The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #21  
Old 01-20-2018, 11:04 PM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is online now
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 3,748
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frozen Royalist View Post
Okay, we talk about nations that could become monarchies while also talking about the popularity and maintaining of existing monarchies, how about we talk about something specific?

What I'd like this thread to be about is Canada having its own royal family outside of the Commonwealth Realm, I'm talking about Canada going from being the Dominion of Canada to the United Kingdom of Canada (It is a federal state and it would be best in my opinion that would be United Kingdom of Canada rather then simply Kingdom of Canada because of Quebec), a Canada that isn't sharing with the UK in terms of Head of State.

I would like discussions about Canadian republicanism and Windsor-loyalism to stay out of this thread because it is primarily hypothetical meaning in theory. Meaning just discuss about there being a Canadian Royal Family in general, don't say it's impossible, don't say it would be more likely for Canada to form a United North American Republic with the US, just talk about an independent Canadian monarchy.

So what are your thoughts of an independent Canadian Royal Family? How should it be established? Should somebody from the House of Windsor be voted as the first monarch? Perhaps somebody from the House of Bourbon because of Quebec? Or a different dynasty entirely form Europe or a prominent Canadian family? How would you like there to be a United Kingdom of Canada?

The reasons I'm asking is because I have recently received a new perspective of Canadian Monarchism, some people have pointed that the polls I've seen about the monarchy in Canada are rather rubbish like the Serbian Restoration polls. While thinking I'm afraid I received a brain fart and thought about how cool it would be for Canada to have its own royal family. This would mean that there is an independent constitutional monarchy in the Western Hemisphere (I'm not saying Canada isn't independent I'm just saying Canada would be independent of the Commonwealth Realm) which in turn could cause the idea of monarchism to become more popular or resurface even further in Brazil and maybe even Mexico, crazier things have happened.

-Frozen Royalist

P.S. Once again the purpose of this thread is just to talk about stuff that is in theory, hypothetical, etc. I hope the rules make sense.
I'm going to break the rules of this thread in that we're not supposed to be discuss Canadian republicanism or Windsor loyalism. The reason I'm doing this is that I think the idea that there isn't a republican movement in Canada, or that there is a strong Windsor loyalism is a huge misconception.

There is a republican movement, although outside of Quebec it really isn't strong. What is a lot stronger is a laissez faire-type attitude towards the monarchy in Canada; most people simply don't care. A big part of the reason why republicanism doesn't have a political foothold in Canada (outside of Quebec, which is a special case) isn't because of any strong support towards the monarchy, but rather because no one involved in politics seriously wants to open up the issue that is the Canadian constitution. In order to get rid of the monarchy, or to simply get rid of the House of Windsor and adopt a new monarch, the constitution would have to be changed and that's a political nightmare. In order to change the nature of the Crown, it's required to have the unanimous consent of all the provinces and both Houses of Parliament. The attempts to amend the constitution since 1982 (when it was enacted) that have passed are the ones that don't require all the provinces to consent. The ones that have failed? Required all the provinces.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 01-21-2018, 01:19 AM
hel hel is offline
Nobility
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Kitchener, Canada
Posts: 488
I think it's a bit challenging to have a discussion as its outlined in the OP.

To begin with, while the original post pays lip service to Canadian independence, most of the rest of the post seems to belie that lip service. The Dominion of Canada hasn't existed since 1982. Canada is already an independent constitutional monarchy in the Western Hemisphere. Canada achieved independence gradually from the 1830s to the 1930s, when Canada was independent except for the power to amend its constitution. That changed in 1982 with the repatriation of the Constitution.

Part of that misunderstanding, I think, is that lack of realization that there's no such thing as "the Commonwealth Realm". The Commonwealth isn't a realm, it's a confederation of 52 independent sovereign states. So to specify as an end goal that "Canada would be independent of the Commonwealth Realm" isn't a particularly meaningful statement.

As for the Commonwealth, I don't think a discussion of Canada having a monarchy unique from the UK monarch should ever presuppose that Canada leaves the Commonwealth.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 01-21-2018, 04:40 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 3,296
Quote:
Originally Posted by JR76 View Post
The Duc d'Anjou and his ancestors have been living in Spain for 300 years so he's not exactly French
But he is a descendant of Louis XIV, so his claim to the Québec throne is stronger than that of the Orléans, who descend only from Louis XIII. Unfortunately, there are no living (legitimate) male line descendants of the last King of France who was also the sovereign of Canada, i.e. Louis XV.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 01-21-2018, 05:03 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 3,296
Quote:
Originally Posted by Countessmeout View Post
Both you'd have the whole transitioning private citizens into royals, but then again this is a new monarchy anyways. They have the royal blood, but no real link to the running of the family back in the UK. George though is heir to Kent, though I guess he could pass over his right in favor of his brother. Or Edward could remain heir to his grandfather, and Marina could be the future queen. I don't see Canada, if we had our own monarchy, embracing anything less then equal inheritance.

As former PM Stephen Harper argued, the laws of succession to the throne are NOT part of the Canadian constitution. That is why Canada didn't have to amend its constitution (with the consent of the two houses of the federal parliament and of the legislative assemblies of all 10 provinces) to ratify the Succession to the Crown Act. According to the Canadian government, a bill "consenting" to the Sucession to the Crown Act was introduced in and ultimately passed by the Canadian parliament just to comply with the requirements in the preamble to the Statute of Westminster, but otherwise had no effect in Canadian domestic law. Therefore, in a way, when the UK embraced equal primogeniture in the succession to the throne, Canada automatically did it too.


I know that the interpretation according to which whoever is the monarch under British law is also automatically the monarch of Canada has been disputed inside Canada. Nonetheless, so far the Canadian courts have not ruled otherwise, so I assume Stephen Harper's interpretation that Canada does not have its own law of succession still stands. I agree with Ish that having a separate monarch from the UK would, however, require a constitutional amendment and, then, Section 41 of the Constitution Act 1982 would probably apply.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 01-21-2018, 06:49 AM
Somebody's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Somewhere, Suriname
Posts: 1,203
Quote:
Originally Posted by Countessmeout View Post
The only chance a monarchy would have of standing is to be a Windsor one. Keeping the traditions and such we love, but making it 'our own'.

But to really make it our own, we could argue that should be 'Canadian'. There are two options really. One much closer to the throne, but there really isn't a need for them to be physically close.

-King Peter, Queen Autumn and Princesses Savanah and Isla: Anne is firmly entrenched in royal life in the UK and her role there. Her Canadian daughter in law as a Canadian queen consort.

or a bit further from the throne but still Windsor blood:
-King George, Queen Sylvana and prince/ss Edward, Marina and Amelia

Both you'd have the whole transitioning private citizens into royals, but then again this is a new monarchy anyways. They have the royal blood, but no real link to the running of the family back in the UK. George though is heir to Kent, though I guess he could pass over his right in favor of his brother. Or Edward could remain heir to his grandfather, and Marina could be the future queen. I don't see Canada, if we had our own monarchy, embracing anything less then equal inheritance.
Thanks for adding the St Andrews idea. Would the Canadians care whether their monarch is Anglican or Roman Catholic? The advantage of the future duke of Kent is that his elder children are already excluded from the UK throne, so fewer people who might have to give up their UK rights.

I don't see an issue with the Kent title. Could be kept imo.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 01-21-2018, 09:18 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 3,296
Quote:
Originally Posted by Somebody View Post
Thanks for adding the St Andrews idea. Would the Canadians care whether their monarch is Anglican or Roman Catholic? The advantage of the future duke of Kent is that his elder children are already excluded from the UK throne, so fewer people who might have to give up their UK rights.

I don't see an issue with the Kent title. Could be kept imo.
I don't think they would care either way about the religion of the sovereign. Canada doesn't have an established church. The largest church in number of members is actually the Roman Catholic Church, which accounts for 39 % percent of the population according to the 2011 National Household Survey (I got the figures from the Wikipedia article on 'Religion in Canada'). In the same survey, Anglicans were approximately 5 % of the population only; "Protestants" in general were 24.1 % with the Anglican Church being actually the second largest Protestant denomination after the United Church of Canada, which accounted for 6.1 % of the national population. Besides Catholics and "Protestants", the survey listed the Eastern Orthodox churches as a separate category accounting for 1.7 % of the population and there was a separate column for "Christians not included elsewhere"(3 %), who, according to Wikipedia, are people who self-identify as "Christian", "Evangelical", "Born again", etc. but do not self-identify as "Protestant".

Going back to Canada not having its own law of succession as part of the constitution, I believe that the rules of succession to the throne have been challenged in the past on the grounds that they violated the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms by discriminating against women and Catholics, but the Canadian courts consistently dismissed those challenges as "non-justiciable".
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 01-21-2018, 07:27 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 3,296
I think you should rephrase it, or else the Canadians will protest. The discussion is not about "a monarchy for an independent Canada" as Canada is already independent. As I understand it, the OP was suggesting instead a separate monarch (and a separate royal family) for the UK and Canada, which is completely different. As of today, the person who is the British monarch under British law is automatically the monarch of Canada (as controversial as that may sound, it has been confirmed both by the Canadian government and by some Canadian courts when the issue of ratification of the Succession to the Crown Act was raised).

The only caveat is that, because of the preamble to the Statute of Westminster, the UK cannot change its succession law without the assent of the "parliaments of the Dominions" and that is the reason why the Canadian parliament, according to the Canadian government, had to pass a bill assenting to the Succession to the Crown Act even though the said act is not part of Canadian law per se and was not incorporated into Canadian law thereafter.

In other words, as odd as it may sound for an independent country, what the Canadian government and the Canadian courts have said is that Canada does not really have a law on the succession of its Head of State and actually delegates the power to change that law to the United Kingdom, which nonetheless has to ask for the assent of the Canadian parliament to do so. Quite complicated, isn't it ?

Going back to the OP, I don't see Canada ever choosing a new dynasty that somehow does not descend from the first monarch under the Dominion, i.e. Queen Victoria. As for Québec, on the other hand, if it breaks out from Canada and becomes a separate monarchy, I really think there is a strong case to offer the Crown to descendants of the old Kings of France. The only question is whether the Québec Crown should go to the Bourbons or the Orléans. On one hand, the Bourbons are genealogically closer to the last King of France to rule over Canada as they descend from Louis XIV whereas the Orléans descend only from Louis XIII. On the other hand though, since France lost Canada only in 1763, the 1713 Treaty of Utrecht excluding the descendants of Philippe d'Anjou from the French succession was already in effect and, in the absence of any legitimate male-line Bourbon descendant of Louis XV, the legitimate heirs to all of Louis XV's dominions, including Canada had it not been lost to Britain, would be the Orléans. A difficult question again !
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 01-21-2018, 07:39 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 10,678
To be absolutely honest, I've found all of this discussion to be very informative and have learned more about the way things work in Canada in this recent discussions that I probably ever would have learned in my lifetime without it.

The more I think about it, establishing a purely Canadian monarchy would be tantamount to Egypt trying to revert to having a pharaonic head of state that dates back to the first pharaoh Narmer (Menes). Over time, too much has happened and too much has changed to revert back to what once was.

To me, the only move that may possibly happen is that Canada just abolishes all ties to any monarchy whatsoever.
__________________
I dream of a better tomorrow, where chickens can cross the road and not be questioned about their motives.

~~~Ralph Waldo Emerson~~~
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 02-09-2018, 06:30 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 3,296
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
To me, the only move that may possibly happen is that Canada just abolishes all ties to any monarchy whatsoever.
Regrettably, many Americans ignore that, at the time of the American Revolution, at least 20 % of the white population of the colonies remained actively loyal to the British Crown and, out of those loyalists, roughly 15 % (i.e. about 3 % of the white population of the colonies) left the new United States and settled in other parts of the British Empire, including what is now the eastern half of continental Canada (Ontario, Quebec, New Brunswick and Nova Scotia), forming the original nucleus of Canada's English-speaking population. In a way then, one can say that the American Revolution actually gave birth to two separate countries: the United States and the future (English) Canada.

Loyalism played an important role in the divergent histories of the United States and Canada . In contrast to the United States, Canada showed that it was possible to follow a gradual path to independence via evolution under British law, rather than a violent revolution. In doing so, it also provided a successful template for decolonization that was later followed by other Commonwealth nations like Australia and New Zealand. It may be the case that, at some point in the future, Canadians may decide to sever their ties to the Crown permanently, but, if and when they do so, they will be turning their backs on an institution that was essential to shape Canada as we know it and, especially, to forge a separate English Canadian identity that differs from that of the United States.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 02-10-2018, 07:44 PM
CyrilVladisla's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Conneaut, United States
Posts: 3,643
Would the royal family reside in a royal palace? If Yes, in which city would the palace be located?
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Happy Canadian Thanksgiving! Duke-of-Earl Forum Announcements and Admin 5 10-08-2012 09:35 AM




Popular Tags
birthday camilla chris o'neill crown princess victoria current events duchess of brabant family general news general royal discussion gloucester hasnat khan hereditary grand duchess stéphanie hereditary grand duke guillaume infanta cristina infanta leonor infanta sofia iñaki urdangarín jacobite king felipe king felipe vi king philippe king willem-alexander letizia monarchy news nobel nobel prize opening of parliament porphyria prince alexander prince charles prince charles; biographies; tom bower prince daniel prince emmanuel prince felix prince gabriel prince harry prince nicholas prince oscar princess alexandra of luxembourg princess beatrice princess claire of luxembourg princess diana princess estelle princess leonore princess madeleine princess margaretha of luxembourg princess of asturias princess sofia princess victoria queen letizia queen letizia casual outfits queen letizia daytime fashion queen letizia fashion queen letizia gowns queen mathilde queen mathilde daytime fashion queen maxima queen maxima daytime fashion queen maxima hats queen sofia royal ancestry royal ancestry; oscar and sophia royal geneology spanish royal family events state visit stephanie sweden swedish royal family victoria



Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:50 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2018
Jelsoft Enterprises