Why a 'curious interest' and questions of money loom over Harry and Meghan coming to Canada - CBC.ca | Canada News Media
Connect with us

News

Why a 'curious interest' and questions of money loom over Harry and Meghan coming to Canada – CBC.ca

Published

 on


Prince Harry and Meghan clearly want to come to Canada — and senior members of the Royal Family gave their wish their blessing at their Sandringham summit on Monday.

But how Canadians feel about the Duke and Duchess of Sussex spending part of their time here as they step back from their senior roles in the Royal Family is more nuanced.

“I’d say there’s a curious interest to some degree as to how this will unfold, that certainly Harry and Meghan’s enthusiasm about Canada is well-received,” said Carolyn Harris, a longtime royal observer and Toronto-based author and historian.

“There are many who have commented that Harry and Meghan — as Harry is unlikely to succeed to the throne — should be able to live life on their own terms, provided they will be indeed be financially independent.”

While some Canadians may welcome Harry and Meghan, others may feel great indifference.

“People who support the Crown, most of them will think this is nice,” said John Fraser, author of The Secret of the Crown: Canada’s Affair with Royalty, and founding president of the Institute for the Study of the Crown in Canada.

Prince Harry and Meghan visited Canada House in London earlier this month, in thanks for the warm hospitality and support they received during their recent stay in Canada over the holidays. (Daniel Leal-Olivas/WPA Pool/Getty Images)

“The idea of members of the Royal Family actually having some domicile in a Commonwealth country, to me, is wonderful. It suggests the possibility — especially if the Queen goes along with the idea — that Harry and Meghan can be special Commonwealth ambassadors or supporters.”

Others who are often less interested in the Crown, he suggests, will “think they are leeches on the body politic.”

But whatever interest there is among Canadians could be tempered by one very tricky topic: money.

“I think any support for Harry and Meghan would be negatively affected if the couple were seen as making use of public funds in Canada for their security while they live a private life,” Harris said.

Chenoa Paccagnan, of Invermere, B.C., echoed a similar sentiment.

“I love my royals, but I am not interested in paying for long-term security or maintenance if they choose to spend increased time in Canada,” Paccagnan wrote in an email to CBC’s Royal Fascinator newsletter over the weekend.

‘Honour and a privilege’

Others looked at the financial aspects differently.

Bill Kostiuk, of Alliston, Ont., said it would be “an honour and a privilege” to have Harry and Meghan living in Canada.

“They do so much for charitable organizations and they seem to inspire the younger generation in a very positive way,” he said in an email to the Fascinator.

“Thousands of immigrants come into Canada and no one questions who’s going to pay for what and what they will do for income. I wish people could get off the gossip train and let this couple and their young child try to have a life together without all the finger-pointing.”

WATCH | Expert Robert Lacey says Harry and Meghan might follow the Obamas’ example when it comes to managing their finances independent of the royal household:

Robert Lacey says royal couple’s independence may lie in huge charitable foundation 0:57

Harry and Meghan’s seismic announcement last week that they wanted to step back included mention that they want to become financially independent. And in a statement Monday, Queen Elizabeth said Harry and Meghan “have made clear that they do not want to be reliant on public funds in their new lives.”

But what exactly that means remains unclear.

Finance Minister Bill Morneau said Monday the federal government hasn’t decided if Ottawa would help cover security costs associated with a move to Canada by the sixth in line to the throne and his wife.

‘Serious issue’

There’s little doubt security for such a high-profile couple will carry a hefty price tag.

“The question of security is a serious issue,” said Fraser.

“Whether they are here or anywhere, they are major public figures who need protection,” he said.

“At the moment, unless something is being worked out with the Canadian government, they don’t have any official status here other than the respect there is — and also the lack of respect — for members of the Royal Family.”

Fraser said the cost for security would probably have to be covered privately. “I don’t think it should be a Canadian government cost,” he said.

Christine Richardson, of Uxbridge, Ont., said in an email to The Royal Fascinator that she can understand why Harry and Meghan may want to step back, but feels “very strongly they can’t have their cake and eat it, too.”

“Independence means what it says, and from a financial perspective, it should not cost Canadians anything (i.e. for security) if they live here part-time. Also, they should have to pay income tax relating to money made in Canada, just like the rest of us.”

What about the taxes?

Taxation poses significant unknowns around Harry and Meghan’s plans, and would depend on numerous issues.

“If Harry spends enough time in Canada to become classed a Canadian resident, then he would start to become liable to Canadian taxes,” Craig Prescott, director of the Centre for Parliament and Public Law at the University of Winchester in southern England, said via email.

“With Meghan, she is still a U.S. citizen and so is liable to U.S. taxation on her worldwide income (as U.S. taxation operates on citizenship rather than residency — only Eritrea and Myanmar do the same). There are reliefs and exemptions to this, but they appear to be relatively limited.”

Under U.K. tax rules, Prescott said, if overseas tax is paid on overseas income, then you can claim relief to avoid being taxed twice.

Harry and Meghan, shown holding their son Archie, visited Cape Town on Sept. 25, 2019, during a trip to southern Africa. (Toby Melville/Reuters)

“How this operates will depend on any double tax treaty between the U.K. and that country. The U.K. has a double tax treaty with the U.S. and Canada,” he said.

While much remains unknown about how Harry and Meghan’s part-time residency will unfold, Fraser said a lot of that will be answered “just by them taking up residence here of some sort, whatever it is.”

The only people he can see being really upset by the move are the British tabloids that “love either praising them or damning them.”

WATCH: Canada undecided on covering Harry and Meghan’s security costs

Finance Minister Bill Morneau says the government hasn’t decided if it will cover any of the security costs for Prince Harry and Meghan during their time in Canada, which are estimated at more than $1.7 million per year. 1:59

Fraser expects there will be some “fervent following” of Harry and Meghan for a little while.

“But I think they have a fair chance of having a more normal life over here, whatever a normal life is, a private life, than they do in the U.K.”

  • For more coverage of Harry and Meghan, subscribe to the Royal Fascinator, our biweekly newsletter dedicated to news and analysis of the goings-on at Buckingham Palace, Windsor Castle and beyond.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)



Source link

News

Virginia Democrats advance efforts to protect abortion, voting rights, marriage equality

Published

 on

 

RICHMOND, Va. (AP) — Democrats who control both chambers of the Virginia legislature are hoping to make good on promises made on the campaign trail, including becoming the first Southern state to expand constitutional protections for abortion access.

The House Privileges and Elections Committee advanced three proposed constitutional amendments Wednesday, including a measure to protect reproductive rights. Its members also discussed measures to repeal a now-defunct state constitutional ban on same-sex marriage and ways to revise Virginia’s process to restore voting rights for people who served time for felony crimes.

“This meeting was an important next step considering the moment in history we find ourselves in,” Democratic Del. Cia Price, the committee chair, said during a news conference. “We have urgent threats to our freedoms that could impact constituents in all of the districts we serve.”

The at-times raucous meeting will pave the way for the House and Senate to take up the resolutions early next year after lawmakers tabled the measures last January. Democrats previously said the move was standard practice, given that amendments are typically introduced in odd-numbered years. But Republican Minority Leader Todd Gilbert said Wednesday the committee should not have delved into the amendments before next year’s legislative session. He said the resolutions, particularly the abortion amendment, need further vetting.

“No one who is still serving remembers it being done in this way ever,” Gilbert said after the meeting. “Certainly not for something this important. This is as big and weighty an issue as it gets.”

The Democrats’ legislative lineup comes after Republican Governor Glenn Youngkin, to the dismay of voting-rights advocates, rolled back a process to restore people’s civil rights after they completed sentences for felonies. Virginia is the only state that permanently bans anyone convicted of a felony from voting unless a governor restores their rights.

“This amendment creates a process that is bounded by transparent rules and criteria that will apply to everybody — it’s not left to the discretion of a single individual,” Del. Elizabeth Bennett-Parker, the patron of the voting rights resolution, which passed along party lines, said at the news conference.

Though Democrats have sparred with the governor over their legislative agenda, constitutional amendments put forth by lawmakers do not require his signature, allowing the Democrat-led House and Senate to bypass Youngkin’s blessing.

Instead, the General Assembly must pass proposed amendments twice in at least two years, with a legislative election sandwiched between each statehouse session. After that, the public can vote by referendum on the issues. The cumbersome process will likely hinge upon the success of all three amendments on Democrats’ ability to preserve their edge in the House and Senate, where they hold razor-thin majorities.

It’s not the first time lawmakers have attempted to champion the three amendments. Republicans in a House subcommittee killed a constitutional amendment to restore voting rights in 2022, a year after the measure passed in a Democrat-led House. The same subcommittee also struck down legislation supporting a constitutional amendment to repeal an amendment from 2006 banning marriage equality.

On Wednesday, a bipartisan group of lawmakers voted 16-5 in favor of legislation protecting same-sex marriage, with four Republicans supporting the resolution.

“To say the least, voters enacted this (amendment) in 2006, and we have had 100,000 voters a year become of voting age since then,” said Del. Mark Sickles, who sponsored the amendment as one of the first openly gay men serving in the General Assembly. “Many people have changed their opinions of this as the years have passed.”

A constitutional amendment protecting abortion previously passed the Senate in 2023 but died in a Republican-led House. On Wednesday, the amendment passed on party lines.

If successful, the resolution proposed by House Majority Leader Charniele Herring would be part of a growing trend of reproductive rights-related ballot questions given to voters. Since 2022, 18 questions have gone before voters across the U.S., and they have sided with abortion rights advocates 14 times.

The voters have approved constitutional amendments ensuring the right to abortion until fetal viability in nine states: Arizona, California, Colorado, Maryland, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, Ohio and Vermont. Voters also passed a right-to-abortion measure in Nevada in 2024, but it must be passed again in 2026 to be added to the state constitution.

As lawmakers debated the measure, roughly 18 members spoke. Mercedes Perkins, at 38 weeks pregnant, described the importance of women making decisions about their own bodies. Rhea Simon, another Virginia resident, anecdotally described how reproductive health care shaped her life.

Then all at once, more than 50 people lined up to speak against the abortion amendment.

“Let’s do the compassionate thing and care for mothers and all unborn children,” resident Sheila Furey said.

The audience gave a collective “Amen,” followed by a round of applause.

___

Associated Press writer Geoff Mulvihill in Cherry Hill, New Jersey, contributed to this report.

___

Olivia Diaz is a corps member for The Associated Press/Report for America Statehouse News Initiative.

Source link

Continue Reading

News

Vancouver Canucks winger Joshua set for season debut after cancer treatment

Published

 on

 

Vancouver Canucks winger Dakota Joshua is set to make his season debut Thursday after missing time for cancer treatment.

Head coach Rick Tocchet says Joshua will slot into the lineup Thursday when Vancouver (8-3-3) hosts the New York Islanders.

The 28-year-old from Dearborn, Mich., was diagnosed with testicular cancer this summer and underwent surgery in early September.

He spoke earlier this month about his recovery, saying it had been “very hard to go through” and that he was thankful for support from his friends, family, teammates and fans.

“That was a scary time but I am very thankful and just happy to be in this position still and be able to go out there and play,,” Joshua said following Thursday’s morning skate.

The cancer diagnosis followed a career season where Joshua contributed 18 goals and 14 assists across 63 regular-season games, then added four goals and four assists in the playoffs.

Now, he’s ready to focus on contributing again.

“I expect to be good, I don’t expect a grace period. I’ve been putting the work in so I expect to come out there and make an impact as soon as possible,” he said.

“I don’t know if it’s going to be perfect right from the get-go, but it’s about putting your best foot forward and working your way to a point of perfection.”

The six-foot-three, 206-pound Joshua signed a four-year, US$13-million contract extension at the end of June.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Nov. 14, 2024.

The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.

Source link

Continue Reading

News

Trump chooses anti-vaccine activist Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as health secretary

Published

 on

 

NEW YORK (AP) — President-elect Donald Trump says he will nominate anti-vaccine activist Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to lead the Department of Health and Human Services, putting him in charge of a massive agency that oversees everything from drug, vaccine and food safety to medical research and the social safety net programs Medicare and Medicaid.

“For too long, Americans have been crushed by the industrial food complex and drug companies who have engaged in deception, misinformation, and disinformation when it comes to Public Health,” Trump said in a post on his Truth Social site announcing the appointment. Kennedy, he said, would “Make America Great and Healthy Again!”

Kennedy, a former Democrat who ran as an independent in this year’s presidential race, abandoned his bid after striking a deal to give Trump his endorsement with a promise to have a role in health policy in the administration.

He and Trump have since become good friends, with Kennedy frequently receiving loud applause at Trump’s rallies.

The expected appointment was first reported by Politico Thursday.

A longtime vaccine skeptic, Kennedy is an attorney who has built a loyal following over several decades of people who admire his lawsuits against major pesticide and pharmaceutical companies. He has pushed for tighter regulations around the ingredients in foods.

With the Trump campaign, he worked to shore up support among young mothers in particular, with his message of making food healthier in the U.S., promising to model regulations imposed in Europe. In a nod to Trump’s original campaign slogan, he named the effort “Make America Healthy Again.”

It remains unclear how that will square with Trump’s history of deregulation of big industries, including food. Trump pushed for fewer inspections of the meat industry, for example.

Kennedy’s stance on vaccines has also made him a controversial figure among Democrats and some Republicans, raising question about his ability to get confirmed, even in a GOP-controlled Senate. Kennedy has espoused misinformation around the safety of vaccines, including pushing a totally discredited theory that childhood vaccines cause autism.

He also has said he would recommend removing fluoride from drinking water. The addition of the material has been cited as leading to improved dental health.

HHS has more than 80,000 employees across the country. It houses the Food and Drug Administration, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Medicare and Medicaid programs and the National Institutes of Health.

Kennedy’s anti-vaccine nonprofit group, Children’s Health Defense, currently has a lawsuit pending against a number of news organizations, among them The Associated Press, accusing them of violating antitrust laws by taking action to identify misinformation, including about COVID-19 and COVID-19 vaccines. Kennedy took leave from the group when he announced his run for president but is listed as one of its attorneys in the lawsuit.

__ Seitz reported from Washington.

The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Exit mobile version