Parsley,
I came across this article that I am preparing for a "Policy and Procedure" manual.
VERY Interesting!
Where does the CWB fit into the model of "Good Governence"?
Here is what I have gleaned!
Good governance is the medium for attaining general well being; and corruption indicates poor government. Corruption by – politicians, officials and others – dissipates essential resources and produces poverty. This poverty is an active concern of our community.
Advanced democracies have virile electorates, media and criminal justice systems to combat corruption. Political and civil institutions that are weaker, in effect license corruption with impunity, and fail to control it.
"Good Governence:
Governance is the process whereby public institutions conduct public affairs, manage public resources and guarantee the realization of human rights. Good governance accomplishes this in a manner essentially free of abuse and corruption, and with due regard for the rule of law. The true test of “good” governance is the
degree to which it delivers on the promise of human rights: civil, cultural, economic, political and social rights. The key question is: are the institutions of governance
effectively guaranteeing the right to health, adequate housing, sufficient food, quality education, fair justice and personal security?
Good governance has realistic, audited programs to combat corruption, and does not send good money after bad. Corruption in officials is a grave breach of trust. It connotes decay, immorality, or impairment of integrity or virtue. It denotes the abuse of power (in politics, the corporate sphere and public service) to gain personal advantage in the form of financial or other material resources or in reciprocal favours. The culprits exploit their office to win advantages to which they are not entitled. They are not up to the tasks of good government, but seek office to milk the system. Given the opportunity and the ease of concealment, the temptation is rife in societies inured to it. Beyond a criminal law which detects it and orders restitution, we need a fearless press, a vigilant democracy and savvy electorate." [Adapted from the "Gerald Acquaah-Gaisie Abstract"]
Does our CWB monopoly qualify as having a "criminal legal system which aggressiviely detects its corruption, orders restitution; do we have a fearless press, a vigilant democracy and savvy electorate which insures the CWB is accountable?"
I say NO.
Try to take the CWB to court... How much do you think it would cost to challenge what any reasonable person would call abuse of power and breach of public trust?
If Lawyers were used at normal fees today... $ 100,000.00?
And what chance would you say Parsley, in Sask... would you have of winning what a reasonable person would normally consider a open and shut case of "Breach of Trust"?
1%... if you were lucky.
Where exactly does the CWB compare with the AWB on a scale of 1 to 10... 10 being the AWB... and corrupt... if a reasonable person were to understand what the CWB was getting away with today?
I came across this article that I am preparing for a "Policy and Procedure" manual.
VERY Interesting!
Where does the CWB fit into the model of "Good Governence"?
Here is what I have gleaned!
Good governance is the medium for attaining general well being; and corruption indicates poor government. Corruption by – politicians, officials and others – dissipates essential resources and produces poverty. This poverty is an active concern of our community.
Advanced democracies have virile electorates, media and criminal justice systems to combat corruption. Political and civil institutions that are weaker, in effect license corruption with impunity, and fail to control it.
"Good Governence:
Governance is the process whereby public institutions conduct public affairs, manage public resources and guarantee the realization of human rights. Good governance accomplishes this in a manner essentially free of abuse and corruption, and with due regard for the rule of law. The true test of “good” governance is the
degree to which it delivers on the promise of human rights: civil, cultural, economic, political and social rights. The key question is: are the institutions of governance
effectively guaranteeing the right to health, adequate housing, sufficient food, quality education, fair justice and personal security?
Good governance has realistic, audited programs to combat corruption, and does not send good money after bad. Corruption in officials is a grave breach of trust. It connotes decay, immorality, or impairment of integrity or virtue. It denotes the abuse of power (in politics, the corporate sphere and public service) to gain personal advantage in the form of financial or other material resources or in reciprocal favours. The culprits exploit their office to win advantages to which they are not entitled. They are not up to the tasks of good government, but seek office to milk the system. Given the opportunity and the ease of concealment, the temptation is rife in societies inured to it. Beyond a criminal law which detects it and orders restitution, we need a fearless press, a vigilant democracy and savvy electorate." [Adapted from the "Gerald Acquaah-Gaisie Abstract"]
Does our CWB monopoly qualify as having a "criminal legal system which aggressiviely detects its corruption, orders restitution; do we have a fearless press, a vigilant democracy and savvy electorate which insures the CWB is accountable?"
I say NO.
Try to take the CWB to court... How much do you think it would cost to challenge what any reasonable person would call abuse of power and breach of public trust?
If Lawyers were used at normal fees today... $ 100,000.00?
And what chance would you say Parsley, in Sask... would you have of winning what a reasonable person would normally consider a open and shut case of "Breach of Trust"?
1%... if you were lucky.
Where exactly does the CWB compare with the AWB on a scale of 1 to 10... 10 being the AWB... and corrupt... if a reasonable person were to understand what the CWB was getting away with today?
Comment