New Governor-General

[Black Dog]

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.

So her race and background were considerations. So? Why not also mention the fact she's kinda hot? Has as much bearing on the appointment and the position of GG.

Personally, it's too bad that, if they are filling a shallow position with someone of shallow qualifications, they couldn't find a lesbian. The sound of heads popping from coast to coast would have been worth it.

[Canuck E Stan]

With a history of Quebec French hating the English in Quebec, wouldn't doing away with the Queen and things like her face on coins plus all the other "English Monarchy" traditions bring back a lot of the separatist Quebecers into Canada. I believe many of French Quebecers and Immigrants too, resent having ties to the English monarchy for so long and believe Canada should after 137 years give it up.Has anyone thought about what getting rid of the GG and the Monarchy connection in Canada would mean to the popularity of the Separatists in Quebec?

[Argus]

With a history of Quebec French hating the English in Quebec, wouldn't doing away with the Queen and things like her face on coins plus all the other "English Monarchy" traditions bring back a lot of the separatist Quebecers into Canada.

Outlawing English would bring back a lot more. Want to do that too?

[takeanumber]

Anyway...

1. Hats off to her. It's a nice choice. Why? She seems decent. That's all.

2. Will it make much of a difference in Quebec? Meh. Probably not.

3. Role of monarchy in Canadian society? Meh. Another time. It's not that important to me.

[BHS]

Personally, it's too bad that, if they are filling a shallow position with someone of shallow qualifications, they couldn't find a lesbian. The sound of heads popping from coast to coast would have been worth it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Absolutely.

[g_bambino]

Personally, it's too bad that, if they are filling a shallow position with someone of shallow qualifications, they couldn't find a lesbian. The sound of heads popping from coast to coast would have been worth it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The post has become more and more shallow because more and more the position has been pulled away from what it is -- a representative of the Sovereign -- and tarted up to seem like what it is not -- a stand-alone head of state. The substance, stature, and even the constitutional power (which, contrary to your comments, does most certainly exist), is all derived from the Monarch. However, over the past few decades, with the speed escalating during Clarkson's tenure, the Monarch has been pushed into the shadows and the GG elevated. Clarkson, in particular, was led by her big 'A' (the PM and other ministers) and small 'a' (staff at Rideau Hall) advisors to believe that she alone was the one and only Canadian head of state.

Sure, Clarkson did well with the show of it all, and played the role well. But by hiding the true root of the power and status of the position, it was a sham, and I believe people could perceive that. Trying to stand alone at the pinnacle, literally putting herself ahead of the person she is meant to represent (Canadian D-Day ceremonies in France), actually made the position seem vague and somewhat pointless. She was not the representative of the Sovereign, but just a vapid appointee of the PM.

This is the result of the 'republicanization' of our constitutional monarchy, driven by the Liberal political elite -- trying to transform the GG into a president by relegating the actual source of the position's power and stature to the background, while simultaneously sucking the power out of it for themselves. This even extends to the repression of the Monarchy from Canadian education over the past twenty years (thus, as you stated, everyone thinks the "Queen of England", whoever that is, has nothing to do with Canada). It's not working, though. Each successive GG moves further away from being a representative of the apolitical and unifying Crown, the foundation of our constitution and government, and appears more and more like some flaky pageant winner who smiles and waves a lot; while the PM more and more appears as the actual 'president' who holds uncontested power. No wonder people are now so confused and disenfranchised with the whole thing.

To me, Mme. Jean would do well to make sure everyone knows the Constitution of Canada vests all executive power in the Crown, and that it is in the name of the Queen of Canada (not the Queen of the UK) that all laws are passed and exercised. It's about time the PM was pulled off his pedestal and Canadians were told that he is not an invincible dictator, nor is he our head of state, but must ultimately answer to the Sovereign who acts, by constitutional law, on behalf of the People. And she should make clear that her purpose is to represent that Sovereign. It would make clear who she is, what she does, and why she has the ability to do it. It would return the much needed constitutional substance to the office. From listening to her speech from the Parliament this afternoon, I could hear hints of this – she acknowledged Canada is a constitutional monarchy, she is the representative of the Crown in this country on behalf of the Queen, and that she would pay strong attention to her constitutional duties. To me, that’s a good start, but much of the machinations of previous years still needs to be undone.

As an end note, I also feel that we would do well to return to the practice, stopped (surprise, surprise) in the late 1960s, of submitting five or so names to the Queen and having her choose her representative from that list. It would seriously undermine the notions of political patronage that we have now.

My apologies for the long post...

[g_bambino]

With a history of Quebec French hating the English in Quebec, wouldn't doing away with the Queen and things like her face on coins plus all the other "English Monarchy" traditions bring back a lot of the separatist Quebecers into Canada. I believe many of French Quebecers and Immigrants too, resent having ties to the English monarchy for so long and believe Canada should after 137 years give it up.Has anyone thought about what  getting rid of the GG and the Monarchy connection in Canada would mean to  the popularity of the Separatists in Quebec?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I doubt it would have any effect at all. Seperatists are in it for themselves, regardless of whether Canada is united under the "English Monarchy" (which doesn't exist anyway) or not.

As well, a president would do nothing but cause more division between Quebec and the rest of the country. I'm sure that, under the threat of seperatism, Quebec would demand that it be guaranteed that the presidential nominees be only from the limited Quebec population one half of the time, and from all the other provinces the other half; or that the votes of all Quebecois would count for more than those of the population of the other 9 provinces. Could anyone imagine 'anglophone' Canada standing for that?

[BHS]

g_bambino:

The post was long, but well worth it. Well done.

If there was some way for the things that you wish to have happen, to happen, I'd be all for it. Unfortunately, I think that the cat is out of the bag, so to speak. Pandora's box has been opened.

If, as you suggest, Canadian republicanism finds it's roots in a Liberal power grab, I fail to see how our forseeable future of electing and re-electing successively less trustworthy Liberal grandees and bag-men is going to help the situation, or turn things around.

You've pointed out that the Governor General does indeed have Constitutionally mandated power, and this is so. But in my short lifetime, it has never occurred to any of our Governors General to refuse a piece of legislation, or to refuse to disolve Parliament when so requested. Those powers have been usurped by a "tradition" of acquienscence. That the GG has powers means nothing if those powers have so been rendered unusable.

The Monarchy has served us well. Indeed, it has served all of the Commonwealth well. We owe a great deal of our success as a nation to the Westminster tradition.

But if our current course holds, and a republican state is in the offing, better to demand now that the elements of that state serve a useful purpose.

John Manley, in his tenure as Deputy Prime Minister, had the tactlessness to suggest we abolish the Monarchy during a royal visit. At that time, he suggested a "Made in Canada" formulation for how our head of state should be. This boiled down to an unelected position, appointed by Parliament (rather than the PM solely) and having essentially the same powers as the Governor General. If this is what the future government "Republic of Canada" looks like, I want no part of it.

Unfortunately, the Liberals are in power, and will be for some time to come. And this blighted and useless head of state, combining the worst aspects of both our Monarchy and republicanism, may be exactly what we have in store for ourselves.

[BHS]

I doubt it would have any effect at all.  Seperatists are in it for themselves, regardless of whether Canada is united under the "English Monarchy" (which doesn't exist anyway) or not.

As well, a president would do nothing but cause more division between Quebec and the rest of the country.  I'm sure that, under the threat of seperatism, Quebec would demand that it be guaranteed that the presidential nominees be only from the limited Quebec population one half of the time, and from all the other provinces the other half; or that the votes of all Quebecois would count for more than those of the population of the other 9 provinces.  Could anyone imagine 'anglophone' Canada standing for that?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

British Monarchy. Whatever. A popular vernacular formulation in the English speaking world is "Queen of England" and that's why I used it.

I think I've come to understand your distaste for an elected head of state, and the above quote was the key to my understanding. It all boils down to the interminable Quebec question.

It seems unlikely that, using an American style system of presidential elections, we would very often see Quebec candidates running for and gaining that office. There's just too much weight in the other provinces, and with the country as divided as it is, they would vote down Quebercer candidates every time if only out of spite.

Quebecers would never stand for this situation, and the seperatist movement would surely succeed within a short time.

So once again, Quebec seccession drives the debate. Quebec alone really is the source of all power in this country. What a pathetic set of circumstances.

[Guest eureka]

This is a large part of the Letters Patent of a Governor General. One could find some real powers in there if read with an open mind,

More importantly is the totality in that the GG does represent the "King-in-Parliament," the foundation of the most successful modern democracies. The GG has the right to be consulted on all legislation just as does the Monarch in England. And that is not an insignificant power since no Government can legislate without the cooperation of the GG: cooperation that will not be given if the circumstance warrants refusal or public display of the problem.

Checks and balances, BSH! That is a real one not the pretend of your favour.

National Unity is a concern of the Office. It is one that, in many ways, the "symbolic" Head of State is better able to carry out than any elected politician ever could since the Office is strictly non-partisan.

Read it BSH and try once to respond without the BS.

III. And We do hereby authorize and empower Our Governor General to keep and use Our Great Seal of Canada for sealing all things whatsoever that may be passed under Our Great Seal of Canada.

IV. And We do further authorize and empower Our Governor General to constitute and appoint, in Our name and on Our behalf, all such Judges, Commissioners, Justices of the Peace, and other necessary Officers (including diplomatic and consular officers) and Ministers of Canada, as may be lawfully constituted or appointed by Us.

V. And We do further authorize and empower Our Governor General, so far as We lawfully may, upon sufficient cause to him appearing, to remove from his office, or to suspend from the exercise of the same, any person exercising any office within Canada, under or by virtue of any Commission or Warrant granted, or which may be granted, by Us in Our name or under Our authority.

VI. And We do further authorize and empower Our Governor General to exercise all powers lawfully belonging to Us in respect of summoning, proroguing or dissolving the Parliament of Canada.

VII. And Whereas by the Constitution Acts, 1867 to 1940, it is amongst other things enacted that it shall be lawful for Us, if We think fit, to authorize Our Governor General to appoint any person or persons, jointly or severally, to be his Deputy or Deputies within any part or parts of Canada, and in that capacity to exercise, during the pleasure of Our Governor General, such of the powers, authorities, and functions of Our Governor General as he may deem it necessary or expedient to assign to such Deputy or Deputies, subject to any limitations or directions from time to time expressed or given by Us; Now We do hereby authorize and empower Our Governor General, subject to such limitations or directions, to appoint any person or persons, jointly or severally, to be his Deputy or Deputies within any part or parts of Canada, and in that capacity to exercise, during the pleasure of Our Governor General, such of the powers, authorities, and functions of Our Governor General as he may deem it necessary or expedient to assign to him or them: Provided always, that the appointment of such a Deputy or Deputies shall not affect the exercise of any such power, authority or function by Our Governor General.

VIII. And We do hereby declare Our pleasure to be that, in the event of the death, incapacity, removal, or absence of Our Governor General out of Canada, all and every the powers and authorities herein granted to him shall, until Our further pleasure is signified therein, be vested in Our Chief Justice for the time being of Canada, (hereinafter called Our Chief Justice) or, in the case of the death, incapacity, removal, or absence of Our Chief Justice, then in the Senior Judge for the time being of the Supreme Court of Canada, then residing in Canada and not being under incapacity; such Chief Justice or Senior Judge of the Supreme Court of Canada, while the said powers and authorities are vested in him, to be known as Our Administrator.

Provided always, that the said Senior Judge shall act in the administration of the Government only if and when Our Chief Justice shall not be present within Canada and capable of administering the Government.

Provided further that no such powers or authorities shall vest in such Chief Justice, or other judge of the Supreme Court of Canada, until he shall have taken the Oaths appointed to be taken by Our Governor General.

Provided further that whenever and so often as Our Governor General shall be temporarily absent from Canada, with Our permission, for a period not exceeding one month, then and in every such case Our Governor General may continue to exercise all and every the powers vested in him as fully as if he were residing within Canada, including the power to appoint a Deputy or Deputies as provided in the Seventh Clause of these Our Letters Patent.

IX. And We do hereby require and command all Our Officers and Ministers, Civil and Military, and all the other inhabitants of Canada, to be obedient, aiding, and assisting unto Our Governor General, or, in the event of his death, incapacity, or absence, to such person as may, from time to time, under the provisions of these Our Letters Patent administer the Government of Canada.

X. And We hereby declare Our Pleasure to be that Our Governor General for the time being shall, with all due solemnity, cause Our Commission under Our Great Seal of Canada, appointing Our Governor General for the time being, to be read and published in the presence of Our Chief Justice, or other Judge of the Supreme Court of Canada, and of members of Our Privy Council for Canada, and that Our Governor General shall take the Oath of Allegiance in the form following:-"I, ................. do swear that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to His Majesty King George the Sixth, His Heirs and successors, according to law. So Help me God"; and likewise he shall take the usual Oath for the due execution of the Office of Our Governor General and Commander-in-Chief in and over Canada, and for the due impartial administration of justice; which Oaths Our Chief Justice, or, in his absence, or in the event of his being otherwise incapacitated, any Judge of the Supreme Court of Canada shall, and he is hereby required to, tender and administer unto him.

XI. And We do authorize and require Our Governor General from time to time, by himself or any other person to be authorized by him in that behalf, to administer to all and to every person or persons, as he shall think fit, who shall hold any office or place of trust or profit in Canada, that said Oath of Allegiance, together with such other Oath or Oaths as may be from time to time be prescribed by any Laws or Statutes in that behalf made and provided.

XII. And do further authorize and empower Our Governor General, as he shall see occasion, in Our name and on Our behalf, when any crime or offence against the laws of Canada has been committed for which the offender may be tried thereunder, to grant a pardon to any accomplice, in such crime or offence, who shall give such infomation as shall lead to the conviction of the principal offender, or of any one of such offenders if more than one; and further to grant to any offender convicted of any such crime or offence in any Court, or before any Judge, Justice, or Magistrate, administering the laws of Canada, a pardon, either free or subject to lawful conditions, or any respite of the execution of the sentence of any such offender, for such a period as to Our Governor General may seem fit, and to remit any fines, penalties, or forfeitures, which may become due and payable to Us. And We do hereby direct and enjoin that Our Governor General shall not pardon or reprieve any such offender without first receiving in capital cases the advice of Our Privy Council for Canada and. in other cases, the advice of one, at least, of his Ministers.

XIII. And We do further authorize and empower Our Governor General to issue Exequaturs, in Our name and on Our behalf, to Consular Officers of foreign countries to whom Commissions of Appointment have been issued by the Heads of States of such countries.

XIV. And whereas great prejudice may happen to Our service and to the security of Canada by the absence of Our Governor General, he shall not quit Canada without having first obtained leave from Us for so doing through the Prime Minister of Canada.

[theloniusfleabag]

Dear eureka,

Thanks for posting such excellent info. I suppose the rest of us should do a little research before dismissing the GG office as 'powerless'. However, I am not sure how old your computer is, or what version of windows you are running, but...

Our Governor General shall take the Oath of Allegiance in the form following:-"I, ................. do swear that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to His Majesty King George the Sixth,

this makes me unsure of it's legitimacy, even with the

His Heirs and successors, according to law

bit, is it still legally binding even though we have achieved independence from the crown? If not, what boob overlooked this bit in our constitution?

[Guest eureka]

That is the form of all Letters Patent. There are a couple of bits that have fallen by the wayside.

This appointment, for instance. Martin did not submit a list of five for the Queen to choose from. That is a bit troubling in that it makes it a Prime Ministerial appointment.

We have not achieved independence from the Crown nor can we. This is all about the place of the Crown in government. As you will know, I contend that the limited Monarchical system has proven over centuries now to be the most democratic form yet devised.

Most of these arguments against the GG and other facets of our system are just the crying of ignorance. When a better system is proposed, I will enthusiastically support it. There just has not been one "replacement" that has worked out to this point in time.

[BHS]

eureka:

Excellent series of posts. Very informative.

Regarding your second post, you contend that we cannot achieve independence from the Crown.

If Quebec votes to secede from Canada, what process will be used to facilitate the seccession?

[Canuck E Stan]

If the GG position is of such importance as some posts have stated, why wouldn"t the Liberals also take this position seriously. Instead they put in individuals who have no experience with constitutional matters and thus turn this position into nothing but a "PR" type of job. Wouldn't experience be vital with the way the present political situation is, and who are these constitutional expert advisors Jean will consult? Jean would only be a mouthpiece for (Liberal?) experts.

Are there not individuals that could do this job without apprenticing in this position?

From Canada.com:

Jean quickly acknowledged that she's no constitutional expert -- a key aspect of the governor general's job these days as Martin's minority Liberal government struggles to hang on to power. But she vowed to seek out expert advice as quickly as possible, once on the job.

"I will take my responsibilities very, very seriously. I will be asking lots of questions."

That willingness to learn will be vital in the coming months as the new governor general could be suddenly pulled into a constitutional crisis if Martin's minority government falters, said political scientist Heather MacIvor.

[Argus]

If the GG position is of such importance as some posts have stated, why wouldn"t the Liberals also take this position seriously.

Is that a rhetorical question? Why on earth would they?

That willingness to learn will be vital in the coming months as the new governor general could be suddenly pulled into a constitutional crisis if Martin's minority government falters, said political scientist Heather MacIvor.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Too bad we'll have a GG who's probably spent hundreds of hours in discussion of proper makeup and hairstyles with her makeup people, but has zero political or constitutional knowledge or experience.

At least if there is a crisis she'll be able to advise Martin and Harper on how to look good for the TV cameras.

[Guest eureka]

There is no process t facilitate "Secession" for Quebec. Interestingly, and what is ignored, is that there is no precedent in all of modern history for the secession of an integral part of a nation. All other secessions have been of territories that have had separate histories and sovereignties.

It cannot happen in Canada without Canada itself ceasing to exist and reconstituting itself as a new nation. Nothing in Canadian or international law gives any guidance to a legal split.

It cannot happen without, at a vey minimum, partition of Quebec. Let's say,60% of Quebeckers vote for separation. That would mean that 3 million Quebeckers, among them a million or so English speaking Canadians, would be forcibly deprived of their Canadian citizenship. They would also be condemned to living in a ghetto where the French language and "culture" is legislated as supreme.

The American Revolution would have nothing on it for violence. That is why I never get into the discussions about how the "House" is to be divided. It is an absurdity. Even a partition would leave a patchwork quilt of disconnected parts of each state. It is an absurdity.

[theloniusfleabag]

Dear eureka,

There is no process t facilitate "Secession" for Quebec.

I think you mean that there is no 'legal' process. Land ownership essentially boils down to the ability to keep something, or the ability to take it away, which ultimately means force of arms.

[Argus]

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.

So her race and background were considerations. So? Why not also mention the fact she's kinda hot? Has as much bearing on the appointment and the position of GG.

Nonsense. Her being a francophone was the primary consideration, followed by her political beliefs, and then her skin colouring. You are suggesting race played no real part and I think that absurd. There are several more accomplished Quebec women whose names were speculated upon because they were clearly more obvious choices. What does Jean have they don't? Black skin.

The New GG

[August1991]

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!

Argus, of course states it best.

PM PM is so unoriginal. He just purely imitated Chretien. (Chretien segued Trudeau - when Trudeau named Shreyer GG, he segued Diefenbaker's Vanier.)

Something else.

"I've never been a token ... and never will be," said Ms. Jean, who was flanked by her film-producer husband, Jean-Daniel Lafond, and their six-year-old adopted Haitian daughter, Marie-Eden. "I will represent the Crown in Canada and I believe in that institution -- the oldest in our history. From Samuel de Champlain to Michaelle Jean, we went a long way. I want every citizen to know that this institution belongs to all of us."

Ottawa Citizen

The GG position is all about tokenism, about symbols. That is exactly what her new position is. The only possible substance is the final protection of legality - and the possible designation of a first minister. But the GG position is primarily a token, a symbol, a way to identify Canadians.

The new GG is a TV journalist. Good image. Face, hair, make-up, voice. She has a good accent in French. Make no mistake; she understands perfectly the notions of image, symbols, tokens.

Something else? Her husband makes movies about FLQ terrorists.

[mirror]

Politically this was brilliant strategy on PM Martin's part. For the first time in a long time he is getting positive press in Quebec over Jean's appointment. What percentage of Quebeckers are allophones? Think about it!

[Argus]

Politically this was brilliant strategy on PM Martin's part. For the first time in a long time he is getting positive press in Quebec over Jean's appointment. What percentage of Quebeckers are allophones? Think about it!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Ten minutes of good press because he appointed a French-speaking Quebecer. He'd have gotten the same no matter which French-speaking Quebecer he appointed, and the allophones all vote Liberal anyway.

But Quebecers aren't about to switch votes because the TV journalist who is our current GG is from Quebec instead of Ontario, or Haiti instead of Hong Kong -- whatever.

[mirror]

CRTC probing 'shameful' comments about Jean

I hope they throw the book at this guy. Disgusting behaviour. Thank goodness for the CRTC to ensure that we still have some decency standards in Canada.

[BHS]

CRTC probing 'shameful' comments about Jean

I hope they throw the book at this guy. Disgusting behaviour. Thank goodness for the CRTC to ensure that we still have some decency standards in Canada.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

And what, exactly, would they charge him with?

ALL HAIL THE GREAT NANNY STATE!!!!

[cybercoma]

And what, exactly, would they charge him with?

ALL HAIL THE GREAT NANNY STATE!!!!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

We need more decency laws in Canada. I really enjoy other people deciding what I can and can't say or think. It gives me a warm and fuzzy feeling inside.

[kimmy]

If what he said on air would have been inappropriate to say of any other woman, then it was inappropriate to say of the GG as well. If it was something that he wouldn't have been criticized if he'd said it about Pam Anderson, then I don't care if he said the same of the GG. And, on a related note, wouldn't Pamela Anderson make a good GG? Her medical problems might mean she doesn't have many years left, and it seems sad that this Great Canadian might not have the opportunity to be Governor General.

-k