{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.025490196078431372, 'fraction_numerical': 0.00392156862745098, 'mean_word_length': 5.124, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Life and Times of the Camp Commission

Around the Ontario Legislature, the reports of the Camp Commission have attained the status of classics, which is to say that everyone refers to them but no one reads them. The question naturally arises, then, was this $400,000 enquiry really necessary? More to the point perhaps, did anything of substance come of it? To both questions, the answer is an unqualified yes. The Camp Commission, or more properly the Ontario Commission on the Legislature, was an attempt at redressing the crushing dominance of the Ontario executive over its legislature. As to results, a truly remarkable number of the Commission's recommendations have been implemented, and if the Ontario Legislature is still in need of substantial modernization, it has progressed enormously in recent years, due in no small measure to the Commission's impetus. The Commission's main task lay not so much in divining the problems of the Ontario Legislature, for these were never obscure, as in proposing workable remedies acceptable to the government. This the Commission did with consummate skill. Taken one by one, none of the recommendations was so outlandish as to invite out-of-hand government dismissal, yet collectively they amounted to a blueprint for very far-reaching reforms. Moreover, the Commission's work and its reports were executed with thoroughgoing pragmatism; indeed, the Camp Commission provides a first-rate illustration of how an advisory body or Royal Commission goes about maximizing its impact.