Sign up
Nov 16, 01 / Nov 20, 17 02:10 UTC
Government vs Transparency

In most of todays governments, transparency takes a back burner in the name of "national security" or "need to know". I believe in transparency, that is in that "the people, have a right to know what the governments actions and intentions are, unless in dire moments of terrorist threats or acts of war, which is a given. However, the hush hush, behind closed door dealings that take no account of the will of the people, in essence, removing the people's right to make informed decisions, completely goes against that which should be a democratic governmental system. This is one of the systemic failures currently in the United States Government. Most politicians who attend these behind closed door meetings, at some point, get "bought" by special interests, in turn giving their vote for that cause, which often times, completely contradicts the will of the people, or would, had the people been given the opportunity to make their voices heard. In nearly 20 years of service to countless communities, one thing that I am truly proud of in dealing with governments, at least, on a local level is that I cannot be bought. And I have always taken the utmost pride in standing up for the rights of the people. I have nothing to hide, and personally welcome transparency. Shouldn't your government?

Nov 16, 01 / Nov 20, 17 02:31 UTC

Let me start by saying I very much agree with you, and I was and am still a member of the party for accountability, competency and transparency (or PACT) in Canada - no relation to Asgardia

However having stepped up to the plate, primarily to lead by example, not at the time in hopes of winning I see that, especially for Asgardia, the candidates have little to no political experience and make many mistakes (myself included)

I propose that it might be possible for parliament to meet as a group in private, where they can grow together, for asgardia needs unity in the parliament if it is going to have unity throughout.  And unity cannot be allowed to come from one side, but must come from all.  In that growing together there are bound to be disputes they would not want publicized... they may say stupid things without all the facts, for no one has them all, without wanting to get scrutinized over every little word.

People are caution about speaking in public, and I don't think we would want our parliamentary, or leaders, or perhaps even government, for it too is new, to be limiting their contributions due to broadcast to the entire world.

I do see your point, and hope you understand mine, and I hope you might have some input on a middle ground - for input is what Asgardia needs most, especially now in it's infancy.

Nov 16, 01 / Nov 20, 17 21:04 UTC

Chris -

I agree with your reply in many ways, including the parliamentary meetings. However, unlike some current situations in my current government, I strongly believe that the people have a right (and deserve) to know what their government is up to. Unfortunately in my government, a majority of "business" is conducted behind closed doors and the people are kept in the dark. There has to be transparency. It fosters a sense of trust, believability and fairness.

While I understand that things like terrorist attacks or acts of war require secure and tactful decimation of information, I believe that other information should be readily available (ie: Freedom of Information Act) without threats or fear of repercussions.

One thing that I am sure we can both agree on is that as a government, we should encourage a sense of trust and mutual respect with the people. If we cannot find a way to bring about that trust, we are setting ourselves up for failure from the start.

Perhaps it would be prudent to host open forums with the people, then use the information obtained to open dialogs with fellow parliamentarians. In essence, keeping the people in "the loop", while gaining information about their needs and expectations of the government.