By Peter Mills. The anti-government corruption watchdog Transparency International has released its latest report into the overall state of honesty or dishonesty amongst the countries of the world – and it makes powerfully interesting reading!
Each nation has been given a rating figure on a simple scale of 1 to 10 depending on how corrupt or honest a country and its government is shown to be according to a set of comprehensive surveys. A very upright and honest government gets a top score of 10, while a thoroughly corrupt and crooked government gets just 1.
The most honest national administration in the world proves to be that of New Zealand with a score of 9.5, closely followed by Denmark, Sweden, Finland, Singapore and Norway, all of whom scored 9 or more. Britain managed 7.8, hardly a score to boast about, but we beat the USA at 7.1 and France at 7. Bottom of the list – and no great surprises here – are Somalia and North Korea, both scoring a feeble 1, with Sudan also near the bottom of the honesty heap with 1.6.
The detailed map and alphabetical listing can be found on the Transparency International website here.
There are many fascinating facts and inferences to be drawn from the availability of this global information, for example the revelation that the “Arab Spring” revolts against established ruling bodies blazing like brushfires across the Middle East are seemingly, more than anything else, the result of a general public reaction against bribery and corruption within governments
However, the most interesting – and worrying – thing from a local perspective within the European Union is the horrifying “dishonesty rating” of the administrations of countries within the EU, and countries being considered for imminent future membership of the EU.
The “Honesty Ratings” figures paint a very bad picture indeed of Eastern Europe. This should have been a major concern of everyone in Britain, and everyone in the original EU, over the last several years. Instead, it is becoming public knowledge only now, at the end of 2011, thanks to an independent organisation that is telling us the news which our own corrupt government does not want us to know.
It is perfectly fair to state that, in any rating scale of 1 to 10, whether it be for government honesty or the exhibits entered in a local village vegetable show, anyone getting a score above 5 is within the better grouping, whilst anyone getting below 5 is in a bad way.
I therefore suggest that it is very accurate to state here that, when considering a common economy such as the Euro and all the national economies which depend upon it to a greater or lesser degree, such as the British pound, any country with an honesty rating below 5 should not be touched with a bargepole, nor be trusted to present an honest and accurate set of balanced accounts books for assessment when applying for EU membership.
Consider, then, what I will call the “Corruption League Rating” of the following national administrations, which I shall present in 3 groups. The first group will be actual present members of the European Union.
The second group will be what are referred to as Candidate Countries, which are countries currently seeking membership of the EU. The third group are Potential Candidate Countries, which are countries that have expressed an interest in becoming Candidate Countries.
Whilst looking at this information, consider also that we here in Britain are (without any referendum or any democratic voice in the issue) forced to be part of the European Union whether we want to be or not, and we are therefore forced to accept the process of being joined in a kind-of “unholy wedlock” with these countries and, in effect, to invite them into our bedchamber.
(In fact, it might also be suggested that the British people have been the victims of a national-scale “forced marriage” with Europe; I am sure that if any reader thinks this statement to be an exaggeration, or unwarranted hyperbole, they will make their opinions known by posting them here – that is democracy. Value it while we still have it!)
Now, and bearing in mind that a score of 5 is only halfway honest, consider the following National Honesty Ratings.
EU MEMBER STATES:
Lithuania: 4.8
Hungary: 4.6
Czech Republic: 4.4
Latvia: 4.2
Slovakia: 4
Italy: 3.9
Romania: 3.6
Greece: 3.4
Bulgaria: 3.3
CANDIDATE COUNTRIES FOR EU MEMBERSHIP:
Turkey: 4.2
Croatia: 4
Macedonia: 3.9
POTENTIAL CANDIDATE COUNTRIES:
Montenegro: 4
Serbia: 3.3
Boznia & Herzegovinia: 3.2
Albania: 3.1
Kosovo: 2.9
Should we be worried? If these countries were single citizens, they would not be able to qualify with our banks or building societies for a mortgage on a house! As nations, therefore, how can they be regarded as being suitable for admission into an economic network upon which we are dependent for our own future survival?
In economic effect, permitting such countries to become members of the European Union is to do the same thing with nations that the sub-prime mortgage catastrophe did with houses. In this Transparency International report, we may well be seeing the beginning of an even worse international financial disaster which is not yet obvious, yet may be speeding towards us like a tsunami that is just out of sight over the horizon.
As a final footnote to this article, it is also worth considering the Honesty Ratings of the administrations of countries at the bottom of the scale which we are supporting with all manner of international aid and military programs including the monstrous and obscene Foreign Aid squandering of our hopeless politicians who, themselves, only managed a less-than-honourable score of 7.8.
INDIA: 3.2
PAKISTAN: 2.5
AFGHANISTAN: 1.5
2
Well. – What do you know !
Should one laugh or cry?
Andrew, you may be interested in this sublet situation –
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2075480/Council-warehouse-contained-2million-worth-cannabis.html
How can we be anywhere near the top when we Borrow our money from Private Banksters and the EU has nt had its accounts signed off for around 15 yrs.
In my opinion, our government must know that it gives our money in aid to regimes which are thoroughly corrupt . So why does it go on giving it?
It does this for 2 main reasons:-
1. A lot of this money which is knowingly creamed off corruptly one way or another its actually bribe money. That is, the government is using our money indirectly to bribe foreign governments. It is as corrupt as they are.
2. The government is using our money to burnish up its image as ‘caring’ even though it does not actually give a fig that it goes to buy mercedes and into the secret bank accounts of political elites in the recipient countries. This again is corrupt practice..