Monday, February 06, 2006


I have long held the opinion that society is regressing in the area of “what’s right and what’s wrong” to put it in layman’s terms. An article in the MSM highlights my hypothesis, and it adds to the “entitlements” scenario that is still being talked about, and should be talked about until something is done about it.

This story goes something like this; Joe E is a consultant of 40 something vintage, has worked on Provincial files that total in the billions[not NL], thinks he has something to offer the new crowd in Ottawa, has even been offered a position, but it would mean he has to relocate. His better half told him he would be on his own if he does relocate, so Joe E has decided to stay put.

But Joe E is not letting it rest there. Maybe Joe E has other reasons for staying put with his better half.
Joe E is mussing about the fact he is worried about the Harper plan to bring in legislation to ban former ministers, their staff, and senior public servants from lobbying government for 5 years-up from the current 1 year cooling off period. Joe E thinks this is unfair, that it would prevent him from earning a living after he leaves the public pay roll, he could not use his vast knowledge in betterment of the world.

What a load of rubbish. Since when does society owe Joe E a living, particularly in his chosen profession? It’s seems obvious that Joe E is more worried about his bank balance than any pie in the ski ideology, like what’s good for his better half, or the country.

I say 5 years is the minimum cooling off period that should be introduced. There should be strong enforceable guide lines and an oversight department independent of PM, MP offices too.

No comments: