The basis of the argument is that any supposed crimes are little more than the cost of engaging in international trade.
We discussed some of the public perceptions and reasoning recently in Another View of Corruption.
In a show of gross hypocrisy, this same augment is also coming from Australia’s Howard government, as they weave precariously through the Cole Inquiry fallout.
AWB, Australia’s monopoly wheat exporter has been shown to have a long history of doing ‘whatever it takes’ to gain markets. If that means supporting Saddam’s regime while the government is at war with them, so be it. If it means breaking UN sanction laws, so what?
That they have done so with some measure of government complicity should raise serious questions, and not simply be fobbed off with – ‘well, that’s just the way things are done.’
A record of hypocrisy
There have, by now, been as number of books written, with reference to the Howard government’s record of hypocrisy and double standards. Rather than catalogue the list, I want to focus on those issues related to the former Australian Wheat Board, AWB Ltd and the surrounding mess.
1/ Australia is a signatory to the OECD Anti-bribery Convention, and has enacted national laws in line with this Convention.
2/ Australia is a member of longstanding of the UN and was a supporter of the Iraq sanctions and the Oil for Food Program.
3/ The Howard government has driven a National Competition Policy throughout all sectors of its economy, with one exception; it has maintained AWB’s monopoly on wheat exports.
Is that the way things are done?
What the Australian government is saying is that they can enact laws, support conventions and International programs, but they are not bound, themselves, to the limitations imposed. “We will make the law and the policy, but we don’t have to abide by it.”
It would seem that many ordinary Australians are ready to accept that approach, and perhaps adapt it to their own needs. The seeds of wider corruption are sown from the very top.
Personally I have real problems with John Howard’s approach to government. Not forgetting the encouragement of corrupt practices, the issue goes far deeper.
The very honesty, the veracity of every utterance of government must be in doubt, given their stand on these major issues.
What can you actually believe when a government refuses to uphold its own laws? More troubling is what can be done about it when a population seems content to accept such transparent dishonesty?
No comments:
Post a Comment