Diminished freedom of speech and action

[a_majoor]

This is very disturbing:

http://deborahgyapong.blogspot.com/2008/02/could-mps-be-afraid-to-speak-out-and.html

Deborah Gyapong: Could MPs be afraid to speak out? And not of Harper?
Could MPs be afraid to speak out? And not of Harper?

Last week when I was on the Hill mingling with some MPs from both the Liberal and the Tory parties, I asked an MP for an opinion on the freedom of speech/ Ezra Levant and Mark Steyn human rights complaints. This particular MP was appalled by it. I asked this individual for a public comment. After a few moments thought, the MP decided not to. Then this person mused--alas, I did not have a notebook or my recorder out so I can't recall the exact words--that some MPs might be afraid to speak out on this issue, afraid their families might be targeted.

This was said in a casual manner, as social chit chat, so it didn't register with me perhaps as much as it should have at the time. But the conversation keeps coming back to me. I haven't been able to get away from a gnawing sense of unease. Is this possibly the case? Are some MPs not speaking out on Parliament Hill out of a sense of intimidation when it comes to any form of criticism of radical Islam?

MPs are on break next week, but I will do some more probing on this possible fear angle when they return. It's one of those things though where it is easy to retreat behind talking points or refusals to comment on cases currently before a commission.

Surveys show something like 70 per cent of journalists believed the Danish cartoons should have been republished because of their news value, but Ezra Levant was just about the only publisher to do so. Looks like most publishers did a cost/benefit analysis and figured perhaps the danger to their property and their staff was not worth the risk. Remember how the Indigo-Chapters chain refused to even carry the Western Standard's cartoon issue?

Parliament Hill has changed a great deal since 9/11. You can't drive up on the Hill anymore. Those cars that do have to go through an RCMP checkpoint and get screened for possible bombs. There are airport security type devices for screening everyone who comes onto the Hill without a security pass. There are men and women with those little earpieces all over the place.

 

[gordjenkins]

If it is as you suggest -"fear" then this is disturbing!

There could be other reasons - MPs are very concerned about making public statements because
what they say might reflect on their Party

After all they are treading on egg shells being in the  minority government position.

New MPs in particular are aware of the minority government situation -the last thing an MP wants is to
be berated by PMO or brought up in front of Caucus.

Hence they guard their words. Discretion - probably the reason. Fear - -I certainly hope not.

 

[a_majoor]

The reporter did not specify which party the MP belonged to, it quite possibly was a Liberal member based on the opening line. As well, there are plenty of loose cannons in the house (people like Garth Turner come to mind) who will apparently say anything so long as it brings them press and notoriety, so I would lean towards fear being more likely than discretion as a motivation.

 

[Reccesoldier]

Self censorship is the most insidious attack on freedom.  I hope that it was just politically motivated silence, the alternative is truly scary.