In a scandal between the Canadian government and one of the world’s leading information technology corporation, Hewlett-Packard Company, once again, the conservative government maintains that it will not tolerate any form of corrupt practices, stating that HP could be removed as the government’s technology supplier

A cartoon depiction of corporate crime

if allegations prove to be true. This situation has put the Canadian government in a great position to display it’s firmness on unethical business practices. Though the government has often been criticized as being too strict in it’s policies, the government appeared to control over the situation, establishing a serious conduct expectation from companies throughout Canada and those affiliated with the country. It is important that these companies realize that even large corporations such as HP are bound by the same laws and are not entitled to more lenient consequences based on its global recognition and prior success. However, with that being said, I still question whether a 10-year ban is an appropriate punishment for such a case. We have to consider the implications of the restriction on such a large corporation. If implemented, which parties will the ban really be affecting? Who loses out? HP? Or the middlemen? Suppliers who work to provide different levels of the Canadian government with HP products and services. As HP cuts sales with a fairly large consumer group, there will no longer be a need for jobs in this department, and thus, it is the innocent in-between workers who suffer the consequences. In this scenario, a fine – though a weaker message to companies to conduct moral practices – may be the better option.

The Globe and Mail article: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/international-business/us-business/hp-faces-10-year-ban-as-canadian-governments-technology-supplier/article20774807/