Sahil Gazetesi [ Manavgat 'ın Haber Merkezi ] 0242 746 55 35 Manavgat ANTALYA: TEMA’dan Ilıca’ya teÅekkür ziyareti
Array-ne It is perhaps inevitable, with the change of leadership at the United Nations, that we will now be bombarded by a series of explanations, justifications and excuses from the previous management.It may be up to academics and other researchers to completely analyze the full extent of UN dysfunction, lack of management accountability and corruption within this organization over the last decade and a half. In spite of many difficulties, its members largely seem to consider it a useful and relevant organization, as can be seen in the fact that no country has yet opted to relinquish its membership.But, far from being a well-run and efficient organization, it is beset with management problems, unaccountability on a fantastic scale and a total disregard for the member states, its staff and its beneficiaries, burdened with unprofessional, incompetent and self-serving officials on many levels, an arena for waste and fraud on an unbelievable scale.The starting point for UN reform is in fact a thorough housecleaning exercise to rid the organization of the charlatans, the crooks, the time servers and assorted hangers-on that dominate every aspect of the organization.Only then can some headway be made to tackle the far more complex and intractable challenges that face the United Nations on a political level.The name “United Nations” there are no political excuses for employing crooks and criminals, no political excuses for the lack of oversight, no political excuses for the organization not following its own internal rules and regulations, no political excuses why criminals pointed out and named remain within the organization, no political excuses for the self-serving barrage of lies, propaganda and spin that issues from the organization.Mark Malloch Brown’s speech do deserve some comment, the easiest way to do it is by copying it in its entirety, interjecting comments here and there as required.Here it is:UN Secretary-Generals are infamous for their reform initiatives. We were all at it.Probably, the UN is the rare organization where the internal talk seemed to be more about reform than sex. UN reform is about politics in the sense that it is a response to the frustration of governments and the UN’s other stakeholders and partners that our capacity to get results seemed so impaired. Almost nothing moved.The last Annan reforms at the UN came after the Oil-for-Food scandal. The top such as the Secretary General and the Heads of Agencies?)Where I was, at UNDP, as disappointing was the way the Oil-for-Food Program had become a major income source for cash-strapped parts of the UN system that had no business being in Iraq in the first place. (A form of corruption.) I found that, because of arcane administrative rules requiring us to find another UN entity actually to implement operationally our program in Iraq, UNDP were using a UN Secretariat department whose traditional work was drafting reports and servicing conferences to rehabilitate the electricity system in the Kurdish parts of northern Iraq. These were screened and debated by UN diplomats and made the basis of the draft Summit Declaration in the run-up to the Heads of Government meeting at the UN in September 2005.While a number of reforms covering peace-building, human rights, development, humanitarian relief, and management made it through the labored preparatory process of drafting committees by the eve of the Summit, the writing was on the wall. On management reform, even more damagingly, developing countries chose to view a strongerSecretary-General with greater authority but also greater accountability as a plot to increase American and Western control over the organization.The series of reforms to fix the basics that I, my predecessor Louise Frechette and a dedicated group of UN officials had carefully crafted, with the help of McKinsey’s senior partner Rajat Gupta and his team, proposed personnel reforms to allow mobility and better quality of staff; The Wall Street Journal, in trumpeting his credentials, several times in editorials referred to my imprudent partial endorsement.Seeking a silver lining, I had told them that if he became a champion of reforms at the UN, he would be better placed than anyone else to sell them to Washington. notice.Reflecting on our rocky path, I had concluded by the middle of 2006 that, while a Secretary-General could drive reform with smart proposals that countries could rally around in a way they never would if an individual country proposed them, there was no alternative to a real commitment by countries to a better UN. It seemed to me that the United States had to be the indispensable partner in UN reform. There was no recognition that, to make the UN function effectively, it was necessary to buy all the courses, we were a prix fix deal!By the early summer of 2006, with reform failing, it seemed the time had come to try to appeal directly to the American people. White House behavior that had allowed the attacks to proceed largely unchallenged, even as it turned to the UN for vital strategic assistance in Iraq and elsewhere in the Middle East, was too much for many fair-minded people to stomach.(Any and all countries, and their citizens, that are members of the UN, have the right to be critical of the UN, even if they are then accused of hectoring and bullying, AND the right to simultaneously turn to it for vital strategic assistance. For them, the incident was further evidence that Bolton must be doing terrible damage to so provoke a friend of America!The underlying point that my speech sought to confront, though, was that reform in the UN was impossible without the United States. In 1945, when the US led, the UN was established, an astonishing diplomatic achievement by any standard.The question for the future is, how reform will be again set up for real action? It is easy to imagine reform slumping into a long period of tinkering with the UN machinery in a way that allows the gap to increase between performance and growing need.Events are, however, likely to bring matters to a head. First, that growing gap between UN performance and the scale of global problems will prompt a renewal of calls to address UN weakness more systematically. And if the direction of global events leads, as it inevitably must, to more such demands on the UN, the call for reform is likely to grow steadily. One wishes for none of them, but it may be that we only see the necessary galvanization of reform when such a crisis is viewed as having been brought about in some major part by the absence of the international means to manage it.So reform is likely to move, from a UN management worthily trying to keep up with what it is asked to do, to a real restructuring. Scrapping in the committee rooms and not grasping the reform nettle can look like a good option for diplomats scared of being drawn into major concessions of rights and privileges that have been the bread and butter of member state representatives.The bar is so high for UN reform because the most powerful and the weakest member states both need to give ground in order to make additional space for the emerging new powers. The G-77 had become a club for hardliners like Cuba, Venezuela, and Syria until India, Brazil, South Africa, and others essentially revived it as a means of confronting the West on UN reform and thereby ultimately securing membership of the Security Council.Perhaps even more than adjusting vertebrae, such a change could draw the poison from discussion. Good can only flow from it, not least if empowered governments leads to empowered UN management.As I said at the start, taking a demotion to come over from running UNDP to be Kofi Annan’s chief of staff was a much bigger step down than I had anticipated. Rather than a man in charge of my own show I was to be chief of staff, but to the man who was nominally the most powerful person in the UN system, the Secretary-General himself. that the UN Security Council (55%), the UN General Assembly (42%), and the UN secretariat and its agencies (39%) are reformed to achieve their ideal vision of global governance. In all cases, Southern NGO leaders are more strongly in favour of UN reform than their Northern peers. The desire for UN reform is evident among Northern and Southern NGO leaders. This suggests that while leaders believe reforms are needed, the UN continues to have a relevant and necessary role in their ideal vision of global governance, more so than the general public.”And UNDP tries to tell us that they, amongst all of the UN agencies, have almost universal credibility and that people value them. is far too vague to have any statistical meaning.)Annual internal staff surveys showed it to be a highly motivated place with a staff who felt they were making a difference, enjoyed their work, and for the most part respected their managers.The personnel reforms that we made so little progress on at the UN because of continuous political interference had sailed through UNDP.(Staff Council Chairman, Dimitri Samaras, gives tough answers to a no-holds barred interview with UNDP NEWS Editor, Nosh Nalavala (May 2001)Unfortunately, despite the Resident Representative competency assessment, we still have Resident Representatives who are not familiar with human resources management and prefer to “govern by fear”. Unscrupulous managers with threats of non-renewal of contracts, etc., can easily intimidate staff in country offices.But the results of the Global Staff Survey taken last year indicate that staff has a much better relationship with management. Until the sense of crisis at the UN is strong enough to make governments let go of their own agendas, there cannot be the kind of cathartic recommitment and renewal of the UN proper that is required. A good Secretary-General, like Kofi Annan and a dedicated committed UN staff alone cannot overcome this. and rather be willing to allow an empowered accountable management to lead a modern UN under the strategic direction of governments, the UN will continue to disappoint.The world has never in human history been more integrated but less governed. Problems from terrorism to climate change, crime and poverty, migration or public health, security and trade, have escaped national control and the UN is in no state to catch them.(From personal experience, the UN, specifically UNDP, is in no state to catch the criminals in its own midst.
link
TEMA Manavgat Åubesi, baÅta BucakÅıhlar ve çevresindeki köylerde yanan 900 hektarlık alanın aÄaçlandırılması ve ilköÄretim okullarındaki öÄrencilerin çevre konusunda bilinçlendirilmesi için ataÄa geçtiÅenay Malbora BaÅkanlıÄında Manavgat Belediyesi Kültür Evinde ilk toplantısını yapan TEMA Vakfı Manavgat Åube yönetimi, acil eylem planını belirledi.
link
YiÄit, göreve ilk geldikleri günden buyana yönetim ve Baro Temsilcileri ile birlikte zamanın Adalet Bakanını ziyaret ederek Manavgat için bir zaruret olan AÄır Ceza Mahkemesinin kurulmasını istediklerini belirterek, ‘’Yönetime seçildiÄimiz ilk günlerimizde yeni yönetimimiz ve Baro temsilcileri ile birlikte o zaman ki Adalet Bakanımızı ziyaret etmiÅ ve ilçemiz için artık bir zaruret olan AÄır Ceza Mahkemesi’nin kurulmasını istemiÅtik.GeçtiÄimiz günlerde Manavgat AÄır ceza dosyasının komisyonun gündeminde olduÄunun haberini aldık yalnız kesinleÅmeden sizlerle paylaÅmak istemedik.
link
Seher Otel’de verilen iftar yemeÄine, Antalya Milletvekili Sadık Badak, Ak Parti Ä°lçe BaÅkanı Cemil YiÄit, Ãolaklı Belediye BaÅkanı ve MATAB BaÅkanı Hasan ÃoÅkun, Evrenseki Belediye BaÅkanı Recep Barut, Ilıca Belediye BaÅkanı Rafet Ãnal, Side Belediye BaÅkanı Osman Delikkulak, Kızılot Belediye BaÅkanı Mustafa Keçer, MATSO BaÅkanı Dr. Åükrü Vural, Side-Manavgat Turizm Ä°Åletmecileri DerneÄi (Side-TUDER) Cengiz Haydar Barut, Ä°l genel meclis üyeleri, resmi kurum ve kuruluÅların temsilciler katıldı.
link
-ne TEMA Vakfı Manavgat Åube yöneticileri ve Manavgat Orman Ä°Åletme Müdürü Mümin Ahmet Ãoban, Manavgat sınırları içerisinde yanan yaklaÅık 900 hektarlık ormanın yeniden kazanımı için açılan kampanyaya destek veren Ilıca Belediyesi’ne teÅekkür ziyaretinde bulundular.
link
Array-ne It is perhaps inevitable, with the change of leadership at the United Nations, that we will now be bombarded by a series of explanations, justifications and excuses from the previous management.It may be up to academics and other researchers to completely analyze the full extent of UN dysfunction, lack of management accountability and corruption within this organization over the last decade and a half. In spite of many difficulties, its members largely seem to consider it a useful and relevant organization, as can be seen in the fact that no country has yet opted to relinquish its membership.But, far from being a well-run and efficient organization, it is beset with management problems, unaccountability on a fantastic scale and a total disregard for the member states, its staff and its beneficiaries, burdened with unprofessional, incompetent and self-serving officials on many levels, an arena for waste and fraud on an unbelievable scale.The starting point for UN reform is in fact a thorough housecleaning exercise to rid the organization of the charlatans, the crooks, the time servers and assorted hangers-on that dominate every aspect of the organization.Only then can some headway be made to tackle the far more complex and intractable challenges that face the United Nations on a political level.The name “United Nations” there are no political excuses for employing crooks and criminals, no political excuses for the lack of oversight, no political excuses for the organization not following its own internal rules and regulations, no political excuses why criminals pointed out and named remain within the organization, no political excuses for the self-serving barrage of lies, propaganda and spin that issues from the organization.Mark Malloch Brown’s speech do deserve some comment, the easiest way to do it is by copying it in its entirety, interjecting comments here and there as required.Here it is:UN Secretary-Generals are infamous for their reform initiatives. We were all at it.Probably, the UN is the rare organization where the internal talk seemed to be more about reform than sex. UN reform is about politics in the sense that it is a response to the frustration of governments and the UN’s other stakeholders and partners that our capacity to get results seemed so impaired. Almost nothing moved.The last Annan reforms at the UN came after the Oil-for-Food scandal. The top such as the Secretary General and the Heads of Agencies?)Where I was, at UNDP, as disappointing was the way the Oil-for-Food Program had become a major income source for cash-strapped parts of the UN system that had no business being in Iraq in the first place. (A form of corruption.) I found that, because of arcane administrative rules requiring us to find another UN entity actually to implement operationally our program in Iraq, UNDP were using a UN Secretariat department whose traditional work was drafting reports and servicing conferences to rehabilitate the electricity system in the Kurdish parts of northern Iraq. These were screened and debated by UN diplomats and made the basis of the draft Summit Declaration in the run-up to the Heads of Government meeting at the UN in September 2005.While a number of reforms covering peace-building, human rights, development, humanitarian relief, and management made it through the labored preparatory process of drafting committees by the eve of the Summit, the writing was on the wall. On management reform, even more damagingly, developing countries chose to view a strongerSecretary-General with greater authority but also greater accountability as a plot to increase American and Western control over the organization.The series of reforms to fix the basics that I, my predecessor Louise Frechette and a dedicated group of UN officials had carefully crafted, with the help of McKinsey’s senior partner Rajat Gupta and his team, proposed personnel reforms to allow mobility and better quality of staff; The Wall Street Journal, in trumpeting his credentials, several times in editorials referred to my imprudent partial endorsement.Seeking a silver lining, I had told them that if he became a champion of reforms at the UN, he would be better placed than anyone else to sell them to Washington. notice.Reflecting on our rocky path, I had concluded by the middle of 2006 that, while a Secretary-General could drive reform with smart proposals that countries could rally around in a way they never would if an individual country proposed them, there was no alternative to a real commitment by countries to a better UN. It seemed to me that the United States had to be the indispensable partner in UN reform. There was no recognition that, to make the UN function effectively, it was necessary to buy all the courses, we were a prix fix deal!By the early summer of 2006, with reform failing, it seemed the time had come to try to appeal directly to the American people. White House behavior that had allowed the attacks to proceed largely unchallenged, even as it turned to the UN for vital strategic assistance in Iraq and elsewhere in the Middle East, was too much for many fair-minded people to stomach.(Any and all countries, and their citizens, that are members of the UN, have the right to be critical of the UN, even if they are then accused of hectoring and bullying, AND the right to simultaneously turn to it for vital strategic assistance. For them, the incident was further evidence that Bolton must be doing terrible damage to so provoke a friend of America!The underlying point that my speech sought to confront, though, was that reform in the UN was impossible without the United States. In 1945, when the US led, the UN was established, an astonishing diplomatic achievement by any standard.The question for the future is, how reform will be again set up for real action? It is easy to imagine reform slumping into a long period of tinkering with the UN machinery in a way that allows the gap to increase between performance and growing need.Events are, however, likely to bring matters to a head. First, that growing gap between UN performance and the scale of global problems will prompt a renewal of calls to address UN weakness more systematically. And if the direction of global events leads, as it inevitably must, to more such demands on the UN, the call for reform is likely to grow steadily. One wishes for none of them, but it may be that we only see the necessary galvanization of reform when such a crisis is viewed as having been brought about in some major part by the absence of the international means to manage it.So reform is likely to move, from a UN management worthily trying to keep up with what it is asked to do, to a real restructuring. Scrapping in the committee rooms and not grasping the reform nettle can look like a good option for diplomats scared of being drawn into major concessions of rights and privileges that have been the bread and butter of member state representatives.The bar is so high for UN reform because the most powerful and the weakest member states both need to give ground in order to make additional space for the emerging new powers. The G-77 had become a club for hardliners like Cuba, Venezuela, and Syria until India, Brazil, South Africa, and others essentially revived it as a means of confronting the West on UN reform and thereby ultimately securing membership of the Security Council.Perhaps even more than adjusting vertebrae, such a change could draw the poison from discussion. Good can only flow from it, not least if empowered governments leads to empowered UN management.As I said at the start, taking a demotion to come over from running UNDP to be Kofi Annan’s chief of staff was a much bigger step down than I had anticipated. Rather than a man in charge of my own show I was to be chief of staff, but to the man who was nominally the most powerful person in the UN system, the Secretary-General himself. that the UN Security Council (55%), the UN General Assembly (42%), and the UN secretariat and its agencies (39%) are reformed to achieve their ideal vision of global governance. In all cases, Southern NGO leaders are more strongly in favour of UN reform than their Northern peers. The desire for UN reform is evident among Northern and Southern NGO leaders. This suggests that while leaders believe reforms are needed, the UN continues to have a relevant and necessary role in their ideal vision of global governance, more so than the general public.”And UNDP tries to tell us that they, amongst all of the UN agencies, have almost universal credibility and that people value them. is far too vague to have any statistical meaning.)Annual internal staff surveys showed it to be a highly motivated place with a staff who felt they were making a difference, enjoyed their work, and for the most part respected their managers.The personnel reforms that we made so little progress on at the UN because of continuous political interference had sailed through UNDP.(Staff Council Chairman, Dimitri Samaras, gives tough answers to a no-holds barred interview with UNDP NEWS Editor, Nosh Nalavala (May 2001)Unfortunately, despite the Resident Representative competency assessment, we still have Resident Representatives who are not familiar with human resources management and prefer to “govern by fear”. Unscrupulous managers with threats of non-renewal of contracts, etc., can easily intimidate staff in country offices.But the results of the Global Staff Survey taken last year indicate that staff has a much better relationship with management. Until the sense of crisis at the UN is strong enough to make governments let go of their own agendas, there cannot be the kind of cathartic recommitment and renewal of the UN proper that is required. A good Secretary-General, like Kofi Annan and a dedicated committed UN staff alone cannot overcome this. and rather be willing to allow an empowered accountable management to lead a modern UN under the strategic direction of governments, the UN will continue to disappoint.The world has never in human history been more integrated but less governed. Problems from terrorism to climate change, crime and poverty, migration or public health, security and trade, have escaped national control and the UN is in no state to catch them.(From personal experience, the UN, specifically UNDP, is in no state to catch the criminals in its own midst.
link
TEMA Manavgat Åubesi, baÅta BucakÅıhlar ve çevresindeki köylerde yanan 900 hektarlık alanın aÄaçlandırılması ve ilköÄretim okullarındaki öÄrencilerin çevre konusunda bilinçlendirilmesi için ataÄa geçtiÅenay Malbora BaÅkanlıÄında Manavgat Belediyesi Kültür Evinde ilk toplantısını yapan TEMA Vakfı Manavgat Åube yönetimi, acil eylem planını belirledi.
link
YiÄit, göreve ilk geldikleri günden buyana yönetim ve Baro Temsilcileri ile birlikte zamanın Adalet Bakanını ziyaret ederek Manavgat için bir zaruret olan AÄır Ceza Mahkemesinin kurulmasını istediklerini belirterek, ‘’Yönetime seçildiÄimiz ilk günlerimizde yeni yönetimimiz ve Baro temsilcileri ile birlikte o zaman ki Adalet Bakanımızı ziyaret etmiÅ ve ilçemiz için artık bir zaruret olan AÄır Ceza Mahkemesi’nin kurulmasını istemiÅtik.GeçtiÄimiz günlerde Manavgat AÄır ceza dosyasının komisyonun gündeminde olduÄunun haberini aldık yalnız kesinleÅmeden sizlerle paylaÅmak istemedik.
link
Seher Otel’de verilen iftar yemeÄine, Antalya Milletvekili Sadık Badak, Ak Parti Ä°lçe BaÅkanı Cemil YiÄit, Ãolaklı Belediye BaÅkanı ve MATAB BaÅkanı Hasan ÃoÅkun, Evrenseki Belediye BaÅkanı Recep Barut, Ilıca Belediye BaÅkanı Rafet Ãnal, Side Belediye BaÅkanı Osman Delikkulak, Kızılot Belediye BaÅkanı Mustafa Keçer, MATSO BaÅkanı Dr. Åükrü Vural, Side-Manavgat Turizm Ä°Åletmecileri DerneÄi (Side-TUDER) Cengiz Haydar Barut, Ä°l genel meclis üyeleri, resmi kurum ve kuruluÅların temsilciler katıldı.
link
-ne TEMA Vakfı Manavgat Åube yöneticileri ve Manavgat Orman Ä°Åletme Müdürü Mümin Ahmet Ãoban, Manavgat sınırları içerisinde yanan yaklaÅık 900 hektarlık ormanın yeniden kazanımı için açılan kampanyaya destek veren Ilıca Belediyesi’ne teÅekkür ziyaretinde bulundular.
link