THE INCREASING DISCONNECT BETWEEN CANADIANS AND THEIR PARLIAMENT Michael Chong The last election saw the lowest voter turnout since Confederation, evidence of a growing gap between Canadians and their democratic institutions. If the centre of our democracy is Parliament, then the heart of Parliament is Question Period in the House of Commons. Each day, its proceedings are relayed to millions of Canadians through the national media. For many Canadians, Question Period is Parliament. In order to bridge the gap between Canadians and their Parliament, Parliament should be reformed. This reform ought to begin with Question Period. Preuve de l’écart grandissant qui sépare les Canadiens de leurs institutions démocratiques, la participation électorale n’a jamais été aussi faible qu’aux dernières élections fédérales dans toute l’histoire de la Confédération. Or, si le Parlement joue un rôle central dans notre démocratie, écrit Michael Chong, la période de questions à la Chambre des communes en constitue le cœur même : Tous les jours, des millions de Canadien suivent ses délibérations à la télévision nationale. Pour bon nombre d’entre eux, la période de questions est le Parlement. C’est pourquoi toute réforme parlementaire visant à combler cet écart doit commencer par la période de questions, conclut le député de Wellington-Halton Hills. n the last federal election, 59 percent of Canadians What they see through this window is not some- turned out to vote, the lowest turnout since thing they are impressed with. If there is one thing that I Confederation. The fact that more than four out of ten Members of Parliament hear consistently in their con- voters stayed away from the ballot box is evidence of a stituencies, it is that many Canadians, disapprove of the growing gap between Canadians and their Parliament. way in which Question Period is conducted. As a result, This growing gap undermines the centrality of Parliament there is a growing divide between Canadians, who are to public debate. The increasing irrelevance of Parliament to increasingly apolitical, and a Parliament that is more many Canadians is forcing these debates into other forums, and more partisan. For this reason, the reform of such as the courts, the Internet and civil society. While each of Question Period is the necessary first step to restoring these various forums plays an important role in public debate, Parliament’s relevance. they cannot represent the democratic will of the Canadian Before we discuss some of the problems with Question people. Only the 308 Members of Parliament, duly elected by Period, a brief history will help provide the context. their constituents, can do that. If Parliament is becoming increasingly irrelevant to Canadians and is not central to pub- hen the Parliament of Canada was created in lic debate in Canada, then public policy will be determined in W 1867, Question Period did not formally exist in an increasingly nondemocratic fashion. the standing orders governing the House of Commons. So how do we restore Parliament’s relevance to In the subsequent decades after Confederation, Question Canadians? A first, but important, step should begin with Period slowly established itself in the daily practices of the reform of Question Period. the House, but it was not until 1964 that it was formally The heart of the daily proceedings in Parliament is codified in the standing orders. Even after its formal Question Period in the House of Commons. For 45 minutes establishment in 1964, Question Period continued to each day, Members of Parliament ask questions of the gov- evolve. For example, changes were made to establish ernment in order to hold it to account. Each day, Question Question Period at certain times and for certain dura- Period is relayed to millions through the national media. tions. In addition, successive Speakers have made numer- For many Canadians, it is their only window on Parliament ous rulings that established precedents governing and for those Canadians Question Period is Parliament. Question Period. These rulings have contributed greatly 24 OPTIONS POLITIQUES SEPTEMBRE 2010 The increasing disconnect between Canadians and their Parliament to the evolution of Question Period focus on rhetoric and hyperbole, due, in characterized by aggressive body lan- over the last number of decades. part, to the rule changes introduced by guage and by those who can yell the What is striking about these rul- Speaker Parent. Limiting questions and loudest and hurl the biggest insults. ings is the reluctance of successive answers to 35 seconds has had the result The noise, a result of the yelling and Speakers to enforce the rules as they of encouraging rhetorical questions and incessant applause (begun after the exist in the standing orders and other answers over substantive ones. Often, introduction of television to the conventions, instead deferring to 35 seconds is not enough time to ask a House), is often at such levels that a Members in the expectation that they substantive question or to provide a Member cannot hear what is happen- will regulate themselves. What is equal- thorough answer. As a result, rhetorical ing even with the volume turned all ly striking is that, in certain cases, sig- questions dominate Question Period, the way up in the earpiece. Ministers nificant rule changes were made by naturally producing rhetorical answers. have difficulty hearing the questions successive Speakers based on agree- This does not advance the understand- and the professional translators — in enclosed soundproof If there is one thing that Members of Parliament hear booths and with state-of- consistently in their constituencies, it is that many the-art sound equipment — Canadians disapprove of the way in which Question Period have difficulty delivering is conducted. As a result, there is a growing divide between simultaneous translation. This is most unfortunate. Canadians, who are increasingly apolitical, and a Parliament Of all forums in Canada, that is more and more partisan. For this reason, the reform the House should be the of Question Period is the necessary first step to restoring place for reasoned debate. Parliament’s relevance. Instead, it resembles more the Roman Colosseum ments reached in private discussion ing of any particular issue and is one of where gladiators spilled blood and among fewer than five Members of the the reasons that Canadians do not see fought for the crowd’s emotions. House (often the party whips or House themselves or their concerns reflected in leaders), rather than by the debate and Question Period. he current standing orders and consent of the House as a whole. The second problem with T other conventions governing For example, after the introduc- Question Period is the behaviour. Question Period are more than ade- tion of television to the House of Quite simply, on many days, Question quate to address the problem of deco- Commons in 1977, a significant Period is unintelligible to most rum. As mentioned before, successive change to Question Period was intro- Members. Far too often, it descends Speakers have been reluctant to duced by Speaker Jeanne Sauvé. into, anger-filled screaming match, enforce these existing rules, leaving it According to Robert Marleau, former Clerk of the House, after private dis- FIGURE 1. VOTER TURNOUT AT FEDERAL ELECTIONS, 1958-2008 cussions between Speaker Sauvé and the party whips, the Speaker agreed to 100 accept from them lists of Members 90 permitted to ask questions during 80 Question Period. Prior to these lists, any member of the House could pose 70 a question by rising and catching the 60 t eye of the Speaker. n e c r 50 In another example, after the feder- e P al election of 1997 and at the beginning 40 th of the 36 Parliament, Speaker Gib 30 Parent held discussions with the House 20 leaders of the five parties then in the House. The six of them agreed to a num- 10 ber of conventions governing Question 0 8 2 8 3 0 9 0 4 6 8 2 5 8 4 4 7 Period that are still in current use, and in 3 0 7 8 9 0 7 8 0 0 5 6 6 6 7 8 9 6 0 9 9 9 0 9 9 0 0 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 particular, the convention that questions 1 / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / 4 0 1 5 7 2 8 8 3 1 8 8 5 8 4 2 8 / / / / / 1 3 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 3 1 2 / / / / / / / / / / / 1 / 7 9 6 and answers be limited to 35 seconds. 4 0 0 1 0 1 5 2 6 1 3 6 1 6 1 1 1 1 The first problem with Question 1 Period is the lack of substance and the Source: Elections Canada. POLICY OPTIONS 25 SEPTEMBER 2010 Michael Chong to Members to self-regulate. offices to make their way to Parliament questions to ministers other than Collectively, Members have not shown Hill for a 1:00 p.m. meeting with all the prime minister. themselves up to that task. other ministers. It is at this meeting A third problem with Question that the entire ministry is coordinated he first proposal calls for the ele- Period is that most Members are relegat- and final messaging for the day deter- T vation of decorum by strengthen- ed to the role of spectators, not partici- mined. At 2:15 p.m., the minister ing the authority of the Speaker. Many pants. As a result of the rule changes arrives in the House for the start of believe that the level of decorum in introduced by Speaker Sauvé, Members Question Period, to remain there until the House has eroded over the years.