The Ideal Australian official : incorruptible, uncorrupt - home and away - is this achievable

An interesting read in today's newspapers : an analysis of the fiasco invovling some former executives of Securency and Note Printing Australia (NPA) on bribery charges.

Companies can no longer afford to turn blind eye to bribery practices

Benny Tabalujan July 05, 2011

http://m.smh.com.au/business/companies-can-no-longer-afford-to-turn-blind-eye-to-bribery-practices-20110704-1gz2i.html

Well, it's all good and well on paper.

First off, the parameters of longstanding laws governing officials performing their duties are limited by territorial jurisdiction. Even though the ambit has been expanded to cover foreign activities, making officials potentially liable for criminal prosecution, it is difficult to enforce.

Australian government departments and boards do not have the resources to monitor, supervise, administer and enforce the best rules that have been put in place.

The officials' primary concern is to get the job done, clinch a deal, sometimes necessitate bending the rules and work according to local conditions. Inflexibility and failure to adapt to the international environment may result in Australia lagging behind and even losing out to its global competitors. As far as we know, these Securency officials did not personally pocket the funds.

FEW Australian would condone corrupt behaviour and defend the officials' misdeeds. It could also be argued that an Australian organisation's interests are undermined having to pay for the bribes. Moreover, once the rules are flouted, there is no guarantee that human beings will be tempted to bend backwards to please their counterparts. Where do we draw the line?