# International Respectability



## Edward Campbell (2 Nov 2011)

I have commented, before, on the relationship between "transparency" (open and honest dealings by government and businesses) and _productivity_. Generally the more open, honest or "transparent" a country is then the more prosperous it is, too. Canada has, also generally, ranked well in transparency but now, on one specific index - the likelihood of bribery - we have fallen, sharply according to this article which is reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act from the _Globe and Mail_:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/canada-loses-ground-on-bribery-ranking/article2221891/


> *CORRUPTION*
> 
> Canada loses ground on bribery ranking
> 
> ...




It is important to remember that these indices are _perceptual_ - based on how people, including Canadians, think we act, *at home and abroad*, not on "proven" acts - but, especially in matters of _reputation_ perception trumps reality. Our *reputation* for open, honest, fair business dealings is suffering. Our national government is, arguably correctly, focused on domestic crimes while it appears to _tolerate_ and even reward corporate crime.

Too many businesses, especially businesses that are based in or do a lot of business in Québec (our second largest province with a strong engineering sector) are "seen" to be less than fair and honest in their dealings abroad. About half of SNC Lavalin's revenue comes from overseas work and it is, too often, linked to corruption overseas and its stance on position on corruption at home is also troubling. (SNC Lavalin is used as an example only because it is cited in the article.)

I suggest that our decline in _perceived_ honesty is at least as important and as worthy as aggressive government action as is tougher sentencing for drug dealers - something which, by the way, I support. (Even though I would support public corporal punishment even more.)


----------



## RangerRay (2 Nov 2011)

The headline makes it sound like bribery of _Canadian_ _public_ officials is on the rise.  Only when you read it, does it become clear that it's Canadian _companies_ bribing _foreign_ public officials.  As distasteful the practice is, in some countries, that is how things get done.

Just as long as that practice does not continue here...


----------



## The Bread Guy (2 Nov 2011)

Reminds me of a bit from "Yes, Minister" regarding how government "gets things done" in some places (with similar wording likely being used by corporations doing the same):


> .... Terms for describing bribes when drawing up contracts:
> 1. Below £100,000
> - Retainers
> - Personal donations
> ...


----------



## Edward Campbell (4 Nov 2011)

RangerRay said:
			
		

> The headline makes it sound like bribery of _Canadian_ _public_ officials is on the rise.  Only when you read it, does it become clear that it's Canadian _companies_ bribing _foreign_ public officials.  As distasteful the practice is, in some countries, that is how things get done.
> 
> Just as long as that practice does not continue here...




Sadly the problem of corruption, and the productivity sapping _perception_ of untrustworthiness it creates, is not confined to international dealings according to this report which is reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act from the _Globe and Mail_:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/probe-of-canada-revenue-agency-broadened-after-new-allegations/article2224991/


> Probe of Canada Revenue Agency broadened after new allegations
> 
> DANIEL LEBLANC
> OTTAWA— From Friday's Globe and Mail
> ...




There's a bit of _dot joining_ that I am almost reluctant to do, but ... suppose you are a senior official in an Asian country helping your ministry to evaluate bids for a major new project. The bid from a Québec based engineering firm is very attractive and several people, including your minister, seem to favour them. You look at reports of bribery and corruption at home, in Québec, and abroad, in, say, Bangladesh, and at crumbling infrastructure in Québec which _may_ reflect second rate work having been done for first rate prices and at more, domestic, corruption reports and you wonder: did the Canadian firm bribe my minister or some of my own junior officials? will they do good work? will they bring a corrupt business _culture_ with them?

Hell's bells: put yourself in the place of Ottawa City which must evaluate bids from three consortia for a new light rail system. How do you _rate_ the bid from a consortia that is _linked_, not _tied_, not *guilty* of anything, just _associated_ with corruption allegations here, in Canada, and overseas? 

Assume, as I do, that SNC Lavalin has done nothing wrong; it doesn't matter: it's reputation is tarnished.


----------



## Edward Campbell (1 Dec 2011)

And more bad news which, in a perverse sort of way, might be good news, according to this report which is reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act from the _Globe and Mail_:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/canada-slips-again-in-global-corruption-ranking/article2256299/


> Canada slips again in global corruption ranking
> 
> JULIAN SHER
> Globe and Mail Update
> ...




The last paragraph is important. The political will to find and defeat corporate and political corruption (the former includes criminal labour gangs (some, not all, unions) and the latter includes many, many, many individuals who e.g. cheat on their taxes or file false claims for being handicapped or in need) is, in my perception, weak in Canada, especially in _la belle province_. Until we, all of us, are willing to tell Québec, especially, that it must clean up its corporate, political and, yes indeed, individual acts then we will be unable to run the sort of country in which other people want to invest.


----------



## Canadian.Trucker (1 Dec 2011)

RangerRay said:
			
		

> As distasteful the practice is, in some countries, that is how things get done.
> 
> Just as long as that practice does not continue here...


The problem is when you have Canadian citizens and businesses going abroad and conducting shady deals to "get things done", it shows there may be a wider systemic problem here in Canada.  If you have no moral qualms about doing something in someone elses backyard, how long before it's not a problem to do it in your own.


----------



## Rifleman62 (1 Dec 2011)

And who is "Transparency International" and where does their funding originate from?

Why should we believe the info on their website (which generalizes where their funding comes from {Maybe from Redeye!!})?

Who made them an authority?

Minutes after posting the above I have added this:

_Thank-you TheHead for your usual deduction of points anytime "Redeye" appears in my post._


----------



## Edward Campbell (1 Dec 2011)

While Transparency International does not provide a detailed breakdown of its funding it does offer rather more information than do most such organizations.

I think it is "trusted" because its conclusion appear, pretty much, to confirm what we see.


----------



## DBA (3 Dec 2011)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> While Transparency International does not provide a detailed breakdown of its funding it does offer rather more information than do most such organizations.
> 
> I think it is "trusted" because its conclusion appear, pretty much, to confirm what we see.



They do provide a detailed breakdown in their yearly financial reports. I notice the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) gave them 437,701€ in 2010 for example. They list all individual donors over 1000€ and provide a total for all less than 1000€ which was 12,518€ in 2010. They also list restricted donations and what programs they apply to. It's very detailed and transparent.


----------



## Edward Campbell (26 Mar 2012)

More news, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act from the _Globe and Mail_, about the fallout from the SNC Lavalin bribery matter:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/snc-lavalin-ceo-resigns/article2381181/


> SNC-Lavalin CEO resigns
> 
> PAUL WALDIE
> 
> ...




So now we know that the bribes were approved in Montreal by a Canadian senior executive ... they are not just local palm greasing between Libyans, one of whom just happens to work for Lavalin.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (26 Mar 2012)

Mind you when people overseas see headlines here about corruptions, senior ex resigning, they are impressed that we actually seem to care about this stuff. For most countries it's a fact of life that receives scant light and acts as a noose around their necks, slowly tightening it's grip till the society can no longer function.


----------



## Edward Campbell (30 Oct 2012)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> Scandal has been a feature of Canadian politics since well before 1867. What has changed, since the 1970s, is that we used to be scandalized, at least a little bit. In the ‘70s we learned to accept lies and scandal as the price we had to pay if we wanted (as we most certainly did) to slavishly emulate our American neighbours.
> 
> They, the political _”pros”_ in Ottawa – schooled by their friends in Washington – told us not to worry: we had out very own, _Kennedyesque_ leader, just the like the Americans; we were “cool,” too, because our leader was bedding Hollywood celebrities, just like the Americans we idolized; we were “with it,” far removed from the old, white, mostly WASP men who had governed from the grey background for so long. So the ‘price’ was more than just a whiff of corruption and incidents of incompetence; so the price was a stark repudiation of decades of sound, solid, prudent policy in return for a dilettante’s flirtations with the communist dictator flavour of the month, so what? We had our very own little, frozen, imitation _Camelot_.
> 
> ...




And, as if to revel in the fact that we are no longer _scandalized_ by the _Adscam_ or _Shawinigate_ sort of thing, Jean Chrétien does another complex land/money, deal according to this article which is reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act from the _Globe and Mail_:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/chrtien-expands-lakeside-domain-in-quebec-with-complex-land-deal/article4750664/


> Chrétien expands lakeside domain in Quebec with complex land deal
> 
> DANIEL LEBLANC
> OTTAWA — The Globe and Mail
> ...




I don't know if this story will have "legs" in Canada, M. Chrétien still commands a powerful and ruthlessly effective propaganda PR team, but it adds to our broad and generally rancid reputation for tolerating small time corruption ~ Justice Gomery was right, it's "small town cheap," and it's probably crooked, too.


----------



## jollyjacktar (30 Oct 2012)

I've always felt he was a straight as a paper clip.  I still do.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (30 Oct 2012)

Canadian (ex) PMs and Power Corp  :facepalm:


----------



## Brad Sallows (30 Oct 2012)

I think more politicians should never pass up an opportunity to point out to the world how small they are.


----------



## Edward Campbell (26 Nov 2012)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> More news, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act from the _Globe and Mail_, about the fallout from the SNC Lavalin bribery matter:
> 
> http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/snc-lavalin-ceo-resigns/article2381181/
> 
> So now we know that the bribes were approved in Montreal by a Canadian senior executive ... they are not just local palm greasing between Libyans, one of whom just happens to work for Lavalin.




And, in terms of Canada's international reputation, _SNC Lavalin_ is the "gift that keeps on giving" according to an article in the _Globe and Mail_, which tells us that the Swiss have charged a former _SNC Lavalin_ senior executive and that the amounts involved have grown from $50+ Million to about $140 Million.


----------



## dapaterson (26 Nov 2012)

So, to recap:

The mayors of Montreal and Laval have quit under a cloud.

The mayor of London (ON) has been charged for allegedly using public money when he was a member of parliament to pay for his son's wedding reception.

And today a judge will release his decision on whether or not the mayor of Toronto is to be removed from office.


On the plus side, Ontario is proving that corruption isn't just a Quebec problem any more...


----------



## George Wallace (26 Nov 2012)

;D

Interesting that he voted on a motion over his own conflict of interest.


----------



## Retired AF Guy (26 Nov 2012)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> So, to recap:
> 
> The mayors of Montreal and Laval have quit under a cloud.
> 
> ...



I don't consider what Mayor Ford is alleged to have done as being corruption; dumb yes, but not corruption.


----------



## Edward Campbell (26 Nov 2012)

Retired AF Guy said:
			
		

> I don't consider what Mayor Ford is alleged to have done as being corruption; dumb yes, but not corruption.




I agree with you there, plus what Mayor Fontana is alleged to have done occurred when he was a federal (Liberal) MP. My sense is that ON does not have the same local corruption as does QC ... but maybe that's just wishful thinking.

On _SNC Lavalin_: part of the responsibility is _national_. Both _SNC_, a civil engineering firm ,and _Lavalin_, a more general engineering, began to get lucrative foreign contracts in the early 1960s from the old External Affairs Department and later (after 1968) from CIDA. There was nothing to suggest that either firm was less than fully able to do the work required but the work was, too often, unnecessary. Foreign Aid in the 1960s, '70s and '80s was, in large measure, aimed at supporting Canadian industries by building unneeded railways or "bridges to nowhere." The real aim was to keep Canadian locomotive plants working; to keep Canadians employed. In the 1980s, under economic pressures, we began to put more emphasis on useful aid but the now merged firm of _SNC Lavalin_ *needed* a steady flow of contracts - in part because it was, and still is, a mainstay of _Québec inc_. Without CIDA money, and in the face of stiff competition (often bribe laden competition) from other countries, including from the USA which still does a HUGE amount of "tied" aid, _SNC Lavalin_ also, apparently, resorted to bribes.


----------



## Edward Campbell (26 Nov 2012)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> So, to recap:
> 
> The mayors of Montreal and Laval have quit under a cloud.
> 
> ...




Somewhat  ff topic: but: Mayor Rob Ford has been removed from office ... my guess is his appeal will be filed today!


----------



## The Bread Guy (26 Nov 2012)

Retired AF Guy said:
			
		

> I don't consider what Mayor Ford is alleged to have done as being corruption; dumb yes, but not corruption.


If this is correct ....


> .... Ford had been accused of violating council's conflict guidelines after he spoke to and voted on whether to accept an Integrity Commissioner's report critical of how he raised funds for his football charity last February.
> 
> Integrity Commissioner Janet Leiper had ordered Ford to repay $3,000.
> 
> Council voted with Ford to reject the report but a private citizen then complained Ford should not have spoken or cast a ballot on the issue ....


.... then to me, it fits this definition:


> ....  impairment of integrity, virtue, or moral principle ....


You shouldn't vote on or discuss an item where _you_ are the subject of the item.  That said, it'll be interesting to see how the legal beagles parse the decision, the City of Toronto Code of Conduct  and the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act in any appeal.


----------



## Retired AF Guy (26 Nov 2012)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> Somewhat  ff topic: but: Mayor Rob Ford has been removed from office ... my guess is his appeal will be filed today!



You guessed correctly. Already announced that he will appeal.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (26 Nov 2012)

Stupid, so many people in senior postions just can't grasp simple ethics. I trusted my assistant view on ethics far more than my DG's. and I was correct.


----------



## Edward Campbell (28 Nov 2012)

And it just gets messier ... now, according to the _Globe and Mail_, Pierre Duhaime, former President and CEO of _SNC Lavalin_ has been arrested by Quebec's provincial anti-corruption squad which is, _inter alia_, investigating a billion-dollar contract SNC and its partners struck to build a new hospital for McGill University. This is over and above the Swiss investigation into bribes in North Africa.


----------



## Edward Campbell (29 Nov 2012)

I'm putting this here because I suspect that the _Vieux-Port_ thing has come to a head because of the ongoing stench of corruption.

David Akin reports, in the _Toronto Sun_ that the _Société du Vieux-Port de Montreal Inc._ (an organization established by Brian Mulroney (1992) but avidly supported by Liberals, too) will be disbanded and the operations will be folded into the parent _Canada lands Corporation_. David Akin highlights the lavish overspending and questionable executive skills of _Vieux-Port_ CEO Claude Benoit but she, I suspect, is just a catalyst. There were rumours about shady dealings back in 1992, involving Bernanrd Lamarre, longtime CEO of _SNC Lavalin_, whose company, amongst many, many other government contracts, redeveloped the Old Port of Montreal.

I'm guessing that there is more to come about the dealings of _SNC Lavalin_ and many other Quebec firms over the decades.


----------



## foresterab (1 Feb 2013)

I post this hear due to two parts: 1) a change in corporate leadership has resulted in well publicized investigation into bribery in Africa in exchange for oil rights  and 2) the possible role of a prominent ex-politician.

http://gold.globeinvestor.com/servlet/ArticleNews/story/GI/20130131/escenic_8102318/stocks/news/&back_url=yes
Exclusive: Chrétien played key role in controversial Chad oil deal
JACQUIE McNISH and CARRIE TAIT
06:00 EST Friday, Feb 01, 2013
   
TORONTO and CALGARY — Former prime minister Jean Chrétien played an instrumental role in persuading the government of Chad to grant lucrative oil and gas rights in 2009 to Calgary’s Griffiths Energy International Inc., says the country’s former ambassador to Canada.

Mahamoud Bechir said he attended a meeting with Mr. Chrétien and the country’s long-serving president, Idriss Déby, and its then-Minister of Petroleum and Energy in September 2009. During the meeting, held at the Ritz-Carlton Hotel in Washington, D.C., the former prime minister promoted the fledgling company, which was struggling to secure oil concessions in the African country.

Griffiths’ pursuit of energy riches in Chad landed the company in legal trouble when it was discovered that the company had paid $2-million (U.S.) to a consulting company owned by Mr. Bechir’s wife. Last week, Griffiths Energy pleaded guilty to bribery charges in an Alberta court and agreed to pay a $10.35-million penalty.

There is no suggestion or evidence that Mr. Chrétien was involved in any of the dealings that resulted in the bribery case, nor that he had knowledge of the payment to the ambassador’s wife. Mr. Chrétien is counsel to Bay Street law firm Heenan Blaikie, which served as Griffiths Energy’s legal adviser from Aug. 2009 to Jan. 2011. It is common practice for major law firms to hire retired politicians to help build relationships with domestic and foreign countries.

At Heenan Blaikie, Mr. Chrétien has helped a number of Canadian companies establish ties with a variety of African countries.

Mr. Chrétien declined through a spokesman to discuss the meeting, citing client confidentiality. A spokesman for Heenan Blaikie also declined comment.

In an interview with The Globe and Mail, Mr. Bechir, who was fired from his job as Chad’s ambassador to South Africa on the weekend, portrayed Mr. Chrétien as a man who helped Griffiths’ senior management gain access to key officials in the Chadian government. The ex-ambassador said his wife, Nouracham Niam, wrote a formal letter to the embassy proposing the meeting, which he approved “because this is Jean Chrétien. … He has the priority because he was the former Prime Minister of Canada.”

The meeting took place in a small conference room next to Mr. Déby’s suite at the Ritz. According to Mr. Bechir and other people familiar with the session, Heenan Blaikie lawyer Jacques Bouchard Jr. and two company founders, Brad Griffiths and Naeem Tyab, were also in attendance.

Mr. Bechir described Mr. Chrétien “a very funny guy,” who set a jovial tone during the meeting and reassured the Chad delegation about Griffiths Energy’s potential.

“This is a big testimony from a high-profile person,” Mr. Bechir said. “I think that facilitated – it give some confidence to the government these are not just a bunch of people who are dreaming in the internet.”

“I think that gave the confidence to the government that these people are serious, Griffiths’ company is serious.”

Mr. Déby responded by telling the Griffiths team that “they are welcome” in Chad, Mr. Bechir said. One month later, on Oct. 26, 2009, Griffiths Energy signed a memorandum of understanding to conduct due diligence on two oil blocks.

The agreement was a huge leap forward for a relatively unknown company that had failed after a number of visits to Chad to purchase rights to produce oil and gas in the country’s rich southern oil fields. Mr. Griffiths, a former Bay Street investment banker, was so entranced with the investment opportunities in Chad that Mr. Bechir said the executive told him he would change his first name to Chad from Brad if the oil and gas investment was approved. He also promised a number of investments to build everything from new roads in Chad to a radio station at the Washington embassy, the ambassador said.

Griffiths Energy ultimately secured formal rights to the Chad properties in January, 2011, but the victory was short-lived.

Mr. Griffiths drowned in July, 2011, in a boating accident. The company’s new management team discovered problematic contracts in the fall of that year and alerted the police to them, which culminated in last week’s guilty plea.

Federal prosecutors have begun proceedings to force Ms. Niam to forfeit the $2-million payment and her large holding of shares in the company. According to an agreed statement of facts released by the court, in the fall of 2009, Griffiths Energy sold Ms. Niam and two friends 4 million so-called “founders shares” for a fraction of a penny each.

The statement said Ms. Niam was originally awarded 1.6 million shares for $1,600. Mr. Bechir said his wife later purchased an additional 1.6 million Griffiths Energy shares that were awarded to their children’s teacher, Adoum Hassan, who was one of the original recipients of the founders shares.

Her stock holding is currently valued at about $20-million. Mr. Bechir said he plans to fight prosecutor’s plans to force his wife to forfeit the shares.

While it appears Mr. Chretien did nothing wrong it does raise the question of what lobbying is appropriate for an ex-holder of public office.


----------



## Edward Campbell (11 May 2013)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> I have commented, before, on the relationship between "transparency" (open and honest dealings by government and businesses) and _productivity_. Generally the more open, honest or "transparent" a country is then the more prosperous it is, too. Canada has, also generally, ranked well in transparency but now, on one specific index - the likelihood of bribery - we have fallen, sharply according to this article which is reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act from the _Globe and Mail_:
> 
> http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/canada-loses-ground-on-bribery-ranking/article2221891/
> 
> ...




And in an editorial, which is reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act from that newspaper, the _Ottawa Citizen_ sums up my worries:

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/opinion/editorials/Profoundly+corrupt/8368338/story.html


> Profoundly corrupt
> 
> OTTAWA CITIZEN
> 
> ...




We, the Canadian people, led by our urban elites, decided, back in the 1960s, to let Quebec be _"maîtres chez eux"_; that included accepting Quebec's unique _corporate_ (statist) business culture: the creation of _Hydro-Québec_, the Olympics, the _modèle québécois_ in public administration, urban infrastructure ... none of these would have been acceptable anywhere else in Canada, from Victoria to Yellowknife to St John's, but Quebec had to be "accommodated," (appeased). Now, in my opinion, the whole country - especially our reputation as a good place to do business - is suffering because we demonstrated that we are a weak kneed people who are willing to trade the rule of law for political peace.


----------



## WLSC (11 May 2013)

> Citation de: E.R. Campbell le novembre 02, 2011, 09:11:50
> We, the Canadian people, led by our urban elites, decided, back in the 1960s, to let Quebec be "maîtres chez eux"; that included accepting Quebec's unique corporate (statist) business culture: the creation of Hydro-Québec, the Olympics, the modèle québécois in public administration, urban infrastructure ... none of these would have been acceptable anywhere else in Canada, from Victoria to Yellowknife to St John's, but Quebec had to be "accommodated," (appeased). Now, in my opinion, the whole country - especially our reputation as a good place to do business - is suffering because we demonstrated that we are a weak kneed people who are willing to trade the rule of law for political peace.



I think that you mix the issues.  The big problem we have is that we have a big tendancy to do our laundry in public.  We are an emotive people...  I reallllly dont think it is a unique _québéquois_ problem.  However, it show the willingness to clean the table and how the province is completly feed-up with politician.


----------



## Edward Campbell (11 May 2013)

FusMR said:
			
		

> I think that you mix the issues.  The big problem we have is that we have a big tendancy to do our laundry in public.  We are an emotive people...  I reallllly dont think it is a unique _québéquois_ problem.  However, it show the willingness to clean the table and how the province is completly feed-up with politician.




We'll have to agree to disagree, I think the _modèle québécois_ was fatally flawed under Jean Lesage and became more and more so under e.g. René Lévesque and Robert Bourassa - PQ and Liberals alike - as Quebec struggled to do the impossible: run a prosperous, generous and _statist_ welfare state. There are models for that: states with solid social programmes and sterling reputations for honest government (cosider Denmark, the Netherlands and Norway, for example) - none of them employ as explicitly _dirigiste_ and _statist_ models as does Quebec and, to a lesser degree France.


----------



## WLSC (11 May 2013)

I agree we are far far from what we should be.   But corruption is every where, not only here.  That was my points.


----------



## Edward Campbell (11 May 2013)

FusMR said:
			
		

> I agree we are far far from what we should be.   But corruption is every where, not only here.  That was my points.




I understand your point, and I agree that corruption is everywhere, *but* I maintain that the _dirigiste_ "modèle québécois" both encourages and excuses corruption - all that matters is that the project at hand gets completed. Industry and government both have a vested interest in accomplishing the mission; adhering to the rules is a secondary consideration. Things are not the same in Albert or Ontario or Denmark, either. But it does exist in Quebec and France and China and they all need to both clean up their systems and change "models."


----------



## Journeyman (11 May 2013)

FusMR said:
			
		

> But corruption is every where, not only here.


Yes, but its acceptance is greater in Quebec.

I'm quite familiar with a gentleman who is retired Sûreté du Québec from Trois-Rivières.  If you're unfamiliar with the city, there's a very large Hell's Angels' presence.  He was OK with the bike gang being there because "the police didn't have to worry about crime in their neighbourhood, and they only sold drugs to scumbags who wouldn't be missed if they overdosed."   

Different concepts of what's acceptable.


----------



## WLSC (11 May 2013)

I agree.  But, the population is getting tired of this, very tired but they feel they have no power to solve those problems.


----------



## Kirkhill (11 May 2013)

FusMR said:
			
		

> I agree.  But, the population is getting tired of this, very tired but they feel they have no power to solve those problems.



Fusilier:

Y'a une solution bien simple.  Fais ce que tu veux.  Suive pas ton elites.  Mais j'ai le sense que le plupart de la probleme quebecoise est elle n'a pas completer le transition d'une societe religieuse a un societe le meme comme les autres parties du Canada.  Elle a vire de corporatisme clericale au democratie sociale - quand meme comme les Europeens.  

In both cases, whether under the church or under the elites, there is an underlying expectation on the part of the governed that they are not in control and that the government exists separately from the governed.  Consequently the governed resent paying taxes to the government and resent the laws imposed by them.  So they dodge taxes and ignore laws.

Meanwhile the elite are quite happy to set the course and hand out crumbs to keep the governed happy (ie not in the streets - judging by the Montreal experience they are not as good as they could be at that).

It is not that the rest of Canada likes paying taxes or following laws, our politicians are starting to stretch our tolerance to bursting point now.    But historically (at least for the last 100 years give or take) there has been a continuing tendency for the governed to feel engaged in and part of the government.  That feeling is starting to feel sooooo much like last night .....not much left but a memory and a hangover.

I have had the pleasure of working with Quebecois both in Quebec and in Western Canada.  No more corrupt than the rest right enough.   But one thing I did notice, and it impacted on the manner in which business was conducted.  The Quebecois were less trusting.  They expected that in any business arrangement they were going to get screwed over.  That attitude, learned in the Montreal construction trade and expressed directly to me by a confrere and fellow project manager, didn't work well in the West.  In the West we do get screwed over from time to time, sometimes by "friends", but the working assumption, I believe this is true for most people, is that they are willing to give everybody the benefit of the doubt until they prove otherwise.  It is certainly the structural basis for all business agreements - people tend to go into new business relations with an optimistic outlook.  

In practical terms this difference in outlook meant that where I was preparing to write a $3,000,000 contract to advance a project I was informed that we were effectively going to have to create 150 $20,000 contracts and track each one separately, taking each funding request through a management committee.  I found it easier to track a single large contract rather than multiple small contracts (personally I thought the many small contracts left more room for manipulation than the single large one) but that was not in line with a corporate culture where the President and CEO of a multibillion dollar organization only had personal spending authority of $250,000.  Everything went through the board of directors after passing through multiple management committees.  The inefficiencies that resulted cost the company years in decision making and dollars in profits.

Quebec seems to suffer from a great inability to trust anyone - not just anglos, or Canadians, but virtually anybody who isn't family.


----------



## WLSC (11 May 2013)

> Citation de: FusMR le Aujourd'hui à 13:52:26
> Y'a une solution bien simple.  Fais ce que tu veux.  Suive pas ton elites.  Mais j'ai le sense que le plupart de la probleme quebecoise est elle n'a pas completer le transition d'une societe religieuse a un societe le meme comme les autres parties du Canada.  Elle a vire de corporatisme clericale au democratie sociale - quand meme comme les Europeens.



In my view, you are so bang on !!!

It's difficult to have your own mind when you have been told for centuries how thing should be done.  Because, they know better.  People use to trust the elite over here, now, not so sure.

Having a guy from the out side thinking the same then me confort me in the habit we have to take one step back !!


----------

