Even more surprising and notable than the MPs’ lack of training and preparation was how little consistency existed in the way they reflected on the essential purpose of a Member of Parliament. When we asked participants to describe the role of an MP and how they thought about the job, there were nearly as many responses as there were MPs.
Stated most simply, there was little agreement among MPs about what they were in Ottawa to do in the first place.
Ultimately, our 308 Members of Parliament all hold the same essential position. Given this fact, we were surprised that the MPs lacked a shared understanding of the job’s key components, responsibilities and expectations. For example, two-thirds of MPs we interviewed spent at least a portion of their time in Ottawa on the opposition benches, so it came as a surprise that only a few mentioned holding a government accountable as part of their job.
A similarly small number mentioned engaging the public in determining the policies that shape our country and communities. Even those MPs who defined their role as representing constituents were unlikely to talk of such engagement. This raises important questions about the relationship between Parliament and the citizenry, themes we will address in future reports.
It is important to look at this in context. Unlike traditional professions—and indeed unlike the vast majority of jobs across the country—which come with generally accepted and agreed upon responsibilities and codes of conduct, there is no job description for a Member of Parliament.
But even if we were to draft this job description, it would be difficult. Among the 65 MPs to whom we spoke, there is little consensus on the central elements of the job itself. This was not expected, coming from a group who had served in the job for, on average, over ten years.