Quote:
Originally Posted by Admiral Nelson
I don't understand this either, could you elaborate? The only language in the excerpt you quoted that I could interpret the way you do (as in 'not wanting visitors') was its note of the convoy occupation as having been a problem for Parliament—a pretty uncontroversial statement of fact.
|
It was more... we want the public to visit parliament hill but the public are also the same 'risks' we are worried about. I didn't mean it so much as the convoy but i guess could go that way. I was thinking more about the one misbehaving person in every 10 000 that visit parliament hill (fake numbers ...just to give the idea).
The link I provided goes into more detail with their risk assessments. I get it - we saw an interaction with MP Singh just this past week. Does it make sense to make the entire area a walking parliament district based on their risk assessment? The world is changing so maybe?
Sorry for the rambly reply.
Threaded Mode