Talk:Governor General of Canada

"oldest continuous institution in Canada"

@Mr Serjeant Buzfuz: I agree that we have to rely on sources, but that sentence as written is dubious. There is very likely a chiefdom in some isolated BC first nation that predates the office of the GG. The source obviously meant that it is the oldest institution established under Western law. —Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 15:40, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

That would be reading a gloss into the source. Maybe there is a First Nations institution that is older and continuous, but until that it brought forward, backed up by a reliable source, we can't assume that is the case. Nor can we assume that is what the author of Crown of Maples meant. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 15:44, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

"President of canada" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect President of canada has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 March 20 § President of canada until a consensus is reached. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 19:00, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

Suggestion for introduction section

The introductory paragraphs of the article are overly wordy. The first few sentences should clearly outline the origin of the Governor General's position, how they are appointed, their official roles and responsibilities and, importantly, their de facto role.

One must read up to the "Role" section to discover that the modern role of the Governor General is largely ceremonial. There is needless waffle about the King "residing in his oldest and most populous realm" - it reads like something written by a Royal historian. The statement about the tradition of alternating between French- and English-speaking appointees should be relegated to further in the article.

Also, the introduction does not even mention the name of the current GG.

This article about the Australian GG is far easier to read and gives the layman a decent understanding of the GG's position relatively quickly. 131.172.30.143 (talk) 16:46, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

Spelling of title

While I can understand from the perspective of those in-the-know about the Canadian governor general that the absence of a hyphen from the title is trivial, hyphenating the title as "governor-general of Canada" and pluralizing it as "governor-generals" are common errors in the media and elsewhere. So, it seems clarification in this article is helpful and I don't think a note will get noticed. To sort of try to meet the two sides halfway, I've put the spelling info back in article mainspace, but, as the last section, at the bottom. Does that suffice? ₪ MIESIANIACAL 16:07, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

Monarch is head of state

@Miesianiacal: I noticed you removed "head of state" from the intro, as a description of the monarch's position, but I restored it. Would it not be best to let our readers know that Charles III is both monarch & head of state of Canada, as well as the rest of the Commonwealth realms? Anyways, if you disagree (via reverting)? I'll let it be. GoodDay (talk) 21:02, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

"de facto head of state"

@GoodDay: I have reworded the sentence you reverted so that it is now in quotations and says that the GG has been "described as the 'de facto head of state'." Please note the difference between saying the "GG is the de facto head of state" and "has been described as the 'de facto head of state'". I have included eight sources, several of which are academic journals, others of which are CBC News items. You may disagree with what these sources say but that's not a reason to remove reliably sourced information. Wellington Bay (talk) 15:45, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

I initially reverted your changes, but then restored them. It's best for folks to see what exactly is being disputed, in the following RFC. GoodDay (talk) 21:10, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Topic not really covered outside of media in the form of click bait.....no real academic debate ..as the sources presented here state.........including Kenneth Munro that says "For many years, journalists and broadcasters have contributed to the confusion and fuss about who is, in fact, the Canadian head of state"Moxy🍁 05:22, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

References

RFC: Description of the Governor General, in the lead

Should it be mentioned in the lead, that the governor general is described as Canada's de facto head of state? GoodDay (talk) 20:15, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Sources see Talk:Governor General of Canada#"de facto head of state"

Survey

• No - Per WP:WEIGHT, the monarch is described as the head of state. IMHO, we should avoid confusing editors on this matter. GoodDay (talk) 21:09, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
• Yes - there's no reason to dumb things down to the lowest common denominator. Saying that something should not be mentioned because it might be "confusing" to editors[?] or readers is a patronizing argument that literally insults the intelligence of readers. There are eight high-quality sources that either say the GG is the "de facto head of state" or that she has been described as that. Not only that, but Governor General Michaëlle Jean had press releases issued describing herself as such and this description was used on the GG's official website. GoodDay's opposition appears to be based on WP:IDONTLIKEIT. You can use WP:WEIGHT to argue this mention should have less prominence in the article but not as justification to remove the reference altogether and ignore eight high quality reliable sources (academic journals, mostly) used to back it up (and it's a stretch to claim a single sentence making a passing reference violates WP:WEIGHT.) Wellington Bay (talk) 21:33, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
  • My argument is that it shouldn't be in the intro. GoodDay (talk) 21:39, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
• Yes – That's a pretty vital piece of information for readers unfamiliar with the subject. 5225_C (talk • contributions) 01:48, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
• NO lead not the place for the debate about the Canadian Republic. Is this covred in the body in detail ? .....no because it's a footnote in academic Canadian publication. Should try to comeup with wording for body first WP:LEAD. Clear case of Wikipedia:Lead fixation.Moxy🍁 02:11, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

  None of the 8 sources I cited have this as a "footnote". Nor are the references "obscure" as you claim in your edit note (academic sources are considered high quality, no need to denigrate them and CBC News is one of the most widely used sites in Canada) In fact, one GG asserted she was "head of state" in two speeches. The argument is that the GG is the head of state as a result of the 1947 letters patent so perhaps we should add the reference in the passage that mentions the letters patent. Wellington Bay (talk) 11:53, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

  As has been suggested by many we should find some wording for the body of the article by why of academic sources in the field. This needs to be put into context. Best follow WP:BRD. Moxy🍁 14:37, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

• NO I concur with Moxy on this. Not needed in the led, plenty of room to discuss the subject in the article body. Mediatech492 (talk) 05:03, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
• No - This is a minority view which is not accepted by the majority of official government sources, judges, constitutional scholars, and pollsters as is noted in our Monarchy of Canada article and the talk discussion there. Stating this extreme minority view as the truth in the lede is contrary to WP:WEIGHT. I also agree with Moxy's point above. Finally, the fact that Section 9 of the BNA vests all executive power in the monarch saying "The Executive Government and Authority of and over Canada is hereby declared to continue and be vested in the Queen."[1] makes it pretty clear that the head of state is Queen/King not the GG.--Darryl Kerrigan (talk) 17:49, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Discussion

I'm arguing that it shouldn't be in the intro. GoodDay (talk) 21:34, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Then make a proposal as to where it should be mentioned rather than simply reverting and opening an RFC - and in Talk:Monarchy of Canada you were also arguing for removing a 22-year old reference to the GG being describe as "de facto" head of state. Wellington Bay (talk) 21:38, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Concerning the Monarchy page-in-question? I'm no longer taking part in that increasingly long discussion. The disagreement we had there, is basically the same here. I don't think the "de facto head of state" bit, needs to be included at all. But, I'll let others give their input & leave the decision with them. GoodDay (talk) 21:45, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

I'm not necessarily against it in the lead, but I don't think it should be in the opening sentence. That seems a bit much for an unofficial and controversial interpretation. — Kawnhr (talk) 21:56, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

I've seen a number of references to the "de facto head of state" description being a result of the 1947 Letters Patent. I suggest moving the reference so it follows this sentence: "In 1947, King George VI issued letters patent allowing the viceroy to exercise almost all powers on behalf of the monarch" with something like "as a result, the governor general has sometimes been described as the "de facto head of state"" and then following with this existing sentence: "As a matter of law, however, the governor general is not in the same constitutional position as the sovereign". Wellington Bay (talk) 12:44, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

I suggest you read over this quote="There is a common misconception that the Letters Patent, 1947 devolved the position of Head of State from the sovereign to the governor general. This interpretation of the Letters Patent has been supported by recent Governors General Adrienne Clarkson and Michaëlle Jean.....Clarkson’s interpretation of the Letters Patent was critiqued because it did not take into account the Statute of Westminster and other legislation that forged Canada’s independence from Great Britain. "Moxy🍁 14:41, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

You're asking me to conduct original research. Look at secondary sources instead such as here, here, here, or here all of which link the 1947 letters patent with the GG being in fact or being described as de facto head of state. Wellington Bay (talk) 14:49, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Asking you to read what the controversies are....what is needed is context as its not simply clear cut as you imply. I also suggest we look for sources at jstor or perhaps scholar.google that give context. We have talked about this before...it's not some new revelation that you found. What we are lookingf for is WP:DUE not higlighted in the lead with no context in body.Moxy🍁 14:58, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Oh im sorry, I thought you were linking to the actual letters patent which is why I made my comment about OR, I didn't realise that was an article (though it is not neutral - Carolyn Harris has a definite monarchist POV). I am not suggesting we state the GG is or isn't the de facto head of state but simply that they have been described as such and that including that in reference to the letters patent would make sense. Rather than just reverting can you suggest a possible wording and placement? Wellington Bay (talk) 15:46, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

I don't feel I have the expertise to suggest wording. I simply have the capability of researching and realizing that this is controversial and needs context. The article(s) are over two decades old and this has never been mentioned before. I would assume because it's not covered by scholarly publications to any great extent (that I can find). The one scholar that you've sourced Kenneth Munro says "For many years, journalists and broadcasters have contributed to the confusion and fuss about who is, in fact, the Canadian head of state". Constitutional publications just don't cover this.... as academics in the field seem to simply dismiss the media arguments. Thus we need to explain why this comes up in the media and what constitutional scholars have to say. Moxy🍁 15:58, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

The fact that two governors general have asserted that the GG is head of state can't be dismissed. As Munro pointed out: "Adrienne Clarkson stated that “the Governor General is the head of state in Canada, and is treated as such when abroad.” The present Governor General, Michaëlle Jean, has adopted a somewhat different position, preferring instead to refer to the Governor General as Canada’s “de facto head of state” in a September 2006 media release." [She also referred to the GG as head of state in speeches: “I, a francophone from the Americas, born in Haiti, who carries in her the history of the slave trade and the emancipation of blacks, at once Québécoise and Canadian, and today before you, Canada's head of state, proudly represents the promises and possibilities of that ideal of society." Wellington Bay (talk) 16:05, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Agree we need expert opinions....thats not me. Have asked for input at our WP project. Moxy🍁 16:19, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

That's just two out of thirty, fwiw. Besides, declaring or describing yourself to be something, doesn't make you that something. PS - If Mary Simon declared or described herself as "Queen of Canada". Would that make her de facto Queen of Canada? GoodDay (talk) 20:15, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

It is worth considering how other encyclopedias have dealt with this. The Canadian Encyclopedia does not support this interpretation of the head of state controversy arising from Adrienne Clarkson's statements, which were made after she was no longer GG. It states the following on its article about Clarkson [2]:

In 2006, Clarkson published her autobiography, Heart Matters, which became a bestseller. In the book, she wrote that “many politicians don’t seem to know that the final authority of the state was transferred from the monarch to the governor general in the Letters Patent of 1947, thereby making Canada’s government independent of Great Britain.” She further argued that “the governor general is the head of state in Canada, and is treated as such when abroad.” Clarkson’s interpretation of the Letters Patent and the designation of head of state were subject to criticism and contrary to the views of some constitutional scholars and monarchists. Though the Letters Patent give the governor general the authority to act as head of state both domestically and internationally, they do not change the monarch’s status as Head of State (see Monarchism).

Its article about the GG states the following[3]:

The head of state is the Canadian monarch. Their duties are carried out by the governor general, who acts as the representative of the Crown — currently Charles III — in Canada. (Lieutenant-Governors fulfill the same role in provincial governments.)

Its article on the "Sovereign" states the following[4]:

Under Canada’s constitutional monarchy, the sovereign is head of state, the legal foundation of the executive branch of government and one part of Parliament...

Its article on the Letters Patent, 1947 states[5]:

While Letters Patent delegated Crown prerogatives to the governor general, the sovereign remains Head of State.

Our own article on the Letters Patent, 1947 calls Clarkson's statements "misconceptions" and a "misunderstanding of the of the letters patent." It also notes that Michaëlle Jean was slapped down by the PM when she made the similar statements you are referring to. Further, Kenneth Munro who you cite above called it "linguistic recklessness" to describe the GG as Canada's head of state.[6] The overwhelming information out there just doesn't support the claim that the GG is the head of state, de facto or otherwise, nor giving such prominence to these minority views which elsewhere we have called misunderstandings and misconceptions.--Darryl Kerrigan (talk) 23:20, 17 April 2024 (UTC)