From the comments: Is Trudeau’s management style the problem in the SNC-Lavalin case, or is the nature of modern politics to blame? Readers discuss

This is actually the scariest piece I have read about Trudeau since he took office. I had no idea he was unwilling to meet with his own ministers on matters of substance. What kind of boss does not interact directly with his subordinates? If this account is accurate, he has no business being the leader.

Trudeau seems to see his role in government to be more of a figurehead than a hands on manager. Our system of government already has that role covered off with the monarchy and Governor-General. It will be interesting to see in the election if he is called to account for the way he has managed the country and how credible he will be received.

People are piling on Trudeau, but what about the shallow nature of contemporary politics that favours sensation and flair over technical experience and leadership wisdom in the selection of political candidates? Politics these days is a popularity contest and the results speak for themselves.

What Konrad Yakabuski has suggested on the management style is common for most Prime Ministers and Premiers. It is often the Chief of Staff who delivers the difficult news to cabinet ministers about policies and directions. It is always understood that the Chief of Staff speaks for the Prime Minister or Premier. Go ask Guy Giorno, Ian Brodie, Dean French or who ever has held similar position for leaders of all parties. It is generally why those people only last a few years in that position are not usually the most beloved people by their own party members when they are done. Yakabuski does get at the heart of the situation when he discusses the difference between pressure and having her consider options.

I am very disappointed in the Liberal Government, particularly Justin Trudeau. Canada is a democratic country and our government should not be allowed to use their power to cover up wrongdoing. Shame on him. He will not get my vote.

This brings to mind those commercials from the election "He's just not ready." Man, they had him pegged. If what the article says is true, he is way over his head. He is there because he looks good and has the Trudeau name. His previous career says "shallow."

Can we stop this silliness about not ready or no experience? He had just as much experience as Stephen Harper had when he became Prime Minister. Given Justin Trudeau's background and experiences with his father, I would suggest he would have far more experience than Harper ever did on how government works or should work. Criticize him for making mistakes as he has made several but stop the nonsense about him not being ready or qualified.

At the first Liberal caucus meeting, Trudeau said that if Butts said something it was the same as if it came from Trudeau himself. Trudeau's substantial delegation of the duties of the PM has been obvious from the start.

I’ve said elsewhere that - after a decade of Harper competence - Canadians took for granted that the country could run itself, and longed for a different “Management style” such as it is. They’re finding out that running anything - let alone something as complex as Canada - is hard work, and not just anyone can do it.

There is a much simpler explanation of why Wilson-Raybould might not have gone directly to Trudeau to report being pressured in the SNC-Lavalin case. Clearly she believed that Butts was already speaking for Trudeau at the Chateau Laurier meeting. Why would she then go to Trudeau to report something that he'd sent Butts to do?

Did he really display qualities of a bright well read leader before we elected him? Absolutely not he just demonized Harper, got poetic about Canada, admitted his admiration of China. He also mentioned the budget balancing itself. That is basically what we went on, any surprises we are here today?