Why do we Brits have to jump through hoops to get into Canada? Why is the Queen still printed in the bank notes? What is the point of the Commonwealth, if it can't even provide the rights of travel that EU members enjoy? Why do I have to undergo the rigors of Medicals, testimonials, police clearances etc. etc. What is the point? If we're not linked to Canada, why the Queens head? If we are, why the bloody hassle?

That's my last can of beer for now! I hope we get some serious responses. Bonsoir!

The British and Canadian monarchies have been constitutionally distinct for some time.

Anyway, if you want to blame someone, you should start with the then (Conservative) government which did not exempt Canadian citizens from the provisions of the Commonwealth Immigrants Act 1962.

I often wonder why the queen of Canada lives in England. I think we should be a republic, but other Canadians are too apathetic or sentimental to change this..... BTW your title was misleading, I got really excited about a Madonna thread. She is awsome! Old enough to be a granny but pulls off dressing like a teenager, while Elizabeth II looked like a Granny when she was a teenager!

The Governor-General of Canada is effectively the head of state.

If it isn't broken - why meddle with it?

This country hardly runs like a well oiled machine. Not suggesting its the queen's or gov generals fault, although I am an unapologetic republican (if I was an American I would not be, just making that clear) truthfully the monarchy probably does not even make it in the top 25 things that need to change in Canada. Not that I have sat down and wrote that list.

The Commonwealth is all about trade agreements between member countries and nothing to do with the movement of citizens between these countries. It is so different from the EU as to be almost incomparable.

The Commonwealth was a United Nations that actually worked. Its gradual demise is something we should all be ashamed of.

Yet another Brit who thinks that England still rules the world

I can't believe the arrogance/ignorance of this post:curse:

I think what little interest I have in the Monarchy will die with the present Queen.

Unfortunately I can't think of a better alternative for the UK Head of State than continuing with the Monarchy. I'd hate to see a Politician in the position, at least with the Monarchy they normally know their role, and play up to it. The UK also needs its traditions, they are very much a part of the Country, and its society would suffer a tremendous loss if the Monarchy was abandoned.

Canada on the other hand has no great interest in the Monarchy and could easily become a Republic without any repercussions.

How on earth do you get Madonna from the title???

You are hardly the brightest spark in the room, are you? Read the posts again, s..l...o...w...l....y.

In my experience (and it is an admittedly narrow one) I've found that the traffic is a lot more mixed than both the royalist and republican sides would care to admit.

I remember the Canadian author Will Ferguson vehemently railing against the monarchy, using terms that even I thought were a bit strong. But he was also bemoaning the fact that most Canadians are perfectly happy with the current set-up (this was in 1998, but I've seen no grounds to change that view). The Canadian Monarchists are on the extreme end of Liz-luvin', but many Canadians feel warmly towards her. My mother-in-law, for instance, is a staunch monarchist. She was born in Ontario and has living most of her life in Saskatchewan, having never been to the UK.

Also, don't forget: having a monarch is one of the key things distinguishing Canada from the US. Many Canadians will stand by the monarchy for that reason alone.

The world revolves around Ingurland. Didn't you know that ?



R.

Only the sports commentators.

Quite. There are many more pressing things to worry about.

Anyway, any system that gets Michaëlle Jean onto out TV screens on a regular basis can't be all bad.