Yves Boisvert is a columnist for La Presse.
It was New Year's Day, and my family was gathered around the TV, watching the annual classic satirical review on Radio-Canada, Bye Bye 2016. Afterward, the Queen appeared on the screen to wish Canadians a very happy 150th anniversary.
My kids burst out laughing. For them, the scene was not only anachronic, but also absurd and irresistibly comic.
It was time for a constitutional-law lesson.
"Must I remind you," I said, "Elizabeth II is the head of state in this country and you are all Her Majesty's subjects, as shown on the non-animal side of every coin?" Of course, they knew. They are just a little less accustomed to the nonsense. As Canadians grow up, they become indifferent about the fact their country has a foreign monarch as its symbolic state leader.
Would it not be a nice gift from Canada to itself for its 150th legal birthday to get rid of monarchy? Not to worry, we could keep the third Monday of May as a public holiday – which, in Quebec, is not Victoria Day, but the Journée nationale des patriotes.
Surely, there are more pressing issues on the national agenda. After all, why bother, since monarchy is only on paper? The Queen indeed has no impact on the real political lives of Canadians – and it's not as if anyone actively dislikes the lady. Moreover, trying to change the Constitution proved catastrophic the last time we tried. It would require the unanimity of the 10 provinces and the federal government to make Canada a republic.
Nonetheless, it is beyond me that the matter is not discussed at all in the political arena. Even if the Queen is only symbolic in Canada, the reality of a foreign monarchy in our Constitution should raise some objections. I am not talking about Quebec secessionists, but about Canadian nationalists.
Anyone with a basic knowledge of Britain can understand the deep attachment of the people to the symbols of royalty and the person of the Queen, herself. It is rooted in history, culture and sociology. I've met many Scottish nationalists with portraits of the Queen in their living room.
But here, in Canada? What relevance does a colonial figure still have in 2017? It is hard to argue for the unifying effect of monarchy, if you judge by royal visits to Quebec over the past 65 years.
But more importantly, symbols have an impact on a nation's psyche – even in a country of many nations. Does it not reflect a poor political mindset to accept and even celebrate a foreign monarch? If some Canadians enjoy having a monarchy so much, can we at least suggest that it should be one made in Canada – with our Queen wearing a beaver fur coat of some sort?
The British Parliament created Canada's division of powers 150 years ago. When the elder prime minister Trudeau brought the Constitution Act to Ottawa in 1982 (without Quebec's approval), there was little appetite to make Canada totally independent from the British monarchy. But why not?
It is not a matter of costs. There would still be a need for a constitutional figure to officialize government rulings in many instances – some call that a president.
Saying goodbye to our British monarchy to mark our 150th birthday is only a matter of common sense and political maturity.