On Wednesday, Jody Wilson-Raybould and Jane Philpott sat down with The Globe’s Robert Fife and Laura Stone, respectively, to share their thoughts on the Prime Minister’s handling of the SNC-Lavalin affair. Today, readers are responding to those interviews.
These two women continue to act with integrity, a rare commodity in Ottawa. I do hope they stand for re-election because Canadians need politicians who seek truth and to protect our judicial system!
What I regret is that Jody Wilson-Raybould did not assume any responsibility for anything. Rather she refused to consider alternative, diverse view to a position she took on Sept 12th. This is entirety inconsistent with her declaration that listening to diverse views is a virtue in her letter to the caucus.
Res ipsa loquitor in response:
I agree, davidb. She should take responsibility for failing to do her job as a lawyer. It was her job to give legal advice to the government. If she felt she was unduly pressured, her responsibility was to go and see him or write to him and provide him with her legal advice as to why it was wrong. Any good lawyer would have done so.
Trudeau spoke today about the need for trust within a caucus and a government. Trust needs to flow both ways. In this case, he did not trust Jody Wilson-Raybould’s legal opinion, her reading of the severity of the situation and the possible political consequences, and possibly her motivation. The responsibility for the breakdown in trust falls mainly on him. The ironic thing is that if he had let her do her job, he and the Liberal party would be in a much better place.
What is astonishing is that even at this late hour in the SNC-Lavalin scandal, the Liberals continue to double down on suicidally attempting to destroy the reputations of their former colleagues. This despite numerous polls indicating that a very high percentage of Canadians believe Jody Wilson-Raybould's and Philpott's descriptions of events. Ethical concerns aside, they convey the complete opposite of a confident, capable competent organization. Instead they come across as an immature quarreling high school student council, who nonetheless have the impression that they are the "cool kids," and thus automatically worthy of admiration and veneration.
Jane Philpott made a mistake. I don't think she saw the big picture and now sounds regretful. She may not want Scheer to be PM but she sure has helped him along in the past couple of months. I'm not sure what ending she had envisioned. Maybe there's a naiveté there from inexperience.
Richard Roskell in response:
Cast aspersions on these two women if you like. No doubt they're not perfect, just like all the rest of us. Nevertheless, naivety is not one of their faults.
Jane Philpott is wrong. It is not that this “could: backfire, it already has. Philpott and Jody Wilson-Raybould have tremendous support over this issue from the Canadian people, and not just females!
Keep your Opinions sharp and informed. Get the Opinion newsletter.
From the Comments is designed to highlight interesting and thoughtful contributions from our readers. Some comments have been edited for clarity. Everyone can read the comments but only subscribers will be able to contribute. Thank you to everyone furthering debate across our site.