All Categories

Justin Trudeau's Partial About Face on the Monarchy

5/13/2023

Photo Credit: Reuters

I have, for a while now, been
critical of Prime Minister
Justin Trudeau's handling of
the monarchy. Perhaps,
surprisingly, he has done
several positive things for the
monarchy in a very short
amount of time and it is worth
examining what the effects of
his actions will be.

Approval of Coronation Medallions

Trudeau faced a fair amount of
criticism, even from within his own
caucus, for failing to issue a medal to
mark the late Queen's jubilee. While
no coronation medal was issued, a
medallion was. Now, I hate to be the
one to nit pick but medallions are
generally sold while medals are
given to recognize some worthy
person. Given the recent times we've
been through there are a large
number of Canadians who ought to be honoured. Trudeau's
reluctance to issue a medal on both occasions is curious.

King Charles III to Grace the $20 Bill

The government confirmed that the King's portrait will be
on the Canadian $20 bill as well as all coins issued. The coins
were never really in doubt but there were suggestions around
not having the King on the $20 bill. Trudeau has put that
speculation to rest.

Ottawa Coronation Celebrations

While the events were described as low-key, Trudeau's
government didn't have to hold them at all so the fact that he
did shows some desire to acknowledge the monarchy.

A New Crown

Trudeau's government has created a new Canadian crown.
It is a heraldic design only and shares elements with the
Tudor Crown, Saint Edward's Crown, and (probably
unintentionally) the Loyalist Coronet.

Now, some dislike this design. There are criticisms about how
the design was decided on (without consultation), removal of
religious symbols (crosses and fleur-de-lis), and the addition
of a snowflake to the top of the crown. Even the direction of
the ermine arrows was critiqued (I am not going to discuss
ermine arrows!).

Okay, first of all, I understand why there was no consultation
with Parliament. There may still be people old enough to
remember the Canadian Flag Debate and all the acrimony
that caused. The monarchy is meant to be a unifying symbol,
intentionally making it a source of division would be perverse.

Second, as a Christian myself, yes, I would prefer to have my
beliefs represented. However, the Canadian Monarchy, unlike
the British Monarchy, has no connection to an established
church (which is also reflected in a recent change to the
King's Canadian titles). It is weird then for such a connection
to be present in the crown. Given the monarchy's association
with a single faith has been a point of attack for republicans
this may blunt that particular charge.

The new design plays up the theme of Canadians being tied to
the land they live on with the crown's representations of
rivers, mountains, maple trees and snow. Also, that snowflake
is a bestagon.

This does mean that future Leadership Surveys will need
to change out the crown used but thats a me problem.

New Passport Retains Royal Symbols

Photo Credit: Sean Kilpatrick

The new passport design was
released to mixed reviews. Some
praised the artwork while others
criticized the lack of historical
references. But despite this the
passport retains the coat of arms
and its royal symbolism (even if
the cover is a bit awkward). As a
side note the coat of arms still uses
Saint Edward's Crown which may
indicate a lack of coordination between the government
departments. Most likely, differing time tables on when things
needed to be done prevented the new crown from being
included.

Defence of the Monarchy Improves

Recent terrible polling for the monarchy has led other leaders
in the Commonwealth musing about future republics. To his
credit, Trudeau wasn't one of them. In the past I did critique
his defence of the monarchy. His comments after the King's
coronation were quite a bit better and came at a time when
they were needed. Likewise, his comment before the funeral
of Queen Elizabeth II about appreciating the monarchy's
'steadiness' shows a degree of growth, if not in his thoughts
regarding the monarchy, at least in how he presents those
thoughts.

Closing Remarks

Some of the actions above have attracted criticism but that is
unavoidable in the current political climate. Overall, I think
Trudeau has set the monarchy up well for the future. I still
have grievances with how Trudeau handles the monarchy
file (the free portrait program especially) but he has done a
solid B+ job recently.

Loyally Yours,
A Kisaragi Colour

0 Comments

Coronation Cost Too Much? Its A Steal At Double The Price.

5/7/2023

2 Comments

The King's coronation this past
Saturday went off without a
hitch and frankly was a beautiful
affair. It is hard to believe that
the British were once held to be
rather bad at pulling off such
highly orchestrated events. And,
as with all things these days it
seems, someone is worried that
too much money is being spent.

The final cost won't be known for some time but unofficial
estimates put it at $125 million on the high end. Now, it
would be rather trite to call that a rounding error in a country
with a yearly GDP of 3 trillion dollars, so I won't. Instead, I
want to do a small comparison with republics. Specifically, I
want to take a look at inauguration costs (all sums given in
US Dollars).

United States of America

The USA is to republics what the UK is to monarchies; the
arch-typical example everyone seems to compare themselves to. In the US there is a presidential inauguration every four
years. The price varies (but rises with inflation) and private
donations cover some of the costs but taxpayers in the US are
usually on the hook for about $100 million.

France + Germany

The French in inauguration is a bit of an all day affair. There
is the constitutionally required parts followed by various
events around Paris. The Germans have much more low-key
inaugurations.

What both France and Germany have in common is the
difficulty in finding cost breakdowns. The French example
probably reaches the $100 million threshold while the
German example probably doesn't.

Ireland

Again, a full costing does not seem to be available but they did
spend $110,000 on catering for the 2018 inauguration. Its a
bit iffy if Ireland reaches the $100 million threshold. The
main determiner is staffing costs for security and clean-up
which might push it up a bit. An educated guess would be
$500,000 all told.

Time Between Events

Coronations don't happen at set intervals and can vary
between a few years and many decades. Usually a long reign
means a short interval will follow. If you averaged it out you'd probably come out with something close to one coronation
every 20 years. I'm going to say once every ten years for the
sake of the argument I'm making.

Presidential terms vary but for the examples I've used its; US
four years, France five years, Germany five years, and Ireland
seven years. The result being that the US and France spend
twice as much on inaugurations than the UK spends on
coronations. Ireland probably spends more if a 20 year
average interval is used and Germany might have spent more
on inaugurations during the Queen's reign.

More Bang Per Buck

All of which is to say that the King's coronation is not out of
line with what other countries spend on ceremonial transfers
of power and may be on the less expensive side due to longer
intervals on average compared to republics. There is also the
point to be made that since the coronation covers many
different realms its a bargain for all involved. I don't think a
Canadian republic would long avoid having its own, perhaps
modest, inauguration event. The result being the introduction
of a cost it doesn't currently have. Plus, the coronation was
a far more spectacular event than any inauguration. People
need to learn to stop being penny wise, pound foolish.

Loyally Yours,
A Kisaragi Colour

2 Comments

Canadian Emblem for the Coronation of King Charles III

4/12/2023

With less than a month to go before the
coronation there has been an increase
in government announcements in
regards to the various aspects of the
celebration.

The Department of Canadian Heritage
recently released the design for the
King's Coronation Emblem. It is full of
symbolism regarding the outlook of the
King and how he views his role. From
their website:

The Royal Monogram (CIIIR) in the centre of the Emblem and the Royal
Crown at the top are personal symbols of The King.

The ring of triangular shapes evokes the image of a string of pennants
displayed for a celebration. These 13 shapes allude to Canada’s
provinces and territories, and their circular arrangement conveys the
idea of inclusion for all Canadians. The circle is also an important
concept for many Indigenous Peoples, symbolizing not only equity but
also the cycles of the natural world. The green colour of the shapes is
associated with the environment, which has long been an important
cause for His Majesty, and it symbolizes hope and growth.

Inclusion and togetherness are also represented by the white spaces
between the green shapes, which resemble paths leading to a central
meeting place. The entire white space can be seen as a sunburst,
symbolizing innovation and new ideas.

The Emblem was designed and painted by Cathy Bursey-Sabourin,
Fraser Herald at the Canadian Heraldic Authority.

There has been some speculation on why King Charles III
opted for the Tudor Crown rather than St. Edward's Crown in
his cypher. Arguments largely fall into four categories:
1. To differentiate his reign from his mother's reign.
2. The Tudor Crown has a strong link with male monarchs.
3. A call-back to King Charles I after whom the King is named.
4. The simpler design fits the King's aesthetics better.

As briefly mentioned in the official description the emblem is
meant to convey people coming together and it is known the
King values his ability to bring people together to discuss
issues of concern.

Cathy Bursey-Sabourin, Fraser Herald at the Canadian
Heraldic Authority, has worked in Canadian heraldry for over
30 years and was the first women to hold a state herald
position in the Commonwealth. She previously designed the
Queen's Platinum Jubilee Emblem. In early 2023 she was
made a member of the Royal Victorian Order, which is a
personal gift of the reigning monarch.

Loyally Yours,
A Kisaragi Colour

The Ins & Outs of the Royal Lives Clause

3/31/2023

Contract law is boring. But it is boredom built upon a strong
foundation of people trying to mediate their relationships
with each other via law rather than force. This makes some
aspects of contract law, if not exciting, at least somewhat
interesting. One such aspect is the Royal Lives Clause (or RLC
for short). But before we even get to discuss this we need to
understand something about Common Law.

The Dead Can't Dictate The Far Future

In the 1600s a certain Henry, Duke of Norfolk set up a rather
complicated succession plan for his estates which involved
them transferring down through his sons and even later
descendants in very specific ways. Henry dies, everyone gets
their estates, and everything seemed to be going smoothly.
That is until the eldest son died. As per Henry's oh-so-clever
plan the estates of his other two sons would both shift
ownership. The second son refused to relinquish his estates.
The fourth son sued and it all ended up in the House of Lords
to sort out. They saw just how stupid this could become and
nixed the idea that such shifting estates could go on forever.
They didn't specify how long it could go on and wouldn't
revisit that question until 150 years later. The 'Rule Against
Perpetuities' sets out that certain aspects of contracts can't
last for longer than the life of a person plus 21 years after their
death. If you have ever been involved with a legal trust you
may be aware that taxes on the trust must be paid every 21
years. This is an application of this rule.

Why Is This A Thing?

English judges long realized (even before the clever plans of
the above mentioned Duke of Norfolk) that putting certain
limitations and conditions on property made it harder to buy
and sell and that certain aspects of the law could allow the
avoidance of taxation. The Rule Against Perpetuities was a
means of limiting the potential for misuse of these sorts of
contracts. This is why that summer home your family placed in a trust is still taxed every 21 years (even if the option to dissolve the trust is never taken) rather than being a tax free
estate until the end of time. A trust also automatically
dissolves 21 years after its last primary recipient dies.

But I Wanna Mess With My Descendants

Ok, Henry, there is a rule for that. The very rule this article
set out to discuss; Royal Lives Clause. Royal families tend to
be well-documented which makes them useful for tracking
the whole '21 years after death' thing as this is an event people
will note. Its also harder for a member of a royal family to just
disappear. So from the standpoint of a lawyer the lives of
royals are a much better marker than your Aunt Ellis who
disappears for years at a time and has been using a fake ID
for most of her life. An example clause would look like this:

"The option must be exercised before the end of the period
ending 21 years after the death of the last survivor of the
descendants of King Charles III, king of England"

I used this example specifically because Disney recently
invoked this clause in its turf war with the Government of
Florida. Importantly, this clause still sets an end date (but
picking a family with members who routinely make it into
their 90s was a smart move) it is not perpetual and thus a
legal contract.

Who Uses This Clause

Putting aside the House of Mouse, the Royal Lives Clause is a
common legal tool in Britain and the the Commonwealth. It is
often used in Alberta for oil and gas contracts for example.
Similar rules have been used in the US with the Kennedy and
Rockefeller families.

The clause has become a bit rarer in Britain as a new set
period of 125 years was introduced as an alternative. In most
cases the two are roughly equivalent but the new rule is
somewhat more predictable. For this reason other areas, such
as British Columbia, have adopted the 125 rule as well. That
said, it doesn't negate using the Royal Lives Clause if you so
wish.

Loyally Yours,
A Kisaragi Colour

A Collection of Loyal Quotes: Part Six

2/28/2023

"I do not consider myself to be a rabid
monarchist. I am pretty laissez-faire about
our relationship with the monarchy. It does
not bother me in my day-to-day workings,
not only as a citizen of our country but also
as a member of Parliament. In my humble
opinion, monarchs can truly be above
politics. They do not have any political
affiliations. In fact, if the King were to
meddle in domestic politics, that would be
seen as highly inappropriate and would probably result in a
constitutional crisis.

It is important to realize that our oath to the King, to the
heirs and successors of the King, is not to an individual
person; it is rather to that person as an embodiment of the
Crown as an institution. It is a symbol of the Canadian state,
a ship that continues to sail on despite the occasional
changing of its captains. The monarch's continual rule
provides legislative and policy consistency over long periods
of time. Governments come and go but the Crown remains.

Canada is not alone in this. Constitutional monarchies in
western Europe include the United Kingdom, Denmark,
Spain, Norway, the Netherlands, Monaco, Belgium,
Luxembourg and Sweden, countries we would all uphold as
successful, with strong social foundations, strong democratic
participation and, in many cases, serving as models for what
Canada could aspire to be. Asia, Japan and Thailand are
also constitutional monarchies as well.

When we are talking about the institution of Parliament, and
this is what I like to talk to my students in my riding about,
because we often talk about Parliament and the House of
Commons interchangeability, Parliament means the House,
the Senate and the Crown, which is represented by our
Governor General, all three constituent parts that are
required to pass a bill into law. No bill could become a law
without any of those bodies playing an important role.

I also want to address the need for the monarchy to address
past injustices. I may be saying that the monarchy is okay to
stay in Canada, but that does not mean it cannot and must
not change with the times in which we find ourselves. Many
people around the world have a very troubled history and
relationship with the British Crown. It has to confront and
deal with legacies of colonialism, of slavery and, particularly
in Canada, the treatment of indigenous people and
residential schools.

His Majesty King Charles III has an unparalleled
opportunity to move the monarchy forward in a way that is
acceptable and more relevant to today's generation. As a
king, he has the opportunity to go further than his
predecessors, to truly understand the 21st century in which
we find ourselves. It is my sincere hope that in his first visit
to Canada, he takes the time to meet with indigenous elders
to truly understand the Crown's role in the residential school
system and in colonialism. He owes that to Canada's
indigenous peoples, he owes that to the wider public here to
fully address those past wrongs and to set a path forward.

I will not be supporting this motion today. I will continue to
stand in the House and represent my constituents and their
far more pressing needs."

~Alistair MacGregor, Politician and Tree Planter

Loyally Yours,
A Kisaragi Colour

Romana Didulo: Canada's False Pretender

1/30/2023

The face of treason

There has been, since 2020, a woman in
Canada claiming to be the real Queen of
Canada. Her name is Romana Didulo.
The basis of her claim to the throne?
Nothing. No secret royal parentage and
certainly no popular acclaim or noble
support. Some media outlets in their
eternal quest for neutrality use the word 'pretender' and
repeat her self-granted title. But in this instance this is not a
neutral stance to take as the word pretender implies some sort
of legal claim which Didulo simply does. not. have. The term
the media is looking for is 'false pretender' as she is merely a
grifter and charlatan. Also, she has no claim to her second
self-declared title of 'Queen of the World' in case anyone was
wondering.

So Why Talk About Her?

For the same reason someone might discuss a train wreck or
terrible crime. How can you not talk about the spectacle of it
all? But if this was just about some looney making absurd
claims it wouldn't be worth an article. No, the reason I am
writing this post is because Didulo presents several kinds of
threats to Canada, its people, and its monarchy.

Threat to Canada

This is actually a larger section of this article than I think
people should reasonably be comfortable with. To date she
has instructed her followers (estimated to number between
60,000 and 70,000 based on subscribers to her Telegram
account) to 'shoot to kill' healthcare workers in November of
2021. She has also threatened execution against various
supposed enemies and sent pseudo-legal cease and desist
letters to various schools and other organizations.

Perhaps the most troubling thing she has done (despite her
efforts to distance herself) was to encourage 30 of her
followers to storm a Peterborough police headquarters and
'arrest' the officers present in August of 2022. This ended
about as well as one might expect.

While currently not an existential threat to government
institutions, the fact she has followers willing to go to extreme
lengths does make her potentially dangerous.

Threat to Canadians

In most instances Didulo is more an annoyance than a threat.
Cease and desist letters can be trashed, threats of violence
reported, and protests ignored. Ironically, she is of greatest
danger to her supporters. By encouraging them not to pay
taxes and fees she has caused several to lose their homes. By
extorting money to fund cross-country tours she has reduced
several members to poverty. She has also left some of her
supporters stranded on the wrong side of the country when
they started having doubts. She's an all-around dick is what
I'm trying to say. And while it is hard to have sympathy for
these people I will play moron's advocate and argue that,
maybe, the government shouldn't allow a swindler free reign
(heh, pun) to destroy the lives of the gullible and easily led.
That might just be me though.

Threat to the Monarchy

This one is a bit more nebulous. Monarchy is a venerable
institution. A person making a mockery of it degrades its
prestige. Didulo's personal behavior doesn't make this any
better as she is reportedly quite tyrannical towards her own
supporters. This reinforces a stereotype common in media
that monarchs can't possibly be good people. In one rather
pathetic account a mother wrote how she took her children to
see this 'Queen of Canada'. Didulo has no conception of the
role she is trying to claim. No regard for its responsibilities
nor its restrictions. All she sees is a licence to do what she
pleases. That isn't monarchy, its anarchy.

Why Hasn't She Been Arrested?

This is a good question. She was brieftly detained after her
threats against healthcare workers in November, 2021 for a
psychiatric evaluation which she somehow passed. Computer
equipment was also seized. But other than this minor hiccup
she has been left alone. What could she be charged with?

Impersonation - In Canada it is illegal to impersonate
another person. However, Didulo isn't doing this. It is also a
crime to impersonate a police officer or military member but,
crucially, this doesn't seem to apply to any other government
position.

High Treason - Didulo hasn't tried to kill the king and
claims the Queen was killed long before her actual death. She
also has not engaged in war with Canada.

Treason - Didulo hasn't tried to overthrow the government.

The above leads to an interesting observation; you could build
up a parallel government in Canada and provided you left
actually removing the existing government to last there isn't
much the government could do. This seems like a loop hole
that ought not to exist.

Final Thoughts

Thus far Romana Didulo has been very good at knowing how
far she can push without trouble coming back to her. She is
playing a dangerous game though. No one has full control
over their followers, especially radical ones, and there will
always be a risk of one doing something that gets Didulo in a
great deal of trouble. Hopefully, no one gets hurt in the
process.

Loyally Yours,
A Kisaragi Colour

Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year

12/28/2022

It has been quite a year. Queen Elizabeth II oversaw a historic
platinum jubilee. Her death, while saddening, resulted in no
mad rush for the door at the prospect of King Charles III as
republicans had long predicted (hoped?). Instead, the new
king has taken to his role with vigor and the people have been
largely supportive. The Queen's presence benefitted the
monarchy but she knew more than anyone else that the
institution of monarchy isn't about any one person. Over the
last few years she had been slowly easing the public into the
new reign. Quite the contrast with the republican system in
which preparing a successor is almost never seen as desirable.

The King's Christmas Address

"With all my heart I wish each of you a Christmas of peace,
happiness, and everlasting light."

Prince George the Artist

The Prince and Princess of Wales shared a painting by Prince
George a few days ago. It appears he has his grandfather's
talent with the brush.

New Year's Levee

This year will mark the return of the New Year's Levee for
many of Canada's vice-regal offices. It is sometimes forgotten
that the New Year's Levee is a distinctly Canadian tradition
that has its origins in court protocol of the French monarchy
and was adapted by fur traders and early governors of New France (Quebec) as a time to pay one's respects to the crown,
receive news from Europe, and let loose a little bit. British
authorities continued these traditions and are now celebrated
across the country.

The Year Ahead

While the last few years have demonstrated the foolishness of
trying to predict what will happen in the coming year there
are a few things to look out for:

The Coronation
While the exact details have not been worked out, the King
rejected the idea of a 'bargain bin' coronation. One change
likely to be seen is in the title 'Defender of the Faith'. The King
has stated in the past that the monarch, while adhering to
one faith, should seek to protect all faiths and stated a
preference for 'Defender of Faith'.

Fiji
The Fijian parliament is in a minority situation and the
coalition government has stated they wish to restore the Great
Council of Chiefs which was previously parliament's upper
house. The Great Council of Chiefs famously continued to
recognize Queen Elizabeth II as paramount chief long after
Fiji became a republic. While I'm not getting my hopes up for
a royal restoration in a country that still uses some of its royal symbols it is a step in the right direction.

Loyally Yours,
A Kisaragi Colour

Demographic Breakdown of Support and Opposition to the Monarchy Earlier This Month in Parliament

11/30/2022

Late last month there was a motion introduced by MP Yves-
François Blanchet of the Bloc Quebecois advocating for the
abolition of the monarchy. I have been somewhat busy this
month due to municipal elections in New Brunswick and was
not able to get to it right away. As it turns out the Parliament
of Canada keeps a breakdown of how each vote goes on its
website which is a wonderful resource to have. Lets see if
anything interesting can be found from looking at the raw
numbers.

Summary

Motion: the House express its desire to sever ties between
the Canadian State and the British monarchy, and call on the
government to take the actions necessary to do so.
Yea: 44
Nay: 266
Abstention/Absent: 28
Result: Motion Defeated

Party Breakdown

Bloc Quebecois
Yea: 31
Nay: 0
Abstention/Absent: 1
-Perhaps not surprisingly the party whose leader introduced
the motion supported it fully.

New Democratic Party
Yea: 10
Nay: 7
Abstention/Absent: 8
-Of all the results I find this one the most interesting. The
NDP has a republican leader (although he didn't vote on this
motion) but also a large contingent of members who support
the monarchy. During the last survey of NDP leadership
candidates I received several comments from members who
don't vote for the party because they don't trust the party on
this issue. It should also be noted that if the Bloc wanted a
wedge issue to cause trouble for the NDP they couldn't find
a better one. The Bloc traditionally hasn't weighed in on the
monarchy as their stated goal is independence regardless so
the timing seemed odd. They do have to watch out for rivals
though and the NDP has in recent memory absolutely curb
stomped the Bloc. The NDP has also been a fairly effective partner in the current minority government. Does the Bloc
sincerely dislike the monarchy? Yes, but keeping their rivals
from posing a threat is also a concern.

Green Party
Yea: 1
Nay: 1
Abstention/Absent: 0
-Elizabeth May continues to be a strong supporter of the
monarchy. This is the first time we have gotten to see what
Mike Morrice's views are. While disappointing, at least we
know them now. Mike has been suggested as a potential
leader for the party down the road so it is something to watch.

Liberal Party
Yea: 1
Nay: 145
Abstention/Absent: 12
-I'll get into the geographic breakdown next but the one yea
vote was from a Quebec MP. I have been somewhat critical
of the Liberal's handling of the monarchy file over the years
but they can be counted on to not rock the boat at least.

Conservative Party
Yea: 0
Nay: 112
Abstention/Absent: 7
-The Conservative Party continues to be a bastion of loyalty. I
had been worried when Pierre Poilievre was elected leader of
the party due to the complete lack of any statements made
regarding the monarchy and his overall populist leanings. He
is either a closet monarchist or realizes the split this would
cause in his support is even greater than in the NDP's case.

Independent MPs
Yea: 1
Nay: 1
Abstention/Absent: 0
-One Quebec yea vote and one Ontario nay vote. Just goes to
show the more things change the more they stay the same.

Regional Breakdown

Atlantic Canada
Yea: 0
Nay: 30
Abstention/Absent: 2
-Of passing interest is the absence of a vote by MP Jenica
Atwin, former Green Party MP.

Quebec
Yea: 34
Nay: 41
Abstention/Absent: 3
-Despite the Bloc Quebecois voting entirely in favour of the
motion they still didn't manage a majority in their own
province.

Ontario
Yea: 3
Nay: 107
Abstention/Absent: 11
-Interestingly of the five NDP MPs in Ontario three didn't cast
a vote and the remaining two voted in favour.

Prairies
Yea: 3
Nay: 52
Abstention/Absent: 7
-Given the large Conservative contingent on the prairies this
lopsided result was expected. The NDP here heavily
supported the motion.

British Columbia
Yea: 3
Nay: 35
Abstention/Absent: 4
-The NDP split on this question was most pronounced in BC
with three supporting it, seven opposing it, and three not
voting.

Territories
Yea: 1
Nay: 1
Abstention/Absent: 1

The Debate

Openparliament.ca has the full debate on the motion. There
are a great deal of tired arguments. Some of which I've dealt
with before. The debate will be a useful reference in the
future. Whether they like it or not many MPs have had to take
a stand.

Loyally Yours,
A Kisaragi Colour

How King Charles III Can Keep His Voice During His Reign

10/27/2022

Earlier this month former British
Prime Minister Liz Truss managed,
during her very short time in office,
to advise His Majesty not to attend
the environmental gathering known
as COP27. By convention the king has
a duty to follow the advice of his
prime minister even if pretty much
everyone knows he doesn't want to.
Even now, with a brand new prime
minister in place, His Majesty is not
likely to attend. There is still a bit of debate over how much
this was a joint decision but for the sake of this article lets
assume King Charles III would want to attend COP27 to bring
further attention to increasingly worrisome environmental
issues. How could he do so?

The unimaginative might suggest he simply ignore his prime
minister's advice. He is not likely to do this. Not only would it
damage a working relationship that will (presumably) last
more than a couple months, it would feed into the perception
that he intends to 'meddle' in government affairs. Both factors
would reduce the monarch's considerable soft power which is
worth avoiding.

As it happens there is a way for His Majesty to continue to
carry out most, if not all, of his previous work and it is by
learning from an incident that took place in Canada in 1973.
At the time Canada was hosting a meeting of Commonwealth
leaders. British prime minister Edward Heath, for whatever
reason, advised the Queen not to attend. The Commonwealth
was to the Queen what the environment is to the King. The
Queen was able to attend the meeting because she received an
invitation to attend as the Queen of Canada by Pierre Trudeau
(hey! History is starting to rhyme a little). This works as while
the monarch can be advised not to do something in their
capacity as monarch of that country, they can't be barred from
acting as monarch of another country. With this we have a
blue print for King Charles III regaining his voice.

First meeting between Prime Minister Trudeau and His Majesty

Now, I could suggest that Justin Trudeau invite the King and
this would make a certain amount of sense. Justin Trudeau
has come under criticism for making very little progress on
his climate plan. Having a champion of climate reform
present distracts from this narrative and is the type of
ceremonial action the prime minister is good at. That said,
Trudeau hasn't been overly kind to the monarchy during his
time in office. Are there any other candidates? Well, yes,
actually. Papua New Guinea recently stated they wished to
deepen ties with the Royal Family. And climate change will
hit Papua New Guinea, and other equatorial nations with
particular severity. The King and his Papua New Guinean
realm could make common cause at COP27. And there is no
reason the King couldn't ask around the rest of the
Commonwealth for partners on other issues. King Charles III
is head of 15 countries. Perhaps he should make better use of
this fact.

Loyally Yours,
A Kisaragi Colour

State of Monarchy in the Caribbean

9/21/2022

Caribbean Realm Flags

Not too long ago there was some
controversy during the Cambridge's tour
of the Caribbean, although this was really
about some politicians and activists trying
to shake things up. Royal tours
everywhere spark debates all the time.

In reality this tour was very successful.
The Queen was evidently not seen as a
colonial ruler in the West Indies and
continued to be appreciated by many. As I’m writing this, I’m
thinking about my Jamaican-British classmate at music
school who told me that "everybody dances about the
Queen" when she visited.

Crowds greet the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge in Trench Town

Attitudes to the monarchy appear to differ between the
politicians and the general public. A lot of these countries in
the West Indies have threatened to “cut colonial ties” for
decades now but in most places little progress was made with
this.

UK overseas territory Bermuda rejected independence in 1995
despite this being what their politicians campaigned for.
Bermuda would have remained a commonwealth realm even
if they had hypothetically voted yes. Bermudian politicians
continue to be nationalistic. Premier David Burt released a
statement following the Queen’s death, like most
commonwealth leaders, but what was rather concerning was that it read “I express sincere condolences to the Royal
Family and the people of the United Kingdom”, implying that
he is not acknowledging the queen's role in Bermuda.
Despite this kind of attitude from the Premier, the Queen did
make her fair share of visits to Bermuda which were greeted
with enthusiasm by the Bermudian people.

The decision of the Barbados government last year was rather
appalling; going ahead with removed the monarchy with an
act of parliament rather than a public referendum. The
justification for this was that the party in power won every
seat in Parliament and were explicitly republican in ideology.
Although, if you look at the broader picture; both major
parties have republican sentiment so who else were the people
supposed to vote for? The new head of state of Barbados was a
president chosen by their one party parliament who had
previously served as the Governor General. None of this
sounds very republican of them.

Prime Minister Mia Mottley announced her intention to do
this with a rather patriotic tone, saying that Barbados will “cut
colonial ties with Great Britain” on independence day.
Polling data suggests that Barbadians would have either preferred a monarchy, or would have been indifferent about
change, but a majority wished to be consulted about the
change. It’s sad to hear that Barbados was allegedly
encouraged to do this out of debt diplomacy with the PRC but
this really says more about their government than it does
about royalty.

The backlash during Prince William's royal tour obviously
caused him to feel quite remorseful. He acknowledged the
history of slavery in Jamaica and even conceding in the future
to ‘let the people decide’. Overall, the process to ‘ditch the crown’ is an empty threat and has been much slower for Jamaica than in Barbados precisely because the people must
be consulted.

Republicans in every realm have to a large extent waited for
Prince Charles to ascend before beginning to push for a
constitutional referendum. This has finally happened, though
if they want to make this a serious campaign, surely they
wouldn’t want to start too soon. Approval ratings of King
Charles III have gone up greatly since his ascension.

Queen Elizabeth II was obviously known to take her role
seriously in the West Indies, and there is no reason why King
Charles III can’t prove himself willing to do the same now.

Loyally Yours,
Lord Ludichris

<<Previous