Hall Of Mirrors Summary

One of the strongest areas of Smith’s book is his critical analysis of the governor general's role. Smith anylises the democratic nature of the governor general. He argues that the governor general is not as symbolic as most Canadians have a tendency to believe. Smith states that the nature of the governor general's position lack accountability to the public. Smith argues that “the governor general, the representative of the sovereign , is no mere figurehead as is, say, the president of Germany” (Smith 40). He outlines the governor general's role in appointing senators, and argues that this is problematic due to the governor general's office connection to that the of the Prime Ministers. Smith raises important points that are well supported with evidence, making this section of his book a strong point. Another strength of Smith's writing is his detailed analysis of the supposed non-partisanship of the senate. Smith examines and critiques the system used to appoint senators, and express specific concern as to how senators can be non-partisan if they are appointed on recommendation from the prime minister. Naturally, Smith claims, a Prime Minister will recommend people with similar political views as his or her own, therefore making it impossible to have non-partisan senators. He states, …show more content…
One of the major flaws with Smith’s writing is has glaring bias against the Harper government in specific, in a book meant to examine Canada’s governmental system and its flaws. The book is not intended to be one of critiquing Stephen Harper, although Stephen Harper’s name is mentioned thirty times throughout the novel. This in stark contrast to current Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, who is mentioned a mere nine times. In a book meant to highlight the critical facets of the federal government, this is not to the benefit of Stephen