We can be forgiven for assuming that the Canadian government exists to spit out legislation that’s poorly planned, overtly political, and often legally dubious.
It would be more insightful to evaluate the impact of a bill, perhaps noting the difference between how many received assent and how many show some implementation or change in actions?
Lost in the fog of the mindless tribalism of party politics is the reality of end-stage democracy a la Tytler and the prescience of H.G. Wells' increasingly obvious parallels of the citizen to state in the Eloi and Morlocks respectively. The notion of limited government is foreign to Canadians now with a state (at all levels) that represents 44% of the economy and an increasingly infantilized citizenry that have outsourced so many adult responsibilities to the state that politics is now just an extension of the schoolyard where the bullies are in charge.
"When you see that in order to produce, you need to obtain permission from men who produce nothing—when you see that money is flowing to those who deal, not in goods, but in favors—when you see that men get richer by graft and by pull than by work, and your laws don’t protect you against them, but protect them against you—when you see corruption being rewarded and honesty becoming a self-sacrifice—you may know that your society is doomed."
Committees reported on just 37 out of 60 bills that became law in the 44th Parliament. I checked ourcommons.ca and the Industry committee tabled its first report on Canada's productivity gaps last week. Those studies might pack more punch than the minor bill tweaks. It makes you wonder if we need stronger follow-up on committee recommendations. https://www.ourcommons.ca/DocumentViewer/en/45-1/INDU/report-1/
Stronger follow up would be great. But I don't think governments in general (and this government in particular) have any incentive to bend to committee suggestions. As far as I can see, the system is built on honour and good faith - and there's not a lot of that floating around these days.
It would be more insightful to evaluate the impact of a bill, perhaps noting the difference between how many received assent and how many show some implementation or change in actions?
Lost in the fog of the mindless tribalism of party politics is the reality of end-stage democracy a la Tytler and the prescience of H.G. Wells' increasingly obvious parallels of the citizen to state in the Eloi and Morlocks respectively. The notion of limited government is foreign to Canadians now with a state (at all levels) that represents 44% of the economy and an increasingly infantilized citizenry that have outsourced so many adult responsibilities to the state that politics is now just an extension of the schoolyard where the bullies are in charge.
"When you see that in order to produce, you need to obtain permission from men who produce nothing—when you see that money is flowing to those who deal, not in goods, but in favors—when you see that men get richer by graft and by pull than by work, and your laws don’t protect you against them, but protect them against you—when you see corruption being rewarded and honesty becoming a self-sacrifice—you may know that your society is doomed."
Ayn Rand; Atlas Shrugged, 1957
Committees reported on just 37 out of 60 bills that became law in the 44th Parliament. I checked ourcommons.ca and the Industry committee tabled its first report on Canada's productivity gaps last week. Those studies might pack more punch than the minor bill tweaks. It makes you wonder if we need stronger follow-up on committee recommendations. https://www.ourcommons.ca/DocumentViewer/en/45-1/INDU/report-1/
Stronger follow up would be great. But I don't think governments in general (and this government in particular) have any incentive to bend to committee suggestions. As far as I can see, the system is built on honour and good faith - and there's not a lot of that floating around these days.