Hide these selected quizzes | Quebec Journal

It is easy for the Legal government to use the pandemic excuse to ban its aides and ministers from answering questions from journalists in the corridors of parliament.

Opposition parties have stated they will not run in the by-elections, but have criticized Stephen Harper.

However, the ban on CAQ aides emanating from the Prime Minister’s Office is another fine example of this unpredictable similarity.

In the days of Harper, the Prime Minister’s Office controlled questions at press conferences. Access to elected officials is greatly tightened in the House of Commons.

Security question

To illustrate Coquist’s instructions, Mr. Legalt’s press attachment, Ivan Sawes, provokes the question of security and example.

However, if journalists respect the rules of distance and the wearing of masks – and a similar situation – nothing would justify such a ban. Elected representatives of the opposition parties are also always available.

Government strategies are more like controlling the message. When questioned in the corridors, elected officials were not allowed to unpack the tape, during an organized press briefing.

Distance de Postillon

Shortly after her election, MP Catherine Dorian criticized the way media scrum was conducted. If the comparison with the interrogation technique in the former USSR is exaggerated, it achieves one point.

Is it necessary to stand at a postillion distance, use the expression of Antoine Rabbitail, to question politicians? There will be a way to maintain a respectable distance and ask all the necessary questions.

However, there is a big difference between refraining from press scams and banning the entry of elected officials to journalists in corridors. In doing so, the Legalt government is failing in its duty of transparency.