I am pretty certain that I would have let the Speaker, and the Government members, play their partisan game to the finish rather than apologize to the House of Assembly for forcibly advocating on a behalf of a constituent.
Imagine, a Member of the House of Assembly not being able to get a reply from a minister, or her department for two weeks related to an urgent cancer care case. Leaving a couple of exasperated messages demanding a resolution to a problem - that needed to be decided before the close of business that day, appears to me to be an example of how strongly and passionately Jim Bennett feels about his constituents being ignored in their time of need.
What was the threat? To paraphrase, Bennett he said that after two weeks of stonewalling enough is enough, if this is not resolved this afternoon, than I am going to ensure the minister wears this next week. What is wrong with that?
Some politicians might have let the issue slide, to milk it for all it was worth on Monday. Bennett was more concerned about his constituents than headlines! He wanted to ensure they got the treatment they deserved.
This has got to be the most twisted political charade to ever play out on the floor of the House of Assembly. The public can see right through this crap.
Why weren't his constituents legitimate issues resolved or investigated prior to these calls? Would a government member have had to wait so long? Legitimate question.
Let's face it nothing Bennett could have done in the House today would have made a difference. The Progressive Conservatives have the majority, if they say he is in contempt - he is in contempt. If their speaker demands an apology without explanation, he has to apologize that way. They control the House. End of story.
Bennett's apology is much like the assumption that all of the members are honorable.
The Progressive Conservatives may have just ensured Bennett's re-election.
I'll let the public decide who was bullied and who was intimidated!