MEMBERS of the Quebec parliament have sparked a conversation in Canada after refusing to swear allegiance to King Charles III.
Paul St-Pierre Plamondon, who leads the pro-independence Parti Québécois, said the oath of fealty to the King was a “straitjacket that condemns each elected representative of the people of Quebec to hypocrisy”.
Speaking in French, he went on: "A straitjacket that forces democrats of all parties to take an oath they do not believe in and therefore to perjure themselves, to sully the value of their word and to do that in the first act they are called on to take as representatives of citizens."
READ MORE: Canada's experience with Quebec may offer lessons to the UK
St-Pierre Plamondon did take a separate oath to the people of Quebec. However, Members of the National Assembly (MNAs) who do not swear their oath to the monarchy are not allowed to take their seat in parliament.
On Monday, a crowd gathered outside the parliamentary building in Quebec City to show support for the three MNAs under the Parti Québécois banner, as well as the 11 under the Québec solidaire banner, who refused to swear to the King.
Saltires were visible in the crowd as St-Pierre Plamondon (below, often known by his initials of PSPP) spoke to the event organised by Rassemblement pour un Pays Souverain.
Benoit Roy, the group’s president, said he did not think the Quebec government would have any choice but to let the MNAs who chose not to take the oath of allegiance to King Charles III take their seat at parliament.
Roy said there was “an exceptional opportunity … offered to Quebec parliamentarians to find a way to develop and evolve our parliamentary traditions”.
“This institutional anachronism has existed for too long. It is time to put an end to it,” he added.
The 2022 Quebec elections were held on October 3. Commentators in Canada have questioned whether the refusal to swear an oath to the King is a matter of principle or of theatrics for PSPP, whose party suffered very weak results in that election.
Whether MNAs who do not swear to the King can legally sit is a matter of constitutional debate. CTV News Montreal reported that PSPP believes a motion passed by parliament would allow his members to sit, a view supported by some constitutional scholars.
However, others think that a rule change would involve the federal government – which along with other devolved legislatures also requires an oath to be sworn to the British monarch.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel