FROLITICKS

Satirical commentary on Canadian and American current political issues

May 15

Increased Lack of Ethical Conduct Among North American Corporate Leaders

by bcurry

During the past couple of years, I have been closely following the scandal rocking Volkswagen over its falsifying of pollution emission data for its diesel vehicles. In January of this year, six men were formally charged by the U.S. Department of Justice, accused of defrauding the United States and Volkswagen customers there, of violating the Clean Air Act and of committing wire fraud.  More charges could be in the offing.  European authorities are also considering the prosecution of VW executives with respect to the cover up and organized deception carried out over several years. The VW scandal is just the latest in a growing list of scandals going back to Hollinger, WorldCom, Lehman Brothers and of course Enron at the turn of the century — to name only a few.

When it comes to unethical conduct by corporate leaders, the VW case is only the tip of the ice berg. A recent study by Price Waterhouse Cooper indicated that there has been an increase in Chief Executive Officers (CEO) in the U.S. and Canada leaving their position due to scandal or improper conduct.  Improper conduct by a CEO or other employees is defined as including fraud, bribery, insider trading, environmental disasters and sexual indiscretions. Not only is this a North American concern, as the above study looked at ethical lapses by CEOs of the world’s 2,500 largest companies. They found that the issue is indeed global in extent. Furthermore, bigger companies were found to be more likely to force out a CEO over an ethical lapse.

What does this say about the ethics of leaders in the business world? How best can ethics and professionalism be taught in business schools and within companies? There is obviously a concern given that courses on corporate ethics are now being given in some of our top universities and colleges, something unheard of a decade or two ago.  Indeed, such teachings are even more important given the expanded definition of what comprises unethical or improper conduct.  It’s simply not good enough for companies to have written codes of ethics in place, they also have to be enforced from top to bottom in organizations.  Boards of directors and independent bodies have to be more accountable for ensuring that business is being carried out in a proper and ethical manner.

If the work of the private and public sectors is carried out in an unethical manner, we all suffer as clients and citizens. Indeed, it is incumbent upon our national leaders to lead by example.  They must represent the best of our societal values and act as role models for current and future generations of leaders.  Otherwise, we’re all in serious trouble.  We expect and deserve ethical conduct by our Presidents and Prime Ministers, State Governors and Provincial Premiers and other high level public officials.  They need to set the proper tone for ethical public and corporate leadership in our two countries.

Canada Federal Government Leadership Political Scandals US

Leave a comment »
Mar 31

Are Canadian Conservatives Regressing in the Face of 21rst Century Human Rights?

by bcurry

There used to be a federal party in Canada called the ‘Progressive Conservative Party’. In addition, between 1987 to 2000 the Reform Party of Canada emerged federally as a right-wing populist political party. This party then merged with the Progressive Conservatives to form the current ‘Conservative Party of Canada’.  Note that they lost the ‘progressive’ portion of the party’s nomenclature.  However, today there are growing concerns about how Canadian conservatives view ‘human rights’ issues, both federally and provincially.

After all, it was John Diefenbaker, as a Conservative prime minister, who in 1960 successfully introduced the Canadian Bill of Rights, the precursor of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.  Diefenbaker thought that individuals’ freedoms of religion, press, speech and association were threatened by the state.  He believed that a Bill of Rights was needed to take a “forthright stand against discrimination based on colour, creed or racial origin.”

However, lately there has been a conspicuous trend in the stated views of several conservatives in Canada, as exemplified by the following:

  • Federal conservative leadership candidate Kellie Leitch was seen shaking the hands of a ‘Rise Canada’ senior advisor, who represents an organization that has called for a permanent ban on all Muslim immigrants plus the mass deportation of existing Muslims. Leitch has also pushed for the stricter vetting of potential immigrants/refugees based on so-called ‘Canadian values’.
  • Federal Conservative Party leadership candidate Brad Trost’s campaign is not backing down after controversial comments about his stated discomfort with the idea of people being gay.
  • Federal conservative leadership candidate Kevin O’Leary enjoys severely criticizing the policies and qualities of female provincial premiers such as Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne and Alberta Premier Rachel Notley. He appears to imply that male premiers are more capable leaders, especially when it comes to economic matters.
  •  Ontario provincial Conservative MPP Jack MacLaren was forced to apologize after speaking against the provincial government’s proclaimed “zero tolerance” policy for the sexual abuse of patients by medical professionals.
  •  Jason Kenney, leader of the Progressive Conservative Association of Alberta, stated that Alberta schools should notify parents when their children join a gay-straight alliance club at school. This without fully understanding the nature of such school clubs and the resulting danger of putting some students at real physical and emotional risk.
  • Conservative Senator Lynn Beyak was roundly criticized in Parliament after she shocked other senators by defending those who had worked in the church-run schools, and saying that the residential-school experience had positive aspects for the Indigenous children. This despite the findings of the 7-year national Truth and Reconciliation Commission concluding that the residential school system was a program of assimilation and “cultural genocide.”

Canada is generally recognized for its enviable record for respecting individual human rights, societal tolerance and inclusion of groups and their beliefs, cultural diversity and progressive social policies. The above several incidences are but a few representing an alarming trend regarding conservative thinking and attitudes.  Hopefully, they won’t have to change their federal and provincial parties’ names to ‘Regressive Conservatives’.

Canada Conservative Political Groups Leadership

Leave a comment »
Feb 9

Don’t Compare the Position of U.S. President to Canada’s Prime Minister

by bcurry

Recently, there was a poll taken in Canada comparing approval rates by Canadians for President Trump and Prime Minister Trudeau. The poll looked at everything from the handling of policies related to the economy, security, immigration, foreign policy and health care — to name a few. However, such a comparison is really like comparing apples and oranges.  The role of the executive branch in the two governments varies greatly and the constitutional powers are significantly different.

Canada follows the Westminster system based on ‘parliamentary sovereignty’ and ‘responsible government’. The Prime Minister represents the political party with a majority of seats in the House of Commons, and the Cabinet is chosen from among the party’s elected sitting Members of Parliament.  For this reason, the PM depends on the support of his/her party to make policy and to pass laws in Parliament.  The President on the other hand is elected separately and chooses his/her cabinet usually from non-elected persons who support his/her policies.  While the PM sits in Parliament, the President must work to gather support from Congress to implement his/her policies.  The PM must maintain the confidence of the House of Commons to continue to form the government.  Otherwise, loss of a confidence vote in the House would mean that he/she must dissolve Parliament and usually call an election.  Moreover, the PM’s ability to formulate policies is very much dependent on the support of his party in Parliament, thereby limiting the PM’s ability to independently issue executive orders.  The President, unless he/she is impeached, normally resides comfortably for a four-year term.

The President is the civilian Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States. He has the authority to command them to take appropriate military action in the event of a sudden crisis and certain circumstances.  In Canada, the Queen is the head of state, and the Governor General officially represents her in the country.  The Queen is therefore the Commander in Chief, although through the Governor General as her representative.  The PM and the Government is somewhat limited in what military actions can be undertaken without Parliamentary approval, especially where new funding is required.  None-the-less, in domestic or foreign crisis, the PM and the Cabinet can react as needed under certain circumstances.  However, as in the U.S., there can be political consequences and negative electorate reactions to such actions.

Let’s face it, President Trump does not reflect all the views and positions of Republicans in both houses of Congress, especially when it comes to matters of free trade and immigration. Prime Minister Trudeau has no choice but to reflect the majority wishes of his party, which in this case is the governing Liberal Party.  Therefore, to compare the policies of a President and Prime Minister isn’t really a fair comparison, especially when you have a President issuing so many ‘executive statements’ without any direct Congressional involvement.  Furthermore, there appear to be a substantial amount of overt differences of positions between President Trump’s policies and the Republican Party.  Such overt differences could not happen in Canada given the need for Party solidarity to continue governing under the Parliamentary system. Thus, forget any irrelevant comparisons between the two and polls like the one by the National Post.

Canada Donald Trump Justin Trudeau Leadership US US Politics

Leave a comment »
Jan 19

Is Kevin O’Leary a Wanna-be-Trump?

by bcurry

On January 18th, Kevin O’Leary announced that he is running for the Conservative leadership in Canada, suggesting that as a businessman, he is better qualified than the current Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to work with president-elect Donald Trump. What does he have in common with Trump?  Yes, he has had some success as a businessman, but most would argue that he is no “financial guru” and he is not in Trump’s league in terms of wealth and influence.  Being a reality TV star, as a judge on the popular CBC-TV show “Dragons’ Den”, he does have certain celebrity recognition in Canada similar to that of Trump. However, like Trump, O’Leary has no real political or public service experience.

Simply asserting that as PM he would be in a better position to deal with President Trump and his administration than his fellow Conservative leadership candidates is not enough for him to win. At least it shouldn’t be!  In addition, the political, economic and social conditions are not the same as in the U.S. Canada has universal health care and illegal immigration is not considered a major issue. Like the U.S., Canada has had to tackle the results of the great recession primarily through infrastructure development and increasing the public debt. Employment opportunities for the middle class continue to exist and the social safety net is helping people to cope with unemployment.  Is there really enough anger out there for a similar “populist” movement to emerge comparable to that in the U.S.? I doubt it.

Canadians tend to support a more centrist approach when it comes to political and economic platforms. A move to the hard right is very unlikely in the near future.  O’Leary is far more moderate than Trump and understands the need for a centrist Conservative approach.  Like Trump during the Republican primaries, O’Leary will be a target for the other 13 leadership candidates — a number of whom represent the existing political establishment in Ottawa. O’Leary’s entrance into the Conservative leadership race has caused a stir and a fair amount of interest, at least in the media.  Like Trump, his name will raise greater media attention, hopefully not to the same detrimental extent as down south.

There is little doubt that Trump’s success has encouraged a neophyte like O’Leary to throw his hat into the political arena. While well-known in Canada and a Party outsider, he is not a member of Ottawa’s political establishment and is a reasonably successful businessman. However, are his qualifications enough for the Conservative Party and the rank-and-file?  Only time will tell.  One thing is for certain.  He is happily no wanna-be-Trump.

Canada Donald Trump Leadership Uncategorized US US Politics

Leave a comment »
Nov 14

Is there a shortage of strong political leaders in Canada?

by bcurry

In the past year, we have seen a Canadian population that has become more and more cynical about their political leaders and governing parties. This has been particularly true at the municipal level. For example, as many as four Quebec mayors and interim mayors have been forced to step down amid a province-wide corruption investigation, two other big-city mayors have faced court challenges on their mandates, and another faced criminal charges. Of course, Toronto’s mayor Rob Ford stands out from the crowd.

At the federal level, there have been the expense scandals in the Senate, resulting in the suspension of three implicated senators. Payoffs to one senator were made through the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO), resulting in the resignation of the PM’s Chief of Staff. While it is obvious that numerous officials in the PMO were aware of the illicit financial arrangements, Prime Minister Stephen Harper continues to deny any knowledge of such activities. What makes matters worst is that it was Harper who had appointed the three suspended senators in the first place.

There is a difference between a “strong” leader and one who is “strong-willed”. A strong leader builds support among elected and appointed officials and facilitates a “team” approach in dealing with policies and political interests. A strong-willed leader simply believes in his or her ultimate entitlement to do whatever they see fit, while loosing the confidence of supporters and potentially the electorate. Strong leaders delegate responsibilities to members of their executive, all the while maintaining transparency and accountability within the administration. Strong leaders lead by example, both personal and public.

The adage that the “buck stops here” becomes an even more important one. Strong leaders will accept their ultimate accountability for their behaviour and that of their administration. Failure to do so will result in reduced public confidence in the abilities of political leaders. A recent Leger survey of Canadians showed that only 14 percent of respondents said they were significantly confident in the provincial governments they elected. A matching 14 percent expressed significant confidence in the federal government. Only 21 per cent of Canadians said they were confident in the work of their local officials.

Have we set the bar too low? Are we discouraging potential strong candidates from entering politics? Is the Canadian electorate tuning out, fed up with the shenanigans of federal, provincial and municipal leaders? Public life is hard enough without having to carry the baggage of past scandals, political corruption and discreditable conduct. For once, I’d like to see more reports of incidents of strong leadership in Canada. Unfortunately, it seems that this doesn’t make the news! I wonder why?

Canada Federal Government Leadership Political Scandals The Senate

Leave a comment »
May 22

Leadership: It’s Not Only About What You Know, It’s Also About What You Don’t Know

by bcurry

“The buck stops here” is a phrase that was popularized by U.S. President Harry S. Truman, who kept a sign with that phrase on his desk in the Oval Office. Well, in the last few weeks, we’ve learned from President Obama and Prime Minister Harper that the buck appears to stop elsewhere. Sorry, but among the principal attributes of good leadership is setting the tone and establishing the culture for an organization, be it public, private or non-profit. This means that it isn’t always what a leader is aware of but what he or she is not aware of that is important.

In the case of President Barack Obama, it was his apparent lack of awareness of the pending release of the IRS Inspector General’s scathing report criticizing the IRS handling of claims by conservative groups for tax exemption as non-profit “social welfare” organizations. In the case of Prime Minister Stephen Harper, it’s his claims to a lack of knowledge about recent substantial monies gifted to Senator Mike Duffy by his own trusted Chief of Staff, Nigel Wright. Senator Duffy, a Conservative appointee, is involved in the Senate scandal about living and travel expenses, and now sits as an independent in the Senate. The PM apparently denies having any knowledge of what may very well have been a criminal act, and one resulting in the subsequent resignation by Mr. Wright. Now this is a PM who in 2005 vowed to run an accountable and totally transparent government if elected.

In both cases, these national leaders pledged to run ethical and transparent administrations. Thus, like any good leaders, their respective values should be reflected under their administration. In turn, they are accountable to their parties and to the electorate for any and all activities undertaken during their administration. It is not enough to simply deny knowledge of illicit activities and irregularities. Leaders should own up to their general responsibilities for good governance and ensure that those responsible are dealt with under the full force of the law if warranted. Simply making excuses does not cut the mustard!!! Ultimately denying responsibility is not an option, for as President Truman professed: the buck stops at the top.

Leadership Political Scandals Political Scandals

Leave a comment »
Newer Entries »
Blog at WordPress.com.