Professional Abuses II

Accountability and Self regulation are too often a pretentious farce.

Some governmental critics are rightfully now concerned as well tthat the Federal Accountability Act being rushed by new PM Stephen Harper and his government  is being watered down, and only serves to create the appearance of a cleanup,  

Furthermore anyway "I don't care what the rule is, but if it's not enforced, what the hell good is it? What's the point?" Under the federal Liberals as well adequate money was not provided for law enforcement. We have wrongfully have had crooked public and civil servants living above the law, committing immoral acts still for decades in Canada.

It is also true that part of the problem is that the governmental lobbying is also now not properly regulated, but any self-regulating body would next still not solve much of the Lobbying industry's real negative problems as well. The creation of even  a   Lobbyist self Regulating body  alone certainly  will not solve  the problem issue.  "The false solution proposed that even that lobbyists themselves, across the country, should have a professional designation and should enforce their own code like the stockbrokers do, like the chartered accountants do, like the lawyers do," does not and next still  will not work, in fact.

Self regulating bodies  really does not work today in Canada not even for the Accountants, Lawyers, Doctors, Realtors, judges, pastors  immigration consultants, and not even for  the police  too.  Higher Education alone as well does not at all make anyone a better moral person.  Many of the  people cheat on their accademic work too.

Anway the Self regulating professional bodies even too often still tend to be more mere immoral masturbators and not the purveyors of real justice. The proof of this lies in the fact, reality that the  Professionals themselves today even are some of the most unprosecuted, unhindered, immoral persons, cheat , liars, thieves even still  and this too is realy uanccetpable. The  Professional abuses we even do hear about are often just the tip of a big iceberg of the many that are not deal the in Canada still too.

In the last 3 decades I personally even have yet in my Canadian experiences to see one professional regulating body in Canada actually do something right and honest.   All Regulating bodies themselves firstly have to be fully independent, and the examiners, judges, commissioners on the regulating bodies have to be honest themselves, plus they cannot be political appointed, or be part of the group as well,  and  ironically they themselves also do have to be regulated and a provision for such needs to be also included.

On top of all of this that the two most effective deterrents of all wrong doings have to be also  included

1: is a personal job dismissal and

2: and the punishment with real jail time.

Hey I have still met too many crooked accountats and lawyers who still do lie, help to obstruct Justice, do even commit tax evasions in spite of the existing self regulating societies of theirs too.

"Former judge gets 5 years for hospital fraud scheme Last Updated Fri, 31 Mar 2006 20:37:27 CBC News A former New Brunswick judge was sentenced to five years in prison after  being convicted of defrauding the Miramichi hospital corporation of nearly  $1 million. Drew Stymiest and three former hospital executives were found guilty in  February of 40 counts of fraud and breach of trust.  Former New Brunswick judge Drew Stymiest leaves his fraud sentencing hearing  Friday in what was called a simple case of 'greed.' Their scheme diverted cash away from the hospital corporation through shell  companies, double billing, inflated bonuses and kickbacks between 1994 and  2000. In handing down sentence, Judge Stephen McNally reserved his harshest words  for Stymiest, saying he was an "embarrassment to the judiciary" and that  Canadians expect judges to uphold and administer the law. "Stymiest's sole motivation in committing these crimes seems to be simple  greed. The community trusts and expects judges to respect the law as they  administer it." Former CEO John Tucker was sentenced to four and half years and ordered to  pay more than $600,000. Ian Jamieson, former vice-president of finance, and  Darrel Doucette, former vice-president of support service, were each given  two and half years in jail. The four had written and cashed illegal cheques that were supposed to be  used to recruit new doctors, wrote phoney invoices and diverted hospital  funds into their private accounts, their trial was told. All were ordered to pay back money to the hospital. Stymiest's portion was  more than $200,000. McNally said the crime went undetected for so long because of the men's high  professional and social status. "
"We also do  have a vital interest in staying informed about how well justice is delivered. "Unfortunately, the judicial system is as susceptible as the other branches of government to reflexive secrecy. The courts are under enormous pressure to keep a vast array of information out of the sight — and thus away from oversight — of ordinary citizens.  In the course of trying criminals and refereeing disputes between private parties, judges at the local, state and federal levels constantly are called on to protect personal safety and privacy. In addition, they worry about revealing national security information, disrupting ongoing law enforcement investigations or exposing corporate secrets.  So they shut the public out in many important ways.  Judges regularly seal confidential information about defendants, plaintiffs, informants, witnesses and jurors. They issue orders muzzling the parties to legal action, they keep information off the public docket and they deny access to discovery material and settlements. They close courtrooms.  It would be reassuring if each decision to hide information were rendered only after due consideration of the citizens’ right of access to information about the government institutions that influence every aspect of their lives. That is not always the case, however, given the pressure on judges to clear dockets and to be responsive to the wishes of the contending parties.  Just how many sealed cases lurk in the bowels of the judicial system is, of course, unknown. Thousands of cases remain beyond public view in state courts, some under secrecy programs long ago obsolete.  Even domestic matters, such as divorce cases, get caught up in the sealing frenzy. The rich and famous and the politically aspiring frequently seek to hide divorce records from public view. Now, corporations whose executives are involved in divorce proceedings are shouldering their way into the courtroom with demands that judges seal information having to do with assets, compensation and other matters.  Ordinary citizens are largely unaware of the extent of court secrecy, but many judges don’t know how pervasive secrecy is in the  judiciary either. The way such cases take place without any sort of public awareness is breathtaking.If there is a docket entry at all, there is no case number, no parties listed, no facts presented and the names of judges and attorneys are not revealed. The court computer records are altered to hide the case’s existence. Defendants and their attorneys are put under a gag order. Proceedings take place behind closed doors. Even years later, the federal court database contains no clues that justice was rendered and lives altered in secret. Such cases come to public attention only when someone in the system makes a mistake. Secrecy not only covers up mistakes, it obstructs accountability.  Indeed, both court decisions and court rules recognize that public access to the judicial system flows from common law   In addition to those internal considerations, the courts today are subject to an unnerving amount of external concerns. Political officials loudly and loutishly challenge the judiciary’s power as well as its decisions. Judges are removed from cases because of their real or perceived political beliefs. Nominees to the bench are judged on their politics rather than their judicial temperament or constitutional acumen.   Too much secrecy is a challenge to justice " Paul K. McMasters

Public exposure and prosecution of the guilty serves everyone's best interest still too. Most every bad guy who set out to do something awful wanted to do it in secret and keep it secret so he or she unlawfully could keep their false gains too. The citizens have a right to be informed about government actions, and nothing should be done in secret.  Too many  officials in Ottawa, and the other governments,, Civil and public services still do things that they don't want the citizens  to know about. They do things they know are wrong. If our elected officials feel it is a too heavy burden for the citizens to know how they conduct business,  they clearly do now need to find another career. Clearly the Citizens respect and trust of our elected leaders still relies on an open government.  Secrecy  moves us all  down the path of  distrust.  Openness enables the public to trust that government and their agents, agencies are really doing the best they can now for all of the taxpayers, each and every citizen.

Some people still think they are better than the rest, the others and they still personally do not respect the laws, or mutual submissions especially and wrongfully these also are  the  Professionals and Politicians, civil and public servants still too.  The bad, crooked managers, supervisors, politicians, civil and public servants, professionals and their pretentious regulating bodies should still even now get their fair share of real punishment still for their wrong doings for presently they are not.
Now about those much too many bad cops, bad RCMP, bad lawyers, bad accountants, bad politicians, bad judges, bad doctors, bad evangelical pastors too that I wrote about to the federal government  already even  for years what are you doing about it good and where can we see it or when? RSVP

 >> "And under the new intolerant PM of Canada his governmental abuses go on and on and on"   And being an useless, wasteful elected or career official is also the same wrong doing as being secretive. Openness is still  the well known basics  of any good government in Canada now too.  Having an  open-government laws have proven to be an aid to good government