This line of thought fits in with the English approach to policing interpersonal relations as noted by R. Thomas Farrar. The English tend to trust their police and others in authority to exercise the powers given them with reasonableness and common sense. Farrar contrasts this with the American distrust of those in authority and desire for limits and constraints to be in place as a check on the exercise of power. These are tendencies not absolutes. Professor Wexler feels that discretion is too large a feature of administrative action to be ignored but he does not contend that rules and guidelines be abolished.
Rules exist to point administrators in the right direction.
It is our view that a greater structuring of discretion by rules is necessary to protect and enhance civil liberties. We note of the Guaranteed Annual Income for Need Act that this statute does not require welfare home visits. The informal practice of the Ministry of Human Resources effects such a requirement. We feel that the exercise there is wrong. Such an arguments runs completely counter to what we endeavored to show in the first few chapters of this paper.