Wednesday, August 17, 2005


Some remain unimpressed that Jean will be the country's next Governor General.

While others are unimpressed over the 'tizzy' the country has worked itslelf into over Jean's appointment.

Either way, and perhaps in both, its not an impressive state of affairs for the country.

For myself, I was never too concerned with Jean's present committment to Canada. The fact that she accepted the position of Governor General tended to indicate her committment. What concerned me, and continues to, is the degree of her past committment. Conspicuously absent from Jean's statment is any type of reference to having always been committed to Canada or having loved Canada since the day she arrived here. If there was a time when Jean was a separatist to one degree or another, I would have preferred that she address that in her statment. I would be open to understanding how she came to change her beliefs, if it was through a rationale other than opportunism.

Jean has not yet convinced me that she was not at one time a separatist, nor that she did not vote 'yes' in 1995. For a Governor General, that is not acceptable.

While I do not believe that being a former separatist, or having once held separatist sympathies disqualifes a person from citizenship or other jobs, the Governor General must be beyond reproach. Although the role is almost entirely symbolic, it is important in its symbolism.

As for those who would argue that it is nearly impossible to live in the circles of Quebec intelligentsia without at least being suspected of separatist associations and sympathies, this example comes to mind.


I fear Don may be right in pointing to the use of the phrase, 'let me be clear' in the third paragraph of Jean's statement. Did Dithers write this himself? Either way, given the manner in which the PMO has handled this affair, I doubt Jean got to say what she would have liked.

Posted by Matthew @ 11:22 p.m.