This week, Samara Canada released a report titled "No One is Listening: Incivility in the 42nd Parliament and How to Fix It." As could be expected, it's full of terrible tales of just how awful heckling is, and how it's ruining our parliamentary democracy, and the likes. But for as alarmist as the report is, it does actually make some needed recommendations.
The report is based on surveys with sitting MPs, and about a quarter of them responded, in demographics that roughly line up with the makeup of the current House of Commons. 53 percent said that heckling is a problem, while 16 percent find it beneficial. Two-thirds admit to heckling themselves (but this number is likely under-reported especially among the Liberal ranks). There are the usual concerns that they believe the public thinks badly of it.
More interestingly are some of the figures about why they heckle some 72 percent of MPs say that they do it to "correct a perceived untruth," while 15 percent feel that it increases accountability in the Commons. At the same time, 36 percent see it as a form of harassment. There is also a split between rookies and experienced MPs, where 60 percent of rookies feel that it's a problem, and half would like to see it abolished. Among more experienced MPs, however, only 19 percent would like to see it abolished.
Additionally, the leadership role of parties on reducing heckling was also measured, with some 81 percent of Liberals having been formally advised by their party about heckling, 50 percent of New Democrats, and 22 percent of Conservatives. This is fairly reflective of what I've observed in the Gallery on a daily basis, where the Liberals have been largely restrained but by no means silent along with having been banned from applause for the most part. While the NDP made a big deal of civility and not heckling at the start of the 41st parliament in 2011, that was broken on many an occasion, and they are far more vocal now than they ever have been and they do love their applause. The Conservatives are consistently the most vocal, and the most cautioned by the Speaker for their behaviour.
I will laud the report for at least admitting that there is no golden age of civility in our politics. "Disruption has always been a part of Parliament. In the early years after Confederation, MPs meowed like cats, made music to drown out other Members, and (at least once) set off firecrackers in the House." Nevertheless, memories are short, and while some veteran MPs did mention that it used to be worse and it really did, not that many years ago in the Harper era we are often regaled with the tales of rookies who feel harassed by such behaviour.
But this is where the context needs to come into the conversation, because when we talk about heckling, what we're really talking about is Question Period, which is 45 minutes out of a sitting day. That's it. The rest of the day, whether in the droning that passes for debate in the Chamber, or with the work on committees, it's really quite dull. Crashingly dull in some cases, to the point of being on the verge of an outbreak of narcolepsy. To say that heckling is a problem writ-large is not true, and I think it always must be qualified that we are talking about the one time of day when all MPs get together and perform a bit of political theatre.
And we need to reinforce is that this is theatre. And as much as we worry about the public or the school children who occasionally pass through the galleries, we need to do a better job of explaining to Canadians about that fact that much of the disagreement and rancour is for show, that the vast majority of these MPs are very collegial, and friendships are forged across party lines all the time. While part of this behaviour is about playing up for the cameras, much of it is sportsmanlike there is a definite spirit of showing support for your party in the questions they ask and answers that they deliver (though with the Liberal applause ban, that has abated on the answer side). In fact, that air of team spirit is why both the Conservatives and NDP have refused to implement their own applause bans.
And I will note that yes, there are instances of personal of discriminatory remarks as part of the heckling, and those should be dealt with, but they tend to be a small proportion of the crosstalk. I have rarely ever heard it personally, and I'm in the gallery every single day more than any MP or even the Speaker. If it happens, it should be dealt with by the Speaker, party leadership or even peers. But the vast majority of it is in response to prepared scripts that are being delivered, and beyond heckling being a grand parliamentary tradition (provided that it's witty we really, really do need to do better on that front), I do think it's a laudable goal to try and knock people from those scripts in an era of message control and pabulum masquerading as answers.
Which brings me to the recommendations in the report. Most of them are useful and things that I have been recommending as ways to improve the way the House of Commons operates in general getting rid of speaking lists, giving more time for questions and answers, getting rid of the prepared scripts, and ensuring that the camera angles are not tightly focused on whoever is speaking, but rather getting reaction shots and wide shots in order to get a better sense of what goes on. The one recommendation that I will flatly denounce, however, is the notion of changing up the seating configuration so that backbenchers are mixed around from all parties so as to break-up the sympathetic responses from teammates.
Ours is an oppositional system for a reason it enforces accountability, and creates clear delineations between the government and Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition. The placement of government to the Speaker's right, and the head of the Mace pointing to the government, are deeply symbolic traditions that, even if you preserved the front benches for those reasons while mixing up the backbenches, you destroy the spirit of our system. Our system is partisan. We have parties for a very good and defined reason, and to try and break that up because of some squeamishness around heckling is fuzzy-headed logic that seeks to take the lifeblood out of what little excitement there is in politics. Things have improved, and could probably improve a bit more, but the improvements we need are about the quality of crosstalk, and not to smother it entirely.
Photo Credit: Macleans
