The Maple Leaf Lounge

[Timewalker]

Well, I've got no problem saying I'm a monarchist. I want no part of any government system involving a president.

My point is that the GG and LG do have duties. And their letting bad legislation go through is what their duties say they are NOT supposed to do. Granted, it should only be in extraordinary circumstances.

The circumstances in Alberta are extraordinary. The LG should be acting. It's not enough to shrug and say the courts will sort it out. Smith just fires anyone who investigates stuff when they get too close to blowing the whistle.

Now which orange individual does that sound like?

 

[Avro Arrow]

I don't know, I'm of the opinion that the GG and the LGs are figureheads only, and should stay that way. I have to agree with Ovation that an LG refusing to sign into law a bill passed by a legally elected parliament would trigger a huge constitutional crisis here. I can see the desire in this case, because the Alberta government is trampling all over Albertans' rights. But do you really want this to be a thing, when there's the possibility that a Maple MAGA may end up as LG in the future, or something like that? The monarchy, and their representatives, should be strictly hands-off. There have been times when I had thought that it would be nice if the GG refused a prorogation request, but after thinking about it, I realized that I don't really want them insinuating themselves in our politics. They can handle the ceremonial functions, but actual decisions should be in the hands of our elected representatives.

The problem is the NWC itself. I know the history as to why they felt they had to include it. But it was intended to be basically the "nuclear option". The theory was that any sitting government who used the NWC to override the rights of its citizenry would suffer the wrath of said citizenry, and it would basically be political suicide to use it. They did not seem to foresee what we are seeing now, where provincial governments just invoke it when they are writing up the legislation (not even waiting for it to be challenged in court)... and their supporters cheer them on for doing so.

When our rights can be legislated away at a premier's whim, we don't really have "rights".

I’m not taking a position on the desirability of the monarchy itself

I haven't exactly been shy in this thread about expressing my anti-monarchy sentiments, so your "worst case" scenario doesn't necessarily sound all that bad to me.

 

[Set Harth]

Shouldn't it be MCGA?