adplus-dvertising
Connect with us

News

Charles III: It's 'virtually impossible' for Canada to drop the King – CTV News

Published

 on


Canada’s Constitution makes it incredibly challenging for the country to end its ties with the Monarchy.

“I think it would be very difficult,” Allan Hutchinson, a legal theorist and law professor at York University, told CTVNews.ca. “Any change in the arrangements around the Crown would require the unanimity of all provinces and the federal government. The chances of getting that are not good.”

UNANIMOUS CONSENT

Canada is a constitutional monarchy, which means the British sovereign is our ceremonial head of state, represented by the Governor General. Following the death of Queen Elizabeth II, Charles III ascended the British throne and also became King of Canada.

“It really is all about formalities,” Hutchinson said. “King Charles has no power in Canada.”

Countries without monarchies, like the U.S. and France, are known as republics. For Canada to sever its longstanding ties to the Monarchy and become a republic, it would require agreement between the House of Commons, the Senate and all 10 provinces. Known as “amendment by unanimous consent,” the rule is outlined in Section 41 of the 1982 Constitution Act, which was enacted by then-prime minister Pierre Trudeau’s government. Input from the territories or a referendum is not required.

“In 1982, they needed the approval of the Brits in order to get the Constitution repatriated,” Hutchinson, who has written extensively about the Constitution, explained. “I think at that time, if they had made the monarchy a kind of optional feature, that might have been a problem.”

Constitutional law expert David Schneiderman believes it would be “virtually impossible” to achieve unanimous consent on the issue today.

“You would have to have an overwhelming consensus in Canadian public opinion that would warrant premiers passing resolutions in their legislatures calling for abolition of the Monarchy,” Schneiderman, a professor of law and political science at the University of Toronto, told CTVNews.ca. “I don’t see that happening anytime soon.”

Most other constitutional changes require agreement from two-thirds of the provinces, if they represent at least 50 per cent of the country’s population. Previous major attempts to amend the Constitution have failed, like the Meech Lake Accord in 1987 and the Charlottetown Accord in 1992.

“We know from our own history that changing the Constitution is a bit of a fool’s errand,” Hutchinson said. “Once you start opening it up, people will say, ‘Well, if we’re going to change the Constitution, what about this? What about that?’ I think it would lead us down a path that is fraught with a lot of challenges.”

THE COMMONWEALTH REALMS

King Charles III now serves as head of state of 15 Commonwealth realms, which include the United Kingdom and former British colonies like Australia, Belize, Canada, New Zealand and Papua New Guinea. Several—particularly those in the Caribbean—are revaluating their ties.

In November 2021, Barbados became a republic and removed the Queen as head of state, the first country to do so in nearly 30 years. Its constitution simply required a decision by parliament.

Jamaica is also exploring the possibility of becoming a republic, although experts say the process will take years and require a referendum. The government of Antigua and Barbuda has meanwhile announced plans to hold a referendum on the Monarchy within the next three years, and the prime minister of the Bahamas has signalled an openness to a referendum too.

Such a referendum failed to end the Monarchy in Australia in 1999. Known for his republican leanings, Australia’s prime minister recently said that a referendum is not a priority during his government’s first term.

WANING SUPPORT

While Queen Elizabeth’s death has led to an outpouring of admiration for the monarch herself, recent scandals in the House of Windsor, like Prince Andrew’s relationship with disgraced financer and sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, and accusations of racism from Meghan Markle, have tarnished the institution’s reputation for some.

For many Indigenous people in Canada and those who suffered through harsh colonial rule in republics like Kenya and Cyprus, the Monarchy’s legacy can also be painful and complicated.

A poll from the Angus Reid Institute in April 2022 found that 51 per cent of Canadian respondents were in favour of abolishing the Monarchy in coming generations, compared with 26 per cent who were in favour of keeping it and 24 per cent were unsure. Approximately half of respondents believed the Royal Family represents outdated values and is “no longer relevant at all.” The poll also found that 65 per cent of respondents opposed recognizing Charles as Canada’s King and head of state.

Similar surveys from 2021 and 2020 show Canadians are increasingly questioning our ties to the British throne. According to a report from the Monarchist League of Canada, these ties cost Canada $58.7 million in the 2019-20 fiscal year.

Despite the constitutional challenges, Schneiderman believes Canadians could “imagine an alternative.”

“I think we should have been considering our ties to the Monarchy even before the death of Queen Elizabeth,” Schneiderman said. “It’s a moment to reflect on who we have had as a head of state, and whether we want to continue on with a head of state that is hereditary, from a particular family that breeds leaders to serve in this role; or whether in a modern, democratic and multicultural society, we might want a head of state that’s a little bit more representative of the people that the head of state serves.”

Hutchinson, who grew up and studied in the U.K., agrees.

“The idea that we have some hereditary head of state is rather pitiful in 2022 in a so-called democracy,” he said. “I don’t know what we lose by calling the Governor General something else, and then cutting ties with the Monarchy.”

Peter McNally is a retired McGill University information studies professor and a self-proclaimed “palace watcher.”

McNally also believes amending the Constitution would be “extremely difficult,” but when it comes to the Monarchy, he doesn’t want to see Canada try.

“The reason Canada exists historically because of 18th century loyalty to the Monarchy,” he told CTVNews.ca. “Today, the Monarchy is the living embodiment of Canada’s parliamentary tradition. It’s also a bulwark against American cultural imperialism.”

With files from the Associated Press

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

News

From transmission to symptoms, what to know about avian flu after B.C. case

Published

 on

A B.C. teen has a suspected case of H5N1 avian flu — the first known human to acquire the virusin Canada.

The provincial government said on the weekend that B.C.’s chief veterinarian and public health teamsare still investigating the source of exposure, but that it’s “very likely” an animal or bird.

Human-to-human transmission is very rare, but as cases among animals rise, many experts are worried the virus could develop that ability.

The teen was being treated at BC Children’s Hospital on Saturday. The provincial health officer said there were no updates on the patient Monday.

“I’m very concerned, obviously, for the young person who was infected,” said Dr. Matthew Miller, director of the Michael G. DeGroote Institute for Infectious Disease Research at McMaster University in Hamilton, Ont.

Miller, who is also the co-director of the Canadian Pandemic Preparedness Hub, said there have been several people infected with H5N1 in the U.S.,and almost all were livestock workers.

In an email to The Canadian Press on Monday afternoon, the Public Health Agency of Canada said “based on current evidence in Canada, the risk to the general public remains low at this time.”

WHAT IS H5N1?

H5N1 is a subtype of influenza A virus that has mainly affected birds, so it’s also called “bird flu” or “avian flu.” The H5N1 flu that has been circulating widely among birds and cattle this year is one of the avian flu strains known as Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza (HPAI) because it causes severe illness in birds, including poultry.

According to the World Health Organization, H5N1 has been circulating widely among wild birds and poultry for more than two decades. The WHO became increasingly concerned and called for more disease surveillance in Feb. 2023 after worldwide reports of the virus spilling over into mammals.

HOW COMMON IS INFECTION IN HUMANS?

H5N1 infections in humans are rare and “primarily acquired through direct contact with infected poultry or contaminated environments,” the WHO’s website says.

Prior to the teen in B.C., Canada had one human case of H5N1 in 2014 and it was “travel-related,” according to the Public Health Agency of Canada.

As of Nov. 8, there have been 46 confirmed human cases of H5N1 in the U.S. this year, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says. There is an ongoing outbreak among dairy cattle, “sporadic” outbreaks in poultry farms and “widespread” cases in wild birds, the CDC website says.

There has been no sign of human-to-human transmission in any of the U.S. cases.

But infectious disease and public health experts are worried that the more H5N1 spreads between different types of animals, the bigger the chance it can mutateand spread more easily between humans.

WHAT ARE THE SYMPTOMS OF H5N1?

Although H5N1 causes symptoms similar to seasonal flu, such as cough, fever, shortness of breath, headache, muscle pain, sore throat, runny nose and fatigue, the strain also has key features that can cause other symptoms.

Unlike seasonal flu, most of the people infected in the U.S. have had conjunctivitis, or “pink-eye,” said Miller.

One reason for that is likely that many have been dairy cattle workers.

“At these milking operations, it’s easy to get contamination on your hands and rub your eyes. We touch our face like all the time without even knowing it,” he said.

“Also, those operations can produce droplets or aerosols, both during milking and during cleaning that can get into the eye relatively easily.”

But the other reason for the conjunctivitis seen in H5N1 cases is that the strain binds to receptors in the eye, Miller said.

While seasonal flu binds to receptors in the upper respiratory tract, H5N1 also binds to receptors in the lower respiratory tract, he said.

“That’s a concern … because if the virus makes its way down there, those lower respiratory infections tend to be a lot more severe. They tend to lead to more severe outcomes, like pneumonias for example, that can cause respiratory distress,” Miller said.

WILL THE FLU VACCINE PROTECT AGAINST H5N1?

We don’t know “with any degree of certainty,” whether the seasonal flu vaccine could help prevent infection with H5N1, said Miller.

Although there’s no data yet, it’s quite possible that it could help prevent more severe disease once a person is infected, he said.

That’s because the seasonal flu vaccine contains a component of H1N1 virus, which “is relatively closely related to H5N1.”

“So the immunity that might help protect people against H5N1 is almost certainly conferred by either prior infection with or prior vaccination against H1N1 viruses that circulate in people,” Miller said.

HOW ELSE CAN I PROTECT MYSELF?

The Public Health Agency of Canada said as a general precaution, people shouldn’t handle live or dead wild birds or other wild animals, and keep pets away from sick or dead animals.

Those who work with animals or in animal-contaminated places should take personal protective measures, the agency said.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Nov. 11, 2024.

Canadian Press health coverage receives support through a partnership with the Canadian Medical Association. CP is solely responsible for this content.



Source link

Continue Reading

News

Wisconsin Supreme Court grapples with whether state’s 175-year-old abortion ban is valid

Published

 on

MADISON, Wis. (AP) — A conservative prosecutor’s attorney struggled Monday to persuade the Wisconsin Supreme Court to reactivate the state’s 175-year-old abortion ban, drawing a tongue-lashing from two of the court’s liberal justices during oral arguments.

Sheboygan County’s Republican district attorney, Joel Urmanski, has asked the high court to overturn a Dane County judge’s ruling last year that invalidated the ban. A ruling isn’t expected for weeks but abortion advocates almost certainly will win the case given that liberal justices control the court. One of them, Janet Protasiewicz, remarked on the campaign trail that she supports abortion rights.

Monday’s two-hour session amounted to little more than political theater. Liberal Justice Rebecca Dallet told Urmanski’s attorney, Matthew Thome, that the ban was passed in 1849 by white men who held all the power and that he was ignoring everything that has happened since. Jill Karofsky, another liberal justice, pointed out that the ban provides no exceptions for rape or incest and that reactivation could result in doctors withholding medical care. She told Thome that he was essentially asking the court to sign a “death warrant” for women and children in Wisconsin.

“This is the world gone mad,” Karofsky said.

The ban stood until 1973, when the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark Roe v. Wade decision legalizing abortion nationwide nullified it. Legislators never repealed the ban, however, and conservatives have argued the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe two years ago reactivated it.

Democratic Attorney General Josh Kaul filed a lawsuit challenging the law in 2022. He argued that a 1985 Wisconsin law that prohibits abortion after a fetus reaches the point where it can survive outside the womb supersedes the ban. Some babies can survive with medical help after 21 weeks of gestation.

Urmanski contends that the ban was never repealed and that it can co-exist with the 1985 law because that law didn’t legalize abortion at any point. Other modern-day abortion restrictions also don’t legalize the practice, he argues.

Dane County Circuit Judge Diane Schlipper ruled last year that the ban outlaws feticide — which she defined as the killing of a fetus without the mother’s consent — but not consensual abortions. The ruling emboldened Planned Parenthood to resume offering abortions in Wisconsin after halting procedures after Roe was overturned.

Urmanski asked the state Supreme Court in February to overturn Schlipper’s ruling without waiting for a lower appellate decision.

Thome told the justices on Monday that he wasn’t arguing about the implications of reactivating the ban. He maintained that the legal theory that new laws implicitly repeal old ones is shaky. He also contended that the ban and the newer abortion restrictions can overlap just like laws establishing different penalties for the same crime. A ruling that the 1985 law effectively repealed the ban would be “anti-democratic,” Thome added.

“It’s a statute this Legislature has not repealed and you’re saying, no, you actually repealed it,” he said.

Dallet shot back that disregarding laws passed over the last 40 years to go back to 1849 would be undemocratic.

Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin filed a separate lawsuit in February asking the state Supreme Court to rule directly on whether a constitutional right to abortion exists in the state. The justices have agreed to take the case but haven’t scheduled oral arguments yet.

___

This story has been updated to correct the Sheboygan County district attorney’s first name to Joel.

The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.



Source link

Continue Reading

News

When to catch the last supermoon of the year

Published

 on

CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. (AP) — Better catch this week’s supermoon. It will be a while until the next one.

This will be the year’s fourth and final supermoon, looking bigger and brighter than usual as it comes within about 225,000 miles (361,867 kilometers) of Earth on Thursday. It won’t reach its full lunar phase until Friday.

The supermoon rises after the peak of the Taurid meteor shower and before the Leonids are most active.

Last month’s supermoon was 2,800 miles (4,500 kilometers) closer, making it the year’s closest. The series started in August.

In 2025, expect three supermoons beginning in October.

What makes a moon so super?

More a popular term than a scientific one, a supermoon occurs when a full lunar phase syncs up with an especially close swing around Earth. This usually happens only three or four times a year and consecutively, given the moon’s constantly shifting, oval-shaped orbit.

A supermoon obviously isn’t bigger, but it can appear that way, although scientists say the difference can be barely perceptible.

How do supermoons compare?

This year features a quartet of supermoons.

The one in August was 224,917 miles (361,970 kilometers) away. September’s was 222,131 miles (357,486 kilometers) away. A partial lunar eclipse also unfolded that night, visible in much of the Americas, Africa and Europe as Earth’s shadow fell on the moon, resembling a small bite.

October’s supermoon was the year’s closest at 222,055 miles (357,364 kilometers) from Earth. This month’s supermoon will make its closest approach on Thursday with the full lunar phase the next day.

What’s in it for me?

Scientists point out that only the keenest observers can discern the subtle differences. It’s easier to detect the change in brightness — a supermoon can be 30% brighter than average.

With the U.S. and other countries ramping up lunar exploration with landers and eventually astronauts, the moon beckons brighter than ever.

___

The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Science and Educational Media Group. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending