To quote Mark Strahl's Nov. 15 letter to the Times:
"Meeting with constituents and hearing their concerns is extremely important to me."
Really? Wouldn't this be an important reason to be at home to attempt to address these concerns?
Avoidance seems to be a tactic that MP Mark Strahl embraces-at least, so far in his political career.
For example, he avoided a number of debates when first appointed a Conservative candidate with the assurance that polls were indicating any Conservative choice would be a landslide in this area. And, it must be admitted that his choice as a Strahl family member, together with the stigma of his appointment may have been the result of the unusually low voter turnout.
However, I would think his first priority is to address the concerns of his constituency here in Chilliwack?
Rather, Mr. Strahl's letter stated his obligation was to be in Parliament on the date on which the demonstration was being held.
And why would that be, Mr. Strahl? Is there an important House vote that requires the full majority of Conservative members -or is it basically listening to a question-and-answer period and applauding where necessary?
I repeat what I wrote above, isn't your first priority to the constituents of your riding, and wouldn't it be a little more courageous and indeed part of your job to confront problems and try to offer reasonable interacting discussion even in the midst of, and especially during, a demonstration?
However, from the day of his appointment, it appears Mr. Strahl found that avoidance seemed to be the best policy and one that works for him.
Jack Stewart Chilliwack