Social Policy-Making
Certainly, no one can doubt the benefit of government. All of the public benefit for instance from military help in the case of a disaster, such as a storm, etc. Ironically, when this author reads the writings of Senator Forsey, it does seem strange for a Labourite to justify the British Queen as head of state. Whenever one walks through a forest, for instance, one is reminded that this Queen owns the forests, supposedly for our benefit. However, the same Queen's representative (the Governor General) can depose Canadian parliaments, not in a time of war as she did on December 8, 2008 to prevent a vote of no confidence in the government. Since when was such an action like a vote of no confidence in any way dangerous, except to excessive state power? What happens when the head of state acts against the elected government for a non-emergency...
It seems odd to this author that the British crown exercised more power in 2008 than in 1926.
This raises many concerns about the state of the social union at present. On the one hand, Canadians are told it is good for the government to penetrate into a person's privacy on the Internet (Cbc.ca, 2009). Yet when it comes to bailing out poor Canadians, neoliberals of all parties cite Canada's duty to be frugal, cut benefits and support "free trade" by voting for treaties like NAFTA. Neoliberalism will be considered in question two more fully.
2. With regard to the second question in this essay about how the social union has changed, this has especially been…
