Skip to main content
Canada’s most-awarded newsroom for a reason
Enjoy unlimited digital access
$1.99
per week
for 24 weeks
Canada’s most-awarded newsroom for a reason
$1.99
per week
for 24 weeks
// //

Britain's Queen Elizabeth II attends a virtual science showcase to mark British Science Week on March 12, 2021.

Buckingham Palace/Reuters

Looking south a couple of months ago to see the President of the United States denying the results of an election and inciting a riot at the U.S. Congress, a Canadian might have noted the resilient value of the monarchy.

If a prime minister tried to overturn an election like that, they’d be dismissed by the Queen. The great value of a constitutional monarchy is that the leader with the power has to answer to a venerable institution that cannot be badgered or beaten.

But then a simple interview with Oprah Winfrey can make you wonder how long that can last.

Story continues below advertisement

Meghan Markle, the Duchess of Sussex, only had to hint at cruel mistreatment and suggest racism by recounting conversations with unnamed Royal Family members about how dark the skin of her baby might be for the much of the world to suddenly remember how anachronistic royalty seems to be.

Constitutional monarchy serves us well, but it relies on the notion of royalty, and that’s a concept that can’t be expected to hold up through the 21st century.

That creates a Canadian problem. Canada’s constitutional system makes it nearly impossible to get rid of the monarchy. But one day it is going to be unavoidable – perhaps even thrust upon us.

Last week, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said now is not the time to talk about revisiting the role of the Royal Family. There’s a pandemic, after all. Not to mention it would mean opening a divisive can of worms that most people would rather leave alone.

But then Mr. Trudeau, who likes to speak about the importance of inclusion and diversity and the importance of calling out racism, skated around questions of whether Royal Family members are racist. That’s constitutionally appropriate, but it was hardly a banner day for the living symbols of national authority. Constitutionally, it is only the sovereign – the Queen – who is the constitutional symbol of Canada. But in institutional terms there’s no separating the monarch from the family.

It has always taken some suspension of disbelief to accept the role of kings and queens to serve as the source of all national power – and the superior of elected prime ministers. Yet it worked. But that was only because of reverence for, or deference to, the monarch.

But the age of deference is over. Cultural affinity for the traditions of monarchy was already weak in Quebec, and it will grow weaker in post-Empire, multicultural Canada. And no living, breathing family can maintain the illusion of deserving royalty, decade after decade, under 21st-century scrutiny. The Duchess of Sussex’s allegations of racism uncomfortably underlined the question of whether the Royal Family can be an accepted symbol of national authority in this age. Monarchy is a symbol of tradition and duty, but royalty symbolizes privilege.

Story continues below advertisement

There will be other interviews, other scandals and other doubts. It’s not impossible to think that a decline in the Royal Family’s credibility, and the authority of the monarchy, will come suddenly. Will Canadians still defer to royal authority after the reign of Queen Elizabeth II, now 94? Or that of her son, Charles, 72? What will Canada do if, say, Australia drops the monarchy? Or, for that matter, if Britain does?

That would lead to a thorny problem. The monarchy is intertwined in the Canadian tradition and Constitution, which created a British-style system but with powerful provinces. Which means there isn’t an easy way to undo the monarchy, and 10 provinces, plus Ottawa, will have to agree. And coming to unanimous agreement on major constitutional change isn’t, as a rule, something Canada does.

Sure, Mr. Trudeau doesn’t want to think about that now, in the middle of a pandemic. There’s time. But then, his successor, whoever that might be, isn’t going to want to do it either. What national politician wants to open up the traditions on which the country was founded, ask voters to entertain a divisive debate and invite 10 provincial premiers to express views on changing the Constitution?

For a long time, Canadian leaders have avoided that problem with the comforting thought that now’s not the time to think about replacing the monarchy. But that time will come. We don’t know when, but soon enough, we’ll have to start thinking about how.

Know what is happening in the halls of power with the day’s top political headlines and commentary as selected by Globe editors (subscribers only). Sign up today.

Your Globe

Build your personal news feed

  1. Follow topics and authors relevant to your reading interests.
  2. Check your Following feed daily, and never miss an article. Access your Following feed from your account menu at the top right corner of every page.

Follow the author of this article:

Follow topics related to this article:

View more suggestions in Following Read more about following topics and authors
Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

If you do not see your comment posted immediately, it is being reviewed by the moderation team and may appear shortly, generally within an hour.

We aim to have all comments reviewed in a timely manner.

Comments that violate our community guidelines will not be posted.

UPDATED: Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

To view this site properly, enable cookies in your browser. Read our privacy policy to learn more.
How to enable cookies