The judge is out on whether he ignored rural MPs or whether this situation will succeed in gun control. That is a fair example. It was a tough decision.
By and large on ideas not as controversial, when we get a consensus ministers tend to listen.
It is very important that we take notice of the Bloc's point on the control the bureaucracy has in this community. I have been working around this town since 1979. I came here as a young political assistant, not a bureaucrat. I was amazed at the way the bureaucrats, the public servants, operated and managed departments within government. We call it the machinery of government.
I had a terrific experience working in the Prime Minister's office for almost four years. I was amazed even in that office when we
wanted things done the public service had this capacity to actually control the tempo of implementation. I coined an expression back in 1981 called the MAD treatment, maximum administrative delay. They were good public servants. It was just part of the culture. It was part of the thought process that even though the political will wants a particular policy implemented, before we actually put it into the factory and implement it we must do further analysis. We must check this, we must check that. The delay was enough to drive one nuts.
The member for Trois-Rivieres has given us a very important point on which we must be ever vigilant. Those of us who are elected, who are accountable, have to make sure the things approved in the House are implemented and not steered off and done in a way the bureaucracy thinks should be done.
I do not share the member's view when he says we do not have an opportunity for input. I think we do. If we are passionate about our ideas and we get support from other colleagues usually they can be implemented.
It is not always easy. I could give a personal example and pass it on to the members opposite on the whole issue of tax reform. I have been working on the issue of tax reform for six years, the single tax system.
I was hoping that with 50-odd members from the Reform Party who apparently believed in tax reform we would have much more energy in support of the notion of comprehensive tax reform, but that has fizzled. Obviously I have not done a good enough job on that issue in convincing other colleagues we need comprehensive tax reform. We are not talking about it enough, debating it enough or selling it to the rest of the decision makers in the Chamber.