Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site lsuc.UUCP
Path: utzoo!lsuc!jimomura
From: jimomura@lsuc.UUCP (Jim Omura)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: (The CBC) Re: Nationalization/Crown Corps.
Message-ID: <711@lsuc.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 17-Jul-85 19:12:49 EDT
Article-I.D.: lsuc.711
Posted: Wed Jul 17 19:12:49 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 17-Jul-85 19:57:46 EDT
References: <300@looking.UUCP> <3283@garfield.UUCP> <1162@ubc-cs.UUCP>
Reply-To: jimomura@lsuc.UUCP (Jim Omura|Barrister Jimomura Solicitor|Toronto)
Distribution: can
Organization: Barrister & Solicitor, Toronto
Lines: 57
Summary: Role of 'Government'


      Don Acton brought up probably the most significant
discussion point possible in terms of pure political
philosophy.  He noted that although most of our parties
(I take it he was talking about Ontario Provincial
Parties) favour funding of Separate Schools whereas
he believes that the people of the province wouldn't.
 
     He also stated (I think erroneously) that there
is a substantial tide in Canadian politics where
the people are questioning for the first time how
much government involvement is desirable.  I'm
paraphrasing all this because I'm fairly new and
unexperienced using Unix News and don't know how
to do the fancy quoting that everybody else seems
able to do.
 
     Actually, as I noted, I don't believe there
is any such change in the overall Canadian philoso-
phy.  Regardless of whatever good reasons that
Trudeau's government lost it's popularity and Turner
was trampled, it's quite clear that policies had
little to do with it and personal disgust with the
people of the government was the key issue.  Nothing
said in the campaigns shows otherwise (go read the
newspapers and see for yourselves).
 
     Regardless of this, does anybody really believe
that we, the people of Canada really know enough
to govern ourselves directly, rather than via
representatives?  To put it in less extreme terms,
should politicians *follow* popular opinion or
*lead* the country?
 
     Trudeau was a 'leader'.  That is to say, he
acted on his beliefs as to what was right regardless
of what we may think was popular opinion.
 
     Clark tried to be the opposite.  He tried to
follow what he believed to be the popular opinion
of the country (which is a sort of 'idealism' too).
 
     My impression of Mulroney is that he tries to
look like a leader and be on the otherhand a follower
subject only to his general underhanded approach
of putting on past the people (such as using the
indexing of pensions issue to hide other tax
increases via a bluff).  It works.
 
     My feeling is (surprise!) Acton's probably
right in that it's a good time historically to be
a 'follower' than a 'leader'.  People like to feel
that the government is responding to their wishes.

-- 
James Omura, Barrister & Solicitor, Toronto
ihnp4!utzoo!lsuc!jimomura