View source for Debate on the monarchy in Canada

{{Short description|Political issue in Canada}}
{{Use Canadian English|date=October 2016}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=June 2020}}
{{Multiple issues|
{{Original research|date=April 2024}}
{{synthesis|date=April 2024}}}}
{{Monarchy of Canada sidebar|constitutional}}
Debate between monarchists and republicans in Canada has been taking place since before [[Canadian Confederation|the country's Confederation]] in 1867, though it has rarely been of significance since the [[rebellions of 1837]].<ref>{{citation|last=Smith |first=David |title=Republican Tendencies |url=http://www.irpp.org/po/archive/may99/smith.pdf |editor-last=Watson |editor-first=William |journal=Policy Options: Bye-Bye for Good? |issue=May 1999 |page=8 |location=Montreal |publisher=Institute for Research on Public Policy |access-date=10 February 2009 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120217112938/http://www.irpp.org/po/archive/may99/smith.pdf |archive-date=17 February 2012}}</ref> Open support for republicanism only came from the [[Patriotes]] in the early 19th century, the [[Red River Colony|Red River Métis]] in 1869, and minor actions by the [[Fenian]]s in the 19th century. However, paralleling the changes in constitutional law that saw the creation of a distinct [[Canadian monarchy]], the emergence in the 1960s of [[Quebec nationalism]], and the evolution of [[Canadian nationalism]], the cultural role and relevance of the monarchy was altered and was sometimes questioned in certain circles, while continuing to receive support in others.

In 2005, it was estimated that only 0.6 per cent of the population was actively engaged in any debate about a republic.<ref name=Hanon>{{Cite news| last=Hanon| first=Andrew| title=Monarchists, republicans square off| newspaper=Edmonton Sun| date=20 May 2005 |url=http://www.edmontonsun.com/News/Columnists/Hanon_Andrew/2005/05/20/pf-1048971.html |access-date=17 February 2009}}{{dead link|date=May 2018}}</ref> The [[Monarchist League of Canada]]'s chief executive officer, Robert Finch, stated the greatest threat to the monarchy is not republicanism, "it is indifference."<ref name=stayhome>{{Cite news| title=One in five Canadians think the Queen should stay home: Poll | publisher=canoe.ca | date=28 June 2010| url=http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2010/05/31/14205901.html| archive-url=https://archive.today/20130115065351/http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2010/05/31/14205901.html| url-status=usurped| archive-date=15 January 2013| access-date=29 June 2010}}</ref>

==The debate==
{{Main|Monarchism in Canada|Republicanism in Canada}}

===The first 100 years===
[[File:WilliamLyonMackenzie.jpeg|thumb|[[William Lyon Mackenzie]], circa 1855]]

In the early 19th century, reform-minded groups began to emerge in the British colonies in Canada. From them rose [[William Lyon Mackenzie]], who desired a US-style republic for Canada,<ref>{{citation| url=https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/upper-canada| last1=Hall| first1=Roger| last2=Foot| first2=Richard| title=Upper Canada| date=9 December 2022| encyclopedia=Canadian Encyclopedia| publisher=Historica Canada| accessdate=10 April 2024}}</ref> and [[Louis-Joseph Papineau]]. Their causes were countered by the lieutenant governors and members of the executive councils at the time, as well as a majority of the colonists, who did not espouse a break with the Crown,<ref name=Philips>{{citation| last=Philips| first=Stephen| title=The Emergence of a Canadian Monarchy: 1867-1953| journal=Canadian Monarchist News| volume=7| issue=4| pages=1–2| publisher=Monarchist League of Canada| location=Toronto| date=Summer 2003| url=http://www.monarchist.ca/sites/default/files/documents/2003/11/177.pdf| access-date=8 February 2009| url-status=dead| archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150521124231/http://www.monarchist.ca/sites/default/files/documents/2003/11/177.pdf| archive-date=21 May 2015}}</ref> Still, in the lead-up to [[Canadian Confederation|Confederation]] in 1867, there did take place debate over whether the new polity should adopt a republican or monarchical form of government.<ref>{{Cite book| last=Chevrier| first=Marc| contribution=Our Republic in America| editor-last=Venne| editor-first=Michel| title=Vive Quebec!: new thinking and new approaches to the Quebec nation| publisher=James Lorimer & Company| year=2001| location=Toronto| page=87| url=https://books.google.com/books?id=xyNlYxdpdfcC| isbn=978-1-55028-734-9}}</ref>

[[Alistair Horne]] observed in the late 1950s that, while Canada's cultural mix grew, the monarchy remained held in high regard: "At its lowest common denominator, to the average Canadian—whether of British, French or Ukrainian extraction—the Crown is the one thing that he has that the rich and mighty Americans have not got. It makes him feel a little superior." However, at the same time, he noted that the institution was coming more into question in Quebec and that it was sometimes perceived as having a "colonial taint", but theorized that this was because Canadians had an inferiority complex in relation to the British.<ref>{{Citation| last=Horne| first=Alistair| author-link=Alistair Horne| publication-date=2007| editor-last=Cohen| editor-first=Andrew| editor-link=Andrew Cohen (journalist)| title=The Unfinished Canadian| page=42| place=Toronto| publisher =McClelland & Stewart| url=https://books.google.com/books?id=glcBcaMC6doC&q=Andrew%2C+Cohen+%282007%29.+The+Unfinished+Canadian.&pg=PA90| isbn=978-0-7710-2286-9| date=4 November 2008}}</ref> At the same time, controversy arose in the run-up to the Queen's 1959 tour, when [[Canadian Broadcasting Corporation]] personality [[Joyce Davidson]] said in an interview with [[Dave Garroway]] on [[NBC]]'s ''[[Today (NBC program)|Today Show]]'', "like most Canadians, I am indifferent to the visit of the Queen."<ref name=DavidsonG&M>{{citation| url=https://www.theglobeandmail.com/arts/television/article-tv-personality-faced-backlash-after-comment-about-the-queen-in-a-more/| last=Stoffman| first=Judy| title=TV personality Joyce Davidson faced backlash after comment about the Queen in a more narrow-minded Canada| date=23 May 2020| newspaper=The Globe and Mail| accessdate=10 April 2024}}</ref> The CBC was thereafter flooded with telephone calls from angry Canadians, as well as letters supporting Davidson. [[Co-operative Commonwealth Federation]] [[Member of Parliament]] [[Frank Howard (Canadian politician)|Frank Howard]] agreed with Davidson, but, many more did not,<ref name=Buckner84>{{Citation| url=https://books.google.com/books?id=27IggObUC9kC| last=Buckner| first=Phillip| title=The Last Great Royal Tour: Queen Elizabeth's 1959 Tour to Canada| page=84| year=2005| location=Vancouver| publisher=UBC Press| isbn=0-7748-0915-9| access-date=24 October 2009}}</ref> with some demanding Prime Minister [[John Diefenbaker]] "do something".<ref name=DavidsonG&M/> Mayor of Toronto [[Nathan Phillips (politician)|Nathan Phillips]] spoke out against Davidson as well.<ref name=DavidsonG&M/>

===Constitutional evolution===
Debates over the monarchy and its place in Canada took place through the 1960s and 1970s, following the rise of [[Quebec nationalism]].{{cn|date=April 2024}} Republican options were discussed following the sovereigntist [[Parti Québécois]]' (PQ) election to power in Quebec, but, only specifically in relation to the province.<ref>{{cite AV media| people=[[René Lévesque]]| date=27 March 1971| title=René Lévesque, The Queen and the FLQ| language=en| url=https://www.cbc.ca/player/play/1.3593424| accessdate=10 April 2024| format=Video| location=Saskatchewan| publisher=Canadian Broadcasting Corporation| quote="Are you joking? Why? I have great respect for the Queen [...] but, what the hell part should monarchy have in Quebec?"}}</ref> However, the non-Quebecer attendees at the 1968 [[Constitutional convention (political meeting)|constitutional conference]] agreed that the monarchy had worked well and was not a matter for discussion.<ref name=ECF>{{cite web| last=Michener| first=Roland| author-link=Roland Michener| title=The Empire Club of Canada Speeches 1970-1971| url=http://speeches.empireclub.org/60367/data?n=1| access-date=7 June 2015| orig-year=19 November 1970| year=1971| publisher=The Empire Club Foundation| location=Toronto| pages=130–149}}</ref> In 1966, when the [[Queen of Canada]]'s consort, [[Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh]], undertook a royal tour through Montreal, Ottawa, and Toronto, he said that, if Canadians found the monarchy no longer useful, they could get rid of it without opposition from anyone in the [[Monarchy of Canada#Royal family and house|royal family]].<ref name=citizen>{{citation| url=https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news/flags-to-fly-at-half-mast-until-the-funeral-of-hrh-prince-philip| last=Laucius| first=Joanne| title=Flags to fly at half-mast until the funeral of HRH Prince Philip| date=9 April 2021| newspaper=Ottawa Citizen| accessdate=18 August 2022}}</ref> As the [[Monarchist League of Canada]] later put it, "this characteristically outspoken remark—undoubtedly mirroring the sovereign’s views—allowed such republican sentiment as existed to be discussed openly in Ottawa and through the country with the result that, some 60 years on, the institution functions well and is entrenched in Canada’s constitution."<ref name=citizen/>

The Cabinet, in June 1978, put forward the [[constitutional amendment]] Bill C-60 that, among other changes, potentially affected the sovereign's role as head of state by vesting [[Executive (government)|executive authority]] in the [[Governor General of Canada|governor general]] and renaming the position as ''First Canadian''.<ref name=Heinricks>{{citation |last=Heinricks |first=Geoff |newspaper=National Post |year=2001 |title=Trudeau and the Monarchy |via=Canadian Monarchist News |url=http://www.monarchist.ca/cmn/2001/opinion.htm |access-date=10 February 2009 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090708012006/http://www.monarchist.ca/cmn/2001/opinion.htm |archive-date=8 July 2009}}</ref><ref name=Smith11>{{harvnb| Smith| p=11}}</ref> Some academics, such as [[Ted McWhinney]], supported these proposals; though, they were opposed by others, like the editorial board of ''The Globe and Mail'' and Senator [[Eugene Forsey]], who said that the government had managed to "[stir] up a hornet's nest with a short stick."<ref name=ML>{{citation| url=http://www.monarchist.ca/en/node/136| last=Phillips| first=Stephen| title=Republicanism in Canada in the reign of Elizabeth II: the dog that didn't bark| journal=Canadian Monarchist News| volume=Summer 2004| issue=22| pages=19–20| publisher=Monarchist League of Canada| location=Toronto| accessdate=10 February 2009| url-status=dead| archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160406210648/http://monarchist.ca/sites/default/files/documents/2004/8/136.pdf| archive-date=6 April 2016}}</ref> From that year's [[First Ministers' conference]] in [[Regina, Saskatchewan]], the [[Premier (Canada)|provincial premiers]] (including that of Quebec<ref name=Valpy>{{Citation|last=Valpy |first=Michael |title=Don't Mess With Success—and Good Luck Trying |url=http://www.irpp.org/po/archive/may99/valpy.pdf |editor-last=Watson |editor-first=William |journal=Policy Options: Bye-Bye for Good? |issue=May 1999 |page=26 |location=Montreal |publisher=Institute for Research on Public Policy |access-date=17 February 2009 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120217112947/http://www.irpp.org/po/archive/may99/valpy.pdf |archive-date=17 February 2012}}</ref>) issued a statement against what they saw as a unilateral attempt by the federal government to push through alterations to the monarchy and expressed their opposition to "constitutional changes that substitute for the Queen as ultimate authority a governor general whose appointment and dismissal would be solely the pleasure of the federal Cabinet"—a message reiterated at the conclusion of the 1979 meeting.<ref name=Smith11/><ref name=ML/> Decades later, David Smith stated that the federal government at the time had "misperceived the complexity of the Crown [and] failed [...] to recognize its federalist dimension."<ref>{{cite book| last=Smith| first=David E.| title=The Invisible Crown: The First Principle of Canadian Government| url=https://archive.org/details/invisiblecrownfi0000smit| url-access=registration| publisher=University of Toronto Press| year=1995| location=Toronto-Buffalo-London| isbn=0-8020-7793-5}}</ref>

===Into the 21st century===
Debate on the monarchy was seen through the first decade of the 21st century in other Canadian media, generally at times of national significance, such as [[Canada Day]] and [[Victoria Day]],<ref>{{Cite news| last1=Blizzard| first1=Christina| last2=Coren| first2=Michael| author2-link=Michael Coren| title=The debate: Do we need the monarchy?| newspaper=CNews | date=2 July 2007| url=http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2007/06/28/4297676.html| archive-url=https://archive.today/20120709221852/http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2007/06/28/4297676.html| url-status=usurped| archive-date=9 July 2012| access-date=16 February 2009}}</ref> or during a royal tour.{{refn|<ref name=Hanon/><ref name=Simpson>{{Cite news| last1=Simpson| first1=Jeffrey| author-link=Jeffrey Simpson| last2=Valpy| first2=Michael| author2-link=Michael Valpy| title=Has the magic gone out of our monarchy?| newspaper=The Globe and Mail| pages=F6| date=13 April 2002| url=https://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/GIS.Servlets.HTMLTemplate?tf=tgam/common/FullStory.html&cf=tgam/common/FullStory.cfg&date=20020413&cache_key=internationalAfricaHeadline&current_row=4&start_row=4&num_rows=1| location=Toronto}}</ref><ref>{{Citation| last=O'Neill| first=Juliet| title=The fight for the Republic of Canada| newspaper=The Ottawa Citizen| date=2 October 2002| url=http://www2.canada.com/national/features/democracy/story.html?id={1f3ef50e-2a74-401b-883e-ad27a04b271a}| access-date=16 February 2009| archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090808052403/http://www2.canada.com/national/features/democracy/story.html?id=%7B1f3ef50e-2a74-401b-883e-ad27a04b271a%7D| archive-date=8 August 2009| url-status=dead}}</ref><ref>{{cite video| people=McCullough, John J.| title =Today| medium=Television| publisher=CBC Newsworld| location=Toronto|year=2002| url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fzI53qmsEeg&feature=channel_page |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090927022628/http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fzI53qmsEeg |archive-date=2009-09-27 |url-status=dead| access-date=17 February 2009}}</ref>}}

After Prime Minister [[Jean Chrétien]]'s press secretary, [[Peter Donolo]], in 1998 unaccountably announced through a media story that the [[Office of the Prime Minister (Canada)|prime minister's office]] was considering the abolition of the monarchy as a millennium project,<ref name=CBC1>{{cite news| title = Liberals considering break from monarchy| publisher=CBC| date=18 December 1998| url=http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/liberals-considering-break-from-monarchy-1.167431| access-date=7 June 2015}}</ref> Chrétien stated that he was open to a public debate, but never pursued the matter and expressed concerns about resulting divisions,<ref name=CBC1/> saying that he "already had enough trouble on [his] hands with the separatists of Quebec, and didn't want to take on the monarchists in the rest of Canada, too."<ref name=Cret>{{cite book| last=Chrétien| first=Jean| author-link=Jean Chrétien| title=My Years as Prime Minister| publisher=Knopf Canada| year=2007| location=Toronto| page=[https://archive.org/details/myyearsasprimemi00chrt/page/248 248]| isbn=978-0-676-97900-8| url-access=registration| url=https://archive.org/details/myyearsasprimemi00chrt/page/248}}</ref>

Other media at the time noted that, though there was "no longer any strong idea behind the Canadian monarchy and its representative", in the absence of which "there can be no pulse in common between the people and their constitution",<ref name=Smith10>{{harvnb| Smith| p=10}}</ref> there simply was no debate about any republic among the general populace, with discussion limited to a political and journalistic few.{{#tag:ref|Valpy claimed about the debate: "The push to get rid of the Canadian monarchy comes from people like Citizenship Minister [[Lucienne Robillard]] who don't understand it, from people in the Prime Minister's Office desperate for something to merchandise as an idea, and from an arid assemblage of academic, bureaucratic and journalistic elites cemented into some curious antediluvian profession of anti-colonialism and sort-of nationalism indecipherable in 1999 to all but themselves."|group=n|name=ValpyN1}} An inadequate number of willing participants was pointed to as a reason for this phenomenon—which was seen as a manifestation of what Carolyn Tuohy had called Canada's "institutionalized ambivalence"—as well as a lack of alternate model to be discussed, with no method put forward by which the powers of the Crown could be soundly transferred to a president, no definitive solution to where Canadian sovereignty would be placed should the sovereign be removed from Canada,{{#tag:ref|Reg Whitaker said on this: "If sovereignty is now to be vested in the Canadian nation or the Canadian people, what precisely is this? Is it Canada including a Quebec that thinks of itself as a different, perhaps separate nation? Is it [[Preston Manning]]'s "New Canada", shorn one way or another of a distinctive Quebec? Is it a two-headed, dualist sovereign nation, perhaps even sprouting additional heads—Aboriginal nations, regional identities—like some genetically engineered [[Medusa]]?"|group=n|name=WhitakerN1}}<ref name=Smith10/> nor any means by which the constitutionally required consent of all 11 parliaments (one federal and 10 provincial) could be achieved.<ref name=Valpy/> It was also theorized that Canadians had a growing sense of distrust for politicians (which a president would be), more pressing issues to deal with, and no appetite for nationally divisive constitutional change.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Elkins |first=David J. |title=Any Lessons for Us in Australia's Debate? |url=http://www.irpp.org/po/archive/may99/elkins.pdf |editor-last=Watson |editor-first=William |periodical=Policy Options |date=May 1999 |page=24 |location=Montreal |publisher=Institute for Research on Public Policy |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110611230515/http://www.irpp.org/po/archive/may99/elkins.pdf |archive-date=2011-06-11}}</ref> Political scholar David Smith expressed his thoughts on how the Canadian monarchy had benefited from this dearth of discussion.<ref>{{harvnb| Smith| p=9}}</ref>
[[File:John Manley IMF.jpg|thumb|Former [[Deputy Prime Minister of Canada|deputy prime minister]] and [[minister of the Crown]], [[John Manley]]]]

[[John Manley]], a minister of the Crown from 1993 to 2003, was openly critical of the monarchy, beginning in 1997. He said in 2001 that the Canadian Crown was "an institution that's a bit out of date for Canada to continue with" and,<ref>{{citation| url=https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/canada-no-longer-needs-queen-manley-1.283675| author=Staff| title=Canada no longer needs Queen: Manley| date=18 May 2001| publisher=CBC News| accessdate=12 April 2024}}</ref> when the Queen arrived for [[Golden Jubilee of Elizabeth II#Canada|her Golden Jubilee tour]] the following year, Manley stated to reporters, "I don't think it's necessary for Canada to continue with the monarchy".<ref>{{Citation| url=https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/manley-dismisses-monarchy-as-queen-begins-12-day-trip/article1026940/| last=Anderssen| first=Erin| title=Manley dismisses monarchy as Queen begins 12-day trip| date=5 October 2002| newspaper=The Globe and Mail| accessdate=5 February 2020}}</ref> In 2007, the Minister for Intergovernmental Affairs in Quebec, [[Benoît Pelletier]], expressed his opinion that it was "not impossible that we might have to reconsider the role of the monarch, the lieutenant governor, and the governor general [...] I'm not saying that the monarchy must be abolished. But, it will take some thought, especially on its usefulness and relevance.<ref>{{Cite news| last=Fox| first=Jim| title=Quebec dredges up monarchy issue once again| newspaper=St. Petersburg Times| date=6 May 2007| url=http://www.sptimes.com/2007/05/06/Worldandnation/Quebec_dredges_up_mon.shtml| access-date=17 February 2009}}</ref>

Into the 2020s, the Monarchist League of Canada claimed, "opponents of the Canadian Crown frequently criticize the monarchy without fully being aware of the facts. In addition, opponents often deliberately spread misinformation."<ref>{{cite web| url=https://www.monarchist.ca/index.php/our-monarchy/myths-about-the-monarchy| title=Myths About the Monarchy| publisher=Monarchist League of Canada| accessdate=19 August 2022}}</ref> Peter Woolstencroft, a retired political science professor from the [[University of Waterloo]], opined in 2021 that "the optimal republican pathway seems to rest upon attrition through rising indifference." However, he went on to write, "Canada’s constitutional straitjacket makes abolition here highly unlikely. At best, it would take a long and contentious process, something Canadians likely do not want;" considering the differences in methods of choosing a president, in the sizes of the provinces and territories, and of their populations, in addition to the treaty relationship between First Nations and the Crown, Woolstencroft observed "over the long arc of previous constitutional discussions, a clear pattern is discernible. Matters on the table become more diverse, more complicated, more symbolically existential, with a widening set of actors, making it harder and harder to produce a coherent agreement."<ref>{{citation| url=https://policyoptions.irpp.org/magazines/march-2021/what-would-canadian-politics-look-like-without-a-queen/| last=Woolstencroft| first=Peter| title=What would Canadian politics look like without a Queen?| date=26 March 2021| journal=Policy Options| accessdate=19 August 2022}}</ref>

===Reign of Charles III===
Following [[Death and state funeral of Elizabeth II|Elizabeth II's death]] in September 2022, Canadian Prime Minister [[Justin Trudeau]] stated that the monarchy's role in Canada was not open for debate and did not see Canada replacing its monarchy in the near future.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.barrons.com/news/canada-s-trudeau-says-monarchy-s-role-not-open-for-debate-01663545006?tesla=y|title=Canada's Trudeau Says Monarchy's Role Not Open For Debate|author=AFP News|publisher=Barron's|date=September 18, 2022|accessdate=September 19, 2022}}</ref><ref name=newking>{{cite news|url=https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-62957626|title=Prime Minister Justin Trudeau says monarchy offers Canada 'steadiness'|publisher=BBC News|date=September 19, 2022|accessdate=September 19, 2022}}</ref> During an in-person meeting with King [[Charles III]] in London, UK, Trudeau described the monarchy as offering Canada "steadiness."<ref name=newking/> The following month, [[Bloc Québécois]] leader [[Yves-François Blanchet]] tabled a motion in the [[Canadian House of Commons|House of Commons]], proposing that the "House express its desire to sever ties {{sic}} between the Canadian state and the British monarchy [sic]."<ref name=parl>{{citation| url=https://www.ourcommons.ca/members/en/votes/44/1/199| author=Parliament of Canada| title=Notes > 44th Parliament, 1st Session - Vote No. 199| date=26 October 2022| publisher=Queen's Printer for Canada| accessdate=3 February 2023}}</ref> Blanchet did not suggest an alternative form of government. The House rejected the motion by 266 votes to 44.<ref name=CTV>{{citation| url=https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/bloc-quebecois-motion-to-sever-ties-with-monarchy-fails-but-gets-backing-from-other-mps-1.6126409| last=Van Dyk| first=Spencer| title=Bloc Quebecois' motion to sever ties with monarchy fails, but gets backing from other MPs| date=26 October 2023| publisher=CTV News| accessdate=3 February 2023}}</ref> Most members of Parliament condemned the move as a political stunt,<ref name=CTV/> as the Bloc's main aim is the separation of Quebec from Canada. Ten [[New Democratic Party]] MPs, one [[Liberal Party of Canada|Liberal]], one [[Green Party of Canada|Green]], and one [[Conservative Party of Canada|Conservative]] turned [[Independent politician|independent]] MP supported the motion.{{#tag:ref|Respectively, [[Charlie Angus]], [[Niki Ashton]], [[Alexandre Boulerice]], [[Laurel Collins]], [[Don Davies]], [[Blake Desjarlais]], [[Leah Gazan]], [[Matthew Green (Canadian politician)|Matthew Green]], [[Lori Idlout]], and [[Jenny Kwan]] of the NDP, Liberal [[Joël Lightbound]], Green [[Mike Morrice]], and Independent [[Alain Rayes]].|group=n|name=MPs}}<ref name=parl/>

For some decades, many newspaper columnists and [[pundit]]s had contended the death of Queen Elizabeth II would be the moment to replace Canada's monarchy with a president, giving them time to formulate solid arguments both against the status quo and for the republican system Canada should adopt and how. After Elizabeth passed, however, "remarkably little talk of abolishing the monarchy" was heard and what was uttered was a repeat of what had "been written months or years ago."<ref name=Selley>{{citation| url=https://nationalpost.com/opinion/chris-selley-what-happened-to-canadas-anti-monarchist-moment| last=Selley| first=Chris| title=What happened to Canada's anti-monarchist moment?| date=28 September 2022| newspaper=National Post| accessdate=27 March 2023}}</ref> Among the little that was written, [[Andrew Cohen (journalist)|Andrew Cohen]] complained in ''[[The Globe and Mail]]'' about Canada's constitutional monarchy being "shallow" and "small-minded", without recommending any alternative system; though, he did argue a "national referendum" and "citizens' assembly" should be added to the constitutional amending process.<ref>{{citation| url=https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-the-queen-is-dead-time-for-canada-finally-to-talk-about-becoming-a/| last=Cohen| first=Andrew| title=The Queen is dead. Time for Canada, finally, to talk about becoming a republic. We owe it to ourselves| date=16 September 2022| newspaper=The Globe and Mail| accessdate=27 March 2023}}</ref> Retired [[University of Ottawa]] professor John E. Trent proposed in the ''[[Ottawa Citizen]]'' that the governor general be made head of state and, recycling an idea proposed by "a Toronto newspaper" years before, asserted Officers of the [[Order of Canada]] should select who occupies the office,<ref>{{citation| url=https://ottawacitizen.com/opinion/trent-how-canada-can-shift-from-constitutional-monarchy-to-constitutional-democracy?_gl=1*amj4yw*_ga*NTgxNDY1NDE4LjE2NzgwMTQzNjg.*_ga_72QH41ZTMR*MTY3OTg5ODgwMy4yOS4wLjE2Nzk4OTg4MDQuNTkuMC4w&_ga=2.183032294.1917567572.1679631451-581465418.1678014368#Echobox=1663866026| last=Trent| first=John E.| title= How Canada can shift from constitutional monarchy to constitutional democracy| date=22 September 2022| newspaper=Ottawa Citizen| accessdate=27 March 2023}}</ref> something Chris Selley argued in the ''[[National Post]]'' would politicize both the head of state and the Order of Canada, itself. Selley also opined that "the strangest argument in favour of reform is the notion that it [the monarchy] reflects an 'immature' nation" and, in response, quoted Andrew Wudrick, of the [[Macdonald-Laurier Institute]]: "We don't have fighter jets or ships for our military. We can't process passports. We have yearlong waitlists for critical medical procedures. We can't build anything. Maybe our constitutional architecture isn't what's keeping us in prolonged adolescence."<ref name=Selley/>

Former Prime Minister [[Stephen Harper]] argued, following Elizabeth II's funeral, that the monarchy is "not just the formal head of the country's institutions, but the embodiment of the lives of all the nation's families", making the monarch not just head of state, but head of a national family, and monarchy "performs its functions in a way that a presidency can barely dream of." He did, though, opine that the Canadian monarch has less impact on Canadians than does the British monarch on Britons, noting that the viceroys take the monarch's place in Canada and, therefore, how they are selected should be reconsidered, emphasizing that, in addition to qualities of political non-partisanship and social diversity, they have understanding of the "constitutional nature of their position and [...] the wide responsibilities of such an office." Harper explained that his [[Advisory Committee on Vice-Regal Appointments]] had been conceived of as a beginning of a process of creating a more formal means of selecting governors general and lieutenant governors, beyond the sole judgment of the prime minister of the day.<ref>{{citation| url=https://nationalpost.com/opinion/stephen-harper-the-crown-at-the-end-of-the-second-elizabethan-age| last=Harper| first=Stephen| title=The Crown at the end of the second Elizabethan age| date=15 October 2022| newspaper=National Post| accessdate=27 March 2023}}</ref>

An argument was made by Joseph Brean that the "common anti-monarchist view [is] that Canadians would reject the monarchy if they ever paid it more than passing attention. But they don't, so they don't." He concluded Canadians both believe their monarchy is of no importance and, so, feel there are presently more important issues to contend with than replacement of the Crown, as well as hold an expectation that the monarchy will naturally fade into irrelevance, "but, it never does, and too few people are willing to push." Brean also noted there is no set alternative to constitutional monarchy. [[Michael Ashcroft|The Lord Ashcroft]] revealed Canadians being polled often said that, in any future referendum on the Canadian monarchy, they would wish to know precisely what they were choosing between.<ref name=Brean>{{citation| url=https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/canadians-king-charles-monarchy-poll| last=Brean| first=Joseph| title=New poll reveals why Canadians won't abolish the monarchy even though they don't like it| date=3 May 2023| newspaper=National Post| accessdate=16 March 2024}}</ref>
[[File:Princess Anne at commemorative gala in Moncton 2023 003 (cropped).jpg|thumb|left|Princess [[Anne, Princess Royal]], in [[Moncton]], New Brunswick, 14 June 2023]]

In an interview with [[CBC News]] ahead of Charles' coronation, Princess [[Anne, Princess Royal]], said the royal family does not deal with polls on the monarchy and explained discussion about the institution's relevance "[is] not a conversation that I would necessarily have". But, the Princess did opine, "I think it's perfectly true that [this] is a moment when you need to have that discussion." She only went so far as to say "the monarchy provides, with the constitution, a degree long-term stability that is actually quite hard to come by any other way [...] I rather hope that, sometimes, what we can do is just to underline the goodness" and provide "an element of focus" to those who are empathetic and serve others "and [encourage] that in the long term. It's not a short-term thing. You're there for the long term."<ref>{{citation| url=https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/watch-princess-anne-says-you-know-what-you-re-getting-with-her-brother-king-charles-1.6827416| last=Mancini| first=Melissa| title=Princess Anne says 'you know what you're getting' with her brother, King Charles| date=1 May 2023| publisher=CBC News| accessdate=15 November 2023}}</ref>

===Proposals for a solely Canadian monarch===
The idea of an exclusively Canadian monarch has been offered;<ref>{{citation| url=https://macleans.ca/news/world/who-will-wear-the-crown/| last1=Treble| first1=Patricia| last2=Bethune| first2=Brian| title=Who will wear the crown in Canada?| date=1 July 2010| journal=Maclean's| publisher=Rogers Communications| accessdate=5 May 2023}}</ref> Canadian monarchists have suggested that all Commonwealth realms should have their own resident monarchs. This figure could be descended from the House of Windsor;<ref>{{citation| url=http://www.macleans.ca/2009/11/13/defending-the-royals/| last=Coyne| first=Andrew| author-link=Andrew Coyne| title=Defending the royals| date=13 November 2009| journal=Maclean's| publisher=Roger's Communications| location=Toronto| issn=0024-9262| accessdate=18 February 2010}}</ref><ref>{{citation| editor-last=Scott| editor-first=Lingley| title=Clarke calls on grads to help achieve the ideals of Canada| last=Clarke| first=George Elliott| chapter=Speech to the University of Alberta Convocation| date=7 June 2005| location=Calgary| publisher=University of Alberta Senate}}</ref><ref>{{citation| title=Arguments for Repatriating the Monarchy| journal=The Monarchist| date=25 June 2010}}</ref><ref>{{citation| last=Gillespie| first=Kevin| title=A Uniquely Canadian Crown?| page=11| journal=Canadian Monarchist News| issue=Spring-Summer 2010| volume=31| publisher=Monarchist League of Canada| location=Toronto}}</ref> it was suggested in 2011 that [[Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex|Prince Harry]] become King of Canada.<ref>{{citation| last=Rayner| first=Gordon| date=27 June 2011| title=Make Prince Harry our king, say Canadian monarchists| newspaper=The Daily Telegraph}}</ref> It has also been proposed that the Canadian monarch have a First Nations lineage, either as a [[hereditary monarchy]] or an [[elective monarchy]], with a trilingual requirement in English, French, and a relevant Indigenous Canadian language.<ref>Mario, Polèse. "Why not replace the monarchy with a monarchy of a different kind?". ''Policy Options''. Retrieved 4 May 2023.</ref> However, there has been no popular or official support for such a change.

===Proposals for leaving the office of the King vacant===
Ideas have also been raised about removing the monarch from the office of the King and simply leaving the office vacant.<ref>{{Citation| url = https://lagassep.com/2021/11/25/can-canada-go-without-a-queen-probably| last=Lagassé| first=Phillippe|date=25 November 2021| title=Can Canada go without a Queen? Probably}} </ref><ref>{{cite book|url=https://cspg-gcep.ca/pdf/the_crown_dand_parliament_la_couronne_et_le_parlement_chapter_8.pdf| last1=Lagassé| first1=Phillippe|last2=Patrick| first2=Baud| title=The Crown and Parliament / La couronne et le parlement| chapter=The Crown and Constitutional Amendment in Canada| editor=Phillippe Lagassé & Michel Bédard| year = 201}}</ref> A similar proposal is to leave the office vacant but deem that it is held by a natural person; effectively, the office would be held by a fictitious monarch, and the country would have a notional Sovereign.<ref>{{Citation| url=https://journals.library.ualberta.ca/constitutional_forum/index.php/constitutional_forum/article/view/29454| last=Sheaff| first=Tim| title=A Minimalistic Approach to Severing the British Royal Family from Canada's Constitution| date=5 June 2023| journal=Constitutional Forum"|volume=32|issue=1}}</ref> In each of these cases, the Governor General would exercise the King’s powers, as they do now, pursuant to the [[Letters Patent, 1947]], and a new means of appointing the Governor General would be necessary.

==Polls==
{{Further|Monarchy of Canada#Public perception and understanding|Monarchy in Quebec#Popularity}}

Polls on the Canadian monarchy have been regularly conducted since the 1990s, typically coinciding with a royal tour or other major royal event. In 2008, Peter Boyce wrote that successive polls since the aforementioned decade showed an increasing disaffection with the monarchy, but, also noted internal contradictions in specific poll results.<ref>{{Citation| last=Boyce| first=Peter| title=The Queen's Other Realms| publisher=Federation Press| year=2008| location=Annandale| page=223| url=https://books.google.com/books?id=kY-Tk0-quyoC| isbn=978-1-86287-700-9}}</ref> In regard to the polling of Canadians, the Lord Ashcroft said in 2023 that "royal fortunes rise and fall."<ref name=Brean/>

Polls on the institution have been accused of using "inconsistent and sometimes ambiguous wording."<ref name=Boyce2>{{harvnb| Boyce| 2008| p=2}}</ref> Monarchists assert the use of the adjective "British" in a poll question on the Canadian monarchy<ref name=CCR>{{cite web| url=http://www.canadian-republic.ca/polls.html| title=Opinion Polls in Canada| publisher=Citizens for a Canadian Republic| accessdate=24 July 2010| archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140401095559/https://www.canadian-republic.ca/polls.html| archive-date=1 April 2014}}</ref> or implications that the Canadian head of state is foreign<ref>{{citation| url=https://www.monarchist.ca/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/CMN_Spring-2021.pdf| author=Staff writer| title=Why do We Feel so Conflicted About Harry?| journal=Canadian Monarchist News| page=6| issue=Spring 2021| volume=50| publisher=Monarchist League of Canada| accessdate=9 April 2024}}</ref> are inaccurate and skews the results, while republicans say the same about the use of "sever" or "abolish".<ref name=CCR/> The polls sometimes ask about constitutionally impossible scenarios and consistently ignore both the constitutional requirements for a change to the Canadian monarchy and the existence of the provinces, which would also be affected by constitutional amendments that made Canada a republic.{{cn|date=June 2024}}

In addition, it has also been said that Canadians are not well-educated about the constitutional role of the monarchy;<ref name=Boyce2/><ref name=EKOS2002>{{cite web |url=https://www.ekospolitics.com/articles/31may2002.pdf |title=Trust and the Monarchy: an examination of the shifting public attitudes toward government and institutions |author=EKOS Research Associates |date=30 May 2002 |website=EKOS Politics |ref={{sfnref|EKOS|2002}} |at=Section H: Monarchy}}</ref> in 2002, a poll reported that 69% of those polled thought the prime minister was head of state and only 5% responded that it was the Queen.<ref name=EKOS2002/> Both republicans and monarchists in Canada have acknowledged this in relation to polls on the monarchy.<ref name=CCR/>

===1950s===
In advance of Queen Elizabeth II's [[Royal tours of Canada#1950s|royal tour in 1959]], and following Joyce Davidson's public statement on the populace's general indifference toward the tour, a ''[[Vancouver Sun]]'' poll found 70 per cent of those asked indicated interest in the tour, while 50 per cent approved of the spending for it. Gallup conducted a poll in which 64 per cent of respondents said they disagreed with Davidson, 48 per cent stated they were "very interested" in the tour and 19 per cent "not at all".<ref name=Buckner84/>

===1970s===
When constitutional amendments were being considered in the 1960s, the role of the monarchy was not strenuously questioned, as it was deemed to be "no great priority in the present round of constitutional changes."<ref name=ECF/> This statement was reflected in the four opinion polls conducted in 1970, which showed that the monarchy was favoured by two-thirds of those questioned. The Canadian Institute of Public Opinion asked nationally: "Do you think Canada should continue to pay allegiance to the Queen, or do you think we should become a republic with an elected president?" To this, 50 per cent of respondents opted for retention of the ''status quo'', 33 per cent favoured a republic, and the remainder declined to answer. Further, the answers differed by region: of the respondents who lived in Quebec, 46 per cent wished for a republic as against 23 per cent for monarchy, while, in Ontario, the monarchy was favoured well above the national average, and support was even higher in the western provinces. Older persons (over 50 years) were the strongest advocates for the monarchy than any other [[Demographic profile|age group]], although those in their 20s who answered the poll also gave their preference for the Crown. Similarly, another poll that year revealed that in Canada, exclusive of Quebec, the monarchy was of no issue to 37 per cent of the people polled and a further 41 per cent rated themselves as loyalists, although many of the older responders "recognised that youth had different ideas which might have an effect in the future."<ref name=ECF/>

===1990s===
A 1993 poll by [[Angus Reid Group]] asked "thinking about the monarchy's role here in Canada, all things considered, do you think...", to which 45.5 per cent of respondents favoured the answer "preserve connection" and 54.5 per cent favoured "abolish connection".<ref>{{cite web|url=http://odesi1.scholarsportal.info/webview/index/en/Odesi/ODESI-Click-to-View-Categories-.d.6/Public-Opinion-Polls.d.28/CANADA.d.29/Ipsos-Reid.d.717/1990s.d.718/1993.d.722/National-Angus-Reid-Poll-January-1993-Canada-.s.ir-1-555-40-E-1993-01/Royal-Family.h.13F1/Regarding-the-Monarchy-in-Canada-/fVariable/ir-1-555-40-E-1993-01_V11 |title=Dataset: National Angus Reid Poll, January 1993 [Canada] > Variable a7: Regarding the Monarchy in Canada |publisher=odesi |access-date=18 September 2015 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150923060531/http://odesi1.scholarsportal.info/webview/index/en/Odesi/ODESI-Click-to-View-Categories-.d.6/Public-Opinion-Polls.d.28/CANADA.d.29/Ipsos-Reid.d.717/1990s.d.718/1993.d.722/National-Angus-Reid-Poll-January-1993-Canada-.s.ir-1-555-40-E-1993-01/Royal-Family.h.13F1/Regarding-the-Monarchy-in-Canada-/fVariable/ir-1-555-40-E-1993-01_V11 |archive-date=23 September 2015}}</ref>

===2000s===
[[EKOS Research Associates]] concluded in 2002, the year of [[Golden Jubilee of Elizabeth II|Queen Elizabeth II's Golden Jubilee]], there were "highly polarized views" on the monarchy, with "little consensus for moving forward with institutional renewal." The respondents were said to be split on the relevance of the royal family, members being seen both as "interesting" and "tired", while their "historical-institutional significance" was "much more important" than their perception as celebrities; though, this question conflated the royal family with the monarchy and referred to the latter as "British".<ref>{{harvnb| EKOS| 2002| p=49}}</ref> Support for abolition of the monarchy was noted as declining.<ref name=EKOS2002/> A poll by [[Léger Marketing]] in the same year found that 50 per cent of those polled believed the monarchy should be preserved, while 43 per cent disagreed.<ref>{{cite web|last=Leger Marketing |author-link=Leger Marketing |title=Canadians' Attachment to the Monarchy |url=http://www.legermarketing.com/documents/spclm/020401eng.pdf |page=2 |date=March 2002 |publisher=Leger Marketing |location=Montreal |access-date=19 February 2009 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090316202830/http://www.legermarketing.com/documents/spclm/020401eng.pdf |archive-date=16 March 2009 }}</ref>

According to [[Ipsos-Reid]] in 2005,<ref>{{harvnb| Buckner| 2005| p=224}}</ref> "Canadians [were] supportive toward the concept of the constitutional monarchy as Canada's form of government"<ref name=IR2>{{cite web |ref=CITEREFIpsos-Reid2002 | url=http://www.ipsos-reid.com/search/pdf/media/mr020203.pdf| title=While Half (48%) of Canadians Say They Would Prefer a U.S. Style Republic System of Government With an Elected Head of State, and Two-Thirds (65%) Believe the Royals Should not Have any Formal Role and Are "Simply Celebrities"... Eight-in-Ten (79%) Support the Constitutional Monarchy as Canada's Form of Government| page=3| date=3 February 2002| publisher=Ipsos-Reid| location=Winnipeg| accessdate=18 September 2015| url-status=dead| archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090316202829/http://www.ipsos-reid.com/search/pdf/media/mr020203.pdf| archive-date=16 March 2009}}</ref> and 62 per cent of respondents believed the monarchy helped to define Canada's identity.<ref name=IR3>{{harvnb| Ipsos-Reid| 2002| p=3}}</ref> However, at the same time, 48 per cent of those polled agreed "constitutional monarchy is outmoded and would prefer a republican system of government with an elected head of state, like in the United States"<ref name=IR2/> and 65 per cent believed that the royals were simply celebrities who should not have any formal role in Canada.<ref name=IR4>{{harvnb| Ipsos-Reid| 2002| p=4}}</ref> The same poll found that 58 per cent of respondents felt "the issue of the monarchy and the form of Canada's government isn't important to them and if the system is working OK why go through all the fuss to change it?"<ref name=IR4/>

A 2005 poll by The Strategic Counsel reported Canadians to be uncertain "about the legitimacy and role of the British monarchy remaining as Canada's head of state". The poll found an equal number—47 per cent supporting and 47 per cent opposed—to retention of the "British monarchy".<ref>{{cite web|title=Perceptions Toward Governor General |url=http://www.thestrategiccounsel.com/our_news/polls/0905%20GMCTV%20September%2026%20GG.pdf|access-date=20 February 2009 |date=26 September 2005 |publisher=The Strategic Counsel |location=Toronto |page=9 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111206105106/http://www.thestrategiccounsel.com/our_news/polls/0905%20GMCTV%20September%2026%20GG.pdf |archive-date=6 December 2011 }}</ref> Two years later, Angus Reid Strategies reported that 53 per cent of respondents to its survey felt "Canada should end its formal ties to the British monarchy", while 35 per cent thought the contrary and 12 per cent were unsure.<ref>{{cite press release|title=Monarchy: Over Half Think Canada Should Break Ties With the Queen |publisher=Angus Reid Strategies |date=1 October 2007 |url=http://www.angus-reid.com/uppdf/ARS_Monarchy.pdf |access-date=5 July 2010 |url-status=usurped |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080829172459/http://www.angus-reid.com/uppdf/ARS_Monarchy.pdf |archive-date=29 August 2008 }}</ref> Angus Reid stated in March 2008 the majority of those it polled believe "it is time to end the country's official relationship with either the British monarchy or the monarchy."<ref>{{cite press release|title=Angus Reid Poll: Men, Wealthier Canadians More Willing to End Formal Ties with the Monarchy |publisher=Angus Reid Strategies |date=12 March 2008 |url=http://www.visioncritical.com/wp-content/uploads/pdfs/2008.03.12_Monarchy.pdf |access-date=20 February 2009 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120304032127/http://www.visioncritical.com/wp-content/uploads/pdfs/2008.03.12_Monarchy.pdf |archive-date=4 March 2012 }}</ref>

An August 2009 poll commissioned by the group Canadian Friends of the Royal Family found that the majority of those who answered, more than 60%, felt that a constitutional monarchy was outdated.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/canadians-apathetic-about-prince-charles-poll-1.824074 |title=CBC News - Canada - Canadians apathetic about Prince Charles: poll |publisher=Cbc.ca |date=27 October 2009 |access-date=7 June 2015}}</ref>

Three polls were conducted two months later: Léger Marketing found that 45 per cent of the respondents considered the monarchy "to be useless to Canada and feel that the country should sever all formal ties with the Queen", while 44 per cent considered the monarchy to be a tradition that should be maintained. Opposition to the institution was strongest in Quebec, where 78 per cent of those asked believed the monarchy is "useless to Canada" and should be ended, and 11 per cent wanted to maintain it.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://lejournaldequebec.canoe.ca/journaldequebec/actualites/quebec/archives/2009/11/20091102-224851.html |archive-url=https://archive.today/20120713113232/http://lejournaldequebec.canoe.ca/journaldequebec/actualites/quebec/archives/2009/11/20091102-224851.html |url-status=usurped |archive-date=13 July 2012 |title=Journal de Québec – Actualités - Le Québec contre la monarchie |publisher=Lejournaldequebec.canoe.ca |date=23 April 2009 |access-date=30 June 2010}}</ref> Angus Reid's results showed 27 per cent of those polled preferred Canada to remain a monarchy. The plurality. 35 per cent, preferred Canada to have an elected head of state. When asked whom they would prefer as a monarch after Queen Elizabeth II, the plurality, 37 per cent, of respondents said there should be no monarch after her.<ref name=angus2010/> The poll by Ipsos Reid found that the majority, 53 per cent, of those who replied wanted Canada to end "its constitutional ties" to the monarchy after the Queen dies, while 49 per cent wanted to abolish the constitutional monarchy structure then and become a republic, with an elected head of state. The majority, 60 per cent, of respondents said the Queen and the royal family should have no formal role in Canadian society and that they are "simply celebrities and nothing more."<ref>{{Cite news|last=Black |first=Conrad |author-link=Conrad Black |title=Royalty for a grown-up nation |newspaper=National Post |date=31 October 2009 |url=https://nationalpost.com/opinion/columnists/story.html?id=462c1fbb-fae6-43e9-9d82-5dc77dfdb07d&p=1 |archive-url=https://archive.today/20120907160313/http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/columnists/story.html?id=462c1fbb-fae6-43e9-9d82-5dc77dfdb07d&p=1 |url-status=dead |archive-date=7 September 2012 |access-date=8 November 2009 }}</ref>

In November, another poll by Angus Reid found that two-thirds of those questioned would like to see a Canadian serving as Canada's head of state, while 18 per cent disagreed. Twenty seven per cent preferred Canada to remain a monarchy, while 43% preferred Canada to have an elected head of state.<ref name=angus2010/>

===2010s===
In May 2010, a poll by Angus Reid found that more than two thirds of those who replied, a 69 per cent majority, would have liked to see a Canadian serving as Canada's head of state and a 52 per cent supported reopening the constitutional debate to discuss replacing the monarchy with an elected head of state, while only 32 per cent opposed doing so. Despite 69 per cent of respondents having a "mostly favourable" opinion of Queen Elizabeth II as a person, 33 per cent preferred Canada to remain a monarchy; 36 per cent said they would prefer to have an elected head of state, 21 per cent were indifferent, and 11 per cent were unsure. When asked who they would prefer as a monarch after Queen Elizabeth II, three-in-ten respondents said there should be no monarch after her and 31 per cent wanted members of the royal family to stop touring Canada.<ref name=angus2010>{{Cite news| title=Canadians Divided Over Having a Monarch or an Elected Head of State| publisher=Angus Reid Global| date=25 May 2010| url=http://angusreidglobal.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/2010.05.25_Monarchy_CAN.pdf| access-date=7 June 2015| archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150607120940/http://angusreidglobal.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/2010.05.25_Monarchy_CAN.pdf| archive-date=7 June 2015| url-status=dead}}</ref> A national poll conducted a month later by the Association for Canadian Studies found 49 per cent of those asked had a negative reaction to the word "monarchy", compared to 41 per cent with a positive reaction. In the Maritimes, where the Queen would begin her Canadian tour that year, 60 per cent of those who replied registered a negative opinion of monarchy, compared to 37 per cent positive. (The poll did not refer to the Canadian monarchy or to the Queen specifically, but to the concept of monarchy.)<ref>{{Cite news| title=Monarchy gets a lukewarm response from Canadians: Poll | publisher=Canwest News Service | date=28 June 2010| url=http://www.canada.com/news/Monarchy+gets+lukewarm+response+from+Canadians+Poll/3211259/story.html| access-date=29 June 2010}}</ref> A poll by Ipsos-Reid, also in June, found that two-in-three of those asked agreed the royal family should not have any formal role in Canadian society and reported growing sentiment that Elizabeth II should be Canada's last monarch. Fifty-eight per cent wanted Canada to end "ties" to the monarchy when Queen Elizabeth II's reign ends and 62 per cent believed that Canada's head of state should be the governor general, not the Queen.<ref>{{Cite news|title=Six in Ten Canadians (58%, +5) Believe Canada Should End Ties to Monarchy When Her Majesty's Reign Ends |publisher=ipsos-na.com |date=16 June 2010 |url=http://www.ipsos-na.com/news-polls/pressrelease.aspx?id=4819 |access-date=29 June 2010 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101124221027/http://ipsos-na.com/news-polls/pressrelease.aspx?id=4819 |archive-date=24 November 2010}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news| title=Canadians don't want Queen, even if she's done great job | publisher=Canada.com | date=16 June 2010| url=http://www.canada.com/news/Canadians+want+Queen+even+done+great/3158692/story.html | access-date=3 July 2010}}</ref>

A fifth poll, conducted by [[Decima Research|Harris-Decima]] for [[The Canadian Press]] a few days ahead of the Queen's nine-day tour in June, found that nearly half of respondents considered the monarchy to be "a relic of our colonial past that has no place in Canada today." The poll also found that 44 per cent of those asked wanted a national referendum to decide whether Canada should keep its monarchy.<ref>{{Cite news| title=Canadians apathetic about monarchy: poll | publisher=CBC | date=31 May 2010| url=http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/canadians-apathetic-about-monarchy-poll-1.897641| access-date=6 June 2015}}</ref> An Angus Reid poll run just after the Queen's tour found that 36% of responednts wanted Canada to remain a monarchy, 30 per cent preferred having an elected head of state, and 21 per cent felt it made no difference to them.<ref>{{Cite news| title=Queen's Visit Raises Monarchy Profile in Canada: Angus Reid Global Monitor| publisher=Angus Reid| date=15 July 2010| url=http://angusreid.org/queenaas_visit_raises_monarchy_profile_in_canada/| access-date=7 June 2015| archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150607135622/http://angusreid.org/queenaas_visit_raises_monarchy_profile_in_canada/| archive-date=7 June 2015| url-status=dead}}</ref>

In May 2010, an online poll by [[Leger Marketing]] for QMI Agency found that a majority (59 per cent) of Canadians said that they had little or no interest in the Queen's visit to Canada, while 39 per cent had interest. The poll found that 32 per cent of people aged 18 to 34 had an attachment to the crown. Among those 65 and older, 46 per cent reported an attachment. One-fifth of Canadians said the Queen should stay home, and that furthermore, "Canada should sever its ties with the British Crown".<ref name=stayhome/>

A poll conducted by Angus Reid in June 2011 found a decline in support for republicanism, with just 33 per cent of those who replied doing so in favour of abolishing the monarchy and 58 per cent supporting the country remaining a monarchy. When asked what words they would use to describe an upcoming royal tour, 44 per cent said "indifference", 34 per cent said "pride", 34 per cent said "enthusiasm", and 32 per cent said "joy", with the pollster noting that indifference was "largely driven by attitudes in Quebec". [[Elizabeth II]], [[William, Prince of Wales|Prince William]], and [[Catherine, Princess of Wales|Catherine]] were, among those asked, the most popular members of the royal family and, if Prince William were to be made king, 23 per cent would view the monarchy more favourably and two per cent would view it more unfavourably.<ref>{{Cite news| title=Royal Family Image Improves as Visit to Canada Approaches| publisher=Angus Reid Public Opinion| date=29 June 2011| url=http://angusreidglobal.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/2011_06_29-Will_Kate_Royal-Visit.pdf| access-date=25 November 2012| archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150923085721/http://angusreidglobal.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/2011_06_29-Will_Kate_Royal-Visit.pdf| archive-date=23 September 2015| url-status=dead}}</ref>

A 2012 poll by Harris-Decima found that the respondents, as a whole, were "relatively evenly split" over whether the monarchy should remain or be abolished, but, those from English Canada demonstrated a "growing consensus" in favour of the Crown. Overall, the number of those who found the monarchy to be an "important part of Canadian history and political culture that ought to be maintained" rose by six per cent.<ref>{{citation| url=http://www.harrisdecima.ca/sites/default/files/releases/2012/05/25/hd-2012-05-25-en1409.pdf| title=Desire to Maintain Monarchy Has Grown Significantly in English Canada| pages=1–2| date=24 May 2012| publisher=Harris-Decima| access-date=22 September 2015}}{{Dead link|date=July 2019 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}</ref> A Forum poll from July the following year, taken immediately after the birth of [[Prince George of Wales|Prince George]], found that 48 per cent of respondents were opposed to abolishing the monarchy, with 37 per cent in favour, and 15 per cent undecided.<ref>{{cite news | url=http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/07/25/prince-george-boosts-popularity-of-the-monarchy-in-canada-provided-charles-isnt-king-poll/ | title=Prince George boosts popularity of the monarchy in Canada (provided Charles isn't king): poll | newspaper=National Post | date=25 July 2013 | access-date=29 July 2013 | author=Visser, Josh}}</ref>

A [[Forum Research#Political polling|Forum poll]], taken in May 2015, immediately after the birth of [[Princess Charlotte of Wales (born 2015)|Princess Charlotte]], found that 39 per cent of respondents favoured "abolishing the monarchy upon the death of the Queen,"<ref name=may2015>{{cite news|title=4-in-10 favour abolishing monarchy|url=http://poll.forumresearch.com/post/289/majority-dont-want-prince-charles-as-head-of-state/|access-date=7 June 2015|work=The Forum Poll (news release)|agency=Forum Research|date=18 May 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://toronto.citynews.ca/2015/05/18/around-4-in-10-canadians-favour-abolishing-monarchy-forum-poll/|title=Around 4-in-10 Canadians favour abolishing monarchy: Forum poll|date=18 May 2015|access-date=15 October 2016}}</ref> while 45 per cent were opposed; 54 per cent opposed Prince Charles (now Charles&nbsp;III) succeeding his mother on the throne.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://ca.news.yahoo.com/royal-family-support-canadians-waning-174402730.html|title=Royal Family support by Canadians waning, poll indicates|date=18 May 2015 |access-date=15 October 2016}}</ref> According to Forum, 73 per cent of those asked "agree the head of state of Canada should be Canadian-born and live in Canada," an increase from 63 per cent who had the same view in 2013.<ref name=may2015/>

A poll conducted in August 2017 found that 41 per cent of respondents wanted to abolish the monarchy following the death or abdication of Elizabeth II, with 43 per cent in favour of maintaining the status quo.<ref>http://poll.forumresearch.com/post/2774/monarchy-august-2017/ Canada Divided on the Monarchy</ref> In February 2019, a poll by Research Co concluded 31 per cent of those who replied said Canada should remain a monarchy, while 33 per cent believed Canada should have an elected head of state.<ref>[https://researchco.ca/2019/03/07/canadians-monarchy/ Canadians Express a Preference for Prince William as Next King]</ref> 

===2020s===
Research Co's 2020 poll found 32 per cent of respondents would have preferred for Canada to have an elected head of state, while 27 per cent would rather keep the monarchy. The proportion of those asked who said they did not care either way increased to 28 per cent.<ref>https://researchco.ca/2020/03/10/canadians-monarchy-2020/ Half of Canadians Expect to Remain a Monarchy in Twenty Years</ref> Another year after, Research Co ran a poll that found 45 per cent of people asked indicated a preference for Canada to have an elected head of state, while 24 per cent would rather keep the monarchy. The proportion who said they do not care either way dropped to 19 per cent.<ref>https://researchco.ca/2021/03/01/canadians-monarchy-2021/ Canadian Desire to Drop Monarchy Reaches Historic Level</ref>

In a poll conducted in February 2022 by Research Co, 49 per cent respondents claimed they would prefer for Canada to have an elected head of state, while 21 per cent would rather keep the monarchy. In addition, 34 per cent said they would like to see Prince William take over as king from Queen Elizabeth II, while only 17 per cent would rather have Prince Charles as monarch. Forty-eight per cent believed the country will “definitely” or “probably” be a monarchy two decades from now, while 30 per cent expected Canada to have an elected head of state by that time.<ref>https://researchco.ca/2022/03/01/canada-monarchy/ Perceptions of Royal Family Worsen Considerably in Canada</ref>

Angus Reid conducted in April 2022 an online poll of members of the Angus Reid Forum, which found 51 per cent of those who answered were agreeable toward the idea of Canada "severing ties with the British monarchy". Respondents of all ages were also less keen on Elizabeth's successor, Charles, becoming king, with 67 per cent saying they moderately or strongly opposed recognizing him as Canada's next head of state. Seventy-six per cent were against the idea of Charles' wife becoming Queen Camilla. But, nearly two-thirds of those polled still viewed Queen Elizabeth II favourably.<ref>{{Cite web| url=https://globalnews.ca/news/8774026/canada-royals-monarchy-queen-support-poll/ | title=Canadians more open to cutting ties with monarchy, but still support Queen: Poll - National &#124; Globalnews.ca}}</ref> [[Nanos Research]]'s poll a month later, conducted primarily around the question of whether or not Queen Elizabeth II should apologize for the [[Church of England]]'s role in the [[Canadian Indian residential school system]], found that 48 per cent of those polled opposed "cutting ties with the British monarchy" and replacing the head of state with the prime minister, while 43 per cent supported the idea. In the same poll, when asked if Canada should "cut ties" with the monarchy and replace the head of state with a governor general appointed by "the government", 48 per cent of Canadians opposed the idea, while 42 per cent supported it. Support for both proposals was strongest in Quebec, while opposition to the former proposal was strongest in [[the Maritimes]] and opposition to the latter proposal was strongest in the [[Canadian Prairies|prairies]]. When asked if it was a good time to open up constitutional discussions on "cutting ties" with the monarchy, 41 per cent of those who answered said they thought it was a poor time to do so, while 39 per cent thought it was a good time to open up discussions.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://nanos.co/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/2022-2167-CTV-May-Populated-Report-with-Tabs.pdf|title=Majority of Canadians support calling on the Queen to apologize for the Church of England's role in the residential school system|publisher=Nanos Research|access-date=28 June 2022|date=June 2022|website=nanos.co}}</ref>

Research Co. took a poll in September 2022, finding more than a third of those questioned (36 per cent) said they would prefer for Canada to have an elected head of state, down 13 points since February. In contrast, just over three-in-ten (31 per cent; up 10 points) said they would like for Canada to remain a monarchy, while 24 per cent (up six points) did not care either way. Fifty two per cent stated they believe Canada will still be a monarchy in 20 years; 31 per cent said they think the country will have an elected head of state.<ref>{{citation| url=https://researchco.ca/2022/09/22/king-canada/| title=Canadians Want King to Focus on Reconciliation and Environment| date=22 September 2022| publisher=Research Co.| accessdate=15 March 2023}}</ref> The same company polled individuals again in March 2023, finding 19 per cent of those questioned said they would prefer for Canada to remain a monarchy, 44 per cent would prefer for Canada to have an elected head of state, and 22 per cent have no opinion.<ref>{{citation| url=https://researchco.ca/2023/03/15/monarchy-2023/| title=Fewer than One-in-Five Canadians Want Monarchy to Continue| date=15 March 2023| publisher=Research Co.| accessdate=15 March 2023}}</ref>

A [[web survey]] conducted by Leger in March 2023 found 67 per cent of those polled felt indifferent toward the accession of King Charles III and 80 per cent had "no personal attachment" to the monarchy. Fifty-six per cent of respondents said it was time for Canada "to reconsider its ties with the monarchy", 44 per cent being against the idea.<ref>{{Cite web| url=https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/canadians-uninterested-in-king-charles-coronation-monarchy-survey-suggests-1.6312072| title=Canadians uninterested in King Charles' coronation, monarchy, survey suggests| date=14 March 2023| publisher=CTV News| accessdate=14 March 2023}}</ref>

A 2023 survey by Lord Ashcroft Polls found that 24 per cent of those questioned in Canada considered the institution of the monarchy to be favourable, with 41 per cent finding it unfavourable and 34 per cent neutral. The same poll recorded that 47 per cent would vote in a referendum for the country to become a republic, 23 per cent would vote for continuance of the monarchy, 22 per cent stated they did not know, and eight per cent would not vote.<ref>{{Citation| url=https://view.officeapps.live.com/op/view.aspx?src=http%3A%2F%2Flordashcroftpolls.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2023%2F05%2FMonarchy-poll-tables-Canada.xlsx&wdOrigin=BROWSELINK| title=Data tables: Canada| publisher=Lord Ashcroft Polls| accessdate=7 August 2023}}</ref> Brean argued this poll revealed that abolition of the Canadian monarchy is "always in Canada’s future, never its present", pointing out how, when respondents were asked about the result of a hypothetical referendum 10 years ahead, 54 per cent said the republic side would win and 18 per cent said Canada would remain a constitutional monarchy. Yet, when asked how they would vote in the present, the republican impulse weakened, as 23 per cent said they would vote for Canada to stay as a monarchy and 47 per cent stated they would vote to abolish the Crown. When presented with the question of a referendum being held the next day, republicanism grew "weaker still, with 36 per cent answering they would vote to keep things as they are and 40 per cent saying they would vote for abolition. By Brean's analysys, the poll demonstrated Canadians view replacing the monarchy as a very low priority, pointing to the reaction to the statement, "in an ideal world we wouldn't have the monarchy in Canada, but there are more important things for the country to deal with": 79 per cent expressed agreement, including 85 per cent of those who said they would vote against the Crown.<ref name=Brean/>

A poll taken after the death of Queen Elizabeth found 54 per cent of those polled supported "sever[ing] ties" with the "British monarchy" and 58 per cent supported a national referendum on the question. The same poll found 55 per cent of respondents agree the country's constitutional monarchy helps define Canadian identity and ought to remain Canada's form of government, with six in ten agreeing Canada’s "relationship with the monarchy" is useful as it helps to differentiate Canada from the United States. Still, 63 per cent supported the idea the King and royal family should have no formal function in Canadian society.<ref>{{Citation| url=https://www.ipsos.com/en-ca/news-polls/canadians-conflicted-on-future-role-of-monarchy| title=Canadians Conflicted on Future Role of Monarchy as Half (54%) Say Canada Should End Ties to Monarchy| accessdate=21 September 2022| archive-date=21 September 2022| archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220921012408/https://www.ipsos.com/en-ca/news-polls/canadians-conflicted-on-future-role-of-monarchy| url-status=dead}}</ref>

In May 2025, on the eve of King Charles III and Queen Camilla's visit to Canada, a poll released by [[Pollara|Pollara Strategic Insights]] showed that Canadians' attitudes towards Charles III and the monarchy have warmed, with 45% of Canadians supporting the constitutional monarchy, while 39% favour a republic. <ref>{{cite web |url= https://www.pollara.com/canadians-warming-to-king-charles-and-the-monarchy/ |title= Canadians warming to King Charles and the monarchy |last= |first= |date= 25 May 2025 |website= Pollara.com |publisher= Pollara |access-date= 25 May 2025}}</ref>

==See also==
* [[Republicanism in Canada]]
* [[History of monarchy in Canada]]
* [[National symbols of Canada]]
* [[Annexation movements of Canada]]
* [[Citizens for a Canadian Republic]]
* [[Republicanism in Australia]]
* [[Republicanism in the United Kingdom]]

==Notes==
{{Reflist|group=n}}

==References==
{{Reflist|30em}}

{{Canadian monarchy}}
{{Commonwealth monarchism}}
{{Republicanism}}
{{Canadian identity}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Debate on the Monarchy in Canada}}
[[Category:Monarchy of Canada]]
[[Category:Political history of Canada]]
[[Category:Legal history of Canada]]
[[Category:Republicanism in Canada]]