The Law Reform Commission of Canada and Lawyers' Approaches to Public Administration: A Review Essay

Such attitudes are part and parcel of the ideology of law and as such are inculcated in lawyers as they partake of legal education, read legal scholarship and practice law. Even where serious efforts are made to escape the bounds of inherited legal thought, a persistent suspicion of public administration and consequently a general preference for "private" rather than "public" ordering lingers in the juristic mind. Two recent publications of the Law Reform Commission of Canada, Daniel Mockle's The Legal Status of the Federal Administration* and the Report on Independent Administrative Agencies: A Framework for Decision Making* are illustrative of these themes. Both are well researched, well informed works; neither ultimately succeeds in offering a treatment which is fully appreciative of the needs for and purposes of public administration. The Legal Status of the Federal Administration represents an attempt to offer a "modern and coherent" account of the Crown, the extent to which "the Crown" is coterminous with "the administration," the relationship between these state organs and "individuals" and to offer a series of proposals for law reform. These