FEDERAL ASK FORCE
For 45 minutes every day, Canada’s MPs square off on the Hill for question period. But is it political posturing, useful debate or a little of both? A team of Star reporters put MPs under the microscope for five days, fact-checking every query and answer
OTTAWA— There are dodges, stretches and outright falsehoods. Decorum is strained, heckles are hurled, there’s plenty of partisan sniping. And yes, there is the occasional answer to a question.
For 45 minutes each weekday, MPs square off in question period. For everything else that transpires on Parliament Hill, this is the moment the country tunes in. Yet question period is written off by many Canadians as overly partisan, all qquestions and no answers, more fo- cused c on political score-settling than debating issues of concern to everyday Canadians.
But are such perceptions fair?
This week, the Star puts question period under the microscope. We look at the tradition of question period and go behind the scenes into the hours of daily political preparations. We kick it off today by putting MPs to the test. A team of Star reporters fact-checked the questions and responses during five days of
question period in April and May. We assessed statements as true, lie or a stretch. We examined whether the government response was an honest answer or a dodge. So what did we find?
For starters, outright falsehoods are not common. But they happen.
F For example, the Conservatives accused the Liberals of eliminating criminal penalties for ff terrorists; of allowing asy- lum seekers crossing the border illegally to queue jump; that carbon taxes were meant to pay for federal deficits, all of it not true. The NDP claimed that herds of mountain and boreal woodland ww caribou in B. C. and Alberta AA are also on the brink of e extirpation. In fact, caribou in Canada are officially listed as a threatened species, which is one level below endangered and two below extirpated.
But the Liberals weren’t above stating a few falsehoods of their own. Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development Navdeep Bains said the most recent budget “clearly outlined” a process to secure pensions. Not so. The budget only contained a pledge to “obtain feedback from pensioners, workers, ww and companies” as the f federal government developed aplan.
And Liberal ministers are fond of saying the Conservatives did nothing on the environment during their time in office. Not true either. Liberals or environmentalists may not have been fans of the Conservatives’ environmental record. But the previous government did, for example, join with the U. UU S. in 2010 to enact more strin- gent emission controls for light cars and trucks.
But the dominant sins in question period are the stretches and dodges — exaggerations aimed aa at political rivals about t their record and promises.
And cabinet ministers dodged alot of questions, often refusing to respond substantively or ignoring a question altogether. On negotiations with the U. S. over the Safe Third Country Agreement, on federal help for Canada’s news outlets, and going after offshore tax cheats, cabinet ministers dodged and ducked.
The carbon tax was a hot topic during dd the time of the Star ex- amination. Not surprisingly, it’s
complicated topic that doesn’t easily lend itself to 35- second discourse.
So as Conservative MP Pierre Poilievre railed against the “carbon tax cover- up,” Environment Minister Catherine McKenna charged that for a decade, the previous Conservative government “did nothing” on climate change. The exchanges captured little of the complexity of the issue.
That’s why some, like Conservative MP Michael Chong, have been pushing for changes to make question period less partisan, more informative and a forum for real debate rather than spouting talking points.
“It’s no longer serving its function in holding the government accountable. It’s no longer a venue where real answers are provided to real questions,” he said.