[PublicAnimalNo9]

Jabberwalker Jabberwalker:

" I hereby pledge allegiance to Saturday Night Hockey, Rrrolling up the Rrrim and Ontario Bashing ..."

Yeah, something like that

[BartSimpson]

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

What's so honourable about pledging allegiance to a person holding a titular position?
How about an oath of allegiance to the country and its people? To its cultures and its mores?

For many Brits pledging their loyalty to the Queen is an oath of allegiance to their country, their culture, their people, and to their common values.

[Batsy2]

herbie herbie:

Not at all. The Queen couldn't "check" Parliament, can't even do that in the UK. It's a misconception in the USA that King George was the evil one, he was just mental. It was Parliament that made the laws that caused the Revolution.
The Monarchy's been reduced to nothing but pomp and circumstance, someone on the coins and the $20 you cheer and wave at and sometimes has to sign a Bill because of the way the Constitution is set up. Is she refused or even commented that 'this is a terrible law' she WOULD be risking Canada, Australia, New Zealand rethinking their positions.
I'm thinking of ways to retain the traditional ties, yet ensure the national and democratic finality of gov't. And with over 200 years of being next to the USA, avoiding some of the problems of a Republic.
It to often seems, even with your built in 'checks and balances' that in response to the fear of a demagogic King, you guys have created a Demagog elected every 4 years. The checks and balances only ensure nothing ever gets done...

The monarch has several powers - called the royal prerogative - which the monarch can exercise without the backing of parliament.

Here are those powers:


Domestic Affairs

The appointment and dismissal of ministers (in 1975, the Queen dismissed her entire Australian government during the constitutional crisis);

The summoning, prorogation and dissolution of Parliament;

Royal assent to bills;

The appointment and regulation of the civil service;

The commissioning of officers in the armed forces;

Directing the disposition of the armed forces in the UK (the Queen is the Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces);

Appointment of Queen's Counsel;

Issue and withdrawal of passports;

Prerogative of mercy. (Used to apply in capital punishment cases. Still used, eg to remedy errors in sentence calculation)

Granting honours;

Creation of corporations by Charter.



Foreign Affairs

The making of treaties;

Declaration of war;

Deployment of armed forces overseas;

Recognition of foreign states;

Accreditation and reception of diplomats.

[stratos]

$1:

Royal assent to bills;

Is this needed to have a bill become law?

[Batsy2]

stratos stratos:

$1:

Royal assent to bills;

Is this needed to have a bill become law?

A Bill can only become an Act of Parliament if it receives the royal assent of the monarch. It is one of the Queen's main tasks.

[ShepherdsDog]

She rubber stamps whatever legislation the PM puts in front of her. it's essentially been that way since the days of Cromwell. Constitutionally the Crown may have these powers. The Crown will never act on them however, as they'd be ignored and they know it.

[Batsy2]

ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:

She rubber stamps whatever legislation the PM puts in front of her. it's essentially been that way since the days of Cromwell. Constitutionally the Crown may have these powers. The Crown will never act on them however, as they'd be ignored and they know it.

These are powers that the Queen has that she can use without the consent of parliament. The Queen can and does use the powers she has been given - as with the time she dismissed her entire government in Australia in 1975 and on all those occasions she gives royal assent to Bills and on the occasions she grants mercy to felons - and it would be a waste of time to give the monarch these powers if they cannot use them.

[Vamp018]

Well in Canada's Case the GG has the reserve power's and royal assent and as I understand the system Shep nailed it. Although how does the PM and GG prorogation the Senate ??

[Vamp018]

Batsy2 Batsy2:

ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:

She rubber stamps whatever legislation the PM puts in front of her. it's essentially been that way since the days of Cromwell. Constitutionally the Crown may have these powers. The Crown will never act on them however, as they'd be ignored and they know it.

These are powers that the Queen has that she can use without the consent of parliament. The Queen can and does use the powers she has been given - as with the time she dismissed her entire government in Australia in 1975 and on all those occasions she gives royal assent to Bills and on the occasions she grants mercy to felons - and it would be a waste of time to give the monarch these powers if they cannot use them.

Stop flaming our Neighbor with the Queen and your evil ways. Canada is it's own Nation, mind and culture. I remind you, your nation sold Canada's RCN Junk Death Trap Subs. Now go sit in the Tower of London and suck ya thumb.

[ShepherdsDog]

$1:

she dismissed her entire government in Australia in 1975

Governor-General Kerr had to leave Australia after dismissing Whitlam.

$1:

"The Queen has tenure, and she couldn't be sacked. But a Governor-General holds office at pleasure, and if he ceases to please then he can be removed by a Prime Minister."

Australian Liberal Party leader Malcolm Fraser

$1:

Well in Canada's Case the GG has the reserve power's and royal assent

This was also the case in Australia. It was their Governor General Sir John Kerr not, QE II that dismissed the government. he may have informed her of his intentions, but it was Keer, not the Queen who acted.

$1:

Stop flaming our Neighbor with the Queen and your evil ways.

Sorry dude, but I'm a monarchist through and through and my family fought in all of the Empire's wars for centuries, including the American war of succession. I just disagree with his take on the monarchy, which has been done since the Stuart dynasty was removed.

[herbie]

Shep's busy classifying all the acts of the Governor General as acts of the Queen herself. The GG gives Royal Assent to Bills. Here and in Australia.
The GG prorogued Parliament for Harper
The GG at the time dismissed Australia's PM and appointed the Opposition to government.
The GG is appointed by the nations to act as Her representative. That doesn't equate to being the Monarch and the process is referred to as the Crown. That being pointed out when our last GG started quite the fuss with all the stick-up-the-ass Monarchists by saying she was the actual Head of State.
If the Monarch in London actually attempted to use Royal Perogative, they'd be the last one, and it would be ignored.

[Vamp018]

"Sorry dude, but I'm a monarchist through and through and my family fought in all of the Empire's wars for centuries, including the American war of succession. I just disagree with his take on the monarchy, which has been done since the Stuart dynasty was removed."

I can fully respect your views with great appreciation, It was his take and Angle of Attack I didn't like towards Canada. Believe me at times in the US I wish we a form of a No Confidence measure to fit the US System to fall the Federal Elected Government, but we don't, thus door open for abuse of Powers and elections.

[PublicAnimalNo9]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

What's so honourable about pledging allegiance to a person holding a titular position?
How about an oath of allegiance to the country and its people? To its cultures and its mores?

For many Brits pledging their loyalty to the Queen is an oath of allegiance to their country, their culture, their people, and to their common values.

And that's their prerogative. However this ain't Blighty.

[ShepherdsDog]

herbie herbie:

Shep's busy classifying all the acts of the Governor General as acts of the Queen herself.

Really?? That's news to me. I stated the opposite. The GG acted on his own, not on the Queen's directives.

[herbie]

Sorry, meant that @Batsy.