Montreal City Weblog

Kate 17:21 on 2022-11-01 Permalink Reply  

• Leagle 17:42 on 2022-11-01 Permalink

  Those who refuse the oath are attempting to create a constitutional crisis. Paradis is simply upholding the constitution.

  Canada Act, 1867, s. 128:

  Oath of Allegiance, etc.

  128 Every Member of the Senate or House of Commons of Canada shall before taking his Seat therein take and subscribe before the Governor General or some Person authorized by him, and every Member of a Legislative Council or Legislative Assembly of any Province shall before taking his Seat therein take and subscribe before the Lieutenant Governor of the Province or some Person authorized by him, the Oath of Allegiance contained in the Fifth Schedule to this Act; and every Member of the Senate of Canada and every Member of the Legislative Council of Quebec shall also, before taking his Seat therein, take and subscribe before the Governor General, or some Person authorized by him, the Declaration of Qualification contained in the same Schedule.

• H. John 21:22 on 2022-11-01 Permalink

  Change is unlikely.

  Prof. Philppe Lagassé, Carleton University, is an expert and frequent writer on Canada and its Crown. Here are his thoughts:

  https://www.policymagazine.ca/king-charles-iii-and-the-kingdom-of-canada/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=king-charles-iii-and-the-kingdom-of-canada

  It seems like a debate we need to have.

  I don’t think we’re ready for the second part of the debate. How do we choose our Head of State?

  The Aussie’s didn’t so much vote to keep the Monarchy when they had a referendum on the issue in 1999, as they rejected the method of selecting a replacement proposed by the government and politicians at the time.

  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1999_Australian_republic_referendum#Alternative_methods_for_selecting_a_president

• Chris 22:12 on 2022-11-01 Permalink

  Change is even less likely without it being pushed for, which is what those folks are doing.

• SMD 22:35 on 2022-11-01 Permalink

  Agreed, Chris. Also, the National Assembly can change its own rules without touching the Constitution.

• Uatu 07:31 on 2022-11-02 Permalink

  It’s distractions like this which keeps QC from dealing with problems like overcrowded ERs or the closing of lanes in the la Fontaine tunnel. Just get it over with and get to work. I agree with them, but this is backburner bullsht for another time

• denpanosekai 07:47 on 2022-11-02 Permalink

  Uatu with the truth

• Chris 08:58 on 2022-11-02 Permalink

  Analogous to what Kate said the other day, these MLAs are “able to juggle a number of dossiers”, they can work on health care and against the monarchy at the same time.

• Kevin 11:20 on 2022-11-02 Permalink

  Pledging allegiance to all citizens in the symbolic form of the monarch is not something that can be eliminated by a simple changing of the rules of the National Assembly. It requires the unanimous consent of all governments in the country.

  All the politicians know this too — they’re just counting on the people who vote for them not knowing it.

• Kate 15:25 on 2022-11-02 Permalink

  As Kevin says. The National Assembly cannot change this rule as a separate deal from the Constitution. It’s fundamental and probably cannot be changed without a profound adjustment in the basic structure of the entire country.

• Uatu 19:16 on 2022-11-02 Permalink

  Today the Children‘s announced a hospital wide level 3 code surge. Just about every day a code surge is announced for both Glen adults and the Children ER. If they’re multi tasking they’re doing a shit job. Just say that they oppose the oath on principle but will take it because there’s work that their constituents need done and the idea of a republic will be revisited later. And they’ll be joining Levesque, Bouchard, Duceppe etc who all took it before them without making a big deal about it.