Go to the Globe and Mail homepage

Jump to main navigationJump to main content

Entry archive:

An anti-G20 protester flashes a peace sign near the temporary detention centre in Toronto on June 27, 2010. (Kevin Van Paassen/The Globe and Mail)
An anti-G20 protester flashes a peace sign near the temporary detention centre in Toronto on June 27, 2010. (Kevin Van Paassen/The Globe and Mail)

Adam Radwanski

'Thugs and hooligans,' the sequel Add to ...

I won't belabour the point. But having lamented the juvenile way that Tim Hudak approached the concerns over security measures during the G20, I'd be remiss if I didn't note that his federal cousins aren't coming off a whole lot more sophisticated. (Dalton McGuinty's provincial Liberals, incidentally, aren't much better - though their lack of seriousness is reflected more in an unwillingness to engage on the issues, rather than a kneejerk attack on anyone who dares question the police.)

More Related to this Story

Admittedly, the federal Conservatives are responding to an opposition that's perfectly capable of oversimplifying matters itself, as opposed to taking unprompted swipes at any and all civil liberties advocates. But as Kady O'Malley noted in a committee live-blog that really is a must-read - that is, unless you want to avoid getting thoroughly depressed about the state of our democracy - Stephen Harper's MPs seemed to be reading from the same talking points as Hudak.

To review, Hudak is a provincial opposition leader, and even many supporters of his party will acknowledge that his Toronto Sun op-ed was beneath him. These are the people running the country. And they seem not the slightest bit more interested in taking seriously the fundamental questions that have been raised about the balance between liberties and security.

It would be nice to think that, once the theatre is over, some of these people are at least a little bit troubled by what their jobs involve.

 

In the know

Most popular videos »

Highlights

More from The Globe and Mail

Most popular