Post by Girlsandboys on Apr 20, 2007 2:21:37 GMT -5
10000 Islands » 10000 Islands » 10KI Government?
www.10000islands.proboards21.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=1170950574
10KI Government?
Post by Shizensky on Feb 8, 2007, 5:02pm
If an official name of the islands exists... what would it be? The only idea that comes to my head is maybe a Monarchic Republic. Just wondering... it seemed like an interesting thought.
Re: 10KI Government?
Post by Sinn 'The Immigration Daemon' on Feb 8, 2007, 6:16pm
Constitutional monarchy
Re: 10KI Government?
Post by Anime Daisuki on Feb 10, 2007, 10:33pm
It is close but not completely fitting. The head of state in a constitutional monarchy does not participate in government, his role is purely ceremonial.
Ours is a cross between a benign dictatorship and a constitutional monarchy. I'll agree with Shizenky on the term Monarchic Republic.
Re: 10KI Government?
Post by Recruitin' Champ Eridani on Feb 18, 2007, 1:26am
Imperial Republic perhaps?
Re: 10KI Government?
Post by Shizensky on Feb 21, 2007, 4:08pm
Hm, I always thought that Imperial might suggest a conquering state. I think the only time we've gone about Imperialism would be the few times we hit back and invaded DEN.
Re: 10KI Government?
Post by The Candy Lane on Mar 1, 2007, 5:25am
Feb 10, 2007, 10:33pm, Anime Daisuki wrote:
It is close but not completely fitting. The head of state in a constitutional monarchy does not participate in government, his role is purely ceremonial.
Ours is a cross between a benign dictatorship and a constitutional monarchy. I'll agree with Shizenky on the term Monarchic Republic.
Canada is in a constitutional monarchy,
the head of state has as much power as the constitution will allow, wether it be veto power, symbolic or a different role granted by the constitution. granted in modern politics the kings etc. most often use there power only symbolicaly, i can only think of one instance in canadian history wen the attorney general of canada refused to pass a bill.
Noun:A monarchy in which the powers of the ruler are restricted to those granted under the constitution and laws of the nation.
Re: 10KI Government?
Post by A Lee Project (ALPMACO) on Mar 1, 2007, 6:02pm
Mar 1, 2007, 5:25am, The Candy Lane wrote:
Feb 10, 2007, 10:33pm, Anime Daisuki wrote:
It is close but not completely fitting. The head of state in a constitutional monarchy does not participate in government, his role is purely ceremonial.
Ours is a cross between a benign dictatorship and a constitutional monarchy. I'll agree with Shizenky on the term Monarchic Republic.
Canada is in a constitutional monarchy,
the head of state has as much power as the constitution will allow, wether it be veto power, symbolic or a different role granted by the constitution. granted in modern politics the kings etc. most often use there power only symbolicaly, i can only think of one instance in canadian history wen the attorney general of canada refused to pass a bill.
Noun:A monarchy in which the powers of the ruler are restricted to those granted under the constitution and laws of the nation.
Hahah that was the King-Byng Affair....a very important story for us Republic supporters here in Canada: (btw you meant Governor General of Canada )
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King-Byng_Affair)
*Snippet*
The King-Byng Affair was a 1926 Canadian constitutional crisis that occurred when the Governor General of Canada Lord Byng of Vimy, refused a request by the Prime Minister, William Lyon Mackenzie King, to dissolve parliament and call a general election.
The crisis was watched closely by both the Canadian and British governments, and came to redefine the role of Governor General not only in Canada but throughout the dominions. It was also a major impetus in negotiations at Imperial Conferences held in the late 1920s that led to the Statute of Westminster 1931.
According to British Empire constitutional theory the Governor General represented both the Sovereign and the British government, a situation that had evolved with Lord Byng's predecessors and the Canadian government, as well as the Canadian people, into a tradition of non-interference in Canadian political affairs.
In September 1925, King requested a dissolution of Parliament to call an election, which Lord Byng granted. In the election the Conservative Party won 115 seats to 100 for King's Liberals. Counting on the support of the Progressive Party to overcome the Conservative minority, King did not resign and remained in power with a minority government.
A few months later, one of King's appointees in the Department of Customs and Excise was revealed to have taken bribes. The Conservatives alleged that the corruption extended to the highest levels of government, including the Prime Minister. King fired the Minister of Customs, Jacques Bureau, but promptly appointed him to the Senate, creating even more dismay among the members of the Progressive Party, who had already been withdrawing their support from the Liberal government.
Having already lost two previous votes on questions of procedure and afraid of losing a third on a question of government corruption, King went to Byng seeking a dissolution of Parliament. Byng used his reserve power to refuse the request. He argued that the Conservatives, as the biggest single party in Parliament, should have a chance to form a government before he could call an election. King requested that before any decision was made, Byng consult the British government, which he represented. Byng again refused, citing non-interference in Canadian affairs.
The next day, King presented Byng with an Order-in-Council seeking the dissolution of Parliament, which Byng refused to sign. Believing that he no longer had enough support to stay in office, King resigned (convention requires a prime minister to either drop the writ or resign when he loses the support of parliament). Byng then invited Conservative leader Arthur Meighen, who had been Prime Minister from 1920 to 1921, to form a government. Meighen did so, but only made his ministers "acting" ones and did not swear them into office because he still had to win a confidence vote in the House of Commons. The Liberals were furious, and were able to get the Progressives to join them in a drive to bring down the government. This was successful, and Meighen was denied confidence by only one vote. Meighen requested a dissolution of Parliament, which was granted by Byng, and an election was called.
Much was made of the 'Byng-King Crisis' during the election campaign. The Liberals were returned to power with a clear majority and King as Prime Minister. Once in power, King's government sought at a Commonwealth conference to redefine the role of Governor General as a representative of the Sovereign and not of the British government. The change was agreed to at the Imperial Conference of 1926. As a result of the Balfour Declaration of 1926 Commonwealth Governors General ceased to be the agents of the Imperial or British government in each dominion — this role was to be assumed by a British High Commissioner, whose duties were soon recognized to be virtually identical to those of an ambassador.
Leaving Canada on 30 September 1926, Byng returned to England. Despite the political crisis, he left a much-respected man. Many historians have agreed that Byng was constitutionally obligated to refuse King's request, as King had not been in office for sufficient time and merely wanted to avoid a motion of censure.
The King-Byng Affair was the most controversial use of a Governor General's reserve powers until the Australian constitutional crisis of 1975 in which the Governor-General of Australia, John Kerr, dismissed Prime Minister Gough Whitlam.
The King-Byng Affair is occasionally called the "King Byng Thing" by Canadian political scientists and historians in casual conversation or informal writing. "King Byng Thing" was most notably used by author Will Ferguson, who writes about Canadian history, politics and culture with a comedic slant. It is also even more informally known as the "King-Byng Wing-Ding".
www.10000islands.proboards21.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=1170950574
10KI Government?
Post by Shizensky on Feb 8, 2007, 5:02pm
If an official name of the islands exists... what would it be? The only idea that comes to my head is maybe a Monarchic Republic. Just wondering... it seemed like an interesting thought.
Re: 10KI Government?
Post by Sinn 'The Immigration Daemon' on Feb 8, 2007, 6:16pm
Constitutional monarchy
Re: 10KI Government?
Post by Anime Daisuki on Feb 10, 2007, 10:33pm
It is close but not completely fitting. The head of state in a constitutional monarchy does not participate in government, his role is purely ceremonial.
Ours is a cross between a benign dictatorship and a constitutional monarchy. I'll agree with Shizenky on the term Monarchic Republic.
Re: 10KI Government?
Post by Recruitin' Champ Eridani on Feb 18, 2007, 1:26am
Imperial Republic perhaps?
Re: 10KI Government?
Post by Shizensky on Feb 21, 2007, 4:08pm
Hm, I always thought that Imperial might suggest a conquering state. I think the only time we've gone about Imperialism would be the few times we hit back and invaded DEN.
Re: 10KI Government?
Post by The Candy Lane on Mar 1, 2007, 5:25am
Feb 10, 2007, 10:33pm, Anime Daisuki wrote:
It is close but not completely fitting. The head of state in a constitutional monarchy does not participate in government, his role is purely ceremonial.
Ours is a cross between a benign dictatorship and a constitutional monarchy. I'll agree with Shizenky on the term Monarchic Republic.
Canada is in a constitutional monarchy,
the head of state has as much power as the constitution will allow, wether it be veto power, symbolic or a different role granted by the constitution. granted in modern politics the kings etc. most often use there power only symbolicaly, i can only think of one instance in canadian history wen the attorney general of canada refused to pass a bill.
Noun:A monarchy in which the powers of the ruler are restricted to those granted under the constitution and laws of the nation.
Re: 10KI Government?
Post by A Lee Project (ALPMACO) on Mar 1, 2007, 6:02pm
Mar 1, 2007, 5:25am, The Candy Lane wrote:
Feb 10, 2007, 10:33pm, Anime Daisuki wrote:
It is close but not completely fitting. The head of state in a constitutional monarchy does not participate in government, his role is purely ceremonial.
Ours is a cross between a benign dictatorship and a constitutional monarchy. I'll agree with Shizenky on the term Monarchic Republic.
Canada is in a constitutional monarchy,
the head of state has as much power as the constitution will allow, wether it be veto power, symbolic or a different role granted by the constitution. granted in modern politics the kings etc. most often use there power only symbolicaly, i can only think of one instance in canadian history wen the attorney general of canada refused to pass a bill.
Noun:A monarchy in which the powers of the ruler are restricted to those granted under the constitution and laws of the nation.
Hahah that was the King-Byng Affair....a very important story for us Republic supporters here in Canada: (btw you meant Governor General of Canada )
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King-Byng_Affair)
*Snippet*
The King-Byng Affair was a 1926 Canadian constitutional crisis that occurred when the Governor General of Canada Lord Byng of Vimy, refused a request by the Prime Minister, William Lyon Mackenzie King, to dissolve parliament and call a general election.
The crisis was watched closely by both the Canadian and British governments, and came to redefine the role of Governor General not only in Canada but throughout the dominions. It was also a major impetus in negotiations at Imperial Conferences held in the late 1920s that led to the Statute of Westminster 1931.
According to British Empire constitutional theory the Governor General represented both the Sovereign and the British government, a situation that had evolved with Lord Byng's predecessors and the Canadian government, as well as the Canadian people, into a tradition of non-interference in Canadian political affairs.
In September 1925, King requested a dissolution of Parliament to call an election, which Lord Byng granted. In the election the Conservative Party won 115 seats to 100 for King's Liberals. Counting on the support of the Progressive Party to overcome the Conservative minority, King did not resign and remained in power with a minority government.
A few months later, one of King's appointees in the Department of Customs and Excise was revealed to have taken bribes. The Conservatives alleged that the corruption extended to the highest levels of government, including the Prime Minister. King fired the Minister of Customs, Jacques Bureau, but promptly appointed him to the Senate, creating even more dismay among the members of the Progressive Party, who had already been withdrawing their support from the Liberal government.
Having already lost two previous votes on questions of procedure and afraid of losing a third on a question of government corruption, King went to Byng seeking a dissolution of Parliament. Byng used his reserve power to refuse the request. He argued that the Conservatives, as the biggest single party in Parliament, should have a chance to form a government before he could call an election. King requested that before any decision was made, Byng consult the British government, which he represented. Byng again refused, citing non-interference in Canadian affairs.
The next day, King presented Byng with an Order-in-Council seeking the dissolution of Parliament, which Byng refused to sign. Believing that he no longer had enough support to stay in office, King resigned (convention requires a prime minister to either drop the writ or resign when he loses the support of parliament). Byng then invited Conservative leader Arthur Meighen, who had been Prime Minister from 1920 to 1921, to form a government. Meighen did so, but only made his ministers "acting" ones and did not swear them into office because he still had to win a confidence vote in the House of Commons. The Liberals were furious, and were able to get the Progressives to join them in a drive to bring down the government. This was successful, and Meighen was denied confidence by only one vote. Meighen requested a dissolution of Parliament, which was granted by Byng, and an election was called.
Much was made of the 'Byng-King Crisis' during the election campaign. The Liberals were returned to power with a clear majority and King as Prime Minister. Once in power, King's government sought at a Commonwealth conference to redefine the role of Governor General as a representative of the Sovereign and not of the British government. The change was agreed to at the Imperial Conference of 1926. As a result of the Balfour Declaration of 1926 Commonwealth Governors General ceased to be the agents of the Imperial or British government in each dominion — this role was to be assumed by a British High Commissioner, whose duties were soon recognized to be virtually identical to those of an ambassador.
Leaving Canada on 30 September 1926, Byng returned to England. Despite the political crisis, he left a much-respected man. Many historians have agreed that Byng was constitutionally obligated to refuse King's request, as King had not been in office for sufficient time and merely wanted to avoid a motion of censure.
The King-Byng Affair was the most controversial use of a Governor General's reserve powers until the Australian constitutional crisis of 1975 in which the Governor-General of Australia, John Kerr, dismissed Prime Minister Gough Whitlam.
The King-Byng Affair is occasionally called the "King Byng Thing" by Canadian political scientists and historians in casual conversation or informal writing. "King Byng Thing" was most notably used by author Will Ferguson, who writes about Canadian history, politics and culture with a comedic slant. It is also even more informally known as the "King-Byng Wing-Ding".
