Scott
Andrews (IND - Avalon, NL) has announced that he has abandoned his hopes to
rejoin the Liberal Party and will continue to sit as an independent. He said as
much in a statement he gave to the press, but the statement itself is quite
troubling. In it he claimed that he accepted the findings of Cynthia Peterson,
who was appointed by Justin Trudeau (LPC - Papineau, QC) to lead the
investigation, but would not air his objections to appear "mean-spirited".
It's
an interesting tactic. The findings by Peterson are confidential to protect the
victims, yet Andrews' final remarks that the findings are frustrating, and
assumed by him to be inaccurate, clouds the authenticity of the claims. This is
nothing new and nothing surprising. Victims of abuse are subjected to rigorous
and thorough character examinations (or assassinations) while their attackers
are carefully considered to prevent ruinous effects to their careers and public
images. No, this process is not exclusive to politics.
Source: The Canadian Press. |
The
Liberals will exclude Mr. Andrews and Mr. Massimo Pacetti from their caucus and
this is likely the end of their political careers. Though Mr. Andrews suggested
that he might consider a run as an independent.
Andrews
said something during a statement to the media that particularly irked me. He
said, "I have learned a lot about myself through the past few months, and particularly how my jovial Newfoundland friendliness can be received." The culture and character of Newfoundlanders is somewhat legendary in this
country. The allegations against Mr. Andrews and Mr. Pacetti have never been
made clear, but I have to assume that they were more than ribald wit to cause
MPs from another party to come forward to ask for action.
By
blaming the 'friendly' Newfoundland culture Mr. Andrews besmirches the
character of Newfoundlanders and minimizes what he may have done. I suppose
it's possible that Mr. Andrews does not recall whatever it is he did and that
it why he is mischaracterizing it, but it seems an obvious attempt to turn
harassment into 'harmless fun'. The implication is that if his accusers
loosened up, or took the joke the way it was intended all would be well.
The
troubling aspect of this case, primarily, is that it occurred at the central
institution of Canadian politics. The other is the partisan nature of the
discussion and the fog surrounding it. I am not asking the victims to reveal
themselves and all the details be made clear, but this public ignorance allows
Andrews to minimalize his actions.
In
closing I would like to remind my readers of this piece by Laura Payton about
sexual harassment in the halls of power in this country. We should not and must not view this as an isolated incident, but a rare public
airing of some very disturbing laundry. I think we often forget politicians are
human beings, and when we do remember it's to cast them as Shakespearean or
House of Cards-style villains. They are people. The capital is a workplace and
harassment can only be stamped out through a change in the culture and work
practices.
No comments:
Post a Comment