Globe2Go, the digital newspaper replica of The Globe and Mail

GO DEEP

Re In Defence Of The Deep State (Opinion, July 30): Columnist Andrew Coyne advocates a system in which cabinet ministers rely on “measurable benchmarks” to assess the effectiveness of their departments in meeting government policies. If only it were possible to do that.

Departments typically do not have documentary data to measure benchmarks and not all policies can be reduced to quantifiable ones. Furthermore, changes in government policies often require new benchmarks and corresponding data systems to evaluate success.

The performance assessments would never be able to keep up.

Linda Hoffman Toronto

Generally, I agree that limited government is preferred and separation of powers supports democracy. An independent Bank of Canada will usually protect our economic stability. But democracy is the byword.

When an incompetent leader or board is appointed, they can put our financial welfare at risk. Surely, even with clearly delineated powers, there should be a mechanism for change. If there is no recall provision during a seven-year tenure, Parliament can and should exercise appropriate discretion to protect the country.

In a parliamentary democracy, a duty of diligence against mismanagement or misconduct should be exercised by the people’s representatives.

Larry Sylvester Halton Hills, Ont.

It took years before I understood strategic planning.

By using common language, we communicate better. Vision, mission, then goals, objectives and operations.

In theory, the difference is that a vision is what members (in this case, the public) imagine for their future, and that is ideally articulated by government. Mission is what we believe is needed to achieve that vision. Then we hand it off to management (the public service and crown corporations) who establish goals and objectives and manage their organizations to achieve them.

It frustrates me that phrases such as “steering and rowing” are used because of a perception that we’d all be lost with the right language. Not using the language that applies to boards and governing bodies helps keep us dumb, perpetuating opportunities for dysfunctional government because people don’t understand the planning process – what I think Andrew Coyne eludes to.

Jamie Brougham Ottawa

Excellent as Andrew Coyne’s insights are in defining the guiding principles of democracy in action, by turning a page, Doug Saunders’s unnerving commentary distills a creeping, dangerous reality (Why Do Conservatives Still Support Viktor Orban? – July 30).

Why should we care? A wolf may already be at our door. Stephen Harper, as head of the International Democrat Union, not only congratulated Mr. Orban on his electoral win, but also showed his flag by visiting him in 2019.

Now it is 2022 and Mr. Harper is endorsing Pierre Poilievre for Conservative leader. As our next federal election approaches, we should demand that leadership-in-waiting be transparent in defining plans for Canada’s future.

Of ourselves, we should ask: Do we return to order and stability, or will the spell of populism lead us to disruption and, ultimately, destruction at home and on the world stage?

Marian Kingsmill Hamilton

EDITORIAL

en-ca

2022-08-06T07:00:00.0000000Z

2022-08-06T07:00:00.0000000Z

https://globe2go.pressreader.com/article/282424172986727

Globe and Mail