I came across this revolutionary and inspiring speech by British Conservative Prime Minister David Cameron
on TED. The speech, "The Next Age of Government" is a TED talk given in February 2010, several months before Cameron became prime minister. He proposes some radical ideas for government. Here is the transcript of the speech.
Proceeding from the premise that governments in the West are faced with incredible cost pressures that limit their ability to expand programs as a means of improving the quality of life, he proposes harnessing the intelligence of information and communications technology to reshape how government attacks its job.
With a focus on things that underlie well-being, such as family relationships, friendship, community and values,
Cameron then suggests that political philosophy, political thinking and the information revolution can remake politics, government and public services for the better.
Some of the ideas:
1. Conservative political philosophy: Give people more power and control over their lives. Give them
more choice. Connect this with the communications and information revolution.
2. Conservative political philosophy: Go with the grain of human nature assisted by the latest knowledge in
behavioral economics.
2. Political thinking: Emphasize transparency, choice and accountability. Again this should be connected to
IT and Web2.0
Read/listen to the short speech for the details. It is just an introduction. The premise of not enough money is questionable. Most left-leaning sorts would say we need to tax corporations more and that will provide gobs of money for improved social services. I question whether more money and more programs fixes things.
Look at Vancouver's downtown East side, Nunavut and the Aboriginal situation in Canada and poverty in general. How much money have governments at all levels spent to alleviate poverty and how much have things improved? Compare with 50 years ago.
Unfortunately, David Cameron left out reforms to the democratic process in his speech and successfully saw nixed a couple of months ago a fundamental change to this. I hope that an improvement to the political process married with IT and Web2.0 is a part of this thesis.
Thursday, June 09, 2011
Monday, June 06, 2011
An interesting libertarian -- Charles Murray
No stranger to controversy, Charles Murray has been at the forefront of conservative-libertarian policy analysis for the past twenty-five years. His theses shock us, but make us think.
Open your mind and view this recent speech
Open your mind and view this recent speech
Friday, June 03, 2011
Representation by Population and Quebec
Quebec is complaining about changes to the makeup of parliament that will reflect population growth in Ontario and the West by giving additional seats to these areas (17 to Ontario, 7 to BC and 5 to Alberta). Today in the Globe and Mail
Well, if you had wanted to fight this battle, you should have elected Conservatives and so had a say in government. You chose to be out of the loop and so you must bear your fate.
Unfortunately, seats cannot be taken away from regions of stagnant or declining population, so our parliament will simply have to grow and grow. Oh God! If provinces and regions want to maintain or increase their presence in parliament, then they need to get their house in order and attract more people nor have more babies.
Look at the present situation. The government is simply adjusting things to make underrepresented provinces more fairly represented.
Source:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Canadian_provinces_and_territories_by_population
And further ... very interesting reading on population growth statistics from Statistics Canada:
Provincial and territorial projections
Ontario and British Columbia are the only provinces in which average annual growth would exceed the growth rate for Canada as a whole between 2009 and 2036, according to all scenarios.
Ontario's population would increase from nearly 13.1 million in 2009 to between 16.1 million and 19.4 million in 2036, depending on the scenario. Under the medium-growth scenario, it would account for 40.5% of the national population in 2036, up from 38.7% in 2009.
The population of British Columbia would increase from nearly 4.5 million in 2009 to between 5.8 million and 7.1 million in 2036. Under the medium-growth scenario, its share of Canada's total population would rise from 13.2% to 14.5%.
Quebec would remain the second most populous province. Its population would rise from 7.8 million in 2009 to between 8.6 million and 10.0 million in 2036.
Under the lowest-growth scenario, Newfoundland and Labrador's population would decline from 508,900 in 2009 to 483,400 in 2036. Under the highest-growth scenario, it would rise to 544,500.
http://www.statcan.gc.ca/daily-quotidien/100526/dq100526b-eng.htm
So, what do slow growing regions propose? Do we punish faster growing regions by not allowing their political representation to reflect this? Do we change the Senate to provide regional population or abolish it?
Very interesting dynamics at play here. The NDP in BC approves of the changes. Where does Smiling Jack stand? Ah, such a balanced and delicate dance is required when you have a sizeable number of MPs from Quebec!
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad
Well, if you had wanted to fight this battle, you should have elected Conservatives and so had a say in government. You chose to be out of the loop and so you must bear your fate.
Unfortunately, seats cannot be taken away from regions of stagnant or declining population, so our parliament will simply have to grow and grow. Oh God! If provinces and regions want to maintain or increase their presence in parliament, then they need to get their house in order and attract more people nor have more babies.
Look at the present situation. The government is simply adjusting things to make underrepresented provinces more fairly represented.
| Province | Percent of National Population | Percent of Parliament | under/over representation | |
| | | | | |
| | 38.7 | 34.4 | under | |
| | 23.2 | 24.4 | over | |
| BC | 13.3 | 11.7 | under | |
| | 10.9 | 9.1 | under | |
| | 3.7 | 4.5 | over | |
| | 3.1 | 4.5 | over | |
| | 2.8 | 3.6 | over | |
| | 2.3 | 3.2 | over | |
| | 1.5 | 2.3 | over | |
| | 0.4 | 1.3 | over | |
Source:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Canadian_provinces_and_territories_by_population
And further ... very interesting reading on population growth statistics from Statistics Canada:
Provincial and territorial projections
Ontario and British Columbia are the only provinces in which average annual growth would exceed the growth rate for Canada as a whole between 2009 and 2036, according to all scenarios.
Ontario's population would increase from nearly 13.1 million in 2009 to between 16.1 million and 19.4 million in 2036, depending on the scenario. Under the medium-growth scenario, it would account for 40.5% of the national population in 2036, up from 38.7% in 2009.
The population of British Columbia would increase from nearly 4.5 million in 2009 to between 5.8 million and 7.1 million in 2036. Under the medium-growth scenario, its share of Canada's total population would rise from 13.2% to 14.5%.
Quebec would remain the second most populous province. Its population would rise from 7.8 million in 2009 to between 8.6 million and 10.0 million in 2036.
Under the lowest-growth scenario, Newfoundland and Labrador's population would decline from 508,900 in 2009 to 483,400 in 2036. Under the highest-growth scenario, it would rise to 544,500.
http://www.statcan.gc.ca/daily-quotidien/100526/dq100526b-eng.htm
So, what do slow growing regions propose? Do we punish faster growing regions by not allowing their political representation to reflect this? Do we change the Senate to provide regional population or abolish it?
Very interesting dynamics at play here. The NDP in BC approves of the changes. Where does Smiling Jack stand? Ah, such a balanced and delicate dance is required when you have a sizeable number of MPs from Quebec!
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad
Thursday, June 02, 2011
Theodore Dalrymple
I first encountered this trenchant critic of contemporary culture a couple of years ago when I read his book
Our Culture, What's Left of it: The Mandarins and the Masses.
His scathing commentary on modern Western society didn't surprise me altogether, but the way he
wrote it and his supporting examples were astonishing. He has been called a modern George Orwell.
I highly recommend reading some of his essays. There are some good websites about him and lots of his stuff is available on the internet.
Here are some good links:
The Skeptical Doctor (Dedicated to the work of Theodore Dalrymple)
Life at the Bottom (Dalrymple's 2003 book available free online via City Journal)
CBC Ideas Interview (An interview with Dalrymple from 2006)
Our Culture, What's Left of it: The Mandarins and the Masses.
His scathing commentary on modern Western society didn't surprise me altogether, but the way he
wrote it and his supporting examples were astonishing. He has been called a modern George Orwell.
I highly recommend reading some of his essays. There are some good websites about him and lots of his stuff is available on the internet.
Here are some good links:
The Skeptical Doctor (Dedicated to the work of Theodore Dalrymple)
Life at the Bottom (Dalrymple's 2003 book available free online via City Journal)
CBC Ideas Interview (An interview with Dalrymple from 2006)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)