The Aftermath of the RCMP

It is an Interesting question, isn't it?

As a Boy Scout when I was young, we were always told to leave things better than we found them.

I have certainly failed at that often and do not expect perfection, but should that not be the direction aimed for?

I know the word "aftermath" carries a negative connotation, unlike "legacy."

I guess that gives away my pessimism on this one. We all have biases, no?

Do you think they aim for public trust and a good reputation?

I think they will leave behind an eroded public trust and a horrible institutional reputation.

What will be left when the current administration is gone: a stronger foundation for justice, or the status quo?

What about the human casualties?

When the smiles of high-ranking officials fade, and they move toward comfortable retirements, what is left for those they left behind?

What remains for the Janet Merlo's and Catherine Galliford's, who broke their silence only to be broken by the system?

What remains for leaders like Rhonda Blackmore, removed under a cloud of anonymity and suspicion rather than rewarded for taking care of her members' best interests?

What remains for the public, who are left to sift through the remains of the broken trust?

A partnership between political power, the Justice system and the police authority should serve the public.

If it only protects the powerful, it isn’t a partnership - it’s a shield.

What do you think? Are they building accountability, or just biding time and managing the eventual fallout?

The public doesn't expect infallible leaders; they expect leaders who have the courage to admit when they cannot do something, when they have fallen short, or when the system has become the problem.

I’m curious to hear from those who follow me: Is there courageous leadership in these institutions, or has managing the fallout become the only skill set allowed?