[Canada] Canadian Politics Redux

[Bauer]

I require cable to watch hockey else I would have cord cut years ago.  YouTube has so much better content than all the lifestyle channels these days.

[crazy canuck]

The King did in fact have input into what was in the speech that he gave.

And the king did in fact draft part of it.

[Jacob]

I thought Carney was more of an upstart born in NWT, son of a high school principal.  Didn't expect a family connection like that.

Maybe both brothers are go-getters. Maybe Mark managed to get Sean a good job in the UK when he was at the bank, and Sean did reasonably well enough to continue advancing.

Just speculation, though.

[viper37]

The King did in fact have input into what was in the speech that he gave.
And the king did in fact draft part of it.

King Charles III has said Canada faces a "critical moment' in a special speech to mark the opening session of the country's Parliament at the Canadian Senate in Ottawa.

The speech was mostly written for the King by the government of Canada as it lays out its agenda, but the beginning and ending portions were from the King himself.

It's called the throne speech and the last time it was read by a head of state was nearly 50 years ago in 1977 when it was delivered by
In the speech, which was given in a mixture of English and French, he expressed his love for Canada
King Charles added that while "Canada is facing challenges that are unprecedented in our lifetimes", it is also "an incredible opportunity. An opportunity for renewal. An opportunity to think big and to act bigger."

Allright, I stand corrected, these are the parts he wrote:


Edit: I fucking hate Edge.  What an awful browser.

When my dear late mother, Queen Elizabeth II, opened a new Canadian Parliament in 1957, the Second World War remained a fresh, painful memory. The Cold War was intensifying. Freedom and democracy were under threat.
Canada was emerging as a growing economic power and a force for peace in the world. In the decades since, history has been punctuated by epoch-making events: the Vietnam War, the fall of the Berlin Wall, and the start of the War on Terror. Today, Canada faces another critical moment.
Democracy, pluralism, the rule of law, self-determination, and freedom are values which Canadians hold dear, and ones which the Government is determined to protect.
The system of open global trade that, while not perfect, has helped to deliver prosperity for Canadians for decades, is changing. Canada's relationships with partners are also changing.

Conclusion
Honourable Senators, Members of the House of Commons,
When my dear late mother addressed your predecessors seven decades ago, she said that in that age, and against
the backdrop of international affairs, no nation could live unto itself. It is a source of great pride that, in the following
decades, Canada has continued to set an example to the world in her conduct and values, as a force for good.
I wish to express to you and to the people of Canada my heartfelt gratitude, and that of my wife, for the warmth
of the welcome which we have received. As the anthem reminds us: The True North is indeed strong and free!
21
Conclusion

Is there really something that warrants 2 days continuous coverage on RDI and CBC News?
What was different with the last Speech of the throne read by the Governor General, except that she didn't speak French at all and the King can?

https://www.canada.ca/en/privy-council/campaigns/speech-throne/2025/speech-from-the-throne.html

[viper37]

-How did you trip to Canada go, Sir?
-Wonderful, even Québécois appreciated me, look at this pretty sweater they gave me!

[crazy canuck]

The King did in fact have input into what was in the speech that he gave.
And the king did in fact draft part of it.

King Charles III has said Canada faces a "critical moment' in a special speech to mark the opening session of the country's Parliament at the Canadian Senate in Ottawa.

The speech was mostly written for the King by the government of Canada as it lays out its agenda, but the beginning and ending portions were from the King himself.

It's called the throne speech and the last time it was read by a head of state was nearly 50 years ago in 1977 when it was delivered by
In the speech, which was given in a mixture of English and French, he expressed his love for Canada
King Charles added that while "Canada is facing challenges that are unprecedented in our lifetimes", it is also "an incredible opportunity. An opportunity for renewal. An opportunity to think big and to act bigger."

Allright, I stand corrected, these are the parts he wrote:


Edit: I fucking hate Edge.  What an awful browser.

When my dear late mother, Queen Elizabeth II, opened a new Canadian Parliament in 1957, the Second World War remained a fresh, painful memory. The Cold War was intensifying. Freedom and democracy were under threat.
Canada was emerging as a growing economic power and a force for peace in the world. In the decades since, history has been punctuated by epoch-making events: the Vietnam War, the fall of the Berlin Wall, and the start of the War on Terror. Today, Canada faces another critical moment.
Democracy, pluralism, the rule of law, self-determination, and freedom are values which Canadians hold dear, and ones which the Government is determined to protect.
The system of open global trade that, while not perfect, has helped to deliver prosperity for Canadians for decades, is changing. Canada's relationships with partners are also changing.

Conclusion
Honourable Senators, Members of the House of Commons,
When my dear late mother addressed your predecessors seven decades ago, she said that in that age, and against
the backdrop of international affairs, no nation could live unto itself. It is a source of great pride that, in the following
decades, Canada has continued to set an example to the world in her conduct and values, as a force for good.
I wish to express to you and to the people of Canada my heartfelt gratitude, and that of my wife, for the warmth
of the welcome which we have received. As the anthem reminds us: The True North is indeed strong and free!
21
Conclusion

Is there really something that warrants 2 days continuous coverage on RDI and CBC News?
What was different with the last Speech of the throne read by the Governor General, except that she didn't speak French at all and the King can?

https://www.canada.ca/en/privy-council/campaigns/speech-throne/2025/speech-from-the-throne.html

As many as you hate edge, I hate the fact that people  are reducing the sum total of their knowledge to what a quick internet search reveals.

[viper37]

The Governor General never write the Speech of the Throne.
I have seen no indication that it was different for Queen Elizabeth or King Charles.

They are invited to read it, they add a few lines of intro and conclusion.

The rest is straight out of the governing party's agenda.

It's a really futile exercise rooted in some weird tradition.  If it wasn't of the confidence vote, it would be meaningless.


In as much as speech counts, the budget is what really matters.  Throne Speech is simply bla-bla-bla.  Always void of substance.

[crazy canuck]

The Governor General never write the Speech of the Throne.
I have seen no indication that it was different for Queen Elizabeth or King Charles.

They are invited to read it, they add a few lines of intro and conclusion.

The rest is straight out of the governing party's agenda.

It's a really futile exercise rooted in some weird tradition.  If it wasn't of the confidence vote, it would be meaningless.


In as much as speech counts, the budget is what really matters.  Throne Speech is simply bla-bla-bla.  Always void of substance.

Just because you don't know something doesn't mean it didn't happen.  You are going full Yi here, never go full Yi.

If you want to know about all the details of how much interaction the king had with the government regarding the speech from the throne, go back and rewatch the broadcast of the speech. You can probably find that somewhere on the CBC site.  During that broadcast, they had an expert on Royal etiquette, explaining, and sometimes painful detail, the drafting process of the speech and the steps that were taken to ensure that the content of the speech was agreeable to the King.  Will also learn about the portions of the speech that were drafted by the king himself. Which was quite a bit more than what you found on whatever website you located for your post above.

Lastly, you're making a classic logical fallacy.  You are assuming that a set of circumstances that apply to one situation will also apply to a different situation.  The circumstances in which a governor general reads the throne speech is very different from when the monarch himself reads the speech.  That is only happened three times in our whole history and a different set of process and etiquette is involved.

[Valmy]

The Governor General never write the Speech of the Throne.
I have seen no indication that it was different for Queen Elizabeth or King Charles.

They are invited to read it, they add a few lines of intro and conclusion.

The rest is straight out of the governing party's agenda.

It's a really futile exercise rooted in some weird tradition.  If it wasn't of the confidence vote, it would be meaningless.

In as much as speech counts, the budget is what really matters.  Throne Speech is simply bla-bla-bla.  Always void of substance.

True. But surely you want it that way right? The Throne Speech is where the agenda for the incoming government is announced and voted on correct? Surely that should be written by the incoming PM. Not have the King just decide what he thinks the government should do.

I mean Charles is well educated and not a total moron so I am sure he has a few nice ideas, but he isn't some genius either 

[crazy canuck]

The Governor General never write the Speech of the Throne.
I have seen no indication that it was different for Queen Elizabeth or King Charles.

They are invited to read it, they add a few lines of intro and conclusion.

The rest is straight out of the governing party's agenda.

It's a really futile exercise rooted in some weird tradition.  If it wasn't of the confidence vote, it would be meaningless.

In as much as speech counts, the budget is what really matters.  Throne Speech is simply bla-bla-bla.  Always void of substance.

True. But surely you want it that way right? The Throne Speech is where the agenda for the incoming government is announced and voted on correct? Surely that should be written by the incoming PM. Not have the King just decide what he thinks the government should do.

I mean Charles is well educated and not a total moron so I am sure he has a few nice ideas, but he isn't some genius either 

There is also a basic misunderstanding of how our constitutional structure works. The speech is not meaningless as Viper suggests.  That is why it is subject to a confidence vote.  My pet theory is that Canadians are so inundated with American news and politics that we lose sight of why our own traditions are important and have significance.

[viper37]

The Governor General never write the Speech of the Throne.
I have seen no indication that it was different for Queen Elizabeth or King Charles.

They are invited to read it, they add a few lines of intro and conclusion.

The rest is straight out of the governing party's agenda.

It's a really futile exercise rooted in some weird tradition.  If it wasn't of the confidence vote, it would be meaningless.

In as much as speech counts, the budget is what really matters.  Throne Speech is simply bla-bla-bla.  Always void of substance.

True. But surely you want it that way right? The Throne Speech is where the agenda for the incoming government is announced and voted on correct? Surely that should be written by the incoming PM. Not have the King just decide what he thinks the government should do.

I mean Charles is well educated and not a total moron so I am sure he has a few nice ideas, but he isn't some genius either 

What I mean is that there's no need for a speech on the agenda.

We have an agenda, here it is, you can see it on your tablet.  Everyone in favour vote "Yeah". Let's proceed.

[crazy canuck]

The Governor General never write the Speech of the Throne.
I have seen no indication that it was different for Queen Elizabeth or King Charles.

They are invited to read it, they add a few lines of intro and conclusion.

The rest is straight out of the governing party's agenda.

It's a really futile exercise rooted in some weird tradition.  If it wasn't of the confidence vote, it would be meaningless.

In as much as speech counts, the budget is what really matters.  Throne Speech is simply bla-bla-bla.  Always void of substance.

True. But surely you want it that way right? The Throne Speech is where the agenda for the incoming government is announced and voted on correct? Surely that should be written by the incoming PM. Not have the King just decide what he thinks the government should do.

I mean Charles is well educated and not a total moron so I am sure he has a few nice ideas, but he isn't some genius either 

What I mean is that there's no need for a speech on the agenda.

We have an agenda, here it is, you can see it on your tablet.  Everyone in favour vote "Yeah". Let's proceed.

Again, you misunderstand both the constitutional and historical significance of the speech from the throne.  It is the thing that signals parliament's confidence in the agenda of the government.

That is precisely why the vote on the thrones speech is a vote of confidence.

Even if we didn't have a monarch, under our parliamentary system, you would still need a speech of some sort to set the agenda on which a confidence vote is held, unless you want to turn us into a republic and go down the mess that the United States is in.

[Grey Fox]

I don't think Viper misunderstands it, he's willfully ignoring it because to him that part of our system is only wasted time and money.

This time around, our monarchy is something the RoC is using to distinguish it self from the USA. Him & I, we never need to do that.

Myself, I found it jarring at first glance but I get it.

[Valmy]

What I mean is that there's no need for a speech on the agenda.

We have an agenda, here it is, you can see it on your tablet.  Everyone in favour vote "Yeah". Let's proceed.

Sure. You could do that. You could. Just like we could have the President show up for work the January after he was elected at his office and start doing his job with no fuss.

But what fun would that be? No, we have to have this big ceremony and party.

[crazy canuck]

What I mean is that there's no need for a speech on the agenda.

We have an agenda, here it is, you can see it on your tablet.  Everyone in favour vote "Yeah". Let's proceed.

Sure. You could do that. You could. Just like we could have the President show up for work the January after he was elected at his office and start doing his job with no fuss.

But what fun would that be? No, we have to have this big ceremony and party.

The point you are also missing is it is not just ceremony.