It was refreshing to hear that the Conservative government has ordered a review of the federal Public Service Employment Act's affirmative action:

"I strongly agree with the objective of creating a public service that reflects the diversity of Canada, and with fair measures designed to reach that goal. But we must ensure that all Canadians have an equal opportunity to work for their government based on merit, regardless of race or ethnicity," said Conservative MP Jason Kenny.

The intent of 'affirmative action' was to introduce measures to achieve non-discrimination in employment, so in 1986 the Employment Equity Act was passed. Its purpose was to:

"achieve equality in the workplace so that no person shall be denied employment opportunities or benefits for reasons unrelated to ability and, in the fulfillment of the goals, to correct the conditions of disadvantage in employment experienced by women, Aboriginal peoples, persons with disabilities, and visible minority people by giving effect to the principle that employment equity means more than treating persons in the same way but also requires special measures and the accommodation of differences."

Preventing or eliminating discrimination is one thing; "correcting conditions of disadvantage"-which implies giving advantage where there was once disadvantage-is quite another thing. It is social engineering.

In 1986, the federal government wanted to alleviate the historic discriminatory practices against four "employment equity groups." In 2010, they realized that not only has the Act not achieved its intended goal, but that reverse discrimination has resulted. The recent example of Sara Landriault, of Kemptville, Ontario-who was told she could not continue an online job application to Citizenship and Immigration Canada after answering she was white in response to a question about her race-exposes the serious flaws inherent in this Act.

All men/women are created equal, and should have equal opportunities in all areas-not only of employment, but in life. Government social engineering of some segments of society to give preferential status to some and not to others flies in the face of the concept that we all have inalienable rights.

We already have laws in place to prevent discrimination. If someone feels that law has been broken, they should turn to the law for redress. But they cannot ask that their government discriminate against someone else, to redress one wrong with another wrong. As the old saying goes, "Two wrongs do not make a right."

The Act, as it was written in the heat of the rights movements of the '80s, creates more of the very problem it purports to solve.

The CHP will always take a stand for inalienable rights, but steadfastly against government social engineering.

Better solutions begin at CHP.