In this week's essay, Michael challenges the government on two of its recent "cheesy" decisions.

Governments are capable of doing great things.

When we accuse the government of lacking vision and imagination, we forget that sometimes, inspired by history or driven to it by the exigencies of hardball politics, politicians can rise to the level of statesmen.

Governments can create a health care system or give us a flag. They can give us a rights charter or apologize on our behalf to Indian citizens for the abusive treatment they received in residential schools.

But of course on the other side of the ledger, governments are capable of doing really tacky little things seemingly without reason, just to prove something to themselves and their core.

Of which we have two recent examples.

Cheesy Decision Number One: For the past 50 years, Canada has run a program whereby retired teachers travel overseas to teach in the developing world.

The retired teachers are all volunteers.

In the 50 years of its existence, it has sent them to such places as India, Mongolia, Sierra Leone - places which desperately need to educate their children.

The Canadians not only teach children, they teach teachers.

They focus on math and science but also on student discipline and health programs.

They also help local schools in developing countries create their own curricula designed for local needs.

In short, the volunteer teacher program is a model of how the developed west can help the Third World.

But the government has announced it is killing the program. It has given no clear reason.

It can't be money. The costs are peanuts - about a million dollars a year over five years. The Canadian Teachers Federation picks up about 40 per cent of the costs.

The cancellation hasn't gone unnoticed in the developing or for that matter the developed world.

It does not put the country in a favorable light.

Cheesy Decision Number Two: This has to do with criminal pardons.

The idea of a pardon for criminal offences is steeped in judicial history in common law countries.

It goes back to the idea of the Royal Prerogative whereby the sovereign could extend mercy to eliminate the "pains, penalties and punishments" stemming from criminal conviction.

In this country, those convicted of a criminal offense who have served their sentence and have not broken any laws since their release, can apply for a pardon.

It's not just a feel good exercise. A pardon might allow a man or woman to get a job; without it, the criminal record would make it almost impossible.

A pardon can be an indispensable element in rehabilitation.

Until recently, the fee for making a pardon application was $50. And then it was raised to $150.

Well now the government wants to raise the fee to $631 as part of its crime-busting agenda.

Crime Fighter Vic Toews, the public safety minister said: "We believe that ordinary Canadians shouldn't have to be footing the bill for a criminal asking for a pardon."

The pardon system works in giving the convicted a second chance.

Research by the Pardon Society of Canada shows that since 1970, 96 per cent of all pardons remain in force, meaning those pardoned have stayed crime-free for the rest of their lives.

Tripling the fee for pardon application is meaningless as a way to "get tough" on crime.

But it does mean pain and hardship to Canadians who will find their job chances, their ability to travel and even their education limited because they can't afford the filing fee.

The only point to it seems to be to punish or more accurately to carry on the punishment after the offender has served his or her sentence.

I can think of only one word to describe the legislation:

Cheesy.