Canada's commemorative issues policy

[<k>]

Here I quote our member quaziright in another topic:

Canada stopped issuing circulation 25c commemorative coins a couple years ago. Recently its mostly twoonies, though loonies have been making a comeback. This year, there are 3 themes, but with the coloured Coins, it actually means 7 distinct coins. I'm still unsure about one of the 10c blue nose coins.

[<k>]

Canada was the first major country to adopt an Isle of Man approach to commemoratives, producing more coin issues in a year than the annual stamp issues of many countries. Eventually, the Royal Mint, RAM and others were obliged to compete, and that's when the rot set in, in my opinion. 

What are the members' views on Canada's commemorative issues policy, past and present?

[Figleaf]

I don't share that analysis. There is no mechanism that explains why, if Canada has a pseudo-coin diarrhoea, the UK must have one too.

There is a single explanation for both diarrhoeas, though. The cause is a political rightist view on government services, combined with a trend for lower demand for coins. Until 2008, it was politically fashionable to want a small government, based on the conviction that governments would do anything and everything wrong. This stupefyingly simplistic approach came about in the US, where it was a weapon of Republicans, using a commercialised approach to vital government services that led to political stalemate because it effectively split the country, but it had a global influence nevertheless. Meanwhile, any change to circulating coins became impossible.

Owing to the right's view, mints (including the UK mint) were told to be "self-sufficient". This is a fatal misunderstanding of the fact that markets cannot provide all goods efficiently, because social value is always counted as worth $0 in financial accounting. Coupled with the diminishing demand for circulating coins, this meant that mints were saddled with additional cost (large surplus stocks of coins, faster write-down of equipment) while government subsidies for circulation coins were dwindling for dogmatic reasons. That left only sales of non-circulating items as a way to continue to exist. Collectors were abandoned as that "market" was too small to finance circulation issues.

In the UK, the situation worsened in a less dramatic way, as its political system was less binary, but it is nevertheless leading to the same situation.

The irony of the situation is that the "small government" dogma started to change in 2008, when the Lehman crisis threatened to bring the the global financial system as a consequence of far-reaching de-regularisation, governments needed to plow large amounts of tax-payers cash to undo the damage of the small government dogma. Now, as a consequence of COVID, we are faced with another kick in the behind. As an example, remember the Trump administration's decision in 2018 to dismantle a National Security Council directorate at the White House charged with preparing for when, not if, another pandemic would hit the nation. The era of "small government" is over. We are now considering non-financial values, from health to being able to let children play in the street and from having time for your family to being accepted as you are. Markets cannot provide that. Governments can, to a large extent.

As usual, those guilty of creating and maintaining the problem are not foreigners, but voters.

Peter

[<k>]

There is no mechanism that explains why, if Canada has a pseudo-coin diarrhoea, the UK must have one too.

Competition. The Royal Mint (UK) is expected to turn a profit. It saw the Canadian example and took note. But that is a result of the policies that you have explained in your post.

[Figleaf]

There is no competition for providing circulation coins. Both mints have a monopoly. The competition for fluff is quite limited. Most Canadian collectors will collect Canadian coins as most UK collectors will collect UK coins. The only overlap is provided by collectors of commonwealth and coins of all countries, the most likely to exclude non-circulating stuff. The get-rich-quickly crowd reacts on marketing and the marketing of both mints is overwhelmingly national.

Peter

[<k>]

In 1980 I knew a Berliner who collected world commemorative issues, Canadian collector dollars among them. Manx crowns were very popular with German collectors in the 1980s.

Here on the forum, we have a Russian member who is very interested in the commercial collector coins of the 'British outposts' board. Our member Big_M also collects world commemorative issues, and in particular African ones. In a globalised world, this is the norm. And in such a world, the policies of one mint influence other mints.

[redlock]

What are the members' views on Canada's commemorative issues policy, past and present?

NCLT: total overkill because the RCM is supposed to make profit.

Circulation commemoratives: Well, there have been some years when there were clearly a bit too many (in my eyes). But there have also been years when the RCM was ''frugal.''

Doing Loonies and Twoonies as cc, well, there is more space on the coins than on the Quarters. This makes it a bit easier for designers.
Having said that it's very interesting that the RCM has decided to give the 10c the cc treatment. And yes, there will be three this year (2021):
10¢ Bluenose Coloured, Artist: Yves Bérubé (reverse)
10¢ Bluenose Non-Coloured, Artist: Yves Bérubé (reverse)
10¢ Bluenose Double-Dated, Artist: Emanuel Hahn (reverse)