Downloads & Free Reading Options - Results

A document, issued by the Centre for Public Integrity in Australia, about the state of access to Commonwealth Government documents under the Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Cth).

Integrity Matters: Men of Honour in the Public Square contains short biographies of Christian men who have lived visibly public lives, and thus approaches ethical issues from a concrete (not theoretical) standpoint. These include the life stories of Engr. Rumberger, whose invention of the Flex Ring made the V-22 Osprey (a plane that takes off and lands as a helicopter but flies with the speed of a turboprop aircraft) possible; Dr. Dunn, who gives life to countless children through organ transplantation; Hon. Justice Ogebe, whose landmark judgments helped steer Nigeria’s nascent democracy off the path of dictatorship and anarchy at the turn of the new millenium; Gen. Agwai, who defied all odds, not the least being falsely accused of coup plotting, to rise to the pinnacle of the Nigerian military and beyond; and Dr. Kolade, whose wise decision helped Cadbury Nigeria avert a dangerous World Bank debt trap in the dark days of the late 1980s. It has brought to the fore,  among many other issues, the unparalleled significance of the family and good upbringing as prime factors for building virtuous societies. Similarly, the book has brought to light the often unnoticed impact of a truly Christian education on character formation. The thrust of the book, as narrative, lies in “showing” how genuinely ethical lives are lived and how the life of virtue and integrity is still possible, even in the increasingly murky waters of public life. It likewise demonstrates the joys, satisfaction, and rewards that come with living with integrity in the public/market square, the challenges notwithstanding. While this book has popular readership in view, it will be a very good source for case studies in ethics classes.

Samuel Adams.--Henry Laurens.--Robert Morris.--Thomas Eddy [by James C. Watts]--John Hancock [by G. Mountfort]--John Langdon.--Elbridge Gerry.--Joseph Hewes.--Philip Livingston.--Stephen Girard [by James H. Lanman]--Matthew Carey.--William Parsons

Samuel Adams.--Henry Laurens.--Robert Morris.--Thomas Eddy [by James C. Watts]--John Hancock [by G. Mountfort]--John Langdon.--Elbridge Gerry.--Joseph Hewes.--Philip Livingston.--Stephen Girard [by James H. Lanman]--Matthew Carey.--William Parsons

Perma.cc archive of https://www.justice.gov/criminal-pin/about created on 2022-10-01 22:34:42.879178+00:00.

Perma.cc archive of https://www.publicintegrity.org/2018/05/ 04/21736/honduras-temporary-protected-status created on 2022-01-11 18:17:19+00:00.

The mysterious congress. A letter from Aix la Chappel, detecting the late secret negociations there; accounting for the extraordinary slowness of the operations of the campaign since the action at Dettingen; and, particularly, for the resignation of the E-l of S-r. With many other curious particulars relating to the present broils of Europe. By a nobleman, distinguished for integrity and consummate knowledge in public affairs. 1743.. Digitized from IA40313505-14 . Previous issue: bim_eighteenth-century_a-vindication-of-the-gov_mackenzie-george-sir_1712 . Next issue: bim_eighteenth-century_a-serious-address-to-the_1741 .

A paper presented during the International Conference of the Network of Asia-Pacific Schools and Institutes of Public Administration and Governance hosted by the University of the Philippines- National College of Public Administration and Governance on December 5-7, 2007 at the Hyatt Hotel, Manila, Philippines. The theme of the conference - Public Administration and Governance at the Forefront of Change: Dimensions, Dynamics, Dysfunctions and Solutions. The paper was approved for presentation and discussion under the sub-theme: Drawing Lessons and Moving Forward â Next Steps in mainstreaming Rights and Reforms in Development

Amicus brief of Public Citizen, Center for Science in the Public Interest, Collaboration for Research Integrity submitted. in Food Marketing Inst. v. Argus Media, No. 18-481

Amicus brief of Public Citizen, Center for Science in the Public Interest, Collaboration for Research Integrity submitted. in Food Marketing Inst. v. Argus Media, No. 18-481

Democracy is for all intentional purposes based on mutual respect, which means free and fair elections, human rights, and ethical government. How well are we doing with current standards of ethics in politics and the public service, how successfully are they enforced, and how could they be improved? These standards involve conflicts of interest, lobbying, election financing, whistleblowing, expense claims, and public sector accountability. This presentation will contextualize some of the past and present scandals involving both Canadian public servants and elected politicians. Is there a trend towards less accountability and are ethics being compromised as part of a larger problem within society? The speaker will offer hope and suggestions for the future and argue that democracy is not a spectator sport...... Voter apathy makes it very fragile. Speaker: Ian Greene, PhDIan Greene has the title of University Professor at York University in Toronto and as of July, 2013, is semi-retired. He is a member of the School of Public Policy and Administration, and has taught at York University since 1985. Prior to this, he worked for the Government of Alberta for four years, and taught at the University of Lethbridge. He has published seven books, two of them with U of L professor Peter McCormick, and numerous articles. Dr. Greene has taught courses in Canadian public law, the Charter of Rights, judicial administration, program evaluation, political ethics, Canadian government, and public administration. He was the inaugural Director of York's Master's program Public Policy, Administration and Law. He was an associate dean in the Faculty of Arts from 1997 to 2000. He has been co-director of the professional development LLM programme in administrative law in Osgoode Hall Law School. He is a member of the Board of Directors of the York Collegium for Practical Ethics, and the Centre for Public Policy and Law. From 2003 to 2004, he was Chair of the York University Senate. He has been a frequent media commentator on ethics issues in politics.Date: Thursday, March 12, 2015 Time: Noon - 1:30 PM (30 minutes each for presentation, lunch and Q & A) Location: Country Kitchen Catering (Lower level of The Keg) 1715 Mayor Magrath Dr. S Cost: $11.00 (includes lunch) or $2.00 (includes coffee/tea at the presentation only)

This item represents a case in PACER, the U.S. Government's website for federal case data. If you wish to see the entire case, please consult PACER directly.

Samuel Adams.--Henry Laurens.--Robert Morris.--Thomas Eddy [by James C. Watts]--John Hancock [by G. Mountfort]--John Langdon.--Elbridge Gerry.--Joseph Hewes.--Philip Livingston.--Stephen Girard [by James H. Lanman]--Matthew Carey.--William Parsons

U.S. Comptroller General Gene Dodaro testified about vulnerabilities at federal agencies that manage public health emergencies and political interference. The testimony came during a House Coronavirus Crisis Subcommittee hearing. Mr. Dodaro testified about a new Government Accountability Office (GAO) report that highlighted weaknesses at the CDC, FDA, NIH and the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response (ASPR) that allowed for officials in the Trump administration to change public health guidance. Ranking Member Rep. Steve Scalise (R-LA) along with other Republicans questioned the witnesses about Biden administration interference in COVID-19 guidance related school re-openings. According to Mr. Dodaro the report did not investigate those instances, but did make several recommendations for agency improvements to safeguard against future politicization of these public health agencies. Sponsor: House Oversight and Reform Subcommittee on Select Coronavirus Crisis

U.S. Comptroller General Gene Dodaro testified about vulnerabilities at federal agencies that manage public health emergencies and political interference. The testimony came during a House Coronavirus Crisis Subcommittee hearing. Mr. Dodaro testified about a new Government Accountability Office (GAO) report that highlighted weaknesses at the CDC, FDA, NIH and the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response (ASPR) that allowed for officials in the Trump administration to change public health guidance. Ranking Member Rep. Steve Scalise (R-LA) along with other Republicans questioned the witnesses about Biden administration interference in COVID-19 guidance related school re-openings. According to Mr. Dodaro the report did not investigate those instances, but did make several recommendations for agency improvements to safeguard against future politicization of these public health agencies. Sponsor: House Oversight and Reform Subcommittee on Select Coronavirus Crisis

This study aims to determine and analyze the implementation of the integrity zone development policy towards WBK/ WBBM in order to realize an increase inpublic services at the BPK Representative Office for Gorontalo Province. This research approach is qualitative. This type of research is descriptive qualitative. Data collection techniques used are interviews, observation, and documentation studies. Data analysis techniques namely data reduction, data presentation, and drawing conclusions. The results of the study show that 1) Service Standards, Excellent Service Culture, and Satisfaction Assessment Service Standards at the BPK Representative Office for Gorontalo Province have been implemented based on PERMENPANRB RI No. 10/ 2019. However, the implementation of Service Standards and Excellent Service Culture has not been optimal, while the indicators for implementing Service Satisfaction Assessment have been optimal. The implementation of the integrity zone development policy towards WBK/WBBM has been able to realize an increase in public services at the BPK Representative Office of Gorontalo Province; 2) The determinant factor in the implementation of the integrity zone development policy towards WBK/WBB in order to realize an increase in public services at the BPK Representative Office for Gorontalo Province, namely Implementor Compliance, is a support factor as well as an inhibiting for the implementation of the policy. Meanwhile, the factor of Smooth Function Routines, and the factor of Realizing the Desired Performance and Impact are supporting factors in the implementation of the integrity zone development policy towards WBK/WBBM at the BPK Representative Office of Gorontalo Province

This study aims to determine and analyze the implementation of the integrity zone development policy towards WBK/ WBBM in order to realize an increase inpublic services at the BPK Representative Office for Gorontalo Province. This research approach is qualitative. This type of research is descriptive qualitative. Data collection techniques used are interviews, observation, and documentation studies. Data analysis techniques namely data reduction, data presentation, and drawing conclusions. The results of the study show that 1) Service Standards, Excellent Service Culture, and Satisfaction Assessment Service Standards at the BPK Representative Office for Gorontalo Province have been implemented based on PERMENPANRB RI No. 10/ 2019. However, the implementation of Service Standards and Excellent Service Culture has not been optimal, while the indicators for implementing Service Satisfaction Assessment have been optimal. The implementation of the integrity zone development policy towards WBK/WBBM has been able to realize an increase in public services at the BPK Representative Office of Gorontalo Province; 2) The determinant factor in the implementation of the integrity zone development policy towards WBK/WBB in order to realize an increase in public services at the BPK Representative Office for Gorontalo Province, namely Implementor Compliance, is a support factor as well as an inhibiting for the implementation of the policy. Meanwhile, the factor of Smooth Function Routines, and the factor of Realizing the Desired Performance and Impact are supporting factors in the implementation of the integrity zone development policy towards WBK/WBBM at the BPK Representative Office of Gorontalo Province

This item represents a case in PACER, the U.S. Government's website for federal case data. If you wish to see the entire case, please consult PACER directly.

This item represents a case in PACER, the U.S. Government's website for federal case data. If you wish to see the entire case, please consult PACER directly.

This report examines the activities of an independent office within the Small Business Administration: the Office of Advocacy. The Office of Advocacy has responsibility for ensuring that federal agencies evaluate the small business impacts of the rules they adopt. Scientific assessments are not “rules” and do not regulate small business, yet the Office of Advocacy decided to comment on technical, scientific assessments of the cancer risks of formaldehyde, styrene, and chromium. By its own admission, Advocacy lacks the scientific expertise to evaluate the merits of such assessments. The report analyzes correspondence and materials received through a Freedom of Information Act request made by staff at the Center for Effective Government. Our inquiry was driven by two questions: Why did the Office of Advocacy get involved in the debate over scientific assessments that do not regulate small business? Whose interests does the Office of Advocacy of the Small Business Administration actually serve? We found that the Office of Advocacy’s comments on these assessments raised no issues of specific concern to small business and relied almost exclusively on talking points provided by trade associations dominated by big chemical companies. Between 2005 and 2012, the American Chemistry Council (ACC) and its members spent over $333 million lobbying Congress and federal agencies on, among other things, a protracted campaign to prevent government agencies from designating formaldehyde, styrene, and chromium as carcinogens. The Formaldehyde Council, Styrene Industry Research Council, and Chrome Coalition spent millions more. These groups asked the Office of Advocacy for assistance, and the Office became their willing partner. We conclude that the Office of Advocacy’s decision to comment on scientific assessments of the cancer risks of certain chemicals constitutes a significant and unwarranted expansion of its role and reach beyond its statutory responsibilities. We recommend that Congress ask the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to investigate the Office of Advocacy and exert more rigorous oversight of its activities to ensure its work does not undermine the efforts of other federal agencies to fulfill the goals Congress has assigned them. (Unofficial mirror of http://www.documentcloud.org/documents/628585-office-of-advocacy-report.html)

This report examines the activities of an independent office within the Small Business Administration: the Office of Advocacy. The Office of Advocacy has responsibility for ensuring that federal agencies evaluate the small business impacts of the rules they adopt. Scientific assessments are not “rules” and do not regulate small business, yet the Office of Advocacy decided to comment on technical, scientific assessments of the cancer risks of formaldehyde, styrene, and chromium. By its own admission, Advocacy lacks the scientific expertise to evaluate the merits of such assessments. The report analyzes correspondence and materials received through a Freedom of Information Act request made by staff at the Center for Effective Government. Our inquiry was driven by two questions: Why did the Office of Advocacy get involved in the debate over scientific assessments that do not regulate small business? Whose interests does the Office of Advocacy of the Small Business Administration actually serve? We found that the Office of Advocacy’s comments on these assessments raised no issues of specific concern to small business and relied almost exclusively on talking points provided by trade associations dominated by big chemical companies. Between 2005 and 2012, the American Chemistry Council (ACC) and its members spent over $333 million lobbying Congress and federal agencies on, among other things, a protracted campaign to prevent government agencies from designating formaldehyde, styrene, and chromium as carcinogens. The Formaldehyde Council, Styrene Industry Research Council, and Chrome Coalition spent millions more. These groups asked the Office of Advocacy for assistance, and the Office became their willing partner. We conclude that the Office of Advocacy’s decision to comment on scientific assessments of the cancer risks of certain chemicals constitutes a significant and unwarranted expansion of its role and reach beyond its statutory responsibilities. We recommend that Congress ask the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to investigate the Office of Advocacy and exert more rigorous oversight of its activities to ensure its work does not undermine the efforts of other federal agencies to fulfill the goals Congress has assigned them. (Unofficial mirror of http://www.documentcloud.org/documents/628585-office-of-advocacy-report.html)

Dr. Faria, a consulting neurosurgeon, is editor of The Medical Sentinel, the journal of the AAPS. Doctors for Disaster Preparedness 17th Annual Meeting 1999- Seattle, WA

The responsibility of the procurement personnel is twofold – on one hand the personnel is...

A set of submissions provided to the Senate's Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee about a proposed bill - the Whistleblower Protection Authority Bill 2025 (No 2).

Jeff Schmidt vs. American Institute of Physics ( Disciplined Minds case) Public Integrity review of Disciplined Minds

Jeff Schmidt vs. American Institute of Physics ( Disciplined Minds case) Public Integrity review of Disciplined Minds

Jeff Schmidt vs. American Institute of Physics ( Disciplined Minds case) Public Integrity review of Disciplined Minds

Perma.cc archive of https://www.justice.gov/criminal-pin created on 2022-01-25 05:54:38.921142+00:00.

This book provides an important survey of the causes and current state of corruption across a range of nations and regions. Delving into the diverse ways in which corruption is being combatted, the book explores and describes efforts to inculcate principles of ethical conduct in citizens, private sector actors and public sector personnel and institutions. Corruption is a global condition that effects every type of government, at every level, and has bewitched scholars of governance from ancient times to the present day. The book brings together chapters on a range of state and regional corruption experiences, framing them in terms of efforts to enhance ethical conduct and achieve integrity in government practices and operations. In addition, the book addresses and analyses the theoretical and practical bases of ethics that form the background and historical precepts of efforts to create integrity in government practices, and finally assesses recent international efforts to address corruption on an international scale. This book will be perfect for researchers and upper level students of public administration, comparative government, international development, criminal justice, and corruption.

Perma.cc archive of https://www.publicintegrity.org/environment/ environmental-justice-denied created on 2016-12-18 21:56:42+00:00.

Approving animal experiments in Switzerland requires weighing the harms to the animals against the expected benefits of the experiment. Among the harms to the animals are sentientist harms (e.g., welfare considerations such as pain) and non-sentientist harms (e.g., integrity violations). Sentientist and non-sentientist considerations can conflict (e.g., welfare-integrity conflicts such as the creation of “brain-dead” animals). Since decision-making on animal research projects can be informed by the public's perspective, this study aims to understand the influence of welfare and integrity harms on public evaluation of animal research acceptability and the respect of animals.

Perma.cc archive of https://www.publicintegrity.org/2003/06/26/5525/question-integrity. created on 2020-01-21 03:40:45+00:00.

Perma.cc archive of https://www.publicintegrity.org/2003/06/26/5525/question-integrity. created on 2020-01-21 03:40:45+00:00.

Perma.cc archive of https://www.sknis.gov.kn/2018/07/17/no-18-of-2013-integrity-in-public-life-act-2013-saint-christopher-and-nevis/ created on 2022-02-07 16:09:54.643927+00:00.

Perma.cc archive of https://www.sknis.gov.kn/2018/07/17/no-18-of-2013-integrity-in-public-life-act-2013-saint-christopher-and-nevis/ created on 2022-02-07 16:09:54.643927+00:00.

Coverage of the Mayor's Public Integrity Task Force held in the Mayor's Media Room on January 22, 2020

This item represents a case in PACER, the U.S. Government's website for federal case data. If you wish to see the entire case, please consult PACER directly.

This item represents a case in PACER, the U.S. Government's website for federal case data. If you wish to see the entire case, please consult PACER directly.

Episode 2144: MAGA Is Ascendant: The Election Integrity Public Forums; Surging Crime In Democratic Run Cities; We Are Seeing A Global Reordering Of Power

Episode 2144: MAGA Is Ascendant: The Election Integrity Public Forums; Surging Crime In Democratic Run Cities; We Are Seeing A Global Reordering Of Power

We can walk and chew gum at the same time. Americans have every right to be concerned about the integrity of their government *and* want to know that their government is focused on improving health care, public education, and other issues. https://t.co/mXyNDJPysL Source: https://twitter.com/KamalaHarris/status/1187084524401745920 Uploader: Kamala Harris

We can walk and chew gum at the same time. Americans have every right to be concerned about the integrity of their government *and* want to know that their government is focused on improving health care, public education, and other issues. https://t.co/mXyNDJPysL Source: https://twitter.com/KamalaHarris/status/1187084524401745920 Uploader: Kamala Harris

This item represents a case in PACER, the U.S. Government's website for federal case data. If you wish to see the entire case, please consult PACER directly.

A strategy to strengthen the effective implementation of the employment and integrity framework under the Public Service Act 1999 (Cth).

150 pages ; 21 cm

The development of an Integrity Zone towards a Corruption-Free Area (CFA) / a Clean and Serving Bureaucratic Area (CSBA) is a fast step towards achieving the bureaucratic reform goals expected by the government. This study aims to determine the Integrity Zone Development Policy Towards in terms of improving the quality of public service facilities at the Class IIB State Detention Center in Kotamobagu. This research was conducted using qualitative methods, with data collection through observation and interviews. The results showed that the development of integrity zones had not run optimally because apart from not yet available supporting public service facilities, there was still a shortage of staff and limited funding, but it was also very much determined by the commitment of the leadership and all levels of staff within it. Commitment is the main requirement for an agency with integrity.

The development of an Integrity Zone towards a Corruption-Free Area (CFA) / a Clean and Serving Bureaucratic Area (CSBA) is a fast step towards achieving the bureaucratic reform goals expected by the government. This study aims to determine the Integrity Zone Development Policy Towards in terms of improving the quality of public service facilities at the Class IIB State Detention Center in Kotamobagu. This research was conducted using qualitative methods, with data collection through observation and interviews. The results showed that the development of integrity zones had not run optimally because apart from not yet available supporting public service facilities, there was still a shortage of staff and limited funding, but it was also very much determined by the commitment of the leadership and all levels of staff within it. Commitment is the main requirement for an agency with integrity.

Democracy is for all intentional purposes based on mutual respect, which means free and fair elections, human rights, and ethical government. How well are we doing with current standards of ethics in politics and the public service, how successfully are they enforced, and how could they be improved? These standards involve conflicts of interest, lobbying, election financing, whistleblowing, expense claims, and public sector accountability. This presentation will contextualize some of the past and present scandals involving both Canadian public servants and elected politicians. Is there a trend towards less accountability and are ethics being compromised as part of a larger problem within society? The speaker will offer hope and suggestions for the future and argue that democracy is not a spectator sport...... Voter apathy makes it very fragile. Speaker: Ian Greene, PhDIan Greene has the title of University Professor at York University in Toronto and as of July, 2013, is semi-retired. He is a member of the School of Public Policy and Administration, and has taught at York University since 1985. Prior to this, he worked for the Government of Alberta for four years, and taught at the University of Lethbridge. He has published seven books, two of them with U of L professor Peter McCormick, and numerous articles. Dr. Greene has taught courses in Canadian public law, the Charter of Rights, judicial administration, program evaluation, political ethics, Canadian government, and public administration. He was the inaugural Director of York's Master's program Public Policy, Administration and Law. He was an associate dean in the Faculty of Arts from 1997 to 2000. He has been co-director of the professional development LLM programme in administrative law in Osgoode Hall Law School. He is a member of the Board of Directors of the York Collegium for Practical Ethics, and the Centre for Public Policy and Law. From 2003 to 2004, he was Chair of the York University Senate. He has been a frequent media commentator on ethics issues in politics.Date: Thursday, March 12, 2015 Time: Noon - 1:30 PM (30 minutes each for presentation, lunch and Q & A) Location: Country Kitchen Catering (Lower level of The Keg) 1715 Mayor Magrath Dr. S Cost: $11.00 (includes lunch) or $2.00 (includes coffee/tea at the presentation only)

An international multi-stakeholder consensus project will be held with the aim to create guidance on the utilization of public, carer and patient involvement (PCPI) throughout the research life-cycle of randomised clinical trials (RCTs), to better their integrity.