Executive Summary
Reversing the Vasectomy
The Letters Patent of 1947 restate the Governor General's Executive powers exactly as enumerated in the BNA/Constitution of 1867, plus they confer the title of Commander-in-Chief (formerly vested in the Office of HRH s.15). All of this is granted 'at pleasure' of the Queen and can be revised unilaterally by HRH at any time, but in my view nothing 'legally' need be changed, IMHO our as-written systems of hierarchical checks and balances is just about perfect.
I believe the Office of Governor General has been emasculated. Not by castration/removal of powers, but by sleight-of-hand at a time beyond most people's memory. This magical usurpation was achieved by one Order-in-Council, issued by one PM, under emergency conditions, in time of war. The powers and the Office just need to be re-attached.
So, to belabour the medical metaphor to conclusion, the process of reversing the Office's Vasectomy is simple. No Constitutional amendment is necessary, no Act of Parliament is required. Probably only a few sets of Letterhead need be changed.
All that needs to happen is for Canadians to demand that the 50%+1 PM follow the written provisions of our foundational law, and for us to instruct the 50%+1 PM to rescind that one Order in Council and go back to being the Leader of the biggest 'group' of members in the Lowest House of our Legislative power. That's enough power for any one person be it Mr Harper, Mr Chretien, Mr Mulroney, or the late Rt Hon Messrs Trudeau, Pearson, Diefenbaker, St Laurent and King
Next we can make plans to hold elections for Governor General (perhaps simultaneous with every other General Election, for a term that starts 365 days from the return of the Writs).
Consider all this the next time a 50%+1 PM passes a Bill you think is inimical to your interests .... surely you'd like a method to stop an elected official without waiting for the next election.
Consider also if it's worth your time to verify what's written here.
Dear Ladies and Gentlemen,
It seems things have gone a bit wonky with Canada's governance system since my demise in 1944.
Any old codger can describe the symptoms of the metamorphosis for you, but few of the older crowd can precisely describe "what" has gone wrong and fewer still can get anyone to listen to what they have to say.
It appears to me that most Canadians have never learned what "Responsible Government" means - the Executive power being responsible to the Legislative power. In post-1791 colonial days, the Executive levied the taxes but was required to announce their intentions in a Throne Speech and gain approval for the tax measures in the Legislative Assembly, after hearing the Assembly's grievances.
While we now are governed under a new BNA Act (1867 as amended and re-titled) the essence of Responsible Government still remains the foundation for the "similar in Principle" constitution of the governance of Canada although the practise has been turned on its head.
The British colonial framework was based upon achieving and maintaining the greatest common good as viewed by the Monarch-in-Council (the U.K's Privy Council), a view sometimes inimical to the view of the North American subjects. Here's the rub (and the nub of what I have to say herein) ... if now, the greatest common good should be viewed from the standpoint of the Canadian subject/citizens, but the power framework stands in the way of that goal ... how might it be corrected. And how can this be achieved with minimal dislocation, fuss, bother, paperwork and without a Constitutional Amendment requiring 7/50% or 100% unanimity.
Back filling and historic evolution.
After losing the 13 Colonies, the UK Privy Council sharpened their pencils and granted a form of Responsible Government -a popularly (with stringent qualifications) elected Assembly - to the remnant British North American colonies with the Constitutional Act of 1791.
The trick here (as then/now) was/is the double meaning of "Responsible" - some think it means "wholly accountable" to another person/party, while others say it means "have regard for" another's position before doing exactly what you intended to do anyway.
It goes without saying that these two interpretations banged heads in the colonies and caused countless headaches for the Monarch-in-Council's stewards here and 'over'ome'.
So, after a local rebellion or two, a dismally failed attempted at assimilation of the non-English & non-Protestant elements of Canada East & West and faced with the prospect of financing the defense of a huge, far-away border from attacks by the Manifest-Destiny zealots after the American Civil War, the Monarch-in-Council felt it was best to cut British North America loose. If blood turned out to be thicker than water - Hooray, but if not ... so be it ... a few arpents of snow and all that.
The 1867 power-sharing agreement hoist the same form of Responsible Government "General Government" superstructure atop the 4 colonial/provincial forms of Responsible Government hierarchies .... with Sovereignty at the top, all Authority flowing Down from the top and all Accountability and Loyalty flowing UP.
The Monarch-in-Council format was retained and a new (for both countries) Office, Governor General added to the top of the local heap. The local representative of the Crown had full say on local Bills and Orders "as an individual, with or without Advice and or Advice and Consent" see section 12 BNA 1867, albeit subject to the Disallowance Power (any Canadian Bill could be annulled within 2 yrs, section 56) BY the Monarch-in-Council, no questions asked.
So while some thought (and we're still all taught) that we had a country, we had no sovereignty ... we were still vassals and the UK was our suzerain. We'll come back to this.
Appearances can be deceiving (esp when they're supposed to be)
In Great Britain since the Glorious Revolution and Restoration of the Monarchy, the UK Privy Council decides everything and presents their Bills and Orders for rubber-stamping by the Monarch, who is duty-bound to approve them, while being 'held harmless and faultless' by another lost tradition - "Ministerial Responsibility".
This term affords the Monarch and HRH's Ministry some wiggle-room. The tradition holds that if a Bill, measure, Order etc proves in time to be in error, the Minister and or Ministry (if still in Office) who brought the measure to the Monarch will fall on his/her/its sword "for giving bad advice". The measure dies, expires, is rescinded, the poor sword-eater gets pensioned off to Nirvana and the Monarch and in-Council cabal march on as if nothing happened (w perhaps a few tut-tuts, but w many more quietly muttered "there-but-for-the-Grace-of-God-go-I")
In Canada, the Governor General was never compelled to rubber-stamp any Bill, measure, Order etc being presented for Royal Assent after 50%+1 passage by the Legislative Houses and after being vetted by the GG's independent advisors in the Privy Council Section 11. Heavens no, the GG could/can/should/might withhold Assent (see s.12 vs s.13) or, in the event of really tricky issues, Reserve Signification (kick it upstairs, without deciding)
In Canada, the last time a GG famously "Just Said No" was in 1926, the King-Byng Thyng where a sitting PM with the second-largest number of members refused to hand over power to the Leader with the largest-number of members (but still not a majority) after the PM was defeated in the House of Commons. NB less famously the Alberta Legislature's Bill to print currency was Disallowed in mid-Depression as ultra vires (and Mr Aberhardt and his pre-Leduc province 'soldiered on regardless' without his #1 election plank).
This browned off Mr King no end. He wanted to be considered a Rt Honourable, just like in the Home country, on par with the UK PM, not thought of as representing some back-water Dominion - Heck without Canada, what might have happened in WWI? Mr King campaigned in a subsequent but-soon-after election for the right of a PM to force his/her will upon the GG and since he won that election (in the absence of a decent alternative ... akin to May 2 2011, or 1997, or 2000) ... he felt he had a mandate to act like the constitutional law had been changed.
As it turns out, times were good in the colonies and some of the other Dominions were getting similarly Uppity, so after some discussions in London during 1926-1930, a new doctrine re: the Dominions was codified. The Statute of Westminster 1931, gave most Dominions more autonomy (it varied by country's wish), limited the direct effect of the UK Houses on Canadian law ... but retained the "form of Responsible Government" with the Monarch-in-Council as head, source of Authority and Sovereignty.
Then the Depression, then Germany's rise, re-armament (NB on printed greenback wealth), territorial expansion/ liberation/ aggrandizement and Acts of war.
Emasculating the Powers Above
Without the mobilization of Canada in the so-called Phony War (a truly amazing story of King's Minister-of-Everything, C.D Howe and the Dollar a Year Men), the UK would have been lost before the Yanks set out the terms of the first Loan/Lease, before the first twinkle of an idea about the sending troops that eventually turned the tide.
To save the world from the Hun, Canada needed an integrated plan. A Central Command and Control office and Central planning unifying the whole thing.
Unfortunately Canadian governance wasn't structured that way. It was a hierarchy of checks and balances DESIGNED to prevent their being a Central Command and Control Office-HOLDER.
No matter, serendipity prevails.
The long-serving Clerk of the Canadian Privy Council, Ernest Joseph Lemaire, retires on January 1, 1940, Lord Tweedsmuir the Governor General suddenly dies in office on February 11, 1940 ... so in a flash the institutional memory of "How Things Are Supposed To Run" disappears before Mr Kings eyes ... in the midst of a wartime Crisis (how convenient, I'll put my plan in place tout suite and worry about the niceties later ... and if we don't win the war - it won't matter anyway)
a) Expanded the Mandate of the Clerk of the Privy Council (part of the supervisory Executive Order of Governance) to run and expedite things in the Cabinet (part of the needing-supervision Legislative Order)
So all of a sudden, the PM took over the Privy Council and in the absence of a GovGen but with a 50%+1 majority in the House of Commoners, has no one to say NO to him.
Oh well, let's win the war and worry about it later.
After the successful war-effort, Mr King suggested that it might be best henceforth for HRH-in-Council to appoint "a Canadian" (of the PM's recommendation, natch) as Governor General, to redraft the Letters Patent for the Office and to start calling Canadians "citizens" rather than "subjects of the Crown" .... all was agreed.
Then the post war boom and part 2 of C.D Howe's mobilization/nationalization play came into view - the newly-created centralized, nationwide, communications, transportation, aviation, navigation etc networks that acquitted themselves so well in times of wartime emergency, now became the perfect framework for prosperity and development in peacetime.
Unfortunately, the Central/General/Federal government that did so well at running EVERYTHING (for the common good) in wartime .... didn't want to stop being so vital, so important, so integrally involved in every aspect of Canadian economic life - they LIKED being managers of the country. They wanted to continue ... they even wondered if anyone would care if they had no mandate.
So it went, well-meaning and industrious leaders became drunk on power and felt "they knew what was right" even if HOW they did it was out-of-bounds legally.
So, in late 1950's, the opposition parties in Ottawa rose up to stop the Majority Party, the hand-picked heir to the long-serving PM and the Minister-of-Everything .. were discredited, some resigned, some were defeated and we've had a terrible mess ever since and a terribly large amount of central planning ... ostensibly for the greatest common good of everyone....but really for the greatest good of the NEW Canadian version of Monarch-in-Council.
Hospitalization, Old Age Security payments, Senior Citizen Pensions, Universal Healthcare, ... all grand plans built around the Post War's Baby Boom demographics - many young can provide the funds to service the older workers (and encourage them to retire and make room for the youngsters) ... so much money that a Pay-As-You-Go system will surely provide enough for all, forever ... or at least until a few elections pass ... or at least as long as the Baby Boom lasts.
Where was the institutional memory of good times don't last forever, where was the Treasury Board, running contingency plans and considering ramifications in case .... things turned out less-than-optimally and where was the Comptroller General examining payments BEFORE they were made and where was the OLD Monarch-in-Council's local representative -on the watch for short-term thinking coming from the democratic element and where was the ever-vigilant citizenry of Canada -standing on Guard for Thee?
They were all gone, disbanded, forgotten, happy in their personal prosperity with not a thought that "their betters", the Stewards of The Canadian Crown's Assets and Treasury might be pulling the wool over everybody's eyes.
The Order In Council PC 1940-1121 and the decision to appoint a Canadian of the PM's choosing as GovGen made the PRIME MINISTER a King. All the double-checks usurped or emasculated and only the Press and the people to say NO.
Today no one blinks when the less-than 50% PM-up-for-re-election says that Bruce Carson's appointment to a sensitive Canadian Office was the sloppy work of some underling in the Privy Council Office scroll to Apr 4/11. Yet the Privy Council Office answers to that same PM up for re-election.
That 'beauty' slipped right through the Press Corp and was repeated verbatim for public consumption unchallenged!
Do you know they write memos to themselves as part of the "In Council Community" ... this is one group that was never disadvantaged ...
One More Thing
Lest we forget the 'Patriation' of the BNA/Constitution of 1982 - repatriation was incorrect - the Constitution had never been here, so how could it be return/restored, so the new word was coined and popularized without questioning and with only casual scrutiny of the significance of what was NOT being done.
Most Canadians think we became a wholly independent country then, that all the ties to Britain, the UK, etc were cut. Sorry, lost in all the chatter about a Condition-ridden Charter of now-limited Common Law Rights, a virtually-impossible to utilize (save the Bilateral formula) series of Amending formulae, the entrenchment of Group Rights and amelioration exemptions for formerly disadvantaged Groups and the (still unfolding) very-significant addition of Treaty and Aboriginal Rights, was the simple fact that the Monarch still remains atop the power-sharing hierarchy and that same 'form of Responsible Government' (hobbled and scrambled and flipped upside down in practice) still prevails.