Lv 7
Paco asked in Society & CultureRoyalty · 1 decade ago

How about this for King of Canada?

When Norway split from Sweden in 1905 they did not want to continue sharing the monarchy with the current King Oscar II of Sweden (who was 76 years old). The chose a grandson of Oscar's father (age 32), to be their new King. It has worked out very well since the monarchy is very beloved in Norway and is now in it's 3rd generation and is 103 years old.

- The parallel with Canada is obvious. Canada should consider designating Peter Philips (age 30) and Autumn Kelly as Queen consort as their heir to Queen Elizabeth. Their monarchy is seperate from the UK so parliament can write their own line of succession. It would maintain the historical connection back to UK and Scotland , but allow Canada to have it's own line.

- Canada has now shared 5 monarchs with the UK. Elizabeth II, George VI, George V, Edward VII, Victoria. I think Peter and Autumn could start a new Canadian line, and would be more popular than Charles.

A humble suggestion. What do you think?


I mean it wouldn't be a decision Canada would have to make immediately. QEII might live another 20 years. It would be nice to know if Philip and Autumn's marriage lasts and produces an heir. Canada wouldn't necessarily have to keep the male-preference requirement. The royal residence could be La Citadelle in Quebec City bringing renewed attention to that city.

Update 2:

I am talking about the monarch that succeeds Elizabeth as King of Canada. Charles is not going to inspire the same degree of affection as QEII. People are not going to be particularly overjoyed about having him on the banknotes. As the gentleman said, Princess Mary is inspiring a great deal of affection in Australia & she is the crown princess of Denmark. King Philip and Queen Autumn would give Canada their own monarchy while retaining the geneological link back through history. As it was done in Norway in 1905, it would have to be done through an election giving people the options of voting for a republic or retaining Charles as monarch.


I mean Charles proposed to his 2nd cousin before he proposed to Diana because his great uncle told him that was a good thing. Wouldn't you rather have Philip and Autumn then Charles? Plus your own little princes and princesses.

Update 3:

BTW Canada is independent (since 1931). It's just a question of who's your head of state.

Update 4:

Only two members of the House of Windsor have married Canadians. George Windsor married a Canadian divorcee and a Roman Catholic 20 years ago. He is excluded from the line of succession, and 2 of his 3 children are Catholic. The 3rd is only 13 years old and presumably will convert when she is older. They seem to have little connection to Canada.


A 2002 poll of Canadians about the royal family 44% said they were irrelevant, 46% said the opposite, and 8% said neither.


A 2005 poll found that 28% of Canadians saw the Queen as their favourite member of the Royal Family, Prince William was second with 26%, Prince Harry was third with 9%, Prince Charles was fourth with 6% and Prince Philip last with 2%.


With popularity numbers that low, I assume that Canada will probably become a republic after Queen Elizabeth dies. Philip and Autumn would have to be cultivated over the next 10 years .

5 Answers

  • 1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    I think that's a great idea - Australia could do something similar with Harry. After all, he's been here working as a jackaroo. Or Beatrice or Eugenie.

    I think it would be a shame for the last few non-republic commonwealth nations (Canada, Australia, New Zealand) to lose the connection to the monarchy due to all the historical associations. Otherwise, we end up with the USA-style presidential electoral fiascos and yet another layer of government (let's face it, we essentially ignore the royals in our governmental processes).

    I think if we had our "own" royalty in Australia, people would be more supportive - after all, the media here in Australia refer to Crown Princess Mary of Denmark as "Princess Mary" and "our Princess" completely forgetting that Australia has a royal family....

    Your idea for Canada is a good one. I used to be a republican, but now I quite like the longer-term stability of the monarchy. We have elections every 3 years for federal, state and local government here so I'm getting a bit bored of it. Another election for a president that would be here for 3 years? Pointless.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    I think that everything is fine the way that it is. You have to remember that Canada is a Constitutional Monarchy. And that the sovereign really has no power. They only have ceremonial powers. Such as signing laws and granting peerages and honors. They have no real political status. The Prime Minister and their government has all the power. Just as the President of the U.S. Constitutional Monarchy is similar to a republic form of government in some ways. As the people and not the monarch have more of a say in how things are ran. Queen Elizabeth II has no real power in the UK....So she damn well doesn't have any power in Canada, Australia, or any one of her other realms. She is not a very powerful lady. Although I really like the monarch a lot.

    I think that it is fine the way that it is. And regardless of whom is the monarch, those commonwealth realm countries will continue to be ran the same way that they have always been for centuries. It should just be left alone.

    And on the plus side, if you get rid of the queen those countries would stand to loose a lot of money. She is a very famous tourist Attraction and they love her. LOL People come to Britian in order to tour the palace. They love her, and if you get rid of her the countries would loose a lot. She gives in more than what she takes. And she should be respected for that. They british people pay nearly $80 M. USD for the queen yearly....But she brings in almost $300 M. USD yearly alone. So she is doing more good than harm. Just leave the little old lady alone!!!!!

  • J.C. P
    Lv 4
    1 decade ago

    I find this idea intriguing. However, I wonder about the importance of the historical connection with the Windsors. How important is it really? I am an American but watched a lot of Canadian Broadcasting when I lived in Michigan for 3 years. Frankly, I never saw much affection displayed (or mention made) of the royal family.

    Do people feel that Peter has a real connection with the nation?

  • 1 decade ago

    Canada's connection to royalty is symbolic only. Its increasingly mixed society of immigrants cares nothing for that symbolism and history. Canada doesn't want or need kings and queens.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 1 decade ago

    independence would be much better.


    Canada is not fully independent. We have a foreign head of state, and she still has some real powers, just look at Brian Mulroney's senate appointments. And the 20 dollar bill.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.