Governor General should abandon unscripted speeches to conform to her role

Article content

Canada’s newly installed Governor General has drawn criticism for her recent keynote speech at the Canadian Science Policy Conference in Ottawa. Her Excellency Julie Payette urged her scientific peers to promote science education and “deconstruct misinformation,” citing the problems posed by social media.

Governors general have traditionally chosen to support important causes during their terms. David Johnston, for example, promoted volunteerism and education. Payette’s October 2017 appointment by Justin Trudeau’s government offers an opportunity for the accomplished Payette—an astronaut, engineer, and science researcher and educator—to champion the sciences.  

We apologize, but this video has failed to load.

Try refreshing your browser, or
tap here to see other videos from our team.

Governor General should abandon unscripted speeches to conform to her role Back to video

We apologize, but this video has failed to load.

Try refreshing your browser, or
tap here to see other videos from our team.

Play Video

But the disappointed reaction in some quarters to the tone of Payette’s evidently unscripted comments offers an instructive example of the tightrope a viceregal representative must walk between meaningful advocacy and potentially offensive controversy. Payette’s engaging speaking style was evident from the moment of her installation. But the unique demands of the Governor General’s role may require her to abandon extemporaneous remarks.

The GG is barred from legislative deliberations, and should not comment on them, even obliquely

At her November conference speech, Payette animatedly marvelled that, “in houses of government—unfortunately—we’re still debating and still questioning whether humans have a role in the earth warming up, or whether even the earth is warming up, period.”

Can the Governor General be an advocate for awareness of climate change? Absolutely. There can hardly be a more important cause and one better suited to Payette’s background. She is also correct that astrology is risible and that cancer cure quackery abounds. But, as the sovereign’s representative, the Governor General should not express views about what is suitable for discussion in legislative chambers. While the governor general announces the government’s legislative program for the session in the speech from the throne, and ultimately gives royal assent to legislation, by firm tradition, she is barred from taking part in legislative deliberations, and should not comment on them, however obliquely. Careful preparation might have yielded a message in keeping with the Governor General’s more straitened sphere.

Payette also expressed astonishment, with raised eyebrows and a wagging finger, that “we are … still questioning whether life was a divine intervention or whether it was coming out of a natural process, let alone—oh my goodness, lo and behold—random process.” It might have been predicted that these remarks could offend people of faith. Algonquin elder Claudette Commanda was present at Payette’s installation, on which occasion Commanda gave thanks to the Creator. At that ceremony, the Governor General declared that it was “a good thing that we finally decided to listen again” to the wisdom of Aboriginal Canadians. Payette’s subsequent conference remarks could cast doubt on her sincerity.

McKenna and Trudeau have defended Payette. This was the correct response

Environment Minister Catherine McKenna and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau have defended Payette. This was the correct response, and not merely because Payette’s climate-change remarks were consistent with the Liberals’ agenda. It is the duty of the government of the day to take responsibility for the Governor General’s statements, since, by tradition, the representative of the Crown cannot defend herself from criticism, warranted or not.

But this tradition also means that greater-than-usual significance is attached to any utterance the Governor General makes, and explains the tendency for viceregal representatives to speak in bland and relentlessly positive generalities. As much as we might admire Payette’s candour, the inevitable lesson is that her role does not lend itself to on-the-spot improvisation, especially given the onerous schedule of engagements she will be compelled to keep up. Payette would do well to avail herself of all the assistance Rideau Hall’s staff can provide. Viceregal speeches are seldom memorable; when they are, it is usually for the wrong reasons.     

Viceregal speeches are seldom memorable. When they are, it is usually for the wrong reasons

Governors general typically keep up punishing schedules. Unsurprisingly, they blunder on occasion. But the proliferation of media platforms (indeed, the very ones Payette alluded to in her speech) makes damage control especially difficult today. In an earlier, simpler era, that was not the case.

In the autumn of 1876, for example, Lord Dufferin returned from a viceregal tour of British Columbia, a trip that he hoped would help reduce federal-provincial tensions over the unwillingness of Alexander Mackenzie’s Liberals to adhere to the original transcontinental railway construction schedule. On the trip, the governor general openly empathized with British Columbians, but avoided either justifying or criticizing his government.

But once back in Ottawa, Dufferin spoke in rash terms, making remarks that some cabinet ministers considered a direct attack on Mackenzie’s policy—a policy that Dufferin indeed believed was unjust. Dufferin felt a stab of remorse, leaving the train station looking, as one Liberal said, like “he would like to bite his tongue off.” Only one journalist on the scene, George Holland of the Daily Citizen, managed to take shorthand notes of the speech.

Social media makes the role of a GG much more difficult today

When Holland performed the usual courtesy of calling on Dufferin to seek pre-publication approval of the speech, Dufferin feigned interest in the journalist’s shorthand method. When Holland produced his notes, they quickly vanished into Dufferin’s pocket. Holland was invited to lunch the following day and given an altered text of the speech, with all offensive passages gone. The original version never came to light.

How much more difficult is the role of a viceregal representative today! We demand down-to-earth authenticity coupled with unstudied immediacy, and yet expect the Crown’s representative to never cause offence or controversy. Paradoxically, the ubiquity of social media can make speech less free, especially for someone in such an office. It is hard to propose that the remarkable Payette resort to canned and stilted speeches, but it could well be what the role requires.

National Post

Barbara J. Messamore is associate professor of History at University of the Fraser Valley in Abbotsford, British Columbia. She is the author of Canada’s Governors General, 1847-1878: Biography and Constitutional Evolution (University of Toronto Press, 2006) and other publications on the crown, and is co-author of a recent Canadian history survey, Conflict and Compromise (University of Toronto Press, 2017).