CAN WE REMAKE PARLIAMENT… AND SHOULD WE? Geoff Norquay At times in this fractious minority House, Ottawa seems “lost in its petty games of incessant and gratuitous insults, personal attacks and putdowns,” writes Geoff Norquay. However, this is to be expected, particularly in a minority Parliament. “It comes with the territory,” he adds. “Partisanship is probably the most obvious manifestation of the adversarial nature of politics, and this relationship is not accidental.” In our Westminster system, the government proposes and the opposition opposes, with the caveat that in a minority House, a united opposition can bring down the government. Dans ce Parlement minoritaire et belliqueux, Ottawa semble parfois « empêtré dans le jeu mesquin et incessant des attaques personnelles, du dénigrement et des insultes gratuites », écrit Geoff Norquay, qui ne s’en étonne pas outre mesure. C’est en effet « la loi du genre », rappelle-t-il. « La partisannerie est sans doute la plus franche manifestation du caractère antagoniste de la vie politique, précise-t-il, et cette acrimonie n’a rien d’exceptionnel. » Dans notre système de gouvernement britannique, le gouvernement propose et l’opposition s’oppose, avec cet inconvénient que les partis d’opposition peuvent s’unir pour renverser le gouvernement lorsque celui-ci est minoritaire. he winter-spring parliamentary session that paused extensive public information blitz, the two sides ulti- in mid-June for the summer break was remarkable mately played to a draw. T for its intense partisanship, minimal progress on the G The next big issue was the implementation of the H1N1 government’s legislative agenda and loud controversies over immunization program. Because delivery of the pro- relatively minor issues that ultimately went nowhere. While gram was shared among all three levels of government, some important bills were passed in the dying hours of the there was enough blame to go around for the haphaz- session, the media was united in condemning the down- ard rollout, but just when the issue was beginning to right personal nastiness and disharmony of the Commons. bite, it became obvious that there never really was a The session never really escaped its controversial pandemic, so the controversy died. beginning: the unfortunate decision by the government G The government then stumbled into the G8 maternal to prorogue Parliament until after the Winter Olympics. and child health initiative by not anticipating the abor- The move caught fire unexpectedly in the public mind tion issue. Fortunately for the Conservatives, Michael and hurt the government’s reputation unnecessarily. Ignatieff forgot that he also had an anti-abortion group While the government obviously suffered all of the dam- in his caucus and in his attempt to embarrass the Con- age resulting from prorogation, the opposition parties servatives with a vote in the Commons, he managed to did little better in attempting to capitalize on a number blow himself up instead. of high-profile government “scandals” that received G Next came the Jaffer-Guergis fiasco, which generated far much more coverage than any legislative proposal or pol- more heat than light. In the end, both players in the icy initiative: melodrama hurt themselves more than they damaged G First up were the opposition attacks on the “delays” in the government, but yet again, parliamentarians both getting the stimulus spending out the door, followed past and present were cast in a less than favourable closely by complaints over Conservative “overspend- light. One moment opposition members were demand- ing” on advertising to prove that the stimulus dollars ing that Helena Guergis be dismissed from cabinet, and were indeed flowing. Since the first allegation led the next, they were complaining bitterly that the Prime directly to the government defending itself with an Minister had followed their advice. By midsummer the 18 OPTIONS POLITIQUES SEPTEMBRE 2010 Can we remake Parliament…and should we? RCMP had cleared both Guergis And what role does the growing influ- each other’s conceptions of gover- and her husband, Rahim Jaffer, of ence of negative advertising play in nance. That’s how we get better legis- any misconduct over charges popular perceptions of politics in lation and policy. That’s how we make brought by a bankrupt private Canada? In other words, what are the governments accountable. investigator that had been passed problems we are trying to fix, and The next factor to consider is the on to the PM’s office by the Con- what is the best way to meet that majority/minority dynamic. The sta- servative Party’s lawyer. objective? bility provided by majority govern- G MPs of all parties then did them- If the issue is partisanship, then ment sets some important parameters selves some serious damage in the we need to start with a dose of real- for the players in the political system. flap over the Auditor General’s ism. Partisanship is defined as fervent, For the government, it means the pre- right to audit their expenses. By sometimes militant support for a dictability of being able to get its poli- the time a deal to allow an audit party, cause, person or idea; and alter- cy and legislative program through was brokered, MPs on all sides natively, a strong inclination to favour Parliament more or less intact, subject looked as if they had something to one group or view or opinion over all of course to the various House and hide from public scrutiny. alternatives. It’s important to note Senate deliberative processes. On the G Finally, there was the spectacle of a that a significant amount of partisan- other side, the opposition parties raft of ministerial aides being sum- ship is natural and normal in our know there are practical limits to their moned to appear before parliamen- political and governing processes; it ability to stall legislation or force tary committees. In one case, a comes with the territory. Partisanship changes. The government has a major- Liberal committee chair threatened is probably the most obvious manifes- ity on all committees, and while there a staffer with contempt for not tation of the adversarial nature of pol- might be delays on complex or contro- answering questions when the itics, and this relationship is not versial legislation, the ultimate out- staffer testified he had been told by accidental. Indeed, in its historical come is inevitable. the legal counsel to an officer of antecedents and development, the Majority parliaments also change Parliament not to talk about the British parliamentary system evolved the nature and content of legislation very subject under discussion. In a from distinctly adversarial roots. and House strategies on both sides. scene worthy of the Keystone The government can tackle major Cops, the Prime Minister’s director everal hundred years ago, those reforms and difficult or touchy sub- of communications was pursued S who challenged the sovereign on jects early in its term, confident that around the Hill by a bailiff attempt- behalf of the people sometimes paid while it may burn some political cap- ing to serve a summons. with their lives. The stakes aren’t near- ital in the process, there will be time All of these controversies con- ly as high today, but the point over the four-year mandate to build it tributed to the public image of a politi- remains that the effective operation of back. The opposition parties, especial- cal Ottawa out of touch with the real concerns of the elec- Is excessive partisanship in Parliament a threat to our torate, and lost in its petty democratic institutions or simply a reflection of our political games of incessant and gra- system? To what extent is acrimony in the Commons largely a tuitous insults, personal attacks and putdowns. And function of the current spell of minority government? And predictably, as parliamentari- what role does the growing influence of negative advertising ans limped into summer, play in popular perceptions of politics in Canada? there were renewed calls for the House of Commons to reform itself, our democratic system is rooted in a ly the Official Opposition, often take and for the partisanship to be dialled clash of ideas. The government pro- the first year or so in a majority to back to more tolerable levels. poses and the opposition opposes — look inward and undertake some Before everyone runs off in all those are their respective jobs. As a retooling of party policy and the reor- directions remaking the House, it’s result, those who decry the normal ganization of human and financial useful to pause for a moment to place back and forth in the House of assets. Given the four-year term, there a number of questions in context. Is Commons and ask “Why can’t they all will be time enough in years three excessive partisanship in Parliament a just cooperate and get along?” are and four for the Official Opposition threat to our democratic institutions somewhat misguided in their pro- to focus on policy differentiation and or simply a reflection of our political posed solution. In our system of gov- the development of an alternative system? To what extent is acrimony in ernment, the parties and leaders are government narrative. the Commons largely a function of the not supposed to “get along”; they are All of these ground rules change in current spell of minority government? supposed to disagree and challenge a minority situation. What we see in POLICY OPTIONS 19 SEPTEMBER 2010 Geoff Norquay Canada’s Parliament today has all the tics that become inevitable when an As Jonathan Rose put it in Policy signs of a prolonged period of minori- election can occur at just about any Options (September 2004), “Good neg- ty government.