Canadian Governors General are an endangered species because in the not-too-distant future Canada will have its very own head-of-state. The monarchists, of course, will howl at the very idea of replacing a European monarch with a Canadian commoner.
but what else is new? They opposed every step that has ever been taken in Canada's slow march from colony to dominion to nation-state. They even objected to having a Canadian as Governor General in the first place. And many of them still don't like the Canadian flag.
With Australia poised to become a republic in the near future, and British regions like Scotland and Wales yearning to be independent states in the European Union, Canada is not going to be taken seriously so long as it clings to its semi-colonial status. Anyone who believes that a powerful Canada of the future, with twice its current population, will take it's place in the ranks of the most important nations in the world without having it's very own head-of-state is smoking some strange stuff indeed.
In practice, a homegrown head of state would still be a mere figurehead with much the same duties, minus the reserve powers, that are now vested in the Vice-Regal office, as our parliamentary form of government - with a reformed or abolished Senate - would remain. The monarchists who claim that royal heads of state are accorded more respect than elected ones should check out the coverage of the Royals in the British tabloids. The monarchists do have a valid point however when they claim that an elected head of state can be tainted with the sour smell of politics. But this pitfall can be avoided by not making the post a political plum, as is currently the case..
There are four ways that nations go about installing their heads of state: 1): By birthright, as in a monarchy. 2): By force of arms, as in a dictatorship. 3): By government edict, (which is currently the way Canada picks its Governors General.) 4): By the ballot box. It 's plain to see that none of these methods of installing a ceremonial head of state would be satisfactory to everyone. There is, however, a fifth way to fill the position that has not, so far as I know, been tried. This is how it would work: Seeing that a ceremonial head of state needs to be a skilled diplomat, he/she would be picked from the ranks of the Diplomatic Corps. All career diplomats between the ages of 40 and 55 who would like the position would be invited to place their names on a list of candidates for the office. The first name picked randomly by computer would be named president for a term of ten years. A decade is long enough for the public to feel a sense of stability, but not so long that an incumbent would get the idea that he/she, is indispensable. The position would be rotated between Anglophones and Francophones, regardless of their race, religion or sex, so long as the candidate was fluent in both of Canada's official languages.
A head of state chosen in this manner would, unlike a monarch or an elected president, be subject to removal from office for cause by a free vote in the House of Commons. (Incidentally, as all Canadians are commoners, a more appropriate name for the House of Commons would be The Canadian National Assembly). This method of selecting a head of state would be uniquely Canadian, at least until other countries followed suit, in addition, it would prevent politics, racism, sexism or cronyism from tarnishing the selecting process.
by William Bedford
