Talk:Prime Minister of Canada/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Infobox symbol

All the evidence indicates the Arms of Canada are used as a symbol for the Prime Minister's office. The arms appear on the pm.gc.ca Welcome page, at the top of press releases like this one. The PMO uses a black-and-white version as its logo. The PM's official Twitter account also uses them.

Before anyone says "the Arms are used on all GC websites", no they are not. Only pm.gc.ca uses the Arms like this. No other government department uses them. The "Government of Canada signature" which is used at articles like Minister of National Defence (Canada) also does not appear anywhere on pm.gc.ca. TrailBlzr (talk) 14:05, 12 April 2020(UTC)

1. stop editwarring.

2. No one is arguing that the PMO uses the Arms. Irrelevant to the discussion of FUR.

3. The Arms of the Canadian monarch, and therefore of Canada itself, are used as a symbol of Crown (i.e. state) authority and are used by literally thousands of offices. See |the Federal Identity Program.

Above states that "Corporate symbols The Coat of Arms, the flag and the “Canada” wordmark are the corporate symbols of the government...Coat of Arms

The Coat of Arms is used to identify ministers and their offices, parliamentary secretaries, institutions whose heads report directly to Parliament, as well as institutions with quasi-judicial functions. When applied in the context of the Federal Identity Program (FIP)". So, FUR for this article would have far reaching implications. trackratte (talk) 16:41, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

This isn't true. Government departments use a black-and-white version of the arms along with basic text. Only the Prime Minister uses the Arms of Canada on their own and with full colour, as a primary visual identifier of the office. TrailBlzr (talk) 17:52, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

I'm glad you finally decided to engage in this discussion (thank you), but definitely do not accuse me of edit-warring when I am the one who started this discussion and never violated WP:3RR or any other policy. the Government of Canada signature which you have added is not used anywhere at pm.gc.ca, PMO press releases, statements, or any other documents related to the prime minister. the threshold for FUR is not only met, but greatly exceeded for this article. There are no further implication for the use of FUR on this article because no other government position in Canada uses the arms to publicly represent the office the way the Prime Minister of Canada does. I'll remind you that for most of 2010s, it was argued there was no FUR for the arms to be used at Canada, which now seems insane. TrailBlzr (talk) 17:43, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

You'll have to read the link to the FIP. Look at the letter head, the Arms are used for thousands of different offices.

I don't think anyone is arguing against the use of the Arms per se, only that WP doesn't allow it.

Not allowing the Arms in Canada or monarchy has some merit, as the image of the Arms isn't directly the topic of the article. trackratte (talk) 18:10, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Proposed compromise

Instead of using the Coat of Arms on their own or the generic Government text logo, we use the PMO logo used at Office of the Prime Minister (Canada) and pm.gc.ca. It's technically accurate and certainly meets Fair Use. TrailBlzr (talk) 18:06, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Propose it at that image talk. FUR for specific images doesn't really have anything to do with the content or scope of this article. trackratte (talk) 18:13, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

I had a look at most of the others' ministers wiki pages and a standard already exists. For example, look at the image here under file usage to see a list of where this standard image is used, and you can see that the same standard is applied to all of the minister pages. To note, the PM is a minister whose portfolio is the PMO and whose DM is the Chief Clerk. This, in the same way as the Minister of Public Safety has a portfolio of the Department of Public Safety whose DM is the DM of Public Safety, etc.

You can have a look at my last edit of the infobox to see what the common standard across Wikipedia looks like on this specific infobox. trackratte (talk) 11:50, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

In response to your latest change, since you didn't discuss here first or add comments.

The Office of the Prime Minister is likely unsuitable here for the following reasons:

1. I don't see a valid FUR for the image in question, particularly as the last version used on this article was deleted. I think consenses under FUR for use in this article must be established at that image's talk page before it can be used here.

2. The Prime Minister is not part of the PMO, confusing I know, but the PMO is simply the political support apparatus for the PM. This exists for all ministers. For example, a line diagram would look something like this for a generic minister (hopefully this formats alright):

MINISTER
   |
   | --- Office (political support staff)
   |
LINE DEPARTMENT and any other agencies and organizations within their portfolio

So, for the PM we have

MINISTER
   |
   | --- Prime Minister's Office (political support staff)
   |
Privy Council

Or another example for Public Safety

MINISTER
   |
   | --- Minister of Public Safety's Office (political support staff)
   |
Public Safety Canada (and other agencies within portfolio such as CSIS and the RCMP)

As a result, using a Department, Agency, or political office wordmark is not suitable for ministers' infoboxes as they are not actually a part of the Department, Agency, or political office. Instead, they are a minister of the Crown within Cabinet, and are thus part of the Government of Canada. Subsequently, the current standard within all ministers' infoboxes across all of Wikipedia (the status quo) is actually the most suitable and factually accurate solution. Further, the Government of Canada wordmark is "free" for the purposes of Wikipedia, and thus a more suitable alternative exists for the two non-free images proposed (the Arms of Canada, and the Arms of Canada as part of the PMO workmark). trackratte (talk) 16:27, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Caps?

Is there a reason why prime minister isn't capitalized as "Prime Minister"?  Bait30  ^{Talk 2 me pls?} 08:20, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Never mind, I discovered MOS:JOBTITLES.  Bait30  ^{Talk 2 me pls?} 18:00, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Description of role in lead paragraph too royal-centered

I argue that the beginning of the article describes the role of the Prime Minister with undue focus on the very formal, arcane duties of the position, thereby rendering it not as useful to the average reader using the article to gather encyclopedic information. I believe the following should be amended:

• The first sentence of the article should definitely not say that the Prime Minister is the "first minister of the Crown," as this means very little to anybody: not only is the term "first minister" rarely used when describing the Prime Minister (I would argue that few Canadians would actually know what a "first minister" is), the link to "Crown" is for Commonwealth realms in general with little focus on Canada itself.

• Saying that the Prime Minister "advises the Crown on the exercise of executive power and much of the royal prerogative" may be true, but it is not worth mentioning in the very first paragraph. I don't think it even should be mentioned in the lead at all.

In accordance with the lead paragraphs of various other heads of state and heads of government on Wikipedia, here is my idea for a revised first paragraph:

"The prime minister of Canada is the head of government of Canada. They select ministers as part of the Cabinet, of which the Prime Minister is the chair. Under Canada's parliamentary system, the Prime Minister receives a mandate to govern by a majority of the elected representatives of the House of Commons; as such, the Prime Minister is typically the leader of the largest party in the House of Commons, or a coalition of parties that collectively hold a majority of seats in the legislature."

Keithshep (talk) 04:31, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

Much better than the status quo. Instant Comma (talk) 12:12, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

I agree. Better to start with how it works in practice and leave the technical de jure version for later. —Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 16:08, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

I re-wrote most of the the current lead paragraph about a year ago as I thought the previous version didn't really offer much in terms of what the position actually does and it's constitutional context. Through I can definitely see the argument that some parts are too royal centric, there is a fine line between misrepresenting the constitutional role of the PM, and overstating the role of the Crown, which I've tried to balance as best as I can. I think the portion about having the confidence of the House can be largely left intact since that is more technically accurate than the above proposal (legislature is Parliament, not just the House, but the Senate plays no role in confidence matters).

How about this:

The prime minister of Canada (French: premier ministre du Canada) is the head of government for Canada. Under the Westminster system, the government holds office by virtue of their ability to command the confidence of the elected House of Commons, as such prime ministers typically sit as a member of Parliament (MP) and lead the largest party or a coalition in the House of Commons. As first minister, the prime minister selects ministers to form the Cabinet and serves as its chair. Through their advice to the Crown, the Cabinet determines the exercise of much of the executive power and royal prerogative. —WildComet ^talk 23:07, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. You are correct about the term "legislature;" I only added it to avoid writing 'House of Commons' three times in the same sentence. Maybe this would be better:

The prime minister of Canada (French: premier ministre du canada) is the head of government of Canada. Under the Westminster system, the prime minister governs with the support of a majority of the elected members of Parliament (MPs); as such, the prime minister typically leads the largest party in the House of Commons, or a coalition of parties that collectively hold a majority of seats in the House of Commons. As first minister, the prime minister selects ministers to form the Cabinet, and serves as its chair. Officially, the Cabinet advises the monarch as part of the Privy Council on the exercise of executive authority as part of the royal prerogative. Keithshep (talk) 02:00, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

Thanks Keithshep. I've been trying to remove the title of first minister of the Crown for ages seeing how it wasn't specific enough yet Rockcodder kept changing it. Glad to see someone sees my side AtishT20 (talk) 14:44, 30 April 2022 (UTC)

Should the Canadian flag be in the infobox heading?

I took a quick look across several prime minister office pages & they appear to have either their country's flag or their own office flag, in the infobox. I don't know, maybe we should have a centralised discussion, on whether this should be allowed or not. It's up to you all. GoodDay (talk) 21:12, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Should use the arms.....as our page does Office of the Prime Minister (Canada) ....and as per official pages

. *official site

• [
• twitter .. Moxy- 21:25, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

What about the Canadian flag? Do we include it, or exclude the provincial/territorial flags from the 13 other infoboxes? GoodDay (talk) 21:29, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

The prime minister's office has coopted the arms, but they do not represent the position or the occupant. They are the Arms of Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, or the Arms of Canada. Placing the arms in the infobox here, as if they are a symbol of the Office of the Prime Minister, will contradict what's said in other articles about the arms being those of the monarch. The arms are used by other institutions to show from where they derive their authority; but that doesn't mean they are the arms of any of those institutions.

The flag has even less to do with the position of prime minister. It is the national flag, not the PM's flag.

Why not just use File:Office of the Prime Minister.svg (which is the actual logo of the Office of the Prime Minister; it incorporates the coat of arms, but is not itself the coat of arms)? --₪ MIESIANIACAL 21:58, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Should we delete the flags from the 13 premiers infoboxes? GoodDay (talk) 22:09, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

What?....don't use the official logo? The arms is the official emblem of the Government of Canada that happens to be under a monarchy. Pls read over me .Clearly the office of the prime minister's logo has this.....as do many others... including rank and file officers in our forces. Though this would be a no-brainer. Moxy- 22:11, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

This isn't the article Government of Canada; it's the article on the prime minister and the prime minister is not the government. And I already explained some institutions use the arms as a symbol of from where those institutions derive their authority; hence, they're on officers' uniforms in the CAF and above the bench in the Supreme Court. That does not make them the coat of arms of the Canadian military or the coat of arms of the Supreme Court.

Again, why not use File:Office of the Prime Minister.svg? That's the official logo (a coat of arms is not a logo) of the PMO. It more closely represents this position than the sovereign's coat of arms. --₪ MIESIANIACAL 22:19, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

I have no problem using the official logo...just your thinking on this is a bit off... it is the official coat of arms of the Canadian monarch, and thus also of Canada. Its used by Cabinet ministers, Members of Parliament and Senators, and the federal judiciary and prominently by our Head of government. Moxy- 22:38, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

I am aware of how the arms are used by the PMO and the PM himself; that usage isn't right. It's one thing to use the arms as a way to say "my authority stems from the Crown", and it's something else entirely to use the arms as if they're your own and you are the source of authority. The way PMs use the arms falls in with the other ways of presidentializing of the office, as discussed in this article. Anyway, there's a reason the UK government has its own coat of arms, derived from the British royal arms, as it is. The Canadian Heraldic Authority should get working on something similar to clear up all this confusion.

Are we all agreed on the flag? (I checked to see if there's a prime minister's flag. There is not.) --₪ MIESIANIACAL 22:48, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

So they're stealing a copyrighted symbol? very unlikely ...would need a sources for a claim of that nature. It's an official symbol of Canada..... that happens to be a monarchy..... thus why it's packed with royal symbols and other ones. Moxy- 23:03, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

I never suggested anyone is stealing a copyrighted symbol. It is an official symbol of Canada. The PM is not Canada. The Crown/Queen is Canada. The PM derives his authority to govern from the Crown-in-Council; by advising the Crown on the|use of executive power. That doesn't mean he is the Crown and therefore can use its symbols to represent him. He can only use the arms in the way the military and courts use them. Or, he should. Anyway, I think this is an academic discussion now...? --₪ MIESIANIACAL 23:40, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

So we don't really agree on its meaning.....but we agree it is used by his office rightly or wrongly ....correct? Justin ever ask for a Heraldic mark of the prime minister of Canada like his father?Moxy- 23:56, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

I guess we agree the arms are sometimes used by the PM. But, not always. In your cited examples above, one uses the arms alone, the other uses the Government of Canada logo that happens to include the arms, just like the logo for the PMO, which, I'm not sure why nobody's commenting on, given it is the actual logo for the office.

Not that it would be appropriate to use someone's personal coat of arms here, but wouldn't Justin have inherited his father's arms? --₪ MIESIANIACAL 14:24, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

I've only noticed 'now', that the Canadian flag & other symbols, have been deleted from some of the other federal government office infoboxes. GoodDay (talk) 23:51, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

That is false; the Canadian flag and other symbols have not been deleted from some of the other federal goverment office infoboxes. The Government of Canada logo was removed. Please try to be accurate. But, if you want to go and upload all the logos for the various departments (ie the Department of National Defence's, the Department of Finance's, the Department of Fisheries and Oceans', etc.) do go right ahead. --₪ MIESIANIACAL 14:33, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

I checked further into the office pages of the other Commonwealth realms' prime ministers. Indeed, some of them aren't even pages, but rather re-directs to their respective "List" pages. GoodDay (talk) 23:17, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

PS: FWIW, we do show the provincial/territorial flags & coat of arms, in the infoboxes of the provincial/territorial premiers' office pages. GoodDay (talk) 21:19, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

The Prime Minister is not a president and doesn't represent the state. Shouldn't have state emblems in the infobox. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 13:26, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Exactly. --₪ MIESIANIACAL 14:25, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Well, if we do keep'em out? It will be out of sync with the prime ministers & other gov't leaders infoboxes of other countries (examples:Prime Minister of Australia, Prime Minister of New Zealand, Prime Minister of Israel etc), not to mention putting it out of sync with Canada's own infoboxes on the Provincial & Territorial premiers' pages. GoodDay (talk) 14:53, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

WP:OTHERCONTENT --₪ MIESIANIACAL 03:49, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Outside the Canadian political gov't offices? perhaps. Within the Canadian political offices pages? inconsistency would be sloppy. GoodDay (talk) 03:55, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

The point obviously is that use of a flag and arms on other articles doesn't justify using the same here. --₪ MIESIANIACAL 04:00, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

In the coming hours, I'll be deleting the flag & arms from the rest of the federal office pages & all the provincial/territorial office pages. As for the governor general, the lieutenant governors & commissioners? I'll leave that up for others to decide. GoodDay (talk) 04:06, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Just a note about using the PMO logo, it was discussed further up in the talk page and decided against inclusion. Do we want to re-add it? —WildComet ^talk 03:36, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

As I put it in there, I guess I'm somewhat compelled to comment: I'm not bothered if it's in or out. I didn't see the earlier discussion and i thought the PMO logo would make those who insist on there being some logo or flag in the infobox at least somewhat happy. --₪ MIESIANIACAL 04:02, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Prime ministers not elected to that position

The sentence in the main body is incorrect: "Trudeau was subsequently re-elected following the 2019 and 2021 elections with a minority of seats." It should read "The Liberal Party was subsequently re-elected following the 2019 and 2021 elections with a minority of seats." Steveedee (talk) 20:24, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Yes, I corrected that, but it was reverted. --₪ MIESIANIACAL 22:18, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

I've tweaked it to read "...Trudeau's Liberals...". The Canadian prime minister is appointed, rather then elected. GoodDay (talk) 23:49, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

"President of Canada" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect President of Canada has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 March 20 § President of Canada until a consensus is reached. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 18:44, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

Excessive redirect notes

Why has the redirect notes section grown to include 6 links, some with no relevance to the position of Prime Minister? Is it truly necessary to include "Canada does not have a president; the head of state is the King of Canada, represented by the Governor General of Canada. For the debate around presidential government for Canada, see Debate on the monarchy in Canada." This has nothing to do with the article. —WildComet ^talk 22:24, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

I'm not going to argue for or against the note--at this aparticular moment, anyway. But, the discussion around that note is linked to in the section above. (To be honest, I didn't see it until today, myself.)--₪ MIESIANIACAL 23:43, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

I’m with you. I thought it should just be deleted because it’s actively misleading, but the RfC said, “Let’s pretend a non-existent office exists and should be directed somewhere!” Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 00:27, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

The consequence, it seems, of a short-sighted decision to delete the disabmibguation page akin to First Lady of Canada. --₪ MIESIANIACAL 02:21, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

Completely agree. The hatenotes are way too excessive. The reference to president should be completely removed. (In fact, I would go as far as to recommended the 'president of Canada' redirect be deleted. That office does not exist, so if someone looks for it they should not find it). I can really only see the premier of Canada hatnote being useful, due to the possible confusion with provincial premiers. – Handoto (talk) 16:07, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

Well, the redirect can't be deleted, in light of the RfC. However, I see no need to have a hatnote referring to a non-existent office, or using it to point to a completely different article, such as republicanism in Canada. Usually, the only notice of a redirect is that little "redirect from XXX", if that's how the person has ended up on that page. That should be sufficient. (And that matches the way the redirect "Prime Minister of the United States" shows up on the President of the US page; it's only on the page if that's how you got there. That redirect was used in the RfC as a counter-example for keeping this redirect.) I think delete the second hatnote entirely. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 17:09, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

Seeing as no one is actually sure why they are needed, I'm going to go ahead and remove the note for president and the republican/monarchy debate. —WildComet ^talk 17:54, 4 April 2023 (UTC)