Tuning into political news in Canada often means watching, listening to, or reading about Question Period. Question Period is intended as a forum for the opposition to hold the government to account by asking questions of its representatives. It is the most publicized aspect of Parliament. And why not? With all the heckling and carrying on, Question Period makes for great TV.
But according to our MPs, what we see on TV bears little relationship to the actual work underway on Parliament Hill.
Even as they acknowledged Question Period’s shortcomings, many MPs also recognized its role in holding the government to account. “Of course it produces acting and grandstanding, but it also produces accountability. It’s important to democracy,” said one MP.
Despite this important function, however, most MPs claimed to be embarrassed by their colleagues’ behaviour during Question Period. They insisted repeatedly that it misrepresented the daily work of a Parliamentarian, and recognized that, as the primary window into Parliament for most Canadians, Question Period stained the public’s perception of politics and those who practice it.
“The unfortunate thing is that Question Period is used as the barometer of what goes on in Ottawa. And unfortunately it is really a zoo. It’s theatre,” said one MP. “I think that Question Period has become the greatest embarrassment and one of the reasons politicians are frowned upon,” admitted another.
One MP recalled giving a disclaimer to tour groups, especially children, visiting from his
constituency in British Columbia. “They come to Question Period and I would say the same speech every time. ‘What you are about to see is not what I do on a daily basis. This is not what goes on. These are kids in a sandbox. I am embarrassed by it,’” he said.
Most stressed that partisanship was overplayed, and several attributed it to an exaggeration of small differences. “The debate between Liberals and Conservatives on income tax is not whether there should be no income taxes or 100 percent income taxes, it’s whether the rate should be 29 percent versus 25. The debate is not very big, so it’s disingenuous to characterize the other side as being evil,” said one MP.
How party leadership “staged” Question Period also rubbed many MPs the wrong way. Some MPs expressed chagrin at how MPs were required to fill empty seats around the televised speakers. One MP recalled a conversation with a constituent who had been watching him on TV and was confused as to where the MP sat. “I felt like a total idiot in telling him ‘That’s required by the party’,” the MP said. He later characterized MPs in Question Period as “potted plants,” moved around for decoration.
Others characterized the role as akin to a “trained seal.” “If all you do is show up at Question Period and clap when it’s necessary, you can get pretty frustrated,” one MP said. Another echoed the same complaint: “How much time did I need to stand there and clap like a trained seal?”