Really, Grits? You're going to drag the Governor General into it?

by Andrew Coyne on Sunday, May 2, 2010 2:52pm - 258 Comments

This is just outrageous. I cannot remember any opposition party, ever, politicizing the appointment of a governor general before in this way.

Of course, it’s always a political appointment, to a greater or lesser extent. But it has not previously been a point of partisan controversy, and on such calculatedly divisive lines. The appointment is entirely within the purview of the prime minister, and as long as that power was not abused via a manifestly unsuitable appointment, opposition parties have always gone along with it.

They have been right to do so: the Governor General is supposed to be above party politics. As the personification of the state the Queen must be, and must be seen to be, impartial as between rival contenders for power; so must her representatives. Dragging the Governor General down into the mudpit of partisan politics can only cast an overtly partisan light on the appointment, and thus diminish respect for the office.

Worse, in mounting this highly public lobby for her to be retained, the Liberals have chosen to emphasize her demographic credentials: as a woman, black, francophone and immigrant. These were in large part why she was appointed, of course, and perhaps that’s fair enough, though some of us grumped at her signal lack of other qualifications to the job. But to invoke these in the debate over whether she should be reappointed is deliberately to suggest that the government’s decision to replace her is an insult to these groups — making whoever replaces her, should they happen to be white or male or some other genetically incorrect makeup, the embodiment of that insult. That’ll do wonders for his or her legitimacy.

And so an office that is supposed to unite the people is now to be just another casualty in the culture war. What a cynical, destructive ploy.

Bookmark and Share
  • Rob Wolvin

    What if, when the current sovereign passes away, the new monarch was selected through a partially elective process. What if the only requirement to run for the office was to be a descendant of Canada's first Queen, Queen Victoria and be a resident of Canada? To keep the candidates above the frey, they could be required to have a group advocate on their behalf, in the election, rather than running actively themselves? The post would be for life unless resignation is requested. If the post becomes vacant then the same process could be followed or some other succession law could be enacted, with the consent of Canadians, after we have our own resident family.

    This way Canada could get it's own monarch and that person or family would have the legitimacy of election as well as ancestral heritage.

    According to our constitution, the cornerstone of government, federal & provincial as well as the judiciary, is the crown. For that institution to be disrespected and misunderstood is to created a vaccumn of legitimacy that power hungry politicians are too happy to step into. Addressing this impairment goes a long way to saving our democracy. Let's get it done so we can move onto the next challenge.

  • Mulletaur

    Perhaps we could resurrect Ray Hnatyshyn. Or Ed Schreyer. Or perhaps we could just put the embalmed corpses of either one on display and name it the GG. Nobody would be able to distinguish their previous terms from their present ones. Huh.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Mike514 Mike514

    Again, we should remember that it's constitutional and political scholars that are supposedly making a mountain out of a molehill, not merely the media.

From Macleans