OTTAWA—The jeers, insults, shouting, and vague, evasive answers that take place daily during Canada’s parliamentary question period will soon be a thing of the past if Michael Chong has anything to do with it.
The backbench Conservative MP is optimistic that his motion to fix question period, which comes up for debate next Thursday, “can reform Parliament and make it relevant again.”
“I think behavior in question period currently is abhorrent. I think that the level of decorum and behavior needs to be elevated, and that’s what my motion is all about,” Chong said.
“The behavior is terrible, and as a result, the level of debate is extremely low, and the issues that matter to Canadians are not being debated,” he said of the 45-minute parliamentary session when MPs have a chance to hold the government accountable.
“So instead of talking about the economy, environmental issues, the concerns Canadians have about their jobs, question period’s turned into a place where people try to score cheap political points,” he said.
“Elevating decorum and fortifying the use of discipline by the speaker to strengthen the dignity and authority of the House” is one of six changes Mr. Chong’s private member’s motion, M-517, proposes.
M-517 also suggests lengthening the amount of time for each question and each answer. The current 35-second limit is too short for meaningful discussion, and people ask rhetorical questions and give rhetorical answers as a result, the motion states.
Ministers can refuse to answer a question or simply give the question to another minister—another problem the motion identified. M-517 seeks to revisit this convention.
In addition, currently the speaker can only allow MPs to ask a question who are on a list submitted by their party in advance. MPs can’t ask a question they think of during the discussion, and can’t ask any question unless they have approval from their party’s House leader and whip and have their name put on the list.
Chong suggests allocating half the questions each day for members whose names and order of recognition are randomly selected.
He also proposes allocating Wednesdays exclusively for the prime minister to answer questions, following a similar model in place in the U.K. and other parliamentary governments.
Currently, the prime minister attends question period from Monday to Thursday and answers questions for about 10 minutes each day. Compressing it into one day would give him more time to attend to executive functions the other days.
Chong suggests using the rest of the week for other ministers to answer questions—based on a rotational schedule that is published and that requires ministers to be present two of the four days.
M-517 is asking the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs to study these six areas and recommend changes in six months’ time.
“I think Canadians are hungry for change and I think a lot of members of Parliament are hearing that from Canadians,” Chong said, noting that his motion was seconded by 20 MPs from three political parties. He thinks more would have joined if they were allowed to, but 20 is the limit.
Among them is Denise Savoie, NDP MP for Victoria, B.C. “[Question period] isn’t always pretty, and what I see is a rehearsed disrespect, and what I’ve called ‘manufactured outrage,’” she says.
As assistant deputy speaker, Ms. Savoie said she herself has been taking initiatives to help the speaker and work with MPs to achieve a more respectful atmosphere during question period, “because that’s the condition for a democracy to thrive—the ability to have that debate pro and con in a respectful way, without bullying, without mudslinging.”
The democratic process allows motions to be scrutinized, debated, and improved upon if need be, but she says there is bound to be support for Chong’s motion to be adopted.
Liberal MP Siobhan Coady agrees. The Newfoundland MP is among the 20 who seconded M-517. “I really appreciate the spirit of Mr. Chong’s motion,” she said.
“I think that most people would consider it important to always review processes within Parliament to ensure that it’s effective and responsive to Canadians’ needs. … That’s part of what I call good governance.”
She noted, for example, the need for ministers to have more accountability so that they actually answer questions that they’re asked. “I think everyone is looking forward to having Procedure and House Affairs look at Mr. Chong’s proposal.”
An estimated 59.1 percent of Canadians voted in the last election in October 2008, a record low in Canada’s electoral history. Canadians are refusing to vote and are “overwhelmingly turned off by the behavior they see in question period,” Chong said.
“My motion is an attempt not only to fix the behavior in the House, but also to make the discussion more relevant to day-to-day issues of concerns of Canadians. … I’m optimistic that we can reform Parliament and make it relevant again.”
The backbench Conservative MP is optimistic that his motion to fix question period, which comes up for debate next Thursday, “can reform Parliament and make it relevant again.”
“I think behavior in question period currently is abhorrent. I think that the level of decorum and behavior needs to be elevated, and that’s what my motion is all about,” Chong said.
“The behavior is terrible, and as a result, the level of debate is extremely low, and the issues that matter to Canadians are not being debated,” he said of the 45-minute parliamentary session when MPs have a chance to hold the government accountable.
“So instead of talking about the economy, environmental issues, the concerns Canadians have about their jobs, question period’s turned into a place where people try to score cheap political points,” he said.
“Elevating decorum and fortifying the use of discipline by the speaker to strengthen the dignity and authority of the House” is one of six changes Mr. Chong’s private member’s motion, M-517, proposes.
M-517 also suggests lengthening the amount of time for each question and each answer. The current 35-second limit is too short for meaningful discussion, and people ask rhetorical questions and give rhetorical answers as a result, the motion states.
Ministers can refuse to answer a question or simply give the question to another minister—another problem the motion identified. M-517 seeks to revisit this convention.
In addition, currently the speaker can only allow MPs to ask a question who are on a list submitted by their party in advance. MPs can’t ask a question they think of during the discussion, and can’t ask any question unless they have approval from their party’s House leader and whip and have their name put on the list.
Chong suggests allocating half the questions each day for members whose names and order of recognition are randomly selected.
He also proposes allocating Wednesdays exclusively for the prime minister to answer questions, following a similar model in place in the U.K. and other parliamentary governments.
Currently, the prime minister attends question period from Monday to Thursday and answers questions for about 10 minutes each day. Compressing it into one day would give him more time to attend to executive functions the other days.
Chong suggests using the rest of the week for other ministers to answer questions—based on a rotational schedule that is published and that requires ministers to be present two of the four days.
M-517 is asking the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs to study these six areas and recommend changes in six months’ time.
“I think Canadians are hungry for change and I think a lot of members of Parliament are hearing that from Canadians,” Chong said, noting that his motion was seconded by 20 MPs from three political parties. He thinks more would have joined if they were allowed to, but 20 is the limit.
Among them is Denise Savoie, NDP MP for Victoria, B.C. “[Question period] isn’t always pretty, and what I see is a rehearsed disrespect, and what I’ve called ‘manufactured outrage,’” she says.
As assistant deputy speaker, Ms. Savoie said she herself has been taking initiatives to help the speaker and work with MPs to achieve a more respectful atmosphere during question period, “because that’s the condition for a democracy to thrive—the ability to have that debate pro and con in a respectful way, without bullying, without mudslinging.”
The democratic process allows motions to be scrutinized, debated, and improved upon if need be, but she says there is bound to be support for Chong’s motion to be adopted.
Liberal MP Siobhan Coady agrees. The Newfoundland MP is among the 20 who seconded M-517. “I really appreciate the spirit of Mr. Chong’s motion,” she said.
“I think that most people would consider it important to always review processes within Parliament to ensure that it’s effective and responsive to Canadians’ needs. … That’s part of what I call good governance.”
She noted, for example, the need for ministers to have more accountability so that they actually answer questions that they’re asked. “I think everyone is looking forward to having Procedure and House Affairs look at Mr. Chong’s proposal.”
An estimated 59.1 percent of Canadians voted in the last election in October 2008, a record low in Canada’s electoral history. Canadians are refusing to vote and are “overwhelmingly turned off by the behavior they see in question period,” Chong said.
“My motion is an attempt not only to fix the behavior in the House, but also to make the discussion more relevant to day-to-day issues of concerns of Canadians. … I’m optimistic that we can reform Parliament and make it relevant again.”
Friends Read Free