Recently two reports were published on very thorny questions for those who released the texts. At any other time the questions would have been swept under the carpet. In fact, investigations about them happened because the scandal they gave rise to was such that they could not continue to be ignored.

So we had the release by the Vatican of a report on the conduct of American cardinal McCarrick. How could it happen that Popes, one after the other over decades, kept honouring and extending support to this cardinal when for a long while, allegations of sexual misconduct swirled around him?

Meanwhile in Australia, the armed forces published a detailed and extensive report about acts of gratuitous violence on Afghan citizens and of murder by Australian troups stationed in that country. How could such atrocities happen and be allowed to happen?

The Vatican’s report is complete as published; if it was edited and censored beforehand, that doesn’t show. The one published by the Australian army is heavily redacted, but even so presents a pretty grim picture.

Such reports do shock and affect negatively the morale of many good people. Yet if they are not carried out, the hidden cancer that they uncover at the core of an organization would still prevail and continue to undermine and subvert that organzation’s purpose.  

***

IT’S THE RULE OF LAW AGAIN

Disputes about the rule of law have again secured prime place in the European Union’s agenda. Poland and Hugary have been refusing to accept the compromise reached by the German presidency with the European Parliament regarding how member states that failed to respect the principles of the rule of law would forfeit funds allocated to them in the Union’s budget. The other member states, excepting Slovenia, endorsed this compromise.

As in all political polemics, the two sides reverted to a game of mutual demonisation. One side backs the devil, the other backs the saints.

It makes great sense to link the values of the rule of law to the EU’s ongoing programmes. But the manner by which this issue is being discussed, reviewed and decided is politicised and allows for partisan manipulation – that also has been evident in proceedings.

***

FINANCIAL SERVICES

There still is not enough clarity in the aims being followed when promoting financial services. Nice statements about the new technologies in the areas of crypto assets and the rest, the sense of achievement we feel at how the financial servces sector has taken root here – they’re no longer enough.

We need a clear and well focussed mission statement, done especially in a technical format, about which sectors of financial business we seek to attract: why we’re doing this; how and with what tools we’re going to do so; the competitive advantages we hold and on which we can build; as well as the real valued added that will accrue for our “clients” and for all of us.

Honestly I do not think this matter has been dealt with rigorously, or that it’s an approach that is being implemented as of now. Perhaps this is what has generated a relaxation in the running of the sector as a whole, so that now we await with concern the verdicts – no matter how skewed – that reach us from foreign authorities about the development of our financial sector.