The Wayback Machine - https://web.archive.org/web/20090708001344/http://www.monarchist.ca/cmn/1998/manley.htm
JOHN MANLEY: REPUBLICAN
Editorial Comment by John Aimers, Dominion Chairman
John Manley is an honest republican. That is the least - and the most - that one can say of him. Having gratuitously tossed off a suggestion to abolish the institution that is the embodiment of the Canadian State at the end of an interview on another subject, he did not retreat behind the obfuscation so common in politics today. Rather, he acknowledged having cleared his remarks in advance with the Prime Minister's Office; he repeated and expanded on them in media interviews; he was the only Cabinet Minister to respond to the Ottawa Citizen survey of MP's positions on the Monarchy; and he replied to all who wrote him with a full explanation and defense of his position.
That he showed little sense and less sensitivity to have raised this question in the atmosphere of mingled grief, highly-charged emotion and rush to judgement surrounding Diana's death is undeniable. But Manley is a straightforward and clearly able, articulate exponent of republicanism - as well as a rumoured candidate to succeed Mr. Chretien - and so he deserves our respect as a formidable opponent.. And all who value Canada had best be prepared to join in the vigorous debate for which he calls.
The old loyalties are dead. Appeal to the "British connection" - never the League's position - resonates less and less in a swift-changing nation. There are no longer 70 Tory backbenchers in Ottawa providing automatic, instinctive support for the Crown. Indeed - and this is ironic if one considers the circumstances of the League's founding in no small measure as reaction to Trudeau republicanism - the natural parliamentary support for Monarchy in much more diverse, and perhaps all the healthier as a result, coming as it does from the more conservative elements of the Liberal caucus, from a good many Reform MP's pace Mr. Manning, and from some of the rump of Tories and NDP Members who maintain their parties' long-standing Allegiance. And the people show their loyalty, as well: in the crowds greeting The Queen and Consort throughout their summer homecoming; in the young people who see Canada's identity preserved if not personified by the Crown; and in the poverty of argument by those who criticize the Monarchy but who lack anything demonstrably better to replace it.
This absence of a superior alternative is the principal argument to throw out to Manley and his supporters. Do they seriously believe Canadians will jettison a system that works well, that mirrors our federal state and that - for all its faults and imperfections - is non-partisan and giving by its nature, for one that will place untrammeled power in the hands of the ruling political elite ? Do Canadians wish another level of division through an additional national balloting for a President ? Do they want to politicize and destroy the Honours System by turning its Companions into an electoral college to choose the President for them ? Are they so naive as to suppose that republicanism will add one chicken to any pot ? One cent to any single unemployed mother's relief cheque ? Take one per cent off the income tax ? Increase corporate profits or efficiency one jot ? Give one more student a job by which to pay for college ? Reduce classroom size by one girl or boy ? Increase Canada's contribution to international aid and development by one fraction ?
Manley knows little whereof he speaks. He arrogates to himself the decision as to who is a "Canadian" - excluding the Sovereign who has served and loved this land long before he was even born ! He argues that Britain will replace the Monarchy before Canada if we don't get on with it - ignoring Tony Blair's near-avuncular support for the Crown, and the record-high numbers supporting the institution - and the Prince of Wales - according to MORI and other UK pollsters. He raises the spectre of Australia's flirtation with republicanism - apparently unaware of the completely different Constitutional background, class divisions and anti-British sentiments characterizing that Commonwealth's debate. He talks in trendy New Age terms of "change" and the "Millenium" - as if a calendar date reflecting a year of Our Lord should somehow be transmuted into an argument for republicanism, as opposed to a time of giving thanks for the peace, order and good government we generally enjoy. He rails against a male-dominated, Protestant succession - the first is now to change and the second is irrelevant; Canadians judge other human beings by their service, dedication and wisdom, not by their religious beliefs.
Manley is mired in the past - arguments reflecting the insecure, self-conscious nationalism of the 60's. Monarchy embodies the future - aspiration, service to a global community, respect for societal differences amidst tenacious guarding of personal values.
March brought Charles, William and Harry to our shores - to ski, to enjoy hockey, to meet many of their future subjects. In their lives of giving to others, under a relentless and often harsh spotlight, lies the hope of our Dominion to be inspired by all that is best and most admired in the Canadian ideal. In Manley's seeking partisan and personal advantage by tearing down an institution and violating his Oath, is the path of negation, self-absorption and vacuity.
This page was last updated at 7:00 AM on 08/04/1998 by M.D.S.G.