|
Voter's guide 2011:
How the
leaders and parties stand on the
monarchy/republic debate
PDF
With the 2011 Federal
Election campaign coinciding with both the royal wedding and news
coverage of the attempt to revise the antiquated rules of
succession, many Canadian republicans are, for the first time,
considering the issue of the monarchy in their voting decision.
With no party as yet with an official policy on ending the monarchy,
Citizens for a Canadian Republic believes it can help voters with
this important decision by sharing what we know about the federalist
parties and leaders.
Our information is
compiled from over ten years of research by our volunteers and
organizers from various sources. We absolutely do not release
details of views made to our representatives in confidence, but we
do list published quotations, public comments or excerpts from
non-private conversations.
In some cases, the data we're providing is already universally
known. In other cases, it will not, and may raise some eyebrows.
Either way, the main goal of this guide is to point the massive
block of republican-minded voters toward candidates and parties that
we feel are the most open to promoting both internal and public
debate on the monarchy.
Another purpose is to
prove that republican beliefs run deep in all parties, and that one
reason politicians are not speaking up is because a few party
strategists feel it's too hot to handle. We know that policy is
wrong. Instead, it's just the opposite. We believe the party with
the most open and progressive policies on this issue will command
not just respect from voters, but also electoral support.
It's important to note
that that Citizens for a Canadian Republic is a non-partisan
organization with supporters and organizers from the entire
political spectrum. So regardless of affiliation, if we believe a
party or candidate has progressive republican traits, we will advise
accordingly.
So here's our guide. Good luck on May 2!
RATING FORMULA:
Our guide is composed of ratings of 1 to 5. These are the six
categories:
1) Perceived views of the party leader
2) Perceived views of the caucus
3) Present party policy
4) Present openness of the party to discuss ending the monarchy
5) Frequency of party spokespeople or MPs expressing pro-republic
opinion
6) Likelihood the party will form a government with a pro-republic
initiative
PARTIES (In
alphabetical order)
Conservative Party of
Canada
Green party of Canada
Liberal Party of Canada
New Democratic Party of
Canada
Conservative
Party of Canada
At first glance, the Conservatives may seem to be an unlikely
champion of ending the monarchy. After all, their party constitution
advocates: "A belief in loyalty to a sovereign" and "A belief in our
constitutional monarchy." However, the same document advocates "a
belief in freedom of the individual and freedom of speech," leaving
one to assume that party members who don't support the monarchy
would not necessarily be in breach of their own party rules.
Regardless, the evidence
shows that republican sentiment is very much present within the
ranks of the party. For instance, a 2010 opinion poll by Angus Reid
indicated that more Conservative voters (52%) than Liberal voters
(45%) supported reopening the constitution to discuss replacing the
monarchy with an elected head of state. That says a lot.
The leader: Stephen Harper is an ardent advocate of senate
reform, once referring to the appointed upper house as "a relic of
the 19th century." It's not a huge stretch to assume that he may
even have the same views about an appointed governor general as a
representative of another relic of the 19th century: the monarchy.
The party: In 2002, on a Montreal radio talk show, Jim
Abbott, Canadian Alliance MP for Kootenay—Columbia (and now a
Conservative MP), commented on the views of his party toward
republicanism:
"On the question
of the monarchy, there are people within the party who are in
favour of continuing with the monarchy, there are people who
would perhaps take Mr. Manley's position and I think that there
will be a time and a place for that debate."
Parliamentary Hansard
records from February 29th, 2000 also reveal some very interesting
comments by Preston Manning, the former leader of the Reform Party,
whose members now make up a huge chunk of the Conservative Party.
They were made in reference to government spending, but nonetheless,
they don't give the impression he's a monarchist:
"It is the
arrogance of inherited position and the power that goes along
with it. It is like the arrogance that afflicted the old
monarchies and aristocracies of Europe who believed in the
divine right of kings, who believed they had a divine right to
govern regardless of ability, accomplishment or the impact of
what they were doing on their own people."
One of Citizens for a
Canadian Republic's Vancouver organizers, J.J. McCullough (a
contributor to this report) also worked on BC Conservative MP James
Moore's election campaign, and has some fascinating insight on his
personal views of the monarchy.
"During the 2004
and 2006 federal elections I volunteered for the re-election
campaigns of James Moore, and always found him to be a genuine
and honest supporter of the republican cause, with views that
were moderated only by traditional political pragmatism. Indeed,
part of the reason why I was motivated to help re-elect Moore in
the first place was because of his support of abolishing the
monarchy in Canada."
Apparently, James
Moore's outspoken republicanism "was known to his caucus colleagues
and treated with, at best, amused indifference." Moore even admitted
"that he would personally be completely comfortable with ending
Canada's ties to the monarchy," although also acknowledging the
complexities and questioning the priority.
Moore has since gone on to become Minister of Canadian Heritage and
Official Languages, ironically, the ministry charged with managing
Canada's relationship with the monarchy.
He seems to be doing his
job well and monarchists have never complained about him not
fulfilling his duties. In fact, similar to the views of Australia's
governor general, who said in 2009 that she believed Australia would
one day be a republic, this proves that one can believe in a future
without a constitutional link to the monarchy, while also
acknowledging that our historical and cultural link to it
need not be compromised.
Republican-inspired legislation is also not new to Conservatives.
Under the Progressive Conservative government of Brian Mulroney,
Citizenship and Immigration Minister David Crombie released a
position paper titled “Citizenship 87: Proud to be Canadian” as a
national unity initiative. One major issue was the nature of the
citizenship oath; with the government indicating it was prepared to
consider whether the citizenship oath should be amended to either
give allegiance to Canada precedence over allegiance to the Queen,
or to completely eliminate any reference to the monarchy. The
reforms were never legislated, possibly due to preoccupation with
the Charlottetown Accord.
Regardless, republican beliefs appear to be strongest in the old
Reform wing rather than members who have roots in the old
Progressive Conservative Party. Which could explain the reluctance
of the Prime Minister to make the issue a higher priority: He may be
more interested in keeping the two wings of his party united.
Scores:
1) Perceived views of the party leader - 2
2) Perceived views of the caucus - 4
3) Present party policy - 0
4) Present openness of the party to discuss ending the monarchy - 0
5) Frequency of party spokespeople or MPs expressing pro-republic
opinion - 0
6) Likelihood the party will form a government with a pro-republic
initiative - 1
Rating: 7 out of 30
Recommendation: If you're in favour of head of state reform,
the Conservatives don't appear, at the moment, to be the best party
to push the issue forward. However, it's clear that many candidates
are republican, so who knows, maybe they can change the party's
direction. Until then, voters are advised to ask their candidates
their views and vote accordingly.
Green Party of Canada
As far as percentage of republic supporters among caucus, the Green
Party of Canada probably rates number one. By far, we also get the
most supportive correspondence from Green Party members, which
indicates that in time, there's no doubt Canada's Greens will follow
the Australian Green Party who advocate that "Australia should
become a republic with an Australian head of state."
However, presently, the party has no seats in parliament, with none
easily in sight. Therefore, it gets low marks for being able to
influence the debate in parliament.
The leader: To our knowledge, despite many opportunities,
Elizabeth May has never made any statement in support of head of
state reform. Unless she's been extremely adept at concealing her
views, one would conclude that she's not a republican.
The party: In 2008, at its bi-annual convention in Pictou,
Nova Scotia, the Green Party of Canada passed a resolution calling
for the removal of all reference to the Queen and monarchy in the
Canadian Citizenship Oath. Quite surprisingly, there was also a
resolution calling for the replacement of the Queen with an elected
official. It did not pass. Full marks for considering it, though.
Confusion afterwards about whether the resolution on the Queen as
head of state had also passed provoked Elizabeth May to angrily
respond on the party's blog that it had not.
Scores:
1) Perceived views of the party leader - 0
2) Perceived views of the caucus - 5
3) Present party policy - 4
4) Present openness of the party to discuss ending the monarchy - 5
5) Frequency of party spokespeople or MPs expressing pro-republic
opinion - 0
6) Likelihood the party will form a government with a pro-republic
initiative - 0
Rating: 14 out of 30
Recommendation: Admirably, the Green Party gets the bulk of
its support from people who vote for the party's ideals and care
little about whether they'll form a government. For that reason, if
you're already a Green Party supporter, you'll be even more
comforted to know that the vast majority of the party is on your
side regarding the monarchy/republic issue.
It's also important to
note that despite not having seats, the party does have some
political clout. So if the debate ever does develop, as we fully
expect it will, another supportive party can only help. The bottom
line: don't let the party's lack of seats dissuade you from voting
with your heart.
Liberal Party of Canada
Historically, the Liberal Party has been the driving force behind
most of Canada's moves toward independence. The list is long: The
Citizenship Act, the flag, patriating the constitution, as well as
Canadianizing the identity of most government institutions - just to
name a few. However, one issue has not yet inspired the personal
attention of a prime minister or leader: the monarchy.
Republicans often hear the same story from Liberals as we do from
the other parties: that it's not a priority, and that there are
other things to worry about. Well, maybe the issue isn't on the same
level as the economy or health care, but if Pearson had the same
attitude, Canada would still be flying a British naval ensign as our
national flag. There were many important issues to deal with in
1964, but Pearson proved that a government knows how to chew gum and
walk at the same time - and most Canadians are glad he did.
Nevertheless, there are many reasons to believe the Liberals could
some day champion the cause:
The leader: In 1992, when Michael Ignatieff was a journalist,
he wrote a superbly written (as one would expect) and scathing
attack on monarchial principles in the
Montreal Gazette. Regarding the separation of Prince Charles and
Princess Diana, he wrote,
“Listening to the
separation announcement, I found myself wondering exactly why
this shambles was so magically preferable to an elected
presidency.”
"... the British
now have to decide whether to admit how republican their history
actually is or whether to continue with the fantasy that they
are ruled by kings and queens.”
The party: Some
of Ignatieff's closest advisors are republican: one being his Chief
of Staff, Peter Donolo. Commendably, Donolo has never shied away
from his republican views. His best quotation, from Macleans
Magazine in 2002, is classic in our movement: He referred to Canada
as "behaving like a colonial outpost" by clinging to the British
monarchy.
Many current MPs have also spoken out publically for a debate on
cutting ties to the monarchy: Herb Dhaliwal and Ken Dryden are the
most prominent. Under Chretien's government, John Manley, of course,
as well as Brian Tobin, Warren Allmand and Alex Shepherd, being the
more vocal.
In 2007, there were reports in the media that suggested senior
officials in Prime Minister Chretien's Office were promoting the
idea of ending the Queen's role as head of state to mark the
millennium. The fact that a process as complex as ending the
monarchy was planned to be implemented in such a short amount of
time indicates the idea was not proposed seriously. Many gathered it
was "floated" in order to test the public's reaction. At the time,
knowledge of the implication was still highly dependent on the
lobbying of the monarchist league, so there's no surprise the
reaction was less favourable than hoped. Peter Donolo, then the
prime minister's communications director, confirmed discussions
about a non-monarchical system in Canada had occurred, but said
there were no plans to move ahead with it.
The Liberal Party's many initiatives to have the Queen removed from
the Citizenship Oath have been valiant but, as yet, unsuccessful.
In 2005, the Liberal government removed the obligation for Federal
Government employees to swear an oath to the Queen.
Scores:
1) Perceived views of the party leader - 5
2) Perceived views of the caucus - 4
3) Present party policy - 0
4) Present openness of the party to discuss ending the monarchy - 2
5) Frequency of party spokespeople or MPs expressing pro-republic
opinion - 5
6) Likelihood the party will form a government with a pro-republic
initiative - 4
Rating: 20 out of 30
Recommendation: There's no doubt the Liberals are a shadow of
what they once were. However, in a coalition or power-sharing
position, they could help propel the republic debate forward. If
you've always considered yourself a centrist, the Liberal Party is
still a comfortable one for any republican. Voters are advised to
discuss the issue with their candidate. There are still a handful of
vocal monarchists running for election in the Liberal Party.
New Democratic Party of
Canada
Despite receiving our highest rating, the NDP also holds the
distinctive position in this guide of being the most disappointing
in regards to promoting the monarchy debate in Canada. The reason is
simple: being social democrats, the bar is set much higher for that
party than all the rest. Throughout the Commonwealth (the UK
excepted) it's the NDP's ideological brethren, the Labour parties of
Australia, Barbados, Jamaica and New Zealand that have made becoming
a republic - with one of their own citizens as head of state - a
prominent part of their platforms. They haven't suffered for it
either. In those countries, social democratic governments are the
norm. Why the NDP doesn't see the electoral benefit of promoting the
same goal here in Canada escapes most republicans. Public opinion
supports ending the monarchy by a convincing margin, especially in
vote rich Quebec where the NDP is trying to improve their base of
support. Perhaps they're waiting for the right time? One can only
guess.
Whatever the course NDP strategists plan for the impending debate,
there's no denying that the depth of republican sentiment within the
party easily matches that of social democrats elsewhere in the
Commonwealth.
For those of us who look
for the signs, the evidence is clear:
The leader: I had a chance meeting with Jack Layton in a
Toronto bicycle shop in the fall of 2002, a few months before he
became NDP leader in January 2003. After introducing myself as being
with Canada's budding republican movement, I told him our new
organization wants to see the head of state Canadianized and asked
if this is something he supported. His answer was quick:
"It depends on
what you mean by Canadianized. If you're talking about the
governor general becoming the official head of state, I'm all
for it."
Granted, that was before
he was chosen leader of the NDP. A Vancouver interview in 2006,
after being leader for three years, reveals those views were indeed
still intact. This guide's contributor, J.J. McCullough, at the time
writing for the independent Other Press, asked him what he thought
of the monarchy. While acknowledging that constitutional monarchy
has worked well in the past, Layton admitted,
"I do believe
that Canadians struggle, as the years go by, with the issue of
relevancy. On the other hand I think we've had Governors
General, and certainly our current Governor General would be a
good example, of someone representing the Crown - I don't mean
an individual but the phenomenon, the concept of our collective
statehood - in kind of an interesting way."
The fact that Layton
very perceptively sees the Crown as our collective statehood and not
an exclusive description of the monarchy is extremely promising.
This is exactly the direction we as Canadian republicans want the
discussion to go.
Citizens for a Canadian Republic has attempted to poll federal
candidates on the monarchy in the last two general elections. In
both cases, we initially got a lot of very positive feedback, until
all parties quickly instructed candidates not to answer our
questions because only the party headquarters could provide those
views. The response from Jack Layton was promising, however:
"Canada's New
Democratic caucus has not taken an official position on this
issue, to this point. This decision could be considered by a
future caucus of the New Democratic Party of Canada."
The party: The
NDP has also gone further than any other party in discussing the
monarchy's future in policy meetings. In 1999, an official NDP
document titled "Social
Democratic Forum on Canada's Future" considered the
"Canadianization of the head of state" by suggesting the country
follow Australia's progress, which was contemplating becoming a
republic.
At the 22nd biennial New Democratic convention, a resolution was put
forth to have the party "conduct an active campaign so that Canada
becomes a republic" and "conduct an active campaign to redefine the
role of the Executive within the Canadian Constitution." Neither
resolution passed.
A few MPs have been vocal in opposing the monarchy: Pat Martin, in
particular, is quite passionate about it. Joe Comartin as well.
It's also worth mentioning - if only to understand the party's wider
republican ideology - that the monarchy has been an issue in the
provincial wings as well. The Nova Scotia NDP successfully fought
against an initiative by the ruling Conservatives to restore the
singing of God Save the Queen at the opening of the legislature.
According to then Opposition Leader Darrell Dexter:
"The Royal Anthem
is not appropriate in a legislative chamber whose constitutional
purpose is to assert people’s democratic right to govern
themselves rather than be ruled by a monarch"
A former naval officer,
Dexter is now the Premier of Nova Scotia.
Scores:
1) Perceived views of
the party leader - 5
2) Perceived views of the caucus - 5
3) Present party policy - 4
4) Present openness of the party to discuss ending the monarchy - 5
5) Frequency of party spokespeople or MPs expressing pro-republic
opinion - 4
6) Likelihood the party will form a government with a pro-republic
initiative - 3
Rating: 26 out of 30
Recommendation: If you have social democratic to centrist
values and you're republican to the core, then the NDP is your
party.
The winner? The NDP.
This is not an
endorsement of any party. It's merely a guide for people to judge a
party on this single issue. If anything, it's a wake-up call to the
others to get moving on generating monarchy/republic policy before
the NDP owns it. We hope someday soon all parties in Canada can
score in the same vicinity as the NDP has in this guide. Until then,
it holds the most potential for making history and being the first
one to announce a pro-republic policy. And with the rising tide of
new support at the end of this 2011 campaign, that could be sooner
rather than later.
Regardless of whether or
not that support results in a dramatic change in the party's
influence, the NDP will most definitely be a major contributor to
the inevitable parliamentary debate.
by
Tom Freda
|