Justin Trudeau was sworn in as Canada's 23rd Prime Minister
last Wednesday. The process of being sworn in as a Prime
Minister of Canada involves three separate oaths. The first
was the Oath of Allegiance:

The Oath of Allegiance is a requirement for assuming many
high offices in Canada as well as forming part of the Oath of
Citizenship sworn by those who wish to join the Canadian
family. The Oath of Allegiance is often taken along with other
specific oaths (as it is here). The second oath Justin Trudeau
took on Wednesday was the Oath of the Members of the
Privy Council:

Notice that while both oaths require sworn loyalty to the
sovereign the context is different. The first is a promise to be a
loyal Canadian, to do no harm to her Majesty (or her heirs),
and to present yourself as a friend to Canada. The second oath
is a promise (while also upholding loyalty) to do one's duty for
Canada. To finish everything off Justin Trudeau also took the
Oath of Office:

This is the only oath that does not require swearing some sort
of loyalty to the sovereign. This makes a bit more sense when
you consider that the office of Prime Minister is still merely primus inter pares, first among equals. You can't become
Prime Minister (or cabinet minister) without first being a
member of the Privy Council. It is this large group of Her
Majesty's advisers that Justin Trudeau became 'first among'.

There has been a tendency to concentrate power into the Office of the Prime Minister over the years. This slow-motion presidentialization of the office is one thing that the new
Prime Minister has promised to fix. It remains to be seen as
to whether he will follow through and become once again
first among Her Majesty's servants or continue to think of
themselves as over mighty presidential wannabes.  

Loyally Yours,
​A Kisaragi Colour   

So the Canadian election is underway (number 42 for those
keeping track). The candidates are slowly revving up their
campaigns and the media has gone into full election mode. I thought this might be a good time to get into a topic I've
mulling over for some time.

Republicans like to say that the monarchy is an undemocratic
institution. I would like to dissect that claim.

For starters republicans tend to base their claims on the
position being unelected. The monarch/governor general is
neither the only unelected position in the government nor the
most common. That distinction goes to the entire judicial branch. They have even rejected laws passed by a democratic
Parliament (something the Monarch of Canada has never
done). And yet I don't see anyone clamoring to elect the
Supreme Court. And why would they? There is understanding (based in part on observing our neighbors to the South) that
electing members of the judiciary would not help the courts
do a better job and might in fact damage them through
partisanship. There is an understanding that, under specific
circumstances, it is not desirable to elect a position.

We choose to elect Members of Parliament because we
recognize that partisan competition fuels debate and helps
keep everyone on their best behavior. We do this with the full knowledge that said competition can, and does, create
divisions in society (as the last 10 years makes clear). The
office of the monarch is not a position that requires elections
as it is not a position that crafts policy. The Crown is there to
provide stability, non-partisan leadership and to represent
Canada. It is also the hidden emergency button in case
Canada goes off the rails. None of these roles are enhanced
by elections.

And, as I have noted before, directly-elected heads of state
have been shown to cause a 5-7% decrease in voter turnout
for legislative elections. Indirectly-elected presidents also
have difficulties it has been found.

Another claim that republicans make is that the monarchy
is somehow undemocratic by virtue of being hereditary. This
is expressed as the monarchy being an "anachronism" or
"medieval" institution. You want to know what other 
position is hereditary? Citizenship. Once gained, citizenship
is passed on regardless of qualifications or behavior. It also
confers specific rights on its holders (voting rights for one).
But citizens don't hold a place in government, I can hear you saying. Don't they? The republican ideal is a government of the people, by the people, for the people. In the republican
ideal the people are central to the formation and execution of government. And a government based on the people's
participation cannot escape being based on the hereditary
rights of citizenship.

The monarchist ideal is different. Coming out of the Medieval
period there was an understanding within English practice 
(and to a degree, in all of Europe) that the monarch must
consult with the people in governing the country. In Canada
we have a supreme right to be consulted as subjects of Her Majesty. Incidentally the monarch shares this right to have
consultation. In fact the monarch's rights are often a mirror of
the people's rights. Another example is the coronation oath
and the citizenship oath. The monarch promises in the
coronation oath to reign in accordance with Canada's laws
and customs while in the citizenship oath the people promise
much the same towards the monarch.

So why is this important? Because a government that can
reject the monarchy on the basis of its hereditary nature can
reject a citizen's unqualified right to vote on the same
grounds. We use hereditary selection when we want to
prevent an office, group, or position from becoming
monopolized by interest groups. The citizenship can never be
cut down to only people who believe the same things because
it is hereditary. The monarchy cannot become a prize for a
specific partisan viewpoint to capture for the same reason.

Some knowledgeable republicans object to monarchy based
on its association with divine right. While divine right did
play a part in the monarchy's history, it was neither a primary
justification for monarchical rule or even an uncontested one.

It is also not a current justification. Monarchs in Britain or in
Canada have never reigned by divine right. This is because in
1688 the Glorious Revolution occurred. It fundamentally and
definitively changed the monarchy from being based on
divine right to being based on the consent of Parliament.
While certain phrases such as 'by the grace of god' have been
kept they hide the fact that the monarch reigns by the consent
of Parliament, not the authority of God.

While the Rob Fords of the world can cling to power through
appeals to their democratic selection the monarchy is in a far
more precarious position. A monarch who tried to abuse power would simply be gone. Without democratic legitimacy
the monarch is counterfactually more accountable to the
people.

A related difficulty is when two democratically-elected offices
come into conflict. With both able to claim to represent the
people the argument can become messy and often boils down
to who can better use the powers of the state. The monarch
has no such recourse and must acquiesce to the democratic
office.

Republicans should not be allowed to get away with using
appeals to democracy to shut down debate. Monarchists can,
and should, make the argument that, far from being an undemocratic institution, the monarchy is Canada's most unappreciated democratic institution.

Loyally Yours,
A Kisaragi Colour

The Monarchist League of Canada
 is at the forefront of the
promotion, education, and non-
partisan defence of the Canadian
Crown. It was founded in February
of 1970 by supporters of the
monarchy who were concerned about "creeping
republicanism" by successive governments at the federal &
provincial level.

The first League meeting in Ottawa attracted over 600 people
to discuss ways to counter Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau's
moves to weaken the monarchy. Since then the League has gone from strength to strength in its defence of the Canadian Crown. The Monarchist League of Canada maintains its own
chronology of activities but here are some highlights:

1971 Campaigned successfully for Royal Arms of Canada to
remain on Canadian passports. Campaigned successfully to
retain the Crown on Ontario licence plates.

1973 Pressure from the League resulted in Canada Post
issuing two large stamps of the Queen for a Commonwealth
Conference held in Ottawa.

1975 After campaigning, received assurance from Ontario
Premier Bill Davis of his government’s opposition to an
Ontario Advisory Committee report suggesting Queen be
dropped from Canadian Citizenship Oath. Branches
encouraged as six lieutenant governors become League 
patrons.

1976 Lobbied and ran advertising to make sure that the
Queen opened 21st Olympics in Montréal as Canada’s head of state.

1977 Newfoundland Branch obtained signatures of over
three-quarters of the province’s population on a Declaration
of Loyalty for the Silver Jubilee.

1978 Testified before Joint Committee of Commons and
Senate against the republican provisions of Bill C-60 (a new
Constitution for Canada), waged a large public opinion
campaign helping to secure unanimous provincial opposition
to the bill and its eventual withdrawal.

1982 Sponsored a national speaking tour by British MP and
Monarchist Sir John Biggs-Davison.

1984 Assisted the CBC in production of video history of
Canada’s monarchy, The Maple & The Crown. Co-hosted
study conference on monarchy held at the University of
Toronto. Toronto Branch participates in Royal Tattoo in
presence of The Queen.

1985 Submitted to the new Mulroney government a brief,
Canada’s Monarchy, Authentic Evolution, containing
department-by-department recommendations for full
expression of the nation’s monarchical identity.

1987 Defeated attempt by Secretary of State David Crombie
to remove Queen from Canadian Citizenship Oath.

1988 Began research and lobbying activities to encourage
MPs to request, and Government to erect, the Equestrian
Statue of The Queen on Parliament Hill (unveiled in 1992).

1989 Assisted Alberta Provincial Museum in mounting
exhibit on the 1939 Royal Tour.

1990 Issued first bilingual pamphlet about the value of the
monarchy and the work of the League.

1991 Blocked announcement of government’s new Gallantry
Decorations which would have eliminated the Victoria Cross
as a Canadian decoration. Subsequently waged successful campaign resulting in Queen’s creation of a Canadian Victoria Cross in 1993.

1993 Contacted every member of new House of Commons to solicit responses of loyalty to Crown and offer material on the
monarchy for MPs’ offices and constituents.

1996 Becomes first loyal society site on the internet at
www.monarchist.ca; free trial memberships attract many
new supporters.

1997 Established nationwide Red Box program to furnish
monarchical materials and teaching aids at no charge to
school and youth groups. Supplied first annual summer
student intern to Lieutenant Governor of Ontario. Assisted in
presentation of the Five Hundred Years of Royal Canada
mural to The Queen at Rideau Hall.

1998 Campaigned successfully for Oath of Citizenship to
remain Oath to Queen. Testifies before Senate Legal and
Constitutional Affairs Committee on proposed Royal Assent
changes.

1999 Released first comprehensive Survey on Cost of the
Canadian Crown (74 cents per citizen yearly). Exposed
Premiers’ near-unanimous opposition to leaked prime
ministerial millennium project to make Canada a republic.

2000 Received Armorial Bearings containing two Royal
Crowns by the Queen’s permission, presented by the
Lieutenant Governor of Ontario acting on behalf of The
Governor General and proclaimed at Accession Day service.
Testified before the House of Commons Committee and
Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee on
Citizenship Oath.

2001 Joined commentators and his Cabinet colleagues in
rebuking Foreign Affairs Minister Manley’s call for a republic.
Testified before Senate Rules, Procedures and Rights of
Parliament Committee on Royal Assent procedures. Ottawa
branch successfully campaigned to prevent designer logo from replacing Armorials in amalgamated city.

2002 Revised and updates survey on Cost of Canadian
Crown: $1.10 per Canadian yearly. Bilingualized main League
website. Teen and Young Adult Monarchist interest groups
formed in response to surging youth membership.

2003 Campaigned against Bill C-25 to remove allegiance to
Queen from Public Service Oath.

2004 Defended Governor General in media over spending
and travel controversy. Ontario members participated in
Lieutenant Governor’s book drive for First Nations
communities. Exposed federal government's confusion as to
the roles of The Queen and the Governor General, as
demonstrated at Canadian 60th anniversary of D-Day
commemoration in Normandy.

2005 Mounted national campaign in opposition to deletion
of Queen’s name from Canadian diplomatic Letters of
Credence and to demonstrate dangers of creeping
republicanism vested in a Governor General nominated,
advised and budgeted by the Prime Minister. Released third
comprehensive study of the Cost of the Canadian Crown: $1.54 per Canadian annually.

2006 Produced The Canadian Monarchy, full-colour
educational booklet about the Maple Crown, and began distribution to parliamentarians, schools and youth groups.
Revised website to incorporate contemporary education
section.

2007 After decades of lobbying, Canada Post issued the first
permanent (non-denominated) definitive stamp of The Queen for first class letters.

2008 Lead successful public and media campaign to reverse
BC Ferries’ decision to remove pictures of Queen from its
vessels. Protested downgrading of Royal portrait at Rideau
Hall.

2009 Becomes first organization to Tweet a Royal Visit.
Issues fourth triennial study, The Cost of the Canadian
Crown: $1.53 per Canadian yearly.

2010 Celebrated 40th anniversary of founding with complete revamping of website. Campaigned for restoration of “Royal
Canadian Navy” title.

The League has had a proud history. Whether in victory or
defeat it will continue to loyally support our Canadian
sovereign and fight against those who would undermine it.
Congratulations on 45 years!

Loyally Yours,
A Kisaragi Colour

The current Oath of Allegiance dates to 1689 and was used in all of the colonies that came together to form Canada. The oath for MPs is entrenched in the constitution while the oath for new citizens, as part of the Oath of Citizenship, is not. A source of trouble I will address further down.

"I, [name], do swear that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second, Queen of Canada, Her Heirs and Successors. So help me God."

Those with religious reservations may affirm rather than swear.

English Text:
"I swear (or affirm) that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, Queen of Canada, Her Heirs and Successors, and that I will faithfully observe the laws of Canada and fulfil my duties as a Canadian citizen."

French Text:
"Dorénavant, je promets fidélité et allégeance au Canada et à Sa Majesté Elizabeth Deux, Reine du Canada. Je m'engage à respecter les droits et libertés de notre pays, à défendre nos valeurs démocratiques, à observer fidèlement nos lois et à remplir mes devoirs et obligations de citoyen(ne) canadien(ne)."

The current Oath of Citizenship dates from 1947. There have been various changes proposed including making a reference to 'Canadian Values' (for now I'll ignore the absurd suggestion of removing the monarch). 

On this matter I share W. L. Morton's sentiment that because Canadians owe their allegiance to a monarch, rather than to an intangible concept like 'the People', there was no pressure on anyone to conform to a single 'Canadian way of life'; as he stated "the society of allegiance admits of a diversity the society of compact does not, and one of the blessings of Canadian life is that there is no Canadian way of life, much less two, but a unity under the Crown admitting of a thousand diversities."

Loyally Yours,
A Kisaragi Colour