Quote:
Originally Posted by Thunderball
You're absolutely right... its very hypocritical, and that's what I'm getting at. We're sorry when we're caught and pressed hard enough, but if no one brings it up,or brings it up with enough intensity, we didn't do anything wrong and we're happy to look the other way.
|
I suppose at the same time, if the affected people aren't mad enough about it to press for an apology, is an apology necessary in the first place? Or, do we risk re-opening old wounds unnecessarily?
There is also a bit of pragmatism involved as well. As the financial settlements in cases like this show, if the government freely apologizes to any group that might have been wronged in the past, said group might begin to press for a financial package of their own.
Also on the pragmatic side, is the simple fact that government is accountable only to what will earn the most votes. Harper isn't apologizing because he's personally sorry for what happened, or because he feels it important to write a wrong. He's apologizing because it makes him and his party appear more sympathetic to the people. Just as Liberal volleys attempt to portray the opposite view of him/them.
TBQH, I find apologies such as these remarkably hollow for this very reason. I suggested above that all parties should have been apologizing, not just the party in power. The reason why this did not happen, and likely will never happen, is that there are no votes to gain if the opposition doesn't disassociate itself from the governing party.