Categories: Capital Read, Inside the Queensway

UPDATED AGAIN: A constitutional crisis? On the Friday before a long weekend?

by kadyomalley on Friday, October 9, 2009 9:48am - 111 Comments

Sadly, as the ever-vigilant Colleague Potter points out, that’s one way to describe the current dispute between our prime minister and our governor general over whether or not the latter can style herself as Canada’s head of state.

According to PMO — and at least a few constitutional lawyers — she cannot; that title belongs to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth, and Her Majesty alone.

According to the Governor General, she jolly well can. From a statement issued by Rideau Hall last week: : “As the representative of the Crown in Canada, the Governor General carries out the duties of head of state, and therefore is de facto head of state.”

Apparently, it all goes back to King George VI, who, in 1947, “”transferred all the duties of head of state of Canada to the Governor General,” although presumably, that could be revoked by a future monarch, although as far as ITQ knows, that hasn’t happened.

Meanwhile, last night, the GG’s official website appears to have undergone a major redesign; visitors are now greeted by an enormous photo of Michaelle Jean representing Canada at the United Nations. Unfortunately, none of the links seem to be working at the moment, and the site itself is painfully slow to load, but ITQ will keep clicking away — and will report back once she’s able to peruse the rest of the site.

UPDATE: The site seems to be back online, enormous splash screen photo and all. Under the heading “Represent Canada,” the governor general is described as “representative of the Crown and head of State.” It also helpfully provides a link to the aforementioned letters patent from King George in the explanation of her “role and responsibilities”:

Since Confederation in 1867, Canada has been a constitutional monarchy and a parliamentary democracy. Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II is the sovereign and Canada’s head of State.

The role of the sovereign has evolved over time. In 1947, letters patent signed by King George VI redefine the powers of the governor general and authorize the governor general to carry out the responsibilities of the Crown previously assumed by the sovereign, without having to refer to the sovereign. Since then, the governor general has represented the Crown in Canada and carries out nearly all of the duties of the head of State.

The governor general represents Canada during State visits abroad or when receiving Royal visitors, heads of State and foreign ambassadors. The governor general is also the Commander-in-Chief of the Canadian Forces.

Your move, PMO.

~~REPUBLICAN UPRISING~~ NEVER MIND, JUST AN IT SECURITY GLITCH UPDATE: Apparently, the newly refurbished site triggered a brief, but still conspiracy-fuelling, access ban for parliamentary users earlier today:

Just an overzealous autotriggered filtering protocol? At the very least, it suggests that the site itself has been transferred to a new server — perhaps to prevent PCO from getting their hands on it?

IT’S OFFICIAL: Colleague Potter posts the latest release from Rideau Hall announcing the relaunch, which has, we’re told, been in the works for “months”; there is no mention of the contretemps over her official status, as far as state-heading.

Tags: don't mess with a woman who eats her seal heart raw, Michaëlle Jean, so whose side will the monarchists be on?, Stephen Harper, where are all those constitutional lawyers when you need one?

More by kadyomalley

http://sean-cummings.ca Sean Cummings

Scrap the monarchy. It really is time for this country to grow up.

Henry V

Like it or not, it's part of our system, and Trudeau ENTRENCHED it in the Constitution.

http://intensedebate.com/people/tigerinexil1428 tigerinexile

It's pretty darned entrenched. Needs consent of all ten provincial assemblies and the territorial legislatures to change the office of the GG or the institution of the Crown.

You want to get rid of the Crown, you go convince those Nova Scotians and Prince Edward Islanders…
http://www.intensedebate.com/people/tigerinexil1428 tigerinexile

It's pretty darned entrenched. Needs consent of all ten provincial legislatures to change the office of the GG or the institution of the Crown.

You want to get rid of the Crown, you go convince those Nova Scotians and Prince Edward Islanders…
http://www.intensedebate.com/people/tigerinexil1428 tigerinexile

It's pretty darned entrenched. Needs consent of all ten provincial legislatures to change the office of the GG or the institution of the Crown.

http://www.canlii.org/en/ca/const/const1982.html#…

You want to get rid of the Crown, you go convince those Nova Scotians and Prince Edward Islanders…
http://intensedebate.com/people/ChrisInKW ChrisInKW

As did Sir John et al before him.

Dick Richards

Things have gone really well for that Republic south of the boarder over the last 9 years…

http://sean-cummings.ca Sean Cummings

Aside from having the image of whichever incarnation of royal happens to be the sovereign on our money, we have about as much in common with the monarchy as hair tonic for sheep. Nope, it's time to dump the monarchy – all those new Canadians who aren't of good United Empire Loyalist stock have nothing in common with the monarchy. I don't see how having a sovereign has helped keep the UK out of Iraq or saved the Empire from global financial meltdown. Ditch it.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Jenn_ Jenn_

Your very argument proves it works. The sovereign didn't keep the UK out of Iraq, but the very same sovereign didn't force Canada into Iraq. The global financial metldown is most often touted in Canada as being mild, relatively speaking, in relation to one of the very same sovereign's other countries. So obviously, the sovereign does not impede or enhance political will. Unlike a head of state in a republic, who is chock full of a definite political agenda.

I'm okay with having the Governor General on our money, except then we'd have to change it more since the GG isn't as long-term a gig as Queen. But don't you dare even think about putting Harper on our money. Or Ignatieff, depending on your political preference.

Henry V

When the lieutenant governors open parliament, deliver the throne speech, grant royal assent to sign bills into law, etc., they are performing the functions of the head of state. But they, like the GG, do all of this on behalf of the Sovereign.

The Queen has 11 representatives in Canada — and none of them is head of state.
http://intensedebate.com/people/tigerinexil1428 tigerinexile

The site's down again. Too many visitors, or is it getting revamped again?

Well, I think at least one thing has been settled.

Had Ignatieff stuck to his guns (and to the coalition) in January, the Governor General would have been happy to tell Prime Minister Harper to get bent.

Fun times. (Almost as fun as President Obama getting the Nobel Peace Prize for not-so-much on the day that NASA bombed the moon.)
http://intensedebate.com/people/Tridus Tridus

I think Harper is right on this. The Queen is the head of state. The GG acts on behalf of the Queen. That doesn't make the GG head of state.

That said, this is getting far more attention then it really deserves.

http://intensedebate.com/people/VinceClortho VinceClortho

correct, the moment the Queen gets off the plane on Canadian soil the GG is an invitee on a guest list.

It can change, as soon as we have agreement.

It is the PM's duty to defend the crown. Jean is being silly. Does she want this escalated. The logical end point, should she persist is Queen deciding her representative no longer is her representative. Is this what Jean wants?

Whatever some may wish for, is it really appropriate for the GG to be having a spat with the PM? Even if you think Harper shouldnt have made a public rebuke, the GG's appropriate response is to back off. Steering the crown into political waters is an enourmous mistake…….

She can resign anytime.

Lord Kitchener's Own

I don't even like calling it a "public rebuke". How is it that we've reached a point where it's considered a "rebuke" for the PMO to issue a press release containing nothing more inflammatory than a simple statement of fact?

http://sean-cummings.ca Sean Cummings

I take it back – we don't need to dump the monarchy, they need to dump us.
http://intensedebate.com/people/Gaunilon Gaunilon

Governor General Jean overestimates her own importance and has been doing so for quite a while. She should have been replaced last year.
in passing

Oh my goodness. If ‘P’ of PMO stands for ‘President’, why don’t ‘those people’ just emigrate to where anyone can grow up to be President and embrace the entire system?

On the Governor General’s site, there is a section about ‘bringing Canadians together’. This is a long term focus which understands Canada’s institutions and traditions.

Politicians are by nature usually (very) short term thinkers who seldom work to ‘bring Canadians together’ unless it is to poke the Americans in the eye … or to trade the discards from others’ Beetles 45 collections.

Whether or not Canada ‘grows up’ when we are forced to accept the reign of Charles … we will still need some ‘head of state’ figure who understands the continuity of Canada.

I can’t believe elected officials and/or their keepers would stoop to undermine the OFFICE of the Governor General. Isn’t this seditious libel or something?

http://intensedebate.com/people/Ed_Sweeney Ed_Sweeney

I think you mean the Beatles.

Seditious libel? If that claim could be made, it would be against the GG, but she simply misspoke. A simple clarification was made.
http://www.intensedebate.com/people/Ed_Sweeney Ed_Sweeney

I think you mean the Beatles.

Seditious libel? If that claim could be made, it would be against the GG, but she simply misspoke. A simple clarification was made. Capitalizing 'OFFICE' doesn't really confer any extra powers upon it.

kcm

Trudeau a closet monarchist…oh my ears and whiskers!
Mike B

Oh wow, the site really has changed, so maybe you guys were on to something.

However, I find it hard to believe that such an extensive re-design was implemented in response to the rebuke from Harper. This must have been in the works for some time. Although the timing of the new site going live is a bit curious…
kcm

Geddes is spot on. The role of the GG has evolved like everything else. WE as Canadians vest in the GG power that we no longer would tolerate directly from the monarch. But it;s not so simple. The Queen must be consulted. Those who believe the Queen is the sole arbiter here, should ask themselves what the public reaction would be if she took a decision without the advise of our PM which was thought not to be in the best interest of Canada. It would create a firestorm. It happened on at least one occasion in Australia – check out their public reaction.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Ed_Sweeney Ed_Sweeney

Yes, I believe the role of the GG has evolved. Clarkson tried to move it in a more political direction, but was too tightly tied with the Liberals to ever be taken seriously in the attempt. Jean has increasingly pushed the institution into a more political role. That has largely been tolerated because she is not viewed as highly partisan. kcm's point about a political firestorm applies equally to the GG. It the institution starts showing any sign of partisanship there will be a firestorm. If the politicization is limited to non-partisan generalities the public seems accepting enough of that.
http://www.intensedebate.com/people/Ed_Sweeney Ed_Sweeney

Yes, I believe the role of the GG has evolved. Clarkson tried to move it in a more political direction, but was too tightly tied with the Liberals to ever be taken seriously in the attempt. Jean has increasingly pushed the institution into a more political role. That has largely been tolerated because she is not viewed as highly partisan. kcm's point about a political firestorm applies equally to the GG. If the institution starts showing any sign of partisanship there will be a firestorm. If the politicization is limited to non-partisan generalities the public seems accepting enough of that.

kcm

Yes i agree.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Thwim Thwim

As much as it pains me to say it, I believe the PM is correct on this issue.

I mean, petty and rude in the way it was handled, yes.. but technically correct. To be honest, I'm more surprised by what seems to be our Governor General's response to the whole thing. She's usually far more subtle in the way she slaps Harper around. I much more expected to see a response along the lines of "My appointed first advisor has reminded me that our Sovereign is technically our head of state. I thank him for this, and will hold it in my memories when he next approaches me."
http://intensedebate.com/people/OntarioTown OntarioTown

I think Harper is "deliberatley" picking a fight. His ego couldn't stand that he had to answer to GG about the prorogation.

Right after that, I received a 10 percenter from my local MP (Cons) and one of the (polling) questions was:

Does Canada need a Governor General Yes No

You do the math here Kady, it sure looks suspicious to me. I've kept all but one of the over 25 percenters I've received so far from the Cons party…….and will fish through to see if that's one of the one's I've kept.
http://www.intensedebate.com/people/Thwim Thwim

As much as it pains me to say it, I believe the PM is correct on this issue.

I mean, petty and rude in the way it was handled, yes.. but technically correct. To be honest, I'm more surprised by what seems to be our Governor General's response to the whole thing. She's usually far more subtle in the way she slaps Harper around. I much more expected to see a response along the lines of "My appointed first advisor has reminded me that our Sovereign is technically our head of state. I thank him for this, and will hold proper precedence in my memories when he next approaches me."
PolJunkie

This is just vintage Harper. He simply can’t help his true nature.

Rather than just enjoy the afterglow of his NAC stunt and just be happy with the latest polls which, apparently, show a sudden and bizarre “Harper-mania” across the land, he has to do this.

Did he need to humiliate Jean with this public admonition? Not at all. But Harper is and forever will be a mean-spirited, must-anihilate-all-those-who-dare-to-oppose-me kind of politician. A statesman he is not and never will be.

But… If the polls are to be believed, this is the kind of leadership that Canadians want. So bow down, Michaelle, and kiss the ring.
http://intensedebate.com/people/parnel parnel

Could we be hopeful she can and will fire the current PM for dereliction of duty.

http://intensedebate.com/people/VinceClortho VinceClortho

She is the one who needs to be concerned for her job. I think the current Queen would be rather upset at both the content of dispute and the failur of her representative to immeadiately back off.

The Queen knows how to handle this stuff.

I will say again, by convention the PM is supposed to defend the crown. Jean is the one being silly…she is almost out the door anyway.

http://intensedebate.com/people/parnel parnel

HOPEFULLY hARPER WILL SOON FOLLOW.
http://www.intensedebate.com/people/parnel parnel

Hopefully Harper will soon follow

http://intensedebate.com/people/OntarioTown OntarioTown

Also, what's everyone talking about including the media? Harper and GG and not his (secrets, he's got secrets) expensive ads, how about costs of polling, how about Poilievre possibly push-pollling (see BC'r in Toronto)……etc., etc.

Suckers are, aren't we?
wilson

LOL,
so, this manufactured constitutional crisis was the simple updating of the GGs website…..

and in the REAL news :
Jobless rate bounces back
Employers create better-than-expected 30,600 jobs; jobless rate dips to 8.4%

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business…
Holly Stick

So is the company messing about with the GG's website the same one which has been paid with our tax dollars to make the Government of Canada websites into ugly partisan propaganda sites for the Harper governemnt? I want my money back.
http://intensedebate.com/people/SisyphusThis SisyphusThis

I asked my neighbour ( a Czech immigrant ) what he thought of the apparent
dispute between He and She.

He said " huh ?"
http://www.intensedebate.com/people/SisyphusThis SisyphusThis

I asked my neighbour ( a Czech immigrant ) what he thought of the apparent
dispute between He and She.

He said " huh ?"

That's Czech for " yeah, baby ".
RagingRanter

Personally, I've always found it strange that Michaelle Jean's picture on our dimes, quarters, etc. looks nothing like her in real life.
Ernie

Much as I like our current GG, lets have a real constitutional Monarchy and reject Charles as King when the time comes. Instead, invite Princess Margriet of the Netherlands to become Queen – she is the only "royal" to have ever been born in Canada. From what I have read she is very popular and her children are level-headed. There is precident for this move, after all the English "brought" William over from the Netherlands in 1869. The Dutch royals aparartly live fairly inexpensively and Canadian royals would be a terrific tourist draw for Americans.
http://www.koninklijkhuis.nl/english/content.jsp?…
knick

It's the oddest thing – whenever anyone stands up to Harper, they're immediately labelled as a troublemaker…the GG, Page, the Official Opposition, anyone who just wants to do their job without his interference. Meanwhile, the media is entranced by his musical debut, and obsessed with Ignatieff. Sure are peculiar priorities.
http://intensedebate.com/people/psiclone psiclone

The Governor General of Canada (French [masculine]: Gouverneur général du Canada, or [feminine]: Gouverneure générale du Canada) is the viceregal representative in the federal jurisdiction of the Canadian monarch and head of state, Queen Elizabeth II, who is equally shared with 15 other sovereign nations in a form of personal union, but resides predominantly in her oldest realm, the United Kingdom. On the advice of her Canadian Prime Minister only,[1] the Queen appoints the Governor General to carry out most of the monarch's constitutional and ceremonial duties for an unfixed period of time – known as serving At Her Majesty's Pleasure – though five years is the normal convention, as is a rotation between anglophone and francophone incumbents. Once in office, these individuals maintain direct contact with the Queen, wherever she may be at the time.[2]
Julie

I do think MacLean should upgrade their IT equipment and check the facts before publishing this stuff.

People stop beleaving everything that is writen and check the facts.

Get a life either learn about politics or got cook your turkey for the weekend.

MacLean can't you control what you post???