| Submit your comments on this article |
| Great White North |
| Appointing more women and minorities 'produces better government' |
| 2015-12-05 |
| Just look at Detroit, Baltimore, all those urban paradises. [CA.NEWS.YAHOO] Jean Augustine recalls looking around the rooms of meetings she used to be in and sometimes realized she was the only minority person present. Augustine was the first African-Canadian woman to be elected to the House of Commons, representing the riding of Etobicoke-Lakeshore from 1993 to 2006. “I just didn’t see the diversity of my own life reflected in the institutions and organizations I had been appointed to,” Augustine told Yahoo Canada News. That’s an issue the Liberal government says it wants to tackle — by boosting the number of women, minorities and aboriginal people in the hundreds of appointments it will make to agencies, boards and Crown corporations (ABCs). Olivier Duchesneau, a spokesman for Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, told The Canadian Press recently the process would be “open, transparent and merit-based.” In addition, the party has pledged to create an independent body to make recommendations for positions, including new senators. “It’s who you know and who put your name in the hat,” explains Augustine, who also served as minister of state for multiculturalism and the status of women and was parliamentary secretary to then-prime minister Jean Chretien from 1994 to 1996. |
| Posted by:Fred |
| #7 IIRR Discrimating against certain groups produces better government was also the claim of the KKK? |
| Posted by: Bright Pebbles 2015-12-05 17:42 |
| #6 Civilization of the shameless? |
| Posted by: g(r)omgoru 2015-12-05 14:30 |
| #5 I'm sure that's true enough assuming they aren't Democrats. |
| Posted by: rjschwarz 2015-12-05 14:13 |
| #4 "Appointing more women and minorities 'produces better government'" ... say the people who cannot cut it in the Dreaded Private Sector. |
| Posted by: Raj 2015-12-05 13:55 |
| #3 "Appointing more women and minorities 'produces better government'" No, it produces precisely the mess we in the States are in right now: a government that is incompetent, stupid and corrupt. Don't emulate us. |
| Posted by: Dave D. 2015-12-05 08:59 |
| #2 As long as the goals are published and the success/failure reported quarterly. We'll need another bureaucracy to do the reporting, of course, put they'll have to have the same diversity as the stated overall goal. How will failure to meet the goal be punished? If we achieve 110% of the goal, who gets a bonus? Why would exceeding the goal be rewarded? How often should the goals be re-evaluated, and on what basis? All that sounds pretty complicated, so we'll just go for "more". Then it never ends. |
| Posted by: Bobby 2015-12-05 07:39 |
| #1 More like 'Snowflake' government. For some, it is 'better'. In the dark old days, merit and skill were considered 'better'. However, the tags of efficient, effective, and affordable are not of any priority in the new definition of 'good'. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2015-12-05 07:39 |