at
precedent, at just where the evolution from a governor general
representing a British monarch
into an independent ceremonial presidency has been implemented successfully.
The most notable example of this transition formula is the
Republic of Ireland, where their democratically selected presidents command
the highest respect, both at home and abroad. The world's
largest democracy, India, is another fine example. Trinidad and
Tobago as well.
Since most members of
the Commonwealth of Nations are republics, not monarchies,
Canada becoming a parliamentary republic has no effect on status
in that organization.
So how do we get
started? In a March
18, 2004 press release, Citizens
for a Canadian Republic
called for a special parliamentary committee, similar to the
flag committee of the 1960s, to examine revamping the role and
selection process of the office of the Governor General as a
prelude to becoming a republic. At the time, another
parliamentary committee, the Standing
Committee on Government Operations and Estimates,
was in session, primarily to discuss the budgetary excesses of
the Governor General's office. On April 2, the committee released
a report titled The Governor General of Canada: Role,
Duties and Funding for Activities, in which the following recommendations
were made:
"That
the Parliament of Canada 1) take the necessary measures to
conduct a review and initiate a debate on the mandate,
constitutional role, responsibilities, and future evolution of
the Office of the Governor General of Canada (the Head of State)
in which all Canadians be included, and 2) conduct
a review of the process for selecting and appointing the
Governor General (Head of State) of Canada."
Normally, the
government is required to table a comprehensive response to a
report such as this within one hundred and fifty days, but,
unfortunately, shortly after its release, a general election was
called and parliament's obligation to respond was nullified. The
committee was formed again when parliament resumed in October.
However, only matters related to the budget of the governor
general were addressed.
Despite this setback, Citizens for a Canadian Republic
remains committed to the establishment of
an all-party Parliamentary Committee on the Head
of State to deal with the future of the monarchy in Canada. More
than ever, we believe it's essential to initiate now, the
process of healthy, constructive debate, inclusive of all
Canadians, on this important subject.
Finally, Canada has
traditionally lead the Commonwealth in initiating legislative,
economic and cultural independence over the last century.
However, the two decades since the patriation of our
constitution has seen remarkably less of that than
when our constitution resided in Britain.
Increasingly, Commonwealth
nations such as Australia, Barbados, Jamaica and New Zealand
have picked up the ball where Canada has dropped it. And while
our national leaders cower at the mere suggestion of opening our
constitution to allow progressive change in regards to the
monarchy, their leaders
are refreshingly outspoken. Canada should be embarrassed
that we've allowed this to happen. It's time we resumed our
leadership role in the Commonwealth. It's time to join the
Commonwealth-wide movement toward enhancing national
independence and make fully Canadianizing the head of state a
national priority in Canada.
It's time for a new option in
Canada.
Below is a clip from CBC’s
The National - Debating the Future of the Monarchy in Canada (May 31, 2002). Host Brian Stewart is speaking with Canadian
expatriate Anthony
King, Professor of Government, University of Essex, United
Kingdom. As this short passage indicates, we must not waste time
in getting this subject before the public and parliament:
STEWART: Still, shouldn't
there at least be calm study now while a popular monarch reigns
in apparent good health? Isn't it now the time we should be
airing this?
KING:
Oh, absolutely. I mean, if you're going to take a decision like
abolishing the monarchy for Canada, then you should spend quite
a lot of time picking it up, holding it up to the light, looking
at its various facets, and asking yourselves do you want really
to do this. And if you do, what are you going to put in its
place? And the further in advance that discussion begins, the
better.
Related
Information:
Frequently
Asked Questions
Commonwealth leaders on the
monarchy
Press releases
The
History of Republicanism in Canada
|
