Violence Against Women - More on Causation Rape and Affects

This was an attempt to clarify some points - useful thinking.

I never knew you were a “Plato Guy / Bloke”, fact is tricky here due to the evolution in thought and the “mash up” that is modern perception – whatever happened, history is only as useful as the future it makes – we are both agreed on what the future should be.

The semantics related to the term “platonic” in contemporary context I believe supports my use of the term to communicate non-sexual association. It may be the case that Plato argued in defense of women’s equality, there is a degree of linearity in “platonic” relations and stoicism, in so much as one manages the relations – what is relevant is the contemporary expression of “celibacy” and it being held as a “value”; if you’re advocating for Plato as a feminist, I’ll let history speak. Celibacy exercised as a life choice is a “platonic” value, humans are innately “a” platonic, and our default state is to engage in sexual relations. The fact that religious organizations hold celibacy as a value, puts us at odds with our “innate” state of being and has in it inherent conflict. Christian doctrines tend to hold a negative bias toward women in the management of sexual relations, that is to say, women are given the responsibility of virtuosity to a greater extent than men – this is certainly true tacitly in society – the double standard that exists which to a degree gives men a tacit pat on the back at sexual conquest and has the same action by women garners an unfavourable social outcome. THIS IS WRONG TO BE CLEAR. While I appreciate your knowledge, what is relevant is how the complex of contributing factors – contemporary culture and the memes that have travelled to us out of past western teaching land on the minds of people to an actuate proper treatment of women or not – presently women are the recipients of a disturbing degree of sexual violence.      

“Self - Control” as delivered by Stoicism is of course a good thing, the challenge with “self-control” and Stoicism is that many people, in an effort to exercise Self-control of emotion often end up suppressing emotion – Stoicism practiced “healthfully” permits the choice to access emotion or to leave it, but emotion is present. To some extent “stoicism” is more actively expressed in the male population – women often describe men as “emotionally unavailable” – it maybe that the attempt to detach one’s self from overriding attachment effects a degree of conflict in relations with women. It has been my observation that when natural and healthy inclinations are suppressed – ugliness and violence ensue. Violence first in the suppressing in many cases and violence in circumventing the suppression and violence again in the punishing of the for the second.

God is a divine – humans’ response to God is a human construct – this is evidenced by the multitude accepting there is a God, and yet having many different ways of attending to metaphysical contemplation. I am saying, violence is a part of the human condition, as you point out, dominance is an inclination of humans – male and female. The inclination to violence as a means to dominate is primal, perhaps archetypical; it resides in us individually and tribally – the realities of manliness & womanliness historically permitted male dominance – no man has ever been barefoot and pregnant.  England is a country founded on religion generally, yet it holds dear stoic values – stiff upper lip – in the US the Abrahamic adherents have found much common cause, the channel has been stoicism’s primary carrier. Jesus was a tender, gentle, tolerant – beautiful – entity, as you point out his actions on earth sullied no one – yet the institutions that have emerged in his name have – at the confluence of social reality and narrative marginalized and sullied female sexuality to an even greater degree than sexual relations generally.       

I take your point with respect to physical harm; it is my assertion that the greatest affect is mental - more so spiritually. I think much of the “frat boy” or “date rape” hinges on attraction. It may be the case there are numbers to support attraction is a smaller player than I assert. This in no way negates the capacity for women to manage risk – where you are, how you conduct yourself, who you associate with, where you place your faith – all play a role in self-protection. It is the total assault on one’s being, regardless of physical pain, it is the breach all things sacred, defenselessness – the failure of structure to effect safety – the illusion of order is attacked. It would be my assertion to say mental trauma occurs, and that physical trauma only serves to contribute to it.

It is clearly the responsibility of parents to firstly council against sexually violent material and secondly, to curb viewing via electronic media. There should be no coercive elements permitted to play on the inclinations of young women, in a healthy setting there is a forum to discuss these influences. As you say “make it essential for her to unequivocally say yes”.  

Violence Against Women - Rape and Response

Written in response to discourse on CBC radio, May 28, 2015.

There is a call from people affected by rape to strengthen laws. There has been an evolution in law away from the victimization of the victim; a reduction if you will, in drawing inappropriately on orthodoxy and a contorted view of female sexuality.  For a person to be charged with rape, there needs to be a clear determination of the absence of consent on the part of the victim – oft times the means by which to determine the presence or absence of consent is in the un-witnessed dialogue between two people leading up to the event. There is no basis in this circumstance to answer to an accusation of rape and there can never be, or people would be convicted on accusation alone.

The goal is to have a society where people are safe and can choose how they want to interface with others – the challenge is it is hard to effect through law enforcement – it needs to be culturally driven and that will take some time. Women are understandably frustrated that they are required to be constrained in their daily lives to a greater degree than men to protect themselves, but there is really no other way, people simply have to protect themselves. As a man I am mindful of where I am, who I am exposed to and how I might manage any given situation should it arise and women need to as well. So prevention is a critical element in response to the threat of rape.

Consent and only consent – is the determinant of rape. People must be clear in communication around sexual relations, by way of example, a woman when confronted with a male in a manner that is uncomfortable to her should respond by saying, PLEASE STOP WHAT YOU ARE DOING – an affirmative request to cease is the clearest means by which to be sure what you are saying is understood. There is room for misinterpretation in the interface unless a very clear AFFIRMATIVE request to cease is made.  

  

People refer to the presence of rape culture, it is important to break out all the aspects of the issue – there is the patriarchy – there are men who rape women, but they are unrelated. The patriarchy marginalizes women by systematizing male privilege, and rapists rape. The patriarchy has an imperative to protect women, an imperative that is part and parcel with “chauvinist” inclination; the protective inclination as a “stand-alone” entity is a good thing. Patriarchs in the traditional sense see rape as a crime, as women do. A convicted rapist or a person compelled to act to rape when the opportunity presents, should be contemplated separately and apart from the male population generally. One hears women referring to the “rape culture” as though it is a general practice of “most” men. Most men I know are kind, loving and respectful towards women. The general state of patriarchy effects less than desirable outcomes for women in society at large – this is in no way a rape culture, it is a culture of privilege for men.

The awkward fusion of Stoicism and Christian Theology has created a culture where women become devalued when contemplated in the context of sexual relations; this reality then contributes to male disrespect for women in some circumstances. This may be the source of some violence toward women – this is the point where violence against women can be attacked culturally. Presently, we are at an awkward point in the evolution of female sexuality in society at large, women have evolved perhaps in advance of society as a whole, which is abrading against old perceptions on the part of males.

Due to the reality that rape is very difficult to prove and is subject to interpretations of discourse between people, caution is warranted in how we respond to accusations of rape. Also, given that the data associated with conviction is ofttimes the interpretation of interface between two people, there is a high possibility of wrongful convictions. Given these realities, it is important that people convicted of rape once, who have served their sentence, be permitted to enter society in an unfettered fashion.  So the answer to the question - To publish rapist names - seems simple enough, the first time through the process NO, if a person re-offends, then society needs to protect all concerned. There is wrongful conviction, especially in the area of rape; rape is very difficult to prove for the reasons stated above – so if someone is convicted and serves their sentence, they deserve the benefit of the doubt. There should be no question that if there is an offender that has more than two convictions, steps should be taken to ensure the public can manage their presence in any given community.

What is missing here, and is missing throughout our corrections processes, is criteria-based advancement. There needs a series of steps people go through to regain their place in society at large having committed a crime. Multiple time offenders are by definition “repeat offenders”, so our approach to them needs to be different than a person that is a first-time offender. The key here is assessing each case and then making a choice to publish data or withhold it.

The challenge with publishing the names and locations of offenders is that we marginalize them more and subject them to people inclined to “name & shame”.  Naming & shaming offers no value in the case of an individual intent on reforming and fails to arrest the actions of an individual who is compelled to act as a result of illness. The general public ofttimes is out to effect vengeance – rather than exercise a measured response to people accused or convicted of rape.

Rapists that have offended eight times (as was the subject of the CBC program that has prompted this blog) require NO consideration with respect to privacy, they need to be managed. In the case of repeat, “high risk” offenders, they should be monitored 24/7, ankle bracelets and other technology to communicate their location to the police or a monitoring body is warranted and or an isolated living circumstance – perhaps a community that is designed to house and contain the negative affect of repeat rapists.

It is critical, however, that people, having served their punishment, and having been released on the first occasion be given the opportunity to reintegrate into society – unobstructed. A person in this circumstance should never be exposed to “community” type interventions, because, for the most part, there is an absence of evolved enough people to involve themselves in the private lives of others. There tends to be a vindictive, small-minded cohort that finds their way into the “community justice” space, people absent the understanding of fundamental law and ignorant of critical elements related to civil rights.

The other challenge is the reversion to an “ancient” moral perspective, a degree of righteousness emerges along with a “vigilantly” mentality. This is exacerbated by people who have been affected by rape as they become involved in processes related to “community” interventions, people traumatized by an event are unlikely to be able to find an objective place from which to actuate.

Within our society there is a wide cultural variation with respect to sexual discourse, this is allowed, and the response to sexual deviation tends to drive us backward to a strict and highly traditionally moralized stance. It is the merger of sex and all the associated baggage it carries and violent suppression that drives the rebuke. The focus of response needs to be on violence and the violation of being overpowered – to be forced to action absent consent.  

Ideally, society would be free of rape, there is no more grievous injury to the sole than to be overpowered, rendered defenceless and sexually assaulted. Ideally, women would be treated the same clothed in a burka or a bikini – the reality is they are treated differently. Ideally, women could run in the parks at any time of day or night by themselves absent of fear, the reality is however, they are at risk when they do. The prevalence of rape is shocking to me, when I inventory the women in my life whose personal lives I am familiar with – the percentages that have been affected by rape is staggering. I am unsure what drives it, I only know it exists, the only way to manage it is to recognize its presence, to understand the modalities that lead to it occurring and then find a way to lower the risk, and contain perpetrators.   

Click Below

VAW - More Discourse

Public Transit & Where Solution Lies

We can quibble about the amount of subsidy transit in British Columbia takes, my understanding is that about 2/3 of the cost is carried by the government and 1/3 by users. Whatever it is, it indicates that even with a heavily subsidized transit system people, when given a choice, choose independent transportation. People want the freedom of independent transportation, so even if public transit were free, people would likely choose to pay for independent transport.

The statement above is particularly true of North America and less so in Europe. My Uncle in England lived in the executive belt outside London, he used public transit, as Chairman of the company he had a chauffeur who would pick him up at Baker Street Station where he would start his day. The transit offered him an advantage, by planning his day around the train travel it was faster to use transit than sit in the car and fight traffic. The efficiency advantage of train travel, in this case, was in large measure due to high traffic facilitated by a high population density.    

The situation in England contrasts sharply with the situation in small-town British Columbia, where population densities are relatively low, so public transit cycle times make transit use inefficient for the individual. So, aside from being stuffed in a bus with a bunch of strangers, one has to wait and waste valuable time in transit as the bus stops here and there. The concept of common transport is flawed because it attacks the inherent preferences of people; people want the fastest way from a to b - when they want to go.

Rather than try and build solution around what we think people “should” do, we should build solution around what people want to do. What is the overarching objective of transit – perhaps to reduce traffic – all though that can be managed for? Most people are desiring to find a way for people to get around absent harm to the environment. Perhaps the solution lies in reducing the transport Canada requirements for independent vehicles, in most cases a fast golf cart would suffice, we are driving a 5000 lb SUV. Perhaps we should reduce the age requirement to drive to 12 or 14 on electric bikes and small “cars”. Perhaps the city should invest in free electric carts and cars that are merely left around for people to use and redistributed as required by a small staff.

There are independent travel solutions that are in harmony with the environment; better to put our attention there, than trying to spoon-feed everyone something that is clearly demonstrated to be undesirable. 

Want Diversity, Prosperity - FOSTER INDIVIDUALISM

Individualism is a modern phenomenon, the concept can only find expression in a circumstance where society is big enough, easy enough and people are isolated enough to be able to survive absent a tribe. Individualism is constantly corrupted by the collective and the massive mass media narrative that is at play now in the world. Individualism is in large measure a spawn of the United States, an order, which aspires to deliver personal choice – the first of its kind in history. I love individualism as it merges with democracy and common law, because, at once, people act with autonomy and it is required that they respond to the interests of others; this is a beautiful thing.

It seems that when you get more than a couple of people acting together, autonomy gets challenged, especially in modern society, where groups tend to coalesce around a “special interest”. “Special Interests” are okay, what is unacceptable, however, is the way in which the actions of people associated with a special interest tend to become associated with “left” or “right” or one political brand or another. At the very moment, an issue becomes attached to a political brand, it gets distorted because politics are about power first and policy second. Given that in a democracy to forward an idea, one needs political mass (power), acquiring political mass requires accommodating large numbers of people and in the accommodation of large numbers of people, distortions occur. It is optimum to seek solutions to issues rather than distort issues to suit power, which rarely happens. By nurturing the Individual, by creating self-supporting, self-sufficient, independent people we begin to fracture “the group” and/or “group think”. This is a healthy thing, as it permits people to bring a critical mind to challenges.

Individualism in the modern context of social media, has “individualism” in effect being a branding exercise, one hopes that the broad-based ability to “mediafy” one’s self begins to fracture the narrative – under the “post WW2” mass media regime we were slotted into a bi-polar, tri-polar – or a limited polled political space and then slotted into one of about 6 or 7 stereotypes. The old media space held control over the populace’s thought under a narrow spectrum of competition; the modern individual is able to draw on, and build the “individual” from a broader spectrum in the social media space; allowing for a nuanced projection of self and a general societal circumstance of a more nuanced perception of others. Further, the coalescence of micro-topics or interests “on the tail” brings oddities into the mainstream as they gain resolution in a manner that would have never occurred in the past, generating a circumstance where “individuals’” emerge in a more varied and nuanced way. This is a beautiful thing as well, it is being challenged by the increasing regulation of the internet space – governments are seeking to once again restrict and control the data that feeds the narrative – as, where the narrative goes society goes. This is the paradox, the broader and more varied the data field, the broader and more varied the individual becomes; this well-spring nearly always brings disruption, and disruption scares the established and the established seek to suppress disruption - yet we need disruption to advance.

We must seek to enhance the individual, to foster diversity; individuals are rarely birthed in large monolithic institutions, in fact, large monolithic institutions are hostile to the individual. Institutions “haze” individuals out of existence or the bell curve does and forces them to fit the mould, rather than liberate them from the mould. Every individual is a point of emergence, we can smother that emergence with dogma, and conformity, thereby, retaining “norms” & “stability” OR we can seek at every opportunity to feed the creation of individuals that emerge un-subdued by the “old” and embrace the disruption that they bring us.   

Please click here for my professional website

Alberta & the NDP - Alberta?

I often say, “shake a tree at any post-secondary institution and a half dozen Trotskies fall out”, this is the brain trust of the Canadian socialist movement – the source of a regurgitated dogma, a dogma, when given cursory review, has in every instance ended in the few, running the many and with everyone having less as opposed to more – China, Soviet Russia …, even Sweden had to come back to the market economy to repair the damages caused by their pursuit of socialist policy. The pursuit of equality always ends badly, when equity is held as a priority and people can pursue their interests – people get more. Why, then, does a doctrine that drives policy that never works always seem to get another chance – bad government market policy that’s why. My Uncle taught me, it was bad conservatism that was the birth place of socialism; my observations have confirmed his assertion. Conservatism is seen as a fusion between market economy, fiscal restraint and social conservatism – in effect, market economy and good fiscal policy are falling prey to social conservatism – Canada is a progressive country, forget that and prosperity will die the same death that oppressive social conservative inclinations have.

There has never been a more prosperous civilization in the history of the world than the western modern economic complex; we are now at the apex of human existence. The two things that have driven the accent of prosperity has been the market economy, in concert with democracy. The constant competition for companies to provide a better product cheaper, has created a circumstance where people spend their entire day figuring out what I want, then making it, getting to me where I want it and finally at the cheapest price – disruption, creative destruction are the marvels that have given us so much. This stands in startling contrast to the monoliths socialist policies have generated – medical system that is failing us and an education system that is delivering services the same way it has for 5000 years.  I ran a fishing lodge for eight years, I took over in 1989 – I purchased a computer and automated guest interaction, accounting and all administrative aspects of the business. I stopped going to the doctor 7 years ago and then they still had paper files and I was unable to even communicate with the guy by email.  

So hold onto your hat Alberta, maybe the NDP will give you a few more monoliths to live with like ICBC, or maybe you’ll be lucky enough for the government to regionalise your already waning medical system. Alberta Farmers, just wait, the NDP may mimic the largest expropriation of land in history as the BC NDP did, in the manner they implemented the Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR). The ALR has grown into its own industry here in BC, farmland is getting eaten up anyway, it is just that we have another byzantine hoop to jump through – you even have to go to the Agricultural Land Commission if you want to bring a belly-dump in to change the drainage or alter the topography on your own place. Oh, and when you want to put in a septic system on your place – it is going to cost you about $10,000 more to higher an accredited insulation company. The metaphorical horse shit is going to pile high and wide in Alberta now, the real stuff will have several inspectors with permit books and forms in triplicate to fill out – it will sit there longer now because you will be unable to do anything with it until a recent graduate from Resource Management, with the life experience of a lab rat grants permission to move shit around on your own place - enjoy. 

Everyone that believes in the individual, in enterprise, in prosperity needs to wake up and start making capitalism accessible. The socialist brain trust has feed the doctrine of envy, they teach people to hate the successful, they cut the heads off of the tall poppies and the tax initiative – we should be able to beat that pretty easy. What’s stopping us, we are, we are failing to be generous enough – we need to build a culture of facilitation, entrepreneurial adventurism. Alberta is the most prosperous jurisdiction in North America, when you go there, one sees many who are absent access to business and it fruits, doctrine won in Albert, the NDP has spun the molehill of inequality in to the mountain of societal injustice in the most prospers place on earth, exceptional political play. This standing in startling contrast as well, to the protectorate of the market economy, your bickering on the right – well enjoy. I hope for your sake, that this government takes the same tact as the Blair government, at least there, there was a grand bargain; OR you may sit down to a banquet of consequences, a bunch of redistributionist policy and a whole bunch more government.   

  

Canada - Economic Stagnation Nation?

BOOMERS - Wealth Concentration and Stagnation

In reading Sotheby’s report on Real-estate trends in luxury properties the excerpt below spurred some thought, 9.6 million people (boomers), 80% of high net worth Canadians, are over 55 years of age and 58% of those are retired – and more are soon to be retired; this reality is rested juxtaposed against the provision of many FREE services to this same cohort, of most significance of course are medical services. While this “age group” is larger than ever before, they are healthier than ever before which may defer to some degree their taxing the free services, but tax services they will. There is a another affect on economy as well, they cost more to keep and they generate less income, once more however, the capital they have they are conservative in investing – less apt to take chance on disruptive, innovation or risk prone investments, often the type of investments that stimulate the economy.

In the forest management people refer to a stand of timber becoming decadent, that is to say, that in its maturity the old growth precludes new forest, and the old growth is well established and living thereby precluding giving living space to new forest – this is a point of stagnation, the increase in fiber volume is limited. This contrasts to a circumstance after a fire perhaps, where several species are taking hold, there is age class variance as the forest species move through life cycles – there is dynamism here – annual increase in fiber volume is greater here. The population profile of Canada, much of the western world is in a state of decadence due to this reality, which parallels the aged forest reality.

Japan, given its racial homogeneity and the resulting resistance to immigration was the first example of this pernicious reality taking hold – some two decades of low growth and a monetary policy at war with deflation ensued. Could this fate be awaiting us in Canada or the wider western economy? There are indications that there are factors seemingly suppressing inflation, Central Bank policy has been simulative in the extreme since the 2008 downturn, with little indication the tide is turning. It seems that the economy is never really hitting it’s stride, never any pressure on price due to capacity restraints, just more or less – sideways. It would be unwise to suggest that a single cohort is to blame, or a single demographic element – it is, however, certainly a single and significant contributing factor. 

The combination of the increased use of free government services, the withdrawal from vocation and resulting income contraction and the ongoing conservative management of capital on the part of this cohort is sure to challenge us.

The situation seems to cry out for some means to incent this cohort to put its money to work more aggressively. There may be reward to government coffers in policy that mitigates risk in the areas of investment that most improves our economy.  There is requirement for infrastructure spending, capital that is more or less latent or invested at no real rate of return – the government could engage in 3P processes that include partial payment of infrastructure thereby reducing “cost” and improving return. A municipal bond program could be brought in to play, so local communities could go to their citizens to raise capital for City infrastructure and enjoy the support of upper level governments, via a tax credit of some kind. Recent attempts at infrastructure spending seem somewhat muted, in the post stimulus spending time frame we are now in, there seems very little infrastructure spending on the horizon. The joy of infrastructure spending is, it gives an immediate boost the economy now – in much the same way a healthy house market does, AND then it is the gift that keeps giving as it makes the future economy more efficient.

The process of government sweetening the pot for investors in government infrastructure is aggressive in that it is a form of quantitative easing, it is quantitative easing that puts enhanced return in a place that rewards presently “latent” capital AND directs benefit to the middle class, rather than the institutions that caused the downturn in the first place. Quantitative easing in other jurisdictions had the government issuing a $1000 bond at a cost of $900 – this is a simplification for illustration, the point is financial institutions got “free” money. Sweetening the pot for “Boomers” who have capital directed in a manner that is less advantageous now, who then move investments to a place that moves the economy in an immediate way, is likely to provide several benefits; including the funds to government coffers on the boomers capital gains taxes.

One would have to put pencil to paper to see the degree that is appropriate for government to participate; however, when one tallies the quantifiable benefits of infrastructure, increased revenues from capital gains – (offsetting to some degree the initial investment by government) AND the multiplier effect of the actual work – one would guess supplementing infrastructure bonds and or municipal bonds to the tune of 5% would be very viable – I suspect even a better return could be offered. Here we have a several wins; the public gets better return on capital, the public invests in the infrastructure it needs (the hospitals the boomers are going to be filling, the road and rail that support commerce, the city transportation networks the improve commerce and the environment, the much needed education system reconfiguration – the list is endless) AND the people who have wrongly paid to repair the damages of a financial industry gone a rye, get a little back.

I know what you're thinking, this is like a remake of the Keynesian “Roosevelt New Deal”, and there is nothing new here. The concept of the new deal is here, the implementation is different.  The Keynesians purpose in all policy is to increase aggregate demand, they rarely care how that is done, government spends – I mean SPENDS – to increase aggregate demand. This is different, this is government “seeding the economy”, by providing an avenue for all levels of government AND it could be easily adapted for small and medium business as well in the same spirit as the British Columbia Venture Capital Program,  an avenue that lets infrastructure that is in REAL demand be build. The “New Deal” was a top down, centralized effort, the same sort of effort that had quantitative easing enriching the very people who created the financial downturn in the first place. This is a hybridization of quantitative easing, municipal & government bond programs, directed at a group of people who require secure returns and whose capital we need.

        

Canada is a long way from the Japan scenario, we have immigration, we are a resource economy and we have a generally more vibrant demographic picture. We do however, need to be mindful that the “idle boomers”, their ageing and their “idle capital” could be a drag at the very least, and push us into a period of stagnation at worst. With a small amount of incentive, we can generate a big result, and if it is managed properly, rather than saddling future generations with debt, we enhance future generations’ operational reality and enrich them.           

More Thoughts On the Issue

Thoughts on - Counter Cyclical Spending

Senate - Government Financial Monitor?

Government Resource Revenue Dependence

Government - Ensuring Optimum Size

Senate Spending & Restructuring

Government Scale & Accountability
Government - Budgeting Accountability

CLICK HERE - My Professional Website

Government Funding Accountability Mechanisms

Every time a finance minister deliberates over a pair of shoes, what to buy to express their view of the country’s best way forward, I am hopeful, hopeful that just once, there will be an extended discourse on accountability mechanisms – you know, monitoring and reporting – I am always left with my hopes dashed. To be fair, the last conservative government at least attempted with the Accountability Act to give voice to the issue, the challenge is that substantive change to government operations has seen very little evolution. There is a massive requirement for real accountability, accountability that has ANY government policy subjected to a public mission statement, metrics and indicators that measure whether the mission statement has been met AND, MOST IMPORTANTLY, an independent assessment and reporting entity. I have lobbied the government repeatedly to deliver this type of accountability, we focus attention on Senator miss-spending or other “nickel and dime” issues, “nickel and dime” compared to the billions of dollars government eats in wasted spending because, present reporting mechanisms have such a long and winding, ambiguous accountability cycle – there is just no resolution to the efficacy of spending for the public.

In business we have a “dashboard” to guide use, firstly, there is always the bottom line as a gross measure of performance – there is just no hiding from that. Secondly, in business, we have key metrics and accompanying indicators that we use to measure performance. We also benchmark our performance relative to the norm or our peers, indicators like market share, gross margin, internal rate of return, and return on assets – a nearly endless list of ratios and measures are used to ensure our decision-making is taking us on the right path. The quality of a decision can only be assessed if it is measured, if you can't measure you can't manage it. We need a dashboard for the Canadian public, so they have an objective measure of governance; presently we have no clear dashboard or clear communication of governmental performance.   

There needs to be a government entity that is at arm’s length from the government that firstly has a narrow mandate analogous to The Bank of Canada, to at least, publish, or preferably, limit government spending to an agreed ratio with GDP or some other metric – the key being to maintain government size and spending at optimum. Secondly, this entity would report to the Canadian public on the efficacy of government spending against a fully declared policy mission, metrics and indicators and reporting in a clear and standardized manner.

The primary impediment to this dream coming true is; that any incumbent government that institutes a measure such as this incurs a disadvantage, because of the variance of accountability relative to past accountability mechanisms. The best means for implementation are nonpartisan development and deferred implementation – participants are always better at developing policy absent immediate effect.

This is in no way left or right issue, this is an issue of universal concern; regardless of what size you believe government should be, or the degree of spending you want the government to do – we should all want to know government funds are used wisely – we have no idea now.      

More Thoughts On the Issue

Thoughts on - Counter Cyclical Spending

Senate - Government Financial Monitor?

Government Resource Revenue Dependence

Government - Ensuring Optimum Size

Senate Spending & Restructuring

Government Scale & Accountability

CLICK HERE - My Professional Website