Transparency and good governance are taken seriously

The first thing is to clarify what transparency is. And at the same time, and confusingly if we fail to remedy it, a moral aspiration with a blurred profile, a set of political principles seeking legal concreteness, is a necessity for many citizens in their dealings with public administrations. a set of administrative techniques and tools that can also seek efficiency or encourage more bureaucracy. The question is whether all this falls into this category. system or doomed to create lasting anger. It seems to me that it can acquire a systematic character when certain conditions are met:

1.- There Should Be a Right to Transparency this may hopefully be a Fundamental Right with all the warranties it contains. Given the difficulty of getting this into the Constitution, we should hope that the intermediary bodies – Transparency Boards, Ombudsman Offices – and especially judges and courts develop decisions and case-law that go in this direction, and that the subjects move in this direction. Those concerned were not helpless, and they also set firm boundaries. The same idea should permeate legal texts.

2.- Another Transparency law should be made: The year 2013 is outdated and vague, anticipating outdated ideas, and containing notable shortcomings—for example, anything that refers to local powers. As with so many other things, it is not surprising that territorial arrangements eventually outgrow and rationalize the principles of state law. For the rest, the Central Government’s Executives did not show much interest in developing techniques for coordinating with Communities or ensuring the functioning of the Transparency Council for long periods of time. The various Open Government Plans have often been incomplete, fearful and unimaginative. And it was ignored in public discussion: paradoxically opaque.

3.- Some of the innovation funds can be allocated for: technological and social innovation in terms of transparency, both Government and Communities, Town Halls etc. for. Seeking a certain consistency in public action promotion mechanisms, interoperability and ease of access should be priorities: the first transparency is to provide a comfortable interface between administrations and citizens.

These ideas are not dependent on their ability to prevent or prosecute corruption. no doubt transparency prevents corruption, however, other mechanisms are required. Transparency is necessary when there is not the slightest fear of moral, political or administrative abuse. This is a democratic necessity and is effective in building what we call Good Government, insofar as it is combined with other measures of integrity that prevent the State from disfiguring and eroding. I will avoid cumbersome definitions, I will simply say that the statement that the color of the cat does not matter, that the important thing is that it catches mice is false. The cat should have the color of democracy, because otherwise if procedures are neglected—or facts are overloaded with procedures—after a few years the institutions will slacken and distrust will grow again. In other words: policies path where decisions are discussed, adopted and implemented. Therefore, transparency must be combined with other core values ​​such as administrative simplicity, austerity, elimination of the behavior of public forces favoring private takeovers of politics, internal democratization of parties, continuity in office, laxity in conformity. , the existence of “revolving doors”, legally established accountability that supports democratic negotiation mechanisms, etc.

All of this is good government, as long as it creates an understandable climate of honesty without the need to be permanently attacked by politicians, officials, businessmen, and citizens, without becoming a polarizing factor. From the right perspective, the greatest value of Good Governance is, back democratic State and law, but also the diversion of funds, corporatism, nepotism, etc. of the social State, which can develop its policies in favor of equality without the inhibition of fear. It is therefore pointless to oppose the mechanisms of wealth creation and good governance: if there is conflict, it is because good law is mixed with bad bureaucracy. Therefore, an intrinsic part of good governance should consist of establishing deliberative frameworks to deal with this serious problem.

I am a strong supporter of accepting these principles and techniques as a set of principles and techniques so that all this is possible. public policy like others, a program, budget, technicians, training designs, legislative initiative, etc. are equipped with. Have a clear and identifiable responsible person who is accountable to Parliament and the citizens and sits at the desk of the Cabinet. In other words, that he has his own political power and does not allow his actions and duties to be seen as mere embellishments, petty delicacies of substance when the really bad guys come. I hope all parties include this idea in their next election programmes. Then I will believe them when they talk about transparency and honesty.