The Jefferson Tree - A platform for open debate and discussion of current events and politics...

Article statistics…

  • 402Articles read today:
  • 591Articles read yesterday:
  • 4817Articles read last week:
  • 321263Total reads:

“A government of reason is better than one of force.” Thomas Jefferson

Copyright infringement…

All materials and articles on this site are protected by copyright per the original author or blog owner and published with their consent. Any re-blogging or re-publication of this content without the authors permission is illegal and subject to liability and criminal prosecution.

“Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law,' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual.” Thomas Jefferson
Frustrated Joe - Dwindling Empire

Now, if Ottawa really wants to get serious about this

So according to a story in the Globe and Mail, Ottawa is apparently going to start having telemarketers underwrite the cost of enforcing the national Do Not Call List. It seems that our  federal government plans to consult with the telemarketing industry in the coming months and implement a permanent funding mechanism to take effect April 1 of next year.

Junk Calls, an endless stream

Great concept, making the offender responsible for the cost of policing themselves. After all, why should the taxpayer continuously be expected to foot the bill to police industry. I understand the reasoning behind society having to cover the cost to police criminals, plain and simple they are criminals and its not like we can expect them to fund efforts to arrest, convict, and imprison themselves ( try collecting those dues…..). However, legitimate industry and business is another matter. When there is talk of impending government regulation for a specific sector of business we often hear from that particular group that they would much prefer self regulation over the government imposed version. Typically the argument will be made that the vast majority of the group is not the problem, that generally members respect and abide by the rules and common sense, and that excessive regulations will add to the costs of doing business. All good arguments, and for the most case very true. However, on occasion the government has no choice but to step in when an industry proves incapable of regulating itself  (yes, I said it, more government regulation), however why should the taxpayer be expected to shoulder the financial burden. After all, the industry itself is responsible for the problem and even if it were to effectively self regulate there would be an associated cost to its members.

So, maybe, just maybe this latest tact will help eliminate some of the dozens, if not hundreds of junk calls the average Canadian is subjected to.

Now while it is a good start, it simply does not go far enough. The current Do Not Call legislation effectively exempts a number of groups from the rules, charities, newspapers, pollsters and survey companies, and you guessed it, politicians and political parties. All of these groups will tell you that these calls are absolutely essential to fund raising, information gathering for their group or organization, or simply staying in business. Again probably true, however the same argument could be made for virtually any operation performing outgoing calls, yet none of them are blessed with exemption from the rules. It appears from the exempt list that the government covered itself (politicians and pollsters) and any allies that they felt might cause a backlash if not exempted (charities and newspapers), but does that really surprise anyone, its par for the course.

So if our government really wants to get serious about providing Canadians some relief from constant phone ring during their personal time at home, the regulations should blanket ALL call, no exceptions.

Frustrated Joe - Dwindling Empire

Author: Frustrated Joe - Dwindling Empire

Just your average born and raised Canadian who goes to work each day, pays his taxes, and hopes that there is something left for the next generation. This blog is just a snapshot of my thoughts and the issues that interest or infuriate me as I go through life.

1 comment to Now, if Ottawa really wants to get serious about this

  • It is, indeed a great concept–making the offender responsible for policing themselves. In point of fact, why should the Taxpayer even be concerned about policing Industry? Hasn’t Industry been “Policed” and taxed to the point of virtual extinction as it is? Shouldn’t all industry be free to run as rampant over the rights of the Public as it desires without the fear of any kind of government intervention?

    What ever happened to “Free Enterprise?” Al Capone knew a thing or two about “Free Enterprise” as did Boss Tweed and look at what happened to them. Tragic end to the concept of Free Enterprise for those two.

    Yes, I think we can reasonably assume that Big Business is honest enough and filled with enough integrity that there need be no fear that the Public Confidence would ever be violated. So I would propose that all government everywhere just forgo any intent to regulate anything and let it all run wild and free.

    As a Liberal, I support the concept of regulating business for the sake of protecting the consuming and the working public but I can also see the Conservative side of the argument too…Big Business…particularly “Corporate” Big Business is a legal “Person” and as such should never have the burden of the government sticking it’s nose in anywhere along the line.

    No–I agree with you! The Taxpayer should never be expected to shoulder the burden or any part of the burden. The Taxpayer has done his or her share once they have patronized the Business and the Business should be forever after free of any fear of any kind of government intervention into it’s affairs.

    Businesses, after all, are not in business to cater to the needs and whims of the Consuming Populace—Business is in business to make profits and to bolster the bottom line. There is no other justification for a Business other than making money and lots of it. Any benefit such as “Service” or “Convenience” that might accrue to customers as a result of a business is secondary in important and sometimes even inconsequential.

    Al Capone would probably have agreed with me on that point, don’t you expect?

    I think in the question of “Junk Calls,” someone with a little creative imagination might find a way to invent a “Filtering” device that is capable of detecting junk calls through recognition of “Keywords” perhaps or patterns of Keywords and simply avoid answering them much the same as a spam filter works on a computer.

    It doesn’t seem so far fetched to me. I think it is well within the realm of possibility.

    Anyway, there is always the other option of looking at the window of the “Incoming Call” function on most telephones and if the “Caller ID” shows something suspicious, the intended target of the junk call could simply refuse to pick up on the call. That seems simple enough.

    I think it would be heartless to put restrictions on calls from charities, don’t you really?

    Charities do so much good work in providing their administrators with outlandish lifestyles and I cannot see anyone of a Conservative bent ever wanting to restrict a hard working administrator from making their big salaries…wouldn’t that be restraint of commerce?

    All this is so academic and hardly bears discussion, now does it?

    There is something inherently wrong in the idea of putting restrictions on telemarketing calls. I mean, after all, there aren’t many Business Enterprises much larger than some telemarketing firms, is there?

    Think of the jobs they provide to the economy. Telemarketers provide thousand and perhaps millions of jobs to an economy. We certainly wouldn’t want to be sticks in the mud about jobs now would we?

    Maybe the whole problem is that there aren’t enough telemarketing operations headed up by Conservatives.

    Maybe we ought to insure that the telemarketing opportunities are fair and balanced and require legislation to insure that there are fully as many Liberal telemarketers in operation as there are Conservative ones.

    I think that would solve the whole problem.

    Anyway..what about the millions of elderly and lonely folks who rarely have anyone to talk to? Don’t the telemarketers provide a really needed service for those folks?

    If that is true, then who, with any conscience, could ever consider putting any kind of quash to these humanitarian efforts?

Leave a Reply




You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>