SkyscraperCity banner
1 - 20 of 60 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,572 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Over the past 10 years, the Canadian cost of supporting the monarchy has more than doubled

Robert Finch has a favourite saying: “For the price of a cup of coffee, Canadians can enjoy the stability of the Crown.” By this, the chief operating officer of the Monarchist League of Canada means that the monarchy costs Canadians only $1.53 per capita each year, about the price of a large cup of joe at Tim Hortons. But in fact, Canadians are now paying more per capita to support the Queen than the British are.

According to the latest figures out of Buckingham Palace, while Canadians are shelling out $1.53 per capita, the British are only paying about $1.32. And the Monarchist League’s own numbers show the Canadian cost is skyrocketing. Over just the last 10 years, the per capita bill for supporting the monarchist framework— including expenses incurred by the royal clan on Canadian soil, as well as the cost of running the offices of the Governor General and our 10 provincial lieutenant-governors—has more than doubled.

Finch says that the climbing costs reflect the fact that the Queen’s reps are taking on more active roles, with heightened responsibility and more travel time. While that might be costing Canadians a few extra pennies, he stresses that the monarchy “is not a very expensive operation.” But Tom Freda, national director of Citizens for a Canadian Republic, is not so sure. “Ah, the Monarchists. They love to break it down to per capita and make it sound all nice and rosy,” he says. “But $40 million or $50 million [a year] sure sounds like a lot to me.” The Monarchist League supports that figure, estimating that about $50,147,000 was spent during the 2006-07 year.

The problem, Freda says, is that Canada effectively has two heads of state: the Queen and the Governor General, as well as a band of provincial reps. And that overlap creates “redundant and obsolete positions” that end up costing Canadian taxpayers big bucks. The Queen’s agents need to learn a lesson in frugality during these tough times, he argues, especially since most of the work done by the lieutenant-governors is already handled by deputy premiers and other officials. Freda says it is “exorbitant,” for example, that the Ontario lieutenant-governor employs nine staff members, and “shocking” that the B.C. office shells out piles of cash each year to run a 102-room official residence for its lieutenant-governor. As for the “highly irrelevant” Governor General? “The Governor General has literary awards and cuts ribbons and plants trees and travels to Nunavut and eats seal meat. But what else?”

Finch counters that the Crown’s stabilizing presence is worth the money. He accounts for Canadians’ more sizable bill with more mundane explanations: our smaller population, for instance. He also explains that Brits have the home court advantage when it comes to the monarchy, since the U.K. receives income tax from royal estates and we don’t. In the end, it’s a small price to pay, he says, to safeguard Canada’s democratic tradition.

Despite such arguments, it seems like Freda and his Canadian Republicans are winning in the court of public opinion. According to a Canada Day poll by Strategic Council, only 30 per cent of Canadians feel a connection to the Queen or Governor General. And 65 per cent think ties to the monarchy should be cut once the Queen dies.

Freda cites numbers like that as support for his group’s radical proposal to completely overhaul the system. He calls for the Governor General to be replaced by “a wholly Canadian institution”—an independent head of state, accountable only to Canadians. Sure, he admits, that would still cost money. “But Canadians wouldn’t mind spending on an institution that they can call their own.”

While $1.53 may not get you very far at Tim Hortons, Freda hopes the escalating cost of supporting the Queen will set the wheels of change in motion. It’s not even about the money, he says. “It’s the 21st century. If we’re going to be an independent country, we bloody well better act like it.”
http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/07/14/queen-costs-us-more-than-the-brits-pay/
 

·
Registered Abuser
Joined
·
532 Posts
^^

I'm sure a lot of Canadians would rather buy themselves a Medium double - double than having the Queen as their Representative. lol
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,365 Posts
It's sad when people who don't understand something try to argue against it.

Time and time again we have explained how we can be a totally independent country and maintain our Monarchy and our relationship to it as a distinct part of our identity and time and time again most people are just too dunce to understand the concept.

How much would it cost to have a president? Probably more than $1.53.

Unless we fundamentally change how the 11 parliaments work, we're still going to need 11 people at the top of each one. Even if we just axed the Queen and didn't change anything else, we wouldn't save very much money. We'd still foot the bill for her visits, like we do with all visits by heads of state.

I'd like to know how much money we're sending to the Japanese monarch this year!!
 

·
The Mighty.
Joined
·
3,184 Posts
It's sad when people who don't understand something try to argue against it.

Time and time again we have explained how we can be a totally independent country and maintain our Monarchy and our relationship to it as a distinct part of our identity and time and time again most people are just too dunce to understand the concept.

How much would it cost to have a president? Probably more than $1.53.

Unless we fundamentally change how the 11 parliaments work, we're still going to need 11 people at the top of each one. Even if we just axed the Queen and didn't change anything else, we wouldn't save very much money. We'd still foot the bill for her visits, like we do with all visits by heads of state.

I'd like to know how much money we're sending to the Japanese monarch this year!!

You godamn better believe!

Those in favour of a Republic are wannabe Americans. We're totally distinct, with a unique set up. So what if a dollar something is taken off my taxes a year. I lose that much change on a Saturday night.

Be loyal and keep the Monarchy. Or I'll come get cha for high treason.
:banana:
 

·
Smelly cat...
Joined
·
1,307 Posts
We expectin' a Toronto teaparty?? Queen shall be quite dissatisfied with her subjects' behaviour! :eek:hno:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,593 Posts
These ridiculous articles pop up once in awhile that try to shock people that haven't a clue on how our system works in the first place. Canada as a constitutional republic would pay the same, if not more, with a politicised head of state. A federal system like Can, Aus, or the US is still going to cost the same amount of money to maintain a head of state and a provincial 'head of state'.

As for Canada not acting like an independent country. What a load of crap from that vile Freda guy. I actually like to refer to him as an anti-Canadian who'd rather destablise Canada, spend heaps of money doing it, and introduce a governmental system that is completely foreign to Canada since its existence. The current system, which is already %100 Canadian and independent to begin with, has been working well since 1931. '82 if you want to get picky.

How is Canada's constitutional monarchy system fundamentally failing Canada?
 

·
The Mighty.
Joined
·
3,184 Posts
Most of the rising cost is the office of the Governor General. The last two have hugely increased their annual budgets.
The Queen herself costs this country very little.
Yeah... I don't usually disagree with my Queen, but the last two G.G's have been pretty weak and petty.

And our's now wasn't even born under the yolk of the Commonwealth.
That sir, offends me truly.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,365 Posts
I'd rather a sane woman born in a different country than a retard born in mine as a leader. She chose Canada. She wanted to be here. There are many who were born here who hold the opposite desire. Are they more fit to lead us than her? No. Your sentiment, sir, offends me truly.

And considering how the Queen rarely has an opinion on anything and that at this point the monarchy is a little more than the rubber stamp for everything the government asks, I don't see how you can agree or disagree with her. It's the government that you should disapprove of in that situation.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,488 Posts
These ridiculous articles pop up once in awhile that try to shock people that haven't a clue on how our system works in the first place. Canada as a constitutional republic would pay the same, if not more, with a politicised head of state. A federal system like Can, Aus, or the US is still going to cost the same amount of money to maintain a head of state and a provincial 'head of state'.

As for Canada not acting like an independent country. What a load of crap from that vile Freda guy. I actually like to refer to him as an anti-Canadian who'd rather destablise Canada, spend heaps of money doing it, and introduce a governmental system that is completely foreign to Canada since its existence. The current system, which is already %100 Canadian and independent to begin with, has been working well since 1931. '82 if you want to get picky.

How is Canada's constitutional monarchy system fundamentally failing Canada?
+1

But a constitutional republic would definitely cost more than the current system.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
79,193 Posts
I think perhaps it might be not a bad idea to have a close look at the budgets of the GG. The Queen is renown for being frugal, and I would hope that the same example gets followed here at Rideau Hall. I have heard some cost statistics of the GG in the past that made my eyebrows rise, and I would be interested in seeing a thorough breakdown.
 

·
Welcome to the Rail World
Joined
·
4,671 Posts
Britain may pay less per capita. As a country, they pay more gross total.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,120 Posts
I'm sure the Brits pay FAR more in offering up indirect costs to keep the Queen cozy. Just imagine the security costs for one. She probably also gets tax breaks for her palaces located in prime real estate. I hardly think we have anything near the security for our GG and L-Gs as the Queen does.

Not to mention the EU actually subsidizes the Queen every year via their farm subsidies which I think is pretty funny:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/17/business/global/17farms.html?ref=global-home
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
79,193 Posts
Britain may pay less per capita. As a country, they pay more gross total.

True, but the Queen is also a MAJOR tourist attraction. Changing of the guards, and all that. That pours a HUGE
amount of money into the coffers. We do not get that sort of touristic bump from the GG. People simply do not
visit Canada with the lifelong dream of seeing the Governor General. Also she provides massive prestige to Britain.
 

·
Smelly cat...
Joined
·
1,307 Posts
True, but the Queen is also a MAJOR tourist attraction. Changing of the guards, and all that. That pours a HUGE
amount of money into the coffers. We do not get that sort of touristic bump from the GG. People simply do not
visit Canada with the lifelong dream of seeing the Governor General. Also she provides massive prestige to Britain.
True. Buckingham Palace is one of the major tourist attractions in London.
 

·
The Mighty.
Joined
·
3,184 Posts
I'd rather a sane woman born in a different country than a retard born in mine as a leader. She chose Canada. She wanted to be here. There are many who were born here who hold the opposite desire. Are they more fit to lead us than her? No. Your sentiment, sir, offends me truly.

And considering how the Queen rarely has an opinion on anything and that at this point the monarchy is a little more than the rubber stamp for everything the government asks, I don't see how you can agree or disagree with her. It's the government that you should disapprove of in that situation.
Absolute bollocks.
The Commonwealth is the ideal we (in the commonwealth) hold together.
I don't care if Michelle is the patron saint of Canada... the Governor General should be someone born in Canada or the Commonwealth whether it's Australia or Jamaica.

Would you agree with a Prime Minister born abroad? It's the same thing. I wouldn't agree with that at all. Whether they're the best for the job or not. Don't just bust into our politics like you own the joint.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,365 Posts
Would you agree with a Prime Minister born abroad? It's the same thing. I wouldn't agree with that at all. Whether they're the best for the job or not. Don't just bust into our politics like you own the joint.
Then you are xenophobic. If they are truly committed to making this a better country, I don't care if they're from Haiti, Timbuktu or Mars.
 

·
The Mighty.
Joined
·
3,184 Posts
Then you are xenophobic. If they are truly committed to making this a better country, I don't care if they're from Haiti, Timbuktu or Mars.
Nah, it's not right. In order to represent Canadians, you should be born and bred here, no matter what your ancestry is, but a Canadian born none the less.
:cheers:
 
1 - 20 of 60 Posts
Top