'Why," the puzzled American tourist asked, " is the band playing My Country, 'Tis of Thee?"

"It's God Save The Queen," I replied.

"The Queen of England?" he said.

"No, the Queen of Canada."

This is a sore point for us monarchists, the notion that Her Majesty is not ours, too. Every time some ignoramus -- particularly one of the airheads in the Canadian media -- calls her the Queen of England, our muttonchops quiver in indignation and our single malt slops all over the breakfast table. For the record, the official title of our head of state is Elizabeth the Second, by the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom, Canada and Her other Realms and Territories Queen, Defender of the Faith, Wearer of Big Hats and Keeper of the Corgis. Or something like that.

There is, as the big crowds that greeted Charles and Camilla in Victoria will attest, something to be said for having a non-political figurehead, one who doesn't, say, invade Iraq by mistake. I had to remind our American visitor that he elected George W. Bush. Twice. The first time was bad luck, the second sheer sloppiness.

Ah, but Americans aren't alone in misunderstanding the concept of the modern monarchy. Canadians' interest in, and knowledge of, their Royal Family is gradually fading -- which is why I thought a brief question-and-answer primer might be helpful:

Q. What is the purpose of the monarchy in Canada?

A. The Canadian monarchy exists primarily to infuriate those who oppose it.

Q. Who are these opponents?

A. Roundheads. Wretched, grim-lipped, dour fun-suckers, the same people who want to ban street hockey, Teletubbies, Harry Potter and any mention of Christmas outside the privacy of your home. They belong to groups with names like Citizens for a Canadian Republic or the Humourless Bastards Who Should Devote This Kind of Energy to Real Problems. Their hobbies include worshipping Stalin and burning books of poetry.

Q. Do Canadians agree with these republicans?

A. Alas, many do. A recent poll conducted for Canwest Global showed 49 per cent of Canadians want to trade our constitutional monarchy for a republic. Sixty per cent said the royals are "simply celebrities and nothing more."

Q. Is this true?

A. No. There is much about the monarchy to admire. Not the People magazine, soap-opera version of the Royal Family, but the values they represent:

honour, service, integrity, religious discrimination (OK, let's forget that one) and the wearing of

Wellington boots. Charles himself is pretty much a heretical hippie

on issues like the environment, sustainability and organic farming; think David Suzuki with polo ponies and better table manners.

Q. Is a foreign-based monarchy not an illogical anachronism?

A. All monarchies are illogical anachronisms. What's your point?

Q. Um.....

A. Suck it up princess, er, comrade. It's not like they have real power. (See Bush, George W.) And as Robertson Davies said, "The Crown is the consecrated spirit of Canada."

Q. What does that mean?

A. I haven't got a clue.

Q. Is it true that in an ultimately successful attempt to mortify his new wife, Jack Knox once chased the Prince of Wales's car through London's Hyde Park, waving a notebook and yelling "Mr. Prince! Mr. Prince!"

A. Yes. Sorry, dear.

Q. During the Second World War, Hatley Castle was considered as a home for the Royal Family. What would it have been like had the house of Windsor moved to the West Shore?

A. We would have had the Duke of Edinburgh racing four-in-hand carriages in hit-to-pass events at Western Speedway, Princess Anne doing the barrel races at the Luxton Rodeo. Princes Harry and William would have given Belmont Secondary an awesome polo team. Charles would have grown a mullet.

Q. Why is Charles known as the Prince of Wales?

A. King of Pop was taken.

Q.How long will we sing God Save The Queen?

A. Until the Prince of Wales succeeds her, when the anthem will become the theme to Charles in Charge. Unless the wretched republicans win out, in which case the music will die altogether.