nicky10013 Posted July 8, 2010 Report Posted July 8, 2010 http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/david-johnston-to-be-named-canadas-next-governor-general/article1632368/ Hopefully he turns out to be a good GG. Quote
Uncle 3 dogs Posted July 8, 2010 Report Posted July 8, 2010 http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/david-johnston-to-be-named-canadas-next-governor-general/article1632368/ Hopefully he turns out to be a good GG. another academic in Ottawa. Oh goody <sarcasm off> Quote
Bonam Posted July 8, 2010 Report Posted July 8, 2010 I dunno much about him. Anyone have any thoughts? Quote
Jack Weber Posted July 8, 2010 Report Posted July 8, 2010 This is a completely different Dave Johnston from the other Dave Johnston I thought it might have been... His non-partisian nature is probably a plus... What might happen at the next Harper perogie? Quote The beatings will continue until morale improves!!!
Remiel Posted July 8, 2010 Report Posted July 8, 2010 I do not know what his background is really like outside of his credentials, but as credentials go, now is certainly a good time to have someone versed in constitutional law to be the Governor General. Such an academic is exactly what is required right now. An expert to deal in matters requiring expertise. Quote
geoffrey Posted July 8, 2010 Report Posted July 8, 2010 I do not know what his background is really like outside of his credentials, but as credentials go, now is certainly a good time to have someone versed in constitutional law to be the Governor General. Such an academic is exactly what is required right now. An expert to deal in matters requiring expertise. 100% agreed. Though I maintain we'd be better off without a GG! Quote RealRisk.ca - (Latest Post: Prosecutors have no "Skin in the Game") --
August1991 Posted July 8, 2010 Report Posted July 8, 2010 100% agreed.Though I maintain we'd be better off without a GG! The country needs a Head of State. I just don't think a foreign head of state should be involved in the selection process....I liked this quote from CTV: The committee ruled out sports, entertainment and arts figures, deciding that the next governor general should be well-versed in constitutional matters and parliamentary procedure, in case Canada finds itself in an extended period of minority governments. IMV, this is a good choice. University president jobs are largely ceremonial, shaking hands, kissing babies and so on. Canada hasn't had such a plain vanilla GG since, well, I dunno. Quote
Smallc Posted July 8, 2010 Report Posted July 8, 2010 100% agreed. Though I maintain we'd be better off without a GG! I'm not sure how we'd be better off without one.....but ok. Quote
Moonbox Posted July 8, 2010 Report Posted July 8, 2010 It's a pointless and redundant position. It's the cushiest and most ceremonial job you could have in Canada and hardly ever does anything of consequence. Perhaps we might not be hugely better off without it, but we'd save money and be no worse off. Quote "A man is no more entitled to an opinion for which he cannot account than he is for a pint of beer for which he cannot pay" - Anonymous
g_bambino Posted July 8, 2010 Report Posted July 8, 2010 The country needs a Head of State. I just don't think a foreign head of state should be involved in the selection process.... You must be glad we don't have a foreign head of state involved, then. Quote
g_bambino Posted July 8, 2010 Report Posted July 8, 2010 It's a pointless and redundant position. Uh huh... So, as you clearly think yourself to be quite educated on this matter, please edify us plebs on why the most pointless and redundant position in the country is one of the hardest to change or remove? I await enlightenment... Quote
eyeball Posted July 8, 2010 Report Posted July 8, 2010 (edited) Uh huh... So, as you clearly think yourself to be quite educated on this matter, please edify us plebs on why the most pointless and redundant position in the country is one of the hardest to change or remove? I await enlightenment... The position symbolically concretizes the official amber in which everything else remains permanently stuck and immovably unchanging...forever and ever and ever. Edited July 8, 2010 by eyeball Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
g_bambino Posted July 8, 2010 Report Posted July 8, 2010 The position symbolically concretizes the official amber in which everything else remains permanently stuck and immovably unchanging...forever and ever and ever. In other words, you can't answer the question. Quote
Leafless Posted July 8, 2010 Report Posted July 8, 2010 Uh huh... So, as you clearly think yourself to be quite educated on this matter, please edify us plebs on why the most pointless and redundant position in the country is one of the hardest to change or remove? I await enlightenment... Simply because arrogant power hungry pm's do not want any change. Quote
ToadBrother Posted July 8, 2010 Report Posted July 8, 2010 (edited) This is a completely different Dave Johnston from the other Dave Johnston I thought it might have been... His non-partisian nature is probably a plus... What might happen at the next Harper perogie? Same thing as the last one. The GG would be obliged to act on the advice of Her Majesty's Government. Still, he's not a bad choice, a legal scholar of some note. Edited July 8, 2010 by ToadBrother Quote
ToadBrother Posted July 8, 2010 Report Posted July 8, 2010 The position symbolically concretizes the official amber in which everything else remains permanently stuck and immovably unchanging...forever and ever and ever. Last time I checked, Canada had undergone some rather profound constitutional changes in the last thirty years. Quote
g_bambino Posted July 8, 2010 Report Posted July 8, 2010 Simply because arrogant power hungry pm's do not want any change. Seeing as prime ministers don't write the constitution all by themselves, that can't be the answer. Quote
eyeball Posted July 8, 2010 Report Posted July 8, 2010 (edited) In other words, you can't answer the question. Sure I can, it's because a governor general predates and precedes Canada's existence. It's the chicken to our egg. Petrified egg I might add. Edited July 8, 2010 by eyeball Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
eyeball Posted July 8, 2010 Report Posted July 8, 2010 Last time I checked, Canada had undergone some rather profound constitutional changes in the last thirty years. ...snore... Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
g_bambino Posted July 8, 2010 Report Posted July 8, 2010 It's because a governor general predates and precedes Canada's existence. And yet, the clause basicly cementing the Crown and its offices in Canada wasn't enacted until 1982. So, try again. Quote
Topaz Posted July 8, 2010 Report Posted July 8, 2010 Since Canadians are not well informed about him, we'll just have to wait and see what happens if Harper tried to prorogue again. Harper must feel he has a friend in the GG or he would never selected him. One thing Johnson didn't do, was to try to find where the money went from the Airbus scam, some think it would have embarrassed the Tory party if he had. I wonder how many were asked and said no the Harper? Quote
William Ashley Posted July 8, 2010 Report Posted July 8, 2010 (edited) I dunno much about him. Anyone have any thoughts? I'm a UW student technically, and he was president of UW since my late teen years. I have communicated with him on an issue. I think he will be fairly "openly" non interventionist in his duties, exercising clear seperation of powers, and respecting various institutions. He has acted as an "arbitrator" for many years, and so in event of there being some type of issue, he has experience consolidating issues, and acting as a show piece. He is aged and experienced, has an active mindset, and has a very well rounded background. Oh and he is a federalist - so no free quebec for the next five years. Edited July 8, 2010 by William Ashley Quote I was here.
eyeball Posted July 8, 2010 Report Posted July 8, 2010 And yet, the clause basicly cementing the Crown and its offices in Canada wasn't enacted until 1982. So, try again. I know what you're saying. But even you seem to realize the idea that things are or should be cemented in place takes precedence. Virtually guaranteeing this by requiring the unanimous consent of every senior government in the land seems more like an underscore than anything else. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
Moonbox Posted July 8, 2010 Report Posted July 8, 2010 Uh huh... So, as you clearly think yourself to be quite educated on this matter, please edify us plebs on why the most pointless and redundant position in the country is one of the hardest to change or remove? I await enlightenment... Wouldn't it be so much easier to have you explain what the Governor General actually DOES??? Your response would be an answer to your own question. Quote "A man is no more entitled to an opinion for which he cannot account than he is for a pint of beer for which he cannot pay" - Anonymous
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.