As the House resumes sitting Monday after its summer recess, politicians and pundits alike are again talking wistfully about the need to raise the level of debate and bring civility back to the Commons.
Most Canadians – 56 per cent according to a recent poll – think less of their government when they watch Question Period. Another 65 per cent say the 45-minute daily session, which is sometimes described as “Kabuki theatre,” needs to be reformed and improved.
Last week, the Public Policy Forum brought together a group of current and former parliamentarians together for a big think on the issue. They all floated potential ways to transform the mid-afternoon shouting match in the Canada’s “main public forum of debate” and to do this with passion and civility.
One of them, Conservative MP Michael Chong, has put forward concrete reforms in the Commons that would permit longer questions and answers, and give the Speaker more latitude to let backbench MPs hold the government to account.
But will that work? Or, as former Liberal MP Marlene Catterall suggested at the forum, do Canadians enjoy verbal fisticuffs on the floor of the House as much as they do physical blows in NHL arenas? “Would we really watch the hockey game if there were no fights,” she asked.
With these issues in mind, Mr. Chong – a former intergovernmental affairs minister first elected to Parliament in 2004 – joined us for a live discussion. He graciously set aside 30 minutes to take your questions on the state of debate in the House and his suggestions to improve it.
A transcript of the discussion follows:
Globe communities editor Jennifer MacMillan: Good morning, and thanks for joining us. I'm The Globe's communities editor, and will be moderating our discussion today on civility in the House of Commons with MP Michael Chong. We'll be getting underway momentarily, so feel free to start sending your questions in for Mr. Chong now.
Jennifer MacMillan: Also, thank you Mr. Chong for taking the time to join us today. Let's start things off with a bit of background - What has prompted the recent examination of civility in the House of Commons? Have recent sessions in the House been worse than previous years?
Michael Chong: In the last federal election, 59 percent of Canadians turned out to vote, the lowest turnout since Confederation. I can also tell you that the one thing that Members of Parliament hear consistently from their constituents, is that many Canadians disapprove of the way in which Question Period is conducted. These two things are evidence of a growing divide between Canadians who are increasingly apolitical, and a Parliament that is more and more partisan. For this reason, the reform of Question Period is the necessary first step to restoring Parliament’s relevancy. I don’t think that the current class of elected officials is any worse than at any other time in Canadian history. I don’t think the behaviour is a result of the fact that we have a somehow lesser group of Canadians representing us in the House of Commons. Whether the decorum is any worse in these minority parliaments than it was before is a matter a dispute (think “rat-pack”). The difference today is that the decorum in the House, once witnessed only by Members themselves and by a few scattered observers in the galleries (before television), is now seen by millions of Canadians. As a result, even if the level of decorum has not declined in recent years (which is debatable), it is no longer acceptable. The Canadian public, seeing what was once unseen, is demanding something better.
Brian: How can the speaker be held more accountable, seems what is lacking is control in the house which has consistently gone down hill, the rules are there, why are they not used?
