Nigel Wright: Great Canadian or Greatest Canadian?

‘If he made a mistake, it was a gentleman’s mistake’

<p>Nigel Wright, chief of staff for Prime Minister Stephen Harper, appears as a witness at the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics on Parliament Hill in Ottawa, Tuesday, Nov.2, 2010. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Adrian Wyld</p>

Nigel Wright, chief of staff for Prime Minister Stephen Harper. (Adrian Wyld/CP)

Conservative MP Ted Opitz attempts to sum up Nigel Wright’s resignation.

Nigel Wright is a patriot. A man with honour. If he made a mistake, it was a gentleman’s mistake. One made with the truest of intentions.

NDP MP Craig Scott, meanwhile, doesn’t see any acknowledgement of wrongdoing.

Wright gone but still not wrong? See today’s resignation statements – no acceptance of wrongdoing … Harper’s statement does nothing to condemn the $90,000 secret payment – the spin is still Wright as gallant knight … The claim is Harper knew nothing abt the Wright-Duffy secret deal, yet #PMSH has so far retroactively endorsed it by not once condemning it.

Mr. Wright’s statement explains that he’s stepping down because of the “controversy.” He regrets the “impact.”  That sounds a lot like part of Mr. Duffy’s explanation for voluntarily—via Mr. Wright’s largesse—paying back his housing allowance. Mr. Duffy didn’t want to be a distraction. Mr. Duffy “filled out the forms in good faith,” but “rather than let this issue drag on” he and his wife had decided that the allowance would be repaid. Mr. Wright “intended solely to secure the repayment of funds,” which he “considered to be in the public interest,” but “in light of the controversy” he was resigning.

Mr. Duffy at least allowed that he “may have been mistaken.” And Mr. Opitz at least allows for the possibility that Mr. Wright also may have made a mistake, even if only of the gentlemanly variety.

So do Conservatives believe Mr. Wright did something wrong? Does the Prime Minister believe his chief of staff did anything wrong? And, if so, how do they think he erred? Merely in being too generous a man and too selfless a public servant?