It’s not every day that government gets it right. But sometimes they do. Our Prime Minister has been consistent in his promise to create smaller government. And he has delivered.
I mean, yes, sure, he is tied with Brian Mulroney for having the largest cabinet in Canadian history, at thirty-nine ministers. And yes, some simpler countries, like the United States, they get by with twenty-three cabinet ministers. But to be fair, a lot of our cabinet ministers are not that bright. If they didn’t have this job, they might have to turn to crime or public broadcasting. And this government is tough on both.
But as the old adage goes, sometimes you have to spend money to make money. Which is why, in an effort to make government smaller, Stephen Harper is making it bigger by creating thirty new members of Parliament. Who among us, when contemplating the major problems of the day—poverty, unemployment, Tony Clement—has not said, “If only we had more members of Parliament, everything would be okay”? Suddenly, I don’t feel bad that the people who take the search-and-rescue calls from drowning fishermen are being laid off because we’re getting new MPs.
See? It’s all about balance.
Now, don’t get me wrong—I’m all for electoral reform. Many geeks with an obscure interest in the subject are. But before we add new MPs, why don’t we fix some of the problems with the existing MPs? Like the fact that we are the only parliamentary democracy in the entire world where an MP does not have the right to stand up and ask a question not approved by their leader. Yes, freedom of speech is a right we all enjoy in this country, unless you’re a member of Parliament. And a bill addressing this very problem was killed last year in committee.
So really, if Stephen Harper’s idea of job creation is creating thirty new MPs, why don’t we save ourselves a pile of cash? Get thirty old mannequins, throw them up in the back row of the House of Commons, sit back and see if anyone notices.