Canadian Republicanism Article Index for
Canadian
Website Links For
Canadian
 

Information About

Canadian Republicanism





HISTORY


William Lyon Mackenzie advocated the creation of a Canadian republic during the 1837 Upper Canada Rebellion and, after the defeat of his uprising in Toronto , established a Provisional Government for the Republic Of Canada on Navy Island . The Patriotes Rebellion in Lower Canada is also thought to have been republican in nature. (see also Rebellions Of 1837 ). The British government's Durham Report in the aftermath of the rebellions led to the introduction of Responsible Government thus quelling republican sentiment by giving settlers in what became the United Province Of Canada more rights while retaining British rule and eventually leading to Canadian Confederation .

Latent republican sentiment remained a factor in Quebec where Henri Bourassa and other nationalists opposed British Imperialism and advocated Canadian independence from the British Empire in response to the Boer War and, later, the Conscription Crisis Of 1917 during the First World War . Republican sentiment became more prominent with the rise of the Quebec Nationalist movement in the 1960s with the demands for an independent republic of Quebec put forward by both the Front De Libération Du Québec which advocated violent methods and the parliamentary Quebec ''indépendentistes'' who formed the Parti Québécois . Queen Elizabeth 's Royal Visit to Quebec City in 1964 provoked a militant anti-monarchist and Quebec nationalist demonstration which was put down by police with 36 arrests and scores of injuries in what is remembered as ''samedi de la matraque'' (truncheon Saturday). Support for the monarchy remains weakest in Quebec to this day.

Simultaneously, the idea of a Canadian republic where the Queen would be replaced by an elected head of state gathered strength in English Canada among those who saw the abandonment of what was seen as the vestiges of Colonialism as both a means of stengthening national unity between English and French-Canadians and as a means of asserting Canadian sovereignty and nationhood. The '' Toronto Star '', English Canada's largest circulation daily newspaper first endorsed the creation of a Canadian republic during the Canadian Centennial year of 1967 , however the publication no longer supports this movement.


REPUBLICAN ARGUMENTS

is often held up as example of a Wesminster-style Republic by Canadian Republicans. The current Irish President Mary McAleese claims to be an admirer of Elizabeth II , the current Queen of Canada.]]
Republicans have traditionally argued against the monarchy on the basis that it is a historic relic, or a colonial holdover with little relevance in modern Canada. Members of both the political Left and Right have also argued that it is an institution of Elitism that undermines democracy. Republicans argue that the monarchy is not a Canadian institution but a foreign and specifically British one, even though the monarchy is no longer an exclusively British institution. Like monarchists, however, the majority of contemporary republican arguments tend to centre on political justifications of such a change.

In response to monarchist claims of neutrality, republicans will argue that it is entirely possible to have an apolitical, elected head of state. Perhaps it is even inevitable, given the current trend in government to make institutions more transparent, accountable and democratic. One example of this type of head of state in a Westminster-style parliamentary republic is the President Of Ireland .

Republicans point out that in the current system, the prime minister is elected by his or her party, not by popular election. Canadians, therefore, do not vote for a prime minister; they vote for members belonging to the party that the prime minister leads. Also, there are other methods for electing a president, with popular election being only one option of many. India's Republican System is a model many Canadian republicans see as one that could be applied at least in part in Canada. Other republicans argue that an elected president could serve as an effective Check on the power of the prime minister, and help encourage a greater separation of power within the nation's political culture. The current powers of the Prime Minister of Canada are often criticised as being excessive, so the creation of a revised, independent executive branch may be a solution to this. The fact that these different arguments are often contradictory highlights the fact that in many cases Canadian republicans are not yet fully united on what sort of republican form of government they believe the nation should adopt. The Westminster-style parliamentary republican model, which is advocated by other Commonwealth republican movements, has been embraced by Citizens For A Canadian Republic as the preferred model for Canada.

Tony O'Donohue , a Canadian republican and civic politician, observed that the '' Act Of Settlement 1701 '' explicitly excludes Roman Catholic s from the throne and the Queen is Supreme Governor Of The Church Of England , requiring her to be an Anglican . This discriminates against non-Anglicans, including Catholics who are the largest faith group in Canada. In 2002 , O'Donohue launched an ultimately unsuccessful court action that argued the ''Act of Settlement'' violates the Canadian Charter Of Rights And Freedoms in that it discriminates against Catholics. His case was dismissed by the court, which found that as the ''Act of Settlement'' is part of the Canadian Constitution , the Charter of Rights does not have supremacy over it. Also, the court pointed out that while Canada has the power to amend the line of succession to the Canadian Throne, the '' Statute Of Westminster '' stipulates that the agreement of the governments of the fifteen other realms that share the Crown would first have to be sought if Canada wished to continue its relationship with the other Commonwealth Realm s. An appeal of the decision was dismissed 16 March 2005 .

In his ruling on the matter, Justice Rouleau included the following comments:

: {Link without Title} The impugned positions of the Act of Settlement are an integral part of the rules of succession that govern the selection of the monarch of Great Britain. By virtue of our constitutional structure whereby Canada is united under the Crown of Great Britain, the same rules of succession must apply for the selection of the King or Queen of Canada and the King or Queen of Great Britain.

Further, he wrote:

: {Link without Title} In the present case the court is being asked to apply the Charter not to rule on the validity of acts or decisions of the Crown, one of the branches of our government, but rather to disrupt the core of how the monarchy functions, namely the rules by which succession is determined. To do this would make the constitutional principle of Union under the British Crown together with other Commonwealth countries unworkable, would defeat a manifest intention expressed in the preamble of our Constitution, and would have the courts overstep their role in our democratic structure.

A few have interpreted Justice Rouleau's ruling as implying that the Constitution of Canada remains subordinate to external legislation, despite the 1982 Patriation of the Constitution, while others have found that the language of the judgment reinforces the principle of equality between the Commonwealth Realms , and makes clear that the Crown in Right of Canada, including the Office of the Queen, the line of succession, etc., is a legal entity separate but equal to the Crown In Right Of The United Kingdom .

See Also: O’Donohue v. Canada, 2003



In March 2004, Citizens for a Canadian Republic proposed changes that would avoid a new round of constitutional negotiations by advocating a parliamentary reform of the office of the governor general, an office generally expected to be transformed into a presidency should the monarchy end. The group claims their proposal will address divisive aspects such as the duties and selection process of the new head of state without constitutional amendment, leaving the remaining issue of who should occupy the position to be decided in a referendum. However, monarchists point out that this proposal does not address the provinces, especially concerning the importance of the Crown in their relationship with the federal government, and the positions and powers of the lieutenant-governors; both issues which would weigh heavily in any constitutional debate on the Crown, regardless of the selection process of the governor general.

One constitutional scholar, Ted McWhinney , has argued that Canada can become a republic upon the demise of the current Queen by not proclaiming a successor. However, McWhinney's proposal remains unstudied, and thus publicly unsupported by either the Canadian government or other constitutional experts. Monarchists have also pointed out that his proposal, like that put forward by republicans, assumes no input from the provinces regarding this attempt to change the status of the Crown and ignores certain prescriptive clauses of the '' Constitution Act '', such as Sections 9 and 17, as well as other constitutional statutes and conventions.

The republican objectives of fellow requires a much more difficult process to attain unanimous provincial consensus.


CONSTITUTIONAL IMPLICATIONS


's insignia of the Order Of Canada and the Order Of Military Merit ]]

While the idea of a republic was a minor issue during the Canadian Constitution al negotiations of the 1970s , when a new Constitution was agreed to in 1982 it included a provision requiring unanimous consent of the federal government and all ten provincial governments before any change could be implemented to the status of the monarchy. This was agreed to by Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau as a concession to his two closest allies among the Provincial Premier s, Bill Davis and Richard Hatfield , both of whom were fervent monarchists. As a result it is constitutionally more difficult to remove the monarchy in Canada than it is in any other Commonwealth Realm including the United Kingdom. However, retired political science Professor Edward McWhinney , a constitutional expert and former Member Of Parliament , argues in his book ''The Governor General and the Prime Ministers'' that Canada could become a republic "quietly and without fanfare by simply failing legally to proclaim any successor to the Queen in relation to Canada." Still, this theory remains unsupported by either the Canadian government or other constitutional scholars.
{Link without Title} .


CURRENT OPINION


In recent years senior Canadian Cabinet ministers such as John Manley and Brian Tobin have expressed their republican views while serving in the government of Jean Chrétien , and the influential '' Globe And Mail '' newspaper adopting a pro-republican editorial position in the 1990 s.

Public opinion polls in Canada show that sentiments concerning the monarchy tend to be apathy and indifference. Some polls have shown a slight majority of Canadians to favour the creation of a republic, while others show support for the Monarchy, but most polls suggest that the issue is a low priority among Canadians. Monarchists, traditionally, are more passionate about their advocacy for the monarchy than republicans have been in their opposition. While the Monarchist League Of Canada was formed in 1970 to fight what it saw as "creeping republicanism" in the gradual removal of references to royalty and the Dominion by federal institutions, it was only in 2002 that republicans formed their own lobby group, Citizens For A Canadian Republic .


Recent polls

Support for the monarchy in Canada dropped to record lows in the late 1990s. In the 2000s, support for the monarchy has risen to include the majority of Canadians. However, the fact that many Canadians continue to not completely understand exactly what a " Head Of State " is, or the exact nature of the Queen's current role in Canada, can cause some problems in drawing concrete conclusions from poll results. Other problems in seeking public opinion have been caused by the phrasing of individual questions in such polls.
  • An opinion poll conducted by the Strategic Council and published by the '' of the Monarchist League Of Canada argued that as with the 2002 Ekos poll (listed below), the question asked contained the word "British" in association with the monarchy. Aimers asserted that this wording is not neutral and presents the institution as foreign thus affecting the answers given by respondents.

  • An opinion poll conducted by Environics Research Group Ltd. for the CBC in April 2005 taken on the eve of Prince Charles' wedding to the Duchess Of Cornwall found that 65% of Canadians support Charles as King. Only 27% of Canadians did not support him as King.

  • A March 2005 Decima Research Poll found that 71% of Canadians had a favourable impression of the Royal Family and only 20% had an unfavourable impression of the Royal Family. The poll found that 28% of Canadians saw the Queen as their favourite member of the Royal Family, Prince William was second with 26%, Prince Harry was third with 9%, Prince Charles was fourth with 6% and Prince Philip last with 2% support.

  • A March 2005 poll prepared by Pollara Inc. for Rogers Media Inc. and '' Maclean's '' indicated that 46% supported, while 37% opposed the statement: "Do you support or oppose Canada replacing the British Monarch as Canadian Head of State?" (''Source: Maclean's magazine, March 21, 2005, p.15''). This survey was deemed by monarchists as skewed for two reasons: It mentioned the "British Monarch" rather than the "Queen of Canada", and it was taken at after the announcement of Prince Charles's marriage to Camilla Parker Bowles – an announcement that was seen as unpopular even by some monarchists.


In 2002 , the year of the Queen's golden jubilee, polls were taken by Canada's three biggest polling firms on Canadian views of the monarchy.
  • The 2002 Ekos poll found that support for abolition of the monarchy is declining yet also highlighted many contradictions in public opinion. 48% agreed and 35% disagree with the statement, "Instead of a British monarch, we should have a Canadian citizen as our head of state." Yet at the same time 43% disagreed and 41% agreed to the same question worded slightly differently: "it's time to abolish the monarchy in Canada." Again, monarchists suggest the confusion may arise from the skewed question which refers to the "British monarch" as Canada's head of state. (As the distinct Queen of Canada, sovereign of the Canadian Crown, many argue the monarchy is, in part, Canadian.) Only 5% were even aware that the Queen was, in fact, Canada's head of state, with 69% thinking it was the Prime Minister and 9% believing it was the Governor General. 55% agree that the monarchy keeps Canada distinct from the United States, while 33% disagree. This survey has often been cited as evidence of the lack of knowledge that many Canadians have of their government's institutions and functions. ( Poll results – PDF document)

  • The 2002 Ipsos-Reid poll found that 79% of Canadians support "the constitutional monarchy as Canada's form of government where we elect governments whose leader becomes Prime Minister." However, republicans suggest the result may have been skewed by the inclusion of "where we elect governments whose leader becomes Prime Minister." Also, 62% believe the monarchy helps to define Canada's identity. At the same time, 48% of Canadians say that "the constitutional monarchy is outmoded and would prefer a republican system of government with an elected head of state", and two-thirds (65%) believe the royals are merely celebrities and should not have any formal role in Canada. The same poll also found that 58% believe that "the issue of the monarchy and the form of Canada’s government isn’t important to them and if the system is working OK why go through all the fuss to change it." ( Poll results – PDF document)

  • The 2002 Leger Marketing poll found 50% said "yes" to the statement, "Elizabeth II is currently the Queen of Canada. Do you (yes or no) want Canada to maintain the monarchy?" 43% said "no". Also, a majority (56%) said "yes" to: "In your opinion, should we replace the head of Queen Elizabeth II on the Canadian dollar by those of people who have influenced Canadian history?" 39% said "no". ( Poll results – PDF document)



SEE ALSO



Republican views