Your editorial of the June 7, 2016 issue (We need better scandals) and other subsequent media all used the same verbiage to describe the House of Commons fiasco of May 18, 2016.
The various articles treated it as no big deal, not an issue of great concern. Was there collusion within the media? It seems so, to downplay the real issue, that of the Prime Minister, with anger in his eyes, and a most arrogant stride across The People’s House of Commons when it was in session is an absolute no-no.
To cross the House, it shows no respect for Parliament and is against all protocol, tradition, regulations, and rules established by the British North America Act of 1867.
It is obvious he has no comprehension of Parliament and how it works, even though he is an educator. Possibly one or two of the retreads from the cabinet of Jean Chretien’s government could tutor the Prime Minister until he understands the proper conduct for Parliament.
He did assault two people, as well as offending every Canadian citizen with his action. The assaults should be dealt with as they would be with any CEO who assaulted personally, staff of his firm, unintentionally or otherwise. If that does not happen, then the next best thing is for the PM to enter a program of anger therapy and maybe he can absorb how to conduct himself properly.
The Prime Minister’s made an apology, made several more to try to convince Canadians he was sincere. What we don’t need is another arrogant Prime Minister using fuddle duddle in the House of Commons or giving the finger to people at the train station in Salmon Arm as the former Trudeau did. As I said, is there collusion between the media from coast to coast, trying to create another Teflon Jean?
David C. Heenan