Polls Details


One wonders if Political Parties are, at this time in our society, worth what they cost the taxpayers. They were useful organizations in days past as a vehicle for disseminating information about Government and in encouraging participation. Without the availability of modern communications, the electioneering process was a face to face effort. My experience, as a teenage political worker, spreading the message, to being an elected member, was for the most part enjoyable. I did not like fund raising in the towers of Toronto. There may have been faults with the political system in the old days. They were nothing compared to today’s buying of influence by large donors to the Political Parties.

Every Legislator comes to realize that his hopes “to be able to make a difference” is impossible because of his Party affiliation. Their party seems to have little interest in making a real difference, only in getting elected. The parties have bought off members hopes of “making a difference” by ratcheting up the remuneration of Legislators to far in excess of the value of the work they presently do. Instead of seriously involving Elected Members in the function of Governing, the Leader, selected by the Party for the ability to win an election, uses them as rubber stamps for the party demands. Of what value to any citizen is the Members' time spent electioneering between elections or of the money spent during elections. A simple brochure distributed by each individual candidate, to all voters, highlighting beliefs, rather than overblown advertising slogans by a political party, would suffice. A simple brochure, and people, especially young, fired with enthusiasm to reclaim their country, by getting out the vote, can make the difference.

Since no Political Leader has restored the role of Elected Legislators to that of serving the electorate instead of a party, Elected Members, who are not controlled by a party, must be elected to serve. This can be done by creating a “NO PARTY ARMY” in each constituency to counter the power of the money dominated political parties. Having worked in two countries where the disadvantaged and young formed an army to install a Government to serve people, I have seen it work. They did it with AK47s, this army can do it with ballots.

In between elections, the No Party Army would be the power behind a “NO PARTY CONSTITUENCY ORGANIZATION” whose function would be to encourage all candidates seeking election in the Constituency to embrace policies that would return Government control to the elected representatives. The real battles of the army would be against the Political Party Organizations in assuring election of a candidate based on their personal ability, principle and policies. A main function would be to encourage voters to submit policy and other questions for comment by all candidates. By having candidates evaluated on the same basis, true ability could be evaluated.

The majority of Political Party Constituency Organization Members are civic minded people who want to make a difference. Some have special agendas of improving the treatment of their special interests by Government. There may also be those who hope for patronage. These are acceptable reasons at the Constituency level. But supporters who simply want the best for their society are becoming disappointed with the failure of their party, at both the Provincial and Federal level, to represent them.

It is expected that a NO PARTY ARMY would attract joiners from all Political Parties , those who want to make a difference, as well as many that are opposed to the party system. Unless youth, who want a better future, join this army, change will not happen. It makes little difference to many of us who are getting long in the tooth, change is always slower than the passing of our lives. The ones that will be around for a while will benefit most. The function of the No Party Army would be to enable all voters to support any candidate of their choosing, not based on a party affiliation but solely on the policies and action that the candidate espouses their commitment to, and to encourage all eligible voters to exercise their privilege, and duty, to vote.

Based on the extent of complaining about the political parties, there must be a few leaders in each constituency who will make the effort to organize. Others would then join this army. The conduct of the legislative bodies could probably not be drastically changed immediately. However, the introduction of even a few independent members might immediately have an effect of providing real leadership by good example.




The selection of an employee for even the lowliest of positions warrants serious consideration by an employer. It is a bit different with selecting an Elected Member of a Legislative body, in that, there are a great number making the decision as employer and a limited number of contestants to choose from. Candidates must realize that they are not being selected for any other reason than to work for those paying them. There is the added factor that decisions and actions of this employee significantly affect the well being of a great number of people, not just those of their constituency. All candidates should be obliged to provide an indication of what his position might be, should he be faced with making any decision. Some voters might be satisfied with making their decision on who to vote for by seeing a smile or having a hand shake. Hopefully electors would want to be more serious about choosing their candidate. Many might have specific questions that they would want answered by the candidate. Rather than the candidate being queried at the front door, when he only wants to shake hands, or the voter not knowing where that candidate stands, any question that any constituent might have could be answered by all candidates on a questionnaire.

The type of investigation for an employee for any position offering the remuneration lever now enjoyed by elected representatives, would entail review at considerable depth. It is an indication of the value placed on the members of a political party “team”, that their back bench members should be chosen by popularlity vote by people who pay for (or are given) a $5.00 membership to a constituency organization. Even after candidates are nominated, voters are not adequately informed about the candidates. The information provided is mainly limited to the advertising campaign of the party.

The information that voters should have is in the candidates head. How they think and what they think. Voters should know the source of their information and knowledge. What books they read, what magazines, what TV, what radio. What opinions have they formed on schools, universities, unions, hospitals, police and any other things that the voters wish their opinions on. They should answer concerning what position they, NOT THEIR PARTY, would take on any subject of concern to the voter.

This extent of information about a candidate can not be provided at face to face campaigning. It is necessary that any person campaigning on behalf of a candidate know how and what their candidate thinks, and they must believe in the candidate, to pass that belief to others. A No Party Constituency Organization could disseminate the information in comparative form for all candidates.

Without community support,and workers dedicated to belief in a candidate, we will always have the sheep following their political masters.


I now have regrets, as I am sure many others do, that I fulfilled my two terms as MLA without taking more action when I was in a position to do so. My, and others, failure to accept the responsibilities expected of those elected to serve their constituents has resulted in growing disrespect for politics and government.

What is that single responsibility of an elected representative? It is to dedicate completely and exclusively to the welfare of each and every constituent and their society as a whole. Not to a political party, not to family, not to their profession but only to the people who are their constituents and those who pay their remuneration. The great rise in remuneration for serving in elected office has been justified by the claim that those without supplementary financial resources should also be able to serve and would be more representative of the rest of the members of their society. The danger thereby created is that the main reason for seeking nomination is not service but remuneration.

The members of the legislatures are highly paid for performing their legislative duties on behalf of all people. A supplementary role has developed, because of the expanded role and complexity of Government, to mediate differences between the constituent and the bureaucracy. In any other employment, the amount of remuneration paid members would be expected to provide a high level of dedication and performance. Sitting in the Legislature listening to speeches of questionable content and voting the way their political masters tell them to, is of no value to the people paying them. Section by section consideration, and the overall effect, of Legislation in a Committee setting would be more effective than false debate in the House. But not committees that are simply dedicated to political aims. The members should work at understanding the legislation in detail,and thinking about its effect on the people that they represent. But that does not happen. The members mostly play a child's game of party politics. Party politics has no place in the Legislature. Neither has the childish desk pounding and catcalls. Once the members are elected they are on the public payroll and they are not being paid to play politics. There is no need for the Legislature to sit except infrequently for the official creation of the Legislation that should have been already been thoroughly considered by Members. There should be no Caucus discussions of bills, it is using the time and effort of members being paid by the taxpayers to play politics. Instead of Question Periods, questions should be submitted in writing and the question and answer published. Voters should have the full text, rather than the one liners picked up by the media, available to them. The false theatricals are play acting instead of serious debate.

What needs to be done? Party house leaders and whips must be eliminated. Voting must be by members conscience with due consideration of the wishes of their constituents. Seating in the house should not be grouped by party, but in a way that assures more harmonious interaction. Time should not be wasted on speeches for their own sake. Speeches introducing Bills should clearly outline their intent and background so that administration fully complies with the intent. The Committee structure must become the vehicle not only for considering new Legislation but also for reviewing that already existing. Committees should be established on a Departmental basis both as support for Ministers and as monitors on behalf of the public. Elected representatives have become full time employees. As such they should be working full time, in their offices when not required elsewhere. With modern communications and software, members can be in constant contact with their colleagues.

An elected member is the only one who shares the interests of their constituents, and those of the rest of the province or country. The unelected controlling the parties only care for the power of the party and how it benefits them. The senior bureaucrats care for their remuneration and status. Elected members have only one thing to give in exchange for the amount that they cost the taxpayers. That is, their ability to use their god given gifts of thinking and moral standards. For the current levels of remuneration there should be a lot of both.

Part of the problem with Government today is the concentration of both Legislative and Administrative power in the office of the premiers and prime minister. Canada being so close and so influenced with affairs in the USA, has adopted the worst of the Presidential and Parliamentary systems. John Adams warned “ If there is one central truth to be collected from the history of all ages, it is this: that the people's rights and liberties, and the democratic mixture in a society can never be preserved without separating the executive from the legislative power. If the executive power is left in the hands of the Democratic assembly, it will corrupt the legislature to the detriment of the people”. Elected members should realize that they have a separate role to play on the governing team. Leaders and Cabinet members may also be legislators, but they are too busy to think, and rely on the bureaucrats to think for them. The bureaucrats are limited to administering the legislation, and give no, or little, thought to the people affected. If they do think, it may be limited to the strengthening the systems that they have developed.

Once a member arrives in the legislative chamber they can only be effective if their mind is completely open. The responsibility should be only to the people they represent, not to a political party, not to what has been, but only to now and the future. The party leaders and the bureaucracy should be responsible to the elected members. Members should not be responsible to their party or their leader. The electors selected them to exercise their ability as they feel is for good government. John Adams also said “A representative must be sensitive of the views of the people, and sometimes must run the risk of their displeasure, or he will never do them any good in the long run.”



Let us assume that there has been an election under new rules. Having laid out their own opinions, and stand on policies, in reply to the questions raised by voters, the voters have chosen their elected representative. The members arrive at their legislature to join those 50% of sitting members whose constituencies would hold their election in 2 years. The first order of business would be for all members to draw for the seat in the legislative body, that they would occupy for the next 2 years. Since all members have equal standing as elected representative, the seating would be of equal standing. Those belonging to the same political party would not be represented as a group. With 50% of the constituencies selecting their representative every 4 years, and with a 2 term limit, there would always be representatives with experience. With the satisfaction and recognition of having served well, probably most members would offer and be elected for a second term.

The next order of business would be the nomination and then election of the person most suited to be Premier or Prime Minister. The selection would probably be the member who had served well as Premier or one who had served well as a leader in a cabinet post or as a leader outside of Government. Ability, instead of popularity or vote getting skills, would presumably be the choice of all members, since they would not be bound by any duty other than to their constituents.

Cabinet members would also be nominated and chosen by how the sitting members evaluate their interests and ability. The Premier as a leader would presumably be influential in the selection, since it would be the premier's responsibility to assure that the Cabinet worked well together for the welfare of the jurisdiction as a whole.

The remaining representatives would form into boards of support for each Cabinet Minister with duties defined to develop special knowledge of the Department, assist as liaison with the public, and consider policy. Committee members would be required to devote time and effort to their committee duties commensurate with their remuneration.

Actual sitting time of the legislative body would be restricted to that required to offer members the opportunity to have final debate on legislation already subjected to consideration by committee and public input. Presumably a few days in a month would suffice, if the foolishness caused by party politics were eliminated from the legislative chamber.

There would be no need to have constituency offices. Their function has been purely political, to help the member be reelected. The public input into policy and legislation is more efficiently brought to the attention of members through modern communications. A member elected after having been properly evaluated by voters need have little interaction with constituents until being reevaluated for possible reelection.

To properly carry out the responsibilities of elected representative, full time should be devoted to those duties. Full and detailed study of new and old legislation, and its administration, should leave no time for anything else. Especially, to their own reelection. It is the responsibility of the electorate to evaluate if the member is earning their paycheck.

This may be a ridiculous scenario. But less ridiculous than the present actions, and inaction, of political party representatives.



To me, most people are young people. For those under 25, wake up to what has happened in your country, and take action because you want a better country. For you who are over 50, act out of guilt over what you have done or let others do to your country. Realize what a serfdom your country has become, with concentration of wealth and power in the few. Either rise up and make the effort peacefully now or let your children and grandchildren do it by violence.

I have not addressed this to the middle of our people. They are too busy with the uphill battle of careers and family, like I was, to realize what is being done to them. They have been educated and brainwashed to believe that what the paper pusher, robber barons are doing is the only way.

In the earlier days of serfdom, the control of the serfs was restricted to an area of land owned by the lords. Now, because of modern communication, the control area is unrestricted. Before, the serfdom was defined by land, now it it defined by money. Your Government no longer controls the money. Do not think for a moment that the control of money has been taken through the creation of wealth or has been taken justly. Maybe lawfully, but not justly. It has been taken by the weakness of Government, which has been caused by the Political Parties and their controllers. It has been taken because our elected representatives have failed to represent the people that elect them.

SO, what can you do, little you? You can do the same as those who first worked and sacrificed to build their lives and their country. You can work and sacrifice. Do it now, or it will be done later, with greater sacrifice.

You have to make the effort of mind and body. You must stop the slavery to the TV sets, ( the opiate of the masses) sports teams, substances and use your mind to better understand how things work and how they should work. You have to make sure you elect people who will take the actions necessary to effect change in Government. You must be one of the few who will do the work. The first thing is to realize that you CAN do the work, that you WANT to make a difference. You have to do what every uprising has done, join with all the people you can, in the common purpose. To elect people, you can overcome the advertising paid for by the political machines. You can defeat the political parties. Fewer people are volunteering to work for political parties. You have to call and transfer your enthusiasm to every voter several times during a campaign. I did just that. I changer the voting of a constituency who had voted for only one party for 100 years. I called at every house in the constituency at least two times, more if they were still not convinced to support my party. It was also interesting and a great pleasure to do it.

You may call it a No Party Army, or just friends with purpose, join together to take back our country.


This is a past due expose of the perversion of our Legislative traditions. This book should be compulsory reading for every teen age student in every school in Canada, they are the ones who will suffer for my, and the next generations, malfeasance. Every voting age person should suffer great guilt for allowing this social cancer to grow. I am so very ashamed when I am asked “You were there, why did you not do something about it.”

I bought this book as soon as it arrived in the book store and read it through immediately. I had learned most of the same about politics over 30 years ago when I served 2 terms in the Nova Scotia Legislature. There has been no improvement, and never will be until our Politicians serve the Province before serving their Political parties. Unlike the author, I had been involved in Nova Scotia Politics since I was in my teens, when it had been a different world.

The early chapters, and the last, hang out the dirty linen of the proceedings in the selection and use of elected representatives of the citizens. The practice of nomination by signing up members in a Constituency Organization hardly assures selection by the capability to deal with the problems of Government. It very well may provide members that the leader can control. The leader and political masters may be more interested in “mushroom members”, “Those that are kept in the dark and fed manure”. The lack of duties commensurate with the remuneration paid for members shows a sad waste of talents.

The book deals with how the Legislature is supposed to work, but fails to examine if it meets the circumstances of the current status of Society and Communications. To read about the function and conduct of members in the Legislature almost made me sick, because I remembered what it was like. The childish and useless conduct that is learned by new members has been passed on because leaders do not lead. The concentration of both Legislative and Administrative powers in the office of the Political leader opens the door to many evils.

The author states “Party discipline drives all real debate behind closed doors”. If there is indeed any debate. Even in Caucus, debate is tempered by reliance on the Minister and his Deputy and a lack of effort by members. Debate in the Legislature is about the politics instead of the substance. As the saying goes both Government and Opposition members would “ choke on a gnat and swallow a camel”. In the discussion of the “The Rules of the Game” the Author points out that “Policy Debates are for losers”. Imagine a group of members, one asks “What is our policy on so&so?” Some one answers “Who was the last person in the Leaders office?” At which everyone laughs. A sad but true story.

What the book does not contain are any thoughts on how, or if, the political disease can be cured. During a recent conversation, a new MLA was experiencing the shock of his new position. The author quotes the maxim of Enoch Powell that “all political lives end in failure”. Mine did. I want all present and future members to know that they too will fail to make a difference unless they take control of their actions unto themselves.

Stop the foolishness in the House. No more desk pounding and catcalls. Ask sensible questions and give sensible answers. Be respectful of your colleagues of all parties, they are as good and wise and wish the best for their province, as you do. Actually do the work you are paid for, study the legislation, make sure it says what it should. Remember that “No legislation has been passed, nor ever will be passed, that does not take away some freedom from some people”. Seek members, whatever their party, and tackle things together.

As the author says “The current way of doing things is not working to make life better for Nova Scotians”. Things can be better but there is a limit to what should be done by Government. I have a  quotation, although I forget its source, “How small, of all that human hearts endure, a part that Government can ease or cure.”



The history of the rise and fall of each Empire of the past 3,000 years has encompassed approximately 10 generations of human life. The similarities in their rise and fall during that span can be observed to fall into 5 stages. Those of pioneering, of commerce, of affluence, of intellectualism and of decadence. The Countries, Societies or Empires of today can be seen to be following those same trends.

Our Country and Province are a small part of the “Western Societies”. Common and historical traits constitute the “West” as a power, a society, a civilization, and to some degree, an empire. The countries of this grouping can be considered tribes with differences. Those differences have, with the component of human influence, led to competitions and occasional wars. But the pattern of development and decline has been common. Let us hope that our tribe can change its ways so as to avoid the ending that is sure, if history is repeated, to come to the Western Empire. To quote President Harry Truman “ The only thing new in this world is the History that you don't know”.

Nova Scotia's and Canada's stage of pioneering was similar to the first stage of new empires throughout history. This stage displays a period of amazing initiative, and almost incredible enterprise, courage and hardihood. Usually overrunning other civilizations and enemies by force of arms, and, in the case of the Americas, also overrunning a wilderness.

The age of commerce developed first in Nova Scotia and overlapped with the age of pioneering that was still going on as Canada expanded to the west. The forming of Canada from East to West disrupted the normal North-South trade routes, taking away the growth of commerce in Atlantic Canada. Then for over a hundred years, the nation's East to West commerce developed steadily with major boosts from two world wars.

The developing commerce created higher standards of living and affluence. This has been based, to a large extent, on extraction of natural resources. Unfortunately, because of the domination of its political parties by the financial interests, Canada’s resources were extracted for others. The wealth derived from the exploitation of these resources accrued chiefly to foreign interests and a minority of Canadians. Even without the majority of Canadian's benefiting from our national wealth, the stage of Affluence was carried by Canadians assuming immense debt to leave the future generations.

The stage of intellectualism seems to always overlap those of affluence and decadence. As affluence grows and spreads, and the challenges of wealth creation diminish, the pleasures of intellectualism develop and expand to take prominence. It seems that at this point morals and dedication to purpose decline. Affluence morphs into decadence. Sports, leisure, art, travel, pleasures of the flesh expand their presence in the society. The empire or society or country is then exposed to the take over of a new age of pioneers. These new pioneers are usually characterized by an extraordinary display of energy and courage. The new conquerors are normally poor, hardy and enterprising and above all aggressive. The decaying empires which they overthrow are wealthy but defensive-minded and trapped in the status quo. Lets us hope that our new conquerors are our own youth.

Each must decide for themselves how far our society has traveled on our road to the end. There are many symptoms comparable to those that were evident in the empires of the past. We have the bulk of wealth created by our society going to an elitist minority. We have built a dependency on foreign and minimum wage workers, somewhat equivalent to the slave labour of past empires. I have said many times that the only hope that Government is allowing people is the lottery and the stock market gambling. We have our sports, gambling, entertainment, drugs, and the modern “opiate of the masses”-- television. We are loosing, as was lost in previous empires, the work ethic, morals, fitness and appreciation of our planet. Do you think that the symptoms are similar?

Sir John Glubb (deceased) published a paper “THE FATE OF EMPIRES AND SEARCH FOR SURVIVAL” in which he traced the growth and death of empires over a 3000 year period. He likened all of those empires to the the present British Empire and the Western Society.

The Fate of Empires by Sir John Glubb - Friends of the ...

The following quotation has been around and ignored for a long time "A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves money from the public treasury. From that moment on the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most money from the public treasury, with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship." The fiscal policies followed for at least the last 40 years has even allowed the banks to create money as well as receive it from the public treasury.



From each according to their ability, to each according to their needs.” was a topic of a speech I gave in the Legislature that prompted some to claim that I was a socialist at heart. It is a worthwhile objective in any type of society.

Everyone has basic ability and everyone has basic needs. In nature individuals could balance one against the other. Because some have greater abilities than others, societies have developed, among other reasons, to provide joint defense, to divide work, to share resources and to enjoy social intercourse. Because of some antisocial aspects in human nature, complete freedom can not be tolerated in society. There are those individuals who would commit crimes or take advantage of others. For example, psychopaths may be void of empathy but may still have abilities useful to society and serve well in positions of authority. Living in society trades off lack of freedom with greater opportunity.

Ability without society can provide nothing above basic needs. Some people, or groups of people, may claim that their production of wealth or income is due to their ability. Far from it. Their start in life, education, experiences and place in society may enable them to maximize their productive capacity. Just as peoples ability may differ, so may their needs. Needs may differ because of, and in order to maximize, their ability. The challenges of exploiting ability may allow, but also require, a more costly standard of living.

Governments roll in society is, or should be, to do those things that individuals can not do by and for themselves. All people in a society want protection of their persons and property. All want services that are impossible or difficult to do themselves. No thinking member of society wants to have people deprived of the basics of life. We accept that we need a Government structure to do this. What is Governments roll in assuring full utilization of ability and the assurance of meeting basic needs ?

Government is trying to do more than is can or should do. “How small of all that human hearts endure, a part that Government can cure.” It would appear that those making decisions have lost touch with people. Government today is underestimating the ability of people to satisfy their needs or to maximize the production from their abilities. The education and lifestyle of our decision makers have narrowed their understanding of the abilities of individuals. They see people as they wish they were, rather than as they really are. They treat people as statistics. Their welfare policies, their tax policies, their education policies, and others, take away the initiative of the individual and fail to yield the intended results. Instead of encouraging savings and production to improve our economy they encourage consumption and weaken society.

Decisions that should be left to the individual are being made, or influenced, by laws and its administrators. By exempting point-of-sales tax from certain consumption, choices of satisfying personal needs are influenced. In addition, a monetary advantage is given to the richer consumers. It would be much fairer to tax all consumption and provide rebate of the point of sales tax to those who need the assistance. Also, the great cost of administrating social assistance could be better spent if paid directly as income to those in need. Such would also influence recipients to greater personal responsibility. Also, the health care system is based on bureaucratic decisions regarding treatment, rather than payment to assure adequate treatment. As long as Government is controlled and administered by the intellectual elite our society will continue along the downward path of all societies over history.

Governments seem to favour paying for things that people may not want or need. They pay Universities instead of students. They pay for a health system rather for health costs that people can not afford. They pay for school rather than for Graduates. They pay for a system of social security rather than pay for a minimum standard of living. They pay subsidies to big businesses but create red tape to kill small business, the drivers of an economy. It seemed funny when a business person said “What, another program to help business, soon they will ruin us all”. Many of the programs of Government provide greater support for the rich than poor.

These supports of systems and things sometimes have no consideration of what is best for the society that they serve. For example, in financing Universities or Trade Schools, the first consideration of Government should be “What skills are most needed in our society”. Then they would know where the money should go. For example, in financing health care, the first consideration should be “What would serve our people best, big hospitals or small clinics close to the people served and without the big overheads.” The big bureaucracy and big political parties and big businesses prefer their power, over service to the people they serve.


I think that our GDP is being used by Government to lead us poor citizens of Canada astray. The quarterly reports are announced as an indicator of how great our Government is doing. How is GDP arrived at? The sale of imported goods is supposed to add to our GDP. Does that make any sense? The amount of debt that we pile on top of the already obscene amount individuals owe is reflected as growth in GDP. New Government debt or money printed becomes GDP. The natural resources that we deplete is shown as Product. Government expenditures of all kinds are considered as Product. The cost of the Stock Market casino is considered a product whereas there is nothing actually produced. The cost of that Cuban vacation is considered a product of Canada. The costs to clean up pollution is considered Product. The future cost of cleaning up pollution is not deducted from today's Product. So how does GDP indicate anything useful about the state of our country?

While I am on a rant, another thing that bothers me is why Government borrows money. It is bad enough that the banks and financiers create money to loan to people for financing cars or other consumer goods, or credit card debt, or personal loans. Why does not the Government just print it like they used to? The money comes from the taxpayers no matter which way it is done. If the money is printed it is reflected by the decrease in the value of the money of the Current generation. If it is borrowed it is passed on to future generations to pay. If the money is borrowed it is in effect printed by the banks and financiers and increases the wealth of the already rich.

And while I am still on a rant, what does Government do when it wants to stimulate the economy. It uses their “trickle down” economic foolishness. They feed the banks, the big corporations, the paper pushers, those who use it for buying up existing business, or for foreign investment, rather than creating new production. Government should pay it directly to people where it gets into the economy the fastest.

Now my rant just makes me sad. I am sad that our elected representatives have allowed the status quo to become so complicated. They have been led away from the basic reason for Government, to serve people. They have the wrong taxation base, that of what people create rather than what they consume. The taxation of income is so detrimental to the economy and unfair that volumes of complication has tried to correct the damage done by the use of a wrong tax base. They have undertaken a complicated web of doing things to help people rather than the simple one of simply providing resources to those in need, no matter what the reason for the need. In doing so they have taken away personal incentive and freedoms that would otherwise be beneficial to society as a whole.

11 WHY ME ??

Why would someone without a College education, think that he is qualified to write about changing Government? Firstly, because no body else is doing, or even suggesting, anything to change the basics of our problems. And because, he has experience and has, since the demands of career and family are past, had time to read, reflect and THINK. Maybe because of a breadth and variety of work and experience. A breadth including, work and night study to achieve the status of Chartered Accountant; Farm machinery sales, trucks and car dealer; CA professional practice partner; Consultant to Canadian Governments at all levels; Vice President of Professional Engineering firm; International project management; Business start up and management in fish processing, cable television and venture capital; and Political involvement for over 60 years as poll worker, fund raiser and 2 term elected member of the Nova Scotia Legislature.

Even being qualified, why undertake what may be a futile attempt to make a difference? Because of the responsibility we all have to future generations. Not only our Governments but our Society have allowed themselves to forsake the moral and service standards that past generations initiated. The pattern of formation and disintegration suffered by empires and societies over the past 3,000 years are being followed by us, and the glory days are past. The citizens of our country and society know things are not right and they complain. Some peoples finally resort to violence to get rid of those who serve their own interests instead of those of their country. I hope that the Internet and the opportunity that it gives for using the ballot instead of violence to change our society will enable the developing generations to rescue us from the political and economic excesses that has developed.

If my humble effort influences people to use their God given minds and brains to turn their complaining about Government, business and the state of our society into action, I will have achieved the highest goal. People complain that the present actions of all parties have focused attention on politics instead of on Government. They complain that the power that individuals should have over their own affairs is being concentrated in bureaucracy, the political parties and those that control them. They complain that the wealth of the Country is being denied to the productive members of our society and concentrated in the hands of the politically favoured. They complain that our natural resources are being depleted to pay for the excesses of the rich and for the importation of unnecessary consumer goods.

The ineffectual members of Parliament and the Legislatures are letting themselves be manipulated. The action proposed is to counter the adversarial political system and return the emphases of Government to the individual. This can only be achieved where citizens have any power at all, at the constituency level. We must form an army in every constituency, armed with the ballot. As in any army, the young must be the foot soldiers, knowledgeable leaders their sergeants and lieutenants, and those with experience and maturity, their strategists and trainers. Everyone has a duty to join this army. Those with something to lose will say that the suggestions are too radical, crazy, impossible, harmful and every other negative thing. They will be right that nothing can be changed, UNLESS, we take control of our Governments back from the political parties.