Thank you for that question. I agree with its premise 100%.
We have mangled the idea of rights, such as those in the Charter of Rights. They're supposed to be negative rights, meaning they are rights against government interference. If the government does not interfere with you, your rights are being observed. We have an idea in this country that there are rights we need the government's help to achieve, that we need the government to intervene in this and to impose on that. This group asks the government to make that group stop saying things about it, because it's not right. That's not the conception of rights we were supposed to have. The conception we're supposed to have is this: If the government leaves you alone, your rights are being observed. It's government intervening that is the problem. You can see that reflected in the comments and submissions here.
To your larger point, we have a government that has grown beyond its useful limits. The other day, I saw an estimate that said the public sector has grown to 40% of the economy of this country. That is not sustainable. That is one of the reasons this country is becoming poor. You need more people than that in the private sector to make it possible to have a government. We think that money grows on trees and that government is the solution to everything. We're in that trap so deep that we cannot see anything else. Whenever there's a problem, the only possible solution is more, not fewer, government programs, rules, taxes and structures. Sometimes—if not always, in this day and age—the solution is fewer, not more.