Vancouver Courier
for December 30, 1998

It was just a teeny coincidence – no more. But there I was reading a biography of King George VI (A Spirit Undaunted – Robert Rhodes James) when I turned to the paper and saw that Jean Chretien was saying that dealing with the monarchy in this country was not high on his agenda. I noted that we’re changing our oath of allegiance to downplay the Queen a bit. Then I read an article by William Johnson, the Montreal anglo activist calling for the abolition of the monarchy. And I found myself wondering whether or not Mr Chretien’s denial didn’t sound like a hockey owner’s public vote of confidence to his losing coach.

(Mr James’s book, incidentally, is an excellent one and tells the story of the remarkable relationship between His Majesty and Winston Churchill during World War II.)

All of this got me to thinking about the monarchy in Canada which, despite the legal nitpicking that the Queen is Queen of Canada, is foreign and getting more foreign by the day. Has the time come when Canada, in the interest of unity, should consider an alternative? And must I look at my own views?

For starters, to abolish the monarchy isn’t easy. It takes unanimous consent and is indeed an amendment which could be stopped in its tracks by tiny Prince Edward Island where, should the attempt be made, which would no doubt be where the monarchists would fight hardest on the assumption that a handful of traditionalists would be easier to sway than the larger more cosmopolitan provinces.

I’ve long been a monarchist. And I allege that I am because it has proved a good system. Even when it’s gone wrong, such as the Byng Crisis in 1926, it quickly adapted to the lessons learned. But is this the real reason? Am I really being honest when I claim support for this institution on its merits?

The answer is no. I’m being dishonest as hell. I favour the monarchy because it represents the quickly diminishing power base from which I sprang.

The Monarchy, truth be told, is Admiral Nelson and Sir Francis Drake. It’s Elizabeth I, Magna Carta, Winston Churchill and the Union Jack. It’s the history I was taught right to and including Law School. It’s Sir Henry Newbolt’s Vitae Lampada with the schoolboy’s cry of "play up, play up, and play the game". It’s Kipling’s rousing poetry and Elgar’s Pomp and Circumstance better known as Land of Hope and Glory. But, dammit, it’s Wolfe and Montcalm too and I can’t deny it.

The monarchy while it represents my British background of which I’m deeply proud also gives the finger to those of other cultures. Oh, I know, the monarchists tell us that the English Queen, for that’s what she is, represents protection of all her subjects blah, blah, blah but I have to ask myself this question – if I weren’t of the fast fading British hegemony, would I see the monarchy as representing my connection to the country?

The answer is no. I might accept it in an effort to blend noiselessly into the community but it would scarcely represent my patriotic feelings for Canada.

But there are two other more important questions.

If the monarchy is, at worst, a neutral thing – some people revere it, most are indifferent - would its replacement make a positive change? Would, for example, an elected Canadian president occupying a ceremonial office only be a good thing. Would it help unify this beleaguered state? And if the answer is yes, how do we select this powerless symbol?

Well, we sure as hell don’t appoint it or we’d just have a continuation of paid off party hacks as we have seen, alas with so few exceptions, since Vincent Massey became the first Canadian Governor-General a half century ago.

As we stand here, but two years away from the third millenium which as all who can count know starts January 1, 2001, I say get rid of the monarchy. Let us take a leaf from the books of Israel and Ireland and elect a ceremonial president. But we must elect him/her at the same time as a general election for it we do it separately, the new President might logically assume that some power went with the post. The president would, like the Queen, be the ultimate repository of all power but constitutionally unable to exercise it except when parliament fails and then only in a constitutional manner. If we get lucky, as Ireland has with her last two presidents, both women I might add, the president could become a position of positive moral and patriotic influence and a focal point of unity for all regions of the country.

I would miss the Queen but the important point is that millions of Canadians wouldn’t. And if we are all to be Canadians together, we must be bound not only by the same laws but the same emotions.

God bless the Queen but long live the president!