# C'est fait : Canadian Senate passes same-sex marriage, royal assent expected tomorrow **URL:** \ **Category:** Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share\ **Created:** [July 20, 2005, 4:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cest-fait-canadian-senate-passes-same-sex-marriage-royal-assent-expected-tomorrow/313252 "2005-07-20T04:45:06Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 16\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![jkusters](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/fbc32d/32.png) [@jkusters](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jkusters)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2005, 5:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cest-fait-canadian-senate-passes-same-sex-marriage-royal-assent-expected-tomorrow/313252/21 "2005-07-21T17:59:59Z")
> [@matt\_mcl](#): > > Update: Royal Assent was granted by Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin yesterday evening. Our marriages are now equal before the law from sea to sea to sea. _jealous_ 🙂 JOhn. ---
**Author:** ![Bippy\_the\_Beardless](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/ac8455/32.png) [@Bippy\_the\_Beardless](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bippy_the_Beardless)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2005, 6:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cest-fait-canadian-senate-passes-same-sex-marriage-royal-assent-expected-tomorrow/313252/22 "2005-07-21T18:08:17Z")
> [@matt\_mcl](#): > > Update: Royal Assent was granted by Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin yesterday evening. Our marriages are now equal before the law from sea to sea to sea. > > Well done, everyone. Congrats. Does the Royal Assent oficially indicate Queen Elizabeth II has given assent to allowing Gay Marriage in Canada? If so it is a good sign the old Queen won’t oppose a similar law in UK if such a thing comes up/ ---
**Author:** ![Gorsnak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gorsnak/32/7587_2.png) [@Gorsnak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gorsnak)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2005, 6:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cest-fait-canadian-senate-passes-same-sex-marriage-royal-assent-expected-tomorrow/313252/23 "2005-07-21T18:16:18Z")
> [@Bippy the Beardless](#): > > Congrats. > > Does the Royal Assent oficially indicate Queen Elizabeth II has given assent to allowing Gay Marriage in Canada? If so it is a good sign the old Queen won’t oppose a similar law in UK if such a thing comes up/ Royal Assent is purely ceremonial. The Queen has no power to prevent legislation from being enacted. ---
**Author:** ![matt\_mcl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7ab992/32.png) [@matt\_mcl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/matt_mcl)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2005, 6:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cest-fait-canadian-senate-passes-same-sex-marriage-royal-assent-expected-tomorrow/313252/24 "2005-07-21T18:39:18Z")
Well, technically speaking she does, but you’re right, it’s completely ceremonial and any attempt to actually _use_ her “reserve powers” would mean complete constitutional upheaval. IIRC, the Crown’s powers were used once, possibly twice (depending on your definition) during the whole of the twentieth century in Canada. It would be quite unthinkable that if the British Parliament passed a law in favour of same-sex marriage, that the Queen would refuse to sign it, even if she were personally inclined to do so. As it is, I presume that if she actually _did_, they would find a way around it. For example, in Belgium, King Baudouin I refused to sign a law regarding abortion, due to his religious beliefs; the government simply voted to remove him from office, signed the law in its capacity as interim executive power, and then voted to return him to office. Furthermore, the Queen delegates all her powers in Canada to the Governor General (who was in this case stood in for by the Chief Justice, as she’s recovering from surgery), so Her Maj doesn’t have to worry her bejewelled head about a thing. Even if she were directly involved, since the Statute of Westminster she can only be advised on Canadian matters by her Canadian government, and likewise for the UK. What her legal personality does in one of her realms has no bearing whatever on what it does in another one of them. ---
**Author:** ![ouryL](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ouryl/32/6067_2.png) [@ouryL](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ouryL)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2005, 7:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cest-fait-canadian-senate-passes-same-sex-marriage-royal-assent-expected-tomorrow/313252/25 "2005-07-21T19:15:35Z")
Does that mean Prince Edward can become Queen now? ---
**Author:** ![Sunspace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sunspace/32/1250_2.png) [@Sunspace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sunspace)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2005, 7:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cest-fait-canadian-senate-passes-same-sex-marriage-royal-assent-expected-tomorrow/313252/26 "2005-07-21T19:34:03Z")
Another interesting tidbit is that the monarch, the Gov-Gen, and the Supreme Court justice involved were all female. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Hypnagogic\_Jerk](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hypnagogic_jerk/32/4252_2.png) [@Hypnagogic\_Jerk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hypnagogic_Jerk)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2005, 7:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cest-fait-canadian-senate-passes-same-sex-marriage-royal-assent-expected-tomorrow/313252/27 "2005-07-21T19:49:20Z")
> [@matt\_mcl](#): > > As it is, I presume that if she actually _did_, they would find a way around it. For example, in Belgium, King Baudouin I refused to sign a law regarding abortion, due to his religious beliefs; the government simply voted to remove him from office, signed the law in its capacity as interim executive power, and then voted to return him to office. That’s curious. The Belgian parliament is allowed to fire the King with a simple vote? I mean, here, if we wanted to remove the Queen from office, we’d probably need some sort of Constitutional amendment, which requires _a lot more_ than a vote in Parliament. Do you know when this happened, and where I could read more about this case? ---
**Author:** ![matt\_mcl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7ab992/32.png) [@matt\_mcl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/matt_mcl)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2005, 8:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cest-fait-canadian-senate-passes-same-sex-marriage-royal-assent-expected-tomorrow/313252/28 "2005-07-21T20:04:34Z")
> [@Sunspace](#): > > Another interesting tidbit is that the monarch, the Gov-Gen, and the Supreme Court justice involved were all female. 🙂 I’m reminded of when Jean Chrétien quipped that the three most powerful people in Canada were all women: Adrienne Clarkson, Beverley McLachlin, and Aline Chrétien. ---
**Author:** ![matt\_mcl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7ab992/32.png) [@matt\_mcl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/matt_mcl)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2005, 8:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cest-fait-canadian-senate-passes-same-sex-marriage-royal-assent-expected-tomorrow/313252/29 "2005-07-21T20:05:42Z")
> [@severus](#): > > That’s curious. The Belgian parliament is allowed to fire the King with a simple vote? I mean, here, if we wanted to remove the Queen from office, we’d probably need some sort of Constitutional amendment, which requires _a lot more_ than a vote in Parliament. Do you know when this happened, and where I could read more about this case? > [@](#): > > He was a very religious man. In 1990, when a law liberalising Belgium’s abortion laws was approved by parliament, he refused to give the Royal Assent–an unprecedented act since the assent has always been considered a mere formality. The government declared him unable to reign on April 4, 1990. The Belgian constitution provides that, if the king is incapable of reigning, the government as a whole will fulfil the role of head of state. All members of the government signed the bill, and the government declared that Baudouin was capable of reigning again the next day, on April 5, 1990. (It is a point of contention as to whether Baudouin abdicated for two days so as not to have to approve the law, while still allowing abortions to be legalised in Belgium, or whether he was actually suspended for the day). [Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baudouin_I_of_Belgium) ---
**Author:** ![Gorsnak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gorsnak/32/7587_2.png) [@Gorsnak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gorsnak)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2005, 8:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cest-fait-canadian-senate-passes-same-sex-marriage-royal-assent-expected-tomorrow/313252/30 "2005-07-21T20:26:24Z")
> [@severus](#): > > That’s curious. The Belgian parliament is allowed to fire the King with a simple vote? I mean, here, if we wanted to remove the Queen from office, we’d probably need some sort of Constitutional amendment, which requires _a lot more_ than a vote in Parliament. Do you know when this happened, and where I could read more about this case? Thing is, the Queen isn’t even involved in Royal Assent in Canada, except indirectly insofar as it’s the Queen who appoints the Governor General on the advice of Parliament, i.e., the PM appoints the GG, and the Queen nods politely. If the Governor General refused Royal Assent (on any bill, not just this one), I would imagine that Rideau Hall would be housing a new tenant so fast it’d make her head spin. ---
**Author:** ![matt\_mcl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7ab992/32.png) [@matt\_mcl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/matt_mcl)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2005, 8:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cest-fait-canadian-senate-passes-same-sex-marriage-royal-assent-expected-tomorrow/313252/31 "2005-07-21T20:31:31Z")
> [@Gorsnak](#): > > Thing is, the Queen isn’t even involved in Royal Assent in Canada, except indirectly insofar as it’s the Queen who appoints the Governor General on the advice of Parliament, i.e., the PM appoints the GG, and the Queen nods politely. If the Governor General refused Royal Assent (on any bill, not just this one), I would imagine that Rideau Hall would be housing a new tenant so fast it’d make her head spin. Yes, and even so, they’d probably just get the Chief Justice (a.k.a deputy governor general) to do it, as they have in this case (albeit for a different reason). ---
**Author:** ![GingerOfTheNorth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/cdc98d/32.png) [@GingerOfTheNorth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GingerOfTheNorth)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2005, 9:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cest-fait-canadian-senate-passes-same-sex-marriage-royal-assent-expected-tomorrow/313252/32 "2005-07-21T21:52:21Z")
Hey Matt? I just wanted to say “thank you” for keeping me up to date on stuff like this. I never hear any Canadian news anywhere, and I don’t have time to search it out and visit cbc.ca daily. I get my news from my sister (occasionally) and you. Fitting, considering what your dad did. ---
**Author:** ![Hypnagogic\_Jerk](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hypnagogic_jerk/32/4252_2.png) [@Hypnagogic\_Jerk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hypnagogic_Jerk)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2005, 12:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cest-fait-canadian-senate-passes-same-sex-marriage-royal-assent-expected-tomorrow/313252/33 "2005-07-22T00:33:18Z")
> [@matt\_mcl](#): > > [Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baudouin_I_of_Belgium) Yes, thanks **matt**. I usually check Wikipedia, but this time I thought that this was probably some unknown thing that would be hard to find. So as you said, it was actually the _government_ of Belgium, and not the assembly, that had the power to declare the King unfit to rule. This seems a bit unusual to me, but given that the King has no actual power anyway, it probably won’t cause any trouble. And yes, given that here, the Queen delegates her powers to the Governor General who is chosen by the prime minister, I guess that a Governor General who refused to give Royal Assent would just be removed. ---
**Author:** ![Bookkeeper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bookkeeper/32/281_2.png) [@Bookkeeper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bookkeeper)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2005, 2:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cest-fait-canadian-senate-passes-same-sex-marriage-royal-assent-expected-tomorrow/313252/34 "2005-07-24T02:26:03Z")
> [@severus](#): > > Yes, thanks **matt**. I usually check Wikipedia, but this time I thought that this was probably some unknown thing that would be hard to find. So as you said, it was actually the _government_ of Belgium, and not the assembly, that had the power to declare the King unfit to rule. This seems a bit unusual to me, but given that the King has no actual power anyway, it probably won’t cause any trouble. > > And yes, given that here, the Queen delegates her powers to the Governor General who is chosen by the prime minister, I guess that a Governor General who refused to give Royal Assent would just be removed. And yet more [Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Assent), with more than you ever wanted to know about Royal Assent. While the Royal Assent Act says that an act doesn’t come into effect until both the Senate and Commons have received written notice of the assent, apparently they don’t actually have to be sitting (I had wondered about that), as the Parliament Website noted in the Commons journal that the Speaker of the Commons had received the notice even thought the Commons are recessed for the summer. The Senate was still sitting that day and the Speaker announced it in the chamber. ---
**Author:** ![NinjaChick](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/71c47a/32.png) [@NinjaChick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NinjaChick)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2005, 5:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cest-fait-canadian-senate-passes-same-sex-marriage-royal-assent-expected-tomorrow/313252/35 "2005-07-24T05:25:10Z")
Go Canada! Once again, our Friendly Northern Neighbors prove a bit more sensible than us… ---
**Author:** ![alphaboi867](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alphaboi867/32/3898_2.png) [@alphaboi867](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/alphaboi867)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2005, 5:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cest-fait-canadian-senate-passes-same-sex-marriage-royal-assent-expected-tomorrow/313252/36 "2005-07-24T05:37:19Z")
> [@severus](#): > > That’s curious. The Belgian parliament is allowed to fire the King with a simple vote? I mean, here, if we wanted to remove the Queen from office, we’d probably need some sort of Constitutional amendment, which requires _a lot more_ than a vote in Parliament. Do you know when this happened, and where I could read more about this case? He wasn’t “fired”. The Belgian cabinet declared him to be temparliy incapcitated so it could act as a council of regency for a day. The same procedure would’ve been used if he fell into a coma. BTW That problem wouldn’t really come up in the UK since the monach doesn’t actualy assent to laws _in person_ (Victoria was the last one to). The Queen appoints 3-5 Lords Commisioner who give assent in _her name_. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cest-fait-canadian-senate-passes-same-sex-marriage-royal-assent-expected-tomorrow/313252.md?page=1)