Head of State and Republicanism

Like so many peculiar Canadian myths, the one regarding the monarchy continues to baffle me. Whenever a media commentator discusses the question, whether it be pro or con, it warms the blood of many otherwise complacent folk. This article is the latest one that caught my attention.

The reason the question of the monarchy baffles me is that it is a settled question, regardless of the seeming controversy. By saying that I may have in turn baffled you! Let me explain what I mean.

Canada is not a monarchy. It is a republic. Yes, it is true that there is a piece of parchment somewhere that says we are -- as schoolchildren are taught -- a constitutional monarchy. There are also the visible signs of the monarchy such as the Governor General, the monarch's image and Latin caption on our money, occasional royal visits, and so on. This is the obvious stuff that blinds some into believing that we do have a monarch. We don't. Starting with so-called responsible government well before Confederation and up to the ultimate act of making the Supreme Court the highest court of appeal about three decades ago, we have moved slowly but steadily from a monarchy to a republic. But as of three decades ago, Canada is a fully-operational republic. No, not on paper (sorry, parchment), but in the reality of how power is wielded.

The monarch has no regal power in this country. None. Try to image if you can Queen Elizabeth actually attempting to influence, let allow propose or quash, acts of Parliament, or, going even further, dissolve Parliament. If she or her successor were silly enough to try any of these things you can bet that we would very quickly do what's needed to become a republic on paper (or parchment) as well. The government wouldn't stand for it and neither would the "loyal" opposition or us, the citizens. If we ask the same question of the Governor General, it is less clear, as we discovered earlier this year. The difference is that, while usually a purely ceremonial role, the role of GG does have power, but that power originates with the government -- a government elected by the people -- that nominates the sole candidate for the position. This is just like one style of republic where the President is appointed by the government or elected by Parliament; another other way is to elect the President by popular vote, though this step is often skipped where the role is not one of chief executive.

The role of GG or President is not entirely ceremonial since there are cases where parliamentary deadlocks must be broken (e.g. dismiss the government or ask another party to try to form one), but also can serve as a check to a broadly-unpopular act of Parliament when there is no other body to vet legislation. In Canada's case, the Senate is almost entirely toothless in this regard. I suggest that this one item is where the power of a GG contrasts with that of a ceremonial President: the GG does not dare to block legislation, whereas a President might. The difference is small though necessary but, importantly, has nothing whatever to do with the monarch.

Whether we take the step to formally abolish the monarchy is of no importance to me. It's enough that I know that Canada is, where it matters most -- formal power -- a republic. The imprint on our coins doesn't affect this reality.