wushuren
综合杂谈名誉斑竹
- 注册
- 2002-02-10
- 消息
- 6,500
- 荣誉分数
- 9
- 声望点数
- 0
CLEANING UP POLITICS
DEMANDING CHANGES IN ETHICS AND ACCOUNTABILITY
Ed Broadbent & the NDP’s 7 Point Plan
“When they fi nd themselves in the midst of wrongdoing those with a vivid sense of right and wrong have feelings
of remorse. On the other hand the defi ning characteristic of corruption is that feelings of remorse have been lost,
replaced by the impulse to deny, perpetuate and cover-up. Th e Liberal party is losing its sense of remorse.”
Ed Broadbent, MP Ottawa Centre
DEMANDING CHANGES IN ETHICS AND ACCOUNTABILITY
Canadians are demanding changes in ethics and in accountability. They want a strong
Canada resting on ethically based democratic institutions. They want honesty, fairness and
transparency to be the rule, not the exception in political life.
The New Democratic Party is proposing the following set of democratic and ethical
reforms.
1. Democratic Accountability for MPs
议员的民主可靠性
Democratic accountability should mean no MP can ignore his/her voters and wheel and
deal for personal gain: MPs should not be permitted to ignore their voters’ wishes, change
parties, cross the fl oor, and become a member of another party without fi rst resigning their
seats and running in a by-election.
Wherever we can, we must put an end to backroom opportunism in politics. In particular,
we must ensure that MP’s who are voted in as members of one political party no longer
have the right to ignore those parties and those voters who put them there in the fi rst place.
MPs should not be permitted to ignore their voters’ wishes by changing parties, crossing the
fl oor, and becoming a member of the cabinet without fi rst resigning their seat and running
in a by-election. We must combat cynicism by making better rules. Public trust cannot be
written off for personal gain.
NDP MP Peter Stoffer has a Private Members’ Bill on the order paper which would amend
the Parliament of Canada Act to deal with members who cross the fl oor. This measure
provides that a member’s seat in the House of Commons must be vacated and a by-election
called for that seat if the member, having been elected to the House as a member of a
political party or as an independent, changes parties in the House or becomes a member
of a party in the House, as the case may be, at any time during the term for which he or she
was elected. A member’s seat will not be vacated if the member, having been elected as a
member of a political party, chooses to sit as an independent at any time during the term
for which he or she was elected.
2. Fixed Election Dates
固定选举日期
Election dates should be fi xed: Prime Ministers in governing parties should lose their
control over when we vote. The date should be every four years, unless the government
falls as a result of a confi dence vote. This would add fairness and transparency about dates
for voters and for other political parties.
Election dates should be fi xed. The large majority of the world’s democracies do not give
to the party in power the right to call an election whenever it’s thought to best benefi t
themselves. We should rid Canada of this anti-democratic anachronism.
At present, and subject to the confi dence convention, the timing of an election is almost
always the prerogative of the prime minister. This power has several negative effects on the
governing process. Much of the business of government stays on hold when the possibility of
an election looms. The longer the period of uncertainty, the fewer the things accomplished.
Like any well-run organization, having a fi xed deadline to achieve a task ? a fi xed election
date ? would better focus the mind of any government.
The date should be every four years. By doing this, more rigorous enforcement of election
and pre-election spending laws would also be possible. There would be transparency about
the dates for voters and for other political parties. Governing parties should lose their
control over when we vote. Should a government lose a confi dence vote during the fouryear
period, an election would of course take place. However, the date for the subsequent
election could be set for precisely four years later.
Fixed elections would also remove an unfair advantage held by the governing party.
Opposition parties are forced to spend scarce resources planning for every contingency
while the governing party can focus its efforts on the only date that matters.
Provincial practice demonstrates that there is no fundamental inconsistency between fi xed
elections and parliamentary democracy. British Columbia has recently implemented a fi xed
election date mechanism. The Ontario government has introduced similar legislation.
3. Transparent Leadership Contests
政党领导人竞选透明化
Set spending limits and transparency conditions on leadership contests within political
parties: Parties are largely fi nanced by the taxpayer and the same principles pertinent
to the public good should apply to the internal affairs of parties as they do to electoral
competition between parties.
Canada has laws and regulations regulating the fi nancing of general elections. There are
limits and there is transparency. However, while parties, candidates, electoral district
associations and even nomination race contestants all face strict expense limits, those
running to be the leaders of their parties do not. There is, therefore, a major democratic
defi cit when it comers to the internal operations of political parties. Parties are not private
clubs. In a democracy, they are the means by which citizens select their governors. In
Canada, they are largely fi nanced by the taxpayers. The same principles pertinent to the
public good should apply to the internal affairs of parties as they do to electoral competition
between parties.
The centralized nature of Canadian politics means that party leaders enjoy tremendous clout
within the party, and not only in the governing party. Leaders have authority to accept or
reject candidates nominated at the electoral district level, and exercise additional infl uence
over MPs through party discipline.
There needs to be strong accountability rules for political parties, including regulations
ensuring sources, transparency, and spending limits. In the recent leadership contests,
in the Liberal and Conservative parties, respectively, Mr. Martin spent $12 million and Mr.
Harper spent $2.7 million. In a democratic Canada, no one with access to virtually unlimited
amounts of money should be able to effectively discourage or stop a more poorly funded
opponent. Ideas and values, not cash, should trump.
The absence of spending rules in leadership contests seems incongruous given the power
that party leaders have. Even the prime minister is sometimes “elected” fi rst by the party
in a leadership race. As a result, someone running to be a regular MP may face a more
stringent limit on his or her public electoral campaign than will someone running in a party
contest to inherit the party leadership from a resigning incumbent prime minister, the most
powerful offi ce in the country.
4. Electoral Reform
选举改革
Electoral reform: A major source of needed democratic reform is our outmoded fi rstpast-
the-post electoral system. There is a serious imbalance in the House of Commons in
gender, ethnic, ideological and regional voting preferences. Our present system does not
refl ect Canadian voters’ intentions. Fairness means we need a mixed electoral system that
combines individual constituency-based MPs with proportional representation. Most other
commonwealth countries have already moved in this direction.
A major source of needed democratic reform is our outmoded fi rst-past-the-post electoral
system. In Canada every vote should matter. Ninety percent of the world’s democracies,
including Australia, New Zealand, Scotland, Ireland and Wales have abandoned or
signifi cantly modifi ed the pre-democratic British system that still prevails in Ottawa. As
the Canadian Law Commission recommended and fi ve provinces seem to agree, fairness
means we need a mixed electoral system that combines individual constituency-based
MPs with proportional representation. The global evidence is clear: only such a system
would positively redress the existing imbalance in the House of Commons in gender, ethnic,
ideological and regional voting preferences.
The Pepin-Robarts Commission pointed out a quarter of a century ago, our present system
does a great disservice to Canadian unity because regional representation in the House
of Commons ? in the caucuses and in the cabinet ? does not refl ect Canadian voters’
intentions
Recently a Standing Committee of the House of Commons voted unanimously on a motion
presented by Ed Broadbent that called for a concurrent, two-track process to begin by
October 1, 2005, with a joint session mid-way through the process in November. According
to the Committee’s proposal, the citizen consultation process would have concluded its
work, and publicly released its report by January 30, 2006. This report would then have
been taken into account by the Special Committee in the development of its fi nal report
and recommendations on Canada’s democratic and electoral systems. It would table its
recommendations in the House on or by February 28, 2006.
Regrettably on September 20th the Minister responsible, Hon. Mauril Bélanger, announced
that the consultation process on electoral reform would not begin as promised this year.
This cynicism effectively means there will be no decision on electoral reform before the
next election. The New Democratic Party will continue to work to ensure that our present
electoral system is improved.
5. Ending Unregulated Lobbying
结束没有管理的说客
Unregulated lobbying and political cronyism must end: We need tougher laws requiring
disclosure of fees and expenditures of lobbyists. We also need to make illegal the acceptance
of contingency or profi t-based fees. The government must initiate reforms with tough
sanctions applicable to wrongdoing in the public sector.
In spite of the Lobbyist Registration Act which came into force in June, major reform is
still required. In this we have much to learn from the United States where the national and
most state governments have much tougher laws, including requiring disclosure of fees and
expenditures by lobbyists. Our Act has no such provision. Disclosure of this information by
consultant lobbyists and the corporations and organizations employing in-house lobbyists
would allow Canadians to assess just how great a stake a client has in a piece of legislation
or contract.
We also have no laws prohibiting lobbyists from accepting contingency or success-based fees.
This is morally and ethically wrong. Canadians have higher standards. Some government
programs make it impermissible (technically) for contingency fees to be paid by a company
where government contracts (as opposed to grants or other benefi ts) are awarded. There
is some evidence that this policy is violated. All “profi t-related” or “success based” fees
should be illegal to pay and those making them should be brought to court. Equally, it
should be made illegal for a lobbyist to accept such payments. Any violation should entail
a breach of the Criminal Code and be accompanied by a fi ne of up to $25,000, as well as a
prison sentence of up to two years.
As the former co-chair of a commission on corporate accountability, Ed Broadbent
recommended the government initiate reforms with tough sanctions applicable to wrongdoing
in the private sector. The same principles of personal liability should be duplicated in the
public sector. It is time we made corrupt behaviour not only politically embarrassing but
also a matter for the courts.
Also, recently former cabinet ministers have been exempted by the Ethics Commissioner
from the rule prohibiting lobbying activity for a certain period, and no reasons were given.
When the commissioner provides such an exemption he should be required by law to publish
his reasons.
Canada’s lobbyist law falls short in regulating the activities of lobbyists. The Lobbyist
Registration Act now includes a basic code of ethics for lobbyists. Noncompliance with
this code may be investigated by the lobbyist registrar (part of Industry Canada). However,
the actual consequences of the registrar fi nding noncompliance with the code are unclear.
Further, the Act states that “section 126 of the Criminal Code, which provides punishment of
up to two years imprisonment “does not apply in respect of a contravention of” the provision
obliging lobbyist adherence to the code. Hence, sanctions for a violation of the code generally
come only in the form of negative media attention in response to the registrar’s report. This
is obviously not a robust system of enforcement.
Finally, fi rms that act both as lobbyists and as government consultants create diffi cult
confl icts of interest scenarios. Current rules require lobby fi rms to set up “Chinese walls”
partitioning businesses to separate their lobbying operations from other functions, such
as conducting government communications work. However, communications consultants
should be obliged to decide whether they wish to be private lobbyists or public service
confi dantes. They should not be allowed to be both. “Chinese walls” simply do not work.
6. Ethical Appointments
5规范化的任命：
政府任命：在上千的联邦政府机构，委员会，等的官员任命中不公平和照顾行为必须被停止。NDP建议政府给所有的政府职位制定技能和竞争标准，该标准将被公之于众进行严格考试和执行。
（一个独立的管理委员会）
Government appointments: Unfair and unethical patronage practice must stop in the
appointment of thousands of offi cials to federal agencies, boards, commissions and Crown
Corporations. The New Democratic Party proposes that the government develop skills and
competence-related criteria for all government appointments, that these criteria be publicly
released and that committees scrutinize appointments.
The cabinet appoints thousands of full-time and part-time non-judicial offi cials to
approximately 170 federal agencies, boards, commissions and Crown Corporations. A large
proportion of these are made entirely on a partisan basis that effectively excludes large
numbers of qualifi ed Canadians simply because they are independent or have not supported
the party in power. For example, 14 of 15 members of the current board of the National
Capital Commission have fi nancial or other connections with the Liberal Party.
This process has been condemned by the Auditor General (2001) and criticized by the
President of the Public Service Commission (2004). Not only are qualifi ed people excluded
from consideration for partisan reasons, but as well, some incompetent and unqualifi ed
persons got their positions simply because of their political connections.
This unfair and unethical patronage practice must stop. The New Democratic Party would
put an end to it. All Canadians who qualify for these positions must have access. Membership
or support for any political party should neither be a barrier nor a requirement for such
positions. Cynicism about appointments must stop. Merit and merit alone must count.
New Democrats propose the following:
• That the government of Canada develop skills and competence-related criteria for all
government appointments, [including Board Members and senior Offi cers of Crown
Corporations and other government agencies], for which a Standing Committee has
reviewing responsibility; and that these criteria specifi cally address the non-partisan
nature of these appointments;
• That the government submit these criteria to the appropriate Standing Committee for
consideration and approval, with amendment if necessary;
• That the Government of Canada then publicly release the committee-approved criteria
for each appointment;
• That the names and background of each subsequent nominee for appointment be
referred to the appropriate Standing Committee 60 days prior to the date of their
appointment, with an explanation of how each nominee has met the established criteria;
and, that the Committee, unless it unanimously decides otherwise, shall have at least
one full meeting every two months (while the House of Commons is in session) to review
the nominees.
NOTE: The report containing this motion was concurred in by the House on May 31; therefore, the
House of Commons ALREADY supports this portion of the ethics package. We will continue to monitor
this to make sure that Treasury Board implements the proposals. In the present Parliament the
government has already ignored proposals that have been adopted by the House.
7. Access to Information
信息透明
Access to information: The government is backtracking on reforms leading to greater public
access to information. A recent discussion paper introduced by Justice Minister Irwin Cotler
contains proposals that would actually reduce Canadians access to information, virtually
killing reform until after the next election. Canadians want more access to information
about their government.
Canada badly needs an improved Access to Information Act. Justice Minister Cotler promised
last fall to bring forth as a government bill, Bill C-201, MP Pat Martin’s private members
bill. Instead of doing so in March Minister Cotler presented the Standing Committee on
Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics merely with a discussion paper many of the whose
proposals would actually reduce access to information.
What we need are the changes proposed in Mr. Martin’s bill which enjoyed the support of all
Members on the Committee:
• Extends the Act to Crown corporations and agencies previously excluded and to all
incorporated not-for-profi t organizations that receive at least two-thirds of their funding
through federal government appropriations;
• Makes ministers of the Crown, their exempt staffs and offi cers of parliament subject to
the Act;
• Brings Cabinet confi dences under the Act;
• Improves public access to government records pertaining to third-party contracts and
public opinion polling.
• Requires government records that are more than 30 years old to be automatically
opened except where specifi cally exempted for reasons of national security, public safety
or international obligations;
• Establishes the principles that records be provided without unreasonable barriers as to
time and cost and provides a government institution with the discretion to provide them
free of charge to users who request them in the public interest;
• Provides protection of information related to endangered species and threatened
ecological or archeological sites;
• Allows the disclosure of retained records pertaining to public health and safety,
the environment and governance of corporations if the public interest in disclosure
outweighs in importance the possible injury to the institutions and persons subject to the
Act.
www.ndp.ca/ethics
DEMANDING CHANGES IN ETHICS AND ACCOUNTABILITY
Ed Broadbent & the NDP’s 7 Point Plan
“When they fi nd themselves in the midst of wrongdoing those with a vivid sense of right and wrong have feelings
of remorse. On the other hand the defi ning characteristic of corruption is that feelings of remorse have been lost,
replaced by the impulse to deny, perpetuate and cover-up. Th e Liberal party is losing its sense of remorse.”
Ed Broadbent, MP Ottawa Centre
DEMANDING CHANGES IN ETHICS AND ACCOUNTABILITY
Canadians are demanding changes in ethics and in accountability. They want a strong
Canada resting on ethically based democratic institutions. They want honesty, fairness and
transparency to be the rule, not the exception in political life.
The New Democratic Party is proposing the following set of democratic and ethical
reforms.
1. Democratic Accountability for MPs
议员的民主可靠性
Democratic accountability should mean no MP can ignore his/her voters and wheel and
deal for personal gain: MPs should not be permitted to ignore their voters’ wishes, change
parties, cross the fl oor, and become a member of another party without fi rst resigning their
seats and running in a by-election.
Wherever we can, we must put an end to backroom opportunism in politics. In particular,
we must ensure that MP’s who are voted in as members of one political party no longer
have the right to ignore those parties and those voters who put them there in the fi rst place.
MPs should not be permitted to ignore their voters’ wishes by changing parties, crossing the
fl oor, and becoming a member of the cabinet without fi rst resigning their seat and running
in a by-election. We must combat cynicism by making better rules. Public trust cannot be
written off for personal gain.
NDP MP Peter Stoffer has a Private Members’ Bill on the order paper which would amend
the Parliament of Canada Act to deal with members who cross the fl oor. This measure
provides that a member’s seat in the House of Commons must be vacated and a by-election
called for that seat if the member, having been elected to the House as a member of a
political party or as an independent, changes parties in the House or becomes a member
of a party in the House, as the case may be, at any time during the term for which he or she
was elected. A member’s seat will not be vacated if the member, having been elected as a
member of a political party, chooses to sit as an independent at any time during the term
for which he or she was elected.
2. Fixed Election Dates
固定选举日期
Election dates should be fi xed: Prime Ministers in governing parties should lose their
control over when we vote. The date should be every four years, unless the government
falls as a result of a confi dence vote. This would add fairness and transparency about dates
for voters and for other political parties.
Election dates should be fi xed. The large majority of the world’s democracies do not give
to the party in power the right to call an election whenever it’s thought to best benefi t
themselves. We should rid Canada of this anti-democratic anachronism.
At present, and subject to the confi dence convention, the timing of an election is almost
always the prerogative of the prime minister. This power has several negative effects on the
governing process. Much of the business of government stays on hold when the possibility of
an election looms. The longer the period of uncertainty, the fewer the things accomplished.
Like any well-run organization, having a fi xed deadline to achieve a task ? a fi xed election
date ? would better focus the mind of any government.
The date should be every four years. By doing this, more rigorous enforcement of election
and pre-election spending laws would also be possible. There would be transparency about
the dates for voters and for other political parties. Governing parties should lose their
control over when we vote. Should a government lose a confi dence vote during the fouryear
period, an election would of course take place. However, the date for the subsequent
election could be set for precisely four years later.
Fixed elections would also remove an unfair advantage held by the governing party.
Opposition parties are forced to spend scarce resources planning for every contingency
while the governing party can focus its efforts on the only date that matters.
Provincial practice demonstrates that there is no fundamental inconsistency between fi xed
elections and parliamentary democracy. British Columbia has recently implemented a fi xed
election date mechanism. The Ontario government has introduced similar legislation.
3. Transparent Leadership Contests
政党领导人竞选透明化
Set spending limits and transparency conditions on leadership contests within political
parties: Parties are largely fi nanced by the taxpayer and the same principles pertinent
to the public good should apply to the internal affairs of parties as they do to electoral
competition between parties.
Canada has laws and regulations regulating the fi nancing of general elections. There are
limits and there is transparency. However, while parties, candidates, electoral district
associations and even nomination race contestants all face strict expense limits, those
running to be the leaders of their parties do not. There is, therefore, a major democratic
defi cit when it comers to the internal operations of political parties. Parties are not private
clubs. In a democracy, they are the means by which citizens select their governors. In
Canada, they are largely fi nanced by the taxpayers. The same principles pertinent to the
public good should apply to the internal affairs of parties as they do to electoral competition
between parties.
The centralized nature of Canadian politics means that party leaders enjoy tremendous clout
within the party, and not only in the governing party. Leaders have authority to accept or
reject candidates nominated at the electoral district level, and exercise additional infl uence
over MPs through party discipline.
There needs to be strong accountability rules for political parties, including regulations
ensuring sources, transparency, and spending limits. In the recent leadership contests,
in the Liberal and Conservative parties, respectively, Mr. Martin spent $12 million and Mr.
Harper spent $2.7 million. In a democratic Canada, no one with access to virtually unlimited
amounts of money should be able to effectively discourage or stop a more poorly funded
opponent. Ideas and values, not cash, should trump.
The absence of spending rules in leadership contests seems incongruous given the power
that party leaders have. Even the prime minister is sometimes “elected” fi rst by the party
in a leadership race. As a result, someone running to be a regular MP may face a more
stringent limit on his or her public electoral campaign than will someone running in a party
contest to inherit the party leadership from a resigning incumbent prime minister, the most
powerful offi ce in the country.
4. Electoral Reform
选举改革
Electoral reform: A major source of needed democratic reform is our outmoded fi rstpast-
the-post electoral system. There is a serious imbalance in the House of Commons in
gender, ethnic, ideological and regional voting preferences. Our present system does not
refl ect Canadian voters’ intentions. Fairness means we need a mixed electoral system that
combines individual constituency-based MPs with proportional representation. Most other
commonwealth countries have already moved in this direction.
A major source of needed democratic reform is our outmoded fi rst-past-the-post electoral
system. In Canada every vote should matter. Ninety percent of the world’s democracies,
including Australia, New Zealand, Scotland, Ireland and Wales have abandoned or
signifi cantly modifi ed the pre-democratic British system that still prevails in Ottawa. As
the Canadian Law Commission recommended and fi ve provinces seem to agree, fairness
means we need a mixed electoral system that combines individual constituency-based
MPs with proportional representation. The global evidence is clear: only such a system
would positively redress the existing imbalance in the House of Commons in gender, ethnic,
ideological and regional voting preferences.
The Pepin-Robarts Commission pointed out a quarter of a century ago, our present system
does a great disservice to Canadian unity because regional representation in the House
of Commons ? in the caucuses and in the cabinet ? does not refl ect Canadian voters’
intentions
Recently a Standing Committee of the House of Commons voted unanimously on a motion
presented by Ed Broadbent that called for a concurrent, two-track process to begin by
October 1, 2005, with a joint session mid-way through the process in November. According
to the Committee’s proposal, the citizen consultation process would have concluded its
work, and publicly released its report by January 30, 2006. This report would then have
been taken into account by the Special Committee in the development of its fi nal report
and recommendations on Canada’s democratic and electoral systems. It would table its
recommendations in the House on or by February 28, 2006.
Regrettably on September 20th the Minister responsible, Hon. Mauril Bélanger, announced
that the consultation process on electoral reform would not begin as promised this year.
This cynicism effectively means there will be no decision on electoral reform before the
next election. The New Democratic Party will continue to work to ensure that our present
electoral system is improved.
5. Ending Unregulated Lobbying
结束没有管理的说客
Unregulated lobbying and political cronyism must end: We need tougher laws requiring
disclosure of fees and expenditures of lobbyists. We also need to make illegal the acceptance
of contingency or profi t-based fees. The government must initiate reforms with tough
sanctions applicable to wrongdoing in the public sector.
In spite of the Lobbyist Registration Act which came into force in June, major reform is
still required. In this we have much to learn from the United States where the national and
most state governments have much tougher laws, including requiring disclosure of fees and
expenditures by lobbyists. Our Act has no such provision. Disclosure of this information by
consultant lobbyists and the corporations and organizations employing in-house lobbyists
would allow Canadians to assess just how great a stake a client has in a piece of legislation
or contract.
We also have no laws prohibiting lobbyists from accepting contingency or success-based fees.
This is morally and ethically wrong. Canadians have higher standards. Some government
programs make it impermissible (technically) for contingency fees to be paid by a company
where government contracts (as opposed to grants or other benefi ts) are awarded. There
is some evidence that this policy is violated. All “profi t-related” or “success based” fees
should be illegal to pay and those making them should be brought to court. Equally, it
should be made illegal for a lobbyist to accept such payments. Any violation should entail
a breach of the Criminal Code and be accompanied by a fi ne of up to $25,000, as well as a
prison sentence of up to two years.
As the former co-chair of a commission on corporate accountability, Ed Broadbent
recommended the government initiate reforms with tough sanctions applicable to wrongdoing
in the private sector. The same principles of personal liability should be duplicated in the
public sector. It is time we made corrupt behaviour not only politically embarrassing but
also a matter for the courts.
Also, recently former cabinet ministers have been exempted by the Ethics Commissioner
from the rule prohibiting lobbying activity for a certain period, and no reasons were given.
When the commissioner provides such an exemption he should be required by law to publish
his reasons.
Canada’s lobbyist law falls short in regulating the activities of lobbyists. The Lobbyist
Registration Act now includes a basic code of ethics for lobbyists. Noncompliance with
this code may be investigated by the lobbyist registrar (part of Industry Canada). However,
the actual consequences of the registrar fi nding noncompliance with the code are unclear.
Further, the Act states that “section 126 of the Criminal Code, which provides punishment of
up to two years imprisonment “does not apply in respect of a contravention of” the provision
obliging lobbyist adherence to the code. Hence, sanctions for a violation of the code generally
come only in the form of negative media attention in response to the registrar’s report. This
is obviously not a robust system of enforcement.
Finally, fi rms that act both as lobbyists and as government consultants create diffi cult
confl icts of interest scenarios. Current rules require lobby fi rms to set up “Chinese walls”
partitioning businesses to separate their lobbying operations from other functions, such
as conducting government communications work. However, communications consultants
should be obliged to decide whether they wish to be private lobbyists or public service
confi dantes. They should not be allowed to be both. “Chinese walls” simply do not work.
6. Ethical Appointments
5规范化的任命：
政府任命：在上千的联邦政府机构，委员会，等的官员任命中不公平和照顾行为必须被停止。NDP建议政府给所有的政府职位制定技能和竞争标准，该标准将被公之于众进行严格考试和执行。
（一个独立的管理委员会）
Government appointments: Unfair and unethical patronage practice must stop in the
appointment of thousands of offi cials to federal agencies, boards, commissions and Crown
Corporations. The New Democratic Party proposes that the government develop skills and
competence-related criteria for all government appointments, that these criteria be publicly
released and that committees scrutinize appointments.
The cabinet appoints thousands of full-time and part-time non-judicial offi cials to
approximately 170 federal agencies, boards, commissions and Crown Corporations. A large
proportion of these are made entirely on a partisan basis that effectively excludes large
numbers of qualifi ed Canadians simply because they are independent or have not supported
the party in power. For example, 14 of 15 members of the current board of the National
Capital Commission have fi nancial or other connections with the Liberal Party.
This process has been condemned by the Auditor General (2001) and criticized by the
President of the Public Service Commission (2004). Not only are qualifi ed people excluded
from consideration for partisan reasons, but as well, some incompetent and unqualifi ed
persons got their positions simply because of their political connections.
This unfair and unethical patronage practice must stop. The New Democratic Party would
put an end to it. All Canadians who qualify for these positions must have access. Membership
or support for any political party should neither be a barrier nor a requirement for such
positions. Cynicism about appointments must stop. Merit and merit alone must count.
New Democrats propose the following:
• That the government of Canada develop skills and competence-related criteria for all
government appointments, [including Board Members and senior Offi cers of Crown
Corporations and other government agencies], for which a Standing Committee has
reviewing responsibility; and that these criteria specifi cally address the non-partisan
nature of these appointments;
• That the government submit these criteria to the appropriate Standing Committee for
consideration and approval, with amendment if necessary;
• That the Government of Canada then publicly release the committee-approved criteria
for each appointment;
• That the names and background of each subsequent nominee for appointment be
referred to the appropriate Standing Committee 60 days prior to the date of their
appointment, with an explanation of how each nominee has met the established criteria;
and, that the Committee, unless it unanimously decides otherwise, shall have at least
one full meeting every two months (while the House of Commons is in session) to review
the nominees.
NOTE: The report containing this motion was concurred in by the House on May 31; therefore, the
House of Commons ALREADY supports this portion of the ethics package. We will continue to monitor
this to make sure that Treasury Board implements the proposals. In the present Parliament the
government has already ignored proposals that have been adopted by the House.
7. Access to Information
信息透明
Access to information: The government is backtracking on reforms leading to greater public
access to information. A recent discussion paper introduced by Justice Minister Irwin Cotler
contains proposals that would actually reduce Canadians access to information, virtually
killing reform until after the next election. Canadians want more access to information
about their government.
Canada badly needs an improved Access to Information Act. Justice Minister Cotler promised
last fall to bring forth as a government bill, Bill C-201, MP Pat Martin’s private members
bill. Instead of doing so in March Minister Cotler presented the Standing Committee on
Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics merely with a discussion paper many of the whose
proposals would actually reduce access to information.
What we need are the changes proposed in Mr. Martin’s bill which enjoyed the support of all
Members on the Committee:
• Extends the Act to Crown corporations and agencies previously excluded and to all
incorporated not-for-profi t organizations that receive at least two-thirds of their funding
through federal government appropriations;
• Makes ministers of the Crown, their exempt staffs and offi cers of parliament subject to
the Act;
• Brings Cabinet confi dences under the Act;
• Improves public access to government records pertaining to third-party contracts and
public opinion polling.
• Requires government records that are more than 30 years old to be automatically
opened except where specifi cally exempted for reasons of national security, public safety
or international obligations;
• Establishes the principles that records be provided without unreasonable barriers as to
time and cost and provides a government institution with the discretion to provide them
free of charge to users who request them in the public interest;
• Provides protection of information related to endangered species and threatened
ecological or archeological sites;
• Allows the disclosure of retained records pertaining to public health and safety,
the environment and governance of corporations if the public interest in disclosure
outweighs in importance the possible injury to the institutions and persons subject to the
Act.
www.ndp.ca/ethics
