Article content continued
David Lorge Parnas, Ottawa
Where are the adults on the PMO?
Re: Editorial, Trudeau’s worrisome bind spot, Aug. 1.
Congratulations for your editorial, which shows a very impressive ability to synthesize the situation concerning the “WE” affair.
Most of us think that the behaviour of our prime minister (and a few others) in this affair stinks. But that opinion is exactly that – an opinion. One fact, however, remains: Section 21 of the Conflict of Interest Act is easy to understand. The words “shall recuse” are used; not “should recuse.” Hence, our prime minister broke the law –again. This pattern of ethical breaches should raise a question is everyone’s mind: Where are the adults in the Prime Minister’s Office and the cabinet?
André Corriveau, Stittsville
Trudeau’s swagger meets Poilievre’s arrogance
Re: Column, Whether Trudeau’s testimony worked or not, the winds of change are blowing for Liberals, July 31.
Surely readers can expect balance from a journalist with John Ivison’s credentials. Yet, in his comment on Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s Commons committee appearance, it is lacking. Terms such as. “swagger … smug … hubris … conceit … audacity … rotten … muck …wily … dung,” leap off the page, all aimed at the prime minister. Arguably, they might fit this sad episode, but could you not have saved a few of your colourful zingers to describe the arrogant, puerile, leering performance put on my Conservative MP Pierre Poilievre? The man’s name is not mentioned once in your invective.
