[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
9353: Transparency and the Kurzban fees (fwd)
Regarding the fees the Haitian Government has paid to Mr. Kurzban, Julie Hoover writes:
>[I] Don't think he or anyone else really needs to
>explain how this money is spent but if they should do
>so, am sure your concerns would be alleviated.
Julie, you're quite right that Kurzban doesn't need to explain how the $2,651,259 were spent. However, in the name of transparency (remember that one?), the Haitian Government (GOH) has an obligation to the desperately poor populace on whose behalf it is ostensibly spending that money. Is this something that has become part of the GOH's annual budget? Were there debates in Parliament about it? What are the procedures for evaluation and follow-up?
We understand that the relationship between Mr. Kurzban and the GOH goes back many years. Is Mr. Kurzban under contract for a specific period or is it indefinite? Does it continue by default? What does the GOH expect from Mr. Kurzban? Are there measureable indicators on which both parties agree?
The high fees notwithstanding, for me the more important issue here is not the amount being spent. It is, rather, a basic question of governance and how the GOH sees its responsibility to the people of Haiti. At a time when so many things cannot be done because there's no money, at the very least we expect to understand the wisdom behind certain decisions.
On a related note... The GOH obviously values its relationship with U.S. policy-makers or else it wouldn't have had this deal with Mr. Kurzban. Now, here's where I'm lost: If Washington is so important, why in Goerge's name haven't we had a Haitian Ambassador there for the past 3/4 years? Wouldn't the ambassador play a pivotal (cheaper?) role in any attempt to cultivate and improve our country's relationship with Uncle Sam?
Someone please explain this to me as if I were four years old.