I understand your comments about her. Here's my thinking - If the Reporter wasn't actively trying to bait her, there were far better ways she could have worded that question.

I was watching the video. It cuts in around the time the woman started speaking "Did I hear you correctly? How Can Justin Trudeau be held responsible for that?"

Whenever I hear media and people talking about this, they paint the reporters question as "How are things different under Justin Trudeau than they were under Stephen Harper?" Not "How can Justin Trudeau be held responsible for that?"

Both questions aren't that tactful. The "all I was asking is" version seems politically partisan. I'm not a native either, and I can see that this is clearly not a Government to Government issue.

It's not something that's going to get better over night like changing hats, because we voted out nasty old (unpopular politician). Sure, some politicians may be slight improvements over others, but there are still deep rooted issues and addressing them is going to be an arduous process. Dealing with the crimes of our ancestors is not a matter of merely voting for the right leader.

The reporter should have known better.

If the question was "How can Trudeau be held responsible?" That's pretty rude. For the same reason Trump can be held responsible for the ramifications of his policies. He's the damned President.

And I'm assuming the Reporter was naive, not actively malicious, because both questions smell kind of like bait. You can see the article they want to build around it. Talking about how much better things are now that we've voted for the Right PartyTM.

Maybe I'm being cynical. I don't know.