Who's mandate is the well-being and betterment of each and every Canadian? The Order in Council of 1940.

Bottom line & Executive Summary
Knowing that nothing can stop a Majority PM, We must elect the Governor General.



Originally Posted January 25/2009

Introduction

I've been ranting and railing about the Office of Governor General (and how the Executive's powers to BE the Executive, or "deciding element" within Canada, was usurped by the Legislative order) for many years .... BUT anyone I ever talk to about it just rolls their eye - not interested.

I'm either a lousy explain-er,
or
the explanation is not deemed worthy of consideration,
or
the solution I'm proposing is connected with a problem that no one sees as a problem, never mind whether anyone agrees with my idea of a solution.

THIS BLOG ENTRY CAME ABOUT because the only person who ever asked for more information about, asked on Jan 9/09 "I read King's letter of March 1940 but I need some explanation of the consequences of that particular action.

My understanding of parliament is not that great so when you have a moment to spare I would like to know more the effect of that decision which I presume is how Harper got his wish talking to the Governor. thank you"

To you Vic, thank you and here goes, once more ... perhaps only for my own benefit ... or for someone to read after I'm gone.

rce

Nothing can stop a Majority Canadian PM

Since 'twas never intended like this, is this what you want?

Since the opposite was the framers intent, should we not follow the original plan?



The gov't of Canada was set up in 1867 as a superstructure erected over top of the existing colonial governance structures.

The concept and design of the new, superior, Confederal level (called the General Gov't) was based on everything "parliamentary" -both good and bad- that had transpired in Britain, the breakaway USA, France AND any/all of the colonies in British North America or elsewhere on the planet.

A new independent country was NOT being created, just an agglomeration of colonies that had one of two possible fates i) the starting point for new coast to coast 'Dominion' to be within the UK's orb or ii) a territory that could be plausibly abandoned should the Americans turn their (now stilled) Civil War military resources northward.

The Confederal government would be loosely based on the Westminster, fool-enough-commoners-who-can-vote democratic "cabinet system" with a drone Monarch masquerading as titular head of the regime, and styled a constitutional-Monarchy, but with the local bicameral influences of the Iroquois Confederacy's Council of Grandmothers and the 2nd USA Constitution (check the 11th Article of their FIRST attempt)

BUT... slightly different (hence the phrase "similar in Principle" within preamble to the BNA 1867)

-a) it's not a design FOR governing the mother country,

-b) it's not a design for governing an independent country,

-c) it's not for governing a fully developed country (many anticipatory steps had to be included)

-d) it's not for governing a "conquered" country

The fathers (in Canada but more importantly those in the UK) of the 1867 system:
1) saw the checks and balances benefits of the division of powers in the USA;
2) knew the Ancient philosophers wish to be governed by a Benevolent Dictator (I prefer to use the less-coloured word Autocrat);
3) knew that the Linguistic+Religion-based factionalism of Canada was nowhere near resolved;
4) knew the nature of human beings with not-enough freedom for their circumstances and the nature of those with too-much freedom;
5) knew the system they picked couldn't approximate the USA system (that would just be inviting trouble);
6) knew that the Loyalists of North America and the Executive powers in the UK would have to be satisfied with "enough" control being retained in Gr Br, so that rag-a-muffin rebels wouldn't try again;
7) knew that the hierarchy of powers (as in UK) would accomplish the compromise necessary to assuage all parties.


Canadian Sovereignty remained vested in the Crown (this was just a little local administrative shuffling),

The Crown remained Monarch-in-Council (ie the Cabinet retain operational control over the titular Monarch),

The new Confederal gov't would have an all-the-powers-of-the-Monarch-in Council EXECUTIVE Officer, the Governor General including the power to veto any Cdn Bill,

the Governor General (who could be a newbie) would have an independent panel of appointed-for-life local advisors (the Privy Council) to balance out what the Legislative level proposed,

AND the Monarch in Council/Br Cabinet would have the power to disallow any silliness that snuck past the GovGen and his privy Council,

The New Parliament had three elements the Monarch (assent or not), the Upper House styled Senate, the lower House of Commoners.

The Upper house was to represent the propertied class (property taxes paid the bills, with a little help from excise & custom tax) and each Senator had to prove and maintain a net-worth and a clear-of-encumbrances real property holding equivalent to ~$300,000 today.

('Tis truly a shame that the Senators' original ($4,000) qualification is the only dollar amount in Canada that's never been adjusted for inflation)

These propertied folk were to be drawn equally from the 3(now4) divisions(now referred to as regions) of Canada. So that the varied economic interests could be represented - fish, farm, timber, mines, commerce etc, east west, french/catholic, dissentient/separate see 93(2) etc etc

The lowest chamber was for elected representative. They were to be from ridings distributed by province in relation to the representation-based-on-population of the new Quebec province (the most populous prov in 1867, the-then most powerful one but ... trending down)

The new 4 provinces continued to have a Governor appointed by the Monarch-in-Council's representative so that any business approved in those local Legislative Assemblies, Legislative Councils and Executive Councils still needed assent by the Lt Governors (as before Confederation), but as a new measure, any Provincial Bill could be Disallowed by the new office of Governor-General in Council (the GG with the Advice and Consent of the Privy Council)

So ... the Confederal system of 1867 was really being run (Executive Power rested) by the Governor General and the Monarch-in-Council.

The system was set up this way purposely ... so that no one person or level could get too powerful and that at all times the Crown-in-Council could correct any local excesses.


Nothing has changed since then, except

1931 the Statute of Westminster granted an independent Foreign Policy to Canada.

1940 The Office of Clerk of the Privy Council (head of Executive admin) is merged with the office of Secretary to the Cabinet (head of Legislative administration) by Order in Council 1940-1121 of Rt Hon Wm Lyon Mackenzie King;

King government and his Dollar a year Men transform Canada from agrarian backwater to munitions manufactory, initiate pan-national transportation, communication, defense, fiscal/monetary plans, nationalize anything and everything to aid the war (very successful) effort

1947 the Letters Patent of the Governor General re-state (I'd say re-instate) the 1867 delegated powers to the Office of GovGeneral PLUS expressly designate the GG as Commander in Chief in place of the Monarch (as in 1867)

1947 Rt Hon Wm Lyon Mackenzie King initiates Canadian citizenship (passports in a different name, no new rights, privileges or ownerships) in addition to British subject-ship for Canadian,

1950 the Rt Hon Wm Lyon Mackenzie King succeeds in lobbying to have a Canadians (not Brits) appointed to Office of GG (ie individuals to be recommended by Cdn PM not U.K. PM);

1950's National transportation, communication, manufacturing schemes are transformed to peacetime uses (as if they'd been designed that way)

1950's With the War over, (Korea too) and once the Seaway and D.E.W. line are underway, not many new 'huge' projects are on hand for the much-bigger gov't to undertake.
-International financing and ownership of a National pipeline not is publicly accepted because of Parliamentary opposition (they too are looking for things to do after such a long time of agreeing to everything) - pushing it thru causes gov't to fall.
-While USA worries about communist infiltration of gov't and the UK pretends they're still a world power, Canada institutes National Hospitalization ...the gov't will now have a interest in how "safely" you live .... "unsafe living" could lead to unnecessary hospital expenditures.

1960's The Liberals regain power as minority and jam thru the UnionDParty's, social top 10 list of programs to stay in power.
-they buy votes with Healthcare for everyone and senior citizen pensions .... both pay-as-you-go schemes based on perpetual-baby-boom demographics. Pays as you Go means current benefits will be paid out of current revenue, future (increased) benefits will have to come from future (increased) revenue (or borrowings) that will have to be paid/serviced by future-future increased revenue (or borrowings) et cetera

1968 An "I'm too smart to be constrained by the laws of nature" libertine (perhaps a Fabian, too) is elected Prime Minister and soon after:

1) undoing the conventions on dissolution of marriages;
2) eliminating the written penalties against his friends' type of sexual immorality;
3) discovering that the Native Canadians WILL win every case where they present the Proclamation of 1763 as their claim as they did in the Calder case:
4) realizing that the baby-boom is over and he'll need some more people FAST (hello wide-open immigration) to pay for all the pay-as-you-go programs;
and
5) seeing that since the 1774 Quebec Act , French facts about Canada cannot be assimilated away and so he starts a program to assimilate the English;

becomes bored with the whole thing and lets his all-political party-men run things with ONLY the next election in mind.

Then spending balloons in the high-interest cycle of the late 1970-early1980's until only by 1)ceaseless tax increases by Myron Baloney heading his party's traditional opponents and 2)ceaseless erosion of principle by inflation-over-time and 3) slashing transfer dollars to the provinces (in exchange for more autonomy - a deal they stupidly gobble up) does a successor government balance the budget that he un-balanced 20+ years before.

He temporarily snapped out of this boredom when the sincere-but-boneheaded minority PM who briefly succeeded him, naively thought he could govern-in minority, as-if he had no-blood-thirtsty-opposition-waiting-to-pounce and thereby gave him another chance.

He took the opportunity (knowing that as a Majority PM no one could stop him) to fulfill some personal projects

1) Removing the need to have the UK Parliament approve every change to the Canadian foundational documents (unf. achieved by making the Constitution now virtually IMPOSSIBLE to amsnd)

2) Adding a Codified Set of Legal Rights into our Common Law system (unf. achieved by ONLY with ridiculous conditions and subject-to clauses that undermine those rights - net effect less rights than before under Common Law).

3) Saving the World by meeting each World Leader in person and changing their minds by the force of his personality (unf. dismal failure - even as personal PR - this part now conveniently forgotten).


When his term expired and even though he was technically not the leader, his party was reduced to a rump of 40 in 1984 ... But not before he "accomplished":
-#1, by compromising so much with his opponents that we have an impossibly complex set of amending formulae (things will never change beyond BiLateral (Confederal gov't + 1 province) matters , and getting the UK Parliament to remove the "in Council" part about the Monarch in relation to Canada ... now it's just the Individual Office Holder that is the source of all sovereignty and the holder of the Disallowance power .... not the UK Cabinet.

#2 by compromising so much with his opponents that all the so-called "rights" he enshrined are but condition-ridden, subject-to shadows of what we enjoyed prior to that acts passage - in addition Parliament was in charge of law, thereafter the Supreme Court (and the predisposition of the person appointing individuals to that now-politicized legal office) became truly so.

#3 is so sad I won't even talk about it


So that's how I think the government of Canada's very-suitable hierarchical system of checks and balances got perverted and its people got subverted into tax-drenched drones that cannot even think about there government system because we don't know anything about it. We've never been taught the mechanics of its operation.

We're not taught the "civics" of the "Constitution" because the on-the-ground-facts do not match the on-the-paper written laws-of the land.


If we did teach our foundational rules FOR/ restrictions UPON government in detail, the attentive teens might inquire as to why 'twas so. This would be either an embarrassment to the teacher (who'd likely NOT be able to answer why the government need not follow the constitution) or an encouragement to already-scofflaw-ish teens to do so also.

HOWEVER despite my complaints ... the country is constantly mentioned as tops (or close) in every survey or poll of countries.

REGARDLESS of how much better Canada could already be (if these excesses in power-wielding/power-concentrating and self-serving mistakes in policy & math had not taken place), it could still be great IF we act to stop any further mis-management of the country, it's people, it's money, it's resources, it's laws, it's constitutional protections and safeguards.

If Canada and Canadians do nothing we will become:

a) fully socialist (we have no property rights, we're already taxed to death and already almost totally reliant on government FOR services, FOR protection, FOR remedies, FOR money to subsidize the young, the old, the indigent, the business startup, the business-windup etc etc

b) part of the North American economic Zone with all the problems of the USA's biggest cities and all the rape-of-resources-with nothing-to$$show for it of the most underdeveloped countries .. just another cog in the one world, New world order.


Do nothing and what else can you expect ... something in-between, that is not quite so gruesome ... who cares.

If we did:

1) require our government to follow the constitution,

2) want to be competently informed about the actions and accurate costs of the planned expenditures of gov't,

3) require our representatives to do what they said they'd do (at least not to do the exact opposite once in office),

4) expect to have a government system with provisions in place that would stop self-serving or short-sighted or only-politically motivated decisions from ever taking effect.



If we did want those things (at a minimum)

.........we'd need a veto.

Or a big Uncle/Aunt-who-loves-us-best in a position of power WITH a veto.

The Governor General has that power of veto.

We'd need a big Uncle/Aunt-who-loves-us-best to have the mandate of a Benevolent Autocrat .. one person whose sole objective and highest unwavering aim is the well-being and betterment of each and every Canadian

The Governor General has that mandate now.

We'd want that big Uncle/Aunt-who-loves-us-best to not be able to get too human.To not be able to get corrupted by power.
Perhaps to have no power to initiate laws or spend money (that's the assembly's job), but just to say no to the stupid spending and ill-considered laws. AND if in doubt to put the law or expenditure "on hold" and call the question in a nation-wide referendum.

The Governor General has these powers already - withholding of Royal Assent and Reservation (scroll down to s. 55 and s.57 )


If we had a big Uncle/Aunt-who-loves-us-best who was the Governor General, S/he could re-instate the office of Comptroller General - a sort of Auditor General BEFORE the spending.

If we had a big Uncle/Aunt-who-loves-us-best who was the Governor General, S/he could rescind the 1940 Order in Council that stole control of the Privy Council away from Her/his predecessor(s).

If we had a big Uncle-who-loves-us-best who was the Governor General S/he could get the discussion going on adjusting the Senate's $4000 property qualification/disqualification standard for inflation - thus re-establishing its place as House of Taxpayers


If we had a big Uncle-who-loves-us-best who was the Governor General S/he'd have to have all of that Office's powers already written down because i) the existing usurpers would fight tooth and nail to retain their power, ii) the existing Constitution is too difficult to amend and iii) Canadians politicos and pundits would never agree on the terms if we had a Royal Commission or First Ministers Conference to try and set the terms.

Fortunately this is the case.

If we had this kind of Governor General ... that person should be elected.

Fortunately, this IS readily achievable because The Monarch selects the GG based on recommendation -this recommendation, by CONVENTION not LAW, was initially received from the UK Cabinet, more recently from the Cdn Cabinet .... no laws need be changed to have the recommendation flow from a nationwide election (Perhaps held simultaneous with every-other General Election and for a term that starts 365 days after the return of the Writs for the simultaneous General Election).

I further suggest a single transferable-style ballot so that many candidates could run and no run-off would be necessary.


Bottom line & Executive Summary
Knowing that nothing can stop a Majority PM, We must elect the Governor General.