Canada: Government: The structure and politics of the office of Governor-General in Canada, PM's recent appointment

Reflection on the relevance of the Office of Governor-General

by Jacques Hamel (original text in French)

Mrs Michaelle Jean, was named [our new GG] by the Prime Minister with the agreement of Her Majesty Élizabeth, Queen of Canada and the United Kingdom. However, the office to which Michaelle Jean accedes is hierarchically higher than that of Paul Martin. Indeed, the occupant of the GG office will have to pose her signature on all the bills voted by the government. This is only one formality, acceptance being necessary to ratify the bills is a firmly established tradition. Then the GG's office is never opposed to the bills of the government, which makes ratification something of an asset. One can say, therefore, the role of the Governor-General is simply the epicenter of a quasi-symbolic system.

In addition, the station of G-G in is also one of image. Mrs Michaelle Jean will have to represent Canada in the world and the Canadian unit as a whole. For the Sovereigntists, the appointment of the young Québécoise woman is perhaps positive:indeed, Michaelle is not known for any enthusiasm to defend Canadian federalism, certain sources evensay that she has leaning towards the Sovereigntists. One can doubt thatshe is a genuine Sovereigntist, if only because she wouldn't in that case have accepted the office [offered her] - but to that observation one may add the additional thawt that she has a fund of sympathy and tolerance towards the Souvereigntists which previous Governor-Generals never had.

Then why name a woman very tolerant towards the Québécois freedomfighters? Quite simply for the better allurement of the Inhabitants of Quebec and making them adhere more easily to the idea of the Canadian federation. A choice that could gain ground; and, from the point of view of the image, the strategy succeeds very well.

Quebec was heavily wounded by the scandal of the mixed-liability companies (Adscam scandal), it seems then enough for the federal government to clog the wounds and to give a powerful message of this government's being representative of the Québec population in Rideau Hall.

Wasn't Luck Mervil, a Québécois Haitian, named Patriote of the year by the Saint Jean Baptiste Society, a group dedicated to the independence of Quebec? Can one think that the nomination of a Haitian as G-G [by the Liberals] is a reaction to this [previous] appointment of the Sovereigntists? And what to think also of Maka Kotto, another candidate of Black origin who was elected for the Bloc Québécois at the time of the federal elections in 2004?

Certainly, for his construction of the image of his government, it's necessary to give Mr Martin his due. But as to the content of that image? In fact, the office of GG is not one to which one posts a greatcontent, but all the same the GG must maintain a discourse on Canadian unity. In this regard, Mrs Clarkson fulfilled her role well. One could have thought of Mrs Frulla, if one wanted to continue a tradition of great oratory declaiming in lyric addresses on the merits of Canada. It should be well understood that there is something of lyric inherentin this position, for it is necessary to defend Canada in representations and in strong images, to make Canadian pride foam up with a hi froth. Somebody from the arts milieu is completely appropriate for the posting. But nobody has had the chance yet to see Mrs Jean in this role, speaking lyrically in praise of Canada.

Adrienne Clarkson was often criticized, rightly or wrongly, for her "insane expenditure". Indeed, the budget of the Governor-General figures at nearly 20 million dollars. This budget is, in addition, voted upon by Parliament.

Is the office of Governor-General still useful? In that the position isone of representation, one should note that the GG gives out all those honorary medals to the Canadians who distinguish themselvesin many fields. The Prime Minister could perform this task, but does he have time for this ceremonial duty? The Prime Minister has a heavily-loaded daily schedule, he must sit in the Parliament, as well as work continuously on various files, and must make official visits to various countries to contract agreements.

However there is large difficulty when comparing his office's legitimacy to that of the office of the Governor-General; the latter is not elected. Some will say such precisely reflects the latter's not-partisan spirit. But nomination of the GG by the Prime Minister has certainly to reflect the particular interests of the PM.

Moreover, a Radio-Canada journalist can only with difficulty be completely objective. In fact, the journalists have so much of their collective nose in the daily business of the company, regarding which they very often take a stance reflected in their way of presenting the news, the choice of words, intonation, features of the face - all are telltale of the opinion of the journalist.

The position of the governor-General is thus an office of projecting an image and incarnating suppossed "objectivity."

In my opinion an office of representation is certainly relevant, but I believe that the occupant of the office should at least be elected by the Parliament - or officially elected in some other as-yet-to-be specified way - in order to stop the favouritism which the Prime Minister inevitably communicates to us all by naming, in his own voice only, a particular person. The appointment of the Governor-General should be the fruit of a debate in Canada and not the particular choice of the PM.
It is in addition known that the Liberal Party of Canada is very close to Radio-Canada; Radio-Canada gives 82% of its political contributions to the Liberal Party of Canada - which discredits the assertion that this choice is exclusively non-partisan. This nomination was not discussed, nor do we know who else was on Paul Martin's shortliest of candidates. There is an aspect a little too Soviet in this approach. That the PM omit his criteria of representation of Canada is particularly insulting to the integrity of our democracy and to us citizens who should also have a word to say. Perhaps it'sthe case that the population itself would not make a very positive discrimination among candidates and would really choose according to required personal qualities only.

It is true that at this very point, I pose a breach in the monarchical system. While I am not additionally for a republican system, the constitutional monarchy is quite well agreeable to me. Because it is based on the parliamentary system of Prime Minister and the ministerial responsibility of the cabinet members, which in my eyes is more interesting than a republican presidential mode devoted to the separation of the presidential office and the Parliament, and which thereby opens the gate with the blocking of the two institutions.

In my opinion the office of Governor-General can very well be retained, but it could be selected in a more democratic and more transparent way.

- A miserable free translation by Owl of a French text by Jacques Hamel, posted on his website, La sphère des idées J. H., August 4, 2005.