Ignatieff said the handling of Helena Guergis's dismissal from her cabinet post raises questions about the prime ministers' judgment and commitment to transparency.
Martha Hall Findlay intentionally telling QP, that any Committee investigation will focus on high signal questions:
"Our issue is -- did he actually exercise influence and has government money been misspent or planned to be spent improperly?"
With the Afghan file flaring again this week, the secretive, non-transparent narrative works well in tandem with keeping mum on Guergis. I note, rare acknowledgement- on this show and elsewhere- that the Liberals had a good tactical week. I was particularly impressed the other day, when the Liberals decided to lead with Afghanistan in QP, rather than the kneejerk Guergis matter. Clearly, there was an attempt to draw similar negative impressions, from different files.
Moving forward, the argument needs to expand further, because I note some hesitancy in examples once people move beyond these two recent examples. When I have the time, maybe I'll do a overview of all the matters and items at our disposal over the past few years, that highlight the idea this gov't is the most non-transparent, stifling, secretive, anti-democratic manifestation federal politics has seen. I'd love to hear Ignatieff rhyme off example after example, and just keep hammering home the point, that no matter where you look, the same unattractive traits are clearly visible.