Lets make a clear distinction between: (i) "promises" made in an election campaign, and later wise (or even unwise) governance decisions, and (ii) gracefully acceptance of a governance decision that one does not agree with, and critiquing the governance process leading up to the decision. Mr. Broadbent's article fails on both of these points. It confuses "electioneering" with "good governance". It fails to make clear that Mr. Broadbent disagrees with the eventual governance decision, and then hides this disagreement in a critique of process.

I voted in the last election. I took Mr. Trudeau's comments about electoral reform as pointing a finger in a certain governance direction, as raising important questions, not as promising this or that action. My vote took into account many issues, including the competencies of the local candidates to serve well as parliamentarians.

I do NOT feel betrayed. The electoral reform issues remain, for further conversations among Canadians. So be it!