Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

Should the Queen be invited?


Recommended Posts

Québec City will soon be celebrating its 400th anniversary. The Conservatives have not extended an invitation to the Queen to attend the celebrations. Not surprising, the Bloc agrees. Should the Queen be invited? I am a monarchist but personally, this non-invitation does not upset me whatsoever.

Are the Conservatives being opportunistic in pandering to separatists in La belle province? Does it even matter?

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2007/12...4717334-cp.html

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 50
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

On the occasion of the 400th anniversary of the foundation of Quebec City, France wanted to highlight the profound friendship that exists between France and Quebec since the foundation of the city by the Frenchman Samuel de Champlain, on July 3rd, 1608. It is doing so by taking an active role alongside the Quebec people throughout the entirety of the celebrations during 2008, both in Quebec and France.
Link

Frankly, between a French president and a British monarch, I could care less. I am far more grateful to Laurier - on the tricentenary - for his cabinet's decision:

On March 17, 1908, the law creating the National Battlefields Commission (NBC) was sanctioned to highlight and preserve this site, unique in the world by its sheer size, its geographic location, its historical role and its beauty. The Battlefields Park, which groups together the Plains of Abraham and the Des Braves Park, was developed to honour the memory of both French and British combatants.
Link

This Park in Quebec is magnificent and all Canadians should at one time in their life walk about in it and see the plaques. It is to Laurier's credit that the space was preserved.

This four-hundredth anniversary has nothing similar to offer.

----

I can only add that Lord Dufferin thankfully preserved Quebec's walls, and its old city and gave his title to the terrace. Montreal was not so well protected.

The Dufferins also used the Citadel of Quebec in Quebec City as a second vice-regal residence. When Quebec city officials began to demolish the old city walls, Dufferin was appalled, persuading them to stop the demolition, and to repair and restore what had already been damaged. Old Quebec was recognized by UNESCO as a World Heritage Site in the 1980s. Dufferin's final public appearance as Governor General was in Quebec City, to lay the foundation stone for Dufferin Terrace, a walkway overlooking the St. Lawrence River built to his own design.
Edited by August1991
Link to post
Share on other sites

Gee, that last time I looked Quebec was part of Canada and part of the British Commonwealth. What is the big deal? They should invite her but who says she will come. She is in her 80's and it's winter and she would probably decline or send someone else.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It doesn't come in English.... :D

I'm not a big fan of the monarchy, and think it has very little place in Canadian life or politics, so I have no problem with her not being invited.

I only wish that the lack of an invitation was a case of trying to phase the monarchy out and not trying to avoid a riot in the streets.

Edited by Newfie Canadian
Link to post
Share on other sites
It doesn't come in English.... :D

I'm not a big fan of the monarchy, and think it has very little place in Canadian life or poolitics, so I have no problem with her not being invited.

I only wish that the lack of an invitation was a case of trying to phase the monarchy out and not trying to avoid a riot in the streets.

I think I must be the only "old guy" on this board! Many of the founders of the BQ/PQ were monarchists! They were proud of the Queen, just felt that she should be their Queen of an independent Quebec, just as she is of an independent TROC.

There are still large numbers of Canadians proud of their British Heritage. SOMEONE has to be, now that we live in a multi-cultural society that values any country's heritage BUT Canadian!

Any politician who wants to make us over into a republic would have to consider this group of votes.

Link to post
Share on other sites
It doesn't come in English.... :D

I'm not a big fan of the monarchy, and think it has very little place in Canadian life or poolitics, so I have no problem with her not being invited.

I only wish that the lack of an invitation was a case of trying to phase the monarchy out and not trying to avoid a riot in the streets.

While I am a person who is not a huge Monarchist, I do recognize that until we change our own status in this country, the Royal Family are indeed our "figure head" leaders. Belonging to the "Empire" does indeed have a few benefits.

That being stated I figure if she was smart she would stay away - just another place for a bunch of party goers to get drunk and bash the Anglos as a whole.

I wonder if there will be any mention of the fact that the french got their asses handed to them on a silver platter way back when?

Borg

Link to post
Share on other sites
While I am a person who is not a huge Monarchist, I do recognize that until we change our own status in this country, the Royal Family are indeed our "figure head" leaders. Belonging to the "Empire" does indeed have a few benefits.

That is the direction to which I point. I'm a Canadian, born and raised. My family has been in this glorious land for as far back as I can trace on the old family tree. It sort of irks me to see the Queen, bless her, on my money and so on. I'm a Canadian, not a British subject.

Edited by Newfie Canadian
Link to post
Share on other sites
Québec City will soon be celebrating its 400th anniversary. The Conservatives have not extended an invitation to the Queen to attend the celebrations. Not surprising, the Bloc agrees. Should the Queen be invited? I am a monarchist but personally, this non-invitation does not upset me whatsoever.

Are the Conservatives being opportunistic in pandering to separatists in La belle province? Does it even matter?

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2007/12...4717334-cp.html

Actually, I don't think the Queen should preside over this anniversary. It should be the Prince of Wales. #1) Charles hasn't been to Canada for a number of years; he wanted to come before his tour of the US in 2005, but Martin said no. #2) It was the Prince of Wales (later King George V) who attended the 300th anniversary in 1908.

Link to post
Share on other sites
That is the direction to which I point. I'm a Canadian, born and raised. My family has been in this glorious land for as far back as I can trace on the old family tree. It sort of irks me to see the Queen, bless her, on my money and so on. I'm a Canadian, not a British subject.

It's a pretty benign problem. Much greater things to worry about.

My gut feeling is that, all things being equal, most Canadians would vote to get rid of the monarchy.

However, those who would vote that way can't be arsed to get worked up about it. But that small group of monarchists would fight tooth and nail for it. So we have the Queen.

I understand it sort of irks you to see the Queen on your money. Would you prefer Mulroney or Trudeau? I bet you 95% of posters here would be really irked to see one of those two on the back of the loonie. But the Queen? meh, not really a big deal.

I think we should wait until Betty kicks and then deal with it at that time...

Link to post
Share on other sites
It's a pretty benign problem. Much greater things to worry about.

My gut feeling is that, all things being equal, most Canadians would vote to get rid of the monarchy.

However, those who would vote that way can't be arsed to get worked up about it. But that small group of monarchists would fight tooth and nail for it. So we have the Queen.

I understand it sort of irks you to see the Queen on your money. Would you prefer Mulroney or Trudeau? I bet you 95% of posters here would be really irked to see one of those two on the back of the loonie. But the Queen? meh, not really a big deal.

I think we should wait until Betty kicks and then deal with it at that time...

The Queen is the boss and should attend - she is not a figure head but the most powerful buisness person on earth - it would be un-wise to snub her.

Link to post
Share on other sites
My gut feeling is that, all things being equal, most Canadians would vote to get rid of the monarchy.

There's two aspects to the monarchy: 1) governmental, and 2) symbolic. In terms of the first: because the system works, less than benign, it isn't a problem at all. As it isn't a problem, most Canadians don't care about it. The latter point, however, is something different, and relates more to the topic of this thread; the role of the Crown in the life of the nation - at both a governmental and symbolic level - has been played down so much in the last thirty years that hardly anybody has a clue what it's there for. Hence, there is widespread confusion about what the Crown is, what it does, what's happened to it, what it symbolises, etc. I mean, we still - after seventy five years! - have Canadians who believe Canada to be under the Queen of the United Kingdom, as though the Statute of Westminster had never happened.

So, I can only imagine that when being asked if the Queen should attend the 400th anniversary of the founding of Quebec, they believe she would be doing so as a foreign dignitary representing the UK, like the President of France, instead of as the domestic Queen of Canada - Canada's head of state. Similarly, if asked to vote on retaining or dismissing the monarchy, they'd believe it to be a foreign institution. People shouldn't be asked to vote on something they completely misunderstand.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Québec City will soon be celebrating its 400th anniversary. The Conservatives have not extended an invitation to the Queen to attend the celebrations. Not surprising, the Bloc agrees. Should the Queen be invited?

Certainly the Queen should be invited.

It was the British who gave Quebec a culture through the Quebec Act.

Why does Quebec not acknowledge this?

Link to post
Share on other sites
So, I can only imagine that when being asked if the Queen should attend the 400th anniversary of the founding of Quebec, they believe she would be doing so as a foreign dignitary representing the UK, like the President of France, instead of as the domestic Queen of Canada - Canada's head of state. Similarly, if asked to vote on retaining or dismissing the monarchy, they'd believe it to be a foreign institution. People shouldn't be asked to vote on something they completely misunderstand.

If the monarchy was a foreign institution what business would it be of ours to vote on it?

I think that most people get the fact that the monarchy has an official role in Canadian life.

The Monarchy is still taught in our school system and the Queen is on the money, yada yada.

If such a referendum ever occured the media coverage would be at saturation level. Anybody who had the belief you claim would seriously be going out of their way to avoid any sort of understanding of the issue.

Link to post
Share on other sites
If the monarchy was a foreign institution what business would it be of ours to vote on it?

I think that most people get the fact that the monarchy has an official role in Canadian life.

The Monarchy is still taught in our school system and the Queen is on the money, yada yada.

If such a referendum ever occured the media coverage would be at saturation level. Anybody who had the belief you claim would seriously be going out of their way to avoid any sort of understanding of the issue.

There is no democracy on earth - may as well let the Queen go about her buisness...the picture of the queen on the money - is there because it belongs to her - so what else is new?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ah, so you too, like me, are a subject of Her Majesty the Queen of Canada. Good for you.

Touché.

The Queen of Canada simply makes little sense to me, as a Canadian. She visits once in a blue moon and there is no practical or tangible presence, save for the Governor General and various Lieutenants General. She isn't really here in any real sense, so why have her instead of something we can call our own?

I understand it sort of irks you to see the Queen on your money. Would you prefer Mulroney or Trudeau? I bet you 95% of posters here would be really irked to see one of those two on the back of the loonie. But the Queen? meh, not really a big deal.

I think we should wait until Betty kicks and then deal with it at that time...

We have a loon, a polar bear, a beaver and a schooner on some money, I would assume we could come up with something.

I agree that in the grand scheme of things it doesn't really matter a single iota. The only time I ever think about it is when it comes up on a forum like this or there's some absurdly elaborate, and might I add expensive, government ceremony that comes on TV.

i suppose we could wait until Charlie takes the throne...

Link to post
Share on other sites
The royal family are parasites.

No comment.

A handful of out of touch with reality, filthy rich people, living in absolute obscene luxury, at huge expense to everybody else.

In our case, Canada does not pay any money to the Royal Family.

"Contrary to common misconception, Canadians do not pay any money to the Queen, either for personal income or to support the royal residences outside of Canada. Only when the Queen is in Canada, or acting abroad as Queen of Canada, does she draw from Canadian coffers for support in the performance of her duties. This rule applies equally to other members of the Royal Family."

But Canada funds the Governor Genera and Lieutenant Governors in provinces. I think the expenditure is around $40M annually. As long as we remain a constitutional monarchy, I don't object to funding these institutions.

"Usually the Queen's Canadian governments pay only for the costs associated with the Governor General and Lieutenant Governors in their exercising of the powers of the Crown on behalf of the Queen, including travel, security, residences, offices, ceremonial occasions, etc."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monarchy_in_Canada#Finance

As long as Canadians are not dishing out for the Royal Family to operate in the UK and maintain their lifestyle, I don't care where their funding comes from.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The royal family are parasites. A handful of out of touch with reality, filthy rich people, living in absolute obscene luxury, at huge expense to everybody else.

Oh, did I mention that I'm anti royalist?

Tourist attraction, supposedly returns more money to GB than she costs.

Heck, invite her, shes always up for a good party. Or send her grandsons and some of his hotties.

Link to post
Share on other sites
If the monarchy was a foreign institution what business would it be of ours to vote on it?

I think that most people get the fact that the monarchy has an official role in Canadian life.

The Monarchy is still taught in our school system and the Queen is on the money, yada yada.

If such a referendum ever occured the media coverage would be at saturation level. Anybody who had the belief you claim would seriously be going out of their way to avoid any sort of understanding of the issue.

That's an interesting question that makes sense, but most people - at least that I've come across - don't see the conflict in their notion that the monarchy is part of Canadian life yet is still foreign.

I don't think the media frenzy that would lead up to any hypothetical referendum on the monarchy would do much to quell this hypocrisy. They already almost constantly refer to the monarchy as British, and don't seem to have a clue as to how it fits into Canada's national institutions; hell, even that it is a Canadian institution. I've seen the garbage that the Australian media printed before their referendum on the Crown in 1999; misinformation at best, downright lies at worst. I guess you'd be surprised just how far people will go to avoid true understanding of an issue, especially when its in their best interests not to.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Sounds more like politicians to me, actually.

If it was not for the Queen - Bush would not have been snubbed for being a fool- appreciate her majesty...better to have a Queen then none - or would you prefere to see a Trotskyite greed filled loser like Hillary Clinton wearing a crown? - she would destroy every resister to tyranny if she could - at least the Queen is not going to shove Ritalin down your kids throats in hope of creating a sub-class of short stunted people - Hillary would - cos' she's nuts. I like the Queen - even her husbands national socialist ideals are useful if tempered.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Tell a friend

    Love Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
×
×
  • Create New...