Wetcoaster Posted November 19, 2012 Share Posted November 19, 2012 With too many people thinking that way, yes. Not sure if you're a defeatist or a loyalist though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucklehead Posted November 19, 2012 Share Posted November 19, 2012 nm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucklehead Posted November 19, 2012 Share Posted November 19, 2012 Without getting off topic, "England" ? do you mean Great Britain? are riddled with class corruption and delusions of still being a World Power. Both are linked by the way...............and there lies the source of their fiscal ineptitude. That is one of the reasons I am such a strong Scottish Nationalist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buggernut Posted November 19, 2012 Share Posted November 19, 2012 Neither, I am a realist not prone to flights of unsupported fancy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wetcoaster Posted November 19, 2012 Share Posted November 19, 2012 200 years ago, we thought Canada (BNA) would forever remain a British Colony. I don't know how long it'll take, but we should eventually come to our senses and drop this useless relic of the past. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronthecivil Posted November 19, 2012 Share Posted November 19, 2012 Given the unanimity clause in our Constitution for changing the office of the Queen it seems fantastical. And the other offices would have to be created to fill the role of the Queen as Head of State and her delegates - federal and provincial Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted November 19, 2012 Author Share Posted November 19, 2012 Given the unanimity clause in our Constitution for changing the office of the Queen it seems fantastical. And the other offices would have to be created to fill the role of the Queen as Head of State and her delegates - federal and provincial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wetcoaster Posted November 19, 2012 Share Posted November 19, 2012 I was talking about it realistically happening... and it is not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted November 19, 2012 Author Share Posted November 19, 2012 Sure, but are you able to answer the question? Just pretend you're reading a piece of fiction. You're allowed to react to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wetcoaster Posted November 19, 2012 Share Posted November 19, 2012 I do not engage in fantastical hypotheticals . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted November 19, 2012 Author Share Posted November 19, 2012 So... Why post? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wetcoaster Posted November 20, 2012 Share Posted November 20, 2012 So... Why post? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted November 20, 2012 Author Share Posted November 20, 2012 Well you've been around long enough to know that you should probably stick with the topic at hand. But maybe you can teach us all about what your opinion would be on the actual discussion. Please? I mean, since you're in the thread and all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronthecivil Posted November 20, 2012 Share Posted November 20, 2012 Even if you killed the Royals, seized all their property, and proportioned the money out as a dividend cheque (which using the rough value of 20 billion for their total land holdings, the castles, the crown jewals, etc. would be about 350 pounds sterling) for everyone in England they would still be hooped. It would cover 20% of their current budget deficit. For one year. As a nation they would still be massively in debt. Doing the same for the Governer General in Canada might save you enough for a cup of coffee. Even in England and even more so you're free to say bad things about the Queen or just outright ignore all the pap. Compare that with the states where you get the same mess but with Kardashians. Compare that with other states where the King is still very much real and not to be insulted. Compare that even with supposedly equal societies where inevitably some sort of elite emerges. I would say what we have no is a pretty cheap and benign placeholder for claims anyone might have regarding their moral reasoning for being the head of state. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wetcoaster Posted November 20, 2012 Share Posted November 20, 2012 Well you've been around long enough to know that you should probably stick with the topic at hand. But maybe you can teach us all about what your opinion would be on the actual discussion. Please? I mean, since you're in the thread and all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theminister Posted November 20, 2012 Share Posted November 20, 2012 Personally, I'll keep the Royals on the off chance someone, I don't know who maybe the big guy in the basement, decides to home invade us because he did not pay his water bill. It's a little reassuring knowing we have historical and political ties to another strong nation. All your egss, one basket.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buggernut Posted November 20, 2012 Share Posted November 20, 2012 Personally, I'll keep the Royals on the off chance someone, I don't know who maybe the big guy in the basement, decides to home invade us because he did not pay his water bill. It's a little reassuring knowing we have historical and political ties to another strong nation. All your egss, one basket.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuck_trevor16 Posted November 20, 2012 Share Posted November 20, 2012 It won't happen anytime soon...as if it really really difficult to make this happen...if you think about it there has been other similar reform like the Canadian Senate which had failed and tried to change I believe but never worked...anyone who study political science should know this wont happen with the current government or probably future government as does not seem to be willing change Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buggernut Posted November 20, 2012 Share Posted November 20, 2012 The problem is getting rid of the Queen of Canada and her delegates the Governor General and Lieutenant Governors requires a unanimous amendment to the Constitution of Canada and can only be modified by a unanimous vote of all the provinces plus the two Houses of Parliament known as the "unanimity formula" per section 41 (a) of the Constitution Act, 1982: 41. An amendment to the Constitution of Canada in relation to the following matters may be made by proclamation issued by the Governor General under the Great Seal of Canada only where authorized by resolutions of the Senate and House of Commons and of the legislative assemblies of each province: (a) the office of the Queen, the Governor General and the Lieutenant Governor of a province; That possibility seems to be on the order of chance of slim and none... and slim has left the building. So it is pure fantasy without any real world foundation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted November 20, 2012 Author Share Posted November 20, 2012 I feel no need to complain when this doesn't really impact me in any way. Afterall, it's not like you're doing something major like denying me a haircut. However, i am curious as to why you cannot just answer the question? All work and no play? I am sticking with the topic at hand. As I have pointed out it is a fantasy post. If you think I am not "on topic" then do what the rules direct and report me rather than blathering on.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.