The GG Fiasco

Like many Canadians, I have been extremely disturbed by the Michaelle Jean affair. Throughout the entire adventure, from the time when the allegations were just unfounded rumours, through the uncertainty, and now when any reasonable person would be forced to admit that these rumours perhaps aren't all that unfounded, one journalist has been persistant in his questioning of Jean's appointment and his skepticism towards her half-hearted denunciation of the separatist "movement". Like him, I remain unconvinced that Michaelle Jean is fit to be Canada's head of state. Leaving aside the fact that she is completely unqualified on political grounds, she is absolutely unqualified on national unity grounds.

The journalist to whom I am referring is Andrew Coyne, who has written several pieces on Jean's appointment. Coyne is one of my favourite journalists, and I've been nothing less than impressed with his committment to this story. His points that merely "not being a separatist" is not what ought to qualify one to be Governor General, and that there shouldn't even be a shadow of a doubt as to the vice-regal's loyalties, are very astute and, I feel, completely correct. Being Governor General is not a right, it is a privilege. Michaelle Jean does not have a right to be Canada's head of state, and supporters of her appointment should stop pretending like it's somehow "aiding the separatists," or "unpatriotic" or whatever other bunk they've come out with, to question her qualifications. This is the person who is supposed to represent Canada, in whom we place the trust of being Canada personified. The fact that there's even a legitimate question as to her loyalties is proof positive that she is not fit to be our head of state.