Re: 鈥淧M facing backlash over minister鈥檚 exit,鈥� Feb. 14.
A debate that looms even larger than the legal and ethical conundrum the federal Liberal government finds itself in will never take place, unfortunately. It is the debate about why any subject with real or perceived negative impact on Quebec immediately becomes a No Trespassing zone.
For example, we cannot honestly and openly debate the supply-management system that allows the (Quebec) dairy cartel to ensure we pay a king鈥檚 ransom for dairy products, reap compensation from government every time a trade agreement is signed and even profit from the resulting allowed dairy imports.
Nor, it seems, can we debate the equalization formula that ensures Quebec reaps $11.4 billion this year from federal coffers, contributed to greatly by provinces such as Alberta and others where tens of thousands have lost jobs in the oil-and-gas and related industries.
And we won鈥檛 debate why SNC-Lavalin merits such favouritism from Liberals and the Prime Minister鈥檚 Office.
SNC-Lavalin managed to arrange dozens of meetings with government, lobbying for the very deferred prosecution agreements that shortly after passing (in an omnibus budget bill), it is seeking to benefit from.
And, as expected, Quebec media are all in knots supporting SNC-Lavalin (of which the Quebec Pension Fund is the major shareholder).
No. An election is nigh. Canada will again avoid such a debate for fear that Quebec favouritism and ugly national blemishes are nakedly exposed for all to see, a perilous outcome for certain political parties. Oh, Canada.
Gord Zawaski
Parksville
