Posted: Fri Oct 01, 2010 3:00 pm
It would not be hard to figure out the general criticisms of Michaëlle Jean, I would think, hanging around this site for years and hearing many of them come up time and again. The big one would be her line from a dinner with several hard line Quebec separatists saying "Independence can't be given, it must be taken." To put this in context, this came out after it became clear that Jean and her husband were both supporters of Quebec independence, although there was ulterior motives in revealing this to try and get English Canada to reject her as the next GG. This was followed up by the dual citizenship scandal. While the latter was put to rest firmly when she renounced her citizenship from France (although France did allow it even as a breach of law, she decided to remove it as was the wishes of Canadians that were expressed), the former's wrap up still left some people uncomfortable and the feeling of her inclinations towards separatist agendas continued.
Keep in mind that the GG is supposed to be a non-partisan position, and she was criticized for wading into politics more than once during her tenure as GG (ranging from lobbying for one thing and criticizing another, etc). Her tenure was also sprinkled with a few other minor scandals. She was brought in amid some controversy and with less than stellar approval ratings, which is not a good position to be in.
It does not help that her being Haitian, her being a CBC reporter (the second in a row), and her proroguing parliament all fell in line with perceived party platforms, which alienated her from several political groups in turn. She got muddled into the royalist debate when it became public knowledge that her staff had been removing royal pictures from Rideau Hall, and referred to herself as Canada's HoS, rather than HRH representative, which got parliament a bit riled up. The media and politicians for a bit both spread the idea that she was a bit of a loose cannon.
I think when you look at the polls and see how much her approval has changed in areas, it is indicative of her performance and it's relation to those problems. Her approval in the West and Ontario has gone up by 30% or around there since she began -- and in Quebec, it's fallen by 30%. She did do some things which I personally think were a good move, which, besides the obvious (with Haiti), including the "Seal Meal" event which garnered a mixture of criticism and applause, with her herself not lending any opinion on the topic other than letting the media take it wherever they wanted. She supported a number of stances for women's rights internationally and supported the fight against abuse of women domestically.
I don't have a solid opinion of her (nor are the above my opinions save for where I expressly pointed them out as such), and I'm just restating the general feelings or facts which have come up over the years. More people seem to have approved of how she filled her role than disapproved, from what I've read, and the difference between the two groups is fairly sizable from what I've been reading. She has had her share of gaffs and her share of successes. A 21 gun salute is quite different than when all the veterans turned their back on the GG during Remembrance Day closer to the beginning of her term as Governor General.
Personally, I have high hopes for David Lloyd Johnston, who I did recognize as an incredibly experienced Canadian academic. His list of achievements is quite long, and his most recent, as the president of the University of Waterloo, arguably Canada's top university outside of the Big Five (after having significant positions at two of those), being the most impressive of the lot. His involvement in positions of political moderation and media are long-running, he's fairly well recognized as largely non-partisan (even after the Oliphant commission smearing) and is a strong supporter of Canadian federalism, which I'm sure lends him some more credence to the crowd than Jean got from the get-go.
CKA Uber 
CKA Moderator 
