Bank of Canada cancels $200 banknote idea

News: Registration is free here at the CPMF!

This is a tough topic to cover in a paragraph or two: but I can think of two very important (and often ignored) figures in Canadian history who could  be placed on such a high denominational bill.  I have just finished doing a little research about the union of Upper and Lower Canadas.  Its surprising how Canadians so conveniently forget why we're indeed an independent nation, and not annexed to the US or just a British colony.  Robert Baldwin and Pierre LaFontaine both have statues of their likeness outside the parliament buildings in Ottawa.  Other than that, a few brief footnotes in history books, they're mostly ignored today.

After the hard faught WAR of 1812 (against US aggression), the people of both provinces felt somewhat indebted to the British soldiers who faught/died to win the war.  (We also forget Tecumseh, and other Iroquois leaders who came to the British defense-- mostly out of a last ditch effort to stop US settler expansion/invasion!  And although many Canadians (including the Baldwins) fought in this war, it wasn't until well into it, after General Brock's successes that they joined).  Nevertheless, Britain poured a lot of money and resources into the provinces, and the governors, and subsequent Lt. Governors never let the elected provincial assemblies forget that.  In short, this was a very conservative time, with only very pro-British members of parliament.  Any time the challengers (or Reform party as it was known back then) came into power, the governor, his hand picked senate, and the family compact would veto bills that would propose democratic reforms.  To be a "reformer" was considered in a bad light (often disdainfully referred to as "Republican" or democrat), esp after the failed Rebellion of 1837 (led by the radical reformer William Lyon Mackenzie).  

So while the predecessors of Robert Baldwin and Pierre LaFontaine fought (through proposed legislation) for "responsible government" (or self-government) it was very unpopular to the British authorities (family compact, conservative elements) at the time, and it wasn't until these two gentleman united in spirit, that the whole movement (and a couple of steady governments) actually came into being.  After Lord Durham's report on the problems facing the 2 provinces, and the "union of the Canadas" came about in 1840, subsequent governors (like Elgin) actually assented to the many proposals and bills brought forth by the elected assemblies led by these two men (as solicitors/attorney generals).  Baldwin got the municipal acts put into place, and the two men accomplished enormous institutional/infrastructural changes in order to show the authorities that the provincial politicians could indeed govern themselves.  By teaming up with LaFontaine, Baldwin also showed the British that French Canadians had a voice in Canadian politics, and would be  heard come hell or high water.  While these men and their assistants (ie: Frances Hinks the financial genius) were demonstrating that Canadians could indeed be accountable, competent, and qualified leaders, the Tories were taking note, and adopting similar platforms (seeing how popular this republican/democratic movement was amongst the citizens).  Both LaFontaine and Baldwin are considered the "fathers of confederation" in that they handed the torches to the Tory government headed by MacDonald to give birth to the new nation.

Having a government solely focussed on the needs of the people (rather than on the needs of Britain- from across the Atlantic) seems to be so logical now that its hard to fathom there was a time that was any different.  Pre-confederation Canada became an independent nation with barely a drop of blood spilled (if we don't count the Rebellion of 1837).  However, it was a complex process with a wild and rough frontiere as the context. The population consisted of almost 2/3 Loyalist farmers who moved from the US when Robert's father (William) & grandfather (John Robert) emigrated from Ireland in 1799.  A great deal of time was spent clearing the land, working, and working some more, so its no wonder that resentments to arbitrary/aristocratic rule arose, and it wasn't until the middle 19th century that the people considered themselves Canadian citizens independent (and yet peacefully co-existing) with the super-powers of the United States and Great Britain.

If there were 2 founders of this nation to grace a new note, I'd vote for them.

It’s possible, but necessary?
The Woodstock Sentinel-Review

Kristi Setterington
Thursday August 24, 2006

The people have voiced their opinion and for once, they’ve been heard.

Earlier this week, the Bank of Canada withdrew its proposal to introduce a $200 banknote, after a survey of retailers showed strong opposition.

Really, why do we need a $200 bank note? It isn’t like many of us actually carry cash anymore. Considering how much shoppers rely on their debit and credit cards, it doesn’t seem realistic to introduce any new money at this time.

According to the Interac Association, there were 3.1 billion Interac direct payment transactions in Canada in 2005. The company also stated 86 per cent of Canadians have a banking card and Interac direct payment was used by 46 per cent of Canadians, compared to 28 per cent who used cash.
During a recent telephone survey, retailers expressed concern that accepting a $200 banknote may lead to more counterfeiting. Another concern was that a customer might clean out all the change in the till after a single transaction. All valid points.

Even if you could find a sure proof way of preventing counterfeit bills and if you could ensure that all your change wouldn’t be wiped out, there is still the fact many businesses today don’t even accept $50 or $100 banknotes. It’s probably safe to assume receiving a $200 banknote would be out of the question.

Given the number of debit and credit cards, it’s a real possibility money could one day become obsolete. According to Industry Canada, Canadians use their debit cards millions of times a day. Debit and credit cards are accepted almost everywhere, for almost any purchase, so why do we need to carry around money any more?

On its website, the Interac Association revealed 52 per cent of respondents to a survey it conducted said they prefer to use Interac direct payment at grocery stores, while 45 per cent said they use cards at drugstores and 33 per cent use them at liquor/beer/wine stores.

In fact thanks to automated bank machines, located at more than 51,000 locations throughout Canada, should you ever encounter a moment where you do need cold, hard cash, money is far more accessible than ever before. There is no reason to carry a wallet full of 50s. You can simply slip into your favourite gas station, convenience store, hospital or even your local hockey rink and use an ABM to get any amount of money you need at that moment.

Perhaps when it comes to the topic of money, we should begin a campaign to convince banks to allow for smaller withdrawal amounts from ABMs.

http://www.woodstocksentinelreview.com/story.php?id=250231

It’s possible, but necessary?
The Woodstock Sentinel-Review
In fact thanks to automated bank machines, located at more than 51,000 locations throughout Canada, should you ever encounter a moment where you do need cold, hard cash, money is far more accessible than ever before. There is no reason to carry a wallet full of 50s. You can simply slip into your favourite gas station, convenience store, hospital or even your local hockey rink and use an ABM to get any amount of money you need at that moment.

Wow, I use my debit card for one thing only:  Get spendable cash from an ATM.  I do use credit cards often, but I have not used my debit card to make a purchase in more then four years!

Reasons I prefer cash transactions over debit:

1) universally accepted (try using a debit card at a garage sale)
2) more convenient
3) quicker transaction at the cash register
4) more secure
5) If the Interac system goes down, I get to go to the front of the line because everyone in front of me was going to pay with debit and had no cash (this has happened more than once!)
6) You get to look for radar notes and other specialties in your change
7) You get to play

www.whereswilly.com[/list]

Death to debit!

 8-)

One major point missed in the list above: TRANSACTION FEES

Many retailers charge a fee to use their Interac system.  Why not pay them with cash?  It's so much faster, (I *hate* waiting in line for people who mess up their pin several times!), and there are no transaction fees!

I say bring on a $200 note.  :-)

Cash is a no-brainer!

koremore

Koremore I am with you 110% I hate waiting in lines where people have to sign or enter pin numbers ahhh it drives me crazy I say the $200 should have come out years ago. Arthur