As many of you know all too well, 45 minutes are set aside every day that the House sits for Question Period. Question Period is considered by many to be an important part of political life. If you have ever watched this unique daily event in the House, you’ve probably noticed that answers are rarely given to the questions that are asked. When the opposition members completely miss the mark in their scripted supplementary questions, it quickly becomes apparent that they don’t actually expect an answer and/or they are not listening for one.
Day after day, Ministers, Members of Parliament and numerous political staff spend hours in the morning scanning the newspapers, reviewing notes and preparing for an event where questions are asked and real answers are normally not given. Yes, Question Period feeds the media cycle. Stories on the front page of the newspaper often end up as a question and the media in turn will watch intently at the exchange and then write a story stemming from what was said. Yes, Question Period is the place where we can find out about the most important aspects of political life such as the alleged misdeeds of a Junior Minister’s husband or even how much another Minister may have spent on pizza. Now don’t get me wrong; many important questions are asked and occasionally they do get answered, but I am left to wonder – does it have to be this way?
For most of Canadian history there were no formal rules that would allow someone to ask questions in the House. The rules outlining the time of day that questions could be asked, the length of time that they had to ask the questions, who could ask questions, and the specific content that was considered appropriate has changed considerably since confederation. In fact, it wasn’t until 1964 that the first rules were officially adopted. Interestingly, one of the requirements consistently cited was that the questions be of an urgent nature.
The introduction of television cameras in the House in 1977 led to a significant change in the decorum during Question Period. Today, Question Period resembles more of a staged WWE wrestling match as Members of Parliament grandstand for the camera in an effort to get their face in the news. The Senate, on the other hand, is not televised and if you read the transcripts from their Question Period you will notice a big difference in tone and conduct of its members. I’ve come to realize that if you actually want your question to be answered you are better off placing a written question on the Order Paper.
QP, for all the attention it gets, is usually heavy on theatre and light on substance. If the show must go on, maybe it’s time we consider allocating fewer of our Parliamentary resources to it, and getting QP over with before the lunch hour every day. Or perhaps we would be better served by the British model of one QP per week. I am curious to hear about your thoughts on the matter.
Edit to add:
You might also like to read what the Honourable Monte Solberg had to say about Question Period in the Toronto Sun. http://www.torontosun.com/comment/columnists/monte_solberg/2010/03/04/13114001.html
