After all she has done for Canada, we owe the Queen our oath 그래도 그녀(여왕)는 캐나다를 위해 많은일을 했기에, 여왕에 대한 충성맹세는 지켜져야 한다. 많은 캐나다인들을 포함하여, 국민이 선출한 국회의원, 국민들이 선출하지 않은 상원의원들 까지도 여왕이 캐나다의 수반으로 존중되는 의식은 이제 그 종막을 고해야 한다고, 치열한 논쟁을 벌이고 있는 가운데, Segal 상원의원이 절규비슷한 내용으로 여왕의 존엄만은, 여왕에 대한 충성맹세만은 지켜져야 한다고 상원( Red Chamber)에서 행한 내용에 대한 기사 내용입니다. ARTHUR MILNES Special to Globe and Mail Update May 19, 2008 at 7:19 PM EDT Notwithstanding all the chipping away at the monarchy we Canadians have done in recent years, one suspects the Queen would now admit that at least one Canadian politician is no fair-weather friend. Senator Hugh Segal proved this in a recent speech in the Red Chamber that has garnered little attention. Mr. Segal, who played a key role as an adviser to Ontario premier William Davis during the constitutional talks of 1981-82, has now stood and called for the monarchy to be defended at all cost. While other politicians have feared to even utter the words “notwithstanding clause,” Mr. Segal's belief in the monarchy is so firm, he says he'd even touch this third rail to defend his Queen. “The core symbols of our citizenship, the core institutions of our society, and the values they reflect and defend are not just another list of negotiable preferences to be chopped up in court challenges,” he thundered in a recent speech. “One part of the Constitution, the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, should not be used to crush another part of the Constitution – that of the Crown – as some might wish to do by using the Charter … before the courts. Allegiance to the Crown, through loyalty to the Queen, is an integral part of the present citizenship oath.” His new bill would grant the current oath – whereby new citizens swear allegiance to the Queen – the protection of the notwithstanding clause. That oath is under attack by many in Canada who believe new Canadians should not swear fealty to the Queen. And rather than be ashamed of his work in 1981-82 on the repatriation of the Constitution, Mr. Segal's speech showed his pride in what he was a part of so many years ago. It also proves he knows a thing or two about Canada's rich parliamentary heritage. “As a result of this experience, I know there would be no Charter of Rights and Freedoms without the notwithstanding clause,” Mr. Segal said. “I know that the clause was put in to protect parliamentary sovereignty and not totally Americanize and judicialize our Constitution, as a charter without that specific clause would clearly have done.” A proud and traditional Red Tory – like Sir John A. Macdonald of Kingston before – Mr. Segal deserves praise for his political bravery. Even if you disagree with the monarchy in Canada, and many do, Mr. Segal has at least offered a fitting thanks to a Queen and institution we've been nickel-and-diming for years. His bill comes after the Harper government, to all intents and appearances at least, bureaucratically seems to have disinvited the Queen to celebrations marking the 400th anniversary of Quebec. Before that, it was the City of Ottawa, citing budget constraints, announcing that it wanted to return (a decision now reversed) the royal swans that the Queen had given with all good and gracious intentions back in 1967 as a way for our nation's capital to mark Canada's 100th birthday. And like the monarchy or not, even basic decency forces one to acknowledge that a former deputy prime minister, an Ottawa man named John Manley whom I normally respect, was rude when he took it upon himself to badmouth the monarchy on the eve of a visit by the Queen back in 2002. It was then, just before the Queen was to tour Canada to mark 50 years on the throne, that Mr. Manley said the Queen should be replaced at the end of her reign and republicanism should prevail. When she's dead is what he meant. Not the way I treat my guests. I think it's time the Queen got rid of us, not the other way around, when you consider how Canadians have treated this proud woman and institution. For more than 50 years she has served Canada in any way we have asked, visiting places most of us who live here couldn't find in our vast expanse if an oversized map were placed before our eyes. And if she should come for one last visit here as the Queen of Canada, you can be assured that as her flight gets set to leave she'll have a fitting and respectful farewell – even if it's just Mr. Segal and me and a few other Kingstonians on the tarmac. Our Queen has served us well. We will salute both her and her service to us that day. It will be at that moment, I sadly predict, that Canadians will realize what we have collectively lost. Part of Canada's history will depart forever with Her Majesty on that final flight home to Britain. And Canada, notwithstanding, will never be the same.