In “Strengthening Citizen Participation in Public Decision Making: A Canadian Perspective” by Michael R. Woodford and Susan Preston analyzes how citizen participation and government accountability in the decision-making process are often in disagreement. It is not often that Canadians are denied the opportunity to participate in public hearings, citizen polls and other consultative methods; however, the degree to which their voices have been taken into account is often insufficient. Politicians are not bound by the opinions of citizens – unless it is a binding referendum – and yet public participation is said to help “reverse the growing democratic deficit, promote citizenship and community capacity, and promote responsive policy decisions and effective” (Woodford and Preston 346). These “improvements”, in practice, raise a broader question: should members of Parliament vote in accordance with party policy or that of their constituents? Because the effective inclusion of citizens' opinions “requires that public administrators and policy makers commit to truly considering [this] input into policy analysis and decision making” (347). Without a commitment to collective voice, citizens may not be better off. This calls into question whether a decrease in voter turnout is associated with the lack of influence citizens feel they truly have in Canada's decision-making and bigger picture. In Canada, the participatory role of citizens in decision-making is made possible through consultative activities. methods that seem to have many more negatives than positives. Woodford and Preston note that according to various Canadian scholars, consultative means include: “one-way communication, infrequent feedback, limited involvement, low representativeness,…half of the document…management remained a top-down approach.” process (354), with government at the helm. Some would say it presents itself as an absence of commitment to citizen influence, although it becomes difficult to conceptualize citizen commitment as a basis for new or changing policy Is the average person equipped with the knowledge necessary to fairly evaluate all government issues? Is personal opinion sufficient, without substantiated evidence? Is it possible to place contingencies on the desire to strengthen citizen participation in public decision-making? The questions are endless, and yet, as Woodford and Preston point out, “statutory requirements for citizen input 'would not necessarily mean that citizen involvement is accessible and done particularly well'” (356). The inclusion and weight of citizen input is necessary, although to what extent remains to be determined.