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