By Arthur Weinreb
Tuesday, March 6, 2007
There seems to be a lot written and discussed these days about the behaviour of MPs during Question Period. The consensus seems to be that the behaviour of the boys and girls who sit in Parliament has become worse in recent times.
An illustrious member of the teaching trade even went so far as to say that he no longer wanted to bring his students to Parliament Hill to watch the daily 45-minute ritual because of the way the Members behave. He has a point; after all, going to observe the way our country is governed takes valuable time away from important things that students could be learning like how the evil capitalist system is destroying the planet or learning right from wrong, with wrong being admirably played by George W. Bush.
The reality is, of course that Question Period is no different than it ever was. Before the cameras were allowed into the chamber, it was even worse. MPs would not only yell and scream at each other but it was not unusual to see Honourable Members reading newspapers with their feet up on their desks, paying not the least attention to what was going on around them. This type of conduct changed quickly with the introduction of television cameras. The Members can ill afford to have their constituents see them goofing off when the camera unexpectedly turns in their direction.
Question Period has always been a raucous affair and undoubtedly will remain so. For some unknown reason, behaviour of the Members worsens on Wednesdays. It's hard to forget the late James Jerome, a speaker during the Trudeau years, standing up, shaking his head and saying that it must be Wednesday. This lack of civility as it is sometimes called is hardly new or worse for that matter.
Toronto Sun columnist Rachel Giese was at least honest in why the issue that she describes as "Ottawa's lunacy" is now suddenly becoming newsworthy. The title of her piece, "Harper's a bad boy" says it all. The recent spate of criticism about how the Honourable boys and girls behave during Question Period results not from any worsening behaviour per se but from the fact that the Conservative Party now forms the government of Canada. Giese attributes this bad behaviour to the prime minister's attempt to suggest (we think; he never did get to finish his answer) that the Liberals voted against extending the country's anti-terrorism measures to protect the father-in-law of Liberal MP Navdeep Bains, who might be questioned concerning the Air India bombing.
Criticizing Harper for attempting to suggest what we are pretty sure he was attempting to suggest is fair game, but using that one specific incident as being the reason why Question Period is what it is, is nothing more than a partisan attack on the Conservatives by their political enemies. To suggest as Giese does that all the deficiencies of Question Period is because the "PM sets [the] tone" is absurd.
Meanwhile, Liberal leader Stphane Dion is given a free pass for anything he might say during Question Period. Dion's frequent use of terms such as "neo conservative" or "climate change deniers" with all the implications that those terms have, is always given a pass by those that criticize the way Question Period is conducted.
When the QP critics rise to condemn the behaviour of MPs it makes you wonder whether they actually ever watch Parliamentary debates or whether they think that all Parliamentary business is conducted like Question Period. They certainly help give the impression to the uninitiated that Question Period is representative of the way in which our Parliament works.
The current kerfuffle over the usual Question Period antics is nothing more than an attack on the current "neo-conservative" government by the country's liberal elites. They should just give it a rest.
Pursuant to Title 17 U.S.C. 107, other copyrighted work is provided for educational purposes, research, critical comment, or debate without profit or payment. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for your own purposes beyond the 'fair use' exception, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Views are those of authors and not necessarily those of Canada Free Press. Content is Copyright 1997-2024 the individual authors. Site Copyright 1997-2024 Canada Free Press.Com Privacy Statement