Should provinces 'elect' our Lieutenants-Governor?

[August1991]

There is an idea afoot in Quebec to elect the next Lieutenant-Governor by vote in the National Assembly or some other constituent body. The idea comes from the ex-rector of a Quebec university (UQAM) and has been supported by Le Devoir's editor and Michel C. Auger.

Harper must soon change Quebec's Lieutenant-Governor (Chretien's nominee, a regular disaster) and the theory is that if Charest organizes an election, Harper would have no choice but to accept the "popular" verdict.

Les bonnes idées sont rares et elles méritent donc qu’on en parle pour ne pas qu’on les oublie. Celle de l’ex-recteur de l’UQAM, Claude Corbo, reprise ce matin par mon éminent collègue et directeur du Devoir, Bernard Descôteaux, est de celles-là. Pourquoi ne pas élire le prochain Lieutenant-gouverneur.

Mme Lise Thibault quittera bientôt un poste qu’elle a contribué à discréditer, encore que le travail fût déjà bien entamé. Pourtant, le Lieutenant-gouverneur est le chef d’État du Québec et il pourrait jouer un rôle plus important – et surtout plus utile – si on lui redonnait un peu de légitimité.

Link

In some ways, the Lieutenant-Governor is the federal representative at the provincial level. In Russia, each constituent state once had the power to elect its own governor. Putin took back that power and now names the executive governors. In the US of course, they are elected. In India, a Governor (as opposed to a Chief Minister) is appointed by the federal President.

In Quebec, it is hard not to see this question in the context of the Quebec national question. On one hand, there is the symbolism. On the other, the federal Liberals have always been careful to choose a hard minded federalist as Lieutenant-Governor in Quebec. No law becomes law without the L-G's approval.

[g_bambino]

There is an idea afoot in Quebec to elect the next Lieutenant-Governor by vote in the National Assembly or some other constituent body. The idea comes from the ex-rector of a Quebec university (UQAM) and has been supported by Le Devoir's editor and Michel C. Auger.

Harper must soon change Quebec's Lieutenant-Governor (Chretien's nominee, a regular disaster) and the theory is that if Charest organizes an election, Harper would have no choice but to accept the "popular" verdict.

Les bonnes idées sont rares et elles méritent donc qu’on en parle pour ne pas qu’on les oublie. Celle de l’ex-recteur de l’UQAM, Claude Corbo, reprise ce matin par mon éminent collègue et directeur du Devoir, Bernard Descôteaux, est de celles-là. Pourquoi ne pas élire le prochain Lieutenant-gouverneur.

Mme Lise Thibault quittera bientôt un poste qu’elle a contribué à discréditer, encore que le travail fût déjà bien entamé. Pourtant, le Lieutenant-gouverneur est le chef d’État du Québec et il pourrait jouer un rôle plus important – et surtout plus utile – si on lui redonnait un peu de légitimité.

Link

In some ways, the Lieutenant-Governor is the federal representative at the provincial level. In Russia, each constituent state once had the power to elect its own governor. Putin took back that power and now names the executive governors. In the US of course, they are elected. In India, a Governor (as opposed to a Chief Minister) is appointed by the federal President.

In Quebec, it is hard not to see this question in the context of the Quebec national question. On one hand, there is the symbolism. On the other, the federal Liberals have always been careful to choose a hard minded federalist as Lieutenant-Governor in Quebec. No law becomes law without the L-G's approval.

It would draw the office into the political arena - open it up to be contested over by self-serving politicians and undermine the impartiality the incumbent is to practice. The L-G should continue to be appointed, though I'm not against a change in the current set up. In Australia the state governors are appointed by the Queen directly on advice of the relevant state premier, not by the Governor General on the advice of the federal prime minister as it is here.

[geoffrey]

Axe the office all together.

[g_bambino]

Axe the office all together.

And... then what?

[jdobbin]

Axe the office all together.

It would still entail opening the Constitution and then the question of the Governor General comes up and the relationship with the Queen and whether Canada should have a president and be a Republic and whether we should continue to add and add and add to the ever growing list of constitutional amendments such as property rights, First Nations, Senate and so on and so on. Once the Genie is out of the bottle, expect a party. And not a happy one.

People have to ask: Is it worth all the trouble to elect a Lieutenant-Governor, a position that is an area of Federal responsibility in the provinces?

[rover1]

It is constitutionally impossible for Mr Harper, or anyone else for that matter, to tamper with or to pass laws respecting the status of any Lt Governor.

[stignasty]

Unless the position of Lieutenant-Governor (not to mention Governor General) is changed so that the responsibilities are more than simply being a rubber stamp, what is the point of making it an elected position?

I would rather see some electoral reform that puts power into the hands of the people (such as proportional representation) than what would really amount to a waste of time and money.

[g_bambino]

Unless the position of Lieutenant-Governor (not to mention Governor General) is changed so that the responsibilities are more than simply being a rubber stamp, what is the point of making it an elected position?

Well, the Lieutenant Governors hold great responsibilities, actually - because they rarely use them doesn't mean they aren't there.

I would rather see some electoral reform that puts power into the hands of the people (such as proportional representation) than what would really amount to a waste of time and money.

I can't disagree with that.

[August1991]

It would draw the office into the political arena - open it up to be contested over by self-serving politicians and undermine the impartiality the incumbent is to practice. The L-G should continue to be appointed, though I'm not against a change in the current set up. In Australia the state governors are appointed by the Queen directly on advice of the relevant state premier, not by the Governor General on the advice of the federal prime minister as it is here.

WTF? You don't think our current GG was appointed by a self-serving politician?

The suggestion in Quebec is that the National Assembly propose a name to the federal PM. (At present, the federal PM just chooses whomever he wants.)

Well, the Lieutenant Governors hold great responsibilities, actually - because they rarely use them doesn't mean they aren't there.

Rarely used? Someone has to send out a telegram when people have their 100th birthday.

[g_bambino]

It would draw the office into the political arena - open it up to be contested over by self-serving politicians and undermine the impartiality the incumbent is to practice. The L-G should continue to be appointed, though I'm not against a change in the current set up. In Australia the state governors are appointed by the Queen directly on advice of the relevant state premier, not by the Governor General on the advice of the federal prime minister as it is here.

WTF? You don't think our current GG was appointed by a self-serving politician?

The suggestion in Quebec is that the National Assembly propose a name to the federal PM. (At present, the federal PM just chooses whomever he wants.)

Of course she was put forward by a self-serving politician, but so what? Last time I checked the Governor General didn't make political decisions or guide policy, the self-serving politicians do. But, elect someone to the position and filling it becomes a political contest, politicising the office - regard the case in Papua New Guinea where the election by parliament of the next Governor General took over six months, and the loser (46:50) still took the resulting appointment to the country's supreme court to contest it. Sounds more like a Mexican presidential election than the appointment of a monarch's representative.

Think the same thing couldn't happen in the Quebec legislature?

Anyway, the appointment of Lieutenant Governors remains, by the Constitution, a federal responsibility - the provinces really have no say in the matter. I think things have developed, though, to a point where the LGs have become no longer representatives of the Queen in Right of Canada in a province, but a direct rep. of the Queen in right of the particular province, closer to, though not exactly like, the situation in Australia. Thus, I think the provincial premiers should have a say in who's appointed lieutenant governor, though to make them the ones who choose and advise the Queen directly would mean a constitutional re-writing, and most likely unanimous consent of every province.

Well, the Lieutenant Governors hold great responsibilities, actually - because they rarely use them doesn't mean they aren't there.

Rarely used? Someone has to send out a telegram when people have their 100th birthday.

Typically you have interesting things to say, but in these matters your ignorance greatly undermines your credibility.

[geoffrey]

It would still entail opening the Constitution and then the question of the Governor General comes up and the relationship with the Queen and whether Canada should have a president and be a Republic and whether we should continue to add and add and add to the ever growing list of constitutional amendments such as property rights, First Nations, Senate and so on and so on. Once the Genie is out of the bottle, expect a party. And not a happy one.

Let's do the republic, without a president, and just hang out in our happy Canadaland. We're going to need to open up that constitution sometime.

First Nations are a few percentage of the population, they aren't needed to sign a constitution for the majority of Canadians that consider themselves Canadians.

I think it'd be alot easier than people make it out to be, not a cakewalk, but easy.

People have to ask: Is it worth all the trouble to elect a Lieutenant-Governor, a position that is an area of Federal responsibility in the provinces?

It's not worth the trouble or expense to have one there at all.

[jdobbin]

Let's do the republic, without a president, and just hang out in our happy Canadaland. We're going to need to open up that constitution sometime.

First Nations are a few percentage of the population, they aren't needed to sign a constitution for the majority of Canadians that consider themselves Canadians.

I think it'd be alot easier than people make it out to be, not a cakewalk, but easy.

It's not worth the trouble or expense to have one there at all.

I wish I had your optimism that all hell wouldn't break lose if the Constitution was opened.

[geoffrey]

I wish I had your optimism that all hell wouldn't break lose if the Constitution was opened.

It all depends on what level of political correctness you desire. If you want a constitution a solid majority of Canadians would agree with, you don't need Quebec or the Indians. Use the same strategy the Federal government has used on Alberta and BC since they became provinces, screw the West we'll take the rest... except apply it to the trouble makers instead of the cash cows.

[g_bambino]

It would still entail opening the Constitution and then the question of the Governor General comes up and the relationship with the Queen and whether Canada should have a president and be a Republic and whether we should continue to add and add and add to the ever growing list of constitutional amendments such as property rights, First Nations, Senate and so on and so on. Once the Genie is out of the bottle, expect a party. And not a happy one.

Let's do the republic, without a president, and just hang out in our happy Canadaland. We're going to need to open up that constitution sometime.

First Nations are a few percentage of the population, they aren't needed to sign a constitution for the majority of Canadians that consider themselves Canadians.

I think it'd be alot easier than people make it out to be, not a cakewalk, but easy.

Easy? Getting all ten provinces to agree to a completely new system of government would be easy? Are you serious? Under the Crown the sovereignty of the provinces is passed on not by the Governor General or the Canadian Parliament, but through the Crown itself. How will this same set up be guaranteed in a republic?

People have to ask: Is it worth all the trouble to elect a Lieutenant-Governor, a position that is an area of Federal responsibility in the provinces?

It's not worth the trouble or expense to have one there at all.

Um... and who'll keep the government in check then?

[geoffrey]

Easy? Getting all ten provinces to agree to a completely new system of government would be easy? Are you serious? Under the Crown the sovereignty of the provinces is passed on not by the Governor General or the Canadian Parliament, but through the Crown itself. How will this same set up be guaranteed in a republic?

Great point. Make each province a republic and setup Canada as a union of autonomous states, shared foreign policy and defense. Then get on with things.

Um... and who'll keep the government in check then?

Because the GG is keeping the government in check?

[g_bambino]

Easy? Getting all ten provinces to agree to a completely new system of government would be easy? Are you serious? Under the Crown the sovereignty of the provinces is passed on not by the Governor General or the Canadian Parliament, but through the Crown itself. How will this same set up be guaranteed in a republic?

Great point. Make each province a republic and setup Canada as a union of autonomous states, shared foreign policy and defense. Then get on with things.

Good luck with that.

Um... and who'll keep the government in check then?

Because the GG is keeping the government in check?

Yup.

[August1991]

Well, this one seems to have been decided. But has it been noticed in English Canada?

Selon les informations recueillies par Le Soleil, la possibilité d’un autre référendum au Québec a été l’une des considérations retenues par le premier ministre Harper dans l’étude des candidatures à ce poste. Des sources fiables veulent que des pressions aient été exercées auprès de M. Harper pour la nomination de l’ancien ministre conservateur Benoît Bouchard. Mais le premier ministre tenait à ce que le représentant de la reine en poste dans l’éventualité d’un référendum soit bien au fait de ses responsabilités et prérogatives s’il avait un jour à trancher sur un sujet litigieux.

Link