This one's gonna hurt.
Jane Philpott wants to tell "her truth."
The former Treasury Board president has given an interview to Macleans's Paul Wells that can only fan the embers of the Jody Wilson-Raybould/SNC-Lavalin affair.
She believes, as she put it, that “there’s much more to the story that needs to be told” but that it can’t come out because “there’s been an attempt to shut down the story”—an attempt she attributed to the Prime Minister and his close advisors.
But she is also keenly aware, because she has been hearing from Liberal colleagues, that “there are people who are afraid that they’re not going to get elected because of what I did.” As she described that anger, the former minister said: “My only way of living with myself on that, is that this is not my fault. I did not start this.” Now she is trying to figure out how to see it through.
I believe the former attorney general has further points to make. I believe that I have further issues of concern that I’m not free to share. There was a reference by Gerry Butts in his testimony of the fact that I spoke to the Prime Minister on January the 6th about SNC-Lavalin’s desire to have a DPA [deferred prosecution agreement]. This was more than a month before the story became public. And I ordinarily would have not been allowed to share that information. But of course it’s already on the public record from the Justice Committee. I think Canadians might want to know why I would have raised that with the Prime Minister a month before the public knew about it. Why would I have felt that there was a reason why former Minister Wilson-Raybould should not be shuffled?
I did not start this. And a very wise person said two things to me that helped me over that. This is someone who has been around politics for a long time. They said that politicians in general, and perhaps Liberals in particular, make mistakes when they assume that the best interests of Canadians and their own future political success are synonymous.
Of course I want a Liberal government in federal politics. I do not want to see Prime Minister Andrew Scheer, for a whole bunch of really important reasons. But the Liberal Party needs to be the best version of the Liberal Party. And I had to do the right thing and trust that the details would work out for the best interests of Canadians. And I think that was the second thing that this person said to me: that you have to make the decision that you can live with, based on your own convictions and principles, and you are not responsible for the fallout from it.This will undoubtedly stir the prime minister's fan club into a fury. They haven't skipped an opportunity to slag Wilson-Raybould and her supposed motivations. Jane Philpott will probably be in for the full treatment.
.. amen ..
It's really so obvious now the Jane P is not "politically smart".
I suspect her confidential adviser is Kinsella and he continues to use her. "And I think that was the second thing that this person said to me: that you have to make the decision that you can live with, based on your own convictions and principles, and you are not responsible for the fallout from it." Of course it would be her fault if the Liberals fail because she's keeping the story alive.
When you're part of cabinet you need to follow cabinet solidarity and confidentiality. If you don't like what's going on, you step down - and, keep you mouth shut. Unless, you do not really care about the party.
She didn't come across as very convinced herself. Her reaction to the question about friendship and her actions was a bit over the top. She also said that while there was ' more to it' she admitted that she knew no more information than anyone else. A hit job with a hit but no job.
“Hell hath no fury like a Jody, a Jane or a Warren scorned”? Mac
"And a very wise person said two things to me that helped me over that. This is someone who has been around politics for a long time."
Would that person's initials be W.K.?
Post a Comment