Identity
Filter
Visitors
(0) (0) (0) (0) (1) (0) (0) (0) (0) (0) (0) (0) (0) (0) (0) (0) (0) (61) (0) (0) (0)Subscribers
(0) (0)
Highest posts
Latest posts
Links
Blogs
Democracy
Search
[top-politics] Re: What does TOP mean to you?
-
08/07/06 13:46
Gale(1) What does TOP mean to you?
[Gale]:
“This part about public matters among private individuals is not clear
to me. …" My post is about TOP in the public service. Public officials = public employees Private individuals = ordinary citizens See my reply to [Magnus] for a more detailed explanation. Best regards Eric Lim
illegale <geoerdeaen@yahoo.com> wrote: Hello Eric!
lpc1998 wrote:
> Important Notice: > > Although this discussion is initiated by a group of 4 members, it is open to all. So all comments and contributions are welcome. > > ============ > > > TOP is the acronym for Transparent, Open and Public in reference to the governance of the country or in the conduct of public business. What is open and public in governance will make it transparent as well. > > From the above definition, TOP clearly does not apply to private exchanges on private matters among the public officials or on public matters among private individuals.
This part about public matters among private individuals is not clear to me. So, what I do see is that if these individuals are just privately discuss with no intention to set their interests, or not. If yes, they actually need TOP in order to set legimacy of their action. Passing their opinions and interests through TOP they can gain it. If it does not pass, it can not gain political relevance. So, I suppose this TOP is oriented towards publicly oriented initiatives in order to create desired support.
> How about private exchanges on public matters by public officials? In other words, should there be a prohibition of public officials discussing public matters in private? Should all discussions on public matters be open and public?
I do not actually support concept of prohibition. Not just because I do not find it easy to realise, but because I am not sure is it good at all?
So, here I find important part is articulation of individuals who set some policies. More info we have, more people can support such policies with no fear of loosing of public support. If there are some “mystery” issues that indiviuals do not find apropriate due to any reason to public, the way to realise them is putting their word, their reputation on probation. So, it is up to the public should they legitimate those mystery ones, or those fully transparent.
For concrete example, there is Milan Bandic in Croatia, pretty strong politician who openly says, this stuff is not good to talk about in this very time. And he is not willing to give his opinion about ceratin issues, but state that. I find this be his right. If he gains legimacy in such issue, that is fine with me, what I find here important is the way of articulation of someones integrity and trustworthiness through this system. This thing be imoprtant one.
So, what about TOP at all? I find it be technical solution that can not be faked. At this adress, http://www.milanbandiczagreb.com/ we can notice Milan Bandic does not have any TOP interface, which says to me he does not want to let to people their right for public speech about him. This is issue that can not be faked, this is the issue I find distinctive. Not his legitimated opinion that something is not interesting issue in some very moment.
And why is that? I suppose because free public speech is something Bandic is afraid of.
Will contiue at the next post:
+1
