Government and MP openness and accountability

[Michael Hardner]

Legislate morality? That's an odd comment. I don't see anyone legislating morality or advocating it.

Making a rule against uttering an untruth is a form of that, and it's ineffectual.

[PIK]

Honestly can we have real openness and accountability in todays world to the level people want???

[cybercoma]

Making a rule against uttering an untruth is a form of that, and it's ineffectual.

I don't think the person was serious. There's no way to enforce it, like you said. The best way to deal with lying politicians is for the opposition to show that they're lying when it's time to ballots in boxes.

[Sandy MacNab]

I don't think the person was serious. There's no way to enforce it, like you said. The best way to deal with lying politicians is for the opposition to show that they're lying when it's time to ballots in boxes.

What exactly do you mean by "lying politicians" and "the opposition"? I would take great exception to your comment if you meant "lying CPC politicians" and "the pure, innocent opposition".

[Bob Macadoo]

Posted 24 July 2013 - 08:29 PM

I wish to outlaw these phrases;

"Let me be clear......"

".....but at the end of the day...."

".....the people have told me....."

Because whatever statement that is linked to these phrases is normally a bunch of pretzel speak that means absolutely sweet f-all.

I would like a politician to stand up and say, my opinion is this and I stand behind this good or bad.....now lets debate.

Add to that;

"We've had meaningful conversations....."

I noticed today our new minister Kellie Lietch used all of them, she is a drinking game all to herself.

Edited July 26, 2013 by Bob Macadoo

[cybercoma]

What exactly do you mean by "lying politicians" and "the opposition"? I would take great exception to your comment if you meant "lying CPC politicians" and "the pure, innocent opposition".

I mean exactly what I said. Lying politicians, all of them, and their opposition, whomever that might be.

[g_bambino]

For example - the trick of not answering an interview question directly, but misdirecting with a long answer about a related topic..

I think that's been going on for a few thousand years.

[Wilber]

Refusing to take questions, or to take significantly less questions from the media than other PM's, as well as controlling who is allowed to take questions etc. is not simply about not wanting to play "media's BS games", it's about avoiding accountability and openness. Our government is also accountable to the media, who are the Fourth Estate, because they investigate and report government wrong-doings. Citizens greatly rely on the media more than anything else to keep them informed on what the government is up to, and to hold the government to account.

I can understand why a politician/PM wouldn't want to take questions from certain journalists who are a major thorn in their side, but too bad. Our Charter guarantees 'freedom of the press'. The PMO choosing from self-determined "friendly and enemy" journalists on who they will & won't take questions from is censorship.

I think it is called " controlling the message". Not exactly the definition of openess.

[Michael Hardner]

I think that's been going on for a few thousand years.

Probably, but it became part of the playbook for TV & radio interviews in the last few decades.

[PIK]

I guess your poll did not have the results you were looking for. LOL

[cybercoma]

Nope. The results are pretty much what I would expect from this forum.

[jacee]

Michael Hardner, on 22 Jul 2013 - 08:18 AM, said:

For example - the trick of not answering an interview question directly, but misdirecting with a long answer about a related topic.

I think that's been going on for a few thousand years.

Maybe 150 or so.

And maybe we're tired of them wasting our time and our money scoring political points, and maybe it's time we put a stop to that waste.

Rebellions do happen when governments are out of touch, arrogant blowhards flaunting waste of taxpayers' money.

[eyeball]

Honestly can we have real openness and accountability in todays world to the level people want???

I think you can but I believe you have to decentralize governance to as local a level as possible to make it happen. That includes decentralizing the authority to make decisions too, especially with regards to land and resource use and therein lie the real rub. The lack of transparency and accountability is as much the result of wealthy people's machinations as it is the powerful. Power and wealth are more like time and space and go together like peas and carrots.

Of course we could also wire the *&^%$#@'s to the Internet and monitor them the way they like to monitor us.

"Yes we Scan"

Edited August 19, 2013 by eyeball