New Governor-General

[lenwick]

PM picks Quebecer, Haitian immigrant as next GG

CTV.ca News Staff

The new Governor-General of Canada will be an award-winning journalist who was born in Haïti and immigrated to Quebec as a child. Michaelle Jean will also be the youngest person to ever serve as the Queen's representative in Canada.

Jean, 47, has worked for CBC and Radio-Canada since 1988. She is currently the host of the Newsworld documentary series, The Passionate Eye. She presents a similar series on the French-language news channel, RDI.

[mirror]

Michaelle Jean - a great Canadian and a great choice IMO. And gotta love that CBC connection. I wonder what she thinks of Canada's involvement in Haiti. Not too much I would gather .

[mirror]

We all know about John Raulston Saul, Adrienne Clarkson's husband but who knows anything about Michelle Jean's husband? (hint: think Quebec)

My goodness Canada's is going to have a sexy GG. Who'd ever thought!

[Argus]

PM picks Quebecer, Haitian immigrant as next GG

CTV.ca News Staff

The new Governor-General of Canada will be an award-winning journalist who was born in Haïti and immigrated to Quebec as a child. Michaelle Jean will also be the youngest person to ever serve as the Queen's representative in Canada.

Jean, 47, has worked for CBC and Radio-Canada since 1988. She is currently the host of the Newsworld documentary series, The Passionate Eye. She presents a similar series on the French-language news channel, RDI.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The last real governor general Canada had was Roland Michener. After that the GGs post started going to political hacks with no known interest in or affection for the Crown. They were all pretty forgettable, though Hnytishn didn't do a bad job. Then Chretien started the habit, I guess, of using the post to show how politically correct he was and Martin has continued that habit (another way in which Martin has revealed just how similar he is to Chretien). I doubt Jean knows much about the Crown or its history or cares. We'll have to see if she's any different than the loser she replaces. On the surface, I doubt it. Another CBC lightweight with the right skin colouring to please the lefties.

[Argus]

Michaelle Jean - a great Canadian and a great choice IMO.  And gotta love that CBC connection.  I wonder what she thinks of Canada's  involvement in Haiti. Not too much I would gather .

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

What makes her a great Canadian, mirror? Her skin colour? That she works for the CBC?

[crazymf]

Canada should terminate the GG position as it pertains to the queen. We do not need it. Waste of tax dollars, especially Clarkson. I know it'll never happen as the position is integrated into the highest level of government.

Of course I also think the whole 'queen' concept is outdated. That whole bunch is a waste of skin. They are terrible role models. Divorces, scandals, etc.

Tsk, tsk you guys. The royal family is nothing more than Englands pet people and serve nothing more useful than living history for tourism.

Does she have political clout? Maybe some, but only from a tradition standpoint.

[BHS]

Argus kind of beat me to the punch. I think it's kind of interesting, that the last two Governors General were female immigrants and former CBC employees. I don't really know what to make of it yet. It does seem like some sort of pattern is emerging. Probably not, though. Who cares.

I agree with crazymf. The whole monarchy thing should be scrapped, but especially the GG position. I was reading in the paper this morning that one of the GG's (can't remember his name, don't really care) was ill for a while during his tenure and so his wife took over his duties (though I doubt she signed any laws). I think that says a lot about the importance of the position right there.

[canadian_conservative]

"What makes her a great Canadian, mirror? Her skin colour? That she works for the CBC?"

She makes a good GG considering she is young and more in touch with Politics becaus eof her career as CBC plus the fact that she is young she can get more young people in tune and interested in politics.

By the way her "skin color" as you call it makes her the first black woman to become Governeur General it shows Canada that white and French people are not the only ones who can become GG or maybe soon become PM.

[g_bambino]

I agree with crazymf. The whole monarchy thing should be scrapped, but especially the GG position. I was reading in the paper this morning that one of the GG's (can't remember his name, don't really care) was ill for a while during his tenure and so his wife took over his duties (though I doubt she signed any laws). I think that says a lot about the importance of the position right there.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That doesn't say much about your knowledge of civics. Remove the Monarchy, you remove the GG, and replace it with what? Why, an elected president, ie. just another politician in Ottawa with a biased mandate. When one ignores the useless money-driven slander of the tabloids, it becomes obvious that the Monarchy, including, in Canada, the office of the Governor General, serves us just fine. I would much rather have the Sovereign as not only a link to our history, but also as the contemporary non-partisan, apolitical foundation of our government, and a bond to the 15 other countries of the world that share the Crown. Better that than some internationally diminished presidential office which will cause division through its politics, and become lost in the shadow of the presidency to our south.

That said, I'm personally very pleased, so far, with the announcement of the appointment.

[crazymf]

Yeah, but some of us think the style of democracy in Canada in general needs a makeover.

For instance, this:

http://www.republicofwesterncanada.com/index2.html

[canadian_conservative]

I agree with g_bambino the GG and the Monarchy is a tie in are history and Ill be damned if like he said and we get cought up in the presidency like the south of us. Ol pierre back in his days in office tried to replace PM with the word president but luckily that didn;t go over well.

[BHS]

Remove the Monarchy, you remove the GG, and replace it with what?  Why, an elected president, ie. just another politician in Ottawa with a biased mandate.  When one ignores the useless money-driven slander of the tabloids, it becomes obvious that the Monarchy, including, in Canada, the office of the Governor General, serves us just fine.  I would much rather have the Sovereign as not only a link to our history, but also as the contemporary non-partisan, apolitical foundation of our government, and a bond to the 15 other countries of the world that share the Crown.  Better that than some internationally diminished presidential office which will cause division through its politics, and become lost in the shadow of the presidency to our south.

That said, I'm personally very pleased, so far, with the announcement of the appointment.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Perhaps my knowledge of civics is lacking, though to be honest I've already had this argument in this forum. The practical effect of the status quo is a concentration of power in the Prime Minister's Office. How is that beneficial to the Canadian democratic process? The Governor General who serves us so well has no practical function at all. The fact that the GG position is non-partisan is irrelevant.

I fail to see how an elected president would have less international status than a Governor General that no one outside of the Commonwealth recognizes as the representative of our head of state (prefering in stead to think of the PM as head of state, which is, let's face it, more realistic).

Are we to wait until England abolishes the Monarchy and the Commonwealth for us? Don't be too sure it won't happen - Tony Blair has made efforts to eliminate the House of Lords, and with the royal family being in such a shambles there's always talk of eliminating the Monarchy after the current Queen dies.

A seperately elected President, with seperate powers and a seperate agenda acts as a counter-balance to the currently unlimited power of the PMO. (And don't point to the Senate and suggest that they act as the counter-balance. For all of their arms-length unaccountability, when was the last time that the Senate refused to pass a piece of legislation that the PMO was pushing through Parliament?)

[g_bambino]

Perhaps my knowledge of civics is lacking, though to be honest I've already had this argument in this forum. The practical effect of the status quo is a concentration of power in the Prime Minister's Office. How is that beneficial to the Canadian democratic process? The Governor General who serves us so well has no practical function at all. The fact that the GG position is non-partisan is irrelevant.

I fail to see how an elected president would have less international status than a Governor General that no one outside of the Commonwealth recognizes as the representative of our head of state (prefering in stead to think of the PM as head of state, which is, let's face it, more realistic).

Are we to wait until England abolishes the Monarchy and the Commonwealth for us? Don't be too sure it won't happen - Tony Blair has made efforts to eliminate the House of Lords, and with the royal family being in such a shambles there's always talk of eliminating the Monarchy after the current Queen dies.

A seperately elected President, with seperate powers and a seperate agenda acts as a counter-balance to the currently unlimited power of the PMO. (And don't point to the Senate and suggest that they act as the counter-balance. For all of their arms-length unaccountability, when was the last time that the Senate refused to pass a piece of legislation that the PMO was pushing through Parliament?)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

There are indeed problems with too much power lying with the Prime Minister; that pull, I believe, began with Trudeau. But the answers to our current problems do not lie in Canada becoming a republic. This country functioned for well over 100 years as a constitutional monarchy; only in the past 15 or 20 years have changes been taking place in Ottawa which are causing issue today. I'm not a political expert, so I can't deeply analyze the history of it, but I can say that to me it is the politicians who have caused these problems rather than the Monarch -- mostly by slowly pulling power away from the Sovereign/Governor General, and handing it to the PM, as well as trying to graft elements of a republican government onto a constitutional monarchy. Removing the Sovereign and putting another high powered politician in Ottawa will certainly not make the situation better.

Aside from that, it is not the Governor General who is necessarily internationally known (they're actually meant to be more of a domestic body), but rather it is our head of state -- the Queen -- who is. A president of Canada will be a nobody compared to Elizabeth II, or indeed, to the US president next door.

Anyway, this thread I think is to discuss the new appointment of the GG, and as I stated already, I am so far pleased with the decision.

[Black Dog]

That doesn't say much about your knowledge of civics. Remove the Monarchy, you remove the GG, and replace it with what? Why, an elected president, ie. just another politician in Ottawa with a biased mandate. When one ignores the useless money-driven slander of the tabloids, it becomes obvious that the Monarchy, including, in Canada, the office of the Governor General, serves us just fine. I would much rather have the Sovereign as not only a link to our history, but also as the contemporary non-partisan, apolitical foundation of our government, and a bond to the 15 other countries of the world that share the Crown. Better that than some internationally diminished presidential office which will cause division through its politics, and become lost in the shadow of the presidency to our south.

That said, I'm personally very pleased, so far, with the announcement of the appointment.

This is what is known as a "false dichotomy". Who says if we remove the trappings of our colonial past that we have to replace it with anything? The GG and, by extension, the Monarchy don't "serve us well": they don't serve us at all. They are figureheads, ceremonial relics. That in and of itself would be harmless, but for the fact we pay for these things.

The last real governor general Canada had was Roland Michener. After that the GGs post started going to political hacks with no known interest in or affection for the Crown. They were all pretty forgettable, though Hnytishn didn't do a bad job. Then Chretien started the habit, I guess, of using the post to show how politically correct he was and Martin has continued that habit (another way in which Martin has revealed just how similar he is to Chretien). I doubt Jean knows much about the Crown or its history or cares. We'll have to see if she's any different than the loser she replaces. On the surface, I doubt it. Another CBC lightweight with the right skin colouring to please the lefties.

What differentiates a "real" GG from a "lightweight" exactly? Do "real" GG's pay their own tab? I doubt it.

[BHS]

There are indeed problems with too much power lying with the Prime Minister; that pull, I believe, began with Trudeau.  But the answers to our current problems do not lie in Canada becoming a republic.  This country functioned for well over 100 years as a constitutional monarchy; only in the past 15 or 20 years have changes been taking place in Ottawa which are causing issue today.  I'm not a political expert, so I can't deeply analyze the history of it, but I can say that to me it is the politicians who have caused these problems rather than the Monarch -- mostly by slowly pulling power away from the Sovereign/Governor General, and handing it to the PM, as well as trying to graft elements of a republican government onto a constitutional monarchy.  Removing the Sovereign and putting another high powered politician in Ottawa will certainly not make the situation better.

Aside from that, it is not the Governor General who is necessarily internationally known (they're actually meant to be more of a domestic body), but rather it is our head of state -- the Queen -- who is.  A president of Canada will be a nobody compared to Elizabeth II, or indeed, to the US president next door.

Anyway, this thread I think is to discuss the new appointment of the GG, and as I stated already, I am so far pleased with the decision.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Indeed, we're pulling away from the purpose of the thread, so this will be my last post on the matter. I'd just like to agree with your sense that the politicians are to blame, but that the system was flawed from the outset in that it relied on politicians to behave with dignity and honour. That is clearly no longer the case, and I don't believe that the situation will improve without an overhaul. The best solution is still, in my mind, becoming a republic. I think you're either underestimating the impact that a president of Canada would have internationally, or overestimating the Queen's ability to represent Canada. I mean really, how many people in the world know that the Queen of England is our head of state too? How many Canadians can answer that question correctly, despite hints all over our money and postage?

[Riverwind]

This is what is known as a "false dichotomy". Who says if we remove the trappings of our colonial past that we have to replace it with anything? The GG and, by extension, the Monarchy don't "serve us well": they don't serve us at all. They are figureheads, ceremonial relics. That in and of itself would be harmless, but for the fact we pay for these things.

Our parlimentary system gives complete executive power to a party with a minority of seats in the commons. As a result, we must have a 'final arbitrator' when it comes to deciding what is a non-confidence vote and what is not. Even with a majority government we need a legal mechanism to force the PM and the cabinet to resign in extraordinary circumstances (similar to the impeachment process in the US).

For these reasons, simply eliminating the GG without having a replacement is not an option unless we completely rewrite the rules of parliment.

[Guest eureka]

Good to see you back for this one, Bambino. It is just too depressing to go through all the silliness and ignorance of Parliamentary government over and over.and I had thought to let this discussion pass as another where prejudice rules over knowledge.

But "don't talk about the Senate." though. Notice that the rules of debate have been established for you by one who does not know how the Senate works or grasp its great value. He still thinks that because there are words like "checks and balances" written into the American Constitution they mean something. It seems to be beyond the reach of so many to understand that we have real checks and balances as opposed to rhetoric. The GG is part of that.

[Riverwind]

http://www.republicofwesterncanada.com/index2.html

Anyone advocating political change that lists french labeling on products as a 'problem' that needs fixing clearly has issues with priorties and proper perspective.

[Black Dog]

It seems to be beyond the reach of so many to understand that we have real checks and balances as opposed to rhetoric. The GG is part of that.

I trust you mean to say the GG is not a check.

Our parlimentary system gives complete executive power to a party with a minority of seats in the commons. As a result, we must have a 'final arbitrator' when it comes to deciding what is a non-confidence vote and what is not. Even with a majority government we need a legal mechanism to force the PM and the cabinet to resign in extraordinary circumstances (similar to the impeachment process in the US).

Since the GG is a partisan appointment , they are ana rbitor of nothing. The GG's job is to pin medals, cut ribbons and dole out rubbber stamps on the taxpayer's tab. Useless, in other words.

We could go the BHS republican route. Or we could curb the power of the PMO. either is preferable to the status quo.

[BHS]

eureka, I would ask you to illustrate the "real" checks and balances our system uses with an example, but past experience leads me to believe that all I'll get from you is arrogant condescension, so just forget it.

[Riverwind]

Since the GG is a partisan appointment , they are ana rbitor of nothing. The GG's job is to pin medals, cut ribbons and dole out rubbber stamps on the taxpayer's tab. Useless, in other words.

An emergency exit door on an aircraft is useless until a plane skids off the runway - at that time it becomes indespensible. The GG is a partisan appointment, but like the speaker of the house, an GG is capable of arbitrating in situations where the actual decision is not as important as the fact that someone has the power to make a final and binding decision.

[Argus]

Argus kind of beat me to the punch. I think it's kind of interesting, that the last two Governors General were female immigrants and former CBC employees. I don't really know what to make of it yet. It does seem like some sort of pattern is emerging. Probably not, though. Who cares.

I can see poor little Paulie sitting around rubbing his knuckles against his furrowed brow trying to think of ways to make a "statement" or at least, put some kind of mark on his pathetic term in office. And along comes this opportunity! Jean Chretien already beat him to the first immigrant and person of colour. But gosh darn it he's going to go him one better! He'll appoint the first black! Everyone knows blacks outrank asians on the bleeding heart liberal guilt scale! I'm surprised he didn't find himself a black lesbian to appoint. That would have been just too perfect. I'm sure they looked, too.

I agree with crazymf. The whole monarchy thing should be scrapped, but especially the GG position. I was reading in the paper this morning that one of the GG's (can't remember his name, don't really care) was ill for a while during his tenure and so his wife took over his duties (though I doubt she signed any laws). I think that says a lot about the importance of the position right there.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I would like to see a more neutral head of state with some small powers just in case the PM, who has nearly absolute power, goes off the deep end. I think the GG has to power to dissolve parliament, for example. That could be a handy little tool given the extreme power being accumulated by the PMO.

[Argus]

"What makes her a great Canadian, mirror? Her skin colour? That she works for the CBC?"

She makes a good GG considering she is young and more in touch with Politics becaus eof her career as CBC plus the fact that she is young she can get more young people in tune and interested in politics. 

So like, she's young, eh? Is that what makes her a great Canadian? Are all young people great Canadians or just the ones with Black skin?

By the way her "skin color" as you call it makes her the first black woman to become Governeur General

Wow, really? Are you, like, shure? That's like, so awesome, dude!

it shows Canada that white and French people are not the only ones who can become GG or maybe soon become PM.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That's like, so impressive, so Liberal! Wow. Those Liberals sure are open minded folks.

Maybe one day they'll even let some Black people join their party.

[Black Dog]

I can see poor little Paulie sitting around rubbing his knuckles against his furrowed brow trying to think of ways to make a "statement" or at least, put some kind of mark on his pathetic term in office. And along comes this opportunity! Jean Chretien already beat him to the first immigrant and person of colour. But gosh darn it he's going to go him one better! He'll appoint the first black! Everyone knows blacks outrank asians on the bleeding heart liberal guilt scale! I'm surprised he didn't find himself a black lesbian to appoint. That would have been just too perfect. I'm sure they looked, too.

As I've made clear already, since the GG is a pretty much pointeless position, then the identity of the individual residing in Rideau Hall is pretty much irrelevant. yet for some reason, its clear that some would prefer their useless ceremonial figureheads to be white male useless ceremonial figureheads. Or soemthing. I can't fo rthe life of me figure out why the race, gender or sexual orientation of the person recieving the cynical patronage appointment matters a whit.

[Argus]

I can see poor little Paulie sitting around rubbing his knuckles against his furrowed brow trying to think of ways to make a "statement" or at least, put some kind of mark on his pathetic term in office. And along comes this opportunity! Jean Chretien already beat him to the first immigrant and person of colour. But gosh darn it he's going to go him one better! He'll appoint the first black! Everyone knows blacks outrank asians on the bleeding heart liberal guilt scale! I'm surprised he didn't find himself a black lesbian to appoint. That would have been just too perfect. I'm sure they looked, too.

As I've made clear already, since the GG is a pretty much pointeless position, then the identity of the individual residing in Rideau Hall is pretty much irrelevant. yet for some reason, its clear that some would prefer their useless ceremonial figureheads to be white male useless ceremonial figureheads. Or soemthing. I can't fo rthe life of me figure out why the race, gender or sexual orientation of the person recieving the cynical patronage appointment matters a whit.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Do you think for one second her race and linguistic makeup were not the overriding considerations in this appointment? If she'd been white she'd not have been appointed. Period. Given that, I think it's reasonable to comment on it, even if it is to point out how shallow the appointment was - in part for that reason. And hey, the cynic in me couldn't possibly resist.