It takes great moral strength to be a public servant. As guardians of the public purse they must decide where to spend money and equally importantly where not to. It is thus inevitable that their decisions will cause some to suffer. Increased spending on health care may come at the expense of the education budget. Increased funding for the police may mean less for public transportation. And the list goes on and on.
Making such decisions is not for the faint hearted nor the morally weak. With so many competing interests and the impossibility of knowing the full impact of one’s decisions, mistakes are inevitable and fully excusable - provided one’s motivation is to act in the public interest.
However when decisions are motivated by personal career ambitions, or even by the desire to help a favorite charity then one must bear the moral brunt and responsibility ofall the harm one has caused. It is this exacting standard for public officials that serve as the basis for denying office to those who are not morally fit and for the weekly communal prayer for those “are involved faithfully in communal needs”.
Unfortunately such leaders, especially amongst our democratically elected political officials are few and far between. This moral failing of leadership which is a theme we have discussed on these pages in the past, is more evident during the challenging economic times that we are currently facing.
A small but instructive example of lack of moral integrity needed for our leaders is the short lived controversy surrounding the unfortunate but revealing comments of Lisa Raitt, the Minister of Natural Resources, regarding the sudden and life threatening shortage of medical isotopes used in the treatment of both cancer and heart patients.
The minister was caught on tape saying that the crisis represents a “sexy” career challenge with much benefit to accrue to the one (namely herself) who would solve the crisis. What is sexy about people dying is something that perhaps only a true politician could understand. Compounding the problem was her delay in apologizing leading one to suspect the apology may have been “politically motivated” and thus morally worthless if not repugnant.
Coming on the heels of her firing of her aide for leaving confidential papers in the CTV Ottawa offices one might have thought this would be grounds for a reprimand. One who thought such would be sorely disappointed. She received the full backing of the Prime mister and the “gaffe” quickly faded from memory.
Inexplicably the Prime Minister also announced that the nuclear plant that had been producing the nearly half the medical isotopes used world wide would not be reopened. What strikes me as disheartening is the seemingly lack of public outcry about actually solving the crisis and the seemingly acceptance of such insensitive comments as par for the course.
While such a display of crass political opportunism in the face of human suffering is unfortunate public figures need not and should not let the helping individuals be their primary focus. Rather they must take a more global approach balancing the many needs of public as a whole even at the expense of many an individual. A government is within its moral right to increase spending on education or even a cultural center despite the possible negative repercussions on health care. It is for this reason that Jewish law forbids paying exorbitant amounts to redeem hostages. While the family may suffer untold grief the needs of the nation take precedence.
Ultimately one’s motivation is something that is known only to oneself and our Creator. We can only hope and pray that our leaders are motivated to act in the best interests of those whom they must serve.
Comments to rabbijay@torahinmotion.org
